Distorted misconception about Mary being elevated to the level of divinity.

[Mannyfit75]

Some non-Catholic Christian here mentioned something about Mary being sinless as being elevated to the level of divinity. Such claim by a Non-Catholic Christian seems rather stupid in my opinion.

I think this individual either one, refuses to believe that God is capable of created a creature without sin rather than understand it.

I do not really care if this individual or any Non-Catholic denies this certain truth. They are not Catholic and thus should not concern themselves.

I can tell you this much such distortion is basically done out of ignorance. Any Catholic who has taken RCIA or any classes about the Catholic does not believe that Mary’s sinlessness equals divinity.

I have one advice for you Non-Catholic Christians about Mary’s sinlessness. If you find this doctrine difficult to understand just let it go. For crying out loud, you are not even Catholic.

It would be better to ask God himself when you die to see if what we believe is truth. Rather than make stupid assumptions.

 

[JonNC]

=Mannyfit75;4261865]Some non-Catholic Christian here mentioned something about Mary being sinless as being elevated to the level of divinity. Such claim by a Non-Catholic Christian seems rather stupid in my opinion.

Not stupid (that’s uncharitable), just incorrect. Her being “full of grace” is God’s grace, not her own.

I do not really care if this individual or any Non-Catholic denies this certain truth.

If you don’t care, why the thread?

They are not Catholic and thus should not concern themselves

Catholics do not have a corner on Marion beliefs, thus others do concern themselves.

I can tell you this much such distortion is basically done out of ignorance.

Exactly. Not stupidity, as you claimed earlier.

I have one advice for you Non-Catholic Christians about Mary’s sinlessness. If you find this doctrine difficult to understand just let it go. For crying out loud, you are not even Catholic.

Would it be too much to ask that maybe, instead of cursing the darkness, Manny, you lit a match? Maybe explain it. Instead of whining about ignorance, you gracefully and with Christian love explain the Catholic view.

Jon

 

[tGette]

Not stupid (that’s uncharitable), just incorrect. Her being “full of grace” is God’s grace, not her own.

If you don’t care, why the thread?

Catholics do not have a corner on Marion beliefs, thus others do concern themselves.

Exactly. Not stupidity, as you claimed earlier.

Would it be too much to ask that maybe, instead of cursing the darkness, Manny, you lit a match? Maybe explain it. Instead of whining about ignorance, you gracefully and with Christian love explain the Catholic view.

Jon

 

[a_mirror_dimly]

I have one advice for you Non-Catholic Christians about Mary’s sinlessness. If you find this doctrine difficult to understand just let it go. For crying out loud, you are not even Catholic.

It would be better to ask God himself when you die to see if what we believe is truth. Rather than make stupid assumptions

I’m perfectly happy with this stance. As I don’t believe that the various Marian doctrines are critical matters of salvation I sincerely wish that we could simply let those be matters of conscience and accept each other of brothers and sisters even though we disagree in this area. Unfortunately, it seems that unity would never be acceptable to the Catholic Church if it meant leaving things like Mary’s Assumption and the Perpetual Virginity of Mary as matter of conscience.

 

[tGette]

I’m perfectly happy with this stance. As I don’t believe that the various Marian doctrines are critical matters of salvation I sincerely wish that we could simply let those be matters of conscience and accept each other of brothers and sisters even though we disagree in this area. Unfortunately, it seems that unity would never be acceptable to the Catholic Church if it meant leaving things like Mary’s Assumption and the Perpetual Virginity of Mary as matter of conscience.

I think Catholics will not let go of the belief, because (A) they hold it to be true and (B) it would be the same for us to stop believing that Jesus Ascended into Heaven. Or more accurately (C) for us to stop believing all the miracles that have occurred since the founding of the Church. They are historical truths and they strengthen our faith.

Is believing in these Marian doctrines required for Salvation? Of course not! But they add to the fullness of faith!

Since we hold it to be fact, we want it to remain so. We could not leave it behind because the early Christians witnessed it and have passed the belief on until today.

Though, despite this, we can still accept each other as family! I already do! Though I even accept non-believers as my family of God’s people created in His Image! So maybe I think a bit different than some. I do not know.

 

[a_mirror_dimly]

I’m fairly certain I understand where you’re coming from. I am not, however, talking about asking any Catholic to give up their beliefs about any of the Marian doctrines, but rather that they not put up barriers to unity over issues that are not core to salvation. As I see it, if two people disagree on a matter of faith, unity can only be achieved if either one comes to hold the same belief as the other, or if they can agree that although one of them is right and the other is wrong, that difference is less important than the beliefs that they share.

The question then is what beliefs may be left to conscience and which ones are more important than unity. As I understand it even in the Catholic Church this idea is present, for there are many matters, especially regarding the miraculous, that are left to conscience.

I’m content to disagree over this issue and trust that God’s grace is sufficient to cover whomever is in error, but I get the feeling that the Catholic Church would never accept that.

 

[JonNC]

I think Catholics will not let go of the belief, because (A) they hold it to be true and (B) it would be the same for us to stop believing that Jesus Ascended into Heaven. Or more accurately (C) for us to stop believing all the miracles that have occurred since the founding of the Church. They are historical truths and they strengthen our faith.

Is believing in these Marian doctrines required for Salvation? Of course not! But they add to the fullness of faith!

Since we hold it to be fact, we want it to remain so. We could not leave it behind because the early Christians witnessed it and have passed the belief on until today.

Though, despite this, we can still accept each other as family! I already do! Though I even accept non-believers as my family of God’s people created in His Image! So maybe I think a bit different than some. I do not know.

One of the things I’ve learned since being here at CAF is how important the Marion doctrines are to Catholics. I’m also respectful of the importance of Marion and saintly intercession to many Catholics, as they seem to gain strength and solace from it, even though I don’t practice it myself (I believe they pray for the Church Militant in a general way, but not in response to particular intercessions).
Since, as you said, these practices are not required for salvation, this is one area that, to me (and I admit this outside the Lutheran confessions), does not have to divide “invisible” unity.

I am less willing to accept a rejection of the Holy Trinity (a rejection of Christ’s divinity), that, afterall, is the very basis of Christianity; that God himself was willing to take on our human form and die for us, in our stead. I just can’t see how a non-divine Christ completes this atonement, though I’m open to listen.

Jon

 

[tGette]

a_mirror_dimly and JonNC:

Definitely…Marian doctrine is not necessary to salvation.
We believe them just the same as we believe the life of Saint Francis of Assisi occurred.

I think my analogy was not the best one I could give. So, let me give another.

Giving up Marian belief for a Catholic is like an historian giving up belief in who actually made the most impact warning everyone that the “Redcoats are coming”. Even though Israel Bissell is the one who truly made the impact; the short ride by Paul Revere has been made the most famous. I guess because Paul Revere sounded better in a poem? I don’t know.

Let me give one more analogy…then I’ll quit with them (at least for this post ):

Giving up Marian belief for a Catholic is like an historian saying the Constitution is all that is important and who wrote it is not.

Old Kinderhook, I am realizing that no analogy is going to sufficiently explain my point, just like no analogy can sufficiently explain the Trinity…so I will just move on.

Basically, the point I am getting at is that the Marian beliefs are simply de rigueur. (As you two obviously know.)

I guess for me, in the fullness of faith, I prefer to not have to reject any of it. Not that ALL of it is necessary for salvation, it is necessary for a more complete faith life…if I can word it that way. I do not say that to mean Protestants have a less full faithlife…just not as dynamic. My choice of words might not be the best…sorry if it sounded rude in any way. The Marian doctrines are, simply because they are. Just as Tradition just is.

Wow…I am explaining this terribly. I am going to wait for a response because I just need to shut up! lol!

As far as “invisible unity” you should check out my thread “We Must ALL Agree (part 2)”

A real quick though (then I actually will shut up)…this is more of a provocatory thought than anything:
If we boil down faith, could we say then that the Bible is not necessary either? As long as we are passing on the faith of belief in Christ as Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity and His death on the cross for the redemption of our sins? Just a thought…

Shutting up…NOW!

 

[a_mirror_dimly]

I guess for me, in the fullness of faith, I prefer to not have to reject any of it. Not that ALL of it is necessary for salvation, it is necessary for a more complete faith life…if I can word it that way. I do not say that to mean Protestants have a less full faithlife…just not as dynamic. My choice of words might not be the best…sorry if it sounded rude in any way. The Marian doctrines are, simply because they are. Just as Tradition just is.

See, the thing is I’m specifically not talking about asking you to reject belief in Marian doctrine. Rather, I’m talking about not setting up those doctrines as a barrier to those who desire unity but don’t believe them to be true. As you’ve said, they’re not a matter of salvation, so is it really worth perpetuating division in body of Christ over this issue?

I most certainly agree that there must be non-negotiables, but this is one issue where I believe more good would be done by unifying the body of Christ than there would harm from the fact the not all shared the same beliefs of these issues.

While the Marian Doctrines may be a comfort to you and many other Catholics, they are a distraction and an obstacle to many believers outside the RCC, and no matter how much I may desire unity, I am not welcomed in membership to the Catholic Church so long as I do not accept those beliefs.

 

[SIA]

Some non-Catholic Christian here mentioned something about Mary being sinless as being elevated to the level of divinity. Such claim by a Non-Catholic Christian seems rather stupid in my opinion.

I think this individual either one, refuses to believe that God is capable of created a creature without sin rather than understand it.

I do not really care if this individual or any Non-Catholic denies this certain truth. They are not Catholic and thus should not concern themselves.

I can tell you this much such distortion is basically done out of ignorance. Any Catholic who has taken RCIA or any classes about the Catholic does not believe that Mary’s sinlessness equals divinity.

I have one advice for you Non-Catholic Christians about Mary’s sinlessness. If you find this doctrine difficult to understand just let it go. For crying out loud, you are not even Catholic.

It would be better to ask God himself when you die to see if what we believe is truth. Rather than make stupid assumptions.

Gloves off? I have a feeling that you are looking for me. I am the one who asserted that the Catholic church raises Mary to the level of divinity. I also said that the Mary of Catholicism is a different Mary than the Mary of Scripture. This is the biggest disagreement I have with the RCC.

 

[bpbasilphx]

I also said that the Mary of Catholicism is a different Mary than the Mary of Scripture.

**The Mary of Catholicism and Orthodoxy IS the Mary of Scripture.

The Mary of Protestantism is like the Mary of Mahometanism–an entity they made up.**

 

[SIA]

I also said that the Mary of Catholicism is a different Mary than the Mary of Scripture.

**The Mary of Catholicism and Orthodoxy IS the Mary of Scripture.

The Mary of Protestantism is like the Mary of Mahometanism–an entity they made up.**

can you show me?

 

[SIA]

How do you make up the mother of Christ (God made flesh)? Gotta show me where that came from please.

 

[mrs_abbott]

I’m perfectly happy with this stance. As I don’t believe that the various Marian doctrines are critical matters of salvation I sincerely wish that we could simply let those be matters of conscience and accept each other of brothers and sisters even though we disagree in this area. Unfortunately, it seems that unity would never be acceptable to the Catholic Church if it meant leaving things like Mary’s Assumption and the Perpetual Virginity of Mary as matter of conscience.

I agree with you and maybe one day there will be unity. You never know.

 

[RobHom]

How do you make up the mother of Christ (God made flesh)? Gotta show me where that came from please.

From here: drbo.org/chapter/47001.htm

16 And Jacob begot Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ. 17 So all the generations, from Abraham to David, are fourteen generations. And from David to the transmigration of Babylon, are fourteen generations: and from the transmigration of Babylon to Christ are fourteen generations. 18 Now the generation of Christ was in this wise. When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child, of the Holy Ghost.

21 And she shall bring forth a son: and thou shalt call his name JESUS. For he shall save his people from their sins. 22 Now all this was done that it might be fulfilled which the Lord spoke by the prophet, saying: 23 Behold a virgin shall be with child, and bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us. 24 And Joseph rising up from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord had commanded him, and took unto him his wife. 25 And he knew her not till she brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.

Sheesh… you really have some problems sport. Maybe someday you’ll have to tell us who did what to your wheaties one morning that put you on the tracks you’re on.

 

[SIA]

From here: drbo.org/chapter/47001.htm

16 And Jacob begot Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ. 17 So all the generations, from Abraham to David, are fourteen generations. And from David to the transmigration of Babylon, are fourteen generations: and from the transmigration of Babylon to Christ are fourteen generations. 18 Now the generation of Christ was in this wise. When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child, of the Holy Ghost.

21 And she shall bring forth a son: and thou shalt call his name JESUS. For he shall save his people from their sins. 22 Now all this was done that it might be fulfilled which the Lord spoke by the prophet, saying: 23 Behold a virgin shall be with child, and bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us. 24 And Joseph rising up from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord had commanded him, and took unto him his wife. 25 And he knew her not till she brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.

Sheesh… you really have some problems sport. Maybe someday you’ll have to tell us who did what to your wheaties one morning that put you on the tracks you’re on.

You didn’t answer my questions. How did Protestants fabricate the story of Mary being the mother of God in the flesh? Do you not believe that Mary is Jesus’ mother?

 

[RobHom]

Gloves off? I have a feeling that you are looking for me. I am the one who asserted that the Catholic church raises Mary to the level of divinity. I also said that the Mary of Catholicism is a different Mary than the Mary of Scripture. This is the biggest disagreement I have with the RCC.

Unfortunately, SIA…while you appear to be somewhat intelligent and possessing decent writing skills…you have of late begun to make little sense in what you say. Simple truth, like it or not. Most of what comes from you is vitriolic hyperbole… and what you said is true: You made “assertions”…and I think that even you know that those assertions are false. You have yet to prove a single one.

That you have a “difference” with the RCC is a personal problem indigenous to yourself. Perhaps you should resolve that issue within yourself…and get over it.

Yes, you are entitled to your opinion…but in keeping with that entitlement…everyone else is entitled to theirs as well.

 

[SIA]

The kind of behavior you exude is the stuff going into the wheaties my friend. When the answer is obvious, why continue to needlessly mold it about like play dough?

 

[SIA]

Unfortunately, SIA…while you appear to be somewhat intelligent and possessing decent writing skills…you have of late begun to make little sense in what you say. Simple truth, like it or not. Most of what comes from you is vitriolic hyperbole… and what you said is true: You made “assertions”…and I think that even you know that those assertions are false. You have yet to prove a single one.

That you have a “difference” with the RCC is a personal problem indigenous to yourself. Perhaps you should resolve that issue within yourself…and get over it.

Yes, you are entitled to your opinion…but in keeping with that entitlement…everyone else is entitled to theirs as well.

Ah, fair enough. But, let’s start with the Marian doctrines. I said that they didn’t come from Scripture. Can you show me where they do? Fr. Mitch Pacwa of the Society of Jesus doesn’t think they do but you seem to so lets hear it.

 

[RobHom]

You didn’t answer my questions. How did Protestants fabricate the story of Mary being the mother of God in the flesh? Do you not believe that Mary is Jesus’ mother?

I did answer the question… You missed the answer. SO I’ll give you the “vernacular” answer.

**Many “protestants” ** deny who Mary is. They actually believe she is just a simple female jewess nobody hanging around town up to no good that God knocked up just to prove He could. Sounds nasty…and I agree. But I have stood face to face with “so-called xtians” who believe that ****. And that’s all it is. And these so-called “xtians” are rather “anti-Catholic”, thus it seems more than easy to fathom the origin of their vitriolic “views”.

Beyond that… “Protestants” CANNOT fabricate anything about Mary being Christ’s earthly mother…its all quite well spelled out in the Bible. I used the Douay-Rheims as my source. Its really quite reliable and true to the original texts.

SIA… I am a Roman Catholic…so you KNOW what I believe. Asking foolish questions will avail you nothing.