Actually ther are no doctrines Marian salvation doctrines, only hyperbolic expressions that don’t translate well into english. Marian devotion does not save us. Her Son does. Our devotion to Mary the Holy Theotokos is that of children to their mother, since Jesus gave her to us as our mother.
Sadly, he refuses to accept this; to him, we Catholics are idolators who believe Mary saves us. Even when we explain to him ad nauseum that we do not believe in such a blasphemous idea, he stamps his feet and insists that we do.
Yes ignatious I agree with you. The church does not say Mary devotion saves. Just. Want to put that out there! That we are in agreement.
I never called Catholics idolaters, nor did I say official Catholic doctrine states that Mary saves. But it is said among Catholics (even on this thread) that without Mary there is no salvation. And the subject of this thread is “How does Marian devotion save?” The content of my posts was about the unbiblical support of Marian devotion based on the extra-biblical nature of your Marianology. Please refrain from putting words in my mouth. Your feelings of bitterness toward me are made obvious but such bitterness should not be expressed in slander or false witness.
Perhaps it sounds good this way? :
I will just speak for myself and say that Marian devotion is important to me because it helps me to focus on Jesus. To me, our Blessed Mother is like a clear pane of glass that lets the perfect Light of Christ shine through. There are no smudges or stains on that “glass”. Mary’s humility is that she is nothing without the Lord, and she knows it. Just as all of us, members of the Body of Christ can be intercessors for one another, I believe that Mary intercedes for us.
Paul is not saying that HE is the source of salvation, as all his letters note it is only God who saves. Paul is working for people’s salvation, yes of course.
Fair enough on the first point (and I appreciate that), but you have repeatedly insisted that we believe that Mary saves.
Of course there isn’t, because she was Christ’s mother. Sure, God would have chosen someone else and had someone else groomed were Mary herself not in existence, but that’s a given, and in that case we’d be arguing about that woman instead of the one whom we are arguing about now.
No one here is claiming that Marian devotion has or needs an entirely Scriptural basis. There can be no understanding between us because you believe in the idea of Sola Scriptura and we do not.
I apologize if I was mistaken; I am not bitter towards you per se but rather your arguments, which reek of the same anti-Catholic nonsense that has been debunked time and again for centuries. To listen to more of it here, on a Catholic forum, is embittering.
Amen! Preach it brother (or sister) (S)
How do you know what she knows? How is it you can speak on her behalf? Someone else on this thread said, “she’s like that.” How do they know what she’s like? How do they know her personality?
For Mary to intercede for you she would have to know your inner thoughts and hear your private prayers. This would require the Divine attribute of omniscience, if not omnipresence. Unless you and I make personal contact we cannot know each other’s needs. We cannot pray to one another. So it’s not really the same, is it? If Mary prayed to you, would you hear her? You are claiming something far different of her. Something far more powerful.
The defensiveness occurs when a non-Catholic asks the Catholic for some kind of objective proof or evidence for the extra-biblical things said of her. Such as her bodily assumption into heaven, her coronation as heaven’s Queen, or her supposed heavenly, intercessory work. Christianity’s Christology is based on what is revealed of Christ in the theopneustos Scriptures (His Person and work), but this is not true of many things said of Mary (other than her giving birth to the Messiah). This absence of Scriptural support, I think, is the reason for all of the “hyperbole” that surrounds her. But is it “hyperbole?” Who is to judge since there is no Divinely inspired revelation on the things proclaimed of her by men, nor is it required? Is her alleged assumption into heaven hyperbole? No one eye witnessed the supposed event. It’s simply proclaimed. To whom did Christ personally reveal her alleged coronation as “Queen of heaven?” What was his name? How and when was it revealed to him? Or is this also just hyperbole? What is hyperbole and what is not? Who is to say? Who is to say it isn’t all hyperbole?
And blessings to you, Dorothy.
as a former “pharisee” I can assure you of a few things. If Paul was in fact a pharisee, he would of believed that GOD gave 2 sets of Torah(commandments) at Sinai. the ORAL law now known as the Talmud in simple terms, and the Written law- Genesis, exodus, Leviticus, etc.
I said “Mary’s humility is that she is nothing without the Lord and she knows it”
No I haven’t. I have, however, challenged those who claim she does in some abstract way.
To claim there would be no salvation without Mary is erroneous for the simple fact that Mary’s connection to the Messiah was giving Him birth. No man was ever saved by Christ’s birth. Men are saved by His death, His shed blood. It’s based on these that God has the legal power to save, by GRACE, all who believe in Christ. All who believe what He has done on their behalf. The Divine basis of man’s salvation is the cross of Christ, His sacrificial death, which was His work and His alone. Man’s salvation originates from a cross, not a womb. If Christ would have ascended back to heaven before He went to the cross, no man would be saved.
My challenge is proof for what you claim concerning her. Her heavenly position and supernatural abilities.
You’re right.Also, it’s Mariology
It’s not "anti-Catholic, “per se.” You “feel” it’s anti-Catholic because as a Catholic you’re not used to someone challenging Catholic doctrines.
I’ve said nothing false against her. And you should cease from slandering simply because it’s wrong (and in Catholicism it’s a “mortal” sin).
Truth (Christian) is based on Divine Revelation, not longevity. Error can possess longevity.
I think it’s also important to note and consider that first Mary questioned (objected?) to the revelation by questioning. So common in the prophetic tradition. How can this be? I am not worthy?
But based on the Scriptures, Jesus is not now reigning in heaven as King. He is sharing His Father’s throne functioning there as the believer’s High Priest, ever interceding for them (Heb. 7:;25). He will not reign as King until He returns to this earth as “King of kings and Lord of lords” and ascends the Davidic throne which is His according to birth (Jesus anticipates this event in Rev. 3:21; cf. Rev. 19:11-21). And interestingly, none of the ancient Hebrew prophets who foretold of this glorious event spoke of a mother reigning with Him.
Yes, that’s based on a Scriptural interpretation. But most Greek scholars understand it to say, “highly favored.”
Actually it didn’t begin with the Reformation (examples: Lk. 24:27, 32, 45, Acts 17:2; 1 Cor. 15:3-4). The Reformers went back to the Scriptures.
Yes, I know this.
And you as well, Dorothy.
Nor I you! But it is good to discuss things. There was a time when men could not. You have a kind spirit which I enjoy.
Can you please give us the reference as to where the Catholic Church has officially declared such? Thanks…this is a question I struggle to respond to, having authoritative Catholic answers would help.
If you go to the website www.miraclehunter.com there is a complete list and categorisation of Apparitions which are approved or under investigation.However if you wish to read the approval letters given by Church dignitaries of the individual Apparitions listed by me you could search via Google or any search engine for the relevent appartion.Thanks and God Bless You.