Prayer of Pope to Mary: To Whom Would the Apostles have pointed him ..Mary or Jesus?

[avenger]

Not that it is any of your business, but I’ll tell you. I’m 52. I was born when Pope Pius XII was Pope. I have 3 grown children. I lived through the changes of Vatican 2. I was in Boston in 1979 when Pope John Paul II visited this country. I don’t know why you want to know, but there it is.

just wondering because of the low maturity level…I saw the pope, JP2, when he came to NY…so?

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Well, thankfully I’m old enough and mature enough to disregard silly remarks.

 

[Leeann]

Go out for dinner for a couple of hours and what’s happening here???

Maybe I should have hired a babysitter???

Come on guys/gals - no more :slapfight:
Prayer of Pope to Mary: To Whom Would the Apostles have pointed him …Mary or Jesus?

 

[Leeann]

Leeann:

There you go – Simon cooperated without any special “blessings” – just as other believers have and will do…. __________________

mercygate:
I disagree. Everyone cooperates via grace. The Incarnation is unique.

What and why are you disagreeing again?

 

[Leeann]

Tantum ergo:

The whole idea that Catholic teaching separates Mary and Jesus into two opposing beings and then asks its adherents to choose ‘between’ them is a flawed idea in the first place.

Praying to Mary is not done ‘instead of’ praying to Jesus. It never was and it never will be.

Not according to the prayer the Pope prayed – it’s directly “to Mary.

 

[Leeann]

Tantum ergo:
Also, Leeann, you have never given us proof that the Apostles and Jesus ‘never taught the Catholic teaching about Mary’.

In fact, they did. It is you and those like you who disregard 2000 years of Catholic teaching in order to teach a man-made gospel.

Well…since the bible is inspired by the Holy Spirit….all of it….the OT/Gospel books/Epistles/Revelation….and since no record is made of either Jesus or the Apostles ever taught or preached to the very first believers anything regarding the necessity of going to/through Mary, or any of the other attributes that the Catholic Church has developed and taught over the years with regards to Mary….that would be a pretty good indication about what has become a “man-made gospel”.

 

[RobbyS]

OIC. So, then, in the passages you quoted, the other women and Mary were present with the Apostles. Does she also get to benefit from the unity of the Apostles and the HS?

When did the HS leave the Church?

Wow. Well, the Catholic Church teaches that it has EVERYTHING to do with it. We believe that the shed blood of Jesus on the cross is the basis for everything we do and are as Christians.

We believe that His shed blood has opened heaven for us, and enabled us to conform our lives to His image:

" Since, then, we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God, let us hold fast to our confession." Heb 4:14

For us, becoming His disciples means that we hold fast to our confession, that for which He died. Without His shed blood, we have nothing to confess, and no reason to become disciples.

Catholics do not separate these things from one another. Separating and dividing is the fruit of the Reformation, but prior to that, every baptized Christian was considered to have been buried with Christ in His death, and raised to a new life. Raised to a life of obedience and service. For us, there is no Readers’ Digest version, it is all, or nothing.

Luther taught a kind of Christian idealism, which is not surprising since he was an Augustinian monk, but he carries it further than Augustian in his lack of interest in nature. Catholicism is a religion of incarnation, and Mary was the means of incarnation. He was born of a woman, was nurtured by a woman and in a family. But he left that family to fulfill his mission, and from Scripture we learn that only Mary knew from the beginning what an important a mission that was, and how dangerous it was. She was there at the beginning and in the middle and at the end.

 

[Leeann]

**Originally Posted by Leeann **
Believers have always been encouraged to pray for other’s needs – all of the references above are dealing with people who were here on earth. The Apostles and God, never encouraged people to pray to/through anyone else in heaven….except Jesus.

guanophore:
I think you say things like this because you are limited to the Apostolic Teaching you can glean from the Scripture. However we can see from the Liturgies and the early prayers that the Apostles made no distinctions when asking intercession if the saint was alive or dead.

That’s interesting – what specific “liturgies and early prayers” of the Apostles are you referring too?

**Originally Posted by Leeann **
It is in fact of denial of the Catholic Church’s teaching. (and any others that teach the same thing)

guanophore:
No, it is a denial of Apostolic Teaching. This practice is found in other Apostolic churches who are not in communion with Rome. A person who denies this teaching as a “catholic innovation” is obligated to explain it away from those other communities founded by Apostles.

Yes…however the thread topic is with regards to a prayer by the Catholic Church’s Pope.

**Originally Posted by Leeann **
It should be dependent upon the leading of the Holy Spirit.

guanophore:
Yes, I agree. The problem is that one “hears” the HS through one’s own mind and heart. The perceptions of mankind are influenced by a person’s experiences and education.

The Holy Spirit surpasses any “influence of a person’s experiences and education” and transforms our feeble human “perceptions”.

**Originally Posted by Leeann **
Those verses don’t apply.
The Pope was not “imitating” the Apostles or Christ when he prayed to/through Mary, as they simply never did this.

guanophore:
You seem to believe that they did not, because you are going off very limited evidence. In fact, the Pope was imitating the Apostles and Christ.

When did the Apostles…………and Christ……go to/through Mary in prayer?

**Originally Posted by Leeann **
No more beyond the scope of this thread than any other queries or statements that have been made?

guanophore:
Since we are over the post limit for this thread, can we take the need for pronouncement of the IC to another thread? That is, if you are really interested…

I’m lost here…what do you mean IC?

**Originally Posted by Leeann **
All the official pronouncements??? – other than the first one – Mother of God to clearly define Christ’s divinity. No, I don’t believe we are in agreement that all the pronouncements were in response to heresy.

guanophore:
Sounds like an excellent place to begin our next thread.

Sounds like an excellent way of dodging a response!

**Originally Posted by Leeann **
Any “church” can say anything…some truth…”scripture being inspired by the Holy Spirit”….and some things that are not true.
I don’t trust any “church” in particular “when reading scripture”…my trust and faith is in God…and to test the scripture against any teaching/preaching ….believing and trusting that His Will and His Truth will be made known.

guanophore:
What you are saying is that you have made yourself the ultimate authority of what it means.

No…that’s what you’re saying.
I’m saying is that I trust God’s authority.

---

**Originally Posted by Leeann **
I’m with you on that - it can’t…we’ve got the book, we know the outcome!

guanophore:
I agree with you. but the “book” was written by those God chose to “need”.

Oh brother!

**Originally Posted by Leeann **
There you go – Simon cooperated without any special “blessings” – just as other believers have and will do….

guanophore:
How do you know he did not get any special blessings?

Check the original posting I was responding too….’Simeon didn’t appear to know why he was doing it….’ And I was responding as “Mary did have a special blessing”……trying to make it clear that Simon cooperated just as other believes have and will do……you have to go back guanophore and look at it in context….it’s one of those – “you had to be there” things…

 

[Leeann]

**Originally Posted by Leeann **
No amount of “tradition” can bring truth to “a different gospel message”.

Again I ask – to whom would the Apostles point too – Mary….or Jesus?

lte ad loseph:
Hi, Leeann. I will try to answer the original question.
To Whom Would the Apostles have pointed him …Mary or Jesus?
If you asked an Apostle, they would probably point to Jesus. However, if I asked one of them if I could ask Mary for her intercession to get to Jesus, because prayer to saints is encouraged in the Catholic Church, they would probably say, “Yes, that is an acceptable and encourageable practice.”

Take a look at my sig line. “Ite ad Ioseph…” “Go to Joseph…”
This verse from Genesis has long been used in reference to St. Joseph, that is, Ask St. Joseph for your request. St. Joseph can do NOTHING without Christ. If I pray to St. Joseph, he will ask his Foster Son, who might grant the request. The result if the prayer happened THROUGH St. Joseph.

The reason Catholics look to Saints as well as Christ is because the Saints are our role models in the faith. The bishops of the Catholic Church tell us this is okay, and we believe they are the successors to the Apostles. IMO, this means they are living apostles who have valid succession. There is continuity, and I believe the Catholic Church will never lead us from the truth.

Hi lte ad loseph!
Thank you for taking the time to respond and the explanation you gave.

 

[Leeann]

Tantum ergo:

Good question. . .
There are none so blind as those who will not see, and none so deaf as those who will not hear.

I sincerely wish Leeann and ron well, though I am saddened that they have embraced error as truth and have closed eyes, ears, and minds when many, many Catholics such as I have given them legitimate, authoritative answers to their errors. I know that of course they must feel about their own ‘beliefs’ much as I do. . . despite all their attempts to make me accept THEIR beliefs as truth I never would.

This really is something that you have taken upon yourself……this idea that I am “attempting to make you accept my beliefs”. I have been responding to questions asked and statements made, as honestly and openly as possible and in actuality, have had very little dialogue with you in particular.

Tantum ergo:

The only difference is that my Catholic beliefs don’t just rest on me (I’m just a fallible human). They rest on Christ, and not just because I ‘think’ they do. . .because I can actually look to a legitimate authority, the Church established by Christ and given that authority. That’s why along with St. Paul I can be sure that the gospel I know is the ‘real’ one, and that those who preach against it, even if they claim theirs is from God, even if they ‘look’ or sound like ‘angels of light’, are preaching error. And that’s why if I were in Leeann’s shoes, at some point, intellectual honesty and the Holy Spirit would have me saying, “on what authority am I denying the Catholic Church and how can I be sure I’m right?” And again, intellectual honesty and the Holy Spirit would, at some point, have me (were I Leeann) acknowledging that a person in denying the Catholic Church is actually denying Christ’s authority and elevating his or her own self to be the ultimate authority. Leeann is saying then not only that the Catholic Church is wrong, but that she, somehow, is ‘right’. . .and thus, she is claiming herself as ultimate authority, but not giving any proof of that authority other than that on HER Scriptural cherry picking, or opinions regarding her friends words or actions, she ‘feels’ that she is right.

Now see, I couldn’t do that. Lord knows as a younger woman struggling with church teachings (specificially Humanae Vitae) I often ‘felt’ that the teachings went against the intellectual climate of the day, but it was obvious to me that the ‘intellectual climate’ was not any kind of ultimate authority. "intellectual climates’ are relative, not absolute. And they can be wrong (and were). The more I examined the Church’s teachings, the more obvious it was that any ‘difficulty’ I had in accepting their authority was due to MY lack, not THEIRs.

If one has no authority other than one’s ‘relative’ feelings and ‘beliefs’, one is building on a foundation of sand. Because any ‘difficulties’ with things like Scriptural texts (John 6) don’t rest on the TRUTH of the Scripture, as they do for Catholics, but on an ‘interpretation’ which can differ from individual to individual, as they do for Protestants. Thus one given Protestant can believe in consubstantiation, another can feel Jesus is present in ‘some kind of way’, yet another can feel it’s symbolic, and yet another can find the whole subject ultimately not important enough to even mention at a service. Same Scripture but many DIFFERENT interpretations, and not just different but actually CONTRADICATORY. . .and all claiming ‘authority’.

Protestant theology and teachings which contradict Catholic theology and teachings ultimately just don’t make sense, Biblically or otherwise.

You mention above that you are “just a fallible human” – from your previous postings and their contents and from the statements above – it appears you know yourself well.

I sincerely hope that you will find peace. __________________

 

[nimish]

I’ll try my best to answer this Leeann, (good question btw)
The Apostles would definitely point to Jesus! But lets take that a step further… so would Mary!
Now you may ask, ‘how is Mary’s role justified through scripture?’ or a similar question.
If you’ve read about Solomon, and the other kings. You would know that they all had concubines. Therefore the idea that the kings wife would be the Queen was foreign to them. Therefore they had a Queen-mother i.e the kings mother!
If we can say Christ’s Kingdom is the fullfillment of the davidic kingdom, then we may also go a step further and say that the Queen-Mother is in fact Mary! unless you can prove tha Jesus had a ‘spiritual mother’.
But it would mean that you don’t believe jesus is fully God and fully Man! (all at the same time).
therefore my conclusion is:
The Pope was guided by his apostolic succession to address Mary in his prayers, because this is what the subjects of the Davidic Kingdom did, they approahed the Queen-Mother First!
Similarily there is the role of the sort of prime-minister in the davidic kingdom that can well be applied to the Pope!!! Maybe read a little more about that, and then lets have a good discussion.

 

[Leeann]

Hi Nimish

Thank you for taking the time to respond.

Yes, I’ve heard about what you posted and have read about it also.

Now THAT would be a whole new thread for you to open Nimish.

 

[nimish]

Well maybe it would… but thanks for acknowledging at least. But does that satisfy your question or what?

 

[prayerwarrior17]

Welcome to CAF, prayerwarrior. The Bible was never intended to be the sole rule of faith, or to contain everything about our faith practice. However, the Bible is clear that there is One Body, and that death cannot separate us from Him. This being the case, we cannot be separated from one another by death either. However, that is off topic in this thread, which is about the Pope’s prayer to Mary. The Pope was heard by others reciting a favorite prayer, and some who heard him have judged his faith to be “off”, since his expression was directed to Mary “and not” Christ.

are you sure that the Bible was never intended to be the sole rule of faith, or to contain everything about our faith practice??..no offence…i just want to know…GOD BLESS

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Well, Leeann, you’re very quick to criticize others for giving ‘opinions’ yet you give absolutely no proof that your own words are anything other than your opinion.

Where in the Bible does it say that if something is not mentioned explicitly in Scripture it is not authentically a Christian teaching?

Where in the Bible does it say that everything Jesus said and taught is contained in Scripture, and Scripture alone?

How can you claim that ‘prayer to Mary isn’t in the bible, therefore it’s not Christian’ and ignore other facts like the definition of the Trinity as Three Divine Persons in One God is not explicitly given in the Bible either, yet it is accepted and indeed preached as authentic Christian doctrine?

 

[Tantum_ergo]

The whole mistaken and man-made tradition of “Scripture alone” is neither Scriptural itself, not a Christian teaching that is apostolic in nature. It is the worst and most heretical teaching that has risen in Christianity, as it encompasses all other heresies and disseminates them to more people than ever before. It is worst because it attempts to make human interpretation trump divine interpretation.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Again I repeat: The entire mistaken idea that there is some kind of competition between Jesus and Mary, or that Mary is set up by Catholics as equal to or superior to Jesus, is ludicrous. It is yet another example of how people, good honorable Christian people, by refusing to acknowledge any authority but their own ‘interpretations’ and insisting upon being their own little Holy Spirits and privately interpreting Scripture, fall into error and rush around confused, with thousands and even millions disputing ‘verse after verse’, spinning in disunity and wounding the Body of Christ through their obstinate refusal to accept His own Divine Authority which He specifically gave to His ONE Church.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Prayer of Pope to Mary:

Scriptural. Christian. Authentic. Apostolic.

Scriptural basis: Luke 1 and 2. Revelation. St. Paul, especially in Romans and Galatians. Maccabees. Isaiah. Jeremiah. Deuteronomy. Genesis.

Christian: Authentically taught with examples (written) as early as the second century of Christianity. Uniformly taught in both Catholic and Orthodox teaching for 2000 years. Accepted even by the first “Protestants” such as Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli.

Authentic: Documented and uniformly practiced under an authoritative Church, not instituted by men hundreds of years ‘after the fact’ as is the false notion of sola scriptura and other protestant failings.

Apostolic: Knowing authoritatively that both Scripture and Sacred Tradition are apostolic teachings, having documentation of such teachings throughout recorded history as well as above all the promise of Christ that His Holy Spirit guides us to all truth, we can know for sure that Catholic teachings are authentic, holy, and apostolic. Others ‘assume’ wrongly that if they can’t find something explicit ‘in scripture’ it doesn’t exist. . . ignoring the fact that SCRIPTURE ITSELF DOES NOT MAKE ANY SUCH CLAIM FOR ITSELF.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

To Whom would the apostles point us, Jesus OR Mary?

Both. Mary is united to Jesus as part of the Body of Christ; the spouse of Christ. Everyone knows from Scripture that a man and a woman become, in marriage, one flesh. They are not divided.

Being part of Christ’s spousal body means that any saint is likewise not divided from Jesus. It is Jesus who, as Scripture tells us, makes us ‘gods’. . .yet we are not ourselves above Jesus in being His brothers and sisters. His redemption makes us children of the Father, His life gives us eternal life.

There is no false dichotomy here. There is no attempt to set up Jesus OR Mary, Jesus OR St. Paul, Jesus OR St. Peter, Jesus OR you and I. If we have died with Christ, we live with Him. We are part of Him; He is in us and we are in Him. That is Scriptural, for heaven’s sake!

So those who read St. Paul’s works aren’t listening to St. Paul INSTEAD OF Jesus. Those who pray to St. Paul or others are not praying to them INSTEAD OF Jesus.

Attempting to ‘divorce’ people from Jesus is an attempt to divide the Body of Christ. . .hardly what Jesus taught.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

It is likewise interesting to see among those who hold to a narrow and man-made tradition of "scripture only’ such situations as these which have been stated in these forums in other threads:

One person states that “Scripture says” that Jesus taught us to pray to the Father. Therefore, this person does not pray to Jesus or to the Holy Spirit, but ONLY ‘to the Father’.

Another person states that Jesus taught us to pray the Our Father, and this is the only prayer he prays because it’s the only one "in Scripture’.

Yet another person states that since “Scripture says” we are not to use ‘vain repetition’, he will not pray the Our Father as that would BE a repetition as it has already been prayed. Therefore he prays ‘similar’ prayers but not ever using the same words or so he claims.

Yet another person states that since “Scripture says” we are to pray in secret, he will not pray out loud in a church setting because that would be against Scripture. He goes into his room as Scripture says, only.

Here are all these people insisting they’re doing what “Scripture says”, correctly. Yet they contradict each other.