Protestants and Mary

[Holly3278]

I agree with you if any protestant totally neglect Mary.​

I think that God is saddened by anyone who would neglect the example Mary is to us all. I also think He is saddened by the teachings that elivates her to a position that is not hers: virgin all her life; coming from a virgin birth herself; to be prayed to to interceed for us; etc.

Tell me, where does the Catholic Church teach that Mary was born of a virgin? I can tell you. It doesn’t teach this. It does teach that she was immaculately conceived though.

 

[Dokimas]

Tell me, where does the Catholic Church teach that Mary was born of a virgin? I can tell you. It doesn’t teach this. It does teach that she was immaculately conceived though.

I’ve already acknowledged I was mistaken and I said I was sorry.​

I understand your church teaches immaculate conception; the Bible does not teach it.

 

[Good_Fella]

Amen, The issue of Mary having a sin nature or not falls into the category of disputable matters, (there is room for disagreement here without either side having to pass judgment on the other).

There is absolutely no room for disagreement. Mary’s immaculate conception and her personal sinlessness are infallible teachings of the Sacred Magisterium of the Church belonging to the deposit of faith: Scripture and Tradition. A professed Christian who rejects these dogmas commits a formal act of heresy. The question of whether someone may be held inculpable because of invincible ignorance does arise in the mean time.

Pax Christu :harp:

 

[Christian_Sr]

God forbids idolatry read the ten commandments once in a while

As a former Protestant I used to agree with you. However, I have a question for you. Do you love and respect your own mother? Don’t get me wrong, I would never disrespect someones mother, and that is kinda my point. I used to think that Catholics worshiped Mary, but we don’t. Mary is the mother of Christ. Like any other mother she is a women deserving of respect. Mary, though, is the mother of Jesus Christ, not just some person like you or me, but Jesus. Once I looked at Mary from that perspective all things changed for me. I don’t know if that helps any, but that is how my point of view changed. It is not worship, it it is honoring the mother of Jesus.

 

[Christian_Sr]

There is absolutely no room for disagreement. Mary’s immaculate conception and her personal sinlessness are infallible teachings of the Sacred Magisterium of the Church belonging to the deposit of faith: Scripture and Tradition. A professed Christian who rejects these dogmas commits a formal act of heresy. The question of whether someone may be held inculpable because of invincible ignorance does arise in the mean time.

Pax Christu :harp:

That last line made me laugh out loud, thank you!!!

 

[Good_Fella]

I’ve already acknowledged I was mistaken and I said I was sorry.​

I understand your church teaches immaculate conception; the Bible does not teach it.

The deposit of faith has always consisted of both Scripture and Tradition since apostolic time. Nevertheless, the Immaculate Conception of Mary is implicitly affirmed by the Scriptures. The typification of Mary as the ark of the Covenant is one such affirmation that she was sinless, reflecting the traditional belief of the Church that had existed by the time St. Luke penned his gospel. Your understanding of the written word is deficient because you read the Scriptures in a purely literal sense. Everything must be explicitly revealed to you. But it is the Church’s role to make explicit what lies implicitly in the written word by interpreting the Scriptures in light of Apostolic Tradition from whence the Scriptures proceed.

Pax Christu :harp:

 

[humble_maid]

BTW, you didn’t answer my question— Is there something lacking in the ability of Jesus to intercede for us?

Jews don’t think that they need Jesus to intercede for humanity yet Jesus was a jew and ‘salvation comes from the jews’; the importance given to someone or dishonoring of a person by human standards does not diminish or erase what God exalts and sanctifies; Mary was sanctified and her soul magnifies the Lord. Luke 1:46-49

46 And Mary said:
My soul doth magnify the Lord.
47 And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.
48 Because he hath regarded the humility of his handmaid: for behold from henceforth** all generations shall call me blessed**. *Shall call me blessed… These words are a prediction of that honour which the church in all ages should pay to the Blessed Virgin. Let Protestants examine whether they are any way concerned in this prophecy.*49 Because he that is mighty hath done great things to me: and holy is his name.

 

[rchapm77]

There is absolutely no room for disagreement. Mary’s immaculate conception and her personal sinlessness are infallible teachings of the Sacred Magisterium of the Church belonging to the deposit of faith: Scripture and Tradition. A professed Christian who rejects these dogmas commits a formal act of heresy. The question of whether someone may be held inculpable because of invincible ignorance does arise in the mean time.

Pax Christu :harp:/QUOTE
No room for disagreement? Some matters of church doctrine are disputable, some are not. It is essential that I believe; the doctrine of the trinity, that I am a sinner and can not save myself, that Jesus by His death atones for my sins and saves me. But can you tell me why it is essential that I accept chatholic dogmas about Mary? Do you imagine that my worship is less acceptable to God because I don’t accept them? Do you think I love Jesus less than a chatholic does because I don’t have the same beliefs about His mother that the RCC does?

 

[rchapm77]

Yet, we get accused of idolatry, and Fundamentalists wont listen to explanations, which have been given ad nauseum.

Yes some of the very protestants I worship with are judgemental, and not willing to try to understand the way catholics honor Mary. God have mercy on us for unwillingness to try to understand.

 

[guanophore]

There is no need for Mary to be sinless.

Who are you to decide what is needed? How is what you think as needful more important than what the Apostles taught?

Since Jesus humbled himself in taking the form of a man, even to the point of dying on a cross, then what would prevent him from inhabiting the womb of a sinful human being?

Nothing can “prevent” Him. He prepared a perfect vessel for His purpose. However, He did more than “inhabit” her womb. He took His flesh from hers, which needed to be untainted.

To dogma of immaculate conception may have the effect of lessening Christ's humanity.

Only if you don’t understand it.

The Bible says that Jesus took the form of a servant, was tempted in every way that we are, and yet did not sin. He was 100% God and 100% man. Hence, there is absolutely no need for Mary to be sinless at all. The dogma of immaculate conception is just a Catholic invention with no scriptural support…

That 100% of His humanity was taken from His mother. The rejection of the Immaculate conception is based, in part, on a deficient understanding of original sin.

There is some scriptural support for the IC, but it is not explicit. For example, Jesus referred to Mary as “Woman”. This is because she was created like Eve, the mother of all living. She was the fulfillment of His intention for humanity to be without sin.

It is a mere addition to established biblical doctrine.

Such a statement reveals several errors. One is that additions can be made. Catholics believe that there was one deposit of faith that was complete at the death of the last Apostle. Nothing can be added. Second, all the Churches started by Apostles have this doctrine, including those not in communion with Rome, such as the Copts, Orthodox, and Oriental Churches. If it is an invention of Catholicism, why would those with no love lost on Catholicism have it?

And finally, the idea of “established biblical doctrine” is a complete fabrication. Correct doctrine is not extracted from scripture. Correct doctrine is recieved through paradosis from the Apostles. No Catholic doctrine is derived from the NT. It all comes from Jesus through the Apostles. It was complete prior to a word of the NT being written, and was established by the Church centuries before the NT existed. To assert that a doctrine received from the Apostles does not conform to a source that occurred after the fact is ridiculous.

Don’t you think the Apostles would know if Jesus had siblings, or if His mother was saved by His grace or not?

 

[guanophore]

The one statement above eliminates and thought of an immaculate conception or perpetual sinlessness and any possibility of co-mediatrix; can you see that?

No. Maybe you can explain it?

Of course God is her saviour. She is a creature…she needed to be redeemed from the effects of original sin.

God wants us all to live eternally in perpetual sinlessness.

She was like the rest of us; stained with the ugliness of sin and in need of a savior.

Can you please show in scripture where “Mary was stained with the ugliness of sin”?

Could you please show scripture that explains how one “full of grace” can have any room for sin?

John 7 - Therefore His brothers said to Him, "Leave here and go into Judea, so that Your disciples also may see Your works which You are doing. 4 “For no one does anything in secret when he himself seeks to be {known} publicly. If You do these things, show Yourself to the world.” 5 For not even His brothers were believing in Him. 6 So Jesus *said to them, "My time is not yet here, but your time is always opportune. 7 "The world cannot hate you, but it hates Me because I testify of it, that its deeds are evil.

You see Bob, He had brothers; no more virginity; you gave it up to her husband Joseph, just as God has it for all married couples.

If you are willing to accept it, Rick, these children belong to another Mary, who is noted in scripture as a “sister” of the mother of Jesus. We are not told if she was a sister of Joseph, or poss,. a sister in law of her brother. Whoever is their father, they are very close kin of Jesus.

I do agree, though, they did not believe in Him until after the resurrection.

Matthew 12:46-50 46 While He was still speaking to the crowds, behold, His mother and brothers were standing outside, seeking to speak to Him. 47 Someone said to Him, “Behold, ***Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside seeking to speak to You.” ***48 But Jesus answered the one who was telling Him and said, “Who is My mother and who are My brothers?” 49 And stretching out His hand toward His disciples, He said, "Behold My mother and My brothers! 50 “For whoever does the will of My Father who is in heaven, he is My brother and sister and mother.”

Gees; there it is again; brothers.

All near relatives in a clan are considered mothers, brothers, sisters, etc. Abraham referred to his nephew as “brother”.

Mt 13:56 “And His sisters, are they not all with us? Where then {did} this man {get} all these things?”

Matthew was written originally in Aramaic. There is no word for “cousin” or “stepbrothers”.

Mr 6:3 “Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon? ***Are not His sisters here with us?” ***And they took offense at Him.

Read your scriptures, Rick. James and Joses are sons of Alphaeus! This rules out the Mother of Jesus.

Gees; sisters too; now what will an unrational person do with all this?

It is not “unrational” to trust in the Teachings of theApostles, Rick.

See you have the truth from Scripture about Mary.

It is true that the Truths about Mary are reflected in the Scripture. This is because the NT is a Catholic book. It was written by, for, and about Catholics. there is nothing in it that is not Catholic. That is why there is no contradiction between the Teachings of the Apostles contained in the Church (Sacred Tradition) and the teachings of the Apostles contained in teh Holy Writings.

Will you deny or accept the truth of the word of God or will you plainly reject the word of God? The choice is set before you; chose you this day, the way of life or the way of death; the choice is your and yours alone.

God bless you,
rick

Rick all we reject is your interpretation of what you are reading. We understand what is written differently because we read it from the frame of reference in which it was written (what the Apostles believed). You understand it apart from this tradition, from which your spiritual ancestors have been separated for 500 years.

 

[guanophore]

I was saved before I came to the world; will you worship me to?

Really? How do you know that?

If you distinguish yourself as a role model after the Teaching of the Apostles, of course we will honor you as such. I honor your zeal as it is, even though it is misplaced.

Romans 8 - For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; 30 and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.

The 'Apostle is using the past tense to refer to all the saints who have gone on before us in faith. You can see an accounting of some of these who are members of the “great cloud of witnesses” in Heb. 11. This passage is not to be applied to those who have not yet finished the race. All those who are presently on earth can be disqualified, and their names removed from the book of life. Mary, however, has taken her place in heaven.

All in the past tense; I was predestined before the foundation of the world; my name was written in the Lamb's Book of Life efore I was born.  Will you worship me to?

You have misunderstood the Scriptures, and the Apostles’ teaching.

It was also given to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them, and authority over every tribe and people and tongue and nation was given to him. 8 ***All who dwell on the earth will worship him, (antiChrist) ***{everyone} ***whose name has not been written from the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb ***who has been slain.

Are these the saints you were just saying in the other post don’t exist? are these the ones who don’t offer prayers to God?

 

[guanophore]

** show in Scripture where this is based. ** This is a sad discourse without merit.

Do you believe the Apostles’ creed? If so, what do you think is meant by “the communion of saints”?

It seems unlikely that anything can really be shown to you from scripture, or anything else. You really seem to have a very closed mind for this discussion. It appears that you are not even interested in learning why Catholics see things differently. If you find the discourse so sad, why are you here?

**Give us one example of an apostles, or writer or the Lord prayig to anyone except the Father.  Just one example**.  Then, show us where a saint prays for the living and can obtain "graces".

Don’t you think that is outside the boundaries of the thread? In this context, “pray” just means to ask. 'Scripture is full of the saints asking things from one another. Paul asks the saints to pray for him, and admonishes them to “pray without ceasing”. Is there sonmething wrong with asking others to pray for you?

 Sounds like it is all made up; certainly outside the strict bounds of Scripture.

Well, this statement reveals two serious errors. One is that something that is not found explicity in scripture is “all made up”. If such a premise were true, you would not have a NT!

Furthermore, there is no such a thing as “strict bounds of Scripture”. Scripture was never intended to be a complete compendium of the faith. On the contrary, the concept of “sola scriptura” is what was made up!

In thanksgiving to God the Father, the Church professes all this when she proclaims "You give us an example to follow in the lives of your Saints, ***assistance by their intercession, and a bond of fraternal love in the communion of grace"(***278).

Now you are thanking God for the intercession given by the deceased on earth saints. Sounds more like teaching people to take way the glory due only to God.

We believe that those who die in the Lord are alive forevermore. Their prayers are most effective, because they are perfected forever.

I don’t understand how saints helping one another takes away glory due only to God. Scripture indicates the opposite.

212. The ultimate object of veneration of the Saints ....

From 214 (speaking of Angels) and ***they present the prayer of the Saints to God ***(cf. Ap 8, 34) blasphemy; the Holy Spirit is the one who does this.

Well, certainly no saint or angel presents anything to God apart from the HS. If you think this is blasphemy, you may wish to visit the book of Rev. again.

215. The Church, which at its outset ***was saved and protected by the ministry of Angels***, and which constantly experiences their "mysterious and powerful assistance"(281), ***venerates these heavenly spirts and has recourse to their prompt intercession.*** More blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.

Why do you Catholics always deny the fact that you do worship, saints, angels, images and relics?

Because it Truth requires our denial. We don’t. You appear to be equating veneration (honor to whom it is due) with worship.

 Why not just admit it and move on?  By denying what is so blatently obvious; you lose any credibility for honesty.  At least you own writing do not deny it; they just redefine it to a "lessor form of worship"; so why do you deny it; is it embarrassing to you because it sounds ridiculous?

I agree, the language presents difficulties. It is the archaic Latin that is lost in modern conceptions of theological matters. However, the Catholic Church teaches that worship and adoration is due only to God. We can honor and respect, and take as role models, those who have distinguished themselves in faith, but it is a violation of the first commandment to worship any but God.

In other words, veneration or worship of sacred images is based on Jesus. Where is this in Scripture?

There is no worship of images. The veneration is given to that which the images represent, not the images themselves. We do not make unto ourselves graven images. They are all made to the glory of God, to reflect the work He has done to reveal himself to men.

You are mistaken when you believe that all Christian beliefs and practices must be found in scripture. It is off topic in this thread, anyway. Try to focus, Rick. You appear to have been steeped in so many anticatholic ideas,a nd have so much hostility toward what you think Catholic means that you are having difficulty sticking to the topic.

 

[guanophore]

***There are several degrees of this worship: ***
When worship is addressed only indirectly to God, that is, when its object is the veneration of martyrs, of angels, or of saints, it is a subordinate worship dependent on the first, and relative, in so far as it honours the creatures of God for their peculiar relations with Him; it is designated by theologians as the worship of dulia, a term denoting servitude, and implying, when used to signify our worship of distinguished servants of God, that their service to Him is their title to our veneration newadvent.org/cathen/15710a.htm

Do you know what God calls this?

I think you have made it clear what you think.

I think you don’t understand the meaning of what you are reading, and you are so intent upon reading it for the purpose of finding fault, that it is impossible for you to see past your prejudice.

Quit denying you worship Mary, saints, and angels and saints that don’t even exist. Call a spade a spade or is it embarrassing to admit what you are taught?

You are saying that saints and angels don’t exist?

What we understand of the things that you are reading is different than what you understand.

Col. 2:18    ***Let no one keep defrauding you of your prize by delighting in self-abasement ***and the ***worship of the angels***, taking his stand on {visions} he has seen, inflated without cause by his fleshly mind

Catholics don’t worship the angels. We worship God through them. We honor the magnificence of His creation manifested in them. Same with saints.

Worship of angels is strictly forbidden in Scripture.

Yes, of course.

In Exodus "You shall not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth. 5 "You shall not worship them or serve them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God,

We don’t worship and serve objects, Rick.

 what will you do with the truth and the reality of worshipping saints, angels and Mary in light of what God has said?  The Truth sets before you; do you chose to obey God or not; the choice is all of yours and no one can force you make a choice.

There is nothing to be “done”. since we don’t engage in these activities, Catholic belief and worship is fully consistent with the Scriptures.

You are seeming quite “forceful” yourself, Rick. You seem to really strongly want us to abandon our Catholic faith,a nd embrace the way of the biblical Christian.

 

[Good_Fella]

rchapm77:

No room for disagreement? Some matters of church doctrine are disputable, some are not. It is essential that I believe; the doctrine of the trinity, that I am a sinner and can not save myself, that Jesus by His death atones for my sins and saves me. But can you tell me why it is essential that I accept chatholic dogmas about Mary? Do you imagine that my worship is less acceptable to God because I don’t accept them? Do you think I love Jesus less than a chatholic does because I don’t have the same beliefs about His mother that the RCC does?

Every article of faith that has been prompted by the guidance of the Holy Spirit is essential for us to give our religious assent. God reveals nothing that he doesn’t want us to know, nor anything non-essential.

The doctrine of the Holy Trinity was also disputed by heretics who were refuted and condemned by the Church hierarchy.

The erroneous Protestant principles of Sola Fide and Sola Christu have probably served to damn souls, or imprison them in Purgatory for a long time, by their applications in the lives of countless individuals in spite of the merits of Christ.

It is essential to accept every infallible doctrine of the Church, because our Lord wills that we obey the Apostolic teaching authority of his one universal Church.

I would probably love Jesus less, or even refuse to accept his love, which I would regard as imperfect, if he had in fact dishonoured his mother by allowing her body to be subjected to the universal law of sin and death under the curse of Eve. It’s hard to place one’s faith in the love of another person if he isn’t true to his word. My understanding of God’s holiness, wisdom, and might would also be greatly distorted and transformed if I rejected the Marian doctrines of the historic Christian faith.

In our worship we should praise God for his mighty deeds accomplished in Mary and glorify him for his greatest creative handiwork: His handmaid.

If you loved Jesus, you wouldn’t publicly dishonour his mother by contesting the great things he must have done for her. Christians who reject the Marian doctrines understand Jesus terribly less than they imagine.

The Catholic Church isn’t just “Roman”. Marian devotion originated in the East.

www.justinangel.st.blogs.com

PAX :heaven:

 

[Good_Fella]

Every article of faith that has been prompted by the guidance of the Holy Spirit is essential for us to give our religious assent. God reveals nothing that he doesn’t want us to know, nor anything non-essential.

The doctrine of the Holy Trinity was also disputed by heretics who were refuted and condemned by the Church hierarchy.

The erroneous Protestant principles of Sola Fide and Sola Christu have probably served to damn souls, or imprison them in Purgatory for a long time, by their applications in the lives of countless individuals in spite of the merits of Christ.

It is essential to accept every infallible doctrine of the Church, because our Lord wills that we obey the Apostolic teaching authority of his one universal Church.

I would probably love Jesus less, or even refuse to accept his love, which I would regard as imperfect, if he had in fact dishonoured his mother by allowing her body to be subjected to the universal law of sin and death under the curse of Eve. It’s hard to place one’s faith in the love of another person if he isn’t true to his word. My understanding of God’s holiness, wisdom, and might would also be greatly distorted and transformed if I rejected the Marian doctrines of the historic Christian faith.

In our worship we should praise God for his mighty deeds accomplished in Mary and glorify him for his greatest creative handiwork: His handmaid.

If you loved Jesus, you wouldn’t publicly dishonour his mother by contesting the great things he must have done for her. Christians who reject the Marian doctrines understand Jesus terribly less than they imagine.

The Catholic Church isn’t just “Roman”. Marian devotion originated in the East.

www.justinangel.st.blogs.com

PAX :heaven:

I meant to add, anyone who hopes to be saved must apply the proper understanding of justification and sanctification, and faith and works done in grace in their lives. Christians who normally reject the Marian doctrines of the Church basically do so beacause they espouse false conceptions of these necessary principles of salvation.

Correction: www.justinangel.stblogs.com

 

[Bengoshi]

It is against Forum rules to post links to anti-Catholic websites

Why? Is it because the readers might find out the truth? Besides, the article didn’t even talk about Catholicism, it was refering to Oneness Pentecostals, which I know the RCC also considers to be heretical in their doctrine of the Trinity.

 

[Bengoshi]

Yes “full of grace” can mean many different things. But it is the Church, and not you, that has the chrism of infallibility. This is no way violates Romans 3:23. “All” and “none” in the context of Romans are not absolutes. They are generalizations that allow for exceptions. Mary was one such exception. No God did not “need” to do anything. But He did. As the Spouse of the Holy Spirit, and Mother of the Son, she was taken care of.

Again, mere man-made tradition without any clear scriptural basis. It always boils down to Catholics claiming infalibility… It’s just like saying “I am infallible because I said so!” Only God can say that about Himself! Humans will always be fallible except the Biblical authors at the time when they were writing Scripture.

 

[Bengoshi]

Really? Then why do we get baptized? Let me go a little further and ask," Why did Jesus get baptized?"

Didn’t you read the article I linked? It was already explained there. I don’t need to repeat it here myself.

 

[Bengoshi]

Jews don’t think that they need Jesus to intercede for humanity yet Jesus was a jew and ‘salvation comes from the jews’; the importance given to someone or dishonoring of a person by human standards does not diminish or erase what God exalts and sanctifies; Mary was sanctified and her soul magnifies the Lord. Luke 1:46-49

46 And Mary said:
My soul doth magnify the Lord.
47 And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.
48 Because he hath regarded the humility of his handmaid: for behold from henceforth** all generations shall call me blessed**. *Shall call me blessed… These words are a prediction of that honour which the church in all ages should pay to the Blessed Virgin. Let Protestants examine whether they are any way concerned in this prophecy.*49 Because he that is mighty hath done great things to me: and holy is his name.

What does her soul magnifying God have to do with her being a co-mediatrix? In fact, all of our souls should magnify the Lord! All protestants agree that Mary is blessed! A woman who carried God the Son Himself is definitely blessed! We don’t argue against that, especially that Scripture itself says that Mary shall be called blessed by all generations. However, this does not prove any of your points either. Protestants love Mary! Let us make that clear.