Protestants honest question about Mary

[rinnie]

OK, Let’s see if I get what you mean. It is not the praying "for" that is at issue, it is the praying “to”. My dad is quite probably praying for the well-being of his children and grandchildren here on Earth. Can he respond to my requests to him for intercession?
I am not convinced that he can. Am I on it now?

Jon

Okay I see what you are saying.

First here is my point. Jobs kids were dead. But he prayed for them. I say he prayed them out of purgatory. But beside the point, but the point is according to scripture his prayers were heard. (remember GOd said have Job pray for you his prayers I hear) So I am sure God meant all of them right?

Now back to your Dad praying for your kids here, Why Not. I know my Dad prayed for me here until the day he died. And I know he prays for me now. And I know God listens to his prayers as much now as when he was alive.

How can I be sure. Easy. To me, TO say God could listen to your prayers on earth, but not listen to them in heaven does not make sense.

Our faith in the communion of Saint is nothing less than our belief in the enduring power of Gods promise the life giving gift of the Holy Spirit and the unity we all share. We are all still one in Christ. Rather we are struggling in this world, enduring purgation in anticipation in heaven or already enjoying heaven.

Now the question would be do you agree that we are all One in Christ.

We believe that eternal life begins at baptism. We believe our fellowship with the saints in heaven begins by our membership in the church on earth. We believe we are all bound together by one bond the HS which begins here and its culmination in glory.

When we profess our communion of saints we are adressing the essence of the word communion, community.

IT goes back to Acts 2:36

Our faith in the communion of saints is a belief that the bonds that hold us together a a spritual family in the church endure after death.

We pray for the dead so they may be freed from sin. Mac. 12:45

We feel good praying to the Saints because we know they are members of our same family and they have achieved the goals we are trying to make. We also can be assure God hears their prayers because he is with them.

Quite simple huh

 

[sckcd]

: You don’t believe in Mary’s Perpetual Virginity, obviously. Just some food for thought:
"In Luke 1:26-35, Luke says that Mary was a virgin and already engaged to marry Joseph when the angel Gabriel came to her. After greeting her, he calmed her fear: “Do not be afraid Mary. You have found favor with God. You will conceive and bear a son, Jesus.” Mary answered, "How shall this be? I do not know man" (a Hebraism for sexual intercourse). Her question shows Mary knew how babies are made. The question makes no sense unless she resolved to remain a virgin even in marriage.
+JMJ+

I still don’t see how that proves she remained a virgin. Maybe she did, but maybe she didn’t. I think the whole concept is left open ended. When she said she did not know a man, at that time she did not. But who is to say that later she didn’t? Would she be less holy if she did later have children with Joseph in the convenant of her marriage? I personally don’t see why it’s such an issue that she is a virgin or not.

 

[Nominefili]

What do you mean by this?

My wife and I discuss the Catholic Church binding consciences but I am really not sure what is meant by that. She can’t understand why the Church would make something not essential to salvation a doctrine that must be believed once one has heard of it. I don’t have an answer for her, and perhaps there is no answer.

This would probably be best answered by a Catholic apologist, but I will do my best.

As far as I understand, the Catholic church sees its entire systematic theology as a single corpus (body) of doctrine. All of their various dogmatic theses (everything from the Primacy of Peter to the Immaculate Conception to Original Sin) are woven together in such a way that if one does not believe each part of it, one is (perhaps temporarily) outside the Church, and one is committing a sin by not submitting to Vatican law and practice. This is what is meant by ‘binding consciences’, because people are told that if they cannot accept the existence of Purgatory or the semper virgo, they are in a state of sin until such time as that viewpoint is rectified.

The Lutheran Church, on the other hand, looks at dogmatic statements in a different way. We teach for instance, that while it is an obvious sin to deny Christ’s bodily resurrection or His virgin birth, it is not a sin to deny the existence of Purgatory, because ultimately such a belief has poor Scriptural foundation and furthermore has no implication for one’s eternal salvation. If one believes in Jesus Christ and is baptized, he or she will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. Period.

We don’t read the Gospels in such a way as to suggest, “whoever believes in the Pope as Christ’s vicar on earth and who accepts the invocation of saints and Mary’s immaculate conception, etc. will be saved.”** Of course I am not positing that the Catholic church teaches these beliefs are necessary for salvation either**, but where such beliefs are seen as peripheral to the Lutheran Church, they are central to the Catholic church, and as such the sinner’s conscience is ‘bound’ to accept these doctrines, not because of solid Scriptural evidence, but rather for fear of sinning otherwise.

 

[spoiltvictorian]

This would probably be best answered by a Catholic apologist, but I will do my best.

As far as I understand, the Catholic church sees its entire systematic theology as a single corpus (body) of doctrine. All of their various dogmatic theses (everything from the Primacy of Peter to the Immaculate Conception to Original Sin) are woven together in such a way that if one does not believe each part of it, one is (perhaps temporarily) outside the Church, and one is committing a sin by not submitting to Vatican law and practice. This is what is meant by ‘binding consciences’, because people are told that if they cannot accept the existence of Purgatory or the semper virgo, they are in a state of sin until such time as that viewpoint is rectified.

The Lutheran Church, on the other hand, looks at dogmatic statements in a different way. We teach for instance, that while it is an obvious sin to deny Christ’s bodily resurrection or His virgin birth, it is not a sin to deny the existence of Purgatory, because ultimately such a belief has poor Scriptural foundation and furthermore has no implication for one’s eternal salvation. If one believes in Jesus Christ and is baptized, he or she will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. Period.

We don’t read the Gospels in such a way as to suggest, “whoever believes in the Pope as Christ’s vicar on earth and who accepts the invocation of saints and Mary’s immaculate conception, etc. will be saved.”** Of course I am not positing that the Catholic church teaches these beliefs are necessary for salvation either**, but where such beliefs are seen as peripheral to the Lutheran Church, they are central to the Catholic church, and as such the sinner’s conscience is ‘bound’ to accept these doctrines, not because of solid Scriptural evidence, but rather for fear of sinning otherwise.

Are they venial sins? I guess the idea is that Rome has a middle category of “beliefs that must be believed but are at the same time not necessary” and we Lutherans just have “necessary” and “optional.”

 

[Just_Me_Andrew]

I would like to respond to the original post. The answers are helpful that we have received however I have never received an answer to posts about Marian prayers like the following:

**Pope Pius XII, in the Marian Year in which he proclaimed the Assumption of Mary, said, **

Enraptured by the splendor of your heavenly beauty and impelled by the anxiety of the world, we cast ourselves into your arms, O, immaculate mother of Jesus, and our mother, Mary. God crowned you Queen of the Universe. O, crystal fountain of faith, bathe our minds with eternal truths; O, fragrant Lily of all holiness, captivate our hearts with your heavenly perfume. O, conqueress of evil and death, inspire in us a deep rise from every heart in this year dedicated to you. Convert the wicked, dry the tears of the afflicted and the oppressed. Comfort the poor and the humble. Quench hatred. Sweeten harshness. In your name, resounding harmoniously in heaven, may they recognize they are all brothers. And, finally, happy with you we may repeat before your throne that hymn which is sung today around your altars: You are all beautiful, O, Mary, you are the glory: you are the joy: you are the honor of our people.1

1 Walter Martin, The Roman Catholic Church in History (Livingston, NJ: Christian Research Institute, Inc., 1960), pp. 45-46.

Is this just lovely poetry? Would any Protestant on the blog feel comfortable praying this? How about some Catholics? Please respond. Below is the response of this prayer by Dr. Walter R. Martin (God Bless this man who died in the Lord)

To the contrary, Christ is the author and finisher of faith. Mary is not the “glory and joy and honor of Christians”—Jesus Christ is our glory. In Him is the hope of glory. He is our joy. Christ is the One we honor. Yet it is clear, just from reading this prayer, that titles are conferred upon Mary which belong to God. To “convert the wicked” is the job of the Holy Spirit, who “convicts the world of sin and of righteousness and of judgment.” Mary does not give comfort to all Christians. That is the very reason Jesus sent the Holy Spirit—to be our “Comforter.”

In the Catholic Church the faithful say, “Our life, our sweetness and our hope, to thee we cry, poor banished children of Eve.” Even giving Mary her due right, she is not our life—Jesus Christ is our life. She is not the sweetness of our life—Jesus Christ is the sweetness of our life. Mary is not our hope because “Christ in you is the hope of glory.” From a biblical perspective, it is more than clear that the Mary of the Bible is not the Mary of Catholic theology.

Finally it’s Dr. Martin’s view that Catholic Mariology —> **I want to make it clear at the beginning that I put much emphasis upon knowing the doctrine of the Virgin Mary in Catholic theology because if any one doctrine in the Roman Catholic formula of theology would cause us, on Biblical grounds, to withdraw from fellowship with them, this would be the doctrine.**12

Walter Martin, The Roman Catholic Church in History (Livingston, NJ: Christian Research Institute, Inc., 1960), pp. 45-46.

 

[sckcd]

I would like to respond to the original post. The answers are helpful that we have received however I have never received an answer to posts about Marian prayers like the following:

**Pope Pius XII, in the Marian Year in which he proclaimed the Assumption of Mary, said, **

Enraptured by the splendor of your heavenly beauty and impelled by the anxiety of the world, we cast ourselves into your arms, O, immaculate mother of Jesus, and our mother, Mary. God crowned you Queen of the Universe. O, crystal fountain of faith, bathe our minds with eternal truths; O, fragrant Lily of all holiness, captivate our hearts with your heavenly perfume. O, conqueress of evil and death, inspire in us a deep rise from every heart in this year dedicated to you. Convert the wicked, dry the tears of the afflicted and the oppressed. Comfort the poor and the humble. Quench hatred. Sweeten harshness. In your name, resounding harmoniously in heaven, may they recognize they are all brothers. And, finally, happy with you we may repeat before your throne that hymn which is sung today around your altars: You are all beautiful, O, Mary, you are the glory: you are the joy: you are the honor of our people.1

1 Walter Martin, The Roman Catholic Church in History (Livingston, NJ: Christian Research Institute, Inc., 1960), pp. 45-46.

Is this just lovely poetry? Would any Protestant on the blog feel comfortable praying this? How about some Catholics? Please respond. Below is the response of this prayer by Dr. Walter R. Martin (God Bless this man who died in the Lord)

To the contrary, Christ is the author and finisher of faith. Mary is not the “glory and joy and honor of Christians”—Jesus Christ is our glory. In Him is the hope of glory. He is our joy. Christ is the One we honor. Yet it is clear, just from reading this prayer, that titles are conferred upon Mary which belong to God. To “convert the wicked” is the job of the Holy Spirit, who “convicts the world of sin and of righteousness and of judgment.” Mary does not give comfort to all Christians. That is the very reason Jesus sent the Holy Spirit—to be our “Comforter.”

In the Catholic Church the faithful say, “Our life, our sweetness and our hope, to thee we cry, poor banished children of Eve.” Even giving Mary her due right, she is not our life—Jesus Christ is our life. She is not the sweetness of our life—Jesus Christ is the sweetness of our life. Mary is not our hope because “Christ in you is the hope of glory.” From a biblical perspective, it is more than clear that the Mary of the Bible is not the Mary of Catholic theology.

Finally it’s Dr. Martin’s view that Catholic Mariology —> **I want to make it clear at the beginning that I put much emphasis upon knowing the doctrine of the Virgin Mary in Catholic theology because if any one doctrine in the Roman Catholic formula of theology would cause us, on Biblical grounds, to withdraw from fellowship with them, this would be the doctrine.**12

Walter Martin, The Roman Catholic Church in History (Livingston, NJ: Christian Research Institute, Inc., 1960), pp. 45-46.

No, I could not follow that. I feel that it elevates her to as high as Jesus and I don’t feel it’s right. I respect Mary and think she played an important role, but I don’t think she’s divine or should be prayed to. This is my biggest stumbling block with Catholicism. The only one whose arms I want to be cast into is Jesus, no one else’s.

 

[lil_flower_luv]

I still don’t see how that proves she remained a virgin. Maybe she did, but maybe she didn’t. I think the whole concept is left open ended. When she said she did not know a man, at that time she did not. But who is to say that later she didn’t? Would she be less holy if she did later have children with Joseph in the convenant of her marriage? I personally don’t see why it’s such an issue that she is a virgin or not.

It’s an issue to me personally because I’m a Catholic…and the Church says she was a virgin from the time she was born to the time she was assumed into Heaven. I don’t believe what I pick and choose to believe. I am in lock step with the Catholic Church.
God chose to send us a Savior. We should not question that. God also chose to make Mary sinless, a virgin, and His Mother. We should not question that.

 

[sckcd]

It’s an issue to me personally because I’m a Catholic…and the Church says she was a virgin from the time she was born to the time she was assumed into Heaven. I don’t believe what I pick and choose to believe. I am in lock step with the Catholic Church.
God chose to send us a Savior. We should not question that. God also chose to make Mary sinless, a virgin, and His Mother. We should not question that.

What verses specifically say that she remained a virgin and was assumed into Heaven? I can believe it when I see it in the Bible.

 

[lil_flower_luv]

What verses specifically say that she remained a virgin and was assumed into Heaven? I can believe it when I see it in the Bible.

As I’m sure you already know, Catholic’s do not go sola scriptura.

 

[lil_flower_luv]

As I’m sure you already know, Catholic’s do not go sola scriptura.

On that note:

• 966 "Finally the Immaculate Virgin, preserved free from all stain of original sin, when the course of her earthly life was finished, was taken up body and soul into heavenly glory, and exalted by the Lord as Queen over all things, so that she might be the more fully conformed to her Son, the Lord of lords and conqueror of sin and death."506 The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin is a singular participation in her Son’s Resurrection and an anticipation of the resurrection of other Christians:
  
  In giving birth you kept your virginity; in your Dormition you did not leave the world, O Mother of God, but were joined to the source of Life. You conceived the living God and, by your prayers, will deliver our souls from death.*

vatican.va/archive/catechism/p123a9p6.htm

God Bless

 

[sckcd]

On that note:

• 966 "Finally the Immaculate Virgin, preserved free from all stain of original sin, when the course of her earthly life was finished, was taken up body and soul into heavenly glory, and exalted by the Lord as Queen over all things, so that she might be the more fully conformed to her Son, the Lord of lords and conqueror of sin and death."506 The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin is a singular participation in her Son’s Resurrection and an anticipation of the resurrection of other Christians:
  
  In giving birth you kept your virginity; in your Dormition you did not leave the world, O Mother of God, but were joined to the source of Life. You conceived the living God and, by your prayers, will deliver our souls from death.*

vatican.va/archive/catechism/p123a9p6.htm

God Bless

That’s all very well… if you are Catholic. I don’t take the Catechism as the Word. The CC may teach all this, but I want to see where the Bible backs it up. I think it would have been included in the Bible if it were so.

 

[JonNC]

What verses specifically say that she remained a virgin and was assumed into Heaven? I can believe it when I see it in the Bible.

What specific verses say she didn’t remain a virgin?

Jon

 

[lil_flower_luv]

That’s all very well… if you are Catholic. I don’t take the Catechism as the Word. The CC may teach all this, but I want to see where the Bible backs it up. I think it would have been included in the Bible if it were so.

The Bible may not back it up in the way you think it backs it up. But yes, Catholic’s do not rely solely on the Bible.

 

[sckcd]

What specific verses say she didn’t remain a virgin?

Jon

Until I see a Bible verse that says she remained one, then I will assume that as a married woman she consummated her marriage, like any other married person. Do you have a verse that says so or not?

 

[JonNC]

Until I see a Bible verse that says she remained one, then I will assume that as a married woman she consummated her marriage, like any other married person. Do you have a verse that says so or not?

You are welcome to believe what you wish on this subject, and I will not condemn it, as scripture is not explicit. On the other hand, as scripture is not explicit, those of us, Catholic or not, who believe her perpetual virginity, ought to be granted the same courtesy.

Matthew 1:25 has consistently been interptreted, even by the reformers, as indicating that Joseph never had relations with her, oweing to her special nature as the mother of the Christ.

Jon

 

[sckcd]

You are welcome to believe what you wish on this subject, and I will not condemn it, as scripture is not explicit. On the other hand, as scripture is not explicit, those of us, Catholic or not, who believe her perpetual virginity, ought to be granted the same courtesy.

Matthew 1:25 has consistently been interptreted, even by the reformers, as indicating that Joseph never had relations with her, oweing to her special nature as the mother of the Christ.

Jon

25And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS

Exactly my point. And I am not condemning you for believing she was a lifelong virgin, but I personally don’t find enough evidence to believe so and I am not just because someone tells me to.

 

[JonNC]

25And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS

Exactly my point. And I am not condemning you for believing she was a lifelong virgin, but I personally don’t find enough evidence to believe so and I am not just because someone tells me to.

I’m sure you’ve heard the argument regarding the use of the word “until” or “till”.
Ex: “My grandfather quit smoking at the age of 60, and did not light up a cigarette again until he died at 85.” So goes the argument that this doesn’t mean he lit up after he died.
But again, marion beliefs are adiaphora, at least that seems to be the Lutheran belief.

Jon

 

[lil_flower_luv]

I’m sure you’ve heard the argument regarding the use of the word “until” or “till”.
Ex: “My grandfather quit smoking at the age of 60, and did not light up a cigarette again until he died at 85.” So goes the argument that this doesn’t mean he lit up after he died.
But again, marion beliefs are adiaphora, at least that seems to be the Lutheran belief.

Jon

Thank you!!!

+JMJ+

 

[DerekD]

This question is for Protestants who have been on this site for awhile.

Can you say that the questions that you have had on Mary, and the answers you got here helped you at all to understand why we hold her to such high standards?

And can any of you honestly say that you understand now the truth and how we honor her in our faith?

And can any of you honestly say that you can find yourself finding confort in her prayers now, and can feel any closer to her, after you have heard of our great Love for her?

There is a Catholic Mary not found in Scripture; therefore whatever esteem you place on her is your own business AISI (as i see it).

 

[lil_flower_luv]

There is a Catholic Mary not found in Scripture; therefore whatever esteem you place on her is your own business AISI (as i see it).

Thank you.
Let me remind you, there is also a scriptural Mary who does not get the honor she deserves from people like you. Catholic or protestant; it doesn’t matter. Mary is our Christian role model. In the words of Mother Teresa, “We must become humble like Mary so that we may be holy like Jesus.”

+JMJ+