Scholar says Baptists neglect lessons from Virgin Mary

  • Thread starter Thread starter Siddhartha
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A FEW MORE RESPONSES
Code:
 I'm sure many of you will agree when I say that I should give this up and get busy with other things. But it's difficult to let certain things stand without clarifying or challenging. Here are a few examples in response to various postings.

  1. First and foremost, every Protestant I know and has ever known honors Mary. I am repeating myself but this needs to be emphasized. The difference is that we do not venerate her, do not claim to see apparations of her, do not make her the "Queen of Heaven" and the patron saint of the USA - etc. I suspect that she was a humble young woman who must be troubled by such adulation. It appears to be a cult based on a medieval mindset and the monarchist tradition that seems so alien to this era of advanced education. 

  2. I doubt seriously if either Luther or Calvin believed in the Immaculate Conception or the Assumption. It's been years since I read their main writings, but I would need to know chapter and verse. They obviously believed in the Virgin Birth which scripture clearly states. But, in any case, Protestants that I know don't regard Luther, Calvin or any of the other Reformers as infallible, not even when it comes to doctrine. They were just pulling away from Catholicism and were developing their theologies. I don't look to any of them for my theology. I look to scripture, to reason, to modern science, etc. It was easy to believe in Adam and Eve centuries ago, but our knowledge has so expanded re the age of the world, Neanderthal Man, and much, much else that the notion that the first humans were created roughly 6000 years ago seems absurd today. But if you work out the genealogies of those allegedly between Adam and today it adds up to roughly 6000 years. So, what do we accept: the Biblical account or documented history?

  3. Someone states, in effect, that Protestants will be treated gently for their heresies because they were born into Protestants families. Well, my paternal family was Catholic and my late and beloved wife had been Catholic, so I assume they will catch 'hell' because they left the true church. Where I attend now probably 50% of the congregation came from Catholicism. Fine people. We, by the way, don't speak of them as converts. We see Christianity as a house with many rooms, but they are and were all part of one family. I am troubled when Pope Benedict states that Protestant churches are not really churches but 'ecclesial' societies and that Protestant ministers do not officiate at authentic communion services! 

   4.  As stated in Posting 12 Jesus did not seem to treat his mother deferentially as recorded in the gospels. And Paul, in his letters, doesn't mention her even once. That Paul omission strikes me as very indicative since Paul was so central in organizing the early churches.

   5. I do admire some saints. One of my favorites is St. Francis of Assisi. And I admired Mother Theresa despite her confession of so many 'dark years'. She was a true worker in the Kingdom. But what about Padre Pio? Does anyone out there actually believe that Padre Pio could levitate and that he could be at more than one place at the same time? And so many other stories of saints are wild and simply over the top. This combined with Fatima, Lourdes, Guadalupe, etc., can make Catholicism seem to many like a relic of past generations when superstitions were widely accepted as fact.

    6. Finally, millions of us are 'big tent' Protestants, not scriptura sola fundamentalists. Most of my Protestant friends are the same, So often the criticism of Protestantism forgets that mainline Protestants (and most Catholics I know) are generally ecumenical, friendly to other faiths, open to honest dialogue, but not able to believe the unbelievable. We can respect what others may believe (Catholics, Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, etc.) but find it impossible to embrace all of their doctrines and traditions..
.
God bless Catholics, Protestants and all God’s children of every creed, color, and nation. Let us help make religion a bridge and not a barrier. Few will remember Seth Parker from years ago. He wrote a hymn which began: “I’ll go to my church and you go to yours, and let’s walk along together…” Good idea. I don’t know why some Catholics get so defensive when they believe that ‘the gates of hell’ will not prevail against their church.
 
So Mary was a “baby mamma” ,so to speak? Her only importance was a warm womb for God to park his son in for 9 months?
Mary was a virgin who conceived Jesus Christ by the will of God, through the Holy Spirit and with her own consent.
She is the mother of Christ, but she was not without sin. She lived and died like everybody else. She also was not a perpetual virgin, especially not during and after childbirth… that is ridiculous, even though Pope Pius XII taught that her corporal integrity was not affected by giving birth.

There is something special about that: She gave herself over into the service of the most high and that is something we should aspire to do too. God is almighty and we are His creatures. He made us, so what makes you assume that God using someone is not special?

All of this shows her devotion towards God. A devotion that many others have had throughout history till today.
 
I don’t follow.

Do you mean Catholics are calling Mary a vessel?

Or Catholics are accusing Protestants of calling her a vessel?
I’m not accusing anybody of anything… I was just told that I did it and I did not use that word… I do not think it is any bad though. Why not say that God did His holy work using Mary as a vessel? (She was called a “pure vessel” earlier)
 
That just doesn’t sound like the God who is Love.

Did your husband use you?

Did your father “use” your mother?

Is it ok for your daughter’s husband to “use” her?

The old testament, jealous God of the baptists is at work here.
My husband is not God. God is almighty and it is an honor to be part of His holy plan and to be used as a such. We should be all His and that includes agreeing that He uses us for His purpose.
 
God certainly does “use” us in many glorious ways, but that does not diminsih the purpose. If I am to be “used” by God, I praise the chance to glorify His name in that way.
Amen to that. That is what I am trying to say the whole time.
 
That just doesn’t sound like the God who is Love.

Did your husband use you?

Did your father “use” your mother?

Is it ok for your daughter’s husband to “use” her?

The old testament, jealous God of the baptists is at work here.
This utilitarian view of Mary comes from the mistaken idea that any praise given to Mary takes praise away from God. Many Protestants of the Evangelical kind cannot see that by exalting Mary we are praising God for all he accomplished in her life. It’s like praising a friend’s mother’s cooking. The son or daughter of that mother feels happy that his/her mother is getting such recognition for her culinary skills not that the one giving such praise thinks less of his friend for praising his/her mother.

God created Mary, so when we give Mary honor and praise we are a praising the great work God has done in creating the perfect mother for the perfect Son. God gets all the praise in it since he is the one responsible for all the graces given and all the good works done through Mary.
 
Mary was a virgin who conceived Jesus Christ by the will of God, through the Holy Spirit and with her own consent.
She is the mother of Christ, but she was not without sin. She lived and died like everybody else. She also was not a perpetual virgin, especially not during and after childbirth… that is ridiculous, even though Pope Pius XII taught that her corporal integrity was not affected by giving birth.
And you base her perpetaul virginity being ridicolous on what? Also can you show us in Mystici Corporis Christi where Pius XII says he hymen remained intact?
There is something special about that: She gave herself over into the service of the most high and that is something we should aspire to do too. God is almighty and we are His creatures. He made us, so what makes you assume that God using someone is not special?
Why would God require a sanctified tabernacle for stones of tablets and bread from heaven to reside in but not ask for the same for his son?
All of this shows her devotion towards God. A devotion that many others have had throughout history till today.
So you beleive there was nothng special about her devotion to God? That God just randomly chose her ? What others had the same devotion? were they at the foot of the Cross? Did they bathe him, feed him, comfort him?
 
A FEW MORE RESPONSES
Code:
      5. I do admire some saints. One of my favorites is St. Francis of Assisi. And I admired Mother Theresa despite her confession of so many 'dark years'. She was a true worker in the Kingdom. But what about Padre Pio? Does anyone out there actually believe that Padre Pio could levitate and that he could be at more than one place at the same time? And so many other stories of saints are wild and simply over the top. This combined with Fatima, Lourdes, Guadalupe, etc., can make Catholicism seem to many like a relic of past generations when superstitions were widely accepted as fact.
Roy, I’m really concerned about your characterization of these things as superstitious. Don’t you believe in miracles? Isn’t it possible that Padre Pio really did levitate or appear in two places at once? Remember, an atheist would say you are superstitious because you believe Christ rose from the dead. Yet that is a lot bigger miracle than any attributed to any of the saints. Some liberal “Christians” would say miracles don’t happen any more. If that be true, Heaven help us because we are all totally lost and bound for Hell because we could no longer experience that wonderful miracle of forgiveness of sins.
 
And I admired Mother Theresa despite her confession of so many ‘dark years’.
Despite?? How fortunate you are to never have had a question.
But what about Padre Pio? Does anyone out there actually believe that Padre Pio could levitate and that he could be at more than one place at the same time?
I don’t give it much thought. I should no more doubt the folks who saw it than my alcoholic Baptist friend who claimed to have seen an Angel.
And so many other stories of saints are wild and simply over the top. This combined with Fatima, Lourdes, Guadalupe, etc., can make Catholicism seem to many like a relic of past generations when superstitions were widely accepted as fact.
**But the wildest Catholic story of all is that the Word became Flesh, was crucified, died and was buried, and after 3 days rose from the dead!! **
 
And you base her perpetaul virginity being ridicolous on what? Also can you show us in Mystici Corporis Christi where Pius XII says he hymen remained intact?
This is definitely getting too dumb and I agree with a prior poster and let this topic rest. Insult me and my intelligence because I decide to do so if you must.
 
This is definitely getting too dumb and I agree with a prior poster and let this topic rest. Insult me and my intelligence because I decide to do so if you must.
well in parting I will let you know that there is one thing you and my wife absolutely agree on-your husbands are not God:D.
 
Superstitions are not the same thing as supernatural events. The events at Lourdes, and Fatima have been approved by the chuch as authentic after many years of scrutinizing… Many, or most of these kinds of events/apparitions are concluded to be false, and are condemned by the church. I don’t find it difficult to believe in the possibilty of an apparition of the Virgin Mary, and I don’t understand how it would be considered superstitious to believe in them when the messages she conveyed to the seer’s contained information that was truthful and aligned with the bible and teachings of the Church.
A study of the approved apparitions of Fatima and Lourdes would shed light on questions that may be hard to understand or believe. There is a good book on the apparitions written by a Lutheran man, called “Those that saw her”.
It’s true that God gave us the ability to use science to help us understand the world around us and we rightly use it as a tool, but God also gave us an imagination, also a tool; the platform that begins the discovery of all things seen, and things unseen.

Sincerely,
Debbie
 
A FEW MORE RESPONSES
Code:
 I'm sure many of you will agree when I say that I should give this up and get busy with other things. But it's difficult to let certain things stand without clarifying or challenging. Here are a few examples in response to various postings.

  1. First and foremost, every Protestant I know and has ever known honors Mary. I am repeating myself but this needs to be emphasized. The difference is that we do not venerate her, do not claim to see apparations of her, do not make her the "Queen of Heaven" and the patron saint of the USA - etc. I suspect that she was a humble young woman who must be troubled by such adulation. It appears to be a cult based on a medieval mindset and the monarchist tradition that seems so alien to this era of advanced education.
It seems you don’t realize how condescending it sounds for you to tell Catholics that what their Church has approved is superstition. It is apparent you know nothing about apparitions and how the Church determines which are approved and which aren’t.
Code:
  2. I doubt seriously if either Luther or Calvin believed in the Immaculate Conception or the Assumption. It's been years since I read their main writings, but I would need to know chapter and verse. They obviously believed in the Virgin Birth which scripture clearly states. But, in any case, Protestants that I know don't regard Luther, Calvin or any of the other Reformers as infallible, not even when it comes to doctrine. They were just pulling away from Catholicism and were developing their theologies. I don't look to any of them for my theology. I look to scripture, to reason, to modern science, etc. It was easy to believe in Adam and Eve centuries ago, but our knowledge has so expanded re the age of the world, Neanderthal Man, and much, much else that the notion that the first humans were created roughly 6000 years ago seems absurd today. But if you work out the genealogies of those allegedly between Adam and today it adds up to roughly 6000 years. So, what do we accept: the Biblical account or documented history?
Luther and Calvin didn’t believe in certain things because they just couldn’t leave certain aspects of their Catholicism behind, but because they understood why certain teachings about Mary are important to the Christian faith. They had no qualms at all about ditching those teachings they no longer held to, I can’t imagine they’d stick at Marian ones out of mere sentiment.

I would remind you that the Bible is the Catholic Church’s book. As for science, what does that have to do with the things we are discussing? And the supposed 6000 year old Earth idea? The Church fostered and encouraged scientific inquiry all through its history and it never taught a 6000 year old Earth. Those are Protestant notions.
Code:
  3. Someone states, in effect, that Protestants will be treated gently for their heresies because they were born into Protestants families. Well, my paternal family was Catholic and my late and beloved wife had been Catholic, so I assume they will catch 'hell' because they left the true church. Where I attend now probably 50% of the congregation came from Catholicism. Fine people. We, by the way, don't speak of them as converts. We see Christianity as a house with many rooms, but they are and were all part of one family. I am troubled when Pope Benedict states that Protestant churches are not really churches but 'ecclesial' societies and that Protestant ministers do not officiate at authentic communion services!
The Church does not teach that everyone who leaves the Church is doomed to hell. And Protestants who become Catholics aren’t converts, either. They are candidates for confirmation and reconciliation. And the Pope is right in his definition. Faith groups that don’t have a valid priesthood are not churches in the proper sense of the word. They are groups of people who gather in an ecclesial body to pray and worship.
Code:
   4.  As stated in Posting 12 Jesus did not seem to treat his mother deferentially as recorded in the gospels. And Paul, in his letters, doesn't mention her even once. That Paul omission strikes me as very indicative since Paul was so central in organizing the early churches.
And you’re seeing it that way doesn’t at all make it so. I’ve already gone over this ground, so I won’t cover it again.
Code:
   5. I do admire some saints. One of my favorites is St. Francis of Assisi. And I admired Mother Theresa despite her confession of so many 'dark years'. She was a true worker in the Kingdom. But what about Padre Pio? Does anyone out there actually believe that Padre Pio could levitate and that he could be at more than one place at the same time? And so many other stories of saints are wild and simply over the top. This combined with Fatima, Lourdes, Guadalupe, etc., can make Catholicism seem to many like a relic of past generations when superstitions were widely accepted as fact.
You’re personal distaste isn’t sound reasoning. Lourdes, Guadalupe, Fatima have brought millions of souls to salvation. No one is making anyone believe in apparitions or even demanding anyone know about them, but to dismiss them without knowing anything about them is not reasonable.
Code:
    6. Finally, millions of us are 'big tent' Protestants, not scriptura sola fundamentalists. Most of my Protestant friends are the same, So often the criticism of Protestantism forgets that mainline Protestants (and most Catholics I know) are generally ecumenical, friendly to other faiths, open to honest dialogue, but not able to believe the unbelievable. We can respect what others may believe (Catholics, Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, etc.) but find it impossible to embrace all of their doctrines and traditions..
No one is asking you to embrace anything. We are only asking you to open your mind.
.
Code:
     God bless Catholics, Protestants and all God's children of every creed, color, and nation. Let us help make religion a bridge and not a barrier. Few will remember Seth Parker from years ago. He wrote a hymn which began: "I'll go to my church and you go to yours, and let's walk along together...." Good idea. I don't know why some Catholics get so defensive when they believe that 'the gates of hell' will not prevail against their church.
Ecumenicism is a fine thing. I’m all for it. However, you telling Catholics that what they believe is superstitious hardly lives up to your own definition of ecumenicism. 😉
 
John 2: 4 And Jesus said to her, “O woman, what have you to do with me? My hour has not yet come.”
5 His mother said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.”
Jesus hour has not come yet, Mom sure packs a big punch with her Son.Why would’nt it be the same when we ask her for her interssion if acceptable to Jesus?🤷
Peace and God Bless onenow1
 
SDA’s say i have to be baptized by full immersion and worship on Saturday to be saved. Baptists say that I merely need to accept Jesus Christ as my peronsonal Savior and I am saved. Catholics say i need to have faith in jesus Cheist and obey his commands to be saved. Jehova Witnesses claim i am condemned if I am given a blood transfuson and that regardless only 144,000 will gain heaven, Mormons deny the trinity but say I can beocme a god.

How do we resolve this?
Only one way … ‘Take it to the Church’
 
Janet1983; said:
Summa Theologiae III.28.2

) state that Mary gave birth painlessly in miraculous fashion without opening of the womb and without injury to the hymen as did Pope Paul IV’s Cum quorundam of 7 August 1555 at the Council of Trent…



St. Augustine suggested that Christ could of passed thru the wall of the womb, just as he would later pass thru a closed door.
 
A FEW MORE RESPONSES
Code:
 Paul, in his letters, doesn't mention her even once. That Paul omission strikes me as very indicative since Paul was so central in organizing the early churches.

.
An Argument from Silence …

Do we know for sure we have all of Paul’s letters and beliefs recorded ?

And, if Paul had taught ideas apposed to Church beliefs on Mary … would not Tradition have been influenced by such ideas ?
 
As a catholic I have visited many churches. In Russia the Russian orthodox church. I was amazed to see their art work and images of saints around the church. In one of the churches I would look up at the dome of it and see the image of Mary. The position of her being that high up showed how important she was and her closeness near God.
Now when my grandpa died I had to attend to his funeral. He was Lutheran and I saw a stain glass window of Mary, and a statue of Jesus. I had been to this church before a couple times in the past when I stayed at my Aunt’s house. She is a Sunday school teacher there. My mother was raised Lutheran. My Aunt says the church is changing some of it’s ways and going back to what Catholicism was teaching. When I had attended my grandpa’s funeral I was stun to see that the minster dressed up like a Catholic priest.
I have also visted some baptist churches and they frown upon stain glass windows. They may only have a plain cross in the background, and candles for lent and Easter. Mary is not shown as an important figure in their church.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top