No, I didn’t misunderstand your question. I presume that what you mean by what we “don’t” do is erect statues of her, kneel and pray to her, elevate her to unbiblical positions, consider her our “mother,” or believe she has the power to intercede for us on earth and dispense “graces” in order to do “gracious works” which contribute to one’s future salvation. If that’s what you mean, then you’re right. We don’t do any of those things as a way of considering/counting her "blessed."We count her “blessed” because of what was said TO her and what was fulfilled through her. It’s that simple.
As I stated earlier, just because someone “counts” / “considers” Mary blessed does not mean that he can’t also ignore her. I clearly showed this with my “feuding brothers” example. You have yet to reply to that reasoning in defense of your statement that you do not ignore her.
We can go no further. We cannot exceed what is written concerning her.AGAIN, there is no instruction to “honor” Mary either from Christ, the Apostles (they never even mention her in the Epistles) or Scripture.
What the Catholic Church says about Mary comes from the Deposit of Faith, which includes Scripture and Sacred Tradition. So it comes from God. Your statements show that you are an adherent to Sola Scriptura, but I am sure you are aware that Catholics don’t accept this doctrine. This is a Catholic forum, so if you judge what we say and do about Mary based on Sola Scriptura, then first prove that Sola Scriptura is a valid doctrine to begin with. As far as Catholics (and Orthodox, and certain other Protestants) are concerned, it is not a valid doctrine.
If I say any more on this subject I’ll be kicked off the forum. Well, my warning states differently.
Here is the link to the CA forum policy rules:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=116150
And here is a link to CA’s banned topics:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=2363920&postcount=9
Exactly which rule(s) were you warned against? This is the second time I’ve asked.
And the post I uploaded was deleted.I would differ with you based on that John passage but I was already warned. Suffice it to say that that passage does not present Mary as everyone’s "mother.
I didn’t ask for a link to your
post, I asked for a link to the entire
thread. Are you saying the entire thread was deleted?
And I never brought up the Gospel of John. Evidently you are referring to the “Behold your mother” exchange at the foot of the cross. I did not use this, or any of the Gospel of John, to demonstrate that Mary is our mother, but instead what the NT teaches elsewhere about our relationship with Christ. So it appears that you certainly can address what I stated earlier without either of us bringing up the Gospel of John.
But you don’t elevate Joseph, the shepherds and the wise men to unbiblical, heavenly positions. Nor do I see statues of Joseph, the shepherds or the wise men erected in all your church buildings throughout the year. To which of the shepherds do you personally pray? Do you say a “Hail Shepherds?”
No, we do not award them the same degree of honor we do Mary, but we still honor them. What do you do? Ignore them, too? And for the record, most Catholic churches have a statue of Joseph prominently displayed throughout the year.
You’re right back to your mundane “rape” logic. I already gave you my response to that and “Paul c” used it to slander me (“Christian charity?” I think not). So I’m not responding to that mundane reasoning anymore, which I consider placing that wonderful event into a vulgar context anyway.
Here is exactly what I asked of you in my last post: “I will withhold all labels, so there is no issue of me taking you out of context. I’m not even necessarily saying that your interpretation of Luke is the same thing as the example I gave of the kidnapped woman. I am simply asking you to explain to me the fundamental difference between the two.”
And remember, I did not say that my kidnapping example was “rape”, but a “serious crime”, and left it at that. So explain how your interpretation of Luke is different from my example. Explain how your interpretation is not a crime. It seems that you are unable to, and are also unwilling to admit that that there is no fundamental moral difference. Saying “I’m not responding to that mundane reasoning anymore” is simply a way of looking for an excuse to back out of a debate rather than admit that you have an indefensible position.
My interpretation is based on what is REVEALED in the Scriptural passage itself. Not your stories which have no validity to the actual Biblical text. Show me in the text where Gabriel asks for Mary’s consent.
Mary understood that she was being offered a choice, or she would not have said, “Let it be done unto me.” So the text clearly shows that Mary, in the very least,
thought she was being offered a choice. And the conception did not happen until after this statement. Plus, it happened* immediately* after this statement. She was not pregnant when Gabriel arrived and greeted her, but only after she said, “Let it be done unto me…”
But let me ask you this: According to your interpretation, what would have been the outcome of this event had Mary said, “Let it NOT be done unto me…”?
And I also challenge you to find one credible Protestant Scripture scholar or theologian who backs up your position concerning Mary not giving consent.
