The Inspired Scriptures are All-Sufficient?

[ScottH]

Mary worship was attempted, and rebuked by Christ Himself in Luke.

Luke 11:27
*27As Jesus was saying these things, a woman in the crowd called out, “Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you.” *

• 28He replied, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it.”*

Could He be any clearer? And do we not see a nod to sola scriptura in there to boot?

(Pop…)

…goes the can-o-worms.

 

[MrS]

Genesis315:

That’s the whole point. Not everything is spelled out in the Bible The Bible does talk about one Churc however. Jesus founds it and Paul calls it the pillar and foundation of truth. Likewise, the Church is called the Catholic Church by St. Ignatius of Antioch (he was the bishop of Antioch) in 110 AD. **He was a friend of St. John the Apostle./**QUOTE]

At best, an understatement. I believe history tells us that Ignatius studied “at the feet” of the beloved disciple for 40 years.

Since the bible as we know it did not yet exist, the teaching was primarily oral.

As for what Paul says… he says it at a time when only the scriptures of the Old Testament were available. So are we thus reduced to just OT writings as the source of Truth.??

 

[Scott_Waddell]

ScottH:

And do we not see a nod to sola scriptura in there to boot?

No we don’t. The Word of God is taught from Christ to the apostles orally. In Scripture Christ neither wrote a Gospel, nor commanded anyone else to do so, and certainly didn’t say that the apostles make this uncommanded gospel to be the sole rule of faith.

Sola Scriptura is a tradition of man.

Scott

 

[MrS]

justaccord:

The Bible:
“This motherhood of Mary in the order of grace continues uninterruptedly from the consent which she loyally gave at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation. . . . Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix.”

She first brought us the gift of Salvation in the birth of the Lord.

She again brought us the gift of Salvation when she presented her Son in the temple.

She accompanied the gift of Salvation throughout His entire Life.

She was in the center of the disciples at Pentacost, the birthday of the Church founded by the Gift of Salvation.

And she continues to bring us the graces from her Son, today if we let her. Her only message is just the same as it was at Cana: “Do as my Son asks.”

 

[MrS]

ScottH:

Mary worship was attempted, and rebuked by Christ Himself in Luke.

Luke 11:27
*27As Jesus was saying these things, a woman in the crowd called out, “Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you.” *
28He replied, "Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it."

Could He be any clearer? And do we not see a nod to sola scriptura in there to boot?

(Pop…)

…goes the can-o-worms.

perhaps you mean a boot to Sola Scriptura - it does say “blessed rather are those who HEAR the word…”

 

[TNT]

justaccord:

Mary cannot “work with Christ as mediator” without clearly violating God’s own Word. Christ is utterly sufficient as Mediator all by Himself – He is the Son of God. Mary is not divine (agreed?) and it is blasphemy to elevate her to a postion Jesus alone earned with His death on the cross.

1Tim. 2:5 For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,

One means one not two. Co- is not consistent with one. It is not a shared position. So says God’s Word.

AND THIS ALL HAS EXACTLY WHAT TO DO WITH THE SUBJECT OF THIS THREAD.
HONESTLY, EVERY TIME WE GIVE REBUTTALS TO THE IDEA OF SOLA SCRIPTURA, OUT COME THE :
MARY WORSHIP
PETER-STONE
POPE MISSING
STATUES FORBIDDEN. BLAH BLAH.
WHY CAN’T THE SOLA SCRIPTURITES HONESTLY ANSWER THE REBUTTALS?

 

[deb1]

ScottH:

Mary worship was attempted, and rebuked by Christ Himself in Luke.

Luke 11:27
*27As Jesus was saying these things, a woman in the crowd called out, “Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you.” *
28He replied, "Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it."

Could He be any clearer? And do we not see a nod to sola scriptura in there to boot?

(Pop…)

…goes the can-o-worms.

Could we move this to another thread? Also that ending. Pop goes the can-o-worm sounds smug. Take my word for it, if you start another thread then the people on this board can defend their position on Mary. As you have been told before, you need to start different threads for different subjects. That is just polite and only fair.

 

[El_Catolico]

WHY CAN’T THE SOLA SCRIPTURITES HONESTLY ANSWER THE REBUTTALS?

Because there is no way to rationally defend it. There comes a time when the purpose of apologetics ends and a person is simply faced with the descision to believe what he knows is true or follow his old beliefs. People who refuse to admit they are in error are out of our reach. The only one who can cause the seed we have planted to bear fruit is the Holy Spirit.

 

[deb1]

justaccord:

Mary cannot “work with Christ as mediator” without clearly violating God’s own Word. Christ is utterly sufficient as Mediator all by Himself – He is the Son of God. Mary is not divine (agreed?) and it is blasphemy to elevate her to a postion Jesus alone earned with His death on the cross.

1Tim. 2:5 For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,

One means one not two. Co- is not consistent with one. It is not a shared position. So says God’s Word.

Ahhhh…:banghead: What is so difficult about starting a new thread for each subject? This is driving me nuts. Other people, both Catholics and Protestants, figure this out and follow the rules. :tsktsk: What is wrong with these two particular posters? I really don’t want to be harsh-I just want you to start a new thread.

 

[El_Catolico]

Mary worship was attempted, and rebuked by Christ Himself in Luke.

Luke 11:27
*27As Jesus was saying these things, a woman in the crowd called out, “Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you.” *
28He replied, "Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it."

Could He be any clearer? And do we not see a nod to sola scriptura in there to boot?

(Pop…)

…goes the can-o-worms.

This is a better translation (NASB):

While Jesus was saying these things, one of the women in the crowd raised her voice and said to Him, “Blessed is the womb that bore You and the breasts at which You nursed.”

Mary’s high position is due primarily to the fact that she “heard the word of God and obeyed it.” There is no problem here with Catholic teaching.

This is far from advocating sola scriptura. It is simply talking about the precepts of God. The “word of God” here is not just scripture. It is every place where God has revealed to manking his precepts.

 

[Salmon]

justaccord:

The Bible:
1Tim. 2:5 For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man* Christ Jesus,

The catholic catechism:

969 “This motherhood of Mary in the order of grace continues uninterruptedly from the consent which she loyally gave at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation. . . . Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix.”

Is this or is this not a contradiction? If we have to suspend the rules of grammar and the common meaning of words in order to have this conversation, someone is being less than candid.

Mary is officially declared Mediatrix. But Scripture says NO ONE is a Mediator (that is the capitalized title, not mediator with a small “m” as in your example).

If there were no contradiction between the magisterium and the Word of God, you would not need a dogma that establishes that the magisterium trumps the Word of God.

Why not just admit what we all know – the tradition of men is not consistent with the Word of God – not in abrogation of teh 2nd commandment to allow idol worship, not in Marian doctrine, not in placing the church between an individual and Christ, thus frustrating the tearing of the temple curtain and mocking the work of Christ on the cross, not in the need to re-sacrifice Christ, not in making salvation conditional on works instead of faith alone – there are a host of ways. Why not just own up to the dogma on the magisterium and go from there?

As is ALMOST ALWAYS the case when non-Catholics cite the Catechism, they conveniently leave out the footnotes.

The footnotes are included to provide further insight and explanation of what has been stated. justaccord wishes to give the impression that the paragraph cited is open to his explanation. If one searches the footnote cited (512 LG 62), one finds a much different explanation than that cited by justaccord:

CITED TEXT:

Lumen gentium 62

This maternity of Mary in the order of grace began with the consent which she gave in faith at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, and lasts until The eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this salvific duty, but by her constant intercession continued to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation.(15*) By her maternal charity, she cares for the brethren of her Son, who still journey on earth surrounded by dangers and cultics, until they are led into the happiness of their true home. Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked by the Church under the titles of Advocate, Auxiliatrix, Adjutrix, and Mediatrix.(16*) *This, however, is to be so understood that it neither takes away from nor adds anything to the dignity and efficaciousness of Christ the one Mediator.(17)

For no creature could ever be counted as equal with the Incarnate Word and Redeemer.** Just as the priesthood of Christ is shared in various ways both by the ministers and by the faithful, and as the one goodness of God is really communicated in different ways to His creatures, so also the unique mediation of the Redeemer does not exclude but rather gives rise to a manifold cooperation which is but a sharing in this one source.

The Church does not hesitate to profess this subordinate role of Mary. It knows it through unfailing experience of it and commends it to the hearts of the faithful, **so that encouraged by this maternal help they may the more intimately adhere to the Mediator and Redeemer. **

Since the footnotes are included (and hyper-linked) in the various sites for the on-line Catechism, including:

K of C Online Catechism

one can’t help but be suspicious when the obvious intent of the passage is so twisted and distorted intentionally.

Peace in Christ…Salmon

 

[justaccord]

Criticize me for “interpretation” if you will. This is akin to an Alice in Wonderland conversation. Words mean something. Your church can SAY she IS a COmediator and a COredeemer and then SAY this takes nothing away from Christ, but it is sheer poppycock.

God does not share His glory. What are you doing, contrary to the pronouncement of your church, is similar to what we see on CNN – it is called “spin”. Mediator means mediator. One means one. With all due respect, if you can’t see the problem, my hope and prayer is that others will – others who will not be satisfied by a verbal shell game in which catholicism tries to talk out of both sides of the mouth simultaneously.

 

[Milliardo]

justaccord:

Mary cannot “work with Christ as mediator” without clearly violating God’s own Word.

We pray for each other. We are violating God’s Word then?

Christ is utterly sufficient as Mediator all by Himself – He is the Son of God. Mary is not divine (agreed?) and it is blasphemy to elevate her to a postion Jesus alone earned with His death on the cross.

First, do you think you are violating God’s Word by praying for a person, or if someone prays for you? Yes or no. Until you answer that, instead of dodging it, I will not answer you.

 

[El_Catolico]

God does not share His glory. What are you doing, contrary to the pronouncement of your church, is similar to what we see on CNN – it is called “spin”. Mediator means mediator. One means one. With all due respect, if you can’t see the problem, my hope and prayer is that others will – others who will not be satisfied by a verbal shell game in which catholicism tries to talk out of both sides of the mouth simultaneously.

You dont seem to be opening your mind to the possibility that words arent defined strictly the way you want to define them. There are certain ways to interpret things. For example, Jesus says “The Father and I are one.” Unitarians and Modalists use this to support their own doctrine about the Godhead, in which there is only 1 person operating under 3 different forms. Or likewise, when the bible says “God is one”, a lot of people try to use that to reject the trinity.

Mediatorship comes in different senses. In one sense, Christ is the high mediator- he goes before the father to plead our case. Mary and the saints are not mediators with him at this level. In another sense, we are all mediators for each other- insofar as we all pray for each other. And, if you look at it as a whole, all the mediatorship is, in essense, christ’s- it is by his grace and free gift that we are able to do this.

 

[Ignatius]

justaccord:

Criticize me for “interpretation” if you will. Words mean something. .

Exactly, and you clearly do not understand what they mean in the context in which they are being used.

Listen justaccord, if you truly desire to enlighten yourself with regard to the Holy Scriptures, you might start with answering the following questions.
Insofar as what books to include in the New Testament, who declared which books to include?

Where (geographic location) was this done?
When (approximate dates) was this done? (Hint: look for New Testament Cannon).

Now I have asked this of you a couple of times now. Whay don’t you answer. The information is readily available and will take very little effort to find out. Please reply to this post and let me know what you find so that we can further discuss it.

I pray that the Holy Spirit grant you the wisdom and vision in this research and guide you to the Pillar and Foundation of Truth.

May the love of God the Father, the love of His Son Our Lord Jesus Christ, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you always.

Your brother in Christ.

 

[Salmon]

justaccord:

Criticize me for “interpretation” if you will. This is akin to an Alice in Wonderland conversation. Words mean something. Your church can SAY she IS a COmediator and a COredeemer and then SAY this takes nothing away from Christ, but it is sheer poppycock.

The Catholic Church teaches no such thing.

The Catholic Church teaches that Mary is the Mediatrix of all Graces, since Jesus Christ came THROUGH HER.

Simple.

The Catholic Church does NOT teach that Mary is Co-Redeemer, despite the fact that you may wish the Church did teach so.

Individual Catholics have been known to assign that title to Our Blessed Lady, but that is NOT Church teaching.

I am beginning to think there is no truth in you.

God does not share His glory.

What a dreary picture you paint for your resurrection.

This may be a difficult passage for some, but I’m certain you have mastered it:

1 Peter 4:13

But rejoice, inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christ’s sufferings; that, when his glory shall be revealed, ye may be glad also with exceeding joy.

justaccord:

What are you doing, contrary to the pronouncement of your church, is similar to what we see on CNN – it is called “spin”.

Or you just don’t want to see the truth. You say the Church teaches a doctrine (Co-Redeemer) and refuse to see that the Church teaches no such thing.

justaccord:

Mediator means mediator. One means one.

A million crucified Blessed Virgins would have been insufficient to mediate a resolution of the breach that existed between God and man since Adam’s fall. Is that the only meaning of the word “mediator”, or you willing to understand that words have more than one meaning. Insisting that the Catholic Church uses the word according to definition ‘c’ in the dictionary when it truly uses the word in accord with definition ‘b’, you protest that this is a non-valid use of the word.

C’mon, pray for you neighbor’s welfare. Be a good little mediator between your neighbor and God. You can do it.

With all due respect, if you can’t see the problem, my hope and prayer is that others will – others who will not be satisfied by a verbal shell game in which catholicism tries to talk out of both sides of the mouth simultaneously.

Certainly. The problem is obvious. The Church doesn’t use the word in accordance with your definition, yet, you insist that it must. When the Church provides that clarification, and explains the teaching, you insist upon your definition, and claim the Church really means something else.

You don’t argue against what the Church teaches…you argue against what you wish the Church taught.

Peace in Christ…Salmon

 

[RobbyS]

ephphatha:

Robert,

I’m not Catholic, but I still want to respond to a few things. Your argument for sola scriptura doesn’t seem sound to me.

First, you quoted three sources–two from the catechism and one from the Bible–to show that the Bible is the word of God. That, by itself, is not enough to establish that only the Bible is the word of God, and none of the sources you quoted exclude Tradition from carrying the same authority as the Bible.

Second, you made three observations about what the above authors did not say. Your point here seemed to be that since they did not say those things, then they were excluding those things as true. That, to me, seems like a glaring case of an argument from silence.

Third, using 2 Timothy 3:16-17 to argue for the sufficiency of scripture is problematic unless you can make the case that 2 Timothy was the last book written. If 2 Timothy 3:16-17 indicates that whatever scriptures exist are sufficient, and if there were other things written after 2 Timothy, then those other things were not necessary. But if there were scriptures written after 2 Timothy, then 2 Timothy cannot mean that the scriptures then in existence were sufficient or that they could not be added to.

Sam

Plus the obvvious question: what did he mean by" Scripture?" The Hebrew canon, the Greek Scriptures? Which writings of the New Testament?

 

[sonseeker]

mercygate:

Hm. Not sure what the question is. The Mass is totally impregnated with and derived from Scripture. Three distinct lessons are read at every Sunday Mass (OT, Epistle, Gospel) and the homily is always an explication of the Gospel. All doctrinal decisions are tested against Scripture. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states:
(Bold type is mine.)

In private, many of us pray the Scriptures in an ancient way known as Lectio Divina or Sacred Reading. We calmly read a passage – perhaps several times, even repeating a phrase several times to “feel” its impact; then we meditate on it – turn it over in our mind, perhaps we relate it to other scriptural passages, asking questions of it, learning from it; then a prayer will be formulated from it, and as we repose on this experience of the sacred Word, we may be drawn into a kind of silent contemplation and integration of that passage into our heart.

Does that answer your question, or did you have something else in mind?

That answers it. Thanks.

 

[justaccord]

Salmon:

The Catholic Church does NOT teach that Mary is Co-Redeemer, despite the fact that you may wish the Church did teach so.

Individual Catholics have been known to assign that title to Our Blessed Lady, but that is NOT Church teaching.

I am beginning to think there is no truth in you.

So who should I listen to, you or John Paul II. Does HE know catholic doctrine do you think? You people are so worried about multiple interpretations of Scripture, you forget how many opinions you all hold of what is and what is not catholic doctrine.

Here is what John Paul II said:

John Paul II, Allocution at the Sanctuary of Our Lady of Guayaquil, given on Jan 31, 1985, reported in L’Osservatore Romano Supplement of Feb. 2, 1985 and in English L’Osservatore Romano, March 11, 1985, p. 7.

Crucified spiritually with her crucified Son (cf. Gal 2:20), she contemplated with heroic love the death of her God, she ‘lovingly consented to the immolation of this Victim which she herself had brought forth’ (Lumen gentium #58) … as she was in a special way close to the Cross of her Son, she also had to have a privileged experience of his Resurrection. In fact, Mary’s role as co-redemptrix did not cease with the glorification of her Son.

CO REDEMPTRIX, did you get it? And it did not cease even after the ascension and glorification of Christ, but (presumably) goes on today.

Who exactly is lacking in truth here?

 

[pnewton]

I tried to read this whole thread. I really did. So many topics and so little time. I will just pick one.

“Co” in latin does not imply and never will imply equality, like it does in English. This little confusion may be part of the hesitancy on the Church in officially adopting this language. I do not know.

Nowhere will anyone find that Catholics put Mary, a creature, on the same plane as Jesus, the second person of the Holy Trinity. It just doesn’t happen. The most you may find in some of the mystics who spoke of her in the language of love. When a man says his wife looks divine, or he loves her more than anything, he does not mean to elevate her as a deity, but is speaking out of love.

We understand that Mary is not God and do not engage in idolatry by worshipping her.