This question is for Protestants only. What do you have against Mary?

[PRmerger]

Take a page from the Quran itself: How is the Muslim going to feel when you tell him that Jesus did not, in fact, possess the gift of speech even in His infancy, as the Quran says He did? Isn’t that loss of miraculous infant speech going to detract from the glory of Jesus’ divinity?

Fair enough.

What matters more, in other words: the truth, or whatever embellishments we can put on the truth that might draw in prospective believers?

On this we are agreed.

So, we take 2 POV which are presented to the Muslim. Both are Christians proclaiming these differing POVs. Which one will be more likely to enhance and affirm the divinity of Christ?

 

[PRmerger]

Nothing what so ever. She is creature…not Creator. She has honor as the mother of Jesus of Nazareth…but she is not the Savior. Yes…she said “Yes” to God, and as an example of how a Christian should live, par excellence…but still…she is creature.

And this is very Catholic of you to say!

 

[mpartyka]

Correct. And I’ve yet to see any Protestant offer any other plausible explanation.

Since the Transfiguration occurred immediately afterwards, some Protestants point to that as a foretaste of seeing Jesus coming with His kingdom.

The Dormition accounts say She fell asleep and then was assumed. Did Yoda taste death in Return of the Jedi? No, he took a nap and then disappeared into the Force. If you actually read the dormition accounts that’s what they all say happened to Mary. As has been noted the ones that claim She actually did taste death are all dubious.

You are actually using Star Wars to justify a Catholic belief. Good for you. At least you didn’t liken Jar Jar to the first pope.

If I recall the dormition accounts from my brief skimming of them last night, most (I think) of the accounts speak of the Virgin Mary’s soul as having been transferred to Jesus’ care before her body was assumed to Heaven. Correct me if I’m wrong, but the final separation of the soul from the body prior to resurrection is what we normally call “death.”

 

[mpartyka]

Sure. And I have no doubt that she* was* attended by a halo of brilliant light. There is nothing in Scriptures that contradict this. And perhaps those who did not see it were blinded by their sin, and those who did see it only affirmed their veneration of her.

Thank you for affirming my earlier point that, since the Scriptures have so little to say about Mary, they can’t possibly be used to deny whatever over-the-top characteristics, powers, and titles anyone later on would like to assign to her, short of making her God-in-the-flesh herself.

So, we take 2 POV which are presented to the Muslim. Both are Christians proclaiming these differing POVs. Which one will be more likely to enhance and affirm the divinity of Christ?

Well…neither, because neither of these POVs has any bearing on the divinity of Christ, right? There is no requirement, even under Catholic teaching, that Mary be immaculately conceived and perpetually sinless to be the Mother of God, so whether she was or wasn’t those things is completely irrelevant to Christ’s divinity. You’re basically showing off two sets of the same brand of speakers, only on one of the sets the volume knob goes to 11 instead of 10. There’s no substantial difference.

And consider this: The Muslim doesn’t believe that Mary is without sin. So in asking the Muslim to believe not only that Jesus is divine but that Mary is without sin, you’re asking him to swallow two really big ideas instead of one. And I think that’s part of the problem many Protestants have with Catholicism and Orthodoxy today – Protestantism, for all its shortcomings, is simple enough to be communicated by a believer and accepted by an unbeliever after a brief testimony, whereas the apostolic interpretations of the faith would take hours to explain and require the unbeliever to accept so many different things so as to be more unpersuasive than persuasive.

 

[Indifferently]

I don’t have anything against Mary. She was a very devout woman chosen by God to bear his Son Jesus Christ. We read the ‘Magnificat’ at Evening Prayer, which some Anglicans say or sing every day. Some of us just don’t have quite the same view of Mary that Roman Catholics do, that’s all. The question was quite combative in tone.

 

[robwar]

best point made yet. This is a loaded question and makes assumptions and lumps all Protestants together which one can’t do. Because Protestants have a different understanding about Mary and the concept of honor and veneration and worship, there simply is not a way to answer the OP. As a former Protestant, it is not just having “something” against Mary but having a different understanding about Mary and concept of honor and worship and grace and the differences between them.

 

[robwar]

Nothing what so ever. She is creature…not Creator. She has honor as the mother of Jesus of Nazareth…but she is not the Savior. Yes…she said “Yes” to God, and as an example of how a Christian should live, par excellence…but still…she is creature.

exactly!

 

[PRmerger]

Thank you for affirming my earlier point that, since the Scriptures have so little to say about Mary, they can’t possibly be used to deny whatever over-the-top characteristics, powers, and titles anyone later on would like to assign to her, short of making her God-in-the-flesh herself.

Sure. No Catholic ought to have a problem with that.

Curious, though, that you call a halo “over the top”.

Do you wish to retract that, or are you really going to claim that this is an “over the top” characteristic belonging to the realm of science fiction?

http://www.stcolumbanewark.com/my_content/images/Virgin_Mary.png

Perhaps you are unfamiliar with what revelation has proclaimed that eye has not seen and ear has not heard what God has ready for those who love him?

 

[PRmerger]

Well…neither, because neither of these POVs has any bearing on the divinity of Christ, right?

That is begging the question though, isn’t it.

There is no requirement, even under Catholic teaching, that Mary be immaculately conceived and perpetually sinless to be the Mother of God, so whether she was or wasn’t those things is **completely irrelevant **to Christ’s divinity.

Absolutely untrue. Of course it is relevant.

Having a vessel that was depraved tells us that that which it contained was not that valuable.

Ask a Muslim which upholds the divinity of a creature: having a dirty vessel, or having a pure one.

In fact, I ask you this: what would you pour The Numinous into? This:

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

or this:

http://i.istockimg.com/file_thumbvi...e-of-a-dirty-crushed-plastic-water-bottle.jpg

And imagine presenting these 2 vessels to a Muslim and saying, “Guess which one is a fitting vessel for holding The Numinous?” Which one do you think he’s going to choose?

 

[PRmerger]

And consider this: The Muslim doesn’t believe that Mary is without sin.

My point EXACTLY!! :extrahappy: :dancing:

Muslims don’t believe Mary was sinless. Muslims don’t believe Jesus was divine.

It follows, doesn’t it? If Mary was sinless–if that were a teaching of Islam–then it wouldn’t be a very big leap to believe that what she carried was Divine.

Which only goes to show that an impoverished understanding of Mary leads to an impoverished understanding of Jesus.

 

[stewstew03]

Watch this video and see if you can identify any kind of anger against Catholic veneration of Mary.

youtube.com/watch?v=PrPrbdonJ68&feature=related

Note that this video is even more laughable because that which he identifies as Mary is actually St. Therese, the Little Flower.

Little Flower, taking one for the team!

 

[stewstew03]

elisakreisinger.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/eyeroll.gif

Incidentally, while a member may ask that only a specific group of individuals respond, this request will always be superceded by the general CAFs rule which is: all members may respond to ANY thread.

Does this include Catholics? Are you saying the rules allow Catholics to respond to any thread on CAF? Because apparently there should be a rule against allowing Catholics to respond to any thread on a Catholic forum…

 

[stewstew03]

Did Yoda taste death in Return of the Jedi? No, he took a nap and then disappeared into the Force.

This is, hands down, the most brilliant illustration anyone has ever used in relation to the Assumption of Mary.

 

[datritle]

Mary is in fact known as the Co-Redemptrix. this is for Iloveangels

 

[Radical]

Having a vessel that was depraved tells us that that which it contained was not that valuable.

hmmm…please tell me how exactly this works (in your mind). At your Eucharist you believe that the body of the Lord is taken entirely into your mouth…you are then the alleged vessel of the Lord, just as Mary was the vessel of the Lord (though the womb is perhaps a more “honourable” location than the mouth, esophagus, and gut). You are not sinless and the millions of other Catholics all over the world that participate in your Eucharist aren’t sinless (and some are extremely depraved)…Let’s say that, on average, one out of a hundred Catholics particpates in the Eucharist each day and that the Lord’s body persists for a minute in each case…we then have the Lord’s body (cumulatively) residing in a non-sinless person 10 million minutes/day…as opposed to 400,000 minutes for Mary’s pregnancy…so what gives? How is it so impossible for Jesus to spend about 400,000 minutes in the womb of a sinner and yet spend far, far more time in the mouths and guts of sinners each and every day?

 

[stewstew03]

hmmm…please tell me how exactly this works (in your mind). At your Eucharist you believe that the body of the Lord is taken entirely into your mouth…you are then the alleged vessel of the Lord, just as Mary was the vessel of the Lord (though the womb is perhaps a more “honourable” location than the mouth, esophagus, and gut). You are not sinless and the millions of other Catholics all over the world that participate in your Eucharist aren’t sinless (and some are extremely depraved)…Let’s say that, on average, one out of a hundred Catholics particpates in the Eucharist each day and that the Lord’s body persists for a minute in each case…we then have the Lord’s body (cumulatively) residing in a non-sinless person 10 million minutes/day…as opposed to 400,000 minutes for Mary’s pregnancy…so what gives? How is it so impossible for Jesus to spend about 400,000 minutes in the womb of a sinner and yet spend far, far more time in the mouths and guts of sinners each and every day?

The distinction is that we are commanded to consume Christ’s body and blood - and in doing this we are “proclaiming the Lord’s death until He comes again.” See 1 Cor 11:23-26.

You bring up a good point, though: why do you think we are instructed to examine our conscience before receiving Christ? See 1 Cor 11:27-29.

With regard to Mary - she carried the New Covenant; just as the Ark (made of incorruptible wood) carried manna and the ten commandments. Put simply, Mary was the vessel; we are the consumers.

[BIBLEDRB]1 Corinthians 11:23-29[/BIBLEDRB]

:bible1:

 

[MaryT777]

She’s not God at all. She’s not a co-redemptor. She’s not a divine being. She’s not the 4th person of the Trinity.

There are a lot of people in the Catholic Church that need basic lessons in what Christianity consists of.

I have NEVER met one person in a Catholic Church who felt Mary was divine or
MORE RIDICULOUS the 4th person of the Trinity.
How ignorant of Catholicism.
Mary.

 

[mpartyka]

Thank you for affirming my earlier point that, since the Scriptures have so little to say about Mary, they can’t possibly be used to deny whatever over-the-top characteristics, powers, and titles anyone later on would like to assign to her, short of making her God-in-the-flesh herself.

Not even going to argue with it. Just quoting it because wow.

Curious, though, that you call a halo “over the top”. Do you wish to retract that, or are you really going to claim that this is an “over the top” characteristic belonging to the realm of science fiction?

A perpetual, visible halo over Mary’s head 24/7? Over the top.

Having a vessel that was depraved tells us that that which it contained was not that valuable.

Or maybe it tells us that the value of the vessel comes not from itself but from what it contains?

Muslims don’t believe Mary was sinless. Muslims don’t believe Jesus was divine. It follows, doesn’t it?

Well…no, of course not. Millions of Protestants don’t believe Mary was sinless, but they believe Jesus was divine. Which indicates that it’s far easier to believe Jesus was divine than that Mary was sinless. Which means her sinlessness would be a potential obstacle to Muslim belief in Jesus’ divinity rather than a help.

Which only goes to show that an impoverished understanding of Mary leads to an impoverished understanding of Jesus.

That still doesn’t follow. Jesus is still the God-Man whether Mary is sinless or not. What matters isn’t whether her sinlessness would affirm Jesus’ divinity. What matters is whether her sinfulness would deny Jesus’ divinity. And to millions of Christians, it clearly does not.

 

[mpartyka]

This is, hands down, the most brilliant illustration anyone has ever used in relation to the Assumption of Mary.

(If only there were a facepalm emote.)

 

[PRmerger]

Well…no, of course not. Millions of Protestants don’t believe Mary was sinless, but they believe Jesus was divine.

And that is why millions of Protestants have an impoverished understanding of Christ.

Incidentally, the ONLY way you know Jesus was divine is because the Catholic Church proclaimed this for you.

You have simply, as Mark Shea said (who borrowed from Chesterton), peculiarly, smashed the teachings on Mary while, inexplicably, proclaiming that the Church happened to get it right about Christ’s divinity.

(You here being a generic Protestant You. Not a personal you.)