What do YOU think about Us Catholics and our veneration of Mary

[PetraG]

I don’t understand. I had no intention of being sarcastic? What did I write that you took that way?

 

[PJM]

not the mere fact of her physical motherhood. God did not use her as a convenient physical object; the important thing to salvation history was the relationship of unreserved love between Mary and her Creator and her total obedience to everything that relationship justly called on her to do. That is the relationship from which everything praiseworthy about her flows.

hmmm, Mary was chosen by our GOD out literally BILLIONS of other choices; can we make this hilighted statement?

I completely AGREE with the rest of your post;

Continued Blessings

Patrick [The OP]

 

[MT1926]

She told some people this at a wedding. She is not the authority of scripture, Jesus is.

Paul only spoke to some people in Corinth or Galatia or Ephesus, etc. does that mean we should disregard what he said as well?

All scripture, no matter who spoke it, is inspired by the Holy Spirit? Are you claiming there is nothing of importance in these words that she spoke?

 

[LostSheep7]

When I was a Protestant (Reformed), I thought that Marian Devotion was a hateful and demonic idolatry.

Now that I’m converting to the Holy Mother Church and looking foward to become a Catechumen, my love and admiration for the Most Blessed Virgin grows stronger every day

 

[mcq72]

Christians do not “need” scripture in the strict sense. The first generations of Christians had none.

Sounds familiar, like the Jews during our Lord’s visitation also only need their rabbis/lawyers and the Sanhedrin, their magisterium, forming “tradition”.

The church was first Jewish, and to say they had no writ doesn’t fit, as NT writ testifies.

Jesus did not write a thing.

except He very often pointed out how He was fulfilling Writ. he did not say he was fulfilling tradition , or magisterial wishes.

And He most definitely shortly after His departure command inspired writings.

New Testament” refers strictly and solely to His Body and Blood in the Eucharist.

not sure, that therewas a “eucharist” at Last Supper, at least not as we with certainty give thanks later. Were the apostles thanking God for Calvary at the Last Supper ? Was is more declaratory than a thanksgiving?

For sure the elements were there, and consecratory words (with any ''changes" one would believe or not), but was there thanksgiving , for which Christians would later become famous for, for which the entire rite would be known by and finally labeled "Thanksgiving " ? Eucharist =Thanksgiving in Greek

 

[mcq72]

Why do you think that we require a bible, when that is not a biblical belief? Where does the bible say that must only believe that which is in it? For that matter, where does the bible mention what should even be in it?

Then why did Barnabas write,

" Those that are knowledgeable of the Lord’s precepts, keep them, as many as are written " ?

 

[mcq72]

She is the “Woman” of Revelation 12.

Well Victorinus, one of the first fathers to write commentary on Apocalypse in 3/4 th century wrote this:

"The woman clothed with the sun, and having the moon under her feet, and wearing a crown of twelve stars upon her head, and travailing in her pains, is the ancient Church of fathers, and prophets, and saints, and apostles, which had the groans and torments of its longing until it saw that Christ… had taken flesh out of the selfsame people. …"

Did Mary at Bethlehem give birth in travailing pains ?

Many say she, the “woman” , is “Israel” , especially in the last days.

I do not mind seeing it as partly playing on Mary’s history and the birth of Christ , but with future application as context ( the woman fleeing into the wilderness for three and a half years , a time familiar at end times). Prophecies often have several layers of fulfilment, or a shadowing of a future event.

 

[po18guy]

Stay on point! Where did JESUS teach that we run to the bible and argue?

Where did JESUS teach that anything written was the “final authority”?

Where did JESUS teach that anything written was the “sole rule”?

Answer those and we can talk. Of course, He did none of these.

Jesus did NOT NOT NOT found a bible Church.

You are at least two degrees of separation away from the Church that Christ founded.

1. You rely on your ego’s interpretation of the bible
2. You have departed even from the reformers.

How do you KNOW that you are even Christian?

 

[po18guy]

Epic fail. As many as are written? This does in no way say that everything must be written! Leviticus was written. The Decalogue was written. We do not follow the 613 written laws.

“Bible-based” is 100% unarguably a man-made idea.

You cannot argue that and retain any credibility,

 

[po18guy]

What? The Church gave birth to Christ?

Epic fail.

 

[po18guy]

not sure, that therewas a “eucharist” at Last Supper, at least not as we with certainty give thanks later. Were the apostles thanking God for Calvary at the Last Supper ? Was is more declaratory than a thanksgiving?

For sure the elements were there, and consecratory words (with any ''changes" one would believe or not), but was there thanksgiving , for which Christians would later become famous for, for which the entire rite would be known by and finally labeled "Thanksgiving " ? Eucharist =Thanksgiving in Greek

If you are inventing your own religion, and using a dictionary to define words, this makes sense.

Where did Jesus say to do that?

Consider: You claim that 5 Billion Christians over 2,000 years were ALL WRONG but you and your bible are right?

I may very well be retarded, but that sounds arrogant.

 

[po18guy]

Serious thread drift.

Why Catholic, Orthodox and the reformers venerate Mary is 100% clear and the right thing to do.

What would Jesus do? - to use a hackneyed phrase. What did He do?

I seriously wonder what in hell has crept into bible Christianity to make her common, or simply forget about her?

Have a read about demonic limitations during exorcisms:

http://www.signandsight.com/features/530.html

From the interview:

(Fr. Barrajon) At the end, the priest says to the demon, “Go away! Disappear!” The
demon usually answers, “No, I don’t want to.” It rebels and revolts.
Sometimes it says “You have no power over me. You are nothing to me.”
But after a while, its resistance weakens. This usually happens after
the invocation of the Holy Mother, she’s very important for that. No demon ever dares to insult her during an exorcism. Never.

(Paul Badde) Does he have more respect for Mary than for God himself?

(Fr. Barrajon) Apparently.
Otherwise no holds are barred, and everyone is insulted: the priests,
everyone present, the bishops, the Pope, even Jesus Christ. But never
the Virgin Mary. It’s an enigma.

Even the devil venerates her by leaving her untouched by his filthy hands.

 

[shazirah]

Maryam is the greatest of all women, so venerating her is totally understandable. I was sort of surprised at the level that Catholicism takes it to, but obviously you guys see her as the mother of God, so that’s understandable too.

 

[mcq72]

Gal 4:26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.

Agree, that is the “woman” is not Mary but the church or “Israel”,as many commentators state, and that in the last days…of tribulation, even great tribulation.

Certainly Mary and the birth of Jesus is a type or a foreshadow of the end time event ( the birth, Herod trying to kill Him, the fleeing into Egypt), much like they thought John the Baptist was Elijah, yet was not the fulfillment of another end time prophecy.

Again, early church father Victorinus commentary on Apocalypse agrees with your well written post.

 

[MT1926]

Gal 4:26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.

Amen, this is not contradictory to Catholic belief.

The Catholic Church does not give an infallible interpretation to very many verses of scripture. I think it’s something like 11 verses that are infallible defined. She believes scripture can have layers of meaning.

Here’s I good article from a Jimmy Kin on Revelation 12.

The Woman of Revelation 12 | Catholic Answers Magazine

I prefer this approach because it answers all of the questions without have to jump to conclusions to make something fit.

In Rev.12:2 the woman is in labor which means she cannot be in labor with Yeshua because he was born without labor pains or before the great tribulation.

Where does the Bible tell us Mary didn’t have labor pains?

 

[po18guy]

What do we know about private interpretation of scriptural prophecy?

It is false.

Make up all you want, you are and will be incorrect.

 

[mcq72]

I seriously wonder what in hell has crept into bible Christianity to make her common, or simply forget about her?

As I first stated, wondering what do Catholics think of protestant veneration of Mary, saying it would probably be just as critical.

Criticism is fine, but hyperbole stunts any iron sharpening. To say we “treat her as common and simply forget about her” is as extreme as others saying you worship her. Yet for sure that is how both exremists “feel”. I would indeed say with some foundation by comparison.

I do not say you worship her, especially by official teaching or proper practice, as we do not treat her as “common” or forget about her, in official teaching or proper practice.

 

[thistle]

Mary and Jesus were always “together” in his 33 years on earth

Sorry to be pedantic but we don’t know how old Jesus was when he died. Scripture says he was “about” 30 when he started his public ministry. That could mean in his 20’s or 30’s.

 

[meltzerboy2]

It is incumbent upon others (mainly Protestants) to understand this, not on Catholics to constantly explain or even try to justify it. Veneration and adoration do NOT mean deification. Why is this idea so difficult to grasp?

 

[ahs]

Agree, that is the “woman” [of Revelation] is not Mary but the church or “Israel”,as many commentators state, and that in the last days…of tribulation, even great tribulation.

Certainly Mary and the birth of Jesus is a type or a foreshadow of the end time event ( the birth, Herod trying to kill Him, the fleeing into Egypt), much like they thought John the Baptist was Elijah, yet was not the fulfillment of another end time prophecy.

Again, early church father Victorinus commentary on Apocalypse agrees with your well written post.

Victorinus’ commentary wasn’t strictly limited to one interpretation or the other. And Paul’s Scripture passage also does not contradict seeing Mary as the “woman” in Revelation. The Church as seen the woman of Revelation as BOTH a sign of Mary AND the Church. It need not be “either/or”, and it is certainly not in this case. For, Revelation clearly and explicitly states that the woman gave birth to the Child who would rule with a rod [Christ], and we know that the Church did not give birth to Christ…but Mary did. So, the clear language of Scripture and the commentaries clearly show us that the truth is found in “both/and”, as opposed to “either/or”.