Why do non catholics dislike Mother Mary?

  • Thread starter Thread starter wwolverine
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It does say:
12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name:
I don’t see the question, “Have you accepted Jesus as your personal Lord and Savior?” in that verse, but I’m willing to accept that if you’re willing to accept Luke 1:34 as a proof text for Mary’s perpetual virginity! 😉
 
Because it is a source of contention between protestants and Catholics especially when discussing sola scriptura. And because we are human beings, made in God’s image, but in the flesh. It just proves that there really is a theology of the body, and a Gospel of Life.

And often times, when a protestant’s arguments don’t win over a Catholic, it comes down to what does my flesh really want. Sex is often the biggest stumbling block to becoming a Catholic for many protestants, when they are honest with themselves.
Would you dare to guess how many catholics that go to church use contraception?
More than 50 Catholic groups in an open letter published Friday in Italy’s largest newspaper Corriere della Sera called on Pope Benedict XVI to lift the Roman Catholic Church’s ban on contraceptive use, Reuters reports. According to Reuters, the letter was published on the 40th anniversary of the late Pope Paul VI’s encyclical “Humanae Vitae,” which states the church’s opposition to contraception.
The letter said the church’s anti-contraception policy “has had a catastrophic impact on the poor and powerless around the world, endangering women’s lives and leaving millions at risk of HIV.” It added that after 40 years, the encyclical continues to be “a source of great conflict and division” in the church. In addition, because many Catholics use contraception, believe it is a moral choice to do so and feel they are not sinning, the policy has been “an utter failure,” according to the letter. It also said, “It is clear to us that the Catholic Church cannot move forward until it honestly confronts the paradox of Humanae Vitae.” The letter concludes, “Pope Benedict, we call on you to use this anniversary as an opportunity to start the process of healing by being true to the positive aspects of Catholic teachings on sexuality and lifting the ban on contraception to allow Catholics to plan their families safely and in good conscience.”
 
Dokimas;6107043]
The difference here is that you read with only your own limited human understanding based only on the words of the page. I have studied and read through the eyes of the Church, who is my Authority on moral matters that are hard to understand from Scripture alone. This is quite a revealing statement.
Hopefully it reveals my humility after 20 yrs of scripture study, realizing that someone somewhere is smarter than me, and Jesus really did leave us His Church to guide us.
When we understand God’s heart on the matter in one moral area, we can also say that God has the same heart in another moral area. Don’t just think in terms of prohibition, think in terms of what He calls us to do. God created us for a purpose, and that is to glorify Him always. To use our created bodies for the purpose they were created. God commanded “Be fruitful and multiply.” Is that a command found in the NT?
Matthew 5:17-20
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.”
Homosexuality, bestiality, masturbation, and contracepted sex are all closed to life, and therefore they go against his first commandment. There are other ways contracepted sex is sinful, primarily is that it is selfish. It is not giving of self to the spouse, but taking sexual gratification from the spouse. It is using what God created, but taking God’s purpose away from it. It is keeping God out of the sexual union between husband and wife, and saying, “My will be done, not thine.” Sounds like you are condeming Mary if she remained celebate for her whole marriage to Joseph./QUOTE]
Mary and Joseph chose to be celibate. They did not contracept. They used their bodies in the way God created them to be used. Joseph did not use Mary, the ark of the new covenant for sexual gratification, because she was set aside as something special. They chose together to be celibate. That was God’s will for them. There was no sexual union to contracept.
All fantastic questions…

Only I have given you some resources that would answer these questions, and I don’t see how you have had time to look at them, before picking three new topics out of my post.
 
I don’t see the question, “Have you accepted Jesus as your personal Lord and Savior?” in that verse, but I’m willing to accept that if you’re willing to accept Luke 1:34 as a proof text for Mary’s perpetual virginity! 😉

If the Bible says that a person gets the right to become a child of God by receiving Jesus (the Him in the passage), then it is a loving thing to ask if a person has received Jesus, wouldn’t you agree?​

As for Mary’s statement, I totally agree she was a virgin when the Holy Spirit overshaddowed her. That’s all I can get from Luke 1:34.
 
All fantastic questions…

Only I have given you some resources that would answer these questions, and I don’t see how you have had time to look at them, before nitpicking my post.
I noticed your comments next to the verses. I took your word for it. I made comment where I thought reasonable.
 
Those aren’t keys. “Keys” in ancient times were a sign of authority. In Isaiah 22, it explains about the keys. The keys are given to only the chief steward of the king’s household and no one else. When he dies, the keys are given to another person who then becomes the chief steward because someone must keep the keys safe and ready for the King’s use of his treasury at all times. This office of chief steward cannot be left vacant.
That presumes Peter is the chief Steward of the Fathers household, but God the Father says it has been given to Jesus, the Son. So there goes your theory and there goes your misinterpretation of Isaiah 22, which clearly is a reference to Christ and is supported almost verbatim by Rev. 3 - see Philadelphia. 🙂
Moses and his successors, the scribes and Pharisees, had authority in the Old Covenant. Jesus called their authority the “seat/chair of Moses.”
If you read the verses carefully, then you will see God working through Moses, where God is the authority, but who cares about the details, that is where the devil lies.
Matthew 23:1-3
Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to His disciples, 2 saying: “The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. 3 Therefore whatever they tell you to observe, that observe and do,
However, only Peter and his successors were given the authority of the keys of the kingdom of heaven in the New Covenant.
Isaiah 22:22
The key of the house of DavidI will lay on his shoulder;** So he shall open, and no one shall shut;And he shall shut, and no one shall open.** edit
Matthew 16:15-19
He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?”
16 Simon Peter answered and said, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”
17 Jesus answered and said to him, “**Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. **18 And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”
Only one person can have the keys of the office of chief steward at a time. Jesus chose Peter alone. Peter (and his successors) is in charge of safeguarding the gospel of Christ until Jesus returns at His Second Coming.
I think it best to trust Jesus’ judgment in that He chose to give the keys of the kingdom of heaven to only Peter and no one else and He did this in response to His own Father’s choice of Peter to lead Jesus’ Church.
I think it is best to get the true interpreter of Scripture, which is the HS. 👍
Jesus cannot lie, so we know that the Catholic Church cannot teach error because it is prevented from teaching error concerning faith and morals by the Holy Spirit because He is the Spirit of Truth, not falsehood.
It is easy to determine which Church is the true Church of Christ. It is the one who has Peter’s successor at its head because only this one Church is in possession of the keys of the kingdom of heaven and it is also the one and only Church that has the promise of Jesus that Hades cannot prevail against this one Church.
How many authorities are their in heaven? Doesn’t matter how you put it; the number is one. By definition of the Greek the term used for “key” means “a key”; so either there are multiple ways and authorities in to the Kingdom of God OR there is one key and one authority and the Apostles each received a key to the Kingdom of God. Doesn’t matter to me if you don’t see it; I will guarantee you that one day you will see it and know it.

"Do not be afraid; I am the first and the last, 18 and the living One; and I was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore, and*** I have the keys of death and of Hades.

Here is the only other example of the use of the word “keys”, which means “a key” and since is is with the “s”, then there is more than one in view. A key of death and a key of hades = 2 separate keys or a key + a key = keys

Now here is the use of “a key” (below) where there is a key related to a singular object, as in Matthew “Kingdom of God” = singular object, which has to be a single key and the personal singular pronoun, is mistaken as Peter rather than the only correct grammatical context, which would be “each of you”, which is each of the Apostles.

then the fifth angel sounded, and I saw a star from heaven which had fallen to the earth; and the key of the bottomless pit was given to him.

For Jesus to just give Peter the key of the Kingdom of God, it would have to phrased just like that or I will give you the key to the Kingdom of God, but since it uses keys to the Kingdom of God, which is the singular object of the key, which must be sigular and the pronoun must also be singular.

This is why most Protestants disagree and I’ll bet many Catholic scholars know this to be true, but cannot admit it because your church is infallible and to admit something as large as this would utterly destroy all credibility and that isn’t going to happen. Some thing with the latria, dulia and hyperdulia, The council of Nicaea pronounced anathema on the worship of statues, saints and relics, but a little later a Pope, forget which one, called that aspect “nonsense” (paraphrased); therefore it was allowed and has remained; yet condemned by a Council you all refer to often.
 
Would you dare to guess how many catholics that go to church use contraception?
I have always heard it to be around 70-80 %.

If you had listened to the doctor I linked you to you would learn that as many Christians divorce as non-Christians. Couples who do not contracept, but trust God with the outcome of every sexual union, by using NFP, have a THREE PERCENT divorce rate.

Contraception has an underlying message, it says, “I don’t accept you fully, I will take your sex, but not your babies.”
 
-If the Bible says that a person gets the right to become a child of God by receiving Jesus (the Him in the passage), then it is a loving thing to ask if a person has received Jesus, wouldn’t you agree?
I agree it’s a loving question.

I just don’t see where it’s the question to ask to see if they’re a Christian. I also don’t see the question in Scripture.

It seems to be another extra-Biblical tradition that I can add to that growing list! 😃

As for Mary’s statement, I totally agree she was a virgin when the Holy Spirit overshaddowed her. That’s all I can get from Luke 1:34.
But, Dokimas, why would any engaged/betrothed/newly married woman ask that question if she intended to enjoy marital relations? The question makes no sense.

If an angel had appeared to me after my engagement but before I had consummated my vows with my husband and told me I was going to conceive a child, I would NOT ask, “How?” (meaning, since I’m never going to engage in the marital act).
 
Graceandglory, you correctly quoted Jesus as saying He did not come to abolish the Law. You used that as your reason to say ‘being fruitful and multiply’ was still in effect. First, was that a part of the Law mentioned by Jesus? Sacrificing a lamb was part of the Law. Do you still sacrifice lambs at least once a year? Of course not!!!
 
Celebacy seems to be the best form of contraception.
Certainly celibacy is 100% effective. But in a natural marriage, it would be called periodic continence. You can’t get pregnant 100% of the time. No one is fertile 24 hrs a day, 365 days a year. Couples who communicate with each other and know when wife is fertile/not fertile, abstain for a while, and come together again, enjoying little honeymoons on a regular basis.
 
You would think that praying to Mary “diminishes” the glory to God -if the bible is your ONLY link to God…

Do you recieve Holy Communion with Jesus through the Eucharist ? If you do, then you should realize that you are truly “linked” to Jesus… And you know that Jesus is “linked” to God through the Trinity… So we cant really take anything away, when Jesus lives in us… We can only add.

(but I dont expect you to believe me, I dont think its in scripture…)
You overlook Paul’s explanation and how the church in Acts responded, by the breaking of bread w/o any priest or consecration et al. Paul makes it crystal clear in 1 Co. 11.

If the Bible is not the only source of divine revelation outside of creation, then anythings goes.
 
Graceandglory, you correctly quoted Jesus as saying He did not come to abolish the Law. You used that as your reason to say ‘being fruitful and multiply’ was still in effect. First, was that a part of the Law mentioned by Jesus? Sacrificing a lamb was part of the Law. Do you still sacrifice lambs at least once a year? Of course not!!!
Actually we do that every time we go to Mass. That is why Jesus is the Lamb of God. Christ was the final sacrifice. We re-present this in the “Sacrifice of the Mass.”

Lots of stuff here, and I’m not an expert on covenantal theology. But it is rich. There are better people to explain this than me.
 
I agree it’s a loving question.

I just don’t see where it’s the question to ask to see if they’re a Christian. I also don’t see the question in Scripture. Is it in any way, shape, manner or form against any teaching of the Bible?

It seems to be another extra-Biblical tradition that I can add to that growing list! 😃

But, Dokimas, why would any engaged/betrothed/newly married woman ask that question if she intended to enjoy marital relations? The question makes no sense. Then why did you ask it? 😃 Well let’s role play, (I was asked to role play before, it must be okay even though it’s extra-Biblical 👍). Remember a betrothal could take up to 2 yrs from time of contract to consumation. Let’s say several days or weeks after she commited to Joseph, the angel came to her with a message that had obvious immediate implications. She’s sitting there and thinks, I’ll not be consumating my marriage for many months and blurts out your quote. A very reasonable observation, wouldn’t you agree?
If an angel had appeared to me after my engagement but before I had consummated my vows with my husband and told me I was going to conceive a child, I would NOT ask, “How?” (meaning, since I’m never going to engage in the marital act).
 
You’re a liar when you say Catholics worship Mary.
Notion and characteristics

The word worship (Saxon weorthscipe, “honour”; from worth, meaning “value”, “dignity”, “price”, and the termination, ship; Latin cultus) in its most general sense is homage paid to a person or a thing. In this sense we may speak of hero-worship, worship of the emperor, of demons, of the angels, even of relics, and especially of the Cross. This article will deal with Christian worship according to the following definition: homage paid to God, to Jesus Christ, to His saints, to the beings or even to the objects which have a special relation to God.

There are several degrees of this worship:
Code:
* if it is addressed directly to God, it is superior, absolute, supreme worship, or worship of adoration, or, according to the consecrated theological term, a worship of latria. This sovereign worship is due to God alone; addressed to a creature it would become idolatry.
* When worship is addressed only indirectly to God, that is, when its object is the veneration of martyrs, of angels, or of saints, it is a subordinate worship dependent on the first, and relative, in so far as it honours the creatures of God for their peculiar relations with Him; it is designated by theologians as the worship of dulia, a term denoting servitude, and implying, when used to signify our worship of distinguished servants of God, that their service to Him is their title to our veneration (cf. Chollet, loc. cit., col. 2407, and Bouquillon, Tractatus de virtute religionis, I, Bruges, 1880, 22 sq.).
* As the Blessed Virgin has a separate and absolutely supereminent rank among the saints, the worship paid to her is called hyperdulia (for the meaning and history of these terms see Suicer, Thesaurus ecclesiasticus, 1728).
In accordance with these principles it will readily be understood that a certain worship may be offered even to inanimate objects, such as the relics of a martyr, the Cross of Christ, the Crown of Thorns, or even the statue or picture of a saint. There is here no confusion or danger of idolatry, for this worship is subordinate or dependent. The relic of the saint is venerated because of the link which unites it with the person who is adored or venerated; while the statue or picture is regarded as having a conventional relation to a person who has a right to our homage — as being a symbol which reminds us of that person (see Vacant, Diet de théol. cath., s.v. Adoration, and authors cited in bibliography; also ADORATION; IDOLATRY; IMAGES; DEVOTION TO THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY).
newadvent.org/cathen/15710a.htm

Worship, CHRISTIAN.—NOTION AND CHARACTERISTICS.—The word worship (Saxon weorthscipe, “honor”; from worth, meaning “value”, “dignity”, “price”, and the termination, ship; Lat. cultus) in its most general sense is homage paid to a person or a thing. In this sense we may speak of hero-worship, worship of the emperor, of demons, of the angels, even of relics, and especially of the Cross. This article will deal with Christian worship according to the following definition: homage paid to God, to Jesus Christ, to His saints, to the beings or even to the objects which have a special relation to God. There are several degrees of this worship: if it is addressed directly to God, it is superior, absolute, supreme worship, or worship of adoration, or, according to the consecrated theological term, a worship of latria. This sovereign worship is due to God alone; addressed to a creature it would become idolatry. When worship is addressed only indirectly to God, that is, when its object is the veneration of martyrs, of angels, or of saints, it is a subordinate worship dependent on the first, and relative, in so far as it honors the creatures of God for their peculiar relations with Him; it is designated by theologians as the worship of dulia, a term denoting servitude, and implying, when used to signify our worship of distinguished servants of God, that their service to Him is their title to our veneration (cf. Chollet, loc. cit., col. 2407, and Bouquillon, “Tractatus de virtute religionis”, I, Bruges, 1880, 22 sq.).

As the Blessed Virgin has a separate and absolutely supereminent rank among the saints, the worship paid to her is called hyperdulia (for the meaning and history of these terms see Suicer, “Thesaurus ecclesiasticus”, 1728). In accordance with these principles it will readily be understood that a certain worship may be offered even to inanimate objects, such as the relics of a martyr, the Cross of Christ, the Crown of Thorns, or even the statue or picture of a saint. There is here no confusion or danger of idolatry, for this worship is subordinate or dependent. The relic of the saint is venerated because of the link which unites it with the person who is adored or venerated; while the statue or picture is regarded as having a conventional relation to a person who has a right to our homage—as being a symbol which reminds us of that person (see Vacant, “Diet de theol. cath.”, s.v. “Adoration”, and authors cited in bibliography; also Adoration; Idolatry; Veneration of Images; Devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary).

Interior worship is to be distinguished from exterior worship. The former is not manifested by external acts, but consists in internal adoration; but when this inner sentiment is expressed by words or actions, prostration, genuflexion, the sign of the cross, or any other gesture, it becomes exterior worship
oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=Christian_Worship

You really should apologize for calling them a liar, since in your ignorance of your own church’s teaching contradicts you own denial. So embrace the worship; after al it is only a matter of degree w/in your church.
 
If the Bible is not the only source of divine revelation outside of creation, then anythings goes.
Where does the Bible say it’s the only source of divine revelation?

Chapter and verse, please.

Also, did you see the proof texts that show that [SIGN]James is not the uterine brother of the Lord! [/SIGN]
Shall we now move on to Joses, “brother” of the Lord?
 
You really should apologize for calling them a liar, since in your ignorance of your own church’s teaching contradicts you own denial. So embrace the worship; after al it is only a matter of degree w/in your church.
You lied when you said that Catholics worship (latria) Mary. We “worship” her in the sense of giving her respect and veneration.

We only give Latria (adoration) to God alone.

[SIGN]However, “worship” has more meanings than “the adoration due only to God”, [/SIGN]as can be seen even today in any dictionary. It can mean respect and veneration. In that context, it can be said that we “worship” Mary, as has been stated in an encyclical by Pope Pius X: (AD DIEM ILLUM LAETISSIMUM–encyclical on the Immaculate Conception)

“For to be right and good, worship of the Mother of God ought to spring from the heart; acts of the body have here neither utility nor value if the acts of the soul have no part in them. Now these latter can only have one object, which is that we should fully carry out what the divine Son of Mary commands.”

[SIGN]In this context, it is used as “respect and veneration”. [/SIGN]
 
Actually we do that every time we go to Mass. That is why Jesus is the Lamb of God. Christ was the final sacrifice. We re-present this in the “Sacrifice of the Mass.”

Lots of stuff here, and I’m not an expert on covenantal theology. But it is rich. There are better people to explain this than me.
Why do you re-present something Jesus did Himself? Jesus sacrificed Himself ONCE and for all and is seated on the Throne. It’s finished, as He said, so why are we getting involve by re-presenting?
 
Scripture is heart-breaking? Who taught you what you now believe about the meaning/interpretation of the Scriptures that you quote on this thread?
As I have said, the true interpreter of Scripture is the Holy Spirit, which will manifest the truth pertaining to God and His Word.

Lead me in Your truth and teach me, For You are the God of my salvation; For You I wait all the day.
 
Why do you re-present something Jesus did Himself? Jesus sacrificed Himself ONCE and for all and is seated on the Throne. It’s finished, as He said, so why are we getting involve by re-presenting?
Jesus’ atoning death on the cross is ETERNAL before the throne of heaven. It’s happening now, it happened then, it continues to be present. Eternally. We simply are participating in that ETERNAL sacrifice, once and for all, past present and future.

THAT"s one of the reasons why the Divine Liturgy is soooo sublime and profound and is nothing close to any Protestant praise and worship service.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top