I love the Mother of God!

[NotUrAvgGuy]

Thanks again for responding to my latest post. However, once again I fail to see in this post of yours where I have been asking you for biblical reference in regard to James 5:14-16 where you say "believers have been undergoing intense persecution, they are weary, not so much in body but in spirit."

Instead of doing this, you seem to believe that I, a cradle Catholic, need a lesson on the beliefs and practices of the Catholic Church, along with your personal interpretation/beliefs of various scripture passages from a self-admitted fallible non-Catholic such as yourself. With all respect, I find this quite odd.

However, I will say this, as a cradle Catholic, if I have a question on a certain belief or practice of the Catholic Church, which does happen more than I like to admit, I bring out my copy of the Catechism of the Catholic Church to find the truthful answer. I have had many non-Catholic friends and family members that tell me "The Catholic Church teaches this" or "the Catholic Church teaches that." When I hear a misconception of their views regarding the Catholic Church, I show them in the Catechism exactly what the Church teaches in regard to the topic at hand. When doing so, more time than not, they will say "really, this is what the Catholic Church actually teaches and practices? How did I get it so wrong?"

I would suggest to any Catholic, or non-Catholic, so not to spread misinformation regarding the beliefs and practices of the Catholic Church, pick up a copy of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, or find it online to actually find the truth, and not rely on what some non-Catholic friend or pastor tells you what Catholics believe. Anyway, enough of that.

Back to the topic at hand, I will put forth to you one last time, in hopes you will address request as follows:

Nowhere in this latest post of yours do I see where it says...."He is writing to believers who have been undergoing intense persecution." Or "They are weary." Or "Not so much in body but in spirit." Could that be, because these words are nothing more than your own personal (and fallible) interpretation of James 5:14-16 which are subject to error? Keeping in mind what you said in post #971....."I only care what Scripture says." Would this also hold true with you what Scripture does not say?

Have a Blessed Day!

I too was a "cradle Catholic." I attended the church for the first 24 years of my life and went through all the catechism classes offered from youth. I even briefly thought about becoming a priest and met with two missionary priest organizations. I am well aware of the catechism of which you speak and have looked at the online version. I consider myself fairly knowledgeable although you may not always agree with my perspective as an ex-Catholic. What led me to leave is that in high school I read through the Bible 4 times. This was an official Catholic Bible and I read Genesis to Revelation 4 times. As I did that reading, I began to see areas where I did not believe the Catholic church was correct. I had the official Catholic explanations but just couldn't agree with them. At that point in time, I had no contact with Protestants or any other commentaries and this was before the Internet existed. These were not difficult passages of Scripture. The meaning seemed plain. That eventually led me to leave.

I think you are taking too wooden of a view of what I mean when I say I only believe what the Scriptures teach. I subscribe to the literal historic grammatical view of interpretation. In short, it means you let the text speak for itself and you interpret it using the grammar of the text, word meanings, context, and what we know of the historical context. I don't need to find exact words saying they were weary. That can be gleaned from the context and the history and finding it to be the best understanding of what the text says. Finding the exact wording in a verse is not necessary. The doctrine of the Trinity is a good example. That doctrine must be built from several verses in the Bible. There is not one perfect verse that teaches the concept in exact words yet it can be clearly found in Scripture.

This is all besides the point though of this thread which is about the propriety of "praying" to anyone other than God.

 

[bbbbbbb]

I too was a "cradle Catholic." I attended the church for the first 24 years of my life and went through all the catechism classes offered from youth. I even briefly thought about becoming a priest and met with two missionary priest organizations. I am well aware of the catechism of which you speak and have looked at the online version. I consider myself fairly knowledgeable although you may not always agree with my perspective as an ex-Catholic. What led me to leave is that in high school I read through the Bible 4 times. This was an official Catholic Bible and I read Genesis to Revelation 4 times. As I did that reading, I began to see areas where I did not believe the Catholic church was correct. I had the official Catholic explanations but just couldn't agree with them. At that point in time, I had no contact with Protestants or any other commentaries and this was before the Internet existed. These were not difficult passages of Scripture. The meaning seemed plain. That eventually led me to leave.

I think you are taking too wooden of a view of what I mean when I say I only believe what the Scriptures teach. I subscribe to the literal historic grammatical view of interpretation. In short, it means you let the text speak for itself and you interpret it using the grammar of the text, word meanings, context, and what we know of the historical context. I don't need to find exact words saying they were weary. That can be gleaned from the context and the history and finding it to be the best understanding of what the text says. Finding the exact wording in a verse is not necessary. The doctrine of the Trinity is a good example. That doctrine must be built from several verses in the Bible. There is not one perfect verse that teaches the concept in exact words yet it can be clearly found in Scripture.

This is all besides the point though of this thread which is about the propriety of "praying" to anyone other than God.

Actually, the thread is not about "praying" to anyone other than God, but about "loving" God's mother. The premise is obviously quite slanted and intentionally used to stir either efforts toward greater mariolatry or, the converse, evidence of disdain toward God's mother. In the process, naturally, one is forced to distinguish one's means where by one loves God's mother. Praying to her is one of the accepted, if not required, methods, by proponents.

Semantics plays a key role. Proponents insist that they do not "worship" God's mother even though she is allegedly "Queen of heaven" and "Star of the Sea", etc. Nor are they permitted to go so far as to call her Co-Redemptrix, although that is a perfectly logical conclusion. They also insist that these beliefs are of apostolic origin, as confirmed by proclamation of the Four Marian dogmas in 1950. In order to legitimize that dogmatic proclamation, of course, the doctrine of papal infallibility had to be developed in 1871. All this, of course, from the One, True, and Unchanging Church.

When devout members of this denomination, as in VietNam, take the baby step of recognizing God's mother as the fourth person of the Godhead, as I described very early in this thread, they are branded as heretics. Thus, even in the One, True, and Unchanging Church, there is a limit to the love for God's mother.

 

[Valletta]

They also insist that these beliefs are of apostolic origin, as confirmed by proclamation of the Four Marian dogmas in 1950. In order to legitimize that dogmatic proclamation, of course, the doctrine of papal infallibility had to be developed in 1871. All this, of course, from the One, True, and Unchanging Church.

When devout members of this denomination, as in VietNam, take the baby step of recognizing God's mother as the fourth person of the Godhead, as I described very early in this thread, they are branded as heretics. Thus, even in the One, True, and Unchanging Church, there is a limit to the love for God's mother.

This thread is not about your opinion of Catholics, it is about love for Mary, Mother of God. Mary has been revered by many, Martin Luther, Orthodox, and Catholics to name a few. If Catholics get mentioned in the conversation please try and restrain yourself from taking the opportunity to make a charge against Catholics. I've asked you for documentation on your Vietnam story about Catholics a number of times before and you failed to provide it. If a person who identifies as a Catholic does not recognize a major teaching of the Catholic Church, as per your Vietnam story, it is Catholic teaching to correct them, not "brand" them. As to Catholic teaching, please quote the Catechism of the Catholic Church rather than give your own rendition. As to the last line of yours I quoted, please keep your sarcasm of the Catholic Church and for that matter any other religion to yourself.

 

[bbbbbbb]

This thread is not about your opinion of Catholics, it is about love for Mary, Mother of God. Mary has been revered by many, Martin Luther, Orthodox, and Catholics to name a few. If Catholics get mentioned in the conversation please try and restrain yourself from taking the opportunity to make a charge against Catholics. I've asked you for documentation on your Vietnam story about Catholics a number of times before and you failed to provide it. If a person who identifies as a Catholic does not recognize a major teaching of the Catholic Church, as per your Vietnam story, it is Catholic teaching to correct them, not "brand" them. As to Catholic teaching, please quote the Catechism of the Catholic Church rather than give your own rendition. As to the last line of yours I quoted, please keep your sarcasm of the Catholic Church and for that matter any other religion to yourself.

I agree entirely with you. This thread is a litmus test for Mariolatry. It is not unlike the political situation today in the United States. We are becoming increasingly polarized. You might (or might not) find this Wikipedia article of interest - Caodaism - Wikipedia

 

[returntosender]

I love the Theotokos. I have learned to respect her and venerate what she does us and her role with Christ.

Does anyone else feel the same?

More than Jesus?

 

[bbbbbbb]

More than Jesus?

Thus, we now have the litmus test.

 

[prodromos]

More than Jesus?

No. Why do you ask?

 

[returntosender]

No. Why do you ask?

If your going to pick one over the other it should be the most important first. God, Jesus. The holy Spirit. Which we shouldn't do because we're supposed to love
equally. Mary wouldn't be on my list if i was playing favorites .

 

[prodromos]

If your going to pick one over the other it should be the most important first.

No one is picking one over the other. I don't divide my love among my children. Each of them has all my love, as does my wife. My love for them is not a sum of parts.

God, Jesus. The holy Spirit. Which we shouldn't do because we're supposed to love equally. Mary wouldn't be on my list if i was playing favorites .

I'm sorry, but this made no sense to me at all. Perhaps you could rephrase?

 

[returntosender]

No one is picking one over the other. I don't divide my love among my children. Each of them has all my love, as does my wife. My love for them is not a sum of parts.

I'm sorry, but this made no sense to me at all. Perhaps you could rephrase?

Not really, not important enough for me to rephrase

 

[NotUrAvgGuy]

This thread is not about your opinion of Catholics, it is about love for Mary, Mother of God. Mary has been revered by many, Martin Luther, Orthodox, and Catholics to name a few. If Catholics get mentioned in the conversation please try and restrain yourself from taking the opportunity to make a charge against Catholics. I've asked you for documentation on your Vietnam story about Catholics a number of times before and you failed to provide it. If a person who identifies as a Catholic does not recognize a major teaching of the Catholic Church, as per your Vietnam story, it is Catholic teaching to correct them, not "brand" them. As to Catholic teaching, please quote the Catechism of the Catholic Church rather than give your own rendition. As to the last line of yours I quoted, please keep your sarcasm of the Catholic Church and for that matter any other religion to yourself.

Although I do not believe it is proper or possible to pray to Mary, I do love her. She is a model Christian whose faith and trust in God are remarkable. That said, I don't ascribe to her all the non-Biblical teachings of the Catholic church. That does not mean I don't love her. I love all the saints (i.e. believers in Christ).

 

[bbbbbbb]

Although I do not believe it is proper or possible to pray to Mary, I do love her. She is a model Christian whose faith and trust in God are remarkable. That said, I don't ascribe to her all the non-Biblical teachings of the Catholic church. That does not mean I don't love her. I love all the saints (i.e. believers in Christ).

 

[Valletta]

Although I do not believe it is proper or possible to pray to Mary, I do love her. She is a model Christian whose faith and trust in God are remarkable. That said, I don't ascribe to her all the non-Biblical teachings of the Catholic church. That does not mean I don't love her. I love all the saints (i.e. believers in Christ).

Very nice sentiments. My comment to someone else was about the misrepresentation of Catholicism which keeps being inserted into threads These threads are about discussions between Christians and not about looking for an opportunity to vent animosity toward any religion. Saint Joseph too must have been an incredible saint to be chosen as the step-father for Jesus.

 

[prodromos]

Although I do not believe it is proper or possible to pray to Mary, I do love her. She is a model Christian whose faith and trust in God are remarkable. That said, I don't ascribe to her all the non-Biblical teachings of the Catholic church. That does not mean I don't love her. I love all the saints (i.e. believers in Christ).

How do you love someone you don't have a relationship with? How does that play out exactly?

 

[bbbbbbb]

How do you love someone you don't have a relationship with? How does that play out exactly?

If I may address this question I would like to provide an example. Although I never had the slightest opportunity to meet Mother Theresa during her sojourn on earth I developed a deep respect and genuine love for her. This love was far from erotic or emotional but is probably the closest I know to agape love in which one loves complete strangers as God loves humanity.

 

[NotUrAvgGuy]

How do you love someone you don't have a relationship with? How does that play out exactly?

"God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten son..." Does God have a personal relationship with every human being? What about those who don't believe in Him or have rejected Him? Yet God still loves them. I have a love for all people because they are created in the image of God. Granted, there are degrees of love. I don't believe I can have a relationship with Mary as she cannot hear my prayers. I can though still love her.

 

[prodromos]

"God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten son..." Does God have a personal relationship with every human being?

Yes.

What about those who don't believe in Him or have rejected Him?

He is personally involved with every one of them. They may not recognise His involvement with them but it is there, nonetheless.

Yet God still loves them. I have a love for all people because they are created in the image of God. Granted, there are degrees of love. I don't believe I can have a relationship with Mary as she cannot hear my prayers. I can though still love her.

The problem I see here is that "love" in English is both a noun and a verb. I'm asking about the verb and you are responding with a noun.

 

[NotUrAvgGuy]

Yes.

He is personally involved with every one of them. They may not recognise His involvement with them but it is there, nonetheless.

The problem I see here is that "love" in English is both a noun and a verb. I'm asking about the verb and you are responding with a noun.

I cannot love Mary in the verb sense. She is in heaven and I am on earth. God has not provided a way for me to interact with her. The same is true of Moses, Elijah, or John the Baptist. I will get that chance in heaven but not here on earth.

 

[returntosender]

Seems obscene to me and i keep un following it but here it is again!

 

[jamiec]

prodomos,

re: "It seems you would interpret the Gospels as having Christ break the 5th commandment."

Your argument would be with whoever wrote those scriptures.




re: "For what purpose do you imagine the Apostles would have written about Mary, when their sole purpose was announcing the Good News about Christ?"

Their purpose was also to encourage new believers about living in a Christian manner and growing in holiness. Within Catholicism and similar organizations Mary appears to be an integral part of their liturgy while seemingly to be raising her to a level of a fourth member of the Christian hierarchy. It just seems odd that they would completely ignore her if she is to be such an important part of Christian living. You apparently feel otherwise, so to each his own I guess.

"Within Catholicism and similar organizations Mary appears to be an integral part of their liturgy while seemingly to be raising her to a level of a fourth member of the Christian hierarchy."

That is false. False and nonsensical, as a description of Catholicism, and equally false and nonsensical as a description of the other ancient Churches not in communion with Rome. In no sense is she a Divine Person, so it is false to imply that she is, somehow, a Person of the Holy Trinity. One should not have to waste time refuting such puerile drivel. She is certainly present in the Liturgy - that is no reason to think of her as anything more than a creature of God: which is what she is. She is a Saint - nothing more.

It is the United States - not Orthodox Christians, not the ancient non-Chalcedonian Churches, & not the Churches in communion with Rome - that has a painting of "The Apotheōsis of Washington". Apotheōsis means "deification". So by the normal logic of Catholic-bashing Fundamentalists, that has to mean that the USA regards a somewhat questionable American rebel & politician, "the father of his country", one of the so-called "founding fathers", is regarded in the US as a deity.

Article, with pictures, of The Apotheosis of Washington here: The Apotheosis of Washington - Wikipedia

There is in London a painting of "The Apotheosis of James I" - appropriate, given his description of kings as "little gods". But because he was a Protestant, and not a Catholic, Catholic-bashing Fundamentalists ignore such language.

The picture can be found here: RCIN 408414 - The Apotheosis of James I