Why don't protestants bless Mary?

[Panevino]

I never hear them use the word except when referring to Apostles and people who the pope has "named into sainthood" if it is confirmed that they have performed something the church thinks was a miracle.

Catechism
CCC 1475
In the communion of saints, "a perennial link of charity exists between the faithful who have already reached their heavenly home, those who are expiating their sins in purgatory and those who are still pilgrims on earth......

This reflects the distinction in
Colossians 1:12

Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light:

 

[Albion]

I never hear them use the word except when referring to Apostles and people who the pope has "named into sainthood" if it is confirmed that they have performed something the church thinks was a miracle.

You're right about that and it's hardly worth anyone's time to deny it.

Our Catholic friends are often aware that the Scriptures use the word in another sense, but when it come to how they or their church use it, it's as you said here.

 

[Open Heart]

Not a strawman. It is what Open Heart told me previously on this thread. If it is inaccurate, you should let her know.

jason: there are dogmas, which every Catholic must believe, and then there are traditions which are commonly held but which are not requirements. The idea that Mary had to be sinless because her son was sinless is a tradition, not a dogma.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

jason: there are dogmas, which every Catholic must believe, and then there are traditions which are commonly held but which are not requirements. The idea that Mary had to be sinless because her son was sinless is a tradition, not a dogma.

And of Joseph? Would you then consider him "sinless "? I would also like to point out that the lineage of Jesus in both Matthew and Luke ends with Joseph...not Mary. One could assume that the authors did not put much importance on Mary but more so on Joseph.

 

[Open Heart]

And of Joseph? Would you then consider him "sinless "? I would also like to point out that the lineage of Jesus in both Matthew and Luke ends with Joseph...not Mary. One could assume that the authors did not put much importance on Mary but more so on Joseph.

Joseph did not give birth to Christ. He had no physical relationship whatsoever.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Joseph did not give birth to Christ. He had no physical relationship whatsoever.

So why was the lineage in Matthew and Luke concerned with Joseph?

 

[Aldebaran]

Joseph did not give birth to Christ. He had no physical relationship whatsoever.

That hardly answers the question you were asked. Since scripture places more emphasis on Joseph, why does the CC place more emphasis on Mary? If you stick to what you just said to Jason Delisle, then it becomes even more clear that the CC places more emphasis on something that it believes to be of more importance that what scripture places emphasis on.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

That hardly answers the question you were asked. Since scripture places more emphasis on Joseph, why does the CC place more emphasis on Mary? If you stick to what you just said to Jason Delisle, then it becomes even more clear that the CC places more emphasis on something that it believes to be of more importance that what scripture places emphasis on.

Nailed it.

 

[prodromos]

Not a strawman. It is what Open Heart told me previously on this thread. If it is inaccurate, you should let her know.

Did she provide references to Church teaching on the subject. Her personal opinion can hardly be held up as Catholic teaching.

 

[prodromos]

I was also told by Patricius79. We've had long discussions, so I've heard it more than once.

Patricius79 seems to be quite "out there" on the fringe of Catholic opinion.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Patricius79 seems to be quite "out there" on the fringe of Catholic opinion.

There seems to be a trend that many Catholics don't know what the church doctrines really are.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Did she provide references to Church teaching on the subject. Her personal opinion can hardly be held up as Catholic teaching.

Absolutely not.

 

[Panevino]

There seems to be a trend that many Catholics don't know what the church doctrines really are.

Non Catholics also

 

[Panevino]

You're right about that and it's hardly worth anyone's time to deny it.

Our Catholic friends are often aware that the Scriptures use the word in another sense, but when it come to how they or their church use it, it's as you said here.

Incorrect
When Catholics refer to the communion of saints it's the church militant and triumphant. It's the body of Christ in total

 

[Panevino]

That hardly answers the question you were asked. Since scripture places more emphasis on Joseph, why does the CC place more emphasis on Mary? If you stick to what you just said to Jason Delisle, then it becomes even more clear that the CC places more emphasis on something that it believes to be of more importance that what scripture places emphasis on.

Doctrine is not defined by some kind of tally /quantity of words which somehow point to emphasis.
It's obviously deeper than that with brief events clearly significant in salvation history. Such as the fiat.

 

[Panevino]

And of Joseph? Would you then consider him "sinless "?

no, nor is there a need to

I would also like to point out that the lineage of Jesus in both Matthew and Luke ends with Joseph...not Mary. One could assume that the authors did not put much importance on Mary but more so on Joseph.

Jesus is tied to Joseph through Mary
Matthew 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

the davidic royal line includes a special place for the Kings mother and this is a part of the context of these lists you mention
See 2kings8to24 the mother is specifically named /singled out for the majority of the davidic Kings discussed, highlightingthe importance of the position. See 8:26 and beginnings of ch12,14,15,18 & 21-24

 

[Albion]

Incorrect
When Catholics refer to the communion of saints it's the church militant and triumphant. It's the body of Christ in total

But even there, you're not using the word in the sense that Aldebaran uses it. Technically, the concept is included in the phrase, "Communion of saints," but the typical Catholic almost never uses saint to mean believer.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Matthew 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

You are missing the point. Joseph was simply the surrogate stepfather to Jesus. The only connection that Joseph has to Jesus is that Joseph was the husband to Jesus' mother. The lineage of Jesus found in Matthew and Luke IS NOT the bloodline of Jesus. Rather it is the bloodline of Joseph with a final "Joseph married Mary who was the mother of Jesus". That last sentence in itself seems to still direct the attention to Joseph rather than Mary. If Joseph wrote a biography about himself and ended it with "Finally I met my wife and she was pregnant with the son of god", is the biography then not about Joseph? Prophesy says the massiah would come from the house of David yet the lineage of Jesus goes through Joseph rather than Mary. Ok. I am done ranting.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Non Catholics also

True. But don't you see it as a problem that a Roman Catholic Church can be so complex that so many catholics have no clue what the church actually teaches. It is almost like there are different denominations within the RCC. My father (who is a devout Catholic ) told me that Hell and Purgatory is not a place but rather "a state of being". But I will leave that topic for another thread.

 

[Albion]

True. But don't you see it as a problem that a Roman Catholic Church can be so complex that so many catholics have no clue what the church actually teaches. It is almost like there are different denominations within the RCC. My father (who is a devout Catholic ) told me that Hell and Purgatory is not a place but rather "a state of being". But I will leave that topic for another thread.

Chances are he meant that they are not geographical locations. There are some few Christians who actually do believe that Heaven, Hell, etc. can be located within the physical universe.