They pray to Mary. Pretty much every Catholic person I know does it. I've been to mass with them many times and seen it/heard it with my own eyes/ears. They even kneel in front of her huge shrine in the middle of the church and pray to her like she's God. They also pray to other saints and to the Pope.
I think that this is pretty common place, that's maybe you have so many people in this thread not agreeing with you on this particular point about Mary.
I only pray to God and this is one of the things that has bugged me about Catholics for a long time.
I know you are going to turn around and say I'm wrong or that they are wrong for doing it, but it's very commonplace in Catholic church. I was raised Protestant but I've been to about 50 Catholic churches in my life and seen 100's of people do it.
Arrogance was implied at an ins utional level... not at the level of a prac ioner. Besides I don't believe I saw Crook's post the first time around (now doesn't that make you feel silly).
It is the RCC which contends that people like myself, who choose to follow Christ outside the bounds of her sacraments, cannot attain a relationship with GOD. That my friend is arrogance -- they are exalting themselves to a judicial position that only GOD and GOD alone can hold.
Last edited by Phenomanul; 10-25-2006 at 11:47 PM.
GOD does not share his DIVINITY with anyone... so no.
Having Mary as queen reeks of paganism... and I'm sorry if you disagree. It just does. Being a queen implies she must be served. I will only serve GOD and GOD alone - PERIOD.
You do realize that Constantine's proclamation made it 'politically incorrect' to profess to be from another faith aside from Christianity. Many many people were therefore absorbed by the church - and many of those did not have genuine conversions. This absorption included the incorporation of many false teachings and pagan theologies. The veneration of Godesses comes from Babylonian, Greek, Roman and Egyptian theologies. Not from Judaism or Apostolic Christianity.
How convenient.
If she was sinless how come she needed a Savior herself? She clearly rejoices in "GOD her savior" in Luke 1:47.
OK... I'll quote the pope again....
Hence, just as Christ, the Mediator between God and man, assumed human nature, blotted the handwriting of the decree that stood against us, and fastened it triumphantly to the cross, so the most holy Virgin, united with him by a most intimate and indissoluble bond, was, with him and through him, eternally at enmity with the evil serpent, and most completely triumphed over him, and thus crushed his head with her immaculate foot. - - Ineffabilis Deus(19)
and re-emphasize: "and thus crushed his head with her immaculate foot."
Mary did not descend into the bowels of Hades to defeat death... JESUS did. JESUS will defeat Satan at Armaggedon not Mary.
Last edited by Phenomanul; 10-25-2006 at 11:46 PM.
Like any good agnostic, I have an inquiring mind.While a valid point... I didn't realize that you would in any way merit the worth or relevance of any of my spiritual anecdotes. You never struck me as the 'type' who would even care to hear a faith based story. I'm surprised to say the least... I guess your mantra of satire, cynicism and facetiousness doesn't describe you entirely.
My biggest stumbling block when engaging in threads like these is that I base my opinion of Christianity on Christian thought.
That any Christian would want to ARGUE their beliefs confounds me. Isn't going to heaven enough to satisfy you?
No, I'm going to turn around and say the Catholic Church says we can communicate with the dead and ask them to pray for us, the same way you can turn to your mother, uncle, best friend, etc to pray for you.
How are we to communicate with the dead? It only makes sense we do it the only way we know how to make contact with Heaven, and that's kneeling down in Church (or at home) and think about (talk to) our loved ones, or Mary or a Saint.
I doubt you have actually heard/knew, without a shadow of a doubt, what was going on between Mary and all those hundreds of people you claim were praying to her. The only way what you saw is wrong is if these people don't know or don't acknowledge that all they are doing, or should be doing, is asking Mary/Saints/other dead people that they help them in their prayers to God. If what they are doing is actually PRAYING to Mary as if Mary could help them in their material or spiritual needs (something only God can help them with), then I agree with you they are mistaken and committing a sin (I hope most of these later cases, this is done unknowingly).
It is almost impossible to know if somebody is kneeling down in front of an image of Mary, what he or she is really doing. I know if you ever see me doing this, you would probably think I praying to Mary, but I can asure you I wouldn't be.
Why do you keep making things up? Where does it say that we Catholics "serve" Mary? We put Mary in the place she deserves because of what she did, which is willingly take a crucial part in God's Redemptive plan.
We do the same thing with Saints, that is honor them for who they were when they were alive (and who they are now that they are dead).
Do you honor your father? I know you do because the Bible says so (and because you have spoken highly of him many times). Well use your relationship with you father as an analogy of Catholics' relationship with certain Saints. And our relationship with Mary mimics our relatioship with our mothers (saving the distance).
You do realize that Constantine's proclamation made it 'politically incorrect' to profess to be from another faith aside from Christianity. Many many people were therefore absorbed by the church - and many of those did not have genuine conversions. This absorption included the incorporation of many false teachings and pagan theologies. The veneration of Godesses comes from Babylonian, Greek, Roman and Egyptian theologies. Not from Judaism or Apostolic Christianity.
Again you bring up a Protestant missconception about Catholicism (that we borrowed pagan practices) and try to pass it as truth.
You do realize that Mary's veneration strarted well before 313 AD. There are records of this in Ignatius Epistles (110 AD) and a much more clearly defined Marian veneration in Justin Martyr's books (135 AD).
How convenient.
Does a one year old child who dies commit any sin in his lefetime? As you can see, Paul's comments was not meant to be all inclusive. There are exceptions to an otherwise universal rule. The other exception being the Man Jesus. You have pointed out that sometimes he spoke as a man (on our discussion about Arianism) because he was a man. Well, as a man, he never sinned. If these exceptions exist, why should Mary be an exception too? And why is it, in you eyes, so bad that she was sinless?
If she was sinless how come she needed a Savior herself? She clearly rejoices in "GOD her savior" in Luke 1:47.
I'm not sure I know the answer to this question, but i will find out.
and re-emphasize: "and thus crushed his head with her immaculate foot."
And I will re-emphasize too: "so the most holy Virgin, united with him by a most intimate and indissoluble bond, was, with him and through him, eternally at enmity with the evil serpent, and most completely triumphed over him, and thus crushed his head with her immaculate foot. "
She did not do any of this alone. She did it with Christ.
Mary did not descend into the bowels of Hades to defeat death... JESUS did. JESUS will defeat Satan at Armaggedon not Mary.
Where does it say she descended into ? How do you conclude that Mary, by herself, defeated death?
All it says is that Mary helped Christ defeat the serpent that tempted Eve. Mary is also known as the second Eve. Eve helped in the events that caused humanity to be tainted with sin; Mary helped in the events that brought salvation to humanity.
pheno, would you assume buddhists worship buddha?
I have tons of Catholic friends. I went to church with them. They say they pray to Mary.I doubt you have actually heard/knew, without a shadow of a doubt, what was going on between Mary and all those hundreds of people you claim were praying to her.
I am going to exercise restraint in this, and not go past Scriptural references. There are instances throughout history, where I vehemently disagree with choices made by the RCC according to the authority it claims, which I believe invalidate its claims of infallibility. I do not really want to flesh out those concerns so much, because I do not want to turn this dialogue into an orgy of Catholic-bashing, inasmuch as devout Catholics are Christians.
I believe that the arguments I have presented for the sufficiency of Scripture outweigh those presented for the authority of tradition. Since you are a Catholic, certainly you place the burden of proof on me. Since I am Protestant, I place the burden of proof on you.
I do not believe that it is likely or even necessary to try to bring you around to my way of thinking. But I certainly am going to present and defend my views on faith.
I think that a lot of people (Catholics and Protestants) are confused if Catholics pray TO Mary or if they are just asking her to pray with them. (which some would say is praying TO her and asking her to pray for them)
I think when the Pope say something like this, "Let us pray to Mary Queen of Peace," said Benedict, "that she may implore from God the fundamental gift of harmony, bringing political leaders back to the way of reason and opening new possibilities of dialogue and understanding. With this in mind, I invite the local Churches to raise special prayers for peace in the Holy Land and in the entire Middle East." It makes things even more hazy. (I understand he's not saying anyone should worship her)
I know some Catholics can present evidence through scripture that they should ask Mary to pray for them. However, many people will dispute that and say there's no scriptures stating that anyone but God will hear their requests (prayers?).
The whole point of the Reformation was that the authority was being abused.
I don't think joch is talking about people who just go through the motions of religion. There are whole heck of a lot of tepid "Catholics" too.
He is talking about people who in moving from one to the other begin bearing fruit for God.
I had another question. Why do Catholics refer to Mary as the "All-Holy One"?
i've never heard her referred to as that.
God could have picked anyone to be Jesus' mother. If Mary did not have an obedient heart, he could have elected another.
While we have an opportunity to participate in God's plan, it does not hinge on us. It is not our plan. It was not Mary's plan. Gabriel did not come to her and say, "Hey, Mary, God has this idea about redeeming mankind and wants to see if you agree with it before he moves ahead." He did not say, "Mary, God needs your help to redeem mankind. Can you lend a hand and bear his Son?"
Rather, he said, "You will be with child." Not, "You will be with child, if you're OK with it." Not, "Make a choice about whether you are going to be with child."
Mary had an obedient heart, and so God elected her. Certainly this means she was a woman of extraordinary character. Certainly this means that God showed her great favor and honor.
But it does NOT mean that salvation hinged upon her. She was a vessel used by God. God uses people how he sees fit (Rom. 9:20-21).
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_cs...m/p4s1c2a2.htm
2677 By asking Mary to pray for us, we acknowledge ourselves to be poor sinners and we address ourselves to the "Mother of Mercy," the All-Holy One. We give ourselves over to her now, in the Today of our lives. And our trust broadens further, already at the present moment, to surrender "the hour of our death" wholly to her care. May she be there as she was at her son's death on the cross. May she welcome us as our mother at the hour of our passing38 to lead us to her son, Jesus, in paradise.
Mary rocks!
What's wrong with that?
IMO, she's not the All-Holy One. That's God. To say she's the All-Holy One is to say she's equal with God's holiness and it seems that's blasphemous.
Revelation. 15:4 Who shall not fear Thee, O Lord, and glorify Thy name? For Thou only art Holy: for all nations shall come and worship before Thee...
I Samuel 2:2 There is none holy as the Lord: for there is none beside Thee: neither is there any rock like our God.
Anyway, I do not really have time to post here. So if I don't answer any posts it's not that I'm defeated, I'm just try to work (which is why I didn't want to post in this thread anyway).
I'm glad that everyone is being (relatively) civil. Faith is such a personal choice, I normally don't try to get into it in the forum.
Take care.
Mary is the Mother of Jesus, the Son of God, the All Holy One. Blessed is she amongst women. Not saying she is GOD.
The Virgen de Guadalupe is dear to my heart.
Funny coming from someone that posted this:
A lot of Catholics I know pray to Mary in and out of church (which I think is ridiculous).
I concur. I don't ever question another's faith and all the remarks against Catholicism never faze me one bit. Mouse has tried to tear me up about being Catholic but ain't gonna happen.
Take care!
I pray to Mary everyday and ask that she watch over my family. I find nothing ridiculous about it at all but it is my belief that makes it so.
If the shoe fits....
Many true disciples in the catholic church understand the difference between 'worship' and 'honor'... and refrain from doing the former. I don't believe, however, that the Catholic laity as a harmonious whole differentiates the meaning or the connotative implications of those two verbs. Marianists, in particular, have elevated Mary to a status that rivals that of GOD -- GOD wants to be our priority - to occupy first place in our hearts. It is one thing to honor Mary, and quite another to build shrines to her or to place her as the central focus point (architecturally, aesthetically or other) of a temple.
While you claim that no one can really hear what prac ioners are praying... and you're right, I can't... that doesn't mean that their body language is to be excluded from the discussion. I've seen countless of people 'bow' to Mary. I've seen pilgrims crawl on their knees for several kilometers to shrines located in remote and 'sacred' places... shrines built for Mary or some other 'virgin'.
Bowing on one's knees with your face to the ground is teeter-tottering on the brink of worship... otherwise Daniel, Shadrack, Meshac and Abednego would not have protested to the same.
Yes, I honor my parents, my grandparents, and aunts and uncles.
That is a far cry from declaring them my Kings or Queens.
The theological rifts between the practices observed in the apostolic age and those in the 2nd and 3rd centuries are very obvious. I can't envision either Paul or Peter sitting on a gold throne, trying to stipulate moral policy. Their main purpose was to spread the message of GOD's love to all those who would hear it, to all corners of the known world. Furthermore, Peter, Paul nor any of the other disciples sought earthly power or political authority because they realized that Christ Himself did not come to establish a political kingdom. How then can you reconcile the political power that the Vatican wields with the Apostolic mission statement? What caused that change in purpose? That is why the absence of Mary veneration from scripture is very revealing. You continually claim that Ignatious and other 2nd century figures incorporated veneration of Mary in their congregations (along with other 'strictly catholic' practices). But the point remains: the practice doesn't harmonize with the Apostolic creeds unless you give these other writings equal worth. We both agree that these additional works were not inspired and yet you insist on allowing new material and doctrines to emanate from them, not scripture. Besides, what is to prevent the keeper of history from bending it to suit its needs (IMO I would venture to say it has)? You act like the Vatican has been a shining example of integrity.
And that is not catholic bashing. That is a secular perspective on historical accounts.
Again it's funny how none of the inspired works hint to any of these practices. Only when you include other writings does the catholic perspective come into focus. Why would GOD have left such an important and 'enhancing' practice out of His Word?
IMHO that just shows that Christ's atoning blood is sufficient to cleanse the 'unclean' for entry into heaven. Babies or children (only GOD knows at what age - as it is different from person to person) are excluded from having to confess that JESUS is their LORD; especially if they are at an age where they do not understand what that means. Coupled with GOD's mercy and grace He grants them exceptions... But only because His Love is so great. Yes, GOD is JUST, but He is also LOVE and MERCIFUL. How then can all these attributes be reconciled? That is why the subject of infant afterlife is very controversial. It's one of those things I don't believe we can completely wrap our minds around.
As an offnote: That is not to say that children aren't capable of committing 'venial' sins of their own... Ever heard of two year olds yelling at the top of their lungs MINE MINE MINE! as they punch another toddler in the face? They may not know that corrupt human nature is seeded in their very being and that it begins to manifest itself at a very young age. Nevertheless, I believe Christ died for them as well.
To state however, that Mary committed no sin... and as an adult, no less, is very unrealistic. Only one was perfect. The Scriptural record is abundantly clear that Jesus was "without sin" (Heb. 4:15). "In Him there was no sin" (1 John 3:5). He "knew no sin" (II Cor. 5:21), and "committed no sin, nor was any deceit found in His mouth" (1 Peter 2:22).
Jesus Himself could ask His contemporaries, "Which of you convicts Me of sin?" (John 8:46), and no one could do so. He was a "high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners" (Heb. 7:26), who "offered Himself without blemish" (Heb. 9:14), "a lamb unblemished and spotless (1 Peter 1:19).
The doctrine of Mary's 'immaculate conception' is unsubstantiated by scripture.
The fact that it atributes any of that 'victory 'to Mary runs contrary to scripture.
She didn't... only Christ did.
All Mary did was fulfill the role that the profecy of Christ's virginal birth had foretold. She found favor in GOD's eyes. She had the priviledge of being selected for this glorious task. But I'm sorry, she had no part in the redemption and atonement of our sins - that task was Christ's alone.
Last edited by Phenomanul; 10-26-2006 at 11:03 AM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
