Considering Catholicism,but need to learn more

[Fish and Bread]

If the co-redemptrix dogma is not a formal teaching, why does the vatican permit some clergy to teach this?

Generally, when something is within the range of what could be true, theologically speaking, the Church permits clergy to teach it. So you get clergy who will sometimes teach things that aren't the formal teaching of the Church, but don't contradict it. Personally, I don't like the practice. I'd prefer that when something is just a theory the priest say "This is my view and there are several within the Church on this subject" and so forth, for the sake of clarity, if he is addressing something that has not been defined as a teaching of the Church. But no one consulted me on this policy.

Another question, is it a formal church teaching that Mary remained a virgin after marrying Joseph? I know many Catholics believe that, but i don't know if that is an official church position.

Yes, the perpetual virginity of Marty is an official teaching. This is actually one where there are writings of Christians from very early times that express a belief in it. It's in the ancient eastern liturgies and so on and so forth. It's very well documented that this belief has been around continuously for nearly 2,000 years. It actually has probably better and fuller documentation to it than almost anything else that's believed about Mary not explicitly included in scripture.

Personally, i believe it's important to have only one intercessor between us and God, which is Christ.

The Roman Catholic view is that Christ is the only mediator of man's salvation with God. In other words, the idea is that people are saved through Jesus Christ's atoning sacrifice, and he will be everyone's judge and advocate before the thrown of God. However, that doesn't exclude you praying for OBOB people or vice-versa, and it doesn't exclude Saints praying (or interceding) for you in heaven should you ask.

I know that officially the veneration of saints means to honor them (which i do), but it seems that asking them to intercede for us is the same as prayer and borders on polytheism when it is practiced. I highly esteem all those saints that have gone before us and i want to emmulate them and learn from them, but the idea of asking favors of them as if they had divine power doesn't sit right with me

No Saint has merit or power of his or her own. All power and merit and ultimately comes from God, and nothing is done that is not according to God's will. In short, Saints are the servants of God, and they can bring requests to him like in the Book of Revelations, or theoretically perhaps be sent to do things, but they're not independent gods with their own agendas and independent power running around. They're more like employees.

When you say that one must accept the honoring of saints in order to be a catholic, what exactly does that entail? By honoring, do you mean that i must ask them to intercede for me? If i do not ask for intercession, does the church consider it that i'm dishonoring the saints? Does the catechism have an explicit explanation regarding this teaching? If so, can you tell me where?

My understanding is that you only have to participate in what may be in the mass any given week, what prayers and devotions you do in your spare time are up to you. The idea is that Catholics must recognize intercessory prayer is alright and encouraged in theory, but apart from the mass, no one is going to say you have to pray to any Saints under pain of sin or anything.

 

[Filia Mariae]

Hi Monica, welcome to OBOB Thanks for sharing your story.

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]In order to join the catholic church is it a requirement that i accept and practice the teachings regarding Mary and the veneration of saints? or is this something left up to the individual? Are there any liberal catholics who don't accept these teachings? Don't get me wrong, I honor Mary and regard her in high standing, but i don't consider her as a "co-redemprtress"....which is something i have heard her called by some priests. [/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]I look forward to hearing some of your responses and getting to know you all.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Sincerely,[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Monica[/FONT]

Well there are certainly Catholics who reject various teachings. Despite what some posters here have said, veneration of Our Lady and the saints is not optional. It is a part of many of the Mass prayers and the documents of Vatican II state that Marian devotion is a part of the ordinary path to holiness.

"Co-redemptrix" literally means "the woman with the redeemer." Mary is the co-redemptrix because she a) provided the instrument for our salvation, Jesus' body (Heb. 10:10) and because being free of all sin, actually willed Calvary in the unity of her will with the Father's will. This teaching is not dogmatic, but is doctrinal.

I believe Caitlin (HelenofBritain) listed three Marian dogmas, but there is a fourth as well, Mary the Mother of God.

Peace.

 

[MikeK]

Despite what some posters here have said, veneration of Our Lady and the saints is not optional.

Explain further. Say one says "nope, I'm just not going to venerate Our Lady. I'll do everything but that. Then what?

 

[Filia Mariae]

Explain further. Say one says "nope, I'm just not going to venerate Our Lady. I'll do everything but that. Then what?

Then they've rejected grace offered to them by God. They've refused to fully participate in the Mass. They've denied the teaching of an infallible ecumenical council.

 

[Filia Mariae]

Monica-

If you're looking for a book spelling out exactly what the Church teaches on the Blessed Mother, I would recommend Introduction to Mary by Dr. Mark Miravalle. It's very easy to read and a good introduction.

 

[StTherese]

Explain further. Say one says "nope, I'm just not going to venerate Our Lady. I'll do everything but that. Then what?

That is like someone agreeing to marry someone so long as they don't have to have anything to do with their mother...its like saying, I love you very much, and I know your mother is a very good person and all, but I would just prefer to have nothing to do with her...

 

[kepha31]

Explain further. Say one says "nope, I'm just not going to venerate Our Lady. I'll do everything but that. Then what?

THE BLESSED VIRGIN MOM
First we establish, through scripture, that Mary is our mother. This is evident in Rev. 12:17
And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.
Any bible student can see that there is a distinction between the "woman" and "seed", the Church. So "woman" can't be Isreal who rejected the NT message and woman can't be the same as "seed" (offspring, in some translations)

No matter how one looks at it, those "who keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ" are a spiritual generation from the woman. Luke: 1:48 All GENERATIONS shall call me...what??? The Bible clearly and expicitly commands ALL GENERATIONS (those alive in Christ) to call her BLESSED, and that is what VENERATION means. Yet these same people who refuse to venerate Mary claim to follow the Bible, and "Blessed" is not in their religious vocabulary. Is it blindness, ignorance, or indoctrination?

"Now there stood by the cross of Jesus His mother, and His mother's sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. When Jesus therefore saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing by, He said to his mother, "Woman, behold your son!" Then He said to the disciple, "Behold your mother!" And from that hour that disciple took her to his own home." ( John 19:25-27, NKJV) What makes the Gospel of John different from the other 3 is that it is written from the perspective of the reader. Even Protestant scholars will acknowledge that much. John represents us. Jesus was dying. He was not settling family affiars with his dying breaths, so that argument is shallow and not worth elaborating on.

Then we look at how important honoring parents is. Some of the Jews invented a tradition of not caring for their parents and claimed to give all the glory ($) to God. This is the only tradition Jesus condemned.
"He answered them, "And why do you transgress the Commandment of God for the sake of your tradition (that you invented)? For God commanded, 'Honor your father and your mother,' and, 'He who speaks evil of father or mother, let him surely die.' But you say, 'If any one tells his father or his mother, What you would have gained from me is given to God, he need not honor his father.' So, for the sake of your tradition, you have made void the Word of God." (Matthew 15:3-6)RSV
By not giving due honor (veneration) to Jesus' mother, who is our mother too, (that God himself clothed with the light of Christ, the brilliance of the sun) they make void the word of God with this false tradition.
Some Protestants will talk all day about the Fatherhood of God, and the brotherhood of believers, but many are beginning to see that something in this family that has been neglected. Our Blessed Virgin Mom.

 

[Foundthelight]

Venerating Mary and the saints is necessary and right. There is no requirement to pray for their intercession outside of the Mass. Intercessory prayer is different from veneration.

 

[Robbie_James_Francis]

As far as I know, Mary as co-redemptrix could legitimately be accepted to be part of the Church's dogma, even though it hasn't been extraordinarily proclaimed. It simply means 'woman with the redeemer' and though it sounds problematic to some Protestants, when understood properly it is a belief that all mainstream Christians already hold.

It simply means that Mary played a unique role in bringing the Redeemer to earth. So the only problem that people could have with it is if they deny that Mary was Jesus' Mother, because her maternity obviously makes her unique.

 

[Fish and Bread]

Despite what some posters here have said, veneration of Our Lady and the saints is not optional. It is a part of many of the Mass prayers and the documents of Vatican II state that Marian devotion is a part of the ordinary path to holiness.

What most folks have said is that it is not strictly necessary in a technical sense to pray to and practice devotions regarding Saints, except for those that are part of the masses one attends or that may be required as penance, as as long as one recognizes that such devotions are good things and an acceptable path for people. The ordinary path to holiness is not the only path.

"Co-redemptrix" literally means "the woman with the redeemer." Mary is the co-redemptrix because she a) provided the instrument for our salvation, Jesus' body (Heb. 10:10) and because being free of all sin, actually willed Calvary in the unity of her will with the Father's will. This teaching is not dogmatic, but is doctrinal.

Alright, you're the only one who is saying that it's binding doctrine, so it falls upon you to demonstrate that to us.

 

[Filia Mariae]

What most folks have said is that it is not strictly necessary in a technical sense to pray to and practice devotions regarding Saints, except for those that are part of the masses one attends or that may be required as penance, as as long as one recognizes that such devotions are good things and an acceptable path for people. The ordinary path to holiness is not the only path.

I can't find the premise paragraph in LG at the moment, but the statement is in the context of Mary as the mother of all Christians and the mediatrix of all graces, and the path to be taken by all.The details of our journeys may be individual, but the means of sanctification offered to all of us are not.

Alright, you're the only one who is saying that it's binding doctrine, so it falls upon you to demonstrate that to us.

Well, technically speaking, the first assertion was that it's not doctrinal, so therefore that assertion is the one bearing the burden of proof , but here are a few notes, by no means exhaustive. The book I referenced above gives a more complete treatment.

Mary, Co-Redemptrix

• “Co” means with, redimere- to buy back, trix- feminine suffix à “She who buys back with Jesus”
• Coredemption is backbone of doctrine of Marian mediation because it is only because she is co-redemptrix that she can distribute graces
• Scriptural Foundations
  • Gen. 3:15 à Mary foreshadowed as intimately sharing in victory over Satan (enmity between Satan and the woman)
  • Luke 1:38 à fiat begins role of co-redemptrix because she cooperates uniquely with Christ and gives the instrument of redemption (His Body, Heb. 10:10)
  • Luke 2:35 à prophecy of Simeon (a sword shall pierce your own heart too), pierce is mystically experienced
  • John 19:25-27 à Mary offers Jesus and suffers with Him to fulfill the planned redemption, she associates herself with His sacrifice in her mother’s heart, and she “lovingly consented to the immolation of this victim.” She doesn’t just endure Calvary, she wills it.
• Tradition Foundations
  • New Eve- Mary’s unique cooperation with Christ the Redeemer is “cause of salvation for herself and whole human race.” St. Irenaeus
  • “Redemptrix” in 10th century hymn, prefix co in 14th century hymn, Catherine of Siena calls her “Redemptrix” and St. Brigid received a redemptrix revelation in the 14th century
  • St. Bernard of Clairveux is the 1st to speak of Mary offering her Son in obedience to the Father, Arnold of Chartres (12th cent.) introduces co-suffering and co-death.
  • 17th century golden age of Mary Co-Redemptrix
  • 18th century sees over 300 references to her co-redemption
  • Salmeron (theologian of Trent) defended titles in 16th century
• Magisterial Foundations
  • Leo XIII- calls her “co-operatrix” (woman who works with), saying she willingly offered Him up to divine justice, dying with Him in her own heart
  • St. Pius X- reparatrix- repairing the relationship between God and man, co-redemptrix and because of that Mediatrix
  • Benedict XV- “Mary redeemed the human race together with Christ”
  • Pius XI- uses the title 3 times and explains it “ought to have associated His mother with His work.”
  • Pius XII- favorite title was socia alma redemptoris (loving associate of New Eve), offered Him on Golgotha like a New Eve
  • Vatican II/ Lumen Gentium 58- doctrine of coredemption, no title because a subcommittee removed it before it was brought to Council fathers, original schema has 4 paragraphs explaining history of title
  • John Paul II- used the title 6 times and expanded treatment of the doctrine in Ecuador in 1985- Mary crucified spiritually, loving consent to immolation, Mary’s role as co-redemptrix did not cease with the glorification of her Son, she suffers as her children suffer but doesn’t acquire new grace

 

[wonderwoman]

I don't really believe in all those things. Am I gonna get the boot?

Mike,
do you believe that jesus is who he said he was?....the son of God?..the messiah? If you accept this as truth, why then wouldn't you accept the account in the gospels which tells of Mary being chosen by God to be miraculously impregnated as was prophesied in the old testament?
If God became incarnate in the form of a man, performed miracles while he walked the earth and resurrected from the dead, why would it be so hard to believe that he was immaculately conceived?
I understand that there are many teachings and doctrines that one may not yet fully understand or know about, but in order to consider oneself a christian is to believe, follow and accept that Christ is the messiah/redeemer.....the one who took our place for the forgiveness of sins. If you say yes to this and follow christ, you are called a child of God and are granted eternal life. This is the heart of christianity....everything else springs from this. The same gospels that report of christ's life, death, resurrection and salvation also reports the account of the immaculate conception. Why would you accept one part of the gospels and yet disbelieve another?

 

[wonderwoman]

ok lots of information to take in here and to explore.

Someone mentioned on one of the posts that mary is without sin. I don't understand where this idea comes from? When exactly was this doctrine taught in the church? I mean, Jesus being both human and divine (God) could not have had the power to forgive sins if he himself was born with original sin. Death is the result of original sin and this was why death had no power over him. He was tempted in the desert, but he overcame the temptation and did not sin. So was Mary born without original sin? Is she a goddess? Is she both human and divine? Incarnate like Jesus? Are you saying that salvation comes not only through the sacrifice of christ but through the choice of Mary? Just cause Mary was chosen to be the mother of Jesus, why does that automatically mean that she was sinless? If you're going to use that argument, does that mean Moses who was chosen to bring the jews out of captivity, sinless as well? Did Mary exist in heaven as Jesus's mother before jesus came to earth in human form?
The language of co-remptrix is very confusing and misleading for me because it implies that redemption is attained not only through jesus, but through her as well. Did she die for my sins, did she take away my sins and make me righteous before God? Was Mary the only human not redeemed from original sins through the sacrifice of her son? Or are you saying she was the only human exception? I do consider her blessed among all women since she was chosen to not only bring the messiah into this world, but to raise him. But what about Joseph, he was chosen to be his human father here on earth.......according to this teaching, why should Joseph be left out and not called co-redeemer? Are you adding Mary to the holy trinity? are there 4 now instead of 3? God, the father, God the son, God the holy spirit and God the blessed lady? God chose her as the vessel which is a glorious honor, but God also chose Joseph, the apostles, the disciples, he chose you and me to be his children.......why is Mary given such a god-like status? Is it possible that the emphasis of this tradition was born out of syncritism?... With the cultures who later converted to chrisianity that didn't want to let go of their goddess tradition. Isn't it just possible that the church adopted this and carried it for all these years? Believe me ,as a female, i would like nothing more than to have a female God given past views of women etc....but i also understand that though the language of the bible uses gender (god the father etc), we also know that he is genderless....that both male and female are made in his image.
Anyway, i'm not trying to offend anyone, but i'm just trying to make sense of all this and say what's on my mind. I'm not here trying to defend a protestant tradition....i am earnestly searching for the truth and trust that God will lead me. I can't simply accept something just cause men who interpret the bible say their interpretation is the correct one. I have to find out for myself.
There are many church teachings that are no longer practiced or held to officially, does that mean the popes and the councils are fallible sometimes and infallible others?
I totally get that we should aspire to unity and agreement in doctrinal teachings, but is there no room for discussion? For questioning? Are we to blindly obey certain teachings simply because it's a tradition or because certain groups decided it as Truth?
Take indulgences for example.........this was once a church teaching/tradition wasn't it? How corrupt and erroneus was that idea?

 

[wonderwoman]

Thank you for this detailed explanation of the Marian doctrine.
My question to you is: is this Marian doctrine of Mary as co-redemptrix/co-mediary in the catechism? Is this officially considered as a standard teaching or only held by certain pockets in the church?

Are there catholic clergy and lay people who disagree with this interpretation of the aforementioned verses?

Also, forgive my ignorance, but i have one more question:
I keep hearing mention of "Vatican II".....what does that mean?

 

[wonderwoman]

Q: As Catholics, do we have to accept everything the Church teaches?

A: If you want to call yourself Catholic, but you want to pick and choose for yourself which of the Church's teachings to accept and which to reject, you give everyone else who calls themselves Catholic the right to do the same thing.

For example, you believe women should be priests...in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 1577 states, "Only a baptized man validly receives ordination...For this reason the ordination of women is not possible!" You don't believe that...well, that's fine...[RIP] just tear that page out of your Catechism...you just made it a Catechism of your Catholic Church...not mine.

But remember, if you can throw doctrines out, so can everyone else who calls themselves Catholic. That gives Joe Parishioner over at St. Doubting Thomas Catholic Church the right to throw out the Church's social justice teachings...he doesn't feel like feeding the hungry, caring for the poor, and all that other "bleeding heart" stuff - Paragraphs 2401 -2463 [RIP]...he just made it a Catechism of his Catholic Church...not mine and not yours.

You believe contraception is okay? Paragraph 2370 says contraception is intrinsically evil! [RIP] Joe Parishioner doesn't like what the Church teaches on the death penalty - Paragraphs 2266-2267[RIP]. You don't like what it teaches on pages 55-60 [RIP]. He doesn't like what it teaches on pages 128-140 [RIP]

Can you see what's happening? I heard it said once that there is a shortage of vocations to the priesthood in the United States, but no shortage of vocations to the Papacy! If we don't believe in all of it, if we each appoint ourselves Pope and throw out a doctrine here or a doctrine there, then our faith is no longer Catholic.

Source: http://www.biblechristiansociety.com/2min_apologetics.php?id=5

Hi secret of Fatima,

I've a question. I see you mentioned the cathecism states that contraception is intrinsically evil. Can you tell me why this is believed? I mean what bible verse/s is this based on? Does the catholic church believe "life" begins before the moment of conception...i.e...in the form of sperm and egg? Is the use of contraception considered the murder of potential life like abortion is regarded?

 

[wonderwoman]

Fail. No man gets his rights from me.

Secret, instead of beating around the bush, why not just answer the question re whether I'm Catholic or not.

hi mike,
I think the important thing is not whether you belong to this group or fully understand some doctrine, but what makes one a christian is simple: Do you believe and accept that christ died for your sins and redeemed you before God through his death and resurrection? If you believe that, then yes you are a Christian. This is the only requirement for salvation...for eternal life....that sacrifice is what reconciles us to God.
There are many doctrines and teachings that either i am not convinced of or do not fully understand, but that's ok because i am now in communion with God through Christ. There are things that "the verdict is not out" for me, but as long as i continue to walk with God and grow in christ, he reveals things to me and deepens my faith.
I do accept the account of the immaculate conception and assumption since those reports are clearly stated in the gospels, but i am not convinced of Mary's perpetual virginity mostly because she was married to joseph and for other reasons i won't go into here, but since i am not convinced of that one teaching, does that mean i'm not saved and i'm going to hell? Of course not!

 

[wonderwoman]

Thanks for sharing your testimony..I had a pretty radical conversion to Christ also when I was 21..Although I am not Catholic I live in a heavily Italian catholic area..What you shared was why I had such a low view of of Catholicism. All those I knew were either party hearty or Mary this, Mary that and print this novena and your prayer will get answered types..It wasn't till I came here to obob that I found Catholics committed to Christ as I was..May the Lord guide you in your journey to become closer to Him..shalom..kim

BTW Yes you are correct, there are wheat and tares everywhere believers gather in His name

Hi hiskid,
As i mentioned to you before, i am beginning to view things like a buffet....I want it all. I am very happy to have found such wonderful things within Catholicism.......things i had no idea existed. I truly appreciate some of the masses i have attended and got so much out of certain rituals and sacraments i once considered empty or without meaning.
These days, I sort of feel like i'm the peacemaker in the middle between 2 siblings in battle. I see more and more that there are so many misconceptions and misunderstanding on both sides. I've always considered Catholics my brothers and sisters in Christ and now i am feeling like i am moving more towards Catholicism for various reasons......i even went to confession not too long ago for the first time since i was a kid, but there are still certain doctrinal teachings that don't jive with me. I hope that they can still accept me even still and see me as i see them.
I just wish we all could celebrate our similarities more rather than get so caught up with arguing our differences.
"They will know we are christians by our love"

 

[wonderwoman]

$100,000 REWARD for anyone who can produce an official Catholic document over 2000 years that declares any saint to be a sole mediator!!!

Hi Wonderwoman,

Nice screen name, Kepha!

I’d like to share a few thoughts about intercession of the saints. First of all, the Jews did honor great teachers with shrines.
Second, we have the Prayer to St. Joseph that dates back to 60 A.D. when the Apostles were still alive. If there was something wrong with it, it wouldn’t have taken 1500 years to notice. Prayers to saints can be found written on the walls of the Roman Catacombs from the 1st century. In other words, prayers to saints is a normal part of Christianity that has always been there. Denial of intercession is a man-made tradition.

Third, the Gospels and Epistles had little to say about private devotion because it deals more with doctrinal issues, and the Bible itself says it does not contain everything about Christianity.
Fourth, Catholicism does not hold to the man-made invention of separating Gods family. Those in heaven are of the same family as Christians on earth. (Eph. 3:14-15) God’s love is not separate and different over those in heaven with those on earth. But those with Christ are much more alive than we are. Some Protestants, by denying intersession of the saints, have divided God’s kingdom, and those in heaven are deaf, dumb, and useless to the affairs of the earth. This is not Christianity and it certainly isn’t heaven according to the Bible.

When a loving father allows his 5 year old to carry in the groceries, does the father NEED his child’s help? No. Does the child want to please his father? Yes. Does the father demand the child’s help? Let’s hope not. The father allows the participation of the child because he loves him/her, and wants the child to work with him. God INVITES our participation on earth and in heaven because He loves us and wants us to share in His work. (1 Cor. 3:9) The phrase used to describe "fellow workers" is "sunergoi," which literally means synergists, or cooperators with God in salvific matters. Protestantism does not teach the love of God in it's fullness.
Christ is the sole mediator between God and man. (1 Tim. 2:5) I don’t mean to confuse you but this has always been a Catholic teaching well before St. Paul wrote it to Timothy, as Catholic Traditions pre-date the canon of the Bible. But to use this verse to refute what has always been believed is to play god, because then one must dictate to Christ how he applies His sole mediatorship to allow for SUBORDINATE mediators, which is what St. Paul asks us to do right before 1 Tim 2:5. More on that here: http://www.scripturecatholic.com/saints.html

Lastly, I invite you to examine a prayer to any saint, or post it for discussion. They don’t contain the objections raised by Protestants. When I post a few prayers to saints in debates with anti-Catholics, they change the subject or fall silent. Glory is given only to God in all of them, and honor given to the one who has lived an exemplary life in Christ. Here is a list of good articles you can pick from:
http://www.phatmass.com/directory/index.php/cat/6
But keep asking questions, Ww, we’re glad to have you here.

Peter

Hi Peter, thanx for your response.
Regarding what you said about the prayer to St. Joseph in 60A.D....that's very interesting. I never knew that. I would be interested in seeing what that looked like. Do you know what the prayer was? Also, regarding the shrines that the jews placed for teachers, does that mean they were praying to the deceased teachers and asking God to intercede for them?

I guess my dilemna lies in the language of prayer and the state of mind when one enters prayer which is worship. It's one thing to say to a saint: "pray to God on my behalf" , but it's another thing to say: "so and so saint grant me this or that favor". It just seems one is treading on dangerous ground when one starts believing that other humans, even if they are extra holy, can have the power to grant answers to prayer. When i ask my friends or relatives here on earth to pray for me for a certain thing, i don't adore those friends who are praying for me. I love and respect them and am thankful for their prayers, but what i see happening in Catholicism is not simply an asking for prayer from other saints, but a sort of mystical adoration of such beings not so different from how they worship and adore christ. It almost seems like they believe them to be "demi-gods" with special supernatural powers. I'm not saying that those who are now with God are deaf and mute, i am simply saying that the bible speaks nothing of this. I do not want to add to something that is not there. I have no idea what life is like in heaven for those who have died and very little is described in the bible about this. Just because there is a tradition of this, doesn't make it a true practice that God wants us to follow.

When i quoted tim. regarding christ being the mediator between us and God .......that is not my attempt to play God. I am simply echoing what Paul and others taught in the NT. Christ is clearly referred to as the 2nd adam, the high priest, the lamb of God etc....he is clearly the reconciliator, mediator, the bridge.......the redeemer. This language is repeatedly emphasized and expressed through out the whole NT. There is no one like him. He is God incarnate and the only one who can bring us directly to God........because of his blood, his sacrifice, that adoption, we can come boldly before the throne of God, and we no longer have to go through other parties, such as the high priest which is what the jews had to do before the messiah came.

Do you honestly believe that i have missed out on the fullness of God's grace, presence, love, forgiveness and answers to prayer because i have never asked a saint to intercede for me on my behalf? Is my faith and relationship with God handicapped because i don't practice the veneration of saints? I've read the writings of many of the saints, learned from their exemplary lives, desire to emmulate their devotion, thank God for them and look forward to meeting them face to face someday, but when i petition God for something i am in need of, I relish in the freedom that i can go directly to him through the blood of Christ and stand before his thrown as his child. This direct access to God is the beauty and the good news of the gospel.

With all due respect, i don't think it's fair of you to assume that protestants don't teach the fullness of God's love only because they don't practice the veneration of saints.
I am open to God to teach me anything new that i may not understand, so i will look at some of the verses more carefully that you mentioned and look at some of those articles.
Please know that i am not here to rock any boats, i do love much of catholicism and am here to learn more.
Thanx,
monica

 

[Filia Mariae]

ok lots of information to take in here and to explore.

Someone mentioned on one of the posts that mary is without sin. I don't understand where this idea comes from? When exactly was this doctrine taught in the church?

That's what the Immaculate Conception is- that Mary was conceived free from original sin and remained free from sin throughout her entire life. This has always been a belief of the Church and it was dogmatically defined in 1954.

I mean, Jesus being both human and divine (God) could not have had the power to forgive sins if he himself was born with original sin. Death is the result of original sin and this was why death had no power over him. He was tempted in the desert, but he overcame the temptation and did not sin. So was Mary born without original sin?

yes.

Is she a goddess?

No.

Is she both human and divine?

No. She is human.

Incarnate like Jesus?

No, she's a created human being, but is the crown of all creation.

Are you saying that salvation comes not only through the sacrifice of christ but through the choice of Mary?

Our redemption was accomplished by the death and resurrection of Christ. Mary was instrumental in God's plan because her "fiat" or yes at the Annunciation allowed God's will to be done in becoming the Incarnate Jesus who redeemed us.

Just cause Mary was chosen to be the mother of Jesus, why does that automatically mean that she was sinless? If you're going to use that argument, does that mean Moses who was chosen to bring the jews out of captivity, sinless as well?

No. Mary wasn't sinless because it was necessary, but because it was fitting. She was the tabernacle of God Almighty, and it is fitting for Him to dwell in a spotless tabernacle.

Did Mary exist in heaven as Jesus's mother before jesus came to earth in human form?

No.

{quote]The language of co-remptrix is very confusing and misleading for me because it implies that redemption is attained not only through jesus, but through her as well. Did she die for my sins, did she take away my sins and make me righteous before God?

No, no, and no.

Was Mary the only human not redeemed from original sins through the sacrifice of her son? Or are you saying she was the only human exception? I do consider her blessed among all women since she was chosen to not only bring the messiah into this world, but to raise him.

No. Mary WAS redeemed through the sacrifice of her Son. That's what I'm saying. God is outside of time. He can "apply" the merits of the Cross wherever He sees fit. And He applied them to the Blessed Mother before she sinned. In that way, she owes more to the saving death of Christ than any of us.

But what about Joseph, he was chosen to be his human father here on earth.......according to this teaching, why should Joseph be left out and not called co-redeemer?

We are all called to be co-redeemers. To "make up what is lacking in the sufferings of Christ."

{quote]Are you adding Mary to the holy trinity? are there 4 now instead of 3?

No Mary is created. She is not divine.

God, the father, God the son, God the holy spirit and God the blessed lady?

No.

God chose her as the vessel which is a glorious honor, but God also chose Joseph, the apostles, the disciples, he chose you and me to be his children.......why is Mary given such a god-like status? Is it possible that the emphasis of this tradition was born out of syncritism?... With the cultures who later converted to chrisianity that didn't want to let go of their goddess tradition. Isn't it just possible that the church adopted this and carried it for all these years?

SHe's not given god-like status and no it's not possible the Church has erred because she is protected by the Holy Spirit.

There are many church teachings that are no longer practiced or held to officially, does that mean the popes and the councils are fallible sometimes and infallible others?

Can you give an example?

I totally get that we should aspire to unity and agreement in doctrinal teachings, but is there no room for discussion? For questioning?

Of course there is. That's what we're doing right this very moment.

Are we to blindly obey certain teachings simply because it's a tradition or because certain groups decided it as Truth?

We are to receive the gift of divine revelation with faith and work through it intellectually that we might understand it.

Take indulgences for example.........this was once a church teaching/tradition wasn't it? How corrupt and erroneus was that idea?

Nope, indulgences are a legitimate teaching of the Church. Their abuse is not. Good things can and are abused.

 

[Fish and Bread]

Pope Pius IV, Council of Trent, Sess. 25, On Invocation, Veneration and Relics of Saints, and on Sacred Images, ex cathedra: “…the saints, who reign with Christ, offer up their prayers to God for me; and that it is good and useful to invoke them suppliantly and, in order to obtain favors from God through His Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who alone is our Redeemer and Savior….But if anyone should teach or maintain anything contrary to these decrees, let him be anathema.” (Denz. 984-987)