How do non-Catholics explain Eucharistic miracles, such as bleeding, and Marian...

[Standing Up]

Luther considered us Catholics; he considered his (our) work as going back to what the Catholic Church originally was. He also strongly disliked the name "Lutheran", and always rejected it.

We Lutherans do not consider ourselves Protestants at all. Anglicans and Lutherans have always been "different" from the "typical" Protestants.

And to answer the question, why I'm Lutheran and I don't convert: I'm Lutheran because I believe in the real presence, the Bible, and I'm conservative, among many other things. I have yet to convert because I'm trying to discern what's what.

So too did Cyprian and Firmilian consider themselves Catholic versus the Roman religion. Matter of fact Rome called herself the Roman Church. Too bad those members today haven't done much homework into this.

At least your answer clarifies a bit. I'm really just wondering why a Lutheran would defend visions of "Mary" that clearly oppose scripture and the Mary of the bible?

 

[Sword of the Lord]

I'm not defending apparitions of Mary. I'm trying to discern the truth about them. This thread has become "the RCC is evil and apparitions are a hoax or demonic". The two other largest and ancient faiths also claim apparitions, and also believes as the RCC believes. I'm trying to find a logical reason why apparitions should be considered a hoax or demonic, when the most ancient churches, from in and around the holy land, all believe the same thing. Why is a few hundred years old group of Christians that is splintered into tens of thousands of denominations right. Why is American Protestantism right but the ancient faiths from in and around the holy land wrong. George Washington isn't in the Bible but he is (was) real. The Bible itself claims not everything is in the Bible.

 

[Albion]

I'm not defending apparitions of Mary. I'm trying to discern the truth about them. This thread has become "the RCC is evil and apparitions are a hoax or demonic". The two other largest and ancient faiths also claim apparitions, and also believes as the RCC believes. I'm trying to find a logical reason why apparitions should be considered a hoax or demonic, when the most ancient churches, from in and around the holy land, all believe the same thing.

Well, for one thing, there have been more "apparitions" declared by the RCC itself to have been bogus than the few famous ones that the church considers to be genuine. That certainly does not suggest that if Protestants are doubtful about such events that they are being unreasonable.

And if these events are not real, what would you think the explanation for the reports can be if we rule out hoaxes and demonic origins?

Then too, if you read that article I posted, you will know that all these alleged apparitions introduce doctrines that are unscriptural. That being the case, we know that they cannot be genuine!

All of that considered, the Protestant doubts are well-founded.

Why is afew hundred years old group of Christians that is splintered into tens of thousands of denominations right.

Again with the anti-Protestant bias. Your real agenda is showing, friend.

 

[Tzaousios]

Again with the anti-Protestant bias. Your real agenda is showing, friend.

What agenda is that? Please be specific.

 

[Lion King]

I'm not defending apparitions of Mary. I'm trying to discern the truth about them. This thread has become "the RCC is evil and apparitions are a hoax or demonic". The two other largest and ancient faiths also claim apparitions, and also believes as the RCC believes. I'm trying to find a logical reason why apparitions should be considered a hoax or demonic, when the most ancient churches, from in and around the holy land, all believe the same thing. Why is a few hundred years old group of Christians that is splintered into tens of thousands of denominations right. Why is American Protestantism right but the ancient faiths from in and around the holy land wrong. George Washington isn't in the Bible but he is (was) real. The Bible itself claims not everything is in the Bible.

What is this Holy-land you are referring to??

Q: Why is the apparitions at Fatima false?

A: Well, for one the prophecies claimed by the apparitions never came to pass. As far as I'm aware, Russia is not even remotely connected to roman catholicism.

 

[Rhamiel]

Well, for one thing, there have been more "apparitions" declared by the RCC itself to have been bogus than the few famous ones that the church considers to be genuine. That certainly does not suggest that if Protestants are doubtful about such events that they are being unreasonable.

I think it makes your objections even more unreasonable
it is not like you are opposed to things that are not being investigated and just blindly accepted
you are rejecting something that has been investigated with a critical POV

Again with the anti-Protestant bias. Your real agenda is showing, friend.

pointing out that the truly ancient churches accept visions of the Saints is not an "anti-Protestant bias"
he is pointing out a discrepancy between different faith traditions
just to call it a bias and treat it like any other preconceived prejudice is not being honest about History

the Coptic Church, the Catholic Church, the Orthodox Church all accept that sometimes God uses the Saints who have passed on to appear to those of us on earth
even if you accept the Anglican Church as an ancient Church, early on, it acted the same way, and it was not until it was influenced by the Protestant Reformation did it reject such things, St. Simon Stock was born in AD 1165 in England and the Church in England (whoever you associate that with at the time) accepted that he saw visions of the Virgin Mary

 

[Albion]

I think it makes your objections even more unreasonable
it is not like you are opposed to things that are not being investigated and just blindly accepted
you are rejecting something that has been investigated with a critical POV

Just a minute there. You're saying that we are unreasonable because we do not automatically accept as true the decision about their genuineness made unilaterally by the one church that benefits from having them be thought genuine?? Think about that one again. It would be laughable if it were not so absurd.

pointing out that the truly ancient churches accept visions of the Saints is not an "anti-Protestant bias"

Nice try, but of course that is not the reason.

 

[Rhamiel]

What is this Holy-land you are referring to??

Q: Why is the apparitions at Fatima false?

A: Well, for one the prophecies claimed by the apparitions never came to pass. As far as I'm aware, Russia is not even remotely connected to roman catholicism.

it was that people need to pray the rosary or Russia will spread her errors to the rest of the world

who is to say that this did not happen?
secularism, lack of respect for human life, lack of respect for the family and lack of respect for rights to property
looks like Russia did spread her errors to the rest of the world

or if the Prophesy is going to come to pass, maybe it is just taking some time?
Look how long the Prophets in the Old Testament were waiting for the Messiah?

 

[Tzaousios]

Nice try, but of course that is not the reason.

Well, what is it, what is the agenda you mentioned?

 

[Rhamiel]

Just a minute there. You're saying that we are unreasonable because we do not automatically accept as true the decision about their genuineness made unilaterally by the one church that benefits from having them be thought genuine?? Think about that one again. It would be laughable if it were not so absurd.


Nice try, but of course that is not the reason.

well ofcourse you should not automatically accept such things as being true
but from looking at this thread
it seems like most Protestants automatically accept such things as demonic
they do not investigate such things or are they open to reasoned debate, they just shut down in the face of anything that appears "too Catholic"
even though it has been pointed out that similar type visions are regularly accepted by the other ancient Christian Churches such as the Eastern Orthodox and the Oriental Orthodox

what is the reason you say that his posts are biased?

 

[Albion]

it was that people need to pray the rosary or Russia will spread her errors to the rest of the world

who is to say that this did not happen?

That's how you make decisions that your eternal soul may depend on getting right--Who is to say it could not happen?

If you're serious about that, I'd like to sell you some land on Jupiter that just might make you wealthy.

 

[Rhamiel]

no... everyone talks about "Russia will spread her errors to the rest of the world" as having to do solely about Marxist Socialism/Communism
I am saying that the "error" that was spoken of might how we no longer look at people as being made in the image of God but rather treat people like animals

look at what has happened to the world since 1917
there is a rise in slavery around the world
sex trafficking
sexual revolution
the epidemic of pornography
"Christian Countries" both Catholic and Protestant becoming even more secular
many nations accepting physician assisted suicide as legitimate

all of it comes from treating others as objects instead of human beings
is this the "errors of Russia" that we were warned about?

 

[sunlover1]

Originally Posted by sunlover1

That's all sex is to you?
Carnal?

Seriously? US PEOPLE? lol.
You're the one making sex a big deal.​

​

Do you call it pro-choice, too???

Call what pro choice?

Where's that mandate?

The husband must fulfill his duty to his wife, and likewise also the wife to her husband. 4The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does; and likewise also the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. 5Stop depriving one another, except by agreement for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer, and come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.…

Mary was disobedient and therefore a sinner.

God actually demands that we not lust after our spouse. There's chastity in marriage, too.

That's not true. He demands no such thing.
The marriage bed is undefiled. He didn't have
to make it so pleasurable, think about it.
You really thought that God made sex so
enjoyable and then put the brakes on?

Mary was, according to tradition, a vowed virgin. Consecrated, which is a permanent thing, whether you know it or not. You can't consecrate something to God, and then unconsecrate it. Which is why she said "How can this be since I know not man." God doesn't command indiscriminate sex with contraception. It's called temperance. I really don't expect you to understand. Maybe look into the subject and study it. From points of view other than yours. I did, and it made me want to be Catholic.

This makes no sense in light of the whole of Scripture.

BTW...I never mentioned contraception.
I have 9 kids, most of my relatives are RCC and
have an average of 2.5 kids roughly

 

[Lion King]

it was that people need to pray the rosary or Russia will spread her errors to the rest of the world

who is to say that this did not happen?
secularism, lack of respect for human life, lack of respect for the family and lack of respect for rights to property
looks like Russia did spread her errors to the rest of the world

Nice try, but Russia neither invented nor spread those errors throughout the world. It's not like those errors you proposed only started with the emergence of the USSR...people have been killing each other for foolish reasons long before the birth of the Soviet Empire.

or if the Prophesy is going to come to pass, maybe it is just taking some time? Look how long the Prophets in the Old Testament were waiting for the Messiah?

Funny how every "prophet" whose prediction has failed to come pass likes to use this excuse. Unfortunately, you are not the first, nor will you be the last.

 

[Stryder06]

She wasn't? I'd say asking someone to allow the Holy Spirit to create life in you, bear him in your womb, mother him to adult-hood, and watch him suffer the horrid brutality Christ suffered for us isn't what you would call "Sacrifice"?

Where was Mary asked to do any of that? She wasn't asked. She was told. This was all God's plan as prophesied.

That's asside from the tradition that she sacrificed herself to be a temple virgin, and aside from the widowhood she suffered after Christ's crucifixion.

Unsurprisingly, your tradition is wrong. You still haven't explained Matt 1:25 to me.

Nah, no sacrifice there. Nothing to see, move along.

You're right.

 

[Stryder06]

God has called the Blessed Virgin Mary to be an example of deep and abiding faith in Jesus Christ even when such faith costs what is most dearly held to her heart. Blessed Mary kept the faith she exhibited from the beginning of Christ's earthly ministry at Cana and she kept it faithfully with resolute determination until the end despite all the hardships she faced. And earlier in her life on this Earth Blessed Mary freely consented to God's purpose in bringing the Saviour into the world he was to save. Thus Blessed Mary's life and words - few though they be in sacred scripture - have been a source of inspiration for countless faithful Christians through all the generation from the beginning of the gospel until our own day.

Please tell me how you know all of this about Mary? Aside from her accepting God's will for her to be mother to Christ, how do you know she was so unwavering? You say there are few who have been as great a source of inspiration, but I disagree. Mary is only as popular as she is because your church has elevated her status so high, making her more than what she was. If you look to the scripture, you'll see more examples of faithfulness than just Mary.

You ask how can Blessed Mary "save anyone from anything?" The answer is found in sacred scripture by analogy to the saving work of saint Paul expressed in these words,

For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office: If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and might save some of them. (Romans 11:13-14 KJV)​

And also by analogy with a similar doctrine expressed by saint Jude in the following words,

But you, beloved, build yourselves up on your most holy faith; pray in the Holy Spirit; keep yourselves in the love of God; wait for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life. And convince some, who doubt; save some, by snatching them out of the fire; on some have mercy with fear, hating even the garment spotted by the flesh. (Jude 1:20-23 RSV)​

Every labourer in the field of the gospel message seeks to save some people through the preaching of the gospel so one ought not to baulk at the thought that the saints in heaven and Blessed Mary, who is mother of the Church, have the same desire.

These examples aren't the same. Paul never saved anyone. His admonition to walk as he walk was nothing more than a request that others follow Christ. In that prayer a direct cry for help is being given to Mary. She is being asked to do the saving. The words are plain

Tell me this, your church has an abundance of saints that you consider worthy examples of emulation. Do you have any other prayers of consecration to other saints, where you ask them to save you?

 

[Stryder06]

well ofcourse you should not automatically accept such things as being true

Isn't that what you do? Accept them as true because your church has "validated" them?

but from looking at this thread
it seems like most Protestants automatically accept such things as demonic

Because they are.

they do not investigate such things or are they open to reasoned debate, they just shut down in the face of anything that appears "too Catholic"
even though it has been pointed out that similar type visions are regularly accepted by the other ancient Christian Churches such as the Eastern Orthodox and the Oriental Orthodox

I'll speak for myself and say that this has nothing to do with it being "too catholic". I consider these visions to be just as demonic as the visions that psychics see. One only need investigate the scriptures to see this as true.

And the sad part is that you can only accept these as being true based on the word of your church. Compare the visions and the message to scripture, and it'll become clear that it isn't from God.

 

[Stryder06]

I'm not defending apparitions of Mary. I'm trying to discern the truth about them. This thread has become "the RCC is evil and apparitions are a hoax or demonic". The two other largest and ancient faiths also claim apparitions, and also believes as the RCC believes. I'm trying to find a logical reason why apparitions should be considered a hoax or demonic, when the most ancient churches, from in and around the holy land, all believe the same thing. Why is a few hundred years old group of Christians that is splintered into tens of thousands of denominations right. Why is American Protestantism right but the ancient faiths from in and around the holy land wrong. George Washington isn't in the Bible but he is (was) real. The Bible itself claims not everything is in the Bible.

I don't think I'll ever understand why individuals believe that longevity is proof of the ability to discern something properly. If you want to decide if these apparitions are true, you only need look to scripture. The biggest issue is the fact that 99% of protestants have bought the "immortal soul" theory. Cast that lie away and you'll be able to see the truth about these apparitions.

 

[Albion]

Originally Posted by Rhamiel View Post

well of course you should not automatically accept such things as being true

Isn't that what you do? Accept them as true because your church has "validated" them?

Not only the ones the church has 'validated.' He jumped on me for having the audacity to question the genuineness of ANY alleged apparition in history!

That, of course, was MiketoMichael's view, also.

I'll speak for myself and say that this has nothing to do with it being "too catholic". I consider these visions to be just as demonic as the visions that psychics see. One only need investigate the scriptures to see this as true.

And if you did NOT consider them to be demonic but only hallucinations or some sort of natural phenomena, you'd still be a target.

 

[MoreCoffee]

God has called the Blessed Virgin Mary to be an example of deep and abiding faith in Jesus Christ even when such faith costs what is most dearly held to her heart. Blessed Mary kept the faith she exhibited from the beginning of Christ's earthly ministry at Cana and she kept it faithfully with resolute determination until the end despite all the hardships she faced. And earlier in her life on this Earth Blessed Mary freely consented to God's purpose in bringing the Saviour into the world he was to save. Thus Blessed Mary's life and words - few though they be in sacred scripture - have been a source of inspiration for countless faithful Christians through all the generation from the beginning of the gospel until our own day.

Please tell me how you know all of this about Mary? Aside from her accepting God's will for her to be mother to Christ, how do you know she was so unwavering? You say there are few who have been as great a source of inspiration, but I disagree. Mary is only as popular as she is because your church has elevated her status so high, making her more than what she was. If you look to the scripture, you'll see more examples of faithfulness than just Mary.

I know because the Church knows and the Church knows because the Fathers knew and the Fathers knew because the Apostles taught them. It is, in short, Apostolic Tradition.

And yes, the Blessed Virgin Mary is well known and acclaimed as blessed by so many people because the Catholic Church and the other ancient churches have constantly held and taught Apostolic Tradition. I guess that when you opine that the Blessed Virgin is presented as "more than what she was" by the Apostolic and ancient churches it is because the theology which you teach makes rather little of her thus she become less that what she was in that system of beliefs.

You ask how can Blessed Mary "save anyone from anything?" The answer is found in sacred scripture by analogy to the saving work of saint Paul expressed in these words,

For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office: If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and might save some of them. (Romans 11:13-14 KJV)​

And also by analogy with a similar doctrine expressed by saint Jude in the following words,

But you, beloved, build yourselves up on your most holy faith; pray in the Holy Spirit; keep yourselves in the love of God; wait for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life. And convince some, who doubt; save some, by snatching them out of the fire; on some have mercy with fear, hating even the garment spotted by the flesh. (Jude 1:20-23 RSV)​

Every labourer in the field of the gospel message seeks to save some people through the preaching of the gospel so one ought not to baulk at the thought that the saints in heaven and Blessed Mary, who is mother of the Church, have the same desire.

These examples aren't the same. Paul never saved anyone. His admonition to walk as he walk was nothing more than a request that others follow Christ. In that prayer a direct cry for help is being given to Mary. She is being asked to do the saving. The words are plain

Tell me this, your church has an abundance of saints that you consider worthy examples of emulation. Do you have any other prayers of consecration to other saints, where you ask them to save you?

I make it a rule to reject a theology that will cause me to dismiss what is said in sacred scripture; the theology you are offering in the above quote simply asks that what saint Paul and saint Jude wrote be rejected.

Saints Paul and Jude were instrumental in the salvation of others and expressed that instrumentality as if they were saving those people. Mary too is instrumental in the salvation of those who practise the devotion to the immaculate heart of Mary and so they express themselves about Mary as if she was saving them. In the cases of saints Paul and Jude neither was under the impression that they saved anybody apart from the grace of God and that they were anything other than his faithful servants in the salvation of those to whom they ministered. In the case the the blessed virgin Mary none who practise devotion to the immaculate heart of Mary has been taught that Mary saves anybody apart from the grace of God or that Mary is anything other than his faithful servant in the salvation of those who are devoted to the immaculate heart of Mary.