not from what I've seen either.
Mother Mary
- Thread starter dingoling.
- Start date
Oh let us all be honest we don't see it because RCs are not allowed to discern for themselves at all. Their institution's leaders are the only ones allowed the gift of discernment.
Blessings8
Well-known member
Protestants do not worship God as he commanded, It is just you and the bible the fell from the sky. Reverence is a foreign thing to you and looks like worship. And you obviously do not even understand what the mass is.
a gift they do not have...
some don't - any more than catholics do. they are also unbelievers.
what heading is that under in the rcc guidebook? catholics keep mentioning 'bibles falling from the sky'. I've never seen one fall from the sky (not even as a catholic), have you?
Reverence isn't foreign to believers, but worship of humans and things of this world is foreign to believers.
many catholics have done their best to describe it on here, and that's bad enough, but not nearly as bad as the realty of it is.
More false claims from an RC, that is bearing false witness. It is RCs who show a lack of reverence. It is RCs who find it foreign and do not understand the meaning of worship or true biblical repentance. The mass is not hard to understand at all, and it is a fraud put upon the people. In fact, RCs do not worship like the NT church at all. The NT had an agape meal. I have never been to one in my many years as an RC. Thank God I never have to attend an RC service again.
More false claims. Mary is blessed and so are all real believers.
Jesus is very clear on that point:
Luke 11
27 As Jesus was saying these things, a woman in the crowd called out, “Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you.”
28 He replied, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it.”
Mary was blessed as we all are. I am happy to commemorate all that Jesus has done.
Bonnie
Super Member
We get it just fine. But we see the problem with such a title. It is too vague. Mother of God Incarnate is more specific and less likely to be misunderstood.
I see the title as deceptive.
Bonnie
Super Member
I understand what the Mass is just fine. But Jesus said God is looking for those to worship Him in spirit and in truth. I cannot speak for other churches, but in mine, we do just that.
Reverence isn't foreign to us, but we recognize when it goes too far, as your church does with its Mariolatry. It goes much too far in "reverencing" Mary, making a near goddess out of her, and ascribing powers, glory, and some titles to her--like "Only Hope for Sinners"--that rightfully belong ONLY to her Son. The RCC doesn't reverence Mary at all, since it makes gross caricature out of the gentle maid of Nazareth. Just read a chapter or two of diLiguouri's execrable The Glories of Mary.
And none of us ever said the Bible "fell from the sky."
Bonnie
Super Member
False. In the thread I started about the 4 Marian Dogmas and how they must be believed to be saved, I pointed out and quoted John 3:16:
"For God so loved the world, that He gave His One and only Son, that whosoever believes in Him will not perish but have everlasting life."
Then I quoted from Acts 16:
"29 The jailer called for lights, rushed in and fell trembling before Paul and Silas. 30 He then brought them out and asked, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”
31 They replied, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved—you and your household.” 32 Then they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all the others in his house."
So, I simply asked Catholics to show me where either Jesus or Paul and Silas added the 4 Marian Dogmas as to how we are saved. I was told by a Catholic I was putting my Lutheran spin on it, in interpreting these verses. But I made no interpretation--just quoted the verses and asked a logical question: where did either Jesus or the Apostles mention believing the 4 Marian Dogmas were necessary for salvation?
So, no, I don't think some Catholics know the difference between what Scripture actually says and interpreting Scripture.
Last edited:
Bonnie
Super Member
And even their leaders have zero true discernment. Though at least Francis did not allow the "co-Redemtrix" belief to be made a dogma. Unfortunately, he had zero discernment when it came to that Pachamama debacle and that more recent spirit thing in Canada.
Bonnie
Super Member
I don't, so much as being too vague and not specific enough. But unfortunately, Catholics use the title NOT to affirm Jesus' divinity, but to affirm their Mariolatry and hyper-dulia-ing of her.
romishpopishorganist
Well-known member
Fine. But really, even among Catholics, who has ever been confused? What Catholic has ever asserted that "The Mother of God" means Mary is the mother of the Trinity, Mary pre-existed the Trinity, thus Mary is God?
In all my years as a Catholic--even before I formally studied theology--I knew what that title meant--and was never confused by it.
pilgrim
Well-known member
The only ones who misunderstand the title are the Protestants.
Bonnie
Super Member
I don't misunderstand the title. But it is still too easy for unbelievers to misunderstand and misconstrue.. If the title had been Mother of the Incarnate God/Incarnation, there would be far less objection to it from nonRCCs.
Far better just to stick to what the Bible says and teaches us, directly and indirectly. We don't need any titles for Mary, anyway, in order to be saved by grace through faith in Christ Jesus our Lord, other than that she was a virgin when she conceived Jesus and gave birth to Him.
pilgrim
Well-known member
If you don't misunderstand, why do you assume that other Protestants will?I don't misunderstand the title. But it is still too easy for unbelievers to misunderstand and misconstrue.. If the title had been Mother of the Incarnate God/Incarnation, there would be far less objection to it from nonRCCs.
Far better just to stick to what the Bible says and teaches us, directly and indirectly. We don't need any titles for Mary, anyway, in order to be saved by grace through faith in Christ Jesus our Lord, other than that she was a virgin when she conceived Jesus and gave birth to Him.
If the term was more to your liking, wouldn't that more likely cause other misunderstandings, such as how many Gods there are?
romishpopishorganist
Well-known member
No, you don't. You just think Catholics misunderstand the title.
Since when have Christians ever been concerned with what unbelievers think?
And--why should Catholics care what nonRCC's think?
You mean like--say----for instance----when the bishops at Nicaea approved the use of an unbiblical word to describe the nature of the relationship between God the Father and God the Son? You mean--like that?
If all Christianity is--is just making sure our after-life insurance policy is in place--then I guess so.We don't need any titles for Mary, anyway, in order to be saved by grace through faith in Christ Jesus our Lord, other than that she was a virgin when she conceived Jesus and gave birth to Him.
Since we are to preach the Gospel to them. Why would you not care what they think about what you would tell them about God?
Why do you care what we think? If you didn't, you wouldn't be posting here.
romishpopishorganist
Well-known member
In the sense of teaching unbelievers who are open to the Gospel message? Then we just explain what we mean by the terms.
But I was talking more about unbelievers who aren't open to our message. I do not care whether approve of us or not.
I am not here for your sake. I do not care whether you approve of Catholicism or not, and never have.
I am here for the sake of other Catholics.