This is coming from one individual who holds views contrary to what the Catholic Christian Church teaches. Had this individual lived and was well-known to the Early Church Councils, they would have said, “Let him be anathema.”
There would be no incarnation without Mary’s obedience to God and her co-operation with His grace.
She was made holy and filled with grace by God (for she is the “Ark of the New Covenant”).
Again, this was by one individual. And I responded that I do not believe anyone who holds your view is “a Satanist” (maybe not as directly as I should have, but I try to be respectful to everyone here).
This is great! I think this is true of most good Christians. We are reminded of our Baptismal vows every time we dip our fingers in the holy-water font when we enter/leave Church. And explicitly renew these vows again during the Easter Liturgy.
I reject Satan!
And all his works and empty promises.
I believe in God, the Father Almighty, creator of heaven and earth!
I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord, who was born of the Virgin Mary, was crucified, died, and was buried, rose from the dead, and is now seated at the right hand of the Father!
I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy Catholic church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and life everlasting!
God, the all-powerful Father of our Lord Jesus Christ has given us a new birth by water and the Holy Spirit, and forgiven all our sins. May He also keep us faithful to our Lord Jesus Christ for ever and ever.
Amen! ♱
I appreciate you being here. I am sorry that some have not been charitable towards you. I think you definitely add to the conversation here. Don’t take everything that individuals say here personal. Ultimately, it is all about Christ. These disagreements and slanderings, each will one day have to answer for to God.
A few thoughts: First, what do you believe is meant by mediator between God? Do you believe this is referring to Prayer (a Protestant interpretation) or Salvation (a Catholic/Orthodox interpretation)?
Second, we do not believe that Mary can redeem souls. This is not what Co-redemptrix means. This is what Protestants (and some ignorant Catholics) think it means. If you believe this is what was ever meant by this term when used by the Popes and Fathers, then you are either listening to Protestants who assume what we mean or are ignorant of what the Church means by this term.
The Church has not changed her teaching on this (we agree). Where you and I disagree (and perhaps Pope Leo too) is that former Popes have used these terms and Early Church Fathers have described these teachings (without using these terms explicitly). You are correct that these terms are not found in decrees or dogmas. So, you can make the argument that it is not official teaching if your definition of “official teaching” is only that which has been defined as dogma. And that is a valid definition, but not what I mean when I speak of “Church teaching.”
However, you have shown that your definition of these terms is not what those who used/described them (and I don’t mean on this forum, but rather former Popes & Patristics) have taught. You are interpreting these terms as Protestant and ignorant Catholic Christians do.
I have not read the new document yet, so I cannot respond to what you claim Leo says. Can you post a link to the actual document (and, please, not to an article telling us what it says)?
We also have to understand that Vatican II cares more about ecumenicalism, which some Catholic Christians see as a watering down of the Faith to become more Protestant. Meanwhile the Eastern Orthodox Church is doing the opposite. They are standing firm in the Apostolic Faith and saying, if you want the Christian Faith as the Apostles taught, then join us, but if you want modernity, then remain Protestant or “join the Catholics.”
So, what will happen is, the Orthodox Church will become more relevant and the Catholic Church will become less relevant as she becomes less catholic/orthodox and more protestant/worldly.
So, why am I Catholic and not Orthodox? That is a conversation for another thread.
Thank you : )
Fair enough. The answer is yes, about a handful of Popes have used either of these terms in dispute.
I know that it is not what you are referring to, which is part of the disconnect. Mary as the “New Eve” relates to Mary as Co-redemptrix. If you are interested in reading what the Early Church Fathers taught on this subject, check out the writings of Justin Martyr, St. Irenaeus of Lyons, Cyprian, and St. Ambrose; all described Mary as the New Eve.
Why does it matter? Because if you do not understand this teaching, then you do not understand what is meant by Mary as Co-redemptrix.
Are you sure that you are not Protestant? I am not saying that Catholic Christians must Pray the Rosary, but The Rosary is a reflection on Jesus and the Holy Gospels.
I do not disagree with you here. You define “teaching of the Church” as only being what has been officially defined as dogma (and that’s fine), whereas I define “Church teaching” as being the entire deposit of Faith (including what was taught in Sacred Scripture, the writings of the Early Church Fathers, and the Articles of Faith.
Again, please link to this document. I would love to read it for myself and then I will share my thoughts about it.
Marianist? This sounds like how some Protestants used to call Catholic Christians Papists. Catholic Christians honor Mary and you used a derogatory term to describe us. Catholic Christians believe in the primacy of Peter and the office of which Jesus bestowed upon him and that which was passed on to his successors (not dissimilar to Isaiah 22:22), but some Protestants use a derogatory term to describe us.
You and I agree that some Catholic Christians honor Mary a little too hard, if I’m being frank. And some Catholic Christians and most Protestants do not honor Mary enough. And a few put her on the same level as the serpent, which is discussing.
God bless
[/quote]
