My Mother Mary And Me?

[Laudate_Dominum]

I don't know of it's any consolation to a protestant, but the fruits of the Rosary are staggering. I mean, if you look at the history of the Church and of all the great Saints who had a great love for the Rosary, and even how the Rosary has changed the course of history for the better. If you look at the many fruits of the Rosary it seems silly not to pray it.

[quote]I know of no greater way to keep focused on God than devotion to Mary. [/quote]
This is really the fact that protestants fail to grasp isn't it?

The fact that the protestant idea of no communion of Saints goes against historical Christianity so you are basically saying that the early Christians and the Christians of the first 1,500 years did not know Christianity at all.

One of the many Marian prayers that I like very much is called the 'sub tuum praesidium', it goes back to the earliest centuries when Christians were persecuted and had to say Mass in the catacombs and all that. These Christians lived in constant danger of being killed, they had no reservations about entrusting themselves to the Mother of God.
"We fly to your patronage, O holy Mother of God, despise not our petitions in our necessities, but deliver us from all dangers. O ever glorious and blessed Virgin."

It's part of Christianity and the fact that the general protestant mentality can't comprehend it suggests to me that there is something fundamentally unchristian about the essence of protestantism. In fact I would argue this on many levels.

[[i]the following is largely a compilation of quotes, I'm lazy this morning[/i]]
What are the signs of this essential dynamic of what is distinctively protestant? (Note that I bring this up because I believe it is at the heart of why protestant thought consistently fails to comprehend the communion of Saints and devotion to Mary.) A well known convert from protestantism captures it well: Individualism and divisiveness, the dichotomous nature of protestant thought, protestantism as the root cause of secularization, the liberalizing tendency of protestantism, pragmatism, theological relativism, ecclesiological anarchism, the privatization of religion, accommodation to the spirit of the age and moral fadism, anti-Catholicism, anti-historicism, no unified tradition, the novelty of the 'invisible church', what the Lutheran Bonhoeffer called this "cheap grace", namely the seperation of a profound, life-transforming repentance and radical discipleship from its gospel message. The tendency toward humanism and secularization leads to a loss of the sacred, the sublime, the holy, and the beautiful in spirituality. Many Protestant churches are no more than "meeting halls" or "gymnasiums" or "barn"-type structures. Most Protestants' homes are more esthetically striking than their churches. Likewise, Protestants are often "addicted to mediocrity" in their appreciation of art, music, architecture, drama, the imagination. This also leads to the loss of Liturgical form of worship which was the heart of Christian worship for 1500 years. Protestantism neglects the incarnational principle and also lacks a conception of reality established upon the Trinitarian dynamism. These tendencies result in an antagonism toward Sacramentalism, which is also at the heart of historical Christianity, especially the removal of the Eucharistic Mystery from the center of the Christian worship. Another effect is the abolishment of the priesthood, which again, is essential to historical Christianity. Other false dichotomies that result from the essence of the protestant heresy: the Word (the Bible, preaching) against sacraments; inner devotion and piety against the Liturgy; spontaneous worship to form prayers; separates the Bible from the Church; Bible vs. Tradition; Tradition against the Holy Spirit; considers Church authority and individual liberty and conscience contradictory; Protestantism (esp. Luther) sets up the Old Testament against the New Testament, even though Jesus did not do so; on equally unbiblical grounds, Protestantism opposes law to grace; Protestantism separates justification from sanctification, contrary to Christian Tradition and the Bible; creates a false dichotomy between symbolism and sacramental reality (e.g., baptism, Eucharist); separates the Individual from Christian community; pits the veneration of saints against the worship of God; The anti-historical outlook of many Protestants leads to individuals thinking that the Holy Spirit is speaking to them, but has not, in effect, spoken to the multitudes of Christians for 1500 years before Protestantism began. Flaws in original Protestant thought have led to even worse errors in reaction. E.g., extrinsic justification, devised to assure the predominance of grace, came to prohibit any outward sign of its presence ("faith vs. works," "sola fide"). Calvinism, with its cruel God, turned men off to such an extent that they became Unitarians (as in New England). Many founders of cults of recent origin started out Calvinist (Jehovah's Witnesses, Christian Science, The Way International, etc.). Evangelicalism is presently obsessed with self-fulfillment, self-help, and oftentimes, outright selfishness, rather than the traditional Christian stress on suffering, sacrifice, and service.Evangelicalism has a truncated and insufficient view of the place of suffering in the Christian life. Instead, "health-and-wealth" and "name-it-and-claim-it" movements within pentecostal Protestantism are flourishing, which have a view of possessions not in harmony with the Bible and Christian Tradition. Evangelicalism has, by and large, adopted a worldview which is, in many ways, more capitalist than Christian. Wealth and personal gain is sought more than godliness, and is seen as a proof of God's favor, as in Puritan, and secularized American thought, over against the Bible and Christian teaching. Evangelicalism, by its own self-critiques, is badly infected with pragmatism, the false philosophical view that "whatever works is true, or right." The gospel, esp. on TV, is sold in the same way that McDonalds hawks hamburgers. Technology, mass-market and public relations techniques have largely replaced personal pastoral care and social concern for the downtrodden, irreligious, and unchurched masses. Protestantism, in all essential elements, merely borrows wholesale from Catholic Tradition, or distorts the same. All doctrines upon which Catholics and Protestants agree, are clearly Catholic in origin (Trinity, Virgin Birth, Resurrection, 2nd Coming, Canon of the Bible, heaven, hell, etc.). Those where Protestantism differs are usually distortions of Catholic forerunners. E.g., Quakerism is a variant of Catholic Quietism. Calvinism is an over-obsession with the Catholic idea of the sovereignty of God, but taken to lengths beyond what Catholicism ever taught (denial of free will, total depravity, double predestination, etc.). Protestant dichotomies such as faith vs. works, come from nominalism, which was itself a corrupt form of Scholasticism, never dogmatically sanctioned by the Catholic Church. Whatever life or truth is present in each Protestant idea, always is derived from Catholicism, which is the fulfillment of the deepest and best aspirations within Protestantism. As thoughtful evangelical scholars have pointed out, an unthinking sola Scriptura position can turn into "bibliolatry," almost a worship of the Bible rather than God who is its Author. This mentality is similar to the Muslim view of Revelation, where no human elements whatsoever were involved. Sola Scriptura,, rightly understood from a more sophisticated Protestant perspective, means that the Bible is the final authority in Christianity, not the record of all God has said and done, as many evangelicals believe. Christianity is unavoidably and intrinsically historical. All the events of Jesus' life (Incarnation, Crucifixion, Resurrection, Ascension, etc.) were historical, as was the preaching of the apostles. Tradition, therefore, of some sort, is unavoidable, contrary to numerous shortsighted Protestant claims that sola Scriptura annihilates Tradition. This is true both for matters great (ecclesiology, trinitarianism, justification) and small (church budgets, type of worship music, lengths of sermons, etc.). Every denial of a particular tradition involves a bias (hidden or open) towards one's own alternate tradition (E.g., if all Church authority is spurned, even individualistic autonomy is a "tradition," which ought to be defended as a Christian view in some fashion).

This post is getting over done. This was largely hacked from Dave Armstrong's site. To read much more, and get more detail go here:
[url="http://ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ409.HTM"]http://ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ409.HTM[/url]
[url="http://ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ103.HTM"]http://ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ103.HTM[/url]
[url="http://ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ387.HTM"]http://ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ387.HTM[/url]

So I brought up these points because the essence of historical Christianity is not inherently opposed to the communion of Saints and of devotion to Mary, but on the contrary understands it naturally. The real question to ask is why does protestantism tend to oppose these things? Why does the protestant conception of reality see God and Mary, or God and the Saints, as necessarily in competition? I am convinced that when one examines the nature of protestant thought it is evident that there are certain tendencies (many of which were alluded to in this post) which setup dichotomies which are foreign to an authentically Christian worldview. Asserting that the Church fell into apostasy early on and that true Christianity was rediscovered by men like Luther and Calvin, certainly does not resolve the tensions, because this worldview is foundationally Biblical. Besides the many tensions, historical problems, and absurdities with this approach at explaining away the inconsistency of protestant thought with historical Christianity.

[Brother Adam]

[quote name='mulls' date='Mar 13 2004, 09:23 PM'] i don't know if i personally prove this to be true, i'm just trying to give you some warning, and i'm glad you are taking what i'm saying into consideration. i'll just try to think out loud for a bit and try to make myself more clear....

....

personally, I would rather be in situation A. i would rather have a problem in my life, but focusing on God to help me beat it. i wouldn't want anything else to take away focus from God WHATSOEVER, no matter how much it may benefit me. i don't want to overcome the problem by any other means, know what i mean? if i had a money problem, i would rather suffer the consequences of being in debt and wait for God to provide an answer, rather than stealing money to pay it off immediately.

i hope that helps expand on what i said, it's the best analogy i can come up with right now. maybe we should continue this through pm, or instant message me if you want.

i know you know about discerning the spirits, and i pray that God leads you in the proper direction.

peace. [/quote]
That is an interesting analogy mulls. I don't see any reason to move our discussion to PM's though. You can remember that you don't have to argue with what the Catholics might say. I'm just going to listen to both sides and pray about it.

So basically you ask: Does the Rosary take focus off of Christ? Off of where our focus belongs. Also, can something that invokes the name of Jesus Christ as the scriptures do, be evil? I'll pray about that.

On the other hand, I would also have to ask:

Does the Rosary not only place a great focus on Christ through the scriptures that are meditated on, but does it also ask for the aid of Saints in heaven? I'll pray about that too.


Thank you everyone. You have been a great help. You've helped me see this from both sides, and now I must just have a patient spirit and wait on God for answers.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote]i would rather have a problem in my life, but focusing on God to help me beat it. i wouldn't want anything else to take away focus from God WHATSOEVER, no matter how much it may benefit me. i don't want to overcome the problem by any other means, know what i mean? if i had a money problem, i would rather suffer the consequences of being in debt and wait for God to provide an answer, rather than stealing money to pay it off immediately.[/quote]
I fail to see how the analogy of stealing applies. What are you talking about?
Also, why should we pray at all? Why not just live life and trust that God will take care of things regardless of if we pray or not? Afterall He knows what you need even before you ask. And why ever ask for another persons prayers? Why pray for other people? Why do the prayers of a righteous man avail much? Is God swayed by people? Etc.. I think the answers to these kind of questions touch intimately upon the issue at hand. I also suspect that protestantism cannot offer fully adequate answers.

I must again remark that "I know of know devotion to Mary, except devotion to Christ, and I know no devotion to Christ that is divorced from a deep, conscious love of the one who remains always His Mother."
The a priori category that Mary and Jesus are in rival compartments is simply a falsehood. A part of that basic, pre-logical division which is in many ways the core of everything distinctively protestant. Often described as the either/or of protestantism verses the both/and of Catholicism.
If one really seeks to understand Catholic devotions one must be able to overcome the protestant dichotomy.
By analogy one could think of Jesus and the Father. I doubt most protestants are so caught up in the two-compartment psychology that they would say that emphasis on Christ takes away from the Father. Devotion to Christ and emphasis on Him do not take away from the Primacy of the Father. Here is an example of both/and that I believe most protestants in fact accept. This is similar to the Catholic being able to assert that devotion to Mary and even emphasis on Her does not take away from the Primacy of Christ. I would say further that not only does devotion to Mary not take away from Christ it actually emphasizes Christ. Christ is glorified by devotion to Mary. A relationship with Mary is not something that is seperate from a relationship with Christ, it is a fruit of a relationship with Christ. And the effects of this devotion to Mary are nothing less than a deeper knowledge, love and union with Jesus Christ, who alone reconciles us to the Father.

Edited March 14, 2004 by Laudate_Dominum

[Theoketos]

[quote name='mulls' date='Mar 13 2004, 09:58 PM'] somebody is 'blessed' with wealth. that's a good thing. but the wealth takes over his life and leads him astray from God. is it still good?


a man meets a beautiful woman and marries her. that's a good thing. but the woman is totally wrong for him, not the person who God intended for him, and he married her more out of lust than love. his relationship with God is hurt. is this marriage a good thing? is she still good for him?


good can come from both situations....money can be used to do good and marriage can produce wonderful children. but for the person in question, his relationship with God was affected badly.



remember, Satan = angel of LIGHT.

he looks GOOD, enticing, attractive, etc etc.


that's all i'm trying to say [/quote]
I think what you are trying to say is that Satan disguises himself as good.

To brother Adam the Rosary seems good.

Since it only seems good then it must be of Satan.

THE ROSARY IS GOOD, IT IS FROM GOD, IT WILL DEFEAT SATAN, IT IS CHRISTOCENTRIC, IT ECHOS THE LITURGY, IT IS OLDER THEN PROTESTANT RELEGIONS, IT IS BASIED IN HUMILITY, IT IS SHORT AND SWEET, IT IS A WEAPON AGIANST SATAN, IT IS GOOD, IT IS BASED ALMOST COMPLETELY OFF THE BIBLE, IT HAS DEAFETED SATAN IN MY LIFE, IT HAS GIVEN ME GRACE, IT IS GOOD, IT BRINGS ME TO JESUS, IT BRINGS ME TO MARY, IT BRINGS THEM TO US, IT IS GOOD, IT ALLOWS US TO PRAY WITH TEXT FROM THE BIBLE, IT HAS MADE ME AWARE OF MY SINS, IT GIVES ME STRENGTH IN WEAKNESS, IT IS GOOD, IT IS NOT EDDIABLE, WITH IT THERE IS LATRIA, WITH IT THERE IS HYPER DULIA, WITH IT THERE CAN BE DULIA, IT IS AN ECUMENICAL TOOL, IT IS GOOD. IT IS WORDS OF LOVE.

I

[Laudate_Dominum]

I went to a Tridentine Mass this morning and part of the Gospel reading was what I have quoted below. It made me think of this thread.

[quote]22 And the scribes who were come down from Jerusalem, said: He hath Beelzebub, and by the prince of devils he casteth out devils.

23 And after he had called them together, he said to them in parables: How can Satan cast out Satan?

24 And if a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand.

25 And if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand.

26 And if Satan be risen up against himself, he is divided, and cannot stand, but hath an end.

27 No man can enter into the house of a strong man and rob him of his goods, unless he first bind the strong man, and then shall he plunder his house.
[/quote]

[Brother Adam]

Theo and L_D,

Honestly your posts have been coming off as condescending and almost derogatory. I've talked to other phatmassers about this and they agree. Please watch how you are coming across.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Brother Adam' date='Mar 14 2004, 03:32 PM'] Theo and L_D,

Honestly your posts have been coming off as condescending and almost derogatory. I've talked to other phatmassers about this and they agree. Please watch how you are coming across. [/quote]
I wish some of these other phatmassers would post then. maybe they could set a good example, whoever they are.
And in retrospect I'd say two of my posts do seem a bit derogatory. I don't know about condescending. The scripture quote post seems fine to me. The derogatory posts were mainly just me wanting to say many things but being pressed for time and just posting a jumble of information without much sensitivity. I apologize if I've offended.

Protestants also please watch how you come accross. I would not go to a protestant board and pontificate about how protestantism is a terrible lie of satan without at least expecting an equal and opposite reaction.

Edited March 14, 2004 by Laudate_Dominum

[Brother Adam]

True colors?

[Laudate_Dominum]

what have I said that is either not true, derogatory, condescending, etc.? If you provide a quote I will either apologize or explain my intent of the particular statement.

the strongest statement I could see at a glance was:
[quote]... the fact that the general protestant mentality can't comprehend it suggests to me that there is something fundamentally unchristian about the essence of protestantism. In fact I would argue this on many levels.[/quote]
Considering this post was in response to a post which was basically arguing exactly the same thing about Catholicism I don't think it can be called derogatory. And certainly this was not the intent. I was merely being blunt, it was not an emotionally charged statement or a vicious kind of thing but was a response to a challenge. Protestants claim to be the true Christians and Catholicism is a corrupt, necromancy practicing, paganized false Christianity. My position (which I felt compelled to share to some extent) is more or less the opposite, read the post for the details, or visit the links for major details.
Do you feel this was not appropriate for some reason?

peace.

Edited March 14, 2004 by Laudate_Dominum

[homeschoolmom]

I'll post. I'm one who thought your earlier post was quite uncharitable to Protestants. As a convert, there is nothing I like hearing less than how Protestantism is responsible for all of the ills in society. I was told by someone that the bikini clad rock and roll beer bashes that they hold every year at our basilica is due to Protestantism. (If you ever went anywhere near a Baptist church, you'd know there'd be no bikinis or beer bashes and no secular rock and roll there to be sure!)

I agree with some of the idea of the "spirit of Protestantism" being responsible for some of the chaos... but please... a little charity. We aren't satanic... :pitchfork:

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='homeschoolmom' date='Mar 14 2004, 03:54 PM'] I'll post. I'm one who thought your earlier post was quite uncharitable to Protestants. As a convert, there is nothing I like hearing less than how Protestantism is responsible for all of the ills in society. I was told by someone that the bikini clad rock and roll beer bashes that they hold every year at our basilica is due to Protestantism.    (If you ever went anywhere near a Baptist church, you'd know there'd be no bikinis or beer bashes and no secular rock and roll there to be sure!)

I agree with some of the idea of the "spirit of Protestantism" being responsible for some of the chaos... but please... a little charity. We aren't satanic...    :pitchfork: [/quote]
I certainly don't think protestantism is responsible for all the ills of society and I don't recall saying that. My post was very summary and certainly was not watered down so I'm not surprised some people were offended. But why is it that when protestants bash the Catholic Faith it's not a big deal but if someone criticizes protestantism they are all of a sudden being a derogatory jerk? There seems to be a double-standard. Maybe we are just so used to being put on the defensive around here we just expect the Faith the be attacked.

Anyway, while I certainly think protestant people do a great amount of good in society, I also believe that many ideologies and social phenomenon can clearly be shown to have roots in the protestant tradition. There is a big difference between criticizing a tradition of ideas and criticizing individuals on a personal level. And I certainly was not doing the latter. and what do you mean by have charity? I think I was being charitable, perhaps I was too blunt though.

Edited March 14, 2004 by Laudate_Dominum

[homeschoolmom]

I certainly don't mean to get into an arguement... Let me clarify myself and if you can see where I (and many others here) am coming from, you can see why your post was somewhat upsetting. I'm a convert-- a recent decision by my husband and me. We are now constantly having to defend the Catholic faith against anti-Catholics and so I realize that there is a great deal of misunderstanding on the faith. Protestants also must watch what they say... I know full well, there are many uncharitable Protestants. It seems to me that this thread has turned into a debate and belongs on the debate table.

Reading this:

A well known convert from protestantism captures it well: Individualism and divisiveness, the dichotomous nature of protestant thought, protestantism as the root cause of secularization, the liberalizing tendency of protestantism, pragmatism, theological relativism, ecclesiological anarchism, the privatization of religion, accommodation to the spirit of the age and moral fadism, etc....

before heading off to Mass this morning made me want to not go. I did go in spite of this. But those of us who are in between, who don't feel welcome at either church (being sent out of Mass every week is a little bit discouraging... ) just cringe at these kinds of posts.

Obviously, you don't know what I mean. You've probably never been in this situation. As for your well known convert person above.... I'm pretty sure I know who he is... I know that he could be so much more effective at teaching people about the Catholic faith if he didn't come off so smug.

Understand that when you are asking sincere devout Protestants to leave their churches and become Catholic, it's like peeling off a huge scab (ew, gross)... just please be careful not to pour a bunch of salt in the wound... thank you.

done rambling now...

[BLAZEr]

Laudate and Theo (tokos, not logian in training)

I just want to help you guys realize something because both of you are relatively new. Both Mulls and Bro Adam have been on the board a long time. Most of us here at Phatmass have seen both their good intentions, and their honesty and charity in these discussions. Neither are Catholic, but I know that both are sincere and very respectful of the Church.

I also think that more often than not, a patient and respectful approach to the explaining Catholic teachings and devotions is more effective than the "bazooka blaster" approach.

Oh, and no amount of CAPS will make something more evident.

[mulls]

i appreciate that blazer






and for the record i did make the disclaimer that i didnt want to offend anyone by posting in this thread....that's why i offered bro adam to continue this privately. not trying to start a war here, but i'm also not going to concede anything that i don't agree with.


besides, this thread should be about bro. adam and what he is dealing with right now. we all want whats best for him, as God sees fit.

[Laudate_Dominum]

I must admit, I was acting in haste and carelessly fell into what BLAZEr called the "bazooka blaster" approach. I still think there is a double-standard here because I am constantly reading posts criticizing Catholicism that are often worse than what I typed and generally they are engaged and discussed. Whereas my post has simply been blown off and sneered at.

Perhaps I should state my intent with the controversial post(s). When it comes to discussing the communion of Saints and devotion to Mary with protestants I find that verse slanging and things tend to go nowhere. It seemed appropriate to discuss the deeper issues. I believe that the deeper reasons for this stumbling block for protestants has to do with the philosophical roots of protestantism. As a sociological and historical phenomenon protestantism is a "protest" or revolt against Catholicism. This is not a derrogatory statement by any means. It is simply what the history books record. Also pointing out that the philosophical roots of protestantism tend to dichotomize reality is not derrogatory but only an observation. I am speaking of protestantism in a general and abstract way. Certainly I have known protestants who pray the Rosary and have devotion to Our Lady. This can be said of many of the early protestants and of some of the reformers themselves. But as a system of thought there are clear trends and dynamics which are at times the opposite of those present in Catholic thought. It seems important to discuss the underlying reasons for this because many protestants seem unable to see devotion to Mary as anything other than competition with God.
There are fundamental psychological and categorical differences which are a barrier for communication that need to be addressed. A critical examination of protestantisms foundations would be a part of identifying the factors involved. This was more or less my main motivation in writing the post.

Anyway, my intentions were good and frankly I don't see my post as being way out of line considering what I read and respond to on these forums on a regular basis. If I could go back in time I would revise my post in certain ways to make it less of a bazooka blast, but I believe the things I wrote and think it's an interesting subject for discussion.