[quote=Inquirer]Hi Rob, (Robyn from NY?)
Thanks for the links. Yes, I am from a protestant background. (How did you guess?!)
Indeed. I am uncreative with naming myself.
I realise you all believe that you don’t worship Mary.
But in fact I do?
But you have to see that although there are Dogmatic Constitutions, Encyclicals and what nots, that all say that catholics don’t and cannot worship Mary, writings like St Bona’s Psalter seems to contradict all those Constitutions and Encyclicals, and just looks awfully like idolatory.
But Bonaventure’s Psalter has nothing whatsoever to do with worship in it. Which part exactly do you think has to do with worship?
It seems to me more that you think Bonaventure is giving attributes of God to Mary. That is not worship.
By stating *“Just because someone is a Saint,and even a Doctor of the Church doesn’t mean that they do nothing wrong.” *seems to hint that you think that his writings are suspect too.
I find nothing suspect with his writings whatsoever. I am merely stating the truth that even our Doctors and Saints make mistakes which we recognize.
It’s one thing to make mistakes - Saints don’t enjoy the protection of infallibility, I know. But this is no ordinary oopsie - this is tantamount to idolatory.
Idolatry, perhaps, is a better word than worship, although Mary is not an idol, as she truly exists and is living in heaven. Well, for common ground, I looked for a defintion of idolatry:
- Worship of idols.
- Blind or excessive devotion to something.
I cannot see #1 at all in Bonaventura’s case. #2 is perhaps arguable from your perspective, but even if you think he has excessive or blind devotion, it doesn’t mean it is worship.
From the 4th Psalm
*]From the roaring of the wild beasts prepared to devour me: and from the hands of them that sought me, thy grace will deliver me.
[/list]Any suggestion that someone else’s grace other than God’s can ‘deliver me’ should sound disturbing. Catholic OR Protestant, no?
Except that all grace from Mary comes ultimately from God, as I pointed out. He is not implying that Mary’s mediation is separate or superior to Christ’s. The Catholic paradigm is that Mary’s mediation is secondary to, subordinate to, and totally dependant on Christ’s sole mediation. You can read into this what you would like, but he plainly doesn’t mean anything else other than I said.
I understand how it “feels wrong” and “sounds wrong” to you, and indeed, much of the language that Catholics use can be shocking to someone from a Protestant background. The question is, what does this essentially mean? If it doesn’t mean, as I contend, that Mary derives grace on her own, then what is wrong with it?
Don’t get me wrong. Notice I did mention that I am a potential convert; I am at this stage where I’m almost ready to throw my lot in with the RCC, I have seen that you guys are right 99% of the time.
I am assuming that it is actually 100% - I’m looking to see if this can be resolved as well. Perhaps you can pull some obscure documentation from somewhere to explain that
I’m sure it can be resolved. This isn’t exactly my forte, so I’ll just hold the topic over until the big guns are ready.
i) this does not mean Mary has grace that saves, or
ii) the RCC has declared, like other heretical writings, that this is heretical. (which I suppose she cannot, since he is a Saint)
i) Any grace dispensed from Mary is ultimately from Christ. Mary has “grace that saves,” only inasmuch as she receives all grace from her Son.
ii) The CC has declared writings or positions of Saints to be heretical or wrong, but I doubt very much she will declare these writings wrong.
Note: This is why you won’t see language like this from Catholics too much, even if it is technically correct. It is a stumbling block to people such as yourself.