Praying to Mary

looksee

Yes, ok, I thought you were putting forward the Catholic argument - quote: 'I'm not a prod'.

uck51js9zml2yt

looksee wrote: »

Yes, ok, I thought you were putting forward the Catholic argument - quote: 'I'm not a prod'.

Prods and Catholics don't have the sole rights to Christianity;)

looksee

That's a rather interesting point that I had not particularly considered before - like most people I consider all Christians to be Catholics or not-Catholics, ie Protestants. But yes, I can see that that strictly is not correct. A discussion for another thread maybe.

Giacomo McGubbin

Leia Nutritious Murk wrote: »

Statutes are not less of a distraction. It's idolatry which is forbidden by God.
Pray to a "saint" who can be an intermediary with God, when Jesu said that we wouldn't even have to ask Him but could ask the Father directly.
There is only One Mediator between God and men and that's Jesus. And his meditation is as advocate in the process of redemption.

I'm not sure if this is a basic lack of knowledge of the english language and Catholicism or if you are just being disingenuous, but to give you the benefit of the doubt :

Firstly, to be idolatry you have to worship the actual object. Secondly, Catholics don't worship statues or Mary or saints. To pray means to ask, prayers to the saints is asking others to pray for you as well.

uck51js9zml2yt

Giacomo McGubbin wrote: »

I'm not sure if this is a basic lack of knowledge of the english language and Catholicism or if you are just being disingenuous, but to give you the benefit of the doubt :

Firstly, to be idolatry you have to worship the actual object. Secondly, Catholics don't worship statues or Mary or saints. To pray means to ask, prayers to the saints is asking others to pray for you as well.

In the Old Testament it is clear that there were entities behind the name of the various "gods". e.g Baal, Molech, Asheroth to name but a few. The statues symbolised these entities and were a focus of worship.

Statues to "saints" etc are no different.
You're free to disagree but I prefer to use the Bible as my reference point than "church" doctrine.

Worship (OED) is defined as
[mass noun] The feeling or expression of reverence and adoration for a deity: worship of the Mother Goddess ancestor worship More example sentences Synonyms
1.1Religious rites or ceremonies, constituting a formal expression of reverence for a deity: the church was opened for public worship More example sentences Synonyms


1.2Great admiration or devotion shown towards a person or principle: the worship of celebrity and wealth More example sentences Synonyms


1.3 archaic Honour given to someone in recognition of their merit.

solodeogloria

Jellybaby1 wrote: »

This thread has descended into the usual argy-bargy. I just spent the evening in a meeting with a group of RC's and CoI's. We all had a lovely time together and no-one mentioned religion because it was unnecessary and we all get along so well without it.

Good afternoon!

Why do you think not mentioning genuine differences with others is positive?

Dialogue with other people to understand their perspectives is important, and these issues are important. They must have been important to the Reformers who risked their lives for the Christian faith in Europe, and the gospel must have been important enough for the apostles to risk their lives for it.

Surely implying that it is more noble not to discuss our faith in Jesus Christ, and reason together is saying that what these people suffered and in many cases died for is somehow trivial?

I'd much rather have the frankness to have the discussion rather than say mums the word on these issues out of a faux sense of politeness.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

looksee

So, if a group of people from the local RC church and a group from the CoI get together to discuss organising a joint flower show (or whatever) they should first discuss their differences and establish where they all stand on transubstantiation before they discuss ticket prices and which hall they are going to use?

solodeogloria

looksee wrote: »

So, if a group of people from the local RC church and a group from the CoI get together to discuss organising a joint flower show (or whatever) they should first discuss their differences and establish where they all stand on transubstantiation before they discuss ticket prices and which hall they are going to use?

Good evening!

I guess the only question I would ask is did I say that?

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

Giacomo McGubbin

Leia Nutritious Murk wrote: »

In the Old Testament it is clear that there were entities behind the name of the various "gods". e.g Baal, Molech, Asheroth to name but a few. The statues symbolised these entities and were a focus of worship.

Statues to "saints" etc are no different.
You're free to disagree but I prefer to use the Bible as my reference point than "church" doctrine.

Worship (OED) is defined as
[mass noun] The feeling or expression of reverence and adoration for a deity: worship of the Mother Goddess ancestor worship More example sentences Synonyms
1.1Religious rites or ceremonies, constituting a formal expression of reverence for a deity[b/]: the church was opened for public worship More example sentences Synonyms


1.2Great admiration or devotion shown towards a person or principle: the worship of celebrity and wealth More example sentences Synonyms


1.3 archaic Honour given to someone in recognition of their merit.

Your post is self contradictory. Either you've a poor grasp of the actual meaning of english words or you're hoping the other people reading this have. Catholicism specifically teaches saints are not deities they are ordinary people and worship is only due to God, never anything else. As for scripture, I prefer it in it's entirety rather than attempting to selectively misuse it in a cheap attempt to attack other Christians, while wishing to hide the rest of scripture from the causal readers who don't know it, including the occasions where God commanded that statues and images be made of angels to serpents to fruit. Ordinary Statues, paintings and images are not Gods, nor idols or graven images, and never have been. To try and pretend that Catholicism worship statues and saints and images is the cheapest form of a lie.

solodeogloria wrote: »

Why do you think not mentioning genuine differences with others is positive?

Genuine differences are fine. Made up ones in order to attack and blacken other Christians . . . not so much.

looksee wrote: »

So, if a group of people from the local RC church and a group from the CoI get together to discuss organising a joint flower show (or whatever) they should first discuss their differences and establish where they all stand on transubstantiation before they discuss ticket prices and which hall they are going to use?

Locally in our parish we do similar joint events several times per year and also with the local Presbyterian churches, because our CoI and Presbyterian friends don't make false accusations about what we believe, nor do we make false accusations about what they believe. Lots of Anglican Churches and Cathedrals have statues, images and paintings. None of them are graven images either, nor do they worship them either. Many Anglicans, who are also Protestants, (more commonly the high Anglican church in England) also pray the Rosary, and they have a shrine to venerate Our lady of Walsingham in Norfolk. They don't worship Mary either. Not something some of those with a sectarian agrenda here will tell you, or like seeing people fully informed of. They seem to much prefer spreading twisted false claims about other Christians rather than Christian ecumenism.

Jellybaby1

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

Why do you think not mentioning genuine differences with others is positive?

Dialogue with other people to understand their perspectives is important, and these issues are important. They must have been important to the Reformers who risked their lives for the Christian faith in Europe, and the gospel must have been important enough for the apostles to risk their lives for it.

Surely implying that it is more noble not to discuss our faith in Jesus Christ, and reason together is saying that what these people suffered and in many cases died for is somehow trivial?

I'd much rather have the frankness to have the discussion rather than say mums the word on these issues out of a faux sense of politeness.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

Looksee understood my post perfectly, and you failed to do so. I never said our meeting was a religious one. It was a social event. It was neither the time or the place for a religious discussion.

solodeogloria

Jellybaby1 wrote: »

Looksee understood my post perfectly, and you failed to do so. I never said our meeting was a religious one. It was a social event. It was neither the time or the place for a religious discussion.

Good morning!

I'm confused why you brought it up here then. We all agree that one can have perfectly good interactions with people we disagree with. My interactions on a daily basis range from people who are convinced Hindus to atheists. Most of the time without discussing religion. I'm not sure why that is inherently noble though.

We're having a discussion on Marian devotion in common Catholic practice here. You seemed to imply that not discussing the subject was more noble than discussing it. Otherwise what relevance did pointing out that you have social interactions with Catholics without mention religion add to the discussion?

It's really important to have these conversations, and it was very important for the Reformers to have made these changes in the 16th century. It isn't a trivial matter, but an important one.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

1123heavy

Did Adam practice worship with statues?

Did Abraham practice worship with statues?

Did Noah practice worship with Statues?

Did Jacob practice worship with statues?

Did Noah practice worship with statues?

Did Aaron practice worship with statues?

Did Jonah practice worship with statues?

Did John the Baptist practice worship with statues?

Did Jesus practice worship with statues?

I'm sure all here would agree that the names mentioned above (peace and blessings be upon all of them) are of an authority given by God. Yet none of them used statues or encouraged worship via statues/images.

Given the above, how can worship via statues be deemed an acceptable form of worship when no one who can be looked up to as an example of how to worship the one true Lord used statues in their worship?

Church tradition supersedes?

The mind boggles, and I mean absolutely no disrespect to anyone. People, can we please be reasonable about this.

looksee

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

I'm confused why you brought it up here then. We all agree that one can have perfectly good interactions with people we disagree with. My interactions on a daily basis range from people who are convinced Hindus to atheists. Most of the time without discussing religion. I'm not sure why that is inherently noble though.

We're having a discussion on Marian devotion in common Catholic practice here. You seemed to imply that not discussing the subject was more noble than discussing it. Otherwise what relevance did pointing out that you have social interactions with Catholics without mention religion add to the discussion?

It's really important to have these conversations, and it was very important for the Reformers to have made these changes in the 16th century. It isn't a trivial matter, but an important one.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

Where did anyone claim that anything was 'noble'?

Jellybaby's comment followed on from a very ill-informed comment about Protestants regarding apparitions as demonic, and JB was saying that this kind of belief created divisions. She(?) said as an aside that that it was perfectly possible for different faiths to get on together and (by implication) it was not necessary to continually thrash out differences.

I would add, from my personal experience, that large numbers of Catholics (not particularly those here) have very strange ideas about non-Catholics. I have (amiably) explained numerous times to people who did not understand the term Protestant, how it related to C of I and that Protestants were indeed Christians. A surprising number of Catholics think that only Catholics are Christians.

LordSutch

looksee wrote: »

A surprising number of Catholics think that only Roman Catholics are Christians.

I added 'Roman' to your quote above to prevent any confusion, seeing as us Anglican Christians are also of the catholic tradition, albeit not in the Roman form ....

I must admit I have never ever heard this "Catholics think that only Catholics are Christians"! Do you mean in Ireland only, or where? I am curious as to where this odd revelation came from.

uck51js9zml2yt

LordSutch wrote: »

I added 'Roman' to your quote above to prevent any confusion, seeing as us Anglican Christians are also of the catholic tradition, albeit not in the Roman form ....

I must admit I have never ever heard this "Catholics think that only Catholics are Christians"! Do you mean in Ireland only, or where? I am curious as to where this odd revelation came from.

Much of the conversation on this forum revolves around R Catholic/ Protestant with the belief that if your not one, your the other
I'm Christian and neither RC or Protestant.

1123heavy

LordSutch wrote: »

I must admit I have never ever heard this "Catholics think that only Catholics are Christians"! Do you mean in Ireland only, or where? I am curious as to where this odd revelation came from.

I must say I'm inclined to agree with looksee's comments on the views of some Catholics on other forms of Christianity. I'm not a Christian at all and have had Catholics try to convert me to Catholicism, in the process it has been mentioned that "only" Catholics are true Christians. I have met a few Catholics in my time and it certainly isn't a rare view.

Terrlock

Can I ask a question?

Why do you need to pray to Mary when the whole point of the Gospel and Christ dying is that we can have a direct relationship with God through Christ Jesus whom is God.

Why then would we be going to another to talk to God on our behalf.

By doing this are we not denying the direct relationship with God that he has given us.

It's best to work on your relationship with God himself then focusing on others.

LordSutch

Terrlock wrote: »

Can I ask a question?

Why do you need to pray to Mary when the whole point of the Gospel and Christ dying is that we can have a direct relationship with God through Christ Jesus whom is God.

Why then would we be going to another to talk to God on our behalf.

By doing this are we not denying the direct relationship with God that he has given us.

It's best to work on your relationship with God himself then focusing on others.

Well of course that's one of the reasons for the Reformation, which still has echoes today?

lazybones32

Terrlock wrote: »

Can I ask a question?

Why do you need to pray to Mary when the whole point of the Gospel and Christ dying is that we can have a direct relationship with God through Christ Jesus whom is God.

We have a direct relationship with Him. We also have a direct relationship with all other inhabitants of Heaven. It's been written a few times in this thread already, that Mary is not considered to be a deity but a most powerful intercessor and a creature who has been blessed by God in a way that has never been replicated nor ever will be. Honouring Mary is honouring the immense and undeserved privilege and graces He gave her.

Terrlock wrote: »

Why then would we be going to another to talk to God on our behalf.

Why is there a prayer request thread on Boards? Why do people ask people to pray for them? Why indeed is intercessory prayer so important if no-one should ask someone to ask on their behalf? Unless, of course, you've been granted everything you've ever prayed for...

Terrlock wrote: »

By doing this are we not denying the direct relationship with God that he has given us.

No, we're not. We're actually glorifying God and utilising the resources He has placed at our disposal. We are the Body of Christ; my Father is your Father and the Father of all. We are family and getting a brother or sister to petition God on your behalf can strengthen the bonds, not weaken them. If someone has greater faith than you, why wouldn't you seek their assistance?

Terrlock wrote: »

It's best to work on your relationship with God himself then focusing on others.

Where's that in the Bible?

1123heavy

lazybones32 wrote: »

We have a direct relationship with Him. We also have a direct relationship with all other inhabitants of Heaven. It's been written a few times in this thread already, that Mary is not considered to be a deity but a most powerful intercessor and a creature who has been blessed by God in a way that has never been replicated nor ever will be. Honouring Mary is honouring the immense and undeserved privilege and graces He gave her.

Why is there a prayer request thread on Boards? Why do people ask people to pray for them? Why indeed is intercessory prayer so important if no-one should ask someone to ask on their behalf? Unless, of course, you've been granted everything you've ever prayed for...

No, we're not. We're actually glorifying God and utilising the resources He has placed at our disposal. We are the Body of Christ; my Father is your Father and the Father of all. We are family and getting a brother or sister to petition God on your behalf can strengthen the bonds, not weaken them. If someone has greater faith than you, why wouldn't you seek their assistance?

Where's that in the Bible?

Asking the dead to pray for you is not the same as asking the living.

When you ask a friend to pray for you, or type a post on boards asking for prayers, do you clasp your hands together, and offer a prayer to that person and ask them to pray for you and be an intercessor? I doubt it. However when you pray to these statues or saints or whoever it may be in the hope that they can be intercessors, you actually offer a prayer to them in a manner that you simply wouldn't do to a person who is alive whom you're asking to pray for you. You pray to them to pray for you, i.e. you offer them worship so that they may offer worship for you to God.

This is the exact purpose statues existed in Biblical times ... and God told his people it was forbidden. See what Abraham pbuh with the statues of his people.

Terrlock

lazybones32 wrote: »

We have a direct relationship with Him. We also have a direct relationship with all other inhabitants of Heaven. It's been written a few times in this thread already, that Mary is not considered to be a deity but a most powerful intercessor and a creature who has been blessed by God in a way that has never been replicated nor ever will be. Honoring Mary is honoring the immense and undeserved privilege and graces He gave her.

Why would we need another intercessor when we have Christ Jesus and the Holy Spirit.

Many others were blessed by God, but they are not worshiped as a result of that.

lazybones32 wrote: »

Why is there a prayer request thread on Boards? Why do people ask people to pray for them? Why indeed is intercessory prayer so important if no-one should ask someone to ask on their behalf? Unless, of course, you've been granted everything you've ever prayed for...

Asking someone to pray for you is a lot different then worshiping someone repeatably so they will be an intercessor between you and God.

lazybones32 wrote: »

No, we're not. We're actually glorifying God and utilizing the resources He has placed at our disposal. We are the Body of Christ; my Father is your Father and the Father of all. We are family and getting a brother or sister to petition God on your behalf can strengthen the bonds, not weaken them. If someone has greater faith than you, why wouldn't you seek their assistance?

Where's that in the Bible?

From beginning to the end, Is the Lords work not too show us the light, so that we may follow him that he might restore our relationship to him?

Leroy42

I have to say this thread has both educated me and confused me.

Educated me in that I didn't know that protestants didn't pray to Mary, it's not something I ever thought, about but makes perfect sense.

Confused in that praying to Mary does seem somewhat blasphemous and is strange that Catholics are brought up with such regard for Mary. It nothing to do with her sinlessness, or whatever, but Jesus said that the only way to God is through him and yet we (Catholics) decided to expand that.

It must be annoying to God that He created the universe, sent his only Son down to atone for our sins and then Catholics decide that Mary deserves some credit when really what did she do, and what can she do?

So by praying to Mary are we actually going against the very teachings of the bible? As was mentioned, with a direct line to God through Jesus why bother with Mary (the middle man so to speak)

uck51js9zml2yt

The problem lies in Mary being given the title of Co- Redemptrix, Queen of Heaven, ever virgin.

Firstly, there is only One in heaven who has the title of Redeemer, thats Jesus Christ.
There is only one in the Bible who was called the queen of heaven. That was the pagan goddess Asteroth. Who also represented the madonna figure as did Diana of the Ephesians in the New Testament.

As for ever virgin, the Bible clearly states that Joseph did not "know" Mary until after Jesus was born, The word "know" being used in relation to them having sexual relations. There is also a mention of the names of Jesus' siblings in the Gospels and that information the crowd gave Jesus that His mother and brothers were outside.

The RCC wants to tell us that there are Mediators other than Jesus in Heaven. The Bible says that Jesus is the only mediator between God and men, I'm fairly sure that if there were any more, then they wold have been included in the Bible, particularly in relation to Mary.

Before anyone says.."what do I know about Roman Catholicism"...I was RC for a good many years and am very familiar with it.



For our Muslim Friend. Islam refers to Mary as Ma'suma - "She who never sinned" . This is more akin to Catholicism and equally erroneous. She needed a Saviour. She said so herself.

Jellybaby1

branie2 wrote: »

While we're on the subject, the visions at Lourdes, Knock and Fatima are regarded as demonic by Protestants

Jellybaby1 wrote: »

As a life long Prod, I have never heard that before. Where do people get their information from I wonder? I have never been taught anything at all by my religious teachers about Lourdes, Knock or Fatima. Never even been mentioned to me. Is it possible someone told you porkies? Or maybe I should ask what Protestants have you discussed this with?

This thread has descended into the usual argy-bargy. I just spent the evening in a meeting with a group of RC's and CoI's. We all had a lovely time together and no-one mentioned religion because it was unnecessary and we all get along so well without it.

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

Why do you think not mentioning genuine differences with others is positive?

Dialogue with other people to understand their perspectives is important, and these issues are important. They must have been important to the Reformers who risked their lives for the Christian faith in Europe, and the gospel must have been important enough for the apostles to risk their lives for it.

Surely implying that it is more noble not to discuss our faith in Jesus Christ, and reason together is saying that what these people suffered and in many cases died for is somehow trivial?

I'd much rather have the frankness to have the discussion rather than say mums the word on these issues out of a faux sense of politeness.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

looksee wrote: »

So, if a group of people from the local RC church and a group from the CoI get together to discuss organising a joint flower show (or whatever) they should first discuss their differences and establish where they all stand on transubstantiation before they discuss ticket prices and which hall they are going to use?

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening!

I guess the only question I would ask is did I say that?

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

Jellybaby1 wrote: »

Looksee understood my post perfectly, and you failed to do so. I never said our meeting was a religious one. It was a social event. It was neither the time or the place for a religious discussion.

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

I'm confused why you brought it up here then. We all agree that one can have perfectly good interactions with people we disagree with. My interactions on a daily basis range from people who are convinced Hindus to atheists. Most of the time without discussing religion. I'm not sure why that is inherently noble though.

We're having a discussion on Marian devotion in common Catholic practice here. You seemed to imply that not discussing the subject was more noble than discussing it. Otherwise what relevance did pointing out that you have social interactions with Catholics without mention religion add to the discussion?

It's really important to have these conversations, and it was very important for the Reformers to have made these changes in the 16th century. It isn't a trivial matter, but an important one.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

looksee wrote: »

Where did anyone claim that anything was 'noble'?

Jellybaby's comment followed on from a very ill-informed comment about Protestants regarding apparitions as demonic, and JB was saying that this kind of belief created divisions. She(?) said as an aside that that it was perfectly possible for different faiths to get on together and (by implication) it was not necessary to continually thrash out differences.

I would add, from my personal experience, that large numbers of Catholics (not particularly those here) have very strange ideas about non-Catholics. I have (amiably) explained numerous times to people who did not understand the term Protestant, how it related to C of I and that Protestants were indeed Christians. A surprising number of Catholics think that only Catholics are Christians.

Sorry I am always a bit late coming onto Boards so I haven't had time to reply but I see Looksee has done it very well already. solodeogloria, I would say that I would have agreed with quite a few of your posts on Boards but I notice here that you seem to be looking to pick a fight with me for a trivial reason. I replied to a post. That's all. Thankfully, the thread is continuing nicely so I will exit now which I think is what you desired.

lazybones32

1123heavy wrote: »

Asking the dead to pray for you is not the same as asking the living.

When you ask a friend to pray for you, or type a post on boards asking for prayers, do you clasp your hands together, and offer a prayer to that person and ask them to pray for you and be an intercessor? I doubt it. However when you pray to these statues or saints or whoever it may be in the hope that they can be intercessors, you actually offer a prayer to them in a manner that you simply wouldn't do to a person who is alive whom you're asking to pray for you. You pray to them to pray for you, i.e. you offer them worship so that they may offer worship for you to God.

This is the exact purpose statues existed in Biblical times ... and God told his people it was forbidden. See what Abraham pbuh with the statues of his people.

I've already answered the points you raise, in earlier posts on the thread so there's no need to write them out again; I'm not being rude but I don't have to keep typing for every new person who asks similar questions. Other posters have explained the Catholic position too and I think every question has been answered: whether the answer is acceptable or palatable depends on the reader.

We don't ask the dead to pray for us. We ask our brothers and sisters who are in the presence of God to pray for us or to present our petitions to the Most High -
"And regarding the dead rising, have you not read about the burning bush in the book of Moses, how God told him, ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is not the God of the dead, but of the living.” Mk 12:27

lazybones32

Terrlock wrote: »

Why would we need another intercessor when we have Christ Jesus and the Holy Spirit.

I and others have already answered this objection: Christ is the sole Mediator of grace. Scripture shows there are many intercessors...

Terrlock wrote: »

Many others were blessed by God, but they are not worshiped as a result of that.

RC's honour and venerate the BVM and the difference between veneration and worship has already been laid out in the thread, so you can read through if you want to know. The only time the words 'Mary' and 'worship' are used by a RC in the same sentence is to refute accusations.

Terrlock wrote: »

Asking someone to pray for you is a lot different then worshiping someone repeatably so they will be an intercessor between you and God.

I don't know about that...I've sacrificed sheep and goats to pictures of the Pope and I got what I wanted. It must be done 7 times for it to work.

Terrlock wrote: »

From beginning to the end, Is the Lords work not too show us the light, so that we may follow him that he might restore our relationship to him?

Yup, we see God by the light of God just as we see the Sun by the light of the Sun. It's all Him. However, God uses multiple channels and means to convey His light.

solodeogloria

Good evening!

I'm not trying to get at you Jellybaby1. I'm just asking why the example of not speaking about religion was relevant to this thread about Mary. Looksee didn't answer that.

I think ecumenism is great and I think it is good when we honestly acknowledge difference instead of implying it isn't important. People died for these things.

I think the problem with lots of Anglicanism is that we're not confident to stand up for the Reformation when we should. Instead of claiming that Marian devotion isn't important we should engage in honest dialogue and acknowledge difference rather than claiming it doesn't matter. It does, people died for it!

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

1123heavy

Leia Nutritious Murk wrote: »

For our Muslim Friend. Islam refers to Mary as Ma'suma - "She who never sinned" . This is more akin to Catholicism and equally erroneous. She needed a Saviour. She said so herself.

Mary pbuh is a woman of very high status in Islam, she dedicated her womb to the service of God and was chosen by God to give birth to the Messiah pbuh. She is also deemed to be the Queen of heaven according to Islamic teaching.

However, we most certainly do not worship, communicate, make statues or graven images of her. in Islam we communicate in prayer with only one being, and that is God, absolutely nobody else, we have a dirct relationship with him and none else. To say Mary in Islam is akin to Mary in Catholicism is only correct in so far as she is a woman of high status (i.e Queen of heaven), but that is all.

And you mention that she needed a saviour, well Islam is different to Christianity in that no one needs a saviour in Islam, we sin, we ask forgiveness to God, God forgives. It is very simple, there is no one having to act in between or die for us. So Mary pbuh is no different to me or anybody else in that we don't need a "saviour" in the Christian sense of the word.

looksee

I added 'Roman' to your quote above to prevent any confusion, seeing as us Anglican Christians are also of the catholic tradition, albeit not in the Roman form ....

I must admit I have never ever heard this "Catholics think that only Catholics are Christians"! Do you mean in Ireland only, or where? I am curious as to where this odd revelation came from.

I have heard it a good few times. Mostly years ago when I lived in a country area and there really were not that many non-Catholics around. I was asked during amiable conversation with neighbours, if the subject of religion came up, 'and are you Christian?' and I would answer 'yes, I am Protestant' which resulted in some comment that indicated that the person had never considered the connection. Another conversation went along the lines of 'I am a Christian, I agreed that I was too and the person looked puzzled and said 'but you are not Catholic, are you?

I am not suggesting this was in-depth, academic conversation, just passing remarks which suggested that the person had never given any thought to religion beyond the fact that they were Catholic and that was all they needed to know.

Edited to add - it was really not necessary to alter what I said. I am well aware of the term catholic as referring to the Anglican tradition. I spelled it with a capital C and anyone who was being other than pedantic would have known what I meant - you yourself wrote catholic with a small c so you are award of the difference.

lazybones32

Are you a Sunni Muslim, 1123heavy? I ask only because I thought Ashura (had to look the name up) was a day of atoning/cleansing of sin that applied to all Islam.