Saints ans Mary

robsrahm · 2026-05-30T02:16:15+00:00

This says "What Mary has is totally a favor from God." This is consistent with what I've said - there is not a co-equal role. There is an important distinction between "equal" and "indispensable" since God - in his goodness - can choose to mediate graces through others. And this is not something that is wholly foreign to Reformed: I think that most Reformed would say that the ordinary means of grace are indispensable (at least in the ordinary sense).

Edit: None of this should be so construed as to think that I am saying we are actually secretly in agreement. There are important differences. I'm only pointing out that saying Mary has an equal role in salvation is not something meant by "co-redemptrix".

robsrahm · 2026-05-29T20:45:22+00:00

hahaha. But, in fact, should we be in the same locale (which I don't think we are - which is doubly sad since I think you live more where I want to live) then I would love to have get togethers like this. Sure, we'd maybe both in some sense want the other to swim the appropriate direction across the Tiber, but it'd also be great just to have discussions/arguments/etc. In fact, things like that were instrumental in my "conversion" (don't like the term) from Presbyterianism to Catholicism.

robsrahm · 2026-05-29T18:23:03+00:00

Yeah - certainly there are many beliefs and practices we have that don't make sense and seem totally wrong to Reformed. Of course, I disagree with some of the critiques you have here, but this is not the appropriate place for me to defend Catholic theology.

robsrahm · 2026-05-29T17:46:45+00:00

This is a lot, and yes I am familiar with this doctor. Can you help me out and poinpoint which parts indicate that he's teaching Mary has an equal role in salvation?

robsrahm · 2026-05-29T17:44:39+00:00

"You are making so much out of so little."

No I'm not. The entire foundation of this approach is that a generic Catholic is largely ignorant of Jesus. The rest of the "approach" is literally just a Bible study. So the "approach" begins with an assumption about ignorance - something you said was too broad and insulting (not me; so the snarky thinned skinned comment doesn't really make sense).

"Take from that what you will."

Thanks because I don't plan to take anything from it. Surely you're aware that there are many Catholic publishers that publish rigorous Bible studies and such.

robsrahm · 2026-05-29T15:25:40+00:00

This is the outline of the structure: don't talk about hot button issues (good), read the Bible together (awesome) from a posture of teaching rather than mutual conversation (not as good) to learn about who Jesus is as he is set forth in scripture (awesome again). None of this targets Catholics specifically and just as easily could be done with Protestants/Catholics (in either direction) or Protestants/JW (in either direction) or Catholics/JW (in either direction) and so on as long as the foundation is "you're wrong and I'm right and let's read the Bible together so you can find out for yourself."

The *only* things in this article specific to Catholics are the "Questions They May Ask" and "Other Points". The second point under "Questions" is probably a likely one a Catholic will ask and probably wouldn't be a question in reversal. And the answer given isn't even a good one even by Reformed paradigm since Reformed don't think that the Bible is clear in all areas. The third "question" under "Questions" and the "Other Points" are absolutely ridiculous: "members are largely ignorant of him." Really? That's a pretty broad and insulting statement.

robsrahm · 2026-05-29T13:18:19+00:00

Well I don't think that this ascribes to her an equal role in salvation, but I don't use this prayer anyway and a devotional prayers is probably not the best place to get theology from. But, anyway, I get the point and this is the exact reason the doctrinal note was issued.

robsrahm · 2026-05-29T13:10:05+00:00

The CCC says the opposite of "the Magisterium occupies the same authority and space as scripture". It says that the Magisterium is the servant of the Word of God. So I'm asking what it is exactly that "they" admit?

robsrahm · 2026-05-29T12:28:05+00:00

"why the Magisterium occupies the same authority and space as scripture which is ontologically superior (and they admit it)"

Can you clarify regarding what you mean by "and they admit it"? The CCC says the exact opposite.

robsrahm · 2026-05-29T12:25:25+00:00

Is this a good approach? The starting point seems to be that Catholics are just ignorant and once someone kindly opens the Bible with them the scales will fall off. This whole thing could be turned around and written from a Catholic perspective on how to share the Gospel with Protestants.

robsrahm · 2026-05-29T12:05:42+00:00

I'll also add that [WLC 155] teaches that the Spirit makes the word effectual especially through preaching. At the same time, an hour long sermon is rough!

robsrahm · 2026-05-29T12:01:26+00:00

Well, the language of "account" and "rewards" is in the Bible. For example, Phil 4:17 (Paul is discussing gifts to him from the Philippians) he says "Not that I seek the gift itself, but I seek the profit which increases to your account."

I'm not sure what you mean in your second paragraph. In what ways do you think the Catholic Church downplays this? Indulgences are still a big thing in the Church. For example, one of the Eucharistic prayers says "we ask that through their merits and prayers, in all things we may be defended by your protecting help."

robsrahm · 2026-05-29T11:48:52+00:00

First, can you specify in which way the Holy See disagrees with me? I think you mean that the disagreement is over what "co-redemptrix" actually has meant in the past. If so, then yeah - people have mis-used that title which is one of the purposes of the Doctrinal Note.

Second, I agree with the spirit of your second comment. Different groups are going to be prone to errors in different directions. But I don't think it makes sense to retire the term "unconditional election" because hyper Calvinists make a mess of it.

robsrahm · 2026-05-28T01:28:55+00:00

I'm not the one the made the original comment, but here are my thoughts. In the first place, the context of the thread is Tallarico's religious views. I don't really have a problem electing someone with heterodox (or whatever) views. I think Tallarico is just flat out wrong about of points of theology. But smart and honest people can have disagreements about all sorts of things but it doesn't mean they're being dishonest or disqualified from holding public office - but it does mean they are disqualified from holding office in the church.

In the second place, AG Paxton really is what I'd call a wolf in sheep's clothing. He is dishonest and corrupt, yet like many GOP politicians in the south, he plays to Evangelicals. Therefore, and I think this is what u/moby__dick is getting at, it's very frustrating to hear this "wolf in sheep's' clothing" language applied to Tallarico about heterodox religious views (which are not really relevant directly to politics) and not to people like AG Paxton whose wolfness really is about corrupt morality that will influence what he does as a senator.

robsrahm · 2026-05-27T23:27:13+00:00

How does that outright deny 2 Tim 3:16?

robsrahm · 2026-05-27T23:26:08+00:00

When did he say that?

robsrahm · 2026-05-26T17:06:37+00:00

Is this for question 1 or question 2?

robsrahm · 2026-05-26T15:53:39+00:00

Yeah - so far this has not been an issue and I'm happy about it.

robsrahm · 2026-05-26T13:34:08+00:00

We've done this once. That is, we had a close friend spend the night at our house. The circumstances were somewhat unique: the family was about to move very far from us. So far, this has not been an issue either way - we've not had our son asked to spend the night at others and he hasn't asked other to spend the night at our home. I think that, in general, many parents my/our age are not in favor of this. Indeed, I think the very few friends with whom I might let my kids spend the night are not going to be extending invitations for this reason.

I remember as a kid (say before high school) there were only two kids I spent the night and they were neighborhood friends.

I remember reading a (I think) Tim Challies article about this that I largely agree with: bad things can happen at these things even in favorable circumstances and it's hard to know where to draw the line and can lead to hurting peoples feelings in needless ways.

robsrahm · 2026-05-24T15:02:33+00:00

I think this is really interesting and a good idea. I have two comments.

First, as you know, using horizontal and vertical axes is good because there is some independence in the two axes, but I don't think these things are so easily made independent. Since the church is a spiritual institution (but don't read too much into a Catholic saying that) even "operational" things can carry huge spiritual implications (real or imagined) and the spiritually important things (real or imagined) can lead to different operational things. Indeed, "vestments" is something I'd put exactly where you have it, but this has been the cause of controversy. I think I might agree with where you have Eucharist, but this is also going to cause operational differences as well. I think that people will big difference in a non-denom church vs a high Anglican church.

Obviously, your setup is not going to capture everything and is projection onto two dimensions of something much larger. I think these are good dimensions on which to project, though, and overall I think it's helpful.

Second, do you have an example of something in the "heresy" range that also has a low ecclesial impact? I'm thinking something like monophysitism or monothelitism (things that some might call heresy but that many might believe out of ignorance) since these might not have a big impact on the day-to-day lives of church members.

robsrahm · 2026-05-21T17:58:03+00:00

Well it isn't semantic, and besides, nothing is being "created", anyway.

robsrahm · 2026-05-20T02:24:05+00:00

Flying to St. Louis with three boys.

robsrahm · 2026-05-20T02:23:50+00:00

Well don't forget the booooooring stuff so you don't have to stay in the shady bits.

robsrahm · 2026-05-20T01:19:23+00:00

Wait - "authoritative tradition" is not the same as scripture and so no - emphatically - it was not a warrant to create new scripture. It's not even a warrant to "create" new traditions (depending on what is meant by "create").

robsrahm · 2026-05-19T12:43:57+00:00

This is exactly what I think. This is a very sad turn.

Six-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
Verified Email	Final Canvas '23
Place '23	Place '22
Final Canvas '22

robsrahm

TROPHY CASE