I’ve actually never heard the Immaculate Conception defined this way. I struggle with accepting the teaching, but this actually really helped that along. Thanks, Matt.
Well done. With the majority of Church doctrine, the dispute is rarely about what the Church teaches, but that She teaches. We get lost so often defending individual dogmas, but this is the right move to go from individual dogma to the Church’s teaching authority. Also, the “this wasn’t defined until 1854” objection is very ironic. Doctrines aren’t defined until heresies emerge claiming something Christians have always known to be true is not. The fact that it was defined so late just demonstrates that Christians had such widespread agreement of its truth for so long.
((Therese, the over energetic borderline Charismatic/former homeschooler, walks in))
Therese: There was also a Marian apparition where Our Lady introduced herself as the Immaculate Conception, so that PROVES it!!
Thomas: ((closes his eyes and quietly dies a thousand deaths))
James: Uh...
Therese: ((Undaunted)) there's a miraculous spring there, and a ton of people have been cured of random diseases! I have a bottle of Lourdes water here somewhere, and I just know you're supposed to have it...((Rummages through an oversized purse. Various rosaries (including one made of glow in the dark plastic, and several with plastic colored beads and white string) and holy cards in various states of disrepair fall out.)) Here, you should take a rosary too!!
James: I don't really believe in any of this...
((Steve the Ortho-bro walks up and takes in the scene. He turns to James.))
Steve: I'm with you on the Immaculate Conception thing, but we really ought to talk about the Theotokos sometime.((He places his arm oh-so-slightly possessively over James's shoulders)) How do you feel about icons?
From what I understand, grace isn't forgiveness for sins (though that is a grace) so much as a general term for God working within us, or giving us some sort of gift or change. It's a much broader term, at least to Catholics. God does a lot with us beyond just forgiveness of sins (which is where we run into some differences between how Protestants and Catholics understand the logistics/economy of grace and salvation, but I digress).
It's like saying "bologna is a sandwich topping, so all sandwiches are bologna". No...bologna is a type of sandwich, but sandwiches are not defined by it, even if sandwiches commonly include it.
Love this! Been wrestling through and thinking alot about the Church's teaching on Mary.
As a Protestant who is seriously and genuinely interested in Catholicism, and has greatly benefited from so much from the Catholic Church, what would you recommend is the best book to read on Mary and other Catholic distinctives that can give a full, beautiful picture of what the church teaches and why?
As a Protestant who genuinely tries to hear out other denominations and is more than willing to go outside of the Baptist Theology I grew up with (I lean Old Earth, I think Premillennialism is the silliest of the 3 primary views of Revelation, I think Reason is much more important than most Baptists I know, and I also think Tradition is more important than my fellow Baptists)...
This post made me more sure that Immaculate Conception is absurd on its face. The argument starts strong with the premises of a Protestant (Scripture above the Church) and Catholic (Scripture is OF the Church). Then it devolves into the best points the Protestant making being totally ignored, and making the Protestant position seem about as plain and unnuanced as possible. You made an argument here that it COULD be true, not that it likely IS true. The Catholic church has taught many things that are obviously wrong and from man rather than God over the centuries, so your ultimate appeal to "early Church fathers thought" rings relatively hollow.
This entire thing reads "lay Protestant who is bad at apologetics gets talked in circles by a Catholic who is good at apologetics"
Just like an Atheist schooling a Christian in a debate (or Kamala beating Trump, etc) doesn't mean they actually are correct, a borderline-strawman fictional protestant vs a fictional good Catholic debate doesn't prove anything. If anything it is evidence for the alternative. If you have to strawman a protestant as someone who can't understand "complications" and is too dumb to understand anything but SCRIPTURE ALONE, that tells me you don't actually have a good argument, you just like doing the same thing every Catholic YouTuber seems to do- like condescending Protestants.
More importantly, as a protestant who wants to better unite Christianity around the Nicene creed and who wants to see the positives of different beliefs within it, the undertone of condescension towards all non-Roman Catholics that this and most Catholic YouTube videos have make me want to change my mind. I think most Protestants want to be friends and have genuine fellowship across the table. Catholics seem to only want that if they get to still claim to be superior. On a personal level, it pisses me off. On a Christ's Kingdom level, I somehow doubt Jesus is up there smiling about the Roman Catholics condescending another big bad protestant.
I am sorry you understood the writing that way. I would be interested to hear the arguments you would have presented against the Immaculate Conception!
I also think it is worth noting that many of the objections to Immaculate Conception found within are common objections to this dogma. I would like to understand why you felt strongly that it was a horrible straw man of protestants?
I’ve actually never heard the Immaculate Conception defined this way. I struggle with accepting the teaching, but this actually really helped that along. Thanks, Matt.
You're welcome!
As a protestant, I felt that this was a charitable dialogue. God Bless
That's certainly what I was going for. Thanks.
Well done. With the majority of Church doctrine, the dispute is rarely about what the Church teaches, but that She teaches. We get lost so often defending individual dogmas, but this is the right move to go from individual dogma to the Church’s teaching authority. Also, the “this wasn’t defined until 1854” objection is very ironic. Doctrines aren’t defined until heresies emerge claiming something Christians have always known to be true is not. The fact that it was defined so late just demonstrates that Christians had such widespread agreement of its truth for so long.
Thanks
Love it. In the tradition of "Father Smith Instructs Jackson" by Fr. John Francis Noll.
Thanks
((Therese, the over energetic borderline Charismatic/former homeschooler, walks in))
Therese: There was also a Marian apparition where Our Lady introduced herself as the Immaculate Conception, so that PROVES it!!
Thomas: ((closes his eyes and quietly dies a thousand deaths))
James: Uh...
Therese: ((Undaunted)) there's a miraculous spring there, and a ton of people have been cured of random diseases! I have a bottle of Lourdes water here somewhere, and I just know you're supposed to have it...((Rummages through an oversized purse. Various rosaries (including one made of glow in the dark plastic, and several with plastic colored beads and white string) and holy cards in various states of disrepair fall out.)) Here, you should take a rosary too!!
James: I don't really believe in any of this...
((Steve the Ortho-bro walks up and takes in the scene. He turns to James.))
Steve: I'm with you on the Immaculate Conception thing, but we really ought to talk about the Theotokos sometime.((He places his arm oh-so-slightly possessively over James's shoulders)) How do you feel about icons?
Isn’t “grace” typically associated with forgiveness of sins? So “full of grace” implies that Mary, at one time, sinned — and was forgiven by God?
From what I understand, grace isn't forgiveness for sins (though that is a grace) so much as a general term for God working within us, or giving us some sort of gift or change. It's a much broader term, at least to Catholics. God does a lot with us beyond just forgiveness of sins (which is where we run into some differences between how Protestants and Catholics understand the logistics/economy of grace and salvation, but I digress).
It's like saying "bologna is a sandwich topping, so all sandwiches are bologna". No...bologna is a type of sandwich, but sandwiches are not defined by it, even if sandwiches commonly include it.
Love this! Been wrestling through and thinking alot about the Church's teaching on Mary.
As a Protestant who is seriously and genuinely interested in Catholicism, and has greatly benefited from so much from the Catholic Church, what would you recommend is the best book to read on Mary and other Catholic distinctives that can give a full, beautiful picture of what the church teaches and why?
As a Protestant who genuinely tries to hear out other denominations and is more than willing to go outside of the Baptist Theology I grew up with (I lean Old Earth, I think Premillennialism is the silliest of the 3 primary views of Revelation, I think Reason is much more important than most Baptists I know, and I also think Tradition is more important than my fellow Baptists)...
This post made me more sure that Immaculate Conception is absurd on its face. The argument starts strong with the premises of a Protestant (Scripture above the Church) and Catholic (Scripture is OF the Church). Then it devolves into the best points the Protestant making being totally ignored, and making the Protestant position seem about as plain and unnuanced as possible. You made an argument here that it COULD be true, not that it likely IS true. The Catholic church has taught many things that are obviously wrong and from man rather than God over the centuries, so your ultimate appeal to "early Church fathers thought" rings relatively hollow.
This entire thing reads "lay Protestant who is bad at apologetics gets talked in circles by a Catholic who is good at apologetics"
Just like an Atheist schooling a Christian in a debate (or Kamala beating Trump, etc) doesn't mean they actually are correct, a borderline-strawman fictional protestant vs a fictional good Catholic debate doesn't prove anything. If anything it is evidence for the alternative. If you have to strawman a protestant as someone who can't understand "complications" and is too dumb to understand anything but SCRIPTURE ALONE, that tells me you don't actually have a good argument, you just like doing the same thing every Catholic YouTuber seems to do- like condescending Protestants.
More importantly, as a protestant who wants to better unite Christianity around the Nicene creed and who wants to see the positives of different beliefs within it, the undertone of condescension towards all non-Roman Catholics that this and most Catholic YouTube videos have make me want to change my mind. I think most Protestants want to be friends and have genuine fellowship across the table. Catholics seem to only want that if they get to still claim to be superior. On a personal level, it pisses me off. On a Christ's Kingdom level, I somehow doubt Jesus is up there smiling about the Roman Catholics condescending another big bad protestant.
Sorry you felt that way. If you’d like more information specifying Catholic beliefs these resources might help you:
- Didache Bible: Contains 73 books of the bible as well as Catholic commentary.
- Catholic.com - contains documents from early church fathers and theologians clarifying church belief
- The Bible is a Catholic Book by Jimmy Akin
- Why we’re Catholic by Trent Horn
- Catechism of the Catholic Church - available online
- Fr Mike Schmitz - A Catholic priest who makes YouTube videos explaining Catholic beliefs
God bless ✝️🙏
I am sorry you understood the writing that way. I would be interested to hear the arguments you would have presented against the Immaculate Conception!
I also think it is worth noting that many of the objections to Immaculate Conception found within are common objections to this dogma. I would like to understand why you felt strongly that it was a horrible straw man of protestants?