Three objections to Catholicism

Tonight I saw a post on Facebook and thought I would reply. The resulting threads were rather disappointing and messy, but I thought I’d share the original post and my replies in case they garner some reasoned responses here.

Three Objections

…there are 3 areas where we have a conflict. 1) the virginity of Mary. 2) the celibacy of priests. 3) The insinuation that we should call anyone the “mother of God.”

#1: Jesus had 6 younger brothers and sisters.

Mark 6:3: “Isn’t this Mary’s son and the brother of James, Joseph, Judas and Simon? Aren’t his sisters here with us?”

Can’t really understand how you deduce virginity out of Mary after all that…

Decreed “official” in the Catholic Church in the 19th century, 1800 years after Christ.

And point #2: the celibacy of priests. The first “Pope,” Peter, was married, with children. Anyone who knows history knows that the celibacy of priests wasn’t introduced until the dark ages, 1100 AD, as a land grab against the kings of Europe, so that priests’ kids would not receive the land inheritance of their fathers but they’d have new land, to combat the land being accumulated by European kings. In the present day, it’s the main thing which has contributed to the $6 billion paid out by the Catholic Church in pedophilia allegations. Time Magazine said that 30-50% of Catholic priests are homosexuals. (Don’t shoot the messenger…) I’m just saying, there is nothing biblical and ultimately even sensical about the celibacy of priests.

And #3: the consideration of Mary as the “Mother of God.” The Bible is replete with references to the “Jezebel spirit” which says that any reference to the “Queen of heaven” (Jeremiah 44) is complete and utter blasphemy. In Luke 8:21 Jesus seems to tackle this question head on when he’s told his mother and brothers are outside and he rather disrespectfully (to his mother) says “Who are my mother and brothers? Those who do the will of God are my mother and brothers.” Uhhhhh…that’s not much respect for the “mother of God.”

So, no “behold your mother” theology will work with me; please don’t condescend to my Biblical knowledge because you don’t know the Bible better than me. I’ve read it cover to cover a dozen times, and memorized much of it. You may interpret it differently, granted, but don’t act like you have some corner on Biblical or eschatological knowledge which I don’t possess. Or I’ll eat you alive…

Having said all this, I encourage the games to begin. A hundred people have tried unsuccessfully to change my mind on the subject, convinced they could make a Catholic out of me. But my beliefs are passionately employed, and are well-rooted in Scripture. As are yours, in a contrary belief.

The pervading goal is to create love, not antagonism, so anything intended to condescend or de-value anyone won’t be tolerated. My point is, we’ll all be arm in arm in heaven. So why not down here?

Facebook post

Responses

Issue #1

“#1: Jesus had 6 younger brothers and sisters.”

The sematic range of brother is broad – it’s not limited to siblings. An ancient tradition says that Joseph was a widower with other children, but these “brothers and sisters” could just be Jesus’ extended family.

“Decreed “official” in the Catholic Church in the 19th century, 1800 years after Christ.”

This is incorrect. Not only do you find it in the Fathers affirming it as early as 2nd Century, it was established as orthodoxy at the Council of Ephesus in AD 431. I’d also guard you against assuming that a declaration by an Ecumenical Council means that it wasn’t believed previously, otherwise you’re going to have problems with doctrines such as the Nature of Christ and the Trinity.

Issue #2

“And point #2: the celibacy of priests.”

Celibacy is a discipline of the Latin-Rite Catholic Church. It has therefore changed throughout history and may possibly change in the future. It may also be dispensed on occasion when an Anglican or Lutheran minister converts to Catholicism and feels called to the Catholic priesthood.

However, the Catholic Church isn’t only the Latin-Rite. I have worshipped at Byzantine Catholic Churches for over a decade and been pastored by several priests who were married.

“The first “Pope,” Peter, was married.”

True, although we don’t know if his wife was still alive during Jesus’ ministry. In fact, there’s a hint that she might not have been, given that his mother-in-law was the one who served them after her healing. It wouldn’t make any difference, however, to the Catholic position though if he was still married.

“Anyone who knows history knows that the celibacy of priests wasn’t introduced until the dark ages, 1100 AD, as a land grab against the kings of Europe, so that priests’ kids would not receive the land inheritance of their fathers but they’d have new land, to combat the land being accumulated by European kings.”

Okay, a lot of this is incorrect. Also, calling it “the dark ages” suggests to me that you’d benefit from reading better history books on the period.

“In the present day, it’s the main thing which has contributed to the $6 billion paid out by the Catholic Church in pedophilia allegations.”

I’m guessing you’ve just assumed this. If you investigate, you’ll find that there is no difference in the rate of abuse among married clergy or secular institutions such as public schools.

“Time Magazine said that 30-50% of Catholic priests are homosexuals. (Don’t shoot the messenger…)”

Well, if Time magazine says it…

“I’m just saying, there is nothing biblical and ultimately even sensical about the celibacy of priests.”

Wasn’t Jeremiah celibate? John the Baptist was almost certainly celibate? Didn’t Jesus speak about those renounced marriage for the sake of theKingdom? Didn’t St. Paul exhort his readers to celibacy and say that he wished that they would be all like himself? Didn’t the Early Church prize celibacy? Isn’t the sexual state of those who make it Heaven commented upon in Revelation 14?

Issue #3

“And #3: the consideration of Mary as the “Mother of God.””

This is just logical:

P1. Jesus is God
P2. Mary is the Mother of Jesus
C. Therefore Mary is the Mother of God

Which premise do you think is incorrect? Do you deny that Scripture says in Luke 2:34 that “Simeon blessed them and said to Mary his mother“? Or do you believe that Jesus isn’t God? To object to this title seems to require that one of them be denied.

The Bible is replete with references to the “Jezebel spirit” which says that any reference to the “Queen of heaven” (Jeremiah 44) is complete and utter blasphemy.

It also speaks of many “Baals”, a title which means means “Lord”. Just as counterfeit money doesn’t disprove the existence of real money, counterfeit Lords doesn’t disprove the existence of a true Lord. Counterfeit Mothers of God doesn’t disprove the existence of a true Mother of God.

“In Luke 8:21 Jesus seems to tackle this question head on when he’s told his mother and brothers are outside and he rather disrespectfully (to his mother)”

There’s nothing disrespectful about it – he’s making a point – those who do His will are part of the family of God.

The real question which needs to be asked is “Who did the will of God?” It was a woman who was “full of grace”, uniquely privileged to gestate the Creator of the Universe, who told the angel “Let it be done until me according to your will” and the servants to “Do whatever He tells you”.

We haven’t even begun to look at the Old Testament understanding of the Queen Mother, or the praise which the Early Church heaped upon Mary…