'catholics "worsip Mary"

[ckempston]

Gracious heavens above, preserve me from ever going to Tokyo – I might have to bow to people, so I’d be worshipping them. Eek!

And heaven preserve me from ever dropping a kiss on the picture of my dear departed father. I must be worshipping him.

I guess some people are more comfortable with a falsely narrow and restricted view which attempts to make worship as narrow and restricted as a cold, sterile, and ‘puritanical’ nature would approve.

But most of us are drawn, paradoxically, to the Jesus who came for all and who opened us up to God above AND also to ‘our neighbors’ --and not just the neighbors who were ‘worthy’ of our notice at that. We have a warmer nature (more like that of Our Lord than of the Pharisees who ‘missed’ Him by looking for somebody more in THEIR image and likeness) and a more embracing and contextual understanding of Christ’s teachings in Catholicism. . .

Christians should not use what worldly cultures do to justify our actions, nor should they appeal to what simply “feels” right.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

They should also try not to make assumptions . . .

The practice of the Japanese to bow (as opposed to the modern Western ‘shaking hands’) has nothing to do with whether or not Catholics ‘should’ bow or kneel in front of a statue. . .the point was made simply to illustrate that what a given person (usually Protestant) might think is ‘meant’ by bowing (like his thought that it is worship, and thus wrong save to God alone) is not necessarily what that Protestant assumes it is.

You don’t think a Japanese man bowing to a friend is worshipping him. . .not because you’re ‘justifying’ the action by his culture, but because AN ACTION does not necessarily mean the same thing when it is performed by individuals. I might suddenly drop to my knees in front of a picture --not to ‘worship’ but to search for a dropped contact lens. But if you ‘looked in the window’ at that point, and you associated the act of ‘bowing’ with worship, you might start to think I was ‘worshipping the picture’.

Further, suppose that I were approached by the (male) love of my life (as I’m female), who dropped to his knees in order to pop the question. Is he worshipping me? No, but as he crooned Frankie Valli’s “My Eyes Adored You” to me (hey, it’s MY fantasy), would I take the words LITERALLY? No.

People who assume that Catholics approach statues and start associating pieces of plaster and wood with real beings–and not only that, but endow those plaster with attributes of godhood–are as sadly mistaken as those who would think my love was literally ‘adoring’ me with the worship of a man for his God. . .

 

[ckempston]

They should also try not to make assumptions . . .

The practice of the Japanese to bow (as opposed to the modern Western ‘shaking hands’) has nothing to do with whether or not Catholics ‘should’ bow or kneel in front of a statue. . .the point was made simply to illustrate that what a given person (usually Protestant) might think is ‘meant’ by bowing (like his thought that it is worship, and thus wrong save to God alone) is not necessarily what that Protestant assumes it is.

You don’t think a Japanese man bowing to a friend is worshipping him. . .not because you’re ‘justifying’ the action by his culture, but because AN ACTION does not necessarily mean the same thing when it is performed by individuals. I might suddenly drop to my knees in front of a picture --not to ‘worship’ but to search for a dropped contact lens. But if you ‘looked in the window’ at that point, and you associated the act of ‘bowing’ with worship, you might start to think I was ‘worshipping the picture’.

Further, suppose that I were approached by the (male) love of my life (as I’m female), who dropped to his knees in order to pop the question. Is he worshipping me? No, but as he crooned Frankie Valli’s “My Eyes Adored You” to me (hey, it’s MY fantasy), would I take the words LITERALLY? No.

People who assume that Catholics approach statues and start associating pieces of plaster and wood with real beings–and not only that, but endow those plaster with attributes of godhood–are as sadly mistaken as those who would think my love was literally ‘adoring’ me with the worship of a man for his God. . .

I would tend to agree that intent has something to do with it, and I certainly hope that God sees it that way as well, for the sake of my Catholic family and friends. However, all that being said, I still think the practice is way out of hand, and is certainly not in line with what was normative in the early church, as I pointed out in my other post.

 

[dianaiad]

Yep! And on TV we have fundamentalist preachers offering “prosperity cloths” to increase your finanacial situations…the same preachers that condemn our prayers asking the intercession of the Blessed Mother…go figure!

On another post I mentioned TimeLife informercials…I don’t watch these or these preachers…it’s interesting what you’ll find trying to get to EWTN using the remote…

Y’know, just a thought here…but it’s the Catholics who are doing the ‘worshiping’ and the praying and the venerating. If THEY see a difference between what they owe to Mary and what they owe to Christ, then it doesn’t matter what anybody who is looking at this from outside thinks.

There’s a difference–and certainly God knows this. I had that difference explained to me quite awhile ago, and while I don’t agree with it, I understand it–and that there IS a rather large difference between the honor and veneration they pay Mary, and in a lesser degree the Saints, and that which they give God.

It’s certainly not our place (the non-Catholics) to tell them what they really believe, is it?

Diana

 

[Tantum_ergo]

And in that early Church you’d be waiting to picked up for the Christians v. Lions games, wearing robes, reclining at table to celebrate the sacrament of the Eucharist, speaking Latin and Greek, etc. etc. etc.

Iconoclassicism is a heresy that keeps rearing its ugly head every few centuries or so, sadly.

And I hope I’m expressing this charitably because after all, I’m sure you don’t mean to be offensive about this and are sincerely concerned, but seriously. . .come on. . .who appointed you the 'worship meter meister?" How did you get the authority to read the minds of your Catholic family and friends, not to mention somebody you don’t even know, and find their practices to be ‘overdone’, or ‘out of hand’?

You know, if we Catholics really DID worship Mary we’d not only admit it, we’d be ‘proud of it’ as we are of all our Catholic teachings. Come on, dear separated brethren. If you want to criticize our Catholic practices, why not criticize the ones we really do and stop making a straw man (or woman) from practices we do not and never have engaged in?

 

[ckempston]

And in that early Church you’d be waiting to picked up for the Christians v. Lions games, wearing robes, reclining at table to celebrate the sacrament of the Eucharist, speaking Latin and Greek, etc. etc. etc.

Iconoclassicism is a heresy that keeps rearing its ugly head every few centuries or so, sadly.

And I hope I’m expressing this charitably because after all, I’m sure you don’t mean to be offensive about this and are sincerely concerned, but seriously. . .come on. . .who appointed you the 'worship meter meister?" How did you get the authority to read the minds of your Catholic family and friends, not to mention somebody you don’t even know, and find their practices to be ‘overdone’, or ‘out of hand’?

You know, if we Catholics really DID worship Mary we’d not only admit it, we’d be ‘proud of it’ as we are of all our Catholic teachings. Come on, dear separated brethren. If you want to criticize our Catholic practices, why not criticize the ones we really do and stop making a straw man (or woman) from practices we do not and never have engaged in?

I don’t have a “worship” meter, but there is something a bit disengenuous about your explanation. It’s like sitting around looking at a Playboy magazine but saying, “I’m not intending to lust or be impure, I just read it for the articles.” Right.

I can only repeat what I have already said. Bowing, kissing, and otherwise worshiping anybody but God were all condemned in the New Testament. As a for instance, see John and the Angel in Revelation:

Revelation 22:8 I, John, am the one who heard and saw these things. And when I had heard and seen them, I fell down to worship at the feet of the angel who had been showing them to me. 9But he said to me, “Do not do it! I am a fellow servant with you and with your brothers the prophets and of all who keep the words of this book. Worship God!”

The words used are “pipto” (to lower) and “proskuneo” (bow down/kiss hand). The angel showed extreme alarm that John would do this, and told him not to.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Point is, the argument about Playboy is flawed. Because the magazine DOES contain offensive material in addition to ‘articles’ that one might consider acceptable, there is a huge difference as there could legitimately be a ‘good’ or a ‘bad’ judgment. . .

But the practice of Catholics in prayer to the saints does not have an ‘offensive’ side to it, despite your attempts to stretch it. One might as well argue that mother love is a bad thing because some people love their mothers too much. Apple pie is a bad thing because some people eat too much. That kind of stretching is itself disingenuous.

There is also a great danger in cherry picking Scripture and pulling out verses out of context to support a theory, especially when there exist other verses which disprove that theory and those verses are ignored (or did not God command cherubim on the Ark, did not Moses make a bronze serpent and hold it up for the people to gaze upon, did not Jesus Himself speak of a person gaining honor, using the terminology which was recognized at the time of the writing to express the same sense in which Catholics use it today but Protestants have ‘changed’ the meaning thereof?)

And you still haven’t addressed the fundamental issue:

Because you, personally, have ‘determined’ something to be ‘unScriptural’, does not make it so. Particularly when the accusation you keep on making is refuted, over and over.

You would only have a case to make in criticizing people for ‘bowing’ etc. IF THEY WERE ACTUALLY WORSHIPPING SOMEBODY OTHER THAN GOD. . .but they aren’t. So your whole premise is flawed from the start.

 

[GailMac4]

Really want to get tangled up in semanitcs?

I love Mary. I love God. Can I love both and still be “obeying” the commandment to love God alone? Have fun folks!

Peace,

Gail

 

[ckempston]

Point is, the argument about Playboy is flawed. Because the magazine DOES contain offensive material in addition to ‘articles’ that one might consider acceptable, there is a huge difference as there could legitimately be a ‘good’ or a ‘bad’ judgment. . .

The analogy was extreme, though that was the point. All analogies break down eventually. Though, I think the point is valid. Intention may be taken into consideration, but it’s pretty subjective.

But the practice of Catholics in prayer to the saints does not have an ‘offensive’ side to it, despite your attempts to stretch it. One might as well argue that mother love is a bad thing because some people love their mothers too much. Apple pie is a bad thing because some people eat too much. That kind of stretching is itself disingenuous.

If God sees it as inappropriate (as the angel in Revelation did), then certainly, it does have an “offensive” side to it.

There is also a great danger in cherry picking Scripture and pulling out verses out of context to support a theory, especially when there exist other verses which disprove that theory and those verses are ignored (or did not God command cherubim on the Ark, did not Moses make a bronze serpent and hold it up for the people to gaze upon, did not Jesus Himself speak of a person gaining honor, using the terminology which was recognized at the time of the writing to express the same sense in which Catholics use it today but Protestants have ‘changed’ the meaning thereof?)

And you still haven’t addressed the fundamental issue:

Because you, personally, have ‘determined’ something to be ‘unScriptural’, does not make it so. Particularly when the accusation you keep on making is refuted, over and over.

You certainly haven’t refuted anything, so I’m not sure what you’re referring to. Proskuneo is bowing. Jesus says not to do it. Period. Doesn’t matter if it makes sense to you or not.

You would only have a case to make in criticizing people for ‘bowing’ etc. IF THEY WERE ACTUALLY WORSHIPPING SOMEBODY OTHER THAN GOD. . .but they aren’t. So your whole premise is flawed from the start.

So you say.

 

[ckempston]

Really want to get tangled up in semanitcs?

I love Mary. I love God. Can I love both and still be “obeying” the commandment to love God alone? Have fun folks!

Peace,

Gail

Great, I love Mary too.

 

[NDfan]

I forgot to mention that when I was a Baptist before I got saved, we said prayers to pieces of cloth.

Why weren’t you saved as a Baptist?

Did you really say prayers to a cloth?

 

[GailMac4]

P.S. Here’s another point to ponder - I once heard a man speak about his love for Mary and devotion to her. He was sharing about another’s way of explaining to his Protestant friend about our ways of honoring her. His friend said that he’d had such a deep** fear of God **that it was easier for him to open his heart to God’s Mother than it was to open it to God for fear of offending God, so all his little loves he gave to her instead. He talked to her, prayed to her, did all sorts of stuff to honor her. Once when he was lying ill and at death’s door, he had a “vision” while in delirium from fever. In it he saw all his little loves for Mary gathered up like flowers by the angels and carried to Mary herself and given to God at His throne where they were even more magnified. God spoke to Him and said something like this “what you did for her, you did for Me. Love her always.” He never doubted his devotion to her again.

Peace,

Gail

 

[elvisman]

I don’t know, are they bowing down and kissing the pictures and statues?

I’ve kissed my daughter’s picture that I carry in my wallet many times - my wife’s, too. I love them immensly. Does that mean that I worship them or give them undue praise? Nope. All it means is that the pictures are reminders of those who I love. That’s all a statue or picture of Mary is - a reminder of our Blessed Mother, whom we love and respect immensly.

When my father died, I knelt before his casket and said a prayer. I, then kissed him on the forehead. Did I worship him? Nope.

According to the the Catholic Encyclopedia:
(Greek doulia; Latin servitus), a theological term signifying the honour paid to the saints, while latria means worship given to God alone, and hyperdulia the veneration offered to the Blessed Virgin Mary.

**Merriam-Webster Dictionary
Main Entry: ven·er·ate
**Pronunciation: \ve-nə-rāt\ **
**Function: transitive verb **
1 : to regard with reverential respect or with admiring deference
**

 

[dianaiad]

P.S. Here’s another point to ponder - I once heard a man speak about his love for Mary and devotion to her. He was sharing about another’s way of explaining to his Protestant friend about our ways of honoring her. His friend said that he’d had such a deep** fear of God **that it was easier for him to open his heart to God’s Mother than it was to open it to God for fear of offending God, so all his little loves he gave to her instead. He talked to her, prayed to her, did all sorts of stuff to honor her. Once when he was lying ill and at death’s door, he had a “vision” while in delirium from fever. In it he saw all his little loves for Mary gathered up like flowers by the angels and carried to Mary herself and given to God at His throne where they were even more magnified. God spoke to Him and said something like this “what you did for her, you did for Me. Love her always.” He never doubted his devotion to her again.

Peace,

Gail

This is pretty much how it was explained to me; not as an ‘idol worship’ of Mary, but as a reverence so great for God the Father that one felt…unworthy? (no, that’s not quite the word…)

anyway, there is a difference.

…and non-Catholics who don’t know what that difference is, or who can’t see it, shouldn’t assume that their ignorance is the Catholic’s condemnation.

 

[emarc]

And in that early Church you’d be waiting to picked up for the Christians v. Lions games, wearing robes, reclining at table to celebrate the sacrament of the Eucharist, speaking Latin and Greek, etc. etc. etc.

Iconoclassicism is a heresy that keeps rearing its ugly head every few centuries or so, sadly.

And I hope I’m expressing this charitably because after all, I’m sure you don’t mean to be offensive about this and are sincerely concerned, but seriously. . .come on. . .who appointed you the 'worship meter meister?" How did you get the authority to read the minds of your Catholic family and friends, not to mention somebody you don’t even know, and find their practices to be ‘overdone’, or ‘out of hand’?
You know, if we Catholics really DID worship Mary we’d not only admit it, we’d be ‘proud of it’ as we are of all our Catholic teachings. Come on, dear separated brethren. If you want to criticize our Catholic practices, why not criticize the ones we really do and stop making a straw man (or woman) from practices we do not and never have engaged in?

this is well said, but for non-Catholics their eyes are veiled from seeing/understanding the truth. let’s pray for them that the Holy Spirit does open their eyes just as many protestant ministers who converted to Catholicism have experienced. Amen.
God bless.

 

[JonNC]

=dianaiad;4647826]Y’know, just a thought here…but it’s the Catholics who are doing the ‘worshiping’ and the praying and the venerating. If THEY see a difference between what they owe to Mary and what they owe to Christ, then it doesn’t matter what anybody who is looking at this from outside thinks.

There’s a difference–and certainly God knows this. I had that difference explained to me quite awhile ago, and while I don’t agree with it, I understand it–and that there IS a rather large difference between the honor and veneration they pay Mary, and in a lesser degree the Saints, and that which they give God.

Well said, Diana.

It’s certainly not our place (the non-Catholics) to tell them what they really believe, is it?

No, its not. It is better instead to listen to what others tell us they believe. If we disagree, disagree with what they actually believe, not what we think they believe. And that goes both ways.

Jon

 

[cfrancis]

Most Catholics don’t know that Jesus said not to do either. There are two words in the New Testament used for these actions of worshiping or venerating:

Proskuneo - to bow before/kiss the feet
Latreuo - serve, in a religious sense

Jesus said do both to God only.

I found this from another thread:

Refuted with an English translation! You can’t be serious. The word is proskuneo. It means bow down, kiss a hand or ring (which is what Catholics do in front of the Pope, statues, etc.), and the Bible says not to do it. For the record, that’s not the word used in Luke 24:5 (that word indicates falling back out of fear, not bowing). Also not the word used in Acts 16:28-30, and in this case, Paul obviously gets him up and brings him out to be baptized. If you’re going to try to refute the use of a Greek word, at least check a lexicon to make sure that word is actually used in the passage.

Here is Strong’s entry for proskuneo :
4352. proskuneo pros-koo-neh’-o from 4314 and a probable derivative of 2965 (meaning to kiss, like a dog licking his master’s hand); to fawn or crouch to, i.e. (literally or figuratively) prostrate oneself in homage (do reverence to, adore):–worship.

I understand how you hope your reply would “shame” me off the topic…
Acts 10:25 (Greek):
pipto epi ho pous proskuneo
(falling on the feet he worships)

Rev 19:10 (Greek):
pipto emprosthen ho pous autos prokuneo
(I fall in toward place of the feet of him to worhsip)

In both cases, Scripture is clear to combine the falling at the feet with the intent of the one falling at the feet. Two distinct issues: the action (pipto) and the intent (proskuneo), meaning one can do the action with or without the intent.

Proof?

Acts 16:29:
prospipto ho paulos kai ho silas
(he toward falls to the Paul and to the Silas)

Same action, without the worship.

Mt 8:2:
lepros proserchomai proskuneo autos
(leper toward coming worshipped to Him)

Intent to worship without the action (same with Mt 9:18)

Scripture appears to use a particular verbiage when it wants to combine the action and intent:

Rom 11:4:
ou kampto gonu
(not bow knee)

Rom 14:11:
kampto pas gonu
(shall be bowing every knee)

Eph 3:14:
kampto ho ganu
(I am bowing the knees)

Yet that language (kampto gonu) is not used in any of the rebuking instances you’ve presented.

 

[Stephen_C]

That is what one of the Greek words for worship (proskuneo) means, which Christians are not supposed to direct to any but God.

I find it interesting that prior to Christianity becoming a state religion, there were some interesting observations made by outsiders. I would need to find the quotes, but I know I have seen where, for one, they were thought to be atheists due to the fact that they had no images that they bowed down to. Secondly, they refused to bow before Caesar, and say he was Lord, despite the fact that in the Old Testament many people were referred to as Lord (e.g. David). The first Christians seemed to be extremely cautious with doing anything that would remotely suggest impropriety with regard to worship.

huh?
Ok by the numbers.

1. I am Catholic, Latin Rite.
2. I worship God the Father and God the Son
3. I do not worship anyone or anything else…to include not worshiping Mary, Saints, or our Pope (past and present).
4. The above aligns me with the teachings (on these matters) of the Catholic Church (all rites)
   What part of the above do you not understand?
   I will let Jesus judge my heart. I will also let him be the judge of all others as well. Just maybe you should do the same.

 

[Mark77]

From the beginning of time, there has only been one human being chosen by God to conceive, carry and give birth to our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

There has only been one human being chosen to be with Jesus from His birth, to His death on the Cross, to His Resurrection, to be His first disciple and to share in His eternal life in with Him in Heaven.

MARY!

Spend some time in prayer and ask Jesus if He has a problem with you showing love, honor and the ultimate respect to His Mother Mary.

I bet He has a problem with those who do not love His mother as much as He surely does!

Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, Ora Pro Nobis Peccatoribus.

Mark

 

[LilyM]

Put it this way - you think JESUS who produced wine from water at Cana at Mary’s request, never ever kissed His mother? Or that He would never have kissed a picture of her if He had any and she wasn’t around in the flesh?

You think Jesus who almost with His last breath on the cross begged John to look after Mary and treat her as His own mother, never bowed before her at times? Just as Jacob bowed to Esau SEVEN times in Genesis as a sign of respect (and of course an attempt to avert his anger too) - an act of ‘worship’ with which God seems to have been just fine?

If He did those things for His mother, then there is no earthly reason why we cannot as well.