check out this anti catholic blog

[TriuneUnity]

If you quote someone, such as you did above in “Wasn’t it Patrick Madrid who said…” would it be wrong to take this out of context and present it to mean something it does not? What about God’s commandment not to bear false witness? In order to show a sense of fairness and justice, please provide the context of the quote you provided to the forum.

He said it as a joke and I knew he was joking. I was repeating that joke in response to adstrinity’s joke.

He said this at a seminar I attended on apologetics at a local parish here (I live in the same town as Mr. Madrid).

 

[MrS]

The windl blows… and so does the Spirit of God (John 3). I am not anti-Catholic but pro Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is sufficient and superior. The unsearchable riches are found in Christ alone.

You cannot be both pro-Jesus, and anti-His Church.

You cannot be both pro-Jesus, and reject John 6 in favor of any symbolism.

You cannot be both pro-Jesus, and deny infant baptism, the sacraments, the teaching authority of His Church,… etc etc etc.

Get off your high horse, and start answering some of the rather direct and simple questions that you avoid.

and what do you mean… unsearchable??

 

[MDK]

MDK;4094156:

If you quote someone, such as you did above in “Wasn’t it Patrick Madrid who said…” would it be wrong to take this out of context and present it to mean something it does not? What about God’s commandment not to bear false witness? In order to show a sense of fairness and justice, please provide the context of the quote you provided to the forum.

He said it as a joke and I knew he was joking. I was repeating that joke in response to adstrinity’s joke.

Thanks for putting it on the record. However, other context is that you’re a Lutheran, and have posted some things on CAF that would call into question your statement about “joking” in that it’s not to be taken as obvious without a sincere statement. I understand that you have no problems with statues in general. However, am I correct in saying that your attitude has been that an act of simple veneration (honoring) is the same as worship? So then you claim that even the act of veneration of Mary the Blessed Mother would be an act of worship to you? Therefore, if Catholics even honor Mary, then they’re worshiping her. Naturally, I believe that equating honoring with worshiping is simply way off course. Your attitude seems to have been that Catholics are indeed engaging in worshiping a false god, they just don’t recognize it. Simply stated, the Catholic Church doesn’t teach idolatry, and your equation of the two is simply confused.

I understand that Catholics do not believe they are in an act of worship when venerating an image. Whether it’s a crucifix or a statue of Christ or Mary. The Israelites did not think so either with that whole golden calf affair.

In truth, honoring (as Catholics do with Mary) and treating as god (Israelite behavior with golden calf) are two very different beliefs. To confuse these is departed from reality.

TriuneUnity:

For what it’s worth… I have never met a Catholic who has claimed to worship Mary. A lot of those things are in the eyes of perceiver. Since in our view any form of veneration is an act of worship… our argument would be that any time a Catholic venerates the Blessed Mother, or any other saint, it is an act of worship.

But open paganism-type attitudes of worship I’ve never seen amongst Catholics. I have read of some of the “devotions” in parts of Southern America wherein it appears a cultic type veneration of Mary occurs.

 

[TriuneUnity]

Thanks for putting it on the record. However, other context is that you’re a Lutheran, and have posted some things on CAF that would call into question your statement about “joking” in that it’s not to be taken as obvious without a sincere statement. I understand that you have no problems with statues in general. However, am I correct in saying that your attitude has been that an act of simple veneration (honoring) is the same as worship? So then you claim that even the act of veneration of Mary the Blessed Mother would be an act of worship to you? Therefore, if Catholics even honor Mary, then they’re worshiping her. Naturally, I believe that equating honoring with worshiping is simply way off course. Your attitude seems to have been that Catholics are indeed engaging in worshiping a false god, they just don’t recognize it. Simply stated, the Catholic Church doesn’t teach idolatry, and your equation of the two is simply confused.

That is true, MDK. However, the context of that statement was a joke since I myself did not make the comment about statues. I understand that Catholics on this forum have to deal with troll-like attacks against the faith. In all honesty, however, we as Protestants have to deal with the same thing from Catholics on this forum. No one is more victim than another in that respect. There is nothing wrong with honoring the lives of the saints. Clearly there is biblical and apostolic witness to the fact that heroes of our faith should be remembered, talked about, and emulated. The context of the discussions regarding veneration are not based on simple honor or respect. Rather, it is based on performing those actions that are condemned as idolatrous within the Scriptures; acts such as prayer, religious icons or statues ringed with candles, physical devotion such as prostration, etc.

Acts such as these should be, and are, reserved for the divine alone.

 

[sola_scriptura]

You cannot be both pro-Jesus, and anti-His Church.

True, it’s just that your definition of church and Jesus’ isn’t the same.

You cannot be both pro-Jesus, and reject John 6 in favor of any symbolism.

Are you referring to the “bread of life” and infusing that section into your view of the Eucharist?

You cannot be both pro-Jesus, and deny infant baptism, the sacraments, the teaching authority of His Church,… etc etc etc.

Again the church of Christ is the collective of all the faithful, it isn’t represented in man made institutions or buildings. However, since I have no problem with infant baptism I really can’t comment on that.

 

[ralphinal]

Thank you for confirming the verifiable fact that more Catholics leave Rome to a Protestant community than the other way around. We just disagree on the reason of that truth. Just ask Justin on his blog and he will tell you why he left Roman Catholicism. What he believes and proclaim is what I proclaim too.

And somehow you missed the point. THERE ARE MORE OF US THAN YOU SO MORE OF US CAN LEAVE. It is more telling to look at percentage change, especially that of clergy. A smaller percentage of Catholics leave than Protestants come back.

Sorry.

I plan on asking him why he left after next week (busy at work). I bet he either did not know the truth so he fell for the lies or he fell in love or some such junk.

 

[TriuneUnity]

I plan on asking him why he left after next week (busy at work). I bet he either did not know the truth so he fell for the lies or he fell in love or some such junk.

Well we know someone here’s opinion on dating and marriage haha

 

[MDK]

True, it’s just that your definition of church and Jesus’ isn’t the same.

Are you referring to the “bread of life” and infusing that section into your view of the Eucharist?

Again the church of Christ is the collective of all the faithful, it isn’t represented in man made institutions or buildings. However, since I have no problem with infant baptism I really can’t comment on that.

Are you claiming your interpretations of Sacred Scriptures to be infallible?

If so, where did God give you this charism of infallibility, or perhaps how did you come to attribute it to yourself?

 

[adstrinity]

Could you please just post the Scripture references to support praying to the Saints and Mary.

Not nearly as well as that book does it. One must understand the Bible in its entirity. I can post the chapters and verses, but, if one doesn’t love Christ like God commands, one will be blind to what the Bible says.

Wasn’t it Patrick Madrid who said “I saw a statue scene of Our Lady of Fatima, with the three children kneeling before her, and I thought to myself…we’re so Catholic, even our statues pray to statues.”

snicker AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

I still owe you an explination, don’t I? goes to look for other thread

 

[MDK]

That is true, MDK. However, the context of that statement was a joke since I myself did not make the comment about statues. I understand that Catholics on this forum have to deal with troll-like attacks against the faith. In all honesty, however, we as Protestants have to deal with the same thing from Catholics on this forum. No one is more victim than another in that respect. There is nothing wrong with honoring the lives of the saints. Clearly there is biblical and apostolic witness to the fact that heroes of our faith should be remembered, talked about, and emulated. The context of the discussions regarding veneration are not based on simple honor or respect. Rather, it is based on performing those actions that are condemned as idolatrous within the Scriptures; acts such as prayer, religious icons or statues ringed with candles, physical devotion such as prostration, etc.

Acts such as these should be, and are, reserved for the divine alone.

Thanks for the additional context regarding your take on this issue. It’s not automatically a joke, just because you provide a quote from someone else. Many provide quotes from others, normally which is to use their words or credibility as substantiation of something. Non-Catholics will often provide quotes of Catholics to attempt to “show how they’re wrong.” Additionally, that adstirnity made a satirical post as a Catholic, doesn’t automatically follow that you would as a Protestant who has presented opposition to what you erroneously presented as the Catholic problem in very well related discussions. For example, another non-Catholic did not continue adstrinity’s satire, but did the opposite.

To say that there’s moral equivalency because some oppose others’ views, and vice versa is not necessarily true. Anyone who attacks the truth, is not in the same morality as one who rebukes untruths. Your post above still doesn’t seem to provide clarity with the original quote of Patrick Madrid. You said you provided Pat’s quote about statues praying to statues being really Catholic as a continuation of the satire, then you go on to provide a fairly nebulous statement about “acts such as prayer, religious icons or statues ringed with candles, physical devotion such as prostration, etc.” being banned in Scriptures. What do you mean by prayer, i.e. is that prayer to Mary mother of Jesus, or prayer to a statue? You’re walking a fine, and perhaps blurred line here. How do you characterize the difference between honoring the lives of the saints, and your other posts stating “venerating” (honoring) the saints being the same as worship? Please forgive me, but your attempt to clarify really doesn’t seem to help much in clarifying.

 

[adstrinity]

I’ll beer batter it to make it take more time to cook.

By the way, what’s the cool dragon/cross symbol on your profile?

Oh, apparently it was the same thread. Okay.

The symbol is the symbol for The Order of the Dragon. It was a chilvaric order to defend the Church against all enemies of Christ. It was mainly a battle against the Muslims that they fought, but, I thought that that is still an appropriate theme, especially here, on CAF, where so much is posted in either ignorance or sans charity. I don’t care if people disagree with what the Church teaches, but, I want them to KNOW what they disagree with. At the very least, I want to impart upon all how Catholic’s see things (why we believe in the Pope’s Office, why we believe praying to saints, Jesus IS God, there IS only one God, ect.) I hope to get a tattoo of it one day.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

True, it’s just that your definition of church and Jesus’ isn’t the same.

That definition of Christ and Church has existed for over 2000 years.

Again the church of Christ is the collective of all the faithful, it isn’t represented in man made institutions or buildings. However, since I have no problem with infant baptism I really can’t comment on that.

How can the Church be a “collective” of all the faithful, when there are thousands of different denominations, based on slightly to major differences in doctrine?

When Christ built His Church upon Peter and gave Peter the keys and authority to bind and loose on earth with a promise to bind and loose the same in heaven, it was an institution. How else would an invisible Church within each and every individual apply binding and loosing on earth?

 

[adstrinity]

Wasn’t it Patrick Madrid who said “I saw a statue scene of Our Lady of Fatima, with the three children kneeling before her, and I thought to myself…we’re so Catholic, even our statues pray to statues.”

I know I already replied to this, but, I thought this was funny, although, I couldn’t tell you if it was Patrick Madrid who said that or not, but, whoever said it, didn’t say it with malace…or at least it didn’t come across that way, not to me, anyway.

 

[TriuneUnity]

snicker AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

I still owe you an explination, don’t I? goes to look for other thread

Yeah, you do

 

[adstrinity]

Again the church of Christ is the collective of all the faithful, it isn’t represented in man made institutions or buildings. However, since I have no problem with infant baptism I really can’t comment on that.

All of the Faithful being those in Heaven, those in Purgatory, and those here on Earth being the Collective of the Church of Christ.

It isn’t represented in man made institutions such as how Luther reformed it or how Calvin reformed it, but it was instituted by Christ, for all to be seen, for all to be one, not many.

Not represented in buildings.

…When you posted this did you realise how spot on Catholic dogma you were? …Or how a Catholic COULD read this?

Even when we’re protested against, we are protested against using words and phrases that point to the Catholic Church.

OOOH! I just felt like Rush Limbaugh, there!

 

[TriuneUnity]

Oh, apparently it was the same thread. Okay.

The symbol is the symbol for The Order of the Dragon. It was a chilvaric order to defend the Church against all enemies of Christ. It was mainly a battle against the Muslims that they fought, but, I thought that that is still an appropriate theme, especially here, on CAF, where so much is posted in either ignorance or sans charity. I don’t care if people disagree with what the Church teaches, but, I want them to KNOW what they disagree with. At the very least, I want to impart upon all how Catholic’s see things (why we believe in the Pope’s Office, why we believe praying to saints, Jesus IS God, there IS only one God, ect.) I hope to get a tattoo of it one day.

I agree with everything you say here vis a vie attacking that which is unknown. Maybe I’ll have to get a tattoo with that symbol lol. It does look nifty.

 

[MDK]

I know I already replied to this, but, I thought this was funny, although, I couldn’t tell you if it was Patrick Madrid who said that or not, but, whoever said it, didn’t say it with malace…or at least it didn’t come across that way, not to me, anyway.

Thanks. I see you two have some special relationship going that would mean something to each other, but not necessarily another. Neither do I believe the original quote by a Catholic was malicious, but was obviously humorous. A non-Catholic had already made the mistake of not recognizing the satire in your post, then one would have to admit given the context of a Protestant who has had issues with what they say Catholics actually do in this area quoting a famous Catholic could have that wrong as well. It’s really no big deal, but seems to be custom tailored to you. His message to you is almost more of a personal message in nature than a thread discussion.

 

[TriuneUnity]

For example, another non-Catholic did not continue adstrinity’s satire, but did the opposite.

They did and that’s probably because they either lack a sense of humor or are ignorant enough to have taken it seriously (or a combination of both).

To say that there’s moral equivalency because some oppose others’ views, and vice versa is not necessarily true. Anyone who attacks the truth, is not in the same morality as one who rebukes untruths.

Well, that would be true of both sides when something untrue is attacked. But in an equal number of cases Catholics attack that which is not an accurate representation of others beliefs. Let’s take something we both agree on; OSAS. I hold it as false teaching, and so do you. But when Catholics attack those who hold to it, they mischaracterize it. That’s a moral equivalence that would be the same in the case of a Protestant who disagrees with the eucharist, but does so Jack Chick style.

Your post above still doesn’t seem to provide clarity with the original quote of Patrick Madrid. You said you provided Pat’s quote about statues praying to statues being really Catholic as a continuation of the satire, then you go on to provide a fairly nebulous statement about “acts such as prayer, religious icons or statues ringed with candles, physical devotion such as prostration, etc.” being banned in Scriptures.

Not sure what that has to do with Madrid’s quip.

What do you mean by prayer, i.e. is that prayer to Mary mother of Jesus, or prayer to a statue? You’re walking a fine, and perhaps blurred line here. How do you characterize the difference between honoring the lives of the saints, and your other posts stating “venerating” (honoring) the saints being the same as worship? Please forgive me, but your attempt to clarify really doesn’t seem to help much in clarifying.

If I have a picture of my deceased father in a prominent place, say, the wall or a table…obviously my intention there is to pay homage to his memory, who he was, etc. I have no problem with that in regards to having statues of famous saints from the past…or naming a parish after a saint (we do the same). However, were I to lead a procession down the street carrying a statue of my father while intoning requests for aid and grace in the form of a prayer, etc…I would categorize that as a wholly different thing.

 

[TriuneUnity]

Thanks. I see you two have some special relationship going that would mean something to each other, but not necessarily another. Neither do I believe the original quote by a Catholic was malicious, but was obviously humorous. A non-Catholic had already made the mistake of not recognizing the satire in your post, then one would have to admit given the context of a Protestant who has had issues with what they say Catholics actually do in this area quoting a famous Catholic could have that wrong as well. It’s really no big deal, but seems to be custom tailored to you. His message to you is almost more of a personal message in nature than a thread discussion.

I don’t fault you for your reaction, MDK. No worries. I can’t say I wouldn’t have done the same were I in your position.

 

[MDK]

They did and that’s probably because they either lack a sense of humor or are ignorant enough to have taken it seriously (or a combination of both).

Agreed.

Well, that would be true of both sides when something untrue is attacked. But in an equal number of cases Catholics attack that which is not an accurate representation of others beliefs. Let’s take something we both agree on; OSAS. I hold it as false teaching, and so do you. But when Catholics attack those who hold to it, they mischaracterize it. That’s a moral equivalence that would be the same in the case of a Protestant who disagrees with the eucharist, but does so Jack Chick style.

I don’t know that there’s an equal number of cases, at least the ones that I’ve seen. Normally, I don’t refer to it in numbers, though, but in right and wrong behavior, as it’s more to the point instead of saying as many of you do it as our side… In addition, is there some consistent meaning or definition among Protestants as to what OSAS means?

Not sure what that has to do with Madrid’s quip.

It’s not about Madrid’s quote, but about your use of it as it related to your post in which you provided your words to clarify your belief. I believe you that you used Patrick’s quote in your relationship with adstrinity as teasing, but it ended up engendered further discussion.

If I have a picture of my deceased father in a prominent place, say, the wall or a table…obviously my intention there is to pay homage to his memory, who he was, etc. I have no problem with that in regards to having statues of famous saints from the past…or naming a parish after a saint (we do the same). However, were I to lead a procession down the street carrying a statue of my father while intoning requests for aid and grace in the form of a prayer, etc…I would categorize that as a wholly different thing.

Let’s please distill it down even more, forgetting the procession for now. Assuming your father to be in heaven, what’s wrong with asking him to pray for you? After all, if the least in the kingdom of Heaven is greater than the greatest man born of woman during Christ’s earthly ministry, why wouldn’t you want the help? Do you believe it’s wrong to ask an earthly friend to pray for you?

God is the ultimate in everything. However, we share in roles with Him… some share as a father as in being a dad, some share with Him in the role of a healer like a doctor, some share in Christ’s priesthood, etc. It doesn’t automatically mean that they replace Him, and should never be believed or viewed that we do or another does.

What I’ve seen so far too in your posts is now a bit of a blurry line regarding Mary. When does veneration (honoring) turn into idolatry?

If you worship your father in place of God, then you’ve obviously gone over the edge. Does it go over the edge in asking him to pray for you?