Ricardo Gomez:
One of the lethal weapons protestants use to make us doubt about our doctrine, is Exodus 20:3-5.
According to them, for those who worship other gods/images god won’t bless the first, second, third, and fourth generation. But, what they do not tell us is their understanding of the verse 6.
“And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments” I know some one who is a protestant and has three sons and two daughters. All of her five children were born in the protestant religion, but from the five only one follows the word. The other four are away from God. In fact, one of them is in dead row, the other three are in parol. Do you know any body like that?
If, according to the protestant doctrine, God is going to bless even the sixth generation of those who do not worship or have any images, why do the protestant’s sons/daughters are not been blessed like the word says?
COULD IT BE THAT THE PASSAGE DOES NOT REFER TO THE CATHOLIC IMAGES?
It doesn’t - though it can perfectly well have an application to all things that are not God, and which are therefore all capable of being idolised.
What puzzles me, is that the image-rejecters don’t seem to be quite clear about whether:
- having images at all
- having images of holy people
- giving them adoration
- giving them relative honour
- giving them relative adoration
- having them in churches
- having representations of created things - flags, for example
- having figural representations in the round - such as statues
- having flat figural representations - such as photographs
is what is wrong.
The principle which allows dollar-bills with pictures of George Washington, and allows statues of the Reformers, and statues of public figures, but won’t allow holy cards of the mother of God or St.Philip Neri or St. John the Baptist, is never spelled out - so it is very hard to know what part of that text is the fatal objection to Catholic “idolatry”.
After all, George Washington and Teddy Roosevelt were both “in the earth beneath” - so don’t Mount Rushmore and the USA currency come under the prohibition of Exodus 20 ?
And Catholics do not worship representations of the Saints - but “Hail to the Chief” looks remarkably like a hymn. And why is the Statue of Liberty not as objectionable as a holy picture ? As for “America the Beautiful” & “My Country, 'tis of Thee”, what are those but signs of Americolatry ?
The trouble with ignoring the intentions of Catholics, is that it becomes possible to insist that using minted money with the head of some famous person on it, is idolatry, as much for Protestants as for any one else.
The “popular Protestant” argument looks very much as if it has been framed for one purpose only - to convict Catholics of idolatry, despite their intentions.
To complain of Catholic “idolatry”, while ignoring Catholics’ intentions & the intentions of Protestants, is not only inconsistent - it is a superstitious attitude; for any argument that is not purely partisan, must be be applied not only to the behaviour of one’s opponents, but to one’s own side’s behaviour as well. Otherwise one has nothing but one-sided special pleading.
That is a problem with Fundamentalism - the conclusion is more important than the reasoning by which it is arrived at. ##
