Hail Mary

[Pixie_Dust]

We all know that Mary is not deity. What I am trying to understand is how does your priest explain the difference between the adoration payed to Mary and the adoration payed to Jesus Christ our Lord. You say her name many times more then Jesus’s name during the Rosary.

To worship God means you show reverence,adoration,express love and pray to God.
Adoration is showing fervent and devoted love.
Catholics have given honor and adoration to Mary for years.
Father Caropi once said that you honor the one that occupies your mind the most. How can you honor our Lord Jesus Christ when you refer to Mary at any time you mention Jesus.
I just still don’t get it. How can you say you don’t worship Mary when she occupies so much of your worship and prayer time?
And I want you to know that I ask this so I can understand the catholic religion. I am so close to deciding to attend classes and I would become a catholic if someone would finally explain this to me. In a way that makes sense of course. I’ve heard the"we don’t worship Mary" explanation. I would believe you didn’t worship Mary if I heard the name of Jesus our Lord many more times then I hear the name Mary.

Actually, The Rosary is more about Jesus than Mary.

 

[Good_Fella]

Part 1

We can discuss the Trinty on another thread. The issue is Mary. Do the Scriptures teach what the Marian doctrines claim? That has yet to be established.

I take the Scriptures in the context in which the authors wrote. Each book or passage must be understood in light of the kind of writing it is. We must also take other factors into consideration such as what the words mean in context.

The issue is your faulty approach to reading the scriptures which explains why you fail to see the fulness of truth implicitly revealed in the scriptures.

You have no idea what the context is or what the words mean in context. You’re just generalizing.

 

[Good_Fella]

Justasking4, you obviously have a serious problem with pride. Some Catholics have given you excellent, theologically correct positons and answers, and others have given you answers that are incorrect according to Catholic teaching.

The last post does this by saying “our doctrines do not originate from analyzing Scripture.” This is obviously untrue, and I have no doubt you know the correct position, but you have simply taken advantage of this person’s error and exploited the response into something to use for your arguments.

I am sure you know the correct answer is that church tradition which is not explicit in Scripture is implicit in Scripture. The sinlessness of Mary, though, is based on both explicit Scripture, (the angel’s salutation that indicated Mary was in a continuing state of grace) and the typology of the Ark of the Covenant and the New Eve. You know that, I’m sure.

As I pointed out above, if to pray, “Hail Mary” is worship, then you accuse the angel who saluted Mary this way and bowed to her of worship as well, rather than acknowledge it as veneration.

The problem is I am absolutely certain that you have been given theologically sound answers from the more theologically sound board members, and so you take advantage of this person you are quoting by arguing with an incorrect position you know to be incorrect. What is that except pride? That’s all it is. Nothing more. Just you exploiting someone’s ignorance to bolster the ego-boost you get from arguing with people and condescndingly assuming Catholics are more ignorant than you.

Our doctrines originate from the medium of Sacred Tradition which precedes the Scriptures.

 

[Angels_Unaware]

True, but there is nothing in Tradition that contradicts Scripture or is not implicit in Scripture.

 

[Good_Fella]

True, but there is nothing in Tradition that contradicts Scripture or is not implicit in Scripture.

I never said that there is or is not. The Church believed in Mary’s sinlessness and chastity, not to mention her powerful intercessory role, for instance, before the Scriptures were written to confirm and establish the Church’s traditional beliefs. Of course we consult the Scriptures to support and articulate our beliefs. Scripture and Tradition form the deposit of faith. But our beliefs do not originate from the written word. They originate from the Holy Spirit in our experience of faith.The written word was given through the inspiration of the Spirit who interprets the scriptures through the Church in light of her traditional beliefs.

PAX :harp:

 

[Linda_Marie]

We all know that Mary is not deity. What I am trying to understand is how does your priest explain the difference between the adoration payed to Mary and the adoration payed to Jesus Christ our Lord. You say her name many times more then Jesus’s name during the Rosary.

To worship God means you show reverence,adoration,express love and pray to God.
Adoration is showing fervent and devoted love.
Catholics have given honor and adoration to Mary for years.
Father Caropi once said that you honor the one that occupies your mind the most. How can you honor our Lord Jesus Christ when you refer to Mary at any time you mention Jesus.
I just still don’t get it. How can you say you don’t worship Mary when she occupies so much of your worship and prayer time?
And I want you to know that I ask this so I can understand the catholic religion. I am so close to deciding to attend classes and I would become a catholic if someone would finally explain this to me. In a way that makes sense of course. I’ve heard the"we don’t worship Mary" explanation. I would believe you didn’t worship Mary if I heard the name of Jesus our Lord many more times then I hear the name Mary.

We do NOT adore Mary. Adoration is reserved for God alone. We venerate Mary, we honor her, but we do not adore her. She does not occupy any of our ‘worship time’ because we do not worship her.

The rosary, which is a devotion and not worship, is a Christ-centered prayer. It is not merely the repetition of Our Father’s and Hail Mary’s. It is a deep meditation on the life and teachings of Christ. The heart of the Rosary is the meditations on Christ, not the prayers.

Our ‘worship time’, the Mass, is all God; Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

The problem is that in getting rid of the Sacraments, since they no longer have the Eucharist, Protestants redefined (at least for them) what worship is, and limited it to prayers and songs so that a prayer group became a worship service and prayer became exclusively an act of worship of God.

This is not that case with Catholics. We have true worship in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and a much wider definition of prayer. Prayer is not limited to God alone. We pray to our brothers and sisters in Christ to pray for us to the Lord Our God. Our brothers and sister in the Lord include all those who have gone before us. They are alive in Christ. Thus we can pray to them, just as we pray that our brothers and sisters who are living at this time will also pray for us to the Lord our God.

Mary received singular grace (that means, she was gifted with grace that no other Christian has ever received) in being chosen to be the Mother of God. God did not take that grace away once He was born. A mother is a whole lot more than just a womb.

We honour Mary because God honours her, we love Mary because God loves her.

 

[guanophore]

Yes I have attended a Divine Liturgy or church service.

There is a vast difference between Divine Liturgy and “church service”. Are you sure?

I did not feel it was Mary centered.

Well, this sounds promising, but one wonders where you were.

I have only attended a Catholic church service twice.
Once as a teenager. The family who took me knew I was
protestant and still had me take communion. Maybe they
wanted to “make me a catholic”.

They were probably poorly catechized. Taking communion does not “make” one Catholic. Taking communion is a reflection of being Catholic, not a cause.

The second time I attended a funeral at a catholic church. They also had everyone take the bread,but did not offer wine.

I doubt they “had everyone take the bread”, in fact I can assure you they did not. Everyone is expected to examine their conscience, and if they are not in unity, to refrain.

One lady I told about this said that I really shouldn’t have been abe to take part in the communion.

You should have refrained. However, since the priest has no way of knowing your spiritual status, and all are invited, it is up to you to prevent a sacrilege.

So who knows. Maybe the person who planned the funeral just wanted everyone to be saved. I have no idea.

I can assure you once again, profanation of the Body and Blood of Jesus saves no one.

I knew the people there and most knew I am not catholic.
The priest held up the host and told me “this is the body of Christ” and I nodded my head and opened my mouth for him to place it on my tongue. I don’t feel I broke any rules because I know in my heart what communion is about.

It is not likely that you knew, or currently know. It is not likely that the priest knew. Catholics that knew you maybe should have said something to you in advance, but in everyone’s ignorance, it is not a mortal sin.

I prayed and asked the Lord to cleanse me and make me worthy of taking part in communion.
It was a beautiful service.

God will be merciful to you.

 

[guanophore]

We can discuss the Trinty on another thread. The issue is Mary. Do the Scriptures teach what the Marian doctrines claim? That has yet to be established.

And indeed will not ever be established. Prior, we must establish

Where is ‘Trinity’ in the Bible?

Why is it purported that the Holy Writings “teach”,when those same Holy Writings clearlyl state that this job is given to people.

That the scriptures must contain everything God has revealed.

I would say that there are a majority of your claims that need to be established.

I take the Scriptures in the context in which the authors wrote.

May it be! May you take the Scriptures as products of the Sacred Tradition of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church that produced them!

Each book or passage must be understood in light of the kind of writing it is. We must also take other factors into consideration such as what the words mean in context.

It is very Catholic of you to say this!

The “light” is Catholic. Are you ready to enroll in RCIA?

 

[guanophore]

What specific Sacred Tradition claims that Mary is the Spouse of the HS?

All of the NT emanates from Sacred Oral Tradition.

This is the great weakness in many Catholic doctrines. When compared with Scripture they are in many cases saying different things. Both cannot be true.

You are correct that the Catholic Doctrine cannot contradict the Scripture. However, the “great weakeness” is within you since you erroenously perceive "different things’ where none exist.

This is not true. The Catholic church has taught many things that contravene the Scriptures. Mary’s supposed sinlessness is just one doctrine.

We read the Scripture differently. Upon what basis is your idea of what they say better than that of the authority Jesus appointed to write them, and teach them?

.

There is no proof that Mary was immaculately conceived. Those that knew here in the NT never ever mention such a thing about her.

This is true. There is no proof that God exists, either, but we believe because it is an article of faith.

There are many truths from the NT era that were not understood until much later. One of these was that a NT was needed, and which books belonged in it.
"good fella:

Their spiritual union was fully consummated, so to speak, at the instant Mary pronounced her ‘Fiat’ whereupon she conceived and bore the Son of God. The Holy Spirit acted as the active-separate principle in union with Mary as the conjoined-passive principle in the generation of the Word made flesh. Metaphysically speaking, the Holy Spirit and Mary interacted with each other just as a normally wedded couple would - but in a mystical and supernatural way.

Is this offical Catholic teaching? Is it found in the catechism?

Why would that matter, since you believe it is all the non-biblical speculations of men?

What apostle states this explicitedly about her?

The same one that explicity defines the Trinity, the hypostatic union, and lists the index of which books belong in the bible.

The problem here again is that there is no proof for these statements.

I am sorry that you have such a problem with faith, ja4. It must be very scary to live in a world where you cannot trust others. You are right, the reason we call them “mysteries” and articles of faith is that they defy “proof”

It sounds great and convincing but upon closer examination in light of the Scriptures its not found.

Such a statement hints at the erroneous assumption that all of God’s revelation is found in Scriptures, rather than in Christ HImself.

 

[Good_Fella]

We do NOT adore Mary. Adoration is reserved for God alone. We venerate Mary, we honor her, but we do not adore her. She does not occupy any of our ‘worship time’ because we do not worship her.

The rosary, which is a devotion and not worship, is a Christ-centered prayer. It is not merely the repetition of Our Father’s and Hail Mary’s. It is a deep meditation on the life and teachings of Christ. The heart of the Rosary is the meditations on Christ, not the prayers.

Our ‘worship time’, the Mass, is all God; Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

The problem is that in getting rid of the Sacraments, since they no longer have the Eucharist, Protestants redefined (at least for them) what worship is, and limited it to prayers and songs so that a prayer group became a worship service and prayer became exclusively an act of worship of God.

This is not that case with Catholics. We have true worship in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and a much wider definition of prayer. Prayer is not limited to God alone. We pray to our brothers and sisters in Christ to pray for us to the Lord Our God. Our brothers and sister in the Lord include all those who have gone before us. They are alive in Christ. Thus we can pray to them, just as we pray that our brothers and sisters who are living at this time will also pray for us to the Lord our God.

Mary received singular grace (that means, she was gifted with grace that no other Christian has ever received) in being chosen to be the Mother of God. God did not take that grace away once He was born. A mother is a whole lot more than just a womb.

We honour Mary because God honours her, we love Mary because God loves her.

Very well said!

 

[murtad]

As we say, a prayer to Mary is a prayer to God.

Who is “we” ? I checked your profile and found you are not Roman Catholic! So, that’s why you are ignorant about the Church. We never say “a prayer to Mary is a prayer to God”, since there is a BIG difference between worship and prayer.

Among Christians, majority are Roman Catholics, followed by Eastern Orthodox, and we all know the difference between worship and prayer.

BTW, even Shia Muslims pray to Imam Ali and Iraqi prime minister Nouri al Maliki offered intercession prayers to Imam Ali, and no Shia ever says Imam Ali is Allah, since Shia theology is clear that worship is due to Allah but prayer is due to the Imams/saints.

In the Holy Bible, it is clear, we need to venerate Mary and all should read up your Rheims New Testament (Romans 16:6) which reads “Salute…”. In the more modern RSV it seems to read “Greet Mary who worked hard among you”. I always prefered the Rheims as it is translated from the original Vulgate.

Catholics greet Mary not worship her. Of course, words can be twisted and the enemies of Church will always keep on blaspheming by saying we worship her, but we too can accuse you of hypocrisy since you refuse to follow Bible which is clear we need to venerate Mary.

I have never come across any modern Bible-believing Protestant church that fulfils Romans 16:6 by greeting Most Holy Mother of God.

 

[murtad]

That is what appears to be idolatry to those who are not Roman Catholic. Read your posting again.

It may appear to you to be idolatry but you are by your own confessions a fallible man. Remind yourself of this Bible verse 2 Pet.1:20-21, which is clear that “First of all you must understand this, that no interpretation of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation” so, this is why Church rejects private interpretation. We need to follow the interpretation of the Church, which is the interpretation of the (canonised) saints. The best interpreter of the Bible today is the Cathecism of the Catholic Church.

I will provide you with some Bible verses, which I think refer to veneration of saints and thus justify asking saints to pray for us. Here are some Bible verses for you to consider.

1Thes.1:2 - We give thanks to God always for you all, constantly mentioning you in our prayers

My comment: If you believe Saint Paul is alive, then, this verse is not about one dead man who spoke 2,000 years ago, but binding today. Saint Paul tells us that the saints are praying for us.

1Thes.5:25 - Brethren, pray for us.

My comment: If you believe Saint Paul is alive, then, this verse exorts us to pray for him and the saints.

1Thes.5:26 - Venerate all the saints with a holy kiss.

My comment: If you believe Saint Paul is alive, and so are all the saints, then Christians should venerate all the saints with a holy kiss.

 

[guanophore]

That is what appears to be idolatry to those who are not Roman Catholic. Read your posting again.

This is not true, Reformed. I am not a Roman Catholic, and it does not appear that way to me. I think the misunderstanding originates in the Protestant misunderstanding of what constitutes worship. There are many different kinds of prayer. Intercession is not adoration.

 

[guanophore]

God causes human beings to conform to His will. It is written throughout the OT and NT that God changes the hearts and minds of men to accomplish His will. If God intervenes, then mankind does not have free will at that point.

This concept does not come from the Apostolic Teaching

I think the testimony of the Apostles are written. How did the Catholics give us the Bible since the Bible includes both the New and Old Testaments?

Some of the testimony of the Apostles are written, some were not.

The Jews did not have a canon at the time. The Catholic Church determined that the Septuagint was the collection used by Jesus and the Apostles. Then, from among the 400+ “christian” documents there at the time, the CAtholic Church selected 27 to be included in the NT, then bound all these together in what we know of today as the 'Bible". Actually a library of Sacred WRitings.

I don’t think this is the sola scriptura thread. Maybe we should go back to the thread topic?

No, but you made it run by the SS rules, didn’t you?

I know what is written about the Apostle Peter and Mary both in the Scriptures. Therefore, the prayer suggested is quite foolish and silly to me. ** I do not embrace revelation that cannot be shown in the Bible.** So, if we go beyond what is written (Holy Scriptures), why is the Roman Catholic claim different than the Orthodox claim or the Mormon claim that they are The One True Church. All three religious organzations cannot validate their claim with Scripture. However, all three religious groups make that claim based on their own self-appointed authority. It seems like a circular argument and reasoning. We have the Holy Scriptures, and we both believe the Bible to be the Word of God. So, let’s discuss the contents of the Holy Scriptures.

Now, since we have what is written in the Word of God about Mary, how does the Roman Catholic Church come up with all of her beliefs about Mary? Why is that any different than Joseph Smith?

Your OP presents a seemingly open minded question wanting to know why Catholics believe and pray as they do, yet you refuse to be enlightened because of your blinders.

Make up your mind! Do you want to understand Catholic devotion to Mary, or is it that you really want to use the SS approach to “prove” to us that we are out of order?

I also have issues of elevating Mary as the mother of Jesus in the same way as God as Jesus’ Father.

Mary is not elevated as Christ. You will see this if you are ever humble enough to attend the Divine Liturgy.

If you have an issue with elevating Mary then it is with God, and not with the Church. He is the one who did the elevating.

  I think Joseph was also privilege to raise and care for Jesus too. So, why is Joseph left out of the picture and Mary is elevated?

Joseph is not 'left out". If you are ever willing to understand the Liturgical calendar, you will see this.
Reformed;4230513:

I find the adoration for Mary to be similar to LDS Christians who elevates Joseph Smith in too great of affection. It’s hard not for me to see the abuse of adoration of Mary ahd Joseph Smith to be religious idols, worshiping the created things instead of the Creator.

This is a Catholic finding. Such behavior is considered a violation of the first commandment.

Do you judge the heart of all Jews according to the faithlessness of those who made the Golden Calf?

It seems the anathemas of the Church and excommunication is a graceless Christianity and a movement away from the gospel of God's grace.

This seems to be way off the topic here. Maybe it needs a new thread?

If you have a problem with this practice, maybe you need to “wrestle” with your scripture some more.

They started with your great “apostle of grace” after all.

1 Cor 16:22
22 Let anyone be accursed who has no love for the Lord.

Gal 1:7-9 8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should proclaim to you a gospel contrary to what we proclaimed to you, let that one be accursed! 9 As we have said before, so now I repeat, if anyone proclaims to you a gospel contrary to what you received, let that one be accursed!

This has been the language of the Church for 2000 years.

Luke 14:26

“If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple.

You know, I think I never snapped before that the misinterpretation of this verse is what fuels a lot of Protestant enmity toward Mary and rest of the Body of Christ. It is probably also the root of the “jesus and me only” mentality of many Protestants.

Do you really think not one Catholic drifts into worshipping Mary as an idol?

No. In fact, I know one that does.

In your silence, I assume that the image of Mary being crucified for you is fine with you?

Such a statement demonstrates your skewed perceptions of reality. What you posted is not “the image of Mary being crucified”. If it seems that way to you, the problem is in the eye of the beholder, not the image. If the eye is not sound,the whole body is full of darkness.

I would never post the link because I do not endorse it.

Well, it is against the forum rules to post stuff here without a reference. If you are not endorsing it, why did you post it here? If you want to use it as part of the discussion, fine, cite your source.

 

[guanophore]

I just searched the web for an image of Mary as being crucified so we can continue in greater depth about the topic. The image caught your eye, didn't it?  There are other images of Mary on the cross too.  I heard there are places in the world with statues of Mary on the cross next to Jesus on the cross. Is that true?

I suppose it is possible… People can imagine a lot. I have never seen these. I have always seen Mary portrayed at the foot of the cross.

Please explain the difference. I will find an image of Mary on the cross if that helps our discussion.

http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q193/crinie123/marycross.jpg http://www.ianpaisley.org/images/marycross.jpg

Your perceptions are warped, Reformed. None of these images you have posted shows Mary crucified, or “on” the cross. In the first, we see her image portrayed with stigmata, which is not the same as being crucified (literally, anyhow). the second two show Mary with a cross behind her. She is not attached to it. I think you may need to take off you bigotry glasses, since they are warping your perceptions.

I don’t think you are a moderator.

No, but we all help one another to follow the forum rules, one of which is not to post images or text from the web or elsewhere without references.

I think you may be lying when you state “I just searched the web”. It is curious that you “just happened” to find this on a rabidly anti Catholic website!

http://www.petergullerud.com/pics/MARYCROSS2.jpg

Are you saying that this is not idol worship?

Well, I suppose it could be. Are you saying you think the artist worshipping the painting?

Go back to the artist of this painting and read his description of his art. He does not understand that Christ came to earth to die. To write that Mary would take the place of Jesus on the cross if she could, is not to understand the mission of Jesus Christ to save sinners from their sins. I think the artist is clueless about the gospel of God’s grace.

Ok. How does a clueless artist expressing his opinion make Catholics into idol worshippers? Sorry, I am not getting the connection here.

Mary confessed she was a sinner (Luke 1).

Honestly , Reformed, you are starting to sound just like ja4!

Scriputure does not say this. Your blinders are even making it impossible to read your own truncated version of Holy Scripture!

 

[happilycatholic]

Um, what is the definition of “adore”?

“To love intensely”.

k, thanks.

 

[justasking4]

Angels Unaware;4339096]Justasking4, you obviously have a serious problem with pride. Some Catholics have given you excellent, theologically correct positons and answers, and others have given you answers that are incorrect according to Catholic teaching.

The problem with a lot of the answers is that they are not grounded in the Scriptures.

The last post does this by saying “our doctrines do not originate from analyzing Scripture.” This is obviously untrue, and I have no doubt you know the correct position, but you have simply taken advantage of this person’s error and exploited the response into something to use for your arguments.

I was not the one who originally made this statement. It was made by devote Catholic who is one of the strongest “protectors” of catholic doctrines and practices on the planet.

I am sure you know the correct answer is that church tradition which is not explicit in Scripture is implicit in Scripture.

You prove almost anything with this kind of thinking.

The sinlessness of Mary, though, is based on both explicit Scripture, (the angel’s salutation that indicated Mary was in a continuing state of grace) and the typology of the Ark of the Covenant and the New Eve. You know that, I’m sure.

I do know this and its a false claim as i have continually demonstrated.

As I pointed out above, if to pray, “Hail Mary” is worship, then you accuse the angel who saluted Mary this way and bowed to her of worship as well, rather than acknowledge it as veneration.

What angel bowed down and worshipped her?

The problem is I am absolutely certain that you have been given theologically sound answers from the more theologically sound board members, and so you take advantage of this person you are quoting by arguing with an incorrect position you know to be incorrect. What is that except pride? That’s all it is. Nothing more. Just you exploiting someone’s ignorance to bolster the ego-boost you get from arguing with people and condescndingly assuming Catholics are more ignorant than you.

Not so. This forum gives me an opportunity to talk to individual catholics whom i have never met and treat each with dignity…

 

[guanophore]

The problem with a lot of the answers is that they are not grounded in the Scriptures.

That is only a problem for you, ja4. Catholics know that the Scriptures were never intended to include everything, and that the Sacred Tradition produced the Scriptures, and continues along side of it. The Catholic Church is not a “religion of the book” like those SS religions. Our doctrines are grounded in Christ, through the Apostles, and were whole and entire before a word of it was ever written.

You prove almost anything with this kind of thinking.

I agree! This is why it is so essential to have an infallible Sacred Tradition and Magesterium. This is what prevents us from going too far afield when we are reading the Scripture.

I do know this and its a false claim as i have continually demonstrated.

You have only demonstrated it to yourself. No one here is pursuaded. What is your goal here, ja4? It seems that you are really invested in “proving” the Catholic doctrines to be wrong. Why does it bother you so much that others believe differently than you? What do you think the parable of the wheat and the tares was about?

What angel bowed down and worshipped her?

None. Mary is a creature, and though greeted with high honor by the angel, would not be the focus of any worship.

Not so. This forum gives me an opportunity to talk to individual catholics whom i have never met and treat each with dignity…

That will be the day.

I think when you can accept that we have different beliefs, and develop some tolerance, dignity will be achieved.

 

[Angels_Unaware]

Ah, yes. It was originally Botticello that depicted the Annunication with the angel on bended knee. This is another representation:

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

And yet, what an excellent opportunity to examine a microcosm of the theology of Mary. It is not stated in Luke that Gabriel bowed during his greeting.

Luke 2:28 And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.

Does Botticello then commit heresy by depicting Gabriel this way? Does his image contradict Scripture, does it distort Scripture, or is it appropriate in its exposition of the principles of Scripture?

We are told in the Epistles that the angels marvel at the miracle of our redemption. We are told that we, whose faith has been perfected by the fire of tribulation like gold, will judge the angels.

1 Corinthians 6:3 Do you not know that we are to judge angels? How much more, then, matters pertaining to this life!

1 Peter 1:12: Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into

So, while we agree that this image does not literally follow the images presented in Luke 2, is it still theologically sound, given the principles of angel and human relations in heaven presented in Scripture? Some people will say yes, some will say no. Who is to judge? I suppose we could entrust the Church, or we could argue and create a new denomination and be divided. (But given the creative liberties that are taken with Protestant ideas, such as the Left Behind Series, I would be careful about judging this image as adding to or distorting Scripture).

I do not see this image as in any way depicting the worship of Mary. I see the angel as expressing his wonder at the miracle of the Incarnation and his love for Mary. If anyone does interpret the image as worship, then their problem is within their own mind.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

So you believe it was not a sexual act?

I would cut off both hands, rather than say it was any such thing - it most definitely was not a sexual act, not at all.​

If not a sexual act then it would have no marriage ramifications. Correct?

Correct ​