Protestants; why won't you be CATHOLIC!?

[imjustme]

Im sorry but ancedotal evidence proves nothing. There is nothing in the Rubrics about a Priest bwoing when he mentions the name Mary. Rather than let everyone here dedcide can you post a link to where the Church has now or ever has taught we should worship Mary?

As Catholics always say…“it’s tradition”…but it’s also in their doctrine:

"65. But while in the most Blessed Virgin the church has already reached that perfection whereby she exists without spot or wrinkle (cf. Eph. 5:27), the faithful still strive to conquer sin and increase in holiness. And so they turn their eyes to Mary who shines forth to the whole community of the elect as the model of virtues.**

Devoutly meditating on her and contemplating her** in the light of the Word made man, the Church reverently penetrates more deeply into the great mystery of the Incarnation and becomes more and more like her spouse. Having entered deeply into the history of salvation, Mary, in a way, unites in her person and re-echeos the most important doctrines of the Faith: and when she is the subject of preaching and worship she prompts the faithful to come to her son, to his sacrifice and to the love of the Father. Seeking after the glory of Christ, the Church becomes more like her lofty type, and continually progresses in faith, hope and charity, seeking and doing the will of God in all things. The Church, therefore, in her apostolic work too, rightly looks to her who gave birth to Christ, who was thus conceived of the Holy Spirit and born of a virgin, in order that through the church he could be born and increase in the hearts of the faithful. In her life the Virgin has been a model of that motherly love with which all who joined in the church’s apostolic mission for the regeneration of mankind should be animated"

From Vatican Collection Volume 1, Vatican Council II, The Conciliar and Post Conciliar documents. General Editor Austin Flannery, O.P. New revised edition 1992; Costello publishing company, Northport, New York. 1992 pages 420-421 (par. 65)

On the other hand…this is what Jesus said:

John 14:6
6 Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

Heb 12:2
2 fixing our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of faith, who for the joy set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.

Matt 4:10
10 Then Jesus *said to him, “Go, Satan! For it is written, ‘You shall worship the Lord your God, and serve Him only.’ ”

 

[guanophore]

The truth can sometimes be painful and we are standing up for it with Biblical proof and knowledge of Catholic teaching.

No, you have never showed any Catholic Teaching that demonstrates the Church teaches the calumny that you have brought.

not doing anything about people literally going to hell. It is heartbreaking and I will debate and preach as long as my breath lasts, because the Catholic church does not.

Your posts have indicated that you have very little understanding of what the catholic Church preaches.

CAF is not a venue for resentful ex-Catholics to “preach” to us to prevent us from “literally going to hell”. If you need to do that, perhaps you might consider creating yoru own forum?

Hell has long since been vanished from the pulpits and true salvation is not preached anymore.

I think you just need a few hours with Fr. Corapi.

Even within the Catholic church this is possible, I am sure,

This is very generous of you, thanks.

Why should we help a Hindu to become a better Hindu (according to Mother Theresa) instead of helping him to get saved?

Because God desires all to be saved, and come to the knowledge of the Truth.

You appear to have a deficient concept of salvation.

Just telling people what they want to hear is not going to lead anybody to true repentance and salvation.

CAF is not a venue for you to lead people to your deficient concept of salvation. If you want to dialogue, we can do that. If you want to compare and contrast beliefs, fine, if you are willing to find out that what you think about the Catholic Church is erroneous, even better. This is not a venue for your evangelistic mission.

You seem very angry at the Catholic Church.

 

[imjustme]

Didn’t Nicodemus ask the same question?

While as a Friend I have never been baptized with water…I have been born naturally and from above through the Spirit. Not all Christians have your belefs but they still are Christians.

Yes, I also believe that being “born again” is being born of the spirit.

“Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God” (John 1:12-13).

Water baptism is the public testimony of the believer’s personal faith. A person is saved when he places faith in Jesus. Water baptism is the visible testimony to his faith and the salvation he was given in answer to that faith.

 

[Janet1983]

This certainly seems to be a statement made out of an inability to explain oneself. What you did was reject it based upon your experience, then demonstrated that you were unable to show where the Church actually teaches what you thought it teaches. Your credibility is quickly dissolving

No. I just am quite annoyed by the fact that people are quoting scripture out of context at me and changing topics constantly.
First I say something about the Catholic church and then I am being told that I have a deficient knowledge about the Church. Then I quote the Catechism to support my claims and that is being ignored and scripture is quoted at me without any context.
I am sick and tired of re-acting while people jump around me.
Either we are talking about the Church or the Bible… if I seem to misunderstand something, ok… but when I then go ahead and quote the same authority that is being brought up before to deplete me as the authority I base my claims on I am being ignored. I simply do the same. I will not respond to those who cannot seem to keep a topic. Once I get something right (with the knowledge of the Catechism it has to be) the topic is quickly dropped and not further discussed. Do you call that credible??
Trying to jump here is an obvious waste of time… You bring up claims and tell me I am wrong… Well show me. I clearly base my claims on YOUR catechism!

 

[guanophore]

The main reason why people believe that there is saving value in communion is because they are misunderstanding that anything added to faith then becomes a work man does trying to save himself. That will never work. Eph 2:1-10 please this passage very carefully.

This represents a deficient understanding of faith, grace, and works. You see, Catholics don’t stop reading at v. 10. We continue through v. 11. The works that God has prepared beforehand that we should walk in them are not “added to faith” but an expression of faith. Doing what God has intended for us to do since before the beginning of time is the obedience of faith found in scripture. It is not “man trying to save himself”, but cooperation with the grace that is only accessed through faith.

However, I agree with you that works of the flesh (as opposed to holy works) and efforts to save oneself by them will never work.

 

[imjustme]

C’on Janice, as a fallen away Catholic I can not believe you wrote all that and actually believe it Catholics only worship the TRinity Father Son and Holy Spirit. Sounds like you have been brained washed good and proper. Heresy., The mother of our Lord Jesus Christ? Your mind is closed to the whole truth Carlan

Luke 11:27-28 - What did Jesus think of Marian worship?

"As Jesus was saying these things, a woman in the crowd called out, “Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you.”

“On the contrary, blessed are those who hear the word of God and observe it”

 

[imjustme]

Let’s see what the answer should be. Well, first lets see who the Churches were started by. The Lutheran Church was started by Martin Luther. The Catholic Church was started by Jesus Christ. I will say no more

God Bless

Followers of Jesus were called Christians, not Roman Catholic!

The word catholic in the bible was a greek adjective that means “united” or “universal” and was used to describe the whole body of the followers of Jesus Christ (aka Christians)

The final books of the NT were not complete until around 100 AD and if there was some inkling of a Roman Catholic Church already existing, don’t you think one of the writers would have mentioned it?

 

[imjustme]

Then tell me, when did you ever hear the word “hell” in a sermon?
Did you know that Matthew 7:13-14 is not part of the liturgical year?
Matthew 6:24-35 is the reading for the 8th Sunday in year A
Matthew 7:21-27 is the reading for the 9th Sunday in year A
(that was last year… this year is year B and both Sundays are in the time after Easter anyways… 7th Sunday of Easter and Pentecost)
Strange, huh?
Many Protestant churches have a free choice what to pick out of Scripture and still hell is not mentioned. I listened to some really good and powerful preachers in a military chapel in Germany and even in one of their greatest sermons the word “hell” was not mentioned (even though one came close to thinking about it listening to the sermon).
Preachers do not want to preach about it anymore… some for fear they might scare parishoners away or draw their dislike upon themselves, some maybe because they don’t want to be known as hellfire preachers and others maybe even because they think that all of their listeners are saved, so why bother? Where are the ones that were not scared of telling people the truth even though it might be uncomfortable? The true Gospel is scandalous! It was for the longest time and it still is… The worst thing that can happen to a preacher is that they are getting civilized. Preachers need to be dangerous about truth! They need to proclaim it, not caring about the reaction of the people. Why is it that the greatest preachers of all times would not be welcome in most modern churches if they were showing up? Most of today’s sermons amount to little more than “Positive Mental Attitude,” feel-good drivel: “How to think better about yourself,” “How to squander more money on yourself,” “How to ‘find yourself,’” “How to pamper yourself,” ad nauseum, ad infinitum.
For example, can you imagine how the average church in America today would react to the decisions of Daniel and the three Hebrew children? All four of them were unashamed and unhesitant to practice civil disobedience. All four of them were charged with capital crimes by their government and sentenced to death. In Daniel’s case, all he had to do was not pray out loud to God for thirty days. Thirty days! I can just hear today’s Christian pragmatists screaming, “It’s only for thirty days. You can still pray in your heart. We must obey the government.” Can you imagine Daniel being asked to preach a message on “How And When To Defy Your Government” to the vast majority of churches in America today? Forget it!
It wasn’t much better for the Apostles and disciples in the New Testament. John the Baptist was beheaded for “meddling in politics.” The Apostles were beaten, stoned, and jailed. The Apostle Paul was especially hated. He was hated by Jews; he was hated by Romans; he was hated by businessmen; he was hated by politicians; he was even hated by fellow ministers.
Can you imagine the Apostle Paul preaching a message on “Conquering Low Self-Esteem”? Get real! Give Paul an opportunity today to preach to a church of one thousand members one Sunday morning, and by Sunday night (if they even had a Sunday night service), there might be fifty people back to hear him.
No wonder our people today have become self-centered, sensitive, and shallow. They seldom, if ever, hear honest, straight-forward, fearless preaching.

I agree with you and want to let you know that there are still some churches that don’t skip around topics that the pastor may not be comfortable with. I attend Calvary Chapel where the pastors read each book in the bible “verse by verse”…This explanation is from wikipedia…

Calvary Chapels faithfully uphold expository teaching, a “verse by verse, chapter by chapter, book by book” approach to teaching the Bible. This essentially means that their sermons are directly related to a passage of the Bible, and following sermons will start where the previous sermon left off (often this is done from Genesis to Revelation). They hold the opinion that a steady diet of topical studies only largely fail to present the “whole counsel of God” (Acts 20:27) and that ministers who use this approach often choose topics that they have a certain inclination to teach, while leaving out important (and sometimes controversial) issues of the Bible.

 

[LutheranDK]

Let’s see what the answer should be. Well, first lets see who the Churches were started by. The Lutheran Church was started by Martin Luther. The Catholic Church was started by Jesus Christ. I will say no more

God Bless

Correction: The RC Church CLAIMS to have been started by Jesus.

 

[DLClark]

This person has never read the catholicism of the cathloic or they can not make this remark Please tell us what you think the Church said about being saved or what you think it said

Here is how I know I am right.
Acts 16:31 says that when a person believes in Christ he will be saved.

Q. Will a person be saved if he places his faith in Christ for salvation?

The answer to this question wil prove that your religion is a works oriented or not.

Anything added to faith alone for salvation then becomes a work man must do to be saved.

 

[Earnest_Bunbury]

Here is how I know I am right.
Acts 16:31 says that when a person believes in Christ he will be saved.
Q. Will a person be saved if he places his faith in Christ for salvation?
The answer to this question wil prove that your religion is a works oriented or not.
Anything added to faith alone for salvation then becomes a work man must do to be saved.

Faith is the beginning, it doesn’t seem to be the end, a completeness that changes you. That is what a conversion, repentance from our selfish, sinful nature is about. That is why just calling oneself a Christian doesn’t save one, as I imagine you would concur. If belief is more than identifying oneself as a Christian, working in faith is more than just telling people about Jesus, it is cooperating with Him, through grace, His yoke, (a yoke is made for two oxen, meaning He is helping make the burden light) to be ultimately what God made you to be, fully human like Adam before the fall. We cooperate with Jesus through His grace or with the “enemy” by our own fallen human power that is our own nature separated from God’s Grace. A source on justification and faith is here:vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_31101999_cath-luth-joint-declaration_en.html

 

[estesbob]

A text passage somewhere in a book that is not known to everybody does not change the fact that is has vanished from the pulpits.

Which, of course, is based on nothing more that a fallen away Catholics personal opinion. Which preety much sums up your faith experience-your perosnal interpertations, whether they be of scripture or Catholocism,buttressed by nothing more than that is what you “thiink”.

One of us is very, very wrong about what it takes to obatin heaven. How do we resolve that?

 

[estesbob]

No. I just am quite annoyed by the fact that people are quoting scripture out of context at me and changing topics constantly.
First I say something about the Catholic church and then I am being told that I have a deficient knowledge about the Church. Then I quote the Catechism to support my claims and that is being ignored and scripture is quoted at me without any context.

No-you quote the cathecism and then expect everyone to accept you prsonal interpreation of what it says even when it clearly does not support your argument.

I am sick and tired of re-acting while people jump around me.
Either we are talking about the Church or the Bible… if I seem to misunderstand something, ok… but when I then go ahead and quote the same authority that is being brought up before to deplete me as the authority I base my claims on I am being ignored. I simply do the same. I will not respond to those who cannot seem to keep a topic. Once I get something right (with the knowledge of the Catechism it has to be) the topic is quickly dropped and not further discussed. Do you call that credible??
Trying to jump here is an obvious waste of time… You bring up claims and tell me I am wrong… Well show me. I clearly base my claims on YOUR catechism!

I am still wating for you to show us in the Cathecism or anywhereelse that the church teachs we are to worship Mary. Cut & pasting every mention of Mary in the Cathecism and claimimg that is proof doesnt cut it.

The problem is that as a Baptist you have made yourslef the sole arbiter of what sciprute says(and it appears what the Cathecism says). When someone disagrees with your personal interpration you take offnese. Which birngs us full circle as to to where we began -how do we resolve these disuptes on what Scripture says?

 

[authenticity]

I’m simply asking - in the church I grew up in where this took place, was that worship of Mary going on? Sometimes what is done speaks louder than what is on paper. I mean, the upper left corner of this web site doesn’t help the case! Walking into my old church, it is clear who was the focal point (in that church) and it wasn’t Jesus.

I don’t know what your old church looked like, but in every Catholic Church I go into, there is a large Crucifix hanging above the alter. Usually, the tabernacle of the Eucharist is right below. When people enter or exit, they bow, genuflect and kneel to the Real Presence of Christ. During the reading of the Gospel, everyone stands up out of respect for what they are about to hear. And, obviously, the reason for the Mass is the Eucharist itself. Mary might be mentioned, if the context fits. And there is usually a statue of Mary to the right of the altar representing her Assumption. But the focal point is Jesus Christ.

I’ve been questioned why I am in this forum - this is an example. I was raised Catholic with a heavy focus on Mary (not looking to get into the praying to Mary conversation at this point). It seems most non-Catholics somehow have a notion that Catholics worship Mary. Are that many people mistaken? I’m not trying to be difficult, just looking for honest answers - why does the church I was raised in have an enormous painting of Mary on the ceiling?

There are many reasons for the veneration of Mary. She is the Mother of God, the ark of the New Covenant, an example of perfect devotion to our Lord, Queen of the saints, etc.

What is really important is that the devotion is specifically Catholic and traditional. If you look at when Marian devotion really started to pick up, it was in response to the threat of modernism to the faith. Mary is a thorn in the side of modernism. She clears up the fog of pride. She brings people to the Church and, in turn, to salvation through her Son.

One last thing: I think that Mary presents a positive image of women and respect for women. Our society is filled with images that objectify women and venerate them as glorified prostitutes. The moral health of a society can be determined by the character of it’s women.

 

[estesbob]

I

One last thing: I think that Mary presents a positive image of women and respect for women. Our society is filled with images that objectify women and venerate them as glorified prostitutes. The moral health of a society can be determined by the character of it’s women.

One of the sadder offshoots of the reformation(other than puting millions of souls in jeapordy) is the casual disdain for Mary that has resulted from the Protestant desire to dipute Marian doctrines. Go to any anti-catholic web site and you will see disusssions on how Jesus thought so little of her that he refered to her as “woman” at the wedding feast and other such nonsense.

I vividly recall a comment I saw in a major publicaton that had run story on how some Protestants are beginning to rethink Marian devotion. Thye comment was “Whats the big deal? All she did was what God asked her to,”

Let us recall what the "big deal was:

The Seven Sorrows (or Dolors) are events in the life of the Blessed Virgin Mary which are a popular devotion and are frequently depicted in art.[2]

1. 
   *]The Prophecy of Simeon over the Infant Jesus. (Luke 2:34)
   *]The Flight into Egypt of the Holy Family. (Matthew 2:13)
   *]The Loss of the Child Jesus for Three Days. (Luke 2:43)
   *]The Meeting of Jesus and Mary along the Way of the Cross. (Luke 23:26)
   *]The Crucifixion, where Mary stands at the foot of the cross. (John 19:25)
   *]The Descent from the Cross, where Mary receives the dead body of Jesus in her arms. (Matthew 27:57)
   *]The Burial of Jesus. (John 19:40)

 

[Janet1983]

No-you quote the cathecism and then expect everyone to accept you prsonal interpreation of what it says even when it clearly does not support your argument.

I don’t interpret. I read. And all I said was that the status of Mary comes close to worship… Even though it is called differently (hyperdulia)… where is the difference in the hearts of the people? Being obedient she became the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race. What does that tell you? It tells me that she is “the cause of salvation”. How will you tell me that someone who is not as educated as you and therefore does not know the difference will not worship Mary as she is the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race. She is Queen over all things according to the Catechism. Now tell me where that was so wrong?

If I “interpret” the Catechism wrong, point it out and show me… if I just read it, why do you attack me?

Edit:
“Membership in the Militia means complete dedication to the Kingdom of God and to the salvation of souls through Mary Immaculate.” -Pope John Paul II

 

[estesbob]

I don’t interpret. I read. And all I said was that the status of Mary comes close to worship… Even though it is called differently (hyperdulia)… where is the difference in the hearts of the people? Being obedient she became the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race. What does that tell you? It tells me that she is “the cause of salvation”. How will you tell me that someone who is not as educated as you and therefore does not know the difference will not worship Mary as she is the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race. She is Queen over all things according to the Catechism. Now tell me where that was so wrong?

If I “interpret” the Catechism wrong, point it out and show me… if I just read it, why do you attack me?

If the cathecism intructs Catholics to worhsip Mary pease point it out. Again cutting and pastng sections that dont say what you say they do proves nothing.

You and i disagree on the Scriptural basis for Marian devotion. How do we resolve that?

 

[GodIsGracious]

I don’t interpret. I read. And all I said was that the status of Mary comes close to worship… Even though it is called differently (hyperdulia)… where is the difference in the hearts of the people? Being obedient she became the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race. What does that tell you? It tells me that she is “the cause of salvation”. How will you tell me that someone who is not as educated as you and therefore does not know the difference will not worship Mary as she is the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race. She is Queen over all things according to the Catechism. Now tell me where that was so wrong?

If I “interpret” the Catechism wrong, point it out and show me… if I just read it, why do you attack me?

Edit:
“Membership in the Militia means complete dedication to the Kingdom of God and to the salvation of souls through Mary Immaculate.” -Pope John Paul II

Well, first of all… you’re only quoting part of the whole thing. That’s part of what “interpretation” means.

I read your links. The whole thing.

She can be considered the “cause of salvation” because bore Christ. If it had not been Mary, but someone else, that someone else would be the “cause of salvation.” It’s just a cause. Where as, Christ IS salvation.

This is YOUR intepretation. Sure, you’re reading, but you’re still intrepreting.

If you take a look at the definition of the word “cause:”

a person or thing that acts, happens, or exists in such a way that some specific thing happens as a result; the producer of an effect: *You have been the cause of much anxiety. What was the cause of the accident? *
source: dictionary.reference.com/browse/cause

Mary existed in such a way (full of God’s grace) that some specific thing (the birth of our Saviour, Jesus Christ) happens as a result.

As to your partial quote of the “Queen over all things” continues on with:

so that she might be the more fully conformed to her Son, the Lord of lords and conqueror of sin and death."

Again, it all points back to Christ. But you don’t want to read that.

 

[happilycatholic]

No one should go up against guanophore on matters of catholic faith and what the Church teaches. :tsktsk:

She knows her stuff. She will listen intently and reply with charity and gentle kindness, but she does know what the Church teaches and a lot more history than I can take in.

I’ve learned a lot from reading her posts.

 

[Carlan]

Well, first of all… you’re only quoting part of the whole thing. That’s part of what “interpretation” means.

I read your links. The whole thing.

She can be considered the “cause of salvation” because bore Christ. If it had not been Mary, but someone else, that someone else would be the “cause of salvation.” It’s just a cause. Where as, Christ IS salvation.

This is YOUR intepretation. Sure, you’re reading, but you’re still intrepreting.

If you take a look at the definition of the word “cause:”

Mary existed in such a way (full of God’s grace) that some specific thing (the birth of our Saviour, Jesus Christ) happens as a result.

As to your partial quote of the “Queen over all things” continues on with:

Again, it all points back to Christ. But you don’t want to read that.

Dear wonderful people, read her post(from sterday can’t you see, she does not use the Catechism to find the truth she is a fallen away Catholic who has become anti catholic , she is a heretic. forgive me for my simple bluntness.Carlan