Tricky questions that most Catholics cant answer

[Rolltide]

Another topic is the Last Supper. Called the Eucharist in the Catholic Church. The dogma is that the literal flesh and blood of Jesus Christ is in the bread and wine. IF that was to be true, that would be cannibalism. Plain and simply. Added to that, and this is why people should read the bible themselves and not depend on what others tell them, Christ spoke of that AS He broke the bread and poured the wine, thus showing that it was symbolic. He meant for us to remember Him when we did this act. “Do this in remembrance of Me”. He meant that He is the substance that we need for eternal life. Not eat my literal actual physical flesh. The only times that cannibalism is mentioned in the bible was as a punishment through famines.

For this topic, go see the following thread:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=265578&page=2

It’s already been addressed, including by me, in a very thorough answer.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

There are several points, that when pointed out, the Catholic in question (of the faith not the person) the person gets amazingly defensive and refuses to answer or only gives a generic answer. These questions are such things like the worship of Mary. It doesn’t matter how its worded, its worship. The worship of Mary wasn’t even accepted until prayer to Mary was accepted in 600AD.

The Orthodox would be surprised - they & we honoured her long before then, not least by prayer: the oldest text of a prayer to her dates to the third century, & a Latin version with translation can be found here:​

• preces-latinae.org/thesaurus/BVM/SubTuum.html
• societyomary.blogspot.com/2005/10/sub-tuum-praesidium.html

What you call worship, we call adoration: we do not adore her or any other creature; we do venerate her. We adore God only, sacrifice to Him only - but not to any creature.​

600 years after the death of Jesus. That has no direct link to the bible. That is a dogma, and a dogma means a belief thought to be fact. But its not. 43 main doctrines were established after 300AD up until 1965. Thats a long time. Why add things to the religion AFTER the completion of the bible.

Because the Bible is a complete revelation, but an incomplete record of the conclusions to be drawn from it:​

• It nowhere says the Holy Spirit is is a Divine Being - a Biblical understanding, without Christian Tradition to cloud things, would leave the Holy Spirit as a Divine Force, as in the OT; not as a Divine Person.
• Only post-Biblical Tradition requires Jesus to be a Divine Person: all the NT passages are more naturally interpreted as saying He is a created - though heavenly - Messiah & Saviour.
• Jesus knew of the Jewish Scriptures - but he nowhere says there should be any more. They are as much an addition to the Bible as any other thing that has been said to be.
• The OT denies the deity of Jesus: “My Glory I will not give to another”.
• Deuteronomy 18 convicts Jesus of prophesying falsely - compare it with Matthew 24.34: “this generation” is not only dead & gone, but so are the 60 that have lived between AD 50 & 2000.
• the knowledge of Jesus was limited, in comparison with that of His Father.
• Jesus had a free & relaxed attitude to the OT - he did not confine himself to it, but taught in parables as well: that is, he used fictions.
  So the Bible reduces the deity of Jesus to tatters - only Tradition, & post-Biblical thinking, require Him to be God. You are arguing against the very thing that allows you to find fault with us in the first place.

The only phrase that the bible calls Mary is “blessed”.

By that reasoning, there can be no G/god: for that is denied twice - not once​

And even in that verse it only says she will be blessed among women. Not men.

Since “blessed among women” means “most blessed of women”, it is is not surprising men are not mentioned. You might as well say that she is not called “blessed among alligators”: which is true, & irrelevant. As a female human being, she is compared with other female human beings, rather than with men or alligators.​

Or are you saying that only women can be saved ?

Also, the 2nd commandment, the original, which is in Hebrew, states not to have an carven images. So bowing and praying to a statue falls into that.

That is your - unproven - assertion; you have said “X is the case”, rather than tried to to show how - if at all - “X is the case”. Nor have you tried to show that:​

• Christians are bound by the Decalogue in general
• Christians are bound by that commandment in particular
• the Decalogue can be extracted from the rest of the Law
  If God Himself makes an image of God, by sending His Son as “God-with-us”, that does not suggest that images are ruled out for Christians. In fact, the Bible is full of imagery - so the application of the commandment is limited, as is shown by that very fact.

Another topic is the Last Supper. Called the Eucharist in the Catholic Church.

Not quite correct - the Eucharist commemorates, & is the sacrament of, the Cross; not the Last Supper. The LS prefigured & led on to the Cross, but is not the same thing: unlike the Eucharist & the Cross, which differ only in their modes of offering.​

The dogma is that the literal flesh and blood of Jesus Christ is in the bread and wine.

Not true - this is not Catholic teaching, but a heresy.​

more

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Second & last bit

IF that was to be true, that would be cannibalism. Plain and simply.

Boettner said it was, but he was mistaken, since he misunderstood the mode of the Presence of Christ (like many Catholics, it has to be said).​

Added to that, and this is why people should read the bible themselves and not depend on what others tell them,

Servetus did that, & was burnt for it, because Calvin did not like the doctrine Servetus formed from what he read.​

Your idea would destroy all those kinds of Protestantism that teach doctrines: Anglican, Lutheran, Calvinist, Methodist.

Christ spoke of that AS He broke the bread and poured the wine, thus showing that it was symbolic. He meant for us to remember Him when we did this act. “Do this in remembrance of Me”. He meant that He is the substance that we need for eternal life. Not eat my literal actual physical flesh. The only times that cannibalism is mentioned in the bible was as a punishment through famines.

It’s not cannibalism, & Psalm 14.4, with several other passages, does not support your assertion.​

Next is the assumption that Mary was sinless. Not true at all.

Where is she once convicted of sin ? Other Saints are, but never Mary. And the Bible is not silent about the sins of Peter, Paul, Adam, Abraham, Lot, Isaac, Rebekah, Esau, Jacob, his sons, Tamar, Aaron, Moses, Miriam, Gideon, Samson, & a host of others.​

Yes she does deserve merit

“deserve merit” ??? I think you mean, “deserve credit”​

because she did give birth to the physical God,

Bad word choice​

however, she was not sinless. If she was, then why did she say in Luke 1:47 “And my spirit rejoiced in God my Savior”. Why did she need a savior if she had no sin to be saved of? Also, and this goes for the “infallibility” of the pope,
Romans 3:23, “For ALL have fallen short of the Glory of God”.

Infallibility is not the same as impeccability - an adulterer & wife-beater may be vicious, yet can be very learned too. Somewhat similarly, a Pope can be kept from imposing false teaching on the universal Church without being virtuous. The teaching is after all not his, but Christ’s.​

Was Mary speaking of salvation from sin ? She may have been - but it is not certain she was. As one of the anawim, she may have been talking about salvation from social oppression - or even about rescue from political oppression. Her Magnificat is based on the song of Hannah, which helps us to interpret it. “My Saviour” may, or may not, mean or include “saviour from sin” - if it does, that is still not quite the same as saying “Saviour from the sins I have committed”. We must not muffle the Bible - equally, we must not over-interpret it, or make it say only what suits our beliefs.

So we all fall short and we all sin. No one but Jesus was sinless.

“All” may simply mean “so nearly all as to make no appreciable difference” - if Mary is exempted from the number of sinners, that would not make any difference to the Apostle’s argument. If all mankind now living were being described as sinners, that would be perfectly true even if one person now living were exempted: the Apostle​

is not taking a roll-call of the human race.

He may not have known she was sinless - his words would still be true, though conditioned by what he knew & did not know. He is making a theological argument, quoting OT texts which could not take account of Mary.

Also there is no support biblically that anyone is infallible. That seems like a ruse to cover the butts of Catholic leaders. So that if they make a mistake, they are covered. But then again, if he did have that, he wouldn’t make a bad decision, which Popes have.

This is a straw man out of Boettner: he criticises the Popes for their practical decisions, which make no claim to infallibility.​

The last, at least for this post, is the claim that the true church is the Catholic Church and the true bible is the Catholic bible. The first true bible was the Torah, as the Jews were way ahead of the Catholics. Jesus Himself was Jewish. He was not Catholic. Most people know that the original bible, Genesis to Revelation was written in Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic. So the claim that the change in the 10 commandments is because of numbering is wrong.

“So the…is wrong” does not follow from what preceded it.​

 

[estesbob]

There are several points, that when pointed out, the Catholic in question (of the faith not the person) the person gets amazingly defensive and refuses to answer or only gives a generic answer. These questions are such things like the worship of Mary. It doesn’t matter how its worded, its worship. The worship of Mary wasn’t even accepted until prayer to Mary was accepted in 600AD. 600 years after the death of Jesus. That has no direct link to the bible. That is a dogma, and a dogma means a belief thought to be fact. But its not. 43 main doctrines were established after 300AD up until 1965. Thats a long time. Why add things to the religion AFTER the completion of the bible. The only phrase that the bible calls Mary is “blessed”. And even in that verse it only says she will be blessed among women. Not men. Also, the 2nd commandment, the original, which is in Hebrew, states not to have an carven images. So bowing and praying to a statue falls into that.

Another topic is the Last Supper. Called the Eucharist in the Catholic Church. The dogma is that the literal flesh and blood of Jesus Christ is in the bread and wine. IF that was to be true, that would be cannibalism. Plain and simply. Added to that, and this is why people should read the bible themselves and not depend on what others tell them, Christ spoke of that AS He broke the bread and poured the wine, thus showing that it was symbolic. He meant for us to remember Him when we did this act. “Do this in remembrance of Me”. He meant that He is the substance that we need for eternal life. Not eat my literal actual physical flesh. The only times that cannibalism is mentioned in the bible was as a punishment through famines.

Next is the assumption that Mary was sinless. Not true at all. Yes she does deserve merit because she did give birth to the physical God, however, she was not sinless. If she was, then why did she say in Luke 1:47 “And my spirit rejoiced in God my Savior”. Why did she need a savior if she had no sin to be saved of? Also, and this goes for the “infallibility” of the pope,
Romans 3:23, “For ALL have fallen short of the Glory of God”.
So we all fall short and we all sin. No one but Jesus was sinless. Also there is no support biblically that anyone is infallible. That seems like a ruse to cover the butts of Catholic leaders. So that if they make a mistake, they are covered. But then again, if he did have that, he wouldn’t make a bad decision, which Popes have.

The last, at least for this post, is the claim that the true church is the Catholic Church and the true bible is the Catholic bible. The first true bible was the Torah, as the Jews were way ahead of the Catholics. Jesus Himself was Jewish. He was not Catholic. Most people know that the original bible, Genesis to Revelation was written in Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic. So the claim that the change in the 10 commandments is because of numbering is wrong.

Was there a question in there?

 

[Church_Militant]

Tricky questions my foot.

I think I’ve answered that stuff so many times that you need only search for the topic words with my name to get the answers.

Besides which my Catholic blog has that same stuff as well.

Still, I doubt this guy really wants answers because scattergun posts like that are usually the mark of someone who just wants to use this forum as platform for (more) anti-Catholic propaganda.

We’ll see, but

 

[Nickkname]

There are several points, that when pointed out, the Catholic in question (of the faith not the person) the person gets amazingly defensive and refuses to answer or only gives a generic answer. These questions are such things like the worship of Mary. It doesn’t matter how its worded, its worship. The worship of Mary wasn’t even accepted until prayer to Mary was accepted in 600AD. 600 years after the death of Jesus. That has no direct link to the bible. That is a dogma, and a dogma means a belief thought to be fact. But its not. 43 main doctrines were established after 300AD up until 1965. Thats a long time. Why add things to the religion AFTER the completion of the bible. The only phrase that the bible calls Mary is “blessed”. And even in that verse it only says she will be blessed among women. Not men. Also, the 2nd commandment, the original, which is in Hebrew, states not to have an carven images. So bowing and praying to a statue falls into that.

Another topic is the Last Supper. Called the Eucharist in the Catholic Church. The dogma is that the literal flesh and blood of Jesus Christ is in the bread and wine. IF that was to be true, that would be cannibalism. Plain and simply. Added to that, and this is why people should read the bible themselves and not depend on what others tell them, Christ spoke of that AS He broke the bread and poured the wine, thus showing that it was symbolic. He meant for us to remember Him when we did this act. “Do this in remembrance of Me”. He meant that He is the substance that we need for eternal life. Not eat my literal actual physical flesh. The only times that cannibalism is mentioned in the bible was as a punishment through famines.

Next is the assumption that Mary was sinless. Not true at all. Yes she does deserve merit because she did give birth to the physical God, however, she was not sinless. If she was, then why did she say in Luke 1:47 “And my spirit rejoiced in God my Savior”. Why did she need a savior if she had no sin to be saved of? Also, and this goes for the “infallibility” of the pope,
Romans 3:23, “For ALL have fallen short of the Glory of God”.
So we all fall short and we all sin. No one but Jesus was sinless. Also there is no support biblically that anyone is infallible. That seems like a ruse to cover the butts of Catholic leaders. So that if they make a mistake, they are covered. But then again, if he did have that, he wouldn’t make a bad decision, which Popes have.

The last, at least for this post, is the claim that the true church is the Catholic Church and the true bible is the Catholic bible. The first true bible was the Torah, as the Jews were way ahead of the Catholics. Jesus Himself was Jewish. He was not Catholic. Most people know that the original bible, Genesis to Revelation was written in Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic. So the claim that the change in the 10 commandments is because of numbering is wrong.

ROFL. Trying to upset Catholics, huh? I wonder why. Are you bored or just get a kick out of trying to cause a flame war?

 

[estesbob]

Tricky questions my foot.

I think I’ve answered that stuff so many times that you need only search for the topic words with my name to get the answers.

Besides which my Catholic blog has that same stuff as well.

Still, I doubt this guy really wants answers because scattergun posts like that are usually the mark of someone who just wants to use this forum as platform for (more) anti-Catholic propaganda.

We’ll see, but

Posts like his can be a lot of fun-its like a scavenger hunt-you google bits and pieces of it until you find where they have cut n pasted it from.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Tricky questions my foot.

I think I’ve answered that stuff so many times that you need only search for the topic words with my name to get the answers.

Besides which my Catholic blog has that same stuff as well.

Still, I doubt this guy really wants answers because scattergun posts like that are usually the mark of someone who just wants to use this forum as platform for (more) anti-Catholic propaganda.

We’ll see, but

He is just another Protestant who tries to promote Anti-Catholic Propaganda. I’m glad not all Protestants believes what he believes.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Tricky questions my foot.

I think I’ve answered that stuff so many times that you need only search for the topic words with my name to get the answers.

Besides which my Catholic blog has that same stuff as well.

Still, I doubt this guy really wants answers because scattergun posts like that are usually the mark of someone who just wants to use this forum as platform for (more) anti-Catholic propaganda.

We’ll see, but

**AFAICS, his objections are all from Boettner, if slightly mangled once or twice. **​

 

[reen12]

There are several points, that when pointed out, the Catholic in question (of the faith not the person) the person gets amazingly defensive and refuses to answer or only gives a generic answer. These questions are such things like the worship of Mary. It doesn’t matter how its worded, its worship. The worship of Mary wasn’t even accepted until prayer to Mary was accepted in 600AD. 600 years after the death of Jesus. That has no direct link to the bible. That is a dogma, and a dogma means a belief thought to be fact. But its not. 43 main doctrines were established after 300AD up until 1965. Thats a long time. Why add things to the religion AFTER the completion of the bible. The only phrase that the bible calls Mary is “blessed”. And even in that verse it only says she will be blessed among women. Not men. Also, the 2nd commandment, the original, which is in Hebrew, states not to have an carven images. So bowing and praying to a statue falls into that.

Another topic is the Last Supper. Called the Eucharist in the Catholic Church. The dogma is that the literal flesh and blood of Jesus Christ is in the bread and wine. IF that was to be true, that would be cannibalism. Plain and simply. Added to that, and this is why people should read the bible themselves and not depend on what others tell them, Christ spoke of that AS He broke the bread and poured the wine, thus showing that it was symbolic. He meant for us to remember Him when we did this act. “Do this in remembrance of Me”. He meant that He is the substance that we need for eternal life. Not eat my literal actual physical flesh. The only times that cannibalism is mentioned in the bible was as a punishment through famines.

Next is the assumption that Mary was sinless. Not true at all. Yes she does deserve merit because she did give birth to the physical God, however, she was not sinless. If she was, then why did she say in Luke 1:47 “And my spirit rejoiced in God my Savior”. Why did she need a savior if she had no sin to be saved of? Also, and this goes for the “infallibility” of the pope,
Romans 3:23, “For ALL have fallen short of the Glory of God”.
So we all fall short and we all sin. No one but Jesus was sinless. Also there is no support biblically that anyone is infallible. That seems like a ruse to cover the butts of Catholic leaders. So that if they make a mistake, they are covered. But then again, if he did have that, he wouldn’t make a bad decision, which Popes have.

The last, at least for this post, is the claim that the true church is the Catholic Church and the true bible is the Catholic bible. The first true bible was the Torah, as the Jews were way ahead of the Catholics. Jesus Himself was Jewish. He was not Catholic. Most people know that the original bible, Genesis to Revelation was written in Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic. So the claim that the change in the 10 commandments is because of numbering is wrong.

Good questions, faithinjesus.

Please be prepared for: Ubi Petrus, ibi ecclesia.
This may be quoted.
“Where Peter is, there is the Church.”

The fact that Christ was unrecognizable, by the
15th century, seems to give no one pause.
Luther tried to save what he could, from the
wreckage of Christianity, yet he should have
just walked away. None of it had anything to
do with Jesus. Indulgences, treasury of merit,
economy of salvation, sacramental ‘system,’
Canon Law…
I can just hear Christ now:

"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisee, you hypocrites!
You shut the kingdom of heaven in men’s faces."

Oh. That’s right. That’s what he said to the Pharisees.

For there is one God. There is also one mediator between God and the human race, Christ Jesus… 1 Timothy 5

Best wishes, faithinjesus, :tiphat:

reen12

 

[SIA]

Concerning your saying that no matter how we word it…we do “worship” Mary.
Could you please explain?

I will if I may. I never really thought that Catholics worshipped Mary, at least I didn’t when I was Catholic and for good measure. I was VERY uncomfortable practicing any type of veneration or adoration and I would never dress a statue of her with flowers etc. What I learned about many popes in Catholic church history changed my mind abruptly about Mary worship in the Catholic church.

I quote from Pope Pius XII:

Enraptured by the spledor of your heavenly beauty and impelled by the anxiety of the world, we cast ourselves into your arms O immaculate mother of Jesus and our mother Mary. God crowned you queen of the universe. O crystal fountain of faith bathe our minds with eternal truths. O fragrant lily of all holiness captivate our hearts with your heavenly perfume. Oh conqueress of evil and death inspire in us a deep horror of sin. O well beloved of God hear the ardent cries which rise from every heart in this year dedicated to you. Happy with you we may repeat before YOUR throne that hymn which is sung today around YOUR altar. You are all beautiful O Mary you are the glory, you are the joy, you are the honor of our people. I could go on and on here but what is the point? If you don’t call this worship, you are completely brainwashed.

 

[East_and_West]

Poor faithinjesus. He/she must be smarting now.

 

[adrift]

History isn’t your strong point is it?

The first representation of the Virgin Mother with the Child Jesus, a stucco painting in the catacomb of Priscilla, dates from the beginning of the second century about the time of the death of the Apostle John.

St. Ephraem 4th century

In his sixth hymn, say of Mary
Who else lulled a son on her bosom as Mary did? Who ever dared to call her son, Son of the Maker, Son of the Creator, Son of the Most High?

In a later Hymn St Ephraem represents Mary as Saying: ”The babe that I carry carries me, and He Hath lowered His wings and taken and placed me between His pinions and mounted into the sir”
Warren H. Carroll That building of Christendom Vol 2
page 91

Although others have answered you well on the commandments, I have a question for you. Where are the commandments numbered?
Another history point the early Christians were accused of cannibalism. Why do you think that was? The answer is that like those pagans you do not have a grasp at what Jesus taught. Why is it you limit Him.

 

[Church_Militant]

**AFAICS, his objections are all from Boettner, if slightly mangled once or twice. **​

Oh? Even better! My friend Wolsely gave me permission to post his excellent and extensive refutation of “the Boettner List” on my blog.

Here’s the link. The “Boettner List”: Fact or Fiction?

 

[Church_Militant]

I will if I may. I never really thought that Catholics worshipped Mary, at least I didn’t when I was Catholic and for good measure. I was VERY uncomfortable practicing any type of veneration or adoration and I would never dress a statue of her with flowers etc. What I learned about many popes in Catholic church history changed my mind abruptly about Mary worship in the Catholic church.

I quote from Pope Pius XII:

Enraptured by the spledor of your heavenly beauty and impelled by the anxiety of the world, we cast ourselves into your arms O immaculate mother of Jesus and our mother Mary. God crowned you queen of the universe. O crystal fountain of faith bathe our minds with eternal truths. O fragrant lily of all holiness captivate our hearts with your heavenly perfume. Oh conqueress of evil and death inspire in us a deep horror of sin. O well beloved of God hear the ardent cries which rise from every heart in this year dedicated to you. Happy with you we may repeat before YOUR throne that hymn which is sung today around YOUR altar. You are all beautiful O Mary you are the glory, you are the joy, you are the honor of our people. I could go on and on here but what is the point? If you don’t call this worship, you are completely brainwashed.

Yeah yeah yeah…Never spoken to someone that you really love have you?

There are a host of Biblical reasons for virtually every one of those, and your worst error is in rejecting The Intercession & Communion of Saints

 

[Rolltide]

I quote from Pope Pius XII:

Not that I don’t believe you, because the prayer seems legit, but could you cite the document or speech?

Enraptured by the spledor of your heavenly beauty and impelled by the anxiety of the world, we cast ourselves into your arms O immaculate mother of Jesus and our mother Mary.

Ok, not too much problem up to this point. Nothing blatantly heretical.

God crowned you queen of the universe.

In the Bible, the mother, rather than the wife, of a king was proclaimed the queen. Catholics also associate the woman from Revelation with Mary, further confirming this title. Again, no problem. (Remember this later on, when we talk about her throne…)

O crystal fountain of faith bathe our minds with eternal truths. O fragrant lily of all holiness captivate our hearts with your heavenly perfume.

This is praising the faith and holiness of Mary. She as often seen as a “new Eve”, accepting the instructions of God without question where Eve had rejected God’s instructions.

Oh conqueress of evil and death inspire in us a deep horror of sin.

Conqueress is used in an earthly sense here, as she is the vessel by which Jesus was born, and as such made up for Eve’s rejection of God in many ways (although she did not redeem us as Jesus did). As the only human besides Jesus to be born free from sin, she is the perfect person to inspire us not to sin (to instill horror, so to speak)

O well beloved of God hear the ardent cries which rise from every heart in this year dedicated to you.

We now enter the intercessionary portion of our prayer here…

Happy with you we may repeat before YOUR throne that hymn which is sung today around YOUR altar.

Ok, this one sentence seems to be the heart of the problem, and it does require a bit of explanation. “YOUR throne” refers to the fact that Mary is Queen of Heaven, and thus a queen has a throne. In the Middle Ages, just because a prince or queen had a throne did not make them co-ruler with a king. “YOUR altar” refers to the fact that altars may be dedicated to saints. Many Catholic Churches have side-altars which are devoted the the celebration of specific saints. This doesn’t mean that we’re worshiping them. It’s no different than naming a church after a saint. If I go to St. Paul’s Catholic Church, I’m not going there to worship St. Paul! Likewise, there may be statues and paintings of Mary or a saint to commemorate that person’s actions (think “hall of fame” rather than worship), but we’re not worshiping them in the way that we worship God. The Mass that takes place on the altar is still dedicated to GOD. The decor is simply one of revering a saint.

Catholic Churches were originally designed with many stained glass windows, paintings, and statues back when Rome had collapsed and less than 1% of the population could read. These visual aids allowed the priest to use them as visual instruction tools to teach the faithful, which had no other way to learn about the Bible. Saints were included among these so that parishoners could learn about the stories and actions of the greatest people the church has ever produced, so that they would have wonderful examples of role models to emulate. (Again, the hall of fame reference.)

You are all beautiful O Mary you are the glory, you are the joy, you are the honor of our people.

No problem here. She is the glory, joy, and honor of our people (the human race)! Think hall of fame again! She honored the human race with her actions as one of the greatest people in history, and we rightly thank her for it. (Just as we honor veterans for their service.)

I could go on and on here but what is the point? If you don’t call this worship, you are completely brainwashed.

This is your opinion, and everything presented above can be defended from the Catholic perspective.

 

[cyberjacques]

I quote from Pope Pius XII:

Enraptured by the spledor of your heavenly beauty and impelled by the anxiety of the world, we cast ourselves into your arms O immaculate mother of Jesus and our mother Mary. God crowned you queen of the universe. O crystal fountain of faith bathe our minds with eternal truths. O fragrant lily of all holiness captivate our hearts with your heavenly perfume. Oh conqueress of evil and death inspire in us a deep horror of sin. O well beloved of God hear the ardent cries which rise from every heart in this year dedicated to you. Happy with you we may repeat before YOUR throne that hymn which is sung today around YOUR altar. You are all beautiful O Mary you are the glory, you are the joy, you are the honor of our people. I could go on and on here but what is the point? If you don’t call this worship, you are completely brainwashed.

Sounds like a love letter to me. Contrast this with written prayers to God, where He is called our savior, where the writer humbles themselves before Him, acknowledging Him as the creator of all things and the forgiver of all sins. God is always spoken of in terms of His own glory, whereas Mary is always spoken of in terms of the glory that God has seen fit to give her.

We shine with nothing but the Light that God gives us. Mary is no different.

 

[cyberjacques]

(think “hall of fame” rather than worship), but we’re not worshiping them in the way that we worship God.

Hall of Fame! That’s awesome, I never thought of putting it like that! Can I use that in the future?

 

[Nicholas82]

I will if I may. I never really thought that Catholics worshipped Mary, at least I didn’t when I was Catholic and for good measure. I was VERY uncomfortable practicing any type of veneration or adoration and I would never dress a statue of her with flowers etc. What I learned about many popes in Catholic church history changed my mind abruptly about Mary worship in the Catholic church.

I quote from Pope Pius XII:

Enraptured by the spledor of your heavenly beauty and impelled by the anxiety of the world, we cast ourselves into your arms O immaculate mother of Jesus and our mother Mary. God crowned you queen of the universe. O crystal fountain of faith bathe our minds with eternal truths. O fragrant lily of all holiness captivate our hearts with your heavenly perfume. Oh conqueress of evil and death inspire in us a deep horror of sin. O well beloved of God hear the ardent cries which rise from every heart in this year dedicated to you. Happy with you we may repeat before YOUR throne that hymn which is sung today around YOUR altar. You are all beautiful O Mary you are the glory, you are the joy, you are the honor of our people. I could go on and on here but what is the point? If you don’t call this worship, you are completely brainwashed.

Ever been in love with a girl (or guy- don’t know your gender)? Ever called them your ‘true love’, your ‘everything’, your ‘world’ or any number of things? Isn’t God our only ‘true love’, ‘world’, our ‘everything’ etc…? Ain’t ya got no poetry in your soul???

 

[Rolltide]

Hall of Fame! That’s awesome, I never thought of putting it like that! Can I use that in the future?

LOL… sure, it’s yours to use.