Why do non catholics dislike Mother Mary?

[Dokimas]

I don’t know about you, but I certainly don’t want to face our Lord and say, “Well, Lord, I believed your message when you told me to feed the poor, but when you said that artificial birth control was wrong, well, I think you’re wrong about that!” Yikes!!

I’ve forgotten where the Lord says this. I’m not referring to the CC saying Jesus said this!

 

[PRmerger]

Tim answered the question. He said yes with a small ‘a’ like Barnabus.

Thank you. I missed that.

So, Timothy,

[SIGN]There are two apostles named James.[/SIGN]

“When morning came, he called his disciples to him and chose twelve of them, whom he also designated apostles: Simon (whom he named Peter), his brother Andrew, James, John, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas, James son of Alphaeus, Simon who was called the Zealot, Judas son of James, and Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor.”(Luke 6:13-16)

[SIGN] One James (the brother of John) is not the uterine brother of Jesus; his father is Zebedee[/SIGN].

“James son of Zebedee and his brother John (to them he gave the name Boanerges, which means Sons of Thunder)” (Mark 3:17)

[SIGN]The other apostle named James is not the uterine brother of Jesus; his father is Alpheus[/SIGN].

“And when it was day, he called his disciples, and chose from them twelve, whom he called apostles: Simon, whom he named Peter and Andrew his brother, and James and John and Philip and Bartholomew, and Matthew and James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon who was called the Zealot, and Judas the son of James and Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor.” (Luke 6:13-16)

[SIGN]Therefore, neither apostle named James was a uterine brother of Jesus.[/SIGN]
(repeated post, originally by Randy Carson; BB codes by PRmerger)

 

[tweetymom]

This is a dogma of men not Christ, It isn’t in the Bible not to do it. The CC bases this on Oran spilling his seed on the ground which is disobedience, period

 

[PRmerger]

I’ve forgotten where the Lord says this. I’m not referring to the CC saying Jesus said this!

Dokimas! We’re not going back to the “I only believe things that are in the Bible” argument, are we?

Because I thought you acknowledged that you indeed believe things about God that are not in Scripture, as well. So how can you hold Catholics up to a standard that you yourself don’t hold?

 

[Timothy_Piper]

it’s not an official statement. if you want it straight from the Church read the catechism. this thread is actually making me quite sad so i don’t think i’m going to participate other than repeating again that Catholics and members of the Orthodox Church simply do NOT worship Mary.

adoration, devotion, and love i admit can sometimes appear as worship.

this might help a bit, but really if you get time read that book. and if not, please spend some time reading the writings of the early Church fathers.

also from the catechism: vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P1K.HTM

peace.

What do you think God will see it, since He makes the official ruling?

NOTION AND CHARACTERISTICS

The word worship (Saxon weorthscipe , “honour”; from worth , meaning “value”, “dignity”, “price”, and the termination, ship ; Latin cultus ) in its most general sense is homage paid to a person or a thing. In this sense we may speak of hero-worship, worship of the emperor, of demons, of the angels, even of relics, and especially of the Cross. This article will deal with Christian worship according to the following definition: homage paid to God, to Jesus Christ, to His saints, to the beings or even to the objects which have a special relation to God.

There are several degrees of this worship:

* if it is addressed directly to God, it is superior, absolute, supreme worship, or worship of adoration, or, according to the consecrated theological term, a worship of latria. This sovereign worship is due to God alone; addressed to a creature it would become idolatry.
* When worship is addressed only indirectly to God, that is, when its object is the veneration of martyrs, of angels, or of saints, it is a subordinate worship dependent on the first, and relative, in so far as it honours the creatures of God for their peculiar relations with Him; it is designated by theologians as the worship of dulia , a term denoting servitude, and implying, when used to signify our worship of distinguished servants of God, that their service to Him is their title to our veneration (cf. Chollet, loc. cit., col. 2407, and Bouquillon, Tractatus de virtute religionis , I, Bruges, 1880, 22 sq.).
* As the Blessed Virgin has a separate and absolutely supereminent rank among the saints, the worship paid to her is called hyperdulia (for the meaning and history of these terms see Suicer, Thesaurus ecclesiasticus , 1728).

In accordance with these principles it will readily be understood that a certain worship may be offered even to inanimate objects, such as the relics of a martyr, the Cross of Christ, the Crown of Thorns, or even the statue or picture of a saint. There is here no confusion or danger of idolatry, for this worship is subordinate or dependent.
catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=12449

 

[Dokimas]

YES!! Exactly, Dokimas! They understood him to be literal, and walked away.

Yet Jesus, noting that they left, did not correct them. He did not say, “Wait! I was only speaking figuratively, folks!”

In fact, he reinforced his message again and again–Eat My Flesh. And, he asked his friends, “Are you going to leave me, too?”

But not a word of correction about his message being misunderstood. Only reinforcing and asking, sadly, if his message was too difficult for even his closest and beloved friends.

So, at the Last Supper, did the disciples eat the Lord’s Body and drink His Blood? If so, how, His Body was not yet broken nor was His Blood spilled? He was completely intact, unless He mutilated Himself.

 

[graceandglory]

You own Church says you do; they, unlike you, call it what it is and only make the distinction as a matter of degree. I wonder how God will view veneration of saints, statues, angles, relics and Mary? What do you think?

Can one imagine oneself? Seen openly bowing down before a statute of Mary or Baal in Moses’ day in ones tent or asking the Levitical priest to consecrate the statues before God. They are questioned before Moses, and when asked for a reason for this idolatry, the person says, “Oh, that is not idolatry. sometime in the future, in a new language defines the nuances of worship in about 3,000 years, any one will be able to argue semantics for a looser use of the term, just a matter of degree?” I’m sure that would go over about as well as the, “Oh, I wasn’t worshiping the idol by bowing down, lighting incense and lighting candles before it, I was giving it hyperdulia instead of latria, you know? Hyperdulia is a little less than latria and a little more than dulia” excuse. These statutes would go with the idolater under a large pile of rocks way outside of the camp.

Do you also have a problem with people who kiss photos of their loved ones, or salute the flag with their hand on their heart?

We do NOT light candles or bow down to or worship any statues. We might light a candle, but not for a statue! We may bow our head in front of a statue, but we are not bowing to the statue!!! A statue or an icon is like a picture of a friend. When you want to think about a friend, a husband, your kids, you look at their picture and then you think about them, and feel love for them. Is that also worship? I know that I can go through a whole day of work, so focused on my job that I don’t even give a thought to my own kids. A photo of my kids on my desk brings them to mind. Just a quick look and a pause, and I can think about my kids and feel how much I love them. The picture helps me do that. I post pictures of my weight loss goal on my fridge. Without it, I find it hard to imagine and more difficult to stay focused. A protestant believer bows his head and “imagines” God. Are you not also making an image for yourself? Do you light candles? Have you ever seen the Olympic torch? Are we worshipping the torch?

 

[Dokimas]

Dokimas! We’re not going back to the “I only believe things that are in the Bible” argument, are we?

Because I thought you acknowledged that you indeed believe things about God that are not in Scripture, as well. So how can you hold Catholics up to a standard that you yourself don’t hold?

I guess I should repeat myself. What you must be referring to is going back to question teachings that appear to be contrary to the Bible, not just not in the Bible.

 

[Dokimas]

Dokimas! We’re not going back to the “I only believe things that are in the Bible” argument, are we?

Because I thought you acknowledged that you indeed believe things about God that are not in Scripture, as well. So how can you hold Catholics up to a standard that you yourself don’t hold?

How do we know what Jesus said if it’s not in the Bible?

 

[PRmerger]

I guess I should repeat myself. What you must be referring to is going back to question teachings that appear to be contrary to the Bible, not just not in the Bible.

Ok. Then where in the Bible does it say that we must contracept?

 

[Dokimas]

Thank you. I missed that.

So, Timothy,

[SIGN]There are two apostles named James.[/SIGN]

“When morning came, he called his disciples to him and chose twelve of them, whom he also designated apostles: Simon (whom he named Peter), his brother Andrew, James, John, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas, James son of Alphaeus, Simon who was called the Zealot, Judas son of James, and Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor.”(Luke 6:13-16)

[SIGN] One James (the brother of John) is not the uterine brother of Jesus; his father is Zebedee[/SIGN].

“James son of Zebedee and his brother John (to them he gave the name Boanerges, which means Sons of Thunder)” (Mark 3:17)

[SIGN]The other apostle named James is not the uterine brother of Jesus; his father is Alpheus[/SIGN].

“And when it was day, he called his disciples, and chose from them twelve, whom he called apostles: Simon, whom he named Peter and Andrew his brother, and James and John and Philip and Bartholomew, and Matthew and James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon who was called the Zealot, and Judas the son of James and Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor.” (Luke 6:13-16)

[SIGN]Therefore, neither apostle named James was a uterine brother of Jesus.[/SIGN]
(repeated post, originally by Randy Carson; BB codes by PRmerger)

PRmerger, you have not looked carefully. There are two James Apostles (big A) and one James apostle (little a).

 

[tweetymom]

Ok. Then where in the Bible does it say that we must contracept?

It doesn’t say it either way.

 

[izoid]

What do you think God will see it, since He makes the official ruling?

NOTION AND CHARACTERISTICS

The word worship (Saxon weorthscipe , “honour”; from worth , meaning “value”, “dignity”, “price”, and the termination, ship ; Latin cultus ) in its most general sense is homage paid to a person or a thing. In this sense we may speak of hero-worship, worship of the emperor, of demons, of the angels, even of relics, and especially of the Cross. This article will deal with Christian worship according to the following definition: homage paid to God, to Jesus Christ, to His saints, to the beings or even to the objects which have a special relation to God.

There are several degrees of this worship:

* if it is addressed directly to God, it is superior, absolute, supreme worship, or worship of adoration, or, according to the consecrated theological term, a worship of latria. This sovereign worship is due to God alone; addressed to a creature it would become idolatry.
* When worship is addressed only indirectly to God, that is, when its object is the veneration of martyrs, of angels, or of saints, it is a subordinate worship dependent on the first, and relative, in so far as it honours the creatures of God for their peculiar relations with Him; it is designated by theologians as the worship of dulia , a term denoting servitude, and implying, when used to signify our worship of distinguished servants of God, that their service to Him is their title to our veneration (cf. Chollet, loc. cit., col. 2407, and Bouquillon, Tractatus de virtute religionis , I, Bruges, 1880, 22 sq.).
* As the Blessed Virgin has a separate and absolutely supereminent rank among the saints, the worship paid to her is called hyperdulia (for the meaning and history of these terms see Suicer, Thesaurus ecclesiasticus , 1728).

In accordance with these principles it will readily be understood that a certain worship may be offered even to inanimate objects, such as the relics of a martyr, the Cross of Christ, the Crown of Thorns, or even the statue or picture of a saint. There is here no confusion or danger of idolatry, for this worship is subordinate or dependent.
catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=12449

Hyperdulia

The special veneration due to the Blessed Virgin Mary.

Vatican II’s Dogmatic Constitution on the Church states: 66 “The various forms of piety towards the Mother of God, which the Church has approved within the limits of sound and orthodox doctrine, according to the dispositions and understanding of the faithful, ensure that while the mother is honored, the Son through whom all things have their being Col 1:15-16 and in whom it has pleased the Father that all fullness should dwell Col 1:19 is rightly known, loved and glorified and his commandments are observed.”

There are three levels of reverence that we in this life offer. Latria is reserved for God alone. Hyperdulia is reserved for the Blessed Virgin. Dulia is reserved for all the rest of the heavenly host.

Copyright © 1999-2010 Martin K Barrack. All rights reserved.

VENERATION:

1 : respect or awe inspired by the dignity, wisdom, dedication, or talent of a person

 

[PRmerger]

How do we know what Jesus said if it’s not in the Bible?

Doesn’t the Bible say that he said lots of things that weren’t recorded?

We know what Jesus said that’s in the Gospels, but he also said many, many things that aren’t in the Bible. That’s where Sacred Tradition comes in.

Example: St. Paul says that Jesus said “It’s better to give than receive” yet there is not one Gospel that has Jesus saying that. Paul knew that because of Sacred Tradition. The oral passing down of the Good News through the apostles.

 

[Dokimas]

Ok. Then where in the Bible does it say that we must contracept?

Why, may I ask, are we back to this? I never said the Bible says one MUST contracept. I HAVE said, IMO, the Bible DOES NOT forbid contraception (I suspect God is against us purposely using a contraception that kills the embryo).

 

[Dokimas]

Doesn’t the Bible say that he said lots of things that weren’t recorded?

We know what Jesus said that’s in the Gospels, but he also said many, many things that aren’t in the Bible. That’s where Sacred Tradition comes in.

Example: St. Paul says that Jesus said “It’s better to give than receive” yet there is not one Gospel that has Jesus saying that. Paul knew that because of Sacred Tradition. The oral passing down of the Good News through the apostles.

I’m not up for going around and around on this issue. I’ll sit it out, at least for a while.

 

[izoid]

What do you think God will see it, since He makes the official ruling?

NOTION AND CHARACTERISTICS

The word worship (Saxon weorthscipe , “honour”; from worth , meaning “value”, “dignity”, “price”, and the termination, ship ; Latin cultus ) in its most general sense is homage paid to a person or a thing. In this sense we may speak of hero-worship, worship of the emperor, of demons, of the angels, even of relics, and especially of the Cross. This article will deal with Christian worship according to the following definition: homage paid to God, to Jesus Christ, to His saints, to the beings or even to the objects which have a special relation to God.

There are several degrees of this worship:

* if it is addressed directly to God, it is superior, absolute, supreme worship, or worship of adoration, or, according to the consecrated theological term, a worship of latria. This sovereign worship is due to God alone; addressed to a creature it would become idolatry.
* When worship is addressed only indirectly to God, that is, when its object is the veneration of martyrs, of angels, or of saints, it is a subordinate worship dependent on the first, and relative, in so far as it honours the creatures of God for their peculiar relations with Him; it is designated by theologians as the worship of dulia , a term denoting servitude, and implying, when used to signify our worship of distinguished servants of God, that their service to Him is their title to our veneration (cf. Chollet, loc. cit., col. 2407, and Bouquillon, Tractatus de virtute religionis , I, Bruges, 1880, 22 sq.).
* As the Blessed Virgin has a separate and absolutely supereminent rank among the saints, the worship paid to her is called hyperdulia (for the meaning and history of these terms see Suicer, Thesaurus ecclesiasticus , 1728).

In accordance with these principles it will readily be understood that a certain worship may be offered even to inanimate objects, such as the relics of a martyr, the Cross of Christ, the Crown of Thorns, or even the statue or picture of a saint. There is here no confusion or danger of idolatry, for this worship is subordinate or dependent.
catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=12449

Since you decided to abruptly end what you were quoting, I will finish the thought for you. Here is the rest of the paragraph that you referred to:

"There is here no confusion or danger of idolatry, for this worship is subordinate or dependent. The relic of the saint is venerated because of the link which unites it with the person who is adored or venerated ; while the statue or picture is regarded as having a conventional relation to a person who has a right to our homage – as being a symbol which reminds us of that person (see Vacant, Diet de théol. cath. , s.v. Adoration , and authors cited in bibliography; also ADORATION; IDOLATRY; IMAGES, DEVOTION TO THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY)".

 

[Dokimas]

I agree this is a sticking point. Was it the will of Jesus for catholics not to eat meat on Fridays and then did Jesus change His mind?​

BTW, to be clear, I’m not asking why the practice was instituted in the first place. I understand you think it was for suffering with/for Christ (or that’s what some have said using Paul’s writing to the Colossian church).

 

[izoid]

I agree this is a sticking point. Was it the will of Jesus for catholics not to eat meat on Fridays and then did Jesus change His mind?​

BTW, to be clear, I’m not asking why the practice was instituted in the first place. I understand you think it was for suffering with/for Christ (or that’s what some have said using Paul’s writing to the Colossian church).

I think this post reflects your unwillingness to have productive dialog. These are childish games that will never lead to any understanding. Kinda like, “my dad can beat your dad up”.

 

[PRmerger]

Why, may I ask, are we back to this? I never said the Bible says one MUST contracept. I HAVE said, IMO, the Bible DOES NOT forbid contraception (I suspect God is against us purposely using a contraception that kills the embryo).

But, Dokimas, aren’t you saying that it’s ok to have “extra-Biblical” teachings, as long as they don’t contradict Scripture?

If that’s what you’re saying, then you are opposing the CC’s teaching against ABC (artificial birth control) because it must contradict something in Scripture, right?

So since there’s no verses in Scripture that say one must contracept, then the CC’s teaching against ABC does not contradict Scripture, correct?

So you’re agreed that this “extra-Biblical” tradition of the immorality of ABC falls in the same category as your “extra-Biblica” traditions?