Why does it say to "worship Mary" in an encyclical?

  • Thread starter Thread starter PRmerger
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted by VociMike
Let’s break this down.
  1. Do you think it is wrong to ask any Christian to pray for you?
  2. Do you think those in heaven can pray?
  3. Do you think those in heaven would pray for us if they could?
  4. Do you think those in heaven can hear our requests?

I find it inconsistant to ask for our opinion when any other time we give it, we are told our opinions do not count when it comes to scripture. Are you actually going to consider my answer or is this just a bait to tell me, when it turns out contrary to your doctrines, that I am not one to interpret such things?
Don’t get so defensive. 😃
I will answer you regardless.
Do I think it’s wrong to ask any Christian to pray for us?
Not those that are alive. Paul said to pray for one another. If I wanted to petition somebody in Texas to pray for me, wouldn’t I have to be able to talk to them to petition it? The same goes for those in Heaven. I cannot reach them for we are separated by two worlds. I petition those who I can speak to by letter or phone or by mouth to pray for me. Why would I think that just because there are Christians in heaven that I should ask them to pray for me? I was never instructed to do that. I was insturcted to pray for one another.
OK, you’ve raised two objections:
  1. The saints in heaven cannot hear you.
Revelation 5 shows that those in heaven hear every creature on the earth and under the earth and in the sea. So #1 is no objection.
  1. You should not ask them to pray for you.
Why shouldn’t you ask those in heaven to pray for you, if they can hear you? Just give us a reason why God would disapprove.
Is it wrong if I choose to not pray to anyone but God through the Holy Spirit???
No, that is not wrong.

Now, regarding your objection that people pray TO the saints (whatever you think that means), let’s think about that. Suppose you were out of work and you asked a friend to pray that you would be helped, or simply to help you directly, and it turned out that this friend was able to offer you a job. Did you break God’s law by either asking him to pray that you would be helped, or by directly asking him for help?

Now in one sense that job came from God, since everything that is not evil comes from God. But your friend was in some sense given stewardship of that job, and in that capacity he offered it to you. Is that against God’s law?

So if the saints in heaven are given by God some authority, some stewardship over some of God’s gifts (a question which can be discussed), is that against God’s law for them to exercise that stewardship?

Your problem is that you don’t hold those on earth to the same impossible standards tho which you hold those in heaven. You’re not consistent in your objections.
 
To Leifericson: How could Jesus ever say no to God’s will? What His Mother asks is always God’s will.

The problem with your statement is Mary claims that she will always answer the petition of the person praying no matter WHAT it is.

That’s the problem you need to address. It doesn’t say IF the person praying is in line with the will of God.

“Whatever you petition, I will grant it”
 
Quote:
Is it wrong if I choose to not pray to anyone but God through the Holy Spirit???

No, that is not wrong.

And can I also not call my fellow brother father but instead brother???
 
To Leifericson: How could Jesus ever say no to God’s will? What His Mother asks is always God’s will.

The problem with your statement is Mary claims that she will always answer the petition of the person praying no matter WHAT it is.

That’s the problem you need to address. It doesn’t say IF the person praying is in line with the will of God.

“Whatever you petition, I will grant it”
You’re making the mistake of confusing an apparition with Church teaching. If you want to know Church teaching look in the Catechism, not on apparition sites.

BTW, I find many apparition sites and believers to be over the top. But that’s not a problem since the Church does not require me to believe in their private revelations.

Did you hear that? The Church does not require one to believe in any private revelations. So what you keep quoting is not authoritative. And you presumably don’t quote authoritative sources since they aren’t “shocking enough” for you.
 
So are you declaring publically that the Holy Rosary.org is not a reputable site? Because I really never know.

And by the way, your claim that I don’t post things from reputable sources is not true since it was my post from the ecuminical letter of Pope Pius X that started this to begin with.

But I realize you probably are just jumping in here and won’t hold your accusation against you.

I’ve made similar mistakes myself.
 
And yes I’m glad to hear that the church doesn’t require you to believe in private revelations. But if I’m not mistaken, these revelations have been studied over the years and votes have been made on whether or not they are valid and accepted by the Church.

Correct me if I’m wrong.
 
So are you declaring publically that the Holy Rosary.org is not a reputable site? Because I really never know.
Reputable? I don’t know. Authoritative? Definitely not. You appreciate the difference, right?
And by the way, your claim that I don’t post things from reputable sources is not true since it was my post from the ecuminical letter of Pope Pius X that started this to begin with.
But I realize you probably are just jumping in here and won’t hold your accusation against you.
I’ve made similar mistakes myself.
Did I claim that you don’t post from “reputable” sources? I don’t think I made that claim. Go back and read what I wrote.

Just understand that if you post from non-authoritative sources, we don’t have to defend them. In fact, we can disagree with them ourselves. I happen to disagree with the wording of some Marian prayers, for instance. I think they are excessive. But the wording of some non-liturgical prayer is not an authoritative act or teaching of the Church.
 
And yes I’m glad to hear that the church doesn’t require you to believe in private revelations. But if I’m not mistaken, these revelations have been studied over the years and votes have been made on whether or not they are valid and accepted by the Church.

Correct me if I’m wrong.
The Church does not vote on her beliefs, except when the bishops convene in a General Council, in which case we believe they are protected from error by the Holy Spirit.

So all the study and votes over these apparitions and private revelations means nothing to what one is required to believe as a Catholic. The revelation that a Catholic must believe ended with the Apostles.

To give one personal example, I am strongly opposed to the “Fifth Marian Dogma” crowd, and I consider them to be very mistaken and not a little dangerous to the Catholic faith.
 
**Leifericson?: I think it’s you that said: **The sovereignty, power and greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven will be handed over to the saints, the people of the Most High. His kingdom will be an everlasting kingdom, and all rulers will worship and obey him." According to Sacred Scripture’s prophecies in Old Testament times…

I agree. But what i don’t agree with you is, that we are not the saints it refers to. You have no scripture to say that the saints alive on earth do not have access to the same authority and power as those in Heaven.

For the ones who were alive on earth were casting out demons, raising the dead and doing other miracles before they were perfect in heaven.

Scripture points to yet another contradiction to your dogma that claims only those who are saints in heaven have access to the power of God now through the Holy Spirit.

Or does your church not teach this? If it does not, then that means I have full access to the power of God as a saint on earth as those do in Heaven as did the saints on earth before me.
 
Lefiericson you said: So all the study and votes over these apparitions and private revelations means nothing to what one is required to believe as a Catholic. The revelation that a Catholic must believe ended with the Apostles.

Wouldn’t that mean that the dogmas concerning Mary would be those revelations coming after the Apostles? Dogmas that I have to believe in order to be saved?
 
Hi Lief Erikson, i have read about you in school before.

Many blessings to you!
The prayer of the righteous is powerful and effective . . . are not those in Heaven the most righteous of all Christians? Are they not completely free from the stain of sin? Therefore Mary, being in Heaven, would have a far more potent prayer than any of us on Earth.
Question: how does that prove that she has has a claim to complete authority when praying?
Rev.5:8 These are Saints, but if you where to read the whole book you would understand who the “saints” are… but where in this scripture (or any other scripture) does it say that these saints are already in heaven and that they can interact with those on Earth?
Dan. 7:27, same question as Rev. 5:8
When you take these scriptures in context it is talking about the beasts on Earth, and the saints are those who have submitted themselves to the Lord and did not submit themselves to the beasts.
as far as Matt. 17:1-9, I don’t understand your point with that one… this is during the transfiguration of Jesus along with Moses and Elijah… we cannot get any proof from that scripture that we are able to pray to those in Heaven… in fact, only Jesus talked to them.
These are wondrous and sacred mysteries. To see further, to see from Scripture that Mary, of all the saints, is the most glorified and the most powerful, that the King Himself does whatever she asks, there are other Biblical passages we can turn to.
The following article includes a load of them. catholic.com/thisrock/1998/9812fea2.asp
I have went to that site and read the entire page that you have referenced, I would say simply that i disagree with some of the authors attempt to prove his point, but I do agree that Mary had to be very special to be the mother of God in the flesh… but even your point with “the King Himself does whatever she asks” is borderline blasphemy… God does NOT submit to man (or woman). God is the KING and ruler of all, and Jesus is God!
I’ll just mention very quickly two important New Testament references. Elizabeth refers to Mary as the “Mother of my Lord,” which is the language used in the Near East of that era to refer only to the Queen Mother, a critical royal office of authority in all the kingdoms of the day. The Queen Mother was the right hand of the king. This Queen Mother, Mary, is the right hand of the King of Heaven as well, according to the title Elizabeth gave her.
Where in Scripture does it say that Mary is on the right hand of the king?
This is the explicit acclaim to her position and authority by the saints in Scripture. We have a similarly clear declaration of her position and authority in the words of the angel Gabriel, the archangel of God, who addressed her with these words, “Hail, Full of Grace!” The use of the word “Hail,” is pretty amazing, as it is the word one uses toward rulers, not any normal person one is greeting. And Gabriel, who used that word, was an archangel! The logical inference is that he was treating her as his sovereign.
Full of grace because God has graced her.
Then there’s Rev. 12, which describes the woman who gave birth to Jesus as a crowned and magnificent Queen of Heaven. And there are many other Biblical passages and references to Mary’s queenship as well,
Where does it say that she is the magnificent Queen of Heaven?
(12:1-14:20) This central section of Rev portrays the power of evil, represented by a dragon, in opposition to God and his people. First, the dragon pursues the woman about to give birth, but her son is saved and “caught up to God and his throne” (Rev 12:5). Then Michael and his angels cast the dragon and his angels out of heaven (Rev 12:7-9). After this, the dragon tries to attack the boy indirectly by attacking members of his church (Rev 12:13-17). A beast, symbolizing the Roman empire, then becomes the dragon’s agent, mortally wounded but restored to life and worshiped by all the world (Rev 13:1-10). A second beast arises from the land, symbolizing the antichrist, which leads people astray by its prodigies to idolize the first beast (Rev 13:11-18). This is followed by a vision of the Lamb and his faithful ones, and the proclamation of imminent judgment upon the world in terms of the wine of God’s wrath (Rev 14:1-20).

I do applaud you using scripture, scripture is as sharp as a double edged sword.

2 [1] The woman adorned with the sun, the moon, and the stars (images taken from Genesis 37:9-10) symbolizes God’s people in the Old and the New Testament. The Israel of old gave birth to the Messiah (Rev 12:5) and then became the new Israel, the church, which suffers persecution by the dragon (Rev 12:6, 13-17); cf Isaiah 50:1; 66:7; Jeremiah 50:12. This corresponds to a widespread myth throughout the ancient world that a goddess pregnant with a savior was pursued by a horrible monster; by miraculous intervention, she bore a son who then killed the monster.

3 [2] Because of Eve’s sin, the woman gives birth in distress and pain (Genesis 3:16; cf Isaiah 66:7-14).
 
**Leifericson you said: **To give one personal example, I am strongly opposed to the “Fifth Marian Dogma” crowd, and I consider them to be very mistaken and not a little dangerous to the Catholic faith.

If you don’t embrace it you might be excommunicated. Imagine being excommunicated from Heaven for not embracing such a dogma that no doubt to you has you feeling torn between blasphemy against God and blasphemy against the church, of which the both are supposed to be in complete unison.

This sort of division in the faith of the Catholics is very prevelant from the Marian dogmas to the orthadox churches whom you say are still in union with the RCC and you say is like the prodigal son waiting to return home and the prodigal son says the same of the RCC.

If I started distinguishing all the differences of beliefs among the catholic faith, I’m sure I would find that it is not in unity as it so likes to flaunt but in great disunity on many matters.

The Marian dogas
The 15 promises of the rosary
The fate of aborted or miscarried infants
The inability to join the catholic church if you are remarried and your first marriage cannot be annuled
Not allowed the sacrements from the above situation
A husband and wife not being able to use a sperm donar to have a baby
Not allowed to use contraception

The list is no doubt longer than that which I have learned.

I find them in this very forum asked by current catholic members. I read the responses of the “Fathers” on each topic asked.

And if they do not DO that which is instructed, they are excommunicated from Heaven.
 
**Leifericson you said: **To give one personal example, I am strongly opposed to the “Fifth Marian Dogma” crowd, and I consider them to be very mistaken and not a little dangerous to the Catholic faith.

If you don’t embrace it you might be excommunicated. Imagine being excommunicated from Heaven for not embracing such a dogma that no doubt to you has you feeling torn between blasphemy against God and blasphemy against the church, of which the both are supposed to be in complete unison.

This sort of division in the faith of the Catholics is very prevelant from the Marian dogmas to the orthadox churches whom you say are still in union with the RCC and you say is like the prodigal son waiting to return home and the prodigal son says the same of the RCC.

If I started distinguishing all the differences of beliefs among the catholic faith, I’m sure I would find that it is not in unity as it so likes to flaunt but in great disunity on many matters.

The Marian dogas
The 15 promises of the rosary
The fate of aborted or miscarried infants
The inability to join the catholic church if you are remarried and your first marriage cannot be annuled
Not allowed the sacrements from the above situation
A husband and wife not being able to use a sperm donar to have a baby
Not allowed to use contraception

The list is no doubt longer than that which I have learned.

I find them in this very forum asked by current catholic members. I read the responses of the “Fathers” on each topic asked.

And if they do not DO that which is instructed, they are excommunicated from Heaven.
To talk about “excommunicated from heaven” is to talk nonsense. Don’t use terms if you don’t know what they mean.

Now, regarding the rest of your post, you are simply making a mountain out of a molehill. I believe what the Church teaches to be true. All the rest I am at liberty to ponder and evaluate on my own, within the framework of that true teaching. It’s really very simple, so don’t try and make it seem difficult just to make some point.
 
Vocimike you said: So what you keep quoting is not authoritative. **And you presumably don’t quote authoritative sources since they aren’t “shocking enough” for you. **

Now do you remember?
 
vocimike you said: talk about “excommunicated from heaven” is to talk nonsense. Don’t use terms if you don’t know what they mean.

Well, if your excommunicated from the Church, you are not allowed in Heaven correct? And if you disobey the churches teachings, you can and will be excommunicated for it. Perhaps you don’t know the penalties of your church as you should?
**
you said:**

Now, regarding the rest of your post, you are simply making a mountain out of a molehill. I believe what the Church teaches to be true. All the rest I am at liberty to ponder and evaluate on my own, within the framework of that true teaching. It’s really very simple, so don’t try and make it seem difficult just to make some point.

Not if it’s a dogma. or de fide.

Now, perhaps I am wrong, and frankly, I pray that I am, are you saying that if a priest tells a husband and wife that it is against church doctrine or teachings or whatever you want to call it, for them to have a child by sperm donation, then they are allowed to consider his advice as merely advice and do so anyway?

Is this also true for calling a priest father?

Is this also true for believing the sacrements are symbols of the literal blood and body of Jesus?

Is this true for professing that you believe your miscarried child is in heaven and not purgatory or hell as the priest may tell you?

Are we allowed to speak against what our bishop teaches or pope or priest and not suffer excommunication for it? By which we would could not enter Heaven outside of?

 
Vocimike you said: So what you keep quoting is not authoritative. **And you presumably don’t quote authoritative sources since they aren’t “shocking enough” for you. **

Now do you remember?
“Authoritative” is not the same as “reputable”. And what you did keep quoting were not authoritative sources.

My point remains. If you want to talk about what the Church teaches you need to refer to authoritative Church sources.
 
vocimike you said: talk about “excommunicated from heaven” is to talk nonsense. Don’t use terms if you don’t know what they mean.

Well, if your excommunicated from the Church, you are not allowed in Heaven correct?
Only God decides who enters heaven.
And if you disobey the churches teachings, you can and will be excommunicated for it. Perhaps you don’t know the penalties of your church as you should?
Hah! What you said is incorrect 99.999% of the time.
**
you said:**
Now, regarding the rest of your post, you are simply making a mountain out of a molehill. I believe what the Church teaches to be true. All the rest I am at liberty to ponder and evaluate on my own, within the framework of that true teaching. It’s really very simple, so don’t try and make it seem difficult just to make some point.
Not if it’s a dogma. or de fide.
That would be “what the Church teaches to be true” that I spoke of.

Now, perhaps I am wrong, and frankly, I pray that I am, are you saying that if a priest tells a husband and wife that it is against church doctrine or teachings or whatever you want to call it, for them to have a child by sperm donation, then they are allowed to consider his advice as merely advice and do so anyway?

Is this also true for calling a priest father?

Is this also true for believing the sacrements are symbols of the literal blood and body of Jesus?

Is this true for professing that you believe your miscarried child is in heaven and not purgatory or hell as the priest may tell you?

Are we allowed to speak against what our bishop teaches or pope or priest and not suffer excommunication for it? By which we would could not enter Heaven outside of?

I can’t even comprehend what you are saying here. So I simply repeat, I as a Catholic am required to believe what the Church teaches to be true. Just as you a non-Catholic Christian presumably are required to believe what the bible teaches to be true. What is so complicated about that?
 
Hi Lief,
Many blessings to you!
Bradleyc;5163486:
A saint, in Catholic theology, is one who has been made completely perfect. They are in Heaven. We Christians on Earth are all saints in the making.
can you let me know where that is in Biblical theology? in fact, almost every scripture reference i have found would indicate that a Saint is those on Earth… could you provide them for me (not the one in Rev. 5;8 again, since that is clearly talking about those on Earth)
The bible tells us that Jesus takes away our sins: Rom 6:11 Likewise count yourselves also to be truly dead to sin, but alive to God through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Rom 6:18 Then being made free from sin, you became the slaves of righteousness.
See Psalm 87, a powerful and glorious expression of the teaching of the Church that outside of it is no salvation. Zion, of course, has two meanings, the Israel of the Old Testament and the New Israel of the New Testament, the Church.
We agree with this. God enabled Mary to live without succumbing to sin, but she had free will to reject His plan and fall as the first Eve had done.
Where is this in scripture? for ALL have falled short, ALL have sinned, that is why we need Jesus as our saviour, if it were possible for us to live on this earth without sinning, we would not have a saviour., and that includes Mary, Joseph, Moses, Abraham, Adam, Eve, Peter, Paul, etc. etc.
Believing in the Traditions of the Catholic Church is what the Bible tells us to do in many, many places! See 2 Tim. 2:2, 2 Thess. 2:15, or 1 Cor. 11:2, for starters. The Traditions it refers to were those of the Catholic Church, for historically, that was the Church that existed back then and always from the very beginning.
you don’t have biblical or historical proof of that, in fact the Catholic church had persecuted of the early christians. (anabaptist)
Jesus said to His disciples (Luke 10:16), “He who hears you hears me.” The Tradition they passed on was the infallible voice of God, according to this verse, for one.
it also says
Luk 10:16 The one hearing you hears Me, and he who despises you despises Me; he who rejects you also rejects Him who sent Me.
That is a message to the early Christians that were to be out spreading the gospel and Jesus’s comforting words letting them know that it is not them that they are rejecting, but Christ… that is no claim to the infallability of the Catholic church, you can see for your self throughout history with several points of corruption, corrupt popes, etc.
I’m not saying that all popes are corrupt (or that the Church is entirely corrupt), there were some very good ones, i just think that papal authority needs to be addressed as NOT infallable.
 
IT is always interesting to see the amount discussion generated about any topic concerning the Blessed Virgin Mary.

As far as the encyclical goes…i think it is simply a miss use of words. I base this on the fact that the only official documents of the church are those in Latin. Unfortunately there is no latin version on the vatican web site. However there is a french version and the translation of the same sentence in question

“Car enfin, pour être de bon aloi, le culte de la Mère de Dieu doit jaillir du cœur”

This rougly translates to

“After all, to be of good quality, **the cult of the Mother of God **must spring from the heart”

Hopefully this enhances the discussion.
 
**Leifericson you said: **To give one personal example, I am strongly opposed to the “Fifth Marian Dogma” crowd, and I consider them to be very mistaken and not a little dangerous to the Catholic faith.
No, I have never said that. You must be accidentally quoting someone else. I personally think the Fifth Marian Dogma is a wonderful idea.
If you don’t embrace it you might be excommunicated. Imagine being excommunicated from Heaven for not embracing such a dogma that no doubt to you has you feeling torn between blasphemy against God and blasphemy against the church, of which the both are supposed to be in complete unison.
They are. I do not feel torn by any dogma of the Church; I feel very, very, very honored to be graced by the presence of the great light and beauty cast by all of them.
This sort of division in the faith of the Catholics is very prevelant from the Marian dogmas to the orthadox churches whom you say are still in union with the RCC and you say is like the prodigal son waiting to return home and the prodigal son says the same of the RCC.

If I started distinguishing all the differences of beliefs among the catholic faith, I’m sure I would find that it is not in unity as it so likes to flaunt but in great disunity on many matters.

The Marian dogas
Anyone who claims to be Catholic and disagrees with any dogma, including the Marian dogmas, is in fact a heretic. You won’t find any disunity within the Catholic Church over these dogmas because no one who rejects the authority of the Catholic Church in defining these matters of truth is a Catholic, even if they claim to be.
The 15 promises of the rosary
These are non-dogmatic. They are a private revelation, so disagreement is allowed and is not a sign of any disunity from the faith among Catholics.
The fate of aborted or miscarried infants
The Church has never explained their destiny through official and authoritative teaching, so Catholics are free to speculate and disagree. This is no sign of disunity in the faith.
The inability to join the catholic church if you are remarried and your first marriage cannot be annuled
The proper authorities within the Church make the decisions regarding marital status. I believe ecclesial courts deal with this- I’m not sure how it works. Catholics have no right to dispute against the authority of the Church. But again, disagreements on non-dogmatic and non-doctrinal issues is not a sign of disunity in faith, any more than Christians disagreeing about the exact route and chronology of St. Paul’s journey through the Roman world is a sign that they aren’t worshipping the same God. That’s not how it works. We are one in faith, but free to disagree on matters where the Church has not made an authoritative decision.
Not allowed the sacrements from the above situation
A husband and wife not being able to use a sperm donar to have a baby
Not allowed to use contraception
Disagreement with the Church’s teachings on contraception, sperm donation or the use of the sacraments is very grave. This is not a sign of disunity within the faith, though, for to the extent that people disagree with the Church they leave the faith.
I find them in this very forum asked by current catholic members.
Of course you do. Not all Catholics are fully knowledgeable about their religion. Just about all of us are in ignorance about some parts here or there, but a lot of Catholics are ignorant about the basics. Often people grow up culturally Catholic but not practicing Catholic. Other people are practicing Catholics, but fall away into intellectual error and continue calling themselves Catholic while deliberately defying the Church’s teaching on matters of morals or doctrine.

The same is true throughout the Christian world. The failings of members of the Church do not suggest, however, that the Church’s doctrine is contradictory or its unity unreal. We have one faith. If some Catholics choose not to heed its precepts and fall away, that does not diminish the unity of faith among those that remain.
And if they do not DO that which is instructed, they are excommunicated from Heaven.
Jesus gave authority to the Church to stand in His place on Earth. “Whoever accepts you accepts me, and whoever rejects you rejects me.” His words, not mine.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top