Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc, I know right now you're thinking less about what is actually true, and more about how to defend Orthodoxy.

I urge you to think in the spirit of truth, not in the spirit of self preservation.

---

I'm trying to find what's actually true. That's what led me to start questioning things in the first place.

But let me ask you something honestly: what is the "correct" denomination, in your view?

Because within Protestantism, there are huge differences on salvation itself: whether baptism saves, whether you can lose salvation, whether faith alone is enough, whether God chooses some and rejects others, etc.

Where is the ultimate authority of interpreting scripture? Who has the ultimate authority when people within your own church disagree on an interpretation?

They can't all be right. So how do we know which version of Protestantism has the truth? Why do you think you and your church are the only people who have the correct theology?

If you don't think you have perfect theology, then why does theology even matter? If scripture is all we need, then why do we even need a physical church? Why do we need Pastors?

We both believe and have faith in Jesus, is that not enough?

1 Thess. 5:21

---

Good questions, and I'll answer what you want. I think I've already answered some of them already. But I think you're avoiding the pressing issue here. Can you answer me - you DO see the serious problem in praising someone who took you to church in that way, don't you? I don't know if I can tell you which denomination is "correct", but I CAN tell you which denomination is certainly NOT correct, and it would be any church that teaches THAT.

---

If I had a superficial view that what they're doing is literal worship of Mary then yes I would reject it.

Its the same concept of Protestant communion... yeah it looks like the practice of consuming the literal body and blood of Christ...but you make it very clear that its just symbolic.

You think the words they say are meant to convey worship of Mary...yet they make it very clear that treating it that way would be heretical.

---

So, are you saying that if someone bows and prays to a statue of you in church, sings hymns for you, and calls you "my salvation", "my deliverer from the mire of sin", and that "those who chants hymns of praise to you, Jesus will grant salvation" because you took him to church where he got saved, that it's okay as long as he says he's not worshiping you? God is okay with that?

I think you're really trying to avoid something, and I just want you to be honest. I have not found one honest Catholic to talk with about this. Not one. I'm hoping you'll be different.

---

This isn't Roman Catholicism. They engaged in schism away from the original church and that's precisely why they have so many issues, including the papacy and left leaning ideology. I would argue them splitting also led to Protestant reformation who also has a major issue with left leaning ideology creeping in: See Baylor for example.

Protestant reformation was a reaction to real Roman Catholic abuses and had nothing to do with the Orthodox. Here's what Luther said: "The Greeks [Orthodox] . . . are not heretics or schismatics but the most Christian people and the best followers of the Gospel on earth."

It's Eastern/Greek Orthodoxy, its VERY different from Roman Catholicism. They don't pray the rosary. As Rome focuses on Mary almost to the exclusion of Christ, Protestants ignore or even slander her; meanwhile, Orthodoxy venerates her profoundly, but always in connection with her Son. This is why all Icons of Mary have Jesus in Orthodoxy. Statues in Catholicism don't include Jesus. I would agree that Roman Catholics take it too far with Mary.

One key difference is how worship is perceived though, its very different. The early church is nowhere close to how modern Protestants worship. When the reformation happened, the focus of the Church being on the Sacrifice of Christ offered by himself to himself shifted purely to an intellectual exercise. When worship changed from body/soul participation in the eternal sacrifice of Christ into an intellectual exercise of gaining knowledge and personal prayer, people misunderstood that praying to Mary means worshipping her. That's because they've changed the definition of worship by their praxis caused by heterodoxy. Its almost bordering Gnosticism in some denominations.

I'm trying to avoid looking at these things from a superficial level and instead really diving into the history. It requires a major paradigm shift to understand.

---

Don't neglect Catholic history while you're at it. Luther's praise of the Orthodox should be a bit of a red flag.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc, I know right now you're thinking less about what is actually true, and more about how to defend Orthodoxy.

I urge you to think in the spirit of truth, not in the spirit of self preservation.

---

I'm trying to find what's actually true. That's what led me to start questioning things in the first place.

But let me ask you something honestly: what is the "correct" denomination, in your view?

Because within Protestantism, there are huge differences on salvation itself: whether baptism saves, whether you can lose salvation, whether faith alone is enough, whether God chooses some and rejects others, etc.

Where is the ultimate authority of interpreting scripture? Who has the ultimate authority when people within your own church disagree on an interpretation?

They can't all be right. So how do we know which version of Protestantism has the truth? Why do you think you and your church are the only people who have the correct theology?

If you don't think you have perfect theology, then why does theology even matter? If scripture is all we need, then why do we even need a physical church? Why do we need Pastors?

We both believe and have faith in Jesus, is that not enough?

1 Thess. 5:21

---

Good questions, and I'll answer what you want. I think I've already answered some of them already. But I think you're avoiding the pressing issue here. Can you answer me - you DO see the serious problem in praising someone who took you to church in that way, don't you? I don't know if I can tell you which denomination is "correct", but I CAN tell you which denomination is certainly NOT correct, and it would be any church that teaches THAT.

---

If I had a superficial view that what they're doing is literal worship of Mary then yes I would reject it.

Its the same concept of Protestant communion... yeah it looks like the practice of consuming the literal body and blood of Christ...but you make it very clear that its just symbolic.

You think the words they say are meant to convey worship of Mary...yet they make it very clear that treating it that way would be heretical.

---

So, are you saying that if someone bows and prays to a statue of you in church, sings hymns for you, and calls you "my salvation", "my deliverer from the mire of sin", and that "those who chants hymns of praise to you, Jesus will grant salvation" because you took him to church where he got saved, that it's okay as long as he says he's not worshiping you? God is okay with that?

I think you're really trying to avoid something, and I just want you to be honest. I have not found one honest Catholic to talk with about this. Not one. I'm hoping you'll be different.

---

This isn't Roman Catholicism. They engaged in schism away from the original church and that's precisely why they have so many issues, including the papacy and left leaning ideology. I would argue them splitting also led to Protestant reformation who also has a major issue with left leaning ideology creeping in: See Baylor for example.

Protestant reformation was a reaction to real Roman Catholic abuses and had nothing to do with the Orthodox. Here's what Luther said: "The Greeks [Orthodox] . . . are not heretics or schismatics but the most Christian people and the best followers of the Gospel on earth."

It's Eastern/Greek Orthodoxy, its VERY different from Roman Catholicism. They don't pray the rosary. As Rome focuses on Mary almost to the exclusion of Christ, Protestants ignore or even slander her; meanwhile, Orthodoxy venerates her profoundly, but always in connection with her Son. This is why all Icons of Mary have Jesus in Orthodoxy. Statues in Catholicism don't include Jesus. I would agree that Roman Catholics take it too far with Mary.

One key difference is how worship is perceived though, its very different. The early church is nowhere close to how modern Protestants worship. When the reformation happened, the focus of the Church being on the Sacrifice of Christ offered by himself to himself shifted purely to an intellectual exercise. When worship changed from body/soul participation in the eternal sacrifice of Christ into an intellectual exercise of gaining knowledge and personal prayer, people misunderstood that praying to Mary means worshipping her. That's because they've changed the definition of worship by their praxis caused by heterodoxy.

I'm trying to avoid looking at these things from a superficial level and instead really diving into the history. It requires a major paradigm shift to understand.

---

Okay, we can talk about that later, but you're still avoiding the question, which I find very curious. Surely the answer is plainly obvious to anyone who truly believes in Jesus and wants to worship him, isn't it? Right now, you're not being honest, just like the Roman Catholics aren't. Can I finally get an answer?

---

You want me to say that I think praying to Mary and saints is wrong based solely on the superficial view that it can only be worship and nothing else. Digging any deeper than the surface level is off limits? Why?

You need to be extremely careful here:
1st century Judaism didn't revolve around private Bible study. The canon of Scripture wasn't even finalized yet. Worship was liturgical and sacramental: incense, vestments, candles, priests, sacrifices, psalms, processions, and blessings. There was an altar, sacred vessels, and prayers for the departed. Jesus called the Temple "My Father's house" and faithfully attended synagogue worship.


You're essentially condemning this form of worship as "unbiblical ritual,". This condemns the very context of worship Jesus Himself lived within. The Apostles didn't replace ritual with minimalism; they transformed Temple worship into Christian liturgy.

---

I just want you to answer a simple question, which you dodged again. I'll try one more time:

Do you think it's ever okay for someone to bow and pray to a statue of you in church, sing hymns for you, and call you "my salvation", "my deliverer from the mire of sin", and that "those who chants hymns of praise to you, Jesus will grant salvation" because you took him to church where he got saved?

---

If I said that "my child saved me from my previous life of sin," a phrase that I have heard in various forms from actual people, would you really think that I am attributing the salvation of my everlasting soul to my infant child? No, because it would be immediately obvious that my real intention was to say that they inspired me to reform my life and turn back to God.

This is the sense in which Catholics and Orthodox sing our praises to Mother Mary. She didn't save us in the literal sense, but she saved us by inspiring us to draw closer to her Son, who did save us.

The salvation of an individual person's soul is not a one-time event for members of the Catholic and Orthodox Churches; it is a lifelong process that must be worked out every day. Anything, or anyone, that helps us along our journey to love Christ more fully is responsible for "saving" us in this lesser sense. That is the sense in which the Apostle Paul used the term in 1 Corinthians 9:22, and it is the sense in which these Catholic writers praise Mary.

---

You Roman Catholics must really think people are stupid. Is saying "my child saved me from my previous life of sin" the same as, or anything even close to saying this about your child:

• "No one abounds in the knowledge of God except through my child"
• "No one receives a gift from the throne of mercy except through my child"
• "No one attains salvation except through my child"
• "No one can go to Jesus except by my child"
• "My child is the road everyone must travel to get to God"
• "My child is necessary for everyone's salvation"
• "My child is sovereign"
• "My child is the peacemaker between sinners and God"
• "My child is the ruler of my house"
• "My child, please grant us salvation"
• "My child is the God of this world"
• "I place my salvation in your hands, my child"
• "To you, my child, I entrust my soul"
• "We entrust all our cares and petitions to my child"
• "My child is the ALL HOLY ONE"
• "We give ourselves to my child, and surrender the hour of our death wholly to my child's care"

... and does your child "saving you from your previous life of sin" warrant:

• making statues and images of your child, and bowing and praying to them in church
• singing hymns to your child in church
• holding hundreds of festivals for your child throughout the year
• say prayers where you recite your child's name 10 times as much as you do God's
• write a book of psalms for your child, where you take the Psalms of the Old Testament and substitute your child's name wherever God is mentioned.

You really are gaslighting. Either that, or you're satanically deceived and in complete darkness. People of the light and of truth easily see the idolatry and heresy here. Those in darkness can not, or they try to obscure it. Your dishonesty and deception only furthers my point that the Roman Catholic Church is NOT from God.

---

The "Roman Catholic" thing you keep doing is odd. That is not the name of the Church. The only "Roman" Catholics are those who live in Rome.

Anyway, there's no real point in continuing this conversation. We are clearly talking past one another, so we might as well just drop it.

I am a Christian. I worship the Triune God and no other being. I do not consider the Virgin Mary to be a possible object of worship. I greatly honor and respect her as the Mother of God and a powerful intercessor for Christians. This is the constant and historic Christian position from the earliest times, and I will not deviate from it.

I will pray for you, as I hope you will pray for me.

Practicing gay dude gets communion.

https://www.theblaze.com/news/bishop-raises-hell-after-woke-priest-allows-homosexual-abc-broadcaster-to-receive-eucharist-beside-his-husband

I get how this happens in decentralized denominations, but how does the RC church allow this?

ARbear13 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc, I know right now you're thinking less about what is actually true, and more about how to defend Orthodoxy.

I urge you to think in the spirit of truth, not in the spirit of self preservation.

---

I'm trying to find what's actually true. That's what led me to start questioning things in the first place.

But let me ask you something honestly: what is the "correct" denomination, in your view?

Because within Protestantism, there are huge differences on salvation itself: whether baptism saves, whether you can lose salvation, whether faith alone is enough, whether God chooses some and rejects others, etc.

Where is the ultimate authority of interpreting scripture? Who has the ultimate authority when people within your own church disagree on an interpretation?

They can't all be right. So how do we know which version of Protestantism has the truth? Why do you think you and your church are the only people who have the correct theology?

If you don't think you have perfect theology, then why does theology even matter? If scripture is all we need, then why do we even need a physical church? Why do we need Pastors?

We both believe and have faith in Jesus, is that not enough?

1 Thess. 5:21

---

Good questions, and I'll answer what you want. I think I've already answered some of them already. But I think you're avoiding the pressing issue here. Can you answer me - you DO see the serious problem in praising someone who took you to church in that way, don't you? I don't know if I can tell you which denomination is "correct", but I CAN tell you which denomination is certainly NOT correct, and it would be any church that teaches THAT.

---

If I had a superficial view that what they're doing is literal worship of Mary then yes I would reject it.

Its the same concept of Protestant communion... yeah it looks like the practice of consuming the literal body and blood of Christ...but you make it very clear that its just symbolic.

You think the words they say are meant to convey worship of Mary...yet they make it very clear that treating it that way would be heretical.

---

So, are you saying that if someone bows and prays to a statue of you in church, sings hymns for you, and calls you "my salvation", "my deliverer from the mire of sin", and that "those who chants hymns of praise to you, Jesus will grant salvation" because you took him to church where he got saved, that it's okay as long as he says he's not worshiping you? God is okay with that?

I think you're really trying to avoid something, and I just want you to be honest. I have not found one honest Catholic to talk with about this. Not one. I'm hoping you'll be different.

---

This isn't Roman Catholicism. They engaged in schism away from the original church and that's precisely why they have so many issues, including the papacy and left leaning ideology. I would argue them splitting also led to Protestant reformation who also has a major issue with left leaning ideology creeping in: See Baylor for example.

Protestant reformation was a reaction to real Roman Catholic abuses and had nothing to do with the Orthodox. Here's what Luther said: "The Greeks [Orthodox] . . . are not heretics or schismatics but the most Christian people and the best followers of the Gospel on earth."

It's Eastern/Greek Orthodoxy, its VERY different from Roman Catholicism. They don't pray the rosary. As Rome focuses on Mary almost to the exclusion of Christ, Protestants ignore or even slander her; meanwhile, Orthodoxy venerates her profoundly, but always in connection with her Son. This is why all Icons of Mary have Jesus in Orthodoxy. Statues in Catholicism don't include Jesus. I would agree that Roman Catholics take it too far with Mary.

One key difference is how worship is perceived though, its very different. The early church is nowhere close to how modern Protestants worship. When the reformation happened, the focus of the Church being on the Sacrifice of Christ offered by himself to himself shifted purely to an intellectual exercise. When worship changed from body/soul participation in the eternal sacrifice of Christ into an intellectual exercise of gaining knowledge and personal prayer, people misunderstood that praying to Mary means worshipping her. That's because they've changed the definition of worship by their praxis caused by heterodoxy.

I'm trying to avoid looking at these things from a superficial level and instead really diving into the history. It requires a major paradigm shift to understand.

---

Okay, we can talk about that later, but you're still avoiding the question, which I find very curious. Surely the answer is plainly obvious to anyone who truly believes in Jesus and wants to worship him, isn't it? Right now, you're not being honest, just like the Roman Catholics aren't. Can I finally get an answer?

---

You want me to say that I think praying to Mary and saints is wrong based solely on the superficial view that it can only be worship and nothing else. Digging any deeper than the surface level is off limits? Why?

You need to be extremely careful here:
1st century Judaism didn't revolve around private Bible study. The canon of Scripture wasn't even finalized yet. Worship was liturgical and sacramental: incense, vestments, candles, priests, sacrifices, psalms, processions, and blessings. There was an altar, sacred vessels, and prayers for the departed. Jesus called the Temple "My Father's house" and faithfully attended synagogue worship.


You're essentially condemning this form of worship as "unbiblical ritual,". This condemns the very context of worship Jesus Himself lived within. The Apostles didn't replace ritual with minimalism; they transformed Temple worship into Christian liturgy.

---

I just want you to answer a simple question, which you dodged again. I'll try one more time:

Do you think it's ever okay for someone to bow and pray to a statue of you in church, sing hymns for you, and call you "my salvation", "my deliverer from the mire of sin", and that "those who chants hymns of praise to you, Jesus will grant salvation" because you took him to church where he got saved?

---

If I said that "my child saved me from my previous life of sin," a phrase that I have heard in various forms from actual people, would you really think that I am attributing the salvation of my everlasting soul to my infant child? No, because it would be immediately obvious that my real intention was to say that they inspired me to reform my life and turn back to God.

This is the sense in which Catholics and Orthodox sing our praises to Mother Mary. She didn't save us in the literal sense, but she saved us by inspiring us to draw closer to her Son, who did save us.

The salvation of an individual person's soul is not a one-time event for members of the Catholic and Orthodox Churches; it is a lifelong process that must be worked out every day. Anything, or anyone, that helps us along our journey to love Christ more fully is responsible for "saving" us in this lesser sense. That is the sense in which the Apostle Paul used the term in 1 Corinthians 9:22, and it is the sense in which these Catholic writers praise Mary.

---

You Roman Catholics must really think people are stupid. Is saying "my child saved me from my previous life of sin" the same as, or anything even close to saying this about your child:

• "No one abounds in the knowledge of God except through my child"
• "No one receives a gift from the throne of mercy except through my child"
• "No one attains salvation except through my child"
• "No one can go to Jesus except by my child"
• "My child is the road everyone must travel to get to God"
• "My child is necessary for everyone's salvation"
• "My child is sovereign"
• "My child is the peacemaker between sinners and God"
• "My child is the ruler of my house"
• "My child, please grant us salvation"
• "My child is the God of this world"
• "I place my salvation in your hands, my child"
• "To you, my child, I entrust my soul"
• "We entrust all our cares and petitions to my child"
• "My child is the ALL HOLY ONE"
• "We give ourselves to my child, and surrender the hour of our death wholly to my child's care"

... and does your child "saving you from your previous life of sin" warrant:

• making statues and images of your child, and bowing and praying to them in church
• singing hymns to your child in church
• holding hundreds of festivals for your child throughout the year
• say prayers where you recite your child's name 10 times as much as you do God's
• write a book of psalms for your child, where you take the Psalms of the Old Testament and substitute your child's name wherever God is mentioned.

You really are gaslighting. Either that, or you're satanically deceived and in complete darkness. People of the light and of truth easily see the idolatry and heresy here. Those in darkness can not, or they try to obscure it. Your dishonesty and deception only furthers my point that the Roman Catholic Church is NOT from God.

---

The "Roman Catholic" thing you keep doing is odd. That is not the name of the Church. The only "Roman" Catholics are those who live in Rome.

Anyway, there's no real point in continuing this conversation. We are clearly talking past one another, so we might as well just drop it.

I am a Christian. I worship the Triune God and no other being. I do not consider the Virgin Mary to be a possible object of worship. I greatly honor and respect her as the Mother of God and a powerful intercessor for Christians. This is the constant and historic Christian position from the earliest times, and I will not deviate from it.

I will pray for you, as I hope you will pray for me.

---

How ironic that you think it's "odd" that I call you a Roman Catholic, a common designation, yet it's not odd at all to you that someone who claims to worship only God is perfectly fine with the glory that belongs to Jesus alone to be stolen and given to someone else. This just perfectly sums up the problem here - something is really amiss with your discernment.

I don't see us as talking past each other at all; rather, I see myself laser focusing on the issue, and you talking around it and deflecting. Just look at this last post of yours. You simply don't want to acknowledge the 900 pound gorilla. People with the truth just don't do this.

You keep repeating the claim (lie) that your Marian "devotion" is the "constant and historic Christian position" when it's been made clear that it exists NOWHERE in Scripture and the early church. You just don't want to acknowledge real facts, you just want your church's indoctrination. Your loyalty appears to lie more with your Church than with God.

Can you provide ANY evidence for your claim about Marian devotion? Because the evidence I see shows that Roman Catholic marian "devotion" is deeply rooted in paganism that had infiltrated Christianity starting in about the 4th century. It's pagan mother goddess worship re-awakened. It is NOT from God, it's from the Devil - I'm sorry to say, but it's the truth.

Yes, I'll pray for you, and it would be for you to come to realize all this before it's too late.

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

Practicing gay dude gets communion.

https://www.theblaze.com/news/bishop-raises-hell-after-woke-priest-allows-homosexual-abc-broadcaster-to-receive-eucharist-beside-his-husband

I get how this happens in decentralized denominations, but how does the RC church allow this?

---

The Catholic Church only allows this if both men admitted that their union was illegitimate, confessed of their sins, and agreed to chastity. So, they would have to admit that their "marriage" did not exist at all and that they had been living in sin.

Do I think this happened as it should have? I don't know for sure, but probably not. I'd like to give them the benefit of the doubt, though. There have always been clergy who are happy to accommodate the secular powers of the age. God will deal with them as He sees fit.

James Martin, the Jesuit priest standing beside them, is a very thinly disguised subversive and may end up "reassigned" in the near future if he becomes subject to a bishop with a spine. He is popular among the liberal, elite, culturally "Catholic" crowd in the Northeast. His cachet among the coastal elite and success in "outreach" to this wealthy and influential demographic has won him some prominent backers among the progressive bishops. Fr. Martin is sly and is talented at walking right up to the line of what even liberal bishops will permit without quite stepping over it, but clerics like him are soon to be finished in the United States.

Based on some decades-long trends within the priesthood, the liberal bishops willing to accommodate this perversion, who are already a minority among the American episcopate, will go extinct relatively soon. The upcoming generation of American priests is staunchly conservative and traditional.

Cultural Catholicism, in which people claim affiliation with the Church due to family and ethnic ties but don't actually practice the faith, is quickly dying across the West. The progressive bishops are mostly products of this bygone worldview, but they are old and are dying along with their ideology. As predicted by Pope Benedict XVI, the future Catholic Church will be much smaller in number but much greater in devotion and commitment to following the Church's teachings. It's a hopeful and encouraging trend.

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc, I know right now you're thinking less about what is actually true, and more about how to defend Orthodoxy.

I urge you to think in the spirit of truth, not in the spirit of self preservation.

---

I'm trying to find what's actually true. That's what led me to start questioning things in the first place.

But let me ask you something honestly: what is the "correct" denomination, in your view?

Because within Protestantism, there are huge differences on salvation itself: whether baptism saves, whether you can lose salvation, whether faith alone is enough, whether God chooses some and rejects others, etc.

Where is the ultimate authority of interpreting scripture? Who has the ultimate authority when people within your own church disagree on an interpretation?

They can't all be right. So how do we know which version of Protestantism has the truth? Why do you think you and your church are the only people who have the correct theology?

If you don't think you have perfect theology, then why does theology even matter? If scripture is all we need, then why do we even need a physical church? Why do we need Pastors?

We both believe and have faith in Jesus, is that not enough?

1 Thess. 5:21

---

Good questions, and I'll answer what you want. I think I've already answered some of them already. But I think you're avoiding the pressing issue here. Can you answer me - you DO see the serious problem in praising someone who took you to church in that way, don't you? I don't know if I can tell you which denomination is "correct", but I CAN tell you which denomination is certainly NOT correct, and it would be any church that teaches THAT.

---

If I had a superficial view that what they're doing is literal worship of Mary then yes I would reject it.

Its the same concept of Protestant communion... yeah it looks like the practice of consuming the literal body and blood of Christ...but you make it very clear that its just symbolic.

You think the words they say are meant to convey worship of Mary...yet they make it very clear that treating it that way would be heretical.

---

It's very interesting that if someone dies everything that Catholics do for Mary, but they did it for Buda instead of Mary.... Catholics would agree that those people were worshipping Buda.
Catholics are trying to move the goal posts so that they can engage in Marian worship but claim that it's not worship.
No other religion on the planet builds churches or temples, sings songs, prays prayers, bows before the image of someone or something that they claim they do not worship.
The Catholics have more churches named after & dedicated to Mary than they do Jesus.

Actions speak louder than words.

ShooterTX said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc, I know right now you're thinking less about what is actually true, and more about how to defend Orthodoxy.

I urge you to think in the spirit of truth, not in the spirit of self preservation.

---

I'm trying to find what's actually true. That's what led me to start questioning things in the first place.

But let me ask you something honestly: what is the "correct" denomination, in your view?

Because within Protestantism, there are huge differences on salvation itself: whether baptism saves, whether you can lose salvation, whether faith alone is enough, whether God chooses some and rejects others, etc.

Where is the ultimate authority of interpreting scripture? Who has the ultimate authority when people within your own church disagree on an interpretation?

They can't all be right. So how do we know which version of Protestantism has the truth? Why do you think you and your church are the only people who have the correct theology?

If you don't think you have perfect theology, then why does theology even matter? If scripture is all we need, then why do we even need a physical church? Why do we need Pastors?

We both believe and have faith in Jesus, is that not enough?

1 Thess. 5:21

---

Good questions, and I'll answer what you want. I think I've already answered some of them already. But I think you're avoiding the pressing issue here. Can you answer me - you DO see the serious problem in praising someone who took you to church in that way, don't you? I don't know if I can tell you which denomination is "correct", but I CAN tell you which denomination is certainly NOT correct, and it would be any church that teaches THAT.

---

If I had a superficial view that what they're doing is literal worship of Mary then yes I would reject it.

Its the same concept of Protestant communion... yeah it looks like the practice of consuming the literal body and blood of Christ...but you make it very clear that its just symbolic.

You think the words they say are meant to convey worship of Mary...yet they make it very clear that treating it that way would be heretical.

---

It's very interesting that if someone dies everything that Catholics do for Mary, but they did it for Buda instead of Mary.... Catholics would agree that those people were worshipping Buda.
Catholics are trying to move the goal posts so that they can engage in Marian worship but claim that it's not worship.
No other religion on the planet builds churches or temples, sings songs, prays prayers, bows before the image of someone or something that they claim they do not worship.
The Catholics have more churches named after & dedicated to Mary than they do Jesus.

Actions speak louder than words.

---

Interesting take. Are members of the Church of England (Anglicans) worshipping England (or the head of state)? You are going to be shocked when you find out where Lutherans get their name from. Are Methodists in love with process? What are Baptists worshipping? Are Seventh Day Adventists some weird calendar worshippers? We haven't even gotten to what the nondenominational churches name themselves: you'll find names like Antioch, Watermark, City Church. What do their names tell you about what they worship?

And wait until you figure out who our beloved university is named after. Are we all worshipping Judge Baylor when we gather to celebrate and sing the praises of the Green and Gold? Heck, we even have a statue of him.

ShooterTX said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc, I know right now you're thinking less about what is actually true, and more about how to defend Orthodoxy.

I urge you to think in the spirit of truth, not in the spirit of self preservation.

---

I'm trying to find what's actually true. That's what led me to start questioning things in the first place.

But let me ask you something honestly: what is the "correct" denomination, in your view?

Because within Protestantism, there are huge differences on salvation itself: whether baptism saves, whether you can lose salvation, whether faith alone is enough, whether God chooses some and rejects others, etc.

Where is the ultimate authority of interpreting scripture? Who has the ultimate authority when people within your own church disagree on an interpretation?

They can't all be right. So how do we know which version of Protestantism has the truth? Why do you think you and your church are the only people who have the correct theology?

If you don't think you have perfect theology, then why does theology even matter? If scripture is all we need, then why do we even need a physical church? Why do we need Pastors?

We both believe and have faith in Jesus, is that not enough?

1 Thess. 5:21

---

Good questions, and I'll answer what you want. I think I've already answered some of them already. But I think you're avoiding the pressing issue here. Can you answer me - you DO see the serious problem in praising someone who took you to church in that way, don't you? I don't know if I can tell you which denomination is "correct", but I CAN tell you which denomination is certainly NOT correct, and it would be any church that teaches THAT.

---

If I had a superficial view that what they're doing is literal worship of Mary then yes I would reject it.

Its the same concept of Protestant communion... yeah it looks like the practice of consuming the literal body and blood of Christ...but you make it very clear that its just symbolic.

You think the words they say are meant to convey worship of Mary...yet they make it very clear that treating it that way would be heretical.

---

It's very interesting that if someone dies everything that Catholics do for Mary, but they did it for Buda instead of Mary.... Catholics would agree that those people were worshipping Buda.
Catholics are trying to move the goal posts so that they can engage in Marian worship but claim that it's not worship.
No other religion on the planet builds churches or temples, sings songs, prays prayers, bows before the image of someone or something that they claim they do not worship.
The Catholics have more churches named after & dedicated to Mary than they do Jesus.

Actions speak louder than words.

---

Don't be so sure that they'd agree about Buda being worshiped, or at least admit to it. I presented this very same argument in another thread to a RC (CokeBear). I gave the whole list of things done and said for Mary, and asked if it was worship. They said no. Then I presented the exact same list but said it was being done for Baal (or any entity they wanted to insert in Mary's place) and asked if that is worship. Their answer? "I don't know". There's a double standard when it comes to Mary. They know it, too. That's why you see them dodging and deflecting around that same argument I've been making in this thread.

The answer ArBear has come up with, is that if there's no intent of worship, then it's not worship. So I'd ask ArBear the same question above, but insert Baal or Buda in Mary's place and ask if it isn't worship if the person doesn't intend to worship them. If he says no, that it in that case it would NOT be worship, then you'd have to say that God would be okay with people bowing and praying to statues of Baal or Buda in church, and singing hymns for them, building shrines in their honor, and crediting them for salvation as long as they don't think it's worship. But this would obviously be wrong. So this is another double standard. God's second commandment doesn't say that bowing to idols is wrong only if your intent is to worship it. No, He made it clear that the mere act of bowing to them is evil, regardless of one's intent. The very fact that Roman Catholicism removes this second commandment whenever they list them, well, that tells you all you need to know.

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc, I know right now you're thinking less about what is actually true, and more about how to defend Orthodoxy.

I urge you to think in the spirit of truth, not in the spirit of self preservation.

---

I'm trying to find what's actually true. That's what led me to start questioning things in the first place.

But let me ask you something honestly: what is the "correct" denomination, in your view?

Because within Protestantism, there are huge differences on salvation itself: whether baptism saves, whether you can lose salvation, whether faith alone is enough, whether God chooses some and rejects others, etc.

Where is the ultimate authority of interpreting scripture? Who has the ultimate authority when people within your own church disagree on an interpretation?

They can't all be right. So how do we know which version of Protestantism has the truth? Why do you think you and your church are the only people who have the correct theology?

If you don't think you have perfect theology, then why does theology even matter? If scripture is all we need, then why do we even need a physical church? Why do we need Pastors?

We both believe and have faith in Jesus, is that not enough?

1 Thess. 5:21

---

Good questions, and I'll answer what you want. I think I've already answered some of them already. But I think you're avoiding the pressing issue here. Can you answer me - you DO see the serious problem in praising someone who took you to church in that way, don't you? I don't know if I can tell you which denomination is "correct", but I CAN tell you which denomination is certainly NOT correct, and it would be any church that teaches THAT.

---

If I had a superficial view that what they're doing is literal worship of Mary then yes I would reject it.

Its the same concept of Protestant communion... yeah it looks like the practice of consuming the literal body and blood of Christ...but you make it very clear that its just symbolic.

You think the words they say are meant to convey worship of Mary...yet they make it very clear that treating it that way would be heretical.

---

It's very interesting that if someone dies everything that Catholics do for Mary, but they did it for Buda instead of Mary.... Catholics would agree that those people were worshipping Buda.
Catholics are trying to move the goal posts so that they can engage in Marian worship but claim that it's not worship.
No other religion on the planet builds churches or temples, sings songs, prays prayers, bows before the image of someone or something that they claim they do not worship.
The Catholics have more churches named after & dedicated to Mary than they do Jesus.

Actions speak louder than words.

---

Interesting take. Are members of the Church of England (Anglicans) worshipping England (or the head of state)? You are going to be shocked when you find out where Lutherans get their name from. Are Methodists in love with process? What are Baptists worshipping? Are Seventh Day Adventists some weird calendar worshippers? We haven't even gotten to what the nondenominational churches name themselves: you'll find names like Antioch, Watermark, City Church. What do their names tell you about what they worship?

And wait until you figure out who our beloved university is named after. Are we all worshipping Judge Baylor when we gather to celebrate and sing the praises of the Green and Gold? Heck, we even have a statue of him.

---

Do we sing praises to Judge Baylor IN CHURCH? Do we bow before and pray to his statue? Do we say Judge Baylor is our salvation, THE ALL HOLY ONE, to whom we entrust our souls fully to his care??

You guys really are suffering from some sort of mind virus.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc, I know right now you're thinking less about what is actually true, and more about how to defend Orthodoxy.

I urge you to think in the spirit of truth, not in the spirit of self preservation.

---

I'm trying to find what's actually true. That's what led me to start questioning things in the first place.

But let me ask you something honestly: what is the "correct" denomination, in your view?

Because within Protestantism, there are huge differences on salvation itself: whether baptism saves, whether you can lose salvation, whether faith alone is enough, whether God chooses some and rejects others, etc.

Where is the ultimate authority of interpreting scripture? Who has the ultimate authority when people within your own church disagree on an interpretation?

They can't all be right. So how do we know which version of Protestantism has the truth? Why do you think you and your church are the only people who have the correct theology?

If you don't think you have perfect theology, then why does theology even matter? If scripture is all we need, then why do we even need a physical church? Why do we need Pastors?

We both believe and have faith in Jesus, is that not enough?

1 Thess. 5:21

---

Good questions, and I'll answer what you want. I think I've already answered some of them already. But I think you're avoiding the pressing issue here. Can you answer me - you DO see the serious problem in praising someone who took you to church in that way, don't you? I don't know if I can tell you which denomination is "correct", but I CAN tell you which denomination is certainly NOT correct, and it would be any church that teaches THAT.

---

If I had a superficial view that what they're doing is literal worship of Mary then yes I would reject it.

Its the same concept of Protestant communion... yeah it looks like the practice of consuming the literal body and blood of Christ...but you make it very clear that its just symbolic.

You think the words they say are meant to convey worship of Mary...yet they make it very clear that treating it that way would be heretical.

---

So, are you saying that if someone bows and prays to a statue of you in church, sings hymns for you, and calls you "my salvation", "my deliverer from the mire of sin", and that "those who chants hymns of praise to you, Jesus will grant salvation" because you took him to church where he got saved, that it's okay as long as he says he's not worshiping you? God is okay with that?

I think you're really trying to avoid something, and I just want you to be honest. I have not found one honest Catholic to talk with about this. Not one. I'm hoping you'll be different.

---

This isn't Roman Catholicism. They engaged in schism away from the original church and that's precisely why they have so many issues, including the papacy and left leaning ideology. I would argue them splitting also led to Protestant reformation who also has a major issue with left leaning ideology creeping in: See Baylor for example.

Protestant reformation was a reaction to real Roman Catholic abuses and had nothing to do with the Orthodox. Here's what Luther said: "The Greeks [Orthodox] . . . are not heretics or schismatics but the most Christian people and the best followers of the Gospel on earth."

It's Eastern/Greek Orthodoxy, its VERY different from Roman Catholicism. They don't pray the rosary. As Rome focuses on Mary almost to the exclusion of Christ, Protestants ignore or even slander her; meanwhile, Orthodoxy venerates her profoundly, but always in connection with her Son. This is why all Icons of Mary have Jesus in Orthodoxy. Statues in Catholicism don't include Jesus. I would agree that Roman Catholics take it too far with Mary.

One key difference is how worship is perceived though, its very different. The early church is nowhere close to how modern Protestants worship. When the reformation happened, the focus of the Church being on the Sacrifice of Christ offered by himself to himself shifted purely to an intellectual exercise. When worship changed from body/soul participation in the eternal sacrifice of Christ into an intellectual exercise of gaining knowledge and personal prayer, people misunderstood that praying to Mary means worshipping her. That's because they've changed the definition of worship by their praxis caused by heterodoxy.

I'm trying to avoid looking at these things from a superficial level and instead really diving into the history. It requires a major paradigm shift to understand.

---

Okay, we can talk about that later, but you're still avoiding the question, which I find very curious. Surely the answer is plainly obvious to anyone who truly believes in Jesus and wants to worship him, isn't it? Right now, you're not being honest, just like the Roman Catholics aren't. Can I finally get an answer?

---

You want me to say that I think praying to Mary and saints is wrong based solely on the superficial view that it can only be worship and nothing else. Digging any deeper than the surface level is off limits? Why?

You need to be extremely careful here:
1st century Judaism didn't revolve around private Bible study. The canon of Scripture wasn't even finalized yet. Worship was liturgical and sacramental: incense, vestments, candles, priests, sacrifices, psalms, processions, and blessings. There was an altar, sacred vessels, and prayers for the departed. Jesus called the Temple "My Father's house" and faithfully attended synagogue worship.


You're essentially condemning this form of worship as "unbiblical ritual,". This condemns the very context of worship Jesus Himself lived within. The Apostles didn't replace ritual with minimalism; they transformed Temple worship into Christian liturgy.

---

I just want you to answer a simple question, which you dodged again. I'll try one more time:

Do you think it's ever okay for someone to bow and pray to a statue of you in church, sing hymns for you, and call you "my salvation", "my deliverer from the mire of sin", and that "those who chants hymns of praise to you, Jesus will grant salvation" because you took him to church where he got saved?

---

Doc, if you're not willing to acknowledge the obvious correct answer because you don't want to go against Orthodoxy, then isn't that showing that your loyalty is more with the Orthodox Church than with God?

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc, I know right now you're thinking less about what is actually true, and more about how to defend Orthodoxy.

I urge you to think in the spirit of truth, not in the spirit of self preservation.

---

I'm trying to find what's actually true. That's what led me to start questioning things in the first place.

But let me ask you something honestly: what is the "correct" denomination, in your view?

Because within Protestantism, there are huge differences on salvation itself: whether baptism saves, whether you can lose salvation, whether faith alone is enough, whether God chooses some and rejects others, etc.

Where is the ultimate authority of interpreting scripture? Who has the ultimate authority when people within your own church disagree on an interpretation?

They can't all be right. So how do we know which version of Protestantism has the truth? Why do you think you and your church are the only people who have the correct theology?

If you don't think you have perfect theology, then why does theology even matter? If scripture is all we need, then why do we even need a physical church? Why do we need Pastors?

We both believe and have faith in Jesus, is that not enough?

1 Thess. 5:21

---

Good questions, and I'll answer what you want. I think I've already answered some of them already. But I think you're avoiding the pressing issue here. Can you answer me - you DO see the serious problem in praising someone who took you to church in that way, don't you? I don't know if I can tell you which denomination is "correct", but I CAN tell you which denomination is certainly NOT correct, and it would be any church that teaches THAT.

---

If I had a superficial view that what they're doing is literal worship of Mary then yes I would reject it.

Its the same concept of Protestant communion... yeah it looks like the practice of consuming the literal body and blood of Christ...but you make it very clear that its just symbolic.

You think the words they say are meant to convey worship of Mary...yet they make it very clear that treating it that way would be heretical.

---

So, are you saying that if someone bows and prays to a statue of you in church, sings hymns for you, and calls you "my salvation", "my deliverer from the mire of sin", and that "those who chants hymns of praise to you, Jesus will grant salvation" because you took him to church where he got saved, that it's okay as long as he says he's not worshiping you? God is okay with that?

I think you're really trying to avoid something, and I just want you to be honest. I have not found one honest Catholic to talk with about this. Not one. I'm hoping you'll be different.

---

This isn't Roman Catholicism. They engaged in schism away from the original church and that's precisely why they have so many issues, including the papacy and left leaning ideology. I would argue them splitting also led to Protestant reformation who also has a major issue with left leaning ideology creeping in: See Baylor for example.

Protestant reformation was a reaction to real Roman Catholic abuses and had nothing to do with the Orthodox. Here's what Luther said: "The Greeks [Orthodox] . . . are not heretics or schismatics but the most Christian people and the best followers of the Gospel on earth."

It's Eastern/Greek Orthodoxy, its VERY different from Roman Catholicism. They don't pray the rosary. As Rome focuses on Mary almost to the exclusion of Christ, Protestants ignore or even slander her; meanwhile, Orthodoxy venerates her profoundly, but always in connection with her Son. This is why all Icons of Mary have Jesus in Orthodoxy. Statues in Catholicism don't include Jesus. I would agree that Roman Catholics take it too far with Mary.

One key difference is how worship is perceived though, its very different. The early church is nowhere close to how modern Protestants worship. When the reformation happened, the focus of the Church being on the Sacrifice of Christ offered by himself to himself shifted purely to an intellectual exercise. When worship changed from body/soul participation in the eternal sacrifice of Christ into an intellectual exercise of gaining knowledge and personal prayer, people misunderstood that praying to Mary means worshipping her. That's because they've changed the definition of worship by their praxis caused by heterodoxy.

I'm trying to avoid looking at these things from a superficial level and instead really diving into the history. It requires a major paradigm shift to understand.

---

Okay, we can talk about that later, but you're still avoiding the question, which I find very curious. Surely the answer is plainly obvious to anyone who truly believes in Jesus and wants to worship him, isn't it? Right now, you're not being honest, just like the Roman Catholics aren't. Can I finally get an answer?

---

You need to be extremely careful here:
1st century Judaism didn't revolve around private Bible study. The canon of Scripture wasn't even finalized yet. Worship was liturgical and sacramental: incense, vestments, candles, priests, sacrifices, psalms, processions, and blessings. There was an altar, sacred vessels, and prayers for the departed. Jesus called the Temple "My Father's house" and faithfully attended synagogue worship.


You're essentially condemning this form of worship as "unbiblical ritual,". This condemns the very context of worship Jesus Himself lived within. The Apostles didn't replace ritual with minimalism; they transformed Temple worship into Christian liturgy.

---

You do know that what's being condemned here is NOT the form of rituals, i.e. psalms, processions, candles, altars, synagogues, incense, etc but rather WHO the object of worship is, don't you? This is a straw man argument. Can you just answer my question? Your continued avoidance is very telling.

And regarding priests, you do realize that we don't need priests as mediators anymore, that we are all a "royal priesthood" of believers (1 Peter 2:5-9) who have direct access to God through Jesus? Regarding sacrifices, the one true sacrifice for all time was already completed in Jesus Christ' death (Hebrews 7:27). There is no need for any more sacrifices.

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc, I know right now you're thinking less about what is actually true, and more about how to defend Orthodoxy.

I urge you to think in the spirit of truth, not in the spirit of self preservation.

---

I'm trying to find what's actually true. That's what led me to start questioning things in the first place.

But let me ask you something honestly: what is the "correct" denomination, in your view?

Because within Protestantism, there are huge differences on salvation itself: whether baptism saves, whether you can lose salvation, whether faith alone is enough, whether God chooses some and rejects others, etc.

Where is the ultimate authority of interpreting scripture? Who has the ultimate authority when people within your own church disagree on an interpretation?

They can't all be right. So how do we know which version of Protestantism has the truth? Why do you think you and your church are the only people who have the correct theology?

If you don't think you have perfect theology, then why does theology even matter? If scripture is all we need, then why do we even need a physical church? Why do we need Pastors?

We both believe and have faith in Jesus, is that not enough?

1 Thess. 5:21

---

Good questions, and I'll answer what you want. I think I've already answered some of them already. But I think you're avoiding the pressing issue here. Can you answer me - you DO see the serious problem in praising someone who took you to church in that way, don't you? I don't know if I can tell you which denomination is "correct", but I CAN tell you which denomination is certainly NOT correct, and it would be any church that teaches THAT.

---

If I had a superficial view that what they're doing is literal worship of Mary then yes I would reject it.

Its the same concept of Protestant communion... yeah it looks like the practice of consuming the literal body and blood of Christ...but you make it very clear that its just symbolic.

You think the words they say are meant to convey worship of Mary...yet they make it very clear that treating it that way would be heretical.

---

It's very interesting that if someone dies everything that Catholics do for Mary, but they did it for Buda instead of Mary.... Catholics would agree that those people were worshipping Buda.
Catholics are trying to move the goal posts so that they can engage in Marian worship but claim that it's not worship.
No other religion on the planet builds churches or temples, sings songs, prays prayers, bows before the image of someone or something that they claim they do not worship.
The Catholics have more churches named after & dedicated to Mary than they do Jesus.

Actions speak louder than words.

---

Interesting take. Are members of the Church of England (Anglicans) worshipping England (or the head of state)? You are going to be shocked when you find out where Lutherans get their name from. Are Methodists in love with process? What are Baptists worshipping? Are Seventh Day Adventists some weird calendar worshippers? We haven't even gotten to what the nondenominational churches name themselves: you'll find names like Antioch, Watermark, City Church. What do their names tell you about what they worship?

And wait until you figure out who our beloved university is named after. Are we all worshipping Judge Baylor when we gather to celebrate and sing the praises of the Green and Gold? Heck, we even have a statue of him.

---

That's a pretty pathetic response.

Are you actually attempting to say that all of the thousands of churches named after Mary, are just because of location (church of England) or a different methodology (Methodists)?
That's pathetic.

The entire planet knows the difference between singing songs about a school, and singing worship songs. You are one of the few who can't seem to understand it.

No one bows to the statue of judge Baylor, nor do they sing songs praising him, nor go they ask him for his grace, nor do they pray to him in any way.

Catholics are very much involved in the worship of Mary, and they constantly have to try and convince the rest of the planet that the worship of Mary is not worship.

Very very sad for you and your level of deception. You think you made some kind of brilliant defense of Marian worship, but it's not even close.

I'll pray for your eyes to be opened.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc, I know right now you're thinking less about what is actually true, and more about how to defend Orthodoxy.

I urge you to think in the spirit of truth, not in the spirit of self preservation.

---

I'm trying to find what's actually true. That's what led me to start questioning things in the first place.

But let me ask you something honestly: what is the "correct" denomination, in your view?

Because within Protestantism, there are huge differences on salvation itself: whether baptism saves, whether you can lose salvation, whether faith alone is enough, whether God chooses some and rejects others, etc.

Where is the ultimate authority of interpreting scripture? Who has the ultimate authority when people within your own church disagree on an interpretation?

They can't all be right. So how do we know which version of Protestantism has the truth? Why do you think you and your church are the only people who have the correct theology?

If you don't think you have perfect theology, then why does theology even matter? If scripture is all we need, then why do we even need a physical church? Why do we need Pastors?

We both believe and have faith in Jesus, is that not enough?

1 Thess. 5:21

---

Good questions, and I'll answer what you want. I think I've already answered some of them already. But I think you're avoiding the pressing issue here. Can you answer me - you DO see the serious problem in praising someone who took you to church in that way, don't you? I don't know if I can tell you which denomination is "correct", but I CAN tell you which denomination is certainly NOT correct, and it would be any church that teaches THAT.

---

If I had a superficial view that what they're doing is literal worship of Mary then yes I would reject it.

Its the same concept of Protestant communion... yeah it looks like the practice of consuming the literal body and blood of Christ...but you make it very clear that its just symbolic.

You think the words they say are meant to convey worship of Mary...yet they make it very clear that treating it that way would be heretical.

---

So, are you saying that if someone bows and prays to a statue of you in church, sings hymns for you, and calls you "my salvation", "my deliverer from the mire of sin", and that "those who chants hymns of praise to you, Jesus will grant salvation" because you took him to church where he got saved, that it's okay as long as he says he's not worshiping you? God is okay with that?

I think you're really trying to avoid something, and I just want you to be honest. I have not found one honest Catholic to talk with about this. Not one. I'm hoping you'll be different.

---

This isn't Roman Catholicism. They engaged in schism away from the original church and that's precisely why they have so many issues, including the papacy and left leaning ideology. I would argue them splitting also led to Protestant reformation who also has a major issue with left leaning ideology creeping in: See Baylor for example.

Protestant reformation was a reaction to real Roman Catholic abuses and had nothing to do with the Orthodox. Here's what Luther said: "The Greeks [Orthodox] . . . are not heretics or schismatics but the most Christian people and the best followers of the Gospel on earth."

It's Eastern/Greek Orthodoxy, its VERY different from Roman Catholicism. They don't pray the rosary. As Rome focuses on Mary almost to the exclusion of Christ, Protestants ignore or even slander her; meanwhile, Orthodoxy venerates her profoundly, but always in connection with her Son. This is why all Icons of Mary have Jesus in Orthodoxy. Statues in Catholicism don't include Jesus. I would agree that Roman Catholics take it too far with Mary.

One key difference is how worship is perceived though, its very different. The early church is nowhere close to how modern Protestants worship. When the reformation happened, the focus of the Church being on the Sacrifice of Christ offered by himself to himself shifted purely to an intellectual exercise. When worship changed from body/soul participation in the eternal sacrifice of Christ into an intellectual exercise of gaining knowledge and personal prayer, people misunderstood that praying to Mary means worshipping her. That's because they've changed the definition of worship by their praxis caused by heterodoxy.

I'm trying to avoid looking at these things from a superficial level and instead really diving into the history. It requires a major paradigm shift to understand.

---

Okay, we can talk about that later, but you're still avoiding the question, which I find very curious. Surely the answer is plainly obvious to anyone who truly believes in Jesus and wants to worship him, isn't it? Right now, you're not being honest, just like the Roman Catholics aren't. Can I finally get an answer?

---

You need to be extremely careful here:
1st century Judaism didn't revolve around private Bible study. The canon of Scripture wasn't even finalized yet. Worship was liturgical and sacramental: incense, vestments, candles, priests, sacrifices, psalms, processions, and blessings. There was an altar, sacred vessels, and prayers for the departed. Jesus called the Temple "My Father's house" and faithfully attended synagogue worship.


You're essentially condemning this form of worship as "unbiblical ritual,". This condemns the very context of worship Jesus Himself lived within. The Apostles didn't replace ritual with minimalism; they transformed Temple worship into Christian liturgy.

---

You do know that what's being condemned here is NOT the form of rituals, i.e. psalms, processions, candles, altars, synagogues, incense, etc but rather WHO the object of worship is, don't you? This is a straw man argument. Can you just answer my question? Your continued avoidance is very telling.

And regarding priests, you do realize that we don't need priests as mediators anymore, that we are all a "royal priesthood" of believers (1 Peter 2:5-9) who have direct access to God through Jesus? Regarding sacrifices, the one true sacrifice for all time was already completed in Jesus Christ' death (Hebrews 7:27). There is no need for any more sacrifices.

---

Your problem in grasping the Catholic and Orthodox position is that you see honor and praise as a zero-sum game. In your mind, if something is being praised, they are being praised over and above God. For you and many other evangelicals, it is an "either/or" situation.

That is not how traditional Churches see the issue. For us, it is a "both/and" situation because all Mary's glory derives directly from God. We can honor people, even very highly, while still recognizing that they are nothing in comparison to God. You can disagree with the language -- I myself find some of the more poetic language to be excessive because I don't like poetry -- but you cannot disagree with the intent behind it.

St. Athanasius sang praises to the Virgin Mary using similar terminology to what you have been railing against. Yet he suffered great persecution for decades to fight the Arian heresy and uphold Christ's full divinity, even when the entire weight of the Roman imperial government (led by the Arian Constantius II) was turned against him. He also worked tirelessly as bishop of Alexandria to crush the remnants of Egyptian paganism. Athanasius's entire life was dedicated to ensuring that Christ was viewed as fully God by everyone around him.

Could you really walk up to Athanasius and accuse him of refusing to give Christ his due glory by worshipping a created being? Do you honestly believe that such a man would compromise with pagan theology? Don't you think his vicious Arian opponents would have used this hymn of Mary against Athanasius if they thought they could use it to accuse him of paganism?

His entire life proved that he, along with the rest of the Catholic Church, did not view praising Mary as any sort of detraction from the exclusive worship due to Jesus Christ as God Incarnate.

ARbear13 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc, I know right now you're thinking less about what is actually true, and more about how to defend Orthodoxy.

I urge you to think in the spirit of truth, not in the spirit of self preservation.

---

I'm trying to find what's actually true. That's what led me to start questioning things in the first place.

But let me ask you something honestly: what is the "correct" denomination, in your view?

Because within Protestantism, there are huge differences on salvation itself: whether baptism saves, whether you can lose salvation, whether faith alone is enough, whether God chooses some and rejects others, etc.

Where is the ultimate authority of interpreting scripture? Who has the ultimate authority when people within your own church disagree on an interpretation?

They can't all be right. So how do we know which version of Protestantism has the truth? Why do you think you and your church are the only people who have the correct theology?

If you don't think you have perfect theology, then why does theology even matter? If scripture is all we need, then why do we even need a physical church? Why do we need Pastors?

We both believe and have faith in Jesus, is that not enough?

1 Thess. 5:21

---

Good questions, and I'll answer what you want. I think I've already answered some of them already. But I think you're avoiding the pressing issue here. Can you answer me - you DO see the serious problem in praising someone who took you to church in that way, don't you? I don't know if I can tell you which denomination is "correct", but I CAN tell you which denomination is certainly NOT correct, and it would be any church that teaches THAT.

---

If I had a superficial view that what they're doing is literal worship of Mary then yes I would reject it.

Its the same concept of Protestant communion... yeah it looks like the practice of consuming the literal body and blood of Christ...but you make it very clear that its just symbolic.

You think the words they say are meant to convey worship of Mary...yet they make it very clear that treating it that way would be heretical.

---

So, are you saying that if someone bows and prays to a statue of you in church, sings hymns for you, and calls you "my salvation", "my deliverer from the mire of sin", and that "those who chants hymns of praise to you, Jesus will grant salvation" because you took him to church where he got saved, that it's okay as long as he says he's not worshiping you? God is okay with that?

I think you're really trying to avoid something, and I just want you to be honest. I have not found one honest Catholic to talk with about this. Not one. I'm hoping you'll be different.

---

This isn't Roman Catholicism. They engaged in schism away from the original church and that's precisely why they have so many issues, including the papacy and left leaning ideology. I would argue them splitting also led to Protestant reformation who also has a major issue with left leaning ideology creeping in: See Baylor for example.

Protestant reformation was a reaction to real Roman Catholic abuses and had nothing to do with the Orthodox. Here's what Luther said: "The Greeks [Orthodox] . . . are not heretics or schismatics but the most Christian people and the best followers of the Gospel on earth."

It's Eastern/Greek Orthodoxy, its VERY different from Roman Catholicism. They don't pray the rosary. As Rome focuses on Mary almost to the exclusion of Christ, Protestants ignore or even slander her; meanwhile, Orthodoxy venerates her profoundly, but always in connection with her Son. This is why all Icons of Mary have Jesus in Orthodoxy. Statues in Catholicism don't include Jesus. I would agree that Roman Catholics take it too far with Mary.

One key difference is how worship is perceived though, its very different. The early church is nowhere close to how modern Protestants worship. When the reformation happened, the focus of the Church being on the Sacrifice of Christ offered by himself to himself shifted purely to an intellectual exercise. When worship changed from body/soul participation in the eternal sacrifice of Christ into an intellectual exercise of gaining knowledge and personal prayer, people misunderstood that praying to Mary means worshipping her. That's because they've changed the definition of worship by their praxis caused by heterodoxy.

I'm trying to avoid looking at these things from a superficial level and instead really diving into the history. It requires a major paradigm shift to understand.

---

Okay, we can talk about that later, but you're still avoiding the question, which I find very curious. Surely the answer is plainly obvious to anyone who truly believes in Jesus and wants to worship him, isn't it? Right now, you're not being honest, just like the Roman Catholics aren't. Can I finally get an answer?

---

You need to be extremely careful here:
1st century Judaism didn't revolve around private Bible study. The canon of Scripture wasn't even finalized yet. Worship was liturgical and sacramental: incense, vestments, candles, priests, sacrifices, psalms, processions, and blessings. There was an altar, sacred vessels, and prayers for the departed. Jesus called the Temple "My Father's house" and faithfully attended synagogue worship.


You're essentially condemning this form of worship as "unbiblical ritual,". This condemns the very context of worship Jesus Himself lived within. The Apostles didn't replace ritual with minimalism; they transformed Temple worship into Christian liturgy.

---

You do know that what's being condemned here is NOT the form of rituals, i.e. psalms, processions, candles, altars, synagogues, incense, etc but rather WHO the object of worship is, don't you? This is a straw man argument. Can you just answer my question? Your continued avoidance is very telling.

And regarding priests, you do realize that we don't need priests as mediators anymore, that we are all a "royal priesthood" of believers (1 Peter 2:5-9) who have direct access to God through Jesus? Regarding sacrifices, the one true sacrifice for all time was already completed in Jesus Christ' death (Hebrews 7:27). There is no need for any more sacrifices.

---

Your problem in grasping the Catholic and Orthodox position is that you see honor and praise as a zero-sum game. In your mind, if something is being praised, they are being praised over and above God. For you and many other evangelicals, it is an "either/or" situation.

That is not how traditional Churches see the issue. For us, it is a "both/and" situation because all Mary's glory derives directly from God. We can honor people, even very highly, while still recognizing that they are nothing in comparison to God. You can disagree with the language -- I myself find some of the more poetic language to be excessive because I don't like poetry -- but you cannot disagree with the intent behind it.

St. Athanasius sang praises to the Virgin Mary using similar terminology to what you have been railing against. Yet he suffered great persecution for decades to fight the Arian heresy and uphold Christ's full divinity, even when the entire weight of the Roman imperial government (led by the Arian Constantius II) was turned against him. He also worked tirelessly as bishop of Alexandria to crush the remnants of Egyptian paganism. Athanasius's entire life was dedicated to ensuring that Christ was viewed as fully God by everyone around him.

Could you really walk up to Athanasius and accuse him of refusing to give Christ his due glory by worshipping a created being? Do you honestly believe that such a man would compromise with pagan theology? Don't you think his vicious Arian opponents would have used this hymn of Mary against Athanasius if they thought they could use it to accuse him of paganism?

His entire life proved that he, along with the rest of the Catholic Church, did not view praising Mary as any sort of detraction from the exclusive worship due to Jesus Christ as God Incarnate.

---

Yes, one CAN really go up to Athanasius and tell him that his exaltation of Mary was excessive, and likely stemmed from paganism. Maybe it escaped you, but all the church fathers were fallible men, just like you and I. No fallible man is immune from error. Did you not read my earlier post about how even Augustine and Jerome were willing to compromise with pagan Rome? So yes, even Athanasius could be in error for adopting unbiblical views and practices. Do I need to keep reminding you that Athanasius' language concerning Mary is seen NOWHERE in the Bible and in the early church? He was writing THREE CENTURIES after Jesus. Right around the time that paganism was creeping into Christianity. Your view is dangerous that just because these church fathers were right about some things, even defending it honorably for their whole life, it means they couldn't be wrong about other things.

Now here's the ultimate irony for you - Athanasius provided a list of canonical books, in his Thirty-Ninth Festal Epistle, A.D. 367:

• "There are, then, of the Old Testament, twenty-two books in number; for, as I have heard, it is handed down that this is the number of the letters among the Hebrews; their respective order and names being as follows. The first is Genesis, then Exodus, next Leviticus, after that Numbers, and then Deuteronomy. Following these there is Joshua the son of Nun, then Judges, then Ruth. And again, after these four books of Kings, the first and second being reckoned as one book, and so likewise the third and fourth as one book. And again, the first and second of the Chronicles are reckoned as one book. Again Ezra, the first and second are similarly one book. After these there is the book of Psalms, then the Proverbs, next Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs. Job follows, then the Prophets, the Twelve [minor prophets] being reckoned as one book. Then Isaiah, one book, then Jeremiah with Baruch, Lamentations and the Epistle, one book; afterwards Ezekiel and Daniel, each one book. Thus far constitutes the Old Testament.

• Again, it is not tedious to speak of the books of the New Testament. These are: the four Gospels, according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. After these, The Acts of the Apostles, and the seven epistles called Catholic: of James, one; of Peter, two, of John, three; after these, one of Jude. In addition, there are fourteen epistles of Paul the apostle, written in this order: the first, to the Romans; then, two to the Corinthians; after these, to the Galatians; next, to the Ephesians, then, to the Philippians; then, to the Colossians; after these, two of the Thessalonians; and that to the Hebrews; and again, two to Timothy; one to Titus; and lastly, that to Philemon. And besides, the Revelation of John."

Now, read what Athanasius said about this list of canon he just gave:

• "These are the fountains of salvation, that he who thirsts may be satisfied with the living words they contain. In these alone the teaching of godliness is proclaimed. Let no one add to these; let nothing be taken away from them."

Do you see what's missing in his list? NONE OF THE DEUTEROCANONICAL BOOKS are listed. And Athanasius said that no one should add to this list. But yet, your Church's Council of Trent declared that the deuterocanon to be canon scripture, AND ANATHEMATIZED ANYONE WHO DISAGREED.

So here's your conundrum: either Athanasius is right, and Trent is wrong, which would prove the infallibility of church Councils to be false. Or, Trent is right, and Athanasius is wrong, and not just wrong, but anathematized from the Church, so even YOU have to walk up to Athanasius and tell him that he's wrong!

You want more irony? The above Athanasius canon was approved by the Roman Catholic Church in the ecumenical Council of Constantinople III (via Council of Trullo, which was ruled to be an extension of Constantinople). So the Roman Catholic Church anathematized it's own previous Council in the Council of Trent!!

I really love ironies.

ARbear13 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc, I know right now you're thinking less about what is actually true, and more about how to defend Orthodoxy.

I urge you to think in the spirit of truth, not in the spirit of self preservation.

---

I'm trying to find what's actually true. That's what led me to start questioning things in the first place.

But let me ask you something honestly: what is the "correct" denomination, in your view?

Because within Protestantism, there are huge differences on salvation itself: whether baptism saves, whether you can lose salvation, whether faith alone is enough, whether God chooses some and rejects others, etc.

Where is the ultimate authority of interpreting scripture? Who has the ultimate authority when people within your own church disagree on an interpretation?

They can't all be right. So how do we know which version of Protestantism has the truth? Why do you think you and your church are the only people who have the correct theology?

If you don't think you have perfect theology, then why does theology even matter? If scripture is all we need, then why do we even need a physical church? Why do we need Pastors?

We both believe and have faith in Jesus, is that not enough?

1 Thess. 5:21

---

Good questions, and I'll answer what you want. I think I've already answered some of them already. But I think you're avoiding the pressing issue here. Can you answer me - you DO see the serious problem in praising someone who took you to church in that way, don't you? I don't know if I can tell you which denomination is "correct", but I CAN tell you which denomination is certainly NOT correct, and it would be any church that teaches THAT.

---

If I had a superficial view that what they're doing is literal worship of Mary then yes I would reject it.

Its the same concept of Protestant communion... yeah it looks like the practice of consuming the literal body and blood of Christ...but you make it very clear that its just symbolic.

You think the words they say are meant to convey worship of Mary...yet they make it very clear that treating it that way would be heretical.

---

So, are you saying that if someone bows and prays to a statue of you in church, sings hymns for you, and calls you "my salvation", "my deliverer from the mire of sin", and that "those who chants hymns of praise to you, Jesus will grant salvation" because you took him to church where he got saved, that it's okay as long as he says he's not worshiping you? God is okay with that?

I think you're really trying to avoid something, and I just want you to be honest. I have not found one honest Catholic to talk with about this. Not one. I'm hoping you'll be different.

---

This isn't Roman Catholicism. They engaged in schism away from the original church and that's precisely why they have so many issues, including the papacy and left leaning ideology. I would argue them splitting also led to Protestant reformation who also has a major issue with left leaning ideology creeping in: See Baylor for example.

Protestant reformation was a reaction to real Roman Catholic abuses and had nothing to do with the Orthodox. Here's what Luther said: "The Greeks [Orthodox] . . . are not heretics or schismatics but the most Christian people and the best followers of the Gospel on earth."

It's Eastern/Greek Orthodoxy, its VERY different from Roman Catholicism. They don't pray the rosary. As Rome focuses on Mary almost to the exclusion of Christ, Protestants ignore or even slander her; meanwhile, Orthodoxy venerates her profoundly, but always in connection with her Son. This is why all Icons of Mary have Jesus in Orthodoxy. Statues in Catholicism don't include Jesus. I would agree that Roman Catholics take it too far with Mary.

One key difference is how worship is perceived though, its very different. The early church is nowhere close to how modern Protestants worship. When the reformation happened, the focus of the Church being on the Sacrifice of Christ offered by himself to himself shifted purely to an intellectual exercise. When worship changed from body/soul participation in the eternal sacrifice of Christ into an intellectual exercise of gaining knowledge and personal prayer, people misunderstood that praying to Mary means worshipping her. That's because they've changed the definition of worship by their praxis caused by heterodoxy.

I'm trying to avoid looking at these things from a superficial level and instead really diving into the history. It requires a major paradigm shift to understand.

---

Okay, we can talk about that later, but you're still avoiding the question, which I find very curious. Surely the answer is plainly obvious to anyone who truly believes in Jesus and wants to worship him, isn't it? Right now, you're not being honest, just like the Roman Catholics aren't. Can I finally get an answer?

---

You need to be extremely careful here:
1st century Judaism didn't revolve around private Bible study. The canon of Scripture wasn't even finalized yet. Worship was liturgical and sacramental: incense, vestments, candles, priests, sacrifices, psalms, processions, and blessings. There was an altar, sacred vessels, and prayers for the departed. Jesus called the Temple "My Father's house" and faithfully attended synagogue worship.


You're essentially condemning this form of worship as "unbiblical ritual,". This condemns the very context of worship Jesus Himself lived within. The Apostles didn't replace ritual with minimalism; they transformed Temple worship into Christian liturgy.

---

You do know that what's being condemned here is NOT the form of rituals, i.e. psalms, processions, candles, altars, synagogues, incense, etc but rather WHO the object of worship is, don't you? This is a straw man argument. Can you just answer my question? Your continued avoidance is very telling.

And regarding priests, you do realize that we don't need priests as mediators anymore, that we are all a "royal priesthood" of believers (1 Peter 2:5-9) who have direct access to God through Jesus? Regarding sacrifices, the one true sacrifice for all time was already completed in Jesus Christ' death (Hebrews 7:27). There is no need for any more sacrifices.

---

Your problem in grasping the Catholic and Orthodox position is that you see honor and praise as a zero-sum game. In your mind, if something is being praised, they are being praised over and above God. For you and many other evangelicals, it is an "either/or" situation.

That is not how traditional Churches see the issue. For us, it is a "both/and" situation because all Mary's glory derives directly from God. We can honor people, even very highly, while still recognizing that they are nothing in comparison to God. You can disagree with the language -- I myself find some of the more poetic language to be excessive because I don't like poetry -- but you cannot disagree with the intent behind it.

---

Are you seriously making this argument?? That I see any honor and praise for something or someone other than God as being idolatrous? So, in your mind, when I hear someone praising Mary as blessed among women (which is perfectly biblical so I agree with), or someone saying Michael Jordan was the best basketball player in history, you think I see that as worshiping that person over God?

Yikes. You're just not thinking this through very well. You're really searching for ways to justify obvious idolatry of Mary, and you're coming up with some really ridiculous arguments to do so.

Let's put your most recent theory to the test - if what you're doing and saying regarding Mary is merely subordinate honor and praise that is perfectly okay with God, then using your earlier example, it would be okay to say and do all this for a child who you say "saved your life":

• "No one abounds in the knowledge of God except through my child"
• "No one receives a gift from the throne of mercy except through my child"
• "No one attains salvation except through my child"
• "No one can go to Jesus except by my child"
• "My child is the road everyone must travel to get to God"
• "My child is necessary for everyone's salvation"
• "My child is sovereign"
• "My child is the peacemaker between sinners and God"
• "My child is the ruler of my house"
• "My child, please grant us salvation"
• "My child is the God of this world"
• "I place my salvation in your hands, my child"
• "To you, my child, I entrust my soul"
• "We entrust all our cares and petitions to my child"
• "My child is the ALL HOLY ONE"
• "We give ourselves to my child, and surrender the hour of our death wholly to my child's care"

• you make statues and images of your child, and bow and pray to them in church
• you sing hymns to your child in church
• you hold hundreds of festivals for your child throughout the year
• you say prayers where you recite your child's name 10 times as much as you do God's
• you write a book of psalms for your child, where you take the Psalms of the Old Testament and substitute your child's name wherever God is mentioned.

Right? So as long as you think your child is still nothing compared to God, that all the glory and honor you're giving your child still derives from God, and that it's a "both/and" situation, then you're saying all the above is okay with God.... right?

Yes, or no? Please answer the question.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc, I know right now you're thinking less about what is actually true, and more about how to defend Orthodoxy.

I urge you to think in the spirit of truth, not in the spirit of self preservation.

---

I'm trying to find what's actually true. That's what led me to start questioning things in the first place.

But let me ask you something honestly: what is the "correct" denomination, in your view?

Because within Protestantism, there are huge differences on salvation itself: whether baptism saves, whether you can lose salvation, whether faith alone is enough, whether God chooses some and rejects others, etc.

Where is the ultimate authority of interpreting scripture? Who has the ultimate authority when people within your own church disagree on an interpretation?

They can't all be right. So how do we know which version of Protestantism has the truth? Why do you think you and your church are the only people who have the correct theology?

If you don't think you have perfect theology, then why does theology even matter? If scripture is all we need, then why do we even need a physical church? Why do we need Pastors?

We both believe and have faith in Jesus, is that not enough?

1 Thess. 5:21

---

Good questions, and I'll answer what you want. I think I've already answered some of them already. But I think you're avoiding the pressing issue here. Can you answer me - you DO see the serious problem in praising someone who took you to church in that way, don't you? I don't know if I can tell you which denomination is "correct", but I CAN tell you which denomination is certainly NOT correct, and it would be any church that teaches THAT.

---

If I had a superficial view that what they're doing is literal worship of Mary then yes I would reject it.

Its the same concept of Protestant communion... yeah it looks like the practice of consuming the literal body and blood of Christ...but you make it very clear that its just symbolic.

You think the words they say are meant to convey worship of Mary...yet they make it very clear that treating it that way would be heretical.

---

It's very interesting that if someone dies everything that Catholics do for Mary, but they did it for Buda instead of Mary.... Catholics would agree that those people were worshipping Buda.
Catholics are trying to move the goal posts so that they can engage in Marian worship but claim that it's not worship.
No other religion on the planet builds churches or temples, sings songs, prays prayers, bows before the image of someone or something that they claim they do not worship.
The Catholics have more churches named after & dedicated to Mary than they do Jesus.

Actions speak louder than words.

---

Interesting take. Are members of the Church of England (Anglicans) worshipping England (or the head of state)? You are going to be shocked when you find out where Lutherans get their name from. Are Methodists in love with process? What are Baptists worshipping? Are Seventh Day Adventists some weird calendar worshippers? We haven't even gotten to what the nondenominational churches name themselves: you'll find names like Antioch, Watermark, City Church. What do their names tell you about what they worship?

And wait until you figure out who our beloved university is named after. Are we all worshipping Judge Baylor when we gather to celebrate and sing the praises of the Green and Gold? Heck, we even have a statue of him.

---

Do we sing praises to Judge Baylor IN CHURCH? Do we bow before and pray to his statue? Do we say Judge Baylor is our salvation, THE ALL HOLY ONE, to whom we entrust our souls fully to his care??

You guys really are suffering from some sort of mind virus.

---

Are you well rested enough that you can engage now?

ShooterTX said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc, I know right now you're thinking less about what is actually true, and more about how to defend Orthodoxy.

I urge you to think in the spirit of truth, not in the spirit of self preservation.

---

I'm trying to find what's actually true. That's what led me to start questioning things in the first place.

But let me ask you something honestly: what is the "correct" denomination, in your view?

Because within Protestantism, there are huge differences on salvation itself: whether baptism saves, whether you can lose salvation, whether faith alone is enough, whether God chooses some and rejects others, etc.

Where is the ultimate authority of interpreting scripture? Who has the ultimate authority when people within your own church disagree on an interpretation?

They can't all be right. So how do we know which version of Protestantism has the truth? Why do you think you and your church are the only people who have the correct theology?

If you don't think you have perfect theology, then why does theology even matter? If scripture is all we need, then why do we even need a physical church? Why do we need Pastors?

We both believe and have faith in Jesus, is that not enough?

1 Thess. 5:21

---

Good questions, and I'll answer what you want. I think I've already answered some of them already. But I think you're avoiding the pressing issue here. Can you answer me - you DO see the serious problem in praising someone who took you to church in that way, don't you? I don't know if I can tell you which denomination is "correct", but I CAN tell you which denomination is certainly NOT correct, and it would be any church that teaches THAT.

---

If I had a superficial view that what they're doing is literal worship of Mary then yes I would reject it.

Its the same concept of Protestant communion... yeah it looks like the practice of consuming the literal body and blood of Christ...but you make it very clear that its just symbolic.

You think the words they say are meant to convey worship of Mary...yet they make it very clear that treating it that way would be heretical.

---

It's very interesting that if someone dies everything that Catholics do for Mary, but they did it for Buda instead of Mary.... Catholics would agree that those people were worshipping Buda.
Catholics are trying to move the goal posts so that they can engage in Marian worship but claim that it's not worship.
No other religion on the planet builds churches or temples, sings songs, prays prayers, bows before the image of someone or something that they claim they do not worship.
The Catholics have more churches named after & dedicated to Mary than they do Jesus.

Actions speak louder than words.

---

Interesting take. Are members of the Church of England (Anglicans) worshipping England (or the head of state)? You are going to be shocked when you find out where Lutherans get their name from. Are Methodists in love with process? What are Baptists worshipping? Are Seventh Day Adventists some weird calendar worshippers? We haven't even gotten to what the nondenominational churches name themselves: you'll find names like Antioch, Watermark, City Church. What do their names tell you about what they worship?

And wait until you figure out who our beloved university is named after. Are we all worshipping Judge Baylor when we gather to celebrate and sing the praises of the Green and Gold? Heck, we even have a statue of him.

---

That's a pretty pathetic response.

Are you actually attempting to say that all of the thousands of churches named after Mary, are just because of location (church of England) or a different methodology (Methodists)?
That's pathetic.

The entire planet knows the difference between singing songs about a school, and singing worship songs. You are one of the few who can't seem to understand it.

No one bows to the statue of judge Baylor, nor do they sing songs praising him, nor go they ask him for his grace, nor do they pray to him in any way.

Catholics are very much involved in the worship of Mary, and they constantly have to try and convince the rest of the planet that the worship of Mary is not worship.

Very very sad for you and your level of deception. You think you made some kind of brilliant defense of Marian worship, but it's not even close.

I'll pray for your eyes to be opened.

---

If there was a university named Budda (or Buddha) University and it had a statue of Budda on the campus would you think the people attending there were improperly honoring Budda? This is YOUR simple "replace it with Bud[d]a" test.

There are numerous posts in this thread from Catholics telling you that you are more than free to not have a Marian devotion. Does that sound like people who believe Mary is a deity? This entire thread is about the fact that the Dicastery of the Doctrine of the Faith (in layman's terms, the department in the Vatican responsible for the deposit of the faith and protecting the orthodoxy of the faith and morals) has explicitly stated that the "Co-redemptrix" title is not to be used in reference to the Mary.

The DDF's exact words: "In this case, the expression 'co-redemptrix' does not help extol Mary as the first and foremost collaborator in the work of redemption and grace, for it carries the risk of eclipsing the exclusive role of Jesus Christ."

Does that sound like the DDF believes she is to be worshipped?

So, you have Catholics telling you they are not worshipping her. You have Catholics telling you that nobody is required to keep a devotion to her. You have the DDF all over the place, including recently, telling you not to worship her (note the use of the word extol). But I guess you know better.

DallasBear9902 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc, I know right now you're thinking less about what is actually true, and more about how to defend Orthodoxy.

I urge you to think in the spirit of truth, not in the spirit of self preservation.

---

I'm trying to find what's actually true. That's what led me to start questioning things in the first place.

But let me ask you something honestly: what is the "correct" denomination, in your view?

Because within Protestantism, there are huge differences on salvation itself: whether baptism saves, whether you can lose salvation, whether faith alone is enough, whether God chooses some and rejects others, etc.

Where is the ultimate authority of interpreting scripture? Who has the ultimate authority when people within your own church disagree on an interpretation?

They can't all be right. So how do we know which version of Protestantism has the truth? Why do you think you and your church are the only people who have the correct theology?

If you don't think you have perfect theology, then why does theology even matter? If scripture is all we need, then why do we even need a physical church? Why do we need Pastors?

We both believe and have faith in Jesus, is that not enough?

1 Thess. 5:21

---

Good questions, and I'll answer what you want. I think I've already answered some of them already. But I think you're avoiding the pressing issue here. Can you answer me - you DO see the serious problem in praising someone who took you to church in that way, don't you? I don't know if I can tell you which denomination is "correct", but I CAN tell you which denomination is certainly NOT correct, and it would be any church that teaches THAT.

---

If I had a superficial view that what they're doing is literal worship of Mary then yes I would reject it.

Its the same concept of Protestant communion... yeah it looks like the practice of consuming the literal body and blood of Christ...but you make it very clear that its just symbolic.

You think the words they say are meant to convey worship of Mary...yet they make it very clear that treating it that way would be heretical.

---

It's very interesting that if someone dies everything that Catholics do for Mary, but they did it for Buda instead of Mary.... Catholics would agree that those people were worshipping Buda.
Catholics are trying to move the goal posts so that they can engage in Marian worship but claim that it's not worship.
No other religion on the planet builds churches or temples, sings songs, prays prayers, bows before the image of someone or something that they claim they do not worship.
The Catholics have more churches named after & dedicated to Mary than they do Jesus.

Actions speak louder than words.

---

Interesting take. Are members of the Church of England (Anglicans) worshipping England (or the head of state)? You are going to be shocked when you find out where Lutherans get their name from. Are Methodists in love with process? What are Baptists worshipping? Are Seventh Day Adventists some weird calendar worshippers? We haven't even gotten to what the nondenominational churches name themselves: you'll find names like Antioch, Watermark, City Church. What do their names tell you about what they worship?

And wait until you figure out who our beloved university is named after. Are we all worshipping Judge Baylor when we gather to celebrate and sing the praises of the Green and Gold? Heck, we even have a statue of him.

---

Do we sing praises to Judge Baylor IN CHURCH? Do we bow before and pray to his statue? Do we say Judge Baylor is our salvation, THE ALL HOLY ONE, to whom we entrust our souls fully to his care??

You guys really are suffering from some sort of mind virus.

---

Are you well rested enough that you can engage now?

---

Have you finally learned the concept of sola scriptura?

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc, I know right now you're thinking less about what is actually true, and more about how to defend Orthodoxy.

I urge you to think in the spirit of truth, not in the spirit of self preservation.

---

I'm trying to find what's actually true. That's what led me to start questioning things in the first place.

But let me ask you something honestly: what is the "correct" denomination, in your view?

Because within Protestantism, there are huge differences on salvation itself: whether baptism saves, whether you can lose salvation, whether faith alone is enough, whether God chooses some and rejects others, etc.

Where is the ultimate authority of interpreting scripture? Who has the ultimate authority when people within your own church disagree on an interpretation?

They can't all be right. So how do we know which version of Protestantism has the truth? Why do you think you and your church are the only people who have the correct theology?

If you don't think you have perfect theology, then why does theology even matter? If scripture is all we need, then why do we even need a physical church? Why do we need Pastors?

We both believe and have faith in Jesus, is that not enough?

1 Thess. 5:21

---

Good questions, and I'll answer what you want. I think I've already answered some of them already. But I think you're avoiding the pressing issue here. Can you answer me - you DO see the serious problem in praising someone who took you to church in that way, don't you? I don't know if I can tell you which denomination is "correct", but I CAN tell you which denomination is certainly NOT correct, and it would be any church that teaches THAT.

---

If I had a superficial view that what they're doing is literal worship of Mary then yes I would reject it.

Its the same concept of Protestant communion... yeah it looks like the practice of consuming the literal body and blood of Christ...but you make it very clear that its just symbolic.

You think the words they say are meant to convey worship of Mary...yet they make it very clear that treating it that way would be heretical.

---

It's very interesting that if someone dies everything that Catholics do for Mary, but they did it for Buda instead of Mary.... Catholics would agree that those people were worshipping Buda.
Catholics are trying to move the goal posts so that they can engage in Marian worship but claim that it's not worship.
No other religion on the planet builds churches or temples, sings songs, prays prayers, bows before the image of someone or something that they claim they do not worship.
The Catholics have more churches named after & dedicated to Mary than they do Jesus.

Actions speak louder than words.

---

Interesting take. Are members of the Church of England (Anglicans) worshipping England (or the head of state)? You are going to be shocked when you find out where Lutherans get their name from. Are Methodists in love with process? What are Baptists worshipping? Are Seventh Day Adventists some weird calendar worshippers? We haven't even gotten to what the nondenominational churches name themselves: you'll find names like Antioch, Watermark, City Church. What do their names tell you about what they worship?

And wait until you figure out who our beloved university is named after. Are we all worshipping Judge Baylor when we gather to celebrate and sing the praises of the Green and Gold? Heck, we even have a statue of him.

---

That's a pretty pathetic response.

Are you actually attempting to say that all of the thousands of churches named after Mary, are just because of location (church of England) or a different methodology (Methodists)?
That's pathetic.

The entire planet knows the difference between singing songs about a school, and singing worship songs. You are one of the few who can't seem to understand it.

No one bows to the statue of judge Baylor, nor do they sing songs praising him, nor go they ask him for his grace, nor do they pray to him in any way.

Catholics are very much involved in the worship of Mary, and they constantly have to try and convince the rest of the planet that the worship of Mary is not worship.

Very very sad for you and your level of deception. You think you made some kind of brilliant defense of Marian worship, but it's not even close.

I'll pray for your eyes to be opened.

---

If there was a university named Budda (or Buddha) University and it had a statue of Budda on the campus would you think the people attending there were improperly honoring Budda? This is YOUR simple "replace it with Bud[d]a" test.

---

You're AGREEING with his argument. He's clearly saying that having a statue of your university's namesake is not worship in of itself. It's when you bow and pray to it or petition it for grace that makes it worship. And that isn't his "replace it with Buddha" test. He clearly was talking about doing to Buddha everything that you do to Mary, not just one thing.

Let's me give you some advice - stop attempting arguments with logic. You're terrible at it.

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc, I know right now you're thinking less about what is actually true, and more about how to defend Orthodoxy.

I urge you to think in the spirit of truth, not in the spirit of self preservation.

---

I'm trying to find what's actually true. That's what led me to start questioning things in the first place.

But let me ask you something honestly: what is the "correct" denomination, in your view?

Because within Protestantism, there are huge differences on salvation itself: whether baptism saves, whether you can lose salvation, whether faith alone is enough, whether God chooses some and rejects others, etc.

Where is the ultimate authority of interpreting scripture? Who has the ultimate authority when people within your own church disagree on an interpretation?

They can't all be right. So how do we know which version of Protestantism has the truth? Why do you think you and your church are the only people who have the correct theology?

If you don't think you have perfect theology, then why does theology even matter? If scripture is all we need, then why do we even need a physical church? Why do we need Pastors?

We both believe and have faith in Jesus, is that not enough?

1 Thess. 5:21

---

Good questions, and I'll answer what you want. I think I've already answered some of them already. But I think you're avoiding the pressing issue here. Can you answer me - you DO see the serious problem in praising someone who took you to church in that way, don't you? I don't know if I can tell you which denomination is "correct", but I CAN tell you which denomination is certainly NOT correct, and it would be any church that teaches THAT.

---

If I had a superficial view that what they're doing is literal worship of Mary then yes I would reject it.

Its the same concept of Protestant communion... yeah it looks like the practice of consuming the literal body and blood of Christ...but you make it very clear that its just symbolic.

You think the words they say are meant to convey worship of Mary...yet they make it very clear that treating it that way would be heretical.

---

It's very interesting that if someone dies everything that Catholics do for Mary, but they did it for Buda instead of Mary.... Catholics would agree that those people were worshipping Buda.
Catholics are trying to move the goal posts so that they can engage in Marian worship but claim that it's not worship.
No other religion on the planet builds churches or temples, sings songs, prays prayers, bows before the image of someone or something that they claim they do not worship.
The Catholics have more churches named after & dedicated to Mary than they do Jesus.

Actions speak louder than words.

---

Interesting take. Are members of the Church of England (Anglicans) worshipping England (or the head of state)? You are going to be shocked when you find out where Lutherans get their name from. Are Methodists in love with process? What are Baptists worshipping? Are Seventh Day Adventists some weird calendar worshippers? We haven't even gotten to what the nondenominational churches name themselves: you'll find names like Antioch, Watermark, City Church. What do their names tell you about what they worship?

And wait until you figure out who our beloved university is named after. Are we all worshipping Judge Baylor when we gather to celebrate and sing the praises of the Green and Gold? Heck, we even have a statue of him.

---

That's a pretty pathetic response.

Are you actually attempting to say that all of the thousands of churches named after Mary, are just because of location (church of England) or a different methodology (Methodists)?
That's pathetic.

The entire planet knows the difference between singing songs about a school, and singing worship songs. You are one of the few who can't seem to understand it.

No one bows to the statue of judge Baylor, nor do they sing songs praising him, nor go they ask him for his grace, nor do they pray to him in any way.

Catholics are very much involved in the worship of Mary, and they constantly have to try and convince the rest of the planet that the worship of Mary is not worship.

Very very sad for you and your level of deception. You think you made some kind of brilliant defense of Marian worship, but it's not even close.

I'll pray for your eyes to be opened.

---

If there was a university named Budda (or Buddha) University and it had a statue of Budda on the campus would you think the people attending there were improperly honoring Budda? This is YOUR simple "replace it with Bud[d]a" test.

There are numerous posts in this thread from Catholics telling you that you are more than free to not have a Marian devotion. Does that sound like people who believe Mary is a deity? This entire thread is about the fact that the Dicastery of the Doctrine of the Faith (in layman's terms, the department in the Vatican responsible for the deposit of the faith and protecting the orthodoxy of the faith and morals) has explicitly stated that the "Co-redemptrix" title is not to be used in reference to the Mary.

The DDF's exact words: "In this case, the expression 'co-redemptrix' does not help extol Mary as the first and foremost collaborator in the work of redemption and grace, for it carries the risk of eclipsing the exclusive role of Jesus Christ."

Does that sound like the DDF believes she is to be worshipped?

So, you have Catholics telling you they are not worshipping her. You have Catholics telling you that nobody is required to keep a devotion to her. You have the DDF all over the place, including recently, telling you not to worship her (note the use of the word extol). But I guess you know better.

---

I never made the argument that people who attend a university are worshipping the name of that university. That was your ridiculous argument.

Let me try to explain it to you.

If there was a George Washington Baptist Church somewhere, I might wonder why they named their church after George Washington. If i went inside that church on Sunday and saw a big statue of George Washington behind the altar in the front so that everyone would focus on George during the service... that would be concerning. Then if everyone sang songs to George, praising his qualities... I would start to think that they are probably engaging in idolatry of George Washington. Then if they prayed prayers to George, thanking him for salvation and asking him to dispense Grace and Blessings upon them and their families... now I would definitely think they were engaging in worship of George. Then if they also bowed before the statue of George, while praying to George.... you add it all up and it is obvious that these folks are worshipping George Washington.

Now replace the name George Washington with The Virgin Mary, and you can obviously see the idolatry of Mary by the Catholic church.


I'm glad that there are some catholics who are not taking part in worshipping Mary, but it seems very odd to say that. Those would have to be catholics who also don't pray the rosary and don't go to "confession" because almost all of the priests instruct parishioners to pray the rosary or pray a certain number of Hail Mary prayers for their forgiveness of sins.
In other words, it would be hard to consider someone a Roman Catholic if they were not engaging in the idolatry of Mary, since this idolatry is taught & practiced by all the Popes and all the leaders in Rome and the Bishops and the Priests.
Maybe there are different levels of Marian idolatry in the RC, but just praying the rosary alone is idolatry. If you pray the rosary as instructed, you will be praying to Mary FAR more times than to God Himself.

I do hope that this step of no longer referring to Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Co-Mediator is the first step in moving the Roman Catholic Church away from idolatry. There will need to be many, many more steps before the RC stops it's idolatry of Mary, and sees her as she was, a blessed woman who was a sinner and needed a Savior.

ARbear13 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc, I know right now you're thinking less about what is actually true, and more about how to defend Orthodoxy.

I urge you to think in the spirit of truth, not in the spirit of self preservation.

---

I'm trying to find what's actually true. That's what led me to start questioning things in the first place.

But let me ask you something honestly: what is the "correct" denomination, in your view?

Because within Protestantism, there are huge differences on salvation itself: whether baptism saves, whether you can lose salvation, whether faith alone is enough, whether God chooses some and rejects others, etc.

Where is the ultimate authority of interpreting scripture? Who has the ultimate authority when people within your own church disagree on an interpretation?

They can't all be right. So how do we know which version of Protestantism has the truth? Why do you think you and your church are the only people who have the correct theology?

If you don't think you have perfect theology, then why does theology even matter? If scripture is all we need, then why do we even need a physical church? Why do we need Pastors?

We both believe and have faith in Jesus, is that not enough?

1 Thess. 5:21

---

Good questions, and I'll answer what you want. I think I've already answered some of them already. But I think you're avoiding the pressing issue here. Can you answer me - you DO see the serious problem in praising someone who took you to church in that way, don't you? I don't know if I can tell you which denomination is "correct", but I CAN tell you which denomination is certainly NOT correct, and it would be any church that teaches THAT.

---

If I had a superficial view that what they're doing is literal worship of Mary then yes I would reject it.

Its the same concept of Protestant communion... yeah it looks like the practice of consuming the literal body and blood of Christ...but you make it very clear that its just symbolic.

You think the words they say are meant to convey worship of Mary...yet they make it very clear that treating it that way would be heretical.

---

So, are you saying that if someone bows and prays to a statue of you in church, sings hymns for you, and calls you "my salvation", "my deliverer from the mire of sin", and that "those who chants hymns of praise to you, Jesus will grant salvation" because you took him to church where he got saved, that it's okay as long as he says he's not worshiping you? God is okay with that?

I think you're really trying to avoid something, and I just want you to be honest. I have not found one honest Catholic to talk with about this. Not one. I'm hoping you'll be different.

---

This isn't Roman Catholicism. They engaged in schism away from the original church and that's precisely why they have so many issues, including the papacy and left leaning ideology. I would argue them splitting also led to Protestant reformation who also has a major issue with left leaning ideology creeping in: See Baylor for example.

Protestant reformation was a reaction to real Roman Catholic abuses and had nothing to do with the Orthodox. Here's what Luther said: "The Greeks [Orthodox] . . . are not heretics or schismatics but the most Christian people and the best followers of the Gospel on earth."

It's Eastern/Greek Orthodoxy, its VERY different from Roman Catholicism. They don't pray the rosary. As Rome focuses on Mary almost to the exclusion of Christ, Protestants ignore or even slander her; meanwhile, Orthodoxy venerates her profoundly, but always in connection with her Son. This is why all Icons of Mary have Jesus in Orthodoxy. Statues in Catholicism don't include Jesus. I would agree that Roman Catholics take it too far with Mary.

One key difference is how worship is perceived though, its very different. The early church is nowhere close to how modern Protestants worship. When the reformation happened, the focus of the Church being on the Sacrifice of Christ offered by himself to himself shifted purely to an intellectual exercise. When worship changed from body/soul participation in the eternal sacrifice of Christ into an intellectual exercise of gaining knowledge and personal prayer, people misunderstood that praying to Mary means worshipping her. That's because they've changed the definition of worship by their praxis caused by heterodoxy.

I'm trying to avoid looking at these things from a superficial level and instead really diving into the history. It requires a major paradigm shift to understand.

---

Okay, we can talk about that later, but you're still avoiding the question, which I find very curious. Surely the answer is plainly obvious to anyone who truly believes in Jesus and wants to worship him, isn't it? Right now, you're not being honest, just like the Roman Catholics aren't. Can I finally get an answer?

---

You need to be extremely careful here:
1st century Judaism didn't revolve around private Bible study. The canon of Scripture wasn't even finalized yet. Worship was liturgical and sacramental: incense, vestments, candles, priests, sacrifices, psalms, processions, and blessings. There was an altar, sacred vessels, and prayers for the departed. Jesus called the Temple "My Father's house" and faithfully attended synagogue worship.


You're essentially condemning this form of worship as "unbiblical ritual,". This condemns the very context of worship Jesus Himself lived within. The Apostles didn't replace ritual with minimalism; they transformed Temple worship into Christian liturgy.

---

You do know that what's being condemned here is NOT the form of rituals, i.e. psalms, processions, candles, altars, synagogues, incense, etc but rather WHO the object of worship is, don't you? This is a straw man argument. Can you just answer my question? Your continued avoidance is very telling.

And regarding priests, you do realize that we don't need priests as mediators anymore, that we are all a "royal priesthood" of believers (1 Peter 2:5-9) who have direct access to God through Jesus? Regarding sacrifices, the one true sacrifice for all time was already completed in Jesus Christ' death (Hebrews 7:27). There is no need for any more sacrifices.

---

Your problem in grasping the Catholic and Orthodox position is that you see honor and praise as a zero-sum game. In your mind, if something is being praised, they are being praised over and above God. For you and many other evangelicals, it is an "either/or" situation.

That is not how traditional Churches see the issue. For us, it is a "both/and" situation because all Mary's glory derives directly from God. We can honor people, even very highly, while still recognizing that they are nothing in comparison to God. You can disagree with the language -- I myself find some of the more poetic language to be excessive because I don't like poetry -- but you cannot disagree with the intent behind it.

St. Athanasius sang praises to the Virgin Mary using similar terminology to what you have been railing against. Yet he suffered great persecution for decades to fight the Arian heresy and uphold Christ's full divinity, even when the entire weight of the Roman imperial government (led by the Arian Constantius II) was turned against him. He also worked tirelessly as bishop of Alexandria to crush the remnants of Egyptian paganism. Athanasius's entire life was dedicated to ensuring that Christ was viewed as fully God by everyone around him.

Could you really walk up to Athanasius and accuse him of refusing to give Christ his due glory by worshipping a created being? Do you honestly believe that such a man would compromise with pagan theology? Don't you think his vicious Arian opponents would have used this hymn of Mary against Athanasius if they thought they could use it to accuse him of paganism?

His entire life proved that he, along with the rest of the Catholic Church, did not view praising Mary as any sort of detraction from the exclusive worship due to Jesus Christ as God Incarnate.

---

Quote:

---

Your problem in grasping the Catholic and Orthodox position is that you see honor and praise as a zero-sum game. In your mind, if something is being praised, they are being praised over and above God. For you and many other evangelicals, it is an "either/or" situation.

---

No, that's not our problem. One doesn't have to praise/worship over or above God. You can praise God more than you praise a "lesser divinity". The issue is that RC's have given Mary god-like powers that extend to us earthly mortals, made her divine, pray to her, and idolize her in words and actions. Whether you think she is above, equal, or below God isn't the issue at all. I will also add that for many RC's, Mary receives more praises and prayers than does Jesus. It's not a misunderstanding, it's just not a willingness to rationalize what is obviously true, the RC church whether officially or not, encourages the idolization of Mary. So perhaps for the very devout and educated Catholics, it may be to a lesser degree, but across the globe, including the US, the excessive idolization is pretty clear to anyone willing to be honest about it. The title of the OP proves that.

ShooterTX said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc, I know right now you're thinking less about what is actually true, and more about how to defend Orthodoxy.

I urge you to think in the spirit of truth, not in the spirit of self preservation.

---

I'm trying to find what's actually true. That's what led me to start questioning things in the first place.

But let me ask you something honestly: what is the "correct" denomination, in your view?

Because within Protestantism, there are huge differences on salvation itself: whether baptism saves, whether you can lose salvation, whether faith alone is enough, whether God chooses some and rejects others, etc.

Where is the ultimate authority of interpreting scripture? Who has the ultimate authority when people within your own church disagree on an interpretation?

They can't all be right. So how do we know which version of Protestantism has the truth? Why do you think you and your church are the only people who have the correct theology?

If you don't think you have perfect theology, then why does theology even matter? If scripture is all we need, then why do we even need a physical church? Why do we need Pastors?

We both believe and have faith in Jesus, is that not enough?

1 Thess. 5:21

---

Good questions, and I'll answer what you want. I think I've already answered some of them already. But I think you're avoiding the pressing issue here. Can you answer me - you DO see the serious problem in praising someone who took you to church in that way, don't you? I don't know if I can tell you which denomination is "correct", but I CAN tell you which denomination is certainly NOT correct, and it would be any church that teaches THAT.

---

If I had a superficial view that what they're doing is literal worship of Mary then yes I would reject it.

Its the same concept of Protestant communion... yeah it looks like the practice of consuming the literal body and blood of Christ...but you make it very clear that its just symbolic.

You think the words they say are meant to convey worship of Mary...yet they make it very clear that treating it that way would be heretical.

---

It's very interesting that if someone dies everything that Catholics do for Mary, but they did it for Buda instead of Mary.... Catholics would agree that those people were worshipping Buda.
Catholics are trying to move the goal posts so that they can engage in Marian worship but claim that it's not worship.
No other religion on the planet builds churches or temples, sings songs, prays prayers, bows before the image of someone or something that they claim they do not worship.
The Catholics have more churches named after & dedicated to Mary than they do Jesus.

Actions speak louder than words.

---

Interesting take. Are members of the Church of England (Anglicans) worshipping England (or the head of state)? You are going to be shocked when you find out where Lutherans get their name from. Are Methodists in love with process? What are Baptists worshipping? Are Seventh Day Adventists some weird calendar worshippers? We haven't even gotten to what the nondenominational churches name themselves: you'll find names like Antioch, Watermark, City Church. What do their names tell you about what they worship?

And wait until you figure out who our beloved university is named after. Are we all worshipping Judge Baylor when we gather to celebrate and sing the praises of the Green and Gold? Heck, we even have a statue of him.

---

That's a pretty pathetic response.

Are you actually attempting to say that all of the thousands of churches named after Mary, are just because of location (church of England) or a different methodology (Methodists)?
That's pathetic.

The entire planet knows the difference between singing songs about a school, and singing worship songs. You are one of the few who can't seem to understand it.

No one bows to the statue of judge Baylor, nor do they sing songs praising him, nor go they ask him for his grace, nor do they pray to him in any way.

Catholics are very much involved in the worship of Mary, and they constantly have to try and convince the rest of the planet that the worship of Mary is not worship.

Very very sad for you and your level of deception. You think you made some kind of brilliant defense of Marian worship, but it's not even close.

I'll pray for your eyes to be opened.

---

If there was a university named Budda (or Buddha) University and it had a statue of Budda on the campus would you think the people attending there were improperly honoring Budda? This is YOUR simple "replace it with Bud[d]a" test.

There are numerous posts in this thread from Catholics telling you that you are more than free to not have a Marian devotion. Does that sound like people who believe Mary is a deity? This entire thread is about the fact that the Dicastery of the Doctrine of the Faith (in layman's terms, the department in the Vatican responsible for the deposit of the faith and protecting the orthodoxy of the faith and morals) has explicitly stated that the "Co-redemptrix" title is not to be used in reference to the Mary.

The DDF's exact words: "In this case, the expression 'co-redemptrix' does not help extol Mary as the first and foremost collaborator in the work of redemption and grace, for it carries the risk of eclipsing the exclusive role of Jesus Christ."

Does that sound like the DDF believes she is to be worshipped?

So, you have Catholics telling you they are not worshipping her. You have Catholics telling you that nobody is required to keep a devotion to her. You have the DDF all over the place, including recently, telling you not to worship her (note the use of the word extol). But I guess you know better.

---

I never made the argument that people who attend a university are worshipping the name of that university. That was your ridiculous argument.

Let me try to explain it to you.

If there was a George Washington Baptist Church somewhere, I might wonder why they named their church after George Washington. If i went inside that church on Sunday and saw a big statue of George Washington behind the altar in the front so that everyone would focus on George during the service... that would be concerning. Then if everyone sang songs to George, praising his qualities... I would start to think that they are probably engaging in idolatry of George Washington. Then if they prayed prayers to George, thanking him for salvation and asking him to dispense Grace and Blessings upon them and their families... now I would definitely think they were engaging in worship of George. Then if they also bowed before the statue of George, while praying to George.... you add it all up and it is obvious that these folks are worshipping George Washington.

Now replace the name George Washington with The Virgin Mary, and you can obviously see the idolatry of Mary by the Catholic church.


I'm glad that there are some catholics who are not taking part in worshipping Mary, but it seems very odd to say that. Those would have to be catholics who also don't pray the rosary and don't go to "confession" because almost all of the priests instruct parishioners to pray the rosary or pray a certain number of Hail Mary prayers for their forgiveness of sins.
In other words, it would be hard to consider someone a Roman Catholic if they were not engaging in the idolatry of Mary, since this idolatry is taught & practiced by all the Popes and all the leaders in Rome and the Bishops and the Priests.
Maybe there are different levels of Marian idolatry in the RC, but just praying the rosary alone is idolatry. If you pray the rosary as instructed, you will be praying to Mary FAR more times than to God Himself.

I do hope that this step of no longer referring to Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Co-Mediator is the first step in moving the Roman Catholic Church away from idolatry. There will need to be many, many more steps before the RC stops it's idolatry of Mary, and sees her as she was, a blessed woman who was a sinner and needed a Savior.

---

Let's say you have a university named Budda University with a statue of Budda on it. Let's say the members of that community memorize a handful of ritualized chants about their community. They get together on a regularly scheduled basis where they will all dress similarly announcing their allegiance to BU. They will sing the same songs in coordinated fashion extolling the virtues of their community. They will all agree on a few fundamental issues, like their common enemy of TCU. They will cheer their heroes on as they seek to defeat their opponents in the arena. They have an annual pilgrimage where they are all called to come home to celebrate their community. They plaster their cars in BU decals and emblems. They wear clothes proudly announcing their association with BU. They hang in places of prominence their official certificates marking their membership in the BU Alumni community. They put flags and other decorations on their homes announcing their allegiance. Immediately after birth, they dress their babies in Budda U gear. They even minorly incorporate it into other holidays like their equivalent Christmas, with a BU ornament or some other token or icon of the holiday that incorporates BU. They spend their money supporting BU. Many of them will be proud when their children are initiated into the community. Occasionally the military will get involved and bring aircraft to the gatherings of BU. This could go on and on.

The point is that you and I, as insiders of the community, know that we are not worshipping Judge Baylor or Baylor University. We understand the nuance of the situation, but an OUTSIDER could be forgiven if he or she took a look at the whole thing and accused the BU community members of worshipping or idolizing the namesake of BU and/or his university.

Likewise, the insiders who understand what is happening in the Catholic faith are telling you they are not worshipping Mary. The DDF is telling you it is not happening and to avoid the appearance of it happening (the purpose of this thread). We are explicitly telling you that the faith does NOT require a Marian devotion, but it is approved for the faithful that find comfort in it and beleive it brings them closer to Christ.

Quote:

---

In other words, it would be hard to consider someone a Roman Catholic if they were not engaging in the idolatry of Mary,

---

You are not a Catholic, you do not believe in Catholic teachings and the faith as expressed by the Magisterium, yet you seem to be so self-assured as what it means to be Catholic. Do you always tell others what something you do not believe in actually means? Don't ever lose your humility, my friend....

Your understanding of the design of physical Catholic churches, their worship spaces and their purpose is lacking and leading to faulty conclusions. Lots of literature out there explaining the design of Catholic churches. You should educate yourself.

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc, I know right now you're thinking less about what is actually true, and more about how to defend Orthodoxy.

I urge you to think in the spirit of truth, not in the spirit of self preservation.

---

I'm trying to find what's actually true. That's what led me to start questioning things in the first place.

But let me ask you something honestly: what is the "correct" denomination, in your view?

Because within Protestantism, there are huge differences on salvation itself: whether baptism saves, whether you can lose salvation, whether faith alone is enough, whether God chooses some and rejects others, etc.

Where is the ultimate authority of interpreting scripture? Who has the ultimate authority when people within your own church disagree on an interpretation?

They can't all be right. So how do we know which version of Protestantism has the truth? Why do you think you and your church are the only people who have the correct theology?

If you don't think you have perfect theology, then why does theology even matter? If scripture is all we need, then why do we even need a physical church? Why do we need Pastors?

We both believe and have faith in Jesus, is that not enough?

1 Thess. 5:21

---

Good questions, and I'll answer what you want. I think I've already answered some of them already. But I think you're avoiding the pressing issue here. Can you answer me - you DO see the serious problem in praising someone who took you to church in that way, don't you? I don't know if I can tell you which denomination is "correct", but I CAN tell you which denomination is certainly NOT correct, and it would be any church that teaches THAT.

---

If I had a superficial view that what they're doing is literal worship of Mary then yes I would reject it.

Its the same concept of Protestant communion... yeah it looks like the practice of consuming the literal body and blood of Christ...but you make it very clear that its just symbolic.

You think the words they say are meant to convey worship of Mary...yet they make it very clear that treating it that way would be heretical.

---

It's very interesting that if someone dies everything that Catholics do for Mary, but they did it for Buda instead of Mary.... Catholics would agree that those people were worshipping Buda.
Catholics are trying to move the goal posts so that they can engage in Marian worship but claim that it's not worship.
No other religion on the planet builds churches or temples, sings songs, prays prayers, bows before the image of someone or something that they claim they do not worship.
The Catholics have more churches named after & dedicated to Mary than they do Jesus.

Actions speak louder than words.

---

Interesting take. Are members of the Church of England (Anglicans) worshipping England (or the head of state)? You are going to be shocked when you find out where Lutherans get their name from. Are Methodists in love with process? What are Baptists worshipping? Are Seventh Day Adventists some weird calendar worshippers? We haven't even gotten to what the nondenominational churches name themselves: you'll find names like Antioch, Watermark, City Church. What do their names tell you about what they worship?

And wait until you figure out who our beloved university is named after. Are we all worshipping Judge Baylor when we gather to celebrate and sing the praises of the Green and Gold? Heck, we even have a statue of him.

---

That's a pretty pathetic response.

Are you actually attempting to say that all of the thousands of churches named after Mary, are just because of location (church of England) or a different methodology (Methodists)?
That's pathetic.

The entire planet knows the difference between singing songs about a school, and singing worship songs. You are one of the few who can't seem to understand it.

No one bows to the statue of judge Baylor, nor do they sing songs praising him, nor go they ask him for his grace, nor do they pray to him in any way.

Catholics are very much involved in the worship of Mary, and they constantly have to try and convince the rest of the planet that the worship of Mary is not worship.

Very very sad for you and your level of deception. You think you made some kind of brilliant defense of Marian worship, but it's not even close.

I'll pray for your eyes to be opened.

---

If there was a university named Budda (or Buddha) University and it had a statue of Budda on the campus would you think the people attending there were improperly honoring Budda? This is YOUR simple "replace it with Bud[d]a" test.

There are numerous posts in this thread from Catholics telling you that you are more than free to not have a Marian devotion. Does that sound like people who believe Mary is a deity? This entire thread is about the fact that the Dicastery of the Doctrine of the Faith (in layman's terms, the department in the Vatican responsible for the deposit of the faith and protecting the orthodoxy of the faith and morals) has explicitly stated that the "Co-redemptrix" title is not to be used in reference to the Mary.

The DDF's exact words: "In this case, the expression 'co-redemptrix' does not help extol Mary as the first and foremost collaborator in the work of redemption and grace, for it carries the risk of eclipsing the exclusive role of Jesus Christ."

Does that sound like the DDF believes she is to be worshipped?

So, you have Catholics telling you they are not worshipping her. You have Catholics telling you that nobody is required to keep a devotion to her. You have the DDF all over the place, including recently, telling you not to worship her (note the use of the word extol). But I guess you know better.

---

I never made the argument that people who attend a university are worshipping the name of that university. That was your ridiculous argument.

Let me try to explain it to you.

If there was a George Washington Baptist Church somewhere, I might wonder why they named their church after George Washington. If i went inside that church on Sunday and saw a big statue of George Washington behind the altar in the front so that everyone would focus on George during the service... that would be concerning. Then if everyone sang songs to George, praising his qualities... I would start to think that they are probably engaging in idolatry of George Washington. Then if they prayed prayers to George, thanking him for salvation and asking him to dispense Grace and Blessings upon them and their families... now I would definitely think they were engaging in worship of George. Then if they also bowed before the statue of George, while praying to George.... you add it all up and it is obvious that these folks are worshipping George Washington.

Now replace the name George Washington with The Virgin Mary, and you can obviously see the idolatry of Mary by the Catholic church.


I'm glad that there are some catholics who are not taking part in worshipping Mary, but it seems very odd to say that. Those would have to be catholics who also don't pray the rosary and don't go to "confession" because almost all of the priests instruct parishioners to pray the rosary or pray a certain number of Hail Mary prayers for their forgiveness of sins.
In other words, it would be hard to consider someone a Roman Catholic if they were not engaging in the idolatry of Mary, since this idolatry is taught & practiced by all the Popes and all the leaders in Rome and the Bishops and the Priests.
Maybe there are different levels of Marian idolatry in the RC, but just praying the rosary alone is idolatry. If you pray the rosary as instructed, you will be praying to Mary FAR more times than to God Himself.

I do hope that this step of no longer referring to Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Co-Mediator is the first step in moving the Roman Catholic Church away from idolatry. There will need to be many, many more steps before the RC stops it's idolatry of Mary, and sees her as she was, a blessed woman who was a sinner and needed a Savior.

---

Let's say you have a university named Budda University with a statue of Budda on it. Let's say the members of that community memorize a handful of ritualized chants about their community. They get together on a regularly scheduled basis where they will all dress similarly announcing their allegiance to BU. They will sing the same songs in coordinated fashion extolling the virtues of their community. They will all agree on a few fundamental issues, like their common enemy of TCU. They will cheer their heroes on as they seek to defeat their opponents in the arena. They have an annual pilgrimage where they are all called to come home to celebrate their community. They plaster their cars in BU decals and emblems. They wear clothes proudly announcing their association with BU. They hang in places of prominence their official certificates marking their membership in the BU Alumni community. They put flags and other decorations on their homes announcing their allegiance. Immediately after birth, they dress their babies in Budda U gear. They even minorly incorporate it into other holidays like their equivalent Christmas, with a BU ornament or some other token or icon of the holiday that incorporates BU. They spend their money supporting BU. Many of them will be proud when their children are initiated into the community. Occasionally the military will get involved and bring aircraft to the gatherings of BU. This could go on and on.

The point is that you and I, as insiders of the community, know that we are not worshipping Judge Baylor or Baylor University. We understand the nuance of the situation, but an OUTSIDER could be forgiven if he or she took a look at the whole thing and accused the BU community members of worshipping or idolizing the namesake of BU and/or his university.

Likewise, the insiders who understand what is happening in the Catholic faith are telling you they are not worshipping Mary. The DDF is telling you it is not happening and to avoid the appearance of it happening (the purpose of this thread). We are explicitly telling you that the faith does NOT require a Marian devotion, but it is approved for the faithful that find comfort in it and beleive it brings them closer to Christ.

---

Can you really not comprehend that all what you described is what university students and alumni do for tribal unity and pride for their university, and NOT for the personal honor, praise, and glorification of the namesake of their university??

Can you truly not understand the massive difference between doing all what you described, and them bowing and praying to the image of their namesake, and petitioning it for grace and all salvation, all while elevating their namesake to deity, having the same qualities of Jesus (being sinless, perpetually pure, and assumed into heaven)?? And saying that their namesake is necessary for salvation, THE ALL HOLY ONE, and that in the hour of their death they entrust their souls wholly to their namesake's care??

You really are struggling cognitively with this topic. You and your Catholic brethren. It's quite perplexing to behold.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc, I know right now you're thinking less about what is actually true, and more about how to defend Orthodoxy.

I urge you to think in the spirit of truth, not in the spirit of self preservation.

---

I'm trying to find what's actually true. That's what led me to start questioning things in the first place.

But let me ask you something honestly: what is the "correct" denomination, in your view?

Because within Protestantism, there are huge differences on salvation itself: whether baptism saves, whether you can lose salvation, whether faith alone is enough, whether God chooses some and rejects others, etc.

Where is the ultimate authority of interpreting scripture? Who has the ultimate authority when people within your own church disagree on an interpretation?

They can't all be right. So how do we know which version of Protestantism has the truth? Why do you think you and your church are the only people who have the correct theology?

If you don't think you have perfect theology, then why does theology even matter? If scripture is all we need, then why do we even need a physical church? Why do we need Pastors?

We both believe and have faith in Jesus, is that not enough?

1 Thess. 5:21

---

Good questions, and I'll answer what you want. I think I've already answered some of them already. But I think you're avoiding the pressing issue here. Can you answer me - you DO see the serious problem in praising someone who took you to church in that way, don't you? I don't know if I can tell you which denomination is "correct", but I CAN tell you which denomination is certainly NOT correct, and it would be any church that teaches THAT.

---

If I had a superficial view that what they're doing is literal worship of Mary then yes I would reject it.

Its the same concept of Protestant communion... yeah it looks like the practice of consuming the literal body and blood of Christ...but you make it very clear that its just symbolic.

You think the words they say are meant to convey worship of Mary...yet they make it very clear that treating it that way would be heretical.

---

It's very interesting that if someone dies everything that Catholics do for Mary, but they did it for Buda instead of Mary.... Catholics would agree that those people were worshipping Buda.
Catholics are trying to move the goal posts so that they can engage in Marian worship but claim that it's not worship.
No other religion on the planet builds churches or temples, sings songs, prays prayers, bows before the image of someone or something that they claim they do not worship.
The Catholics have more churches named after & dedicated to Mary than they do Jesus.

Actions speak louder than words.

---

Interesting take. Are members of the Church of England (Anglicans) worshipping England (or the head of state)? You are going to be shocked when you find out where Lutherans get their name from. Are Methodists in love with process? What are Baptists worshipping? Are Seventh Day Adventists some weird calendar worshippers? We haven't even gotten to what the nondenominational churches name themselves: you'll find names like Antioch, Watermark, City Church. What do their names tell you about what they worship?

And wait until you figure out who our beloved university is named after. Are we all worshipping Judge Baylor when we gather to celebrate and sing the praises of the Green and Gold? Heck, we even have a statue of him.

---

That's a pretty pathetic response.

Are you actually attempting to say that all of the thousands of churches named after Mary, are just because of location (church of England) or a different methodology (Methodists)?
That's pathetic.

The entire planet knows the difference between singing songs about a school, and singing worship songs. You are one of the few who can't seem to understand it.

No one bows to the statue of judge Baylor, nor do they sing songs praising him, nor go they ask him for his grace, nor do they pray to him in any way.

Catholics are very much involved in the worship of Mary, and they constantly have to try and convince the rest of the planet that the worship of Mary is not worship.

Very very sad for you and your level of deception. You think you made some kind of brilliant defense of Marian worship, but it's not even close.

I'll pray for your eyes to be opened.

---

If there was a university named Budda (or Buddha) University and it had a statue of Budda on the campus would you think the people attending there were improperly honoring Budda? This is YOUR simple "replace it with Bud[d]a" test.

There are numerous posts in this thread from Catholics telling you that you are more than free to not have a Marian devotion. Does that sound like people who believe Mary is a deity? This entire thread is about the fact that the Dicastery of the Doctrine of the Faith (in layman's terms, the department in the Vatican responsible for the deposit of the faith and protecting the orthodoxy of the faith and morals) has explicitly stated that the "Co-redemptrix" title is not to be used in reference to the Mary.

The DDF's exact words: "In this case, the expression 'co-redemptrix' does not help extol Mary as the first and foremost collaborator in the work of redemption and grace, for it carries the risk of eclipsing the exclusive role of Jesus Christ."

Does that sound like the DDF believes she is to be worshipped?

So, you have Catholics telling you they are not worshipping her. You have Catholics telling you that nobody is required to keep a devotion to her. You have the DDF all over the place, including recently, telling you not to worship her (note the use of the word extol). But I guess you know better.

---

I never made the argument that people who attend a university are worshipping the name of that university. That was your ridiculous argument.

Let me try to explain it to you.

If there was a George Washington Baptist Church somewhere, I might wonder why they named their church after George Washington. If i went inside that church on Sunday and saw a big statue of George Washington behind the altar in the front so that everyone would focus on George during the service... that would be concerning. Then if everyone sang songs to George, praising his qualities... I would start to think that they are probably engaging in idolatry of George Washington. Then if they prayed prayers to George, thanking him for salvation and asking him to dispense Grace and Blessings upon them and their families... now I would definitely think they were engaging in worship of George. Then if they also bowed before the statue of George, while praying to George.... you add it all up and it is obvious that these folks are worshipping George Washington.

Now replace the name George Washington with The Virgin Mary, and you can obviously see the idolatry of Mary by the Catholic church.


I'm glad that there are some catholics who are not taking part in worshipping Mary, but it seems very odd to say that. Those would have to be catholics who also don't pray the rosary and don't go to "confession" because almost all of the priests instruct parishioners to pray the rosary or pray a certain number of Hail Mary prayers for their forgiveness of sins.
In other words, it would be hard to consider someone a Roman Catholic if they were not engaging in the idolatry of Mary, since this idolatry is taught & practiced by all the Popes and all the leaders in Rome and the Bishops and the Priests.
Maybe there are different levels of Marian idolatry in the RC, but just praying the rosary alone is idolatry. If you pray the rosary as instructed, you will be praying to Mary FAR more times than to God Himself.

I do hope that this step of no longer referring to Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Co-Mediator is the first step in moving the Roman Catholic Church away from idolatry. There will need to be many, many more steps before the RC stops it's idolatry of Mary, and sees her as she was, a blessed woman who was a sinner and needed a Savior.

---

Let's say you have a university named Budda University with a statue of Budda on it. Let's say the members of that community memorize a handful of ritualized chants about their community. They get together on a regularly scheduled basis where they will all dress similarly announcing their allegiance to BU. They will sing the same songs in coordinated fashion extolling the virtues of their community. They will all agree on a few fundamental issues, like their common enemy of TCU. They will cheer their heroes on as they seek to defeat their opponents in the arena. They have an annual pilgrimage where they are all called to come home to celebrate their community. They plaster their cars in BU decals and emblems. They wear clothes proudly announcing their association with BU. They hang in places of prominence their official certificates marking their membership in the BU Alumni community. They put flags and other decorations on their homes announcing their allegiance. Immediately after birth, they dress their babies in Budda U gear. They even minorly incorporate it into other holidays like their equivalent Christmas, with a BU ornament or some other token or icon of the holiday that incorporates BU. They spend their money supporting BU. Many of them will be proud when their children are initiated into the community. Occasionally the military will get involved and bring aircraft to the gatherings of BU. This could go on and on.

The point is that you and I, as insiders of the community, know that we are not worshipping Judge Baylor or Baylor University. We understand the nuance of the situation, but an OUTSIDER could be forgiven if he or she took a look at the whole thing and accused the BU community members of worshipping or idolizing the namesake of BU and/or his university.

Likewise, the insiders who understand what is happening in the Catholic faith are telling you they are not worshipping Mary. The DDF is telling you it is not happening and to avoid the appearance of it happening (the purpose of this thread). We are explicitly telling you that the faith does NOT require a Marian devotion, but it is approved for the faithful that find comfort in it and beleive it brings them closer to Christ.

---

Can you really not comprehend that all what you described is what university students and alumni do for tribal unity and pride for their university, and NOT for the personal honor, praise, and glorification of the namesake of their university??

Can you truly not understand the massive difference between doing all what you described, and them bowing and praying to the image of their namesake, and petitioning it for grace and all salvation, all while elevating their namesake to deity, having the same qualities of Jesus (being sinless, perpetually pure, and assumed into heaven)?? And saying that their namesake is necessary for salvation, THE ALL HOLY ONE, and that in the hour of their death they entrust their souls wholly to their namesake's care??

You really are struggling cognitively with this topic. You and your Catholic brethren. It's quite perplexing to behold.

---

No one has elevated Mary to a deity. She is not divine, and the Catholic Church is extremely explicit about this. You keep saying it because you refuse to accept the Catholic conception of worship, but that doesn't make it true. Mary is not God and therefore cannot be adored, which is the common English translation of the Latin latria. Mary's importance to Catholics is derived in its entirety from her ability to draw Christians closer to God via her intercession and righteous example. Intercession and serving as a great exemplar of faith are the only things that the Virgin Mary can do, and neither of those actions are unique to God. You and I are capable of the same actions; Mary is just vastly more effective at them than the rest of us because of her relationship to Jesus.

Mary was sinless. No, being sinless does not make anyone divine; Adam and Eve were sinless before their Fall, but they were still only human. Her sinless nature has nothing to do with her earning it and everything to do with her being the Mother of God Incarnate and the special graces that derive from that status.

Her free participation was necessary for God's salvation plan in a practical sense, as God made his salvation plan contingent on her agreement. God obviously can do anything He wishes, but he wanted to make humanity active participants in His plan for our salvation. Catholics and the Orthodox have a somewhat different atonement theology than most Protestant denominations.

Mary is all-holy. No one, including Mary, can be holy without God making them so. Mary is all-holy because she was never stained with sin in the first place, unlike the rest of us. This was a grace given to her by God, wholly unearned on her part. Also, Mary has a uniquely close relationship to Christ, the source of all holiness. If holiness is a necessity for friendship with God, and people can grow in holiness, then Mary's holiness must be all the more complete because she is the Mother of God in the Person of Christ. Motherhood is the strongest of all relationships and is stronger than friendship.

There isn't anything wrong with the Hail Mary prayer. The only possible contention a Trinitarian Protestant could have with it is in the second half when the text asks Mary, who is already in Heaven, to pray for us. We've already discussed how that is completely fine in Catholic theology due to our belief in the communion of saints. Also, the Hail Mary isn't the most common Catholic prayer. That would be the Our Father, which is obviously said directly to God.

There isn't anything wrong with bowing either. The presence, or lack thereof, of a statue or icon of Mary is immaterial, as no one believes her spirit is tied to the image as ancient pagans commonly believed about their idols. Bowing remains standard practice whenever one is speaking to royalty. And make no mistake, the Blessed Virgin Mary is royalty. She is the Queen Mother of the Universe precisely and solely because her Son, Jesus Christ, is King of the Universe.

And before you repeat "that is mentioned directly in Scripture!" remember that criticism doesn't work on Catholics. We don't believe in Sola Scriptura, which was a 16th century theological innovation. We rely on Christ's promise to "lead you (you being Church as represented by the Apostles) into all truth," not on our individual, fallible interpretations of Holy Writ. God inspired the composition and compilation of the Bible to aid in our understanding of the Christian faith, and He established the Church to teach the precepts of the Faith using the Bible as a primary source.

ShooterTX said:

---

[
Let me try to explain it to you.

If there was a George Washington Baptist Church somewhere, I might wonder why they named their church after George Washington.

---

Never heard of a GW Baptist but there's a Bibles and Rifles Baptist in Kansas that dates back to the mid 1800s

ARbear13 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc, I know right now you're thinking less about what is actually true, and more about how to defend Orthodoxy.

I urge you to think in the spirit of truth, not in the spirit of self preservation.

---

I'm trying to find what's actually true. That's what led me to start questioning things in the first place.

But let me ask you something honestly: what is the "correct" denomination, in your view?

Because within Protestantism, there are huge differences on salvation itself: whether baptism saves, whether you can lose salvation, whether faith alone is enough, whether God chooses some and rejects others, etc.

Where is the ultimate authority of interpreting scripture? Who has the ultimate authority when people within your own church disagree on an interpretation?

They can't all be right. So how do we know which version of Protestantism has the truth? Why do you think you and your church are the only people who have the correct theology?

If you don't think you have perfect theology, then why does theology even matter? If scripture is all we need, then why do we even need a physical church? Why do we need Pastors?

We both believe and have faith in Jesus, is that not enough?

1 Thess. 5:21

---

Good questions, and I'll answer what you want. I think I've already answered some of them already. But I think you're avoiding the pressing issue here. Can you answer me - you DO see the serious problem in praising someone who took you to church in that way, don't you? I don't know if I can tell you which denomination is "correct", but I CAN tell you which denomination is certainly NOT correct, and it would be any church that teaches THAT.

---

If I had a superficial view that what they're doing is literal worship of Mary then yes I would reject it.

Its the same concept of Protestant communion... yeah it looks like the practice of consuming the literal body and blood of Christ...but you make it very clear that its just symbolic.

You think the words they say are meant to convey worship of Mary...yet they make it very clear that treating it that way would be heretical.

---

It's very interesting that if someone dies everything that Catholics do for Mary, but they did it for Buda instead of Mary.... Catholics would agree that those people were worshipping Buda.
Catholics are trying to move the goal posts so that they can engage in Marian worship but claim that it's not worship.
No other religion on the planet builds churches or temples, sings songs, prays prayers, bows before the image of someone or something that they claim they do not worship.
The Catholics have more churches named after & dedicated to Mary than they do Jesus.

Actions speak louder than words.

---

Interesting take. Are members of the Church of England (Anglicans) worshipping England (or the head of state)? You are going to be shocked when you find out where Lutherans get their name from. Are Methodists in love with process? What are Baptists worshipping? Are Seventh Day Adventists some weird calendar worshippers? We haven't even gotten to what the nondenominational churches name themselves: you'll find names like Antioch, Watermark, City Church. What do their names tell you about what they worship?

And wait until you figure out who our beloved university is named after. Are we all worshipping Judge Baylor when we gather to celebrate and sing the praises of the Green and Gold? Heck, we even have a statue of him.

---

That's a pretty pathetic response.

Are you actually attempting to say that all of the thousands of churches named after Mary, are just because of location (church of England) or a different methodology (Methodists)?
That's pathetic.

The entire planet knows the difference between singing songs about a school, and singing worship songs. You are one of the few who can't seem to understand it.

No one bows to the statue of judge Baylor, nor do they sing songs praising him, nor go they ask him for his grace, nor do they pray to him in any way.

Catholics are very much involved in the worship of Mary, and they constantly have to try and convince the rest of the planet that the worship of Mary is not worship.

Very very sad for you and your level of deception. You think you made some kind of brilliant defense of Marian worship, but it's not even close.

I'll pray for your eyes to be opened.

---

If there was a university named Budda (or Buddha) University and it had a statue of Budda on the campus would you think the people attending there were improperly honoring Budda? This is YOUR simple "replace it with Bud[d]a" test.

There are numerous posts in this thread from Catholics telling you that you are more than free to not have a Marian devotion. Does that sound like people who believe Mary is a deity? This entire thread is about the fact that the Dicastery of the Doctrine of the Faith (in layman's terms, the department in the Vatican responsible for the deposit of the faith and protecting the orthodoxy of the faith and morals) has explicitly stated that the "Co-redemptrix" title is not to be used in reference to the Mary.

The DDF's exact words: "In this case, the expression 'co-redemptrix' does not help extol Mary as the first and foremost collaborator in the work of redemption and grace, for it carries the risk of eclipsing the exclusive role of Jesus Christ."

Does that sound like the DDF believes she is to be worshipped?

So, you have Catholics telling you they are not worshipping her. You have Catholics telling you that nobody is required to keep a devotion to her. You have the DDF all over the place, including recently, telling you not to worship her (note the use of the word extol). But I guess you know better.

---

I never made the argument that people who attend a university are worshipping the name of that university. That was your ridiculous argument.

Let me try to explain it to you.

If there was a George Washington Baptist Church somewhere, I might wonder why they named their church after George Washington. If i went inside that church on Sunday and saw a big statue of George Washington behind the altar in the front so that everyone would focus on George during the service... that would be concerning. Then if everyone sang songs to George, praising his qualities... I would start to think that they are probably engaging in idolatry of George Washington. Then if they prayed prayers to George, thanking him for salvation and asking him to dispense Grace and Blessings upon them and their families... now I would definitely think they were engaging in worship of George. Then if they also bowed before the statue of George, while praying to George.... you add it all up and it is obvious that these folks are worshipping George Washington.

Now replace the name George Washington with The Virgin Mary, and you can obviously see the idolatry of Mary by the Catholic church.


I'm glad that there are some catholics who are not taking part in worshipping Mary, but it seems very odd to say that. Those would have to be catholics who also don't pray the rosary and don't go to "confession" because almost all of the priests instruct parishioners to pray the rosary or pray a certain number of Hail Mary prayers for their forgiveness of sins.
In other words, it would be hard to consider someone a Roman Catholic if they were not engaging in the idolatry of Mary, since this idolatry is taught & practiced by all the Popes and all the leaders in Rome and the Bishops and the Priests.
Maybe there are different levels of Marian idolatry in the RC, but just praying the rosary alone is idolatry. If you pray the rosary as instructed, you will be praying to Mary FAR more times than to God Himself.

I do hope that this step of no longer referring to Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Co-Mediator is the first step in moving the Roman Catholic Church away from idolatry. There will need to be many, many more steps before the RC stops it's idolatry of Mary, and sees her as she was, a blessed woman who was a sinner and needed a Savior.

---

Let's say you have a university named Budda University with a statue of Budda on it. Let's say the members of that community memorize a handful of ritualized chants about their community. They get together on a regularly scheduled basis where they will all dress similarly announcing their allegiance to BU. They will sing the same songs in coordinated fashion extolling the virtues of their community. They will all agree on a few fundamental issues, like their common enemy of TCU. They will cheer their heroes on as they seek to defeat their opponents in the arena. They have an annual pilgrimage where they are all called to come home to celebrate their community. They plaster their cars in BU decals and emblems. They wear clothes proudly announcing their association with BU. They hang in places of prominence their official certificates marking their membership in the BU Alumni community. They put flags and other decorations on their homes announcing their allegiance. Immediately after birth, they dress their babies in Budda U gear. They even minorly incorporate it into other holidays like their equivalent Christmas, with a BU ornament or some other token or icon of the holiday that incorporates BU. They spend their money supporting BU. Many of them will be proud when their children are initiated into the community. Occasionally the military will get involved and bring aircraft to the gatherings of BU. This could go on and on.

The point is that you and I, as insiders of the community, know that we are not worshipping Judge Baylor or Baylor University. We understand the nuance of the situation, but an OUTSIDER could be forgiven if he or she took a look at the whole thing and accused the BU community members of worshipping or idolizing the namesake of BU and/or his university.

Likewise, the insiders who understand what is happening in the Catholic faith are telling you they are not worshipping Mary. The DDF is telling you it is not happening and to avoid the appearance of it happening (the purpose of this thread). We are explicitly telling you that the faith does NOT require a Marian devotion, but it is approved for the faithful that find comfort in it and beleive it brings them closer to Christ.

---

Can you really not comprehend that all what you described is what university students and alumni do for tribal unity and pride for their university, and NOT for the personal honor, praise, and glorification of the namesake of their university??

Can you truly not understand the massive difference between doing all what you described, and them bowing and praying to the image of their namesake, and petitioning it for grace and all salvation, all while elevating their namesake to deity, having the same qualities of Jesus (being sinless, perpetually pure, and assumed into heaven)?? And saying that their namesake is necessary for salvation, THE ALL HOLY ONE, and that in the hour of their death they entrust their souls wholly to their namesake's care??

You really are struggling cognitively with this topic. You and your Catholic brethren. It's quite perplexing to behold.

---

No one has elevated Mary to a deity. She is not divine, and the Catholic Church is extremely explicit about this. You keep saying it because you refuse to accept the Catholic conception of worship, but that doesn't make it true. Mary is not God and therefore cannot be adored, which is the common English translation of the Latin latria. Mary's importance to Catholics is derived in its entirety from her ability to draw Christians closer to God via her intercession and righteous example. Intercession and serving as a great exemplar of faith are the only things that the Virgin Mary can do, and neither of those actions are unique to God. You and I are capable of the same actions; Mary is just vastly more effective at them than the rest of us because of her relationship to Jesus.

Mary was sinless. No, being sinless does not make anyone divine; Adam and Eve were sinless before their Fall, but they were still only human. Her sinless nature has nothing to do with her earning it and everything to do with her being the Mother of God Incarnate and the special graces that derive from that status.

Her free participation was necessary for God's salvation plan in a practical sense, as God made his salvation plan contingent on her agreement. God obviously can do anything He wishes, but he wanted to make humanity active participants in His plan for our salvation. Catholics and the Orthodox have a somewhat different atonement theology than most Protestant denominations.

Mary is all-holy. No one, including Mary, can be holy without God making them so. Mary is all-holy because she was never stained with sin in the first place, unlike the rest of us. This was a grace given to her by God, wholly unearned on her part. Also, Mary has a uniquely close relationship to Christ, the source of all holiness. If holiness is a necessity for friendship with God, and people can grow in holiness, then Mary's holiness must be all the more complete because she is the Mother of God in the Person of Christ. Motherhood is the strongest of all relationships and is stronger than friendship.

There isn't anything wrong with the Hail Mary prayer. The only possible contention a Trinitarian Protestant could have with it is in the second half when the text asks Mary, who is already in Heaven, to pray for us. We've already discussed how that is completely fine in Catholic theology due to our belief in the communion of saints. Also, the Hail Mary isn't the most common Catholic prayer. That would be the Our Father, which is obviously said directly to God.

There isn't anything wrong with bowing either. The presence, or lack thereof, of a statue or icon of Mary is immaterial, as no one believes her spirit is tied to the image as ancient pagans commonly believed about their idols. Bowing remains standard practice whenever one is speaking to royalty. And make no mistake, the Blessed Virgin Mary is royalty. She is the Queen Mother of the Universe precisely and solely because her Son, Jesus Christ, is King of the Universe.

And before you repeat "that isn't mentioned directly in Scripture!" remember that criticism doesn't work on Catholics. We don't believe in Sola Scriptura, which was a 16th century theological innovation. We rely on Christ's promise to "lead you (you being Church as represented by the Apostles) into all truth," not on our individual, fallible interpretations of Holy Writ. God inspired the composition and compilation of the Bible to aid in our understanding of the Christian faith, and He established the Church to teach the precepts of the Faith using the Bible as a primary source.

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc, I know right now you're thinking less about what is actually true, and more about how to defend Orthodoxy.

I urge you to think in the spirit of truth, not in the spirit of self preservation.

---

I'm trying to find what's actually true. That's what led me to start questioning things in the first place.

But let me ask you something honestly: what is the "correct" denomination, in your view?

Because within Protestantism, there are huge differences on salvation itself: whether baptism saves, whether you can lose salvation, whether faith alone is enough, whether God chooses some and rejects others, etc.

Where is the ultimate authority of interpreting scripture? Who has the ultimate authority when people within your own church disagree on an interpretation?

They can't all be right. So how do we know which version of Protestantism has the truth? Why do you think you and your church are the only people who have the correct theology?

If you don't think you have perfect theology, then why does theology even matter? If scripture is all we need, then why do we even need a physical church? Why do we need Pastors?

We both believe and have faith in Jesus, is that not enough?

1 Thess. 5:21

---

Good questions, and I'll answer what you want. I think I've already answered some of them already. But I think you're avoiding the pressing issue here. Can you answer me - you DO see the serious problem in praising someone who took you to church in that way, don't you? I don't know if I can tell you which denomination is "correct", but I CAN tell you which denomination is certainly NOT correct, and it would be any church that teaches THAT.

---

If I had a superficial view that what they're doing is literal worship of Mary then yes I would reject it.

Its the same concept of Protestant communion... yeah it looks like the practice of consuming the literal body and blood of Christ...but you make it very clear that its just symbolic.

You think the words they say are meant to convey worship of Mary...yet they make it very clear that treating it that way would be heretical.

---

It's very interesting that if someone dies everything that Catholics do for Mary, but they did it for Buda instead of Mary.... Catholics would agree that those people were worshipping Buda.
Catholics are trying to move the goal posts so that they can engage in Marian worship but claim that it's not worship.
No other religion on the planet builds churches or temples, sings songs, prays prayers, bows before the image of someone or something that they claim they do not worship.
The Catholics have more churches named after & dedicated to Mary than they do Jesus.

Actions speak louder than words.

---

Interesting take. Are members of the Church of England (Anglicans) worshipping England (or the head of state)? You are going to be shocked when you find out where Lutherans get their name from. Are Methodists in love with process? What are Baptists worshipping? Are Seventh Day Adventists some weird calendar worshippers? We haven't even gotten to what the nondenominational churches name themselves: you'll find names like Antioch, Watermark, City Church. What do their names tell you about what they worship?

And wait until you figure out who our beloved university is named after. Are we all worshipping Judge Baylor when we gather to celebrate and sing the praises of the Green and Gold? Heck, we even have a statue of him.

---

That's a pretty pathetic response.

Are you actually attempting to say that all of the thousands of churches named after Mary, are just because of location (church of England) or a different methodology (Methodists)?
That's pathetic.

The entire planet knows the difference between singing songs about a school, and singing worship songs. You are one of the few who can't seem to understand it.

No one bows to the statue of judge Baylor, nor do they sing songs praising him, nor go they ask him for his grace, nor do they pray to him in any way.

Catholics are very much involved in the worship of Mary, and they constantly have to try and convince the rest of the planet that the worship of Mary is not worship.

Very very sad for you and your level of deception. You think you made some kind of brilliant defense of Marian worship, but it's not even close.

I'll pray for your eyes to be opened.

---

If there was a university named Budda (or Buddha) University and it had a statue of Budda on the campus would you think the people attending there were improperly honoring Budda? This is YOUR simple "replace it with Bud[d]a" test.

There are numerous posts in this thread from Catholics telling you that you are more than free to not have a Marian devotion. Does that sound like people who believe Mary is a deity? This entire thread is about the fact that the Dicastery of the Doctrine of the Faith (in layman's terms, the department in the Vatican responsible for the deposit of the faith and protecting the orthodoxy of the faith and morals) has explicitly stated that the "Co-redemptrix" title is not to be used in reference to the Mary.

The DDF's exact words: "In this case, the expression 'co-redemptrix' does not help extol Mary as the first and foremost collaborator in the work of redemption and grace, for it carries the risk of eclipsing the exclusive role of Jesus Christ."

Does that sound like the DDF believes she is to be worshipped?

So, you have Catholics telling you they are not worshipping her. You have Catholics telling you that nobody is required to keep a devotion to her. You have the DDF all over the place, including recently, telling you not to worship her (note the use of the word extol). But I guess you know better.

---

I never made the argument that people who attend a university are worshipping the name of that university. That was your ridiculous argument.

Let me try to explain it to you.

If there was a George Washington Baptist Church somewhere, I might wonder why they named their church after George Washington. If i went inside that church on Sunday and saw a big statue of George Washington behind the altar in the front so that everyone would focus on George during the service... that would be concerning. Then if everyone sang songs to George, praising his qualities... I would start to think that they are probably engaging in idolatry of George Washington. Then if they prayed prayers to George, thanking him for salvation and asking him to dispense Grace and Blessings upon them and their families... now I would definitely think they were engaging in worship of George. Then if they also bowed before the statue of George, while praying to George.... you add it all up and it is obvious that these folks are worshipping George Washington.

Now replace the name George Washington with The Virgin Mary, and you can obviously see the idolatry of Mary by the Catholic church.


I'm glad that there are some catholics who are not taking part in worshipping Mary, but it seems very odd to say that. Those would have to be catholics who also don't pray the rosary and don't go to "confession" because almost all of the priests instruct parishioners to pray the rosary or pray a certain number of Hail Mary prayers for their forgiveness of sins.
In other words, it would be hard to consider someone a Roman Catholic if they were not engaging in the idolatry of Mary, since this idolatry is taught & practiced by all the Popes and all the leaders in Rome and the Bishops and the Priests.
Maybe there are different levels of Marian idolatry in the RC, but just praying the rosary alone is idolatry. If you pray the rosary as instructed, you will be praying to Mary FAR more times than to God Himself.

I do hope that this step of no longer referring to Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Co-Mediator is the first step in moving the Roman Catholic Church away from idolatry. There will need to be many, many more steps before the RC stops it's idolatry of Mary, and sees her as she was, a blessed woman who was a sinner and needed a Savior.

---

Let's say you have a university named Budda University with a statue of Budda on it. Let's say the members of that community memorize a handful of ritualized chants about their community. They get together on a regularly scheduled basis where they will all dress similarly announcing their allegiance to BU. They will sing the same songs in coordinated fashion extolling the virtues of their community. They will all agree on a few fundamental issues, like their common enemy of TCU. They will cheer their heroes on as they seek to defeat their opponents in the arena. They have an annual pilgrimage where they are all called to come home to celebrate their community. They plaster their cars in BU decals and emblems. They wear clothes proudly announcing their association with BU. They hang in places of prominence their official certificates marking their membership in the BU Alumni community. They put flags and other decorations on their homes announcing their allegiance. Immediately after birth, they dress their babies in Budda U gear. They even minorly incorporate it into other holidays like their equivalent Christmas, with a BU ornament or some other token or icon of the holiday that incorporates BU. They spend their money supporting BU. Many of them will be proud when their children are initiated into the community. Occasionally the military will get involved and bring aircraft to the gatherings of BU. This could go on and on.

The point is that you and I, as insiders of the community, know that we are not worshipping Judge Baylor or Baylor University. We understand the nuance of the situation, but an OUTSIDER could be forgiven if he or she took a look at the whole thing and accused the BU community members of worshipping or idolizing the namesake of BU and/or his university.

Likewise, the insiders who understand what is happening in the Catholic faith are telling you they are not worshipping Mary. The DDF is telling you it is not happening and to avoid the appearance of it happening (the purpose of this thread). We are explicitly telling you that the faith does NOT require a Marian devotion, but it is approved for the faithful that find comfort in it and beleive it brings them closer to Christ.

Quote:

---

In other words, it would be hard to consider someone a Roman Catholic if they were not engaging in the idolatry of Mary,

---

You are not a Catholic, you do not believe in Catholic teachings and the faith as expressed by the Magisterium, yet you seem to be so self-assured as what it means to be Catholic. Do you always tell others what something you do not believe in actually means? Don't ever lose your humility, my friend....

Your understanding of the design of physical Catholic churches, their worship spaces and their purpose is lacking and leading to faulty conclusions. Lots of literature out there explaining the design of Catholic churches. You should educate yourself.

---

Let's be honest here.
No one would ever confuse a sports fan with a religion.
No one says prayers to Baylor.
No one prays to Baylor for forgiveness or Grace.
There are massive differences between attending a Baylor event and going to a Marian chapel.

Do you believe the Catechisms? Have you read them? I dont need to be a catholic to read the Catechism and know what your church believes. They have put it on paper so all can see it.

I think you have a bigger problem with the Vatican than with me.

ARbear13 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc, I know right now you're thinking less about what is actually true, and more about how to defend Orthodoxy.

I urge you to think in the spirit of truth, not in the spirit of self preservation.

---

I'm trying to find what's actually true. That's what led me to start questioning things in the first place.

But let me ask you something honestly: what is the "correct" denomination, in your view?

Because within Protestantism, there are huge differences on salvation itself: whether baptism saves, whether you can lose salvation, whether faith alone is enough, whether God chooses some and rejects others, etc.

Where is the ultimate authority of interpreting scripture? Who has the ultimate authority when people within your own church disagree on an interpretation?

They can't all be right. So how do we know which version of Protestantism has the truth? Why do you think you and your church are the only people who have the correct theology?

If you don't think you have perfect theology, then why does theology even matter? If scripture is all we need, then why do we even need a physical church? Why do we need Pastors?

We both believe and have faith in Jesus, is that not enough?

1 Thess. 5:21

---

Good questions, and I'll answer what you want. I think I've already answered some of them already. But I think you're avoiding the pressing issue here. Can you answer me - you DO see the serious problem in praising someone who took you to church in that way, don't you? I don't know if I can tell you which denomination is "correct", but I CAN tell you which denomination is certainly NOT correct, and it would be any church that teaches THAT.

---

If I had a superficial view that what they're doing is literal worship of Mary then yes I would reject it.

Its the same concept of Protestant communion... yeah it looks like the practice of consuming the literal body and blood of Christ...but you make it very clear that its just symbolic.

You think the words they say are meant to convey worship of Mary...yet they make it very clear that treating it that way would be heretical.

---

It's very interesting that if someone dies everything that Catholics do for Mary, but they did it for Buda instead of Mary.... Catholics would agree that those people were worshipping Buda.
Catholics are trying to move the goal posts so that they can engage in Marian worship but claim that it's not worship.
No other religion on the planet builds churches or temples, sings songs, prays prayers, bows before the image of someone or something that they claim they do not worship.
The Catholics have more churches named after & dedicated to Mary than they do Jesus.

Actions speak louder than words.

---

Interesting take. Are members of the Church of England (Anglicans) worshipping England (or the head of state)? You are going to be shocked when you find out where Lutherans get their name from. Are Methodists in love with process? What are Baptists worshipping? Are Seventh Day Adventists some weird calendar worshippers? We haven't even gotten to what the nondenominational churches name themselves: you'll find names like Antioch, Watermark, City Church. What do their names tell you about what they worship?

And wait until you figure out who our beloved university is named after. Are we all worshipping Judge Baylor when we gather to celebrate and sing the praises of the Green and Gold? Heck, we even have a statue of him.

---

That's a pretty pathetic response.

Are you actually attempting to say that all of the thousands of churches named after Mary, are just because of location (church of England) or a different methodology (Methodists)?
That's pathetic.

The entire planet knows the difference between singing songs about a school, and singing worship songs. You are one of the few who can't seem to understand it.

No one bows to the statue of judge Baylor, nor do they sing songs praising him, nor go they ask him for his grace, nor do they pray to him in any way.

Catholics are very much involved in the worship of Mary, and they constantly have to try and convince the rest of the planet that the worship of Mary is not worship.

Very very sad for you and your level of deception. You think you made some kind of brilliant defense of Marian worship, but it's not even close.

I'll pray for your eyes to be opened.

---

If there was a university named Budda (or Buddha) University and it had a statue of Budda on the campus would you think the people attending there were improperly honoring Budda? This is YOUR simple "replace it with Bud[d]a" test.

There are numerous posts in this thread from Catholics telling you that you are more than free to not have a Marian devotion. Does that sound like people who believe Mary is a deity? This entire thread is about the fact that the Dicastery of the Doctrine of the Faith (in layman's terms, the department in the Vatican responsible for the deposit of the faith and protecting the orthodoxy of the faith and morals) has explicitly stated that the "Co-redemptrix" title is not to be used in reference to the Mary.

The DDF's exact words: "In this case, the expression 'co-redemptrix' does not help extol Mary as the first and foremost collaborator in the work of redemption and grace, for it carries the risk of eclipsing the exclusive role of Jesus Christ."

Does that sound like the DDF believes she is to be worshipped?

So, you have Catholics telling you they are not worshipping her. You have Catholics telling you that nobody is required to keep a devotion to her. You have the DDF all over the place, including recently, telling you not to worship her (note the use of the word extol). But I guess you know better.

---

I never made the argument that people who attend a university are worshipping the name of that university. That was your ridiculous argument.

Let me try to explain it to you.

If there was a George Washington Baptist Church somewhere, I might wonder why they named their church after George Washington. If i went inside that church on Sunday and saw a big statue of George Washington behind the altar in the front so that everyone would focus on George during the service... that would be concerning. Then if everyone sang songs to George, praising his qualities... I would start to think that they are probably engaging in idolatry of George Washington. Then if they prayed prayers to George, thanking him for salvation and asking him to dispense Grace and Blessings upon them and their families... now I would definitely think they were engaging in worship of George. Then if they also bowed before the statue of George, while praying to George.... you add it all up and it is obvious that these folks are worshipping George Washington.

Now replace the name George Washington with The Virgin Mary, and you can obviously see the idolatry of Mary by the Catholic church.


I'm glad that there are some catholics who are not taking part in worshipping Mary, but it seems very odd to say that. Those would have to be catholics who also don't pray the rosary and don't go to "confession" because almost all of the priests instruct parishioners to pray the rosary or pray a certain number of Hail Mary prayers for their forgiveness of sins.
In other words, it would be hard to consider someone a Roman Catholic if they were not engaging in the idolatry of Mary, since this idolatry is taught & practiced by all the Popes and all the leaders in Rome and the Bishops and the Priests.
Maybe there are different levels of Marian idolatry in the RC, but just praying the rosary alone is idolatry. If you pray the rosary as instructed, you will be praying to Mary FAR more times than to God Himself.

I do hope that this step of no longer referring to Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Co-Mediator is the first step in moving the Roman Catholic Church away from idolatry. There will need to be many, many more steps before the RC stops it's idolatry of Mary, and sees her as she was, a blessed woman who was a sinner and needed a Savior.

---

Let's say you have a university named Budda University with a statue of Budda on it. Let's say the members of that community memorize a handful of ritualized chants about their community. They get together on a regularly scheduled basis where they will all dress similarly announcing their allegiance to BU. They will sing the same songs in coordinated fashion extolling the virtues of their community. They will all agree on a few fundamental issues, like their common enemy of TCU. They will cheer their heroes on as they seek to defeat their opponents in the arena. They have an annual pilgrimage where they are all called to come home to celebrate their community. They plaster their cars in BU decals and emblems. They wear clothes proudly announcing their association with BU. They hang in places of prominence their official certificates marking their membership in the BU Alumni community. They put flags and other decorations on their homes announcing their allegiance. Immediately after birth, they dress their babies in Budda U gear. They even minorly incorporate it into other holidays like their equivalent Christmas, with a BU ornament or some other token or icon of the holiday that incorporates BU. They spend their money supporting BU. Many of them will be proud when their children are initiated into the community. Occasionally the military will get involved and bring aircraft to the gatherings of BU. This could go on and on.

The point is that you and I, as insiders of the community, know that we are not worshipping Judge Baylor or Baylor University. We understand the nuance of the situation, but an OUTSIDER could be forgiven if he or she took a look at the whole thing and accused the BU community members of worshipping or idolizing the namesake of BU and/or his university.

Likewise, the insiders who understand what is happening in the Catholic faith are telling you they are not worshipping Mary. The DDF is telling you it is not happening and to avoid the appearance of it happening (the purpose of this thread). We are explicitly telling you that the faith does NOT require a Marian devotion, but it is approved for the faithful that find comfort in it and beleive it brings them closer to Christ.

---

Can you really not comprehend that all what you described is what university students and alumni do for tribal unity and pride for their university, and NOT for the personal honor, praise, and glorification of the namesake of their university??

Can you truly not understand the massive difference between doing all what you described, and them bowing and praying to the image of their namesake, and petitioning it for grace and all salvation, all while elevating their namesake to deity, having the same qualities of Jesus (being sinless, perpetually pure, and assumed into heaven)?? And saying that their namesake is necessary for salvation, THE ALL HOLY ONE, and that in the hour of their death they entrust their souls wholly to their namesake's care??

You really are struggling cognitively with this topic. You and your Catholic brethren. It's quite perplexing to behold.

---

No one has elevated Mary to a deity. She is not divine, and the Catholic Church is extremely explicit about this. You keep saying it because you refuse to accept the Catholic conception of worship, but that doesn't make it true. Mary is not God and therefore cannot be adored, which is the common English translation of the Latin latria. Mary's importance to Catholics is derived in its entirety from her ability to draw Christians closer to God via her intercession and righteous example. Intercession and serving as a great exemplar of faith are the only things that the Virgin Mary can do, and neither of those actions are unique to God. You and I are capable of the same actions; Mary is just vastly more effective at them than the rest of us because of her relationship to Jesus.

Mary was sinless. No, being sinless does not make anyone divine; Adam and Eve were sinless before their Fall, but they were still only human. Her sinless nature has nothing to do with her earning it and everything to do with her being the Mother of God Incarnate and the special graces that derive from that status.

Her free participation was necessary for God's salvation plan in a practical sense, as God made his salvation plan contingent on her agreement. God obviously can do anything He wishes, but he wanted to make humanity active participants in His plan for our salvation. Catholics and the Orthodox have a somewhat different atonement theology than most Protestant denominations.

Mary is all-holy. No one, including Mary, can be holy without God making them so. Mary is all-holy because she was never stained with sin in the first place, unlike the rest of us. This was a grace given to her by God, wholly unearned on her part. Also, Mary has a uniquely close relationship to Christ, the source of all holiness. If holiness is a necessity for friendship with God, and people can grow in holiness, then Mary's holiness must be all the more complete because she is the Mother of God in the Person of Christ. Motherhood is the strongest of all relationships and is stronger than friendship.

There isn't anything wrong with the Hail Mary prayer. The only possible contention a Trinitarian Protestant could have with it is in the second half when the text asks Mary, who is already in Heaven, to pray for us. We've already discussed how that is completely fine in Catholic theology due to our belief in the communion of saints. Also, the Hail Mary isn't the most common Catholic prayer. That would be the Our Father, which is obviously said directly to God.

There isn't anything wrong with bowing either. The presence, or lack thereof, of a statue or icon of Mary is immaterial, as no one believes her spirit is tied to the image as ancient pagans commonly believed about their idols. Bowing remains standard practice whenever one is speaking to royalty. And make no mistake, the Blessed Virgin Mary is royalty. She is the Queen Mother of the Universe precisely and solely because her Son, Jesus Christ, is King of the Universe.

And before you repeat "that is mentioned directly in Scripture!" remember that criticism doesn't work on Catholics. We don't believe in Sola Scriptura, which was a 16th century theological innovation. We rely on Christ's promise to "lead you (you being Church as represented by the Apostles) into all truth," not on our individual, fallible interpretations of Holy Writ. God inspired the composition and compilation of the Bible to aid in our understanding of the Christian faith, and He established the Church to teach the precepts of the Faith using the Bible as a primary source.

---

No human is ALL-HOLY, much less the ALL HOLY ONE. The ALL HOLY ONE is GOD, and no one else. NO ONE should be extolled this way except God, as this attribute belongs to NO ONE but God. This is just so basic and such an obvious no-brainer for Christians, that I have no choice but to conclude that you are not a true Christian. You have not been regenerated by the Holy Spirit. You being perfectly fine with this language makes it all the more clear why you support saying that Mary is "necessary for salvation" and that "no one can attain salvation except through Mary". Yes, you've deified Mary. Jesus is deity, and you're giving Mary all of Jesus' traits (sinless, perpetually pure, assumed to heaven, Mediator between sinners and God, "no one attains salvation except through Mary'). This is all just staring at everyone in the face, and we're all sadly watching people like the RC's here who are completely in the dark try their darndest to justify it, all for the sake of protecting their precious Queen mother. THERE IS NO "QUEEN MOTHER' IN CHRISTIANITY. You are blindly following the re-awakened form of the ancient pagan mother goddess religion that has plagued human civilization throughout all of human history. WAKE UP. Before God brings judgement on you the same way he is going to judge the rest of the pagan mother goddess worshipers.

"There isn't anything wrong with bowing, either" - the way you're doing it, yeah, there definitely is, and it's obvious to anyone who isn't blinded by Satan. I already showed you that bowing IS worship, as Revelation 22 reveals. You're just repeating your spiritual stupidity here. And did the second commandment fall out of the hole in your brain? You're in a loop of satanic deception.

And I don't know what it's going to take to get you to stop dodging and answer my question: again, are all those statements and actions I listed in my earlier post okay to do for a child who you say "saved your life"? I mean, if everything you're saying here in your latest post is correct, then PROVE IT by answering the question! Your repeated avoidance of it is telling us all we need to know. It's showing the truth is not in you, and that your church is not from God.

ARbear13 said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc, I know right now you're thinking less about what is actually true, and more about how to defend Orthodoxy.

I urge you to think in the spirit of truth, not in the spirit of self preservation.

---

I'm trying to find what's actually true. That's what led me to start questioning things in the first place.

But let me ask you something honestly: what is the "correct" denomination, in your view?

Because within Protestantism, there are huge differences on salvation itself: whether baptism saves, whether you can lose salvation, whether faith alone is enough, whether God chooses some and rejects others, etc.

Where is the ultimate authority of interpreting scripture? Who has the ultimate authority when people within your own church disagree on an interpretation?

They can't all be right. So how do we know which version of Protestantism has the truth? Why do you think you and your church are the only people who have the correct theology?

If you don't think you have perfect theology, then why does theology even matter? If scripture is all we need, then why do we even need a physical church? Why do we need Pastors?

We both believe and have faith in Jesus, is that not enough?

1 Thess. 5:21

---

Good questions, and I'll answer what you want. I think I've already answered some of them already. But I think you're avoiding the pressing issue here. Can you answer me - you DO see the serious problem in praising someone who took you to church in that way, don't you? I don't know if I can tell you which denomination is "correct", but I CAN tell you which denomination is certainly NOT correct, and it would be any church that teaches THAT.

---

If I had a superficial view that what they're doing is literal worship of Mary then yes I would reject it.

Its the same concept of Protestant communion... yeah it looks like the practice of consuming the literal body and blood of Christ...but you make it very clear that its just symbolic.

You think the words they say are meant to convey worship of Mary...yet they make it very clear that treating it that way would be heretical.

---

It's very interesting that if someone dies everything that Catholics do for Mary, but they did it for Buda instead of Mary.... Catholics would agree that those people were worshipping Buda.
Catholics are trying to move the goal posts so that they can engage in Marian worship but claim that it's not worship.
No other religion on the planet builds churches or temples, sings songs, prays prayers, bows before the image of someone or something that they claim they do not worship.
The Catholics have more churches named after & dedicated to Mary than they do Jesus.

Actions speak louder than words.

---

Interesting take. Are members of the Church of England (Anglicans) worshipping England (or the head of state)? You are going to be shocked when you find out where Lutherans get their name from. Are Methodists in love with process? What are Baptists worshipping? Are Seventh Day Adventists some weird calendar worshippers? We haven't even gotten to what the nondenominational churches name themselves: you'll find names like Antioch, Watermark, City Church. What do their names tell you about what they worship?

And wait until you figure out who our beloved university is named after. Are we all worshipping Judge Baylor when we gather to celebrate and sing the praises of the Green and Gold? Heck, we even have a statue of him.

---

That's a pretty pathetic response.

Are you actually attempting to say that all of the thousands of churches named after Mary, are just because of location (church of England) or a different methodology (Methodists)?
That's pathetic.

The entire planet knows the difference between singing songs about a school, and singing worship songs. You are one of the few who can't seem to understand it.

No one bows to the statue of judge Baylor, nor do they sing songs praising him, nor go they ask him for his grace, nor do they pray to him in any way.

Catholics are very much involved in the worship of Mary, and they constantly have to try and convince the rest of the planet that the worship of Mary is not worship.

Very very sad for you and your level of deception. You think you made some kind of brilliant defense of Marian worship, but it's not even close.

I'll pray for your eyes to be opened.

---

If there was a university named Budda (or Buddha) University and it had a statue of Budda on the campus would you think the people attending there were improperly honoring Budda? This is YOUR simple "replace it with Bud[d]a" test.

There are numerous posts in this thread from Catholics telling you that you are more than free to not have a Marian devotion. Does that sound like people who believe Mary is a deity? This entire thread is about the fact that the Dicastery of the Doctrine of the Faith (in layman's terms, the department in the Vatican responsible for the deposit of the faith and protecting the orthodoxy of the faith and morals) has explicitly stated that the "Co-redemptrix" title is not to be used in reference to the Mary.

The DDF's exact words: "In this case, the expression 'co-redemptrix' does not help extol Mary as the first and foremost collaborator in the work of redemption and grace, for it carries the risk of eclipsing the exclusive role of Jesus Christ."

Does that sound like the DDF believes she is to be worshipped?

So, you have Catholics telling you they are not worshipping her. You have Catholics telling you that nobody is required to keep a devotion to her. You have the DDF all over the place, including recently, telling you not to worship her (note the use of the word extol). But I guess you know better.

---

I never made the argument that people who attend a university are worshipping the name of that university. That was your ridiculous argument.

Let me try to explain it to you.

If there was a George Washington Baptist Church somewhere, I might wonder why they named their church after George Washington. If i went inside that church on Sunday and saw a big statue of George Washington behind the altar in the front so that everyone would focus on George during the service... that would be concerning. Then if everyone sang songs to George, praising his qualities... I would start to think that they are probably engaging in idolatry of George Washington. Then if they prayed prayers to George, thanking him for salvation and asking him to dispense Grace and Blessings upon them and their families... now I would definitely think they were engaging in worship of George. Then if they also bowed before the statue of George, while praying to George.... you add it all up and it is obvious that these folks are worshipping George Washington.

Now replace the name George Washington with The Virgin Mary, and you can obviously see the idolatry of Mary by the Catholic church.


I'm glad that there are some catholics who are not taking part in worshipping Mary, but it seems very odd to say that. Those would have to be catholics who also don't pray the rosary and don't go to "confession" because almost all of the priests instruct parishioners to pray the rosary or pray a certain number of Hail Mary prayers for their forgiveness of sins.
In other words, it would be hard to consider someone a Roman Catholic if they were not engaging in the idolatry of Mary, since this idolatry is taught & practiced by all the Popes and all the leaders in Rome and the Bishops and the Priests.
Maybe there are different levels of Marian idolatry in the RC, but just praying the rosary alone is idolatry. If you pray the rosary as instructed, you will be praying to Mary FAR more times than to God Himself.

I do hope that this step of no longer referring to Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Co-Mediator is the first step in moving the Roman Catholic Church away from idolatry. There will need to be many, many more steps before the RC stops it's idolatry of Mary, and sees her as she was, a blessed woman who was a sinner and needed a Savior.

---

Let's say you have a university named Budda University with a statue of Budda on it. Let's say the members of that community memorize a handful of ritualized chants about their community. They get together on a regularly scheduled basis where they will all dress similarly announcing their allegiance to BU. They will sing the same songs in coordinated fashion extolling the virtues of their community. They will all agree on a few fundamental issues, like their common enemy of TCU. They will cheer their heroes on as they seek to defeat their opponents in the arena. They have an annual pilgrimage where they are all called to come home to celebrate their community. They plaster their cars in BU decals and emblems. They wear clothes proudly announcing their association with BU. They hang in places of prominence their official certificates marking their membership in the BU Alumni community. They put flags and other decorations on their homes announcing their allegiance. Immediately after birth, they dress their babies in Budda U gear. They even minorly incorporate it into other holidays like their equivalent Christmas, with a BU ornament or some other token or icon of the holiday that incorporates BU. They spend their money supporting BU. Many of them will be proud when their children are initiated into the community. Occasionally the military will get involved and bring aircraft to the gatherings of BU. This could go on and on.

The point is that you and I, as insiders of the community, know that we are not worshipping Judge Baylor or Baylor University. We understand the nuance of the situation, but an OUTSIDER could be forgiven if he or she took a look at the whole thing and accused the BU community members of worshipping or idolizing the namesake of BU and/or his university.

Likewise, the insiders who understand what is happening in the Catholic faith are telling you they are not worshipping Mary. The DDF is telling you it is not happening and to avoid the appearance of it happening (the purpose of this thread). We are explicitly telling you that the faith does NOT require a Marian devotion, but it is approved for the faithful that find comfort in it and beleive it brings them closer to Christ.

---

Can you really not comprehend that all what you described is what university students and alumni do for tribal unity and pride for their university, and NOT for the personal honor, praise, and glorification of the namesake of their university??

Can you truly not understand the massive difference between doing all what you described, and them bowing and praying to the image of their namesake, and petitioning it for grace and all salvation, all while elevating their namesake to deity, having the same qualities of Jesus (being sinless, perpetually pure, and assumed into heaven)?? And saying that their namesake is necessary for salvation, THE ALL HOLY ONE, and that in the hour of their death they entrust their souls wholly to their namesake's care??

You really are struggling cognitively with this topic. You and your Catholic brethren. It's quite perplexing to behold.

---

....Mary's importance to Catholics is derived in its entirety from her ability to draw Christians closer to God via her intercession and righteous example. Intercession and serving as a great exemplar of faith are the only things that the Virgin Mary can do, and neither of those actions are unique to God. You and I are capable of the same actions; Mary is just vastly more effective at them than the rest of us because of her relationship to Jesus.

Mary was sinless. No, being sinless does not make anyone divine; Adam and Eve were sinless before their Fall, but they were still only human. Her sinless nature has nothing to do with her earning it and everything to do with her being the Mother of God Incarnate and the special graces that derive from that status.

Her free participation was necessary for God's salvation plan in a practical sense, as God made his salvation plan contingent on her agreement. God obviously can do anything He wishes, but he wanted to make humanity active participants in His plan for our salvation. Catholics and the Orthodox have a somewhat different atonement theology than most Protestant denominations.

Mary is all-holy. No one, including Mary, can be holy without God making them so. Mary is all-holy because she was never stained with sin in the first place, unlike the rest of us. This was a grace given to her by God, wholly unearned on her part. Also, Mary has a uniquely close relationship to Christ, the source of all holiness. If holiness is a necessity for friendship with God, and people can grow in holiness, then Mary's holiness must be all the more complete because she is the Mother of God in the Person of Christ. Motherhood is the strongest of all relationships and is stronger than friendship.

---

---

Mary's intercession drawing people closer to Jesus, her relationship to Jesus makes her more effective, "motherhood is the strongest of all relationships", Mary not being stained with sin, Mary's holiness is more complete than others.....

Says WHO? WHERE are you getting all this, since as you freely admit, it is NOT from Scripture, which is the only thing we have that we know came from the apostles?? WHO told you all this? And since it's not from the apostles, then how do you know it came from God??

Your abandonment of sola scriptura is EXACTLY why you've landed in a very idolatrous, heretical, and evil place.


God's message to those Roman Catholics who are seeing the truth:

"Come out of her, my people, lest you take part in her sins, lest you share in her plagues" - Revelation 18:4

Mary's intercession drawing people closer to Jesus, her relationship to Jesus makes her more effective, "motherhood is the strongest of all relationships", Mary not being stained with sin, Mary's holiness is more complete than others.....


How is it possible for any of this to be true, and yet none of it was ever recorded in any of the scriptures?
Catholics have no logical explanation for how the Virgin birth of the Messiah was prophesied and described in the scriptures.... but nothing about the sinless nature of Mary or her role in salvation or the dispensing or grace of her role as mediator. How do the explain that the Holy Spirit forgot to mention any of the Marian idolatry?

The catholic religion is clearly not based upon scripture.

1 Timothy 2:5 NIV
[5] For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus,

And there is never a mention of needing to ask Mary to ask Jesus for anything.

Saying Mary was sinless is lying.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc, I know right now you're thinking less about what is actually true, and more about how to defend Orthodoxy.

I urge you to think in the spirit of truth, not in the spirit of self preservation.

---

I'm trying to find what's actually true. That's what led me to start questioning things in the first place.

But let me ask you something honestly: what is the "correct" denomination, in your view?

Because within Protestantism, there are huge differences on salvation itself: whether baptism saves, whether you can lose salvation, whether faith alone is enough, whether God chooses some and rejects others, etc.

Where is the ultimate authority of interpreting scripture? Who has the ultimate authority when people within your own church disagree on an interpretation?

They can't all be right. So how do we know which version of Protestantism has the truth? Why do you think you and your church are the only people who have the correct theology?

If you don't think you have perfect theology, then why does theology even matter? If scripture is all we need, then why do we even need a physical church? Why do we need Pastors?

We both believe and have faith in Jesus, is that not enough?

1 Thess. 5:21

---

Good questions, and I'll answer what you want. I think I've already answered some of them already. But I think you're avoiding the pressing issue here. Can you answer me - you DO see the serious problem in praising someone who took you to church in that way, don't you? I don't know if I can tell you which denomination is "correct", but I CAN tell you which denomination is certainly NOT correct, and it would be any church that teaches THAT.

---

If I had a superficial view that what they're doing is literal worship of Mary then yes I would reject it.

Its the same concept of Protestant communion... yeah it looks like the practice of consuming the literal body and blood of Christ...but you make it very clear that its just symbolic.

You think the words they say are meant to convey worship of Mary...yet they make it very clear that treating it that way would be heretical.

---

It's very interesting that if someone dies everything that Catholics do for Mary, but they did it for Buda instead of Mary.... Catholics would agree that those people were worshipping Buda.
Catholics are trying to move the goal posts so that they can engage in Marian worship but claim that it's not worship.
No other religion on the planet builds churches or temples, sings songs, prays prayers, bows before the image of someone or something that they claim they do not worship.
The Catholics have more churches named after & dedicated to Mary than they do Jesus.

Actions speak louder than words.

---

Interesting take. Are members of the Church of England (Anglicans) worshipping England (or the head of state)? You are going to be shocked when you find out where Lutherans get their name from. Are Methodists in love with process? What are Baptists worshipping? Are Seventh Day Adventists some weird calendar worshippers? We haven't even gotten to what the nondenominational churches name themselves: you'll find names like Antioch, Watermark, City Church. What do their names tell you about what they worship?

And wait until you figure out who our beloved university is named after. Are we all worshipping Judge Baylor when we gather to celebrate and sing the praises of the Green and Gold? Heck, we even have a statue of him.

---

That's a pretty pathetic response.

Are you actually attempting to say that all of the thousands of churches named after Mary, are just because of location (church of England) or a different methodology (Methodists)?
That's pathetic.

The entire planet knows the difference between singing songs about a school, and singing worship songs. You are one of the few who can't seem to understand it.

No one bows to the statue of judge Baylor, nor do they sing songs praising him, nor go they ask him for his grace, nor do they pray to him in any way.

Catholics are very much involved in the worship of Mary, and they constantly have to try and convince the rest of the planet that the worship of Mary is not worship.

Very very sad for you and your level of deception. You think you made some kind of brilliant defense of Marian worship, but it's not even close.

I'll pray for your eyes to be opened.

---

If there was a university named Budda (or Buddha) University and it had a statue of Budda on the campus would you think the people attending there were improperly honoring Budda? This is YOUR simple "replace it with Bud[d]a" test.

There are numerous posts in this thread from Catholics telling you that you are more than free to not have a Marian devotion. Does that sound like people who believe Mary is a deity? This entire thread is about the fact that the Dicastery of the Doctrine of the Faith (in layman's terms, the department in the Vatican responsible for the deposit of the faith and protecting the orthodoxy of the faith and morals) has explicitly stated that the "Co-redemptrix" title is not to be used in reference to the Mary.

The DDF's exact words: "In this case, the expression 'co-redemptrix' does not help extol Mary as the first and foremost collaborator in the work of redemption and grace, for it carries the risk of eclipsing the exclusive role of Jesus Christ."

Does that sound like the DDF believes she is to be worshipped?

So, you have Catholics telling you they are not worshipping her. You have Catholics telling you that nobody is required to keep a devotion to her. You have the DDF all over the place, including recently, telling you not to worship her (note the use of the word extol). But I guess you know better.

---

I never made the argument that people who attend a university are worshipping the name of that university. That was your ridiculous argument.

Let me try to explain it to you.

If there was a George Washington Baptist Church somewhere, I might wonder why they named their church after George Washington. If i went inside that church on Sunday and saw a big statue of George Washington behind the altar in the front so that everyone would focus on George during the service... that would be concerning. Then if everyone sang songs to George, praising his qualities... I would start to think that they are probably engaging in idolatry of George Washington. Then if they prayed prayers to George, thanking him for salvation and asking him to dispense Grace and Blessings upon them and their families... now I would definitely think they were engaging in worship of George. Then if they also bowed before the statue of George, while praying to George.... you add it all up and it is obvious that these folks are worshipping George Washington.

Now replace the name George Washington with The Virgin Mary, and you can obviously see the idolatry of Mary by the Catholic church.


I'm glad that there are some catholics who are not taking part in worshipping Mary, but it seems very odd to say that. Those would have to be catholics who also don't pray the rosary and don't go to "confession" because almost all of the priests instruct parishioners to pray the rosary or pray a certain number of Hail Mary prayers for their forgiveness of sins.
In other words, it would be hard to consider someone a Roman Catholic if they were not engaging in the idolatry of Mary, since this idolatry is taught & practiced by all the Popes and all the leaders in Rome and the Bishops and the Priests.
Maybe there are different levels of Marian idolatry in the RC, but just praying the rosary alone is idolatry. If you pray the rosary as instructed, you will be praying to Mary FAR more times than to God Himself.

I do hope that this step of no longer referring to Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Co-Mediator is the first step in moving the Roman Catholic Church away from idolatry. There will need to be many, many more steps before the RC stops it's idolatry of Mary, and sees her as she was, a blessed woman who was a sinner and needed a Savior.

---

Let's say you have a university named Budda University with a statue of Budda on it. Let's say the members of that community memorize a handful of ritualized chants about their community. They get together on a regularly scheduled basis where they will all dress similarly announcing their allegiance to BU. They will sing the same songs in coordinated fashion extolling the virtues of their community. They will all agree on a few fundamental issues, like their common enemy of TCU. They will cheer their heroes on as they seek to defeat their opponents in the arena. They have an annual pilgrimage where they are all called to come home to celebrate their community. They plaster their cars in BU decals and emblems. They wear clothes proudly announcing their association with BU. They hang in places of prominence their official certificates marking their membership in the BU Alumni community. They put flags and other decorations on their homes announcing their allegiance. Immediately after birth, they dress their babies in Budda U gear. They even minorly incorporate it into other holidays like their equivalent Christmas, with a BU ornament or some other token or icon of the holiday that incorporates BU. They spend their money supporting BU. Many of them will be proud when their children are initiated into the community. Occasionally the military will get involved and bring aircraft to the gatherings of BU. This could go on and on.

The point is that you and I, as insiders of the community, know that we are not worshipping Judge Baylor or Baylor University. We understand the nuance of the situation, but an OUTSIDER could be forgiven if he or she took a look at the whole thing and accused the BU community members of worshipping or idolizing the namesake of BU and/or his university.

Likewise, the insiders who understand what is happening in the Catholic faith are telling you they are not worshipping Mary. The DDF is telling you it is not happening and to avoid the appearance of it happening (the purpose of this thread). We are explicitly telling you that the faith does NOT require a Marian devotion, but it is approved for the faithful that find comfort in it and beleive it brings them closer to Christ.

---

Can you really not comprehend that all what you described is what university students and alumni do for tribal unity and pride for their university, and NOT for the personal honor, praise, and glorification of the namesake of their university??

Can you truly not understand the massive difference between doing all what you described, and them bowing and praying to the image of their namesake, and petitioning it for grace and all salvation, all while elevating their namesake to deity, having the same qualities of Jesus (being sinless, perpetually pure, and assumed into heaven)?? And saying that their namesake is necessary for salvation, THE ALL HOLY ONE, and that in the hour of their death they entrust their souls wholly to their namesake's care??

You really are struggling cognitively with this topic. You and your Catholic brethren. It's quite perplexing to behold.

---

No one has elevated Mary to a deity. She is not divine, and the Catholic Church is extremely explicit about this. You keep saying it because you refuse to accept the Catholic conception of worship, but that doesn't make it true. Mary is not God and therefore cannot be adored, which is the common English translation of the Latin latria. Mary's importance to Catholics is derived in its entirety from her ability to draw Christians closer to God via her intercession and righteous example. Intercession and serving as a great exemplar of faith are the only things that the Virgin Mary can do, and neither of those actions are unique to God. You and I are capable of the same actions; Mary is just vastly more effective at them than the rest of us because of her relationship to Jesus.

Mary was sinless. No, being sinless does not make anyone divine; Adam and Eve were sinless before their Fall, but they were still only human. Her sinless nature has nothing to do with her earning it and everything to do with her being the Mother of God Incarnate and the special graces that derive from that status.

Her free participation was necessary for God's salvation plan in a practical sense, as God made his salvation plan contingent on her agreement. God obviously can do anything He wishes, but he wanted to make humanity active participants in His plan for our salvation. Catholics and the Orthodox have a somewhat different atonement theology than most Protestant denominations.

Mary is all-holy. No one, including Mary, can be holy without God making them so. Mary is all-holy because she was never stained with sin in the first place, unlike the rest of us. This was a grace given to her by God, wholly unearned on her part. Also, Mary has a uniquely close relationship to Christ, the source of all holiness. If holiness is a necessity for friendship with God, and people can grow in holiness, then Mary's holiness must be all the more complete because she is the Mother of God in the Person of Christ. Motherhood is the strongest of all relationships and is stronger than friendship.

There isn't anything wrong with the Hail Mary prayer. The only possible contention a Trinitarian Protestant could have with it is in the second half when the text asks Mary, who is already in Heaven, to pray for us. We've already discussed how that is completely fine in Catholic theology due to our belief in the communion of saints. Also, the Hail Mary isn't the most common Catholic prayer. That would be the Our Father, which is obviously said directly to God.

There isn't anything wrong with bowing either. The presence, or lack thereof, of a statue or icon of Mary is immaterial, as no one believes her spirit is tied to the image as ancient pagans commonly believed about their idols. Bowing remains standard practice whenever one is speaking to royalty. And make no mistake, the Blessed Virgin Mary is royalty. She is the Queen Mother of the Universe precisely and solely because her Son, Jesus Christ, is King of the Universe.

And before you repeat "that is mentioned directly in Scripture!" remember that criticism doesn't work on Catholics. We don't believe in Sola Scriptura, which was a 16th century theological innovation. We rely on Christ's promise to "lead you (you being Church as represented by the Apostles) into all truth," not on our individual, fallible interpretations of Holy Writ. God inspired the composition and compilation of the Bible to aid in our understanding of the Christian faith, and He established the Church to teach the precepts of the Faith using the Bible as a primary source.

---

Everything you've written here, your high praise, exaltation, and glorification of Mary, is worship.

No human is ALL-HOLY, much less the ALL HOLY ONE. The ALL HOLY ONE is GOD, and no one else. NO ONE should be extolled this way except God, as this attribute belongs to NO ONE but God. This is just so basic and such an obvious no-brainer for Christians, that I have no choice but to conclude that you are not a true Christian. You have not been regenerated by the Holy Spirit. You being perfectly fine with this language makes it all the more clear why you support saying that Mary is "necessary for salvation" and that "no one can attain salvation except through Mary". Yes, you've deified Mary. Jesus is deity, and you're giving Mary all of Jesus' traits (sinless, perpetually pure, assumed to heaven, Mediator between sinners and God, "no one attains salvation except through Mary'). This is all just staring at everyone in the face, and we're all sadly watching people like the RC's here who are completely in the dark try their darndest to justify it, all for the sake of protecting their precious Queen mother. THERE IS NO "QUEEN MOTHER' IN CHRISTIANITY. You are blindly following the re-awakened form of the ancient pagan mother goddess religion that has plagued human civilization throughout all of human history. WAKE UP. Before God judges

"There isn't anything wrong with bowing, either" - the way you're doing it, yeah, there definitely is, and it's obvious to anyone who isn't blinded by Satan. I already showed you that bowing IS worship, as Revelation 22 reveals. You're just repeating your spiritual stupidity here. And did the second commandment fall out of the hole in your brain? You're in a loop of satanic deception.

And I don't know what it's going to take to get you to stop dodging and answer my question: again, are all those statements and actions I listed in my earlier post okay to do for a child who you say "saved your life"? I mean, if everything you're saying here in your latest post is correct, then PROVE IT by answering the question! Your repeated avoidance of it is telling us all we need to know. It's showing the truth is not in you, and that your church is not from God.

---

To answer your question directly: no, I wouldn't say most of those things about my own child. Of course, my child also did not carry God Incarnate in her body and raise him from infancy. My child will never contribute to the salvation of humanity in such a profound way and therefore will never deserve such high praise.

Yes, there is a Queen Mother in Christianity, and there has been for over two thousand years. You are wrong about this. The concept is tied directly to Christ's status as the true restorer of the heavenly Davidic Kingdom in other words, the Messiah. It has nothing to do with paganism at all.

In the Davidic kingdom of history, there was a queen mother. Bathsheba was queen mother in Solomon's reign, just to use a famous example. The position is directly referenced several times in the Old Testament. If Jesus is the King of the Jews and the ultimate culmination of the Davidic line of kings, which He is, then His government has a queen mother. Like in the Davidic kingdom, Queen Mother Mary's royal status derives directly from her Son's position as King of Heaven and Earth. Any and all authority she has stems entirely from her privileged relationship to the King.

You really should learn about typology. It is a truly ancient form of Biblical interpretation and is commonly used in all of the Apostolic churches, including the Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, and Assyrian churches.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc, I know right now you're thinking less about what is actually true, and more about how to defend Orthodoxy.

I urge you to think in the spirit of truth, not in the spirit of self preservation.

---

I'm trying to find what's actually true. That's what led me to start questioning things in the first place.

But let me ask you something honestly: what is the "correct" denomination, in your view?

Because within Protestantism, there are huge differences on salvation itself: whether baptism saves, whether you can lose salvation, whether faith alone is enough, whether God chooses some and rejects others, etc.

Where is the ultimate authority of interpreting scripture? Who has the ultimate authority when people within your own church disagree on an interpretation?

They can't all be right. So how do we know which version of Protestantism has the truth? Why do you think you and your church are the only people who have the correct theology?

If you don't think you have perfect theology, then why does theology even matter? If scripture is all we need, then why do we even need a physical church? Why do we need Pastors?

We both believe and have faith in Jesus, is that not enough?

1 Thess. 5:21

---

Good questions, and I'll answer what you want. I think I've already answered some of them already. But I think you're avoiding the pressing issue here. Can you answer me - you DO see the serious problem in praising someone who took you to church in that way, don't you? I don't know if I can tell you which denomination is "correct", but I CAN tell you which denomination is certainly NOT correct, and it would be any church that teaches THAT.

---

If I had a superficial view that what they're doing is literal worship of Mary then yes I would reject it.

Its the same concept of Protestant communion... yeah it looks like the practice of consuming the literal body and blood of Christ...but you make it very clear that its just symbolic.

You think the words they say are meant to convey worship of Mary...yet they make it very clear that treating it that way would be heretical.

---

It's very interesting that if someone dies everything that Catholics do for Mary, but they did it for Buda instead of Mary.... Catholics would agree that those people were worshipping Buda.
Catholics are trying to move the goal posts so that they can engage in Marian worship but claim that it's not worship.
No other religion on the planet builds churches or temples, sings songs, prays prayers, bows before the image of someone or something that they claim they do not worship.
The Catholics have more churches named after & dedicated to Mary than they do Jesus.

Actions speak louder than words.

---

Interesting take. Are members of the Church of England (Anglicans) worshipping England (or the head of state)? You are going to be shocked when you find out where Lutherans get their name from. Are Methodists in love with process? What are Baptists worshipping? Are Seventh Day Adventists some weird calendar worshippers? We haven't even gotten to what the nondenominational churches name themselves: you'll find names like Antioch, Watermark, City Church. What do their names tell you about what they worship?

And wait until you figure out who our beloved university is named after. Are we all worshipping Judge Baylor when we gather to celebrate and sing the praises of the Green and Gold? Heck, we even have a statue of him.

---

That's a pretty pathetic response.

Are you actually attempting to say that all of the thousands of churches named after Mary, are just because of location (church of England) or a different methodology (Methodists)?
That's pathetic.

The entire planet knows the difference between singing songs about a school, and singing worship songs. You are one of the few who can't seem to understand it.

No one bows to the statue of judge Baylor, nor do they sing songs praising him, nor go they ask him for his grace, nor do they pray to him in any way.

Catholics are very much involved in the worship of Mary, and they constantly have to try and convince the rest of the planet that the worship of Mary is not worship.

Very very sad for you and your level of deception. You think you made some kind of brilliant defense of Marian worship, but it's not even close.

I'll pray for your eyes to be opened.

---

If there was a university named Budda (or Buddha) University and it had a statue of Budda on the campus would you think the people attending there were improperly honoring Budda? This is YOUR simple "replace it with Bud[d]a" test.

There are numerous posts in this thread from Catholics telling you that you are more than free to not have a Marian devotion. Does that sound like people who believe Mary is a deity? This entire thread is about the fact that the Dicastery of the Doctrine of the Faith (in layman's terms, the department in the Vatican responsible for the deposit of the faith and protecting the orthodoxy of the faith and morals) has explicitly stated that the "Co-redemptrix" title is not to be used in reference to the Mary.

The DDF's exact words: "In this case, the expression 'co-redemptrix' does not help extol Mary as the first and foremost collaborator in the work of redemption and grace, for it carries the risk of eclipsing the exclusive role of Jesus Christ."

Does that sound like the DDF believes she is to be worshipped?

So, you have Catholics telling you they are not worshipping her. You have Catholics telling you that nobody is required to keep a devotion to her. You have the DDF all over the place, including recently, telling you not to worship her (note the use of the word extol). But I guess you know better.

---

I never made the argument that people who attend a university are worshipping the name of that university. That was your ridiculous argument.

Let me try to explain it to you.

If there was a George Washington Baptist Church somewhere, I might wonder why they named their church after George Washington. If i went inside that church on Sunday and saw a big statue of George Washington behind the altar in the front so that everyone would focus on George during the service... that would be concerning. Then if everyone sang songs to George, praising his qualities... I would start to think that they are probably engaging in idolatry of George Washington. Then if they prayed prayers to George, thanking him for salvation and asking him to dispense Grace and Blessings upon them and their families... now I would definitely think they were engaging in worship of George. Then if they also bowed before the statue of George, while praying to George.... you add it all up and it is obvious that these folks are worshipping George Washington.

Now replace the name George Washington with The Virgin Mary, and you can obviously see the idolatry of Mary by the Catholic church.


I'm glad that there are some catholics who are not taking part in worshipping Mary, but it seems very odd to say that. Those would have to be catholics who also don't pray the rosary and don't go to "confession" because almost all of the priests instruct parishioners to pray the rosary or pray a certain number of Hail Mary prayers for their forgiveness of sins.
In other words, it would be hard to consider someone a Roman Catholic if they were not engaging in the idolatry of Mary, since this idolatry is taught & practiced by all the Popes and all the leaders in Rome and the Bishops and the Priests.
Maybe there are different levels of Marian idolatry in the RC, but just praying the rosary alone is idolatry. If you pray the rosary as instructed, you will be praying to Mary FAR more times than to God Himself.

I do hope that this step of no longer referring to Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Co-Mediator is the first step in moving the Roman Catholic Church away from idolatry. There will need to be many, many more steps before the RC stops it's idolatry of Mary, and sees her as she was, a blessed woman who was a sinner and needed a Savior.

---

Let's say you have a university named Budda University with a statue of Budda on it. Let's say the members of that community memorize a handful of ritualized chants about their community. They get together on a regularly scheduled basis where they will all dress similarly announcing their allegiance to BU. They will sing the same songs in coordinated fashion extolling the virtues of their community. They will all agree on a few fundamental issues, like their common enemy of TCU. They will cheer their heroes on as they seek to defeat their opponents in the arena. They have an annual pilgrimage where they are all called to come home to celebrate their community. They plaster their cars in BU decals and emblems. They wear clothes proudly announcing their association with BU. They hang in places of prominence their official certificates marking their membership in the BU Alumni community. They put flags and other decorations on their homes announcing their allegiance. Immediately after birth, they dress their babies in Budda U gear. They even minorly incorporate it into other holidays like their equivalent Christmas, with a BU ornament or some other token or icon of the holiday that incorporates BU. They spend their money supporting BU. Many of them will be proud when their children are initiated into the community. Occasionally the military will get involved and bring aircraft to the gatherings of BU. This could go on and on.

The point is that you and I, as insiders of the community, know that we are not worshipping Judge Baylor or Baylor University. We understand the nuance of the situation, but an OUTSIDER could be forgiven if he or she took a look at the whole thing and accused the BU community members of worshipping or idolizing the namesake of BU and/or his university.

Likewise, the insiders who understand what is happening in the Catholic faith are telling you they are not worshipping Mary. The DDF is telling you it is not happening and to avoid the appearance of it happening (the purpose of this thread). We are explicitly telling you that the faith does NOT require a Marian devotion, but it is approved for the faithful that find comfort in it and beleive it brings them closer to Christ.

---

Can you really not comprehend that all what you described is what university students and alumni do for tribal unity and pride for their university, and NOT for the personal honor, praise, and glorification of the namesake of their university??

Can you truly not understand the massive difference between doing all what you described, and them bowing and praying to the image of their namesake, and petitioning it for grace and all salvation, all while elevating their namesake to deity, having the same qualities of Jesus (being sinless, perpetually pure, and assumed into heaven)?? And saying that their namesake is necessary for salvation, THE ALL HOLY ONE, and that in the hour of their death they entrust their souls wholly to their namesake's care??

You really are struggling cognitively with this topic. You and your Catholic brethren. It's quite perplexing to behold.

---

....Mary's importance to Catholics is derived in its entirety from her ability to draw Christians closer to God via her intercession and righteous example. Intercession and serving as a great exemplar of faith are the only things that the Virgin Mary can do, and neither of those actions are unique to God. You and I are capable of the same actions; Mary is just vastly more effective at them than the rest of us because of her relationship to Jesus.

Mary was sinless. No, being sinless does not make anyone divine; Adam and Eve were sinless before their Fall, but they were still only human. Her sinless nature has nothing to do with her earning it and everything to do with her being the Mother of God Incarnate and the special graces that derive from that status.

Her free participation was necessary for God's salvation plan in a practical sense, as God made his salvation plan contingent on her agreement. God obviously can do anything He wishes, but he wanted to make humanity active participants in His plan for our salvation. Catholics and the Orthodox have a somewhat different atonement theology than most Protestant denominations.

Mary is all-holy. No one, including Mary, can be holy without God making them so. Mary is all-holy because she was never stained with sin in the first place, unlike the rest of us. This was a grace given to her by God, wholly unearned on her part. Also, Mary has a uniquely close relationship to Christ, the source of all holiness. If holiness is a necessity for friendship with God, and people can grow in holiness, then Mary's holiness must be all the more complete because she is the Mother of God in the Person of Christ. Motherhood is the strongest of all relationships and is stronger than friendship.

---

---

Mary's intercession drawing people closer to Jesus, her relationship to Jesus makes her more effective, "motherhood is the strongest of all relationships", Mary not being stained with sin, Mary's holiness is more complete than others.....

Says WHO? WHERE are you getting all this, since as you freely admit, it is NOT from Scripture, which is the only thing we have that we know came from the apostles?? WHO told you all this? And since it's not from the apostles, then how do you know it came from God??

Your abandonment of sola scriptura is EXACTLY why you've landed in a very idolatrous, heretical, and evil place.


God's message to those Roman Catholics who are seeing the truth:

"Come out of her, my people, lest you take part in her sins, lest you share in her plagues" - Revelation 18:4

---

How do I know all this? The same way I know everything else about living a Christian life: the Church teaches it to me. You know, the Church explicitly established by Jesus Christ in the Gospels to instruct and guide the Christian faithful to eternal salvation. It's not only an invisible union of all Christians; it is also a visible organization with temporal structure and leadership. No one thought otherwise until the emergence of Protestantism.

There is no Bible without the Church because there would have been no one to authoritatively determine which books should and should not have been included in the Biblical canon. The books themselves would exist, but there would be no way to make a universal appeal to Scripture because different Christian congregations would disagree about which books (and which parts of books) were divinely inspired. In fact, they did indeed disagree in real history until the canon was completely and officially closed by agreement of both the Catholic and Orthodox Churches at the Second Council of Nicaea in 787. Most of the canon was agreed upon far earlier, of course, but the debate wasn't completely settled for nearly eight centuries. The debate, which was long thought to have been concluded, was then re-opened 700 years later during the Protestant Reformation.

This entire debate we've been having proves the need for a visible, organized Church to determine matters of Christian doctrine and practice. If Sola Scriptura is the only guiding rule of faith, then the Christian Church as a whole keeps dividing forever over differing interpretations of Scripture, with no way to reunite. That is not what Jesus prayed for in John 17:20-23.

ARbear13 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc, I know right now you're thinking less about what is actually true, and more about how to defend Orthodoxy.

I urge you to think in the spirit of truth, not in the spirit of self preservation.

---

I'm trying to find what's actually true. That's what led me to start questioning things in the first place.

But let me ask you something honestly: what is the "correct" denomination, in your view?

Because within Protestantism, there are huge differences on salvation itself: whether baptism saves, whether you can lose salvation, whether faith alone is enough, whether God chooses some and rejects others, etc.

Where is the ultimate authority of interpreting scripture? Who has the ultimate authority when people within your own church disagree on an interpretation?

They can't all be right. So how do we know which version of Protestantism has the truth? Why do you think you and your church are the only people who have the correct theology?

If you don't think you have perfect theology, then why does theology even matter? If scripture is all we need, then why do we even need a physical church? Why do we need Pastors?

We both believe and have faith in Jesus, is that not enough?

1 Thess. 5:21

---

Good questions, and I'll answer what you want. I think I've already answered some of them already. But I think you're avoiding the pressing issue here. Can you answer me - you DO see the serious problem in praising someone who took you to church in that way, don't you? I don't know if I can tell you which denomination is "correct", but I CAN tell you which denomination is certainly NOT correct, and it would be any church that teaches THAT.

---

If I had a superficial view that what they're doing is literal worship of Mary then yes I would reject it.

Its the same concept of Protestant communion... yeah it looks like the practice of consuming the literal body and blood of Christ...but you make it very clear that its just symbolic.

You think the words they say are meant to convey worship of Mary...yet they make it very clear that treating it that way would be heretical.

---

It's very interesting that if someone dies everything that Catholics do for Mary, but they did it for Buda instead of Mary.... Catholics would agree that those people were worshipping Buda.
Catholics are trying to move the goal posts so that they can engage in Marian worship but claim that it's not worship.
No other religion on the planet builds churches or temples, sings songs, prays prayers, bows before the image of someone or something that they claim they do not worship.
The Catholics have more churches named after & dedicated to Mary than they do Jesus.

Actions speak louder than words.

---

Interesting take. Are members of the Church of England (Anglicans) worshipping England (or the head of state)? You are going to be shocked when you find out where Lutherans get their name from. Are Methodists in love with process? What are Baptists worshipping? Are Seventh Day Adventists some weird calendar worshippers? We haven't even gotten to what the nondenominational churches name themselves: you'll find names like Antioch, Watermark, City Church. What do their names tell you about what they worship?

And wait until you figure out who our beloved university is named after. Are we all worshipping Judge Baylor when we gather to celebrate and sing the praises of the Green and Gold? Heck, we even have a statue of him.

---

That's a pretty pathetic response.

Are you actually attempting to say that all of the thousands of churches named after Mary, are just because of location (church of England) or a different methodology (Methodists)?
That's pathetic.

The entire planet knows the difference between singing songs about a school, and singing worship songs. You are one of the few who can't seem to understand it.

No one bows to the statue of judge Baylor, nor do they sing songs praising him, nor go they ask him for his grace, nor do they pray to him in any way.

Catholics are very much involved in the worship of Mary, and they constantly have to try and convince the rest of the planet that the worship of Mary is not worship.

Very very sad for you and your level of deception. You think you made some kind of brilliant defense of Marian worship, but it's not even close.

I'll pray for your eyes to be opened.

---

If there was a university named Budda (or Buddha) University and it had a statue of Budda on the campus would you think the people attending there were improperly honoring Budda? This is YOUR simple "replace it with Bud[d]a" test.

There are numerous posts in this thread from Catholics telling you that you are more than free to not have a Marian devotion. Does that sound like people who believe Mary is a deity? This entire thread is about the fact that the Dicastery of the Doctrine of the Faith (in layman's terms, the department in the Vatican responsible for the deposit of the faith and protecting the orthodoxy of the faith and morals) has explicitly stated that the "Co-redemptrix" title is not to be used in reference to the Mary.

The DDF's exact words: "In this case, the expression 'co-redemptrix' does not help extol Mary as the first and foremost collaborator in the work of redemption and grace, for it carries the risk of eclipsing the exclusive role of Jesus Christ."

Does that sound like the DDF believes she is to be worshipped?

So, you have Catholics telling you they are not worshipping her. You have Catholics telling you that nobody is required to keep a devotion to her. You have the DDF all over the place, including recently, telling you not to worship her (note the use of the word extol). But I guess you know better.

---

I never made the argument that people who attend a university are worshipping the name of that university. That was your ridiculous argument.

Let me try to explain it to you.

If there was a George Washington Baptist Church somewhere, I might wonder why they named their church after George Washington. If i went inside that church on Sunday and saw a big statue of George Washington behind the altar in the front so that everyone would focus on George during the service... that would be concerning. Then if everyone sang songs to George, praising his qualities... I would start to think that they are probably engaging in idolatry of George Washington. Then if they prayed prayers to George, thanking him for salvation and asking him to dispense Grace and Blessings upon them and their families... now I would definitely think they were engaging in worship of George. Then if they also bowed before the statue of George, while praying to George.... you add it all up and it is obvious that these folks are worshipping George Washington.

Now replace the name George Washington with The Virgin Mary, and you can obviously see the idolatry of Mary by the Catholic church.


I'm glad that there are some catholics who are not taking part in worshipping Mary, but it seems very odd to say that. Those would have to be catholics who also don't pray the rosary and don't go to "confession" because almost all of the priests instruct parishioners to pray the rosary or pray a certain number of Hail Mary prayers for their forgiveness of sins.
In other words, it would be hard to consider someone a Roman Catholic if they were not engaging in the idolatry of Mary, since this idolatry is taught & practiced by all the Popes and all the leaders in Rome and the Bishops and the Priests.
Maybe there are different levels of Marian idolatry in the RC, but just praying the rosary alone is idolatry. If you pray the rosary as instructed, you will be praying to Mary FAR more times than to God Himself.

I do hope that this step of no longer referring to Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Co-Mediator is the first step in moving the Roman Catholic Church away from idolatry. There will need to be many, many more steps before the RC stops it's idolatry of Mary, and sees her as she was, a blessed woman who was a sinner and needed a Savior.

---

Let's say you have a university named Budda University with a statue of Budda on it. Let's say the members of that community memorize a handful of ritualized chants about their community. They get together on a regularly scheduled basis where they will all dress similarly announcing their allegiance to BU. They will sing the same songs in coordinated fashion extolling the virtues of their community. They will all agree on a few fundamental issues, like their common enemy of TCU. They will cheer their heroes on as they seek to defeat their opponents in the arena. They have an annual pilgrimage where they are all called to come home to celebrate their community. They plaster their cars in BU decals and emblems. They wear clothes proudly announcing their association with BU. They hang in places of prominence their official certificates marking their membership in the BU Alumni community. They put flags and other decorations on their homes announcing their allegiance. Immediately after birth, they dress their babies in Budda U gear. They even minorly incorporate it into other holidays like their equivalent Christmas, with a BU ornament or some other token or icon of the holiday that incorporates BU. They spend their money supporting BU. Many of them will be proud when their children are initiated into the community. Occasionally the military will get involved and bring aircraft to the gatherings of BU. This could go on and on.

The point is that you and I, as insiders of the community, know that we are not worshipping Judge Baylor or Baylor University. We understand the nuance of the situation, but an OUTSIDER could be forgiven if he or she took a look at the whole thing and accused the BU community members of worshipping or idolizing the namesake of BU and/or his university.

Likewise, the insiders who understand what is happening in the Catholic faith are telling you they are not worshipping Mary. The DDF is telling you it is not happening and to avoid the appearance of it happening (the purpose of this thread). We are explicitly telling you that the faith does NOT require a Marian devotion, but it is approved for the faithful that find comfort in it and beleive it brings them closer to Christ.

---

Can you really not comprehend that all what you described is what university students and alumni do for tribal unity and pride for their university, and NOT for the personal honor, praise, and glorification of the namesake of their university??

Can you truly not understand the massive difference between doing all what you described, and them bowing and praying to the image of their namesake, and petitioning it for grace and all salvation, all while elevating their namesake to deity, having the same qualities of Jesus (being sinless, perpetually pure, and assumed into heaven)?? And saying that their namesake is necessary for salvation, THE ALL HOLY ONE, and that in the hour of their death they entrust their souls wholly to their namesake's care??

You really are struggling cognitively with this topic. You and your Catholic brethren. It's quite perplexing to behold.

---

No one has elevated Mary to a deity. She is not divine, and the Catholic Church is extremely explicit about this. You keep saying it because you refuse to accept the Catholic conception of worship, but that doesn't make it true. Mary is not God and therefore cannot be adored, which is the common English translation of the Latin latria. Mary's importance to Catholics is derived in its entirety from her ability to draw Christians closer to God via her intercession and righteous example. Intercession and serving as a great exemplar of faith are the only things that the Virgin Mary can do, and neither of those actions are unique to God. You and I are capable of the same actions; Mary is just vastly more effective at them than the rest of us because of her relationship to Jesus.

Mary was sinless. No, being sinless does not make anyone divine; Adam and Eve were sinless before their Fall, but they were still only human. Her sinless nature has nothing to do with her earning it and everything to do with her being the Mother of God Incarnate and the special graces that derive from that status.

Her free participation was necessary for God's salvation plan in a practical sense, as God made his salvation plan contingent on her agreement. God obviously can do anything He wishes, but he wanted to make humanity active participants in His plan for our salvation. Catholics and the Orthodox have a somewhat different atonement theology than most Protestant denominations.

Mary is all-holy. No one, including Mary, can be holy without God making them so. Mary is all-holy because she was never stained with sin in the first place, unlike the rest of us. This was a grace given to her by God, wholly unearned on her part. Also, Mary has a uniquely close relationship to Christ, the source of all holiness. If holiness is a necessity for friendship with God, and people can grow in holiness, then Mary's holiness must be all the more complete because she is the Mother of God in the Person of Christ. Motherhood is the strongest of all relationships and is stronger than friendship.

There isn't anything wrong with the Hail Mary prayer. The only possible contention a Trinitarian Protestant could have with it is in the second half when the text asks Mary, who is already in Heaven, to pray for us. We've already discussed how that is completely fine in Catholic theology due to our belief in the communion of saints. Also, the Hail Mary isn't the most common Catholic prayer. That would be the Our Father, which is obviously said directly to God.

There isn't anything wrong with bowing either. The presence, or lack thereof, of a statue or icon of Mary is immaterial, as no one believes her spirit is tied to the image as ancient pagans commonly believed about their idols. Bowing remains standard practice whenever one is speaking to royalty. And make no mistake, the Blessed Virgin Mary is royalty. She is the Queen Mother of the Universe precisely and solely because her Son, Jesus Christ, is King of the Universe.

And before you repeat "that is mentioned directly in Scripture!" remember that criticism doesn't work on Catholics. We don't believe in Sola Scriptura, which was a 16th century theological innovation. We rely on Christ's promise to "lead you (you being Church as represented by the Apostles) into all truth," not on our individual, fallible interpretations of Holy Writ. God inspired the composition and compilation of the Bible to aid in our understanding of the Christian faith, and He established the Church to teach the precepts of the Faith using the Bible as a primary source.

---

Everything you've written here, your high praise, exaltation, and glorification of Mary, is worship.

No human is ALL-HOLY, much less the ALL HOLY ONE. The ALL HOLY ONE is GOD, and no one else. NO ONE should be extolled this way except God, as this attribute belongs to NO ONE but God. This is just so basic and such an obvious no-brainer for Christians, that I have no choice but to conclude that you are not a true Christian. You have not been regenerated by the Holy Spirit. You being perfectly fine with this language makes it all the more clear why you support saying that Mary is "necessary for salvation" and that "no one can attain salvation except through Mary". Yes, you've deified Mary. Jesus is deity, and you're giving Mary all of Jesus' traits (sinless, perpetually pure, assumed to heaven, Mediator between sinners and God, "no one attains salvation except through Mary'). This is all just staring at everyone in the face, and we're all sadly watching people like the RC's here who are completely in the dark try their darndest to justify it, all for the sake of protecting their precious Queen mother. THERE IS NO "QUEEN MOTHER' IN CHRISTIANITY. You are blindly following the re-awakened form of the ancient pagan mother goddess religion that has plagued human civilization throughout all of human history. WAKE UP. Before God judges

"There isn't anything wrong with bowing, either" - the way you're doing it, yeah, there definitely is, and it's obvious to anyone who isn't blinded by Satan. I already showed you that bowing IS worship, as Revelation 22 reveals. You're just repeating your spiritual stupidity here. And did the second commandment fall out of the hole in your brain? You're in a loop of satanic deception.

And I don't know what it's going to take to get you to stop dodging and answer my question: again, are all those statements and actions I listed in my earlier post okay to do for a child who you say "saved your life"? I mean, if everything you're saying here in your latest post is correct, then PROVE IT by answering the question! Your repeated avoidance of it is telling us all we need to know. It's showing the truth is not in you, and that your church is not from God.

---

To answer your question directly: no, I wouldn't say most of those things about my own child. Of course, my child also did not carry God Incarnate in her body and raise him from infancy. My child will never contribute to the salvation of humanity in such a profound way and therefore will never deserve such high praise.

---

Of course you wouldn't say those things about your child. No one ever should. Because even though your child might have "saved your life" by redirecting you away from a dangerous lifestyle towards a conscientious life that ultimately led you to Jesus - still, those words and actions towards your child are completely inappropriate and unwarranted. They are taking that sense of "saving" and magnifying it to a level that replaces the salvation that only Jesus gives. It's ultimately replacing Jesus.

But this is how you Roman Catholics argue about Marian "veneration". You always argue that the things you say and do for Mary are only in the sense that Mary "pointed you to Jesus" ultimately leading you to the salvation of your soul by Jesus, just like the child in your scenario. Other people have argued that it's in the sense of a person who takes you to church where you get saved. Or any rendition of this kind of logic. But if it were the same sense as those, and you are admitting here that you would NOT say and do all those things about your child, then why are those words and deeds warranted about Mary? Obviously, all your arguments are disingenuous - you are NOT arguing in the same sense. Because if you were, then you could call it out as unjustified, just as you are able to do for your child. Obviously, you are saying those words and doing things for Mary in a FAR, FAR greater sense than that. Just as you are finally admitting to in your comment. Thanks for helping me make my point.

So, Roman Catholics, please stop with this very disingenuous motte and bailey argument. People who have the truth in them don't do this. They don't have to try and deceive people to justify what they say and do.

ARbear13 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc, I know right now you're thinking less about what is actually true, and more about how to defend Orthodoxy.

I urge you to think in the spirit of truth, not in the spirit of self preservation.

---

I'm trying to find what's actually true. That's what led me to start questioning things in the first place.

But let me ask you something honestly: what is the "correct" denomination, in your view?

Because within Protestantism, there are huge differences on salvation itself: whether baptism saves, whether you can lose salvation, whether faith alone is enough, whether God chooses some and rejects others, etc.

Where is the ultimate authority of interpreting scripture? Who has the ultimate authority when people within your own church disagree on an interpretation?

They can't all be right. So how do we know which version of Protestantism has the truth? Why do you think you and your church are the only people who have the correct theology?

If you don't think you have perfect theology, then why does theology even matter? If scripture is all we need, then why do we even need a physical church? Why do we need Pastors?

We both believe and have faith in Jesus, is that not enough?

1 Thess. 5:21

---

Good questions, and I'll answer what you want. I think I've already answered some of them already. But I think you're avoiding the pressing issue here. Can you answer me - you DO see the serious problem in praising someone who took you to church in that way, don't you? I don't know if I can tell you which denomination is "correct", but I CAN tell you which denomination is certainly NOT correct, and it would be any church that teaches THAT.

---

If I had a superficial view that what they're doing is literal worship of Mary then yes I would reject it.

Its the same concept of Protestant communion... yeah it looks like the practice of consuming the literal body and blood of Christ...but you make it very clear that its just symbolic.

You think the words they say are meant to convey worship of Mary...yet they make it very clear that treating it that way would be heretical.

---

It's very interesting that if someone dies everything that Catholics do for Mary, but they did it for Buda instead of Mary.... Catholics would agree that those people were worshipping Buda.
Catholics are trying to move the goal posts so that they can engage in Marian worship but claim that it's not worship.
No other religion on the planet builds churches or temples, sings songs, prays prayers, bows before the image of someone or something that they claim they do not worship.
The Catholics have more churches named after & dedicated to Mary than they do Jesus.

Actions speak louder than words.

---

Interesting take. Are members of the Church of England (Anglicans) worshipping England (or the head of state)? You are going to be shocked when you find out where Lutherans get their name from. Are Methodists in love with process? What are Baptists worshipping? Are Seventh Day Adventists some weird calendar worshippers? We haven't even gotten to what the nondenominational churches name themselves: you'll find names like Antioch, Watermark, City Church. What do their names tell you about what they worship?

And wait until you figure out who our beloved university is named after. Are we all worshipping Judge Baylor when we gather to celebrate and sing the praises of the Green and Gold? Heck, we even have a statue of him.

---

That's a pretty pathetic response.

Are you actually attempting to say that all of the thousands of churches named after Mary, are just because of location (church of England) or a different methodology (Methodists)?
That's pathetic.

The entire planet knows the difference between singing songs about a school, and singing worship songs. You are one of the few who can't seem to understand it.

No one bows to the statue of judge Baylor, nor do they sing songs praising him, nor go they ask him for his grace, nor do they pray to him in any way.

Catholics are very much involved in the worship of Mary, and they constantly have to try and convince the rest of the planet that the worship of Mary is not worship.

Very very sad for you and your level of deception. You think you made some kind of brilliant defense of Marian worship, but it's not even close.

I'll pray for your eyes to be opened.

---

If there was a university named Budda (or Buddha) University and it had a statue of Budda on the campus would you think the people attending there were improperly honoring Budda? This is YOUR simple "replace it with Bud[d]a" test.

There are numerous posts in this thread from Catholics telling you that you are more than free to not have a Marian devotion. Does that sound like people who believe Mary is a deity? This entire thread is about the fact that the Dicastery of the Doctrine of the Faith (in layman's terms, the department in the Vatican responsible for the deposit of the faith and protecting the orthodoxy of the faith and morals) has explicitly stated that the "Co-redemptrix" title is not to be used in reference to the Mary.

The DDF's exact words: "In this case, the expression 'co-redemptrix' does not help extol Mary as the first and foremost collaborator in the work of redemption and grace, for it carries the risk of eclipsing the exclusive role of Jesus Christ."

Does that sound like the DDF believes she is to be worshipped?

So, you have Catholics telling you they are not worshipping her. You have Catholics telling you that nobody is required to keep a devotion to her. You have the DDF all over the place, including recently, telling you not to worship her (note the use of the word extol). But I guess you know better.

---

I never made the argument that people who attend a university are worshipping the name of that university. That was your ridiculous argument.

Let me try to explain it to you.

If there was a George Washington Baptist Church somewhere, I might wonder why they named their church after George Washington. If i went inside that church on Sunday and saw a big statue of George Washington behind the altar in the front so that everyone would focus on George during the service... that would be concerning. Then if everyone sang songs to George, praising his qualities... I would start to think that they are probably engaging in idolatry of George Washington. Then if they prayed prayers to George, thanking him for salvation and asking him to dispense Grace and Blessings upon them and their families... now I would definitely think they were engaging in worship of George. Then if they also bowed before the statue of George, while praying to George.... you add it all up and it is obvious that these folks are worshipping George Washington.

Now replace the name George Washington with The Virgin Mary, and you can obviously see the idolatry of Mary by the Catholic church.


I'm glad that there are some catholics who are not taking part in worshipping Mary, but it seems very odd to say that. Those would have to be catholics who also don't pray the rosary and don't go to "confession" because almost all of the priests instruct parishioners to pray the rosary or pray a certain number of Hail Mary prayers for their forgiveness of sins.
In other words, it would be hard to consider someone a Roman Catholic if they were not engaging in the idolatry of Mary, since this idolatry is taught & practiced by all the Popes and all the leaders in Rome and the Bishops and the Priests.
Maybe there are different levels of Marian idolatry in the RC, but just praying the rosary alone is idolatry. If you pray the rosary as instructed, you will be praying to Mary FAR more times than to God Himself.

I do hope that this step of no longer referring to Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Co-Mediator is the first step in moving the Roman Catholic Church away from idolatry. There will need to be many, many more steps before the RC stops it's idolatry of Mary, and sees her as she was, a blessed woman who was a sinner and needed a Savior.

---

Let's say you have a university named Budda University with a statue of Budda on it. Let's say the members of that community memorize a handful of ritualized chants about their community. They get together on a regularly scheduled basis where they will all dress similarly announcing their allegiance to BU. They will sing the same songs in coordinated fashion extolling the virtues of their community. They will all agree on a few fundamental issues, like their common enemy of TCU. They will cheer their heroes on as they seek to defeat their opponents in the arena. They have an annual pilgrimage where they are all called to come home to celebrate their community. They plaster their cars in BU decals and emblems. They wear clothes proudly announcing their association with BU. They hang in places of prominence their official certificates marking their membership in the BU Alumni community. They put flags and other decorations on their homes announcing their allegiance. Immediately after birth, they dress their babies in Budda U gear. They even minorly incorporate it into other holidays like their equivalent Christmas, with a BU ornament or some other token or icon of the holiday that incorporates BU. They spend their money supporting BU. Many of them will be proud when their children are initiated into the community. Occasionally the military will get involved and bring aircraft to the gatherings of BU. This could go on and on.

The point is that you and I, as insiders of the community, know that we are not worshipping Judge Baylor or Baylor University. We understand the nuance of the situation, but an OUTSIDER could be forgiven if he or she took a look at the whole thing and accused the BU community members of worshipping or idolizing the namesake of BU and/or his university.

Likewise, the insiders who understand what is happening in the Catholic faith are telling you they are not worshipping Mary. The DDF is telling you it is not happening and to avoid the appearance of it happening (the purpose of this thread). We are explicitly telling you that the faith does NOT require a Marian devotion, but it is approved for the faithful that find comfort in it and beleive it brings them closer to Christ.

---

Can you really not comprehend that all what you described is what university students and alumni do for tribal unity and pride for their university, and NOT for the personal honor, praise, and glorification of the namesake of their university??

Can you truly not understand the massive difference between doing all what you described, and them bowing and praying to the image of their namesake, and petitioning it for grace and all salvation, all while elevating their namesake to deity, having the same qualities of Jesus (being sinless, perpetually pure, and assumed into heaven)?? And saying that their namesake is necessary for salvation, THE ALL HOLY ONE, and that in the hour of their death they entrust their souls wholly to their namesake's care??

You really are struggling cognitively with this topic. You and your Catholic brethren. It's quite perplexing to behold.

---

No one has elevated Mary to a deity. She is not divine, and the Catholic Church is extremely explicit about this. You keep saying it because you refuse to accept the Catholic conception of worship, but that doesn't make it true. Mary is not God and therefore cannot be adored, which is the common English translation of the Latin latria. Mary's importance to Catholics is derived in its entirety from her ability to draw Christians closer to God via her intercession and righteous example. Intercession and serving as a great exemplar of faith are the only things that the Virgin Mary can do, and neither of those actions are unique to God. You and I are capable of the same actions; Mary is just vastly more effective at them than the rest of us because of her relationship to Jesus.

Mary was sinless. No, being sinless does not make anyone divine; Adam and Eve were sinless before their Fall, but they were still only human. Her sinless nature has nothing to do with her earning it and everything to do with her being the Mother of God Incarnate and the special graces that derive from that status.

Her free participation was necessary for God's salvation plan in a practical sense, as God made his salvation plan contingent on her agreement. God obviously can do anything He wishes, but he wanted to make humanity active participants in His plan for our salvation. Catholics and the Orthodox have a somewhat different atonement theology than most Protestant denominations.

Mary is all-holy. No one, including Mary, can be holy without God making them so. Mary is all-holy because she was never stained with sin in the first place, unlike the rest of us. This was a grace given to her by God, wholly unearned on her part. Also, Mary has a uniquely close relationship to Christ, the source of all holiness. If holiness is a necessity for friendship with God, and people can grow in holiness, then Mary's holiness must be all the more complete because she is the Mother of God in the Person of Christ. Motherhood is the strongest of all relationships and is stronger than friendship.

There isn't anything wrong with the Hail Mary prayer. The only possible contention a Trinitarian Protestant could have with it is in the second half when the text asks Mary, who is already in Heaven, to pray for us. We've already discussed how that is completely fine in Catholic theology due to our belief in the communion of saints. Also, the Hail Mary isn't the most common Catholic prayer. That would be the Our Father, which is obviously said directly to God.

There isn't anything wrong with bowing either. The presence, or lack thereof, of a statue or icon of Mary is immaterial, as no one believes her spirit is tied to the image as ancient pagans commonly believed about their idols. Bowing remains standard practice whenever one is speaking to royalty. And make no mistake, the Blessed Virgin Mary is royalty. She is the Queen Mother of the Universe precisely and solely because her Son, Jesus Christ, is King of the Universe.

And before you repeat "that is mentioned directly in Scripture!" remember that criticism doesn't work on Catholics. We don't believe in Sola Scriptura, which was a 16th century theological innovation. We rely on Christ's promise to "lead you (you being Church as represented by the Apostles) into all truth," not on our individual, fallible interpretations of Holy Writ. God inspired the composition and compilation of the Bible to aid in our understanding of the Christian faith, and He established the Church to teach the precepts of the Faith using the Bible as a primary source.

---

Everything you've written here, your high praise, exaltation, and glorification of Mary, is worship.

No human is ALL-HOLY, much less the ALL HOLY ONE. The ALL HOLY ONE is GOD, and no one else. NO ONE should be extolled this way except God, as this attribute belongs to NO ONE but God. This is just so basic and such an obvious no-brainer for Christians, that I have no choice but to conclude that you are not a true Christian. You have not been regenerated by the Holy Spirit. You being perfectly fine with this language makes it all the more clear why you support saying that Mary is "necessary for salvation" and that "no one can attain salvation except through Mary". Yes, you've deified Mary. Jesus is deity, and you're giving Mary all of Jesus' traits (sinless, perpetually pure, assumed to heaven, Mediator between sinners and God, "no one attains salvation except through Mary'). This is all just staring at everyone in the face, and we're all sadly watching people like the RC's here who are completely in the dark try their darndest to justify it, all for the sake of protecting their precious Queen mother. THERE IS NO "QUEEN MOTHER' IN CHRISTIANITY. You are blindly following the re-awakened form of the ancient pagan mother goddess religion that has plagued human civilization throughout all of human history. WAKE UP. Before God judges

"There isn't anything wrong with bowing, either" - the way you're doing it, yeah, there definitely is, and it's obvious to anyone who isn't blinded by Satan. I already showed you that bowing IS worship, as Revelation 22 reveals. You're just repeating your spiritual stupidity here. And did the second commandment fall out of the hole in your brain? You're in a loop of satanic deception.

And I don't know what it's going to take to get you to stop dodging and answer my question: again, are all those statements and actions I listed in my earlier post okay to do for a child who you say "saved your life"? I mean, if everything you're saying here in your latest post is correct, then PROVE IT by answering the question! Your repeated avoidance of it is telling us all we need to know. It's showing the truth is not in you, and that your church is not from God.

---

Yes, there is a Queen Mother in Christianity, and there has been for over two thousand years. You are wrong about this. The concept is tied directly to Christ's status as the true restorer of the heavenly Davidic Kingdom in other words, the Messiah. It has nothing to do with paganism at all.

In the Davidic kingdom of history, there was a queen mother. Bathsheba was queen mother in Solomon's reign, just to use a famous example. The position is directly referenced several times in the Old Testament. If Jesus is the King of the Jews and the ultimate culmination of the Davidic line of kings, which He is, then His government has a queen mother. Like in the Davidic kingdom, Queen Mother Mary's royal status derives directly from her Son's position as King of Heaven and Earth. Any and all authority she has stems entirely from her privileged relationship to the King.

---

No, there isn't a "Queen Mother" in Christianity. It is NEVER stated or alluded to in any way in Scripture, or in the testimony of the early church.

What you're doing is trying to infer a "queen mother", and by doing so, you're demonstrating a complete lack of understanding of what Jesus was trying to tell us. You're inferring it by equating Jesus' kingdom to the earthly Hebrew kingdoms of old. But Jesus has abolished earthly forms of kingdomhood for his kingdom. His kingdom is a spiritual kingdom. He even said, "My kingdom is not from this world". There are no longer any Levitical priests in his kingdom, for Jesus himself is the ONE mediator between man and God and his believers are a "royal priesthood". There is no Temple in his kingdom, because God lives among the people, not in a building. There is no "royal line" of blood relatives that share power from the throne - Jesus speciically tells us that believers will share in his power from the throne and reign with him. And of course, Jesus has no mother, therefore there is no "Queen Mother".

You Roman Catholics forget that Jesus ended his earthly relationship with Mary at the cross. He declared that Mary was no longer his mother. That relationship was ended and given to his close disciple, John. Jesus left all blood ties on the cross. He was no longer to be tied by earthly blood in relationship, but by his Spirit he was now to be tied to ALL PEOPLE who believe in eternal relationship. During Jesus' ministry, Jesus clearly disavowed all earthly, blood relationships in his new spiritual kingdom - "who is my mother, and who are my brothers? Everyone who does the will of God is my brother and sister and mother." Jesus didn't even call Mary his "mother" at all, not once, in all of Scripture.

So as you can see, Jesus' spiritual, heavenly kingdom is nothing at all like an earthly kingdom. You can't infer or assume any carryover of the old, earthly form of a kingdom into his new, spiritual kingdom, without direct Scriptural reference, of course. None of which you have. Your belief in a "Queen Mother" is based entirely on your assumption, it is not the direct revelation of God.