TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

Fre3dombear said:

---

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

Nah, not worship, really guys, not worship...

She is the mother of God, the queen of heaven, spouse of the holy spirit, heavens gate, born and lived without sin, must be a perpetual virgin to continue the myth of being sinless, etc.

For the record, I truly respect and honor Mary, but she would figuratively be rolling in her grave based on how high she has been elevated, to the point of idolatry by the catholic church.

Just some of the titles used by catholics for Mary follow.

Gate of Heaven

Ark of the Covenant

Cause of Our Joy

Comforter of the Afflicted

Co-Redemptrix

Destroyer of Heresy

Gate of Heaven

Joy of the Just

Health of the Sick

Help of Christians

Holy Mary

Holy Mother of God

Holy Virgin of Virgins

House of Gold

The Immaculate Heart

Mirror of Justice

Mother of the Poor

Morning Star

Mother Inviolate

Mother Most Admirable

Mother Most Amiable

Mother Most Chaste

Mother Most Pure

Mother of Christ

Mother of Divine Grace

Mother of Good Counsel

Mother of Orphans

Mother of Our Creator

Mother of Our Redeemer

Mother of Perpetual Help

Mother of Sorrows

Mother of the Son

Mother Thrice Admirable

Mother Undefiled

Mystical Rose

Our Lady de Gray

Our Lady de la Breche

Our Lady della Croce

Our Lady de la Treille

Our Lady of Confidence

Our Lady of Akita

Our Lady of Abundance

Our Lady of Acheropita

Our Lady of Africa

Our Lady of Aix-la-Chapelle

Our Lady of Alba Royale

Our Lady of Alexandria

Our Lady of All Help

Our Lady of Almudena

Our Lady of Amiens

Our Lady of Angels

Our Lady of Angels Toulouse

Our Lady of Apareceda

Our Lady of Apparitions

Our Lady of Arabida

Our Lady of Ardents

Our Lady of Ardilliers

Our Lady of Argenteuil

Our Lady of Arras

Our Lady of Atocha

Our Lady of Banneux

Our Lady of Bavaria

Our Lady of Beaumont

Our Lady of Beauraing

Our Lady of Belle Fontaine

Our Lady of Benoite-Vaux

Our Lady of Bessiere

Our Lady of Betharam

Our Lady of Bethlehem

Our Lady of Bolougne

Our Lady of Bonaria

Our Lady of Bonport

Our Lady of Bourbourg

Our Lady of Bows

Our Lady of Bruges

Our Lady of Buglose

Our Lady of Buch

Our Lady of Calais

Our Lady of Calevourt

Our Lady of Cambray

Our Lady of Cambron

Our Lady of Campitelli

Our Lady of Cana

Our Lady of Caravaggio

Our Lady of Carquere

Our Lady of Castelbruedo

Our Lady of Charity

Our Lady of Chartres

Our Lady of Chatillion

Our Lady of Chievres

Our Lady Of Citeaux

Our Lady of Clairvaux

Our Lady of Clemency

Our Lady of Clermont

Our Lady of Clery

Our Lady of Clos-Evrard

Our Lady of Compassion

Our Lady of Conquest

Our Lady of Consolation

Our Lady of Constantinople

Our Lady of Copacabana

Our Lady of Coutances

Our Lady of Covadonga

Our Lady of Craganor

Our Lady of Czestochowa

Our Lady D'Iron

Our Lady of Damietta

Our Lady of Deliverance

Our Lady of Didinia

Our Lady of Dijon

Our Lady of Divine Providence

Our Lady of Dordrecht

Our Lady of Edessa

Our Lady of Egypt

Our Lady of Einsiendeln

Our Lady of Emminont

Our Lady of Esquernes

Our Lady of Exile

Our Lady of Faith

Our Lady of Fatima

Our Lady of Fire

Our Lady of Flines

Our Lady of Foi

Our Lady of Fourviere

Our Lady of Foy

Our Lady of France

Our Lady of Genazzano

Our Lady of Genesta

Our Lady of Gifts

Our Lady of Good Counsel

Our Lady of Good Deliverance

Our Lady of Good Haven

Our Lady of Good Health

Our Lady of Good Help

Our Lady of Good News

Our Lady of Good Remedies

Our Lady of Good Success

Our Lady of Good Tidings

Our Lady of Good Tidings, Lempdes

Our Lady of Grace

Our Lady of Grace, Normandy

Our Lady of Grace, Paris

Our Lady of Great Power

Our Lady of Guadalupe

Our Lady of Guam

Our Lady of Guard

Our Lady of Guidance

Our Lady of Happy Assembly

Our Lady of Haut

Our Lady of Helbron

Our Lady of Highest Grace

Our Lady of Hildesheim

Our Lady of Ireland

Our Lady of Justinienne

Our Lady of Kazan

Our Lady of Kieff

Our Lady of Kiev

Our Lady of Knock

Our Lady of Kuehn

Our Lady of La Carolle

Our Lady of La Chapelle

Our Lady of La Guarde

Our Lady of La Rochette

Our Lady of La Salette

Our Lady of Lac Bouchet

Our Lady of Las Lajas

Our Lady of Last Agony

Our Lady of Laon

Our Lady of Lavang

Our Lady of Liesse

Our Lady of Life

Our Lady of Light

Our Lady of Ligny

Our Lady of Loreto

Our Lady of Lourdes

Our Lady of Louvain

Our Lady of Lyons

Our Lady of Mantua

Our Lady of Marienthal

Our Lady of Marseilles

Our Lady of Matarieh

Our Lady of Meliapore

Our Lady of Milan

Our Lady of Miracles

Our Lady of Miracles Brescia

Our Lady of Miracles Paris

Our Lady of Miracles Rome

Our Lady of Molanus

Our Lady of Molene

Our Lady of Mondevi

Our Lady of Moreneta

Our Lady of Mount Carmel

Our Lady of Monte-Senario

Our Lady of Montserrat

Our Lady of Montevergine

Our Lady of Moustier

Our Lady of Moyen Point

Our Lady of Myan

Our Lady of Nanteuil

Our Lady of Naples

Our Lady of Narni

Our Lady of Naval

Our Lady of Nazareth

Our Lady of New

Our Lady of Oegnies

Our Lady of Oropa

Our Lady of Oviedo

Our Lady of Paris

Our Lady of Peace

Our Lady of Pellevoisin

Our Lady of Perpetual Help

Our Lady of Pignerol

Our Lady of Pompeii

Our Lady of Pontmain

Our Lady of Pontoise

Our Lady of Port Louis

Our Lady of Power

Our Lady of Premontre

Our Lady of Prompt Succor

Our Lady of Abundance or Prosperity

Our Lady of Pucha

Our Lady of Puig

Our Lady of Puy

Our Lady of Quito

Our Lady of Ransom

Our Lady of Ratisbon

Our Lady of Rennes

Our Lady of Rheims

Our Lady of Rocamadour

Our Lady of Rocks

Our Lady of Rossano

Our Lady of Rouen

Our Lady of Safety

Our Lady of Saideneida

Our Lady of Saint Acheul

Our Lady of St Fort Chartres

Our Lady of Saint John

Our Lady of Savigny

Our Lady of Sasopoli

Our Lady of Saussaie

Our Lady of Schiedam

Our Lady of Schier

Our Lady of Scutari

Our Lady of Seez

Our Lady of Sichem

Our Lady of Sion

Our Lady of Smelcem

Our Lady of Sorrows

Our Lady of Soissons

Our Lady of Speech

Our Lady of Spire

Our Lady of Succor

Our Lady of Tables

Our Lady of Talan

Our Lady of Tears

Our Lady of Tears, Spoleto

Our Lady of Terouenne

Our Lady of the Armed Forces

Our Lady of the Assumption

Our Lady of the Bells

Our Lady of the Bush

Our Lady of the Candles

Our Lady of the Cloister

Our Lady of the Conception

Our Lady of the Conception, Flanders

Our Lady of the Divine Shepherd

Our Lady of the Don

Our Lady of the Doves

Our Lady of the Empress

Our Lady of the Fields

Our Lady of the Flowering Thorn

Our Lady of the Forest

Our Lady of the Forests

Our Lady of the Founders

Our Lady of the Fountain

Our Lady of the Fountain, Constantinople

Our Lady of the Grotto Lamego

Our Lady of the Hermits

Our Lady of the Hill

Our Lady of the Holy Chapel

Our Lady of the Holy Cross

Our Lady of the Jesuit College

Our Lady of the Lily

Our Lady of the Miraculous Medal

Our Lady of the Mountains

Our Lady of the Palm

Our Lady of the Pillar

Our Lady of the Place

Our Lady of the Pond

Our Lady of the Portuguese

Our Lady of the Rock

Our Lady of the Rosary

Our Lady of the Sacred Heart

Our Lady of the Silver Foot

Our Lady of the Slain

Our Lady of the Snows

Our Lady of the Star

Our Lady of the Star, Portugal

Our Lady of the Taper

Our Lady of the Thorn

Our Lady of the Tower

Our Lady of the Underground

Our Lady of the Valley

Our Lady of the Vault

Our Lady of the Vine

Our Lady of the Way

Our Lady of the Woods

Our Lady of Tongres

Our Lady of Tortosa

Our Lady of Trapani

Our Lady of Treves

Our Lady of Trut

Our Lady of Valvenere

Our Lady of Vaussivieres

Our Lady of Verdun

Our Lady of Victories

Our Lady of Victory

Our Lady of Victory, Spain

Our Lady of Victory, Senlis

Our Lady of Victory, Tourney

Our Lady of Victory, Valois

Our Lady of Virtues

Our Lady of Vivonne

Our Lady of Vladimir

Our Lady of Walsingham

Our Lady of Zapopan

Our Lady of Zell

Our Lady the Helper

Our Lady Refuge of Sinners

Our Lady, Star of the Sea

Our Lady Queen of Peace

Tabernacle of the Lord

Temple of the Most Holy Trinity

Treasure House of God's Graces

Queen of Angels

Queen of Heaven

Queen of Patriarchs

Queen of Prophets

Queen of Apostles

Queen of Martyrs

Queen of Confessors

Queen of Virgins

Queen of All Saints

Queen Conceived Without Original Sin

Queen of the Most Holy Rosary

Queen of Peace

Refuge of Sinners

Seat of Wisdom

Singular Vessel of Devotion

Spiritual Vessel

Mary, Spouse of the Holy Spirit

Star of the Sea

Tower of David

Tower of Ivory

Vessel of Honor

Virgen de la Antigua

Virgin of the Battles

Virgin of the Kings

Virgin Most Prudent

Virgin Most Venerable

Virgin Most Renowned

Virgin Most Powerful

Virgin Most Merciful

Virgin Most Faithful

---

All worthy fkr the literal sinless ever virgin Mother of God

Man the hubris of some people led astray with even the guy that invented the P's religion said same.

Imagine thinking less of Mary than Gabriel did. Yikes.

Lots of whistlers past the graveyard round here.

I posted the video yesterday or so. Summed it up well.

---

Prots don't think less of Mary than Gabriel. Gabriel certainly didn't elevate her to the heights that RC's do. It's got all the signs of idolatry, and clearly not found in the Bible and not in the early church.

The Mary Queen of Heaven mythos evolved late and relies heavily upon new revelations. Such as replacing praying the Psalms with praying the Rosary and Hail Mary's.

---

Quote:

---

"My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior" (Luke 1:46-47).

Mary herself knew she wasn't sinless and needed a Savior by her own proclaimation. Just as every human born of man alone needs.

The only separator between God and man is sin. A sinless person doesn't need a Savior. Aside Jesus there are no sinless people.

Mary proclaimed this herself when she called Him her Savior.

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Am I correct in saying RC and Prots define saints differently?

---

Actually Orthodox, Roman Catholics, and Protestants define Saints very differently.

The Protestants consider all Christians to be saints.

The Orthodox would say that although in the sense of Revelation that use is correct, that here on earth the term would be used for those Christians who lived lives of service to God and therefore whose lives serve as examples for us and exhort us to be more faithful. Also, this recognition occurs from the grassroots up.

Neither group teaches that purgatory is a thing.

In Roman Catholicism the process of canonization is very much a top down matter, and presumably the saints would be the Christians who bypassed purgatory by accumulating enough merit to do this in this life.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

OsoCoreyell said:

---

I want to know by what authority Catholics think it is sound theology to pray to Mary.

---

I'm not Roman Catholic but this explanation may help.

Intercessory prayer isn't praying to a person. It is a prayer request that others pray to God for us.

The Biblical support for it is found in these verse:

James 5:16 - Therefore, confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous person has great power as it is working."

John 11:26 - "And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?" (It's a modern heresy that Christians die. Historically, the passing of the Christian has been thought of as the falling asleep of their body in the Lord to await a bodily resurrection. This is why Christians bury their dead, and don't cremate them.)

Hebrews 12:1 - "Therefore we also, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which so easily ensnares us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us." (We are surrounded by this great cloud today, not at some point when we get to heaven).

Revelation 8:3-4 "Then another angel, having a golden censer, came and stood at the altar. He was given much incense, that he should offer it with the prayers of all the saints upon the golden altar which was before the throne. And the smoke of the incense, with the prayers of the saints, ascended before God from the angel's hand."

The bolded portion of the text is the actual technical mechanism by which God hears your prayer, by the way.

But who gave this angel with the golden censer your prayer to offer to God? Revelation answers that too.

Revelation 5:8 "Now when He had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each having a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints."

As you can see, making prayer requests of other Christians is not limited to those in your Sunday School Class, Church, City, State, Country, or Generation.

---

There is NOTHING in Scripture that clearly and explicitly instructs us to pray to departed saints or Mary, or tells us that they even have the ability to receive prayers to begin with. There is no instance whatsoever anywhere in the Old or New Testament of anyone praying to a departed believer for any kind of intercession. None. There exists NO teaching from Jesus or his apostles that we can and should pray to Mary and the saints.

I just don't understand how a church can build a system of faith, worship, and practice on something like praying to Mary or the saints, when the basis of such a practice can only be derived by reading your assumptions into Scripture and drawing non sequitur inferences like you did in order to justify something that really isn't there. Especially since there is no real reason to do it. We have direct access to God and Jesus, and we are explicitly instructed by Jesus himself to go directly to them. This is the clear, unambiguous teaching of Scripture.

The prayers being in "bowls of incense" does not necessarily indicate that those prayers were directed to the saints or Mary. And there is no reason whatsoever to believe that this is the "actual mechanism" by which prayers go up to God. All this is pure eisegesis. And after all, the practice has no real benefit - what does a believer lose if they don't pray to Mary of the saints? On the other hand, if you DO pray to them, you risk committing idolatry and angering God. The risk/reward is way too high for something finding its basis only in haphazard eisegesis. Praying to Mary and the saints had its origins in pagan Rome. In order to make the pagans convert to Christianity, they were allowed to continue praying to their multiple gods, but they just renamed those gods after Christian figures, like Mary and the saints. Those of you who engage in this practice REALLY need to understand this history.

---

The Catholic and Orthodox Churches are literally older than the New Testament and therefore don't subscribe to sola scriptura as a universal guiding principle. The Bible is a part of Catholic Tradition, albeit an extremely important and special part that is constantly referenced (seriously, read any papal encyclical to see just how often it is cited. It's a lot). Protestants and Catholics will always be talking past one another until both sides understand that sola scriptura is a fundamentally Protestant principle, not a Catholic or Orthodox one.

Also, how could the New Testament reference praying to the saints? Most of it, excepting Revelation, was composed in the first generation after Christ's resurrection. It makes no sense to ask for the intercession of people in Heaven when most of the saints are still alive on Earth. The one book that was almost certainly composed at a later date, Revelation, is the one that does potentially reference the saints interceding for us in chapter 5. The tradition for saintly intercession can be firmly dated to the early Church before its legalization and later adoption by Emperor Constantine.

The logic of this is simple. Prayer is not always a form of worship, though it can be when directed to God. The word literally means "to ask or petition" and had historical uses outside of a worship context. The saints in Heaven are not dead -- they are in the presence of God and are even more alive that we are (Matthew 22:31-32). We can, therefore, ask them to pray to God for us. It's not necromancy; Catholics are not attempting to conjure their spirits in this world. It's simply a recognition that the communion of saints extends across the veil of death, for all Christians, on Earth or in Heaven, share in the life of Christ.

ARbear13 said:

---

Today, the Vatican officially rejected the doctrinal titles of Co-Redemptrix and Co-Mediatrix to refer to the Blessed Virgin Mary. They did this specifically to avoid confusion regarding Mary's role in God's redemptive plan for humanity.

The term was originally proposed centuries ago by well-meaning, theologically-minded Catholics who wanted to emphasize that Mary did participate (in a subordinate way) in God's plan for human salvation by birthing and raising Jesus, the One Redeemer and Mediator. However, Pope Leo XIV and the Catholic hierarchy concluded that these titles are misleading in modern languages and make it seem like Mother Mary has her own, independent participation in our salvation, which is obviously false and heretical. Jesus Christ is the Redeemer. Everyone else, including the Blessed Virgin Mary, only participates in this process as far as we point others toward Jesus as Savior.

Hopefully actions like these will help my Protestant friends on this site realize that we Catholics DO NOT worship Mother Mary or anything other than the Triune God. We never did.

---

But, but, but in 1854 they said different...

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

OsoCoreyell said:

---

I want to know by what authority Catholics think it is sound theology to pray to Mary.

---

I'm not Roman Catholic but this explanation may help.

Intercessory prayer isn't praying to a person. It is a prayer request that others pray to God for us.

The Biblical support for it is found in these verse:

James 5:16 - Therefore, confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous person has great power as it is working."

John 11:26 - "And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?" (It's a modern heresy that Christians die. Historically, the passing of the Christian has been thought of as the falling asleep of their body in the Lord to await a bodily resurrection. This is why Christians bury their dead, and don't cremate them.)

Hebrews 12:1 - "Therefore we also, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which so easily ensnares us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us." (We are surrounded by this great cloud today, not at some point when we get to heaven).

Revelation 8:3-4 "Then another angel, having a golden censer, came and stood at the altar. He was given much incense, that he should offer it with the prayers of all the saints upon the golden altar which was before the throne. And the smoke of the incense, with the prayers of the saints, ascended before God from the angel's hand."

The bolded portion of the text is the actual technical mechanism by which God hears your prayer, by the way.

But who gave this angel with the golden censer your prayer to offer to God? Revelation answers that too.

Revelation 5:8 "Now when He had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each having a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints."

As you can see, making prayer requests of other Christians is not limited to those in your Sunday School Class, Church, City, State, Country, or Generation.

---

There is NOTHING in Scripture that clearly and explicitly instructs us to pray to departed saints or Mary, or tells us that they even have the ability to receive prayers to begin with. There is no instance whatsoever anywhere in the Old or New Testament of anyone praying to a departed believer for any kind of intercession. None. There exists NO teaching from Jesus or his apostles that we can and should pray to Mary and the saints.

I just don't understand how a church can build a system of faith, worship, and practice on something like praying to Mary or the saints, when the basis of such a practice can only be derived by reading your assumptions into Scripture and drawing non sequitur inferences like you did in order to justify something that really isn't there. Especially since there is no real reason to do it. We have direct access to God and Jesus, and we are explicitly instructed by Jesus himself to go directly to them. This is the clear, unambiguous teaching of Scripture.

The prayers being in "bowls of incense" does not necessarily indicate that those prayers were directed to the saints or Mary. And there is no reason whatsoever to believe that this is the "actual mechanism" by which prayers go up to God. All this is pure eisegesis. And after all, the practice has no real benefit - what does a believer lose if they don't pray to Mary of the saints? On the other hand, if you DO pray to them, you risk committing idolatry and angering God. The risk/reward is way too high for something finding its basis only in haphazard eisegesis. Praying to Mary and the saints had its origins in pagan Rome. In order to make the pagans convert to Christianity, they were allowed to continue praying to their multiple gods, but they just renamed those gods after Christian figures, like Mary and the saints. Those of you who engage in this practice REALLY need to understand this history.

---

There is reason the curtain that partitioned the Holy of Holies tore from top to bottom.

ARbear13 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

OsoCoreyell said:

---

I want to know by what authority Catholics think it is sound theology to pray to Mary.

---

I'm not Roman Catholic but this explanation may help.

Intercessory prayer isn't praying to a person. It is a prayer request that others pray to God for us.

The Biblical support for it is found in these verse:

James 5:16 - Therefore, confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous person has great power as it is working."

John 11:26 - "And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?" (It's a modern heresy that Christians die. Historically, the passing of the Christian has been thought of as the falling asleep of their body in the Lord to await a bodily resurrection. This is why Christians bury their dead, and don't cremate them.)

Hebrews 12:1 - "Therefore we also, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which so easily ensnares us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us." (We are surrounded by this great cloud today, not at some point when we get to heaven).

Revelation 8:3-4 "Then another angel, having a golden censer, came and stood at the altar. He was given much incense, that he should offer it with the prayers of all the saints upon the golden altar which was before the throne. And the smoke of the incense, with the prayers of the saints, ascended before God from the angel's hand."

The bolded portion of the text is the actual technical mechanism by which God hears your prayer, by the way.

But who gave this angel with the golden censer your prayer to offer to God? Revelation answers that too.

Revelation 5:8 "Now when He had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each having a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints."

As you can see, making prayer requests of other Christians is not limited to those in your Sunday School Class, Church, City, State, Country, or Generation.

---

There is NOTHING in Scripture that clearly and explicitly instructs us to pray to departed saints or Mary, or tells us that they even have the ability to receive prayers to begin with. There is no instance whatsoever anywhere in the Old or New Testament of anyone praying to a departed believer for any kind of intercession. None. There exists NO teaching from Jesus or his apostles that we can and should pray to Mary and the saints.

I just don't understand how a church can build a system of faith, worship, and practice on something like praying to Mary or the saints, when the basis of such a practice can only be derived by reading your assumptions into Scripture and drawing non sequitur inferences like you did in order to justify something that really isn't there. Especially since there is no real reason to do it. We have direct access to God and Jesus, and we are explicitly instructed by Jesus himself to go directly to them. This is the clear, unambiguous teaching of Scripture.

The prayers being in "bowls of incense" does not necessarily indicate that those prayers were directed to the saints or Mary. And there is no reason whatsoever to believe that this is the "actual mechanism" by which prayers go up to God. All this is pure eisegesis. And after all, the practice has no real benefit - what does a believer lose if they don't pray to Mary of the saints? On the other hand, if you DO pray to them, you risk committing idolatry and angering God. The risk/reward is way too high for something finding its basis only in haphazard eisegesis. Praying to Mary and the saints had its origins in pagan Rome. In order to make the pagans convert to Christianity, they were allowed to continue praying to their multiple gods, but they just renamed those gods after Christian figures, like Mary and the saints. Those of you who engage in this practice REALLY need to understand this history.

---

The Catholic and Orthodox Churches are literally older than the New Testament and therefore don't subscribe to sola scriptura as a universal guiding principle. The Bible is a part of Catholic Tradition, albeit an extremely important and special part that is constantly referenced (seriously, read any papal encyclical to see just how often it is cited. It's a lot). Protestants and Catholics will always be talking past one another until both sides understand that sola scriptura is a fundamentally Protestant principle, not a Catholic or Orthodox one.

Also, how could the New Testament reference praying to the saints? Most of it, excepting Revelation, was composed in the first generation after Christ's resurrection. It makes no sense to ask for the intercession of people in Heaven when most of the saints are still alive on Earth. The one book that was almost certainly composed at a later date, Revelation, is the one that does potentially reference the saints interceding for us in chapter 5. The tradition for saintly intercession can be firmly dated to the early Church before its legalization and later adoption by Emperor Constantine.

The logic of this is simple. Prayer is not always a form of worship, though it can be when directed to God. The word literally means "to ask or petition" and had historical uses outside of a worship context. The saints in Heaven are not dead -- they are in the presence of God and are even more alive that we are (Matthew 22:31-32). We can, therefore, ask them to pray to God for us. It's not necromancy; Catholics are not attempting to conjure their spirits in this world. It's simply a recognition that the communion of saints extends across the veil of death, for all Christians, on Earth or in Heaven, share in the life of Christ.

---

Roman Catholicism and Orthodox Christianity rejecting sola scriptura is precisely the problem, and why their teachings have strayed from the teachings of Jesus and the original apostles. Even to the point of gross idolatry and heresy. I think even YOU know this, as you have conspicuoulsy avoided answering my challenge to look at those quotes from Roman Catholic authorities saying that Mary is necessary for salvation, and disavowing them.

There were many Christians who were killed in the first century. Do we even see a HINT of the practice of praying to martyrs such as Stephen in Acts? The concept doesn't even need to exist in the minds of Christians - Jesus himself directly instructs us to go to him directly. And if God wanted Christians to do it, wouldn't the Holy Spirit have inspired the New Testament writers to include it? It's highly dubious to base a practice on something completely absent in Scripture, and which only surfaces after centuries afterwards, when Christianity compromised with pagan Rome and incorporated the pagan practice of praying to their pantheon of gods, during the time of Constantine. Yes, this is known history. This is exactly why Roman Catholicism has certain "offices" for each saint (saint of healing, farming, finding lost things, etc). This is a carry over from those pagan gods, their gods of healing, farming, etc. They were simply given the names of Christian figures. You really need to understand this history, and be honest with it. I would be highly, highly suspect of any practice originating during this time.

Praying to departed saints is conferring divine qualities to those saints - the ability to hear all prayers directed to them, simultaneously, and all over the globe, even silent prayers from the heart. And there is absolutely no divine revelation of their ability to do this, or regarding their respective "offices". The deification of Mary and saints to their current positions in Roman Catholicism and Orthodoxy occurred by process of accretion of errors that slowly crept in and became accepted over time. And the most unfortunate (and evil) thing about it all is that because your magisterium claims infallible authority, there is no mechanism for correction.

It's long past time for you Roman Catholics and Orthodox to just be honest and acknowledge what every rational, honest minded person is seeing for themselves on this thread, and STOP trying to gaslighting everyone (including yourself). Any idiot can read those quotes from Roman Catholic popes and theologians and clearly see that your church is crediting Mary for salvation. If you truly can't see how saying such things is very wrong, even idolatrous, then something is really, really wrong.

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

There is reason the curtain that partitioned the Holy of Holies tore from top to bottom.

---

That certainly is the traditional evangelical explanation for it. But what if that evangelical explanation is wrong? After all the events described in Revelation take place *after* the temple veil is torn. What if the tearing of the temple veil means nothing more than ichabod - the Glory has departed? That would be consistent with Hebrews 8:13.

Realitybites said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Am I correct in saying RC and Prots define saints differently?

---

Actually Orthodox, Roman Catholics, and Protestants define Saints very differently.

The Protestants consider all Christians to be saints.

The Orthodox would say that although in the sense of Revelation that use is correct, that here on earth the term would be used for those Christians who lived lives of service to God and therefore whose lives serve as examples for us and exhort us to be more faithful. Also, this recognition occurs from the grassroots up.

Neither group teaches that purgatory is a thing.

In Roman Catholicism the process of canonization is very much a top down matter, and presumably the saints would be the Christians who bypassed purgatory by accumulating enough merit to do this in this life.

---

Catholics dont believe saints bypass purgatory

ARbear13 said:

---

Today, the Vatican officially rejected the doctrinal titles of Co-Redemptrix and Co-Mediatrix to refer to the Blessed Virgin Mary. They did this specifically to avoid confusion regarding Mary's role in God's redemptive plan for humanity.

The term was originally proposed centuries ago by well-meaning, theologically-minded Catholics who wanted to emphasize that Mary did participate (in a subordinate way) in God's plan for human salvation by birthing and raising Jesus, the One Redeemer and Mediator. However, Pope Leo XIV and the Catholic hierarchy concluded that these titles are misleading in modern languages and make it seem like Mother Mary has her own, independent participation in our salvation, which is obviously false and heretical. Jesus Christ is the Redeemer. Everyone else, including the Blessed Virgin Mary, only participates in this process as far as we point others toward Jesus as Savior.

Hopefully actions like these will help my Protestant friends on this site realize that we Catholics DO NOT worship Mother Mary or anything other than the Triune God. We never did.

---

To be clear the document was just nonsense and more Fracis style words that mean nothing but trying to drive confusion.

Fre3dombear said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

Today, the Vatican officially rejected the doctrinal titles of Co-Redemptrix and Co-Mediatrix to refer to the Blessed Virgin Mary. They did this specifically to avoid confusion regarding Mary's role in God's redemptive plan for humanity.

The term was originally proposed centuries ago by well-meaning, theologically-minded Catholics who wanted to emphasize that Mary did participate (in a subordinate way) in God's plan for human salvation by birthing and raising Jesus, the One Redeemer and Mediator. However, Pope Leo XIV and the Catholic hierarchy concluded that these titles are misleading in modern languages and make it seem like Mother Mary has her own, independent participation in our salvation, which is obviously false and heretical. Jesus Christ is the Redeemer. Everyone else, including the Blessed Virgin Mary, only participates in this process as far as we point others toward Jesus as Savior.

Hopefully actions like these will help my Protestant friends on this site realize that we Catholics DO NOT worship Mother Mary or anything other than the Triune God. We never did.

---

To be clear the document was just nonsense and more Fracis style words that mean nothing but trying to drive confusion.

---

How many other documents can be described this way? Is it only the documents you disagree with?

Fre3dombear said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

Today, the Vatican officially rejected the doctrinal titles of Co-Redemptrix and Co-Mediatrix to refer to the Blessed Virgin Mary. They did this specifically to avoid confusion regarding Mary's role in God's redemptive plan for humanity.

The term was originally proposed centuries ago by well-meaning, theologically-minded Catholics who wanted to emphasize that Mary did participate (in a subordinate way) in God's plan for human salvation by birthing and raising Jesus, the One Redeemer and Mediator. However, Pope Leo XIV and the Catholic hierarchy concluded that these titles are misleading in modern languages and make it seem like Mother Mary has her own, independent participation in our salvation, which is obviously false and heretical. Jesus Christ is the Redeemer. Everyone else, including the Blessed Virgin Mary, only participates in this process as far as we point others toward Jesus as Savior.

Hopefully actions like these will help my Protestant friends on this site realize that we Catholics DO NOT worship Mother Mary or anything other than the Triune God. We never did.

---

To be clear the document was just nonsense and more Fracis style words that mean nothing but trying to drive confusion.

---

I thought it was one of the most helpful documents to originate from the Francis pontificate, though that is admittedly a low bar to clear.

Marian titles and doctrines are always meant to reflect in some way the power, authority, or identity of Christ. Co-Redemptrix is problematic because the prefix co- has multiple meanings in English and in many other languages, and an unqualified Redemptrix title for Mother Mary is unacceptable for obvious reasons. It is too easily misunderstood without extensive theological knowledge and careful explanation, which makes it unhelpful and risky for general use. It's semantics, but semantics matter when dealing with terms related to the God of All Creation.

Someone on social media argued that Mother of God is the highest, most accurate, and most complimentary title Mary could possibly be given without risking heresy. I agree with them. The Magisterium's role is to teach the Truth with clarity. If terms have limitations that make clarity extremely difficult, then they shouldn't be used.

ARbear13 said:

---

Fre3dombear said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

Today, the Vatican officially rejected the doctrinal titles of Co-Redemptrix and Co-Mediatrix to refer to the Blessed Virgin Mary. They did this specifically to avoid confusion regarding Mary's role in God's redemptive plan for humanity.

The term was originally proposed centuries ago by well-meaning, theologically-minded Catholics who wanted to emphasize that Mary did participate (in a subordinate way) in God's plan for human salvation by birthing and raising Jesus, the One Redeemer and Mediator. However, Pope Leo XIV and the Catholic hierarchy concluded that these titles are misleading in modern languages and make it seem like Mother Mary has her own, independent participation in our salvation, which is obviously false and heretical. Jesus Christ is the Redeemer. Everyone else, including the Blessed Virgin Mary, only participates in this process as far as we point others toward Jesus as Savior.

Hopefully actions like these will help my Protestant friends on this site realize that we Catholics DO NOT worship Mother Mary or anything other than the Triune God. We never did.

---

To be clear the document was just nonsense and more Fracis style words that mean nothing but trying to drive confusion.

---

I thought it was one of the most helpful documents to originate from the Francis pontificate, though that is admittedly a low bar to clear.

Marian titles and doctrines are always meant to reflect in some way the power, authority, or identity of Christ. Co-Redemptrix is problematic because the prefix co- has multiple meanings in English and in many other languages, and an unqualified Redemptrix title for Mother Mary is unacceptable for obvious reasons. It is too easily misunderstood without extensive theological knowledge and careful explanation, which makes it unhelpful and risky for general use. It's semantics, but semantics matter when dealing with terms related to the God of All Creation.

Someone on social media argued that Mother of God is the highest, most accurate, and most complimentary title Mary could possibly be given without risking heresy. I agree with them. The Magisterium's role is to teach the Truth with clarity. If terms have limitations that make clarity extremely difficult, then they shouldn't be used.

---

To help with the clarity, can you address the long list of statements posted earlier in this thread that seem to say Mary is required for salvation?

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

Fre3dombear said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

Today, the Vatican officially rejected the doctrinal titles of Co-Redemptrix and Co-Mediatrix to refer to the Blessed Virgin Mary. They did this specifically to avoid confusion regarding Mary's role in God's redemptive plan for humanity.

The term was originally proposed centuries ago by well-meaning, theologically-minded Catholics who wanted to emphasize that Mary did participate (in a subordinate way) in God's plan for human salvation by birthing and raising Jesus, the One Redeemer and Mediator. However, Pope Leo XIV and the Catholic hierarchy concluded that these titles are misleading in modern languages and make it seem like Mother Mary has her own, independent participation in our salvation, which is obviously false and heretical. Jesus Christ is the Redeemer. Everyone else, including the Blessed Virgin Mary, only participates in this process as far as we point others toward Jesus as Savior.

Hopefully actions like these will help my Protestant friends on this site realize that we Catholics DO NOT worship Mother Mary or anything other than the Triune God. We never did.

---

To be clear the document was just nonsense and more Fracis style words that mean nothing but trying to drive confusion.

---

I thought it was one of the most helpful documents to originate from the Francis pontificate, though that is admittedly a low bar to clear.

Marian titles and doctrines are always meant to reflect in some way the power, authority, or identity of Christ. Co-Redemptrix is problematic because the prefix co- has multiple meanings in English and in many other languages, and an unqualified Redemptrix title for Mother Mary is unacceptable for obvious reasons. It is too easily misunderstood without extensive theological knowledge and careful explanation, which makes it unhelpful and risky for general use. It's semantics, but semantics matter when dealing with terms related to the God of All Creation.

Someone on social media argued that Mother of God is the highest, most accurate, and most complimentary title Mary could possibly be given without risking heresy. I agree with them. The Magisterium's role is to teach the Truth with clarity. If terms have limitations that make clarity extremely difficult, then they shouldn't be used.

---

To help with the clarity, can you address the long list of statements posted earlier in this thread that seem to say Mary is required for salvation?

---

I've been patiently waiting. Here they are again:

• "O Virgin most holy, none abounds in the knowledge of God except through thee; none, O Mother of God, attains salvation except through thee; none receives a gift from the throne of mercy except through thee." (Pope Leo XIII, Adiutricem, 9)
• "no man goeth to Christ but by His Mother" (Pope Leo 13th, Octobri Mense)
• "She has been made the ladder to paradise, the gate of heaven, the most true mediatrix between God and human beings" (St. Lawrence Justinian)
• "Sinners receive pardon by the intercession of Mary alone." (attributed to St. John Chrysostom, by St. Alphonsus Ligouri)
• "No one ever finds Christ but with and through Mary. Whoever seeks Christ apart from Mary seeks Him in vain." (St. Bonaventure)
• "All those who seek Mary's protection will be saved for all eternity." (Pope Benedict XV)
• "Mary's intercession is not only useful but necessary for salvation.... " (St. Alphonsus Ligouri, Doctor of the Roman Catholic Church)
• "Mary is the road we must travel to reach God" (Pope Francis, paraphrased)
• "God has entrusted the keys and treasures of Heaven to Mary." (St. Thomas Aquinas)
• "The foundation of all our confidence is found in the Blessed Virgin Mary. God has committed to her the treasury of all good things, in order that everyone may know that through her are obtained every hope, every grace, and all salvation. For this is His will: That we obtain everything through Mary." (Pope Pius IX)

So, Roman Catholics, can we get an answer? You say you don't worship Mary but only the triune God, but anyone who loves God and worships only Him would be absolutely DISGUSTED by what is being said here. So if you can't disavow these statements, then it's quite evident that you're just giving lip service and that it's all a bunch of baloney.

Is there an honest Roman Catholic out there? Just ONE??

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

Fre3dombear said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

Today, the Vatican officially rejected the doctrinal titles of Co-Redemptrix and Co-Mediatrix to refer to the Blessed Virgin Mary. They did this specifically to avoid confusion regarding Mary's role in God's redemptive plan for humanity.

The term was originally proposed centuries ago by well-meaning, theologically-minded Catholics who wanted to emphasize that Mary did participate (in a subordinate way) in God's plan for human salvation by birthing and raising Jesus, the One Redeemer and Mediator. However, Pope Leo XIV and the Catholic hierarchy concluded that these titles are misleading in modern languages and make it seem like Mother Mary has her own, independent participation in our salvation, which is obviously false and heretical. Jesus Christ is the Redeemer. Everyone else, including the Blessed Virgin Mary, only participates in this process as far as we point others toward Jesus as Savior.

Hopefully actions like these will help my Protestant friends on this site realize that we Catholics DO NOT worship Mother Mary or anything other than the Triune God. We never did.

---

To be clear the document was just nonsense and more Fracis style words that mean nothing but trying to drive confusion.

---

I thought it was one of the most helpful documents to originate from the Francis pontificate, though that is admittedly a low bar to clear.

Marian titles and doctrines are always meant to reflect in some way the power, authority, or identity of Christ. Co-Redemptrix is problematic because the prefix co- has multiple meanings in English and in many other languages, and an unqualified Redemptrix title for Mother Mary is unacceptable for obvious reasons. It is too easily misunderstood without extensive theological knowledge and careful explanation, which makes it unhelpful and risky for general use. It's semantics, but semantics matter when dealing with terms related to the God of All Creation.

Someone on social media argued that Mother of God is the highest, most accurate, and most complimentary title Mary could possibly be given without risking heresy. I agree with them. The Magisterium's role is to teach the Truth with clarity. If terms have limitations that make clarity extremely difficult, then they shouldn't be used.

---

To help with the clarity, can you address the long list of statements posted earlier in this thread that seem to say Mary is required for salvation?

---

Mary's participation was necessary for God's plan of salvation in a practical sense, since God chose for his Son to be born in the natural way to a human family. God did not force himself upon Mary, so her assent was necessary for the Incarnation in this specific, practical sense. However, her participation was not ultimately necessary in an ontological way because God is Almighty and has no need whatsoever of His creatures to do anything He wishes. God wanted to use humanity in his plan for human salvation, but obviously had no need to do so.

All Christians can help "save" others in a subordinate sense through evangelism by directing people to Jesus. The Apostle Paul said as much in 1 Corinthians 9:22. The Catholic Church believes that Mother Mary is the best possible evangelist because she loved Jesus more than anyone else, so she can bring people to salvation through her evangelical witness. That is the sense in which the word "salvation" is used in all the scenarios you quoted.

Taking quotes out of context to prove a point is never helpful and only serves to mislead people.

St. Louis de Montfort, widely considered the most "extreme" of Marian theologians, said this in the very first paragraph of the first chapter of his book, True Devotion to Mary:

"With the whole Church I acknowledge that Mary, being a mere creature fashioned by the hands of God is, compared to His Infinite Majesty, less than an atom, or rather is simply nothing, since he alone can say, "I am he who is". Consequently, this great Lord, who is ever independent and self-sufficient, never had and does not now have any absolute need of the Blessed Virgin for the accomplishment of his will and the manifestation of his glory. To do all things he has only to will them."

ARbear13 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

Fre3dombear said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

Today, the Vatican officially rejected the doctrinal titles of Co-Redemptrix and Co-Mediatrix to refer to the Blessed Virgin Mary. They did this specifically to avoid confusion regarding Mary's role in God's redemptive plan for humanity.

The term was originally proposed centuries ago by well-meaning, theologically-minded Catholics who wanted to emphasize that Mary did participate (in a subordinate way) in God's plan for human salvation by birthing and raising Jesus, the One Redeemer and Mediator. However, Pope Leo XIV and the Catholic hierarchy concluded that these titles are misleading in modern languages and make it seem like Mother Mary has her own, independent participation in our salvation, which is obviously false and heretical. Jesus Christ is the Redeemer. Everyone else, including the Blessed Virgin Mary, only participates in this process as far as we point others toward Jesus as Savior.

Hopefully actions like these will help my Protestant friends on this site realize that we Catholics DO NOT worship Mother Mary or anything other than the Triune God. We never did.

---

To be clear the document was just nonsense and more Fracis style words that mean nothing but trying to drive confusion.

---

I thought it was one of the most helpful documents to originate from the Francis pontificate, though that is admittedly a low bar to clear.

Marian titles and doctrines are always meant to reflect in some way the power, authority, or identity of Christ. Co-Redemptrix is problematic because the prefix co- has multiple meanings in English and in many other languages, and an unqualified Redemptrix title for Mother Mary is unacceptable for obvious reasons. It is too easily misunderstood without extensive theological knowledge and careful explanation, which makes it unhelpful and risky for general use. It's semantics, but semantics matter when dealing with terms related to the God of All Creation.

Someone on social media argued that Mother of God is the highest, most accurate, and most complimentary title Mary could possibly be given without risking heresy. I agree with them. The Magisterium's role is to teach the Truth with clarity. If terms have limitations that make clarity extremely difficult, then they shouldn't be used.

---

To help with the clarity, can you address the long list of statements posted earlier in this thread that seem to say Mary is required for salvation?

---

Mary's participation was necessary for God's plan of salvation in a practical sense, since God chose for his Son to be born in the natural way to a human family. God did not force himself upon Mary, so her assent was necessary for the Incarnation in this specific, practical sense. However, her participation was not ultimately necessary in an ontological way because God is Almighty and has no need whatsoever of His creatures to do anything He wishes. God wanted to use humanity in his plan for human salvation, but obviously had no need to do so.

All Christians can help "save" others in a subordinate sense through evangelism by directing people to Jesus. The Apostle Paul said as much in 1 Corinthians 9:22. The Catholic Church believes that Mother Mary is the best possible evangelist because she loved Jesus more than anyone else, so she can bring people to salvation through her evangelical witness. That is the sense in which the word "salvation" is used in all the scenarios you quoted.

Taking quotes out of context to prove a point is never helpful and only serves to mislead people.

St. Louis de Montfort, widely considered the most "extreme" of Marian theologians, said this in the very first paragraph of the first chapter of his book, True Devotion to Mary:

"With the whole Church I acknowledge that Mary, being a mere creature fashioned by the hands of God is, compared to His Infinite Majesty, less than an atom, or rather is simply nothing, since he alone can say, "I am he who is". Consequently, this great Lord, who is ever independent and self-sufficient, never had and does not now have any absolute need of the Blessed Virgin for the accomplishment of his will and the manifestation of his glory. To do all things he has only to will them."

---

"so her assent was necessary for the Incarnation "-please explain

Is Mary's role any greater than anyone else's role listed in the genealogy going back to David?

Why are you afraid to answer me? I'm the one that's asking you the question about those quotes.

Here they are again:

• "O Virgin most holy, none abounds in the knowledge of God except through thee; none, O Mother of God, attains salvation except through thee; none receives a gift from the throne of mercy except through thee." (Pope Leo XIII, Adiutricem, 9)
• "no man goeth to Christ but by His Mother" (Pope Leo 13th, Octobri Mense)
• "She has been made the ladder to paradise, the gate of heaven, the most true mediatrix between God and human beings" (St. Lawrence Justinian)
• "Sinners receive pardon by the intercession of Mary alone." (attributed to St. John Chrysostom, by St. Alphonsus Ligouri)
• "No one ever finds Christ but with and through Mary. Whoever seeks Christ apart from Mary seeks Him in vain." (St. Bonaventure)
• "All those who seek Mary's protection will be saved for all eternity." (Pope Benedict XV)
• "Mary's intercession is not only useful but necessary for salvation.... " (St. Alphonsus Ligouri, Doctor of the Roman Catholic Church)
• "Mary is the road we must travel to reach God" (Pope Francis, paraphrased)
• "God has entrusted the keys and treasures of Heaven to Mary." (St. Thomas Aquinas)
• "The foundation of all our confidence is found in the Blessed Virgin Mary. God has committed to her the treasury of all good things, in order that everyone may know that through her are obtained every hope, every grace, and all salvation. For this is His will: That we obtain everything through Mary." (Pope Pius IX)

Do you realize how bad it looks for Roman Catholicism that you're dodging me? People who are of the truth do not do this. I'm just asking you a simple and very fair question.

Is there any other Roman Catholic who is willing to engage this and just be honest and not try to gaslight everyone? Anyone? Sam? CokeBear? Kai? FlBear?

ARbear13 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

Fre3dombear said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

Today, the Vatican officially rejected the doctrinal titles of Co-Redemptrix and Co-Mediatrix to refer to the Blessed Virgin Mary. They did this specifically to avoid confusion regarding Mary's role in God's redemptive plan for humanity.

The term was originally proposed centuries ago by well-meaning, theologically-minded Catholics who wanted to emphasize that Mary did participate (in a subordinate way) in God's plan for human salvation by birthing and raising Jesus, the One Redeemer and Mediator. However, Pope Leo XIV and the Catholic hierarchy concluded that these titles are misleading in modern languages and make it seem like Mother Mary has her own, independent participation in our salvation, which is obviously false and heretical. Jesus Christ is the Redeemer. Everyone else, including the Blessed Virgin Mary, only participates in this process as far as we point others toward Jesus as Savior.

Hopefully actions like these will help my Protestant friends on this site realize that we Catholics DO NOT worship Mother Mary or anything other than the Triune God. We never did.

---

To be clear the document was just nonsense and more Fracis style words that mean nothing but trying to drive confusion.

---

I thought it was one of the most helpful documents to originate from the Francis pontificate, though that is admittedly a low bar to clear.

Marian titles and doctrines are always meant to reflect in some way the power, authority, or identity of Christ. Co-Redemptrix is problematic because the prefix co- has multiple meanings in English and in many other languages, and an unqualified Redemptrix title for Mother Mary is unacceptable for obvious reasons. It is too easily misunderstood without extensive theological knowledge and careful explanation, which makes it unhelpful and risky for general use. It's semantics, but semantics matter when dealing with terms related to the God of All Creation.

Someone on social media argued that Mother of God is the highest, most accurate, and most complimentary title Mary could possibly be given without risking heresy. I agree with them. The Magisterium's role is to teach the Truth with clarity. If terms have limitations that make clarity extremely difficult, then they shouldn't be used.

---

To help with the clarity, can you address the long list of statements posted earlier in this thread that seem to say Mary is required for salvation?

---

Mary's participation was necessary for God's plan of salvation in a practical sense, since God chose for his Son to be born in the natural way to a human family. God did not force himself upon Mary, so her assent was necessary for the Incarnation in this specific, practical sense.

---

Where are you getting that Mary had a choice? It was already decided that she was to bear Jesus. She was not asked. The angel told her "you will", he did not ask her "will you?"

Edit: okay, I see that you said "assent", not "consent".

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

Fre3dombear said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

Today, the Vatican officially rejected the doctrinal titles of Co-Redemptrix and Co-Mediatrix to refer to the Blessed Virgin Mary. They did this specifically to avoid confusion regarding Mary's role in God's redemptive plan for humanity.

The term was originally proposed centuries ago by well-meaning, theologically-minded Catholics who wanted to emphasize that Mary did participate (in a subordinate way) in God's plan for human salvation by birthing and raising Jesus, the One Redeemer and Mediator. However, Pope Leo XIV and the Catholic hierarchy concluded that these titles are misleading in modern languages and make it seem like Mother Mary has her own, independent participation in our salvation, which is obviously false and heretical. Jesus Christ is the Redeemer. Everyone else, including the Blessed Virgin Mary, only participates in this process as far as we point others toward Jesus as Savior.

Hopefully actions like these will help my Protestant friends on this site realize that we Catholics DO NOT worship Mother Mary or anything other than the Triune God. We never did.

---

To be clear the document was just nonsense and more Fracis style words that mean nothing but trying to drive confusion.

---

I thought it was one of the most helpful documents to originate from the Francis pontificate, though that is admittedly a low bar to clear.

Marian titles and doctrines are always meant to reflect in some way the power, authority, or identity of Christ. Co-Redemptrix is problematic because the prefix co- has multiple meanings in English and in many other languages, and an unqualified Redemptrix title for Mother Mary is unacceptable for obvious reasons. It is too easily misunderstood without extensive theological knowledge and careful explanation, which makes it unhelpful and risky for general use. It's semantics, but semantics matter when dealing with terms related to the God of All Creation.

Someone on social media argued that Mother of God is the highest, most accurate, and most complimentary title Mary could possibly be given without risking heresy. I agree with them. The Magisterium's role is to teach the Truth with clarity. If terms have limitations that make clarity extremely difficult, then they shouldn't be used.

---

To help with the clarity, can you address the long list of statements posted earlier in this thread that seem to say Mary is required for salvation?

---

Mary's participation was necessary for God's plan of salvation in a practical sense, since God chose for his Son to be born in the natural way to a human family. God did not force himself upon Mary, so her assent was necessary for the Incarnation in this specific, practical sense. However, her participation was not ultimately necessary in an ontological way because God is Almighty and has no need whatsoever of His creatures to do anything He wishes. God wanted to use humanity in his plan for human salvation, but obviously had no need to do so.

All Christians can help "save" others in a subordinate sense through evangelism by directing people to Jesus. The Apostle Paul said as much in 1 Corinthians 9:22. The Catholic Church believes that Mother Mary is the best possible evangelist because she loved Jesus more than anyone else, so she can bring people to salvation through her evangelical witness. That is the sense in which the word "salvation" is used in all the scenarios you quoted.

Taking quotes out of context to prove a point is never helpful and only serves to mislead people.

St. Louis de Montfort, widely considered the most "extreme" of Marian theologians, said this in the very first paragraph of the first chapter of his book, True Devotion to Mary:

"With the whole Church I acknowledge that Mary, being a mere creature fashioned by the hands of God is, compared to His Infinite Majesty, less than an atom, or rather is simply nothing, since he alone can say, "I am he who is". Consequently, this great Lord, who is ever independent and self-sufficient, never had and does not now have any absolute need of the Blessed Virgin for the accomplishment of his will and the manifestation of his glory. To do all things he has only to will them."

---

"so her assent was necessary for the Incarceration"-please explain

Is Mary's role any greater than anyone else's role listed in the genealogy going back to David?

---

God did not impregnate Mary without her free agreement. I'm sure you can understand why it would be highly problematic to believe that He did. She explicitly gives her assent to the angel Gabriel's Annunciation in Luke 1:38.

Christians have always believed that Jesus was fully man and fully God. It was clearly important to God that Jesus live his life as a human in all ways except sin, and this includes being born of a woman like the rest of us.

Because God wanted humanity to freely participate in His divine plan, assent would have been necessary from any woman God had called upon, not just Mary. However, God did choose Mary to bear and raise His Son, and she did indeed agree to it. This is completely biblical.

The Virgin Mary literally carried God inside her body and voluntarily incurred immediate, personal risk in order to do so; accusations of adultery carried extreme consequences for women convicted of such a crime in 1st century Jewish culture. So yeah, I'd say Mother Mary was definitely more directly involved in God's plan than anyone is Jesus's lineage who came before her. She was the only one in Christ's genealogy who knew specifically what she was getting into, and she had "skin in the game" in the most literal sense.

ARbear13 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

Fre3dombear said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

Today, the Vatican officially rejected the doctrinal titles of Co-Redemptrix and Co-Mediatrix to refer to the Blessed Virgin Mary. They did this specifically to avoid confusion regarding Mary's role in God's redemptive plan for humanity.

The term was originally proposed centuries ago by well-meaning, theologically-minded Catholics who wanted to emphasize that Mary did participate (in a subordinate way) in God's plan for human salvation by birthing and raising Jesus, the One Redeemer and Mediator. However, Pope Leo XIV and the Catholic hierarchy concluded that these titles are misleading in modern languages and make it seem like Mother Mary has her own, independent participation in our salvation, which is obviously false and heretical. Jesus Christ is the Redeemer. Everyone else, including the Blessed Virgin Mary, only participates in this process as far as we point others toward Jesus as Savior.

Hopefully actions like these will help my Protestant friends on this site realize that we Catholics DO NOT worship Mother Mary or anything other than the Triune God. We never did.

---

To be clear the document was just nonsense and more Fracis style words that mean nothing but trying to drive confusion.

---

I thought it was one of the most helpful documents to originate from the Francis pontificate, though that is admittedly a low bar to clear.

Marian titles and doctrines are always meant to reflect in some way the power, authority, or identity of Christ. Co-Redemptrix is problematic because the prefix co- has multiple meanings in English and in many other languages, and an unqualified Redemptrix title for Mother Mary is unacceptable for obvious reasons. It is too easily misunderstood without extensive theological knowledge and careful explanation, which makes it unhelpful and risky for general use. It's semantics, but semantics matter when dealing with terms related to the God of All Creation.

Someone on social media argued that Mother of God is the highest, most accurate, and most complimentary title Mary could possibly be given without risking heresy. I agree with them. The Magisterium's role is to teach the Truth with clarity. If terms have limitations that make clarity extremely difficult, then they shouldn't be used.

---

To help with the clarity, can you address the long list of statements posted earlier in this thread that seem to say Mary is required for salvation?

---

Mary's participation was necessary for God's plan of salvation in a practical sense, since God chose for his Son to be born in the natural way to a human family. God did not force himself upon Mary, so her assent was necessary for the Incarnation in this specific, practical sense. However, her participation was not ultimately necessary in an ontological way because God is Almighty and has no need whatsoever of His creatures to do anything He wishes. God wanted to use humanity in his plan for human salvation, but obviously had no need to do so.

All Christians can help "save" others in a subordinate sense through evangelism by directing people to Jesus. The Apostle Paul said as much in 1 Corinthians 9:22. The Catholic Church believes that Mother Mary is the best possible evangelist because she loved Jesus more than anyone else, so she can bring people to salvation through her evangelical witness. That is the sense in which the word "salvation" is used in all the scenarios you quoted.

Taking quotes out of context to prove a point is never helpful and only serves to mislead people.

St. Louis de Montfort, widely considered the most "extreme" of Marian theologians, said this in the very first paragraph of the first chapter of his book, True Devotion to Mary:

"With the whole Church I acknowledge that Mary, being a mere creature fashioned by the hands of God is, compared to His Infinite Majesty, less than an atom, or rather is simply nothing, since he alone can say, "I am he who is". Consequently, this great Lord, who is ever independent and self-sufficient, never had and does not now have any absolute need of the Blessed Virgin for the accomplishment of his will and the manifestation of his glory. To do all things he has only to will them."

---

"so her assent was necessary for the Incarceration"-please explain

Is Mary's role any greater than anyone else's role listed in the genealogy going back to David?

---

God did not impregnate Mary without her free agreement. I'm sure you can understand why it would be highly problematic to believe that He did. She explicitly gives her assent to the angel Gabriel's Annunciation in Luke 1:38.

Christians have always believed that Jesus was fully man and fully God. It was clearly important to God that Jesus live his life as a human in all ways except sin, and this includes being born of a woman like the rest of us.

Because God wanted humanity to freely participate in His divine plan, assent would have been necessary from any woman God had called upon, not just Mary. However, God did choose Mary to bear and raise His Son, and she did indeed agree to it. This is completely biblical.

The Virgin Mary literally carried God inside her body and voluntarily incurred immediate, personal risk in order to do so; accusations of adultery carried extreme consequences for women convicted of such a crime in 1st century Jewish culture. So yeah, I'd say Mother Mary was definitely more directly involved in God's plan than anyone is Jesus's lineage who came before her. She was the only one in Christ's genealogy who knew specifically what she was getting into, and she had "skin in the game" in the most literal sense.

---

If Mary did not assent, what would have happened? It was already declared that she "will" bear Jesus, even before she was given a chance to agree. Would God's will have been thwarted?

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

Fre3dombear said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

Today, the Vatican officially rejected the doctrinal titles of Co-Redemptrix and Co-Mediatrix to refer to the Blessed Virgin Mary. They did this specifically to avoid confusion regarding Mary's role in God's redemptive plan for humanity.

The term was originally proposed centuries ago by well-meaning, theologically-minded Catholics who wanted to emphasize that Mary did participate (in a subordinate way) in God's plan for human salvation by birthing and raising Jesus, the One Redeemer and Mediator. However, Pope Leo XIV and the Catholic hierarchy concluded that these titles are misleading in modern languages and make it seem like Mother Mary has her own, independent participation in our salvation, which is obviously false and heretical. Jesus Christ is the Redeemer. Everyone else, including the Blessed Virgin Mary, only participates in this process as far as we point others toward Jesus as Savior.

Hopefully actions like these will help my Protestant friends on this site realize that we Catholics DO NOT worship Mother Mary or anything other than the Triune God. We never did.

---

To be clear the document was just nonsense and more Fracis style words that mean nothing but trying to drive confusion.

---

I thought it was one of the most helpful documents to originate from the Francis pontificate, though that is admittedly a low bar to clear.

Marian titles and doctrines are always meant to reflect in some way the power, authority, or identity of Christ. Co-Redemptrix is problematic because the prefix co- has multiple meanings in English and in many other languages, and an unqualified Redemptrix title for Mother Mary is unacceptable for obvious reasons. It is too easily misunderstood without extensive theological knowledge and careful explanation, which makes it unhelpful and risky for general use. It's semantics, but semantics matter when dealing with terms related to the God of All Creation.

Someone on social media argued that Mother of God is the highest, most accurate, and most complimentary title Mary could possibly be given without risking heresy. I agree with them. The Magisterium's role is to teach the Truth with clarity. If terms have limitations that make clarity extremely difficult, then they shouldn't be used.

---

To help with the clarity, can you address the long list of statements posted earlier in this thread that seem to say Mary is required for salvation?

---

Mary's participation was necessary for God's plan of salvation in a practical sense, since God chose for his Son to be born in the natural way to a human family. God did not force himself upon Mary, so her assent was necessary for the Incarnation in this specific, practical sense. However, her participation was not ultimately necessary in an ontological way because God is Almighty and has no need whatsoever of His creatures to do anything He wishes. God wanted to use humanity in his plan for human salvation, but obviously had no need to do so.

All Christians can help "save" others in a subordinate sense through evangelism by directing people to Jesus. The Apostle Paul said as much in 1 Corinthians 9:22. The Catholic Church believes that Mother Mary is the best possible evangelist because she loved Jesus more than anyone else, so she can bring people to salvation through her evangelical witness. That is the sense in which the word "salvation" is used in all the scenarios you quoted.

Taking quotes out of context to prove a point is never helpful and only serves to mislead people.

St. Louis de Montfort, widely considered the most "extreme" of Marian theologians, said this in the very first paragraph of the first chapter of his book, True Devotion to Mary:

"With the whole Church I acknowledge that Mary, being a mere creature fashioned by the hands of God is, compared to His Infinite Majesty, less than an atom, or rather is simply nothing, since he alone can say, "I am he who is". Consequently, this great Lord, who is ever independent and self-sufficient, never had and does not now have any absolute need of the Blessed Virgin for the accomplishment of his will and the manifestation of his glory. To do all things he has only to will them."

---

"so her assent was necessary for the Incarceration"-please explain

Is Mary's role any greater than anyone else's role listed in the genealogy going back to David?

---

God did not impregnate Mary without her free agreement. I'm sure you can understand why it would be highly problematic to believe that He did. She explicitly gives her assent to the angel Gabriel's Annunciation in Luke 1:38.

Christians have always believed that Jesus was fully man and fully God. It was clearly important to God that Jesus live his life as a human in all ways except sin, and this includes being born of a woman like the rest of us.

Because God wanted humanity to freely participate in His divine plan, assent would have been necessary from any woman God had called upon, not just Mary. However, God did choose Mary to bear and raise His Son, and she did indeed agree to it. This is completely biblical.

The Virgin Mary literally carried God inside her body and voluntarily incurred immediate, personal risk in order to do so; accusations of adultery carried extreme consequences for women convicted of such a crime in 1st century Jewish culture. So yeah, I'd say Mother Mary was definitely more directly involved in God's plan than anyone is Jesus's lineage who came before her. She was the only one in Christ's genealogy who knew specifically what she was getting into, and she had "skin in the game" in the most literal sense.

---

If Mary did not assent, what would have happened? It was already declared that she "will" bear Jesus, even before she was given a chance to agree. Would God's will have been thwarted?

---

I needed to do a little vocab brush up to get the meaning of assent.

Since God is all-knowing and exists outside of time , I don't think it was ever a question of whether Mary assented. In the same way Christ already knew what Judas was going to do I believe God already knew what Mary would do.

God is sovereign.

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

Fre3dombear said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

Today, the Vatican officially rejected the doctrinal titles of Co-Redemptrix and Co-Mediatrix to refer to the Blessed Virgin Mary. They did this specifically to avoid confusion regarding Mary's role in God's redemptive plan for humanity.

The term was originally proposed centuries ago by well-meaning, theologically-minded Catholics who wanted to emphasize that Mary did participate (in a subordinate way) in God's plan for human salvation by birthing and raising Jesus, the One Redeemer and Mediator. However, Pope Leo XIV and the Catholic hierarchy concluded that these titles are misleading in modern languages and make it seem like Mother Mary has her own, independent participation in our salvation, which is obviously false and heretical. Jesus Christ is the Redeemer. Everyone else, including the Blessed Virgin Mary, only participates in this process as far as we point others toward Jesus as Savior.

Hopefully actions like these will help my Protestant friends on this site realize that we Catholics DO NOT worship Mother Mary or anything other than the Triune God. We never did.

---

To be clear the document was just nonsense and more Fracis style words that mean nothing but trying to drive confusion.

---

I thought it was one of the most helpful documents to originate from the Francis pontificate, though that is admittedly a low bar to clear.

Marian titles and doctrines are always meant to reflect in some way the power, authority, or identity of Christ. Co-Redemptrix is problematic because the prefix co- has multiple meanings in English and in many other languages, and an unqualified Redemptrix title for Mother Mary is unacceptable for obvious reasons. It is too easily misunderstood without extensive theological knowledge and careful explanation, which makes it unhelpful and risky for general use. It's semantics, but semantics matter when dealing with terms related to the God of All Creation.

Someone on social media argued that Mother of God is the highest, most accurate, and most complimentary title Mary could possibly be given without risking heresy. I agree with them. The Magisterium's role is to teach the Truth with clarity. If terms have limitations that make clarity extremely difficult, then they shouldn't be used.

---

To help with the clarity, can you address the long list of statements posted earlier in this thread that seem to say Mary is required for salvation?

---

Mary's participation was necessary for God's plan of salvation in a practical sense, since God chose for his Son to be born in the natural way to a human family. God did not force himself upon Mary, so her assent was necessary for the Incarnation in this specific, practical sense. However, her participation was not ultimately necessary in an ontological way because God is Almighty and has no need whatsoever of His creatures to do anything He wishes. God wanted to use humanity in his plan for human salvation, but obviously had no need to do so.

All Christians can help "save" others in a subordinate sense through evangelism by directing people to Jesus. The Apostle Paul said as much in 1 Corinthians 9:22. The Catholic Church believes that Mother Mary is the best possible evangelist because she loved Jesus more than anyone else, so she can bring people to salvation through her evangelical witness. That is the sense in which the word "salvation" is used in all the scenarios you quoted.

Taking quotes out of context to prove a point is never helpful and only serves to mislead people.

St. Louis de Montfort, widely considered the most "extreme" of Marian theologians, said this in the very first paragraph of the first chapter of his book, True Devotion to Mary:

"With the whole Church I acknowledge that Mary, being a mere creature fashioned by the hands of God is, compared to His Infinite Majesty, less than an atom, or rather is simply nothing, since he alone can say, "I am he who is". Consequently, this great Lord, who is ever independent and self-sufficient, never had and does not now have any absolute need of the Blessed Virgin for the accomplishment of his will and the manifestation of his glory. To do all things he has only to will them."

---

"so her assent was necessary for the Incarceration"-please explain

Is Mary's role any greater than anyone else's role listed in the genealogy going back to David?

---

God did not impregnate Mary without her free agreement. I'm sure you can understand why it would be highly problematic to believe that He did. She explicitly gives her assent to the angel Gabriel's Annunciation in Luke 1:38.

Christians have always believed that Jesus was fully man and fully God. It was clearly important to God that Jesus live his life as a human in all ways except sin, and this includes being born of a woman like the rest of us.

Because God wanted humanity to freely participate in His divine plan, assent would have been necessary from any woman God had called upon, not just Mary. However, God did choose Mary to bear and raise His Son, and she did indeed agree to it. This is completely biblical.

The Virgin Mary literally carried God inside her body and voluntarily incurred immediate, personal risk in order to do so; accusations of adultery carried extreme consequences for women convicted of such a crime in 1st century Jewish culture. So yeah, I'd say Mother Mary was definitely more directly involved in God's plan than anyone is Jesus's lineage who came before her. She was the only one in Christ's genealogy who knew specifically what she was getting into, and she had "skin in the game" in the most literal sense.

---

If Mary did not assent, what would have happened? It was already declared that she "will" bear Jesus, even before she was given a chance to agree. Would God's will have been thwarted?

---

I needed to do a little vocab brush up to get the meaning of assent.

Since God is all-knowing and exists outside of time , I don't think it was ever a question of whether Mary assented. In the same way Christ already knew what Judas was going to do I believe God already knew what Mary would do.

God is sovereign.

---

Good answer. God already knew Mary would submit to His will, and hence was likely a part of why she was chosen. But I do not agree that it'd be problematic for God to impregnate a woman against her will. God does not and never has needed our permission to do anything to us. He gives life, and he can take it away purely by His will. Having Mary conceive Jesus would be no morally different than God taking out Adam's rib, making Jacob lame, taking away Zecharia's (John the Baptist's father) ability to speak, making Paul blind, or striking people dead, all without their permission. Like you said, God is sovereign.

Also, are you buying ArBear's argument that those quotes were "out of context"? You let him off the hook too easily. I have been trying to address this with him myself, but I fear he has joined the long list of people who don't like my questions so they ignore me. I guess you're gonna have to get that out of him, if you care to.

Is there really a context in which such statements could EVER be acceptable to someone who professes to love and only worship God, as they say they do? Denying that one worships Mary, but then balking at disavowing clear statements of Mary worship somehow just doesn't make a person seem like they're on the level.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Also, are you buying ArBear's argument that those quotes were "out of context"? You let him off the hook too easily. I have been trying to address this with him myself, but I fear he has joined the long list of people who don't like my questions so they ignore me. I guess you're gonna have to get that out of him, if you care to.

Is there really a context in which such statements could EVER be acceptable to someone who professes to love and only worship God, as they say they do? Denying that one worships Mary, but then balking at disavowing clear statements of Mary worship somehow just doesn't make a person seem like they're on the level.

---

I married into a Catholic family and have been to many, many Catholic masses. Some of the family seem to place Mary higher than others but I've yet to hear any of them say salvation comes through Mary or, anything remotely close to it.
I've sat through many liturgies and have yet to hear one say anything that links Mary to salvation. On the other hand, I've also sat through a handful of rosaries after a death and hear nothing about Christ expect from family members in casual conversation before and after. Never have I heard the person conducting (is that the right word) the rosary speak of Christ salvation.

The last rosary I went to , all of the grand kids had t-shirts with their favorite or most appropriate Bible verse on it-verses they had learned in family Bible studies with their grandparents.

As for the quotes, I'd love to have a link to the English translations of each document so I could read them for myself. I fully expect Prots to attack them and RCs to support them or shy away from any defense.

It may be that ARBear isn't shying away from answering but collecting sources . We'll see.

Wiki is probably not the best source but her is a quick snippet

"Some early Protestant Reformers venerated and honored Mary. Martin Luther said of Mary:
the honor given to the mother of God has been rooted so deeply into the hearts of men that no one wants to hear any opposition to this celebration... We also grant that she should be honored, since we, according to Saint Paul's words [Romans 12] are indebted to show honor one to another for the sake of the One who dwells in us, Jesus Christ. Therefore we have an obligation to honor Mary. But be careful to give her honor that is fitting. Unfortunately, I worry that we give her all too high an honor for she is accorded much more esteem than she should be given or than she accounted to herself.[1]
Zwingli said, "I esteem immensely the Mother of God" and "The more the honor and love of Christ increases among men, so much the esteem and honor given to Mary should grow".[citation needed]
Thus the idea of respect and high honour was not rejected by the first Protestants; but rather it was the matter of degrees of honor given to Mary, as the mother of Jesus, that Protestant Reformers were concerned with, and therefore the practical implications for Mariology are still a matter of debate"

Based on the latest from the Vatican it seems RC is also still debating the degrees of honor given to Mary.

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Also, are you buying ArBear's argument that those quotes were "out of context"? You let him off the hook too easily. I have been trying to address this with him myself, but I fear he has joined the long list of people who don't like my questions so they ignore me. I guess you're gonna have to get that out of him, if you care to.

Is there really a context in which such statements could EVER be acceptable to someone who professes to love and only worship God, as they say they do? Denying that one worships Mary, but then balking at disavowing clear statements of Mary worship somehow just doesn't make a person seem like they're on the level.

---

I married into a Catholic family and have been to many, many Catholic masses. Some of the family seem to place Mary higher than others but I've yet to hear any of them say salvation comes through Mary or, anything remotely close to it.
I've sat through many liturgies and have yet to hear one say anything that links Mary to salvation. On the other hand, I've also sat through a handful of rosaries after a death and hear nothing about Christ expect from family members in casual conversation before and after. Never have I heard the person conducting (is that the right word) the rosary speak of Christ salvation.

The last rosary I went to , all of the grand kids had t-shirts with their favorite or most appropriate Bible verse on it-verses they had learned in family Bible studies with their grandparents.

As for the quotes, I'd love to have a link to the English translations of each document so I could read them for myself. I fully expect Prots to attack them and RCs to support them or shy away from any defense.

It may be that ARBear isn't shying away from answering but collecting sources . We'll see.

---

Individual Roman Catholics here and there may not credit Mary with salvation... but the question is not about them, nor about what they show outwardly, but about specific statements made by their leaders. Are they able to disavow those obviously heretical and idolatrous beliefs? Because if not, then something is really, really wrong, and their repeated denial that they worship Mary starts to look phony.

Can you really doubt the translation of those quotes? Roman Catholicism is suffused with this kind of excessive and idolatrous glorification of Mary. I'm sure you've read the quotes I've given in other threads from The Glories of Mary, or the Psalter of the Blessed Virgin Mary (a book of psalms, where the author used the Psalms from the Old Testament and inserted MARY in place of God. Yes, you heard that right. If that in of itself does not scream idolatry, then idolatry has no meaning whatsoever. If one can't recognize the idolatry in that, then one never will.)

Pope John Paul II's personal motto was "Totus tuum Maria" which (accurately) translated means "I am all yours, Mary". It comes from a Marian prayer in the 1712 book True Devotion to Mary by Louis de Montfort. The prayer goes:

"Totus tuus ego sum, et omnia mea tua sunt. Accipio te in mea omnia. Praebe mihi cor tuum, Maria."
("I belong entirely to you, and all that I have is yours. I take you for my all. O Mary, give me your heart")


He belongs entirely to Mary?? Mary is his all??

How does all this not make plainly obvious, about who Mary is in Roman Catholicism? And mind you, we're not even including their bowing and praying to Mary's image IN CHURCH, singing hymns to her IN CHURCH, holding hundreds of festivals for her, calling her "THE ALL HOLY ONE" in their catechism, etc. There's gotta be a point where the oft-repeated, "you're taking it out of context" go-to argument from Roman Catholics hunkering down on the defensive starts to face an enormous and ever-expanding wall of implausibility.... isn't there? Why do they think we'll keep buying it? The level of gaslighting is truly perplexing.

ARBear13 gave a good answer, that Mary is the first and greatest evangelist. Her role as co-mediatrix and co-redeemer, if one chooses to use those terms, doesn't diminish Christ but points the way to him.

The idea is similar to what Paul says in Colossians 1:24 -- that he is grateful for his sufferings because they help complete what is lacking in Christ's afflictions. Of course we know that Christ's sacrifice is sufficient for our salvation. All that's lacking is evangelizing, which is what Paul refers to.

To that I would only add that Mary's role as evangelist didn't end with Christ's death and resurrection. The Church teaches that it continues until the end of time:

Quote:

---

This maternity of Mary in the order of grace began with the consent which she gave in faith at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, and lasts until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this salvific duty, but by her constant intercession continued to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation. By her maternal charity, she cares for the brethren of her Son, who still journey on earth surrounded by dangers and cultics, until they are led into the happiness of their true home. Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked by the Church under the titles of Advocate, Auxiliatrix, Adjutrix, and Mediatrix. This, however, is to be so understood that it neither takes away from nor adds anything to the dignity and efficaciousness of Christ the one Mediator. (Lumen Gentium 62)

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Wiki is probably not the best source but her is a quick snippet

"Some early Protestant Reformers venerated and honored Mary. Martin Luther said of Mary:
the honor given to the mother of God has been rooted so deeply into the hearts of men that no one wants to hear any opposition to this celebration... We also grant that she should be honored, since we, according to Saint Paul's words [Romans 12] are indebted to show honor one to another for the sake of the One who dwells in us, Jesus Christ. Therefore we have an obligation to honor Mary. But be careful to give her honor that is fitting. Unfortunately, I worry that we give her all too high an honor for she is accorded much more esteem than she should be given or than she accounted to herself.[1]
Zwingli said, "I esteem immensely the Mother of God" and "The more the honor and love of Christ increases among men, so much the esteem and honor given to Mary should grow".[citation needed]
Thus the idea of respect and high honour was not rejected by the first Protestants; but rather it was the matter of degrees of honor given to Mary, as the mother of Jesus, that Protestant Reformers were concerned with, and therefore the practical implications for Mariology are still a matter of debate"

Based on the latest from the Vatican it seems RC is also still debating the degrees of honor given to Mary.

---

Do you honestly think the quotes I've given are merely instances of an excessive degree of honor, and not blatant and rank idolatry and heresy? Why the kid glove treatment?

Sam Lowry said:

---

ARBear13 gave a good answer, that Mary is the first and greatest evangelist. Her role as co-mediatrix and co-redeemer, if one chooses to use those terms, doesn't diminish Christ but points the way to him.

The idea is similar to what Paul says in Colossians 1:24 -- that he is grateful for his sufferings because they help complete what is lacking in Christ's afflictions. Of course we know that Christ's sacrifice is sufficient for our salvation. All that's lacking is evangelizing, which is what Paul refers to.

To that I would only add that Mary's role as evangelist didn't end with Christ's death and resurrection. The Church teaches that it continues until the end of time:

Quote:

---

This maternity of Mary in the order of grace began with the consent which she gave in faith at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, and lasts until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this salvific duty, but by her constant intercession continued to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation. By her maternal charity, she cares for the brethren of her Son, who still journey on earth surrounded by dangers and cultics, until they are led into the happiness of their true home. Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked by the Church under the titles of Advocate, Auxiliatrix, Adjutrix, and Mediatrix. This, however, is to be so understood that it neither takes away from nor adds anything to the dignity and efficaciousness of Christ the one Mediator. (Lumen Gentium 62)

---

---

ArBear didn't give a good answer. He didn't answer me at all. He completely dodged the point, just as you are doing.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ARBear13 gave a good answer, that Mary is the first and greatest evangelist. Her role as co-mediatrix and co-redeemer, if one chooses to use those terms, doesn't diminish Christ but points the way to him.

The idea is similar to what Paul says in Colossians 1:24 -- that he is grateful for his sufferings because they help complete what is lacking in Christ's afflictions. Of course we know that Christ's sacrifice is sufficient for our salvation. All that's lacking is evangelizing, which is what Paul refers to.

To that I would only add that Mary's role as evangelist didn't end with Christ's death and resurrection. The Church teaches that it continues until the end of time:

Quote:

---

This maternity of Mary in the order of grace began with the consent which she gave in faith at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, and lasts until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this salvific duty, but by her constant intercession continued to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation. By her maternal charity, she cares for the brethren of her Son, who still journey on earth surrounded by dangers and cultics, until they are led into the happiness of their true home. Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked by the Church under the titles of Advocate, Auxiliatrix, Adjutrix, and Mediatrix. This, however, is to be so understood that it neither takes away from nor adds anything to the dignity and efficaciousness of Christ the one Mediator. (Lumen Gentium 62)

---

---

ArBear didn't give a good answer. He didn't answer me at all. He completely dodged the point, just as you are doing.

---

"All Christians can help 'save' others in a subordinate sense through evangelism by directing people to Jesus. The Apostle Paul said as much in 1 Corinthians 9:22. The Catholic Church believes that Mother Mary is the best possible evangelist because she loved Jesus more than anyone else, so she can bring people to salvation through her evangelical witness. That is the sense in which the word 'salvation' is used in all the scenarios you quoted."

Sam Lowry said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ARBear13 gave a good answer, that Mary is the first and greatest evangelist. Her role as co-mediatrix and co-redeemer, if one chooses to use those terms, doesn't diminish Christ but points the way to him.

The idea is similar to what Paul says in Colossians 1:24 -- that he is grateful for his sufferings because they help complete what is lacking in Christ's afflictions. Of course we know that Christ's sacrifice is sufficient for our salvation. All that's lacking is evangelizing, which is what Paul refers to.

To that I would only add that Mary's role as evangelist didn't end with Christ's death and resurrection. The Church teaches that it continues until the end of time:

Quote:

---

This maternity of Mary in the order of grace began with the consent which she gave in faith at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, and lasts until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this salvific duty, but by her constant intercession continued to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation. By her maternal charity, she cares for the brethren of her Son, who still journey on earth surrounded by dangers and cultics, until they are led into the happiness of their true home. Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked by the Church under the titles of Advocate, Auxiliatrix, Adjutrix, and Mediatrix. This, however, is to be so understood that it neither takes away from nor adds anything to the dignity and efficaciousness of Christ the one Mediator. (Lumen Gentium 62)

---

---

ArBear didn't give a good answer. He didn't answer me at all. He completely dodged the point, just as you are doing.

---

"All Christians can help 'save' others in a subordinate sense through evangelism by directing people to Jesus. The Apostle Paul said as much in 1 Corinthians 9:22. The Catholic Church believes that Mother Mary is the best possible evangelist because she loved Jesus more than anyone else, so she can bring people to salvation through her evangelical witness. That is the sense in which the word 'salvation' is used in all the scenarios you quoted."

---

Seriously- what's the matter with you Roman Catholics? Are you honestly saying that because all Christians can help save others, that it means "none can attain salvation except through that Christian", that "none goes to Jesus except through that Christian", that the Christian is the "gate of heaven", that sinners receive pardon "by that Christian's intercession alone", that the Christian is the "road we must travel to get to God", and that "we obtain EVERY hope, grace and ALL SALVATION through that Christian"??

Do you honestly not see the problem there?? Does it truly go over your head??

My God.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ARBear13 gave a good answer, that Mary is the first and greatest evangelist. Her role as co-mediatrix and co-redeemer, if one chooses to use those terms, doesn't diminish Christ but points the way to him.

The idea is similar to what Paul says in Colossians 1:24 -- that he is grateful for his sufferings because they help complete what is lacking in Christ's afflictions. Of course we know that Christ's sacrifice is sufficient for our salvation. All that's lacking is evangelizing, which is what Paul refers to.

To that I would only add that Mary's role as evangelist didn't end with Christ's death and resurrection. The Church teaches that it continues until the end of time:

Quote:

---

This maternity of Mary in the order of grace began with the consent which she gave in faith at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, and lasts until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this salvific duty, but by her constant intercession continued to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation. By her maternal charity, she cares for the brethren of her Son, who still journey on earth surrounded by dangers and cultics, until they are led into the happiness of their true home. Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked by the Church under the titles of Advocate, Auxiliatrix, Adjutrix, and Mediatrix. This, however, is to be so understood that it neither takes away from nor adds anything to the dignity and efficaciousness of Christ the one Mediator. (Lumen Gentium 62)

---

---

ArBear didn't give a good answer. He didn't answer me at all. He completely dodged the point, just as you are doing.

---

"All Christians can help 'save' others in a subordinate sense through evangelism by directing people to Jesus. The Apostle Paul said as much in 1 Corinthians 9:22. The Catholic Church believes that Mother Mary is the best possible evangelist because she loved Jesus more than anyone else, so she can bring people to salvation through her evangelical witness. That is the sense in which the word 'salvation' is used in all the scenarios you quoted."

---

Seriously- what's the matter with you Roman Catholics? Are you honestly saying that because all Christians can help save others, that it means "none can attain salvation except through that Christian", that "none goes to Jesus except through that Christian", that the Christian is the "gate of heaven", that sinners receive pardon "by that Christian's intercession alone", that the Christian is the "road we must travel to get to God", and that "we obtain EVERY hope, grace and ALL SALVATION through that Christian"??

---

No, Mary is unique in that way. As Christ's mother, she alone is the gate through which salvation came into the world.

Sam Lowry said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ARBear13 gave a good answer, that Mary is the first and greatest evangelist. Her role as co-mediatrix and co-redeemer, if one chooses to use those terms, doesn't diminish Christ but points the way to him.

The idea is similar to what Paul says in Colossians 1:24 -- that he is grateful for his sufferings because they help complete what is lacking in Christ's afflictions. Of course we know that Christ's sacrifice is sufficient for our salvation. All that's lacking is evangelizing, which is what Paul refers to.

To that I would only add that Mary's role as evangelist didn't end with Christ's death and resurrection. The Church teaches that it continues until the end of time:

Quote:

---

This maternity of Mary in the order of grace began with the consent which she gave in faith at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, and lasts until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this salvific duty, but by her constant intercession continued to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation. By her maternal charity, she cares for the brethren of her Son, who still journey on earth surrounded by dangers and cultics, until they are led into the happiness of their true home. Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked by the Church under the titles of Advocate, Auxiliatrix, Adjutrix, and Mediatrix. This, however, is to be so understood that it neither takes away from nor adds anything to the dignity and efficaciousness of Christ the one Mediator. (Lumen Gentium 62)

---

---

ArBear didn't give a good answer. He didn't answer me at all. He completely dodged the point, just as you are doing.

---

"All Christians can help 'save' others in a subordinate sense through evangelism by directing people to Jesus. The Apostle Paul said as much in 1 Corinthians 9:22. The Catholic Church believes that Mother Mary is the best possible evangelist because she loved Jesus more than anyone else, so she can bring people to salvation through her evangelical witness. That is the sense in which the word 'salvation' is used in all the scenarios you quoted."

---

Seriously- what's the matter with you Roman Catholics? Are you honestly saying that because all Christians can help save others, that it means "none can attain salvation except through that Christian", that "none goes to Jesus except through that Christian", that the Christian is the "gate of heaven", that sinners receive pardon "by that Christian's intercession alone", that the Christian is the "road we must travel to get to God", and that "we obtain EVERY hope, grace and ALL SALVATION through that Christian"??

---

No, Mary is unique in that way. As Christ's mother, she alone is the gate through which salvation came into the world.

---

Jesus - "I AM THE GATE" (John 10:9)

Your blind spot to Marian idolatry is absolutely astounding and perplexing. You can't even see it as you're doing it.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ARBear13 gave a good answer, that Mary is the first and greatest evangelist. Her role as co-mediatrix and co-redeemer, if one chooses to use those terms, doesn't diminish Christ but points the way to him.

The idea is similar to what Paul says in Colossians 1:24 -- that he is grateful for his sufferings because they help complete what is lacking in Christ's afflictions. Of course we know that Christ's sacrifice is sufficient for our salvation. All that's lacking is evangelizing, which is what Paul refers to.

To that I would only add that Mary's role as evangelist didn't end with Christ's death and resurrection. The Church teaches that it continues until the end of time:

Quote:

---

This maternity of Mary in the order of grace began with the consent which she gave in faith at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, and lasts until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this salvific duty, but by her constant intercession continued to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation. By her maternal charity, she cares for the brethren of her Son, who still journey on earth surrounded by dangers and cultics, until they are led into the happiness of their true home. Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked by the Church under the titles of Advocate, Auxiliatrix, Adjutrix, and Mediatrix. This, however, is to be so understood that it neither takes away from nor adds anything to the dignity and efficaciousness of Christ the one Mediator. (Lumen Gentium 62)

---

---

ArBear didn't give a good answer. He didn't answer me at all. He completely dodged the point, just as you are doing.

---

"All Christians can help 'save' others in a subordinate sense through evangelism by directing people to Jesus. The Apostle Paul said as much in 1 Corinthians 9:22. The Catholic Church believes that Mother Mary is the best possible evangelist because she loved Jesus more than anyone else, so she can bring people to salvation through her evangelical witness. That is the sense in which the word 'salvation' is used in all the scenarios you quoted."

---

Seriously- what's the matter with you Roman Catholics? Are you honestly saying that because all Christians can help save others, that it means "none can attain salvation except through that Christian", that "none goes to Jesus except through that Christian", that the Christian is the "gate of heaven", that sinners receive pardon "by that Christian's intercession alone", that the Christian is the "road we must travel to get to God", and that "we obtain EVERY hope, grace and ALL SALVATION through that Christian"??

---

No, Mary is unique in that way. As Christ's mother, she alone is the gate through which salvation came into the world.

---

Jesus - "I AM THE GATE" (John 10:9)

Your blind spot to Marian idolatry is absolutely astounding and perplexing. You can't even see it as you're doing it.

---

"It was thus that Christ died as a ransom, paid once for all, on behalf of our sins, he the innocent for us the guilty, so as to present us in God's sight." (1 Peter 3:18)

"Even as I write, I am glad of my sufferings on your behalf, as, in this mortal frame of mine, I help to pay off the debt which the afflictions of Christ still leave to be paid, for the sake of his body, the Church." (Colossians 1:24)

Which one is right, and which one is the heretic?

You will never find satisfactory answers to your questions by proof-texting. You must understand that words have different meanings in different contexts.

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Fre3dombear said:

---

ARbear13 said:

---

Today, the Vatican officially rejected the doctrinal titles of Co-Redemptrix and Co-Mediatrix to refer to the Blessed Virgin Mary. They did this specifically to avoid confusion regarding Mary's role in God's redemptive plan for humanity.

The term was originally proposed centuries ago by well-meaning, theologically-minded Catholics who wanted to emphasize that Mary did participate (in a subordinate way) in God's plan for human salvation by birthing and raising Jesus, the One Redeemer and Mediator. However, Pope Leo XIV and the Catholic hierarchy concluded that these titles are misleading in modern languages and make it seem like Mother Mary has her own, independent participation in our salvation, which is obviously false and heretical. Jesus Christ is the Redeemer. Everyone else, including the Blessed Virgin Mary, only participates in this process as far as we point others toward Jesus as Savior.

Hopefully actions like these will help my Protestant friends on this site realize that we Catholics DO NOT worship Mother Mary or anything other than the Triune God. We never did.

---

To be clear the document was just nonsense and more Fracis style words that mean nothing but trying to drive confusion.

---

How many other documents can be described this way? Is it only the documents you disagree with?

---

Have you read the document? Have you read the other documents?

If you know anything of the infiltration youll recognize exactly what is happening and why and what was said and what wasnt.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Also, are you buying ArBear's argument that those quotes were "out of context"? You let him off the hook too easily. I have been trying to address this with him myself, but I fear he has joined the long list of people who don't like my questions so they ignore me. I guess you're gonna have to get that out of him, if you care to.

Is there really a context in which such statements could EVER be acceptable to someone who professes to love and only worship God, as they say they do? Denying that one worships Mary, but then balking at disavowing clear statements of Mary worship somehow just doesn't make a person seem like they're on the level.

---

I married into a Catholic family and have been to many, many Catholic masses. Some of the family seem to place Mary higher than others but I've yet to hear any of them say salvation comes through Mary or, anything remotely close to it.
I've sat through many liturgies and have yet to hear one say anything that links Mary to salvation. On the other hand, I've also sat through a handful of rosaries after a death and hear nothing about Christ expect from family members in casual conversation before and after. Never have I heard the person conducting (is that the right word) the rosary speak of Christ salvation.

The last rosary I went to , all of the grand kids had t-shirts with their favorite or most appropriate Bible verse on it-verses they had learned in family Bible studies with their grandparents.

As for the quotes, I'd love to have a link to the English translations of each document so I could read them for myself. I fully expect Prots to attack them and RCs to support them or shy away from any defense.

It may be that ARBear isn't shying away from answering but collecting sources . We'll see.

---

Individual Roman Catholics here and there may not credit Mary with salvation... but the question is not about them, nor about what they show outwardly, but about specific statements made by their leaders. Are they able to disavow those obviously heretical and idolatrous beliefs? Because if not, then something is really, really wrong, and their repeated denial that they worship Mary starts to look phony.

Can you really doubt the translation of those quotes? Roman Catholicism is suffused with this kind of excessive and idolatrous glorification of Mary. I'm sure you've read the quotes I've given in other threads from The Glories of Mary, or the Psalter of the Blessed Virgin Mary (a book of psalms, where the author used the Psalms from the Old Testament and inserted MARY in place of God. Yes, you heard that right. If that in of itself does not scream idolatry, then idolatry has no meaning whatsoever. If one can't recognize the idolatry in that, then one never will.)

Pope John Paul II's personal motto was "Totus tuum Maria" which (accurately) translated means "I am all yours, Mary". It comes from a Marian prayer in the 1712 book True Devotion to Mary by Louis de Montfort. The prayer goes:

"Totus tuus ego sum, et omnia mea tua sunt. Accipio te in mea omnia. Praebe mihi cor tuum, Maria."
("I belong entirely to you, and all that I have is yours. I take you for my all. O Mary, give me your heart")


He belongs entirely to Mary?? Mary is his all??

How does all this not make plainly obvious, about who Mary is in Roman Catholicism? And mind you, we're not even including their bowing and praying to Mary's image IN CHURCH, singing hymns to her IN CHURCH, holding hundreds of festivals for her, calling her "THE ALL HOLY ONE" in their catechism, etc. There's gotta be a point where the oft-repeated, "you're taking it out of context" go-to argument from Roman Catholics hunkering down on the defensive starts to face an enormous and ever-expanding wall of implausibility.... isn't there? Why do they think we'll keep buying it? The level of gaslighting is truly perplexing.

---

I understand what you are saying regarding RC leaders and their written statements regarding Mary. I just don't see the trickledown coming out in the liturgy.