Featured Rome's Mary on the Cross and God's Throne

How is it that the Apostles were able to heal, and even raise people from the dead, if they were only human?

How is it that people even tried to have Peter's shadow fall on them so that they would be healed? He's human.

These phenomena do not make these saints omniscient, or omnimpotent, or divine. They merely show the unlimited wonderful ways God can use those who serve him.

 

How is it that the Apostles were able to heal, and even raise people from the dead, if they were only human?

How is it that people even tried to have Peter's shadow fall on them so that they would be healed? He's human.

These phenomena do not make these saints omniscient, or omnimpotent, or divine. They merely show the unlimited wonderful ways God can use those who serve him.

 

Well... that's YOUR opinion now isn't it. I think God knows the human heart better than you, me, or anyone else here. "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." Hmmm.... it seems that many here are throwing rocks with perfect regularity.
WM

 

Many people put their little god into a little box so they can feel confortable with their full understanding of that limited diety. In reality, we understand very little about the real God and that only comes from the tiny amount He has seen fit to reveal. These folks also forget that the propogation of that knowledge came up through history via the Church established by Jesus.

Ultimately, until they let God out of that little box they can never recognize the unlimited power of God, and they can never understand what you are saying. I know about this because it took 40 years for that to happen to me. Praise God that it did!

WM

 

When you speak of a little god, speak for yourself. Forty years??? That is not a great length of time. The Israelites spent that walking in circles in the wilderness because of a lack of faith in the Lord.

Apostles were able to heal, perform miracles etc because the Lord allowed it for His purposes. How on earth does that fact justify following practices that are contrary to Scripture? There is only One Person that is worshiped, adored, praised and prayed to and that would be the Creator in the form of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.

Your collection of "saints" are all sinners, created beings in a fallen state. Yet you have the nerve to accuse others of "putting their little god in a box" when you in fact have created many little gods you give honor that only God deserves. So as you pray to Peter, Paul and Mary, be sure to ask them where all the flowers have gone.

Lots of you seem to have trouble with the concept of the number of catagories. For example, one is either the Creator or a created being. There is not a third catagory of super special created beings that deserve worship, prayer, and praise. They are sinners in a fallen state, and without the work of Jesus Christ on the cross, they are headed for the Lake of Fire like anyone else. Of course, we are assuming that all of your list of "saints" are believers in Jesus Christ and are saved. It is kind of like heaven and hell. There is not a third choice of limbo, purgatory, or the nearest Catholic rest stop.

The statements made to you and the others about Mary are not opinions but facts. It is nothing short of idolatry, which violates the first two or three commandments. Worst of all, to refer to that theological zoo, the RCC, as the true church Jesus Christ established, is nothing short of blasphemy.

 

No, it is not my opinion.

To say what that litany said about about Mary is idolatry and blasphemy, as also the line from the rosary.


"Rejoice, Thou through whom creation is renewed" -- idolatry, blasphemy

"Rejoice, Thou through whom we worship the Creator! -- idolatry, blasphemy

"Rejoice, assurance of those who pray in silence!" -- idolatry, at least

Rejoice, bridge that conveyest us from earth to Heaven! -- idolatry, blasphemy

Rejoice, wound of demons bewailed afar! -- idolatry, at least

Rejoice, Thou Who surpassest the knowledge of the wise: -- idolatry

Rejoice, Thou Who givest light to the minds of the faithful! -- idolatry, blasphemy

Rejoice, propitiation of all the world! -- idolatry, damnable blasphemy


Anyone who can say that is on dangerous ground.

 

Oh it most certainly is YOUR opinion and nothing more. And yes - I can say it and do say it. Further, since only God know my heart, I have no concern what-so-ever about being on "dangerous ground". However, I honestly do thank you for your conceren.

Yet...

Do you not believe that the birth, death, and resurection of Jesus saves us? Who do you think bore the GodMan? It was through her that the imaculate conception took place. So... if we can read the above through a non-biased lense, then we can see that it was indeed through Mary that the Savior was born. Just as it was through Eve that creation was lost through sin, it was also through Mary that creation is renewed. To deny that Mary played a seminal part in the salvation story is to ignore the obvious simply to berate the RCC. I would hope that you could find it in your heart to give Catholics the benefit of the doubt in this case and take what the Church actually teaches as what they actually believe.

Ultimately, the above - taken as the RCC teaches it - is not blasphemy as you claim, it is simply fact my brother!

WM

 

Why? I'm not the one placing limitations on the awsome power of God.

Really? But it's a huge percentage of ones lifespan. That is not non-trivial in my opinion.

Amen! And that is exactly what the RCC teaches. So... what's your problem?

That is true!

I think I said "....putting their little god in a little box". Never-the-less...

Having been a Baptist most of my life, I do believe this about many people in both the Protestant AND the Catholic world. I have opinions just like you. Does the fact that I am now Catholic disallow me that opinion here, yet allow you yours?

That is NOT true and the Church does not teach that.

I got it.

In all honesty, these statements indicate to me that you either don't really understand what the Church teaches on these matters, or you simply refuse to understand them for whatever reason. Unfortunately, I can't help you with that in this forum.

Again, that most certianly IS your opinion and one, I might add, with which I totally disagree!

Theological zoo? Many through-out history disagree with that.

"It is, therefore, the Catholic Church alone which retains true worship. This is the fountain of truth; this, the domicile of faith; this, the temple of God. Whoever does not enter there or whoever does not go out from there, he is a stranger to the hope of life and salvation. . . . Because, however, all the various groups of heretics are confident that they are the Christians and think that theirs is the Catholic Church, let it be known that this is the true Church, in which there is confession and penance and which takes a health-promoting care of the sins and wounds to which the weak flesh is subject" (Lactantius: Divine Institutes 4:30:11–13 [A.D. 307]).

saturneptune... to quote someone whom I cannot currently remember: "You are not God - The job is filled, and you aren't any good at it anyway." But, God bless you.

WM

 

Mary is so very important to catholics, the eucharist is so very important and is central to catholic faith, as thinkingstuff stated in another post...yes, it was the real body and blood of Jesus at the last supper, Jesus gave HIS body and blood to the disciples at the last supper, so here is the big question, why was mary not at the last supper?

 

Interesting question. I have heard someone mention on this board or another that 'someone had to do all the cooking and cleaning up.' lol! Although elsewhere we read He sent Peter and John to prepare the Passover meal. I personally think that Jesus wanted this an all male event because He established the Eucharist here, and taught the disciples to do it so that they could serve as His priests. Unlike many Protestants, Catholics believe history, custom, tradition, and apostolic authority that we find in this event prevent women from serving as priests (presbyters). His Mother was not called to be a priest, so she did not have to learn how to consecrate the Eucharist.

Also, I think that maybe Jesus was sensitive enough to know how much grief Mary could bear. Don't you think it would have been awful watching your Son give His own Body and Blood not only on the cross, but also speaking of it at His Last Supper?

 

Roman Catholic heresy is accomplished when they put tradition and the teaching of their church above Scripture.....it says that tradition is to coordinate with Scripture. And I take that to mean (if you believe this line of reasoning) in the end that tradition is superior to the Scripture.

There is nothing in the Scripture about the so-called Assumption of the Virgin Mary, a doctrine that says that Mary never died nor was buried, but literally rose in the body into heaven. But they teach it & it is by their church's authority alone that sanctions such a teaching.

 

Psalm 132:8 - Arise, O Lord, and go to thy resting place, thou and the Ark (Mary) of thy might. Both Jesus and Mary were taken up to their eternal resting place in heaven

2 Thess. 2:15 -Here St. Paul asks us to hold fast to the oral (not just written) Tradition. Tradition NEVER is placed above scripture and must not contradict it. Apostolic Tradition says Mary was assumed into heaven. While claiming the bones of the saints was a common practice during these times (and would have been especially important to obtain Mary's bones as she was the Mother of God), Mary's bones were never claimed. This is because they were not available. Mary was taken up body and soul into heaven.

 

Thats not quite true. There are two acceptable theories when it comes to the Assumption of Mary for Catholics. One is follows an eastern Tradition called the Dormition where Mary actually died and was resurrected and Translated directly to heaven by God. The other is that she did not die but was translated to heaven by God. Either way it is believed that God took her to heaven much like God to both Enoch and Elijah to heaven. But you can believe in the Dormition or direct translation of Mary to hold the Assumption of Mary.

 

In Acts 5:15,16 one finds Peter demonstrating the "gift of healing" that is no longer available today. He healed all that came to him, regardless of their condition. But he was not omniscient, omnipotent or divine. He had a gift from God and exercised it during that Apostolic Age of the first century.

Today Catholics treat Mary as a god, worshiping her as omnipresent, etc., attributes that belong only to God. They take away from the worship of God and give it to another, thereby robbing God of the worship due to him alone. This is nothing short of Hinduistic belief, or polytheism. For you have made Mary another god.
Look to your own history and the prayers that the RCC encourage you to imitate:

http://christthecenterofyourlife.blogspot.ca/2007/04/st-alphonsus-liguori-prayer-to-mary.html

Is there anyone here that can deny that this is worship?

 

You know that there more exhaustive dictionaries than the Merriam-Webster don't you? But even with the two definitions you provided one still indicates that worship could be considered as

and not necissarily pointed to God. This honor could be given a human and not violate God's Idolatry prohibition.

Correction, only one is expressed towards God in the Bible and is his venue alone.

Certainly it is not idolatry because its understood she doesn't replace God in my life but she is worth the honor I give her.

Only your limited definition which we have discovered is more expansive than your view.

Never did, used the ones that have always applied.

You even messed up what Jesus said. Note what Jesus Said "and him only shoalt thou serve." The issue isn't giving honor or a different type of worship to other people. It about whom we serve. God or ourselves. There is a Tradition that Satan fell saying Non Serviam.

Prayer can be related to worship. What I said is that is not the only function of prayer as I clearly showed you. Pray DHK, isn't that so?

The problem for you is semantic. Because you try to limit meanings of words to incorporate your personal view. Which is why textual Criticism of the bible is such an important field. Semantics is more than word play its word meaning. And you fail to often understand meanings within their context. Thus you err on misinterpreting what is often said to you.

And thus you have proven my point.

Look at your language! "Prayer used in relation". You are admiting though not directly that all prayer isn't used in relation to God if you must specify used in relation. Which means there is prayer not used in relation to God.

And my point is the specific payer you are talking about isn't being used towards anything but God. The prayer used towards Mary is a petition for her prayers. Its not worship designed for God Alone.

And as I pointed out this is not true. Some prayer is for worship. Other prayer is not.

Now you are even trying to change the meaning. Prayer is not petition until it goes to God? Nonsense. Prayer can petition God. It can be a petition to someone else. Pray DHK, isn't that so?

Yes it is. Pray DHK, will you pray for me to God?

Not in this context.

 

I deny it. Also I clicked on your link and that prayer wasnt there.

 

http://christthecenterofyourlife.blogspot.ca/2007/04/st-alphonsus-liguori-prayer-to-mary.html
I edited my post to give the correct one.

 

That's ridiculous and laughable.

RC traditions about Mary always contradict scripture, but they believe these traditions of men anyway.

 

It is worship, and thus blasphemy. The RCC does not believe in a Trinity, they believe in a Quad-rinity.

 

What I have quoted and what others have quoted show beyond question that the RCC has created a Quadrinity with Mary as the fourth member of it, your tortured logic aside. And that is blasphemy. Anyone objectively reading these quotes can see that they attribute to Mary qualities that only God possesses.

And, btw, I do consider you my brother, also, but I think you are on dangerous ground. That is why I post as I do.