10 Misconceptions of the RCC

[Walter]

Which Forums do you recommend? & should I go in as who I am or Tony The Catlik?

Phatmass Phorum is a personal favorite of mine. I find 'Catholic Answers' not only difficult to navigate but Phatmass Phorum has a much better 'debate table'. Most of the participants are well grounded in the word. You would be most welcome to participate.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Phatmass Phorum is a personal favorite of mine. I find 'Catholic Answers' not only difficult to navigate but Phatmass Phorum has a much better 'debate table'. Most of the participants are well grounded in the word. You would be most welcome to participate.

Thanks Walter but when I attempted to register, they "Prohibited" Me. Perhaps because I said I was a Christian instead of a Catholic. My bad!

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Mexican I suspect........................

& whats the difference between them & Guatemalans, Ecuadorians, Chileans, Dominicans, Argentinians etc..... is it a South American dialect vs Mexican or could I live at my Filipino friends home for a while & pick it up......come on.... Rosetta Stone is very particular on dialect selection.:laugh:

 

[DHK]

Where your problem lies is that you equate this saying (by grace through faith, and not of works) is equal to faith alone. When in fact it is not. Its saying that by faith one is saved and not by works. Its says nothing to the effect that Faith must result in works which is what that canon you quote is teaching. and note that passage you quoted from Paul does not say It just doesn't say it. Its saying works cannot saved. However, we see in Romans that Paul certainly believed that Faith must result in works or like James says your faith is dead.

No you are wrong. Faith in Christ alone, by grace alone is what saves. Works has no part in salvation. I simply quoted Scripture. You turned around and denied it. A denial of Scripture is a state of unbelief.

This is not a difficult verse to understand:
Ephesians 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

Everything revolves around one central subject and verb:
you are saved. "are ye saved" Everything in those verses comes back to those three simple words. They modify them in some way.
1. "By Grace" This refers to the grace that Christ provided on the cross, the payment that was made on our behalf when he shed his blood for our sins. Salvation is all of grace. It is the the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ.
"By grace" is a prepositional phrase being used as an adverb defining the verb "are saved." One is saved "by grace."

2. By faith The same as above; it is a prepositional phrase used as an adverb to define the verb, "are saved." One is saved by faith, by faith and faith alone. Faith here is belief. It is the trust or belief that one has in the sacrificial work of Christ. The only thing that can save a person is if he accepts God's gift of salvation by faith, and not of works. Salvation is by faith.

3. And that not of yourselves This puts an emphasis that salvation is not of oneself. The conjunction and makes it a compound sentence and refers it back to the subject which is "salvation." Salvation is not of yourself. It has nothing to do with you, or anything you can do. Salvation is all of God. It is God's gift to you, freely given of God. One must accept it by faith. He cannot work for it; it must be received by faith. It is not of works, of merit, of anything that is of "oneself." It is all of Christ.

4. "It is the gift of God. The it goes back to "salvation." Salvation is the gift of God. Again salvation is a free gift and cannot be earned. It is not of works; cannot be earned. It is the free gift of God and can only be received by faith. This is emphasized over and over again in this passage.

5. "Not of works" How much more clear can it be? Again referring to the subject of salvation; salvation is not of works. There is nothing you can do. Salvation must be received as free gift of God by faith and faith alone. There are no works involved. The reason is given in the last phrase.

6. "lest any man should boast." It is the free gift of God because Jesus paid it all. He paid the entire penalty for your sin. You had nothing to do with it. He paid the full penalty himself when he hung upon the cross. When he said, "It is finished," it was Christ that finished the work of salvation, not the RCC, nor any member thereof.
Thus when one gets to heaven no one will be able to boast: "Look what I did! Look what I did! Look how I helped Christ to earn my way to heaven." One cannot boast in his salvation; Jesus accomplished it all. There is no such thing in "cooperating with God." God provided salvation full and free.

Romans 5:1 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:
--Salvation is by faith and faith alone. To teach anything else from this verse would be to add to this verse. For example one cannot read into this verse: salvation is by faith and baptism, or by works. It doesn't say that. It is "justified by faith." Period. Nothing is to be added to faith.

Romans 4:3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.
--Abraham was justified, not by works, but by faith and faith alone. He believed God, and therefore was justified.
Continue on:

Romans 4:4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.
--To those that work the reward is not reckoned of grace. Grace is not given to those that work. Grace and works don't mix. A reward is given to one who works because he deserves it. It is his wage, his entitlement. But salvation is a free gift, nothing we deserve, nothing that one could ever work for.

Romans 4:5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
--Here the daylight should shine! It is so clear. It is to him that only believes, and does not work whatsoever, that his faith is counted for righteousness. Those that do good works are not counted righteous. Good works cannot make a person righteous in God's eyes; only faith in Christ can.

Salvation is by faith and faith alone. The Bible teaches this simple truth over and over and over again. The RCC denies it over and over and over again. They remain in a state of unbelief. As long as they do so, they can never be saved.

No, again bad translation. According to Trent you are excommunicated from the Catholic Church.

What is the difference. The Catechism contradicts itself. There is no salvation outside the RCC. Therefore all outside the Catholic Church are condemned. Read what it says on the new birth. Without the new birth there is no salvation. But the new birth is baptism, RCC baptism, baptism into the RCC. The RCC has not changed at all.

He considers them when you live in faith. Because as Jesus said and and and

What Jesus said to his disciples he said concerning discipleship, not salvation. That is apples and oranges. To be saved you must trust Christ by faith and faith alone.

Which is refutes your entire post. So I only put the essential part of your argument here.

You have refuted nothing, and denied the clear teaching of the Bible.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Christ Plus is False Teaching

Yes of course .... wrong doctrine is always telling us that we must do something ourselves....that we must add on some plus, some action on our own part, or allow something to be done to us. Faith is not enough.

The RCC says, But of course we believe in Christ......but you must also believe in the church, you must believe in the Virgin Mary, you must believe in the saints, you must believe in the priesthood.....all in addition. Christ alone it appears is not enough.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I also am horrified by the RCC's claims that she is as much inspired today as those first apostles were, but she has no basis in scripture for saying that. Therefore according to them, the RCC is as authoritative as the Word.

 

[DHK]

The truth DHK it isn't really the bible that is your ONLY RULE OF FAITH AND DOCTRINE. No. In reality its how you interpret the bible from the man made teaching that you are saved by faith alone where no where in the bible does it exclude faith from the fruits of faith.

I just demonstrated you through many Scriptures, and could use many more, how Salvation is by faith and faith alone. It is your choice to believe the Scriptures or deny them.

Which is why when the bible combines those two words together faith and alone ie faith alone it says you are not saved by faith alone. Faith first and primary yes. Exclude the fruits of faith (works of love) then you have dead faith just as James says.

You are simply playing a game of semantics which almost everyone can see through. Do you think that the Bible has to clarify itself every single time just for you that when it says "faith" it must add "alone" as well. That would be very redundant wouldn't it. If I say I have four children will you believe me? Or do I always have to word it in such a way that I must say: "I ONLY have four children." You remain in unbelief unless I qualify my statement. That is what you do with the Bible. This is what you are demanding of the author of the Bible, the Holy Spirit. Since when do you have the right to demand anything of the Holy Spirit?

Oh so when you kneel in front of your bed or bed frame or when an alter call has people kneeling in front of the podium you are worshiping your bed or your congregants are worshiping either the podium or the man who is pastor? This logic doesn't add up.

Let's examine your example. I will take one of them.
If I or one of my children kneel before their beds and pray, they are not praying to the bed. They are not praying to what the bed represents (a bed). They are not praying to the bed at all. Their prayers are to whom they are addressing: "Our Father who art in heaven..." They are addressing God, not a bed. There is this thing called geometry. You might have also heard of global positioning. IOW no matter where you are on earth you are "in front" of something. That doesn't mean you are praying to it. Jesus went up into a mountain a great while before dawn and there prayed (Mark 1:35). Your lame logic would have us believe that he was praying to the mountain. Is that what you believe?

However you (the RCC), set up images and icons, like a statue of Mary, kneel down before her and pray to her. The prayer is directed straight to Mary. The image of Mary is a direct representation of Mary, and the prayer is to Mary. The prayer is not to a bed, but to Mary. That is idolatry. That is what the 10 Commandments forbid.

Statues aren't the people themselves they are a representation to remind us of their obedience and faithfulness to God.

The 10 Commandments forbid any statue or image that takes the place of God, takes away from the worship of God, robs God of his worship, is in any way an image of God. The RCC breaks all of those commands.

Just like with the alter call we are not woshiping the thing in front of us but it is God and those images remind us how we should ourselves behave.

Inasmuch as you worship the saint or person that the image represents you commit idolatry. All the stations of the cross, the dead saints that they represent, Mary, etc.; it is all idolatry and both forbidden and condemned in the Word of God.

I'm grafted in are you not?

So was Saul. But he gave up his Judaism. What tribe do you belong to?
You are not a Jew. You are not following the Jewish religion. You have no need to follow Jewish practices. If you do, then follow all the law, not some of it.

No. But I believe I will be at the resurrection.

But that is not now. It is future. Apples and oranges.

Oh come on. So now you pick and choose what the bible tells us? Thats not being bible alone. It certainly is dependent on your ability to interpret it and choose what you want to believe from it. Like a homosexual I know uses the bible to tell him what he wants to hear and dutifully ignores passages about homosexuality being wrong because its no longer "culturally relevant.

It is called "rightly dividing the word of truth." (2Tim.2:15). The Bible is relevant to day as it was in the first century. To add your "paganistic culture" instead of adhering to the Word of God is what put the RCC into trouble in the first place. That is why it is outside the realm of Christianity and in a class of its own. It no longer has a Christian message to preach (if it ever did in the first place). It doesn't preach a gospel of grace. Paul says the gospel it preaches is accursed for it is "another gospel" than the one he preaches. The RCC paganized Christianity, and Christianized paganism. Constantine tries to placate both sides by introducing paganism into Christianity, and that paganism has remained to this day.

It does not.That is a riduculous argument! Those same people use wood, stone, steel to build their temples are we then not to use the same materials? Your logic doesn't follow.

And what did Paul preach on Mars Hill? God does not dwell in a house made of materials of man's hands. But the RCC has images and icons that they bow down before and pray to just like those same pagans. Their religion imitates the Hindus in many similar ways. The Hindu sets up his gods. They don't pray to the idol itself, but the god which the idol represents. You do exactly the same thing. They baptize themselves thinking the water will cleanse them of their sins. You do the same thing. Your brand of so-called Christianity is not much different than the pagan religion of Hinduism.

Ok so there is a word Mariolatry that was probably newly placed in there however the Church teaches not to to be excessive in veneration of Mary. Not to treat her like God. The fact that some do is a direct opposition to Catholic Teaching. However, we do venerate her for her role in the incarnation and her continuing role praying for those of us still here.

Even you worship Mary, but just won't admit it. Every "Hail Mary" that you would pray on the rosary is veneration, worship of the goddess of Mary. It is worship that is being robbed or taken away from the Lord God Almighty, who alone is worthy of worship. All prayer is worship.
BTW, the English language itself is not very old.
Christology is not an old word either. It means the study of Christ.
I imagine that the two words "Mariolatry" and "Christology" came into being about the same time. We study Christ. We also study those who idolize Mary (Mary-idolaters); those who venerate her when they shouldn't. It is a transgression of the Ten Commandments.

 

[DHK]

You know exactly my point.

No, I don't. The Jews followed the Lord's commands in building the Tabernacle. What is your point?

That just because you make a statue to remind you of Heaven, Scriptures, or people doesn't mean you are woshiping those dead pieces of art.

But you do! You pray to Mary and you can't deny it. No Protestant prays to a piece of art.

Any more than God was expecting the Israelites to worship the Cheribum on the Mercy seat. And since it was God's instruction to make an image after creatures in heaven that it isn't the making of the images that is wrong or even using those images on items tat are holy or venerated but treating those creatures like they are God.

They were not images of God. That is what the 10 commandments forbade.
Nor were they worshiped.
They were images of angels. No one venerated them. No one prayed to them. The "in heaven" part of the 10 Commandments refers to "God" and bowing down and worshiping and praying before them as you do.

That is my point. And you know it is. The sheer fact that making an image is not wrong or all art work would be banned by God and he would contradict himself. Not God isn't saying art work is wrong. But making something for the specific purpose to hold that Item to be equal with God.

And that is what you do with Mary. You pray before her; to her, as if she was God. All prayer is to be directed to God alone. He alone is worthy of prayer. All prayer is worship. You worship Mary; you are committing idolatry.

Therefore money which is made by man fall under this catagory. God could just have easily said any paper you make with the intention of worshiping it is forbiden. But that wasn't the issue back then. Today it is the issue. Thus Money can fall under that commandment. Not at all because you leave out the last part of that commandment jEmphasis bolded.

Does your money have an image of God on it?
Do you bow down before it?
Do you pray TO it?

Bowing and serving shows the intent of buiding these things as does the statement "for I am a Jelous God" The issue isn't making art work but replacing God with it.

And that is precisely what you do with Mary and the stations of the cross, before whom you bow, and pray to, or at least to whom they represent (just like the pagan Hindus).

Some people today do exactly that place their art before God.

Do they pray to it?

Actresses allow themselves to fornicate on screen for all to watch. Painters give up their families for their work and placing their families in poverty not willing to give up their art to support their childrens or spouses needs. And the item themselves cannot provide anything. So if you have art work dipicting anything mentioned in this commandment then you have broken it if your interpretation is correct. I don't know about you but I don't choose to believe that God would contradict himself in the orders to make the Mercy Seat with carven images of angles on it.

No Jew ever prayed to the angelic beings or worshiped them. You don't get that. They weren't images of God.

They aren't "quite different". They are numbered differently. They are the same ones

They are very different, deceitfully different.

And also know this both Catholic and Protestant order of 10 Commandments are ordered differently from how the Jews Order them. let me give you an example Catholic
Protestant commandments
The Jewish Commandments So yes I do know why.

There is only one 10th commandment: "Thou shalt not covet." The RCC has split that one command into two, to compensate for the commands on images and bowing down before them that they deliberately left out.

 

[OldRegular]

To some degree this is correct. Because he don't dichotomize the OT from the NT but that they are unified telling the whole of Salvation history. And Christianity spead out from Judaism. And we see in Acts that the Apostles continued in temple worship and litrugical prayers and practices to a degree as well.

The temple was destroyed in 70AD and with it the Levitical priesthood. The Roman Catholic and Orthodox communions have taken that which passed away and expanded it into a much larger role giving priests the power of absolution which according to Scripture is reserved only for God.

Well not the same attire as it is quite different. But the Clergy does have a special administrative roll.

There is nothing in the New Testament that indicates a different attire for the Apostles. Of course they were not priests.

Well first of all the sacrifice we refer to is that one on Calvary not new sacrifices like new bulls etc...Second of all there is a union with God at communion. He joins himself to us even though he is always with us. And its based on Jesus' teaching about it. Lets note some interesting things. The first sin was by a meal. The Jews were fed by bread from heaven. in the Temple was the bread of the presentation. Jews communed with each other and God by eating the slain lamb. Jesus was born at Bethlehem which is translated place of bread. He was laid in a manger which is a feeding trough.

And your point is??

He says that we must eat his flesh and drink his blood. And at the last supper he says this is my body and this is my blood. John the Baptist calls Jesus the lamb of God referring to the passover lamb which was eaten.

Consider what Jesus Christ said at the Last Supper:

Mark 14:22-25
22. And as they did eat, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake it, and gave to them, and said, Take, eat: this is my body.
23. And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them: and they all drank of it.
24. And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many.
25. Verily I say unto you, I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine, until that day that I drink it new in the kingdom of God.

It is obvious that at the Last Supper Jesus Christ was speaking metaphorically when he said: Take, eat: this is my body. Jesus was physically present. The bread could not be His body. That should be obvious to all!. The same is true of his statement: This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many. Note further that He says of the contents of the cup: I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine. The contents of the cup was wine. Yet the false doctrine of Roman Catholicism would have us believe it is the blood of Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ is our passover and he did say in John 6:53: Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Again He was speaking metaphorically. Those who are saved must understand and believe that Jesus Christ died as the sacrifice for their sins.

It is blasphemous to believe that Jesus Christ would tell those who believe in his sacrificial, death to engage in cannibalism. And that is exactly what the Eucharist would be if it were true: Cannibalism. Sadly those who partake believe it is the literal body and blood of Jesus Christ and they are engaging in a pagan practice!

Perhaps what is worse is that they are sacrificing Jesus Christ over and over again, ad infinitum,. They can deny that it is a new sacrifice but as thinkingstuff said:

John the Baptist calls Jesus the lamb of God referring to the passover lamb which was eaten.

Scripture tells us in Hebrews 9:25, 26
25. Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;
26. For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

But those who participate in the Eucharist blaspheme the once for all sacrifice of Jesus Christ as they sacrifice Him continuously.

God didn't get angry with Israel for having a high priest. And what he did get on them for was replacing God entirely for other gods.

God appointed a high priest for Israel in their temple worship. Jesus Christ is the high priest of all who are redeemed by His blood and there is no other. Ant that includes those who call them self “pope”.

Because they worshiped something other than God. And their high places were filled with Baals. Today some preachers do the samething. Money has become God for them. We can see it by loosening the morality of the Gospel and teaching that abortion is ok. Or that homosexual practices are ok. Or hell doesn't exist. So on and so forth.

And you worship something other than God: Mary and the pope for starters!

Scripture also says there will be a great apostasy a falling away. Though I don't place this on protestants I could say that protestantsim is the sign of the great falling away. See what you can do when you rely on your own interpretation?

We rely on our interpretation, and for all our mistakes,
1. we don’t practice cannibalism,
2. we don’t continuously sacrifice Jesus Christ,
3. we don’t worship Mary,
4. we don’t worship the pope,
5.we don’t pray to the dead,
6.we don’t believe in purgatory,
7.we don’t believe in salvation by works.
8.we don’t bow before idols
9.We believe there is only one mediator between man and God, the man Jesus Christ.

And how many do the Roman Catholics have? And which one works best?

BTW it wasn't the faithfulness to the bible that the Jews had an issue with but faithfulness to God himself. That is always the issue. Even when they were "following the Law" in Jesus' day they weren't following God.

And Roman Catholics are not following God. They are following the pope and the Teaching Magisterium!

 

[Alive in Christ]

Cool........ Because I miss the 70's when saying cool was ... well... cool.

I still say cool! I am an ex hippie turned Jesus freak.

. Being a Jesus freak is VERY cool!

Rock on brother!

 

[OldRegular]

The Ten Commandments

There seems to be some confusion as to the Ten Commandments. Scripture tells us that they are as follows. Those of the Roman Communion should note in particular the Second Commandment! And it would not hurt all the OEC folks to take a look at the Fourth.

Exodus 20:1-17
1. And God spake all these words, saying,

First​

2. I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.
3. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

Second​

4. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:
5. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
6. And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

Third​

7. Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.

Fourth​

8. Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
9. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

Fifth​

12. Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.

Sixth​

13. Thou shalt not kill.

Seventh​

14. Thou shalt not commit adultery.

Eighth​

15. Thou shalt not steal.

Ninth​

16. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.

Tenth​

17. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s.


*****************************************************************

 

[Alive in Christ]

Nooooo!.... The catholics and orthodox dont worship Mary........


http://www.wayoflife.org/database/maryolatry.html

 

[OldRegular]

Nooooo!.... The catholics and orthodox dont worship Mary........


http://www.wayoflife.org/database/maryolatry.html

Thought I would add a little text to your link to pictures. It is a great mystery to me why these people would do such a thing. Is it that they are simply evil or fools?

From:http://www.wayoflife.org/index_files/8b64096609af4f2c2c49089ffee3e2b3-713.html

Rome's Mary on the Cross and on God's Throne
Jan/19/11 09:53 Filed in: Roman Catholicism
January 19, 2011 (David Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061, 866-295-4143, fbns@wayoflife.org; for instructions about subscribing and unsubscribing or changing addresses, see the information paragraph at the end of the article)

See Companion photos at MARYOLATRY

In spite of claims of contemporary Catholic propagandists, the Roman Catholic Church worships Mary.

According to Rome, she was immaculately (sinlessly) conceived, participated in Christ’s suffering for mankind, ascended bodily to Heaven, was crowned Queen of the universe, and intercedes for sinners.

During a radio message concluding the Jubilee of the Redemption, April 28, 1935, Pope Pius XI gave the Catholic Mary the title Co-redemptrix. At least five times Pope Paul II referred to her by this title in his papal statements. In his general audience on April 9, 1997, he said that Mary “collaborated in obtaining the grace of salvation for all humanity” (Vatican Information Service). This pope dedicated himself and the whole world to Mary.

The influential book The Glories of Mary by Alphonsus Mary de Liguori, a Catholic saint, calls Mary our Life, our Help, our Advocate, our Guardian, our Mediatress, our Salvation, and the Hope of Sinners. Chapter 5 says “Mary’s intercession is necessary for our salvation.” This book was tested 20 times by the rules of Pope Urban VIII and Pope Benedict XIV and was said to contain not “one word worthy of censure.” It was pronounced to be without error by Pope Pius VII and by Pope Leo XII. Pope John Paul II acknowledged Liguori’s influence in his own idolatrous affection for Mary. Liguori’s book continues to be published today with the imprimatur [Latin meaning “let it be printed”] of various Catholic authorities.

MARY ON THE CROSS

In the Church of the Mother of God of Polish Martyrs in Warsaw, Poland, Mary is depicted hanging on the cross holding the child Jesus.

Outside of the main Mary basilica in Rome (Santa Maria Maggiore) there is a large crucifix with Jesus hanging on one side and a crowned Mary hanging on the other.

This statue depicts Rome’s dogma that Mary is the co-redemptress with Christ and that she intercedes for men from Heaven and aids in their salvation.

Note the following quotations from the Vatican II Council:

“As St. Irenaeus says, she being obedient, became the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race. Hence not a few of the early Fathers gladly assert with him in their preaching ... ‘death through Eve, LIFE THROUGH MARY.’ This UNION OF THE MOTHER WITH THE SON IN THE WORK OF SALVATION is made manifest from the time of Christ’s virginal conception up to his death” (Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, chap. 8, II, 56, pp. 380-381).

“Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but BY HER MANIFOLD INTERCESSION CONTINUES 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 difficulties, until they are led into their blessed home. Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of ADVOCATE, HELPER, BENEFACTRESS, and MEDIATRIX” (Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, chap. 8, II, 62, pp. 382-383).

A plaque in the Chapel of the Virgin of the Grace at Saints Vincent and Anastasius Church in Rome says, “Cardinal Benedetto Odescalchi, who became the pope with the name of Innocent XI, initiated THE WORSHIP OF THE IMAGE, placed on the altar in 1677, and wanted his heart to be buried here, not in the main chapel.”

This is only one example of many that could be given of the term “worship” used in regard to Mary in Rome’s churches.

MARY ON THE ARK OF THE COVENANT

The Saint Stanislaus Kostka Catholic church in Chicago features an image of Mary on the very Ark of God. She is sitting above the Ark in the place that was occupied by God’s presence in the Tabernacle, and she is surrounded by adoring cherubim. This blasphemous image occupies the central altar where Mass is performed. The church’s official literature says that the image depicts the Catholic doctrines that Mary was immaculately conceived and sinless, that she participated in Christ’s suffering for mankind, and that she was bodily assumed into glory and crowned Queen of Heaven. The icon depicting Mary as the Ark of Mercy was dedicated in May 2008. Since then the church has been open 24 hours a day as an invitation for “pilgrims from all around the world to immerse themselves in the spring of grace, mercy, and power” that is supposedly flowing from the image.

This is pure blasphemy. The Ark of the Covenant was located in the Holy of Holies in the Old Testament tabernacle and was the place where God’s presence dwelt (Exodus 25:22). Angels do not worship creatures (Acts 14:11-15; Rev. 19:10).

Roman Catholic churches are filled with idols. Mary is reverenced with far greater fervency than Jesus. Every “evangelical” or “Baptist” or “Protestant” who has said positive things about Rome and who has participated in ecumenical relations with Rome or who has failed even to lift his voice against Rome’s gross heresies will answer to God for the refusal to “earnestly contend for the faith once delivered to the saints” (Jude 3) and for keeping silence in the face of evil.

Dave Hunt has a book out entitled A Woman Rides the Beast. It presents some interesting history of the ascendency of Maryolotry in the RCC! He likely presents an extreme view but the RCC worship of Mary is extreme.

 

[Alive in Christ]

Dave Hunt has a book out entitled A Woman Rides the Beast. It presents some interesting history of the ascendency of Maryolotry in the RCC! He likely presents an extreme view but the RCC worship of Mary is extreme.

I had that book many years ago, and ended up passing it on to someone else. It is EXCELANT..

 

[saturneptune]

We as Baptists can make our belief that the only Diety is the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, the only Ones worthy of praise and worship, and it is our duty to do so. However, it serves no purpose to demean, make light of, or call the person of Mary names. She is a human being like all of us, a sinner in need of a Savior. God used her in a mighty way, to give birth to the Savior, you know, the Person we are depending on to forgive us of our sins and give us eternal life. While she is not Diety, or to be worshiped, she does deserve respect for the role that the Lord chose her for. If you compare your life to what Mary did, where do you stand?

I have been as guilty as anyone. Lets debate the differences in doctrine, and keep away from the jabs at human beings the RCC sets apart. It serves no purpose.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

We as Baptists can make our belief that the only Diety is the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, the only Ones worthy of praise and worship, and it is our duty to do so. However, it serves no purpose to demean, make light of, or call the person of Mary names. She is a human being like all of us, a sinner in need of a Savior. God used her in a mighty way, to give birth to the Savior, you know, the Person we are depending on to forgive us of our sins and give us eternal life. While she is not Diety, or to be worshiped, she does deserve respect for the role that the Lord chose her for. If you compare your life to what Mary did, where do you stand?

I have been as guilty as anyone. Lets debate the differences in doctrine, and keep away from the jabs at human beings the RCC sets apart. It serves no purpose.

Amen :thumbs:

 

[Bro. James]

This has to do with misconceptions of the RCC. It has nothing to do with the poor souls therewith deceived, which are and have been millions. Does God call them out? Certainly. Does He leave them there? Probably not.

Biggest misconception: that the RCC has ever had any authority from God. Jesus gave His authority(exousia and dynamos) to His Bride, along with the promise to be with Her through the end of the age.

That which remains on Vatican Hill and her daughters have a serious probem with authority. They either have it or they do not. If the Holy See has it, all others are usurpers. If Rome never had it, she still does not have it, nor her daughters. If Peter is not the first pope, the whole system falls along with those who would reform it. Falsehoods reformed are still false.

What is in your wallet?

Jesus has been faithful to keep His Bride, even when we are not faithful to Him

Even so, come Lord Jesus.

Peace,

Bro. James

 

[OldRegular]

We as Baptists can make our belief that the only Diety is the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, the only Ones worthy of praise and worship, and it is our duty to do so. However, it serves no purpose to demean, make light of, or call the person of Mary names. She is a human being like all of us, a sinner in need of a Savior. God used her in a mighty way, to give birth to the Savior, you know, the Person we are depending on to forgive us of our sins and give us eternal life. While she is not Diety, or to be worshiped, she does deserve respect for the role that the Lord chose her for. If you compare your life to what Mary did, where do you stand?

I have been as guilty as anyone. Lets debate the differences in doctrine, and keep away from the jabs at human beings the RCC sets apart. It serves no purpose.

I don't believe I have made any derogatory remarks about Mary the Mother of the human nature of Jesus Christ.

It is unacceptable to demean the person of Mary in any way. If I have I sincerely regret it.

Mary can in no way be responsible for those who have grossly misused her person for their hellish doctrine. Frankly these heretical claims demean the person of the woman Mary. It is unfathomable to me why these people would do such but it is a lesson to all that error creeps into the Church and soon becomes heresy if left unchecked!

 

[Thinkingstuff]

I don't believe I have made any derogatory remarks about Mary the Mother of the human nature of Jesus Christ.

this is why terminology is important and why the Theotokos debate was so important in the early Church. Look at what you have just posted. It would seem that you have a Nestorian view with regard to the incarnation indicating that Mary only held Jesus' human Nature and body for 9 months and when she gave birth at some point the Divine side joined with Jesus human side. However, I know you don't believe that but that is certainly how it can be taken with what you said. In your attempt to move away from the Catholic view you have emphasised Jesus humanity in the statement. In order to maintain that Jesus in his incarnation was both divine and human at the point of his conseption the title Mother of God was given to Mary to avoid the Nestorius heresy.

It is unacceptable to demean the person of Mary in any way. If I have I sincerely regret it.

I never thought you did.

Mary can in no way be responsible for those who have grossly misused her person for their hellish doctrine. Frankly these heretical claims demean the person of the woman Mary. It is unfathomable to me why these people would do such but it is a lesson to all that error creeps into the Church and soon becomes heresy if left unchecked!

Well, I don't know about hellish doctrine but Catholics view Mary as a created being who was created for the specific and special role of being Jesus' Mother. She is considered by Catholics to be the first Christian. though Catholics commune with her asking for her prayers we don't consider her a deity but having already recieved in her being the fulness of what God wants for humanity. Those images posted earlier are symbols representing her role as ark of the new convenant and barer within her body the very presence of God until his birth. Those images represent that. They are not saying that she is God or that she was crucified. But through her body God bought forth his son into the world. I don't know if you considered what I just typed heretical but that is the actual Catholic view.

 

[OldRegular]

this is why terminology is important and why the Theotokos debate was so important in the early Church. Look at what you have just posted. It would seem that you have a Nestorian view with regard to the incarnation indicating that Mary only held Jesus' human Nature and body for 9 months and when she gave birth at some point the Divine side joined with Jesus human side. However, I know you don't believe that but that is certainly how it can be taken with what you said. In your attempt to move away from the Catholic view you have emphasised Jesus humanity in the statement. In order to maintain that Jesus in his incarnation was both divine and human at the point of his conseption the title Mother of God was given to Mary to avoid the Nestorius heresy.

You are not reading what I wrote. I said that Mary is the mother of the Human Nature of Jesus Christ. That is the truth and all the truth as far as Mary is concerned. The divine nature of Jesus Christ has no mother. The heresy that Roman Catholicism has introduced is far worse than the so-called Nestorian heresy. Nestorius was correct to reject Mary as the Mother of God; he was incorrect to say there were two distinct persons in Jesus Christ!

Well, I don't know about hellish doctrine but Catholics view Mary as a created being who was created for the specific and special role of being Jesus' Mother. She is considered by Catholics to be the first Christian. though Catholics commune with her asking for her prayers we don't consider her a deity but having already recieved in her being the fulness of what God wants for humanity. Those images posted earlier are symbols representing her role as ark of the new convenant and barer within her body the very presence of God until his birth. Those images represent that. They are not saying that she is God or that she was crucified. But through her body God bought forth his son into the world. I don't know if you considered what I just typed heretical but that is the actual Catholic view.

Through the body of Mary God brought forth His Son into the world. That is true and that is all that can be said of Mary. To call her the Mother of God is heretical. God has no mother. God has no father. The three persons of the Godhead are eternal! Lest you get confused by that statement I simply quote the following: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. [John 1:1]

Following is some of the heretical devotion/worship applied to the Roman Catholic creation of Mary:

From:http://www.theworkofgod.org/Library/catholic/ligouri_prayer.htm

Prayer by St. Alphonsus de Liguori

From the Glories of Mary

Most Holy Virgin Immaculate, my Mother Mary, to Thee who art the Mother of my Lord, the Queen of the universe, the advocate, the hope, the refuge of sinners, I who am the most miserable of all sinners, have recourse this day.

I venerate Thee, great Queen, and I thank Thee for the many graces Thou hast bestowed upon me even unto this day; in particular for having delivered me from the hell which I have so often deserved by my sins.

I love Thee, most dear Lady; and for the love I bear Thee, I promise to serve Thee willingly for ever and to do what I can to make Thee loved by others also. I place in Thee all my hopes for salvation; accept me as thy servant and shelter me under thy mantle, thou who art the Mother of mercy.

And since thou art so powerful with God, deliver me from all temptations, or at least obtain for me the strength to overcome them until death. From Thee I implore a true love for Jesus Christ. Through Thee I hope to die a holy death. My dear Mother, by the love thou bearest to Almighty God, I pray Thee to assist me always, but most of all at the last moment of my life. Forsake me not then, until thou shalt see me safe in heaven, there to bless Thee and sing of thy mercies through all eternity. Such is my hope. Amen.