Prayers To Mary

[Moriah]

This is a Catholic prayer to Mary. Does this sound like a prayer anyone should say to Mary instead of Jesus?

http://www.catholicdoors.com/prayers/english/p00290.htm

PRAYER TO
OUR LADY OF PERPETUAL HELP # 7


Behold, O Mother of Perpetual Help,
at thy feet a wretched sinner,
who has recourse to thee and trusts in thee.
O Mother of mercy, have pity on me;
I hear all men call thee the refuge and hope of sinners:
be therefore my refuge and my hope.
Help me for the love of Jesus Christ:
hold out thy hand to a fallen wretch,
who commends himself to thee
and dedicates himself to be thy servant forever.
I praise and thank God,
who of His great mercy
hath given me this confidence in thee,
a sure pledge of my eternal salvation.
Alas, it is only too true
that in the past I have fallen miserably,
because I did not come to thee.
I know that with thy help I shall conquer;
I know that thou wilt help me,
if I commend myself to thee;
but I am fearful lest in the occasions of sin
I shall forget to call upon thee
and so I shall be lost.
This grace, then, do I ask of thee;
for this I implore thee,
as much as I can and know how to do;
namely, that in the assaults of hell
I may ever run to thy protection
and may say to thee:
Mary, help me;
Mother of Perpetual Help,
permit me not to lose my God.

Say the Hail Mary here...


O Mother of Perpetual Help,
grant me ever to be able to call upon thy powerful name,
since thy name is the help of the living
and the salvation of the dying.
Ah, Mary most pure,
Mary most sweet,
grant that thy name from this day forth
may be to me the very breath of life.
Dear Lady, delay not to come to my assistance
whenever I call upon thee;
for in all the temptations that assail me,
in all the necessities that befall me,
I will never leave off calling upon thee,
ever repeating: Mary, Mary.
What comfort, what sweetness,
what confidence, what tenderness fills my soul
at the sound of thy name,
at the very thought of thee!
I give thanks to our Lord,
who for my sake hath given thee a name so sweet,
so lovable, so mighty.
But I am not content merely to speak thy name;
I would utter it for very love of thee;
it is my desire that love
should ever remind me to name thee,
Mother of Perpetual Help.

Say the Hail Mary here...


O Mother of Perpetual Help,
thou art the dispenser of every grace
that God grants us in our misery;
it is for this cause that He hath made thee so powerful,
so rich, so kind,
that thou mightest assist us in our miseries.
Thou art the advocate of the most wretched
and abandoned sinners,
if they but come unto thee;
come once more to my assistance,
for I commend myself to thee.
In thy hands I place my eternal salvation;
to thee I entrust my soul.
Enroll me among thy most faithful servants;
take me under thy protection
and it is enough for me: yes,
for if thou protect me,
I shall fear nothing; not my sins,
for thou wilt obtain for me their pardon and remission;
not the evil spirits,
for thou art mightier than all the powers of hell;
not even Jesus, my Judge,
for He is appeased by a single prayer from thee.
I fear only that through my own negligence
I may forget to recommend myself to thee
and so I shall be lost.
My dear Lady,
obtain for me the forgiveness of my sins,
love for Jesus,
final perseverance
and the grace to have recourse to thee at all times,
O Mother of Perpetual Help.

Say the Hail Mary here...

 

[mont974x4]

The RCC adopted the practices of the pagans. They pray to many gods, but the RCC calls them saints. They make Mary to be a co-redeemer with Christ.

We have one Mediator, one High Priest, One Advocate, one Redeemer. THese are but a few roles our Lord Jesus Christ fulfills.

 

[mandym]

I'm sorry but this us just rude and a misrepresentation of what Catholics say they believe. Praying to the Saints is not the same thing as praying to a god. it is wrong and lacks scriptural support but that does not rise to the level of worship.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

The RCC adopted the practices of the pagans. They pray to many gods, but the RCC calls them saints. They make Mary to be a co-redeemer with Christ.

We have one Mediator, one High Priest, One Advocate, one Redeemer. THese are but a few roles our Lord Jesus Christ fulfills.

That is like saying Protestantism adopted the practices of the Rationalist during the Rennesiance and degraded faith to the level of just an intellectual exercise.

 

[JarJo]

This is a Catholic prayer to Mary. Does this sound like a prayer anyone should say to Mary instead of Jesus?

As a Catholic, I have to admit I find this prayer over the top. It certainly isn't going to become a personal devotion of mine. I've never heard this prayer said before or prayed it myself.

On the other hand, I read it over and try to see if it contains heresy that I must reject. In the prayer I see a great emphasis on relying on the prayers of Mary to lead us to salvation in Christ. I don't understand why that is necessary or appropriate for anyone. Why wouldn't they just ask Christ to forgive their sins, rather than asking Mary to pray to Christ to forgive their sins? I don't get it. But on the other hand I can't write it off as heresy. Is it a sin to ask another person to pray to God that I be forgiven? Would I have to distance myself from someone who did that, and say they are not Christian?

PRAYER TUR LADY OF PERPETUAL HELP # 7
...
Mary, help me;
Mother of Perpetual Help,
permit me not to lose my God.
...
O Mother of Perpetual Help,
thou art the dispenser of every grace
that God grants us in our misery;
... not even Jesus, my Judge,
for He is appeased by a single prayer from thee.
...
My dear Lady,
obtain for me the forgiveness of my sins,
love for Jesus,
final perseverance
...

I see a lot of relying on a mediator between the believer and Christ, who in turn is the mediator between all men and God. I have no idea why this extra level of mediation is wanted. On the other hand why would I condemn it? It's not a sin or a heresy to ask Mary to pray for us to obtain a true love of Jesus. Weird, maybe... but not a sin.

 

[The Biblicist]

As a Catholic, I have to admit I find this prayer over the top. It certainly isn't going to become a personal devotion of mine. I've never heard this prayer said before or prayed it myself.

On the other hand, I read it over and try to see if it contains heresy that I must reject. In the prayer I see a great emphasis on relying on the prayers of Mary to lead us to salvation in Christ. I don't understand why that is necessary or appropriate for anyone. Why wouldn't they just ask Christ to forgive their sins, rather than asking Mary to pray to Christ to forgive their sins? I don't get it. But on the other hand I can't write it off as heresy. Is it a sin to ask another person to pray to God that I be forgiven? Would I have to distance myself from someone who did that, and say they are not Christian?



I see a lot of relying on a mediator between the believer and Christ, who in turn is the mediator between all men and God. I have no idea why this extra level of mediation is wanted. On the other hand why would I condemn it? It's not a sin or a heresy to ask Mary to pray for us to obtain a true love of Jesus. Weird, maybe... but not a sin.

So, is the Bible the final authority for your faith and practice or is it to be intepreted by church tradition?

 

[JarJo]

So, is the Bible the final authority for your faith and practice or is it to be intepreted by church tradition?

I want to have the same faith and practice that the apostles handed on to the first Churches. The bible nowhere gives us permission to disregard apostolic teaching just because it isn't fully spelled out in writing. The bible is authoritative but so was the preaching of the apostles. Jesus, in the bible, gave the apostles authority to teach and lead, and to disregard their teachings because you don't see them in the bible, is unbiblical.

 

[The Biblicist]

I want to have the same faith and practice that the apostles handed on to the first Churches. The bible nowhere gives us permission to disregard apostolic teaching just because it isn't fully spelled out in writing. The bible is authoritative but so was the preaching of the apostles. Jesus, in the bible, gave the apostles authority to teach and lead, and to disregard their teachings because you don't see them in the bible, is unbiblical.

The New Testament is that oral tradition of the Apostles put into writing and according to Peter, whom I believe Rome holds in high esteem, the written prophetic word is much "more sure" than oral apostolic teaching - 2 Pet. 1:18

What you have in the Ante-Nicene Records is the history of apostasy!

 

[DaChaser1]

This is a Catholic prayer to Mary. Does this sound like a prayer anyone should say to Mary instead of Jesus?

http://www.catholicdoors.com/prayers/english/p00290.htm

PRAYER TO
OUR LADY OF PERPETUAL HELP # 7


Behold, O Mother of Perpetual Help,
at thy feet a wretched sinner,
who has recourse to thee and trusts in thee.
O Mother of mercy, have pity on me;
I hear all men call thee the refuge and hope of sinners:
be therefore my refuge and my hope.
Help me for the love of Jesus Christ:
hold out thy hand to a fallen wretch,
who commends himself to thee
and dedicates himself to be thy servant forever.
I praise and thank God,
who of His great mercy
hath given me this confidence in thee,
a sure pledge of my eternal salvation.
Alas, it is only too true
that in the past I have fallen miserably,
because I did not come to thee.
I know that with thy help I shall conquer;
I know that thou wilt help me,
if I commend myself to thee;
but I am fearful lest in the occasions of sin
I shall forget to call upon thee
and so I shall be lost.
This grace, then, do I ask of thee;
for this I implore thee,
as much as I can and know how to do;
namely, that in the assaults of hell
I may ever run to thy protection
and may say to thee:
Mary, help me;
Mother of Perpetual Help,
permit me not to lose my God.

Say the Hail Mary here...


O Mother of Perpetual Help,
grant me ever to be able to call upon thy powerful name,
since thy name is the help of the living
and the salvation of the dying.
Ah, Mary most pure,
Mary most sweet,
grant that thy name from this day forth
may be to me the very breath of life.
Dear Lady, delay not to come to my assistance
whenever I call upon thee;
for in all the temptations that assail me,
in all the necessities that befall me,
I will never leave off calling upon thee,
ever repeating: Mary, Mary.
What comfort, what sweetness,
what confidence, what tenderness fills my soul
at the sound of thy name,
at the very thought of thee!
I give thanks to our Lord,
who for my sake hath given thee a name so sweet,
so lovable, so mighty.
But I am not content merely to speak thy name;
I would utter it for very love of thee;
it is my desire that love
should ever remind me to name thee,
Mother of Perpetual Help.

Say the Hail Mary here...


O Mother of Perpetual Help,
thou art the dispenser of every grace
that God grants us in our misery;
it is for this cause that He hath made thee so powerful,
so rich, so kind,
that thou mightest assist us in our miseries.
Thou art the advocate of the most wretched
and abandoned sinners,
if they but come unto thee;
come once more to my assistance,
for I commend myself to thee.
In thy hands I place my eternal salvation;
to thee I entrust my soul.
Enroll me among thy most faithful servants;
take me under thy protection
and it is enough for me: yes,
for if thou protect me,
I shall fear nothing; not my sins,
for thou wilt obtain for me their pardon and remission;
not the evil spirits,
for thou art mightier than all the powers of hell;
not even Jesus, my Judge,
for He is appeased by a single prayer from thee.
I fear only that through my own negligence
I may forget to recommend myself to thee
and so I shall be lost.
My dear Lady,
obtain for me the forgiveness of my sins,
love for Jesus,
final perseverance
and the grace to have recourse to thee at all times,
O Mother of Perpetual Help.

Say the Hail Mary here...

Sounds like Blasphemy to me!

 

[JarJo]

The New Testament is that oral tradition of the Apostles put into writing and according to Peter, whom I believe Rome holds in high esteem, the written prophetic word is much "more sure" than oral apostolic teaching - 2 Pet. 1:18

Here's the verse you quote, which says nothing like you claim:

18 We ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven when we were with him on the sacred mountain. 19 We also have the prophetic message as something completely reliable, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. 20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. 21 For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

What you have in the Ante-Nicene Records is the history of apostasy!

I see no evidence of an apostasy when I read the ante-nicene fathers. If Christianity had apostasized during that time, I would expect to see some evidence of a major struggle and great division. I don't see that.

 

[The Biblicist]

re's the verse you quote, which says nothing like you claim:

I mistakenly said verse 18 when I meant to say 19 - my mistake. I am quoting form the KJV but you are quoting from some other version. The Greek term translated "more sure" is Bebaioteron and means something very steadfast and sure. Peter is comparing his oral teaching of his eye witness event (vv. 15-18) with the more trustworthy stability of the written prophetic word (vv. 19-21).

I see no evidence of an apostasy when I read the ante-nicene fathers. If Christianity had apostasized during that time, I would expect to see some evidence of a major struggle and great division. I don't see that.

You don't see it because you don't compare what the Scriptures teach versus what the Ante-Nicene Father's teach. You read Ante-Nicene theology back into the Scriptures rather than examining Ante-Nicene theology by the Scriptures.

 

[JarJo]

I mistakenly said verse 18 when I meant to say 19 - my mistake. I am quoting form the KJV but you are quoting from some other version. The Greek term translated "more sure" is Bebaioteron and means something very steadfast and sure. Peter is comparing his oral teaching of his eye witness event (vv. 15-18) with the more trustworthy stability of the written prophetic word (vv. 19-21).

No... it doesn't say anything like that at all. The subject is prophecy, not oral vs. written tradition:

19 We also have the prophetic message as something completely reliable, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. 20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things.

You don't see it because you don't compare what the Scriptures teach versus what the Ante-Nicene Father's teach. You read Ante-Nicene theology back into the Scriptures rather than examining Ante-Nicene theology by the Scriptures.

Your version would require that the apostasy occurred immediately and on a vast scale, within the first 20 years after the death of John the Apostle. And this apostasy would have to have been so quick and complete that there was not even a mention of any remnant of faithful Christians after that time. It's an incredible theory.

 

[billwald]

>What you have in the Ante-Nicene Records is the history of apostasy!

The Ante-Nicene record of truth is???


I prefer the Orthodox "Jesus Prayer."

Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, be merciful to me, a sinner.

 

[The Biblicist]

No... it doesn't say anything like that at all. The subject is prophecy, not oral vs. written tradition:

19 We also have the prophetic message as something completely reliable, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. 20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things.

There is a contrast being made. He tells them what he was an eye witness to but then commends them to the written prophetic word "pay attenton to it" as it does not contain the personal views or opinion of the writers but is the personal view of God the Holy Spirit - vv. 20-21. The written prophetic word more sure in many ways than personal experiences related by the apostles orally. Oral teaching declines in accuracy each time it is transferred from person to person but not so with the written word of God it simply grows brighter and brighter as it remains the same on the written page but expands under the influence of the Holy Spirit. Oral tradition gives a Personal perspective but written prophecy gives the perspective of God not the individual view of the writer. Hence, only the written word of prophecy is given for doctrine and correction, instruction, reproof that the man of God may be COMPLETE and THOROUGHLY FURNISHED unto ALL good works. No so with oral tradition as it was designed only to be temporary until the written word completed it (Isa. 8:16; Heb. 2:3-4,10-12; 2 Tim. 3:16; Rev. 1:3, 22:18-19).

Your version would require that the apostasy occurred immediately and on a vast scale, within the first 20 years after the death of John the Apostle. And this apostasy would have to have been so quick and complete that there was not even a mention of any remnant of faithful Christians after that time. It's an incredible theory.

Precisely! John says there were many "anti-christs" already present when he wrote the first John. Paul predicted it shortly (1 Tim. 4:1; 2 Tim. 3:1-7). The state of the congregations of Asia were influenced by it (Rev. 2-3).

 

[JarJo]

Precisely! John says there were many "anti-christs" already present when he wrote the first John. Paul predicted it shortly (1 Tim. 4:1; 2 Tim. 3:1-7). The state of the congregations of Asia were influenced by it (Rev. 2-3).

I can't subscribe to a view where the true Christians completely disappear only 20 years after the apostles then appears again 1000 years later. It just isn't credible IMO. It would mean that the entire book of Acts and the apostolates of Peter and Paul etc. was a big colossal failure. It would imply that Jesus picked a bunch of losers to start his Church, who didn't form the first generation properly.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

I prefer the Orthodox "Jesus Prayer."

Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, be merciful to me, a sinner.

How about the thief on the cross ?

"Jesus, Lord, remember me when you enter into your kingdom."

 

[The Biblicist]

I can't subscribe to a view where the true Christians completely disappear only 20 years after the apostles then appears again 1000 years later. It just isn't credible IMO. It would mean that the entire book of Acts and the apostolates of Peter and Paul etc. was a big colossal failure. It would imply that Jesus picked a bunch of losers to start his Church, who didn't form the first generation properly.

I didn't say that "all" Christians apostatized in the first 20 years or even at all. What I said is that the beginning of the great apostasy was in progress even before the New Testament was finished by the end of the first century and increased century by century right up to the present and is still increasing in growth and size. Take a look at the parable of the tares and you will see the Biblcial perspective of increasing apostasy from the apostolic age to the Second coming. The true seed are HIDDEN among the apostate stuff in the professing kingdom.

 

[JarJo]

I didn't say that "all" Christians apostatized in the first 20 years or even at all. What I said is that the beginning of the great apostasy was in progress even before the New Testament was finished by the end of the first century and increased century by century right up to the present and is still increasing in growth and size. Take a look at the parable of the tares and you will see the Biblcial perspective of increasing apostasy from the apostolic age to the Second coming. The true seed are HIDDEN among the apostate stuff in the professing kingdom.

You're changing your story. First you said the apostasy was complete by the year 100 which is why there is absolutely zero evidence of your 'true christians', even as a separate group, in the ante-nicene fathers. Now you're back to saying that the true christians existed side by side with the catholics from the year 100 on. So lets see the historical evidence for the true christians.

Was Irenaeus a Catholic? If so, he lists out all the known heresies of his time. Which of them do your true biblical Christians fall into? Or will you now claim again that they had completely disappeared to the point where an apostate Irenaeus didn't even bother mentioning them?

 

[DHK]

You're changing your story. First you said the apostasy was complete by the year 100 which is why there is absolutely zero evidence of your 'true christians', even as a separate group, in the ante-nicene fathers. Now you're back to saying that the true christians existed side by side with the catholics from the year 100 on. So lets see the historical evidence for the true christians.

Was Irenaeus a Catholic? If so, he lists out all the known heresies of his time. Which of them do your true biblical Christians fall into? Or will you now claim again that they had completely disappeared to the point where an apostate Irenaeus didn't even bother mentioning them?

Christianity never disappeared.
"The Lord knows them that are his."
The Lord always had believers that stayed true to his word throughout every generation from the apostles onward to this day (and they weren't the RCC). If you were objective enough to sit down and study Baptist History you would find out how Rome has revised history and re-written it. In our history books today the bloody Crusades have been cleaned up and sanitized, made to look like necessary war fare--the exact opposite of what they were--bloody needless massacre against defenseless people. The most horrible of Inquisitions are hardly touched upon and/or explained--All for the political expediency of the RCC.
Read some Baptist history and see what really happened.
It was a Catholic, Cardinal Hosius, that testified that the Waldenses were a righteous and godly living people that lived for the last 1200 years right down to the time of the Apostles. At least there was one among the RCC that was willing to admit it.

 

[JarJo]

It was a Catholic, Cardinal Hosius, that testified that the Waldenses were a righteous and godly living people that lived for the last 1200 years right down to the time of the Apostles. At least there was one among the RCC that was willing to admit it.

Let's see your citation for this