The Catholics link to Idolatry from Ancient Baylon

In the interest of fairness, I am posting the complete paragraph.

When read as a whole you get a different feeling.

(Bolded added by me.)

17. For to be right and good, worship of the Mother of God ought to spring from the heart; acts of the body have here neither utility nor value if the acts of the soul have no part in them. Now these latter can only have one object, which is that we should fully carry out what the divine Son of Mary commands. For if true love alone has the power to unite the wills of men, it is of the first necessity that we should have one will with Mary to serve Jesus our Lord. What this most prudent Virgin said to the servants at the marriage feast of Cana she addresses also to us: "Whatsoever he shall say to you, do ye" (John ii., 5). Now here is the word of Jesus Christ: "If you would enter into life, keep the commandments" (Matt. xix., 17). Let them each one fully convince himself of this, that if his piety towards the Blessed Virgin does not hinder him from sinning, or does not move his will to amend an evil life, it is a piety deceptive and Iying, wanting as it is in proper effect and its natural fruit.

You see, honor of Mary is first honor of Jesus.

 

Actually, you said "the" offical Vatican site.

Do you see a distinction?

Yes, I see that it is not an offical organ of the Church.

Rather than reading into words as you are doing here, I read the actual words.

I'll repeat them for you,

"Catholic Information Network (CIN) offers a free exchange of news, information and discussion, and is not an official organ of the Catholic Church."

Already addressed this one post back.

 

tryingtounderstand,

Pope Pius X says "the Virgin, borrowing the words of Jesus Christ, would address us with the just reproach: "This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me" (Matth. xv., 8).

LEt us examine the words of the Lord Jesus at Matthew 15;8:

"This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.
9 But in vain they do worship Me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men"(Mt.15:8,9).

The words which the Lord Jesus spoke are clearly in reference to "worshipping the Lord Jesus".So if Mary uses words "borrowed" from the LOrd Jesus then those words do not change their meaning but instead mean exactly what they meant when the Lord Jesus spoke those words.

And the next words that Pope Pius X said are indeed in regard to "worship":

For to be right and good, worship of the Mother of God ought to spring from the heart; acts of the body have here neither utility nor value if the acts of the soul have no part in them.

In His grace,--Jerry

 

You tricky guy.

You can't fool me. I see you trying to change the word "honoureth" in the quote above to "worship".

The problem for you is that Pope Pious X said "honoureth".

No amount of spin on your part can change that.

As I said, you read into words instead of reading them.

Is that how you handle the Scriptures too?

 

tryingtounderstand,

I never said that the site is an "offical organ of the Catholic Church".I should have known that there would be some who would deny what the "Vatican Information Service" says since it does not agree with what they believe.Perhaps this service just makes up these things!

You strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.

I will remember that nothing that comes out of the "Vatican Information Service" can be trusted.Typical of everything connected to the church at Rome.

In His grace,--Jerry

[ November 21, 2003, 03:30 PM: Message edited by: Jerry Shugart ]

 

Didn't say that you did.

I provided the quote for you from the site.

Here it is again.

"Catholic Information Network (CIN) offers a free exchange of news, information and discussion, and is not an official organ of the Catholic Church."'

It is not an offical site of the Vatican.

It is not an offical site of the Church.

It does not speak for the Church authoritatively.

It's as simple as that.

I am not saying that they make things up.

I am correctly saying that it is not an offical site of the Vatican.

Nope. Just keeping the record straight.

There you go; reading into words again.

 

The Vatican Information Service is "founded in the Holy See Press Office:

"The Vatican Information Service is a news service, founded in the Holy See Press Office.

We are supposed to believe that even though the organization is called the Holy See Press Office that it is not an offical organization of the Vatican?

And we are supposed to believe that even though "The Holy See Press Office Bulletin publishes the official news of the activities of the Holy Father" that this organization is not an "offical" Vatican site?

Nothing offical here,is there?

Even though the organization publishes the offical news of the activities of the Pope there are some that say that it is not an offical site of the Vatican.

In His grace,--Jerry

 

"There are several degrees of this worship:

if it is addressed directly to God, it is superior, absolute, supreme worship, or worship of adoration, or, according to the consecrated theological term, a worship of latria. This sovereign worship is due to God alone; addressed to a creature it would become idolatry.
When worship is addressed only indirectly to God, that is, when its object is the veneration of martyrs, of angels, or of saints, it is a subordinate worship dependent on the first, and relative, in so far as it honours the creatures of God for their peculiar relations with Him; it is designated by theologians as the worship of dulia, a term denoting servitude, and implying, when used to signify our worship of distinguished servants of God, that their service to Him is their title to our veneration (cf. Chollet, loc. cit., col. 2407, and Bouquillon, Tractatus de virtute religionis, I, Bruges, 1880, 22 sq.).
As the Blessed Virgin has a separate and absolutely supereminent rank among the saints, the worship paid to her is called hyperdulia (for the meaning and history of these terms see Suicer, Thesaurus ecclesiasticus, 1728). "

From the Catholic Encyclopedia at www.newadvent.org under the word "worship" </font>[/QUOTE]Thanks, Trying, I've learned something useful from your post! So once again Catholics are getting beat over the head by Protestants who refuse to accept the Catholic meaning of the words we use to describe our faith. Silly me, I was accepting the Protestant definition! I won't make that mistake again!

CCC 971 "All generations will call me blessed": "The Church's devotion to the Blessed Virgin is intrinsic to Christian worship." The Church rightly honors "the Blessed Virgin with special devotion. From the most ancient times the Blessed Virgin has been honored with the title of 'Mother of God,' to whose protection the faithful fly in all their dangers and needs. . . . This very special devotion . . . differs essentially from the adoration which is given to the incarnate Word and equally to the Father and the Holy Spirit, and greatly fosters this adoration." The liturgical feasts dedicated to the Mother of God and Marian prayer, such as the rosary, an "epitome of the whole Gospel," express this devotion to the Virgin Mary.

 

Jerry,

Looks like you'll have to stop jumping up and down after all. If you want to beat up on Catholics with their own words, you'll need to accept the Catholic definition of those words.

Does it please you to know you have been a vehicle for a greater understanding of my Catholic faith? I hope so!

 

So what kind of language do you Catholics speak? Worship means what it means…the Vatican could have used numerous words to mean what they intended it to mean, right? Then if it doesn’t mean what worship intends to mean, then change it or just say that the Vatican had a brain fart or something. </font>[/QUOTE]"Worship means what it means." You realize how circular that is, don't you? Clearly, the word "worship" has had layers of meaning in Catholic theology for centuries, and these layers have been removed in Protestant useage until the word means one thing only. Exactly the same situation with the word "pray."

As a Catholic in a mostly-Protestant country, I just didn't get the memo until today!

 

trying2understand,

Earlier I said:

Pope Pius X says "the Virgin, borrowing the words of Jesus Christ, would address us with the just reproach: "This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me" (Matth. xv., 8).

Then you said;

No,I was saying that Pope Pius X says that Mary "borrows" the words of the Lord Jesus Christ in regard to the "worship" of Him ("honor" is a part of true "worship") and applies them to herself.

And before this the Pope has this to say:

"Those, alas! furnish us by their conduct with a peremptory proof of it, who seduced by the wiles of the demon or deceived by false doctrines think they can do without the help of the Virgin. Hapless are they who neglect Mary under pretext of the honor to be paid to Jesus Christ! As if the Child could be found elsewhere than with the Mother!"

Can you not see that this denigrates the Lord Jesus Christ.Who in their right mind can refer to the Lord of Glory as "the Child".

Here is a accurate description of the Lord Jesus as seen by the Apostle John:

"His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire;
15 And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters.
16 And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp twoedged sword: and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength.
17 And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead"(Rev.1:14-17).

Doesn't much sound like a "Child",does it?

And what are we to make of the words "hapless are they who neglect Mary under pretext of the honor to be paid to Jesus Christ !"

In His grace,--Jerry

 

Jerry,

At what point did Christ cease to be a child of Mary?

Furthermore, was not the infant Jesus True God and True Man?

More fuss and bother over nothing.

 

Jerry, your little rant doesn't change anything.

In an honest discourse, one does not define the words of the other party for them.

One does not ascribe the meaning of the words of the other party for them.

One listens and attempts to comprehend the meaning of the words as the other party intends to exprss.

Again, instead of insisting upon reading into words, read what the words are actually saying.

 

trying2understand,

Earlier you accused me of "lying" and now you seem to be saying that I am not being "honest" in this discourse.

What a fine gentleman you are!

And you say that I should not be defining the meaning of words for the other party.

Well,someone must because they are confused.First they say that they do not "worship" Mary.But when I show them the words of Pope Pius X that they do "worship" Mary,then they say that there are three different meanings of "worship",and one of those meanings of "worship" is in regard to Mary!

So first they say that they do not "worship" Mary and then later they say that there is indeed a "worship" that applies to Mary.

In His grace,--Jerry

 

Here Jerry (and all my other brothers and sisters), I found another explanation to go along with the one posted by trying2understand:

"In more technical terms used by the Tradition to draw this important distinction, devotion to Mary belongs to the veneration of dulia, or the homage and honor owed to the saints, both angelic and human in heaven, and not to latria, or the adoration and worship that can be given only to the Triune God and the Son incarnate. Because of her unique relationship to Christ in salvation history, however, the special degree of devotion due to Mary has traditionally been called hyperdulia. While latria is owed to her Son by reason of unity of his divine and human natures in the Person of the Word made flesh, hyperdulia is due to Mary as truly his Mother (cf. St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 103, a. 4; III, q. 25, a. 5) (Shaw, ed., Encyclopedia of Catholic Doctrine [Huntington, IN: Our Sunday Visitor, 1997], pg. 401).

Well, that should clear it up for good!

 

trying2understand,

Earlier you accused me of "lying" and now you seem to be saying that I am not being "honest" in this discourse.</font>[/QUOTE]There you go, reading into the words again instead of simply reading the words.

"Honest" was used in reference to "discourse" not "you".

That misunderstanding on your part is due to your 1)reading into the words, 2)defining the words of other persons for them, 3)ascribing the intent of the other person's words for them.

If you avoid these things in the future and instead ask for clarifications, it would help the discussion quite a bit.