Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Following-Truth:5 Facts That Must Be Ignored BeforeAccusing CatholicsOf “Mary Worship”[Cath & Open]
Following the ^ | Jun 19th, 2012 | Gary Zimak

Posted on 07/03/2012 4:52:59 PM PDT by Salvation

5 Facts That Must Be Ignored Before Accusing Catholics Of “Mary Worship”!

I love the Blessed Mother! There…I said it and I’m glad I did! As a Catholic, I’m so blessed to be a member of the Church that truly honors and respects the Mother of my Lord and Savior. I must admit that, even though I’m a cradle Catholic, I didn’t always feel this way. In fact, for most of my life I didn’t understand Mary’s role or care about her too much. What a mistake! Now, after several recent accusations of “Mary worship” on my Facebook page, it’s time to stand up for my “Mom”. And, even though I love her and want to defend her honor, I have no intention of getting nasty. Rather, I’d prefer to present 5 facts about Mary. Before you accuse Catholics of worshiping Mary, I ask you to take a long hard look at these facts. They have a way of poking holes in the theory that we place too much emphasis on Mary. If you still want to accuse Catholics of worshiping Mary, then I suggest you ignore these facts!

1. God Sent The Savior Through Mary – I list this one first because it’s really tough to downplay Mary’s importance while acknowledging that the long awaiting Messiah came to earth by being born of a woman…and that woman was Mary. Out of all the ways that Jesus could have come to earth, why was Mary chosen? If Mary was important to God, shouldn’t she mean something to us?

2. Jesus Performed His First Miracle At Mary’s Request - This is another good one. Oh I know, Jesus didn’t need Mary to turn the water into wine at Cana. She just happened to be there. OK, why then did St. John list Mary FIRST in his list of wedding guests?

On the third day there was a marriage at Cana in Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there; Jesus also was invited to the marriage with His disciples. (John 2:1-2)

If Mary is not important in this saga, why is she listed BEFORE the apostles and BEFORE Jesus? St. John the Evangelist was not known for inserting extraneous details. Mary is listed first because John wants to call the readers’ attention to her presence at the wedding.

But what about “the rebuke”? You know, the argument that Jesus was telling Mary to “butt out” when He stated:

“O woman, what have you to do with me? My hour has not yet come.” (John 2:4)

Jesus was a devout Jew and an obedient follower of the Ten Commandments. Why would He publicly dishonor His mother in violation of the Fourth Commandment? Secondly, if this was such a “put down” by Jesus, why did He go ahead and perform the miracle of changing water into wine? Wouldn’t that have been the end of the request. Of course it would, unless He wasn’t putting Mary down. When His mother interceded on behalf of the couple, Our Lord decided that His time had now come. Don’t you think Jesus is trying to tell us something? Isn’t is probable that Jesus waited until Mary’s request, in order to show us her intercessory power? Doesn’t that explain why St. John listed her first among the guests?

3. Jesus Gave Mary To John From The Cross – As He suffered and died on the Cross, Jesus made a very profound statement:

When Jesus saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing near, He said to His mother, “Woman, behold your son!” Then He said to the disciple, “Behold your mother!” And from that hour the disciple took her to his own home. (John 19:26-27)

Why, while struggling to speak as He hung on the Cross, would Jesus have spoken these words if they didn’t mean anything? Could He have been making small talk? Obviously, there was a reason that Our Lord did what He did. The Church has always believed that John represented each member of the Church and that, from that moment on, Mary became our spiritual mother. Scripture tells us that, on that day John accepted Jesus’ gift and “took her to his own home” (John 19:27). Shouldn’t we do the same?

4. Jesus’ First Graces Were Given Through Mary – This is a fact that frequently gets overlooked by those who wish to downplay Mary’s importance…and it comes straight from the Bible! After accepting God’s offer to become the Mother of the Savior, Mary traveled “in haste” to visit her relative, Elizabeth.

And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the child leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. (Luke 1:41)

According to this Bible passage, before Jesus was even born, Mary’s voice was used to deliver the graces to Elizabeth. Why? Because she’s not important? Isn’t there some other way, these graces could have been dispensed?

Not convinced? Listen to what Elizabeth had to say (also directly from the Bible)…

“For behold, when the voice of your greeting came to my ears, the child in my womb leaped for joy.” (Luke 1:44)

It’s pretty hard to deny the importance of Mary’s presence and voice in dispensing these graces to Elizabeth. Did the graces originate from Mary? No, they obviously came from Jesus. However, He chose to have Mary make the journey and use her voice to deliver them. Why? Because He wants us to realize that she is important!

5. Jesus Christ Is The Sole Mediator Between God And Man - Now, this doesn’t make sense. How does this help to support the Catholic position? This is why we Catholics “have it all wrong”, isn’t it? Sorry if I’m bursting anyone’s bubble, but Catholics absolutely believe that Jesus Christ is the sole mediator between God and man. The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) clearly states this belief:

Intercession is a prayer of petition which leads us to pray as Jesus did. He is the one intercessor with the Father on behalf of all men, especially sinners. (CCC 2634)

This Catholic teaching is supported by the following Bible passage:

For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself as a ransom for all. (1 Timothy 2:5-6)

Although Jesus Christ is the sole mediator between God and man, that doesn’t preclude others (including Mary) from being involved in a subordinate mediation, or intercession. Saint Paul, who made the above statement, is obviously aware of that fact since he several times urges his readers to pray for each other (Romans 1:9, 1 Thessalonians 5:25, 1 Timothy 2:1). The Catechism refers to this type of intercession as being a “participation in the intercession of Christ” (CCC 2635) and is put into practice each time we pray for one another. Asking Mary to intercede for us in no way takes away from Jesus’ role as mediator between God and men.

While I’m not naive enough to think that listing these 5 facts will render me immune from further accusations of “Mary worship”, I do think that they will have an effect if looked at with an open mind. Sacred Scripture does not contain a lot of words about Mary, but what’s there is powerful. Theologians have spent 2,000 years studying her Biblical appearances and will continue to do so. We can learn much by studying Mary’s role as documented in the pages of the Bible. If anyone wants to accuse me of being a “Mary worshiper”, I ask you to first look at these 5 facts. If you still want to point a finger, you’ll need to ignore these factual statements…

because accepting them will seriously undermine your credibility!

TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; History; Theology
KEYWORDS: bible; blessedvirginmary; catholic
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-134 next last
To: Salvation

Statements 1-4 are either irrelevant or at best tangential to the issue. After all, even if you have no dispute with any of those 4 assertions, none of those actually establish that praying to Mary, and according her the level of worship that Catholics do, is appropriate.

Number 5 touches on the salient point, that of intercession, but ignores some key matters. First, though the Bible provides evidence of Christians being told to ask each other to pray for them, there is not a single instance of anyone being told to user prayer in order to make that request. Every example is only of one person simply asking another living person to pray for them.

Now, the Catholic counterpoint to that is to say that Christians, living or dead, are all part of the “communion of saints”, so it is therefore no different to ask a dead Christian, such as Mary to pray for you, than it is to ask a living Christian. However, I see a couple holes in that argument.

First, in order for us to accept this argument, the person being prayed to must be part of this communion, or the point is of no consequence. This is only important in the case of asking those not living on earth for intercession, since there is a specific Biblical prohibition against communicating with the dead or with spirits that is relevant to this case. Catholics can argue that Christians who have part in Christ’s resurrection are not “dead” once their bodies die on earth, thus exempting prayer to them from this prohibition. However, only if one was certain of the person’s spiritual condition, be it in heaven, hell, or somewhere else, could one be certain that praying to them would be acceptable and not an act of divination or spiritualism. Thus, one must accept the Catholic Church’s proclamations of the status of Saints such as Mary as absolute, in order to think that this type of prayer is not fraught with danger.

Secondly, we know that living Christians can hear our request and respond, since they are alive and this is just factual observation. On the other hand, we have no real evidence or scriptural examples to say Mary or others who may be in Heaven can actually hear our prayers, or have something approaching omniscience to be able to hear the prayers of multitudes around the world, even those praying silently. Again, we must take the Catholic Church’s opinion on the matter as the absolute truth, or we can’t easily overlook this issue.

Finally, these Catholic doctrines on Mary deal with much more than the simple matter of one Christian saying a prayer for another. The practice of praying to Mary and other Saints imply that their intercessions are more efficacious than the intercessions of others. This idea has a lot of repercussions, and there are more than a few arguments that can be raised against it.

Also, the doctrines on Mary and the saints involve not only simple prayers of intercession, but prayers of reverence. Again, the Catholics invoke the “communion of saints”, as well as the Commandment to honor your father and mother, to answer this objection. Still, the reverence shown to some saints, and especially to Mary, goes well beyond the practice of showing respect to people on earth, and it can be argued that it approaches the level or giving worship to them that is due only to God. The Catholic Church assures us that this level of worship is not inappropriate, but again, we have to accept that they are absolutely correct on that matter, or there is a problem not easily ignored.

In the end, it simply boils down to trusting the authority of the Catholic Church’s doctrine on the matter, in order to put these objections aside. If you are a Catholic, then you will accept that authority, and see no issues at all with these practices. For non-Catholics, there are plenty of reasons to question and object to the practices, but the responses all boil down to “we don’t have to worry about that because the Church says it’s okay”.

21 posted on 07/03/2012 6:23:00 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion

And what if Zimak is right. What he is writing is in line with the teachings of the Church and the Catholic Catechism.

22 posted on 07/03/2012 6:23:52 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

I’ve often wondered how you could pray to someone who has died, how could they hear you in Heaven? I would think only
God could possibly hear all the prayers.

23 posted on 07/03/2012 6:36:27 PM PDT by Mmogamer (I refudiate the lamestream media, leftists and their prevaricutions.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Mmogamer
I’ve often wondered how you could pray to someone who has died, how could they hear you in Heaven? I would think only God could possibly hear all the prayers.

How was Saul able to call Samuel through the witch of Endor?

24 posted on 07/03/2012 6:50:23 PM PDT by Petrosius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Mmogamer

Elijah and Moses, who had died, conversed with Jesus at the Transfiguration.

25 posted on 07/03/2012 6:57:35 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: James Mott
"Here is all you need to know about the catholic church, if you have the guts to read it." You have posted this same claim and link on at least a couple of threads I've seen now.

Your reasoning obviously rests on clearly fallacious logic (applying attributes you perceive in part of a group to the entire group).

By using precisely that same kind of logic, you would have to apply the faults and evils you see in Judas Iscariot to Jesus Christ and his other apostles and followers, as they were all part of the same group.

That kind of claim is plainly based on fallacious reasoning, and is simply false.     (Please remember that all falsehoods come ultimately from the father of all lies.)

I urge you to do a lot more serious thinking about this matter with a prayerful heart, and to please stop repeatedly posting that link with your false claim that this somehow tells you all you need to know about the Catholic Church.     Truthfully, it emphatically does not, and anyone who claims it does is not a friend of the truth.

26 posted on 07/03/2012 7:08:24 PM PDT by Heart-Rest ("The Church is the pillar and bulwark of the truth." (1 Timothy 3:15))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

I do not want to try to change your mind in any way. Each of us should be convinced in his own heart in matters of faith. And I am happy for you to find faith in your church. I wish you the best there.

I just expressed my view that exogesis is absent. In its place I see only eisogesis. For that reason, I believe Zimak handles the Scriptures poorly. Many of these articles are the same.

Having said that, in general, Protestants make too little of Mary and Catholics too much. The Bible, just right.

blessings to you this fourth.

27 posted on 07/03/2012 7:13:52 PM PDT by aMorePerfectUnion ("I'm comfortable with a Romney win." - Pres. Jimmy Carter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion

“they are used in a way that does violence to the meaning”

Question, Are you one who believes in sola scripture? If so is not at the heart of that argument that the individual has the power to understand the meaning? And then if you prescribe to that philosophy how could you question the author then? Does this mean you have more authority than them? Than I? Than anyone else? Or by definition all have the same authority to interpret? Just wondering if that is where you are coming from. Might not be the case but it seams to be a common theme on these threads.

28 posted on 07/03/2012 7:17:03 PM PDT by jafojeffsurf (Return to the Constitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Mmogamer; metmom; boatbums; caww; presently no screen name; smvoice; HarleyD; bkaycee; HossB86; ...
Another of the seemingly daily thread promoting the Roman church, perhaps they gain indulgences. In any case, the tendency of carnal religion flesh is to think of mortals above that which is written, whether it Benny Hinn or Mary.

In the the Catholic tendency to almost deify Mary, it is taught by Catholics*,

Finally, although (technically) Mary is not to be worshiped in the same sense that God is worshiped, yet the distinctions between devotion to Mary and the worship of God are quite fine, and much due to the psychological appeal of a heavenly mother (especially among those for whom Scripture is not supreme), then the historical practice of Catholics has been to exalt Mary above that which is written, (1Cor. 4:6) and thus, "By the sixteenth century, as evidenced by the spiritual struggles of the Reformers, the image of Mary had largely eclipsed the centrality of Jesus Christ in the life of believers." (Robert C. Broderick, ed., The Catholic Encyclopedia, revised and updated; NY: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1987, pp.32,33)

The practice of praying to departed saints and Mary was one that developed, helped by pagan influences, as while Scripture provides no example of any believer praying to anyone in Heaven by the Lord, this was a practice of pagans, including to the “Queen of Heaven.” (Jer. 44:17,18,19,25). The Catholic Encyclopedia admits that a further reinforcement of this idea, “was derived from the cult of the angels, which, while pre-Christian in its origin, was heartily embraced by the faithful of the sub-Apostolic age. It seems to have been only as a sequel of some such development that men turned to implore the intercession of the Blessed Virgin. This at least is the common opinion among scholars, though it would perhaps be dangerous to speak too positively. Evidence regarding the popular practice of the early centuries is almost entirely lacking...,” (Catholic Encyclopedia > Devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary) but which it imagines came from the apostles — who never exampled or instructed it, but who instead showed that the believer has immediate access to God in the Divine Christ, (Heb. 10:19), who is the all sufficient and immediate intercessor between God (the Father) and man. (Heb. 2:17,18; 4:15,16) To the glory of God

I would also like to say that while Roman Catholics condescend to using Scripture in attempting to substantiate to evangelicals that what they hold to is Scriptural, yet in reality neither the Mariology of Catholicism or assurance of doctrine is based upon the weight of Scriptural warrant, but it rests upon the premise of the self-proclaimed authority of Rome, with her assuredly “infallible” magisterium (which infallibly defined herself as being infallible, when speaking in accordance with her infallibly defined scope and subject-based formula), which is held to be able to provide such assurance.

Therefore any appeal to Scripture by Roman Catholic apologists as if it could provide assurance of truth is ultimately in order to convince souls that this is not the way to obtain certitude, and instead their goal must be to convince souls to make a fallible decision to place implicit trust in the assuredly infallible magisterium (AIM) of Rome, as if it were God (though Roman Catholics must discern which pronouncements, of out many candidates, are infallible).

Recognized Roman Catholic authorities and other web apologists will sometimes admit that, as the Catholic Encyclopedia states, "no direct or categorical and stringent proof of the dogma can be brought forward from Scripture" for the Immaculate Conception, and which understatement also applies to PV.

While Catholic authorities such as Cardinal Newman have attempted to explain the lack of Scriptural support by asserting that “Christians have never gone to Scripture for proof of their doctrines, till there was actual need, from the pressure of controversy,” (Anglican Difficulties, London, 1885, II, 54), the reliance upon Scripture to establish truth claims in Scripture does not allow the lack of support for these Marian excesses.

Ratzinger acknowledged that Mary, “in the gospel tradition is quite marginal.” (“God and the world;” p. 296) unlike to souls like Peter and Paul, the latter of whom sees relative little emphasis by Catholics, especially as compared with Mary. And because Scripture does not say what the Catholic wants it to say about Mary, and due to the second class (at best) status of Scripture for Catholics, what the Catholic must attempt to do is to defend a tradition by wresting texts of Scripture to support it, often going to extrapolative extremes, and which actually demeans Scripture, rather than honoring it like as he does the Catholic Mary.

Scripture no where states or teaches an exception for Mary as regards not being a sinner, or for her being a perpetually sinless virgin and having a sexless marriage (contrary to its description: Gn. 2:24; Mt. 19:4,5), who is ascended to Heaven, and who is already crowned (which happens after the resurrection) and enthroned as Queen of Heaven with almost unlimited power, including having the ability to process virtually unlimited prayer requests, (the Holy Spirit provides zero examples of prayer to anyone in Heaven but the Lord, or in its instructions on who to pray to), and who is even set forth by some notable Catholics as a more immediate and superior recourse for help than Christ Himself,

Such an absence of real substantiation is contrary to the manifest practice of the Holy Spirit in stating similar and even lesser exceptions to the norm by notable subjects, from the blood of righteous Abel, (Gn. 4:10; Mt. 23:35) to the age of Methuselah, (Gn. 5:27) to the strength of Samson, (Jdg. 4:4,16; 16:12,29,30) to the number of toes of the Philistine giant, (2Sam. 21:20), to the special diet of the Baptist, (Mt. 3:4) to Joseph being a just man, (Mt. 1:19) to the supernatural transport of Phillip, (Acts 8:40) to Jesus being sinless, which He is said at least twice to be. (2Cor. 5:21; 1Pt. 2:22)

In addition, as such claims for the Catholic Mary are (sometimes extreme) exceptions to the norm, then the burden of proof is upon the Catholic to established them, and not upon us, any more then we must disprove the existence of the Mormonic angel “Moroni.”

As evangelical apologist Steve Hays argues, "If the evidence is uncertain, then our position should be uncertain; not: our evidence is uncertain; therefore, it's certain that Mary was a lifelong virgin. If the evidence is uncertain, then that hardly warrants a certain conclusion.”

Yet some of the Mariology referred to is approved teaching, some of it even being dogma, while the lack of censure of other claims can amount to implicit approval.

In a rare instance of a mild form of reproof of excessive Marian exaltation, no less a devotee of Mary than Cardinal Ratzinger at least recognized that the title “Co-redemptrix” “departs to too great an extent from the language of Scripture and of the Fathers and therefore gives rise to misunderstandings” (see comments on Co-redemptrix below), Yet as regards Scripture, this is also true of other aspects of Catholic exaltation of Mary, which depart too greatly from the sober and balanced descriptions given of Mary in Scripture, showing how she was a holy saint and a virgin, but not going beyond into the extremes of Catholic devotion, in which the Roman Catholic apologists add to their transgressions in their attempts to find support from Scripture by many unwarranted extrapolations.

*Catholic ascriptions to Mary (supplementary to this link):

The recourse we have to Mary in prayer follows upon the office she continuously fills by the side of the throne of God as Mediatrix of Divine grace; being by worthiness and by merit most acceptable to Him, and, therefore, surpassing in power all the angels and saints in Heaven. — Iucunda Semper Expectatione, Pope Leo XIII, 1894

Moreover, one must remember that the Blood of Christ shed for our sake and those members in which He offers to His Father the wounds He received, the price of our liberty, are no other than the flesh and blood of the virgin, since the flesh of Jesus is the flesh of Mary, and however much it was exalted in the glory of His resurrection, nevertheless the nature of His flesh derived from Mary remained and still remains the same — FIdentem Piumque Animum; de Assumpt. B. V. M., c.v., among the Opera S. Aug;

“The blood that Redeemed us on the cross came from her veins.” — Fire of Mercy, Heart of the Word: Meditations on the Gospel..., by Erasmo Leiva-Merikakisp, Volume 1, p. 623

But by her compassion for her Divine Son she had to suffer, as He did, all the consequences of sin. It was not only during the Passion that Jesus and Mary suffered for our sins, for all their lives that heartrending vision was before them in every detail, and never for a moment forgotten. — The Reign of Mary, Vol. 40; Issue 48

Mary is our Lady and Queen because she, the new Eve, has shared intimately in the redemptive work of Christ, the new Adam, by suffering with Him and offering Him up to the Eternal Father. — Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma by Dr. Ludwig Ott, Part 3. cp. 1 (Tan Books & Publishers, Inc., 1974). Imprimatur: +Cornelius, Ep. Corgagiensis et Ap. Adm. Rossesis, October 7, 1954;

"We were condemned through the fault of one woman; we are saved through the merits of another woman. Just as Eve was the root of death for everyone, so Mary was the source of life for everyone. (Ten Series of Meditations on the Mystery of the Rosary,” by John Ferraro, Nihil Obstat - John C. Hogan, Diocesan Censor

Imprimatur (1) - Richard Cardinal Cushing Daughters of St.Paul, 1964).

"After God, it is impossible to think of anything greater than His Mother." - p. 83 ^

"As Mother of the Word Incarnate, Mary was elevated to a certain equality with the Heavenly Father." - p. 83 ^ her, Jesus owes His Precious Blood...Next to God, she deserves the highest creature, can ever be compared to her: "To what shall I compare thee, or to whom shall I liken thee, O daughter of Jerusalem." (Lam. 2:13) [another verse taken out of context, as it refers to the affliction of Jewish mothers in general due to the judgment upon Jerusalem]

..all graces of the Precious Blood come through Mary. No grace is given without her intercession. —

We know, too, that united to the Divinity in the Eucharist there is Jesus' Body and Blood taken from the body and blood of the Blessed Virgin. Therefore at every Holy Communion we receive, it would be quite correct, and a very beautiful thing, to take notice of our Holy Mother's sweet and mysterious presence, inseparably united with Jesus in the Host....the blood of Jesus is the maternal blood of Mary...

Go with this ineffable chaste thought to the banquet of God and you will find in the Blood of the Son the nourishment of the Mother. Jesus is always the Immaculate flesh and the Virginal blood of His Most Holy Mother which penetrates into our hearts and inebriates our souls.

What is needed is a mother who may eat this supersubstantial Bread, transform it into her milk, and in this way feed her poor children. This mother is Mary. She nourishes herself with the Word and transforms It into the Sacred Humanity. She transforms It into Flesh and Blood, i.e., into this sweetest of milk which is called the Eucharist."..

"O Christian who comest full of faith to receive the Bread of life, eat It worthily, and remember that It was fashioned out of Mary's pure blood." Mary can quite rightfully beckon to us and speak to us in the words of the inspired prophet, "Come and eat my bread, drink the wine I have prepared" (Prov. 9:5)...

Thus every time we go to Holy Communion, something sweet to recall is that Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament is the Bread of Life produced from Mary with the flour of her Immaculate flesh, kneaded with the admixture of her virginal milk. —

"The union between the Immaculata and the Holy Spirit is so inexpressible, yet so perfect, that the Holy Spirit acts only by the Most Blessed Virgin, his Spouse. This is why she is the mediatrix of all graces given by the Holy Spirit. And since every grace is a gift of God the Father through the Son and by the Holy Spirit, it follows that there is no grace which Mary cannot dispose of as her own, which is not given to her for this purpose." — Manteau-Bonamy, Immaculate Conception, 91; F.X. Durrwell, The Holy Spirit of God (Cincinnati: Servant Books, 2006), 183-185.


29 posted on 07/03/2012 7:19:58 PM PDT by daniel1212 (Come to the Lord Jesus as a damned+morally destitute sinner,+trust Him to save you, then live 4 Him)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: jafojeffsurf

“Just wondering if that is where you are coming from. Might not be the case but it seams to be a common theme on these threads.”

In short, no.

30 posted on 07/03/2012 7:36:56 PM PDT by aMorePerfectUnion ("I'm comfortable with a Romney win." - Pres. Jimmy Carter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Petrosius

“How was Saul able to call Samuel through the witch of Endor? “

God doesn’t want us accessing departed souls through witches.

31 posted on 07/03/2012 7:39:45 PM PDT by aMorePerfectUnion ("I'm comfortable with a Romney win." - Pres. Jimmy Carter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

I love Mary and beleive that God chose her to be the eathly mother of is son. She has to be special for God to choose her for such a mission. She was obedient to God. I love Joseph, the man God chose to serve as Jesus’ earthly dad. He was obedient to God’s plan, too.

I don’t pray to them, though. I pray to God. I was raised Catholic and from an early age, I knew the go betweens between me and Jesus were not supposed to be there. I bypassed the priest and confessed my sin directly to Jesus and He knew my sorrow and he lifted the burden directly. Until the fifth grade, my mom made me go to confession and I would pray that Jesus would forgive her and the Priests because they did not know we are supposed to talk to Him directly.

I have no idea what Mary is doing in heaven but I think it is safe to assume she’s put to good use by our Father. I don’t think she is supposed to be a go between God and his children in worship so I do not pray to her. But I would not be surprised if she is not sent to help people or involved with a fleet of angels who do help God’s children.

She was full of grace in life and I imagine the same is true in heaven. She was blessed with a heartbreaking mission as Jesus’ earthly mom. The same with Joseph, but sadly, we don’t hear much about him. She is not ‘the mother of God’ as God has no beginning and no end. Some Catholics do worship her and place her above her Son. Some Catholics do pray and pour their hearts out to everyone but Jesus. But this is not true of all Catholics.

32 posted on 07/03/2012 7:40:21 PM PDT by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

I am not going to discuss this article on this thread. But I wanted to give the Catholics on here a heads up. If you think it’s appropriate, you can post it as an open thread or closed.

33 posted on 07/03/2012 7:45:06 PM PDT by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion

The issue is not the use of witches but the ability of the dead to hear the pleas of the living. Scriptures says they can. No witches are involved.

34 posted on 07/03/2012 7:54:07 PM PDT by Petrosius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: daniel1212


35 posted on 07/03/2012 7:54:18 PM PDT by xone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

>>Funny, I always thought that Christ came to save the sinners!<<

The whole world is full of us. Even in the Catholic Church. Afterall, I’m there!

36 posted on 07/03/2012 7:55:53 PM PDT by netmilsmom (Romney scares me. Obama is the freaking nightmare that is so bad you are afraid to go back to sleep)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Petrosius

“The issue is not the use of witches but the ability of the dead to hear the pleas of the living. Scriptures says they can. No witches are involved.”

I’m not aware of any Scriptures that say the dead hear the pleas of the living... or any command that we should seek their assistance.

37 posted on 07/03/2012 7:56:06 PM PDT by aMorePerfectUnion ("I'm comfortable with a Romney win." - Pres. Jimmy Carter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
Although Jesus Christ is the sole mediator between God and man, that doesn’t preclude others (including Mary) from being involved in a subordinate mediation

If there's a subordinate mediator also, then there is no sole mediator.

Sole means only.

Your thinking is fuzzy.

38 posted on 07/03/2012 7:59:55 PM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion
I’m not aware of any Scriptures that say the dead hear the pleas of the living...

Samuel was dead; Saul was alive.

39 posted on 07/03/2012 8:09:33 PM PDT by Petrosius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: what's up; Religion Moderator

**Your thinking is fuzzy. **

Are you trying to read my mind? That’s against the religion forum rules.

40 posted on 07/03/2012 8:14:19 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-134 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson