republicanchick
New member
believe what you want about Holy Communion. We Catholics know...
If you want to miss out, that is your choice. I can't make you appreciate Jesus (ingesting Him, as per John 6:27-72)
Pope Continues Heresies About Mary
- Thread starter serpentdove
- Start date
believe what you want about Holy Communion. We Catholics know...
If you want to miss out, that is your choice. I can't make you appreciate Jesus (ingesting Him, as per John 6:27-72)
republicanchick
New member
there is a prayer to Elijah in the Word somewhere. You would know this if you went to Mass every day and/or read the Bible, both of which I do
genuineoriginal
New member
Yes, Saul sought out a woman with a familiar spirit in order to commit a mortal sin.
1 Samuel 28:7 7 Then said Saul unto his servants, Seek me a woman that hath a familiar spirit, that I may go to her, and enquire of her. And his servants said to him, Behold, there is a woman that hath a familiar spirit at Endor. |
Are you suggesting that anyone else should commit the mortal sins that woman committed?
they aren't
it would be binding
if
the pope said they must pray to mary
but
he didn't say that
he said it was okay
if
you wanted to
that is loosening
Cruciform
New member
Please name the formal Church council during the first millennium-and-a-half of Christian history which declared that Mary's Immaculate Conception is a "heresy," and record the date of this proclamation.
Mary herself possesses no power to save. Rather, she is an instrument through which God communicates saving graces to humanity. Given his militantly anti-Catholic bias, Gendron is simply incapable of correctly understanding the Catechism, and certainly of accurately "explaining" its content.
Gaudium de veritate,
Cruciform
+T+
oatmeal
Well-known member
If you are not taught to worship Mary, what's all that worshipping of Mary about?
Is that Mary worship ? or is that worshiping an physical statue?
Cruciform
New member
Aimiel
Well-known member
No, I'm sorry, there isn't. Please guess again.
I do read my Bible, although I wouldn't go to a pagan church, for any reason.
Aimiel
Well-known member
Both. :thumb:
Right Divider
Body part
So proud of you and that you just know it's in there somewhere.
genuineoriginal
New member
Peter did not say it was okay to commit mortal sins.
Your pope was not given the authority to tell people it is okay to commit mortal sins.
genuineoriginal
New member
Please name any formal Church council that has not come to a heretical conclusion.
[Pope Continues Heresies About Mary Proclaiming the Gospel Ministries]linger: "Pope Francis venerated the statue of the Immaculate Conception on December 8 and invited others to join him. The statue was created in 1857 as a mark of the Roman Catholic belief that Mary was conceived without sin. "I ask you to spiritually unite yourselves to me in this pilgrimage, which expresses filial devotion to our heavenly mother," he said. The concept of the "immaculate conception" was declared by Pope Pius IX on December 8, 1844, who issued a proclamation stating, "The most Blessed Virgin Mary was, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God and by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, Savior of the human race, preserved immune from all stain of original sin."
1.
[Mike Gendron Comment] The doctrine of Mary's pure conception without sin is pure heresy. Catholic doctrine, not only teaches that Mary was sinless, but that she has power to save. The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC)] teaches "Mary did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation" (CCC, para. 969). "The Immaculate Virgin, preserved free from all stain of original sin, when the course of her earthly life was finished, was taken up body and soul into heavenly glory, and exalted by the Lord as Queen over all things. In giving birth, you kept your virginity. You conceived the living God and, by your prayers, will deliver our souls from death" (CCC, para. 966). Read more of Mike's interview with CNN here." Pro-Gospel.org
1. If the concept of the "immaculate conception" was declared by Pope Pius IX on December 8, 1844, what was the Vatican's position for the first 18 centuries of the Church's existance.
2. "The Immaculate Virgin, preserved free from all stain of original sin, when the course of her earthly life was finished, was taken up body and soul into heavenly glory, and exalted by the Lord as Queen over all things. In giving birth, you kept your virginity. You conceived the living God and, by your prayers, will deliver our souls from death"
This is based on an accummulation of Catholic traditions, but there is nothing in the Bible to substantiate that Mary was:
- preserved free from all stain of original sin,
- taken up body and soul into heavenly glory, and exalted by the Lord as Queen over all things
- by your prayers, will deliver our souls from death
Cruciform
New member
Essentially the same. Formal Church definitions of dogma merely affirm---in an official capacity---what Christ's one historic Church has always believed and taught.
Addressed here, and here.
Basically, your position here assumes the validity of the 16th-century Protestant notion of sola scriptura ("scripture alone"), a doctrine that is itself nowhere contained in "Scripture alone," and so which merely refutes itself. The doctrine was entirely unheard of in the Christian Church prior to the 15th-century Proto-Reformation Period at the very earliest.
Gaudium de veritate,
Cruciform
+T+
Spitfire
New member
Thou preachest unto yond proverbial choir. Try telling that to all the English-only Christians who assume "worship" always and only means the kind of worship that is due to God alone.
So would you also object to Christians bowing before a crucifix or a statue of Jesus? Or would it be easier to understand in that case that it's not the image of a strange god that we have fashioned for ourselves?
Mary is not a strange goddess either. She is neither strange (we adore her specifically because she is the mother of Jesus) nor is she a goddess (the heresy of Collyridianism, in which Mary is worshiped as a goddess, was condemned as early as 375 by Epiphanius of Salamis in his Panarion and the church at large has never assumed a contrary stance on the matter).
If you would say that it violates God's commandments even when it's an image of Jesus and not of Mary, once again, we do not believe that the statue itself is divine, we do not adore the statue itself, and we certainly do not serve the statue. Our gestures toward the statue communicate our feelings about the person who the statue represents. For example, we definitely would not consider it a good idea to attack and destroy a statue of Jesus because this implies far more than desire to destroy a statue, it would be an expression of hostility toward Jesus himself.
Compare with the incident in Exodus 32.
All that being said, I, personally, don't think Mary wants us to bow down to her, even if we understand that she is not divine. I am sure she appreciates other gestures of respect and would consider it appropriate for us to kneel when joining her in prayer, but I think she would probably consider it more fitting to bow down before her son. However, if men and women once bowed before mortal kings and emperors as a sign of their respect and trust, I see no reason why Mary would be unworthy of the highest degree of adoration that one human may show another.
Attempting to communicate with Mary using a ouija board would indeed be a terrible idea. Asking Mary to pray for us is no more sinister than asking a friend here on Earth, however. God is the God of the living. If the souls of the faithful are not in Heaven with God now, then Jesus was crucified in vain. The doctrine of soul sleep is completely without any scriptural justification and seems to have been contrived solely for the purpose of providing some defense against the idea of the intercession of saints. I'm perpetually amazed at how far God's anarchists will go in compromising the integrity of their own beliefs and constructing bizarre doctrines of bits and pieces of scripture merely in order to retain their pointless dispute with the big bad RCC.
Last edited:
republicanchick
New member
republicanchick
New member
one thing's for sure. People would be more logical following a 2000 yr old Church than to follow the likes of the anitcatholics as found on internet forums... who don't even study Catholicism but put themselves out as experts just the same... dumb