Washed, Sanctified and Justified in the Sacraments of the Catholic Church.
Friday, October 16, 2015
Thursday, October 15, 2015
The Case for Islam
A long time ago, a Muslim challenged me to provide a forensic defense of the Gospels. He claimed that compared to Islam, the Gospels had no verifiable evidence of even the existence of Jesus. In fact, he, bluntly stated that evidence for the truth of the Gospels would be thrown out of court!
Read More…
Read More…
Wednesday, October 14, 2015
Analysis of a Conversion - Why I left the Catholic Church, I didn't like the Mass
The Mass? Yep, the Mass.
In the last article, I revealed how, one of the reasons that I left the Catholic Church is because I did not like to kneel and pray. It seemed excruciating torture to me. And it was forced upon me by my parents, especially my grandmother, whenever she prayed. Therefore, I learned, at a very young age, to despise and avoid prayer at all costs.
My disliking the Mass at that age, is partly for a similar reason. But there is more to it. Foremost, I think, is that, at that young age, when they dragged me to Mass, they expected me to sit still. In those days, cry rooms were unknown, and I was a fidgety kid. So, throughout the Mass, I would be rapped on the head with knuckles, elbowed and shushed until it was an experience I did not want to repeat.
Mention the Mass, guess what happened to this kid. I would disappear.
There was more, however. I was a young boy. And I couldn't help but notice that the Mass seemed to be a woman thing. My dad had died before I was born. So, my mom and grandmom, had to rely on my uncle to drive us to Mass. And he would oblige. But he would drop us off and pick us up.
And he wasn't the only one. On the way in to Church, we passed by a lot of men of varying ages, sitting on the stoop. They would wait for their mothers, wives and daughters, outside.
And across the street, there were a group of men with guitars and beer bottles, singing and having fun.
Except for the Priest and a few elderly men, there were very few men in the pews.
So guess where this little boy wanted to be? I wanted to be a man. And men, didn't go to Church.
In the last article, I revealed how, one of the reasons that I left the Catholic Church is because I did not like to kneel and pray. It seemed excruciating torture to me. And it was forced upon me by my parents, especially my grandmother, whenever she prayed. Therefore, I learned, at a very young age, to despise and avoid prayer at all costs.
Fidgety kid
My disliking the Mass at that age, is partly for a similar reason. But there is more to it. Foremost, I think, is that, at that young age, when they dragged me to Mass, they expected me to sit still. In those days, cry rooms were unknown, and I was a fidgety kid. So, throughout the Mass, I would be rapped on the head with knuckles, elbowed and shushed until it was an experience I did not want to repeat.
Mention the Mass, guess what happened to this kid. I would disappear.
No Men
There was more, however. I was a young boy. And I couldn't help but notice that the Mass seemed to be a woman thing. My dad had died before I was born. So, my mom and grandmom, had to rely on my uncle to drive us to Mass. And he would oblige. But he would drop us off and pick us up.
And he wasn't the only one. On the way in to Church, we passed by a lot of men of varying ages, sitting on the stoop. They would wait for their mothers, wives and daughters, outside.
And across the street, there were a group of men with guitars and beer bottles, singing and having fun.
Except for the Priest and a few elderly men, there were very few men in the pews.
So guess where this little boy wanted to be? I wanted to be a man. And men, didn't go to Church.
No Reason
Later, as I grew up, there was no adequate reason given to me why I should attend the Mass. Maybe I missed that day in Catechism class. Or maybe I just didn't understand it when it was explained to me. But, except for someone saying to me that it was a mortal sin to attend the Mass, I didn't have a clue why I had to go. Especially when most of the men in my life, didn't think it necessary either.
Lessons
I drew several lessons from this.
First, most kids are fidgety. I was determined, that when we took our children to Mass, we wouldn't make it a burden for them. So, when they began to fidget, I would immediately take them outside and let them tire themselves out. And when they had worn the wiggle out of themselves, I'd come back in.
Relatedly, our children were raised in the pews. We are daily communicants and have always been since my children were born. So, they learned, very early on, how to behave in the Mass. Its much easier to ingrain a behavior in a child daily, than to expect them to remember to behave a certain way, once a week. In addition, the daily Mass is much shorter in duration, so they get incrementally adjusted to it.
Let's give our boys and young men a good example. Women have been holding the fort all alone for too long. Real men, go to Church, go to Mass and pray.
Children learn by example. This is something which I knew to be true. So, I determined that I would give my children the example that they could follow. And that I would never ask them to do anything which I would not also do.
And finally, reasons. Folks, you can't give anyone that which you don't have. How would you respond to a child that asks you, "Why should I go to Mass?" Do you know why you should go to Mass?
I'm certain I'll give my response to this question in a later article. So, I'll leave it at that for now.
Tuesday, October 13, 2015
Paraphrasing the Summa: First part, Question 1, Article 6
Question 1: The nature and extent of sacred doctrine.
Is Christian doctrine revealed by God? Does it teach us about the supernatural as well as the natural?
Article 6. Whether this doctrine is the same as wisdom?
Does Christian doctrine teach us all that we need to know?
Objection 1. It seems that this doctrine is not the same as wisdom. For no doctrine which borrows its principles is worthy of the name of wisdom; seeing that the wise man directs, and is not directed (Aristotle, Metaphysics i). But this doctrine borrows its principles. Therefore this science is not wisdom.Hm? The first objection seems to confuse "wisdom" or "knowledge" with its source. As I understand the objection, if something is taught by someone other than the originator of the doctrine, then neither the thing taught nor the secondary teacher deserve to be called "wisdom" because it is not their own knowledge they pass along.
Therefore, the objector concludes, that neither the Church which passes along Christian doctrine, nor the Christian doctrine which is passed down, may be classified as "wisdom".
Objection 2. Further, it is a part of wisdom to prove the principles of other sciences. Hence it is called the chief of sciences, as is clear in Ethic. vi (another book by Aristotle). But this doctrine does not prove the principles of other sciences. Therefore it is not the same as wisdom.The second objection says that wisdom confirms the truth of other bodies of knowledge. Therefore, wisdom is called the most important science. But Christian doctrine does not substantiate other sciences. Therefore, it should not be classified as "wisdom".
Objection 3. Further, this doctrine is acquired by study, whereas wisdom is acquired by God's inspiration; so that it is numbered among the gifts of the Holy Spirit (Isaiah 11:2). Therefore this doctrine is not the same as wisdom.And, finally, Christian doctrine is obtained by investigation and inquiry. Whereas, wisdom is given us by divine influence. According to Scripture (Isaiah 11:2), wisdom is a gift of God. Therefore, since men must study to acquire the knowledge taught in Christian doctrine, then Christian doctrine is not wisdom.
On the contrary, It is written (Deuteronomy 4:6): "This is your wisdom and understanding in the sight of nations."St. Thomas counters with another verse from Scripture, wherein it says that the content of Scripture is our wisdom and understanding which the world can see.
I answer that, This doctrine is wisdom above all human wisdom; not merely in any one order, but absolutely. For since it is the part of a wise man to arrange and to judge, and since lesser matters should be judged in the light of some higher principle, he is said to be wise in any one order who considers the highest principle in that order: thus in the order of building, he who plans the form of the house is called wise and architect, in opposition to the inferior laborers who trim the wood and make ready the stones: "As a wise architect, I have laid the foundation" (1 Corinthians 3:10). Again, in the order of all human life, the prudent man is called wise, inasmuch as he directs his acts to a fitting end: "Wisdom is prudence to a man" (Proverbs 10:23).Then St. Thomas invokes many Scriptures to prove the point that wisdom, in the human order, is found in all the disciplines. All the disciplines have their masters and those masters are called "wise" because they have understood their craft to an excellent degree.
Therefore he who considers absolutely the highest cause of the whole universe, namely God, is most of all called wise.But, he says, Christian doctrine is of a higher and more excellent order. It is the knowledge of the architect of the world. Therefore, the person who masters this knowledge is most deserving of the classification of "wise".
Hence wisdom is said to be the knowledge of divine things, as Augustine says (De Trin. xii, 14).This is why St. Augustine designates true wisdom as the knowledge of those things revealed by God.
But sacred doctrine essentially treats of God viewed as the highest cause — not only so far as He can be known through creatures just as philosophers knew Him — "That which is known of Godis manifest in them" (Romans 1:19) — but also as far as He is known to Himself alone and revealed to others. Hence sacred doctrine is especially called wisdom.And Christian doctrine treats of the knowledge of all things revealed by God, as well as those qualities of God which are revealed by studying the natural world. Therefore, Christian doctrine is most deserving of the title, "wisdom".
Reply to Objection 1. Sacred doctrine derives its principles not from any human knowledge, but from the divine knowledge, through which, as through the highest wisdom, all our knowledge is set in order.Sacred doctrine is from God and not from men. Therefore, since even the masters of human knowledge are called wise, then Christian doctrine is wisdom of the highest order.
Reply to Objection 2. The principles of other sciences either are evident and cannot be proved, or are proved by natural reason through some other science. But the knowledge proper to this science comes through revelation and not through natural reason.Other sciences can be proved or understood by unaided reason. But the principles of Christian doctrine can not be understood by unaided reason and must be revealed by God.
Therefore it has no concern to prove the principles of other sciences, but only to judge of them.That is why Christian doctrine does not prove other sciences. It only judges them.
Whatsoever is found in other sciences contrary to any truth of this science must be condemned as false: "Destroying counsels and every height that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God" (2 Corinthians 10:4-5).Anything which contradicts Christian doctrine, is false.
Reply to Objection 3. Since judgment appertains to wisdom, the twofold manner of judging produces a twofold wisdom. A man may judge in one way by inclination, as whoever has the habit of a virtue judges rightly of what concerns that virtue by his very inclination towards it. Hence it is the virtuous man, as we read, who is the measure and rule of human acts.The third objection said that wisdom is not taught, but men are born with wisdom since it is a gift of God.
St. Thomas says that it is wisdom is both given by God and acquired by studying the things of God.
St. Thomas begins by explaining that judgment is an expression of wisdom. But good judgment is also a quality of virtue.
In another way, by knowledge, just as a man learned in moral science might be able to judge rightly about virtuous acts, though he had not the virtue.Although a man need not be virtuous to judge that which is virtuous.
The first manner of judging divine things belongs to that wisdom which is set down among the gifts of the Holy Ghost: "The spiritual man judgeth all things" (1 Corinthians 2:15).Now, the first manner of judging, which is the judgement of the virtuous person, is a result of the git of the Holy Spirit.
And Dionysius says (Div. Nom. ii): "Hierotheus is taught not by mere learning, but by experience of divine things."Therefore, Dionysius the aeropagite, a very wise, early christian, in his book, De divinis nominibus, 2nd chapter, says the wise are taught not simply by studying, but by participating in that which is holy.
The second manner of judging belongs to this doctrine which is acquired by study, though its principles are obtained by revelation.The second type of wise judgement requires that one study that which God has made known.
Monday, October 12, 2015
Sunday, October 11, 2015
What do I do to get to heaven?
Jesus is pretty clear about it. Let’s look at the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats.
Matthew 25:41-46
King James Version (KJV)
31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:
32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: 33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.
When Jesus comes to judge the world, He shall first separate the good from the wicked. The sheep are the good. The goats are the wicked.
34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:
Then, He addresses the sheep and He tells them that they are going to heaven.
35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:
36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.
Then, He tells them why they are going to heaven. BECAUSE they have done so many things for Him.
37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?
The sheep are confused. They reply, “But when did we see you, Lord?”
38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?
39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?
40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.
And Our Lord, replies to them, “Whenever you did something good for anyone in need, you did it for me.”
That’s pretty straightforward. You are going to heaven because you did good and cared for your fellow man.
Ok, now He turns to the goats and says:
41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
Get away from me because you are going to hell.
42For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: 43I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
Then He tells them why they are going to hell. BECAUSE they have never done anything good for Him.
44Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?
The goats are confused, and ask, “But, we don’t remember seeing you, ever?”
45Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.
And, Our Lord replied to them, “Whenever you saw someone in need and did nothing to help, you did not help me.”
46And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.
And the goats are condemned to hell, while the sheep inherit everlasting life.
Note that the goats did nothing. They did nothing at all. They did not commit any evil sin. They did not jump on or beat up the innocent. They did not steal their food. They simply did nothing at all.
Note also that they called Jesus, Lord.
Another, very similar Teaching, is here:
Matthew 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
So, if you want to go to heaven, remember:
Faith without works is dead, being alone. (James 2:17)
Saturday, October 10, 2015
Friday, October 9, 2015
Join Scott Hahn at the SPC Gala on October 22nd and November 8th!
| |||||||||
| |||||||||
| |||||||||
| |||||||||
|
Wednesday, October 7, 2015
Tuesday, October 6, 2015
Paraphrasing the Summa: First part, Question 1, Article 5
Question 1: The nature and extent of sacred doctrine.
Is Christian doctrine revealed by God? Does it teach us about the supernatural as well as the natural?
Article 5. Whether sacred doctrine is nobler than other sciences?
Is Christian doctrine more important than other sciences?
Objection 1. It seems that sacred doctrine is not nobler than other sciences; for the nobility of a science depends on the certitude it establishes. But other sciences, the principles of which cannot be doubted, seem to be more certain than sacred doctrine; for its principles — namely, articles of faith — can be doubted. Therefore other sciences seem to be nobler.Christian doctrine is not superior to any other science because it is based upon faith. Since faith is not provable and since many do not believe, then Christian doctrine is not superior to other sciences whose articles can be proven and demonstrated.
Objection 2. Further, it is the sign of a lower science to depend upon a higher; as music depends on arithmetic. But sacred doctrine does in a sense depend upon philosophical sciences; for Jerome observes, in his Epistle to Magnus, that "the ancient doctors so enriched their books with the ideas and phrases of the philosophers, that thou knowest not what more to admire in them, their profane erudition or their scriptural learning." Therefore sacred doctrine is inferior to other sciences.Christian doctrine is also inferior to other sciences because, as the great St. Jerome admits in his letter to Magnus, the ancient teachers of the Christian faith relied more on philosophy than on the divine revelation of God. Therefore, its own instructors did not consider it a superior science.
On the contrary, Other sciences are called the handmaidens of this one: "Wisdom sent her maids to invite to the tower" (Proverbs 9:3).No, says St. Thomas. In fact, the lesser sciences are called the servants of this one, as it is also recorded in Sacred Scripture.
I answer that, Since this science is partly speculative and partly practical, it transcends all other speculative and practical.Christian doctrine is so grand that it encompasses and exceeds all other sciences, whether they ponder truth or apply it.
Now one speculative science is said to be nobler than another, either by reason of its greater certitude, or by reason of the higher worth of its subject-matter. In both these respects this science surpasses other speculative sciences;One soft or contemplative science may be said to be superior to another because it is considered more certain or because of the greater value of its material. Christian science exceeds all sciences for both these reasons.
in point of greater certitude, because other sciences derive their certitude from the natural light of human reason, which can err; whereas this derives its certitudefrom the light of divine knowledge, which cannot be misled:There is no greater certitude than that which is revealed by God. Therefore, Christian Doctrine in Scripture and Tradition is infallible when taught by the Catholic Church.
in point of the higher worth of its subject-matter because this science treats chiefly of those things which by their sublimity transcend human reason;And what more beautiful and of greater value than truths revealed by God which can not be discovered by the unaided human mind?
while other sciences consider only those things which are within reason's grasp.Whereas, other sciences are limited to those things which man can understand.
Of the practical sciences, that one is nobler which is ordained to a further purpose, as political science is nobler than military science; for the good of the army is directed to the good of the State.As for the applied sciences, some of them serve other sciences and are therefore inferior to those which they serve. For instance military science serves political science because the army is at the service of the state.
But the purpose of this science, in so far as it is practical, is eternal bliss; to which as to an ultimate end the purposes of every practical science are directed. Hence it is clear that from every standpoint, it is nobler than other sciences.Christian Doctrine, however, contains God's plan of salvation for mankind. There is no greater purpose and all other sciences serve to achieve this purpose. Therefore, Christian Doctrine is the greatest of all sciences.
Reply to Objection 1. It may well happen that what is in itself the more certain may seem to us the less certain on account of the weakness of our intelligence, "which is dazzled by the clearest objects of nature; as the owl is dazzled by the light of the sun" (Metaph. ii, lect. i).As for certitude. It appears to us that other sciences which can be proven in human fashion are more certain than the articles of faith expressed in Christian Doctrine. But there is nothing more certain than the truths revealed by God.
Hence the fact that some happen to doubt about articles of faith is not due to the uncertain nature of the truths, but to the weakness of human intelligence;The truth does not depend upon our ability to understand it. The fact that some humans doubt Christian doctrine does not make Christian doctrine less certain.
yet the slenderest knowledge that may be obtained of the highest things is more desirable than the most certain knowledge obtained of lesser things, as is said in de Animalibus xi.And it is better for humans to minimally grasp these divinely revealed truths because of their greater worth, than for them to have an absolutely certain understanding of the profane things taught in other sciences. Thus says St. Albert the Great in his book, "de Animalibus, chapter XI".
Reply to Objection 2. This science can in a sense depend upon the philosophical sciences, not as though it stood in need of them, but only in order to make its teaching clearer.Christian doctrine does not depend upon philosophy to provide principles upon which it stands. But only uses philosophical articles in order to better express its own.
For it accepts its principles not from other sciences, but immediately from God, by revelation.Because the principles of Christian doctrine come directly from God.
Therefore it does not depend upon other sciences as upon the higher, but makes use of them as of the lesser, and as handmaidens: even so the master sciences make use of the sciences that supply their materials, as political of military science. That it thus uses them is not due to its own defect or insufficiency, but to the defect of our intelligence, which is more easily led by what is known through natural reason (from which proceed the other sciences) to that which is above reason, such as are the teachings of this science.Since Christian doctrines come directly from God, they exceed our capacity to understand them. Therefore, examples are drawn from other disciplines, which are more accessible to us, in order that the weakness of our intellect may draw analogies from these worldly truths and begin to understand the higher principles of Christian doctrine.
Thursday, October 1, 2015
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
The first problem with that characterization is that we don't consider them idols or gods. We honor and revere them as our older siblings in the faith. In that sense, we follow Scripture:
Hebrews 6:12 That ye be not slothful, but followers of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises.
She hasn't studied the Bible thoroughly. She has only studied the Bible enough to confirm the ideas she has adopted.
Before I continue, some caveats:
First, however, we need to understand that Protestants read Scripture differently than do we. Since they have rejected the Traditions of Christ, when they read Scripture, they discover within it what they want to believe. That is why there are so many competing sects.
Whereas, we recognize that Jesus Christ did not write Scripture. He established a Church and commanded that Church to teach His Traditions to the world (Matt 28:19-20). When we read Scripture, it is to confirm the truths taught us by the Church. It is the Berean methodology (Acts 17:11). They searched the Scriptures to find within it what they had been taught by Sts. Paul and Silas.
2nd. Because Protestants will accept only Scripture as their authority for doctrine, they accept only those doctrines which they see explicitly taught in Scripture. The strange thing is, this rule which is known as "Sola Scriptura or Bible alone", is itself, not found in Scripture.
Its easy to confound a Protestant who says, "I don't believe anything that is not taught in Scripture" by asking, "Where does Scripture say that we must only believe that which is taught in Scripture?"
So, it is a self contradictory proposition. Believe only what is in Scripture. Where does Scripture say to believe only what is in Scripture. It doesn't. Therefore, no need to believe that proposition.
3rd. Scripture does say that the Saints intercede for us here on earth. There are two levels of saints.
a. The Angels. They are portrayed interceding for us throughout Scripture. They even mediated the Law of Moses (Gal 3:19) and they are waging a war on behalf of the righteous (2 Pet 2:10-12) and bring the prayers of the righteous before God (Rev 8:3).
So, that is one class of Saints which intercede for us.
But there are a couple of references which imply this is true. One of them, unfortunately, is in the set of Scriptures which Luther cast out of the Bible. The Maccabbees:
2 Macc 15:
11 When he had armed each of them, not so much with the safety of shield and spear as with the encouragement of noble words, he cheered them all by relating a dream, a kind of vision, worthy of belief.
12 What he saw was this: Onias, the former high priest, a good and virtuous man, modest in appearance, gentle in manners, distinguished in speech, and trained from childhood in every virtuous practice, was praying with outstretched arms for the whole Jewish community.
13Then in the same way another man appeared, distinguished by his white hair and dignity, and with an air about him of extraordinary, majestic authority.
14Onias then said of him, "This is God's prophet Jeremiah, who loves his brethren and fervently prays for his people and their holy city."
15Stretching out his right hand, Jeremiah presented a gold sword to Judas. As he gave it to him he said,
16"Accept this holy sword as a gift from God; with it you shall crush your adversaries."
17Encouraged by Judas' noble words, which had power to instill valor and stir young hearts to courage, the Jews determined not to delay, but to charge gallantly and decide the issue by hand-to-hand combat with the utmost courage, since their city and its temple with the sacred vessels were in danger.
The implication is rather powerful. Notice that Onias, a dead saint, is praying for the entire Jewish community. Whether Jeremiah is dead also is debatable, but I assume that he is also a dead saint praying fervently "for his people and for their holy city."
The other reference of which I'm aware is in the 66 book Protestant Bible. It says:
Jeremiah 15:1
King James Version (KJV)
1 Then said the Lord unto me, Though Moses and Samuel stood before me, yet my mind could not be toward this people: cast them out of my sight, and let them go forth.
By the time the Prophet Jeremiah came along, Moses and Samuel were long dead. Yet, understood in the light of the Traditions of the Church and in light of the Maccabbees, God says that it is still possible for them to intercede for their people.
Whether they are or not is debatable. However, our relationship with God will be cemented and some will receive thrones and others won't. This is something which the Protestants don't deny since they are anxious to receive their crowns. Scripture says:
Luke 22:30
That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
1 Corinthians 9:25
And every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown; but we an incorruptible.
Funny, they vye for their crown, but deny Mary hers (Rev 12:1).
Note also, that it is those in the Church who will judge everyone else.
1 Corinthians 6:3
Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?
This is why Jesus says we must make friends here on earth. Those Christian who go before us will be our advocates in heaven.
Luke 16:9
And I say unto you, Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness; that, when ye fail, they may receive you into everlasting habitations.
Yeah, its cryptic, but that is what that means. So don't be a snob. Make friends on earth. You never know who will be accusing you or defending you on that Day.
Proverbs 28:27
He that giveth unto the poor shall not lack: but he that hideth his eyes shall have many a curse.
Ask her to provide the verse. Protestants have a habit of saying, "The Bible says this and the Bible says that." And guess what, the Bible doesn't say this or that at all. They make it up because they want to believe it. But it isn't there.
Scripture says precisely the opposite. Some will be given Thrones to rule over the rest:
Luke 22:29 And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me;
30 That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
1. Point out that the verse does not say to follow Christ "alone". It says,
1 Corinthians 11:1
Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.
2. Point out that Scripture commands us to follow also the Rulers of our Church:
Hebrews 13:7
Remember them which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the word of God: whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation.
3. Also point out that the miracles are attributed to God through the Saints. Examples:
Acts 19:
11 And God wrought special miracles by the hands of Paul:
4. In this example from Scripture, there is no mention of God:
Acts 5:
15 Insomuch that they brought forth the sick into the streets, and laid them on beds and couches, that at the least the shadow of Peter passing by might overshadow some of them.
16 There came also a multitude out of the cities round about unto Jerusalem, bringing sick folks, and them which were vexed with unclean spirits: and they were healed every one.
I'd take that with a grain of salt. Although its possible, I'm not aware of any Catholic home without a crucifix. Tell her to introduce you to these Catholics. YOU want to see for yourself if this is true or made up.
Tell me, does your relationship with your younger brothers distract you from your elder brother? Does your relationship with your mother distract you from your father?
God would not have admonished us to love our neighbor if loving our neighbor would detract from loving Him. In fact, it is the opposite:
1 John 4:20
If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?
I hope those above help. I believe I provided more for Russell in the discussion we had on the Queen of Heaven post.
I don't personally know any who do such a thing. If any do exist who fall into that error, they should be admonished. But the Church does not teach that error and therefore can't be implicated because certain people purportedly make that error.
The original objection to Mary, as I understand it, is title, Mother of God. This title is perfectly in line with Scripture:
Luke 1:43
And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?
If you know of another "original" Protestant objection to Mary, please reveal it and we can talk about it.
Sincerely,
De Maria