Answering an anti-Catholic's questions about Mary

Annunciation

Anti-Catholic asked:

Where do we see anything in their writings of any mention of her by name? Where do we see any of them exhorting believers to pray to her?

Have you read in Scripture that Jesus is our example?

1 Corinthians 11:1
Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.

Mary is the mother of Jesus Christ. Therefore, as her Child, Jesus had to ask Mary for comfort, nourishment and protection from the elements. He is our example. Therefore we do the same.

Now, most Protestants say, "She was His mother, not ours." But you are mistaken. Jesus appointed Mary our mother. That is plain in Scripture. To be more precise, Jesus appointed Mary the mother of all whom He loves and all who love Him.

First:
John 19:26-28
26 When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son! 27 Then saith he to the disciple, Behold thy mother! And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home. 28 After this, Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the scripture might be fulfilled, saith, I thirst.

Catholics are taught to read Scripture as though God was speaking to us. Now, are you a beloved disciple of Christ? To put it differently, are you a disciple whom Jesus loves?

Catholics would answer, "Yes" to that question and therefore accept Jesus command to take Mary as our mother and bring her into our home (i.e. heart).

For the second part of this explanation, you need to be aware of other verses in Scripture.
Genesis 3:15
15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

The seed of the Woman is not just Jesus. Let me show you:
Revelation 12:17
17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

Do you consider yourself someone who keeps the Commandments of God and the testimony of Jesus? If so, then you are seed or a child of the Woman. That Woman is Mary. And therefore, Scripture says that all who fight the good fight on behalf of God in Christ, are children of Mary.

God appointed Mary our spiritual mother. Jesus gave Mary to the disciples whom He loves. Therefore, as any good children, we ask our mother for that which Our heavenly Father provides us through her.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Rebutting even more anti-Catholic objections to Marian Doctrine

Anti-Catholic said:
If Joseph was a man 

He was and is a man.

then this is something he would have needed to deal with.

Have you ever read in Scripture that God will give you the grace you need to fulfill your vocation?
2 Thessalonians 1:11
King James Version (KJV)
11 Wherefore also we pray always for you, that our God would count you worthy of this calling, and fulfil all the good pleasure of his goodness, and the work of faith with power:

After all, one of the benefits of marriage is for the man and the woman to express their sexuality towards each other in holy and godly way.

What do you think is a greater benefit? To serve God or to have sex with your spouse? This is what Scripture says:
1 Corinthians 7:
32 But I would have you without carefulness. He that is unmarried careth for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please the Lord: 33 But he that is married careth for the things that are of the world, how he may please his wife.

There is no reason to think Joesph did not have normal sexual desires and wanting to have children of his own. Same would apply to Mary. 

You are projecting. To us, we are taught that God satisfies all our desires:
Our Heart is Restless Until it rests in You
Saint Augustine of Hippo

Apparently, you are taught that the highest blessing is sex with your spouse. But that is wrong. We are made for God. St. Joseph and the Virgin Mary received a blessing beyond calculation. They were united to their God in this life.

Children without brothers and sisters do not experience family life the same way that those that do. Does not mean they are less but they don't have this experience.

Does that make them less human? You admit it doesn't, so why even bring that up?

Sincerely,

De Maria

Rebutting more anti-Catholic objections to Marian Doctrine

Anti-Catholic says:Point 4 is enough to show that Mary was not a life long virgin. 

No, it has been effectively rebutted several times. Please read the responses rather than ignoring the points of rebuttal. That is the only way you could make this claim.

Point 1 does not mention anyone in the NT having sex either. Should we assume that it never happened to the people mentioned such Peter or Jarius?

Your logic is faulty.
1. You claim that Scripture does not say that Mary is a perpetual virgin, therefore you conclude that Mary is not a perpetual virgin.

2. To support that contention, you provide an example of Scripture not mentioning that anyone had sex. To be consistent with your first claim, you should conclude that therefore, since it isn't mentioned in Scripture, it can't be true. But you conclude the opposite.

3. Your logic supports the Catholic position.

If Mary was a perpetual virgin then how does Joseph deal with his sex drive?

With the grace of God. Do you really believe the myths that men will go blind if they don't have sex?

Where do you get the idea that "Sex is never done after contact with the Divine Presence" from Scripture? There was nothing from the angel when he spoke with Mary that it was forbidden for her to have sexual relations with her husband. 

Was there anything that said it was permitted?

There is absolutely nothing to be gained theologically by Mary not having normal sexual relations with her husband and having more children.

That is because you don't discern the meaning of Scripture spiritually. Mary is not simply a vessel which carried the Divine Being of Christ. She is the Spouse of the Holy Spirit.

If she were to have sex with St. Joseph, she would become an adulteress and St. Joseph an adulterer.

Now, let me show you that Mary is married to the Holy Spirit. The important terminology here is "overshadowed".

A euphemism for marriage in the Old Testament is covering:
Ruth 3:
7 And when Boaz had eaten and drunk, and his heart was merry, he went to lie down at the end of the heap of corn: and she came softly, and uncovered his feet, and laid her down. 8 And it came to pass at midnight, that the man was afraid, and turned himself: and, behold, a woman lay at his feet. 9 And he said, Who art thou? And she answered, I am Ruth thine handmaid: spread therefore thy skirt over thine handmaid; for thou art a near kinsman.

Ruth, effectively asked Boaz to marry her. If you read the rest of the story, you will see that Boaz understood and was determined to do so.

To a Jew, it is clear that when the Holy Spirit "overshadowed" the Virgin Mary, He took her to Himself and the logical outcome is that a Child would be born. The Virgin Mary then married St. Joseph for righteousness sake. The same reason that the sinless Jesus was Baptized.

St. Joseph, being a righteous man, would have known better than to go into the Virgin Mary, having been informed in a dream that she bore the Child by the Holy Spirit:
Matthew 1:20
But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.

Before Jesus was born it would have been since the prophecy said He would be born of a virgin. See Isaiah 7:14. After this prophecy was fulfilled there is no reason for her to remain a virgin. 

You say this because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God.

Also, if Jesus was to experience humanity to the fullest extent then being part of a family where He had brothers and sisters would be expected.

Being an only child makes one no less a human.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Rebutting Anti-Catholic objections to Marian Doctrine

Humble Virgin

Anti-Catholic said:
There are serious problems with Mary being an ever-virgin. Here is why:1) No mention of it in the Scripture. None of the authors of Scripture claim she was a perpetual virgin. 

True. But that causes problems for you, not for us.

1. Your claim proves too much since none of the authors of Scripture claim that Jesus was a perpetual virgin either. Since it is not denied in Scripture, does that mean it is affirmed that Jesus is not a perpetual virgin?

2. I assume that you believe in Scripture alone. And since Scripture does not say that Mary was not a perpetual virgin, you must be relying upon a non-biblcial source to claim that she was not.

2) The passage in Luke 1:48 in which Mary says she is a virgin does not mean she took a vow of perpetual virginity. It is only that she is a virgin up to this point in time.

If it is read without the benefit of the Traditions and Doctrines of Jesus Christ which underly the whole of the New Testament. If, however, you understand the Traditions and Doctrines of Jesus Christ which are the basis of the New Testament, then you will realize that it is impossible that Mary not be a perpetual virgin.

Anti-Catholic said:3) The idea that a person who is about to be married is taking or has taken a vow of perpetual virginity is unheard of Biblically. There is no indication from the OT or NT that it would be acceptable to be married and yet chose to be a perpetual virgin. Married Jewish couples were to be fruitful and multiply. This is OT teaching. 

And yet St. Paul teaches:
1 Corinthians 7:29
King James Version (KJV)
29 But this I say, brethren, the time is short: it remaineth, that both they that have wives be as though they had none;

Could it be that St. Joseph was aware of this teaching?

4) When brothers and sisters are used in connection with father or mother then it does not mean cousins but actual blood brothers and sisters. See Matthew 13:55-56, Mark 3:31-32; Mark 6:3; John 2:12; Galatians 1:19

a. Not so. The Bible was not written for teachers of grammar but for the common people. And common usage is evident throughout.

b. Even today, in certain societies, cousins are referred to as brothers.

c. In the New Testament, the brethren of Jesus Christ are identified multiple times as His Apostles.

d. If we study the Scriptures, we find that 3 of the 4 brethren identified in Matt 13:55-56 are indeed, Apostles. Let me show you:

Matthew 13:55-56
King James Version (KJV)
55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?

So, who are these brethren? First let us correlate the lists of the Apostles in the various Gospels:
Matthew 10:1-4
King James Version (KJV)
1 And when he had called unto him his twelve disciples, he gave them power against unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of sickness and all manner of disease. 2 Now the names of the twelve apostles are these; The first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother; 3 Philip, and Bartholomew; Thomas, and Matthew the publican; James the son of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus; 4 Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him.

Mark 3:
16 And Simon he surnamed Peter; 17 And James the son of Zebedee, and John the brother of James; and he surnamed them Boanerges, which is, The sons of thunder: 18 And Andrew, and Philip, and Bartholomew, and Matthew, and Thomas, and James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus, and Simon the Canaanite, 19 And Judas Iscariot, which also betrayed him: and they went into an house.

Luke 6:13-16
King James Version (KJV)
13 And when it was day, he called unto him his disciples: and of them he chose twelve, whom also he named apostles; 14 Simon, (whom he also named Peter,) and Andrew his brother, James and John, Philip and Bartholomew, 15 Matthew and Thomas, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon called Zelotes, 16 And Judas the brother of James, and Judas Iscariot, which also was the traitor.

St. John does not provide a list. Here we go:

They all begin with Simon Peter, showing his primacy.
They all mention Andrew, his brother, although not in the same order.
They all mention James, the son of Zebedee.
They all mention John, the brother of James.
They all mention Philip.
They all mention Bartholomew.
They all mention Thomas.
They all mention Matthew.

Now, pay close attention to the next three:

ONE: They all mention James the son of Alphaeus. Some call him James the less.

TWO: Matthew's Labbaeus Thaddeus is Mark's Thaddeus which corresponds to Luke's Judas the brother of James. Did you catch that? Judas the brother of James. Keep that in mind.

THREE: Next, Matt's and Mark's Simon the Canaanite corresponds to Luke's Simon Zelotes.

We can disregard the final Apostle, the traitor Iscariot.

What were the names of those brethren again? James, Joses, Simon and Judas. Is it a coincidence then that James, Judas the brother of James and Simon are always listed together in the lists of Apostles?

There is no question in my mind, that these three Apostles are the brethren mentioned in Matt 13:55-56. But lets go to the next point.


Furthermore:
e. If we study further, we will also see that these same 3 brethren are identified as the children of the other Mary. There is another Mary who is the "sister" of the Virgin Mary. Let us correlate some Scriptures:

John 19:25
Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene.

This Mary is always mentioned along with Mary Magdalene.

Matthew 28:1
In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.

Note that she is the mother of James:
Luke 24:10
It was Mary Magdalene and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other women that were with them, which told these things unto the apostles.

I'm assuming that Joanna is Salome, who is also frequently mentioned with Mary Magdalene and the other Mary:
Mark 15:40
There were also women looking on afar off: among whom was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the less and of Joses, and Salome;

Now, this Mary is the mother of James the less and of Joses. Therefore she is also the mother of Judas the brother of James and of Simon:

Matthew 13:55
King James Version (KJV)
55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?

We know from Tradition that the Virgin Mary is an only child. Therefore her "sister", the OTHER Mary, is her "cousin."

The children of this other Mary, James, Joses, Simon, Judas and Salome are kindred of Jesus. But not brothers of the womb.

Perhaps of further interest is this. One of the early Church Fathers reveals that Alphaeus (aka Cleophas) is St. Joseph's brother. Now, the Jews were expected to marry their cousins. Remember how Abraham sent his servant to his brother to find a wife for Isaac?

This leads to another interesting situation. James the greater and John, the sons of Zebedee are related to Jesus Christ from both sides of His earthly family. Salome, the other Mary's daughter is the wife of Alphaeus, St. Joseph's brother. She is the mother of Zebedee's children, James and John.

5) In the previous passages noted the best way to understand these relationships “brothers-sisters” is that these are siblings of Jesus by blood. 

They are kin, but not siblings.

6) There is no hint in Scripture that Joseph was previously married and had children. 

There is no hint in Scripture that Mary ever committed sin nor that she had other children. Yet, you believe these things.

7) Paul refers to James as the “brother of the Lord” in Galatians 1:19. 

Meaning "cousin" or "kin". But not "brother of womb."

This same James is the brother of Jude. But Jude introduces himself as:
Jude 1:1
Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James, to them that are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ, and called:

NOT the "brother of Jesus Christ and James.

8) There are Greek words for cousin—anepsios as in Colossians 4:10 or kinsman = sungenis which is used in Luke 1:36. The bible never uses these two Greek words anepsiosor sungenisin reference to Jesus brothers.

But we can prove from the Scriptures that those whom you claim are His blood brothers are actually His cousins.

9) Psalm 69 which is a messianic Psalm clearly shows that Jesus has brothers. Verse 8—“ I have become estranged from my brothersAnd an alien to my mother’s sons.”

Ahhhh, how you twist the Scriptures to your convenience. That is a reference to the Nation of Israel. My mother's sons are my fellow Israelites. The mother being Israel:
Deuteronomy 17:15
Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the LORD thy God shall choose: one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee: thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother.

10) Other references to Jesus’ brothers by Mary included: John 2:12, 

That is a reference to the Apostles.

John 7:3; 

You didn't read John 6?

The disciples had just abandoned Jesus:
John 6:66

The only ones left were the Twelve, His brethren. And they were concerned both for His safety and for the fact that the Church had literally been disbanded before it began. Therefore they suggested.

John 7:3
King James Version (KJV)
3 His brethren therefore said unto him, Depart hence, and go into Judaea, that thy disciples also may see the works that thou doest.

Acts 1:14

That is a reference to His Apostles or to His Kin or to both. But again, it is proven from Scripture that those whom you claim are Mary's children are the children of another woman also named Mary.

11) Protestant scholar D. A. Carson points out, if "brothers" refers to Joseph's sons by an earlier marriage, not Jesus but Joseph's firstborn would have been legal heir to David's throne. The second theory — that "brothers" refers to sons of a sister of Mary also name "Mary" — faces the unlikelihood of two sisters having the same name.

A. That's funny. Because it is not uncommon in many households, even today, for EVERY woman to be named Mary.

B. The word "sister" is also a reference to "cousins". We know by Tradition that Mary was an only child.

All things considered, the attempts to extend the meaning of "brothers" in this pericope, despite McHugh's best efforts, are nothing less that farfetched exegesis in support of a dogma that originated much later than the NT... — D. A. Carson, Matthew in The Expositor's Bible Commentary, volume 8 (Zondervan, 1984).

Its a shame that the best Bible Scholars that Protestantism can produce have not bothered to do some actual research in the Bible. If they had, they would have found that the other Mary is the mother of the four individuals whom they claim are the "brothers" of Christ.

It is, indeed, pitiful.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Refuting more anti-Catholic objections

Anti-Catholic said:  

Whenever idolatrous devotees to Mary are identified (such as the hoards in Mexico, Caribbean, Philippines, etc.) Catholics claim that excessive devotion showed by such pagan so-called "Catholics" arises because these simple people were "not well catechised." 

Catholic replied: 

I’ve heard countless times about how Catholics in the places you mentioned are idolaters, but I’m skeptical. This skepticism is borne out of the near-continual “Catholics worship idols” slander that I’ve heard from anti-Catholic Protestants, including yourself.   Since I know you’re lying about the Catholics you do know, why should I trust you to give me accurate information about Catholics you’ve never even met?  And why should I trust you to give me accurate information on Mexican and Filipino Catholics, when you’re openly racist? 

Anti-Catholic replied:

The same news-media that slanders "racists" promotes abortion and homosexuality and atheism ... I happen to believe in both Genesis 10 and Acts 7, and see no contradiction between them both. (i.e., God loves and saves all races by Jesus Christ, yet God wants races to reside in their own distinct separate nations. I am an equal-opportunity critic of all - let everyone acknowledge we are all worms before God.) 

Nevertheless, the excessive Marian devotion of third-world Catholics either proves that the "infallible teaching church" is failing to properly teach - or else calls into question the Church's sincerity in its "veneration versus worship" argument. 

Ironically "uncatechized" tribes of early European barbarians had more sense - they received Christ but wouldn't call Mary "mother of God" and got slandered as "Arians" when they were not. Profession of the Trinity is no virtue to those who use it to shoe-horn Mary into the Godhead (as God's mother no less!). 

Marian fanatics won't rest until some Pope announces her apotheosis. The "pillar and ground of the truth" placates any noisy group - today they kiss the Koran, tomorrow they deify Mary. I invite you to be a Bible Christian. Or perhaps you like where you are at while ignoring inconvenient facts. 

If I'm wrong, God have mercy on me - my ambition was to be consistent and Bible believing.

My response to Anti-Catholic:

The same news-media that slanders "racists" promotes abortion and homosexuality and atheism ...

Rather than deny that you are a racist, you justify your belittlement of people whom you don't know simply on the basis of their genetic heritage?  Strange.  Have you not read in Scripture:

Colossians 3:11
Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all.

I happen to believe in both Genesis 10 and Acts 7, and see no contradiction between them both.

There is no contradiction between them.

(i.e., God loves and saves all races by Jesus Christ, yet God wants races to reside in their own distinct separate nations.

I wonder why God did not punish Moses for having a wife of another race?  Nor does Scripture say anything about God rejecting the Egyptians which left Egypt and joined with the Hebrews.  In fact, God only seems to be angered by the sinful actions of the other nations.  Especially by their idolatry.

I am an equal-opportunity critic of all - let everyone acknowledge we are all worms before God.) 

 That is a Catholic Teaching.  And all the more reason why we are united in one body under God.  The Church, the Body of Christ.

Nevertheless, the excessive Marian devotion of third-world Catholics either proves that the "infallible teaching church" is failing to properly teach - or else calls into question the Church's sincerity in its "veneration versus worship" argument.  

1.   You are not an authority of Catholic doctrine or worship and in no way qualified to judge what is excessive Marian devotion.
2.  The Catholic Church is quite clear in its distinction between veneration and worship.  The only ones confused on the issue are anti-Catholics who pretend not to understand the teaching for their own reasons.
3.  The errors of Catholics do not invalidate the infallibility of any Church Teaching.
4.   Your idea that any disciple's failure to understand a teaching somehow brings into question the sincerity of the Teacher indicts not only the Catholic Church, but every Christian teacher through the ages up to and including Jesus Christ.  You even indict yourself since you are here teaching your version of Christianity and I know that I don't understand how you come up with more than half of your ideas.

Ironically "uncatechized" tribes of early European barbarians had more sense - they received Christ but wouldn't call Mary "mother of God" and got slandered as "Arians" when they were not. Profession of the Trinity is no virtue to those who use it to shoe-horn Mary into the Godhead (as God's mother no less!).

Thanks for providing this.  It gives me an opportunity to compare your beliefs to Scripture and Catholic doctrine to Scripture.

Obviously, you explicitly deny that Mary is the Mother of God.  So, what does Scripture say with regard to that question?

Luke 1:43-45
King James Version (KJV)
43 And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?
44 For, lo, as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in mine ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy.
45 And blessed is she that believed: for there shall be a performance of those things which were told her from the Lord.

Lets break this down:
1.  The word "Lord" is here mentioned two times.
2.  In the second instance, it is an obvious reference to God.  "Blessed is she who believes that the LORD would fulfill His promises."  That is an obvious reference to God.
3.  Therefore, then, what could she possibly have meant when  she said, "mother of my LORD"?
4.  Since she was inspired by the Holy Spirit to utter these words, she must have meant what is most obvious.  Is Jesus, God?  Yes.  Therefore, the words she uttered could also be translated, "mother of my GOD".

So, God explicitly teaches us, in His Word, that Mary is the Mother of God.  This is what you deny and therefore you deny the outright teaching of the Word of God in Scripture.

Marian fanatics won't rest until some Pope announces her apotheosis.

 Apotheosis?  I'm not sure if that is a synonym of Theosis, which is Catholic Teaching regarding us all. All who die in Christ will share in the divine nature:

2 Peter 1:4
Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.

The "pillar and ground of the truth" placates any noisy group -

Your mistaken.  If that were so, the Protestants would have been placated long ago as they are the noisiest group ever.

today they kiss the Koran,

Show me where Scripture says it is a sin to kiss a book?  If it isn't a sin, then what is your objection?

tomorrow they deify Mary.

 We honor Mary in obedience to the instructions of Scripture.

Luke 1:48
For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.

I invite you to be a Bible Christian.

 Catholics are already Bible Christians.  I invite you to be a true Bible Christian and leave behind the errors of the Protestants.

Or perhaps you like where you are at while ignoring inconvenient facts.  

I love the Church which Christ established for my salvation.  It is you who are ignoring the plain teaching of the Word of God.

If I'm wrong, God have mercy on me - my ambition was to be consistent and Bible believing. 

You are wrong.  If you do not repent, may God have mercy on your soul:

James 3:1
My brethren, be not many masters, knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation.

But God has sent you to this blogsite in order that you may learn the Wisdom of His Word through the Teaching of His Church:

Ephesians 3:10
King James Version (KJV)
10 To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God,

Sincerely,

De Maria