![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2020\/11\/MaryAnnunciation8.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
This is a reply to\u00a0Matt Slick<\/a>: Presbyterian pastor and head of the large and influential anti-Catholic Protestant\u00a0CARM<\/a>\u00a0discussion forum. I am responding to his article, \u201cDo Catholics Worship Mary?\u201d<\/a> (2-7-19).\u00a0His words will be in\u00a0blue<\/span>.<\/p>\n *****<\/p>\n Let\u2019s define\u00a0worship\u00a0before we see if the Roman Catholic church advocates the worship of\u00a0Mary.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Worship: \u201cin its most general sense is homage paid to a person or a thing. In this sense we may speak of hero-worship, worship of the emperor, of demons, of the angels, even of relics, and especially of the Cross.[\u201c]<\/span><\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Pastor Slick cites The Catholic Encyclopedia<\/em> (\u201cChristian Worship\u201d<\/a>). But unfortunately he engages in a little sleight-of-hand, by selectively citing (out of context) only what he wants to, for his own polemical purposes. This was only \u201cthe most general sense.\u201d The article then goes on to carefully differentiate worship \/ adoration from veneration. Because Pastor Slick apparently can\u2019t grasp (or accept) these distinctions, he proceeds with false premises throughout his article. Here\u2019s what he deliberately did not<\/em> cite:<\/p>\n There are several degrees of this worship:<\/p><\/blockquote>\n if it is addressed directly to\u00a0God, it is superior, absolute, supreme worship, or worship of adoration, or, according to the\u00a0consecrated\u00a0theological\u00a0term, a worship of\u00a0latria.<\/em>\u00a0This sovereign worship is due to\u00a0God\u00a0alone; addressed to a creature it would become\u00a0idolatry.<\/p>\n When worship is addressed only indirectly to\u00a0God, that is, when its object is the veneration of\u00a0martyrs, of\u00a0angels, or of\u00a0saints, it is a subordinate worship dependent on the first, and relative, in so far as it honours the creatures of\u00a0God\u00a0for their peculiar relations with Him; it is designated by\u00a0theologians\u00a0as the worship of\u00a0dulia<\/em>, a term denoting servitude, and implying, when used to signify our worship of distinguished servants of\u00a0God, that their service to Him is their title to our veneration . . .<\/p>\n As the Blessed Virgin has a separate and absolutely supereminent rank among the\u00a0saints, the worship paid to her is called\u00a0hyperdulia . . .\u00a0 <\/em>[see also the articles on Dulia<\/a><\/em>, Latria<\/a><\/em>,\u00a0Images<\/a>, Saints<\/a>, Relics<\/a>, Adoration<\/a>]<\/p>\n To be fair, Pastor Slick does cite some<\/em> of this at the end of his paper, but it is chopped up and not presented in full, in context (the second and third paragraphs completely omitted). This will not do; it\u2019s shoddy research and dishonest argumentation.<\/p>\n Honor and homage of created persons or angels is clearly taught in Scripture. For example:<\/p>\n 1 Peter 2:17<\/strong>\u00a0(RSV) Honor all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the [even the pagan, anti-Christian, persecuting] emperor.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n For many more biblical examples of such honoring and veneration, see:<\/p>\n The Imitation of St. Paul & the Veneration of Saints<\/a>\u00a0[2004]<\/p>\n Bible on Veneration of Saints & Angels: John Calvin\u2019s Antipathy to Veneration of Saints and Angels vs. Explicit Biblical Evidences of Same<\/a>\u00a0[10-1-12]<\/p>\n Biblical Evidence for Veneration of Saints\u00a0<\/a>[2013]<\/p>\n New (?) Analogical Biblical Argument for Veneration of the Saints and Angels from the Prohibition\u00a0of Blasphemy of the Same\u00a0<\/a>\u00a0[8-8-15]<\/p>\n Bible on the Veneration of Angels & Men<\/a>\u00a0[9-10-15]<\/p>\n Veneration of Human Beings: Seven Biblical Examples (Apostles Paul and Silas, Kings David and Saul, Prophets Daniel and Samuel, Patriarch Joseph)<\/a>\u00a0[3-4-19]<\/p>\n Angel Gabriel\u2019s \u201cHail\u201d (Lk 1:28): Veneration of Mary?<\/a>\u00a0[3-8-19]<\/p>\n Catholics attribute to Mary both physical (altars, bowing down, feasts, locations ) <\/span><\/p>\n We don\u2019t sacrifice to Mary. This is what an \u201caltar\u201d has to do with: the Sacrifice of the Mass, which is making present the sacrifice of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ on the cross. As for feasts, Protestants also express great honor and homage to their founders: Martin Luther, John Calvin et al and many great Christian figures throughout history (like John Wesley and Billy Graham). They make a great deal over \u201cReformation Day\u201d (October 31). I don\u2019t see how these things are any fundamentally different from Catholic feast days (more on this aspect below).<\/p>\n and spiritual (adoration, devotion to, entrust to, glory due to, looking to, prayer to, worship of) aspects of worship. . . .\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n \u201cAscribe to the LORD the glory due His name; . . . \u201d (1 Chron. 16:29).<\/span><\/p>\n The Catholic article Pastor Slick cited expressly denies (see above) that adoration and worship per se can be given to anyone but God, and states that if it is done, it\u2019s idolatry (we totally agree with Protestants in this respect). Thus, Catholic doctrine is being deliberately misrepresented (a very common occurrence in anti-Catholic treatments of Mary). As for glory, the Bible repeatedly states that God shares it with His creatures<\/a>.<\/p>\n The point is that Roman Catholics\u00a0say<\/em>\u00a0they do not worship Mary, but they do the very things that are consistent with worship.\u00a0In other words, they do everything consistent with the essence of worship while denying that they actually do it.<\/span><\/p>\n Only the most pathetically ignorant, nominal Catholic would ever do this (such uninformed people can be found in any and every Christian group). It\u2019s a very basic teaching \u2014 constantly reiterated \u2014 that any Catholic who knows anything understands. Pastor Slick would certainly say that lying and bearing false witness is wrong: indeed, this is one of the Ten Commandments. Yet he shamelessly lies about Catholic teaching on Mary. It\u2019s unconscionable. And he will one day stand and give account before God for this lying, if he and countless other anti-Catholics don\u2019t repent of it. I warn him and others like him for their own good, in charity.<\/p>\n Pastor Slick shows photographs of several statues of Mary, and makes out that this is undeniably idolatry (that it couldn\u2019t be otherwise). Yet a case from the Bible can be made for the use of statues and other religious images:<\/p>\n The Bronze Serpent: Example of Proper Use of Images<\/a>\u00a0[Feb. 2012]<\/p>\n \u201cGraven Images\u201d: Unbiblical Iconoclasm<\/a>\u00a0(vs. John Calvin)\u00a0[Oct. 2012]<\/p>\n Biblical Idolatry: Authentic & Counterfeit Conceptions<\/a>\u00a0[2015]<\/p>\n How Protestant Nativity Scenes Proclaim Catholic Doctrine<\/a>\u00a0[12-15-13; expanded for publication at\u00a0National Catholic Register<\/em>: 12-17-17]<\/p>\n Newsflash!: Catholicism Utterly Opposes Idolatry, Too<\/a>\u00a0[1-18-17]<\/p>\n \u201cArmstrong vs. Geisler\u201d #9: Images & Relics<\/a>\u00a0[3-2-17]<\/p>\n Statues in Relation to Bowing, Prayer, & Worship in Scripture<\/a>\u00a0[12-26-17]<\/p>\n Biblical Evidence for Veneration of Saints and Images<\/a>\u00a0[National Catholic Register<\/em>, 10-23-18]<\/p>\n Was Moses\u2019 Bronze Serpent an Idolatrous \u201cGraven Image?\u201d<\/a>\u00a0[National Catholic Register<\/em>, 2-17-20]<\/p>\n St. Newman vs. Inconsistent Protestant Iconoclasts<\/a>\u00a0[3-21-20]<\/p>\n \u201cTurretinfan\u201d Calls a Statue of Jesus Christ an \u201cIdol\u201d (While His Buddy Bishop James White Praises the Statues of \u201cReformers\u201d Calvin, Farel, Beza, and Knox)<\/a>\u00a0[6-8-10; rev. 6-24-20]<\/p>\n Pastor Slick acts as if bowing before a statue must be idolatry. Yet the Bible presents an acceptable bowing before men and angels, as veneration and honor (a statue simply represents a person):<\/p>\n Venerating & Bowing Before Angels & Men: Biblical?<\/a>\u00a0[11-10-14]<\/p>\n \u201cArmstrong vs. Geisler\u201d #8: Veneration; Bowing to Creatures<\/a>\u00a0[3-2-17]<\/p>\n Pastor Slick cites 1 Corinthians 7:35 (\u201cundistracted devotion to the Lord\u201d) and makes out that no one can be devoted to anything but God<\/em>. Yet the Bible states that King David was devoted to the temple:<\/p>\n 1 Chronicles 29:3\u00a0<\/strong>Moreover, in addition to all that I have provided for the holy house, I have a treasure of my own of gold and silver, and because of my devotion to the house of my God I give it to the house of my God:<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Twice in the very same book<\/em>\u00a0(one in the same chapter<\/em>) St. Paul refers to devotions to things other than only God:<\/p>\n 1 Corinthians 7:5<\/strong> . . .\u00a0that you may devote yourselves to prayer . . .<\/p>\n 1 Corinthians 16:15<\/strong> . . .\u00a0they have devoted themselves to the service of the saints;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Jesus casually assumes that a person can be devoted to their master (Mt 6:24; Lk 16:13). And there are other instances:<\/p>\n Acts 1:14<\/strong>\u00a0All these with one accord\u00a0<\/b>devoted themselves to prayer, . . .<\/p>\n Acts 2:42<\/strong> A<\/span>nd they\u00a0devoted themselves to the apostles\u2019 teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers.<\/p>\n Acts 6:4<\/strong>\u00a0But we will\u00a0<\/b>devote\u00a0ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word.\u201d<\/p>\n 1 Timothy 4:12-15<\/strong>\u00a0Let no one despise your youth, but set the believers an example in speech and conduct, in love, in faith, in purity.\u00a0[13] Till I come, attend to the public reading of scripture, to preaching, to teaching.\u00a0[14] Do not neglect the gift you have, which was given you by prophetic utterance when the council of elders laid their hands upon you.\u00a0[15] Practice these duties, devote yourself to them, so that all may see your progress.<\/p>\n 1 Timothy 5:10<\/strong>\u00a0and she must be well attested for her good deeds, as one who has brought up children, shown hospitality, washed the feet of the saints, relieved the afflicted, and\u00a0<\/b>devoted herself to doing good in every way<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Isn\u2019t it sad that a Presbyterian minister can be so ignorant of God\u2019s Holy Word: the Bible? He didn\u2019t have five minutes to do a search like this? In the very example he gives of supposedly illegitimate \u201cdevotion\u201d (citing the Catechism), it\u2019s made crystal clear:<\/p>\n This very special devotion . . . differs essentially from the adoration which is given to the incarnate Word and equally to the Father and the Holy Spirit . . . (CCC #971)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Does he not have eyes to see? Is he unable to draw the most basic distinctions? But this is what anti-Catholicism does to an otherwise sound mind.<\/p>\n Pastor Slick cites 1 Peter 4:19, which says that we \u201centrust\u201d our souls to God. Then he tries to make out that \u201centrusting ourselves to her prayer\u201d (CCC #2677) is somehow contrary to this, even though (again!) the same passage \u2014 that he himself cites<\/em> \u2014 states that \u201cwe abandon ourselves to the will of God together with her.\u201d The Bible says that mere men are entrusted with many things: \u201cthe oracles of God\u201d (Rom 3:2), an apostolic \u201ccommission\u201d (1 Cor 9:17; 2 Tim 1:12), \u201cthe message of reconciliation\u201d (2 Cor 5:19), the \u201cgospel\u201d (Gal 2:7; 1 Thess 2:4; 1 Tim 1:11; Titus 1:3), the apostolic [oral] tradition or \u201ccommandment\u201d\u00a0 or \u201ctruth\u201d (1 Tim 6:14, 20; 2 Tim 1:14; 2:2).<\/p>\n So we can\u2019t \u201centrust\u201d ourselves to prayers of the holiest woman who ever lived; the mother of God the Son: Second Person of the Trinity, according to James 5:16 (\u201cThe prayer of a righteous man has great power in its effects.\u201d)? St. Paul said that his followers could trust his teaching, too (1 Cor 7:25).<\/p>\n I imagine Pastor Slick would then reply that we can\u2019t ask dead people to pray for us, let alone \u201centrust\u201d ourselves to them.\u00a0 Why, then, does Jesus teach that it was fine to pray to a dead man (Abraham) and ask him to intercede (Luke 16)? Why is it that King Saul could talk to the dead prophet Samuel and ask him for requests? Samuel never said that he couldn\u2019t do so; he simply refused to answer his petitionary request for a military victory (1 Sam 28:3-25). And how is it that dead men in heaven (Rev 5:8) and angels (Rev 8:3-4) somehow have possession of our prayers, to present to God, if we haven\u2019t asked them to intercede for us?<\/p>\n Pastor Slick then argues that because there was a \u201cfeast to the Lord\u201d (Ex 32:5), therefore there can\u2019t be a feast to anyone else<\/em> or anything<\/em>. This is clearly false, and absurd as well. The Jews in New Testament celebrated many feasts, and Jesus and the disciples observed them (see Jn 4:45; 5:1; 12:20), and there is much biblical evidence for holy days<\/a>. The apostles in Jerusalem celebrated\u00a0Shavuot<\/i><\/a>\u00a0or the\u00a0Feast of Weeks\u00a0or\u00a0Pentecost (Acts 2:1). This was when the tongues of fire came upon their heads and people spoke different languages. It didn\u2019t celebrate God directly<\/em>, but rather, the wheat harvest (Ex 34:22).<\/p>\n Jesus celebrated\u00a0Sukkot<\/a><\/em>\u00a0(or the Feast of Tabernacles or Festival of Booths): see\u00a0John 7:1\u201352. It celebrates the fall harvest and also the exodus of the Jews from Egypt. All feasts were ultimately in praise of the Lord, just as all veneration of saints and angels is praise of God their creator (praising a great painting is in effect praise of the painter<\/em> of the painting).\u00a0So what is the (biblical) problem with celebrating Mary the mother of Jesus, or any saint with a feast? There is none that I can see.<\/p>\n Pastor Slick notes the passage, \u201cSo our eyes look to the Lord our God, Until He shall be gracious to us,\u201d (Psalm 123:2). Yes, of course. He applies the usual fallacious Protestant either\/or reasoning: because we ultimately look to God, we can\u2019t (so were told) look to anyone else. It\u2019s not true, and it\u2019s not biblical. The New Testament states twice that we can even look to ourselves<\/em> (Gal 6:1; 2 Jn 1:8). We can look to ourselves but not to the magnificent example of the Blessed Virgin Mary? Pastor Slick cites the Catechism, #972 (what he cited is in blue):<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n After speaking of the Church, her origin, mission, and destiny, we can find no better way to conclude than by looking to Mary.<\/span> In her we contemplate what the Church already is in her mystery on her own \u201cpilgrimage of faith,\u201d and what she will be in the homeland at the end of her journey.<\/p>\n How is this a whit different from looking to the heroes of the faith (all dead) in Hebrews 11?:<\/p>\n Hebrews 11:1-40\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.<\/p>\n [2] For by it the men of old received divine approval. [5] By faith Enoch was taken up so that he should not see death; and he was not found, because God had taken him. Now before he was taken he was attested as having pleased God. [9] By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a foreign land, living in tents with Isaac and Jacob, heirs with him of the same promise. [14] For people who speak thus make it clear that they are seeking a homeland. [18] of whom it was said, \u201cThrough Isaac shall your descendants be named.\u201d [24] By faith Moses, when he was grown up, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh\u2019s daughter, [30] By faith the walls of Jericho fell down after they had been encircled for seven days. [33] who through faith conquered kingdoms, enforced justice, received promises, stopped the mouths of lions, [40] since God had foreseen something better for us, that apart from us they should not be made perfect.<\/p>\n All this<\/em>, and yet it is supposedly impermissible<\/em> to \u201clook\u201d as an example of the godly Christian to Mary: the mother of our Lord Jesus Christ? It\u2019s ludicrous.<\/p>\n \u201cThis twofold movement of\u00a0prayer to Mary has found a privileged expression in the Ave Maria: Hail Mary\u00a0[or Rejoice, Mary]: . . .\u201d (CCC 2676)<\/span><\/p>\n Most of the Hail Mary<\/em> is right from Scripture:<\/p>\n \u201cHail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with you\u201d (Luke 1:28 RSV, Catholic edition)<\/p>\n As to this translation, Baptist Greek scholar A. T. Robertson stated:<\/p>\n \u201cHighly favoured\u201d (kecharitomene<\/em>). Perfect passive participle of\u00a0charitoo\u00a0<\/em>and means endowed with grace (charis<\/em>), enriched with grace as in Ephesians. 1:6, . . . The Vulgate\u00a0gratiae plena<\/em>\u00a0\u201cis right, if it means \u2018full of grace\u00a0which thou hast received<\/em>\u2018; wrong, if it means \u2018full of grace\u00a0which thou hast to bestow<\/em>\u2018\u201d (Plummer).\u00a0<\/span>(Word Pictures of the New Testament<\/em>, II, 13<\/a>)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n So far, it is not a prayer, but praise, or veneration, from the angel Gabriel to Mary (right in Scripture).<\/p>\n \u201cBlessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb [Jesus]!\u201d (Luke 1:42: from Elizabeth, the mother of John the Baptist; again it is veneration, not a prayer]<\/p>\n \u201cHoly Mary,\u00a0Mother of God,\u00a0pray for us sinners now,\u00a0and at the hour of our death.\u201d<\/p>\n Even now, it\u2019s not a prayer, meaning that we are seeking answers directly from Mary rather than God. No, it\u2019s asking her to intercede<\/em> on our behalf (\u201cpray for us\u201d as opposed to \u201canswer our prayer request yourself\u201d), to God. None of this is \u201cworship.\u201d It\u2019s not even prayer. As for asking a human being to pray (or in only a strictly limited sense, praying to [or through] them as a \u201cconduit\u201d to God), I already went through that above. Repetition is a fine teacher, so here it is again (worded slightly differently):<\/p>\n Jesus taught that it was fine to pray to a dead man (Abraham) and ask him to intercede (Luke 16). Saul talked to the dead prophet Samuel and asked him for requests. Samuel never said that he couldn\u2019t do so; he simply refused to answer his request for a military victory (1 Sam 28:3-25). Dead men in heaven (Rev 5:8) and angels (Rev 8:3-4) somehow have possession of our prayers, to present to God: because (so it is reasonably surmised) we have asked them to intercede for us.<\/p>\n All that is the Bible<\/em>, not me<\/em>, or some Catholic dogma<\/em>\u00a0that is thought to be \u201canti-biblical\u201d and not grounded in Holy Scripture. Pastor Slick and all Protestants have to grapple with it. They claim to be especially \u201cbiblical\u201d Christians. Very well, then: I challenge them to get to work<\/em>. I have provided tons of Scripture to ponder. It all has to be interpreted somehow<\/em> by them.<\/p>\n As for \u201cmother of God\u201d: see the following biblical and Christian history argumentation:<\/p>\n Mary Mother of God: Protestant Founders Agree (Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, Bullinger, and Lutheranism)<\/a>\u00a0[10-10-08]<\/p>\n \u201cMother of God\u201d: Quick, Effective Biblical Proof<\/a>\u00a0[12-11-08]<\/p>\n John Calvin\u2019s Objection to the Term, \u201cMother of God\u201d<\/a>\u00a0[5-9-13]<\/p>\n Mary the Mother of God: Idolatry or Plainly Biblical?<\/a>\u00a0[10-8-15]<\/p>\n Martin Luther vs. Nestorius Regarding \u201cMother of God\u201d<\/a>\u00a0[3-28-18]<\/p>\n How to Correct Some Misunderstandings About Mary<\/a>\u00a0(\u201cMother of God\u201d)\u00a0[National Catholic Register<\/em>, 2-20-19]<\/p>\n
\n[3] By faith we understand that the world was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was made out of things which do not appear.
\n[4]\u00a0By faith Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain, through which he received approval as righteous, God bearing witness by accepting his gifts; he died, but through his faith he is still speaking.<\/p>\n
\n[6] And without faith it is impossible to please him. For whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him.
\n[7] By faith Noah, being warned by God concerning events as yet unseen, took heed and constructed an ark for the saving of his household; by this he condemned the world and became an heir of the righteousness which comes by faith.
\n[8]\u00a0By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place which he was to receive as an inheritance; and he went out, not knowing where he was to go.<\/p>\n
\n[10] For he looked forward to the city which has foundations, whose builder and maker is God.
\n[11] By faith Sarah herself received power to conceive, even when she was past the age, since she considered him faithful who had promised.
\n[12] Therefore from one man, and him as good as dead, were born descendants as many as the stars of heaven and as the innumerable grains of sand by the seashore.
\n[13]\u00a0These all died in faith, not having received what was promised, but having seen it and greeted it from afar, and having acknowledged that they were strangers and exiles on the earth.<\/p>\n
\n[15] If they had been thinking of that land from which they had gone out, they would have had opportunity to return.
\n[16] But as it is, they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared for them a city.
\n[17]\u00a0By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was ready to offer up his only son,<\/p>\n
\n[19] He considered that God was able to raise men even from the dead; hence, figuratively speaking, he did receive him back.
\n[20] By faith Isaac invoked future blessings on Jacob and Esau.
\n[21] By faith Jacob, when dying, blessed each of the sons of Joseph, bowing in worship over the head of his staff.
\n[22] By faith Joseph, at the end of his life, made mention of the exodus of the Israelites and gave directions concerning his burial.
\n[23]\u00a0By faith Moses, when he was born, was hid for three months by his parents, because they saw that the child was beautiful; and they were not afraid of the king\u2019s edict.<\/p>\n
\n[25] choosing rather to share ill-treatment with the people of God than to enjoy the fleeting pleasures of sin.
\n[26] He considered abuse suffered for the Christ greater wealth than the treasures of Egypt, for he looked to the reward.
\n[27] By faith he left Egypt, not being afraid of the anger of the king; for he endured as seeing him who is invisible.
\n[28] By faith he kept the Passover and sprinkled the blood, so that the Destroyer of the first-born might not touch them.
\n[29]\u00a0By faith the people crossed the Red Sea as if on dry land; but the Egyptians, when they attempted to do the same, were drowned.<\/p>\n
\n[31] By faith Rahab the harlot did not perish with those who were disobedient, because she had given friendly welcome to the spies.
\n[32]\u00a0And what more shall I say? For time would fail me to tell of Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, of David and Samuel and the prophets \u2014<\/p>\n
\n[34] quenched raging fire, escaped the edge of the sword, won strength out of weakness, became mighty in war, put foreign armies to flight.
\n[35] Women received their dead by resurrection. Some were tortured, refusing to accept release, that they might rise again to a better life.
\n[36] Others suffered mocking and scourging, and even chains and imprisonment.
\n[37] They were stoned, they were sawn in two, they were killed with the sword; they went about in skins of sheep and goats, destitute, afflicted, ill-treated \u2014
\n[38] of whom the world was not worthy \u2014 wandering over deserts and mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth.
\n[39]\u00a0And all these, though well attested by their faith, did not receive what was promised,<\/p>\n