Defense of Allegedly \u201cIdolatrous\u201d Marian Devotions <\/a>[1-11-13]<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n\u201cIn thy hands I place my eternal salvation and to thee do I entrust my soul.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\nYou can at least see how Protestants would interpret this prayer as idolatry?<\/span><\/p>\nDon\u2019t get me wrong, when a Catholic tells me \u201cI don\u2019t worship Mary\u201d I believe them. Why would they say they don\u2019t if they do. But this prayer, if it is not a surrendering of trust due only to God, it sure comes across such a way. You must understand where the Protestant protest comes from. As well, it seems to be highly suggestive and provocative toward Mary worship, especially for someone who first encounters it.<\/span><\/p>\nMy suggestion: get rid of it or drastically reword it.<\/span><\/p>\nI don\u2019t have much a problem with the Catholic understanding of the communion to the saints, or even prayer to the saints in the sense that you are simply asking them to pray for you . . . don\u2019t do it, but I don\u2019t think of it as saint worship necessarily. But this prayer is different.<\/span><\/p>\nHope you understand where I am coming from.<\/span><\/p>\nWell, the Apostle Paul states several times that he was helping to save people or being a channel for them to receive divine grace. If it was okay for him to do, why not Mary, the mother of Jesus our Lord?:<\/p>\n
1 Corinthians 9:22<\/b> I have become all things to all men, that I might by all means save<\/i> some.<\/p>\n
2 Corinthians 4:15<\/b> For it [his many sufferings: 4:8-12,17] is all for your sake, so that as grace extends to more and more people<\/i> it may increase thanksgiving, to the glory of God.<\/p>\n
Ephesians 3:2<\/b> assuming that you have heard of the stewardship of God\u2019s grace that was given to me for you<\/i>\u2026 (cf. 1 Pet 4:8-10)<\/p>\n
Ephesians 4:29<\/b> Let no evil talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for edifying, as fits the occasion, that it may impart grace<\/i> to those who hear.<\/p>\n
1 Timothy 4:16<\/b> Take heed to yourself and to your teaching: hold to that, for by so doing you will save both yourself and your hearers<\/i>.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\u201cEntrust[ing] [your] soul\u201d to a human being gives you pause? Okay, there is Bible sanction for that too (or at least something very similar):<\/p>\n
Hebrews 13:17<\/b> Obey your leaders and submit to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls, as men who will have to give account. Let them do this joyfully, and not sadly, for that would be of no advantage to you.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
So if someone wants to claim the Catholic prayer in question is Mariolatry, fine, but let them be consistent and say that the Bible teaches \u201cPaulolatry\u201d as well, if this is the reasoning. Of course no Protestant will say that, but since the Bible gives sanction to Pauline \u201csaving\u201d and \u201cdistribution of graces\u201d then no one can say that the Theotokos<\/i> participating in the same sort of thing is prima facie<\/i> \u201cunbiblical\u201d.<\/p>\n
If the Catholic Marian prayers were properly understood and interpreted correctly in the first place, the issue would never come up, but because Protestants have no frame of reference in which to interpret them (having not been taught any degree of Mariology to speak of at all), then they automatically view it as a species of idolatry, which it is not.<\/p>\n
I say that \u2014 rightly understood \u2014 Catholic teachings do not contradict the biblical understanding of things at all. We believe, with James, that \u201cthe prayer of a righteous man availeth much\u201d (James 5:16). Therefore, if indeed Mary is sinless (taught in Luke 1:28, closely examined and exegeted, as I have done), and God\u2019s highest creation, then her prayers would be uniquely powerful (just as Elijah\u2019s were, that James refers to); hence this sort of flowery language is perfectly acceptable. One goes to the person whose prayers of intercession have the most power.<\/p>\n
Elsewhere in the prayer \u201cOur Lady of Perpetual Help\u201d it is made clear the origin of this extraordinary power of intercession that Mary has:<\/p>\n
I give thanks to our Lord, who for my sake hath given thee a name so sweet, so lovable, so mighty. . . . He hath made thee<\/b> so powerful, so rich, so kind, that thou mightest assist<\/b> us in our miseries.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Dave, those examples are so different from the Mary prayer it alleviates no problems. Believe me, like I said, I am more than willing to give the benifit of a doubt, but, in all honesty, that seems rather far out to say that this prayer to Mary, \u201cIn thy hands I place my eternal salvation and to thee do I entrust my soul\u201d and Paul self conception concerning his role in preaching the Gospel here on earth are parallel. Are you asking Mary to come and preach the Gospel to people?<\/span><\/p>\nAnyway, again, you must understand how difficult it sounds. I don\u2019t see why you can\u2019t just get rid of the prayer in favor of something different if it is not what it seems to be. This would help people from getting confused and accusing you of things you don\u2019t do. The prayer is not inspired in your view is it?<\/span><\/p>\nAll that I am asking is that you at least consider how difficult it is and not write people off acting as if we just understood what you were saying it would make all the difference. I think I do understand what you are saying, but the prayer still says something different in good ol\u2019 Oklahoman.<\/span>\u00a0![\":)\"](\"https:\/\/web.archive.org\/web\/20111016164552im_\/www.reclaimingthemind.org\/blog\/wp-includes\/images\/smilies\/icon_smile.gif\")
<\/p>\nMichael, I used to be an evangelical Protestant. You\u2019re not telling me anything new. I had to work through many of these same issues in order to become a Catholic. Were you ever a Catholic? If one used to firmly believe one thing, then they knew it from the inside. I was not just a Protestant, but a Protestant apologist and cult researcher. I was on the largest Christian radio station in Detroit talking about Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses as a Protestant in 1989. So I know where you\u2019re coming from, and I understand the Protestant outlook through and through.<\/p>\n
Your choice is simple: you can go the same old tired route (the stuff you say you believed just five years ago) and conclude that Catholics are idolaters who are so stupid and clueless that we don\u2019t even know that Mary is different from Jesus, or you can accept the validity of the reasoning I have given you (and additional explanations from others) or at least acknowledge that there are issues here that are difficult to understand at first but that it is not nonsense and idolatry. The prayer is going nowhere. It has a long tradition and it is perfectly orthodox.<\/p>\n
You say we should just get rid of it? By the same token I could say, \u201cwhy don\u2019t you get rid of one or more beliefs from TULIP?\u201d, since Calvinists are vastly misunderstood and don\u2019t really believe what many people attribute to them (making God the author of evil; making evangelistic efforts null and void, turning men into will-less automatons, etc.)? You wouldn\u2019t do that, on those grounds, so why do you think it is reasonable that we would or should do so?<\/p>\n
I have no problem saying that it is tough for a Protestant to comprehend. Of course it is. I already dealt with that in my previous responses by saying that one can\u2019t comprehend trigonometry without first learning their basic arithmetic.<\/p>\n
Mariology is not Christian kindergarten; it is advanced studies in Christian graduate school.<\/p>\n
\u201cIn thy hands I place my eternal salvation and to thee do I entrust my soul\u201d and Paul self conception concerning his role in preaching the Gospel here on earth are parallel. Are you asking Mary to come and preach the Gospel to people?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
You have not properly understood the analogy that I made. Paul\u2019s saying that he \u201csaved\u201d people and telling Timothy that he can \u201csave\u201d his hearers (when we all know that it is God Who does the saving and Paul is only a vessel of same) is precisely the same that we think of Mary. The logic is exactly the same:<\/p>\n
1. Paul: \u201cI might save some . . . save both yourself and your hearers\u201d.<\/p>\n
2. (the logical converse) Spiritual seeker: \u201cPaul, please save me by your powerful intercession and distribution of God\u2019s grace. In your hands I place my seeking after eternal salvation because I know your intervention on my behalf is profoundly powerful.\u201d<\/p>\n
3. Ergo: logical equivalent of saying to Mary: \u201cIn thy hands I place my eternal salvation\u201d because if the thought is \u201cIf Paul and Timothy [human beings] can \u2019save\u2019 other human beings, then clearly there is a dynamic at work far different from just God alone and the person being saved. God uses human beings in the process.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
In other words, if Paul can say that he saves others, then others can ask<\/i> him to save them, and we are in exactly the same place where the Marian prayer takes us. Mary is the mother of Jesus. Paul didn\u2019t even see Jesus before the Resurrection. So if this is true of Paul, it can certainly be true of Mary.<\/p>\n
Yet you say, \u201cthose examples are so different from the Mary prayer it alleviates no problems.\u201d I disagree; it is a close analogy. We know that Paul doesn\u2019t ultimately save anyone; it is God. Catholics know the same about Mary. It is only by attributing gross ignorance to Catholics en masse<\/i> (even to many of our greatest theologians) that Protestants come up with the hogwash that they do about our supposed Mariolatry.<\/p>\n
The real lack of knowledge and sufficient thought and reflection is seen, rather, in a statement like the one above: \u201cattributing omniscience to a created being is a bit blasphemous.\u201d But of course no one is doing that! Saints in heaven do not have to have all knowledge in order to hear prayers. They are in eternity, with God. They\u2019re out of time. That completely solves that problem. It doesn\u2019t require omniscience at all, but merely being in another sphere in terms of time or dimensions.<\/p>\n
Someone thinks that is insufficient? Very well, then, read what your own Protestant theologians and Bible commentators say about the relationship of time and eternity and how we will be like Jesus when we get to heaven. It\u2019s a perfectly plausible, biblical, acceptable understanding of the afterlife. It\u2019s sheer foolishness to make out that such a scenario requires a saint to be omniscient and therefore God-like.<\/p>\n
Dave, I appreciate that you have been on the other side, but this does not seem to be helping. In fact, it might be hindering. I think that from your perspective you feel that it is your duty to justify all those things that you had a problem with before without recognizing the extent of the problem. If reformation does not come for you in doctrine, can\u2019t it come in communication? Again, I take you at your word when you say you don\u2019t worship Mary.<\/span><\/p>\nWorship is a subjective entrustment of our lives to a source in which we have ultimate reliance. We have non-ultimate reliances in our lives such as our cars to get us to work, our fathers to protect us when we are young, etc. All reliances are secondary to the primary. This I understand. Our ultimate reliance for Salvation does not come through anything other than God, although we do rely upon other people to have their secondary part in God\u2019s plan. If you are simply saying that Mary is a secondary reliance like all others secondary reliances (albeit, a very good one), I take you at your word.<\/span><\/p>\nIn this case, the problem is first one of communication.<\/span><\/p>\nYou say that this:<\/span><\/p>\n\u201c[Mary] In thy hands I place my eternal salvation and to thee do I entrust my soul.\u201d<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\nReally means this:<\/span><\/p>\n\u201c[Mary] In thy hands I place the hope of my eternal salvation since you are one of the many who can pray to the One who can save me and to you I entrust my soul since your are one of the many who can intercede through prayer on my behalf to the One who can take care of my soul.\u201d<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\nYou see. You are having to jump through hoops here to explain the first. All I am saying is be sensitive to the concerns of those who just take the first at face value. Make the first say the second and it would alleviate yourself of having to write books to justify the first.<\/span><\/p>\nTo compare this with Calvinism is helpful to a degree, but in its present form presents a non seq. In other word, TULIP is what it is. It does not have to explain itself to take away the sting of miscommunication. In fact, once you do explain TULIP you find that there is integrity in communication because it means exactly what it says. The problem does not have to do in communicating its points at face value, but the interpretation of its implications.<\/span><\/p>\nFor example, if you were to say that this is one of the points of Calvinism, then there would be a parallel:<\/span><\/p>\nGod is responsible for sin.<\/span><\/p>\nIndeed, this is problematic. There are very few Calvinists who would actually go this far with it. Now, they may communicate it as such, but then they would, like you, have to jump through hoops to explain that this does not mean what it seems to mean. They may say this:<\/span><\/p>\nGod is responsible for sin only in the since that he is the creator of free will beings that choose to sin, but He Himself is not the ultimate first cause of its genesis.<\/span><\/p>\nHere is what I would tell a Calvinist (of which I am one) who has as part of his regular confession the first. Don\u2019t say it!! It miscommunicates what you mean. Just say what you mean! If you don\u2019t, you will do two things. 1) You will scare people away because they have simply thought you meant what you said (who would blame the), or 2) You are going to cause some of your own to actually believe that God is the creator of sin and promote this doctrine as such.<\/span><\/p>\nThis is the same with many issues and confessions in Mariology. You scare people away based upon a perfectly understandable misreading of your doctrine based upon popular communication and, in some cases, you cause your own to fall into idolatry simply because they take this at face value.<\/span><\/p>\nNot that I have any platform to give advice Dave, but I would try to see this first as a theologian and a pastor, rather than an apologist. It seems that as an apologist you are seeking to justify this prayer as it is, failing to recognize how it communicates.<\/span><\/p>\nAgain, I really appreciate your willingness to dialogue.<\/span><\/p>\nHi Michael,<\/p>\n
That was an interesting psychological-sociological analysis of my argument; now would you like to actually interact with the argument itself<\/i>?\u00a0<\/p>\n
Dave, as I have said from the beginning, I don\u2019t have THAT big of a problem with what you mean, but the misleading way in which it is communicated. The ball is in yo\u2019 court my friend.<\/span><\/p>\nI\u2019ve already answered. The devotion will not and should not change simply because it is misunderstood and because Protestantism has a virtually nonexistent Mariology. And I showed that it also was unreasonable to say that it should, based on an analogy to your own belief-system.<\/p>\n
Substantive dialogue deals with the objective assertions of the opponent at some point, rather than merely subjective, stylistic issues and how things are received. Postmodernism (you said on White\u2019s webcast that your bookshelf is filled with this sort of thing) clearly is influencing you to the detriment of your argumentation here. It\u2019s all subjective and little objective analysis of objective stuff.<\/p>\n
My method, on the other hand, is to use Scripture and logic, and history where necessary.<\/p>\n
Dave, again, I think you are too caught up in your apologetic defenses here. I am simply offering a suggestion to you. It is fine if you don\u2019t agree, but my points were valid and not relativistic in the slightest. There was no response from you concerning your non seq with Calvinism and Paul.<\/span><\/p>\nHuh? I made a very extensive response. Obviously you disagreed with it, but that is far different from claiming I made \u201cno response.\u201d<\/p>\n
I argued that your comparison to Calvinism had no parallel. The same with regards to your reference to Paul. If you don\u2019t believe me, this is fine, everyone has the right to be wrong<\/span>\u00a0<\/p>\nThe prayer has no interpretive context. Because of this, people have to take it at face value. You interpret the face value meaning much differently, which is fine (and a bit relativistic), and then say that it is Protestants fault for mistakingly thinking Catholics worship Mary. Like it or not, the prayer does suggest <\/em>this.<\/span><\/p>\nDave, while I know you cannot reform in doctrine, you can reform in communication. The \u201cit says this, but it really means this\u201d is confusing both to Catholics and Protestants.<\/span><\/p>\nIf you are going to teach and defend the prayer, I would rework it. Do you think that Mary will really get THAT upset?<\/span>\u00a0\u00a0Just think about what I am saying, that is all I ask.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Our Mother of Perpetual Help, a 15th Century Marian Byzantine Icon [public domain \/ Wikimedia Commons] *** (7-16-07) ***** The following exchange\u00a0about the Our Lady of Perpetual Help devotion occurred on the Parchment and Pen blog. C. Michael Patton and others have been very gracious and polite in allowing me to give my dissenting viewpoint. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2331,"featured_media":9546,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[45],"tags":[517,1507,2357,2389,2386,190,46,716,371,372,2388,550,503,2356,553,2387,2384,551,685,2393,2385,504,516],"class_list":["post-9544","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-blessed-virgin-mary","tag-adoration","tag-assumption-of-mary","tag-blessed-virgin-mary","tag-dulia","tag-honoring-mary","tag-idolatry","tag-immaculate-conception","tag-intercession-of-mary","tag-intercession-of-the-saints","tag-invocation-of-saints","tag-latria","tag-marian-devotion","tag-marian-doctrine","tag-mariology","tag-mary-mediatrix","tag-mary-queen-of-heaven","tag-maryolatry","tag-our-lady-of-perpetual-help","tag-perpetual-virginity","tag-prayer-to-mary","tag-veneration-of-mary","tag-virgin-mary","tag-worship"],"yoast_head":"\n
Defense of "Our Lady of Perpetual Help" vs. Calvinists<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\""Our Lady of Perpetual Help" is misunderstood because Protestants hardly have ANY Mariology. One can't understand trigonometry without learning arithmetic.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2016\/12\/defense-lady-perpetual-help-vs-calvinists.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Defense of "Our Lady of Perpetual Help" vs. Calvinists\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\""Our Lady of Perpetual Help" is misunderstood because Protestants hardly have ANY Mariology. One can't understand trigonometry without learning arithmetic.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2016\/12\/defense-lady-perpetual-help-vs-calvinists.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:author\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2016-12-09T19:13:11+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-04-18T22:16:45+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2016\/12\/MaryPerpetualHelp.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"372\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"459\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Dave Armstrong\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Dave Armstrong\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"17 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2016\/12\/defense-lady-perpetual-help-vs-calvinists.html\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2016\/12\/defense-lady-perpetual-help-vs-calvinists.html\",\"name\":\"Defense of \\\"Our Lady of Perpetual Help\\\" vs. Calvinists\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2016-12-09T19:13:11+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-04-18T22:16:45+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e\"},\"description\":\"\\\"Our Lady of Perpetual Help\\\" is misunderstood because Protestants hardly have ANY Mariology. One can't understand trigonometry without learning arithmetic.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2016\/12\/defense-lady-perpetual-help-vs-calvinists.html#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2016\/12\/defense-lady-perpetual-help-vs-calvinists.html\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2016\/12\/defense-lady-perpetual-help-vs-calvinists.html#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Defense of “Our Lady of Perpetual Help” vs. Calvinists\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/\",\"name\":\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism\",\"description\":\"Catholic biblical apologetics\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e\",\"name\":\"Dave Armstrong\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Dave Armstrong\"},\"description\":\"Dave Armstrong is a Catholic author and apologist, who has been actively proclaiming and defending Christianity since 1981, and Catholicism in particular since 1991 (full-time since December 2001). Formerly a campus missionary, as a Protestant, Dave was received into the Catholic Church in February 1991, by the late, well-known catechist and theologian, Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave\u2019s articles have appeared in many influential Catholic periodicals, including \\\"This Rock\\\" (now called \\\"Catholic Answers Magazine\\\"), \\\"Envoy Magazine\\\" (Patrick Madrid), \\\"The Catholic Answer,\\\" \\\"The Coming Home Journal,\\\" \\\"Gilbert Magazine\\\" (American Chesterton Society), and \\\"The Latin Mass.\\\" He also writes a featured column for every issue of \\\"The Michigan Catholic\\\": published by the archdiocese of Detroit, and was editor for most of the apologetics tracts published by the St. Paul Street Evangelization apostolate. Dave\u2019s apologetics and writing apostolate was the subject of a feature article in the May 2002 issue of \\\"Envoy Magazine.\\\" He served as the staff moderator at the Internet discussion forum for The Coming Home Network, from 2007-2010. Dave has been interviewed on many nationally syndicated Catholic radio shows, including \\\"Catholic Answers Live\\\" (twice), \\\"Faith and Family Live\\\" (Steve Wood), \\\"Kresta in the Afternoon,\\\" \\\"Son Rise Morning Show,\\\" \\\"Catholic Connection\\\" (Teresa Tomeo), and \\\"The Catholics Next Door.\\\" His large and popular website, \\\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism,\\\" was online from March 1997 to March 2007, and received the 1998 Catholic Website of the Year award from \\\"Envoy Magazine.\\\" His blog of the same name (now transferred to Patheos), begun in February 2004, contains more than 1,500 papers, at least 500 debates or dialogues, and over 50 distinct \\\"index\\\" web pages. Unsolicited correspondence has indicated many hundreds of conversions (or returns) to the Catholic faith as a result, by God's grace, of these writings. Dave's conversion story was published in the bestselling book \\\"Surprised by Truth\\\" (edited by Patrick Madrid; San Diego: Basilica Press, 1994). Sophia Institute Press has published six of his books: \\\"A Biblical Defense of Catholicism\\\" (Foreword by Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J., 1996 \/ 2003), \\\"The Catholic Verses\\\" (2004), \\\"The One-Minute Apologist\\\" (2007), \\\"Bible Proofs for Catholic Truths\\\" (2009), \\\"The Quotable Newman\\\" (editor: 2012), and \\\"Proving the Catholic Faith is Biblical\\\" (2015). He is co-author (with Dr. Paul Thigpen) of the inserts for \\\"The New Catholic Answer Bible\\\" (Our Sunday Visitor: 2005), and editor for \\\"The Wisdom of Mr. Chesterton: The Very Best Quotes, Quips, and Cracks from the Pen of G. K. Chesterton\\\" (Saint Benedict Press \/ TAN Books: 2009). \\\"100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura\\\" was published by Catholic Answers in May 2012. His \\\"Quotable Wesley\\\" compilation was published by (Protestant \/ Wesleyan publisher) Beacon Hill Press in April 2014. Several of his 49 books are bestsellers in their field. Dave maintains a popular personal Facebook page, a Facebook author page, and has a Twitter account as well. He offers almost all of his books in e-book form on his own Biblical Catholicism site (http:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/), at a permanent deep discount: only $2.99 for ePub, mobi, and AZW, and $1.99 for PDF. His writing has been enthusiastically endorsed or recommended by many leading Catholic apologists, authors, and priests, including Dr. Scott Hahn, Fr. Peter M. J. Stravinskas, Marcus Grodi, Patrick Madrid, Steve Ray, Tim Staples, Devin Rose, Mike Aquilina, Al Kresta, Karl Keating, Fr. Dwight Longenecker, Brandon Vogt, Marcellino D'Ambrosio, and Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave has been happily married to his wife Judy since October 1984. They have three sons and a daughter, and reside in southeast Michigan (metro Detroit).\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/\",\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798\",\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@LuxVeritatisApologetics\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/author\/davearmstrong\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Defense of \"Our Lady of Perpetual Help\" vs. Calvinists","description":"\"Our Lady of Perpetual Help\" is misunderstood because Protestants hardly have ANY Mariology. One can't understand trigonometry without learning arithmetic.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2016\/12\/defense-lady-perpetual-help-vs-calvinists.html","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Defense of \"Our Lady of Perpetual Help\" vs. Calvinists","og_description":"\"Our Lady of Perpetual Help\" is misunderstood because Protestants hardly have ANY Mariology. One can't understand trigonometry without learning arithmetic.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2016\/12\/defense-lady-perpetual-help-vs-calvinists.html","og_site_name":"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism","article_author":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798","article_published_time":"2016-12-09T19:13:11+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-04-18T22:16:45+00:00","og_image":[{"width":372,"height":459,"url":"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2016\/12\/MaryPerpetualHelp.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Dave Armstrong","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Dave Armstrong","Est. reading time":"17 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2016\/12\/defense-lady-perpetual-help-vs-calvinists.html","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2016\/12\/defense-lady-perpetual-help-vs-calvinists.html","name":"Defense of \"Our Lady of Perpetual Help\" vs. Calvinists","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website"},"datePublished":"2016-12-09T19:13:11+00:00","dateModified":"2017-04-18T22:16:45+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e"},"description":"\"Our Lady of Perpetual Help\" is misunderstood because Protestants hardly have ANY Mariology. One can't understand trigonometry without learning arithmetic.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2016\/12\/defense-lady-perpetual-help-vs-calvinists.html#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2016\/12\/defense-lady-perpetual-help-vs-calvinists.html"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2016\/12\/defense-lady-perpetual-help-vs-calvinists.html#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Defense of “Our Lady of Perpetual Help” vs. Calvinists"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/","name":"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism","description":"Catholic biblical apologetics","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e","name":"Dave Armstrong","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Dave Armstrong"},"description":"Dave Armstrong is a Catholic author and apologist, who has been actively proclaiming and defending Christianity since 1981, and Catholicism in particular since 1991 (full-time since December 2001). Formerly a campus missionary, as a Protestant, Dave was received into the Catholic Church in February 1991, by the late, well-known catechist and theologian, Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave\u2019s articles have appeared in many influential Catholic periodicals, including \"This Rock\" (now called \"Catholic Answers Magazine\"), \"Envoy Magazine\" (Patrick Madrid), \"The Catholic Answer,\" \"The Coming Home Journal,\" \"Gilbert Magazine\" (American Chesterton Society), and \"The Latin Mass.\" He also writes a featured column for every issue of \"The Michigan Catholic\": published by the archdiocese of Detroit, and was editor for most of the apologetics tracts published by the St. Paul Street Evangelization apostolate. Dave\u2019s apologetics and writing apostolate was the subject of a feature article in the May 2002 issue of \"Envoy Magazine.\" He served as the staff moderator at the Internet discussion forum for The Coming Home Network, from 2007-2010. Dave has been interviewed on many nationally syndicated Catholic radio shows, including \"Catholic Answers Live\" (twice), \"Faith and Family Live\" (Steve Wood), \"Kresta in the Afternoon,\" \"Son Rise Morning Show,\" \"Catholic Connection\" (Teresa Tomeo), and \"The Catholics Next Door.\" His large and popular website, \"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism,\" was online from March 1997 to March 2007, and received the 1998 Catholic Website of the Year award from \"Envoy Magazine.\" His blog of the same name (now transferred to Patheos), begun in February 2004, contains more than 1,500 papers, at least 500 debates or dialogues, and over 50 distinct \"index\" web pages. Unsolicited correspondence has indicated many hundreds of conversions (or returns) to the Catholic faith as a result, by God's grace, of these writings. Dave's conversion story was published in the bestselling book \"Surprised by Truth\" (edited by Patrick Madrid; San Diego: Basilica Press, 1994). Sophia Institute Press has published six of his books: \"A Biblical Defense of Catholicism\" (Foreword by Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J., 1996 \/ 2003), \"The Catholic Verses\" (2004), \"The One-Minute Apologist\" (2007), \"Bible Proofs for Catholic Truths\" (2009), \"The Quotable Newman\" (editor: 2012), and \"Proving the Catholic Faith is Biblical\" (2015). He is co-author (with Dr. Paul Thigpen) of the inserts for \"The New Catholic Answer Bible\" (Our Sunday Visitor: 2005), and editor for \"The Wisdom of Mr. Chesterton: The Very Best Quotes, Quips, and Cracks from the Pen of G. K. Chesterton\" (Saint Benedict Press \/ TAN Books: 2009). \"100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura\" was published by Catholic Answers in May 2012. His \"Quotable Wesley\" compilation was published by (Protestant \/ Wesleyan publisher) Beacon Hill Press in April 2014. Several of his 49 books are bestsellers in their field. Dave maintains a popular personal Facebook page, a Facebook author page, and has a Twitter account as well. He offers almost all of his books in e-book form on his own Biblical Catholicism site (http:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/), at a permanent deep discount: only $2.99 for ePub, mobi, and AZW, and $1.99 for PDF. His writing has been enthusiastically endorsed or recommended by many leading Catholic apologists, authors, and priests, including Dr. Scott Hahn, Fr. Peter M. J. Stravinskas, Marcus Grodi, Patrick Madrid, Steve Ray, Tim Staples, Devin Rose, Mike Aquilina, Al Kresta, Karl Keating, Fr. Dwight Longenecker, Brandon Vogt, Marcellino D'Ambrosio, and Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave has been happily married to his wife Judy since October 1984. They have three sons and a daughter, and reside in southeast Michigan (metro Detroit).","sameAs":["https:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/","https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@LuxVeritatisApologetics"],"url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/author\/davearmstrong"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9544","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2331"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=9544"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9544\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/9546"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=9544"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=9544"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=9544"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
![\"MaryPerpetualHelp\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2016\/12\/MaryPerpetualHelp.jpg\")
<\/p>\n![\":)\"](\"https:\/\/commons.wikimedia.org\/wiki\/File:Our_Mother_of_Perpetual_Help.jpg\")
<\/p>\n