Hail Mary = God centered prayer

Yep...the old detection radar might need some fine tuning I guess.

I am trying to stick to what I personally know about Catholicism...and the few titles I gave out are standard fare in my experience...on top of which one of the unifying factors surrounding Catholicism and one in which many are happy to boast, is their unity in faith and doctrine....so I find it a wee bit peculiar to think that what they each believes/practices varies according to the individual...when it is precisely against such an idea that they protest against Protestantism.

There are some of them which are not often used. And many of them don't use the same titles due to how every priest is different. That's a basic rule, for although there's a unity in faith/doctrine, that doesn't mean there's uniformity in the use of titles on all levels. One would have to assume more than what's present to say that. Catholicism in Mexico is different than Catholicism in the West Indies..and both are different than Catholicism in the U.S in multiple ways, especially after being to the services and talking to others present there...and of course, there are already differences between Eastern Catholics and Roman Catholics as well (as it concerns Liturgy, Eastern Catholics allowing priests to marry, and many other things...look up Joseph Raya or Elias Chacour for examples). ...and then there are differences between Charismatic Catholics and those that are not Charismatic--as the Charismatic Movement actually began in the Catholic Church. And then there's also the issue of Catholics who either support or reject Liberation Theology....or Catholics for Inculturation while others were not for it. THus, I find it a bit interesting that one assumes it's somehow like a cookie-cutter factory within Catholicism if one truly feels they're aware of it.

I take the thrust of your point, and will endeavour to obtain a more rounded understanding of Catholic machinations.

There've been PLENTY of Catholics, for anyone sincerely paying attention, that've noted that Catholicism is just as diverse as the Protestant Movement...although there is greater unity, in their view, that's present there than in the Protestant camp.

Noted.

Respectfully, that may be how you see it or interpret it, but these titles are merely the smallest tip of a very large ice-berg and a warning light to what else lies there waiting to be discovered. I have read what Catholics believe, I have listened to many Catholic programs on TV and heard directly from the mouths of Catholic leaders, and I have actively engaged many Catholics over several years...So although not a Catholic, nor from a Catholic back-ground myself, I really do have a bit of a clue what I am talking about.

Nonetheless, as said before, there's already an assumption that anyone NOT agreeing with you is either unaware of what Catholics believe or somehow ignorant of the "whole ice-berg"--and I've done this for decades, seeing as much of my family is involved in Catholicism and I grew up in the background. Research wasn't based simply from watching a program and essentially coming from the outside-in...but actually living life daily with Catholics. And it seems rather apparent that one is assuming on your part that listening to programs/hearing Catholic leaders means one has the sole perspective of what Catholicism means...never mind others leaders within Catholicism who may've disgareed with whatever you listened to and nevermind that there's still Catholic culture you're trying to understand from the outside in. As it concerns the titles, it's already apparent you made an assumption to believe the worse with titles and thus have an agenda to try to expose the "poor ol Catholcs" while ignoring the fundamental reality that where you are at (as it concerns the Protestant Camp) has much of the same issues on multiple fronts.

Honestly bro, that is a little harsh. Some of the things you level at me I recognise and in some cases I deserve...but I don't have to be a JW or a Mormon to get a very good understanding of their beliefs...it is almost as if the only fair way to engage with Catholic brethren is to have come from a Catholic back-ground...anything less is not worthy.

I had no idea I was coming across as if I had sole perspective on what Catholicism means...and if I have done such I apologise profusely to all the Brethren...I thought I was learning as I went along...even when attacking what appeared to me as unbiblical doctrine.

There's no need for that...and again, please don't assume that others are unaware of the titles (or other things, be it Mariolatry, veneration of the Saints and a host of other things often debated of since I'm well familar with it).

Ok...but it would be good if from time to time there were Catholics who said they understood the problems, and distanced themselves from the mis-conceptions which they recognised in varying degrees throughout the Catholic Body.

I have no difficulty upholding valid arguments they might make against poor theology in non-Catholic Assemblies without the need to use terminolgy that seems to paper the cracks as in a methodology of apologetics.

I am never intentially rude...I might be a bit passionate at times, but most Catholic brethren who know me here, have realised that I may strongly disagree and try to prove certain points...but at the end of the day it is what we do with Jesus in our lives that counts.

Nothing wrong with being passionate at times. Just so long as passion doesn't go into the realm of insistence in telling others to believe what they don't believe

I would be totally gutted if that is how people felt I came across...what seems to be the case is that some Catholics here say one thing, and yet I have seen and heard differently and presume they are unaware of these things because they don't really seem to acknowledge it. I will be word myself more carefully and hopefully from a slightly broader perspective.

Well we will differ on that one my friend...I too have heard ad infinitum the justification for that term, along with any number of other terms...but as I said before, these things do not stand in isolation, and are specific bricks that represent part of a whole building.


If what we were discussing/arguing about merely concerned a few isolated terms that were widely mis-represented you would have a point....and you might even be right about the 'picking a fight to bless Catholic brethren' analogy. (Although you make an interesting point, and I do take note.)

Bro, claiming things do not "stand in isolation" is not the same as showing credibly or logically where others take the term to mean worship as you have assumed. One cannot assume what a brick means by looking at it alone and then building from there---or essentially doing what is taking a brick...and looking at the wrong building to fit the brick into. If you disagree with the term, you disagree...but that's the extent of it.

Gotcha.

cont'd

I realise this... but there are many that inadvertently buy into the idea that merely by substituting the word 'worship' with the word 'venerate' it makes it all acceptable. If you then look at the actually prayers, from the Pope downwards across the board...the words of devotion speak for themselves, and there must come a point for some where reality kicks in and all the excuses of Catholic apologetics can no longer veil what is actually promoted.

Again, this is where there's an assumption is in place where there's no warrant..for it is assumed that because there is devotion to other saints or leaders that there's somehow a level of "worship" involved....and that is no more logical than claiming that the apostles are worshipped because their words were authorative/they had the power to forgive sins ( John 20:22-24 / John 20 ), even though it was said to Christ "Who can forgive sins but God alone?" (Luke 5:19-21 / Luke 5:23-25 ). The same as it concerns the ways others were honored throughout the scripture due to their position....and honoring them via bowing/remembrance of what they do.

Just to be clear....I do not for one minute believe all Catholics worship Mary...and many may use the word venerate in a true context. But there are many others that use the word venerate and yet they are participating in worship...I have often felt in talking with some Catholics that they use the word 'venerate' to avoid any arguments, or a closer examination of their actual practices.

I don't think any one is arguing against honouring Mary, or any of the great men and women of G-d that have gone on before us...even recently Wesley, Whitfield, Mueller, Wigglesworth or people we have actually loved and known personally. But most can recognise the difference between honouring someone and actually going too far so that one crosses an unwritten line.

"Most" based on what? That's spurious...for who are the "Most" we're talking on? Most believers? Most believers in the Protestant camp or most believers in the Anglican camp or most believers in the Eastern Church? As it stands, again, most people don't assume worship when it comes to veneration of Martin Luther in the Lutheran church...and yet people have assumed others "worshipped" the man for placing him/his views as if he was the source of the Reformation. Same with Calvin and others....but many in the camp put that in check really quick when making clear that high honor does not equate to "crossing a line"..

Most....as in most people. I would have thought even the ubiquitous man in the street could give a valid opinion on this issue...so it beats me why you should take umbrage at such an obvious distinction. At times I think you must believe I want to knock Catholics at all costs...if this is the case in part or whole...I assure you it is not.

I strive very hard and prayerfully to get a comprehensive understanding of the issues at stake, and the desire of my heart is not to win an argument or trash someone elses view-point/theology, but to reason things together and look at where G-d is in all this.

I don't really see the point you are labouring concerning Luther, Calvin etc...we are expressly looking at worship of Mary... I have never heard of people worshipping Luther or Calvin in quite the way you try to compare...and although I see the point you are trying to make, I don't think it really works here.

O come on bro...it wasn't said like that at all, I was just being up-front with a brother about how things appeared
, and nothing in your reply has giving me cause to think I was mistaken

Never had a problem being upfront, although understand I am being upfront with you as to how it appeared that you came off with the use of words when saying "cop out". No need reacting as it appears you're doing if the same is done You claimed something was a "cop-out"--yet already did cop-out by trying to blame or deflect as if people were concerned with trying to be appealing to Catholics for it's own sake. The issue is truth...and whether or not what you offered was a truthful assesment. If others disagreed on that/took time out to note why they disagreed, that doesn't mean one is trying to "cop-out."

Ok...not going to argue this one.

..I was specifically addressing what you had written

...not any others that might disagree with my claims.
It was just to you I gently remarked on a 'cop out', and it was just on this one issue, so I find the need for some sort of equivalency yet again a bit unnecessary.

Didn't say you were not addressing what I had written...as that's the entire reason I noted there was a deflection in trying to bring out the term "cop-out" for not taking as much issue with things as you chose to do. Focus....and don't argue against what was never said. If you have an issue with people responding in-kind, then don't dish out what you don't like to take. One can't make a standard of trying to give something out and then say "Oh, well you can't do that back or be equally honest as I give myself the right to be."..for that's hypocritical. It'd be like having a conversation about presidential figures and having someone make a comment on where they may support a political figure....only for another to jump in sharing where they disagreed with the perspective/share why and then effectively try to suppress any dissent from their thoughts by claiming "no need for equivalency" when others note that their views don't seem to be accurate and there's nothing wrong with disagreement.

Hmmm...I will review the way I put things across and try to be clearer in what I say, more reasonable in my approach and fairer in the way I judge other peoples words and the intentions behind them.


I think sometimes when writing in Forums anyone of us can come across as a bit harsh/judgmental/legalistic and only interested in promoting our own view...hopefully over time a relationship develops and people are better able to understand where each other are coming from, and what their heart attitude really is.


To G-d be the glory. Zazal