Religion

Presidential hopeful Barack Obama has quit Chicago’s United Trinity Church of Christ where he was a faithful member for 20 years. Why and why now? In a letter to the church’s new pastor, Rev. Otis Moss III, Obama wrote,

“We make this decision with sadness. Trinity was where I found Christ, where we were married and where our children were baptized.”

He told Rev. Moss that he was concerned about the increased scrutiny the church has received in the past few months. Furthermore, he told reporters,

“Rev. Moss and the Church have been suffering from all the tension my campaign has visited on them. We’ve had news organizations harassing members in their home at their work places… That is just not how people should have to operate in their church. It’s not fair to the other members of the church who seek to worship in peace.”

So, Obama leaves the church not because he disagrees with its divisive message, but because he doesn’t want to hurt the poor parishioners with his presidential campaign. Obama is a martyr? Gimmieabreak!

I can’t see how this is going to help Obama. After all, he didn’t renounce the church’s doctrine, did he? His only regret is that the United Trinity Church has become a political anchor in his campaign. He’s leaving the church for one reason and one reason only: political expediency! This move proves that he is nothing more than a typical Washington politician who promises no change from the status quo.

MORE: Hot Air; Michelle Malkin; Little Green Footballs; The American Pundit; Webloggin; Power Line; Rightwing Nuthouse; Flopping Aces

The controversy surrounding the teaching of intelligent design alongside the theory of evolution in our schools is simply remarkable to me. I also don’t understand why Christian activists think that if creation can’t be taught exclusively, it must be must be taught in tandem with evolutionary theory. Truth be told, I’ve never had a problem separating the teaching of secular idioms in the public school and leaving the proper teaching of Christian principles and ideals in the home. Don’t get me wrong, I believe Christian teaching has a place in public school and is in line with the beliefs of the Founding Fathers, but also concede to the powers-that-be in its disallowance in the public arena of reading, writing and ‘rithmatic. But why can’t it?

Read the rest of this entry »

And it came to pass, as the angels were gone away from them into heaven, the shepherds said one to another, Let us now go even unto Bethlehem, and see this thing which is come to pass, which the Lord hath made known unto us. And they came with haste, and found Mary, and Joseph, and the babe lying in a manger. And when they had seen it, they made known abroad the saying which was told them concerning this child. And all they that heard it wondered at those things which were told them by the shepherds. But Mary kept all these things, and pondered them in her heart. And the shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God for all the things that they had heard and seen, as it was told unto them. (Luke 2:15-20)

After several months of haggling, more than 40 nations have finally arrived in Maryland to talk Mideast peace. Judging from the behavior of the players in attendance, I’m afraid that’s all it’s going to be is “talk.”

Saudi Arabia is one of the nations in attendance, but when asked if he would shake hands with Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert, Prince Saud al-Faisal, the Saudi Foreign Minister gave a curt, “no.” His explanation was

“We are here for the serious business of making peace,” … “It is not a sporting contest where you shake hands and let the best man win.”

Isn’t a handshake symbolic of making peace?

Oh, and the Syrians are there, too, but only to discuss regaining the Golan Heights which Israel has occupied since 1967.

And if that’s not bad enough, the focal point for the talks, the forging of an agreement between Israel and Palestine, appears untenable. Presently the two sides can’t even agree on the content of a negotiating document, a starting point for negotiations. Issues in dispute are the location of final borders, sovereignty over Jerusalem and the fate of Palestinian refugees who lost homes in the war that followed Israel’s establishment in 1948. Essentially, the same old song and dance.

Actually, any agreement between Israel and Palestine is moot because Hamas leaders have labeled Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas a traitor for simply attending the meeting. They’ve also vowed to reject any decisions that come from the meeting.

The Israelis see the futility of this effort as several thousand Jews, led by Benjamin Netanyahu, met at the Western Wall to protest the meeting.

So, it’s no big surprise that Iran’s Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said the meeting “has already failed,” and when considering the resistance from the Islamic states, he’s absolutely right. As always, the failure to achieve peace in the Middle East is a foregone conclusion. Not because the Israelis don’t want peace, but because Muslims will never choose to live in peace with the Jews.

Today marked the release of all the South Korean missionaries held hostage by the Taliban terrorists (h/t: Michelle Malkin). Why did the terrorists hold the seven remaining hostages for an additional day? I believe they wanted to see what kind of response the hostage release received from the media. If it didn’t go their way or if thought they could gain some new advantage, they’d still have some leverage. Just more game-playing.

Now it appears the Church that sent the missionaries to Afghanistan will be charged by the South Korean government for the expense of transporting them home.

According to the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade,

The government will first request compensation for the cost of airfare, the transfer of dead bodies, and expenses for the transportation and medical treatment of the captives.”

The chief pastor of the Bundang-based church said the church will reimburse the government for all costs associated with transporting the dead bodies and freed hostages home. The pastor made the commitment after the government said it would seek compensation from the church since all expenses were paid by taxpayer money.

First taken hostage by Taliban, then robbed by their own government. South Korea has the twelfth largest economy in the world! How cheap can you be?!?

MORE: Tel-Chai Nation

UPDATE: South Korean officials hint at recouping expenses from the hostages themselves (h/t: Hot Air).

Twelve of the nineteen South Korean hostages held by the Taliban have been released. The hostages were released into the care of the International Committee of the Red Cross in small groups at three different locations in central Afghanistan. The Taliban said they would release the seven remaining hostages within the next few days.

At first, South Korea had vowed not to engage in direct talks with Taliban terrorists who had threatened to kill the missionary hostages. However, following the murder of two of the hostages as a result of failed negotiations between the terrorists and the Afghan government late last month, the South Korean government began direct negotiations with the kidnappers.

Of course, this is good news for the missionaries and their families and I’m happy they’re safe. Still, although the hostages-for-prisoners deal fell through, the Taliban can still claim victory.

They certainly didn’t lose, did they?

The South Koreans have reached an agreement with the Taliban kidnappers to free the 19 remaining Christian missionary hostages (h/t: Michelle Malkin).

The deal: In exchange for the hostages, South Korea will withdraw its troops stationed in Afghanistan by year’s end and impose a ban on its Christian nationals’ missionary activities in Afghanistan.

The message: Kidnapping and murdering foreigners works!

MORE: Hot Air; The Jawa Report; Little Green Footballs

(h/t: Hot Air) Seattle Episcopal priest, Rev. Ann Holmes Redding, recently announced that after 23 years in the priesthood, she is now both Muslim and Christian. (strange bedfellows indeed!) The Bishop of the Diocese of Rhode Island, Rev. Geralyn Wolf, sent her on sabbatical to sort things out. Basically, Redding is to take a year off to “reflect on the doctrines of the Christian faith, her vocation as a priest, and what [Wolf] sees as the conflict inherent in professing both Christianity and Islam.”

During the next year, Redding “is not to exercise any of the responsibilities and privileges of an Episcopal priest or deacon,” says Rev Wolf. Redding is of course, “…deeply saddened,” but said she would abide by the rulings of her bishop.

During the meeting, Redding took off her priest’s collar gave it to Rev. Wolf who will hold it for a year–symbolizing that they’re both in this together. At the end of the year, both the bishop and Holmes will revisit the issue. If unable to resolve her dilemma, Holmes will be asked to leave the priesthood. Presently, she isn’t willing to do that, and says, “The church is going to have to divorce me if it comes to that.” … “I’m not going to go willingly.” Still she recognizes, “God will guide me over this year.” (now, is that through Jesus or Allah?)

Even more troubling than this schizophrenic priest are those who actually accept Holmes’ dual-faithfullness. Seattle bishop, Rev. Vincent Warner, who accepts Redding as an Episcopal priest and a Muslim, said Wolf’s decision is a good compromise. (you’ve got to be kidding!)

Warner says, “It’s a good way to have a timeout and provide an opportunity for Ann to continue to teach … and at the same time take a look at her relationship both with the Episcopal Church and the Christian faith and Islam.”

In June, Redding made the announcement that for the past 15 months she had also been a Muslim. She said she was drawn to the faith after an introduction to Muslim prayers left her profoundly moved. Although many (understandably) were confused by her newfound Christian-Muslam marriage, many actually praised her “larger efforts to find common ground between Christianity and Islam.”

Okay. I can accept an effort to find common ground between Christianity and Islam. This is how we live together in a diverse society. However, how can one find common ground when it comes to faith? What compromises will Redding have to make between Episcopal doctrine and that of Islam? The Bible and the Qur’an are diametrically opposed. I recently argued that due to our Judeo-Christian values, one couldn’t be a Muslim and an American and in this situation, the same holds true.

A Pew Research Center poll released late last month found that, while U.S. Muslims are largely the picture of assimilation, about a quarter of Muslims ages 18 to 29 said the use of suicide bombing against civilian targets to defend Islam could be justified, at least on rare occasions.

Suicide bombing is justified?!? Even on “rare” occasions when is suicide bombing ever justified? The fact that young Muslims living in America would even remotely sympathize with terrorists who kill and maim innocent men, women and children in the name of religion is cause for concern.

Is this any surprise given the sentiment of Muslim scholars such as Omar Safi, professor of Islamic studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, who said, “Given what’s happened in Iraq and Palestine, I would be shocked if there wasn’t discontent.”

Muslims living in America cite mistrust of the Islamic faithful since the 9-11 attacks among many Americans as a major cause of their radicalization. And why shouldn’t we mistrust members of a faith committed to the destruction of our very way of life? There is no greater danger to our country today than Islamic fundamentalism. We should be very concerned about polls like this.

And we should be leery…

President Bush met with Pope Benedict XVI in Rome. The Pope is deeply concerned about Christians living in Iraq. According to the President, the Pope “was concerned that the society that was evolving would not tolerate the Christian religion. … He’s worrisome about the Christians inside Iraq being mistreated by the Muslim majority.”

Ya think???

“Fight and slay the Pagans wherever you find them, and lie in wait for them in every strategem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practice regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.” (Qur’an, Surah 9:5)

This is a call to kill anyone who is not Muslim…

Today, the Wall Street Journal reported:

KIEV, Ukraine — A mass grave holding the remains of thousands of Jews killed by the Nazis has been found in southern Ukraine near the site of what was once a concentration camp, a Jewish community representative said Tuesday.

The grave was found by chance last month when workers were laying gas pipelines in the village of Gvozdavka-1, near Odessa, said Roman Shvartsman, a spokesman for the regional Jewish community. He said that Nazis established a concentration camp near the village in November 1941 killed about 5,000 Jews at or near the site.

“Several thousand Jews executed by the Nazis lie there,” Mr. Shvartsman told The Associated Press.

Ukraine’s Jewish population was devastated during the Holocaust. Babi Yar, a ravine outside the capital Kiev where the Nazis slaughtered some 34,000 Jews over two days in September 1941, is a powerful symbol of the tragedy.

After all this and people still deny there was ever a Holocaust! Thankfully, Holocaust denial is widely viewed as failing to adhere to rules for the treatment of evidence, principles that mainstream historians (as well as scholars in other fields) regard as basic to any rational inquiry. Mainstream scholars firmly believe that evidence given by survivors, eyewitnesses, and contemporary historical accounts is overwhelming; that this evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the Holocaust occurred; and that it occurred as these sources say it occurred. The majority of scholars with credentials in the field believe that it as unreasonable to ask these claimants to further prove their evidence is “really real,” especially in the absence of some particular, demonstrably credible reason for considering that evidence suspect.

…and yet there remain small-minded men with political agendas!

The residents of Minnesota’s 5th district recently elected the first Muslim to Congress. Keith Ellison (D-Minn), a defense attorney, won on a platform of anti-war and tolerance. He campaigned heavily against the war in Iraq and has put environmental and health care issues at the top of his list of priorities. Is he on the level? You’ve got to be kidding! I believe he may very well be a wolf in sheep’s clothing. I find it curious that he was associated with the Nation of Islam (an anti-semitic organization led by Louis Farrakhan) and received financing from the Council on American-Islamic Relations (an organization with suspected ties to Hamas). A Muslim in American government is dangerous because of the requirements of the Islamic faith. The Muslim does not recognize and has no loyalty to any non-Islamic government. Remember that!

Almost immediately after 9-11-01 prominent Americans, our president included, assured the world that the United States respects Islam and recognizes that it is a religion of peace, tolerance and forgiveness. The despicable act of war against our country was perpetrated by radical Islamic extremists who use Islam to achieve their political agenda. If you believe that, you’re kidding yourself!

The Muslims who attacked this country on 9-11 are actually fighting a religious war! This has nothing to do with politics or a political agenda. These men are practicing Islam exactly as Muhammad commanded. It is the misguided people who believe Islam is a religion of peace who need to wake up!

Before I really get into this, lets get a couple of things straight. The word “Islam” means submission. The word “Muslim” means one who submits to Allah. The “Quran” is Islam’s holy book and is divided into 114 chapters called “Surahs.” The Quran was written by Muhammad, the prophet of Islam, in the early seventh century. The word “jihad” means struggle and in a practical sense it is “holy war” or “religious terrorism.”

In his book, Islam and Terrorism, Mark Gabriel tells us that there are three kinds of Muslims:

• The secular Muslim believes in the nice parts of Islam, but he rejects the call to jihad.
• The traditional Muslim comes in two types:
  • First are those who study Islam, know it and practice it, but have a stumbling block with the concept of jihad
  • Second are those who know that jihad is fighting non-Muslims, but they don’t take action because they don’t have the ability, are concerned about what might happen to their lives, family or children if they join a fundamentalist group or they want to live a nice life on earth instead of dying
• The fundamentalist Muslim are those who perpetuate terrorism and their goal is to practice Islam as Muhammad did. We call them radicals, they are practicing true Islam!

Islam is a religion based on works. Basically, there are five requirements that must be met to be a Muslim. These requirements are called the “five pillars of Islam.” They are:

• Statement of belief: Accepting the Muslim statement of faith–”There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is his prophet.”
• Prayer: Muslims must pray five times per day facing Mecca (the birthplace of Muhammad)
• Giving Alms: Like a tax, its paid at the end of the year and distributed to the needy
• Fasting: This takes place during the Islamic month of Ramadan, which begins in mid-November
• Pilgrimage: Muslims are encouraged to make a pilgrimage to Mecca at least once in their lifetime where a five day ritual is followed

Why is it necessary for Muslims to perform these pillars of faith? Because entrance to Paradise (heaven) must be earned. However, the Muslim has no assurance of his salvation. When he dies, he believes he’ll go to the grave to await judgment. On judgment day, Allah will weigh his good works and his bad works and decide his fate. The Quran states,

“Then as for him whose balance (of good deeds) will be heavy, he will live a pleasant life (in Paradise). But as for him whose balance (of good deeds) will be light, he will have his home in Hawiyah (pit, i.e. Hell) [Surah 101:6-9].

So there’s no guarantee no matter how many good works you’ve done–its whatever Allah decides, right? Well, there is one way…

The only way to know for sure that you will get into Paradise is to die in jihad–to die while fighting the enemy of Islam. Once again according to Paul Gabriel, “Jihad is really a contract between Allah and the Muslim. If the Muslim fights, Allah rewards him in the afterlife.” The Quran states,

“Let those (believers) who sell the life of this world for the Hereafter fight in the Cause of Allah, and whoso fights in the Cause of Allah, and is killed or gets victory, We shall bestow on him a great reward.” [Surah 4:74]

the Quran also says,

“For them Allah has got ready Gardens (Paradise) under which rivers flow, to dwell therein forever. That is the supreme success.” [Surah 9:89]

Talk about the perfect motive! Kinda makes you want to strap on some explosives doesn’t it?

So, what exactly does the Quran say about jihad?

“Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allah, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad) 94) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islam) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah (tax) with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” [Surah 9:29]

Basically, this verse tells Muslims they must fight four kinds of people:

• Those who don’t believe in Allah
• Those who don’t believe in the last day (”Qiyamah,” the end of time)
• Those who do things that Allah and Muhammad have forbidden
• Those who don’t acknowledge Islam as the truth, i.e. “people of the Scripture,” who are Jews and Christians

and Muhammad gave people three options:

• They could accept the message of Islam
• They could remain Jews or Christians and pay a special tax (jizyah)
• They could die (the phrase “and feel themselves subdued” is much stronger in Arabic than in the english translation. It means “abject subjection” and carries the idea of cowering in fear before a greater power)

So, if jihad is the way of Islam, why does everyone claim its a religion of peace, love, tolerance and forgiveness? At one time, it was. For 10 to 12 years, while Muhammad was in Mecca, he never spoke of jihad. During this time, he persuaded people to follow Islam without killing or demanding taxes from them. His message was one of repentance, patience and forgiveness. During this time many of the people were leaving behind idol worship and following Islam. Of course, the tribal leaders didn’t like this and they persecuted Muhammad, attempting to kill him on several occasions. Because of this persecution, Muhammad soon left Mecca and settled in Medina.

In Medina, Muhammad continued to convert the population while at the same time building an army. It was during this time that Muhammad received the call to jihad. The call came in three revelations. The first, “repay those who mistreat you,” which he did, defeating the tribes that once persecuted him; the second, “conquer your region,” which continues today–there are Islamic governments in 27 countries from Kyrgyzstan to Morocco; and the third, “conquer the world,” which took a giant step forward on September 11, 2001. The message of peace Muhammad presented in Mecca lasted about 12 years; jihad has lasted 2,400 years and continues today.

Why is Islam portrayed a religion of peace, similar to Christianity? Because the non-Muslim doesn’t understand Islam. With the drastic change in Muhammad’s message after he left Mecca, several contradictions arose in the Quran. After all, there are verses in the Quran that speak positively about Christians, while there are others that condemn them to hell. Some verses say that Muslims can have a good relationship with Christians, while other verses say Muslims must require Christians to convert to Islam. There are also contradictions outlining the rules for alcohol consumption and the dress and behavior of women. So, how does one account for these obvious contradictions?

Islamic scholars determined which verses to follow in the case of a contradiction. This was accomplished by the principle of naskh. This principle is based on the fact that the Quran was revealed to Muhammad at different times (over the course of about 22 years). To solve a contradiction, they decided that new revelations would override (naskh) older (previous) revelations. For example, there are over 114 verses in the Quran that speak of love, peace and forgiveness. But when Surah 9:5 was revealed later, it cancelled out all previous verses. This verse states,

“Fight and slay the Pagans wherever you find them, and lie in wait for them in every strategem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practice regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.”

This is known as the verse of the sword, and it explains that Muslims must fight anyone who chooses not to convert to Islam. It is considered to represent the final development of jihad in Islam.

A religion of peace, love, tolerance and forgiveness? Not on your live! (and it may likely come to that). Disagree? Consider this post on islamicweb.com forums:

Originally posted by Max_cell on 24 May 2006, regarding the potential election of Ellison to Congress:

“Since the iraq war, all muslims have changed, american no longer be seen as anything as a big fat kaffir bully with muslim blood on its hands.”

“Muslims in america must choosh [sic] they are either american or muslims, if like fools like this they choosh [sic] america then fine just dont say your muslims, go away…..”

“100,000 muslims are dead in iraq, all that killing all that brutality, all because of lies and a desire to control muslims and have a massive U.S base in the heart of the Ummah.”

“That kaffir desire has failed, but they have No consequences for their war, the consequences is the hatred and anger of 1.5Billion muslims.”

“If a Muslim does not hate america… then its like he has joined the quresh after they attacked and insulted the prophet Muhammed.”

He’s right in one respect: One can’t be an American and a Muslim!

I received a letter from my mother today and among the goings on in the family, she told me about an issue with her pastor. Seems they got into a bit of a debate as to the disposition of Judas Iscariot, Jesus betrayer. The pastor feels that Judas was redeemed and will go to Heaven; my mother believes the opposite. My mother quoted a verse from Matthew 26 that said of the betrayer. The pastor cut her off, ended the discussion, by saying he didn’t want to argue about it.

I can’t believe the pastor got upset when she stated an opposing point-of-view. Isn’t that the purpose of Bible study? Perhaps, he’s not as committed to that line of thinking (i.e. “Judas is in Heaven”) as he says he is. Maybe he has doubts about what he was taught in theology school.

So what could the pastor’s argument be? Possibly this is his support for Judas in Heaven:

1. Judas was prompted by the devil (John 13:2) and satan entered his heart (Luke 22:3, John 13:27)
2. Judas was “seized with remorse” and returned the blood money (Matthew 27:3)
3. Judas was so overcome with that remorse he committed suicide (Matthew 27:5).
4. In an earlier speech to his disciples, Jesus tells the twelve (including Judas) “…you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.” (Matthew 19:28)
5. Jesus died for all (Judas, too) (2 Corinthians 5:15)

Argument #1: Judas was used (possessed?) by Satan and not responsible for the betrayal of Jesus.

Judas was chosen as one of the twelve disciples by Jesus and Jesus knew the heart of every one of them: “Did I not choose you, the twelve, and one of you is a devil?” (John 6:70). Jesus knew the moment Satan entered Judas: “…Satan entered [Judas]. Then Jesus said to him, ‘What you do, do quickly’.” (John 13:27). Jesus knew that Judas would betray him before Judas did, but did “the devil make him do it?” I imagine this is a pretty popular argument today. Thinking that if Judas was indeed a tool of the devil, then he isn’t responsible for his actions. But many forget, God gave us “free will” and Satan can have no more control over us than we allow: “Therefore, submit to God. Resist the devil and he will run from you.” (James 3:7). Therefore, Judas willingly betrayed Jesus.

Argument #2: Judas repented of his sin and was forgiven.

As my mother tried to point out to the pastor, Jesus condemned Judas in Matt 26 when he said: “…but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been good for that man if he had not been born.” Judas felt remorse (guilt?) for what he’d done and returned the silver, and hanged himself. The Bible doesn’t say anything about Judas repenting for his sins, nor does it say anything about forgiveness. In fact, Judas act of suicide implies just the opposite. Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 6:19, “…do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own?” So, isn’t committing suicide in essence destroying the Holy Spirit and the ultimate apostasy? Also, John wrote, “…no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him” (1 John 3:15). Suicide is the murder of oneself; therefore to commit suicide is to condemn oneself to Hell.

I believe Judas is condemned to Hell.

This is certainly something worth discussing at Bible study and I regret the pastor can’t seem to see past his own prejudices to debate the topic. Rather than push the subject with the pastor, my mother held a discussion with other family members presenting both sides of the argument. It’s just unfortunate that she felt she didn’t have the freedom to do this in Bible study with the pastor. Actually, in the years to come, we’ll have to worship in secret or be persecuted by the State (like many places in the world already). When a pastor behaves this way, it makes me realize that future isn’t too far away.

Pope John Paul II has passed. As the flags are flying at half-mast for this world leader (a world religious leader–I imagine the ACLU is just simmering!), I’d like to relay a story my father just told me about a conversation he had with our neighbor, Mrs. Gref, in 1978, when the Pope was first elected. The Gref’s were an elderly couple from New York (we lived in Florida). They had a golden retriever, Shakespeare, who was in the original Broadway production of “Hair.” Anyway, Mrs. Gref told my dad that this would be the last pope to die in office before the end of time (Jesus’ second coming). A cryptic statement perhaps, or one of hope? I prefer the latter. Did Mrs. Gref have an insight into the future of man? Who knows? I’m sure Mrs. Gref has passed on as well. But if she’s right, then our days are numbered and we’ll witness the second coming of the savior in this generation. Believe in this: put your life in order with God and you’ll miss out on the coming persecution. If everyone did, the world would be a better place in the meantime, wouldn’t it?

Do Catholics worship Mary? As an outsider (Protestant) looking in, I think they do. Yet, if you ask a Catholic, you’re likely to be told, “we worship God; we honor Mary.” Why the confusion? I think its safe to say that in the history of mankind, no woman has been more venerated than Mary. This veneration has its roots in and can be almost exclusively attributed to the Catholic Church. So, to answer this question of Mary worship, we must understand what the Catholic Church teaches about Mary:

According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church (ref in brackets):

• Mary was preserved from all stain of original sin from the first instant of her conception (the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception) [490-492]
• Mary “the All-Holy,” lived a perfectly sinless life [411, 493]
• Mary was a virgin before, during and after the birth of Christ [496-511]
• Mary is the Mother of God [963, 971, 2677]
• Mary is the Mother of the Church [963, 975]
• Mary is the co-redeemer, for she participated with Christ in the painful act of redemption [618, 964, 968, 970]
• At the end of her life, Mary was assumed body and soul into heaven (the doctrine of the Assumption) [966, 974]
• Mary is the co-mediator to whom we can entrust all our cares and petitions [968-970]
• We should entrust ourselves to Mary, surrendering ” ‘the hour of our death’ wholly to her care” [2677]
• God has exalted Mary in heavenly glory as Queen of Heaven and Earth [966]. She is to be praised with special devotion [971, 2675]

So, the Catholic Church views Mary as (1) Co-redemptrix, (2) Mediatrix and (3) Queen of Heaven. As Co-redemptrix, she cooperates with Christ in the work of saving sinners. As Mediatrix of all graces, she now dispenses God’s blessings and grace to the spiritually needy. As Queen of Heaven, she rules providentially with Christ, the King of Heaven. Thus, “There is one Mediator between Christ and men, the Holy Mother Mary. Mary is the way, the truth and the life. No man comes to Jesus but by Mary.” (Walter Martin, The Roman Catholic Church in History pg 49)

As a result of teaching such as this, the Catholic Church logically teaches Mary’s right to veneration by faithful Catholics. Because of her role in the economy of salvation, Mary is worthy of special adoration. In light of this, its difficult to deny the response of Protestants that Mary has been elevated from the status of creature into “the supernatural perfection of the life of God” or that “Mary’s role is often delineated by Catholicism in a way that the gospels ascribe exclusively to Christ.” (G. C. Berkouwer, The Conflict With Rome pg 174).

To further illustrate the Catholic Churches exaltation of Mary, consider these statements:

• from Pope Leo XIII: “Nothing according to the will of God comes to us except through Mary…nobody can approach Christ except through the Mother”;
• from Pope Pius XI: “With Jesus, Mary has redeemed the human race”;
• from Pope Pius XII: [Mary] offered him [Jesus] on Golgotha to the eternal Father…for all the children of Adam.”

These statements were reiterated at Vatican II (1968) and by modern Catholic theologians. Vatican II declared, “Taken up to heaven, she did not lay aside this saving role, but by her manifold acts of intercession continued to win for us gifts of eternal salvation.” In The Catholic Catechism, John Hardin writes, “Alongside her Son, Mary has become part of this plan [of salvation] by continuing her share to the justification of the human race, beginning with herself and extending to everyone ever justified.”

In essence, the Church’s exaltation of Mary at the theological level has resulted in her worship at the grass-roots level. How can one dispute this fact when Pope John Paul II, in his book, Crossing the Threshold of Hope refers to his “total abandonment to Mary” and to having chosen the following motto for his papacy, “Totus Tuus” (I am completely yours, O Mary”).

It’s true that the Church distinguishes latria (adoration due to God alone) from hyperdulia (special veneration given only to Mary) and dulia (veneration given the saints). However, in practice, how can one make such a fine distinction? How does someone attempting to give hyperdulia to Mary, refrain from giving latria? I have no doubt in my mind that Catholics are true to their faith in following the Church’s edicts, but what we’re talking about here are levels or varying degrees of worship. It isn’t a matter of semantics–replacing the word, ‘worship’ with ‘honor’–but the actions of the individual. And it is the product of one’s actions that result in this idolatry.

Although Jesus gave the appropriate respect to Mary as His mother, he never set her apart as the Catholic Church has. According to Rome, Mary has been more blessed by God than any other mortal. In the words of Pope Paul VI, citing Vatical II, “The place she occupies in the Church [is] ‘the highest place and the closest to us after Jesus.’” But according to Luke 11:27-28, Jesus himself denied Catholic views when He taught that those who obey God are actually more blessed than Mary–than if they had given birth to the Messiah himself: “As Jesus was saying these things, a woman in the crowd called out, ‘Blessed is the mother who gave birth and nursed you.’ He replied, ‘Blessed rather are those that hear the word of God and obey it.’”

And the word of God is that “Thou shalt have no other gods before me. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.” (Exodus 20:2-6)

The bottom line: If you’re praying to Mary, you’re not praying to God.