Seems that very little has changed in over a century.
I agree. 
Posted on 05/14/2008 10:16:49 PM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg
by C. H. Spurgeon
From the January 1866 "Sword and Trowel Spurgeon"
According to promise, we have summarized the detailed account of the idolatrous worship of Mary by the Papists as exposed in full by Dr. Pusey in his new work. As his statements are not made at random, but are supported by quotations from Romish writers of recognised authority, they will be valuable to those who are met by the crafty denials of Romanists whenever they expose the genuine doctrines of Popish faith. Amid all the mischief which Pusey has done, it is well to note and acknowledge whatever service he may in this case render to truth. The headings of the paragraphs are ours; the quotations are given as they stand.
Blessings said to be obtained through Mary.
—"So, then, it is taught in authorized books, that 'it is morally impossible for those to be saved who neglect the devotion to the Blessed Virgin;' that 'it is the will of God that all graces should pass through her hands;' that 'no creature obtained any grace from God, save according to the dispensation of His holy Mother;' that Jesus has, in fact, said, 'no one shall be partaker of My Blood, unless through the intercession of My Mother;' that 'we can only hope to obtain perseverance through her;' that 'God granted all the pardons in the Old Testament absolutely for the reverence and love of this Blessed Virgin;' that 'our salvation is in her hand;' that 'it is impossible for any to be saved, who turns away from her, or is disregarded by her; or to be lost, who turns to her, or is regarded by her;' that 'whom the justice of God saves not, the infinite mercy of Mary saves by her intercession;' that God is 'subject to the command of Mary;' that 'God has resigned into her hands (if one might say so) His omnipotence in the sphere of grace;' that 'it is safer to seek salvation through her than directly from Jesus.'"
Mary worship held up as a cure for trouble.
—"F. Faber, in his popular books, is always bringing in the devotion to the Blessed Virgin.. He believes that the shortcomings of English Roman Catholics are owing to the inadequacy of their devotion to her. After instancing people's failures in overcoming their faults, want of devotion, unsubmission to God's special Providence for them, feeling domestic troubles almost-incompatible with salvation, and that 'for all these things prayer appears to bring so little remedy,' he asks, 'What is the remedy that is wanted? what is the remedy indicated by God himself? If we may rely on the disclosures of the saints, it is an immense increase of devotion to our Blessed Lady, but remember, nothing short of an immense one. Here, in England, Mary is not half enough preached. Devotion to her is low and thin and poor. It is frightened out of its wits by the sneers of heresy. It is always invoking human respect and carnal prudence, wishing to make Mary so little of a Mary, that Protestants may feel at ease about her. Its ignorance of theology makes it unsubstantial and unworthy. It is not the prominent characteristic of our religion which it ought to be. It has no faith in itself. Hence it is, that Jesus is not loved, that heretics are not converted, that the Church is not exalted; that souls, which might be saints, wither and dwindle; that the sacraments are not rightly frequented, or souls enthusiastically evangelized. Jesus is obscured, because Mary is kept in the background. Thousands of souls perish, because Mary is withheld from them. It is the miserable unworthy shadow which we call our devotion to the Blessed Virgin, that is the cause of all these wants and blights; these evils and omissions and declines. Yet, if we are to believe the revelations of the saints, God is pressing for a greater, wider, a stronger, quite another devotion to His Blessed Mother.'"
The Pope's whole reliance on the Virgin.
—In his Encyclical Letter of 1849, Pius IX wrote: "On this hope we chiefly rely, that the most Blessed Virgin—who raised the height of merits above all the choirs of Angels to the throne of the Deity, and by the foot of Virtue 'bruised the serpent's head,' and who, being constituted between Christ and His Church, and, being wholly sweet and full of graces, hath ever delivered the Christian people from calamities of all sorts and from the snares and assaults of all enemies and hath rescued them from destruction, and, commiserating our most sad and most sorrowful vicissitudes and our most severe straits, toils, necessities with that most large feeling of her motherly mind—will, by her most present and most powerful patronage with God, both turn away the scourges of Divine wrath wherewith we are afflicted for our sins, and will allay, dissipate the most turbulent storms of ills, wherewith, to the incredible sorrow of our mind, the Church everywhere is tossed, and will turn our sorrow into joy. For ye know very well, Ven. Brethren, that the whole of our confidence is placed in the most Holy Virgin, since God has placed in Mary the fullness of all good, that accordingly we may know that if there is any hope in us, if any grace, if any salvation, it redounds to us from her, because such is His will Who hath willed that we should have everything through Mary."
Mary blasphemously called Co-Redemptress with our Lord.
—"We had heard before, repeatedly, that she was the Mediatrix with the Redeemer; some of us, who do not read Marian books, have heard now for the first time, that she was ever our 'Co-Redemptress.' The evidence lies, not in any insulated passage of a devotional writer (which was alleged in plea for the language of M. Olier), but in formal answers from Archbishops and Bishops to the Pope as to what they desired in regard to the declaration of the Immaculate Conception as an Article of Faith. Thus the Archbishop of Syracuse wrote, 'Since we know certainly that she, in the fulness of time, was Co-redemptress of the human race, together with her Son Jesus Christ our Lord.' From North Italy the Bishop of Asti wrote of 'the dogma of the singular privilege granted by the Divine Redeemer to His pure mother, the Co-redemptress of the world.' In South Italy the Bishop of Gallipoli wrote, 'the human race, whom the Son of God, from her, redeemed; whom, together with Him, she herself co-redeemed.' The Bishop of Cariati prayed the Pope to 'command all the sons of Holy Mother Church and thy own, that no one of them should dare at any time hereafter to suspect as to the Immaculate Conception of their Co-redeemer.' From Sardinia, the Bishop of Alghero wrote, 'It is the common consent of all the faithful, and the common wish and desire of all, that our so beneficent Parent and Co-redeemer should be presented by the Apostolic See with the honour of this most illustrious mystery.' Spain, the Bishop of Almeria justified the attribute by appeal to the service of the Conception. The Church, adapting to the Mother of God in the Office of the Conception that text, 'Let Us make a help like unto Him,' assures us of it. and confirms those most ancient traditions, 'Companion of the Redeemer,' 'Co-Redemptress,' 'Authoress of everlasting salvation.' The Bishops refer to. these as ancient, well-known, traditionary titles, at least in their Churches in North and South Italy, Sicily, Sardinia, Spain."
A Parallel infamously drawn between Jesus and Mary.
—"As our Redemption gained its sufficiency and might from Jesus, so, they say, did it gain its beauty and loveliness from the aid of Mary. As we are clothed with the merits of Christ, so also, they say, with the merits of Mary. As Jesus rose again the third day without seeing corruption, so they speak of her Resurrection so as to anticipate corruption, in some three days;' as He was the first-fruits of them that slept, so is she; as He was taken up into heaven in the body so, they say, was she; as He sits at the Right Hand of God, so she at His Right Hand; as He is there our perpetual Intercessor with the Father, so she with Him; as 'no man cometh to the Father.' Jesus saith, 'but by Me;' so 'no man cometh to Jesus', they say, 'but by her;' as He is our High Priest, so she, they say, a Priestess; He, our High Priest, gave us the sacrament of His Body and Blood; so, they say, did she, 'her will conspiring with the will of her Son to the making of the Eucharist, and assenting to her Son so giving and offering Himself for food and drink, since we confess that the sacrifice and gifts, given, to us under the form of bread and wine, are truly hers and appertain unto her. As in the Eucharist He is present and we receive Him, so she, they say, is present an received in that same sacrament. The priest is 'minister of Christ,' and 'minister of Mary.' They seem to assign to her an office, like that of God the Holy Ghost, in dwelling in the soul. They speak of 'souls born not of blood, nor of flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God and Mary;' that 'the Holy Ghost chose to make use of our Blessed Lady to bring His fruitfulness into action by producing in her and by her Jesus Christ in His members;' that 'according to that word, 'the kingdom of God is within you,' in like manner the kingdom of our Blessed Lady is principally in the interior of a man, his soul; that 'when Mary has struck her roots in the soul, she produces there marvels of grace, which she alone can produce, because she alone is the fruitful Virgin, who never has had, and never will have, her equal in purity and fruitfulness.'"
Shameless declaration that Mary is in the Eucharist.
—(Oswald.) "'We maintain a (co-)presence of Mary in the Eucharist. This is a necessary inference from our Marian theory, and we shrink back from no consequence.' 'We are much inclined,' he says afterwards, 'to believe an essential co-presence of Mary in her whole person, with body and soul, under the sacred species. Certainly to such a presence in the Eucharist, 1. there is required a glorious mode of being of the Virgin body of the Holy Mother. We are not only justified in holding this as to Mary, but we have well-nigh proved it. 2. The assumption of a bodily presence of Mary in the Eucharist compels self-evidently the assumption of a multi-location (i.e. a contemporaneous presence in different portions of space) of Mary, according to her flesh too. 3. One who would receive this must be ready to admit a compenetration of the Body of Christ and of that of the Virgin in the same portion of space, i.e. under the sacred species.' The writer subsequently explains that 'the "lac virginale" must be looked upon as that of Mary, which is primarily present in the Eucharist, whereto, in further consequence, the whole Christ the Head, the Blessed Virgin is, as also her soul, would be joined.' 'The Blood of the Lord, and the lac of His Virgin Mother, are both present in the sacrament.'"
Mariolotry to swallow up all other devotion.
—"'Assuming that, in and under Christ the Head, the Blessed Virgin is, after her Assumption, as it were, the neck of the Church, so that all grace whatever flows to the Body through her, that is, through her prayers, it might be argued, that, for such as have this belief to ask anything of or through her, is identical in sense, but in point of form better, than to ask it directly of Christ, in like manner as to ask anything of or through Christ, is identical in sense, but clearer and fuller in point of form, than to ask it directly of the Father. And hence, it might seem that it would bean improvement, if, reserving only the use of the appointed forms for the making of the Sacraments, and an occasional use of the Lord's Prayer (and this rather from respect to the letter of their outward institution than from any inward.199 necessity or propriety), every prayer, both of individuals and of the Church, were addressed to or through Blessed Mary, a form beginning, 'Our Lady, which art in heaven,' etc., being preferred for general use to the original letter of the Lord's Prayer; and the Psalter, the Te Deum, and all the daily Offices, being used in preference with similar accommodation.'" Horrid ravings of Faber, whose writings are very popular among Papists.—"'There is some portion of the Precious Blood which once was Mary's own blood, and which remains still in our Blessed Lord, incredibly exalted by its union with His Divine Person, yet still the same. This portion of Himself, it is piously believed, has not been allowed to undergo the usual changes of human substance. At this moment, in heaven, He retains something which was once His Mother's, and which is, possibly, visible, as such, to the saints and angels. He vouchsafed at mass to show to S. Ignatius the very part of the Host which had once belonged to the substance of Mary. It may have a distinct and singular beauty in heaven, where, by His compassion, it may one day be our blessed lot to see it and adore it. But with the exception of this portion of it, the Precious Blood was a growing thing,' "&c.
Enough! enough! every one of our readers will cry out, and therefore we stay our hand. Surely "for this cause, God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: that they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness."
I don't understand your post. My endeavor to draw whom away where?
I know Catholic doctrine very well. You are wrong.
Perhaps you should study your scriptures a bit more.
No sense in talking to that one, I think it was an “at work” sock puppet.
I agree.
You are, of course, entirely correct. I don’t know any Catholics who “worship” the Virgin Mary. They honor her above all other women because God honored her above all other women.
I would add that the odd disrespect for, or neglect of, the Virgin Mary among some Protestants was a later development. One of my students did some research into this issue, and found that throughout his writings Martin Luther granted every honor to Mary that was common among Catholics, with the sole exception that he denied her the title “Queen of Heaven.” That was a problem for Luther because the title was once used by Ishtar, the pagan goddess, and condemned by the Prophets. (I’m not saying that he was correct about that—since in my view it is not inconsistent to say that there can be a true Queen of Heaven, as well as to condemn a false one—only that it was the one point on which Luther differed with the Church in paying respect to Mary.)
The reason we investigated Luthere’s views was because John Milton, who was a strongly anti-Catholic, revolutionary Reformer, also pays his respects to the Virgin Mary in his various poems, most notably Paradise Regained. Some Miltonists have been surprised by this attitude on Milton’s part, noting that he seems to write like a Catholic in these passages. But it was good enough for Martin Luther.
***The Religion Moderator says: But in this case, the issue remains “open” which is to say, no scab has formed, the issue (whether Mary is being worshipped) has not been settled. ***
A point of order please. If the anti Catholics claim that Mary is worshipped by Catholics, and we present the Catechism (the Rules) which clearly state the opposite, does that, in accordance with the Rules of FR RF, constitute settlement?
If not, then what, in your opinion, would?
I'm not a Jack Chick hater...Never met the guy...
Matthew 13:24-30
But this appears confusing to many people because we are told in Scripture to kneel to none but Christ alone. And yet the RCC encourages its members to kneel to Mary and to pray to Mary and to view Mary as a mediator between God and men and, as John Paul II said on at least six occasions, Mary is to be considered as the "co-redeemer" and the "dispenssatrix of all grace."
Is a redeemer of men's souls a diety?
Catholicism rejects worship or deification of Mary. THAT is settled.
If you’re hoping I call you a tare as you have called me a tare, Mark, you will have a long wait.
>>Mary is to be considered as the “co-redeemer”<<
If you can’t point that out in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, it taint true.
PLEASE, PEOPLE, PLEASE.
We must maintain proper etiquette here! You KNOW the mere mention of that individual is not allowed here. You KNOW that the mere mention of that individual can cause riots, mayhem, even MASS MURDER under the right circumstances (a full moon and a low tide...but only on the third Thursday!)
Please, control yourselves.
No mention of JC on Free Republic. Period!!!!!
Denial ain't just a river in Egypt.
“Never mind that people have different interpretations on certain subjects.”
Thatb is the point, there are NO other interpretations on the question of the Worship of Mary that are Catholic. None. The Catholic view is the one I posted. Period. End of story. That you and many who are not Cathyolic want to run around telling lies to discredit the Church is regretable, but this is a settled issue. The Church teaches verbatim what I posted.
# # # 30 # # #
He did use the words "my Scripture." Perhaps his scripture is not Biblical.
***Never mind that people have different interpretations on certain subjects.***
That’s the problem. Jesus left one Church, not millions of interpretations. It’s the Church that decides, not every milkmaid.
***For some RCs, the ONLY interpretation for anything is the one Rome gives them.***
You are so hung up on Rome. It’s the Catholic Church. Get over it. It goes back to the Christ, not to some group of irritated theology jumpers barely older than I am.
***AND WE DISAGREE WITH IT.***
You disagree with Christ. Are you a Christian?
***Mary is the mother of our Lord, too.***
Ah, the Reformed God, that you keep on your hall stand and rub His head for luck when you walk by.
***This thread was written over 100 years ago. It’s no “Jack Chick” anything. It is not “hatefilled” and it is not a “set of lies.” ***
It’s full of lies and the reason for lies seems to be hate.
***But more importantly in the great scheme of things, you cannot refute what this thread says. You have to become angry and resort to yelling about what the RCC teaches rather than what the Bible teaches.***
We have what Jesus taught. That appears to trump the Bibliolatry of small and unconnected snippets and cherry picked unrelated verse that was the supposed justification of the tens and then hundreds and then thousands of the different Reformation theologies.
The important thing, Narses, is that this thread was written long before Jack Chick was born. It was written in England by a historically renowned baptist preacher, Charles Spurgeon in the 1800’s.
DrE is right that Protestants have their own beliefs about Mary, and just because we state them, that doesn’t mean we’re trying to attack anyone.
It’s just what we believe.
Mary was the mother of Jesus as well as other children. She was a blessed woman who was faithful in nearly every way. Her later life was not recorded, so the safe assumption is that, as with all of us, she passed away at some point, perhaps under the care of the Apostle John.
My saying that is not designed to challenge you, but it is a simple summary of what I believe about Mary.
Darn. No facts? None? Oh well.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.