Posted on 05/14/2008 10:16:49 PM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg
netmilsmom pinged as per her request.
Fichori said: So it seems the question would be is praying to someone worship as prohibited in Deuteronomy chapter 5.(among other places)
Agreed.
Something to keep in mind:
Be careful translating words by themselves.
While a word may have multiple meanings, often the context limits any given word to a single meaning.
So even though a word can have a different meaning, the context may prohibit it.
That's very true, and, I believe as I showed in my prior post, the context of Matt 2 shows that proskyneō, in that passage, means to "show honor and/or respect to men of higher rank".
Iscool said: I don't see where you're being very demonstrative...There are different kinds of worship...One is the one you are speaking of...Another is the aspect of serving God...
Correct.
The one you are referring to is the same as in Joh 4:23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshipers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.
The people that worshipped the baby Jesus worshipped Him the same as others worshipped God...
And exactly the same 'god' worship as the people in Act 7:43 Yea, ye took up the tabernacle of Moloch, and the star of your god Remphan, figures which ye made to worship them: and I will carry you away beyond Babylon
All the same word...All the same worship...
It's not different words used, or different uses of the word worship...It's the same word with the same usage with different gods, in some cases...
You're right, it's not a different word used, however that's fundamentally my point. The point is, that the same word (proskyneō) can be used to indicate different forms of worship, one of which is "honor paid to men of higher rank" (as per this definition.) As Fichori correctly pointed out, the word proskyneō can have different meanings based on the context of the passage it's found. However, as I also pointed out to him, the context of Matt 2:1-11 is clear: The men who engaged (or wanted to engage) in worship of the Baby Jesus was, at the time, desiring in the type of worship that showed honor and respect to men of higher rank. This is, I believe, obvious since it's highly unlikely that either the Magi or King Herod believed at the time the King of the Jews would be God.
Now I suppose one could argue at this point: Well, they still might not have known that He was God, but simply by doing this, (proskyneō) they were actually worshipping God, whether they knew it or not. IMO, that's not a very good argument as it doesn't really address the central question which is:
Do people who simply prostrate themselves (or do anything to honor the person represented) in front of statues engage in the same type of worship as is due God alone?
IOW, the argument above doesn't take into account the intentions of the person involved, it merely states that, really, any honor shown to any person is wrong, which opens up a whole slew of questions, for example, is it wrong to put a picture of a departed loved one in a silver frame, or, put it on a mantle with some candles around it, etc.
HOWEVER, let's just examine it for the sake of argument, and see if it really does stand up to the scrutiny of Scripture. Again, the argument is: Well, they still might not have known that He was God, but simply by doing this, (proskyneō) they were actually worshipping God, whether they knew it or not.
Matt 2:1-11 isn't the only passage where proskyneō is used to clearly describe the action of man in paying homage to another man. Take the example of 1 Kings 1:31 (from the LXX), where Bathsheba "did reverence to the King". Here, the word for "did reverence" is the same (Greek) word used in Matt 2:8 where King Herod wanted "to worship him (Jesus) also". Compare here and here. The point here should be obvious, but briefly, neither Bathsheba or King Herod believed their respective objects of worship were gods, and specifically, King David never was God or "a god".
NOW, of course, one may further argue (if one desires): Well, that's the LXX, and of course you know the OT was originally written in Hebrew, and the Hebrew word for "did reverence" there simply meant "to bow", it doesn't have the more general meaning that proskyneō can have, thus, the 1 Kings example isn't an exactly identical case as what appears in Matt 2.
If one wishes to become so technical, then one is free to do so, however, such an argument would be missing the forest through the trees so to speak. The point is, and has been all along, that the simple act of prostration (or "doing reverence") does not always mean that the one prostrated is desiring to worship the person as he would worship God.
This is indeed shown in 1 King 1:31. Why? Because even though the Hebrew word used for "did reverence" there only means to bow, that's the entire argument here. Simply when (some) Catholics bow to statues of Saints (or adorn them with flowers, or other decoration), they aren't worshipping the statue (because again, if asked, even the most "radical" Latin American Catholic wouldn't say he was worshipping the statue), they are showing respect given to men of higher rank only, who are represented by the statue, as per the more detailed analysis above. Similarly, thus, when people adorn pictures of loved ones, they aren't engaging in idolatry. etc.
OLD REGGIE said: There isn't enough bandwidth to respond to your post point by point nor to discuss the need to invent a special "language".
However, I do think you missed a very important distinction, that is, the highly specialized Catholic definition of "worship".
"For to be right and good, worship of the Mother of God ought to spring from the heart; acts of the body have here neither utility nor value if the acts of the soul have no part in them. Now these latter can only have one object, which is that we should fully carry out what the divine Son of Mary commands. For if true love alone has the power to unite the wills of men, it is of the first necessity that we should have one will with Mary to serve Jesus our Lord. What this most prudent Virgin said to the servants at the marriage feast of Cana she addresses also to us: "Whatsoever he shall say to you, do ye" (John ii., 5). Now here is the word of Jesus Christ: "If you would enter into life, keep the commandments" (Mt. xix., 17). Let them each one fully convince himself of this, that if his piety towards the Blessed Virgin does not hinder him from sinning, or does not move his will to amend an evil life, it is a piety deceptive and lying, wanting as it is in proper effect and its natural fruit." (Ad diem illum laetissimum, Feb 2, 1904: para. 17)
Perfect Consecration to the Blessed Virgin Mary (hyperlink omitted, but contained in OLD REGGIE's original post to me)
No, he didn't address hyperdulia.
I'm not sure what you intend to address here.
The word "worship" in the paragraph you cited can easily mean "honor showed to men (or in this case a woman) of higher rank", as per my discussion above (even in this post).
This again, perfectly dovetails into the distinctions made via latria, hyperdulia, and dulia. I grant you the author of the paragraph you cite above doesn't specifically use the word "hyperdulia" to qualify his use of the word "worship", however this is understood, unless for some reason I cannot fathom, you believe the author is brazenly stating here that he is encouraging the worship of Mary on the same level as worship of God.
I could go on, but I'm sure I missed something obvious in your post, as I clearly don't understand what you're attempting to imply.
The local Syracuse paper had a huge page advertising Mary as Mother for Mother’s Day. All kinds of interesting stuff in that one. Barf.
Not here.
But in this case, they would be lied about.
No, but I’ll bet Jesus is living in Him through the Holy Spirit.
So you're saying you're trying to brainwash us.
Accusing some people trying to help Catholics of hatred and bigotry doesn’t help.
Doesn't help the attempted brainwashing? No, I should hope not.
Accusing some people trying to help Catholics of hatred and bigotry is merely stating facts.
Good thing Catholicism doesn't do that.
Agreed.
Oh, isn’t calling one a troll making an insult? Isn’t that forbidden here???
"Condescending and insulting" is falsely telling someone what they believe.
I know that there are many in the RCC that do not worship Mary. But they don't realize that they are being taught that they should worship her all while not ever saying that they do. So they say things like "We don't worship her we adore, honor and love her as the:
Holy Mary
Holy Mother of God;
Most honored of virgins;
Chosen daughter of the Father
Mother of Christ;
Glory of the Holy Spirit
Virgin daughter of Zion,
Virgin poor and humble,
Virgin gentle and obedient,
Handmaid of the Lord,
Mother of the Lord,
Helper of the Redeemed,
Full of grace,
Fountain of beauty,
Model of virtue,
Finest fruit of the redemption,
Perfect disciple of Christ,
Untarnished image of the Church,
Woman transformed,
Woman clothed with the sun,
Woman crowned with stars,
Gentile Lady,
Gracious Lady,
Our Lady,
Joy of Israel,
Splendor of the Church,
Pride of the human race,
Advocate of grace,
Minister of holiness,
Champion of God’s people,
Queen of love,
Queen of mercy,
Queen of peace,
Queen of angels,
Queen of patriarchs and prophets,
Queen of apostles and martyrs,
Queen of confessors and virgins,
Queen of all saints,
Queen conceived without original sin,
Queen assumed into heaven,
Queen of all earth,
Queen of heaven,
Queen of the universe (pp. 190,191)
From the “Litany of Loreto”
Mother of the Church,
Mother of Divine grace,
Mother most pure;
Mother of chaste love;
Mother and virgin,
Sinless Mother,
Dearest of Mothers,
Model of motherhood,
Mother of good counsel;
Mother of our Creator;
Mother of our Savior;
Virgin most wise;
Virgin rightly praised;
Virgin rightly renowned;
Virgin most powerful;
Virgin gentle in mercy;
Faithful Virgin;
Mirror of justice;
Throne of wisdom;
Cause of our joy;
Shrine of the Spirit;
Glory of Israel,
Vessel of selfless devotion;
Mystical rose;
Tower of David;
Tower of ivory;
House of gold;
Ark of the covenant;
Gate of heaven;
Morning star;
Health of the sick;
Refuge of sinners;
Comfort of the troubled;
Help of Christians;
Queen of the rosary;
And as being able to:
Hear prayers, provide special intercession as the Mother of the Son of God, that she is the Mother of God, that she is the mother of the church, that she is the Queen of Heaven, that she was immaculately conceived, that she was ever virgin, the dispenser of all grace, that she gave birth while keeping a hymen intact, or that she is our co-redeemer, that she appears to people with messages, that she performs miracles from heaven,
If only.
You are misrepresenting his words. Produce a quote.
Never met a Calvinist who believed in reincarnation. Never met another Christian or a Catholic who believed in it either.
see #791
PS how much closer do I need to get to RC theology than learning it from RC Freepers? I find few RCs in real life that know much of anything about their RCC doctrine.
Never met a Catholic who worshipped Mary.
The behavior is what it is.
And that’s exactly what the prottys on these threads are trying to do, Mark. Love, Mxxx
The Catholic Church does not hand Mary the position of Christ.
Prove me wrong.
And which invocation call Mary God?
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.