DR. PUSEY ON THE WORSHIP OF MARY IN THE CHURCH OF ROME

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.

—"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.'"

—"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.'"

—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."

—"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."

—"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.'"

—(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.'"

—"'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 won't count this as a repost of the same material, since you people actually responded to the substance of the post, instead of just ignoring it, thank you for that.

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.

I mean the whole reason we don’t admit to our Mary worship is so other Christians wouldn’t think even worse about Church teaching than they already do?

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,

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.