Replies

I've never even heard of it until it showed up here.

Me neither, and I expect never to hear of it again. As clumsily written as it is, though, I find it far less disturbing than people so seriously disordered by hatred that they have to seek out obscure sources to feed it (or "Dowd-ify" legitimate sources), as if they're afraid the hatred might flicker out, when they apparently prefer to treasure it and nurture it and lasciviously drool over it.

Is that a form of morbid delectation? I can't even imagine putting that much time and effort into something repellent to me.

Perhaps you have heard of St. Louis Marie de Montfort in his book, “True Devotion to the Blessed Virgin.” which played perhaps the most important part in the life of John Paul II.

Our devotion to Our Holy Mother is based on the principles outlined by St. Louis Marie de Montfort in his book, “True Devotion to the Blessed Virgin.” This is the same book that Pope John Paul II said was the most important book he ever read pertaining to the Blessed Mother. It must have had a profound effect on him because he dedicated his papacy to Our Lady by saying, “I am yours, Mary.” His favorite prayer after the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is the rosary. The most important book JPII ever read...

The book in question:

TREATISE ON TRUE DEVOTION TO THE BLESSED VIRGIN St. Louis de Montfort

Idolatry from the top down.

Great.......

Good grief. Paul wasn't talking about Mary, unless of course, you rewrite the bible.

12. Finally, we must say in the words of the apostle Paul, "Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, nor has the heart of man understood" the beauty, the grandeur, the excellence of Mary, who is indeed a miracle of miracles of grace, nature and glory. "If you wish to understand the Mother," says a saint, "then understand the Son. She is a worthy Mother of God." Hic taceat omnis lingua : Here let every tongue be silent.

I think this early line in it says more than enough for me:

NECESSITY OF DEVOTION TO OUR LADY

What idolatrous tripe right in the beginning.

Why do they even bother with even their RUBBERIZED BIBLES?

MORE idolatry without even looking for it:

The Son of God became man for our salvation but only in Mary and through Mary.

What is a Unitarian?

Today, most Unitarian Universalists do not consider themselves Christians, even if they share some beliefs quite similar to those of mainstream Christians. Universalists believe in a loving God.

To a fundamental Christian, a Unitarian is a heretic who has rejected Jesus as the only "way, the truth and the light". A Unitarian on one hand says that Jesus is the greatest teacher. But Unitarians are blinded to His teachings. Jesus said "I and the Father are One". And, Jesus also taught John 14:6 Jesus said, "I am the Way and the Truth and the Life.

To a Christian, a Unitarian seems like someone who can never make up their mind about anything. One of their claims is that they are Unitarians so not to be led into errors by the "teachings of men". But, in remaining outside Christianity, and truly grasping the teachings of Jesus, they fall into the same trap they propose to be hiding from --being misled by men who teach them false doctrines. The Unitarians reject the doctrine of eternal damnation, the Trinity (triune God), and the divinity of Jesus. Universalism is the theological doctrine that all souls will ultimately be saved and that there are no torments of hell.

Unitarian emphasis on the exercise of human reason caused Unitarians to cease to regard the Bible as the ultimate authority in matters of faith. In the 19th century the Universalist church was the first to ordain women. The American Unitarian Association was organized in Boston in May of 1825 and met annually in Boston until the merger with the Universalist Church of America in 1961.

They reject the Biblical and historic person of Christ, do not believe that His sacrifice on the Cross had any validity, and believe that all men will see God if God can be seen (whether they like it or not). The Unitarian Universalist website states (uua.org):

"Some Unitarian Universalists are nontheists and do not find language about God useful. The faith of other Unitarian Universalists in God may be profound, though among these, too, talk of God may be restrained. Why? The word God is much abused. Far too often, the word seems to refer to a kind of granddaddy in the sky or a super magician. To avoid confusion, many Unitarian Universalists are more apt to speak of "reverence for life" (in the words of Albert Schweitzer, a Unitarian), the spirit of love or truth, the holy, or the gracious. Many also prefer such language because it is inclusive; it is used with integrity by theist and nontheist members. Whatever our theological persuasion, Unitarian Universalists generally agree that the fruits of religious belief matter more than beliefs about religion-even about God. So we usually speak more of the fruits: gratitude for blessings, worthy aspirations, the renewal of hope, and service on behalf of justice."

The Unitarian/ Universalist Association is, because of their own scant doctrinal structure, nearly impossible to offer a defense against. If you ask a UUA member what they believe in, their mere reply will be "I believe in God". The Bible has a reply for such a little belief:

James 2:19-20 "Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?"

The Bible makes it clear that scant belief in only God ("Yeah, I believe there's a god") is useless in our Father's eternal plan of redemption. The Unitarian/ Universalist Association cannot be called, even by the greatest stretch of the imagination, neither Christian nor a Church

The UUA does not believe the Bible to be the inspired Word of God. The Unitarian Universalist website states (uua.org):

"We do not, however, hold the Bible-or any other account of human experience-to be either an infallible guide or the exclusive source of truth. Much biblical material is mythical or legendary. Not that it should be discarded for that reason! Rather, it should be treasured for what it is. We believe that we should read the Bible as we read other books (or the newspaper) - with imagination and a critical eye."

The Unitarian Universalist believes that Jesus was only a man, born just like all other men. The Unitarian Universalist website states (uua.org):

"Classically, Unitarian Universalist Christians have understood Jesus as a savior because he was a God-filled human being, not a supernatural being. He was, and still is for many UUs, an exemplar, one who has shown the way of redemptive love, in whose spirit anyone may live generously and abundantly. Among us, Jesus' very human life and teaching have been understood as products of, and in line with, the great Jewish tradition of prophets and teachers. He neither broke with that tradition nor superseded it."

The UUA rejects the Biblical concepts of Heaven and Hell, and in this sense they follow the teachings of the ancient Saducees. Since they reject the teachings of Heaven and Hell, they also reject the idea of salvation

The UUA rejects the idea that God is Triune in Being. They reject the idea that God is One in Three Persons, Father, Son, and Spirit.

Unitarians do not believe in the basic Christian ideas of:
1. Christ is God
2. God is ONE - a Trinity of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit

Now if you as a Unitarian want to believe that, so be it, but if you then want to debate further Christian dogma, it's like someone arguing calculus when they do not agree that 1+1 = 2. Namely, it does not help those talking calculus and the topic goes on a nice merry-go-around.

It's like you or me getting on a thread between Mahayana and Hirayana Buddhism when we don't agree with their fundamental concept of rebirth.

If you as a Unitarian want to argue with us on the nature of the Trinity -- that's fair, just as you / I could argue over whether there is such a thing as rebirth with a Buddhist. But if we try to move further into various Buddhist theology, we are wasting everyone's time.

I've been tempted to bring up de Montfort's "True Devotion" several times but I've never quite had the stomach to deal with the firestorm that would result. I've actually got a copy but I don't think I've even ever read it all the way through. As I've indicated my spirituality simply isn't all that Marian. We've got charismatics in the Church too and that certainly isn't my spirituality.

Don't get me wrong, I pray the rosary, sing the Hail Holy Queen, go to Mass for the Marian feasts, and believe every doctrine on the Mother of God that the Church proposes for belief.

Along with St. Louis de Montfort I can say: With the whole Church I acknowledge that Mary, being a mere creature fashioned by the hands of God is, compared to his infinite majesty, less than an atom, or rather is simply nothing, since he alone can say, "I am he who is". Consequently, this great Lord, who is ever independent and self-sufficient, never had and does not now have any absolute need of the Blessed Virgin for the accomplishment of his will and the manifestation of his glory. To do all things he has only to will them.

As long as everything regarding Mary is rooted in that then I'm not going to get a case of the vapors. When it starts getting weird I go sing the Te Deum.

IF I feel up to it, I hope to highlight the blasphemous, idolatrous, heretical and fantasy parts of the first 50 paragraphs and intro of that document from:

http://www.ewtn.com/library/montfort/truedevo.htm

They look about as dreadful as the Ferraro book.