Venezuelan Bishops Pray to Virgin Mary to Free the Country from the ‘Claws of Communism’

Breitbart ^ | 2 Aug 2017 | Thomas D. Williams, Ph.D.

[detective]

The Venezuelan Episcopal Conference (CEV) has publicly invoked the intercession of the Virgin Mary to free the nation “from the claws of communism,” in a clear reference to the regime of President Nicolás Maduro.

“Blessed Virgin, Mother of Coromoto, heavenly Patron of Venezuela, free our country from the claws of communism and socialism,” the CEV posted on Twitter this Sunday, complete with an image of Santa Maria and a Venezuelan flag.

[Mark17]

Great post. When I was a Catholic, I had no clue what a plan of salvation was. As far as I knew, it was baptism, good works, membership in the OTC, and the sacraments.
Even with all that, I still sensed I was missing something, and I knew if I had croaked, I would have gone straight to Hell.
That just didn't sit well with me. When I finally heard the true Gospel, as opposed to a different gospel, that the Apostle Paul warned us about, I jumped at the truth.
I know, with most of the people, it goes in one ear and out the other, but our job is to tell them, and God's job to convert them. In the meantime, enjoy your assurance of salvation. 😀😆😄

[Mark17]

I humbly call you a Viper!

That's V-I-B-E-R bro, VIBER. I use it all the time. 😀😆😄

[Mark17]

Let me tell you what God really said is the second oldest

Correct me if I am wrong but doesn't that saying originate with Satan too? 🙃🇵🇭

[BlueDragon]

I humbly call you a Viper!

I am not a car.

Not fast or good looking, either.

Believe me.

Even if this was admittedly a Dodgey kind of answer...

[metmom]

Here’s the foundational erroneous assumption: “Whatever has not been officially defined is up for grabs.”

Is that how your religion works? No? Then why do you attribute it to me, or to the Catholic Church?

Cause that's what we've been told by your fellow Catholics.

Whatever is not officially interpreted is left up to the individual.

What is the other option for passages which have not been officially interpreted?

[DungeonMaster]

And all that information that he had come from where? If it was all to be hidden, how did he find out about it? Maybe too much of that there incense they wave around in church.......

One Catholic explained it to me as "he was in a state of ecstasy". I don't get it.

[DungeonMaster]

De Montfort

6. I declare with the saints: Mary is the earthly paradise of Jesus Christ the new Adam, where he became man by the power of the Holy Spirit, in order to accomplish in her wonders beyond our understanding. She is the vast and divine world of God where unutterable marvels and beauties are to be found. She is the magnificence of the Almighty where he hid his only Son, as in his own bosom, and with him everything that is most excellent and precious. What great and hidden things the all-powerful God has done for this wonderful creature, as she herself had to confess in spite of her great humility, "The Almighty has done great things for me." The world does not know these things because it is incapable and unworthy of knowing them.

7. The saints have said wonderful things of Mary, the holy City of God, and, as they themselves admit, they were never more eloquent and more pleased than when they spoke of her. And yet they maintain that the height of her merits rising up to the throne of the Godhead cannot be perceived; the breadth of her love which is wider than the earth cannot be measured; the greatness of the power which she wields over one who is God cannot be conceived; and the depths of her profound humility and all her virtues and graces cannot be sounded. What incomprehensible height! What indescribable breadth! What immeasurable greatness! What an impenetrable abyss!

[Resettozero]

What incomprehensible height! What indescribable breadth! What immeasurable greatness! What an impenetrable abyss!

Also...

What a crock!

[BlueDragon]

(He can’t be disparaging and insisting upon, the selfsame thing, so there must be at least two kinds.)

There's at least "two kinds" even within Official Roman Catholicism.what now? someone will laugh at my use of the word "Official" -- since the exact term is not used within RCC by itself when speaking of itself, even though the concept is applied?

Do not kid yourself there is not blending of what was not teaching of the apostles with that same.

And that is also what the 'hammer and tongs' conversation has been about for years here.

The poisonous blending of subtle (at first introduction) mistakes, which became customs, which entered into tradition, upon which yet more was added, with the overall results being a distancing from, as you had noted;

The kind called Sacred Tradition has exactly the same origin (the teaching of Our Lord and of His Apostles)

I can see it. Why can't you?

Is it because your efforts are focused upon assertions that EVERYBODY has been (and still is) in error in some way --- EXCEPT the Roman Catholic Church, alone? Please, spare me the "I never said that!" and the "don't TELL me what I believe!" sort of umbrage, for effectively you have long been expressing the position amid your usual sophistries.

[Mrs. Don-o]

I doubt that you have been told by "my fellow Catholics" that there are just two categories here: "officially defined" vs "up for grabs." If you were told exactly that, then the person was in error, or carelessly imprecise.

If you can quote what somebody actually said, that would be helpful.

The Church often comes up with guidance telling us what a Scripture passage doesn't say, without "defining" the passage itself, as if one could comprise its whole meaning in one definitive statement. These "negative" points of guidance are of great importance. For instance, we can't define the whole, comprehensive meaning of Jesus' saying "The Father and I are one." But we can say it doesn't mean they are the same, unitary Person. It doesn't mean Jesus doesn't have a mind and a will of His own. It doesn't mean that Jesus is His own Father (begetting Himself). It doesn't mean that Jesus is not a man. It doesn't exclude the role of the Holy Spirit just because the Holy Sppirit is not mentioned. It doesn't mean that the Trinity itself has all of Jesus' human characteristics. It doesn't mean the Trinity was born of the Virgin Mary, the Trinity suffered on the Cross, the Trinity died. It doesn't mean that Jesus is two Persons, or that the Trinity is one Person.

So you see, because a belief, or in this case a verse of Scripture, is not "officially defined," it does not follow that it is "up for grabs."

Heretical implications --- maybe dozens of them --- can be authoritatively excluded, without the passage itself being globally comprehended in one infallible definition.

Do you see that?

[Mrs. Don-o]

No.

[trisham]

Well said, Mrs. Don-o.

[Mrs. Don-o]

See #490

[dfwgator]

Maybe they ought to pray to free the Papacy from the ‘Claws of Communism.’

[Mrs. Don-o]

I must have made it too complicated. Please allow me to explain in simpler terms.

There are not just two choices, "defined doctrine" vs "up for grabs". This is a false dichotomy.

The third possibility is that the Scripture passage has been explained negatively, by excluding erroneous interpretations.

Simple example: Revelation 7:1 says, "After this I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth..." It doesn't mean that the earth is flat and has four corners.

We can tell you "angels" are literally true and that this is going to happen. We don't know, positively, when or how this will take place. There can be be different opinions on that --- it's not defined. But we can tell you what it doesn't mean.

Thus it is not totally "defined," yet it's also not totally "up for grabs," to use metmom's term.

[trisham]

Thanks, Mrs. Don-o. Your posts are always welcome, appreciated and sometimes humourous as well. :)

[Resettozero]

I must have made it too complicated. Please allow me to explain in simpler terms.

Revelation 7:1 says, "After this I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth..." It doesn't mean that the earth is flat and has four corners.

How are you certain that is not what John saw? How are you so certain your understanding of the words of Scripture negates that what Scripture plainly says.

Remember the admonition to not add or to take away from the words of the Book.

A Christian could prefer to believe the world is flat before accepting in any instance an RC's private interpretation that is blatantly contrary to the Word of God, including the passage you quote regarding John on Patmos. The Spirit expressly warns against this kind of private interpretation that detracts from or adds to the Book.

What else in Revelation do you not believe? What about the part about the firmament of heaven with the stars and all, being scrolled away as John looked on? Does that not fit with your understanding of the sky above you either?

[ealgeone]

However, it does not address the issue of Rome not defining the meaning of the texts.

[ravenwolf]

All believers will be raised at the last day, we may be living in the last day at this time as one day is as a thousand years.

But
Ecclesiastes 1:11
“There is no remembrance of former things; neither shall there be any remembrance of things that are to come with those that shall come after.”

So even if Mary has been resurrected she would have no remembrance of her former life.