Mary is not a goddess. We do not consider her one. Read the catechism. She does not "add or remove anything from christ's unique mediation role" .
Anyway gentlemen and ladies.. I am shortly going abroad and will not be back for a couple of weeks.
So I will be silent. I do not know if I will return.
It is rather pointless posting.
You say "you think she is a goddess" I say no we do not think that. read the catechism which proves what we believe
You say again "you think she is a goddess" I say again, no we do not think that. read the catechism which proves what we believe
You say again again "you think she is a goddess" I say again again , no we do not think that. read the catechism which proves what we believe
What is the point.
I urge just several things.
1/ Read the catechism if you want to know what we believe, before criticise it.
As catholics we do not have the freedom of belief others do.
We either agree to it, or we are not catholics.
Catechism of the Catholic Church
2/ Analyze the claim of sola scriptura. Realize it is biblically, logically and historically false. Scripture is truth, but more is needed to decide interpretation. The bible says "the pillar and foundation of truth is the church" not scripture.
3/ So study the early church. Discover it was liturgical, sacramental, appointed bishops, believed in such as real presence, even from the first students of the disciples. People talk of apostasy but when? Some say before constantine , other say after, for some lUtherans not till middle ages. But the church fathers are consistent in their statements, indeed all the way to the present day RCC , little has changed in doctrine. For apostasy you expect to see a doctrine change. It is hard to find inconsistency between the fathers so when can it have been?
4/ A massive key to interpreting the bible is in the old testament. Jesus frequently quotes scripture, even on the cross! When jesus quotes "keys of the kingdom" it is a direct reference back to the office of steward of davidic kings a role equivalent to "prime minister". Jews were obsessive about their own history and looking for meaning in their scriptures (ie the Old testament) and when the NT refers to "scripture" it can only be the old testament.
5/Study the history of the bible. How was the faith handed on in early times? When did the canon of the new testament get compiled and by who?, and who took those decisions? what did they believe? Indeed look at what Paul quoted: the septuagint seemingly, which from historic records seems to contain maccabees - so why exclude it, and on what grounds?
6/Sure the church did some bad things. People do. Luther most abhorred paid indulgencies, but look at the records and see that in the end the church addressed it. The pope at the council of trent, only a few years later spoke out against paid indulgencies! Both should have listened more and argued less.
7/ But ever since the reformation, everyone now feels empowered to have their own doctrinal interpretation which is why there are now 30000 denominations and even more non denominationals. Luther despaired of this in later life, realizing the problem of lack of authority, saying the only way back to unity was via the catholic councils. He said so. So consider the question for yourself. How can a faction born of a doctrinal fracture, destined to fracture itself in time, ever represent the true church? There is no compass in these denominations which is why they drift apart. Look on this forum at bitter arguments on such as salvation between protestants, with several contradicting views. Most of them must be heresy.
Seemingly the only unity is in opposition to RCC, because they cannot reconcile their own differences
THESE ARE THE ESSENTIAL REASONS I LEFT PROTESTANTISM, THEN EVANGELICAL, CAME HOME TO RCC!
Once the myths are dispelled, what is left is justifiable.
The more I studied history, the more there became only one choice left..
Anyway, I go abroad shortly. I may not be back.
I find it frustrating repeating the same things - obviously true - and endlessly.