This prayer of Pope Pius XII is truly blasphemous.
The worship of Mary and worshiping statues of Mary (and other saints and angels) is obvious in popular Roman Catholicism, even though the RCC officially denies that they give Latria/adoration to Mary, they practically do. Prayers of Popes to Mary in history are full of high worship and adoration and asking her to do things that only God - the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit can do. The distinction between latria and dulia and hyper-dulia is a theological word game and sophistry. They are deceived.
PRAYER OF POPE PIUS XII This prayer, dedicated to Mary Immaculate, was composed by the Pope for the Marian Year (December 8, 1953-December 8, 1954), which was proclaimed to mark the centenary of the definition of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception.
"Enraptured by the splendor of your heavenly beauty, and impelled by the anxieties of the world, we cast ourselves into your arms, 0 Immacuate Mother of Jesus and our Mother, Mary, confident of finding in your most loving heart appeasement of our ardent desires, and a safe harbor from the tempests which beset us on every side.
Though degraded by our faults and overwhelmed by infinite misery, we admire and praise the peerless richness of sublime gifts with which God has filled you, above every other mere creature, from the first moment of your conception until the day on which, after your assumption into heaven, He crowned you Queen of the Universe.
O crystal fountain of faith, bathe our minds with the eternal truths! O fragrant Lily of all holiness, captivate our hearts with your heavenly perfume! 0 Conqueress of evil and death, inspire in us a deep horror of sin, which makes the soul detestable to God and a slave of hell!
O well-beloved of God, hear the ardent cry which rises up from every heart. Bend tenderly over our aching wounds. Convert the wicked, dry the tears of the afflicted and oppressed, comfort the poor and humble, quench hatreds, sweeten harshness, safeguard the flower of purity in youth, protect the holy Church, make all men feel the attraction of Christian goodness. In your name, resounding harmoniously in heaven, may they recognize that they are brothers, and that the nations are members of one family, upon which may there shine forth the sun of a universal and sincere peace.
Receive, O most sweet Mother, our humble supplications, and above all obtain for us that, one day, happy with you, we may repeat before your throne that hymn which today is sung on earth around your altars: You are all-beautiful, O Mary! You are the glory, you are the joy, you are the honor of our people! Amen."
Addendum:
Rob Zins, at the 14:43 mark on this video, going through Walter Martin's book on Roman Catholicism (no longer in print), walks through the prayer of Pius XII and shows just how unbiblical and blasphemous it is, and asks, "Can you pray a better prayer to Jesus or God the Father?" (I don't know much about Rob Zins, but I think he really nailed it on this issue.)
At the 34:40 mark, he mentions a pamphlet produced by Roman Catholics with the Imprimatur of Cardinal Spellman (I assume this is Cardinal Francis Spellman (1889-1967) Archbishop of New York - google him. He was not without controversy.) It says that Mary is the ONE mediator between Christ and mankind. Wow. And it takes terms for Jesus and applies them to Mary - "There is one mediator between Christ and men, the Holy Mother Mary. Mary is the way and the truth and the life. No man comes to Jesus except by Mary." Wow. Blasphemous.
Posts
29 comments:
Some say Pope Pius XII was an "anti-pope" or at least "lost his office due to heresy":
http://immaculata-one.com/section_20.2.html
The prayer is no more blasphemous than this one:
"Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child you will bear! But why am I so favored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy. Blessed is she who has believed that what the Lord has said to her will be accomplished!"
~God bless!
that is not a prayer to a dead person, nor does it have praises in it that only belong to God, nor assign language that only belongs to God.
To call someone "blessed" is not a problem and not a prayer.
Hello Rev. Temple: You wrote:
That is not a prayer to a dead person
Me:
Neither is Pope Pius XII's prayer. As you are well aware, Catholics do not hold that those in heaven are dead, but more alive than we are and they can intercede for us just like any member of the Church militant can here on earth.
You wrote:
nor does it have praises in it that only belong to God,
Me:
I do not mean to quibble, but where in Pope Pius XII's effusive words does he ascribe to Mary praises that belong only to God? I mean for us mere creatures, is there any higher praise than to be called blessed or full of grace?
You wrote:
nor assign language that only belongs to God.
Me:
Does not all language belong to God? When we praise a painting, do we not praise the artist as well? When we honor Mary or any of God's saints, do we not honor their Creator as well? That said, show me in Scripture where God commanded that the words used in the prayer may not be used in intercessory prayer.
You wrote:
To call someone "blessed" is not a problem and not a prayer.
Me:
When I make a prayer in a pleading to a court, I do not ask God to grant my clients relief either. The word prayer has a wider meaning than what you limit it to. Anyone who knows Mariology knows that Mary is a creature and is not a source of grace like God is. Rather, if you ask me to pray for you and I do pray for you, and as as result of that prayer, God grants you grace, did I not in a sense obtain for you that grace.
I am not a fan of Pius XII's prayer-too wordy. I also can appreciate that to someone who does not understand Catholic Mariology would find the prayer confusing or troubling. Perhaps you folks who seem to have some level of Marian understanding might want to help explain to your readers how Catholics would understand the prayer and offer how your theology differs.
Apologetics is a much higher and charitable endeavor than polemics and more conducive to genuine dialogue. I would suggest reviewing Chapter 8 of Vatican II's Lumen Gentium as a good place to start.
Thank you for your thoughts and thank you Mr. Swan for allowing me to dialogue here.
Apparently, you didn't look at the video.
"we cast ourselves into your arms, 0 Immacuate Mother of Jesus and our Mother, Mary, confident of finding in your most loving heart appeasement of our ardent desires, and a safe harbor from the tempests which beset us on every side."
Only God can take care of our anxieties and we are to cast ourselves and our anxieties to Him, not to Mary - see I Peter 5:6-7
Only God can satisfy our ardent desires; and only God is a safe harbor from the storms of life.
That's just one example. I don't have time to go through more of them right now.
Mr. Hoffer,
I, for one, appreciate your less than polemic approach. We could all learn from that.
AMDG,
Scott<<<
Oh yes, well done Mr. Hoffer... now, if only you could use that same skill on Facebook instead of saying less than charitable things about me, or mocking me with your buddies.
Yes, that's the same "less than polemical approach" of Mr, Hoffer, sure. Yep.
Scott, I think Mr. Hoffer should rather learn from you on how to behave in cyber-space.
Paul Hoffer said:
Hello Mr. Swan, I thought my comments on Facebook concerning your recent comments on Martin Luther's culpability in the slaughter of thousands of Anabaptist Christians were very charitable. In my first comment, I suggested that your comments could be understood to mean that Luther was not responsible for their execution because Luther was not am member of the civil authority that actually imposed punishment. My second comment was pointing out the inconsistency of you censoring
while taking advantage of the lack of censorship in Catholic forums. Later I responded to his criticism of an apparent lack of scholarship on your part in engaging in the same sort practice you have taken Catholic apologists to task for by stating "Mr. Swan, cutting and pasting...say it ain't so!" I wish you and your group would treat Catholic apologists as gently, sir. Furthermore your definition of mock is broken If you consider my statements to be mocking you, what have you to say about on A truly blasphemous prayer to Mary by Roman Catholic Pope Pius XII
Mr. Hoffer,
My apologies for not getting to your comment sooner, as it was in the "awaiting moderation" blogger bin, and then it had to be edited (which is why I re-posted it under my name).
Frankly, I engage in little censorship on my blog, and perhaps I should post my side of the story as to why I censor the one or two people I do. Yes, I have a side, and it has nothing to do with not wanting to hear from pro-Romanist sources. I mean, I'm currently posting on the CAF, and I've been responding to a number of the defenders of Rome, so obviously, I'm not at all afraid of what is thrown at me. It's been interesting watching the mockery and derision every so often out in general cyberspace (Facebook, etc.)- and that none of the people mocking me have any real idea as to why I censor what I do on my blog and my online interactions, but they creatively come up with all sorts of reasons.
In regard to your little chuckle, on the CAF I admitted where I got the source from (it was the only source I had not come across before). I've gotten sources from Romanist websites in the past. Had I been cutting-and pasting argumentation, then that would be a different story. In fact, it was the only helpful bit of information in the entire blog entry. Since I do not specifically interact with the author of that website anymore, I did not mention that's where I got the link from. Had it been on Akin's website, or Madrid's, etc. I would have linked to the article. None of you put it together that I refuse to interact with the person in question, and that's why I didn't post where I got the source from. Had I wanted to"get into it" and embarrass your buddy, I had the opportunity and passed when it was posted on the CAF discussion that the Luther's didn't have any children. I read the comment about 5 minutes after it was posted.
Your friend will probably continue to mock and chortle and invent his own reasons why I refuse to interact with his material- this isn't OK, and no one on your side of the Tiber appears to care (like, the CAF moderators) anyway what's said about me. It just solidifies in my mind that I made the right decision to censor who and what I do on this blog.
Ken,
Your objections to the prayer of Pius XII are undone by "O well-beloved of God,...".
Put the blame on God.
God commands, in His Word, that you praise the Mother of His Son.
Luke 1:26-28
King James Version (KJV)
26 And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth,27 To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary.28 And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.
Let's break this down:
ANGEL GABRIEL
1. an angel is a messenger of God. That is what the word, angel, means.
2. this angel, Gabriel, is one of the four angels that stands before the throne of God.
WAS SENT FROM GOD
1. God sent this angel to Mary.
2. Since this angel is a messenger of God's, God sent Him to deliver a message.
3. Therefore, the angel was not speaking on his own, but was communicating God's message to Mary.
4. If we skip down to verse 28, we see that this was a message of praise (i.e. blessed art thou).
5. Therefore God praised Mary through His Angel.
Note, how it is God, who sent the Angel to praise Mary. In reality, it is not the Angel praising Mary but God through His Angel.
If God Himself praises Mary in Holy Writ, why do say that Pope Pius XII is wrong for doing so? He and the rest of us, Catholics, are only imitating God when we do so.
When i say to my wife" I cast myself into your arms, It is only you whom I love, it is only you who can help me now, does it mean that I m worshiping her and blaspheming God?
I apologize for the delay in offering a proper response to Pator Temple's article but a heart attack, open-heart surgery, and complications will do that to a guy's schedule: http://capriciousness.blogspot.com/2016/06/tota-pulchra-es-defense-of-pope_95.html .
Sorry to hear of your health issues . . . wow . . . . I am glad to know that you are better and able to write, etc.
Thank you.
Likewise Paul, so sorry to hear about your health issues.
As I get older and I watch the people I know battle serious health issues, I realize more and more how each day is a gift. It's one of the reasons I don't blog as much as I used to. If it's a choice between sitting in front of a computer because "someone is wrong on the Internet" or spending my time elsewhere outside of cyber-space, more often than not, "outside" wins. I still enjoy the theological banter, but not as much as I used to.
Mr. Swan, Again thank you!
Paul,
Your article is rather tedious; but I read it over, and these are the three main issues that seem to jump out for me:
1. Are you saying that Pius XII did not pray that prayer?
2. Are you saying that Walter Martin just made up the part from Cardinal Spellman?
3. Do you agree that Mary is the mediator between Christ and mankind? (you agree that Christ is the one mediator between God and man, per 1 Tim. 2:5, but are you agreeing with the idea that Mary is the one mediator between Christ and man, ie, that all must go through Mary to get to Christ?)
Ken
By the way, Paul Hoffer - the url you left is not correct; but fortunately I found it since it is the lead article up now at your blog.
None of them discuss how Catholics distinguish between adoration and veneration.
I have heard Protestant James White discuss with Roman Catholics on the distinction and the only answer I have ever heard is, "Unless you experience it, you have no right to judge how we make that subjective distinction in our own hearts and minds" (from memory of discussions of several I have heard over the years in discussions with RCs and James White. I think Gerry Matatics, Patrick Madrid, and Jimmy Akin are three that I think I can recall that had that discussion with Dr. White.)
How do you distinguish between them, when a Roman Catholic standing or kneeling before a Madonna or stature of Mary (or any other dead saint), and Jesus or Mary by herself, is bowing, kissing and talking / praying to the statue (or looks like they are) (the RC may say they are praying to the reality of the person in heaven, and the statue is only a symbol of her to help them visualize or concentrate on her or him (if it is statue of Christ) or another saint?
Paul Hoffer wrote:
I do acknowledge that if one conducts enough online searches, passages can be found in genuine Catholic works which are similar-sounding to the first part and third part of Dr. Martin’s spurious quotation. For example, in Pope Leo XIII’s Encyclical Octobri Mense, ¶ 4, one finds the following:
“With equal truth may it be also affirmed that, by the will of God, Mary is the intermediary through whom is distributed unto us this immense treasure of mercies gathered by God, for mercy and truth were created by Jesus Christ. Thus as no man goeth to the Father but by the Son, so no man goeth to Christ but by His Mother. How great are the goodness and mercy revealed in this design of God!” [Emphasis Added].
I honestly did not know that Zins and Walter Martin are mis-quoting things. I assumed that they would be accurate. But even your research says that the prayer in the book by Pope Pius XII was a summary prayer for young Roman Catholics. It is not our fault if we are quoting from that, which your own church prepared for young RCs.
But still, the bold part does communicate the same content as the prayer that W. Martin cites and which I called "blasphemous". It is still blasphemous to exalt Mary so much as you guys (Roman Catholics) do by praying to her and believing that only through her one can pray to Jesus.
Yes, praying to Mary is an act of worship and with the praises of how great and beautiful she is, it is not distinguishable from adoration/worship.
We agree that Mary birthed Jesus (Luke 1-2; Matthew 1) and that she was a godly woman, and humble and obedient. But that is all. Scripture does not tell us or inform us of any of the other RC dogmas/practices about Mary beyond her being a virgin when Christ was born (matthew 1:25; etc.) and a humble, godly woman, a believing Jewish woman. That example is great, but that is no reason to start praying to her and bowing down to statues of her, etc.
She is not a mediator, etc. Once she brought Jesus into the world, her role was finished. She is not a perpetual virgin, nor sinless, nor immaculately conceived, nor bodily assumed, nor Queen of heaven, nor co-mediatrix, etc.
Paul,
You use the term "Pastor Kenneth Temple", as did some other Roman Catholics on line.
Though I am an ordained minister (Southern Baptist), I am not an official "pastor" of a local church. I am a missionary, and was one of the elder/pastors of an Iranian (or also known as Persian) ethnic church from 1996-2008. In 2008, I turned the work of the ethnic Iranian church over to the Iranian pastor. That is the job of missionaries - to eventually turn the work of pastoring over to the national leaders; seeking to be apostolic in practice - Acts 14:23; Titus 1:5-7. All of the Iranians were born Shiite Muslims and later came to saving faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, being converted by God out of Islam.
One of the great missiological events for me in this ministry, around 1998, was when 15 of these Iranians, former Shiite Muslims that I had a part in teaching the faith to; they defended the Deity of Christ and the doctrine of the Trinity against an Armenian Orthodox Church member, who did not believe in the Deity of Christ, and apparently was not taught nor was truly converted. There are many in the old traditional Orthodox churches and Roman Catholic Churches in the middle east like this. They are very dead spritually and ritualistic churches.
Hi Ken:
You wrote: Your article is rather tedious; but I read it over
Me: it is my experience that both in the law and in apologetics responding to an accusation of defamation takes far longer than making the accusation.
You wrote:
These are the three main issues that seem to jump out for me:
1. Are you saying that Pius XII did not pray that prayer?
Me: Yes. He composed the one I linked to on the Vatican site.
2. Are you saying that Walter Martin just made up the part from Cardinal Spellman?
Me: I am not saying that at all. I am merely pointing out that I couldn’t find the work that he is referencing, his own ministry could not provide me with the information as to the source of the quote, and that I could not find any Catholic writer who ever wrote what was said there. It is entirely possible that Dr. Martin misread the quote or his editor mis-edited the quote. Someone else could have misinformed him and he accepted it as truth without checking it first hand. Or if he actually had the pamphlet in his hands when he wrote that chapter, he might have taken the quote out of context like a certain Luther quote that Cochaleus used against his interlocutors. All of those are possibilities which do not rise to the level of culpability which is implied by the phrase “made up”.
.
3. Do you agree that Mary is the mediator between Christ and mankind? (you agree that Christ is the one mediator between God and man, per 1 Tim. 2:5Open in Logos Bible Software (if available), but are you agreeing with the idea that Mary is the one mediator between Christ and man, ie, that all must go through Mary to get to Christ?)
Me: As I explained in my article (perhaps because of the tedium) that the phrase is misunderstood. Mary is not THE mediator between man and Jesus meaning we must go through Mary to get to Jesus. Rather, the phrase means:
1) that historically through Mary’s voluntary consent the world received Jesus in the flesh. Mary’s fiat was truly a voluntary total submission to the will of God.
2) that by contemplating Mary’s example of discipleship we are better able to imitate Jesus.
3) that through Mary’s continued intercession we obtain graces from Jesus. The holier a person is the more effective is that person’s intercessory prayer (James 5:16), and for Catholics at least, Mary is someone who God recognizes as full of grace and there is no mere created being more holier than her. There is noone closer to Him than her. She conceived Him, carried our Lord for nine months in her womb, gave birth to Him, raised Him and then followed Him. His redemptive sacrifice on the Cross was applied to her in a special way that she could physically be the ark of the Word of God.
The verses from John 19:26-27 further show how Christ wanted Mary/Church to be mother to John/us. We do not HAVE to go through Mary to get to Jesus, but I know of no surer way to fully get as close to Him than “through” her, at least as Catholics who offer veneration and devotion to her understand and practice “through”.
You wrote: I have heard Protestant James White discuss with Roman Catholics on the distinction and the only answer I have ever heard is, "Unless you experience it, you have no right to judge how we make that subjective distinction in our own hearts and minds"
Me: If that is the answer they gave, I would personally find such a response rather incomplete. As I attempted to lay out in my article, both adoration and veneration have internal and external components. Interior assent leads to external worship of adoration or worship of veneration depending on to whom the worship is directed. The answer given by the Catholics folks you mention appears to focus on the internal aspect of worship ; Mr. White’s argumentation focuses on the external aspect. If a Catholic were to honor Mary and the saints only and never attended Mass nor said the Liturgy of the Hours nor received the sacraments nor prayed to God, Father, Sone and Holy Spirit, then their relationship with God is askew. But if one looks at the overall spiritual life of a Catholic Christian, and examines their devotion to Mary and/or to saints within the overall context of that life, one would understand a bit better how devotion to Mary and/or saints should lead a person into a more intimate relationship with Christ. Taking a particular prayer or devotion in isolation of the overall spiritual life of the worshiper would be wrong to do because it presumes the worst of that believer. I would not presume that you do not give adoration to God just because I don’t see you going to Mass, receive the sacraments or pray the Liturgy of the Hours daily. You should not presume I give adoration to Mary on the appearance of one prayer when I do those other acts of adoration through my day. And when I do pray to Mary for her intercession, I say something like this: “In the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Amen. Blessed Virgin Mary, as the Undoer of Knots, undo the knots that bind me to this world of sin and strife. Lead me to your Son, the Way, Truth and Life. Glory to the Father, Creator. Glory to the Son, Redeemer. Glory to the Holy Spirit, Sanctifier. Amen.”
You wrote: How do you distinguish between them, when a Roman Catholic standing or kneeling before a Madonna or stature of Mary (or any other dead saint), and Jesus or Mary by herself, is bowing, kissing and talking / praying to the statue (or looks like they are) (the RC may say they are praying to the reality of the person in heaven, and the statue is only a symbol of her to help them visualize or concentrate on her or him (if it is statue of Christ) or another saint?
Me: See above response. I would add this thought though. If devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary or to a saint does not lead or guide a person into a closer relationship with Father, Sone and Holy Spirit, then that person should not do it or is not ready for such devotion.
You wrote: But still, the bold part [of Octobri Mensi] does communicate the same content as the prayer that W. Martin cites and which I called "blasphemous".
Me: It seems that way if one does not understand how much emphasis Catholics place on the Incarnation and the significance of Christ making us a part of salvation history by taking on flesh. Calling something blasphemous without first attempting to understand the ‘why’ behind Pope Leo’s words (which are a quote from St. Therese of Lisieux BTW) is where I take issue.
You wrote: It is still blasphemous to exalt Mary so much as you guys (Roman Catholics) do by praying to her and believing that only through her one can pray to Jesus.
Me: I take issue with your use of the word “only” in the context you are using it. I pray for her and to several saints to make intercession with Christ and I pray to God the Father, Son and Spirit throughout the day. I love Mary for what God has done for her and what God has done for all us through her. As for exalting Mary, if God exalts her (Lk. 1) as well as His saints and us as His saints-in-progress (Mt. 23:12; 1 Peter 5:6) , why is it wrong for me to imitate God and exalt Mary, the Daughter of Zion, Queen of the Saints?
You wrote: Yes, praying to Mary is an act of worship and with the praises of how great and beautiful she is, it is not distinguishable from adoration/worship.
Me: If you feel that way, don’t pray to her. But considering that all saints are refulgent as mirrors of God’s own beauty and greatness, I have a hard time understanding why you are not able to accept that Catholics honor her and the saints because of their relationship with God and how God has manifested Himself in their lives.
You wrote: We agree that Mary birthed Jesus (Luke 1-2; Matthew 1) and that she was a godly woman, and humble and obedient. But that is all.
Me: That is a good start and it is nice to see a Protestant actually acknowledge that she was something other than a goddess Catholics supposedly pray to. Contemplating on and imitating her virtues as shown in the Scriptures would even be better.
You wrote: Scripture does not tell us or inform us of any of the other RC dogmas/practices about Mary beyond her being a virgin when Christ was born (matthew 1:25; etc.) and a humble, godly woman, a believing Jewish woman. That example is great, but that is no reason to start praying to her and bowing down to statues of her, etc.
Me: Those things are all reasons to honor her but Catholics do not pray to her or bow down to statues of her because of those things though. We pray for her intercession because God made her His vessel through which Christ came to us. Christ announced she is our mother as well as His. Why did God feel that was so important to inspire Jogn to write of this last act of Christ from the Cross? She is a singular part of the Communion of Saints. We do not bow to a statue of her, we bow to her honoring her like her Son honored her. A statue is no different than a picture, a song, a symbol, words on a page.
You wrote: She is not a mediator, etc. Once she brought Jesus into the world, her role was finished. She is not a perpetual virgin, nor sinless, nor immaculately conceived, nor bodily assumed, nor Queen of heaven, nor co-mediatrix, etc.
Me: The fact that we all are to intercede for our fellow brothers and sisters in Christ makes us all mediators. To use a law analogy, I may only carry Jesus’ suitcase, but that still makes me parr of the firm. As for the rest of those things you listed, I disagree with your assertions and will try to touch on them in the second part of my article. I would suggest that you read the magisterial documents that defined the dogmas you referenced to see how the Church understand the numerous Scripture references cited as support for them.
You wrote: You use the term "Pastor Kenneth Temple", as did some other Roman Catholics on line. Though I am an ordained minister (Southern Baptist), I am not an official "pastor" of a local church. I am a missionary, and was one of the elder/pastors of an Iranian (or also known as Persian) ethnic church from 1996-2008. In 2008, I turned the work of the ethnic Iranian church over to the Iranian pastor. That is the job of missionaries - to eventually turn the work of pastoring over to the national leaders; seeking to be apostolic in practice - Acts 14:23Open in Logos Bible Software (if available); Titus 1:5-7Open in Logos Bible Software (if available). All of the Iranians were born Shiite Muslims and later came to saving faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, being converted by God out of Islam.
One of the great missiological events for me in this ministry, around 1998, was when 15 of these Iranians, former Shiite Muslims that I had a part in teaching the faith to; they defended the Deity of Christ and the doctrine of the Trinity against an Armenian Orthodox Church member, who did not believe in the Deity of Christ, and apparently was not taught nor was truly converted. There are many in the old traditional Orthodox churches and Roman Catholic Churches in the middle east like this. They are very dead spiritually and ritualistic churches.
Me: I will still call you pastor out of respect for your service as a shepherd to gather people into the Lord’s flock unless there is another title you wish me to call you. The Orthodox and Middle-eastern Catholics I know are a bit more lively than the folks you describe.
God bless and thank you for interacting with my article!
Is the translation/summary of the Pope's prayer in the children's book wrong?
Is it inaccurate?
It is not our fault if your own church mis-represents his prayer.
This video sums up the issues for us Protestants who hold to the Scriptures and sound doctrine. (not liberals or ecumenical types that don't know the details.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiKGHzBtl5o
Thanks for this Paul:
Me: I will still call you pastor out of respect for your service as a shepherd to gather people into the Lord’s flock unless there is another title you wish me to call you.
. . .
God bless and thank you for interacting with my article!
You are welcome and; ok, thanks for that kind respect.
Post a Comment