Questions/Answers about the Golden Compass

This question-answer guide has been published by the ....

MAGISTERIUM [cue sinister music: duhn duhn DUHN!!!!]

That's right... the Office of Catechesis and Evangelization for the Diocese of La Crosse, Wisconsin. Yes, you read correctly, a BISHOP of the MAGISTERIUM was behind this. OOooohhhh.

Letter from Bishop Listecki:
http://www.dioceseoflacrosse.com/files/
GldnCompBp%20Listecki%20Ltr%2011-30-07.pdf

What every parent should know:
http://www.dioceseoflacrosse.com/files/
Gldn%20Comp%20Zenit%20Art.pdf



My bottom line would be: why pay to see a film that debases your deeply cherished faith?

Here is a link to the guide (I have it typed out below in this post)http://www.dioceseoflacrosse.com/files/Gldn%20
Comp%20Office%20of%20Cat.%20&%20Evang.pdf

New Movie Release - The Golden Compass
The Office of Catechesis and Evangelization—Diocese of La Crosse

So, what is the big deal about this movie? Why should
parents be concerned?

The movie The Golden Compass is the fi rst book of the
trilogy, His Dark Materials. Parents need to be concerned
because it attacks the foundation of the Catholic Faith.1
Author, Philip Pullman says,
• “My books are about killing God.”2
• “I am all for the death of God.”3
• “I’m trying to undermine the basis of Christian
belief.”4

The author is an atheist, but how does that affect
the fi lm?

“Though much of Pullman’s trilogy involves… mystical
worlds with talking animals and magical witches, the
underlying theme is no simple fantasy. In the fi ctional universe
of His Dark Materials, there is no real God; rather
there is a high angel called the Authority, who purports
to be God.”5 The Catholic Church, frequently called the
Magisterium, is portrayed as the dark force to be overcome.

Isn’t His Dark Materials just fiction?

It is fiction but it presents good as evil and evil as good.
It portrays the evil of dark, demonic forces that battle God
and ultimately kill God. So a fi lm like this (and especially
the trilogy it is based on) invites us to join forces against
God.

How is the Golden Compass different from Narnia and
the Lord of the Rings?

The Chronicles of Narnia are a fantasy representing the
battle between God and His followers and Satan and his
devils. In the Lord of the Rings, Tolkien shows the power
of God and His grace and invites the reader to join Him.
Pullman’s trilogy, His Dark Materials, promotes the lie
that evil can ultimately defeat God. But we know that Jesus’
death on the Cross has already won the ultimate victory.

Why can’t kids go to it as a fun, fantasy movie? What
am I to tell my child?

It is no simple fantasy. It is about evil being presented in
an enticing and glamorous way. As the fi rst teachers and
protectors, parents would not allow their children to be desensitized
to evil so that it becomes commonplace and they
no longer recognize it as dangerous and seek to avoid it. It
is the same as saying that parents would not let their children
drink poison. Tell your children that this movie is definitely
poison for the soul. In the Our Father, Jesus taught
us clearly to pray, deliver us from evil.6 Jesus does not
want us to toy with evil even when it looks fascinating.

The producers say any references to the Catholic Church
have been removed. Doesn’t this leave the movie as just
a fun fantasy adventure?

The references to the Catholic Church have been removed
from the movie but a different word has been substituted,
it is the Magisterium. The producers of the movie are not
stupid. They have removed some of the most sinister aspects
against Christianity. But don’t be fooled. The fundamental
direction of the story is the same even if it has been
sanitized and Pullman’s goal is to entice people to read his
books and reject God.
The books are much more detailed, more evil, and they
attack, with a hateful vengeance, priests, nuns, bishops, the
Mother of God and the Pope.

What is Pullman’s philosophy and how is it dangerous?

Pullman’s worldview is a world without God. He thinks
the very idea of God needs to be destroyed. Pullman spreads
his hatred for religion through these books.
The Christian worldview is that God is our loving Father.
We cannot exist without Him; God created us and has given
us everything out of love. To believe in God and embrace
Him for all eternity is the joy and very center of our lives.
How can we use this movie’s debut as a teaching experience?
Talk about this with your children. Do not be in denial
that evil exists and that skilled marketers can disguise it and
make it look attractive. We need to have a healthy level of
concern about the power of evil even though Satan does not
have equal power with God and cannot defeat God.
Satan is a fallen angel who hates God and wants us to
hate God.7 We love God and therefore we reject Satan and
all his evil. This is why you promised at baptism:
■ “to reject the glamour of evil and refuse to be mastered
by sin.”

What should Catholic parents do?

Please do not go to the movie and do not buy the books.
Return the books if you have already bought them. Spread
the message to family and friends. Embrace the positive
movies that have come from Hollywood like the Chronicles
of Narnia or read the Lord of the Rings, and refuse to give
your money or your approval to “Dark Materials” that try
to snuff out the Light.8

1 1 John 4:1-4 “…every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not of God.”
2 Tony Watkins, Dark Matter, pp. 21, 152
3 Philip Pullman, www.books.guardian.co.uk
4 Alona Wartofsky, “The Last Word; Philip Pullman’s Trilogy for Young. Adults EndsWith God’s Death, and Remarkably Few Critics,” Washington Post, Feb. 19, 2001.
5 The Golden Compass: Agenda Unmasked, Catholic League. p. 7
6 Matthew 6:13, Philippians 4: 8
7 See Revelation 12:7-9; John 8:44; I John 2:18-25; Catechism of the CatholicChurch, #391
8 Wisdom 4: 12 “ … the fascination of wickedness obscures what is good.”

reviews of The Golden Compass, the Narnia for silly militant atheists and the child in them

There is a lot of commentary on this film all over the web, but a nice post can be found on the blog of popular Catholic author Amy Welborn:

http://amywelborn.wordpress.com/2007/12/04/happy/

Among other things, she comments on how the US Bishop's relatively positive review of the film has been used as advertisement by the promoters of the anti-Catholic film!

_________________________________________________________

Movie review by Catholic News Service:

The Golden Compass

By Harry Forbes and John Mulderig Catholic News Service

NEW YORK (CNS) -- Hollywood history is rife with examples of literary works that by dint of problematic sexual, violent or religious content have been softened to varying degrees to mollify public sensibilities.

So it appears to be with "The Golden Compass" (New Line) which, we'll say right at the start, is a lavish, well-acted and fast-paced adaptation of "Northern Lights," the original title of the first volume of Philip Pullman's much-awarded trilogy, "His Dark Materials," published in 1995.

The film has already caused some concern in Catholic circles because of the author's professed atheism, and the more overt issue of the novels' negative portrayal of his (very much fictionalized) church, a stand-in for all organized religion.

The good news is that the first book's explicit references to this church have been completely excised with only the term Magisterium retained. The choice is still a bit unfortunate, however, as the word refers so specifically to the church's teaching authority. Yet the film's only clue that the Magisterium is a religious body comes in the form of the icons which decorate one of their local headquarters.

Most moviegoers with no foreknowledge of the books or Pullman's personal belief system will scarcely be aware of religious connotations, and can approach the movie as a pure fantasy-adventure. This is not the blatant real-world anti-Catholicism of, say, the recent "Elizabeth: The Golden Age" or "The Da Vinci Code." Religious elements, as such, are practically nil.

The narrative itself charts the adventures of spunky 12-year-old Lyra (Dakota Blue Richards), an orphan who leaves Oxford's Jordan College, where she resides as a ward to become apprentice to a glamorous scholar known as Mrs. Coulter (Nicole Kidman).

She's allowed to leave, equipped with the titular compass -- a truth meter which Lyra is among the privileged few to know how to interpret. Once in Mrs. Coulter's care, Lyra begins to surmise that the woman's motives are far from pure, and she escapes.

Inspired by her Arctic-exploring-uncle Lord Asriel (Daniel Craig) -- who, to the consternation of the Magisterium, is about to make some discoveries about the mysterious substance called Dust -- Lyra journeys northward. She hopes to rescue her young friend Roger (Ben Walker), who has been kidnapped by the Magisterium.

Lyra picks up several useful allies along the way, including John Faa (Jim Carter), a piratelike seafarer of the wandering tribe called Gyptians, Texas aeronaut Lee Scoresby (Sam Elliott), and a great polar bear named Iorek Byrnison (voice of Ian McKellen).

Even if Pullman's fanciful universe has a patchwork feel, with elements culled from other fantasy-adventure stories -- most especially "The Chronicles of Narnia" (a work Pullman disdains) -- there's hardly a dull moment, and the effects are beautifully realized, including the anthropomorphized creatures like the polar bears whose climactic fight is superbly done.

Richards makes an appealingly no-nonsense heroine, and Kidman makes a glamorous and chilling villain. Christopher Lee, Tom Courtenay and Derek Jacobi round out a distinguished cast, with excellent voice work from McKellen and others (e.g. Kathy Bates, Kristin Scott Thomas, Ian McShane and Freddie Highmore).

Whatever author Pullman's putative motives in writing the story, writer-director Chris Weitz's film, taken purely on its own cinematic terms, can be viewed as an exciting adventure story with, at its core, a traditional struggle between good and evil, and a generalized rejection of authoritarianism.

To the extent, moreover, that Lyra and her allies are taking a stand on behalf of free will in opposition to the coercive force of the Magisterium, they are of course acting entirely in harmony with Catholic teaching. The heroism and self-sacrifice that they demonstrate provide appropriate moral lessons for viewers.

There is, admittedly, a spirit of rebellion and stark individualism pervading the story. Lyra is continually drawn to characters who reject authority in favor of doing as they please. Equally, only by defying the powers that be, can a scientist like Lord Asriel achieve progress. Pullman is perhaps drawing parallels to the Catholic Church's restrictive stance towards the early alchemists and, later, Galileo.

The script also makes use of some of the occult concepts found in the books, such as the diabolically named "daemons" -- animal companions to each person, identified as their human counterpart's visible soul.

Is Pullman trying to undermine anyone's belief in God? Leaving the books aside, and focusing on what has ended up on-screen, the script can reasonably be interpreted in the broadest sense as an appeal against the abuse of political power.

Will seeing this film inspire teens to read the books, which many have found problematic? Rather than banning the movie or books, parents might instead take the opportunity to talk through any thorny philosophical issues with their teens.

The religious themes of the later books may be more prominent in the follow-up films which Weitz has vowed will be less watered down. For now, this film -- altered, as it is, from its source material -- rates as intelligent and well-crafted entertainment.

The film contains intense but bloodless fantasy violence, anti-clerical subtext, standard genre occult elements, a character born out of wedlock and a whiskey-guzzling bear. The USCCB Office for Film & Broadcasting classification is A-II -- adults and adolescents. The Motion Picture Association of America rating is PG-13 -- parents strongly cautioned. Some material may be inappropriate for children under 13.

From Church of the Masses, Barbara Nicolosi's blog:

Golden Compass Points to Religious Bigotry
4:07 PM Comments (4)
postCountTB('5325813531989468738');
Trackback
I haven't seen The Golden Compass yet, although I have been aware of the problematic nature of the books for several years. In case you haven't heard of the series, the author Philip Pullman, hates Christianity, and has been pretty vocal about the point of his book being to help free children from the lies of religion, and let's stamp out the damm-ned thing and anyway don't forget the inquisition and ZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzz.Where was I? Oh yes, so, I can't imagine going to see this film because nobody pays me to be a critic, and no amount of money would be worth it to me anyway.But here is a helpful piece featuring friend and Christian critic, Jeffrey Overstreet talking about the substance of the stories. He also cautions Christians about creating any kind of extra publicity for the film by some kind of protest. The best thing to do is to just keep your kids away.

Other reviews:

Bill Donahue of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights views the film as less benign:

http://www.catholicleague.com/release.php?id=1361

http://catholicleague.org/videos/

Rotten Tomatoes: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/
his_dark_materials_the_golden_compass/

UPDATE:

more news stories: Golden Compass promoters trying to advertise in Catholic press

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=11159

Does AnGel Ministries Distort Catholic Teaching? (part 1)

The other day, a lovely woman came into our parish office and placed some fliers for AnGel Ministries' "Just Give Me Jesus", a "life-changing revival for women." http://www.annegrahamlotz.com/





After she left, I decided to look up their website and find out what they are all about. It is often the case that such evangelical ministries, never content with the Nicene Creed or the Apostles' Creed, have their own statements of faith. Unfortunately, as is the case with many Protestant groups, their invented creeds usually make semi-veiled attacks on Catholicism in order to demonstrate how these well-meaning Evangelicals, are true "Christians". In other words, so much of Protestant self-identity depends on the fact that THEY ARE NOT CATHOLIC! Sadly, they often present a simplified and false straw-man of Catholic beliefs that they easily knock down.


Previously, I wrote to an evangelical website called Dare2Share http://www.dare2share.org/ when I found some serious errors in their profile of a Catholic believer. This is becoming a little hobby of mine.


What follows is the AnGel Ministries Statement of Faith and then a link to their longer article on the pivotal Evangelical doctrine of eternal security entitled "You can be sure you will go to heaven when you die."


Finally, in the next couple links I will post my (rather lengthy, of course) emails to AnGel Ministries.





AnGel Ministries' Statement of Faith:
http://www.annegrahamlotz.com/
index.php/Statement-Of-Faith

• 
  Statement Of Faith
  
  We believe in God the Father, Creator of everything, Who loved the world He created and sent His only Son to be our Savior.
• We believe that God the Son is Jesus of Nazareth, the Savior sent by God, Israel’s Messiah, born of a virgin, fully man and fully God.
• We believe that God the Holy Spirit quickens us from death to life, indwells all those who receive Jesus Christ by faith as Lord and Savior and continuously conforms believers to the image of Jesus Christ.
• We believe the death of Jesus Christ on the cross is sufficient in itself to make atonement for the sin of the world--an atonement available to all who repent of their sin and believe in Him alone for forgiveness and salvation.
• We believe Jesus Christ died on the cross, was buried, and the third day He bodily arose from the dead guaranteeing the bodily resurrection of all those who have received eternal life through faith in Him.
• We believe salvation from judgment, forgiveness of sin and eternal life are free gifts of God’s grace and cannot be earned, deserved, inherited or bought.
• We believe only those who believe in Jesus Christ and receive Him into their inner being will escape eternal judgment and be accepted into heaven.
• We believe in the imminent, visible, bodily return of Jesus Christ to this earth to reign in righteousness and justice.
• We believe the true church is not an organization, but the Body of Christ made up of those who have personally trusted Jesus Christ as Savior and publicly confessed Him as Lord.
• We believe that the Bible is the Word of God, inspired by the Spirit of God, without error and thus the supreme and final authority for faith and practice.
• We believe that daily Bible reading and prayer are as necessary for the sustenance of spiritual life as food and water are necessary for physical life.
• We believe that all believers are commanded to be witnesses for Christ, sharing the Gospel to the whole world.

"You can be sure you will go to heaven when you die":
http://www.annegrahamlotz.com/index.php/
You-can-be-sure-you-will-go-to-heaven
-when-you-die

Does Angel Ministries Distort Catholic Teaching? (part 2: The Rosary)

TO: AVA ZETTEL, AnGel Ministries – I am sending you (via email) 3 letters regarding theological questions that stem from reading your website. Someone came to our parish requesting to leave fliers for the “Just Give Me Jesus” women’s rally on April 18 and 19 at Wells Fargo in Des Moines, Iowa. After reading information on your website I would like to comment on how a knowledgable, practicing Catholic would likely respond to your ministry. God bless-Chris
__________________________________________________
my original email:

Hello. I was reading your statement of faith and the section about being certain of going to heaven and I had a question. What did you mean when you said 'you don't have to count beads'?Thank you.

reply:

Dear Chris,

Thank you for your email and for your question regarding this section repeated below in the Know You Will Go To Heaven portion of our Statement of Faith. As Christians we believe that our advocate is Christ Himself and that we need no other go-between, method or practice to speak to our Heavenly Father.
Chris, I pray this answers your question satisfactorily. Please let us know if you require further information.
Trusting Jesus for every provision for you,
Ava Zettel AnGeL Ministries 5115 Hollyridge Drive Raleigh, NC 27612-3111
Tel: 919.787-6606 Fax: 919.782-3669 www.annegrahamlotz.com
________________________________________________

My second email:

Ava,
Thank you for your reply. However, you did not quite answer my question about what "counting beads" refers to.
You did write that "as Christians we believe that our advocate is Christ Himself and that we need no other go-between, method or practice to speak to our Heavenly Father."

1. What is the rosary?
By "method" in relation to "counting beads" I might guess that you are referring to praying the rosary, perhaps? Or am I off-base here? If this is the case, I would respectfully suggest that you learn a little more about this particular Catholic devotion.

For one thing, the rosary does not involve "counting beads." There are 5 "decades" of 10 beads on a rosary, to correspond to the 10 Hail Mary prayers and 1 bead for the Our Father. There are a total of 20 mysteries that trace the life of Christ. The one who prays does not "count" the beads. Originally, the 150 hail mary beads (the original 15 mysteries x 10 hail mary beads per mystery) was a number taken from the original monastic tradition of praying the 150 psalms in the desert.

However, the number of beads is more or less arbitrary. The objective is not to pray the Hail Mary 10 times as if the number really mattered… or as if it was some rigid formula or rite that was necessary to communicate with the Father (like a secret password). There are 10 beads simply to allow the one praying to enter into a rhythm of prayer and maintain focus, without the mind falling into distraction (like saying, "I am going to set the timer and pray for 30 minutes, and then once the timer goes off, I can finish my conversation with the Lord if I need to).

I must also point out that the Church does not anywhere teach that the rosary is a "method to speak to our Heavenly Father" that is necessary for salvation. Indeed, the Church teaches that the Rosary is one of the many ways of praying to God, in addition to Prayers such as the Jesus Prayer ("Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner"), and lectio divina ("sacred reading")--the use of imagination and contemplation in order to encounter our Lord Jesus Christ in the Holy Scriptures. In fact, although the Church recommends the rosary as a time-honored and fruitful devoion, technically, one could be a faithful Catholic “in good standing” even if they do not pray the rosary or if they do not even value it as a devotion. The rosary is simply a devotional prayer and not some go-between for talking to God.

Through repeating the prayers of the Hail Mary (which, for the most part, is taken right out of Luke Ch. 1), the Hail Mary prayers become a background rhythm that allows the prayer to meditate upon the individual mysteries of Jesus Christ:

• 
  The Joyful Mysteries [traditionally prayed on Monday, and Saturday]: the Annunciation, the Visitation, the Nativity, the Presentation, the Finding of Jesus in the Temple, the Finding of Jesus in the Temple
• The Luminous Mysteries [traditionally prayed on Thursday]: the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan, the Wedding Feast at Cana, the proclamation of the kingdom and call to conversion, the transfiguration, and the Institution of the Eucharist (Last Supper)
• The Sorrowful Mysteries [traditionally prayed on Tuesday and Friday]: The agony in the garden, the scourging at the pillar, the crowning with thorns, the carrying of the cross, the crucifixion and death of our Lord
• The Glorious Mysteries [traditionally prayed on Wednesday and Sunday]: The resurrection, the ascension, the descent of the Holy Spirit (Pentecost), the Assumption of Mary, and the Coronation of Mary

Many people also pray “scriptural rosaries” that include short sentences from Scripture read between each Hail Mary to more deeply enter into contemplation. [see my article: http://swallowedscroll.blogspot.com/2006/10/
want-to-add-some-power-to-your-rosary.html

The Bible talks of how Mary witnessed the actions of Jesus and heard his words and “kept all these things, reflecting on them in her heart” (Luke 2:19; 51). The rosary is a prayer form whereby we meditate and reflect upon the actions of deeds of Christ in our heart.

When I pray the rosary, I try to meditate on the mysteries from Mary’s perspective, I use my imagination and visualize the mystery from what her vantage point would have been. As Mary reflects upon the mysteries of Christ eternally in heaven (as do all of the other saints), when we meditate on the life of Jesus we do this in the company of all the other saints. There is only one body of Christ—not two—the holy ones who have passed away are not “dead”, in deed, they are more fully alive than we are here on earth because they are in communion with God (though not complete yet, as they await the return of their glorified bodies at the final judgment).

The following is an article on the rosary that I wrote for my personal website. It might help you understand why many Christians pray the rosary, in addition to reading Holy Scripture, etc., as a way to keep the mysteries of Christ in their mind and heart and continually reflect upon them:

http://swallowedscroll.blogspot.com/2006/10/
how-rosary-draws-us-closer-to-jesus.html

Does AnGel Ministries Distort Catholic Teaching? (part 3: Communion of the Saints vs. Jesus 'the One Mediator'?

2. Are the saints mediators independent of Christ, the one true mediator between God and man?

It might help if I also explain some points about the communion of the saints.

In the Nicene Creed dating back to the 4th century we pray “I believe in the communion of the saints”. How would you define the communion of saints? Is it simply those living in this world that believe in Christ? Where are all those holy souls who have died? Are they somehow cut off from the Body of Christ that they once inhabited?

The Catholic understanding of the communion of saints is that the Church is the family of God. The saints are our “older brothers and sisters” who have gone before us. They are living examples of the Gospel and the “New Law” of Christ, they were so animated by the Holy Spirit and supernatural grace, they allowed Christ to live in them to such an extent that they become shining examples of Christian discipleship.

From the earliest times of the Church has honored (venerated—NOT worshipped!) the holy martyrs that lived out the grace of God to the extreme—dying for their faith. We see in graffiti on the ancient catacomb tombs through which Christians ask for these martyrs to pray for their brothers and sisters fighting the good fight here in this world. If you knew that your brother in Christ had died defending the Faith, and you know that Jesus has destroyed death and that your brother is somehow far more immediately in the presence of God then yourself, what would your attitude be? Would you forget about him? Would you think he was sleeping? Or, would you ask him to pray for the communion of saints that are still in this world.


Of course, asking for the saints' intercession does not mean that you are by-passing Jesus (“the one mediator between God and man”—1 Tim 2:5), or using another mediator. This is clear by the very fact that practically all Christians ask fellow Christians to pray for them (Rom 15:30; Col 4:3; 1 Thess 5:25; Eph 6:18-19; 2 Thess 3:1). Why do we do this if we could go “straight to Jesus”?

Why do we have this impulse to ask other Christians to pray for us when, at the same time, we have a very personal relationship with Christ and intercede to him directly all the time.

I think that the reason might be that God made us a communal people. We are meant to live in the Church as a communion of those who have one identity in Jesus Christ and preserve this bond in charity. In other words, being a Christian is not exclusively about “me and Jesus”. Being a Christian means being part of the Body of Christ—a communion, a family. Just as we do here in this life, it is natural to call upon our brothers and sisters. We are meant to be a tight family as Christians, so, of course we call upon the Lord directly,… but we also ask the saints to join us in our prayer (not because Jesus would not heed our prayer, otherwise, but simply because love impels us to call upon our brothers and sister).

It is true, however, that “the fervent prayer of a righteous man is very powerful.” James letter cites the power of Elijah’s prayer, and one could also give the unique power of Moses’ intercession, as well. Certainly, I will ask for the prayers of my brother and sister Christians in this world, but I will not neglect to ask for the prayers of my brothers and sisters who are fully perfected in charity (completely righteous and transformed by the grace of God), free from all sin, fully employed in the constant worship of God, with an immediate vision of the Lord (the beatific vision) and immediately in the presence of His heavenly throne. In other words, they are “expert prayers” at this point because they are oriented completely toward interceding and adoring the Lord (see Revelation 5:8; 8:3-4; etc.). Flooded with God’s love, they care more about us now than they did while on earth (they are concerned with events in this world—see Rev. 6:9-11). St. Paul asked his fellow Christians to pray for his ministry… do you think that he would disapprove of us asking him to now pray for us while we remain in the race? We only ask him to pray FOR US and WITH US to the Holy Trinity.

Some points to keep in mind:

1. 
   All Christians are members of Christ’s body and one another (Rom 12:5 and many others).
2. Jesus has only one body (Eph 4:4; Col 3;15)
3. Death cannot separate Christians from Christ or from one another (Rom 8:35-39). Death cannot cut us off from one another. In fact, the saints are not “dead” but, rather, are more fully alive than we are! God is the God of the living not the dead (see Mk 12:26-27).
4. Christians are bound in mutual love (Rom 12:10; 1 Thess 5:11; Gal 6:2).
   We are members of Christ’s body, united in His divine life even beyond the grave, and concerned with each other’s salvation and growth in God’s family. There are no 2 bodies of Christ—those “alive” and those who are “dead”.

Does “praying to the saints” mean that we are treating the saints as if they were gods? No, the term “praying to the saints” stems from the old meaning of the English word “to pray”—which used to also mean, “to ask”, i.e. “pray thee bring the letters here”… eventually shortened to “prithy”). We ask the saints to pray for us. We ask the Virgin Mary to pray for us because she is the highest of saints. Of course she is a creature (so it is false when non-Catholics charge Catholics with “worshipping” Mary), and as the most beautiful masterpiece of God’s grace (the one closest to Jesus—his own Mother) she is given the highest honor (veneration) among all the saints. However, we can ask for the prayers of Mary just as we do for any other saint.

Does asking for the prayers of the saints violate 1 Tim 2:5—the fact that there is one mediator between God and man? The answer is no. Jesus is our one mediator with regards to our salvation. However, Jesus employed the apostles and disciples to be his authorized mediators by preaching the Gospel and baptizing (Mt 28), working miracles (see Acts), forgiving sins (Jn 20:23), binding and loosing with the power of the keys (Mt 16:19), celebrating the Eucharist (1 Cor 11:23-24), being “ambassadors of Christ” exercising the “ministry of reconciliation”, laborers and co-workers in the vineyard, working in the “ministry of the Spirit “and the “ministry of righteousness” (2 Cor 3:8-9).

Jesus shared his many unique roles with the members of his Church: creator—parents are co-creators; Shepherd—Peter is chief shepherd (Jn 10:11-16 +Jn 21:15-16; and Eph 4:11); his one priesthood and mediation (see below).

All of these examples of ministry were commanded and commissioned by Jesus to the authority of his Church. They are all ways that he graciously allows his sinful human disciples to mediate his grace to the world. This does not mean that Jesus or the Holy Spirit does not, at the same time, work directly in the hearts of people. Of course He does. But Jesus also intended that the large body of Christ together mediate His truth and grace both before and especially after His ascension to the right hand of the Father.

Lastly, all of the saints are baptized into the very person of Christ. Jesus Christ is the only high priest (Heb 3:1; 7:24; 9:12; 10:12), the one mediator between God and man (1 Tim 2:5). However, with baptism, we are baptized into the one priesthood of Christ. We can offer sacrifices, sufferings, prayers of intercession, praises, etc. to God the Father by exercising our common baptismal priesthood of all believers. We exercise our priesthood in and through the one priesthood of Jesus. This is why we are not seeking out other mediators when we ask for the prayers of Mary and the other saints. We are simply exercising the priesthood of Christ together as His unified body bound in charity.

You must read 1 Tim 2:5 in the context of 1 Pet 2:5:

“let yourselves be built into a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.’

To share in Christ’s priesthood is to share in his one unique mediatorship, both in heaven and on earth. This is a wonderful grace of God and speaks the amazing dignity that he gives us through baptism.

In fact, if you read the wider context of 1 Tim 2:1-7, you see that Paul is asking Christians to offer prayers and intercession for all men—in other words, to participate in Christ’s unique mediation.

Jesus said, ‘I am the vine, you are the branches’, and it is true that, apart from Jesus, the saints would never be able to exercise any of these roles to any effect. It is only in virtue of Jesus that we can ask the saints for prayers and that they can intercede to the Triune God.

How to Answer the Anti-Catholic Question Barage

• I found this Protestant-Catholic exchange interesting. The following is from "Apologetics for the Masses", Issue 64; the electronic newsletter of John Martignoni's Bible Christiam Society [ www.biblechristiansociety.org ] (As usual, I highlight some points in bold, this is my emphasis not the author's)
  ____________________________________
  In the last issue, I gave you an email that Russell D., a Catholic radio listener, had sent to Doug S. at one of the Catholic radio stations, and I asked you to think about how you would respond to that email. I received a number of emails from folks with their responses, which I cannot respond to individually, but about which I will say were, for the most part, spot on.
  
  ...below is his email followed by my response to his email. I do not claim that my response is the absolute best response one could make, but I think it is an example of how you could respond to any email that has a number of arguments in it which go in all different directions…even if the writer of the email is more coherent than the example we have here. So, this is not so much an example of a response to someone who isn’t making much sense, as it is an example of a response to someone who comes at you from a number of different directions all at the same time.
  
  I will reproduce Russel’s email below and then follow it with my response and the thinking (strategies) behind my response.
  
  Challenge/Response/Strategy
  From: Russell D.
  To: Doug S.
  Subject: Re: [Fwd: spiritual warfare, 2006-09-16]
  
  Dear Doug:
  Sorry for the VERY late reply, almost a year later, and thank you for it, but as to not knowing what Catholics believe, having God’s Word that the Vatican has replaced with its own teaching like the Pharaisees did and for which Jesus condemned them, by the grace of God, I know far more about the TRUTH, that is Jesus, than Vaticanism and its adherants (since Rome is now officially secular one can no longer call it Romanism), also having John Paul II’s official Catechism and various other websites intelligently exposing the various errors of Vaticanism comparable and successor to the similarly erroneous Pharaisees and their sacerdotal system of Jesus’s day that the apostles abolished in the power of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, understanding what Jesus meant in John 19:30 when He said “It is finished!” meaning, as Hebrews makes clear the total fulfillment and termination of the Old Covenant i n Himself upon the tree, as the butterfly terminates the caterpillar, one of the earliest Christian symbols of the resurrection, including the Ten Commandments that no longer apply to the Christian as far too lacking compared to the infinitely higher standard demanded by the abiding resurrected Christ (e.g. Matthew 5, especially 21-44 and His replacing the Old Covenant with His own:
  1. enlarging/replacing commandment 6 (don’t murder) with love, 5:21-26,
  2. enlarging/replacing no committing adultery with no looking/thinking about it 5:27-30,
  3. enlarging/replacing unlimited divorce with its qualified abolition, 5:31-32,
  4. enlarging/replacing permitting oaths with their abolition, 5:33-37,
  5. enlarging/replacing revenge with grace, 5:38-42 and
  6. enlarging/replacing love of neighbor to love of enemy, 5:43-44).

Since Jesus wrote the Decalog and gave them to Moses as pre-Incarnate Christ, He has every right to rewrite them according to His perfect understanding of man’s further development in obeying Him more fully than previously. Those who still would hearken to the Ten Commandments are like the Judaizers Paul constantly fought who rejected His Lord Jesus and whom he finally anathemized in order to protect his converts from the Pharaisees’ evil ungodly religious sacerdotal system exalting man above God via cleverly disguised salvation by works, like the Reformers anathemized various doctrines of Rome to protect their converts to Christ from a similar evil ungodly religious sacerdotal system exalting man above God via cleverly disguised salvation by works.

As antidotes to this poison I recommend you visit http://www.aomin.org/ and http://www.monergism.com/ and especially http://www.desiringgod.org/ to see the true Christian faith presented versus Vaticanism’s illiterate sacerdotal system that depends on ignorance to sustain it, sadly including even the ignorance of its clergy, as the above websites prove.

You prayed God would bless my journey to “Truth,” but His Word in John, both 8:32 and 14:6, says that that is Jesus Himself versus an abstraction of modern philosophy, and the book of Hebrews further rejects the toleration of any other mediator than Christ, like Mary or the saints who, knowing both Hebrews and its divine author would condemn Vaticanism for the corrupt antiChrist system, even though there are many godly Catholics justified by faith alone as God and His Word require, though in their ignorance they fail to understand, like Sam Brownback, that in the eyes of Vaticanism, bound by Trent, they are anathema. Everyone who asks a saint for help has turned his back on Jesus and turned his back on and violated Hebrews, the very Word of God they claim to worship. 1 Timothy 2:5 “For [there is] one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus” and Hebrews, chapters 8, 9 & 12.

That anyone would turn to a mere saint for help, according to popular error and Vatican false teaching, instead of Jesus, as God commands in the Scriptures above, even if the saints could hear and act (which Abraham declares by the chasm fixed in Luke16 they cannot (meaning Catholics use Church teaching to reject God’s Word and Abraham’s, making them no children of Abraham, like it was with the Pharisees). One can only wonder how satan has led the Vatican astray with his various Marian apparitions the gullible who reject Christ accept without discernment: 2 Corinthians 11:14-15 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. 15 Therefore [it is] no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works. John 7:24 Judge not according to the appearance but judge righteous judgment.

1 Corinthians 2:14-16 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know, because they are spiritually discerned. 15 But he that is spiritual discerns all things, yet he himself is discerned by no man. 16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he shall instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.
God bless you and may He move you to a blessed journey to Jesus Who is The Way, The Truth and The Life.
Russ D.
________________________________________________________

Response by John Martignoni:

"...If, however, you are capable of making an error when interpreting Scripture, then please give me a reason why I should believe your intepretation of Scripture vs. my interpretation of Scripture?

In other words, why should I believe what you say if you could indeed be wrong? ..."

Dear Russell,

Doug S. forwarded your email to me and asked me to respond. Forgive the delay in replying, but I’ve been doing a lot of traveling in the last several weeks and that always gets me behind.
Anyway, back to your email. You’ll have to forgive me, but I’m from Alabama and we’re not all that smart, so I had a bit of a time trying to follow what you were saying. So, what I would like to do, if you don’t mind, is just simplify the discussion a bit, assuming you’re open to discussing these matters.

Strategy/Comments: In other words, I’m going to “shift the paradigm,” so to speak. Instead of spending hours responding point-by-point to his rambling email, I’m going to basically ignore what he said and start off the argument where I choose to start it from. You can do this with pretty much anyone. You set the tone and let them follow.

If you are open to a discussion about Christ and truth and so forth, then I would like to start off by simply asking if you are infallible in what you teach? In other words, are you 100% certain that your interpretations of Scripture – from which you have derived everything you wrote below – are 100% accurate? Again, are you infallible in what you teach? Is it impossible for you to make an error in what you teach?

Strategy/Comments: I have never met a non-Catholic Christian who believes in the Catholic doctrine of infallibility. In other words, no man – the Pope or anyone else – is infallible in their view. If they believed the Pope was infallible, then the logical thing for them to do, would be to become Catholic. So, I think we can assume most, if not all, non-Catholic Christians do not believe in the doctrine of infallibility. Which means, when you ask someone if they are infallible, then you should get “No,” as an answer. Which means, that it is possible that they can make an error when it comes to matters of faith and morals. So, if there is the possibility that they can err in these areas, then it is possible that anything and everything they have said to you is in error. Make sure to point that out to them and do your best to get them to at least acknowledge the reasonability of that premise. Oh, one other thing – if you use a comm ent like, “If you’re really serious about finding truth,” or “If you’re really open to a discussion about Christ,” or something along those lines, then those who are serious about it, will more than likely respond. Those who aren’t, probably won’t.

I start there because you are asking us to believe what you have taught below. And, in what you have taught below in your email, there are a lot of words and thoughts that do not appear in Scripture. Which means you are interpreting Scripture, and asking us to believe in your interpretation for our salvation. I believe every single verse of Scripture that you quoted; however, I do not necessarily believe in your interpretation of those Scripture verses. So, it is very important to me to know if you are capable of making an error when interpreting Scripture or not.

Strategy/Comments: If you read Russel’s email, you will notice that the majority of it is composed of his words, not Scripture’s words. Which means that most of his email is either his interpretation of Scripture or his commentary on Scripture or on the Catholic Faith, but not Scripture itself. So, it is very important to let the other guy know that you agree 100% with every passage of Scripture that he quotes, but that you do not necessarily agree with his fallible, man-made, non-authoritative interpretation of Scripture…after all, he’s not infallible. He’s trying to set the rules for the discussion – what he claims is true and by golly you have to just accept it as being true – but you will have none of that.

And, if you are not capable of making an error when you interpret Scripture, if you are indeed infallible in your interpretation of Scripture, then please give me some evidence that I may believe such is the case. If, however, you are capable of making an error when interpreting Scripture, then please give me a reason why I should believe your intepretation of Scripture vs. my interpretation of Scripture? In other words, why should I believe what you say if you could indeed be wrong?

Strategy/Comments: In other words, show me where your name is in the Bible that I may believe that you are indeed infallible in your teaching. This paragraph contains one of the 4 main apologetics strategies that I teach: “But That’s My Interpretation!” Under Protestant theology, every person has not only the right, but the duty, to pick up the Bible and read it for themselves to decide what is true and what is false. What is true doctrine and what is false doctrine. So, under their theology, you have the right to read the Bible and decide for yourself what it means. When someone tells you that you, as a Catholic, are wrong in your interpretation of the Bible, all you have to do is point out that their theology gives you the right to interpret the Bible for yourself; therefore, they cannot tell you that you are wrong. They can, at best, tell you that they disagree with your interpretation. But, they have to admit, since they are not infallib le, that your interpretation could possibly be right, and that their interpretation could possibly be wrong. Which, if they think about it, will hopefully plant some seeds in their minds about the need for an infallible authority.

Basically, I’m asking if you believe your interpretation of Scripture to be more valid than my interpretation of Scripture, and, if so, why? By what authority do you teach?

Strategy/Comments: A good question to always ask someone is: Are you an authoritative interpreter of the Scriptures? If yes, how so? Who gave you such authority? If no, then why should I believe your interpretation?

If you could answer those few simple questions, I think we might be able to have a very good discussion here.

Strategy/Comments: I have not heard back from Russell, and I probably never will. Or, if I do hear back from him, I can almost guarantee that he will not respond to my questions and will simply give me another rambling email full of sentence run ons. In which case I can simply respond, “Russell, I asked you a simple question: Are you infallible or not. If you cannot answer that simple question, there’s no reason to continue this discussion.” But, for those who are a bit more rational than Russell appears to be, a response like the one I gave to Russell could lead to some very interesting dialogue – dialogue in which you are setting the pace and in which you are asking a lot of questions. At the very least, it will keep you from wasting your time with those who simply want to talk at you, rather than those who want to talk with you.

God bless!
John Martignoni
Founder/President
Bible Christian Society
http://www.biblechristiansociety.org/