Our Readers' Opinions
September 28, 2007

Did Jesus instruct us to pray to Mary?


Editor: Once more, I am pleased to respond to SALT. This time to the letter captioned ‘Would Anti Christ, discourage murder, rape, theft, and lying?’

I am assuming that SALT’s main thrust in this question is, since the papacy discourages murder, rape, theft and lying, it cannot possibly have an Antichrist spirit, nor be the Antichrist power.{{more}}

I am happy for the opportunity to share with the readers some little known identifying points concerning the Antichrist of the Bible.

Firstly, the word ‘antichrist’ is the greek ‘antichristos’, composed of ‘anti’ meaning ‘substitution’, and ‘Christos’ meaning ‘anointed or Christ.’

Interestingly, the Latin word ‘Vicarius’ means ‘substitute,’ according to the Oxford American Dictionary. One of the papacy’s official titles, ‘Vicarius Christi’ or ‘Vicar of Christ’ really means ‘Substitute of Christ’ or Antichrist.

The word ‘Antichrist’, therefore, describes a doctrine or person which substitutes the authority and ministry of Christ with something or someone else.

For a substitution to take place, the Antichrist must of necessity seek to be identified with the things of Christ.

However, this substitution is achieved not by open opposition, but by deception.

The Scriptures give this a picture of the deceivableness of the Antichrist: “that Man of Sin be revealed, the Son of Perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.” [2 Thessalonians 2:3-4]

Here the Scriptures refer to Antichrist as the ‘Son of Perdition.’

Jesus referred to Judas also as the ‘Son of Perdition,’ cf John 17:12.

So the scripture, not me, has designated both Judas and Antichrist as the ‘Son of Perdition’ to illustrate how Antichrist deceives.

Let’s consider the similarities.

The papacy appears to be Christian, just as Judas appeared to be Christian. Judas was among the twelve whom Jesus told, “…as ye go, preach, saying, ‘The kingdom of heaven is at hand.’” [Matthew 10:7]

The world does not suspect the papal power is the ‘Son of Perdition’, just as Judas was not suspected as the betrayer. Jesus said: “‘He it is, to whom I shall give a sop, when I have dipped it.’ And when he had dipped the sop, he gave it to Judas Iscariot…” [John 13:26]

Jesus identified Judas as the betrayer, but did the disciples believe it?

No! The record indicates, “…Then said Jesus unto [Judas], ‘That thou doest, do quickly.’

Now no man at the table knew for what intent he spake this unto him.

For some of them thought, because Judas had the bag, that Jesus had said unto him: ‘Buy those things that we have need of against the feast’; or, that he should give something to the poor.” [John 13:27-29]

The papacy has a commendable record in service to humanity, just as Judas was the one who appeared to be concerned about the poor and needy (cf John 12:4-6)

SALT needs to consider these things and not let Tradition and Emotion blind him/her to the Truth in the Scriptures.

Therefore, instead of SALT asking: ‘Would Antichrist discourage murder, rape, theft, and lying?’, a better question would be: what are the points by which the Antichrist is identified in the SCRIPTURES, and does the papacy match them point for point?

Surely, if the Antichrist is the ‘Son of Perdition’, he would have no problem discouraging murder, rape, theft, and lying, just as surely and Judas preached ‘The kingdom of heaven is at hand.’

Scripture tells us: “Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the Antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son.” [1 John 2:22-23 – BBE]

The Scripture teaches us that Jesus is THE Christ, i.e., the definite article; the unique, the ONLY Savior.

The papacy claims to teach this, but in reality it teaches that Jesus is A Christ, i.e., the indefinite article; meaning ONE OF MANY Saviors.

The papacy deceptively removes the focus of salvation away from Jesus, by introducing other mediators between the Father and mankind.

At the funeral of Pope John Paul II, clearly, we see a depiction of this.

Cardinal Ratzinger in his prayer said the following: “The Blessed Virgin Mary, Queen of the Apostles and Savior of the people of Rome, intercede to God for us so that the face of his blessed Son may be shown to our Pope…” [www.ewtn.com/JohnPaul2/_mourning/ritessummary1.asp]

When SALT continues to defend such glaring blasphemous and heretical statements, he/she really only proves my point beyond question.

Does the Scripture identify Mary as the ‘Saviour of Rome’? an Intercessor between us and God? as ‘Queen of Apostles?’

Did Jesus instruct us to pray to Mary, or to “…Our Father which art in heaven…”? [Matthew 6:9]

As for SALT’s charge that I have misrepresented the Catechism’s explanation of veneration of images, it clearly says that this is ‘Religious Worship’ in Article 2132, which I have shown already transgresses Yahweh’s expressly detailed commandment.

Is SALT saying that Yahweh did not realize that the images themselves are not worshipped, but the one whom the image represents that is worshipped?

Is SALT counseling God on how the Commandment should be kept?

I most certainly think Yahweh knows to whom such worship is directed. Yet He still FORBIDS it.

SALT suggests that the veneration of Mary is the same as a person looking at the photo of a deceased loved one! That, to me, is hilarious! I’m sure the papacy would object to the veneration of ALL deceased persons, but you never know…

Maurice Rogers