A REBUTTAL


                              Phil Scovell

                          Copyright (C) 1997/2003

                            By Phil Scovell

                          All Rights Reserved

          Reproduction of the following is granted by the copyright holder,
          Phil Scovell, if such reproduction is done in the spirit in which
          it was given.   It may not  be reproduced and sold  for financial
          gain without  written permission  of the  copyright holder:  Phil
          Scovell.  Electronic  formats may be distributed  freely but this
          copyright notice must  remain with each copy and  the text cannot
          be  altered  in  any  way.    For  convenience,  this   copyright
          notification  may  be  placed  at  the end  of  the  document  if
          reproduced electronically.


          Phil Scovell
          840 South Sheridan Boulevard
          Denver, Colorado  80226-8017
          Toll Free:  888-936-0001
          Voice:  303-936-2188
          Fax:  303-936-1841
          Email:  Phil@RedWhiteAndBlue.ORG
          Web:  WWW.RedWhiteAndBlue.ORG

                           TABLE OF CONTENTS

          KEY WORDS
               BIBLICAL FIDELITY
               TRUTHS OF THE BIBLE
               QUEEN OF HEAVEN
               SINLESSNESS OF MARY
               MARY MEDIATOR
          FACING UP TO GOD
               SHEEP'S CLOTHING

                     FACING UP TO THE CATHOLIC MARY

                               A Rebuttal


                              Phil Scovell


               This booklet  is in response to an  article entitled "Facing
          Up To Mary"  by Father Peter E. Gillquist.  Because his doctrinal
          claims were so  clearly erroneous, and because  Catholic theology
          is being  so easily accepted  by some evangelicals today,  I felt
          the necessity of writing a rebuttal.

               Though the article was void of any copyright symbol or date,
          the following  information does  appear at  the beginning  of the
          electronic version of the article:  "This material is copyrighted
          by  Conciliar Press,  Ben Lomond,  CA  and is  made available  on
          electronic   Christian  BBS  systems  by  special  permission  of
          Conciliar Press. It  may not be modified  in any way, but  can be
          transmitted  on  electronic BBS  systems for  the edification  of
          those wishing to know more  about the Orthodox Church."
            This single line was also included:  "Reprinted with permission
          from Conciliar Press."

               I   obtained  the  article  electronically  via  a  computer
          network.    Though  the electronic  reproduction  of  his article
          claims to be his own work,  I cannot guarantee all of the  quotes
          taken from the article are  in fact Father Gilquist's.  What  you
          read in my rebuttal is exactly what I obtained electronically.  I
          have not modified or altered the text in any way.

               On  my Christian  computer bulletin board  Father Gilquist's
          article  and  my rebuttal  appear  together  to allow  for  equal
          representation.    I  trust other  system  operators  of computer
          bulletin boards will permit the same.  If, on the other hand, you
          are  reading this  rebuttal  in  print and  wish  a full  printed
          reproduction  of Father  Gilquist's  article, please  request his
          article by writing  to:  Conciliar Press, 10090 A  Highway 9, Ben
          Lomond, CA  95005-9217
          or  call  1-800-967-7377.   An  electronic  version  of both  his
          article  and this  rebuttal are  available on  my BBS;  the modem
          telephone number appearing at the end of this booklet.


               This rebuttal is going to get me into a lot of  trouble with
          Christians   who  find  very  little,  if  anything,  wrong  with
          Catholicism.  Many evangelicals today consider Catholics not only
          to  be Christian brethren  but doctrinally harmonious  and fellow
          believers  with whom  we should  spiritually  corroborate.   Many
          Bible   preaching   churches,   denominations,   national   radio
          ministries and seminaries  have excepted the idea  that Catholics
          are in fact evangelicals and that they preach and teach the  same
          Gospel as do other fundamentalists.  As Father Gilquist's article
          demonstrates,  nothing could  be further  from  the truth  and he
          isn't  even a  Roman Catholic.   Catholic  theology,  however, is
          false doctrine no matter the denominational title.  This rebuttal
          demonstrates  that Catholicism does  not preach the  same Gospel,
          and  further, the goal of either the Orthodox Church or the Roman
          Catholic Church is  to inculcate Catholic theology  into mainline
          evangelicalism for the  sole purpose of expansion  and dominance.
          Christian   liberalistic   trends   of   today's   neoevangelism,
          unfortunately, is making their job much easier.

               As already mentioned,  the article upon which my rebuttal is
          based is not written by  a Roman Catholic but by a priest  in the
          Greek Orthodox Church.  sometimes they refer to it as the Eastern
          Orthodox Church but mostly as  just the Orthodox Church.  In  the
          United States  it is called  the American Greek  Orthodox Church.
          These  two powerful church groups,  that is the  RCC and the EOC,
          share common doctrinal fallacies and thus this article was chosen
          because of their shared doctrines.

               Because this article is based  upon the worship of Mary, and
          not all the false doctrines of both Roman and Greek orthodoxy,  I
          am emphasizing the influence of Catholic theology in general upon
          the evangelical church  today.  The  Greek Orthodox Church  isn't
          any different, as  you will see, than the Roman  Catholic in many
          respects of  false doctrine.   They  ardently deny,  however, any
          doctrinal agreement with the RCC and  insist they are evangelical
          Christians; howbeit "Orthodox."  They even insist their doctrinal
          views  of Mary  aren't anything  like  the Roman  Catholic Marian
          doctrine.   Father Gilquist's article  proves otherwise.  Be sure
          and read  the reference  materials at the  end of  this rebuttal,
          however, for verification and comparison.


               Before  addressing   the  specifics  of   Father  Gilquist's
          article,  I need to comment on aspects of his article which could
          be easily overlooked.  As is  so often the case, it's what  isn't
          said that speaks the loudest.

               First, Father Gilquist, though he never claims to be a Greek
          Orthodox priest, is, apparently,  since the article claims  to be
          authored by "Fr Peter E. Gilquist."   He never makes mention, for
          some reason, of his position as an ordained Greek Orthodox priest
          anywhere  in his article.  I wonder why.   Perhaps the "FR" is in
          reference to some other designation?

               Secondly,  Father   Gilquist  never   once  uses  the   word
          "Catholic" in his  entire article.   That's right,  not once.   I
          somehow find this strange.  He actually never even  uses the term
          "Greek Orthodox Church;"  choosing instead to  use the title  the
          "Orthodox  Church" when referring  to the Greek  Orthodox Church.
          Though it is clear to anyone reading his booklet he is not only a
          Catholic  himself  but  believes  dogmatically  in  the  Catholic
          teachings of the EOC, he goes  out of his way to avoid  using the
          word.  He does, however, have a good reason for avoiding the term
          "Catholic" which will become apparent as we examine the doctrinal
          errors   of  interpretation  by  the  Roman  and  Greek  Orthodox
          Catholics.  The problem is many evangelicals today have swallowed
          hook, line and  sinker the myth that Greek  Orthodoxy, or perhaps
          more  specifically  the  American  Greek   Orthodox  Church,  are
          protestant Bible believers.   The truth is they  are just as much
          Catholic in doctrine and practice as the Roman Catholics and thus
          are  called  "Catholic"  in  this  rebuttal.    It  makes  little
          difference  to  me  if  the Greek  Orthodox  Catholics  refuse to
          consider  the  Vatican  authoritative and  the  Pope  infallible.
          They're still  Catholics nonetheless  and maybe  it's about  time
          somebody say so.

               Third,  Father Gilquist, instead  of calling his  church the
          Greek  Orthodox  Church, refers  to  it  often  as "the  Orthodox
          Church."  This  is their way of making  sure everyone understands
          there is no other.  Plus it sidesteps any problems one might have
          with  their Catholic  theology by  avoiding  mentioning the  word
          "Catholic" in the first place.  It's, of course, quite convenient
          because if you are the "Orthodox Church," how can anyone question
          your doctrine.  I have often heard Roman Catholics likewise refer
          to  the  RCC as  the "Orthodox  Church."   If  you think  this is
          confusing, just keep  in mind the old  axiom "If it walks  like a
          duck and  swims like  a duck and  quacks like  a duck,  then it's
          unlikely to be  a bicycle pump."   In other words, a  Catholic by
          any other name is still a Catholic.

               Finally, Father Gilquist  nor the Greek Orthodox  Church nor
          the  Roman Catholic  church,  are  ecumenicalist,  though  he  so
          cleverly attempts to make the  reader think otherwise.  The Greek
          Orthodox Church and  the entire Roman  Catholic Church have  both
          for  years,   tried  to   get  evangelicals   of  all   Christian
          denominations, to see them as both "Christian" and "evangelical."
          This  is the  purpose of  the Billy Graham  quote in  his opening
          remarks.   More  on Billy  Graham  later.   For  now, let  Father
          Gilquist speak for himself.

               "I  urge you  to visit  and  get to  know the  historic
               Orthodox  Church  which  has  maintained  the  biblical
               fidelity  concerning   Mary  and  Christian   faith  in
               general.  Within the boundaries of Orthodoxy, the faith
               and practice of the Church safeguard true commitment to
               the Lord Jesus Christ together  with God the Father and
               God the Holy  Spirit.  It is  there that the  truths of
               the  Bible  are  taught in  their  entirety,  where the
               worship of God is  experienced in Spirit and in  truth,
               and where  Mary and  the great  cloud of  witnesses for
               Christ throughout the ages are honored and revered."

               Boy,  where  did his  ecumenical,  harmonious, oneness,  get
          along with everybody, we're just like you, philosophy go?  If you
          are  Catholic, his statements  won't concern you at  all.  If you
          are other than Catholic, however, his comments are, at the least,
          worrisome, and at the most, alarming.

                               KEY WORDS

               Let's focus  on some key  words used in his  closing remarks
          just quoted.


               "I  urge you  to visit  and  get to  know the  historic
               Orthodox  Church  which  has  maintained  the  biblical
               fidelity  concerning   Mary  and  Christian   faith  in

               Apparently the  rest of Christendom  has done a poor  job of
          representing  the  Gospel   of  Jesus  Christ,  not   to  mention
          maintaining  "Biblical  fidelity," at  least according  to Father
          Gilquist.   The  Catholic Church,  on the  other hand,  has never
          wavered in  their doctrinal  positions?  I  find it  difficult to
          even find the Gospel of  Jesus Christ in Catholic theology myself
          but I'll allow you to make your own judgement based on additional
          quotes from Father Gilquist's article.


               "Within the  boundaries  of Orthodoxy,  the  faith  and
               practice of the Church safeguard true commitment to the
               Lord Jesus Christ together with  God the Father and God
               the Holy Spirit."

               Here he falls back on  the old trusty standby which Catholic
          dogma as  maintained for its  entire existence, that is,  it, the
          Catholic   church,  has  helped   protect  (safeguard)  the  true
          spiritual relationship one can have  with Christ.  Without  them,
          apparently, you  cannot have,  or experience, spiritual  intimacy
          with Christ.   In practice, they are actually  much more dogmatic
          about  it than that.   They even believe they are indeed the only
          true guardians  of  the  Holy  Scriptures.    For  centuries  the
          Catholic  hierarchy  refused  to  allow  their  parishioners  the
          privilege of reading the Bible privately.  Up until recent times,
          the Catholic  church  claimed their  own people  weren't able  to
          interpret,  let alone apply,  the Scriptures without  their help.
          Too bad the Catholic church as not only blatantly misinterpreted,
          not to mention misapplied, the holy Scriptures but they have even
          altered  and added to it over  the years.  All  in the name of, I
          might add,  "safeguarding" it.  If you doubt what I've just said,
          keep reading and  make sure you read the  reference documentation
          included at the end of this rebuttal.  He actually gets around to
          confirming what I've just said in his very next statement.


               "It is there that the truths of the Bible are taught in
               their entirety, where the worship of God is experienced
               in Spirit  and in truth,  and where Mary and  the great
               cloud of witnesses  for Christ throughout the  ages are
               honored and revered."

               It is there that the truths of the Bible are taught in their
          entirety?  Shoot!  I guess, unless  you are a Catholic and attend
          a Catholic mass,  you're not getting the whole  truth and nothing
          but the  truth?  Then,  too, apparently, true  worship of God  is
          only in  the traditions of  Catholicism in the Orthodox  sense of
          the word, according  to Father Gilquist, not to  mention the true
          respect due Mary.

                           THE CATHOLIC GOAL

               Though  not  readily  acknowledged,  nor  accepted, by  many
          evangelicals today, the true  Catholic goal for the  past several
          years  has been  to  get evangelical  Christians to  believe that
          they, too,  that is  Catholics, are evangelicals  and that  they,
          Catholics,  share the same  doctrines with evangelicals.   Father
          Gilquist begins  by quoting  Billy Grham to  prove that  even he,
          Billy  Graham,  shares  their  doctrines.    Here's  what  Father
          Gilquist says about Billy Graham.

               "If I have heard him say it once, I have heard  Billy Graham
               say it  at least a  half a dozen  times over the  years:  We
               evangelical Christians do not give Mary her proper due."

               Actually his  quote of  Billy Graham  was mentioned for  two
          reasons.   First,  he wants  everyone to  know that  Billy Graham
          believes  like the Catholics  and second, Catholics  believe like
          Billy Graham.   I admit that Billy Graham  hasn't helped anything
          by sharing his  platform with those  who doctrinally disagree  in
          major   Biblical  positions  but  Billy  Graham,  nor  any  other
          evangelical  fundamentalist  doctrinally  agree  with  the  false
          doctrines of the Roman and Greek Orthodox Catholics.  Of course I
          could  be wrong  about Billy  Grham but unless  he has  in recent
          years  changed,  he  doesn't  believe  in  praying to  Mary,  her
          intercessory authority, her perpetual  virginity, her sinlessness
          or her bodily resurrection.  There is, of course, the possibility
          that  Father Gilquist  may know  something we  don't about  Billy

                        THE NEW TESTAMENT RECORD

               From  here, let's  now systematically  examine  each of  the
          statements Father Gilquist mentions in his article and see if the
          Scriptures do indeed agree with his Catholic theology.

               Father Gilquist begins  by making for statements  about Mary
          and attempts  to substantiate  Catholic theology with  Scripture.
          He begins with:

               "1.  Mary is the greatest woman who ever lived."

               Using the  confessions of Gabriel and Elizabeth in Luke 1:28
          and 42, "Blessed  are you among women,"  Father Gilquist attempts
          to prove Mary is something other than what the Scriptures record.

               Quick on the heals of this apparent Scriptural confirmation,
          he says:

               "She is  the  most blessed  of  women and  for  several

               Before getting to those reasons,  please notice that he says
          "She  is  the most  blessed of  women" immediately  following the
          Scriptural quote  of  "Blessed  are  you among  women."    Father
          Gilquist,  the Catholic  church  and  the  Orthodox  Church,  all
          misquote the  Bible on exactly what  was said.  Both  Gabriel and
          Elizabeth said Mary was blessed "among" women; not blessed above,
          or superior to,  other women.  The Greek  word translated "among"
          in these two verses of Luke's Gospel means (a primary preposition
          denoting [fixed]  position [in  place, time  or  state], and  [by
          implication] instrumentality  [medially or constructively]).   It
          is more than obvious that the confession  made of Mary was one of
          recognition only  and  not  position;  position  of  superiority.
          Catholicism,  however, would  like us  to  believe that  Mary was
          exalted above all other women and yet the Scripture simply states
          was blessed "among" or (in) women.   Luke's actual record of  the
          angel's confession is, "And the angel came in unto her, and said,
          Hail, [thou  that art] highly  favored, the Lord [is]  with thee:
          blessed [art] thou among women. (Luke 1:28).  The Greek rendering
          of "highly  favored" is, (be  highly favored,  make accepted,  to
          make graceful, charming, lovely, agreeable, to peruse with grace,
          compass  with favor,  to honor  with blessings).   Mary  was most
          certainly  chosen by the Heavenly Father to give birth to His Son
          miraculously  but He  never  made  her superior  or  a symbol  of
          personal  worship by  the rest  of the  Body of  Christ.   Father
          Gilquist, the  Greek Orthodox  Church and  the  RCC, changed  the
          meaning of  Scripture when he said, "she   is the most blessed of
          women."   That isn't what the Bible said nor is it what the Bible
          meant.  The Greek meaning simply means she was picked, out of all
          other women, to  give birth to Christ.   If the reader  will take
          the  time to carefully study  the passages of Scripture referring
          to Mary and her life, it will be discovered she was a Godly woman
          and in  fact believed the  angel when God's intentions  were made
          known  to her.   It  was  because of  her  faith in  God and  her
          confession of faith  in Him as Lord that allowed the blessings of
          God to come upon her.

               Before moving into  his second point, Father  Gilquist makes
          the following astonishing statement concerning Mary.

               "She was sovereignly  chosen by the Father  to bear His
               only begotten  Son.   In that role,  Mary is  the first
               person in  all history to receive and  accept Christ as
               her Savior."

               Who says?  Father Gilquist?  The Greek Orthodox Church?  The
          American  Greek  Orthodox  Church?   The  Roman  Catholic Church?
          There  is absolutely  no Scripture  anywhere  in the  Bible which
          makes  this erroneous claim but  Father Gilquist makes it anyway.
          He does so,  however, as if  it is gospel.   A practice, I  might
          add, the  Greek  Orthodox Church  and Roman  Catholic Church  has
          exercised dozens of times throughout their history.

               May I  quote from the oldest book in the Bible?  "Oh that my
          words  were now  written! oh that  they were  printed in  a book!
          That they  were graven with an iron pen and  lead in the rock for
          ever!  For I know [that] my redeemer liveth, and [that]  he shall
          stand at the latter [day] upon the  earth:  And [though] after my
          skin [worms] destroy  this [body], yet  in my  flesh shall I  see
          God:  Whom  I shall see for  myself, and mine eyes  shall behold,
          and not  another; [though] my  reins be consumed within  me" (Job
               Job knew Christ  personally thousands of years  before Mary.
          Where does it say, because Mary was  favored by God to give birth
          to Christ as  a virgin, she was the first person to accept Christ
          as her Savior?  He later states:

          "Early  in Christian  history she  is  called [the  first of  the
          He additionally states the following:

          "Do  you want to be favored of God?  Then give Him everything you
          have, give Him your very life.  This is precisely what  Mary did,
          and why  she is  to  be considered  the greatest  woman who  ever

               Father Gilquist,  in his  article, attempts to  substantiate
          his claim that  Mary was  the greatest  woman who  ever lived  by
          comparing what Jesus said about John the baptizer when Jesus said
          no one was greater  than he.  Father Gilquist, however,  as is so
          often  true  in  Catholic  dogma,  fails  to  quote the  complete
          statement of  our Lord.  "Verily I say  unto you, Among them that
          are born of  women there hath not  risen a greater than  John the
          Baptist:  notwithstanding he  that  is least  in  the kingdom  of
          heaven is greater  than he. (Matthew 11:11).   If he is  going to
          make a parallel  comparison between John  the baptizer and  Mary,
          Father  Gilquist must,  by  Scriptural necessity,  conclude  with
          Jesus the  least in  the kingdom  of God  are greater  than Mary.
          That is, however, something never mentioned in Catholic theology.
          Thus, it  is  Scripturally  obvious  that this,  too,  is  simply
          another    Catholic    theological   position    unrelated    and
          unsubstantiated by Scripture.

               Another astonishing  omission by Father  Gilquist and  those
          sympathetic with  Catholic theology  is what  Jesus said  himself
          about His own  mother.  Following the casting out of a demon, and
          subsequent  teaching on  the  power  of God,  a  woman spoke  out
          concerning the mother  of our Lord.   Listen closely to  what she
          said and then how Jesus Himself responded.  "And it came to pass,
          as he spake these  things, a certain woman of the  company lifted
          up her voice, and said unto him,  Blessed [is] the womb that bare
          thee,  and the  paps which thou  hast sucked.   But he  said, Yea
          rather, blessed  [are] they that hear  the word of  God, and keep
          it.  (Luke 11:27-28).  Here was a  woman attempting to focus upon
          Mary and  her role in giving birth to the  Son of God.  Jesus, on
          the other hand, redirects the focus and places  it upon those who
          believe He is  the Son of  God; not on  the blessedness of  Mary.
          For  some unknown  reason,  the RCC  and  the EOC  has  tried for
          centuries to keep that focus upon Mary when Jesus Himself clearly
          states,  if Mary  is  blessed, we  are even  more  so because  we

               "2.  Mary is our model for Christian Service."

               This is one point of Father Gilquist's statements with which
          I fully agree.   He  simply states  that Mary is  our example  of
          Christian service, dedication  to Christ and faithfulness  and he
          is certainly correct.  It is his next statement which could choke
          a horse.

               "3.  Mary is the Mother of God."

               In all fairness,  Father Gilquist makes it  absolutely clear
          that Jesus  Christ is  God and  that Mary  is not,  in fact,  the
          mother of the  Holy Trinity.  He furthermore  clearly states that
          Mary did not give birth to God Himself, that is, the  Father God.
          I'm glad to  hear that Father Gilquist believes Jesus  is God and
          that Mary isn't  the birth giver  of the  Trinity.  Why  Catholic
          theology insists, however, that we  address Mary as the mother of
          God when the Bible clearly calls her the mother of our Lord, that
          is, Lord Messiah, can only be explained as more Catholic doctrine

               Note what he says concerning this Catholic doctrine:

               "To see Jesus Christ as something less than God in the flesh
               is sub-Christian.  For unless the one in Mary's womb was and
               is God,  we are  dead in our  sins.   To safeguard  the full
               deity of Christ, the Church has always insisted that Mary be
               rightly  called -as  Elizabeth  called her  - the  Mother of

               The longer I  spend time reading Father  Gilquist's article,
          the more I wonder if we are  reading the same Bible.  He actually
          states before this amazing leap in doctrinal interpretation:

               "After Christ  had been conceived  in her womb, Mary  paid a
          visit to the  home of relatives Zacharias and  Elizabeth, soon to
          be parents  of John the Baptist.   When Mary greeted  her cousin,
          Elizabeth called  her blessed and  said, "Why is this  granted to
          me, that the mother  of my Lord should come to  me?" (Luke 1:43).
          Elizabeth knew that  her Lord, the Messiah of  Israel, was in the
          womb of Mary."

          One moment  he admits Elizabeth is  saying Mary is the  mother of
          the Lord Messiah and the next minute he is saying that  she calls
          Mary the mother  of God.   He  even quotes the  Bible and  proves
          exactly what Elizabeth said but  still insists she calls Mary the
          mother  of God  when Elizabeth  said  no such  thing.   Why  does
          Catholic theology  insist upon  calling Mary  the mother of  God?
          Though the answer to this question will  be obvious as we examine
          more Catholic theology, follow the progression of  drift from the
          plain interpretation of Scripture as Father Gilquist continues.

               "Just as we insist  on the Virgin birth  of Christ, we  also
               insist  that for  the nine  months  she carried  Him in  His
               humanity He was  at every moment fully God as well.  Thus we
               say boldly and with great insistence that Mary is the Mother
               of God, Theotokos,  God-bearer.  To say anything  less is to
               side with those who deny His deity."

               There  it is!  If you claim  to be a Christian and refuse to
          agree with Catholic  theology which states  Mary is actually  the
          mother  of God,  you  aren't  a believer  in  Christ's deity  and
          labeled "sub-christian" by the "Orthodox Church."

               Is this Catholic doctrine really worth an argument?  I mean,
          as Bible Believers today, don't  we, too, believe Jesus Christ is
          God?  If  so, is  it wrong,  or at the  very least  theologically
          incorrect, to refer  to Mary as the  mother of God?   Before this
          question is answered, let's look at Father Gilquist's next Marian

               "4.  We are to honor Mary and call her blessed."

               on the surface, this appears to be an agreeable position but
          Catholic theology carries it far beyond Scriptural  bounds.  Note
          Father Gilquist's  comments concerning  what he  really means  by
          saying we should bless Mary.

               "Now comes the toughest  test of all.  Not only  is Mary the
               most  blessed of  women,  our model  for obedience,  and the
               Mother of God, we are called to honor her and to  bless her.
               How  do we know?  The  Bible tells us so.         During her
               three-month stay at  Elizabeth's house, Mary offered  one of
               the most beautiful prayers of praise  to the Lord in all the
               Scriptures.  It  begins, "My soul  magnifies the Lord,"  and
               thus  it has  become known  as  "The Magnificat."   In  that
               prayer,  inspired  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  Mary  prophesied,
               "hence-forth, all  generations will  call me blessed"  (Luke
               1:48).   Essentially, all generations in Church history have
               done so;  only the  last two centuries  have faltered.   Our
               generation of American  Christians is filled with  those who
               refuse to bless  her, and we must change our ways.  For some
               Christian bodies  have come  to  stand dogmatically  against
               Christ and the New Testament by refusing to bless her."

               Father Gilquist, along with the  EOC and the RCC, claims the
          Bible commands us  to "bless"  Mary in  some way.   Mary, on  the
          other hand, simply said she would be called  (considered) blessed
          by all others; not that we should "actually literally bless" her.
          This is  just another  Catholic addition  to Bible doctrine  that
          Scripture never once confirms.  Why does Catholic theology insist
          we "bless"  Mary in  some special way?   I'm  coming to  that but
          first read carefully Father Gilquist's next  statement concerning
          why we should bless Mary above all others.

               "And because Christ is our  elder brother, the first born of
               many brethren, we  honor the Virgin Mary as  our Mother, our
               lady,  as well.   Just as Eve  was mother of  the old Adamic
               race, so Mary is  the true Mother of the new  race, the Body
               of Christ, the Church."

               Also he states:

               "we are  called by God  in no  uncertain terms to  bless the
               Mother of  our  God.   We cannot  get around  that point  in

               Mary has moved from a woman who is blessed among other women
          to the "blessed of all women."  From there she has moved from the
          virgin who  gave birth to our Lord to  the "mother of God."  Then
          she moves from one who is honored and "called blessed" to one who
          is one who becomes  an object of our adoration and  prayers as we
          "bless"  her.    Then  she  moves  into  more   defined  Heavenly
          prominence as  she becomes "our  mother" and "the true  Mother of
          the new race, the Body of Christ,  the Church."  It is impossible
          for the student of the Bible to ignore this doctrinal progression
          of  Scriptural  inconsistency  resident  in  Catholic  Mariology.
          Actually, it  is that very  fact, that is, Catholic  theology has
          made Mary  a doctrine,  which causes the  conflict.  No  where in
          Scripture are we  given license to consider Mary  a doctrine upon
          which personal relationship with God is based.  Catholic theology
          says otherwise.

               Though shortly  I will  consider the  Catholic doctrines  of
          Mary's  sinlessness, her  perpetual  virginity, her  intercessory
          authority and her supernatural ability  to save souls, for now it
          is  important to  recognize that  the  entire Catholic  doctrinal
          position on Mary was flawed from the beginning and all subsequent
          doctrinal  positions thereafter  are based  upon that  flaw.   It
          makes  little  difference if  such is  proclaimed by  the Eastern
          Orthodox  Church or  the  Roman Catholic  Church;  they are  both
          Scripturally and doctrinally in error.

                       THE OLD TESTAMENT AND MARY

               Father  Gilquist,  along with  both  the  RCC and  the  EOc,
          insists the Old Testament  confirms Mary was a  perpetual virgin,
          that is, she  was a virgin before  during and after the  birth of
          Christ.  Before leaving the Old Testament section of his article,
          he says things such as:

               "From the  very early years  of the Church, Mary  was called
               not only  Virgin, but  Ever-Virgin.  She  was seen  as never
               having had a  sexual union with Joseph, before  or after the
               birth of Christ."  

               He also  attempts to use  a single Old Testament  passage to
          prophetically identify Mary's perpetual virginity.

               "Ezekiel 44:1-2 is a passage  often referred to by the early
               Fathers in  this regard.   It states:   "Then He  brought me
               back to the  outer gate of the sanctuary  which faces toward
               the east, but it was shut.   And the Lord said to  me, 'This
               gate shall be shut; it shall not be opened, and no man shall
               enter by it, because the  Lord God of Israel has entered  by
               it;   therefore  it  shall   be  shut.'"     In  traditional
               interpretation  of  this  passage, Mary  is  the  temple and
               Christ is the Prince of Peace.   The gate mentioned is  seen
               as a picture of Christ's  passage through the door of Mary's

               Boy, you certainly have to use your spiritual imagination on
          this one.  I am always amazed  the length people will go in order
          to make the  Bible Scripturally applicable to  personal theology.
          Of course if  you are the guardian of true  commitment to Christ,
          along  with the  protectorate  of the  Holy  Scriptures, you  can
          interpret anyway  you wish and if you  are the "Orthodox," no one
          can  question  that  interpretation.   This  passage,  of course,
          clearly has nothing to do with  Mary nor her virginity.  When  he
          says,  "In  traditional  interpretation   of  this  passage,"  he
          actually  means in Catholic tradition because they, the Catholics
          and those who doctrinally concur with Catholic Mariology, are the
          only   ones  who   stretch  the   spiritual   imagination  beyond
          hermeneutical bounds with this rendering.   If the student of the
          Bible will take the time to read carefully the record of Ezekiel,
          it will be  easily seen that God was referring  to judgement come
          upon Israel because  they forsook Him and His,  the Lord's, house
          including the  sacrifices for  sin.   How  Catholic theology,  or
          anyone  for that  matter,  renders  this  passage  a  prophetical
          utterance  of  Mary's  virginity is  truly  amazing.   When  your
          foundation is false,  however, it is easy to build  on that false
          idea until what you wind up with is something totally unbiblical.

               Father Gilquist then  takes one more step  beyond Scriptural

               "At  this  point,  however, a  very  valid  question  can be
               raised.   If she  remained a virgin, why  does the Gospel of
               Matthew tell  us that Joseph  knew not his wife  until after
               Christ was born (Matthew 1:25)?"

               He then  does some  Scriptural hocus  pocus and attempts  to
          explain that this  really doesn't need to mean  she sexually knew
          her husband  after the  birth of Christ.   Frankly,  he dismisses
          everything  by saying  the  following  concerning  Mary  and  her

               "But  doesn't  the  Bible also  mention  other  brothers and
               sisters  of Christ?   Who are they  and where  did they come
               from?   For one  thing, they are  never directly  called the
               sons and daughters of Mary  and Joseph.  In several passages
               the Bible speaks of the children or relatives as "brothers."
               Abraham  and Lot  are  called  brothers,  although  Lot  was
               actually Abraham's nephew.   And Jacob and  Laban are called
               brothers, even though Jacob was the  son of Rebecca, Laban's
               sister.  Scripture is therefore silent concerning the nature
               of this relationship  between Christ and these  brothers and
               sisters.     Early  Fathers   differed  slightly   in  their
               understanding of what the terms  meant.  Some, such as Saint
               Ambrose,  believed that  they  were  children  of  a  former
               marriage between Joseph and a wife who died prior to Matthew
               chapter 1.   Others taught that they  were cousins.  But  on
               one point, almost everyone is in agreement:  Mary and Joseph
               had no sexual union whatsoever, before or after the birth of

               Almost everyone is  in agreement?  Father Gilquist, you know
          very well that statement is a million light years from the truth.
          Innumerable scholars and  theologians over the centuries,  not to
          mention denominations and church leaders, adamantly disagree with
          this Catholic interpretation and have  been for centuries.  A lot
          of fancy Scriptural foot work is  evident in the Catholic view of
          Mary's perpetual virginity  and the  only group  holding fast  to
          this  unscriptural view  happens  to be  the Catholic  church and
          those sympathetic with Catholic Mariology.  Anyone who can simply
          explain away  the brothers  and sisters  of Christ, the  children
          born  to  Mary  and  Joseph,  will attempt  to  make  us  believe
          anything.  Speaking of which, here it comes.


               Catholic  Marian theology takes another giant step away from
          Biblical evidence  as is clearly  seen so  graphically in  Father
          Gilquist's  next  statement.    This  is  under  his  heading  of

               "If  we as  the Church  are called  to  be "without  spot or
               blemish  or  any   such  thing,  but  holy   and  blameless"
               (Ephesians 5:27),  does it  not follow that  she who  is the
               progenitor of the Lord of that Church should be of that same
               holy character?  Not only has Mary by the mercy and power of
               God conquered  both  sin  and  death, the  Psalmist  sees  a
               glimpse of  her in  heaven through prophetic  eyes.   For in
               Psalm 45:9, Christ is King and Mary is atHis side as Queen -
                and rightly so.   If God  can make  us "kings and  priests"
               (Revelation  1:6) for  all eternity,  certainly  He has  the
               prerogative to crown her with higher honor in heaven's royal
               procession.  Little did John  and James realize the day they
               argued about which of them might occupy the seat of honor at
               Christ's right hand in the  Kingdom, that God the Father had
               already reserved that space for the marvelous woman He chose
               to bear His Son for our salvation.  The honor is appropriate
               for the most blessed  of all women, the one who  is our very
               icon of holiness.   Who else could be more rightly rewarded?
               Thus the Psalmist is well within  the mark when he writes of
               Christ, "At Your right hand stand the queen!"

               Conquered sin  and death?   Queen?  My!   I bet  you weren't
          aware Catholic  theology considers  Mary the  "Queen" of  Heaven.
          Now you know.  Father Gilquist slipped  that one in on us without
          even quoting the passage and his paraphrase of the passage leaves
          a lot to be desired.  If one  will take time to read all of Psalm
          45, it will be  understood that the Psalm is in  reference to God
          and his throne  and His eternal  righteousness.   It is a  poetic
          rendition of  God's eternal  glory and  the rightful  place Jesus
          Christ takes as  King.  No  where is any  reference made of  Mary
          prophetically, or symbolically, in the passage unless, of course,
          you're  Catholic.    If the  queen  in  Psalm 45  is  symbolic of
          anything, it  would be the  Church (the  body of Christ)  to whom
          Christ is married; not His mother.   The last time I checked,  it
          was  wrong to  wed your  mother.   Jesus never  was figuratively,
          symbolically or  literally married  to His  mother and  Scripture
          never  once suggests  Mary  is  Queen of  Heaven.   The  Orthodox
          Church, not to mention the  Roman Catholic Church, have both made
          it a doctrinal position."


               In  Father  Gilquist's  article,  he  makes  some  confusing
          statements  about  the  Catholic  doctrinal  positions  on Mary's
          sinlessness and bodily resurrection.

               "Not only has Mary  by the mercy and power  of God conquered
               both sin and  death, the Psalmist sees  a glimpse of  her in
               heaven through prophetic eyes."

               He then says:

               "There  are two other  beliefs concerning Mary  that must be
               briefly mentioned and  addressed.  The  first is her  bodily
               assumption into heaven, the other her immaculate conception.
               It  was widely  reported in  the early  Church that  shortly
               after her  death, Mary's body  was assumed into heaven.   In
               later  centuries, the Roman  Church ratified this  belief as
               dogma,  while the Eastern  Church withheld such  an official
               imprimatur.  Most  Christians agree that  such a miracle  is
               within  the  realm  of firm  biblical  precedent,  Enoch and
               Elijah being  two  examples.   Further,  there is  no  known
               record of any  gravesite or relics of the  Holy Virgin.  The
               assumption  of the  Virgin  is safely  seen  as an  historic
               Christian tradition, though not recorded in the Scriptures.

               The  Immaculate Conception of Mary is  a doctrine unknown in
               the  ancient Church and  unique to the  modern Roman Church.
               In an effort to distance  Mary (and protect Christ) from the
               stain  of  sin,  the Immaculate  Conception  holds  Mary was
               conceived and born without sin.   This teaching has no basis
               either  in  Scripture  or  in  the  Creeds  of  the  Church.
               Whatever other excesses may have cropped  up in history, the
               Roman  Church has never  believed or officially  taught that
               Mary was in  any way coequal with  the Trinity or was  to be
               worshipped with the Trinity.  Such allegations are sometimes
               set forth by critics of  the Roman Church, but without basis
               in fact."

               One  minute  Father  Gilquist  is  saying Catholic  theology
          doesn't  believe  nor   teach  in  the  sinlessness   and  bodily
          resurrection of Mary and then in the very next breath he says the
          opposite.  The reason for  this confusing dichotomy is related to
          the  difference  of  authoritarian  recognition  in  the  Eastern
          Orthodox and Roman  Catholic churches.   Amazingly he admits  the
          Bible never says Mary was  either born sinless or became sinless.
          He, and his  church, along with the  RCC do in fact  believe Mary
          was sinless however.  One may say  she was born sinless while the
          other  claims she  became  sinless but  frankly  it makes  little
          difference;  it's  still  unscriptural.   Why  Catholic  theology
          chooses to superimpose their  doctrines over Holy Scripture  is a
          mystery.   He may  say the Orthodox  and Catholic  church doesn't
          teach it  but their  official doctrinal  positions clearly  state
          otherwise.   I'm sure  Father Gilquist is  aware no  priest would
          ever be allowed by either the Greek Orthodox Church nor the Roman
          Catholic to pastor if he denied Mary's sinlessness and her bodily
          resurrection or, as it is stated, "her assumption."


               Father Gilquist spends  a little time attempting  to explain
          why the Catholic church believes  Mary is one of our intercessors
          to God.  His argument is so weak and fragmented, I won't take the
          time  to  quote his  explanation.    He concludes  his  doctrinal
          arguments on the topic of Mary mediator by saying:

               "Mary  has a  unique  role  in  our  salvation  because  she
               provided the body of Christ  and thereby became the "mother"
               of all those who  would be saved.  That is  why Jesus, while
               on the Cross, said to  His mother, "Woman, behold your son!"
               and then said to Saint John, "Behold, your mother!"

               Catholic theology has  to justify the claim that  we need to
          pray  to the  virgin  Mary and  this  is it.   Catholic  theology
          clearly teaches Mary  can assist others  in getting into  Heaven.
          Thus  it is  reasonable that she  not only should  be blessed but
          prayerfully  entreated to obtain  salvation both for  oneself and
          for  others.   Hence, Mary  is a  mediator between  God and  man.
          There is, of course, not  a single reference to substantiate this
          claim for the Bible clearly states, "
           For  [there is] one God,  and one mediator  between God and men,
          the man Christ Jesus," (1 Timothy 2:5).

                           CATHOLIC OVERVIEW

               Well,  we've  come  a  long  way  with our  Catholic  Marian
          theology.   We began with the  concept of simply giving  Mary her
          due into making her "the greatest woman  who ever lived."  Though
          Mary  simply  said all  peoples  would  henceforth called  her  a
          blessed woman, Catholic  theology thinks we are to  bless her and
          to literally offer her our prayers.   We then moved into an  area
          which  we  are told  makes Mary  the  first Christian.    We then
          progressed from simply  honoring her and  calling her blessed  to
          accepting the fact that she is the mother  of all Christians; the
          Church.   Of course this is logical  because we must also believe
          that Mary  was, and is,  the mother of God.   For some  reason we
          then must believe  that Mary was a virgin before during and after
          her marriage to Joseph.  Of course we know the Bible says she was
          a virgin when Christ was born so  why not go beyond Scripture and
          believe she  was "forever virgin."   We must  dismiss, therefore,
          the Scriptural references to Mary and Joseph's children following
          the virgin birth of Christ.   They were probably from  a previous
          marriage of Joseph  anyway.  Maybe they  were cousins...who knows
          or cares.   She must have been a  perpetual virgin no matter what
          the Bible says.

               From  this point we discover that Christ is King and Mary is
          Queen; Queen of Heaven.  She  became queen, of course, after  her
          bodily  resurrection which  just  so  happens  to  have  occurred
          following  Christ's bodily resurrection.   Then it  becomes quite
          easy to  believe that Mary  was sinless  and now  can, and  does,
          intercede in  our behalf as  a mediator.  Father  Gilquist avoids
          mentioning that Catholics  are instructed to pray to  Mary and he
          flatly denies they  worship her.  I  don't know what you  call it
          when you  pray to someone or  something if it isn't  worship, but
          that's what he says anyway.

                                   THE BOTTOM LINE

               I  began this  booklet by  quoting  Father Gilquist's  final
          remarks because it  so clearly reveals his true  intentions.  His
          final section was entitled "TAKING ACTION."  What he suggests, of
          course, is that if you really want to be a Bible believer, become
          theologically correct, that  is, Orthodox in your  beliefs. Start
          by joining  the  Greek  Orthodox  (the Eastern  Orthodox  or  the
          American Orthodox Church),  and embrace their unscriptural  stand
          on  Mary  for  starters.   By  doing  so,  of course,  you'll  be
          embracing Catholic theology; something the Orthodox  Church fails
          to  mention up  front.   His overall  intention, however,  was to
          attempt to  make other  Christians believe  Catholic theology  is
          compatible with evangelicalism.  He concludes, on the other hand,
          by making it clear that the Orthodox Church is the only outfit in
          town and if  you really want to  be a true Christian,  well then,
          join them and  adopt Catholic theology but without association of
          the roman Catholic title.

               The  true doctrine  of the Catholic  Church is  salvation by
          works.    Praying  to Mary,  participating  in  "Holy Communion,"
          baptism  by sprinkling  and a  zillion other  such works  are all
          requirements in Catholic theology for true and secured salvation.
          Actually,  it's a  whole lot  easier than  that.   "If  you shall
          confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus, and shall believe in your
          heart that God has raised him from  the dead, you shall be saved.
          (Romans  10:9).   Notice, nothing  was said  about praying  to or
          believing  in Mary's  sinlessness or  bodily  resurrection.   Try
          telling a Catholic that.

                                   FACING UP TO GOD

               A number  of years  ago we  lived next  door to  one of  the
          finest men I've ever  known.  He  was our landlord.   All of  his
          children were  grown and he  lived alone.   My children  were all
          very small at the time and he became like a grandfather; spending
          hours  with  them every  week.    Eventually  we learned  he  was
          diagnosed with terminal cancer and had but a few months to live.

               We often  had him in our  home, and once, shortly  before he
          died, we sat across the dinning room table from each other  and I
          began  sharing  with him  the  Gospel.    "Where will  you  spend
          eternity, Frank," I asked.  Of  course, he said, "I hope I'll  go
          to Heaven."  Here  was a man who had  lived his entire life as  a
          Roman Catholic, prayed to Mary that he might be saved and ushered
          into Heaven  when he died,  took Holy communion weekly,  had been
          sprinkled by the priest with holy baptismal water, and faithfully
          practiced every thing he had  been taught by the Catholic Church.
          Yet he was uncertain about where he would wind up when it was all
          over.   Though I tried my  best to show  him how he could  no for
          certain he would be in Heaven when he died, his Catholic theology
          continually blocked the  plain simple truth of God's  Word on the
          subject of salvation.  When I asked him if he had  ever confessed
          he was a  sinner and invited  Christ into his  heart as Lord,  he
          said  the same  thing I've heard  every Catholic say  with whom I
          shared the Gospel.  "Oh sure.  We do that every time we take Holy
          communion."  By the way, the  term "holy communion" is never once
          used in the New Testament.  Was he  depending upon his confession
          of  sin and  admission of  Christ  as Lord  of his  life  for his
          salvation?   Was there a great deal of dependency placed upon his
          works and  what he believed  concerning communion?   I personally
          would  not want  to  take the  gamble but,  thanks  to the  false
          doctrines  of  the Catholic  Church,  not  to mention  the  Greek
          Orthodox Church, millions today  do.  When coming  to the end  of
          one's life,  facing up to God  becomes a lot more  important than
          facing up  to Mary.   The Heavenly  Father is  going to  judge us
          based upon what we did with Christ; not His mother.

                                THE QUESTION OF BELIEF

               From here the question is always raised, "Is a Catholic born
          again?   Besides,  they believe Jesus  Christ is the  Son of God.
          Don't they?"   Simply believing isn't enough.   The bible clearly
          states confession  must be  made that Jesus  Christ is  Lord; not
          communion,  not baptism,  not  prayers to  Mary,  not her  bodily
          resurrection, not  the  infallibility of  a  pope no  matter  his
          denomination.   We must direct  our confession of sin  to Christ;
          not  to Mary or a priest.   We must make  Christ Lord of our life
          and depend fully upon His Word for salvation; not works or church
          customs, practices or  creeds of  any kind.   If  a Catholic,  or
          anyone else,  believes anything  they've done  will secure  their
          salvation and  home in  Heaven, they are  placing their  faith on
          something  other than Jesus Christ.   Salvation is unavailable to
          those  who  focus on  anything  other  than  Christ as  Lord  and
          Saviour; the only Mediator between God and man.


               The  real danger  today  is  an  infiltration  of  erroneous
          doctrinal interpretation  of what  is so  clearly established  in
          Scripture.      Today    many   pastors,   seminary   professors,
          denominational  leaders and  media  ministers are  succumbing  to
          Catholic theology  via personal fellowship,  ministry association
          and mutual  admiration.   I could easily  mention a  dozen public
          Christian figures that nearly everyone reading this booklet would
          recognize whom either refuse to speak against the false doctrines
          of Catholic theology  or, worse yet, embrace it  as Christian and
          apart of the biblical  Gospel of Jesus Christ.  Why?   One reason
          is the  power behind the  Catholic Church.  Frankly,  it's pretty
          impressive.    They don't  call  it  "The  Universal Church"  for

               Secondly,  the skill  in which  the  subtlety is  presented.
          Father Gilquist does  an excellent job  in attempting to  compare
          mainline Christian doctrine with that of Catholic theology.

               Thirdly, Catholics are moral, honest, faithful, church-going
          folks.  Their against sin, corruption, dishonesty, abortion and a
          whole lot of  other things Christians  should be.  Of  course, so
          are Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses.

               Fourthly,  Since other  well-known Christians  are accepting
          their  beliefs.   Why not  us.   They,  those well-known  popular
          church leaders, couldn't be wrong.

               Fifthly,  and this is probably the biggest reason, there's a
          lot  of money  in  the  Catholic Church.    Radio and  television
          ministries  need  lots   of  money  to  continue   operating  and
          expanding.  Catholic dollars can help build  those ministries and
          those ministries  are not  going to take  a public  stand against
          Catholic false doctrine because those dollars will be lost.

               Finally,  there's another reason why Catholic theology is so
          easily   accepted   by   well-meaning   evangelicals   and   some
          fundamentalists today.   What they  say, on the surface,  looks a
          lot  like what we believe.  They  believe Jesus is the Son of God
          and most say  they believe Jesus is  God.  They say  they believe
          the blood of Jesus Christ was shed for our sins.  They believe He
          needs to be your  personal Lord and Savior.  They  believe in our
          Lord's bodily  resurrection.   So what if  they believe  Mary was
          bodily  resurrected, too.    That can't  hurt  anything; can  it?
          Shoot,  they believe  almost  like  we do  so  where's the  beef.
          Anyone who teaches that Mary was sinless, a perpetual virgin, the
          queen of Heaven, the mother of God, the mother of the  Church and
          can assist  in getting our  prayers answered, not to  mention her
          intercessory authority to  help people get into  Heaven, does not
          accept the finality and authority of  the Bible.  Jesus warned us
          of wolves in sheep's clothing.  We either  believe what the Bible
          says  or we  believe what  Catholic theology  tells us  the Bible
          says.  Does this mean we should reject Catholics?  How Silly!  It
          does mean, however, sharing services, ministries and platforms is
          not  only  an  act  of  biblical  and  doctrinal  compromise  but
          endangers  the  plain simple  message of  the Gospel.   Why?   We
          either  believe  what Jesus  said,  I'm repeating  myself,  or we
          don't.  Anything done  which will shift  the focus of the  Gospel
          or, which frustrates doctrinal clarity, should be  avoided at all
          costs.  The real  danger is when people begin comparing what they
          believe with another's beliefs.  We can always find similarities;
          it's the  differences which  separate us  doctrinally.   The real
          issue is "Will  it take them  to Heaven."   Some misinformed  and
          mislead, but  well-meaning, Christians believe  God somehow,  and
          for some reason, overlooks  their small biblical inconsistencies.
          Besides, doesn't God love them, too?   Won't He just go ahead and
          forgive them  and save  them anyway?      After  all, they're  so
          sincere.  If it blocks, or in any way hinders the  simple message
          of the  Gospel, it should  be resisted, refuted and  renounced at
          all cost.


               Lest I  be chastised for  over stating Catholic  theology, I
          conclude my rebuttal with some documentation which,  I might add,
          Father Gilquist should carefully consider  if he wishes to remain
          a priest in the "Orthodox Church."

                      REFERENCES - ROMAN CATHOLIC

          1.   In  1854,  Pope   Pius IX declared that "by a singular grace
          of God, Mary was     preserved   sinless   from  the  moment   of
          her  conception."

               2.  In  1950  Pope  Pius  XII  decreed her Assumption.

               3.  In  1890, Pope Leo XIII said, "As no man can come to the
          Most  High Father    except  through   the  Son,  so,  generally,
          no man can come to Christ except    through Mary."

          4.  On  March  22, 1918, Pope Benedict  XV said, "She suffered so
          much for us,    almost   to the point of dying with her suffering
          and dying Son. Therefore we     may rightfully say  that she has,
          with Christ, redeemed the human race."

          5.   In  1954,  Pope Pius  XII said,  "Mary is  indeed worthy  to
          receive honor and     might   and  glory.   She  is   exalted  to
          hypostatic  union with the Blessed    Trinity."

          6.  Louis  de   Montford, TRUE DEVOTION TO MARY, commenting  upon
          Genesis 3:15,    "God  has  never made and formed but one enmity;
          but it is  an irreconcilable     one.  It  is   between Mary, His
          worthy Mother and the  devil. He has inspired      her  with   so
          much  hatred   against  that cursed enemy of God, with  so much  
          power  to   crush that proud and impious rebel that he fears her,
          in a sense,    more than God Himself."

          7.  From  DEVOTIONS  FOR  THE  HOLY SOULS, Catholic Truth Society
          of Ireland,    Imp.   Colmanus  a  Doineraile,  page   32. "Be to
          me, O Virgin, nigh. Lest in    flames I burn and die in His awful
          judgment day."

          8.   "Just  as a  woman had a  share in bringing about  death, so
          also      a   woman should  contribute to  life" (LUMEN  GENTIUM,
          11/21/64, Ch. VIII, Sec.    II).

          9.  At   the Rosary for  Peace Rally, Dayton, Ohio,  10/28/84, it
          was  stated that  Mary is  venerated by  1600 different  names in
          Roman Catholicism.

          10.  On  St.  Stanislaus'  Roman  Catholic Church, 524 W Mitchell
          St., Milwaukee,    Wisconsin:  "Ascend  mortals  to this mountain
          top for here through Mary all    shall receive salvation."

          11.  From  WOMAN   CROWNED  WITH  STARS  by  Michael Malone (Imp:
          Bishop  Sullivan,     Baton   Rouge, 1981), page  3. "Our Blessed
          Mother's  Rosary  concludes  with  the       Mystery    of    the
          Coronation   of   the Immaculate  Virgin Mary as  Queen of  all  
          creation;    however,  the  crowning  of  Our  Lady  is  not  the
          culmination, but  the    actual   commencement,  of  all that has
          even happened from the  very beginning    of  time. ... "Psalm 84
          presents graphically for  us this incarnational union     between
          God   and man  - heaven  and  earth, grace  and nature  - in  the
          precious    palace   of  the  Virgin   Mary's  womb:  Mercy   and
          truth have  met each other      (heaven  and earth);  Justice and
          peace  have kissed (grace and nature);  Truth     is  sprung  out
          of   the  earth  (that's Mary!); And justice  hath looked down   
          from   heaven   (that's  Jesus!);   For   the   Lord   (God   the
          Father) will give    goodness  (God  the Son)  and the earth (the
          Blessed Virgin Mary) shall yield    her fruit."

          12.  Pope Leo XIII, "God chose the august Virgin Mary from    all
          eternity  to  be  the Mother of the  Incarnate Word, and for that
          reason     has  so  eminently distinguished her among all  of His
          most beautiful works in    the  triple order of nature, grace and
          glory, that the Church justly applies     to  her   these  words:
          I came out of the mouth of the Most High, the first-  born before
          all creatures."

          13.  Ibid, page 7.  "We  can  hope to attain  the divinity of God
          only  in the      same   way   He attained  the humanity  of man:
          through Mary. We must travel the     identical  route,   and  the
          name  of  that  Royal  Road  is Mary.  `For  by  Mary',       St.
          Fulgentius tells us, `God  descended from Heaven into  the world,
          so that     by  her  men might ascend  from earth to Heaven.'  We
          don't need Mary to be the    sons of men, but we  do need Mary to
          become the sons of God."

          14.   Ibid., page 14.   "God Himself explained  to (St. Gertrude)
          that Jesus was     indeed   Mary's  first-born  according  to the
          flesh,  but that  all mankind was      to   be   her  second-born
          according to  the spirit. St. Bonaventure said, "All    the  sons
          of  the  womb  of the Church are the inheritance and fruit of the
            womb of Mary."

                    REFERENCES - ORTHODOX CHURCH #1

               Though the Orthodox Church  generally denies their doctrines
          are even  remotely similar to  the Roman Catholic,  the following
          documentation claims to be  their theological positions.   I have
          included several  quotes which not  only confirm  their stand  on
          Mariology but others which confirm they are Catholic in doctrine,
          practice,  principle and  application.    I  am  not  suggesting,
          however, they are identical with Roman Catholic theology in every
          respect.   They  do, on  the other  hand, have  similar doctrinal
          positions and  their own statements  confirm such to be  the case
          even if they refuse to see  it.  The reader should note  that, in
          some cases, the quotes are not complete doctrinal  statements but
          explanations  of   their  doctrinal  positions.     Hence,   some
          information  is  vague.   Such  is  a  common practice  of  those
          espousing false doctrine based on something other than Scripture.

               The following quotes come from a publication called "20 Most
          Often Asked Questions About Orthodoxy, by Fr Paul O'Callaghan."

                            The True Church

               "EVANGELICAL   CHRISTIAN:     The   Orthodox   believer  can
          understand your enthusiasm for Christ  and what you believe to be
          the Gospel.  But certain attitudes  common to evangelicals reveal
          serious confusion in their thinking.  There  is  need on the part
          of many evangelicals for a more balanced, historical approach  to
          the   Eastern  Orthodox   Church.      Also,  many   evangelical-
          fundamentalist  teachings need to be seriously re-examined in the
          light of Scripture and  authentic Christian tradition.  It is the
          conviction of the Orthodox that  their Church is in fact the true
          Church  of Christ.  It is  to her fullness   that you are called,
          and her fullness is the fullness of life in Christ."

                              Mary Worship

               "First  of all,  Orthodox Christians  do  not worship  Mary.
          Worship is   reserved for  God alone.   However, Mary  is greatly
          esteemed and honored as the  one chosen by God to bring forth His
          Only-Begotten Son into the  world.   Because of this,  she is the
          most  exalted of  all creatures.   She  herself   prophesied "All
          generations shall call me blessed"  (Luke 1:48).Jesus Christ   is
          an eternal,  divine Person  who took on  a complete  human nature
          through the   Virgin Mary  (cf. John 1:1,  14).  He  is expressly
          called "God"  in the  Scriptures (cf. John  20:28).  As Mary gave
          birth to and nurtured a divine  Person, she is rightly called the
          "Mother of God."   This, of course, does  not  imply that  she is
          the mother of God  the Father.  Many  of those who question   the
          title "Mother of God" are those  who also doubt the full divinity
          of Jesus   Christ.  There is  nothing paganistic in the  Church's
          veneration of the Mother  of Our Savior."

          Author's Note:

               It is clear that the Orthodox  believers practice worship of
          Mary for it is  she to whom they OFFER prayERS.  they may call it
          something else but it is  worship nonetheless.  They even believe
          she can  help them, and  others who have  already died, get  into

                     Prayer To Mary And The Saints

          [The  Orthodox pray  to Mary  and the other  saints.   Isn't this

               "Orthodox  Christians ask Mary and other saints to intercede
          for us  before   God in prayer.   The  Orthodox believe  that the
          reality of the Church  encompasses both the living and those  who
          have died  and are now  "with Christ"   (Phil. 1:23).   Those who
          have died in  Christ do not  care for us any  less, nor   do they
          cease to pray for us because  they have passed into eternal life.
          We  approach the saints with veneration as  we ask their prayers.
          In no  way can   this  be compared to  the worship  we offer  the
          Triune God."

          [Why do  the Orthodox  pray for  the dead?   It is  too late  for
          prayers once   a person has died.]

               "The  Orthodox Church teaches that all persons are dependent
          upon God's  mercy, whether living or dead.  Christians as well as
          unbelievers  will  stand   before  the  "dread judgment  seat  of
          Christ."   According to  St. Paul, our  works  will  be "tried by
          fire" (cf. I Cor 3:13).  We will be held responsible for   "every
          idle word" that we have uttered  (cf. Matt. 12:36).  In the  face
          of  such a rigorous judgment, our prayer goes up to God for those
          who have  departed this life."

          [But receiving the  sacraments of Baptism and Communion  does not
          save      anyone.]

               "Christ's saving power is mediated through the sacraments if
          they  are   received according  to the  intention of  the Church.
          Mere mechanical  or  formalistic reception of the sacraments does
          not save.    In fact,  if  we   partake  unworthily,  we  receive
          damnation, not  salvation (cf.  I Cor. 11:29).     However, God's
          grace  is available in the sacraments to those who approach  with
          a living faith in Christ."

          [The bread and wine  of the Lord's Supper cannot possibly  be the
          real body      and  blood  of  Jesus Christ.    They  are symbols

               "Protestant   Evangelical    teaching   upon    this   point
          unfortunately does not   reflect the Word of God,  but rather the
          teachings  and  opinions  of  men.   Such    teaching  about  the
          Eucharist is totally unscriptural.  The Scriptures say  that when
          the Lord took bread and blessed it  at the Last Supper, he stated
          "This is my  Body" (cf. Matt. 26:26).   Taking the cup,  he spoke
          these words:   "This  is my  blood..." (Matt.  26:27).   Many who
          consider  themselves "Bible    Fundamentalists," however,  cannot
          accept the plain truth as Jesus stated it.    Yet the teaching of
          Jesus  is clear:  "He that eats  my flesh  and drinks my   blood,
          dwells in me, and I in him" (Jn 6:56).   And, "Except you eat the
          flesh  of the  Son of Man, and drink His blood,  you have no life
          in you" (John  6:54).   Just  as in the present, there  were many
          then who heard  this teaching of the   Lord but could  not accept
          it.   The  Scripture tells  us that  these disciples   ceased  to
          follow the Lord rather than  accept His teaching (John 6:60-66). 
          They were in truth the first Protestants!
               This teaching of the Lord has never been a subject of debate
          in  the    Orthodox  Church.   The  Church's  doctrine  has  been
          consistent from the  Apostolic times through the Patristic period
          up to the present.   The great  Fathers of the Church all witness
          to her literal understanding of the words  of Jesus."

                             The Scriptures

          [The true Christian faith is based on the Bible alone.]

               "The Bible never has been and never can be "alone".   It was
          the Orthodox   Catholic  Church that  finally decided what  books
          belonged in  the Bible and   what did not.  In  the era following
          the death of the Apostles, there were  many books that claimed to
          be  Apostolic Scripture.   The  Church decided  what   books were
          authentic and what were not, based on whether or not  those books
          conformed  to  the  oral  tradition she  had  received  from  the
          Apostles.  Without  the Church there would be no Bible.  Heresies
          and distortions  result when  the   Bible is  torn away  from the
          Church or interpreted  privately outside the   catholic tradition
          of the Church  (cf. 2 Pet.  3:16).   The same Holy  Spirit   that
          inspired the Scriptures is promised  to guide the Church unto all
          truth   and preserve her from error (cf.  John 16:13).  The Bible
          is not "alone" - it  belongs to the Church."

          [But   Orthodoxy  de-emphasizes  the   Bible  and   stresses  the
          importance     of tradition.]

               "Orthodoxy  does not de-emphasize  the Bible.   The Orthodox
          Church  accepts  the  Bible as the  divinely-inspired, infallible
          Word of God.  The Bible has  unparalleled authority in the Church
          of God when  it comes to faith  and  practice.   But the Orthodox
          Church insists that the Scriptures must be  interpreted according
          to  the  catholic  tradition  of  the  Church.    This  "catholic
          tradition" is based on  the oral teaching of  the Apostles as  it
          has been  handed  down in the Church (cf. 2 Thess.  2:15).  It is
          the result of the fact   that the Holy Spirit lives in the Church
          (cf. John  14:26).   It is  enshrined   in the  teachings of  the
          Ecumenical  Councils of  the Church  and  the teachings   of  the
          saints and Church Fathers.  Those who live in the fullness of the
          Holy  Spirit  are our best guides  to the Scriptures; it  is they
          who testify  to the  deep  union between Holy  Scripture and Holy
          Tradition in the Church."

                           ORTHODOX CHURCH #2

               The following  quotes are  taken from  a publication  called
          "What   Orthodox   Christians   Believe  -   A   Conciliar  Press

               "MARY  is  called  Theotokos,  meaning  "God-bearer"  or the
          "Mother of God," because she bore the  Son of God in her womb and
          from her He took His humanity.  Elizabeth, the mother of John the
          Baptist,  recognized this  reality when  she   called  Mary, "the
          Mother  of my  Lord"  (Luke  1:43). Mary  said  of herself,  "All
          generations shall  call me  blessed" (Luke 1:48).  So we,  in our
          generation,  call her blessed. Mary lived a chaste and holy life,
          and  we honor her highly  as the  model of holiness, the first of
          the redeemed, the Mother of the  new  humanity in her Son. It  is
          bewildering  to Orthodox  that many  professing   Christians  who
          claim to believe the Bible never call Mary blessed her honor  nor
          who bore and raised God the Son in His human flesh."

               "PRAYER TO THE SAINTS is  encouraged by the Orthodox Church.
          Why?  Because  physical death is not a defeat for a Christian. It
          is a glorious passage  into heaven. The  Christian does not cease
          to be a part of the  Church at  death. God forbid! Nor  is he set
          aside, idle until the day of judgment."

               "The True  Church is composed  of all who are  in Christ--in
          heaven and on   earth. It is  not limited in membership  to those
          presently  alive. Those  in   heaven  with Christ  are alive,  in
          communion with  God, worshipping  God, doing   their part  in the
          body of Christ.  They actively pray to God for all  those in  the
          Church--and perhaps, indeed, for the whole world (Ephesians 6:18;
          Revelation 8:3). So we pray to  the saints who have departed this
          life,  seeking their prayers, even as we ask Christian friends on
          earth to pray  for us."

                            End Of Document
Go To HOME: The Zeneith Tube Website: RedWhiteAndBlue.org