Adult Sunday School - The Roman Catholic Controversy Part 20

Let's pray. Father, in your gracious Son's name, we approach you this morning thanking you,

Lord, for this arrangement, thanking you, Lord, for this time that you've allowed us to gather under your protection, under your lordship.

We ask, Father, that you'd grant us peace from all of our earthly troubles and grant us in this moment a tension and a desire to draw closer to you through your

Word and the teaching that is before us. Pray, Father, that you would humble us in all of our affairs and help us,

Lord, to keep our eyes settled upon Jesus, the one whom you have chosen as the author and perfecter of our faith.

And, Father, we do pray for Roman Catholics in our lives, those who we have encountered, those who we will encounter, that this information would be useful, not just as a homiletic against them, but,

Lord, also, Father, for their salvation and for the glory of your gospel to go forward, that we are justified by faith through Jesus Christ.

And we pray these things unto the glory of the one true and triune God, the Father, Son, and Spirit. In Jesus' name we do pray.

Amen. All right. Well, beloved, we are just about two lessons away from completing this book.

And so, last time we left off, we left off, I think, in chapter 13, when the

Sola Scriptura is rejected. And I'd like for us to finish off this chapter, we're going to be in page 206 until the end of the chapter.

It will be our primary focus for this morning.

And just to recap where we've been, last week we focused heavily on, essentially, what's called

Mariology. Mariology is a doctrine of Mary and examining the

Roman Catholic view of Mary and how they have essentially exalted her to a position to make her, obviously, more than what

Scripture indicates, but in a sense, putting her on par with the

Godhead, putting her on par with the Lord Jesus Christ. She is given titles and positions that are foreign in Scripture, so they don't exist in Scripture, but they really try to, how do

I put this lightly or nicely, you know, they bastardize

Mary in Scripture to the point where I think Protestants are now really afraid to even touch the subject of Mary in fear of making her more than what she ought to be.

But I think Scripture does give Mary a place of honor. Any Scriptures come to mind when you think of that place of honor?

Correct? So, yes, Luke chapter 1, obviously you have the pronouncement from Elizabeth, from Gabriel, that this woman is blessed.

The Lord Jesus even blesses her and gives her a place of honor.

I want to see if it's in John's Gospel. Yeah, in John chapter 19, in verse 25, it says,

But standing by the cross of Jesus where his mother and his mother's sister Mary, the wife of Clopas and the

Mary Magdalene, when Jesus saw his mother and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to his mother,

Woman, behold your son. Then he said to the disciple, Behold your mother.

And from that hour the disciple took her to his own home. And so how this is often viewed within Roman Catholicism is that Jesus is pronouncing

Mary to be the mother of the church, okay? Because John, who is the beloved disciple whom

Jesus loved, is a representation of the And he's not the Pope, because Peter's the

Pope, so then John would be a representation of the church. And so Rome would say, Here, Jesus is pronouncing

Mary to be the mother of the Christian church. And so I would obviously,

Protestants would disagree with that interpretation. But in fact, what this scripture is pointing to is the fact that Mary is given a place of honor amongst the early church and amongst

God's people. Pastor? So it's interesting because, again,

Peter would be the Pope, would be the first Pope. And in a sense, so what is the

Pope? The Pope is the vicar of Christ, he's the physical stand -in for Jesus.

And so essentially, is there anyone in the hierarchy of the

Roman Catholic Church, is there anyone other than the

Pope? And the answer is no, other than Christ. And so Mary, to some sense, has to be almost subservient to the office of the

Pope. And so they distinguish between the office of the Pope, which is represented in Peter, and then the church at large, which would be represented more in John, see?

And so that way, Mary doesn't have authority necessarily over Peter, because again, the pontiff, the vicar of Christ, still has to have some level of authority even over Mary.

Which is why, in history, Popes have declared Mary, given her certain titles and prefixes, but never subservient to the pontiff itself.

Isn't it interesting? Yeah. It's pretty interesting stuff, yeah. Yeah. Looking at some of the prayers, they make it seem like she's our mediator, and that Jesus is someone to be feared, and Mary's the one that has all the blessings and all the...

It's almost like they take away from the Lord and give it to her, I don't understand that.

So what happens when we abandon sola scriptura, we abandon the authority of Scripture as the absolute rule of faith, inevitably what happens is that there's a confusion of roles and there's a confusion of words, essentially.

So how would we define prayer, for instance? What would be kind of a textbook definition of prayer?

Communication with God. Or how about we just simplify it a little bit more. How about just communication with the divine, with things that are spiritual?

Because can you pray to demons? Yes, you can, yeah.

I mean, should you? Is it biblical? Is it right? Is it...

No, obviously. But can you communicate with spiritual beings that's not God?

Yes. And so what happens is that the Bible gives us definitions such as prayer, communication with the divine, which is why in the

Old Testament, Deuteronomy in particular, it specifies against prayer to anything other than Yahweh.

And it prohibits communication, which is necromancy, with the dead or with other spiritual beings because you can't do it.

And it's unlawful. I have a lot of weird interests that bleed in with the

Scriptures but aren't directly related. Aliens is one that we talked about that last week. This idea of psychedelics, for instance, which is very popular here in the

Bay Area, psychedelics. And I was watching a podcast by Doug Wilson, and he made a fascinating connection

I never thought about. And I think he's absolutely spot on on this. People who take hallucinogenics and take psychedelics often have what seems to be really powerful spiritual experiences.

And Doug Wilson says, I don't doubt that. I think that they actually are having a really powerful spiritual experience, but they're doing it unlawfully.

And so they're entering into this space, into this realm in an unlawful way.

We're only allowed to approach this space through Jesus, and yet these people are finding a back way in and communicating with spirits and things that they ought not to.

And so it would be, again, also a violation of biblical law and ethics in approaching the spiritual realm outside of Jesus Christ.

So fascinating stuff. Well, the Roman Catholics do this as well. And the Roman Catholics approach the spiritual realm outside of the biblical confines that's given to us through Jesus Christ as our mediator.

And they do so through prayer to saints, okay? So prayer, again, there's a bastardization of the language, right?

So when they say, it's not really worship, it's not really prayer, right? But it is.

So when they bow before an idol, they say, well, that's not really worship. That's just us using a visible representation in order to get our minds fixed upon God.

In other words, worship, right? I mean, there's no distinguishable difference.

You know, you're just playing games with the language. Same thing with prayer. We're called to pray to God through Jesus Christ.

But when we pray to saints, we're not really praying to them. We're just talking to them. We're just having a conversation with them.

Just like you'd have a conversation with someone in church. We believe that the Roman Catholics say, you know, those who are in heaven are not truly dead.

Therefore, it's totally fine to have a conversation with them, right? Correct.

Yes, they do. Those are common terms within the Eastern Church and the

Roman Church. More so in the Orthodox Church where, you know, in Rome, they have no problem calling it worship and prayer.

And then they just justify and say, well, we don't really mean worship and prayer. It's kind of a lower class of worship, lower class of prayer.

But again, these are ways in which Rome confounds and misinterprets basic biblical principles and precepts.

And this is what happens when you abandon sola scriptura. You don't have a solid biblical basis for what you do.

And we, in particular, as Reformed Baptists, have a mechanism to protect us from such false worship and it's called what?

Sola scriptura and there's also a principle. What's the principle? It starts with an

R, a regulative principle, a regulative principle, okay?

Which says, and essentially, it's a close adherence to the biblical precept that God gets to determine what is and what is not worship, right?

And so modern evangelicals also fall often to this trap where, you know, anything and everything can be defined as worship and so the word becomes meaningless and there's no separation between the mundane and that which is holy.

And so a lot of evangelicals fall into this trap as well. We don't want to fall into that trap and so we have this regulative principle which protects us and protects the integrity of God's word of sola scriptura in saying, this is what

God has defined as worship. This is what is worship, this is what is not worship. And, you know, and I agree to some degree.

I mean, I was a pastor of a non -denominational church for four years and for Southern Baptist Church for two years.

And so I understand the...or three years, I understand the impulse of many evangelicals when they say something to this degree that all of life is about worship.

And I agree with that in principle but what that doesn't mean is that everything is not worship but rather that all of life should point us to worship, should point us to the holy.

Even the things that are mundane should point us to things that are of God. But we don't want to confound them too much where everything becomes holy and there is no distinction between the mundane and the holy.

And I think that's one of the errors of Rome as well is that they don't make these strong distinctions within their own parameters because they don't have the regulative principle of worship.

They do have a regulative principle of worship, actually, but it's not defined by Scripture. It's not

Sola Scriptura. It's actually defined by Rome. And so they do have a strong distinguishing, unlike most evangelicals, between that which is holy and that which is mundane.

So they do have a strong distinction in their ecclesiology and in their theology.

But it's not based upon Sola Scriptura, rather it's based upon church tradition, right?

And so, if you've ever been to a mass service, the whole idea of mass is to distinguish between the mundane and the holy.

And even within their ecclesiology, anyone know what the word ecclesiology means? Let the pastor answer, you got it?

You think you know? The what? Yeah, it just means the structure, teaching, theology of the church, right?

How the church is structured. And in the ecclesiology of the Roman Catholic Church, what you'll find is everything points to Rome, right?

Everything points to a hierarchy. So for instance, the priests wear garbs, which distinguish them from the church, from the laity, right?

There's a clear distinction. There's no confusion where if someone walked into this church, they may not know, you know, if there's no one at the pulpit.

They may not know right away who's the pastor, right? Because there's no clear distinction between the clergy, which is the teaching, you know, priests, teachers, bishops, you know, the ecclesiastical term for church leaders, the clergy.

And the laity, and the laity just means the church members, right? So those who are kind of average churchgoers.

And so in Roman Catholicism, there's a clear distinction between church and laity. And everything they do is to distinguish from the laity.

And so you have the priests wearing particular garments and robes. You'll have them only doing certain rituals and things throughout the service.

You'll have even a host of individuals who have the candles and have the incense being burned.

And it's to distinguish between clergy and laity, where the Bible doesn't make such a strong sharp distinguishing mark between clergy and laity.

If you look at the Bible, the Bible says, it was from among the brethren from the laity that you were to choose men of good repute to be office of deacon, pastor, elder, and so forth.

And so it's not like there's two classes. Rather, it's from among the brothers that these men of good repute are to be chosen from among.

And so again, Rome goes to great lengths to distinguish between these classes in order to point to the authority of Rome, because Rome is the final authority.

It's not the scriptures. And so again, what happens to a church that abandons sola scriptura, that abandons the absolute authority of scripture?

Confusion. And it's a form of Babylonian confusion. If you remember in the story of the

Bible, all the languages were united until the Tower of Babel. And the

Tower of Babel is where we get confusion, which is kind of like when you hear someone just talking and they're not making a lot of sense.

We say that they are what? Babbling. Right? They're talking, but they're not making sense.

And this is where we get that word obviously from Babel, which then later becomes

Babylonia, the great empire that destroyed Jerusalem and Jerusalem's temple.

And then the people of God are then exiled to there for 70 years, which is where we get the book of Daniel. And so Daniel's writing in exile while in Babylon under the rule of Nebuchadnezzar, who is the king.

And so there in the New Testament, we see the book of Revelation speaks a lot about this mystery

Babylon. And this mystery Babylon represents, you know, again, confusion, a spirit of confusion.

Rome is a modern Babylon. It is a ditch of confusion.

It's like a black hole of confusion. And everything that centers around it is, you know, really is

Babylonian in origin. Even if you look at certain things within church tradition, it really goes back to ancient

Babylon. We won't have time to go into all those things today, but if you even just do a quick Google search, you know,

Roman Catholicism and ancient Babylon, and you'll see all these similarities between these two civilizations.

I say all this because the Bible gives us clear instructions. The Bible is clear and it's authoritative.

Rome does not teach a clear and authoritative message. It is convoluted, and it's convoluted even in their worship.

So I want you to go to page 206 in our book, again, we're in the second to last chapter of this book.

I just want to highlight this conversation here between a Protestant and a Catholic. So this conversation takes place almost daily between the informed

Roman Catholic and the less informed Protestant. So the Protestant would say this, It appears to me that the Roman Catholic Church allows for worship of saints.

Isn't that idolatry? So very clear, you know, observation, right? You've probably observed this as well.

Seems very clear that Roman Catholics worship idols. Here's how the Roman Catholic would respond. Oh, I see you haven't really studied our church.

We don't worship saints or even Mary. We worship God and God alone. Protestant says, then what are you doing bowing before a statue of Mary or some other saint?

The Catholic responds, you need to understand the difference between the worship we give to God, which we call

Latria, and the veneration given to saints, which we call Dulia.

Latria is not Dulia. And since we reserve Latria, the highest form of worship, notice the language there, only for God and never give it to the saints, then we obviously are not worshiping the saints.

What's the problem with that rebuttal from the Catholic? And this is actually,

I've had these conversations. This is pretty similar to most conversations that you'll have with an informed Roman Catholic on this issue of worship.

So I don't think James White is doing a disservice to the

Roman Catholic position here. What do you think is wrong with that rebuttal?

Yeah. This is actually very similar to some of the arguments used by Unitarians and Jehovah's Witnesses in regard to the worship of Jesus.

The Unitarians and the Jehovah's Witnesses would say that in the Bible different terms are used for the worship of Jesus, because they'll say, okay, certain words are used for Jesus in terms of worship, we'll grant you that.

But it's always in a different sense, it's always in a different context. And they'll bring out, for instance, in Daniel 7, verse 14, where it talks about the

Son of Man being worshiped by all the nations, they'll say, well, actually, in the Greek Septuagint, the word that's used there is not for worship, but rather it's the word that means to serve.

And so, yes, all the nations will serve the Messiah, but they won't worship the

Messiah in the same way that God the Father alone is worshiped. And so they use very similar common arguments, but just in a different context, where the

Roman Catholic Church would use this in terms of their idolatrous worship of saints and of other spiritual beings, the

Jehovah's Witnesses will use that same line of reasoning, but to attack the deity of Christ. The problem with it is that when we talk about the nuances of words in the

Hebrew or the Greek and the Aramaic, we have to understand that all these things are in a particular context.

So, for instance, where in Daniel chapter 7, all the nations are bowing before Jesus, and Philippians chapter 2, all the nations and all of creation is bowing before Jesus, when in Revelation chapter 5, all the creatures of creation are bowing before Jesus, what's the connotation?

There's no confusion. It is absolute. When everyone is bowing before you, that is worship.

And just to expose the hypocrisy of Jehovah's Witnesses on this subject for a quick moment, Jehovah's Witnesses are known for not being nationalistic.

So much so, that as children, we were instructed not to even stand for the

Pledge of Allegiance. So I'd have to tell my school teacher before class, hey, back then schools were a little more patriotic, especially after 9 -11.

And so we would do the Pledge of Allegiance every day. And so you'd have to put your hand over your heart. And just that act, to them, was considered worship.

And because they don't believe in nationalism, nor do they believe in idols, so they would say the flag is an idol, and putting your hand over your heart is an act of worship, you can't do that.

And so you were forbidden from doing the Pledge of Allegiance. If the simple act of putting your hand over your heart is an act of worship to the

Jehovah's Witness, how can it not be that bowing before Jesus is anything less?

Right? It doesn't make any sense. And the same is true with the Roman Catholic in this sense.

If you were to bow down before Jesus, and then you go and you bow down before a statue, or you bow down before a saint, or you bow down before another creature, how is that not also worship?

It doesn't make sense. Clearly there is an inconsistency here.

But again, because again, the authority isn't the scriptures, it's church tradition, among other things, they can say, they can play loosely with the wording and say, oh no, there's a different classification of worship.

Right? And we don't give this exclusive type of worship to anyone other than God, but there are other lesser forms of worship that we can attribute and we can give to saints, idols, and other individuals.

Okay? Again, this is a departure from scripture. And really, even if you're, this is also true if you're a

Unitarian, Unitarians are people who deny the divinity of Jesus. This is the same problems that you'll have of Unitarianism, is that if you have lesser degrees of worship, because the

Bible is crystal clear that Jesus is worshipped. He's worshipped in Matthew chapter 14 verse 33, where they were at the

Sea of Galilee and Jesus calmed the storms, and it says that they worshipped him. He's worshipped in Matthew 28, after his resurrection.

He's worshipped also in Philippians chapter 2, Revelation chapter 5.

There's so many places. Hebrews chapter 1 verse 6 says, all the angels worship Jesus.

And so it's crystal clear that Jesus is worshipped. What Unitarians will inevitably do, similar to Rome, is that they make this new category of lesser type of worship.

Right? They say, okay, it's worship, but it's a different kind. It's a lesser kind. It's not an exalted kind of worship that we give only to God.

So now you fall into a category error. You make a false category in order to make this fit into your worldview, into your theology.

And that is a huge danger that we want to avoid as Christians. Which is why I think, especially within a reformed soteriology, in a

Trinitarian framework, we have the most consistent view of worship and the most consistent view of God.

Okay? Because when God says, worship me and me alone, we really think he meant that.

And there's no other forms of worship that would be appropriate to anyone else. All other forms of worship would be false worship.

And only that which is given to God is true worship. So then there's a categorization for the

Christian. There's two types of worship. True and false.

There are no varying degrees in between. Okay? There's only true worship and there's false worship.

And God gets to determine what is true worship and to whom it is designated to. Which is the

Triune God, the Father, Son, and Spirit. And so anything outside of those categories would be just nonsense.

Yeah? Right. Right.

Yeah, so I mean, again, they have an interesting view of the church. The church victorious, the church militant, the church militant being the church that's here on the earth, the church victorious being the church that's in heaven.

And that we are one church. And I agree with that, in principle, of course. We all should.

But at the same time, the Old Testament's pretty clear. The Bible, in itself, is pretty clear that, okay, what happens to us when we die?

Do we, like the Jehovah's Witnesses and other groups say, do we no longer exist? No. The Bible says that there is conscious existence outside of this bodily existence, right?

And so when a person dies, they don't cease to exist. But now they're in a different plane of existence.

And the Bible makes it clear that communication with the dead, the physically dead people, in any form is inappropriate, okay?

The Deuteronomy is clear on that, Leviticus is clear on that, the New Testament is clear on that. And so when we look at the text of Scripture, there is no allowing for communication to the other side, except to God through Jesus Christ, is the only form of prayer worship that is acceptable to God.

And so, again, obviously, their rebuttal to that would be, well, no, again, those who are in Christ are alive, they're not separate from us other than through the veil of death.

And because they're alive in Christ, and we are alive in Christ, and we're seated with Christ in heavenly places, there's nothing inappropriate about communicating with those who've gone before us, particularly those who the church has canonized as saints.

And so what sainthood in the Roman Catholic Church looks like, if you've ever studied it and look at the process, it's not like in Protestantism where we kind of understand that most, all of Christians are saints in Jesus Christ, in their view, which is borrowed from ancient paganism, there are those who are saints who have reached this sainthood, which is essentially, you know, akin to the ancient demi -gods who have attained such status in the afterlife that we can communicate particularly to them for particular things.

So there's a, you've heard of the term patron saint, okay, there's a patron saint of love,

St. Valentine, right, and this is where we get Valentine's Day, he is the saint that you go to to appeal, pray for the topic of love.

There's a patron saint for people who are sick, there's a saint for those who have, you know, leprosy, there's a saint for those who, you know, have cancer, and it's all these different saints who you can appeal to for particular things, okay, again, that's a concept totally foreign to scripture.

So when you abandon sola scriptura, what do you get, inevitably get all these extra biblical concepts and things, yes, are you having your hand up, yeah, exactly, and that's very typical even amongst

Unitarian and Jehovah's Witnesses in terms of trying to categorize a lesser form of worship, and so here's a problem with that mentality, there are times in scripture where individuals of high status are given, the term obeisance comes to mind, but I hate that term, and I'll tell you why, no, no, you're good, but it's a good thing, you know,

Jehovah's Witnesses have taken the Greek word proskuneo, the word for worship in the Greek is proskuneo, and they've taken those terms when it's applied to Jesus, and they translate it as obeisance, now some people don't know, but obeisance is, you know, actually comes from a

French word, you know, obeisance to like bow down, to prostrate, to have your face towards the ground, and there is a category error that I think

Catholics and Jehovah's Witnesses and Unitarians are making, when King David receives obeisance, let's just use that term, and I'm using that term in the colloquial sense of meaning bowing down, when he's bowed down to, why is he being bowed down to?

He's the what? He's the king, when Solomon is bowed down to, he's the king, obviously in this context, who does the king represent according to 2

Chronicles, I think chapter 16? He represents

Jehovah, he's a representation of Jehovah, the kingship of Israel is a representation of Jehovah's kingship, right?

And so when a person was to bow down before the king, the king is a stand -in essentially for Yahweh, for Jehovah God, and he's ultimately a foreshadow of the king of Israel, the king of kings,

Jesus Christ, right? And so you have to kind of get, understand that, and it's not a, it is actually a, if we want to use the term obeisance or worship, it's a worship that's actually directed to Yahweh, to Jehovah God, and in these particular circumstances, these are representations, these represent

Yahweh, Jehovah, in a very special sense that would not be appropriate outside of that particular context.

So for instance, if St. Valentine, is there any indication that outside of the kingship, outside of the priesthood that you can give that type of what's called,

I can't remember the term, but let's just use this term, representational worship, there is no instances outside of those.

And so when others are given obeisance, it is a sign of respect in those foreign contexts.

And so today, we don't typically bow down to people, but what do we do? When we meet someone of high reputation, we shake hands, right?

If you're a part of an Asian culture, like Japanese, you still practice a form of bowing down.

If you belong to the British Commonwealth, you also still practice a form of obeisance by bowing down, for instance, when you're in the presence of the king's court, or in front of the king's representatives.

So like in Canada, you'd have to, when you go into a courtroom, you have to bow, because the king's bench, it used to be the queen's bench, now it's the king's bench, is that officer of the court represents the king.

And so are you bowing down to this man? You're actually, you're bowing down to him in recognition of the authority that's behind him, which is the king.

Similarly, in ancient times, those who, the kings who were standing for Yahweh were given obeisance, not in recognition of their deity, but of the deity that was behind them, that is

Yahweh. Does that kind of help a little bit? Yes, in a sense, when you see the kings in particular that are given the term obeisance,

I think there's like two places. Actually, for instance, like in Exodus 7 verse 1, let me make sure

I got this right, Exodus chapter 7, and the

Unitarians love this verse. It says in Exodus 7 verse 1, and the

Lord said to Moses, see, I have made you like God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron shall be your prophet.

And so, for instance, here you have instances where even Moses, who again, all these persons, all these offices, whether it's the prophet or the king or the priest, is pointing towards Jesus Christ.

And so Yahweh says to Moses, I'm going to make you like God. Basically, I'm going to make you my representative, is what

Yahweh is saying to Moses. And so essentially saying that Pharaoh must heed you, he must listen and obey you, because you're my representative, you're my stand -in in this moment.

And so there are times in Scripture where there is this representational worship or authority that is granted, but it is to those particular offices of either the prophet, the king, or the priest, all things that are pointing towards Jesus Christ.

Listen, I don't know if you've ever had a difficult mother -in -law to deal with, but sometimes bowing down might be the appropriate thing to do in the circumstances.

And so I would see that as a more cultural thing. I don't see that as an issue of worship.

Sometimes you just have to concede to those offices. In a very similar way,

I think of my father -in -law, who I really admire and respect, Tatiana's father, he's like 92 years old, and a

Korean War veteran. Every time I see him, last time I saw him I got on my knees for him because he doesn't sit up very much, but I wanted to show reverence and respect for him.

It'd be no different than that. I don't think it's worship, and it's certainly, according to the context, not worship.

Rather, it's a more cultural issue of reverence and respect. And so we can show reverence and respect in certain ways, which

I guess what the Roman Catholic would say, hey, that's what we're doing. But the reason why

I don't think that's the case is because the language that they use in their liturgy in regard to these instances of worship, where they will even call it and use the terms of worship, they'll use terms that are described only of God and of Yahweh to these particular saints, very much particular to Mary, as calling her our beloved, calling her our mother, calling her all these titles and things that would not be appropriate for such created beings.

So does anyone else have any thoughts or questions? Someone had their hand up over there. Pastor, did you have your hand up?

Excellent. So when worship is not properly defined and when worship is not regulated by Scripture, and this is for the

Protestant as much as it is for the Roman Catholic, then you start to fall into some very dangerous territory of falling outside of the biblical categories for worship, really.

Again, Rome has developed over the years kind of an intricate system that distinguishes, that allows

Roman Catholics to distinguish between certain forms of worship. As I mentioned to you, there are only two types of worship that are mentioned in Scripture, and it's true and false.

So it's a binary choice. And unfortunately, as so much things in our current society is heading down towards a plurality, a plurality on a lot of things, plurality of sexes, so there's no longer male and female, now it's 72 different types of sexes.

Non -binary, there's, goodness gracious, I don't even know anymore. It's hard to keep up.

But there's a whole host of shades of in -between. And that's essentially what Rome has done with the system of worship.

There's a whole host of shades of in -between of what is worship. And the Bible just doesn't play that game.

It categorizes it very clearly. What is true worship? What is false worship? Anything that's not true worship is false worship.

And so that's why, in particular here amongst our Reformed brethren, we take the issue of worship very seriously.

And so, as we should, and as we ought to. That Scripture basically has two forms of worship, true and false.

That's right. And that we can stand on that. Okay, good. Absolutely. And it makes it so much simpler, doesn't it? Yeah. You know?

And what did Jesus say in John 4? He talks about, okay, true worship. So who are those who practice true worship?

They're the ones who worship in spirit and in truth. Truth is the important aspect here to focus on.

What is true worship is what God has declared to be true. Okay? So His Word is that which declares what is true worship.

So it's pretty clear cut. And so we're all getting into the weeds of the wording that they use.

So, for instance, Latreia and Dulia. Dulia being the lesser form of worship.

Latreia being the higher form of worship. Just to be...

Here's an interesting tidbit. So the folks who had denied the deity of Christ, so in Daniel chapter 7, verse 14, where it talks about the

Messiah, the Son of Man being worshipped. I think the word that's used there is actually Latreia. It's Latreia.

Which means to serve, but it's to serve in a religious connotation. That's what the word means.

So it's religious service. It's religious worship. And Latreia, in the Roman Catholic dogma, is the highest form of worship.

Interestingly enough, the Unitarians would say, no, actually it's not. Unitarians would say Latreia is just...

It's a lesser form of worship than, say, for instance, the Greek term for worship, which is proskuneo.

It's a lesser form of worship. And so it's interesting how both the

Unitarians and the Roman Catholics use that term and try to make something out of it that's not.

Really, the word Latreia just means religious service or religious worship. So it's actually a really helpful tool because the word, you can't get around it.

It is religious in nature versus maybe some of the more cultural or civic acts of obeisance or worship that we see given to the king, for instance, or in other times in Scripture where creatures are bowed down to.

Those are more civic or cultural instances. Whereas Latreia is, there's no doubt, it's religious in context.

And that's what the word basically means. Any thoughts or questions so far?

I know there's a lot of information here and really just centers around worship. It centers around this conversation of what is worship and who gives us the authority to declare what is worship.

And Dulia, so in page 208, it's Dulia in the middle here. Dulia is differentiated from Latreia, though according to Broderick, both are forms of worship.

So again, Rome would say it's worship, but it's not really worship.

And the reason why they say that is because it's worship of a different kind, of a lesser kind.

Again, that's problematic. Latreia is a higher form of worship than Dulia. Therefore, when the

Bible speaks of worshiping God alone, this refers to Latreia. We are, however, allowed to give

Dulia to others. Where's the biblical evidence for that? And we're using these terms,

Latreia and Dulia. The onus would be on Roman Catholicism to produce the biblical evidence for it, and there is none.

So there's Hyperdulia. So now they got this other term. So you got

Dulia, Latreia. But we're also going to put in another term, Hyperdulia, which is a veneration proper to the

Blessed Mother alone. It is the highest form of veneration short of adoration. Now we've got these two categories, but now we're going to sub -categorize this other category of Dulia.

And there's Dulia, which is kind of regular veneration, but then there's Hyperveneration. And this

Hyperveneration is the closest thing we can get to worship. What does this even mean?

You know, when you really get to the nitty -gritty of it, you're just making noise.

You're not even making sense anymore. You are using categories and just creating things out of thin air just to appease your dogma.

Because now the words just don't have meanings anymore. What would distinguish between Dulia and Hyperdulia?

What distinguishes the two? What then distinguishes that from actual adoration? And what distinguishes adoration from worship?

I mean, words no longer have meanings at this point. It doesn't mean anything.

Because again, they say it's short of adoration.

Have you read Mary's Prayer? It is not short of adoration.

It is adoration. And so they say giving

Hyperdulia to Mary is as close as the Catholic can come to giving something akin to Latreia. But by their definition,

Catholics insist a distinction remains between the two forms of worship. So Mary and saints are venerated but not worshipped in the same way as God is worshipped.

And so here's how this is summed up. This position by Roman Catholicism is summed up in this. Honor paid to the saints who by their intercession, example, and their possession of God, minister to human sanctification, helping the faithful grow in Christian virtue.

Venerating the saints does not detract from the glory given to God, since whatever good they possess is a gift from his bounty.

They reflect the divine perfections, and their supernatural qualities result from the graces of Christ, merited for them by the cross.

So this is the Roman Catholic, again, how they shroud their false worship is under the veneer of God being the origin of those divine gifts and mysteries to the saints.

If you read this again, I can't help but just say these are just words on paper.

They're just saying words, and they're not making a lot of sense. None of these, none of the things that they're saying actually has any true definition.

Okay, it doesn't make any sense. And the reason it doesn't is because again, first and foremost, these are things foreign to Scripture.

You can say all these things. You can make all these declarations similar to Mormonism, similar to Jehovah's Witnesses. You can say a lot of things, but if it's not based upon Scripture, you're just making noise.

I can say to you that the Watchtower, Bible and Tract Society is God's chosen people, and they represent

Jehovah, and they do all these things, but those are just claims. You have to back up the claims with biblical data, with biblical evidence.

And Rome can say all that they want in trying to come up with a myriad of excuses to distinguish between these forms of worship, but worship is worship.

And the onus is on them to demonstrate that there are different kinds of worship outside of the binary of true and false.

And then they have to then give the biblical evidence of New Testament saints receiving these different forms of worship.

All these things, all this onus is on them, but they can't produce the evidence.

Therefore, what do they appeal to is the authority not of Scripture, but of the church. And this is what happens when a people depart from Sola Scriptura.

The Scriptures is not the authority. Now, the church is the authority. The church is not the authority on these matters.

Scripture is. Scripture informs the church what's the authority, and that it is the authority.

So, again, this is inevitably what happens when you depart from Scriptural authority.

And so you'll get a myriad of issues such as a confusion of what is worship, a confusion of the roles of saints, the role of Mary.

You get ultimately, you know, false teachings like the exaltation of Mary. And just to highlight some of these things in page 212, yeah, 212 in our book.

Notice this prayer that is given to Mary. Again, words no longer have meanings in Roman Catholicism, because worship is not worship.

Prayer is not prayer. These are different kinds of prayer. These are different kinds of worship. Words no longer have meanings.

And so notice how this prayer to Mary is described here. Oh, mother of perpetual help.

And I want you just to substitute. Anytime you see mother or Mary, just put in God and tell me if this is worship.

And tell me if this is veneration. Tell me if this is an exalted prayer. Oh, mother of perpetual help, thou art the dispenser of all goods, which

God grants us miserable sinners. And for this reason he has made thee so powerful, so rich, so bountiful, that thou mayst help us in our misery.

Thou art the advocate of the most wretched and abandoned sinners who have recourse to thee.

Come then to my help, dearest mother, for I recommend myself to thee. In thy hands

I place my eternal salvation. And to thee I entrust my soul.

Count me among thy most devoted servants. Take me under thy protection, and it is enough for me.

For if thou protect me, dear mother, I fear nothing. Not for my sins, because thou wilt obtain for me the pardon of them.

Goodness gracious. Nor from the devils, because thou art more powerful than all hell together.

Nor even from Jesus, my judge himself, because by one prayer from thee he will be appeased.

But one thing I fear, that in the hour of temptation I may neglect to call on thee, and thus perish miserably.

Obtain for me then the pardon of my sins, love for Jesus, final perseverance, and the grace always to have recourse to thee, oh mother of perpetual help.

Words no longer have meanings. Prayer is no longer prayer. Worship is no longer worship. None of these things have any sense or meaning, because Romans destroyed it, because they've become the authority.

And so now it's totally appropriate to pray this blasphemous prayer to Mary. Because worship is not really worship.

Prayer is not really prayer. This is concerning, isn't it?

I mean, you read this, it stirs me up. If you were to substitute the terms, the times in which mother appears, and just put in God, it'd be undistinguishable from prayer.

Right? So, again, words no longer have meanings under Rome's teaching and dogmas.

If you were to substitute that simple word with God, there would be no doubt whether this was a prayer.

There'd be no doubt whether this is worship. But because they've inserted a creature into the context, and because they had to deal with at least the scriptures, the first commandment, which is to have no other gods before him, and to worship no other gods, they now have to make these subcategories of worship.

But it's pretty clear. Yes, Pastor? Basically, so remember how

I read to you earlier this morning, John 19, where Jesus says to John, behold your mother, behold your son.

Again, the Roman Catholicism says that this is a representation of Mary's relationship with the church.

And so John represents the church. Mary is now the exalted one who is the mother of us all.

And so, for instance, in Galatians 4, where it talks about Jerusalem above, and she's our mother, and she is free, they believe that's reference to Mary.

And so it is appropriate then, in their interpretation, to appeal to Jesus's mother.

So when Jesus is not sufficient, and when you're on bad terms with Jesus, you can triangulate

Jesus by going to his mom. That's essentially what it is. It's a form of spiritual triangulation.

And saying, hey, you know, Jesus and I are not getting along. Let me talk to his mother. So, yes,

Mary. Yeah, that's right, that's right.

And again, it's this exalted view of Mary. It's foreign to scripture.

And what it really is, is it's a deification of Mary. We've mentioned this many times. And it's essentially including her in the

Godhead. This is an inclusion of Mary within the Godhead of Yahweh. And it is idolatrous.

It is very idolatrous. And so how they would say this is, okay, they say, again, this is hyperdulia.

This is a hyper form of the lower form of worship.

But it's just shy of worship. What about this prayer is shy of worship? Like what would be needed in order to make this full worship?

Because all the language is there. The physical aspects are there too.

And having, whether it's through the rosary, whether it's through standing before a statue of Mary, all the physical indications of worship are there.

And all the word indications of worship are there. Okay. What is missing for making this hyperdulia into full form

Latreia? Nothing. Nothing. Other than the term

God, maybe. Right? Maybe to whom it is directed to. But if words have any meaning, if words have any significance, if physical responses in worship have any meaning, then what would be the distinguishing mark between what is said and what is done practically in Roman Catholicism in regard to Mary and the worship of God?

And there is none. There is none. So again, this is a huge concern and a huge departure from biblical orthodoxy.

Which is again, why? I mean, there's so much more things we can do, but I think you get the point. In that prayer, just kind of touching just the tip of the iceberg of what is attributed to Mary within Roman Catholicism.

So what do we do with this? How do we respond to this? Our response as Christians, as Protestants, as Reformed believers, is to hold on to the authority of Scripture.

Sola Scriptura should not be abandoned. And there is this pull today within the church to return to tradition and reject

Sola Scriptura. I'm seeing this a lot, especially amongst a younger audience.

A lot of our young people, rightly so, are yearning for a sense of tradition.

Because we're in a postmodern world and we see how things in the culture and the world are progressing.

And I think one of the diagnosis is actually true. Like if you watch like the Daily Wire and things like that, where you got a lot of Jewish and Roman Catholics kind of vying for more traditional

Western ideals. They say the reason why we're on the track that we're on is because there's been an abandonment of Western values and traditions.

And I think that's absolutely right. The reason why the world is descending into chaos is because we have abandoned that which kept us on track, that which kept us civilized, that which kept us grounded, which was a

Christian Judeo worldview, okay? Unfortunately, the prescription that they offer falls short.

Because they say, well, what we need to do is go back, is reject modernity, so reject the modern world, and embrace tradition, okay?

I would say we need to reject modernity and tradition and embrace sola scriptura, embrace the scriptures, embrace the truth which sets man free, which is the word of God, which is able to make us strong in salvation.

God's word is the answer. Not tradition which is based upon a myriad of interpretations.

Every tradition throughout church history is predicated upon some type of interpretation.

If we go back to the authority of scripture, scripture is sufficient, scripture is enough, let's go to that, that's the source, that's the answer.

And so let's not embrace these traditions that are outside of scripture.

Let's embrace what the Bible has to say and teach on the subject. And so that's our word to you.

Embrace the scriptures, don't run from them. They will be your protection, they will be your guide in these last days.

Any last thoughts or questions? Let's pray.

Father, thank you for your word, which is clear, which is powerful, which can pierce and divide between joint and marrow, soul and spirit.

We pray, God, that your word will penetrate and pierce our hearts to the truth and the glory of the gospel.

I pray, Father, for Roman Catholics who are deceived, who have fallen into the sin of idolatry, who have fallen to the sin of false worship.

And we pray, God, that through the ministry of Christ and Christ alone, that you would save them, that you would hearken their hearts to yourself by your grace.

And Father, we pray even for us who have hearts that are so prone to wander, hearts that are so prone to sin and to rebel against you,

Lord, that we would come under your headship, under your lordship, under your authority, through the word that you have spoken in holy scripture.

Father, we thank you for your goodness. We pray, God, that your spirit would be amongst us even as we continue our morning and afternoon worship.