There is a recent Catholic convert from Protestantism, Lizzie Reezay, who has been posting videos defending her decision to embrace Roman Catholicism. While I am glad she has seen the errors of Protestantism (e.g., sola scriptura), she has been playing fast and loose (probably out of ignorance at times) to defend Catholicism. I documented one such example here:
In a recent video, Why People Don't Become Protestant, among her many claims, she states the following about the Catholic (and Eastern Orthodox) practice of venerating images which she states is an incorrect perception:
If you have a picture of someone kneeling before Mary, kneeling before Mary, it's like, wow, they're worshipping a statue, idolatry . . . they're like worshipping pictures and statues! That's idolatry! (1:09 mark)
And elsewhere, she tries to relegate icons to mere:
Reminders of our Christian family members and it’s the idea that people don’t die; they are in heaven with God right now (2:49 mark)
However, as the Second Council of Nicea states:
[DS 600] (I. Definition) … We, continuing in the regal path, and following the divinely inspired teaching of our Holy Fathers, and the tradition of the Catholic Church, for we know that this is of the Holy Spirit who certainly dwells in it, define in all certitude and diligence that as the figure of the honored and life-giving Cross, so the venerable and holy images, the ones from tinted materials and from marble as those from other material, must be suitably placed in the holy churches of God, both on sacred vessels and vestments, and on the walls and on the altars, at home and on the streets, namely such images of our Lord Jesus Christ, God and Savior, and of our undefiled lady, or holy Mother of God, and of the honorable angels, and, at the same time, of all the saints and of holy men. [DS 601] For, how much more frequently through the imaginal formation they are seen, so much more quickly are those who contemplate these, raised to the memory and desire of the originals of these, to kiss and to render honorable adoration to them, not however, to grant true latria according to our faith, which is proper to divine nature alone; but just as to the figure of the revered and life-giving Cross and to the holy gospels, and to the other sacred monuments, let an oblation of incense and lights be made to give honor to these as was the pious custom with the ancients. “For the honor of the image passes to the original”; and he who shows reverence to the image, shows reverence to the substance of Him depicted in it.
As the twenty-fifth session of the Council of Trent states:
[DS 1823] Moreover, that the images of Christ, of the Virgin Mother of God, and of the other saints, are to be placed and retained especially in the churches, and that due honor and veneration be extended to them, not that any divinity or virtue is believed to be in them, for which they are to be venerated, or that anything is to be petitioned from them, or that trust is to be placed in images, as at one time was done by the gentiles, who placed their hope in idols [cf. Ps. 134:15 f.], but because the honor which is shown them, is referred to the prototypes which they represent, so that by means of the images, which we kiss and before which we bare the head and prostrate ourselves, we adore Christ, and venerate the saints, whose likeness they bear. This is what was sanctioned by the decrees of the councils, especially that of the second council of NICEA, against the opponents of Images [see n. 302 ff.].
And elsewhere:
Moreover, in the invocation of saints, the veneration of relics, and the sacred use of images, every superstition shall be removed, all filthy lucre be abolished, finally, all lasciviousness be avoided; in such wise that figures shall not be painted or adorned with a wantonness of beauty; nor shall men also pervert the celebration of the saints, and the visitation of relics, into revellings and drunkenness; as if festivals are celebrated to the honour of the saints by luxury and wantonness. Finally, let so great care and diligence be used by bishops touching these matters, as that there appear nothing disorderly, or unbecomingly or confusedly arranged, nothing profane, nothing indecorous; since holiness becometh the house of God.
In his defense of the Council of Trent, Alphonsus Liguori wrote that images do receive some form of veneration, not only the heavenly prototype of the image:
Some think that we should pray to sacred images the same veneration with which we honour the original: thus, they say that to the images of God is due the worship of latria, to the image of the Blessed Virgin, the worship called hyperdulia, and to the images of the saints, that of dulia. But it is better to say with Bellarmine, that although images should be venerated differently, according to the prototype which they represent, still we should (as was observed in the seventh synod,) pay them not strictly, but in an improper sense, the veneration due to the originals; just as the ambassador of a king receives the same honour which is shown to the sovereign, but only in an improper sense. But as St. Thomas solves this difficulty better than any other author. (2.2, q. 8, a. 3, ad 3.) He says, as the advocates of the first opinion hold, that the worship of latria or dulia, shown to God or the saints, may also be paid to their images; but with this difference, that the worship of the prototypes is absolute, and the veneration of the images relative: thus every difficulty is removed. (Alphonsus M. Liguori, An Exposition and Defence of the Points of Faith Discussed and Defined by the Sacred Council of Trent; Along with a Refutation of the Errors of the Pretended Reformers and of the Objections of Fra Paolo Sarpi [Dublin: James Duffy, 1846], 423-24)
§ 2131 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church reads:
Basing itself on the mystery of the incarnate Word, the seventh ecumenical council at Nicaea (787) justified against the iconoclasts the veneration of icons - of Christ, but also of the Mother of God, the angels, and all the saints. By becoming incarnate, the Son of God introduced a new "economy" of images.
Reezay is simply ignorant of Catholicism’s teachings on images/icons on this point. For more on this issue, see:
She also further tries to downplay the “Hail Mary” by focusing on the fact that the Greek term translated as “hail” (χαιρε) simply means “hello” (3:38 mark). I will let readers see if such an apologetic works for another prayer, the Hail, Holy Queen (Salve Regina), a very popular prayer (I had to memorise it when I was 7 years of age):
Hail, holy Queen, Mother of mercy, hail, our life, our sweetness and our hope. To thee do we cry, poor banished children of Eve: to thee do we send up our sighs, mourning and weeping in this vale of tears. Turn then, most gracious Advocate, thine eyes of mercy toward us, and after this our exile, show unto us the blessed fruit of thy womb, Jesus, O merciful, O loving, O sweet Virgin Mary! Amen.
Such is not a mere “hello” directed to Mary—it is a prayer that views Mary as the mediator with Jesus Christ (cf. § 967-970 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church), with Jesus getting a superficial passing reference in this prayer. What Rome teaches about Mary is the single greatest disproof of her claim to be the one true Church. For a fuller discussion on this issue, see my book, Behold the Mother of My Lord: Towards a Mormon Mariology (2017).
