On Lizzie Reezay's youtube video, What I LOVE and HATE about Mormonism! (From a Catholic), I made a few comments about some of the errors she made in this video and made her aware of other articles I have written against her (unintentional, I am sure) abuse of sources and misunderstanding of Catholic theology:
Adolf Von Harnack vs. the Monarchial Episcopacy in Rome
Answering a Catholic Apologist on the Veneration of Images
After providing some evidence that early Christians such as Irenaeus accused Mary of personal sin, one Catholic commentator, Raphael Kohen, wrote the following, which exemplifies a common attitude among some of the more errant Catholic apologists--"Rome has spoken, the thinking has been done!":
It should be noted that in my essay refuting Tim Staples on the Immaculate Conception and Patristic Mariology, one quoted Roman Catholic sources (e.g., Luigi Gambero; Peter Fehlner; Ludwig Ott). Furthermore, according to Rome herself, the Immaculate Conception is a doctrine that has been taught throughout all of Christian history, something Pius IX explicitly stated in Ineffabilis Deus:
This is a lie, and I will happily debate any Catholic apologist on this dogma (the Immaculate Conception) in a public setting.
Finally, it should be noted that this commentators attitude is "Don't blind me with facts, the Church has authoritatively spoken!" While I know many well-informed Catholics who are not like that (do not want to seem like I think some of the better Catholic apologists [e.g., Trent Horn; Robert Sungenis--both of whom, to their credit, keep up with the critical works against Catholicism and interact with such] are like this are, well, cultic.
For those with intellectual integrity and honesty (which, sadly, this Catholic commentator does not have), see my book-length treatment of Mariology:
Behold the Mother of My Lord: Towards a Mormon Mariology
Adolf Von Harnack vs. the Monarchial Episcopacy in Rome
Answering a Catholic Apologist on the Veneration of Images
After providing some evidence that early Christians such as Irenaeus accused Mary of personal sin, one Catholic commentator, Raphael Kohen, wrote the following, which exemplifies a common attitude among some of the more errant Catholic apologists--"Rome has spoken, the thinking has been done!":
It should be noted that in my essay refuting Tim Staples on the Immaculate Conception and Patristic Mariology, one quoted Roman Catholic sources (e.g., Luigi Gambero; Peter Fehlner; Ludwig Ott). Furthermore, according to Rome herself, the Immaculate Conception is a doctrine that has been taught throughout all of Christian history, something Pius IX explicitly stated in Ineffabilis Deus:
[T]his doctrine always existed in the Church as a doctrine that has been received from our ancestors, and that has been stamped with the character of revealed doctrine.
Finally, it should be noted that this commentators attitude is "Don't blind me with facts, the Church has authoritatively spoken!" While I know many well-informed Catholics who are not like that (do not want to seem like I think some of the better Catholic apologists [e.g., Trent Horn; Robert Sungenis--both of whom, to their credit, keep up with the critical works against Catholicism and interact with such] are like this are, well, cultic.
For those with intellectual integrity and honesty (which, sadly, this Catholic commentator does not have), see my book-length treatment of Mariology:
Behold the Mother of My Lord: Towards a Mormon Mariology
