One of the posters had some very passionate and insightful comments and unfortunately, deleted them all. However, another poster, whom I have known for years, added his comments and quickly, so it seemed, took a very aggressive tone and asked some very direct questions, which I will respond to here...instead of on my friend's Facebook wall. So, here we go:
Comment 1: Ok let's start with. "the bible is a catholic book. We gave it to them (Protestants).". How does that work?
Doug (we'll call him Doug since that is his name), the Bible was put together by the Church Fathers. A "canon" was opened, the books were chosen and the "canon" closed, never to be reopened and has never been questioned. The New Testament in a King James version Bible is the same as one that I would use in my Catholic faith. It is the Old Testament that differs a bit. The books that were decided upon were chosen out of many books at the time. The four Gospels are not the only ones written, but they were decided upon by the council that opened and closed the canon. The New Testament canon was merely a process of formal recognition of already recognized scripture that was being used in the early Church, to defend against the various forms of Gnosticism and heresy that were starting to creep throughout the ever-expanding church.
To be able to truly accept this however, will necessitate a person to first accept the fact that "The Church" that is spoken about in history at the time of this canon, was the early Catholic Church. If you cannot, or will not accept the fact that the Catholic Church of today is the same church that Jesus Christ created then you will be unable to follow my logic. All other churches, Protestant, broke away from the Catholic Church...it is a historic FACT.
Continuing on, following this logic then can only lead you to see that if the Catholic Church in it's early years put the writings of the Church into the New Testament, then the Bible you open today, came from the Catholic Church. Not too hard to follow really. And, by the way, King James never did endorse the version of the Bible that bears his name today.
Comment 2: Then let's go to how you talk to a fictitious character that, according to your story, died 2000 years ago (where do you get that Mary is a supernatural being that has current communication with a deity. If your Mary could sway the opinion/action of a deity doesn't that make her a deity. Does that make a quadrinity?)
First of all, I am going to move past the "fictitious character" part of this comment since Christians accept the fact that Mary existed, which is what I am presuming Doug is arguing. And if it is Jesus Christ you are questioning the existence of, then I offer the same argument. How do I know Pocahontas existed? Because history books say so. Weren't you raised Lutheran, Doug? Enough said on this point.
No one is saying that Mary is a "supernatural being". She is one of the Saints and is in Heaven. Stay with me, Doug, as I am speaking as a Catholic so I am writing from my beliefs. She would obviously have a very special relationship with her son, would she not? So, though I can pray directly to Him, and I do, I can also pray to her for her assistance...her "intercession". So I ask her to pray for me as well, to assist me in my requests from her son, whether it be for good health, a successful job interview, etc. Here is the simplest way to put it. My son wanted to begin getting his allowance back. He wasn't sure how to approach me (Father/God) about it, so he asked my fiance' (Mother/Mary) to talk to me about it, to lay the groundwork, so to speak. He asked her to "intercede" for him on his behalf. Pretty simple idea, really. Does my fiance's ability to sway me (Father) make her a father? No, she is still the "mother".
The reason non-Catholics have such heartburn with how we view Mary is because they don't understand. We do not worship her, we honor her, we venerate her. Nowhere in the Church teachings or beliefs are we "required" to pray to her, to honor her or anything. Many people do because we believe in the power of her intercession. If you look at the prayer, "Hail Mary", you will see that the first half is from her visit to her cousin Elizabeth. The second half is where we ask her to "pray for us sinners", for her help.
Comment 3: Oh and you screwed up f*&?#*s (I PG-Rated the word) equate women clergy with pedophiles? Yeah let's discuss.
I don't know who the "screwed up f*&?#*s" are that he is referring to, but if he means ME, since I am the one who wrote in this string, allow me to clarify his error. First of all, I did not equate them with pedophiles and it is my reasoning that the reason the Vatican did so was to show the gravity of the problem. For a Bishop to ordain a female would be commiting a sin that is considered on the same level as that of pedophilia, that is what they are saying. In the eyes of the Church, as I understand it, that false ordination is that serious. As I wrote in a string on the same topic on my wall when discussing the "ordination" of these women...performing the duties of a Priest (under false ordination) is blasphemy. Unlike the protestant churches, our Priests are so much more than a speaker behind a pulpit. Our whole Mass is focused around the Eucharist...where we believe that the bread and wine ACTUALLY BECOMES the Body and Blood of Christ. Not a symbol, no pretending...the real thing. So, to not have the authority of the Church to conduct the Mass, you are against it and therefore shall be excommunicated. That is how grave this issue is considered by the Church.
To Doug and to anyone else who would like to have a serious discussion about what Catholics believe on any given topic, I am ready and willing to answer any and all questions about the Church to the best of my ability. If I don't know the answer or am not sure of it, I will find you the correct answer. So many Protestants have misconceptions about what Catholics believe because they have been misinformed. Who knows, maybe I too, will learn some more about my Faith.

