How Many “Church of God” Groups Exist in the World — and Are They All the True Church Founded by Jesus Christ?

Introduction

Many religious groups today use the name “Church of God.” Some claim that because the phrase appears in the Bible, they alone are the true Church established by Jesus Christ. Others argue that all churches that use this title belong to the original apostolic Church.

But an important question must be asked:

If many different groups all use the same name “Church of God,” can all of them truly be the one Church founded by Christ?

The answer requires careful examination of:

• Biblical teaching,
• Historical continuity,
• Apostolic succession,
• The testimony of the early Church Fathers,
• And the historical origin of these groups.

This article will demonstrate that while many sincere Christians belong to various “Church of God” denominations, these organizations do not all share the same founder, doctrines, or historical continuity with the apostolic Church established by Jesus Christ.

---

1. How Many “Church of God” Groups Exist Worldwide?

There is no exact number because many independent churches continue to form globally. However, historians and religious reference works recognize dozens to hundreds of organizations using the name “Church of God.”

Some major examples include:

• Church of God (Cleveland, Tennessee)
• Church of God of Prophecy
• Church of God (Anderson, Indiana)
• Church of God (Seventh Day)
• Members Church of God International
• United Church of God
• Living Church of God
• Philadelphia Church of God
• Church of God International
• Restored Church of God
• Global Church of God
• Church of God in Christ (COGIC)

These groups belong to very different theological traditions:

• Pentecostal
• Sabbatarian
• Armstrongist
• Holiness
• Nontrinitarian
• Restorationist

Many of them even contradict one another doctrinally.

For example:

• Some believe in the Trinity; others reject it.
• Some worship on Saturday; others on Sunday.
• Some believe Jesus is fully God; others deny traditional Trinitarian doctrine.
• Some accept modern prophets; others reject them.

Therefore, the phrase “Church of God” alone cannot prove that a group is the original Church founded by Christ.

---

2. Do All “Church of God” Denominations Have the Same Founder?

No.

Historically, these groups were founded by different men in different centuries.

Examples include:

Group	Historical Founder	Date
Church of God (Cleveland, Tennessee)	Richard Green Spurling	1886
Church of God in Christ	Charles Harrison Mason	late 1800s
Worldwide Church of God	Herbert W. Armstrong	1930s
Global Church of God	Roderick C. Meredith	1992
Members Church of God International	Eliseo Soriano	1977

Historical sources clearly identify these founders. For example, the Pentecostal Church of God movement in Tennessee explicitly traces its beginning to 1886 under Richard Green Spurling.

Likewise, Armstrongist “Church of God” groups emerged from the teachings of Herbert W. Armstrong in the 20th century.

This creates a serious theological problem for restorationist claims:

If Jesus founded only one Church in the 1st century, how can churches founded in the 19th or 20th centuries be the original Church?

---

3. Does Using the Biblical Name “Church of God” Prove Authenticity?

No.

The expression “church of God” in Scripture is a description, not an exclusive denominational trademark.

Saint Paul wrote:

“To the church of God which is at Corinth” (1 Corinthians 1:2).

The Greek phrase simply means:

“assembly belonging to God.”

The Bible also uses other expressions:

• “Church of Christ” (Romans 16:16)
• “The Way” (Acts 9:2)
• “Catholic Church” in early Christianity
• “Body of Christ” (1 Corinthians 12:27)

A biblical name alone does not prove apostolic authenticity.

Otherwise:

• Any newly formed group today could simply adopt a biblical phrase and claim legitimacy.

Christ did not say:

“By their church name you shall know them.”

Instead, Scripture emphasizes:

• Apostolic teaching,
• Unity,
• Sacraments,
• And succession from the apostles.

---

4. What Did the Early Church Believe About the True Church?

The early Christians did not determine the true Church merely by a name.

They looked for:

1. Apostolic succession,
2. Unity with apostolic bishops,
3. Fidelity to apostolic doctrine.

St. Irenaeus (A.D. 189)

Irenaeus of Lyons wrote:

“We are in a position to enumerate those who were instituted bishops by the apostles and their successors down to our own times.”¹

He specifically pointed to the Church of Rome founded by Peter and Paul as the reference point for apostolic continuity.

---

St. Ignatius of Antioch (A.D. 107)

Ignatius of Antioch declared:

“Where the bishop is, there is the Catholic Church.”²

Notice:

• He did not say:
  “Where the biblical church name is.”
• He emphasized unity under bishops descending from the apostles.

---

St. Cyprian of Carthage

Cyprian of Carthage taught:

“He cannot have God for his Father who has not the Church for his mother.”³

The early Church understood Christianity as:

• visible,
• historical,
• sacramental,
• and united.

---

5. The Biblical Marks of Christ’s Church

Jesus founded one Church, not thousands of competing denominations.

Christ Established One Visible Church

Jesus said:

$\text{One Lord} + \text{One Faith} + \text{One Baptism} \;(Ephesians\ 4:5)$

And:

“I will build MY Church” (Matthew 16:18).

Not:

• “my churches.”

Saint Paul likewise taught:

“There is one body and one Spirit” (Ephesians 4:4).

---

6. Can All “Church of God” Groups Be the True Church?

Logically and historically, no.

Why?

Because many of these groups:

• contradict each other doctrinally,
• began centuries after Christ,
• and were founded by different men.

Truth cannot contradict itself.

For example:

• One group says the Trinity is true.
• Another says the Trinity is false.

Both cannot simultaneously represent the full apostolic faith.

Likewise:

• One group teaches Sunday worship.
• Another says Sunday worship is apostasy.

Both cannot be the identical Church founded by Christ.

---

7. Catholic Response to Restorationist Claims

Many restorationist groups — including some SDA-related or Sabbatarian groups — claim:

“The true Church disappeared and was restored later.”

But this contradicts Christ’s promises.

Jesus declared:

“The gates of hell shall not prevail against it” (Matthew 16:18).

And:

“I am with you always, to the close of the age” (Matthew 28:20).

If the true Church vanished for 1,500–1,800 years:

• then Satan defeated the Church,
• Christ failed to preserve His Church,
• and Christianity disappeared until modern founders restored it.

But Scripture never teaches this.

Instead, the New Testament teaches continuity through apostolic succession:

“What you have heard from me… entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also” (2 Timothy 2:2).

That is precisely the Catholic understanding of apostolic succession.

---

8. What Does the Catholic Church Teach?

The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches:

“The sole Church of Christ… subsists in the Catholic Church.” (CCC 816)

And:

“In order that the full and living Gospel might always be preserved in the Church the apostles left bishops as their successors.” (CCC 77)

The Catholic Church claims:

• historical continuity,
• apostolic succession,
• sacramental continuity,
• and doctrinal continuity from the apostles.

This claim is historically traceable back to the earliest centuries of Christianity.

---

Conclusion

There are many groups worldwide using the name “Church of God,” but they:

• do not all share the same founder,
• do not teach the same doctrines,
• and do not all possess historical continuity with the apostolic Church.

Using a biblical name alone does not prove authenticity.

The early Christians identified the true Church through:

• apostolic succession,
• unity with the bishops,
• continuity of doctrine,
• and communion with the historic apostolic Church.

Historically, the evidence strongly supports the existence of one continuous apostolic Church from the first century onward — not a Church that disappeared and was reinvented centuries later by modern founders.

---

Footnotes

1. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 3.3.1.

Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Smyrnaeans 8.

Cyprian of Carthage, On the Unity of the Catholic Church.

Is the Seventh-day Adventist “Local Conference” the True Church Founded by Christ? A Historical, Biblical, and Apostolic Examination of the Claim

Introduction

Many members of the Seventh-day Adventist Church claim that they alone are the “remnant church” or the true Church established by Jesus Christ because they believe they faithfully follow the Bible, especially the Sabbath commandment and certain prophetic interpretations.

However, your question is very specific:

Is the SDA “Local Conference” itself the true Church founded by Christ — distinct from the SDA General Conference?

This distinction is important because in SDA structure, a Local Conference is merely an administrative subdivision under the authority of the General Conference. Therefore, if one claims that a “Local Conference” alone is the true Church of Christ, the burden of proof becomes even more difficult historically, biblically, and logically.

The short answer is:

No, there is no strong biblical or historical evidence that any SDA Local Conference is the original Church founded by Jesus Christ in the first century.

The reasons are profound and involve:

• Apostolic succession
• Historical continuity
• Unity of doctrine
• The witness of the early Church Fathers
• The nature of the Church in Scripture
• The late origin of Adventism itself

Let us examine the issue carefully.

---

I. What Is an SDA Local Conference?

Within Adventist organization, a “Local Conference” is not an independent church founded directly by Christ. It is a regional administrative body governed under:

1. The Union Conference
2. The Division
3. Ultimately the General Conference

This means:

• A Local Conference has no separate apostolic foundation.
• It derives authority from SDA denominational structure.
• It did not exist before the 19th century.

Historically, the SDA movement itself formally emerged in 1863 in the United States after the Millerite movement failed in predicting Christ’s return in 1844.

Thus, no SDA Local Conference can trace itself directly to:

• the Apostles,
• Jerusalem,
• Antioch,
• Rome,
• or any first-century Christian community.

---

II. The Church Christ Founded Already Existed in the First Century

Jesus said:

“You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church.” (Matthew 16:18)

Christ established one visible Church, not thousands of disconnected groups appearing centuries later.

The Church already existed:

• in Jerusalem (Acts 2),
• under apostolic leadership,
• with bishops, elders, sacraments, and doctrine.

The early Church was identifiable and historically continuous.

The problem for SDA claims is this:

If the true Church disappeared for 1,800 years and reappeared only in the 1800s, then Christ’s promise failed.

But Christ promised:

“The gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” (Matthew 16:18)

and

“I am with you always, to the close of the age.” (Matthew 28:20)

This means the true Church must exist continuously through history.

---

III. A Local Conference Cannot Be the Original Church of Christ

A Local Conference is:

• a modern administrative region,
• formed by denominational policy,
• subject to organizational restructuring.

Christ never established:

• “North American Division,”
• “Local Conference,”
• or “General Conference.”

The New Testament Church was built on:

• Apostles,
• bishops,
• Eucharistic worship,
• sacramental life,
• apostolic succession.

St. Paul wrote:

“The church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth.” (1 Timothy 3:15)

Notice:

• Scripture calls the Church itself the pillar of truth.
• Not a future movement arising in the 1800s.

---

IV. Historical Problem: Adventism Began in the 19th Century

The SDA movement historically came from:

• William Miller’s failed predictions,
• the “Great Disappointment” of 1844,
• later theological developments by Ellen G. White and other Adventist pioneers.

The denomination officially formed in 1863.

This creates a major historical problem:

Where was the “true church” before 1863?

If SDA Local Conferences are the true Church:

• Where were they during:
  • the Apostolic Age?
  • Roman persecutions?
  • the Council of Nicaea?
  • the early martyrs?
  • the Church Fathers?

No evidence exists that:

• Ignatius of Antioch,
• Irenaeus,
• Polycarp,
• Athanasius,
• Augustine,
• or any early Christian community
  taught distinctive SDA doctrines such as:
• Investigative Judgment,
• Ellen White’s prophetic authority,
• 1844 sanctuary doctrine,
• or denominational remnant theology.

---

V. The Early Church Fathers Contradict the SDA “Restoration” Narrative

The earliest Christians believed the Church already possessed apostolic authority.

St. Ignatius of Antioch (c. AD 107)

Ignatius of Antioch wrote:

“Where the bishop appears, there let the people be; just as where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.”¹

Notice:

• already in AD 107,
• the Church was called “Catholic” (universal),
• organized under bishops.

No SDA structure existed.

---

St. Irenaeus (c. AD 180)

Irenaeus argued against heresies by appealing to apostolic succession:

“We can enumerate those who were appointed bishops by the apostles.”²

This is devastating to restorationist claims because:

• truth was preserved through succession,
• not lost for 1,800 years.

---

St. Cyprian of Carthage (3rd century)

Cyprian of Carthage wrote:

“He can no longer have God for his Father, who has not the Church for his mother.”³

The Fathers consistently taught:

• visible unity,
• sacramental continuity,
• apostolic authority.

Not an invisible remnant rediscovered in modern America.

---

VI. The SDA Claim About “Keeping the Commandments”

SDA arguments often focus on Revelation 12:17:

“Those who keep the commandments of God.”

They argue this refers uniquely to Sabbath-keeping Adventists.

But this interpretation is problematic.

A. Christians Always Kept God’s Commandments

Catholics also keep:

• the Ten Commandments,
• moral law,
• worship of God,
• holiness.

The issue is not whether commandments matter.

The issue is:

Who has apostolic authority and historical continuity?

---

B. The Early Christians Worshiped on Sunday

The earliest Christians gathered on:

• “the first day of the week” (Acts 20:7),
• “the Lord’s Day” (Revelation 1:10).

The Church Fathers confirm this.

The Didache (1st century)

Didache states:

“On the Lord’s Day gather together and break bread.”⁴

---

St. Justin Martyr (c. AD 155)

Justin Martyr wrote:

“On the day called Sunday, all gather together.”⁵

Thus:

• Sunday worship predates Catholic councils,
• predates Constantine,
• predates medieval Catholicism.

This destroys the SDA claim that Sunday worship was a later pagan corruption.

---

VII. Catholic Teaching on the True Church

The Catholic Church teaches:

“The sole Church of Christ… subsists in the Catholic Church.”⁶

The Church claims continuity through:

• apostolic succession,
• sacraments,
• bishops,
• preserved doctrine,
• historical continuity from the Apostles.

Unlike SDA Local Conferences, the Catholic Church can historically trace:

• bishops,
• councils,
• worship,
• doctrine,
• and sacramental life
  back to the Apostolic Age.

---

VIII. Problems Specific to the “Local Conference” Claim

Even within Adventism, a Local Conference:

• is not supreme authority,
• can be reorganized,
• can split,
• depends on the General Conference.

Therefore:

• if the General Conference changes doctrine,
• the Local Conference follows.

So a Local Conference cannot independently claim:

“We alone are the original Church of Christ.”

It lacks:

• independent apostolic lineage,
• universal authority,
• ancient historical continuity.

---

IX. The Biblical Marks of the True Church

Historically, Christians identified the true Church by four marks:

1. One

Christ founded one unified Church.

2. Holy

Sanctified by Christ.

3. Catholic

Universal across nations and centuries.

4. Apostolic

Built on the Apostles through succession.

These marks appear in the ancient Nicene Creed (AD 325/381).

A modern Local Conference established in recent centuries does not fit these historic marks.

---

X. Did Christ Promise a Complete Apostasy?

SDA theology often implies that:

• the Church became corrupted,
• truth disappeared,
• and was restored later.

But Scripture says otherwise.

Christ promised preservation

“The gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” (Matthew 16:18)

Paul taught continuity

“To him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all generations.” (Ephesians 3:21)

Not:

• “through a future restoration movement.”

---

XI. Final Conclusion

The claim that an SDA Local Conference is the true Church founded by Christ is not supported by:

• Scripture,
• history,
• apostolic succession,
• or the witness of early Christianity.

A Local Conference:

• is a modern administrative unit,
• originating from a denomination founded in the 19th century,
• without continuous historical existence from the Apostles.

The earliest Christians recognized the true Church through:

• apostolic bishops,
• Eucharistic worship,
• doctrinal continuity,
• and visible unity.

The historical evidence overwhelmingly shows continuity in the ancient apostolic Church rather than in modern restorationist movements.

The question is not merely:

“Who uses the Bible?”

Many groups do.

The deeper question is:

“Which Church can historically and doctrinally trace itself continuously to the Apostles established by Christ?”

That is the central challenge SDA Local Conference claims cannot successfully answer.

---

Footnotes

1. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Smyrnaeans 8.
2. Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3.3.1.
3. Cyprian of Carthage, On the Unity of the Catholic Church 6.
4. Didache 14.1.
5. Justin Martyr, First Apology 67.
6. Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 816.

Flores de Mayo: Biblical Marian Devotion or Pagan Practice? A Catholic Apologetic Response to SDA and Anti-Catholic Claims

Introduction

Every May in the Philippines, millions of Catholics celebrate Flores de Mayo (“Flowers of May”), offering flowers to the Blessed Virgin Mary, praying the Rosary, and participating in the colorful Santacruzan. Yet many critics — especially some anti-Catholic groups and certain members of the Seventh-day Adventist Church — claim that Flores de Mayo is “pagan,” “idolatrous,” or “unbiblical.”

But is that accusation historically and biblically accurate?

Did Catholics merely “Christianize” a pagan flower festival? Or is Flores de Mayo a legitimate Christian devotion rooted in biblical principles, early Christian tradition, and Catholic theology?

This article will examine:

1. The history and origin of Flores de Mayo
2. Whether it is pagan or biblical
3. Biblical foundations for Marian honor and floral offerings
4. Church Fathers’ teachings about honoring Mary
5. Official Catholic teaching from the Catechism
6. Responses to common Protestant and SDA objections

---

What Is Flores de Mayo?

Flores de Mayo is a Filipino Catholic devotion celebrated throughout May in honor of the Blessed Virgin Mary. It involves:

• Offering flowers to Mary
• Marian hymns and prayers
• Catechism for children
• The Rosary
• The Santacruzan procession

The practice became deeply rooted in Filipino Catholic culture during the Spanish era and remains one of the most beloved Catholic traditions in the Philippines.

The devotion is connected to the broader Catholic tradition of May Devotions to the Blessed Virgin Mary, practiced for centuries throughout the Catholic world.

---

When and How Did Flores de Mayo Start?

Historically, devotion to Mary during May developed gradually in medieval Catholic Europe.

The custom of honoring Mary with flowers can be traced to medieval monasteries and convents, where flowers symbolized purity, beauty, and spiritual fruitfulness associated with the Mother of Christ.

In the Philippines, Flores de Mayo became widespread during the Spanish colonial period. According to historical records, the practice expanded especially after the proclamation of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception in 1854 and through the publication of Marian devotional works in the 19th century. The Santacruzan portion commemorates the traditional discovery of the True Cross by Helena of Constantinople.

Thus, Flores de Mayo is not an ancient pagan fertility ritual preserved by Catholics. It is a Christian Marian devotion that developed within Catholic spirituality and Filipino culture.

---

Is Flores de Mayo Pagan?

The Short Answer: No.

Critics often argue:

“Flowers, processions, and honoring Mary came from paganism.”

But this argument commits the genetic fallacy — assuming something is evil merely because pagans may have used similar outward symbols.

Pagans also used:

• candles,
• incense,
• music,
• temples,
• processions,
• weddings,
• altars,
• and prayers.

Yet Scripture itself uses these things in worship of the true God.

The question is not:

“Did pagans ever use flowers?”

The real question is:

“What is the meaning and purpose of the practice in Christianity?”

In Flores de Mayo:

• Catholics do not worship flowers,
• do not worship Mary as a goddess,
• and do not offer sacrifices to idols.

Instead, Catholics honor the woman whom Scripture itself calls:

• “blessed among women” (Luke 1:42),
• “full of grace” (Luke 1:28),
• and “all generations shall call me blessed” (Luke 1:48).

---

Biblical Foundations of Flores de Mayo

Although the Bible does not explicitly mention “Flores de Mayo,” the principles behind it are deeply biblical.

1. The Bible Commands Honor for God’s Servants

Scripture repeatedly teaches honor toward holy people.

Hebrews 11–12

The heroes of faith are remembered and honored publicly.

Philippians 2:29

St. Paul says:

“Honor such men.”

1 Corinthians 11:1

“Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ.”

If Christians may honor apostles and saints, how much more the mother of Jesus?

---

2. Mary Is Biblically Honored

The Gospel itself contains Marian honor.

Luke 1:28

The angel Gabriel says to Mary:

“Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you.”

Luke 1:42

Elizabeth declares:

“Blessed are you among women.”

Luke 1:48

Mary prophesies:

“All generations will call me blessed.”

Catholics fulfill this prophecy whenever they honor Mary.

Flores de Mayo is therefore not contrary to Scripture — it is an expression of Luke 1:48.

---

3. Flowers Are Biblical Symbols of Honor and Worship

Flowers in Scripture symbolize:

• beauty,
• holiness,
• celebration,
• and devotion to God.

Isaiah 40:8

“The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God will stand forever.”

Song of Solomon 2:1

“I am the rose of Sharon.”

Sirach 39:14

“Bloom like a rose growing by a stream of water.”

Even the Temple built by Solomon was decorated with floral imagery.

1 Kings 6:18

The Temple carvings included:

• gourds,
• open flowers,
• palm trees,
• and cherubim.

Thus, floral symbolism in sacred devotion is entirely biblical.

---

4. Processions Are Biblical

Critics attack Catholic processions like the Santacruzan.

But processions are common throughout Scripture.

2 Samuel 6:14

David danced before the Ark of the Covenant.

Joshua 6

Israel processed around Jericho.

Psalm 68:24

“Your procession is seen, O God.”

Christian religious processions are therefore biblical in principle.

---

Mary as the New Ark of the Covenant

One of the strongest biblical foundations for Marian devotion is Mary’s role as the New Ark of the Covenant.

Compare:

Old Testament Ark	Mary
Contained the Word of God	Carried Jesus, the Word made flesh
Overshadowed by God’s glory (Exodus 40:35)	Overshadowed by the Holy Spirit (Luke 1:35)
David exclaimed before the Ark	Elizabeth exclaimed before Mary
Ark remained three months	Mary stayed three months

Catholics honor Mary because she bore Christ Himself.

---

Did Early Christians Honor Mary?

Yes.

The early Church strongly honored Mary long before medieval Catholicism.

Irenaeus of Lyons (2nd century)

He called Mary the “New Eve”:

“The knot of Eve’s disobedience was loosed by the obedience of Mary.”¹

Ephrem the Syrian (4th century)

He praised Mary in hymns and poetry, comparing her to paradise and flowers.

Augustine of Hippo

He taught that Mary is honored because she faithfully obeyed God.

These Fathers did not worship Mary as a goddess. They honored her as the Mother of Christ.

---

What Does the Catholic Church Actually Teach?

The Catholic Church clearly distinguishes:

• worship due to God alone,
• from honor given to saints.

The Catechism states:

“The honor paid to sacred images is a ‘respectful veneration,’ not the adoration due to God alone.”²

The Church condemns idolatry.

Catechism of the Catholic Church §971

Mary receives:

• special honor (hyperdulia),
• not divine worship (latria).

The Church explicitly teaches that worship belongs only to the Holy Trinity.

---

Responding to SDA and Protestant Objections

Objection #1:

“Offering flowers to Mary is idol worship.”

Response:

Flowers are symbols of love and honor, not worship.

People offer flowers:

• at graves,
• to mothers,
• at weddings,
• and during memorials.

This does not mean worship.

Catholics offer flowers to Mary as expressions of love and honor, similar to honoring holy people in Scripture.

---

Objection #2:

“Mary should not receive attention.”

Response:

The Bible itself gives Mary extraordinary attention.

She is:

• chosen above all women,
• called blessed,
• and honored by Elizabeth and Gabriel.

Ignoring Mary entirely is actually less biblical than honoring her properly.

---

Objection #3:

“Flores de Mayo came from pagan festivals.”

Response:

Similarity does not equal identity.

Pagans also used:

• candles,
• temples,
• music,
• and sacrifices.

Christianity transformed many cultural elements toward worship of the true God.

The key issue is meaning and intention.

Flores de Mayo is Christ-centered because authentic Marian devotion always leads to Jesus.

As Mary herself said:

John 2:5

“Do whatever He tells you.”

---

The Spiritual Meaning of Flores de Mayo

Flores de Mayo is ultimately about:

• honoring the Mother of Jesus,
• teaching children the faith,
• encouraging prayer,
• and cultivating virtue.

The flowers symbolize:

• purity,
• love,
• sacrifice,
• and spiritual beauty.

In many Filipino communities, Flores de Mayo also strengthens:

• catechesis,
• family prayer,
• and parish unity.

---

Conclusion

Flores de Mayo is not a pagan continuation disguised as Christianity.

It is a Catholic Marian devotion rooted in:

• biblical principles,
• Christian symbolism,
• Church tradition,
• and Filipino Catholic spirituality.

The Bible supports:

• honoring holy people,
• processions,
• floral symbolism,
• and Marian blessedness.

The early Church honored Mary centuries before modern Protestant objections existed.

Catholics do not worship Mary during Flores de Mayo. They honor the Mother of Christ and ultimately glorify God who worked through her.

As Scripture says:

Luke 1:48

“All generations will call me blessed.”

Flores de Mayo is one way Filipino Catholics fulfill that prophecy.

---

Footnotes

1. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies, Book III, Chapter 22.
2. Catechism of the Catholic Church, §2132 and §971.