Free Republic 4th Quarter Fundraising Target: $88,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $14,288
Woo hoo!! And the first 16% is in!! Thank you all very much!!

Posts by Mrs. Don-o

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Fox News’s Kirsten Powers announces: “I’m becoming Catholic!”

    10/13/2015 9:51:01 AM PDT · 179 of 199
    Mrs. Don-o to Elsie
    He's not talking about traditions that are in the Bible! Read carefully:

    2 Thessalonians 2:15
    So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us,either by word of mouth or by letter.

  • Fox News’s Kirsten Powers announces: “I’m becoming Catholic!”

    10/13/2015 9:21:23 AM PDT · 168 of 199
    Mrs. Don-o to Elsie
    As for Jesus giving Mary to John ONLY, you are reading you own opinion into the text (which doesn't say "ONLY"!), and interpreting it in isolation from Revelation 12.

    This is a common problem with people who have not the advantage of Apostolic Tradition --- you know, that particular kind of capital-T Tradition which St. Paul so strongly directed us to "maintain" and "stand firm and hold to" and live "in accord" with:

    1 Corinthians 11:2
    I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you.

    2 Thessalonians 2:15
    So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter.

    2 Thessalonians 3:6
    Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is living in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us.

    Tradition? Yes. The Bible tells me so.

  • Fox News’s Kirsten Powers announces: “I’m becoming Catholic!”

    10/13/2015 9:13:02 AM PDT · 166 of 199
    Mrs. Don-o to Elsie

    I love those Berean Jews. I consider myself a Berean Catholic.

  • Vatican Pre-approves Kim Davis Press Release

    10/13/2015 9:10:17 AM PDT · 9 of 12
    Mrs. Don-o to dbehsman; don-o
    Thanks x 10000 for this.

    It goes into my parish newsletter!


    10/12/2015 6:24:29 PM PDT · 11 of 12
    Mrs. Don-o to Iscool
    "And in 15 minutes he's gone again...This is so sad...You are alone with Jesus until he's gone and then you have to go to Mary to ask here to communicate to God for you..."

    You are so free in telling thud-headed untruths like this. All the Catholics just roll their eyes and think, "Clueless!"... so you're obviously not fooling them. But why do you say this kind of stuff? In hopes of misleading Protestants?

  • Contrast: Why Doesn’t Pope Francis Talk Like This?

    10/12/2015 6:14:06 PM PDT · 2 of 7
    Mrs. Don-o to ebb tide
    Robert Cardinal Sarah, Prefect for the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, confirms the same reality:

    “The idea of placing the Magisterium in a beautiful reliquary detaching it from pastoral practice that could evolve according to circumstance, fashions and passions is a form of heresy, a dangerous schizophrenic pathology.”

    Bravo, Cardinal Sarah!

    He speaks as a Pope should speak. Any hope, I wonder, that Pope Francis will retire in 2016?

  • Fox News’s Kirsten Powers announces: “I’m becoming Catholic!”

    10/12/2015 5:50:33 PM PDT · 72 of 199
    Mrs. Don-o to newnhdad
    I'd like to see you document that.

    I've seen her denounce that butcher Gosnell, the baby-slayer in Philadelphia, passionately reproach the rest of the news media for not covering his crimes, and call for the de-funding of Planned Parenthood.

    You sure we're talking about the same Kirsten POwers?

  • Fox News’s Kirsten Powers announces: “I’m becoming Catholic!”

    10/12/2015 4:35:04 PM PDT · 64 of 199
    Mrs. Don-o to BlackFemaleArmyCaptain
    OOps. SOrry for ll that big bold-print. I wasn't shouting at you! I just hit the wrong button.

    (Looking at my fumbling fingers...)

  • Fox News’s Kirsten Powers announces: “I’m becoming Catholic!”

    10/12/2015 4:02:24 PM PDT · 62 of 199
    Mrs. Don-o to BlackFemaleArmyCaptain
    This is a false dichotomy. We lovingly follow the Lord Jesus and those who love Him and are faithful to Him. Remember that from the cross, Jesus gave us His mother to be our own: "Behold, your mother."

    It's touching: one of His dying words. And beautiful!

    This is made even more explicit in the book of Revelation:

    (Rev 12:17) "Then the dragon was angry with the woman, and went off to make war on the rest of her offspring, on those who keep the commandments of God and bear testimony to Jesus."

    Mary (the mother of the Messiah) is called mother also of those who obey God and believe in Jesus, i.e. all Christians are her "offspring."

    And what of advice does she have for us? Well, what woulda handmaid of the Lord say?

    "Do whatever He tells you." That's why it's safe and God-pleasing to follow Mary --- for she leads people to Christ. So many of our own mothers do the same (thinking fondly of my own!)

  • Fox News’s Kirsten Powers announces: “I’m becoming Catholic!”

    10/12/2015 3:13:32 PM PDT · 59 of 199
    Mrs. Don-o to fwdude

    Thank you, fwdude. Very decent, and your action speaks well of you.

  • Fox News’s Kirsten Powers announces: “I’m becoming Catholic!”

    10/12/2015 2:41:29 PM PDT · 53 of 199
    Mrs. Don-o to fwdude

    You don’t draw the line at malicious fiction, do you?

  • Fox News’s Kirsten Powers announces: “I’m becoming Catholic!”

    10/12/2015 2:38:56 PM PDT · 52 of 199
    Mrs. Don-o to Paul46360
    This is what I learned in the Catholic Church: Everyone needs Christ. And Christ, by His grace will change you, bless you and make you holy.

    'Welcome Kirsten.'

    She is,like any of us, a work in progress.

  • Synod notes – ‘Status quaestionis’ after Week 1

    10/12/2015 2:11:27 PM PDT · 3 of 4
    Mrs. Don-o to markomalley
    "Aut tace aut loquere meliora silentio."

    "Shut up; speak only if that would be an improvement upon silence."

    Probably not a very elegant, epigrammatic rendering. Somebody want to try to do better?

  • “Once the meeting is over, power will rest entirely in the hands of the Pope.”

    10/12/2015 1:34:26 PM PDT · 35 of 37
    Mrs. Don-o to Elsie
    OK, I googled Thomas Monson coffee and got the whole thing.

    Somethings are worth my time, and some things are... not.

  • The Dramatic Decline in World Poverty

    10/12/2015 4:54:53 AM PDT · 11 of 32
    Mrs. Don-o to expat_panama


  • “Once the meeting is over, power will rest entirely in the hands of the Pope.”

    10/12/2015 4:52:06 AM PDT · 32 of 37
    Mrs. Don-o to Elsie

    These must be”popular culture” references that I’m not getting. Is that something from TV?

  • “Once the meeting is over, power will rest entirely in the hands of the Pope.”

    10/11/2015 5:55:28 PM PDT · 30 of 37
    Mrs. Don-o to Elsie

    That’s all she wrote!

  • Why Singles Rights And Same-Sex Marriage Will Abolish All Marriage

    10/11/2015 4:43:28 PM PDT · 12 of 24
    Mrs. Don-o to Ray76


  • Priest-theologian: if worst-case scenario at synod occurs, Catholics must resist changes

    10/11/2015 2:32:16 PM PDT · 22 of 42
    Mrs. Don-o to ebb tide


  • The Impractical Catholic’s Guide to Infallibility

    10/11/2015 2:25:21 PM PDT · 30 of 169
    Mrs. Don-o to Popman
    This response is beside the point, since the Church does not teach that any human person is infallible, and certainly not by nature.

    Infallibility is a gift TO the Church, to protect it FROM the errors of popes. It is not that the Pope will always say the right thing, but that if the pope thinks or believes or says the WRONG thing, it will not be in such a way as to lead the whole church into error.

    That is to say, erroneous papal opinions will not be permitted to become dogmas.

    But it was a long article to read. So for everyone's convenience, here's a relevant and wacky cartoon featuring a Pope who croaks, for your edification: "How to Explain Papal Infallibility in Under Two Minutes" (YouTube)


  • “Once the meeting is over, power will rest entirely in the hands of the Pope.”

    10/11/2015 2:11:25 PM PDT · 28 of 37
    Mrs. Don-o to Greetings_Puny_Humans
    None of your quotes here are to the point. "Kissing_ whether it's kissing a Koran, or kissing the Western Wall in Jerusalem, or kissing the Liberty Bell in Philadelphia (all of which were done by Popes!) is not a matter of "Catholic doctrine" and has never been proposed as such.

    If it was a misunderstood gesture, it was the pope's personal gesture. If it was a lapse into error, it was the pope's personal error. If it was a sin, t was the pope's personal sin. It was not proclaimed as a binding de fide doctrine of the Church.

  • Diocesan Paper: Homosexual Relations Not Sinful

    10/11/2015 2:03:54 PM PDT · 91 of 91
    Mrs. Don-o to xone

    As far as I know, even if the trial was conducted in an ecclesiastical court, people convicted of capital crimes were always handed over to the “civil arm” for punishment. This rendition, however, did not mean that the Church required a particular punishment to be carried out. The Church, itself, was authorized only to impose ecclesiatical punishments, e.g. excommunication.

  • “Once the meeting is over, power will rest entirely in the hands of the Pope.”

    10/11/2015 1:56:04 PM PDT · 27 of 37
    Mrs. Don-o to daniel1212
    Dear Daniel1212,

    I can appreciate the work you have done on these two responses, totaling ~ 3,400 words, since I tend to send longish ones as well. However, your sources are diverse, the levels of authority mixed, each paragraph requiring adequate definition and distinctions in every instance. All this would probably double to triple the whole "word volume" of the discussion. (Ulp!)

    Neither of us has time to write, or read, a 150 paragraph response!

    The best I can do is to try to summarize.

    ”When the Prophet speaks: the thinking has been done.”

    This basic Islamic concept (“the thinking has been done”) is incompatible with Catholicism, and if it were true that it would find, (if applied to the Pope) “ considerable RC support,” my conclusion would be that those RC’s have not thought about it very carefully.

    The Vehementer Nos and Providentissimus Deus quotes on "authority" refer to formal Church doctrines, not positive canonical regulations, not mere disciplines, not essentially temporary or local rulings, and not even papal opinions.

    The absolutism is understood to be “within the law of Christ,” since anything which is not conformed to Christ lacks binding force.

    We can see this even in the way “we” (you and I) interpret Scripture, in that seeming absolutes are not absolute if they contradict Christ. For instance:

    “Slaves, be obedient to those who are your earthly masters, with fear and trembling, in singleness of heart, as to Christ…” (Ephesians 6:5)

    This looks absolute since in instructs slaves that they owe obedience to their masters “as to Christ”; but obviously if a master commanded “Flog that other slave to death,” or “I want you to have sex with me and my brother,” the slave must not obey, since it would entail disobedience to the Moral Law. The same would apply to ecclesiastical superiors: we owe obedience to them, but only insofar as this is conformable to the Moral Law.

    Inasmuch as Graham and Stapleton (writers previously unknown to me) refer to what Christ teaches us through the Church, they echo the message of the Gospels themselves:

    Matthew 18:17-18
    “ If he refuses to listen to them [two or three witnesses], tell it to the Church; and if he refuses to listen even to the Church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

    Here Jesus confirms the authority of the Church, linking it to the authority of “heaven.”

    And again, referring to the seventy disciples He appointed as messengers of the Gospel (Luke 10:17) :

    “ He who hears you hears Me, and he who rejects you rejects Me, and he who rejects Me rejects Him who sent Me.”

    The injunction to "hear" the Gospel isprimary, since any other legitimate authority is dependent on the reliability of the Gospel. Pius XII, of his own encyclicalls, said that they "demand consent,” and yet that itself cannot be an absolute statement, since Pope Francis demurred from it repeated times in his Encyclical, Laudato Si (LS).

    Unlike Pope Pius XII, who said in Humani Generis that he wished to provide closure on a topic previously considered “a question of free discussion among theologians.” Pope Francis aimed for the opposite: in LS he is writing to kick open a topic for discussion: this encyclical which was manifestly NOT meant to be authoritative. Here you have it, in Pope Francis' own words (paragraph numbers provided):

    (14 )“I urgently appeal, then, for a new dialogue … We need a new conversation…raising awareness of these challenges…”

    (15) “I will advance…proposals for dialogue and action…”

    (16) “[This is] the call to seek other ways of understanding… the need for forthright and honest debate…”

    (19)”Our goal is… to become painfully aware [of] what is happening to our world…”

    (61) “On many concrete questions, the Church has no reason to offer a definitive opinion”.

    “Dialogue,” “conversation,” “proposals,” “debate,” awareness-raising --- these words establish that the papal intent here is to spark a discussion, not to define some new doctrine.

    This bracketing of authoritative claims in LS was, as far as I know, an unprecedented experiment with the concept of Church as one voice in a symposium of many voices. Nevertheless, other Popes have set similar markers to their authority. In 2005 Pope Benedict XVI remarked, "The Pope is not an oracle; he is infallible in very rare situations, as we know". Pope John XXIII once stated it with a humorous twist: "I am only infallible if I speak infallibly but I shall never do that, so I am not infallible".

    The theologian, like every believer, must follow his conscience, and Joseph Ratzinger (as Archbishop) taught that "over the pope as the expression of the binding claim of ecclesiastical authority there still stands one's own conscience, which must be obeyed before all else," it cannot be allowed to be determinative of truth, and the Catholic is obliged to form it according to Catholic teaching."

    Note that this means that even the Pope’s conscience cannot “be allowed to be determinative of the truth,” since the Pope himself is obliged to form his conscience "according to Catholic teaching."

  • “Once the meeting is over, power will rest entirely in the hands of the Pope.”

    10/11/2015 7:30:58 AM PDT · 21 of 37
    Mrs. Don-o to Greetings_Puny_Humans; Montana_Sam; metmom
    "if the Pope comes out and asserts that divorcees can receive communion..."

    GPH, there is no problem with Catholics who have gotten a civil divorce receiving Communion, and to my knowledge never has been. Divorcees lawfully receive Holy Communion now. What would bar one from Holy Communion, would ongoing cohabitation with a person who is not your lawful spouse per Catholic marriage.

    Or how about this:

    "You are saying that if the Pope comes out and asserts [heresyxxx], that you have no obligation to believe official church teaching? "

    No, exactly the opposite. If the Pope asserts heresyxxx, I would still be obliged to be faithful as always to official Church teaching.

    "The Catholic Church can't change any of these official doctrines [?...] they do it all the time! See Vatican II."

    The Catholic Church has not in fact changed official doctrines of the faith via Vatican II. If you think it has, you will perhaps find more agreement with the sedevacantists and others who are in schism, than with me. I think those in schism have (probably in all sincerity) failed to distinguish between dogmas and disciplines, and/or failed to distinguish between the legitimate development of doctrine and the outright contradiction of doctrine.

    "The trick is that they just assert that their obvious changes are really in continuity with the past, even the whole kissing of Korans fad, despite previous Popes calling such activity anathema."

    This exposes what seems to be a misconception on your part: the idea that kissing a Koran is a doctrine of the Church.

    The Catholic Church has never been so foolish as to propose that the Pope is intellectually or morally faultless, flawless, or foolproof, let alone impeccable, personally ---- but only that he will never be able to bind the Catholic Church to falsity in matters of faith and morals.

    That means the Pope could be stupid or sinful (some of them, esp. during the Renaissance, were notoriously so) but cannot make an erroneous doctrine binding on the whole church. Thus "infallibility" is more a divine protection from the Pope than a personal quality of the Pope, since it constitutes a divine promise that no matter how screwed-up some opinion or practice of a Bishop of Rome may be, he will not be able to make a binding dogma out of it to mislead the whole Church. (Keywords "gates" "hell.")

    So whatever it was that St. Pope John Paul was doing in the famous 16-year-old picture that has been around the world 10,000 times on the Internet, it was at worst a cringe-making personal gaffe and not an erroneous definition of dogma.


    I would want to add that Pope John Paul was Polish after all, and therefore a kisser.

    Any time anybody gave him anything, he kissed it as a sign of thanks. He kissed sombreros. CD's. Guitars. Sweatshirts. Soccer balls. Sandwiches. Photographs. Baseball caps. Pineapples. Personal correspondence (letters). Cheeks. Foreheads. Hands. Walls (in Jerusalem.) He's famous for even getting on his knees and kissing the ground for godsake, and literally for God's sake because he was the kind of guy who easily and spontaneously expressed gratitude for gifts all the time.

    It's pretty clear he was kissing the book "as gift" ("as soccer ball") and not as a liturgical gesture canonizing Islamic scripture.

    I might render a different opinion if it had been Rowan Williams, GOL (for Groaning Out Loud); but, not unfairly, I'm going to give our Lolek the Mensch the benefit of the doubt because this is the same guy who commissioned Cardinal Josef ("the Enforcer") Ratzinger to write "Dominus Iesus," which clarified that nobody is saved by anybody except by Jesus Christ Our Lord.

    "Dominus Iesus." Ya could look it up. (LINK)

    I don't read Arabic, so I don't know. But if it turns out, as one FReeper suggested, that it might have been what it looked to be, the Sharif Bible, an Arabic-language edition of the the Jewish/Christian Sacred Scriptures--

    ...if so, well, Holy Moses, brother, get a grip.

    Oh. And here's a relevant and wacky cartoon featuring a Pope who croaks, for your edification:

    "How to Explain Papal Infallibility in Under Two Minutes (YouTube)


  • How the Rosary Led Me to Christ

    10/11/2015 4:47:53 AM PDT · 384 of 407
    Mrs. Don-o to Elsie

    I still don’t get it. This has something to do with grammar not being doctrine?

  • Diocesan Paper: Homosexual Relations Not Sinful

    10/10/2015 8:19:05 PM PDT · 89 of 91
    Mrs. Don-o to xone
    It's not, strictly speaking, a change in doctrine but probably in emphasis. It has never been considered obligatory to execute criminals for capital crimes; for instance, the courts of the various Church Inquisitions had a lower rate of capital punishment than secular or royal courts. Historian Thomas Madden points to documentary evidence that accused criminals sometimes tried to have their trials transferred to ecclesiatical courts, where there were higher standards of evidence and procedural due process, and much lower rates of capital sentencing.
  • “Once the meeting is over, power will rest entirely in the hands of the Pope.”

    10/10/2015 8:11:54 PM PDT · 19 of 37
    Mrs. Don-o to metmom
    Yes, Luther did initially try to reform the Church, and his excommunication in 1521 need not have lead to his permanent rupture from the Church. As you no doubt know, emperors, kings, nobles, bishops, clerics of every rank, all sorts of people were excommuncated over the centuries, and ended up reconciled with the Church, sometimes year later and sometimes in much shorter order.

    In Canon law, excommunication is a "medicinal penalty" intended to invite the person to change behavior or attitude, repent, and return to full communion. It has sometimes imposed illegitimately (since human beings are sometimes unjust!) but, more often, rightly and lawfully. Excommunication does not "undo" membership in the church; excommunicated Catholics are still Catholics, not banned from the assembly, not banned for instance from Mass, but still under the obligation to attend Mass (!) though not to receive Communion.

    Not a few saints, later canonized, were excommuncated for some period in their lives. Examples are St. Hippolytus, St. Columba, St. Athanasius (yes, that Athanasius), St. Joan of Arc, St. Hildegard of Bingen, and St. Mary Mackillop. Athanasius and Hildegard were certainly reformers, and are now considered Doctors of the Church.

    I think Luther's chosen course was to defiantly blow up his excommunication into a permanent rupture. Both the "Pope" side and the "Luther" side made errors of judgment; his was his decision to, as I said, split. And of course, writing pamphlets urging German princes to take up arms and make war on the Church and on the peasants was a definite no-no.

  • Diocesan Paper: Homosexual Relations Not Sinful

    10/10/2015 7:38:20 PM PDT · 87 of 91
    Mrs. Don-o to xone
    The emphasis, I think, is that the state has the right and the duty to protect society--- and ever member in it --- from aggression. If the aggressor cannot be stopped without killing him, then you can justly kill him. But if he can be stopped by non-lethal force, then the state should use that non-lethal force (the force involved in imprisonment.)

    I personally doubt -- and as a Catholic, am permitted to doubt --- the "prudential" part that says that modern societies can now effectively do this. We have all seen how difficult it is to get a real life sentence that cannot be overturned by appeal, by resentencing, by parole, by escape, but a judge letting people go to relieve overcrowding or for some other bogus reason.

    No to mention that convict-against-convict aggression is extremely common, which ought to result in a lot more capital sentences, since such reoffenders have demonstrated that imprisonment alone is not sufficient to restrain them.

    Bottom line, the Catholic Church will not, and cannot, say that executions are never just, or equate the just application of the death penalty with murder. The death penaly, even if very rare, must always be an option if it is the only way to protect society (even prison society) from the continuing predations of violent offenders.

  • How the Rosary Led Me to Christ

    10/10/2015 7:11:44 PM PDT · 352 of 407
    Mrs. Don-o to Elsie

    I don’t get your point. Is this Greek grammar?

  • Diocesan Paper: Homosexual Relations Not Sinful

    10/10/2015 7:10:58 PM PDT · 85 of 91
    Mrs. Don-o to xone
    The "current stance" of the Church acknowledges, as it always has, the legitimacy of capital punishment under specific circumstances, as well as the Christ-like practice of foregoing it in the interests of the sinner having a fuller chance of repenting and turning away from sin.

    From the Catechism:

    #2267 (LINK) Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.

    If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.

    Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically non-existent."

    The last paragraph ("Today, in fact...") is a prudential judgment, not a universal doctrine. That is, an attempted assessment of particular times and places where the severity of capital punishment could be foregone by the substitution of, for instance, life imprisonment without possibility of parole.

    Many have noted, with reason, that even a murderer with a life sentence can still aggress against others, e.g. by assault upon a guard or another prison staffer or another prisoner, and that these cases there would be no other recourse except the death penalty.

  • “Once the meeting is over, power will rest entirely in the hands of the Pope.”

    10/10/2015 6:56:07 PM PDT · 15 of 37
    Mrs. Don-o to metmom
    "If he is the representative of Christ on the earth, then wouldn't going against him equate to going against Jesus Himself?"

    If you had a grasp of history (which I think you do, some, like all of us), you would know the limitations on that sort of statement.

    To put it briefly, it's like what Pope John Paul II said in his Ordinatio Sacramentalis on a particular disputed topic:

    "We declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church's faithful."

    Get that? There are areas in which the Pope has no authority whatsoever. That would be (in the case above) changing the matter or form of a Sacrament, or anything else was handed down to us by Christ through the Apostles.

    Hence, nothing that is against Christ could be "authoritative" coming from the Pope, or from all the Bishops and Cardinals, or from any person or organ of the Church. You know, as we do, that there have been bad popes. None of them had any authority to lead people away from Christ.

    We've also had many, many reformers. I mean real reformers, not people who split.

  • Diocesan Paper: Homosexual Relations Not Sinful

    10/10/2015 4:30:20 PM PDT · 83 of 91
    Mrs. Don-o to NetAddicted

    Well then... thank you!

  • How the Rosary Led Me to Christ

    10/10/2015 4:14:52 PM PDT · 335 of 407
    Mrs. Don-o to ealgeone
    "To say it is not used anywhere else in greek is suspect as this is in the perfect participle verb. It is not an unusual verb in greek.

    But I know that doesn't fit catholic dogma."

    That Catholic Church does not have "dogmas" on the subject of Greek grammar.


    But if you come across "Kecharitomene" in any context other than a commentary of Luke 1:28 you let me know, OK? Because nobody else , to my knowledge, has been able to find one.

    In fact, one of my points is that Jerome's translation "full of grace" ("gratia plena") is not an ideal rendering of "Kecharitomene", nor even a very adequate one. I would say the Angelic Salutation goes somewhat beyond that.

    It's not that one can be "fuller than full," but that Greek, highly inflected language that it is, denotes so much more in a single word which has past, perfect, continuing, nominative, and feminine indicators all combined in one word.

    Latin is not as inflected as Greek is, and English even less so. That's why a really adequate translation would take a rather fuller phrase than "highly-favored one" or even "full of grace."

  • Pope Francis’ Latest Convert: Kirsten Powers

    10/10/2015 3:02:33 PM PDT · 30 of 71
    Mrs. Don-o to NYer
    She'll continue to be an ally of Evangelicals. She'll continue to be a defender of unborn babies She'll continue slamming the White House.

    Prayer, the Lord, the Sacraments.

    So purty, too.

    "Welcome, Kirsten Powers!"

  • Pope Francis’ Latest Convert: Kirsten Powers

    10/10/2015 2:48:59 PM PDT · 29 of 71
    Mrs. Don-o to E. Pluribus Unum


  • Pope Francis’ Latest Convert: Kirsten Powers

    10/10/2015 2:48:31 PM PDT · 28 of 71
    Mrs. Don-o to Bullish; GreyFriar

    Again I ask: did she make any reference to the Pope? Well, she might have, or not. But not in print, anyway. Not that I’ve seen.

  • Pope Francis’ Latest Convert: Kirsten Powers

    10/10/2015 2:46:06 PM PDT · 26 of 71
    Mrs. Don-o to rktman

    I must have missed something. Did she mention the Pope?

  • From the synod: Mercy is not an abandonment of Church teaching

    10/10/2015 2:43:07 PM PDT · 5 of 12
    Mrs. Don-o to faithhopecharity

    Here’s a tagline for ya:

  • How the Rosary Led Me to Christ

    10/10/2015 2:31:43 PM PDT · 333 of 407
    Mrs. Don-o to ealgeone
    "There's a reason it's a one of(f). It's the only time Jesus will be born!!"


    "However because it is used one time does not make it unique in that sense. There are around 400 words (iirc) that are used one time in the NT."

    Even if there are 400 words which are used only one time in the NT (which may very well be true) there is only one word which is used only onetime in the entire history of the Greek language --- in all of its literature, classical, Koine and contemporary --- with the sole exception of commentaries on Luke 1:28 itself. I's unique. And it's used, in its one and only instance, by an Archangel-Messenger who is the Ambassador of God. This angelic intelligence, herald of the Divine Presence, has access to all words fitting for his announcement to Mary, and yet has to invent a new one in order to address the handmaid Mary fittingly. Thank of that.

    "Your attempt at the Greek, while commendable, is based on an incorrect application of the Greek as I've noted too many times on previous occasions."

    Your opinion against mine, or --- to be more fair to you and to me as well --- your experts against my experts, since I don't think either of us personally claims to be a world-class Greek scholar.

    I have great respect for recent scholarship (I'm using that in a broad sense: say, the last 500 years) from people whose first languages were English or German. The work of men like James Strong, an American, English-speaking mid-19th century mayor, railroad organizer, translator and Methodist, are of ongoing value. Yet I would have an even more abiding interest in the scholarship of the men of 1500, 1600, 1700 years ago whose first language was Greek, and who lived immersed in the cultural assumptions and mental habits of an ancient Christian culture. St. John Chrysostom, for instance, richly feeds my conviction that with the "Kecharitomene," we are dealing with something truly astounding.

    Strong is wonderful for analysis, Chrysostom for synthesis. Strong gets the taxonomy of words; Chrysostom, I would say, "gets" the Word.

    "What is unique in this passage is the announcement of Christ to be born."

    What is unique in this passage is the announcement of Christ to be born of God and the Theotokos, the lady He blessed and with whom He chose to have His Holy Child, and called "Kecharitomene." That should be the focus. This is not just some arrival, not even just some arrival from Heaven, it is the Incarnation. God assumes a human nature, God assumes flesh, the Word is made flesh--- from the flesh of Mary. From the Daughter of Zion who is blessed because she heard the Word of God, and kept it.

  • Poll on Armed, Trained, Teachers

    10/10/2015 1:04:56 PM PDT · 10 of 35
    Mrs. Don-o to marktwain

    I just voted. Now pro-gun 67% - 33%.

  • How the Rosary Led Me to Christ

    10/10/2015 12:38:31 PM PDT · 330 of 407
    Mrs. Don-o to ealgeone; St_Thomas_Aquinas
    Dear brother Ealgeone,

    You assume that "Kecharitomene" has been, so to speak, debunked as a word pointing to a unique and mighty work done by God. You see it as somewhat commonplace, even "de minimis" ---a rather shrunken view which is, to say the least, not proven.

    As I proposed in #126, "Kecharitomene" is an unprecedented word, a nonce word. Never used anywhere else in the Bible. Never used anywhere else in all of secular Greek literature, and found only in Christian literature where the author is commenting on its first and only usage in Luke 1:28. It is a one-off event, a hapax legomenon, a singularity not only in the lexical sense but almost, I would say, in the space-time sense. What a delight! And yet --you've never dealt with that fact, neither with delight, nor even (as far as I can tell) with comprehension.

    There are reasons why an unprecedented word would be used for an unprecedented phenomenon. It can be fairly analyzed by adverting to Greek grammar, which is what I did, but you simply reject it as "false information" without refuting it.

    What great things, what great things God has done! In the context of something so marvelous, the rather lazy rejoinder of "well, it's not all that great," is rather disappointing. I sometimes ask myself why I bother. But of course I write because it delights me to think of what God has done here, as well as for the sake of other readers who may join all the rest of Christendom in that delight.

  • Twin bombs kill 86 at pro-Kurdish rally in Turkish capital

    10/10/2015 9:39:40 AM PDT · 4 of 11
    Mrs. Don-o to Dave346
    For good reason Christopher Hitchens called them "the landless, luckless Kurds."

    Yet they have been among the very, very few groups who have been willing to speak up clearly and pay up personally --- specifically, to arm and fight for the Christians and Yazidis against ISIS.

    May God rest their souls.

  • Diocesan Paper: Homosexual Relations Not Sinful

    10/10/2015 9:17:05 AM PDT · 81 of 91
    Mrs. Don-o to xone

    Umm.. OK... what in the world do you mean by “despite the teachings of the Catholic Church”?

  • Diocesan Paper: Homosexual Relations Not Sinful

    10/10/2015 9:15:51 AM PDT · 80 of 91
    Mrs. Don-o to NetAddicted

    Bookmarks: I think they’re used for both posts and comments.

  • How the Rosary Led Me to Christ

    10/10/2015 9:15:07 AM PDT · 325 of 407
    Mrs. Don-o to Elsie

    But with exceptions, of course. Jesus, for instance.

  • How the Rosary Led Me to Christ

    10/10/2015 9:14:28 AM PDT · 324 of 407
    Mrs. Don-o to Elsie

    “Glory in the fact”? That’s going a bit too far! I would say Catholics recognize the significance of the fact that all of the Savior’s “select men” -— and that includes Peter, first in position among the Apostles-— are still prone to darkness of intellect, error and sin. IIn the case you cite (Jesus calling Peter “Satan”) it’s because it goes against all (uninspired) human nature to think that God would allow His beloved Son to be tortured to death.

  • How the Rosary Led Me to Christ

    10/10/2015 9:09:55 AM PDT · 323 of 407
    Mrs. Don-o to Elsie
    "Those who will count Mary blessed are future generation, as she states in her Magnificat (”all generations.”) That would be us.

    So do 'us' Prots."

    Nice to see you here again, Elsie.

    Welcome to Christianity 101!

  • How the Rosary Led Me to Christ

    10/10/2015 9:08:31 AM PDT · 322 of 407
    Mrs. Don-o to Iscool
    Actually, if you want to get right down to it, she was called Kecharitomene.


    There's so much to thank God for, here!

    Bottom line: this unique neologism Kecharitomene (also called, linguistically, a "nonce word" or "hapax legomenon") is the best Greek word that could have been invented by Divine inspiration to indicate Mary's sinlessness, her being equipped to play her role as the natural source of Christ's human nature, His flesh: human, yet untainted by sin. No other Greek formulation could have conveyed it all.

  • Diocesan Paper: Homosexual Relations Not Sinful

    10/10/2015 8:31:11 AM PDT · 77 of 91
    Mrs. Don-o to IrishBrigade
    I think in thisyou are dwing mistken conclusions.

    First, much as it's true that as far as the post-V2 Liturgy is concerned, "the vandals got the handles," the Liturgy did remain the "Holy Mass" with its essentials unchanged, as you could see from comparing it as far back as the writings of St. Justin Martyr (100 - 165 AD)where we can see the essentials of what we indeed still have, and have always had, as the Holy Liturgy, a Sacrifice and a Sacrament.

    Christ only, is the One who make Holy Liturgy "Holy." At every valid Mass it is He who is High Priest. And we have never ceased to have a valid Mass.

    Second, your aphorism "Anything can change, and history posits that it will..." is a flat-out contradiction to reality. Many things do not change, cannot change, and history shows that they didn't, don't, and won't.

  • How the Rosary Led Me to Christ

    10/10/2015 8:24:10 AM PDT · 319 of 407
    Mrs. Don-o to Iscool
    "Those who will count Mary blessed are future generation, as she states in her Magnificat (”all generations.”) That would be us.

    And we do call her blest...She was blest because she was fortunate enough to be chosen by God to carry Jesus...

    And yet, Jesus says we Christians are just as blessed as Mary... "

    Good, good... now you're getting there! You and me both!