DR. PUSEY ON THE WORSHIP OF MARY IN THE CHURCH OF ROME

Sword and the Trowel ^ | 1866 | Charles Spurgeon

[A.A. Cunningham]

who didn’t die a virgin — she had other children after Christ was born.

A personal opinion not supported by Scripture or people like Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, et al.

[A.A. Cunningham]

Quite disingenuous of you to fail to note that the term used to refer to the Blessed Mother, co-redemptrix, is Latin which when translated to English means the woman with the Redeemer. It in no way elevates the Blessed Mother to a "status" equivalent to that of Christ. Perhaps your anti-Catholic MO prevents you from learning Latin. Perhaps you have no desire to be honest. Perhaps you see nothing wrong with bearing false witness against the Catholic Church.

Any viable reason why you refuse to refer to the Blessed Mother as Blessed, since that is what Scripture instructs you to do?

"Because He hath regarded the humility of his handmaid; for behold from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed." Luke 1:48

[sneakers]

Thank you. I'm Catholic as well. I can't believe people would actually believe such lies. It gets tiresome, sometimes, addressing the same tired, old lies over and over again. I just don't even bother anymore.

I love Our Lady. She is HIS mom. He loved her. He kept the 10 commandments more perfectly than human creature ever could: "Honor thy Father and thy Mother". He honored his mother. We should do the same. I am sure it makes Our Lord happy.

[A.A. Cunningham]

Does she not first along with the other Mary, find Jesus gone from the tomb.

No she doesn't. The Blessed Mother did not accompany Mary Magdalen to the tomb of Christ on Easter morning to anoint His body. That was Mary the wife of Cleophas who was the mother of James the less, Joseph, and Jude and Salome the wife of Zebedee who was the mother of James the great and John.

[Judith Anne]

Post of the Day Award!

[nmh]

“Hundreds of millions of moozies want to decapitate us and you are having a go at the Catholics????”

So truth is pushed aside?

That's the lamest excuse I have heard yet to ignore the falseness of Catholicism.

[50sDad]

It would probably be worthwhile to note what Benjamin Franklin had to say:

"If we do not all hang together, we shall all surely hang separately."

There are murderous child-killing monsters outside the gates, Democrats trying to open up the doors so we can "talk" to them...and some are wasting their time slipping the shiv in the backs of their fellow soldiers?

Go back into the keep with the children and let the guards out here do their work.

[SaintDismas]

Don’t bother trying to convince him. He’ll find out soon enough

[ichabod1]

I wonder if this fellow was a progenitor of Gary Pusey.

[Wonder Warthog]

"And I think it’s wierd, only because I don’t believe a dead saint can hear them unless the Holy Spirit passes the prayer along. So that boils down to asking God to tell Saint Joe that you want Saint Joe to ask God about something. Wierd, but otherwise harmless."

So in your particular flavor of Protestantism, you don't believe in life after death??? To Catholics, the dead are not (dead)---they are more alive than they were in this life on earth, with some fraction in Heaven, some in Purgatory, and some in Hell. Those in heaven are "prayed to" (dulia, not latria), those in Purgatory are prayed FOR, and those in Hell pitied.

What do YOU think happens when you die???

[Wonder Warthog]

"I didn’t know that. One can learn so much on FR!"

You didn't know it because "it ain't so". No such Catholic doctrine exists. Some Catholic theologians may have postulated such, but it is NOT a dogma of the Church.

[OpusatFR]

The burdon of proof is on you. I can’t prove a Dogma that doesn’t exist.

It is up to you to produce the Apostolic Constitution defining “ex cathedra” (from the chair of Peter) of this supposedly declared Dogma.

Then we can debate.

However, there is NO DOGMA on Mary as Co-redeemer.

It is, and continues to be a pious exercise.

[Petronski]

Seems that very little has changed in over a century.

Indeed. People of your ilk have been making a fetish of misrepresenting Catholicism for well over a hundred years.

[Uncle Chip]

"'We maintain a (co-)presence of Mary in the Eucharist. This is a necessary inference from our Marian theory, and we shrink back from no consequence.' 'We are much inclined,' he says afterwards, 'to believe an essential co-presence of Mary in her whole person, with body and soul, under the sacred species. Certainly to such a presence in the Eucharist, 1. there is required a glorious mode of being of the Virgin body of the Holy Mother. We are not only justified in holding this as to Mary, but we have well-nigh proved it. 2. The assumption of a bodily presence of Mary in the Eucharist compels self-evidently the assumption of a multi-location (i.e. a contemporaneous presence in different portions of space) of Mary, according to her flesh too. 3. One who would receive this must be ready to admit a compenetration of the Body of Christ and of that of the Virgin in the same portion of space, i.e. under the sacred species.' The writer subsequently explains that 'the "lac virginale" must be looked upon as that of Mary, which is primarily present in the Eucharist, whereto, in further consequence, the whole Christ the Head, the Blessed Virgin is, as also her soul, would be joined.' 'The Blood of the Lord, and the lac of His Virgin Mother, are both present in the sacrament.'"

My Oh My!!! Co-redemptrix and now Co-presence in the Eucharist???? It's getting a little crowded in there, isn't it???

[Gumdrop]

Here we go again. Spreading false interpretation about our devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary, the chosen one of God to be the Mother of our Redeemer.

Honoring her is not worshipping her.

[Petronski]

It's a hobby.

It's a fetish.

[Petronski]

"Illustrations of Popery"

LOL

[Petronski]

Perhaps your anti-Catholic MO prevents you from learning Latin. Perhaps you have no desire to be honest. Perhaps you see nothing wrong with bearing false witness against the Catholic Church.

Perhaps.

[OpusatFR]

“On the face of it, this is difficult to answer. Pius IX’s words do seem excessive. But let’s put them in context. First of all, the quotation is part of Pius IX’s letter to the world’s bishops consulting them on the wisdom of defining the dogma of the Immaculate Conception.

In other words, he is speaking within a Marian document.

**Second, Pius IX is using the papal “we” in expressing his own opinion and love for Mary.**

**He is not making a formal doctrinal pronouncement.** Third, this statement has to be placed within the context of the whole worship and life of the Church.

Taken on its own, this quote sounds as if Pius IX worships Mary. Taken in its context, it is clear that he doesn’t.

***Read the words closely—clearly the Pope’s ultimate reference is to Jesus Christ. Jesus Christis the foundation who is found “in Mary.” Jesus Christ is the one who is the source for “every hope, every grace, and all salvation,” and he comes to us through Mary.”***

http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2003/0301fea3.asp

[Iscool]

However, there is NO DOGMA on Mary as Co-redeemer.

It is, and continues to be a pious exercise.

Is it your 'dogma' that the sky is blue??? NO??? You believe it and teach it don't you???

Your pope believes Mary is the co=Redeemer...So who you trying to kid...If your church teaches it, or condones it, we don't need to get hung up on the definition of dogma...