Posted on 05/14/2008 10:16:49 PM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg
I suspect he HAS read "DeMontforte."
That is, I suspect he has read the WORD "DeMontforte."
FR rules prohibit me from mentioning WHERE I suspect he read that word.
Worship is as worship does. She is certainly not called a goddess by the rcc but the worship remains. There some in the RCC that have stepped over that line of using the W word too.
Just for fun find a thesaurus and look up worship. Now look at all the other words that mean worship. Now go read some writings of Mary and play worship synonym bingo and you will hit them all.
If watering it down does in fact require water, I suggest you drill a deep well.
So it matters not what is in their hearts, YOU decide what their actions mean.
Sometimes all I can say is wow.
Are we allowed to say "comic book"?
I think “tract” is still okay.
Link? So we can read it ourselves?
People that worship an idol don't have to call the idol an idol for the worship to be worship.
Isn't the use of the word "you" personal? Sometimes I get confused by that line.
On the spot? LOL
Do you imagine you've trapped me?
I'd be happy to discuss my beliefs with anyone I feel is of goodwill and truly interested in understanding.
I suspect you are bludgeon hunting.
And this is what I see on a Google search
” Son, the Mother of their unity. … In fact Mary’s role as Coredemptrix did not cease with the glorification of her Son” (Inside the Vatican, July 1997). . (0.38 seconds) “
Did you mean: Having suffered for the Church, Mary deserved to become the Mother of all the disciplines of her Son, the Mother of their unity. … In fact Mary’s role as Coredemptrix did not cease with the glorification of her Son” (Inside the Vatican, July 1997).
co-redeemerHaving suffered for the Church, Mary deserved to become the Mother of all the disciples of her Son, the Mother of their unity. … In fact Mary’s role as ...
www.religion-cults.com/mary/coredeemer.htm - 22k - Cached - Similar pages
LEFT BEHIND: TOLERABLE ENTERTAINMENT, INTOLERABLE THEOLOGY... Mary deserved to become the Mother of all the disciples of her Son, the Mother of their unity. . . . In fact Mary’s role as Co-redemptrix did not cease ...
www.wayoflife.org/fbns/leftbehind.htm - 27k - Cached - Similar pages
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So if you have any other links with the actual quotes, I’d appreciate them.
Who is it here who is declaring the meaning of actions of those he does not even know?
What??? I can't just post random pieces that have co-redemptrix in the title???
The Declaration of Czestochowa correctly observes that while each of these titles can be given a content in conformity with the deposit of the faith, nevertheless such "titles, as proposed, are ambiguous, as they can be understood in very different ways." This is a serious observation, for, in a doctrinal pronouncement of such weight as a dogmatic definition, it is necessary that the terms not lend themselves to ambiguous interpretations and that they be understood in a substantially univocal way. For example, the title of Mediatrix has been understood throughout the centuries and is presently understood in notably different ways. It is enough to check recent books on mariology -- from 1987 to the present some twenty manuals have been published -- to note that the mediation of the Blessed Virgin Mary is treated by theologians in contrasting ways -- in terms of its doctrinal evaluation, the determination of the area in which it is exercised and in comparison with the mediation of Christ and the Holy Spirit. Prescinding from any other consideration, in the case of the mediation of Mary, with respect to many of its aspects, one finds oneself before a quaestio disputata, far from that substantial theological unanimity which, in relation to every doctrinal question, is the necessary prelude for proceeding to a dogmatic definition.
Obviously the current daffynition doesn't go far enough that any one can make hide nor hair of it...
And no one is willing to go beyond that...They all have their own 'private interpretation' of of what co-redemptrix means...Makes it very convenient to be so vague about it...
But what's interesting to me is that it's claimed that these dogmas are the result of direct inspiration of the Holy Spirit, but apparently the Holy Spirit left you guys holding the bag when it came to defining what He meant...
If something is printed on the same style paper as a comic book and it has comic book-style drawings and script and if it is dealing totally devoid of truth (Catholics worship Mary as a goddess is about as believable as saying there really is a guy named Clark Kent from Krypton and he flies around at the speed of light), then it is a COMIC BOOK.
A “tract” is something that subversive (generally far-left Marxists and anarchists) hand to curious bystanders at their hate rallies . . . Okay, on second thought, “tract” works as well as comic book.
Papal Calvin’s followers quickly realized that to live in a world in which all you have to do is climb into a broom closet, fess up, say a Hail Mary and voila' you now have a get out of hell card means you can do what you want on Friday night, as long as you climbed into the closet when you could squeeze it in to your calendar. one’s life decisions had no impact on one’s ultimate outcome was to live in an absurd world.
Not to worry if you are dying in the hospital, the priest can waltz in, mumble some mystical chant and clean your soul up, even if your sin is the cause of you being in the hospital, i.e. getting shot while holding up a liquor store, or in the case of a priest getting beaten to within an inch of your life by the father of an altar boy. You can even be oblivious to what is happening and still receive your get into Heaven Free Card. One can lie, cheat, and steal and still quite easily end up in heaven.
Of course if you buy the farm before receiving the last rites your family can, through a "donation", bribe the local representative of Rome to shorten your stay in purgatory, so what is the incentive of leading a Holy life?
You would do well to read them rather than "just post" them.
"Can?" Present tense?
Prove it.
Not seeing much worship of Mary. Why defend what we are not doing?
Luther's advice was to "Sin boldly!"
I thought that was what we were doing here??? If so, then the question is appropriate ------
This is from your site.
“If you would like to share, as a member of the faithful, in placing this final dogmatic crown on the head of our Immaculate Mother and Queen during the climax of the Age of Mary, please fill out the petition, adding lines as necessary, and mail it to:”
So by your definition, “Catholics” believe that Mary is a co-redeemer, right?
Well, then I guess Americans want to impeach Bush. This group has a petition going....
http://www.democracyinaction.com/dia/organizationsCOM/Greens/petition.jsp?petition_KEY=237
Maybe it would be better to say “some”. Because when you don’t qualify, it makes it “Catholics” inclusive. I’m teaching that in 5th grade english.
I’ll give you that “some” Catholics want to make Mary a co-redeemer, just as “some” Americans want to impeach Bush. “Most” don’t want either. To continue to say Catholics and make it inclusive is not correct grammatically nor without insult.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.