Remember, anti-Catholics must always resort to lying. In general, anti-Catholics distort, misrepresent, and pretend that one thing is another.
You wrote:
“If I figure out how to post pictures on FR I’ll be glad to show you pictures of catholics kneeling before statues of Mary praying the Rosary.”
And yet none of them are worshiping the statue - which was your earlier claim. I’ve known Protestants to pray before caskets are funerals. Does that mean they are worshiping the deceased?
“When Jesus’ disciples asked Him to teach them to pray, did He include His mom in the prayer? Nope.”
Was Mary in Heaven at that time? Nope. Thus, you have no point at all.
And then we see that anti-Catholics - hating genuine scholarship and often being poorly read - rely entirely on anti-Catholic websites for their information. In this case, most likely this one: http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/ptds.html
You wrote:
“According to Eadmer (A.D. 1060–1124), ... Andrew Taylor, “Three medieval manuscripts and their readers,” University of Pennsylvania press; page 173”
And then we see that there is no such book. The title actually is, Textual Situations: Three Medieval Manuscripts and Their Readers.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/27870498?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents So, first we see that the anti-Catholic is too stupid to get the title right. Then we see that there is an ellipse in the quote in Taylor’s book. Then we see that the anti-Catholic cuts out a key phrase that is the original author’s explanation for his belief. After all truth and accuracy don’t matter to the anti-Catholic. And I know that this is the case because I just looked at the page in question.
And even with all of that, it has to be said, it doesn’t matter what Eadmer wrote. It was just his opinion. And almost no Catholic today has ever heard of him let alone been affected by his beliefs.
But, of course, the fact that the quote means nothing, is deliberately cut, and is mislabeled as to its source, none of that will stop you from posting it over and over again: http://209.157.64.200/focus/religion/3281253/replies?c=144
The anti-Catholic doesn’t care about the truth.
>> “According to Eadmer (A.D. 1060–1124), ... Andrew Taylor, “Three medieval manuscripts and their readers,” University of Pennsylvania press; page 173”<<
And then we see that there is no such book. The title actually is, Textual Situations: Three Medieval Manuscripts and Their Readers. http://www.jstor.org/stable/27870498?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents So, first we see that the anti-Catholic is too stupid to get the title right. Then we see that there is an ellipse in the quote in Taylor’s book. Then we see that the anti-Catholic cuts out a key phrase that is the original author’s explanation for his belief. After all truth and accuracy don’t matter to the anti-Catholic. And I know that this is the case because I just looked at the page in question.
And yet, you didn't have the guts to post the quote! Why? Talk about "truth and accuracy" not mattering. That it doesn't matter to some catholics is plainly clear now.
And even with all of that, it has to be said, it doesn’t matter what Eadmer wrote. It was just his opinion. And almost no Catholic today has ever heard of him let alone been affected by his beliefs.
Straight from the liberal/Alinsky playbook.
A large majority of writings by catholics have not been read by catholics....that would include the CCC based on what I've witnessed on this board.
Most catholics have not heard of Montfront either....but he wrote what he wrote.
A lot of catholics couldn't tell you what some of the ECFs have written or even who they were. They still wrote what they wrote. That these authors have not been read or heard of is not the point. The point is they wrote what they wrote due to the roman catholic position on Mary.
Here is the complete quote:
"Her son is the Lord and Judge of all men, discerning the merits of the individuals, hence he does not an once answer anyone who invokes him, but does it only after just judgment. But if the name of his mother be invoked, her merits intercede so the he is answered even if the merits of him who invokes her does not deserve it." From Judgment to Passion: Devotion to Christ and the Virgin Mary 800-1200,p246, Rachel Fulton, Columbia University Press, 2002
Eadmer is also quoted in the same publication: "Sometimes salvation is quicker if we remember Mary's name than if we invoke the name of the Lord Jesus." Fulton, p246.
These two quotes are put together in another text, "Masculinity and Marian Efficacy in Shakespeare's England", Dr Ruben Espinosa, p. 12,Ashgate Publishing Limited, Burlington, VT.
"Sometimes salvation is quicker if we remember Mary's name than if we invoke the name of the Lord Jesus.....Her son is the Lord and Judge of all men, discerning the merits of the individuals, hence he does not an once answer anyone who invokes him, but does it only after just judgment. But if the name of his Mother be invoked, her merits intercede so that he is answered even if the merits of him who invokes her does not deserve it. (570a-b)", p12
So thanks, Vlad....we now have the full complete quote from three sources! Glad we cleared that up.
Was Mary in Heaven at that time? Nope. Thus, you have no point at all.
Really....this is the best you've got on this one??
So catholics are saying that Mary's "powers" came only after she went to Heaven?? If Mary was all catholics claim she is why no record of anyone on the NT coming to her for help? or salvation?
the catholic cannot answer why John did not even use Mary's name in John 2....only the mother of Jesus. Again, not the mother of God, but the mother of Jesus. John knew what he was writing.
Even good doctor Luke did not call her the mother of God.
But to be clear:
Do catholics pray to Mary? check.
Do catholics have statues of Mary? check.
Do catholics kneel before Mary? check.
And again, we won't bring up the proposed Fifth Marian dogma.