The Other Pope (MAJOR BARF ALERT)

Sorry about the tone and I apologize.

What concerns me is that the Catholic Church (At least what happened after centuries after the Resurrection of Christ) revolves around Mary and not just the risen Christ. Heck, that present day Catholic Church says Mary is a co-advocate (Vatican II). That is blatantly false and contrary to the Word of God.

David was Godly, did he commit sin? Moses was Godly, did he commit sin? Mary was Godly, did she sin? If not, why does she refer to Jesus as my savior, not a savior or the savior. Was God inspiring a linguistic course on the meaning of certain words?

I believe in the Catholic Church (As well as other Churches that believe in the Christ Deity and Resurrection) and some traditions but do not stop questioning Church Doctrine. Do you believe the Pope should grant Mary the title of Co-Redemptrix? A lot of Catholics are pushing for this. It took around 1950 years after Christ rose from the dead to officially declare the Assumption as dogma by Pope Pius XII.

My mom called me condescending and the such until she actually started to question the Catholic stance on Mary. She goes to Church everyday (Must be a bad Catholic) and now instead of praying for Mary's "intercession" she goes directly to the source, The Lord Jesus Christ, the only advocate.

Mary is a high figure in heaven, but as to us humans, Mary should just be a role model not prayed to or prayed through and not co-anything equal to the risen Christ.

Sorry - you can't read. Pius XII ruled out an account of evolution according to which the soul emerged from matter. So does John Paull II. Pius said that purely bodily evolution on the material plane is open for discussion. John Paul says so too. There is no difference whatsoever between the actual teaching of the two Popes.

Do you believe the Pope should grant Mary the title of Co-Redemptrix? A lot of Catholics are pushing for this. It took around 1950 years after Christ rose from the dead to officially declare the Assumption as dogma by Pope Pius XII.

(BTW, apology accepted. It's over. That was then, this is now and so forth.)

I think Co-redemptrix is a very silly thing to say and I sho' 'nuff will be concerned if the new Pope goes for it. There's a sense it which it is trivial. That is, when you forgive me and explain to me how I've been wrong, you are participating in the redemptive act. So one could say you are a co-redemptor. But the term sure SOUNDS like Mary is being promoted to a sort of Senior partnership level, and i don't think that's good.

There were a lot of people believing in the assumption before it became de Fide - for a LONG time before it became de Fide (though I can't say how long and REALLY hope you won't ask me to do the research). It was a matter of pious opinion for about 1k years.

And as for the Immaculate thing, I love twitting my Dominican buddy that Thomas Aquinas was against it.

I think I've sort of shot my wad on how Mary's Immaculateness (immaculaticitude?) can be seen as a result of Christ's saving work without her having sinned.

Am I right that you are pretty much rejecting Chalcedon?

Grist for your crevolist. The pope is in apostasy because he suggested that evolution and religion are not in mutual exclusion.

It's a good thing we live in the west where super-state church leaders need not be consulted before science can progress. It wasn't always that way, but this pope knew that faith was more than proving God's existence using a flimsy failure of imagination proof.

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.