Let the review stand, please. The Mary remark is not anti-Catholic, he gave both sides. Maybe we should start another thread.With all due respect, he did not give both sides. He stated that Catholics think of Mary as "divine." The divinity is now and always has been reserved for the Trinity in Catholicism, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Mary is not divine for Catholics. When Catholics pray to her they are praying to an intercessor between Jesus Christ and the prayerful, not to a divinity. There are some extreme Marians who have lobbied the current Pope to name her "co-redemptrix," but the Magisterium so far has rebuffed them, and I do not believe they will ever succeed in assigning her that status. But even if they did succeed, she still would not become "divine." It's simply an error to say otherwise.
I see that as an opportunity for education and discussion, not for pulling the thread. And by education I mean telling Protestants what Catholics believe, rather than what they have been told Catholics believe. It's not probably going to change their own beliefs, but it's still a small step in bringing people a little closer together.
There are some extreme Marians who have lobbied the current Pope to name her "co-redemptrix," but the Magisterium so far has rebuffed them "Co" as in "cooperate," not "co-president." The term means to emphasize Mary's singular, cooperative role in Christ's mission, that she never refused God.
The term isn't meant to raise her to the same level as Christ. The doctrine of Mary as co-redemptrix hasn't been formally dogmatized for pastoral reasons, because the term is confusing.
With all due respect in return, I believe I did. When there is communication there is a responsibility on both sides. The hearers are to try to hear the message in a truthful and unbiased way, while at the same time the communicators should do their best to communicate what they intend to. If there are some in Catholicism who are teaching that Mary is Co-redemptor among them the Pope, we have crossed over into God's territory by the understanding of people like me. It doesn't matter if one says that she is not divine if she is ascribed an ability that is ONLY done by the divine. Mary is what she does, not merely what she is called. If she isn't considered divine, but performs a function that only divinity can perform. She is defined by her actions as divine.
Does the Pope speak for the Catholic church or not? You said:
There are some extreme Marians who have lobbied the current Pope to name her "co-redemptrix," but the Magisterium so far has rebuffed them, and I do not believe they will ever succeed in assigning her that status. Yet, the Pope himself apparently believes this. Is he an "extreme Marian" (your words) or infallible? Look at the following quote DIRECTLY from the Vatican Site:
JOHN PAUL II
GENERAL AUDIENCE
Wednesday 9 April 1997
Dear Brothers and Sisters,
Continuing our catechesis on the Blessed Virgin Mary, we are considering her cooperation in the redemptive sacrifice of Christ. All Christians are called to cooperate with God as his fellow-workers (cf. 1 Cor 3:9) in spreading the fruits of the Redemption accomplished on Calvary. But the Second Vatican Council reminds us that Mary's cooperation with Christ, unlike that of other Christians, remains "completely unique" (Lumen Gentium, 61), since it forms a part of the very events by which her Son achieved our salvation.
The basis of this unique cooperation is Mary's divine motherhood and her sharing in Jesus' life, culminating in her presence at the foot of the Cross. In God's plan, Mary is the "woman" (cf. Jn 2:4; 19:26), the New Eve, united to the New Adam in restoring humanity to its original dignity. Her cooperation with her Son continues for all time in the universal motherhood which she enjoys in the order of grace. Trusting in this maternal cooperation, let us turn to Mary, imploring her help in all our needs.
Vatican source quote HERE
The new Adam brought spiritual life where the old one brought death. What is the new Eve to bring if not the same? Also, she cooperated in the redemptive sacrifice of Christ, according to the Pope. Put another way she is a participant in redemption, put yet another way, a co-redemptor. Plus, she is ascribed "universal Motherhood." If she is the "universal Mother" spiritually how can that not be divine? In what other way could she be a "universal Mother?" That's what I'm interpreting from the words spoken. If there is a problem it seems to be in how they are being communicated rather than how they are being understood by me and others. Surely you can honestly see that it doesn't take twisting to understand his words in that way?
Incidently, if the Pope or whatever group could allow such a thing to happen that was or could be considered wrong, on what basis do you accept so many of the other teachings and traditions that came about in the same way? Many Catholics have been outraged at various rulings down through the years, yet, when those generations died, the teachings were still left. This cannot be denied, Mel Gibson himself doesn't hold to some of the officially stamped Catholic teachings and I'm sure that there are other honest minded Catholics who feel the same way. Doesn't that at least cause some doubts in the area of infallibility? How can you not feel extremly frightened and insecure about what should be and what shouldn't, what is and what isn't? I have my Bible and sometimes that can be difficult enough, but I can't imagine having to keep up with everything else and still have peace of mind. I'm not against Catholics. I'm for everyone who are honestly seeking after the truth. But please don't accuse me of not giving both sides to my understanding, that seems to imply dis-honesty and I have no reason to be anything but as honest as I know to be.