The Worship of Mary? (An Observation)

[netmilsmom]

>>give the poor baby a sugar t_t—i.e. a teaspoon of sugar in a corner of a hankey secured with a string or rubber band.<<

Oh that must have been fun for the baby, but not so good for those budding teeth!

[Mad Dawg]

Well it’s Catholic theology and we are dealing here with a Catholic defense of it,

When I said it was up to someone to quell reasonable doubts of innocence and that this was a Protestant principle, I was ridiculed.

Now when somebody makes some wild and crazy charges against us it is our theology and up to us to provide a defense? And all the less do I think so when I have been shown that "drive them nuts" is a strategy of some Protestant posters (and when drawing the logical conclusion from this and stating it is called "foul and disingenuous").

Let somebody show a serious interest in what we teach and display serious desire to understand and evaluate, and we can discuss all these things in candor.

Otherwise, well, what you see is what you get.

[Petronski]

Glucosamine and condroitin have my 80-year-old father scooting around like a 60-year-old, or a billygoat.

[Mad Dawg]

So:

(A)How do you reconcile that with the same passage telling us to make prayers and thanks givings and supplications and all that for others.

(B)How, exactly, does that show we are not to pray to others? There's clearly a chain of reasoning, but I don't see it.

[Petronski]

It is a proposed Catholic doctrine. It is not a teaching of the Catholic Church.

[Mad Dawg]

between

Between?

[1000 silverlings]

Other posters have been defending it up until now. We have been told, repeatedly, that it is Latin and that it means “with the Redeemer”. Now that it has been pointed out to them that it’s not Latin, that it is illogical and made up, they have decided, apparently, to disown it. So it doesn’t exist. Got it

[Petronski]

Well it’s Catholic theology . . .

It is not. It might be the theology of "a" Catholic or "some" Catholics, but it is not a teaching of the Catholic Church.

[Quix]

True. true.

[Petronski]

We have been told, repeatedly, that it is Latin and that it means “with the Redeemer”. Now that it has been pointed out to them that it’s not Latin, that it is illogical and made up, they have decided, apparently, to disown it.

Fanciful.

[netmilsmom]

>>There are plenty of “Vatican documents” that do not and cannot establish doctrine.<<

True, but this one’s a pretty safe bet.

I’ve done a Vatican.va search for co-redemptrix. It came up with four hits.

Every one is about people deemed to be “cults” that the Vatican shut down.

[reagandemocrat]

Virtually every complaint and every answer filed in every courthouse in every county of every state in the U.S. contains a “Prayer For Relief”...

Do these people seriously believe that all those litigants are blasphemers?

Stunning.

[1000 silverlings]

Now that Catholics have no idea where it’s from, the burden has shifted onto us to tell you, too funny

[netmilsmom]

>>Again, a Catholic needs to explain to us whence it cometh, because it is illogical.<<

Well it wasn’t the Vatican so perhaps you can ask that Catholic?

[Petronski]

I was once told that capitalizing a proper noun means bowing to that thing. Amazing!

[Mad Dawg]

That is false. And I also see no connection between it and the post to which it is allegedly a response.

Rope-a-dope?

[netmilsmom]

Got to make dinner on this HOT day.
Be back!

[Quix]

That helped me, too.

But not near as much as the liquid kind. I don’t know what’s added to those ingredients . . . let me check . .

DRINKABLES ULTIMATE JOINT CARE

also in addition to those to ingrediants—colligen and MSM

[Petronski]

Now that Catholics have no idea where it’s from, the burden has shifted onto us to tell you, too funny

The ones who claim it is a Catholic teaching should prove that it is.

[dan1123]

A) There is a difference between the words “to” and “for”

B) Praying to someone other than God for something only God can give makes them a mediator between God and man.