The Worship of Mary? (An Observation)

[OLD REGGIE]

I’m sorry, FRiend, I can’t speak for Cardinal Law. But I can give you this link to a news story talking about the co-redemptrix title. It’s 1997. JPII never did it.

The drip, drip, drip treatment has begun. How many years did they just "talk" about the bodily Assumption.

One day you were allowed to disagree with the idea and then BANG! it was dogma. Believe or be damned.

Prepare yourself.

[1000 silverlings]

Romans 5:17

For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.

5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.

5:19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

5:20 Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:

5:21 That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.

[1000 silverlings]

hmmm... do you suppose God’s mercy endures forever?

[1000 silverlings]

You know that’s actually a song and not a prayer, right? Catchy refrain.

[1000 silverlings]

I used to could “name that tune” in less beats, but without instructions to the chief priest Asaph and what instruments to use, it takes me longer.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

So now you agree that Christ alone saves the fallen sinner.

And yet earlier tonight when I said that "Mary did not "cooperate" in Christ's "work of restoring supernatural life to souls," you disagreed by saying Mary cooperated in Christ's "work of restoring supernatural life to souls" (which is another way of saying "saves the fallen sinner") "in her assent and submission to the will of God at the anunciation."

Again, the RC wants it both ways.

[roamer_1]

O.k.: it’s very clear that we have very different understandings about the nature of the Body—either we become one Body or we don’t.

I Cor 12:22-26

Of course we become one body, but that is *not* because we deserve it. That is fully a matter of Christ's benevolence.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

lol. And now even a Cardinal is not to be believed.

So much for that vaunted "apostolic authority."

Only when it suits the current argument. Tomorrow, it may be different.

[OLD REGGIE]

Your editing verges on the disingenuous:

Please note I made it clear I posted the Primary definition.

Look again. I'll even put it in big letters for you.

In the following post I have copied #2409 by Philo-Junius. The PRIMARY definition from Dictionary.com is printed in red.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

lol. Absurdity suits their argument.

[1000 silverlings]

They have nothing to hold onto, no anchor. They even get “the Rock” wrong. After that, it’s all shifting sand.

[roamer_1]

??

[Philo-Junius]

Except that the secondary definition, which you omitted, eviscerates your argument that the phrase can be understood in only one way.

[OLD REGGIE]

Good night. This old man is tired.

[dan1123]

You said: "If I ask you to pray for me, I am asking you to intercede or mediate."

Mediate is WAY off and is a horrible misuse of language. If you think asking someone to pray for you is the same as "mediation"--especially when intercession is the term used earlier in the same passage--not mediation, then you're WAY off. To EVEN BRING UP, "If I ask you to pray for me" in a thread about MARY, it is YOU WHO BROUGHT SUMMONING THE DEAD INTO THE CONVERSATION--NOT ME.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

They have nothing to hold onto, no anchor. They even get "the Rock" wrong. After that, it's all shifting sand.

That deep-seated emptiness must be filled with something. So it gets filled with physical sensations like incense and incantations and kneeling pads, and earthly hoops to jump through like performing penance to atone for sins already paid for by Christ, and monastic men standing before you who are named as "another Christ," and moldy relics and icons to kneel before, and wooden statues to pray to, and the physicality of the Lord's Supper trumping its spiritual truth, and most especially this unseemly, unScriptural adoration of Mary which very nearly sounds like some weird incestuous relationship whereby the mother and Son are on the cross together.

I read some of the catechism tonight concerning Mary and the language is really bizarre.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

As we’ve seen from these discussions, the RCC believes a word can mean any number of things depending on the time of day and the turning of the moon.

[dan1123]

If the Blessed Virgin had asked Christ to come down from the Cross, and make atonement, say, by shedding a single drop of His infinitely precious blood, would or would not Christ, as a perfect observer of the Law, have been obliged in filial piety to do so?

Funny in Matt 12:46-50, Jesus didn't seem to mind disobeying His earthly mother. Why would it change at the cross? In John 5, He broke the Sabbath law. So neither point would make Jesus obliged to come down from the cross.