Prove it.
The ball is in your court.
You make the accusation, you prove it.
Who is the artist?
Where is it?
What is the year it was made?
Otherwise it's this
| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 10/27/2009 12:40:43 PM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:
Childish behavior. |
Posted on 07/25/2009 2:40:04 AM PDT by Quix
Yes, Rome talks out of both sides of its mouth, as we’ve just seen. So was John Paul II wrong?
You seem to be confused. Yes, the Church is commonly called the Bride of Christ. The Song of Solomon has frequently been read typologically, as referring to both the marriage between Christ and the individual soul, and the marriage between Christ and His Church, spoken of by St. Paul.
I don’t recall St. Paul calling the Church the Bride of the Holy Ghost. But Mary can, in a sense, be called the Bride of the Holy Ghost since the Holy Ghost came to her and that was how she conceived Jesus, according to the Gospel accounts.
Similarly, Mary suffered when Jesus was on the Cross. Not by being on the cross herself, but because His suffering was like a sword piercing her heart, as Simeon prophesied when Jesus was presented at the Temple as a baby. Milton, a good Protestant, mentions this in Paradise Lost.
As for that cross, with Mary on the other side, it is not Catholic in spirit. There may have been such a thing shown in a church somewhere, but there’s nothing Catholic about it. Nor have you provided any evidence that it is normally to be found in the Church of Santa Maria Maggiore.
I’m not sure why you are wasting everyone’s time with these silly accusations.
It’s not dogma and therefore not the teachings of the Catholic Church. I can think that are angels flying around my head, it’s not dogma. Padre Pio could say that ravioli is a mainstay in the diet, it’s not dogma. Padre Pio said that women shouldn’t wear pants, Honey that ain’t dogma.
So let me say it again slowly.. I-t i-s n-o-t D-o-g-m-a. There, not so hard.
As for this....>>Please note the lack of any Roman Catholic voices against naming Mary as a “co-redeemer.”<<
The big guy already spoke...
The Pope on Co-redemptrix
“Yet when asked, in a 2000 interview by Peter Seewald contained in the book God and the World, whether the Church would go along with the desire to solemnly define Mary as Co-redemptrix, Ratzinger’s response doesn’t look good. He says that the title Co-redemptrix “departs to too great an extent from the language of Scripture and of the Fathers and therefore gives rise to misunderstandings” (53). He also says that “for matters of faith, continuity of terminology with the language of Scripture and that of the Fathers is itself an essential element; it is improper simply to manipulate language” (54). “
And anyone who says different should be referred to him.
So have a little fit and keep quoting those silly websites, but the Pope gave the word and we’re all down wit dat.
And anyone who isn’t Catholic, what do you (plural) care anyway? We know what we are talking about.
Mary’s assent to be the Mother of Christ (2nd person of the Trinity, ie God) makes her the Mother of God. As God is our Father, (see the prayer, “Our Father) so she is our Mother in spirit and in truth. She ever points us to Christ her Son and says, “Do whatever He tells you.” So she aids, in pointing us to Him.
The priest who taught me the initial essentials of the Gospels is my spiritual father. The nun who worked with me when I volunteered at my childrens’ school is my spiritual sister. The nurse nuns I worked with at the hospital are also my spiritual sisters.
Anyone who offends them, offends me. Nevertheless, following Mary’s example, I point them to Christ and say with her, “Do whatever He tells you.” I sincerely doubt He tells you to mock His mother.
How about JPII? Just another muddle-headed pope who kisses Korans and deifies Mary?
Prove it.
The ball is in your court.
You make the accusation, you prove it.
Who is the artist?
Where is it?
What is the year it was made?
Otherwise it's this
I bookmarked that. I’ll cruise around there tomorrow and PM you.
That would be nice if it worked!
Those statues comport with Rome's teachings. I don't know why you and your husband are so perplexed.
Maybe you and hubby could check out your catechism and assorted pope's teachings...
"Mary suffered and, as it were, nearly died with her suffering Son; for the salvation of mankind she renounced her mother's rights and, as far as it depended on her, offered her Son to placate divine justice; so we may well say that she with Christ redeemed mankind." - - Inter Sodalicia - pope Benedict XV, Inter Sodalicia. 973 By pronouncing her "fiat" at the Annunciation and giving her consent to the Incarnation, Mary was already collaborating with the whole work her Son was to accomplish. She is mother wherever he is Savior and head of the Mystical Body.
We”re all familiar with Roman Catholic apologists who cannot face the truth about their own religion and so they close their eyes and shout “I can’t see a thing!”
Again, how are your quotes untrue?
Great.
Hey, "big guy," read your own catechism and stop preaching heresy.
973 By pronouncing her "fiat" at the Annunciation and giving her consent to the Incarnation, Mary was already collaborating with the whole work her Son was to accomplish. She is mother wherever he is Savior and head of the Mystical Body.
How is that false?
You’re the one pushing Co-Mediatrix here.
Give me that Catechism quote again about Co-Mediatrix.
Mary is no one's "co-redeemer." She was a young, fallible and virginal Jewish girl who was in need of a Savior just as much as you and I.
***But I believe those statues with Mary on the cross with Christ are in Rome and Poland, and not a figment of some gigantic Protestant hoax. ***
I don’t care what you believe. You have made a charge. Now prove it.
>>There are TWO CHURCHES and TWO PHOTOS [convert this document.] , one in Rome and one in Poland. <<
WHERE? Both the City of Rome and the Country of Poland (Lord Love her) are pretty big.
Where are they?
What churches?
Who are the artists?
What is the story behind them?
Why did some anti-Catholic blogger Photoshop a hornet’s nest on the back of a crucifix and try to proclaim that it’s Mary at the Vatican.
Quick, someone call Instapundit! It’s another bad Photoshop with no reference!
***INCREDIBLE Blasphemy, YET AGAIN.
The BLOOD OF JESUS
is the furthest thing one can get from threadbare!***
The Body and Blood of Jesus are our spiritual food, as He teaches us. When you repudiate His teachings, His food and His Church, I’d say that you are left with only the threadbare, indeed. Do you have anything left?
And yet...
Oh I can see the picture.
What I can’t see is the references to WHERE the photo was taken.
Rome is a big place
So is Poland.
Where is this?
I’m not trying to be sarcastic, but what are you talking about?
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.