[Quix]

this devotion is necessary, simply and solely because it is a way of reaching Jesus perfectly, loving him tenderly, and serving him faithfully.

UNMITIGATED NONSENSE. Christ Himself showed THE WAY PERFECTLY--AND IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH HIS MOTHER--WHO WAS EVEN THEN, ESSENTIALLY HISTORY.

This whole stinking pile of existential fantasy IS AN INSULT TO THE LIFE, TEACHING AND MINISTRY OF CHRIST--BY WHOM ALL THAT WAS CREATED WAS CREATED.

IT ESSENTIALLY DECLARES that HE, GOD, DIDN'T TEACH IT RIGHT. HE DIDN'T GET IT RIGHT. HE DIDN'T FORMALLY INSTALL MUMMY IN HER PROPER PLACE.

THEREFORE, THIS CABAL OF BUREAUCRATIC POLITICAL MAGICSTERICAL POWERMONGERS 300-400 years LATER HAVE TO CLEAN UP CHRIST'S ACT AND DO IT RIGHT TO RESCUE THE SYSTEM!

TO RESCUE THE WHOLE STINKING FAR TOO OVERLY HUMAN SYSTEM AND THEIR OWN POWER-MONGERING, INDEED!

WHAT AN INSULT TO THE NAME, LIFE, ROLE, & OFFICE OF JESUS THE CHRIST.

CHRIST HIMSELF EMPHASIZED THAT THOSE WHO DID THE WILL OF THE FATHER WERE HIS MOTHER, FATHER, BROTHERS, SISTERS.

RC'S IRRATIONALLY DISMISS THAT VERSE AS WELL AS THE VERSES ABOUT CHRIST'S BLOOD HALF-SIBLINGS. The 'cousin' nonsense is irrational on the face of it from the context. There would, in that culture, be no purpose or reason in mentioning cousins. Such a meaning would negate the whole verse as meaningless and useless. The only fitting rational meaning is as stated in the overwhelming majority of translations--Christ's blood brothers and sisters. Sheesh.

Paul further elaborated on THE WAY--again with no mention of Mary as any part of it.

Montfort is fabricating fantasies . . . and very dangerously so.

[Mad Dawg]

It's the calm well-ordered way you express your arguments that commends them to me. What do you mean by 'essentially history'? She is mentioned in Acts as praying with those technically know as apostibuls in the upper room. Can anyone who was there at the first Pentecost be essentially history?

The problem your side has is that you assume that sometime after the writing of the last book in the NT, everything became so very awful and remained so, despite occasional glimmers of light, that starting in 1517 (only a few decades before 1590, we are asked to believe) the Church had to be reconstructed from ... Sola Scriptura.

The artificiality of this exercise would seem to be emphasized by the wide array of non-Catholic organizations all claiming to be Sola Scriptura and many contradicting one another, some even anathematizing one another, if not now, certainly only 2.5 to 3.5 centuries ago right here in the colonies.

BTW, I remind you personally that you invited a little exposition on scholastic metaphysics. I gave one, and have another in the oven.