[CynicalBear]

>>Everything about a creature is secondary and contingent.<<

Yep, but the problem is that Catholics put Mary in a primary position. They deny it but it has been shown over and over that in fact they do.

[Mrs. Don-o]

">Everything about a creature is secondary and contingent.<< Yep, but the problem is that Catholics put Mary in a primary position. They deny it but it has been shown over and over that in fact they do."

Aha! (Now I feel like a diagnostician.) Now I think I see exactly where the problem is. Everything we Catholics are saying about a creature (Mary) you are taking as if it were absolute and directed toward a goddess.

Think this through with me. I think we can unravel this.

The Song of Solomon (Link) is full of praises of a woman and a man for each other. There's over a hundred verses about the lovers being like roses, lilies, their love being strong than death, the beloved being pure and all-beautiful and without spot, the beloved leaping mountains, their preoccupation with and vehement desire for each other, etc. etc.

As religious expression, how would you evaluate this:

• It's all blasphemy and idolatry. In 117 verses it never even mentions God. It is putting the love of a creature higher than the love of the Creator.Or:
• This is highly extravagant poetry that can only be understood correctly in a larger context.

Your view?

[Mrs. Don-o]

">Everything about a creature is secondary and contingent.<< Yep, but the problem is that Catholics put Mary in a primary position. They deny it but it has been shown over and over that in fact they do."

Aha! (Now I feel like a diagnostician.) Now I think I see exactly where the problem is. Everything we Catholics are saying about a creature (Mary) you are taking as if it were absolute and directed toward a goddess.

Think this through with me. I think we can unravel this.

The Song of Solomon (Link) is full of praises of a woman and a man for each other. There's over a hundred verses about the lovers being like roses, lilies, their love being strong than death, the beloved being pure and all-beautiful and without spot, the beloved leaping mountains, their preoccupation with and vehement desire for each other, etc. etc.

As religious expression, how would you evaluate this:

• It's all blasphemy and idolatry. In 117 verses it never even mentions God. It is putting the love of a creature higher than the love of the Creator.Or:
• This is highly extravagant poetry that can only be understood correctly in a larger context.

Your view?

[Mrs. Don-o]

">Everything about a creature is secondary and contingent.<< Yep, but the problem is that Catholics put Mary in a primary position. They deny it but it has been shown over and over that in fact they do."

Aha! (Now I feel like a diagnostician.) Now I think I see exactly where the problem is. Everything we Catholics are saying about a creature (Mary) you are taking as if it were absolute and directed toward a goddess.

Think this through with me. I think we can unravel this.

The Song of Solomon (Link) is full of praises of a woman and a man for each other. There's over a hundred verses about the lovers being like roses, lilies, their love being strong than death, the beloved being pure and all-beautiful and without spot, the beloved leaping mountains, their preoccupation with and vehement desire for each other, etc. etc.

As religious expression, how would you evaluate this:

• It's all blasphemy and idolatry. In 117 verses it never even mentions God. It is putting the love of a creature higher than the love of the Creator.Or:
• This is highly extravagant poetry that can only be understood correctly in a larger context.

Your view?