All you do is cut and paste globs of text telling me that various Protestants reject the Church’s Marian dogmas.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZ...
That's not quite accurate.
I take that back --- your opinion is not even close to the truth. It's more like a mirage...
In return to most anything I've posted to you, I'm offered argument by way of mere assertion, and spitwads aimed at sources (and persons) at links provided --after myself having been sent off on a goosecha$e to Amazon.com in order to find proof of one of your own assertions.
Within the discussions I had linked to were a variety of specific items. That's not only "various Protestants rejecting Marian dogmas" (argument by assertion, such as you lazily indulge yourself in) but instead, within those discussion of considerations towards how those doctrines and dogma arose, are portions addressing in detail the how's and why's involved with various problems that are associated with the overall theological position and doctrinal development.
You were trying to convince ME of the rightness of your own theological positions -- were you not?
It is only fair that in reply tell you that so far, your method of discourse is simply not been getting us anywhere.
Need I drag all of what I linked to into this forum ---onto these pages more directly, and step-by-painful step spoon-feed it to you?
That could take weeks. I would expect to be fought all the way, if only with the usual spitwad/pee-shooter sniping return commentary, while you of course, regarding your own theological positions, would be desiring I take your each and every uttered assertion as if it were near-Gospel on strength of your own say-so.
The contest now has become regarding your own negative --"it...never happened" assertion that was aimed at what I'd pointed out had transpired regarding Marionist doctrine and dogma. It did come about chiefly through the means (as source materials) which you had labeled ""immaterial".
The info at the provided links goes far enough along the road to proving that contention, I need go not much further.
Ancillary 1.1 fact that later councils approved Marion doctrines proves nothing much other than they did eventually --officially-- not only approve, but also demand everyone ACCEPT doctrines which arose first among commentary & opinions, including from poetical expression.
If there be hidden within your own positions presupposition that the Latin Church cannot err in doctrinal teachings--- that renders it be not myself, but you who has a;
when that presupposition becomes unstated central basis when it comes to an assertion you had made;
I just showed you a bit of how it happened in regard to Marionist doctrines & dogma, and have explained it here, for what -- the third time now?
It sprang up and unfolded, not in one instant, but spread over many centuries time of "development". Having figments of imaginings that such commentary, opinion, and 'poetical expressions' regarding "Mary" were not the main driving forces behind the doctrines and dogmas would be to retain those presuppositional "fig newtons" regarding RC magesterium infallibility, with yet more giant-sized "fig newtons" set to either side of one's own head serving as blinders (such as are put upon draft & carriage horses) and maybe a couple of figs stuffed in the ears (the better to sleep with? -- nice and "quiet" eh?) and is not a counter-argument at all.
It's more like "shut out the message" by way of labeling, then summarily rejecting the messengers in order to reassure oneself the information that is there, is not there.
You sent me to go buy a book, yet appear to me not willing to read a few dozen pages that were supplied to you, free of charge.
If Staples's book has something special about it, something those of us who are well acquainted with apologetic would not be familiar with ---perhaps you could wake from you're nap-time long enough to show us clearly what that is? I asked you once before.
Lacking anything of the sort specific in reply from yourself, I'll need assume you've got nothin', leaving Staples book to generally fail in it's "mission" ---unless that mission was to be preaching to an already woefully mislead choir.
Meanwhile, speaking of buying books, perhaps you should take opportunity to buy one yourself?
Here; Svendsen's book Who Is My Mother?: The Role and Status of the Mother of Jesus presently available for $20 used.
Link to a pdf file containing a couple of pages of Table of Contents, 3 pages of textual discussion, and a couple of pages of notes/source citations; http://www.studio-e-books.com/portfolio/mother.pdf. Think of it as a preview?