Even "mother" Teresa Pushing for Mary to be Considered "co-redemptrix"?

[SwordmanJr]

This article, years ago when it first came out, was very eye-opening to some deeper implications. Given that there were/are millions of catholics worldwide who believe Mary should be elevated as becoming a fourth member of the Trinity, which included "mother" Teresa giving her whole-hearted endorsement for such, I can't help but to wonder that there was/is already that level of adoration/worship of Mary in the hearts of many, whether it ever becomes an official doctrine of the roman catholic religion or not.

What are your thoughts?

Jr

 

[HTacianas]

This article, years ago when it first came out, was very eye-opening to some deeper implications. Given that there were/are millions of catholics worldwide who believe Mary should be elevated as becoming a fourth member of the Trinity, which included "mother" Teresa giving her whole-hearted endorsement for such, I can't help but to wonder that there was/is already that level of adoration/worship of Mary in the hearts of many, whether it ever becomes an official doctrine of the roman catholic religion or not.

What are your thoughts?

Jr

My thoughts are that Mary is the Blessed Theotokos, that she is a saint, and that she lives and reigns with Christ. We pray for her intercession and the intercession of all the saints.

 

[pdudgeon]

This article, years ago when it first came out, was very eye-opening to some deeper implications. Given that there were/are millions of catholics worldwide who believe Mary should be elevated as becoming a fourth member of the Trinity, which included "mother" Teresa giving her whole-hearted endorsement for such, I can't help but to wonder that there was/is already that level of adoration/worship of Mary in the hearts of many, whether it ever becomes an official doctrine of the roman catholic religion or not.

What are your thoughts?

Jr

I think that the article is mistaken in one thing: How the author of the article views the acts and the life of Mary, and that would be most likely from a Protestant point of view.
It was always Mary's humility, her willingness, and her devotion to both God the Father and to Jesus, her Son, that brought her to God's notice. In those things, she was always submissive to the Trinity.

It was not her goal to magnify herself, or to raise herself up, but instead in every way of her life to serve the Trinity, and to accede to Their wish. And because she did so perfectly in all ways, it was The Son who honored her life, and permitted to her what was not permitted to others.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Forgive me if I have got this wrong.

But as an outsider looking in...

It seems to me that regardless of the stance of the church, Mary worship, adoration of Mary, Prayer to Mary is widespread.

Now we have a Father figure in the church.

We don't have a Mother figure in the church.

Could it be then that folks are compensating for a lack of a Mother figure?

Given that there is thin scriptural support for the practice?

 

[SkyWriting]

This article, years ago when it first came out, was very eye-opening to some deeper implications. Given that there were/are millions of catholics worldwide who believe Mary should be elevated as becoming a fourth member of the Trinity, which included "mother" Teresa giving her whole-hearted endorsement for such, I can't help but to wonder that there was/is already that level of adoration/worship of Mary in the hearts of many, whether it ever becomes an official doctrine of the roman catholic religion or not.

What are your thoughts?

Jr

There is never a bad reason for prayer.
It improves the originators conversing skills.

 

[SwordmanJr]

Forgive me if I have got this wrong.

But as an outsider looking in...

It seems to me that regardless of the stance of the church, Mary worship, adoration of Mary, Prayer to Mary is widespread.

Now we have a Father figure in the church.

We don't have a Mother figure in the church.

Could it be then that folks are compensating for a lack of a Mother figure?

Given that there is thin scriptural support for the practice?

I think you're catching on. It appears that the primary drive for that signature collection sent to the vatican was motivated by personal desires for such a dogma, which is thoroughly couched in fleshly desires fueled by the massively powerful thrusts and jabs of modern and historic feminism....that is, if the dynamics of that article are to be believed.

Jr

 

[SwordmanJr]

There is never a bad reason for prayer.
It improves the originators conversing skills.

Uhh.....ok.....whatever.....

Jr

 

[SwordmanJr]

I think that you are mistaken in one thing: How you view the acts and the life of Mary.
It was always Mary's humility, her willingness, and her devotion to both God the Father and to Jesus, her Son, that brought her to God's notice. In those things, she was always submissive to the Trinity.

It was not her goal to magnify herself, or to raise herself up, but instead in every way of her life to serve the Trinity, and to accede to Their wish. And because she did so perfectly in all ways, it was The Son who honored her life, and permitted to her what was not permitted to others.

Then you are not among the millions of catholics around the world who think otherwise. That could be a good thing. Did you read the article?

Jr

 

[chevyontheriver]

This article, years ago when it first came out, was very eye-opening to some deeper implications. Given that there were/are millions of catholics worldwide who believe Mary should be elevated as becoming a fourth member of the Trinity, which included "mother" Teresa giving her whole-hearted endorsement for such, I can't help but to wonder that there was/is already that level of adoration/worship of Mary in the hearts of many, whether it ever becomes an official doctrine of the roman catholic religion or not.

What are your thoughts?

Jr

Are there really millions of Catholics worldwide who believe Mary should be elevated to become the fourth member of the Trinity? Did Mother Teresa actually endorse Mary being the fourth member of the Trinity?

 

[Handmaid for Jesus]

This article, years ago when it first came out, was very eye-opening to some deeper implications. Given that there were/are millions of catholics worldwide who believe Mary should be elevated as becoming a fourth member of the Trinity, which included "mother" Teresa giving her whole-hearted endorsement for such, I can't help but to wonder that there was/is already that level of adoration/worship of Mary in the hearts of many, whether it ever becomes an official doctrine of the roman catholic religion or not.

What are your thoughts?

Jr

• I am not of the RCC so my opinion may be moot, but I give it anyway. Though Mary, the blessed was the vessel our Father use to deliver the flesh body of our Lord Jesus, in no way do I believe she should be elevated to co-redeemer .She was not appointed to shed her blood for the sins of the world.Lord Jesus had no partner. Mary's appointment was to deliver the flesh body of the Lord Jesus Christ and that is all.

 

[SwordmanJr]

Are there really millions of Catholics worldwide who believe Mary should be elevated to become the fourth member of the Trinity? Did Mother Teresa actually endorse Mary being the fourth member of the Trinity?

Did you read the article?

 

[SwordmanJr]

• I am not of the RCC so my opinion may be moot, but I give it anyway. Though Mary, the blessed was the vessel our Father use to deliver the flesh body of our Lord Jesus, in no way do I believe she should be elevated to co-redeemer .She was not appointed to shed her blood for the sins of the world.Lord Jesus had no partner. Mary's appointment was to deliver the flesh body of the Lord Jesus Christ and that is all.

Yes, but catholic teachers believe that because she went through giving birth to Jesus' body, being with Jesus at various times at a couple of times during His ministry, and then at the cross, should qualify her as "co-redemptrix," which they say means "beside" Jesus, not "co-equal." They always stop just short of declaring her to be Deity.

Did you not read the article?

 

[Handmaid for Jesus]

Yes, but catholic teachers believe that because she went through giving birth to Jesus' body, being with Jesus at various times at a couple of times during His ministry, and then at the cross, should qualify her as "co-redemptrix," which they say means "beside" Jesus, not "co-equal." They always stop just short of declaring her to be Deity.

Did you not read the article?

Yeah, but I have never understood their reasoning.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Did you read the article?

The article was paywalled for me so I did not read it. I'm not paying cash money to read something you could have offered a few lines of actual fair usage quotes from. I relied on your claim that there are millions of Catholics worldwide who believe Mary should be elevated to become the fourth member of the Trinity and your claim that Mother Teresa endorses Mary being the fourth member of the Trinity.

Is it your claim that the New York Times is literally reporting that millions of Catholics believe Mary should be elevated to become the fourth member of the Trinity? Is it your claim that the New York Times has reported that Mother Teresa has endorsed this position? I'm not always impressed by the reportage of the New York Times, so maybe they did. But it sounds off to me. Care to substantiate your claim about the NYT?

 

[Not David]

The only Catholics who might practice idolatry could be some Latin Americans but that’s not the Roman Church’s fault

 

[prodromos]

Yes, but catholic teachers believe that because she went through giving birth to Jesus' body, being with Jesus at various times at a couple of times during His ministry, and then at the cross, should qualify her as "co-redemptrix," which they say means "beside" Jesus, not "co-equal." They always stop just short of declaring her to be Deity.

Probably because they don't believe she is, since they are never taught that Mary is anything but human (apart from the immaculate conception doctrine, which sets her apart from the rest of us)

Did you not read the article?

Yes, it claims the proclamation would make Mary 'like' a fourth member of the Holy Trinity, yet it ignores all the reasons why that would not be the case. Nowhere does it claim that millions of Catholics want Mary elevated to the position of "fourth member of the Holy Trinity". That is simply false.

 

[SwordmanJr]

The article was paywalled for me so I did not read it. I'm not paying cash money to read something you could have offered a few lines of actual fair usage quotes from. I relied on your claim that there are millions of Catholics worldwide who believe Mary should be elevated to become the fourth member of the Trinity and your claim that Mother Teresa endorses Mary being the fourth member of the Trinity.

Is it your claim that the New York Times is literally reporting that millions of Catholics believe Mary should be elevated to become the fourth member of the Trinity? Is it your claim that the New York Times has reported that Mother Teresa has endorsed this position? I'm not always impressed by the reportage of the New York Times, so maybe they did. But it sounds off to me. Care to substantiate your claim about the NYT?

Hmm. I've heard some lame excuses for not doing the reading, and this one is a new one. That article is free, and therefore openly available for all to read, just like accessing this forum. But, hey, I'll quote the key item you mentioned:

"Mr. Miravalle, 41, began the petition drive four years ago from his obscure position as a professor of Mariology -- the study of Mary -- at one of the most conservative Catholic universities in the nation. Since then the pope has received more than six million signatures from 148 countries on petitions asking him to give the Virgin Mary the ultimate promotion."

It goes on with:

"In addition to ordinary Catholics, Mr. Miravalle has received support from 550 bishops and 42 cardinals, including Cardinal John O'Connor and Mother Teresa before their deaths."

I didn't pay to access that article, so I'm skeptical that the NYT is trying to charge YOU to access it. I doubt the NYT gave me access because of my looks....

Jr

 

[SwordmanJr]

The only Catholics who might practice idolatry could be some Latin Americans but that’s not the Roman Church’s fault

It's interesting you would mention that, because I met a group down there that still practices ancestral, chicken sacrifices, and are still in good standing with the vatican. The only reason I could figure in that regard is because they still hand over their tithes. They also are allowed some sort of strange ceremony officiated by their romish priest that absolves them of any moral crisis for that pagan practice.

Jr

 

[SwordmanJr]

Probably because they don't believe she is, since they are never taught that Mary is anything but human (apart from the immaculate conception doctrine, which sets her apart from the rest of us)

Yes, it claims the proclamation would make Mary 'like' a fourth member of the Holy Trinity, yet it ignores all the reasons why that would not be the case. Nowhere does it claim that millions of Catholics want Mary elevated to the position of "fourth member of the Holy Trinity". That is simply false.

Many of the OTHER leaders who opposed such a declaration KNEW that naming her co-redemptrix would LEAD to the understanding of the deeper implications of being a fourth member. They KNEW it would also drive a deeper divide between eastern orthodoxy and the vatican's followers.

In other words, many actions based upon seemingly benevolent rationale still carry with them a necessary dynamic of logical implications and conclusions that are inescapable.

Jr

 

[prodromos]

Hmm. I've heard some lame excuses for not doing the reading, and this one is a new one. That article is free, and therefore openly available for all to read, just like accessing this forum.

The NYT allows a small number of articles to be read for free, and after you have reached that limit you are rewuired to subscribe in order to read any more articles. I chevy says he hit a paywall it is only because he has already reach that limit so he is not able to read the article which you are able to. Accusing him of being a liar is what is lame.