Are Marian dogmas wildly un biblical?

[benidict]

so i can’t quote from polls or Catholics Saints or a declared Doctor of the Church.

yes. feel free to do so. that is why i started this thread. any information you have, or opinion is welcome. thank you. i think someone already covered this, but its interesting to note, that Marian dogma, was never an issue, the early reformers had with the Catholic Church. on the contrary, Martin Luther, and John Calvin, never gave up their views of Mary, which were decidedly Catholic. nor have some Lutherans today, from what i can gather, or Anglicans for that matter. it wasnt until much later on in protentanism that the problems protestants have with the Blessed Mother seemed to appear. im gonna do some more research, and see when this first started. Peace to you and yours.

 

[benidict]

Something much worse actually. I grew up in the late 60-80s. Devotion to Mary was for “old ladies”.

It’s taken me 30 years to develop a closeness. How sad is that?

better late than never my dear friend. i just wish, i could have grown up with these truths, or at the very least, listened to the still small voice earlier in life, to find what i now know. it took me 37 years of dead ends and frustration to find out the truth about Mary, and Christ Church. i can clearly see her hand in the way she intercedes for me with her Son. and how he works in my life. even here in a war zone. i am also blessed with a marvelous priest who loves the Church and Mary. he escaped from viet nam, as a young adult, and his testimony is incredible. he and those that escaped, should have been dead on their journey, but grace sustained them. not in a way any of us would have wanted, it was a very tough trip. Peace.

 

[placido]

Not by the time Marian devotion was into full swing…Christianity had been established as the “official” state religion by this time. When was the counsel of Ephesus convenened that named Mary “theotokos” or approved her veneration?

That is the “post hoc ergo propter hoc” fallacy. Because the Marian devotion was into full swing after “Christianity had been established as the official state religion”, the establishment of Christianity as the official state religion must be the cause of Marian devotion.
That is false reasoning!

placido

 

[KathleenGee]

I think the issue with Mary comes about in the last 100 years or so with certain fundamentalists here in USA.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Agree’d and also what I find facinating is the fact of how many are converted to Christ through the Blessed Mother.

Its easy to speculate on false teaching or the proposition that Marian worship is in fact Idol worship.

Yet I haven’t witnessed this in the past 50-years. What I have witnessed is an amazing amount of followers finding Christ and deeper belief in Christology.

And BTW I’ve yet to see ONE single person come foward who claims the Blessed Mother has lead them astray. Matter of Fact its very much on the contrary.

I spent many, many years in denial of Our Lady. Decades with the truth be told. At some point I just said I need to deepen my Faith. I added the Rosary to my religious practice’s. I honestly feel guided by the Blessed Mother. Now I haven’t seen her, but I feel like she brought me closer to her Son. I’m so moved by the experience I’ve sought out others to comprehend their experience. I’ve yet to meet a single person whos gave the Rosary a honest effort that hasn’t deepened their Faith in Christology. And came to understand very quickly just how real the Blessed Mother is and how much influence she apparently has.

I believe she is a Blessing that all simply do not receive. Because of their own denial and refusal to give the practice and honest effort.

I can dig it, I didn’t want hear that for decades either. Yet I watched those in my own family who did pray the rosary gain the deepest faith in Christ…for years. Their Faith in the Rosary combined with fatima is what bought me to the Rosary.

The Seer of fatima wasn’t a quack either. She was the real deal as was the Miracle of Fatima. You can spend all day in denial, and thats really what it comes down to is denial of truth. I’m convinced on Our Lady and the you have Luke and wnat the Bible does say. And after researching Fatima for almost a year now, I find it more and more facinating. The leters written by all who came in contact with Sr Lucy are really whats amazing. Especially during that period. Mother Superior’s are just not that easily convinced I can assure you as will anyone whos attended Catholic Schools. Quite the opposite.

The reluctance the past Century is the opposition of satan because of the effort of the Blessed Mother. I believe its a result of the War of Good and evil. All these appearences are only what 300 years old. The past 100 years has been the most resistence and it seems since Fatima and the Vision of Hell, chastisment of the World etc.

I suppose the first question you must ask yourself is do you believe the history of mankind is the war of Good and evil? From this truth I believe you can more clearly see Mary.

The simple Truth I have witnessed with the Negative output is those who speak in the negative never gave this practice a effort, thus cannot tell you anything but personal belief about it. Its like trying to tell a mechanic how to work on a car after you only read a book. Who would you listen to? Those who work on the car or those who read about it with no practical experience to hang a hat on?

Lot of Great Threads on the Blessed Mother here though. I would do a Search and read a bit on them. Kathleens right we had some awesome debate here the past 6 mths or so. The deep belief some others have right here, I believe also touched and affected me.

Mary just takes an Honest effort, its not easy to Pray the Rosary everyday for a year. But you’ll come out of the Darkeness and come to actually enjoy the practice. You simply can’t be a bigger sinner than I was or engulfed in darkness as I was. If She saved me, I assure you she’ll save you. The Rosary isn’t centered around just Mary either but the Angelic Salutation.

God Bless,
Gary

 

[Publisher]

That is the “post hoc ergo propter hoc” fallacy. Because the Marian devotion was into full swing after “Christianity had been established as the official state religion”, the establishment of Christianity as the official state religion must be the cause of Marian devotion.
That is false reasoning!

placido

I did not state that it was friend.

 

[placido]

I did not state that it was friend.

I am sorry if that is not what you were implying. However, you will have to come back and make yourself clear as to why you said this:

Not by the time Marian devotion was into full swing…Christianity had been established as the “official” state religion by this time. When was the counsel of Ephesus convenened that named Mary “theotokos” or approved her veneration?

You seem to argue that “because the council of Ephesus that named Mary Theotokos or approved her veneration was held after Christianity had been established as the ‘official’ state religion, the establishment of Christianity as state religion MUST BE THE CAUSE of Theotokos or her veneration” …
I may be wrong, but that is the impression I am getting.

placido

 

[KathleenGee]

Hi Gary,

I agree and identify very deeply with your post. I was indifferent to Mary, did not have a personal devotion to her, saw her as a distant madonna statue like I see in the church. I was Christ centered, and was more interested in the lives of the saints. Working with European Latin Catholics in service to the poor brought me to Mary. It was not devotional like we consider, but more in relationship with her in serving Christ through those in need.

When I got married, then my devotion to her really took off. And I could see her as the pure source of God’s creation of truth and beauty, and began to enjoy looking at all the paintings and prayers and titles to her honor. I like to consider Mary’s virtues, and have personally known her great presence in my life praying the rosary.

What fundamentalists don’t realize is that the rosary is Scriptural and reflecting on the life of Christ beginning at His conception at the Annunciation. I am grateful that John Paul II added the luminous mysteries.

Mary is symbol of the church as well, she is our mother and makes our church a family. I read some where that it was the laity and not clerics who brought about the OK to venerate her. But my pastor said no, it was the whole church who honored her.

I cannot understand why Christians can OK the respect and honor given to mothers of famous people, but refuse any honor to the mother of the Savior and Redeemer of the world. She herself knew in her Magnificat that all generations would call her blessed, but the fundamentalists refuse to do so…except comment that she was a very good woman of faith.

I just don’t think people realize all that they are missing in their spiritual life all the graces Mary has for us, coming from her and her proximity to the Savior.

I was at Fatima, saw a man who witnessed the miracle of the sun. I try to place my whole family in her heart. God bless you, Gary.

 

[Publisher]

I am sorry if that is not what you were implying. However, you will have to come back and make yourself clear as to why you said this:

You seem to argue that “because the council of Ephesus that named Mary Theotokos or approved her veneration was held after Christianity had been established as the ‘official’ state religion, the establishment of Christianity as state religion MUST BE THE CAUSE of Theotokos or her veneration” …
I may be wrong, but that is the impression I am getting.

placido

No friend, that is not what I meant. Devotion to Mary was well underway by the time of Ephesus…no big surprise since Ephesus was a center of goddess worship. The veneration of Mary was a force in “conversion” of pagans. The veneration of Mary…who could answer prayers…who had “influence” over the “male deity”…Mary who was “all compassionate” and “dispensed all grace” supplied a female figure that was lacking in a “male montheistic” religion. Veneration of Mary was a natural outcome of Christianity establishing itself in a society which was dominated by the worship of a female deity. That the church “appropriated” the imagery and titles for Mary came as no large surprise.

We are so far removed in time from then that we don’t always keep in mind the development of the veneration of Mary that took place. It has been called the “Mary cult” for a reason. Since I do not embrace the history of the time as told by the Catholic church…but find secular historians take on those times more compelling, I do not find need to deny the pagan influence upon her veneration and elevation in the Orthodox/Catholic church.

 

[Nine_Two]

I do not equate devotion to Mary as “pagan worship”…but her acceptance as “theotokos” by the common people certainly offered a devotion which they longed for…a “Mother” to call upon…so they now had Mary isntead of Isis or Diana.

And do you have actual sources that use this term for Isis, or what?

 

[Publisher]

And do you have actual sources that use this term for Isis, or what?

Yes I do…but I’m sure if you were interested, you’d have already looked. If you are content with your position as detailed by your church…I rejoice with you in your belief…I have no wish to change them in any way. I was offering my opinion based on my own study of historical doctrinal developments…I have no desire to seek to “win the arguement”…since I’m not in an arguement to “win”.

 

[pablope]

Do you with agree claim of Saint Alphonsus Liguori or not?
right now is Mary omnipotent?

Do you agree with the claim of St. Bernardine of Sienna or not?
right now if Mary asks of Jesus, will it be done?

What you are forgetting, is that it is as per the Will of God/Son/HS, not as per Mary’s will. Every prayer for intercession all point, in the end to God will.

 

[placido]

No friend, that is not what I meant. Devotion to Mary was well underway by the time of Ephesus…no big surprise since Ephesus was a center of goddess worship. The veneration of Mary was a force in “conversion” of pagans. The veneration of Mary…who could answer prayers…who had “influence” over the “male deity”…Mary who was “all compassionate” and “dispensed all grace” supplied a female figure that was lacking in a “male montheistic” religion. Veneration of Mary was a natural outcome of Christianity establishing itself in a society which was dominated by the worship of a female deity. That the church “appropriated” the imagery and titles for Mary came as no large surprise.

We are so far removed in time from then that we don’t always keep in mind the development of the veneration of Mary that took place. It has been called the “Mary cult” for a reason. Since I do not embrace the history of the time as told by the Catholic church…but find secular historians take on those times more compelling, I do not find need to deny the pagan influence upon her veneration and elevation in the Orthodox/Catholic church.

So, the general council of Ephesus had nothing to do with Nestorius, but had every thing to do with “creating” a female deity for pagan converts to Christianity?
And you a 100 % sure?

placido

 

[traillius]

There was no need for a ‘female deity’ to aid in conversion. And councils are generally called for resolution of major issues in the church.

 

[Calvin_95]

It is impossible for an eternal being to be born; it is a contradiction in terms. God used Mary as a tool to bring Himself into the earth in human form.

And Mary said: "My soul exalts the Lord, And my spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior. "For He has had regard for the humble state of His slave; For behold, from this time on all generations will count me blessed. – Luke 1:46-48

**Mary’s own words and the whole of Scripture nullify any biblical basis concerning notion of an immaculate conception and nullifies the notion of a sinless life. **

**The Scripture also nullifies the perpetual virginity unless Joseph’s and Mary’s other children were adopted, which there is no indication of this and every indication of the words of the writers of the NT, including Jesus own words, is that Joesph and Mary waited to engage in sexual relations after the birth of Jesus as a God ordained and blessed family would be. If she did not have physical relations with her husband, then God is the God of contradiction because ordained marriage and part of that covenant relationship is the gift of sexual relation and the result of that is clearly represented by the fact that they had other children besides Jesus. Anyone who holds onto these types of contradictory traditions from men, in my opinion, cannot believe what the Bible says in this regard. **

Take it for what it is; you either chose to believe the Biblical accounts or you chose not to; it really is that simple according to Mary’s own words. Perhaps this is why the original poster appears to question these dogmas.

This is all I have to contribute concerning this topic, which is rather cut and dry.

 

[placido]

It is impossible for an eternal being to be born; it is a contradiction in terms. God used Mary as a tool to bring Himself into the earth in human form.

Saying something is impossible to the omnipotent God is itself a contradiction.
The Bible says, “Now this is how the birth of Jesus Christ came about …” (Matthew 1:18).
According to the Bible, God the Father used Mary to give birth to God the Son, “an eternal being”.
That is unfortunate you see that as “contradiction in terms”.

placido

 

[placido]

There was no need for a ‘female deity’ to aid in conversion. And councils are generally called for resolution of major issues in the church.

Publisher has a different story to tell. Whether he has supporting evidence remains to be seen.

placido

 

[benidict]

I think the issue with Mary comes about in the last 100 years or so with certain fundamentalists here in USA.

hi Kathleen. so this would make it a rather recent event wouldnt it? i wonder how someone say…Jonathan Edwards felt about this issue. hes a great protestant pastor. im gonna look this up, and will get back to everybody. Peace to you and yours

 

[benidict]

It is impossible for an eternal being to be born; it is a contradiction in terms. God used Mary as a tool to bring Himself into the earth in human form.

And Mary said: "My soul exalts the Lord, And my spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior. "For He has had regard for the humble state of His slave; For behold, from this time on all generations will count me blessed. – Luke 1:46-48

**Mary’s own words and the whole of Scripture nullify any biblical basis concerning notion of an immaculate conception and nullifies the notion of a sinless life. **

**The Scripture also nullifies the perpetual virginity unless Joseph’s and Mary’s other children were adopted, which there is no indication of this and every indication of the words of the writers of the NT, including Jesus own words, is that Joesph and Mary waited to engage in sexual relations after the birth of Jesus as a God ordained and blessed family would be. If she did not have physical relations with her husband, then God is the God of contradiction because ordained marriage and part of that covenant relationship is the gift of sexual relation and the result of that is clearly represented by the fact that they had other children besides Jesus. Anyone who holds onto these types of contradictory traditions from men, in my opinion, cannot believe what the Bible says in this regard. **

Take it for what it is; you either chose to believe the Biblical accounts or you chose not to; it really is that simple according to Mary’s own words. Perhaps this is why the original poster appears to question these dogmas.

This is all I have to contribute concerning this topic, which is rather cut and dry.

hi calvin. thank you for your thoughts. its interesting to note though, that the term brothers in the new testament could also mean cousins, or close relatives. also, Jesus kept the law perfectly. that being said, as he was dying on the cross, he gave Mary to john to take care of her. why? if in fact the brothers mentioned were actually brothers, not only would there be no need for this, it would be a violation of the law of moses. it would have fallen on them to take care of her needs. this is not what happened. john took her to his own home. even if there were brothers, there is the possibility that Joseph could have been a widower, and had children by another woman. not likely though. again, these sons would have been required to take care of Mary. do not forget also that Joseph may have been much older than Mary. she would probably have been 14 years old and he would be closer to 40. also if you had married a woman, that gave birth to God the Son, would you wish to be intimate with her in that way? i sure wouldnt. she is the living embodiment of the ark of the covenant. more to follow on that if you wish. Peace

 

[KathleenGee]

Hi Benedict…

I am reflecting on the fundamentalist perspective that we are seeing…There are the Anabaptists who broke away from mainline Protestants such as the Lutherans and Anglicans who had great devotion to Mary.

Publisher,

About Ephesus being the center of goddess worship…well, it makes me think of Mary of Guadalupe and where she first appeared to S. Juan Diego…she appeared to him next to the site of the goddess of peace in Aztec beliefs.

Christ chose to start His church in Rome…the center of gods worship. The Romans were upset with the Christians because they were not worshipping their gods and saw them as liabilities. There were zealous Christians going around knocking down statues of Roman gods, and these were executed, the Church did not consider them as martyrs but their actions as suicidal.

I think you missed my point…How would anyone in Christ’s time not want to venerate Mary as His mother, and with her own acknowledgement in Scripture that all generations would call her blessed for her fiat.
Mary was originally at the Church of Jerusalem with St. James the Lesser as head. Then the diaspora came and the Jews fled to escape the Romans. Mary was cared for by St. John.

So historically, the focus is not where Mary chose to be — at the place of goddess worship, but rather under the care of St. John the Evangelist, where he decided to place her in care.