R
- Status
E
Entwhistler
Guest
The main problem I have with the good pastor’s view on Mary is that he admonishes us to merely admire her and be inspired by her. He seems to place Mary’s role as “just” the mother of God. But that is HUGE. Incredibly significant. He also does not quote one of the most important passages concerning Mary, “Blessed art thou among women.”
Besides Jesus, Mary was the most important person to ever live on this world. She played a huge role in the salvation of mankind by saying “yes” to God’s Word. She should not merely be admired but praised and venerated for all she did.
Everything that Jesus physically touches is worthy of veneration. The stones he walked upon on the way to Calvary. Christians walk that path and kiss the stones. People go the Holy Sepulchre and pray in it, and venerate the place. Mary carried the Christ, the Son of the Living God for 9 months. Of course we should venerate her.
Merely the Mother of God? Try Ark of the Covenant. People died from touching it.
Besides Jesus, Mary was the most important person to ever live on this world. She played a huge role in the salvation of mankind by saying “yes” to God’s Word. She should not merely be admired but praised and venerated for all she did.
Everything that Jesus physically touches is worthy of veneration. The stones he walked upon on the way to Calvary. Christians walk that path and kiss the stones. People go the Holy Sepulchre and pray in it, and venerate the place. Mary carried the Christ, the Son of the Living God for 9 months. Of course we should venerate her.
Merely the Mother of God? Try Ark of the Covenant. People died from touching it.
D
Dan_Defender
Guest
I would add to that the importance she is given in heaven:
‘And a great portent appeared in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars’ Rev 12:1
First among saints, wonderful intercessor for us.
‘And a great portent appeared in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars’ Rev 12:1
First among saints, wonderful intercessor for us.
A
Arbovirus
Guest
Boy will they be surprised when they see her honored in heaven by even the seraphim!
T
Thom18
Guest
After she turns up with the disciples praying in the upper room in Acts 1:14, she is never mentioned again in the New Testament.
The first thing I want to point out is, the author suggests that Mary isn’t “that important” because she “is never mentioned again”, but later makes an exception for the virgin birth (that quote I also include), maintaining that it is still important despite “not being mentioned again”.
It was not important enough to be mentioned in any of the New Testament books after Acts.
Lots of things in the New Testament are only discussed once, such as Jesus’ Bread of Life discourse- but does that make it unimportant? It’s foolish to make the decision of what’s important based on this alone. By that logic, sola fide and sola scriptura would be unimportant because there’s very few Scripture passages discussing the weight of Scripture versus non-Scripture or salvation by faith and/or works- but I’m sure the author would be troubled applying this same logic to their own beliefs.
In fact, in the one place where Paul comes close to mentioning Mary, he chooses not to, and simply speaks of generic “woman”: “When the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman”
Jesus also calls His mother “woman”, and the author just assumes that this is bad. They use modern sensibilities and try applying them to a totally different culture.
Yet amazingly this fact—the virgin birth of Jesus by Mary—is never mentioned again in the New Testament. That doesn’t mean it is untrue or unimportant. It simply means that it was not prominent in the life of the church.
I have to wonder if the author has ever read any works from the ECFs. This aside, they are again making the error that the Scripture which wasn’t officially canonized until centuries after it was written is the only sound source.
The first thing I want to point out is, the author suggests that Mary isn’t “that important” because she “is never mentioned again”, but later makes an exception for the virgin birth (that quote I also include), maintaining that it is still important despite “not being mentioned again”.
It was not important enough to be mentioned in any of the New Testament books after Acts.
Lots of things in the New Testament are only discussed once, such as Jesus’ Bread of Life discourse- but does that make it unimportant? It’s foolish to make the decision of what’s important based on this alone. By that logic, sola fide and sola scriptura would be unimportant because there’s very few Scripture passages discussing the weight of Scripture versus non-Scripture or salvation by faith and/or works- but I’m sure the author would be troubled applying this same logic to their own beliefs.
In fact, in the one place where Paul comes close to mentioning Mary, he chooses not to, and simply speaks of generic “woman”: “When the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman”
Jesus also calls His mother “woman”, and the author just assumes that this is bad. They use modern sensibilities and try applying them to a totally different culture.
Yet amazingly this fact—the virgin birth of Jesus by Mary—is never mentioned again in the New Testament. That doesn’t mean it is untrue or unimportant. It simply means that it was not prominent in the life of the church.
I have to wonder if the author has ever read any works from the ECFs. This aside, they are again making the error that the Scripture which wasn’t officially canonized until centuries after it was written is the only sound source.
V
Vico
Guest
He writes: “The veneration given to Mary in the Roman Catholic church is beyond what is warranted by the New Testament.”
His opinion is irrelevant since the Church which is guided by the Holy Spirit has given us that the veneration (hyperdulia) of the Blessed Virgin Mary is truly proper.
Last edited:
A
Arbovirus
Guest
sly, insidious sola scriptura strikes again.
T
Trishie
Guest
WE respect Jesus’ love for His Mother, she whom God chose to be Mother of His divine Son.
It would be churlish and disrespectul to downgrade the specific choice by God in all the ages of this one woman whom God, through the Angel, declared full of grace.
The source of our requesting Mary’s intercession for us is from Jesus Himself… at the wedding feast of Cana.
His Mother was worried about the hosts’ feelings when she knew they were running out of wine.
She mentions this embarrassing fact to Jesus, who at first brushed off her implicit request for His help
She knew what He could do, but He simply said that His time hadn’t yet come, it wasn’t yet time for miracles, He effectively indicated.
However, with trust in her Son, Mary told the servants to do whatever Jesus told them, and in response to her quiet intercession for the hosts, and her faith, Jesus performed the miracle of changing water into wine.
John 2:1-12… the seal of the fitness and efficacy of Mary’s intercession, even in matters that were not ‘life or death’ but in ordinary human matters, was set by Jesus Himself.
Our source for respect of her, is Jesus Himself.
And consider, in His agony on the cross, His tortured body weak and close to death…His thoughts turned to His Mother, and He entrusted her to John’s care. We cannot disrepect Jesus’ love, and Jesus’ great care for her.
It would be churlish and disrespectul to downgrade the specific choice by God in all the ages of this one woman whom God, through the Angel, declared full of grace.
The source of our requesting Mary’s intercession for us is from Jesus Himself… at the wedding feast of Cana.
His Mother was worried about the hosts’ feelings when she knew they were running out of wine.
She mentions this embarrassing fact to Jesus, who at first brushed off her implicit request for His help
She knew what He could do, but He simply said that His time hadn’t yet come, it wasn’t yet time for miracles, He effectively indicated.
However, with trust in her Son, Mary told the servants to do whatever Jesus told them, and in response to her quiet intercession for the hosts, and her faith, Jesus performed the miracle of changing water into wine.
John 2:1-12… the seal of the fitness and efficacy of Mary’s intercession, even in matters that were not ‘life or death’ but in ordinary human matters, was set by Jesus Himself.
Our source for respect of her, is Jesus Himself.
And consider, in His agony on the cross, His tortured body weak and close to death…His thoughts turned to His Mother, and He entrusted her to John’s care. We cannot disrepect Jesus’ love, and Jesus’ great care for her.
G
Gorgias
Guest
Two thoughts, straight from Scripture:
- In each of the synoptic Gospels, the evangelists recorded this scene: a woman says to herself, “if I just touch the hem of His garment, I will be healed!” And she’s right. Just reaching out to touch what he’s wearing, power flows from Him.
- Acts 19 tells us that, so mighty was Paul’s ability to heal in the name of Jesus, that simply having a cloth that touched his face was sufficient to heal people!
M
Maximilian75
Guest
Eh but even of you go completely SS Mary still deserves more respect than this pastor goves her
R
roseyelephant
Guest
interesting. thank you 
R
roseyelephant
Guest
Beautifully said…thank you.
R
roseyelephant
Guest
Are we certain this is Mary?
R
roseyelephant
Guest
But is worshiping separate from praising? I hear many arguments saying Catholics worship Mary.
T
Trishie
Guest
We love and honours a mother, but not worship.
That in fear and prejudice, some may claim that Catholics worship the Mother that Jesus loves, does not make it so.
That in fear and prejudice, some may claim that Catholics worship the Mother that Jesus loves, does not make it so.
A
AveOTheotokos
Guest
Luke Ch1:
T
Todd_Easton
Guest
It is true that it is more important to imitate virtues of the Virgin Mary than to venerate her. Remember what Jesus said, “Not every one who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven” (Matthew 7:21), and, “Why do you call me ‘Lord, Lord,’ and not do what I tell you?” (Luke 6:46) and how he called out the hypocrisy of the Pharisees for venerating the prophets and the righteous, by building tombs for the prophets and adorning the monuments of the righteous, when all the while within they were “full of hypocrisy and iniquity.” (See Matthew 23)
However, I think the opinion of the article’s author that the venerate Catholics give to the Virgin Mary is unwarranted by the New Testament is simply wrong. Didn’t the angel, the messenger of God, venerate the Virgin Mary by addressing her, not by her given name, but by the title, Kecharitomeme, traditionally translated as “Full of Grace” or translated more literally as “Highly Favored One”? And, in some ancient manuscripts, didn’t that same angel venerated her by calling her, “Blessed … among women”? Didn’t the Virgin Mary refer to herself by the title, “The Handmaid of the Lord”? All this New Testament veneration of the Virgin Mary occurred even before the Holy Spirit came upon her and the power of the Most High overshadowed her and the Son of God was conceived in her womb. Didn’t Elizabeth venerate the Virgin Mary by calling her, “Blessed … among women,” i.e., the most blessed of all women, and as “the Mother of my Lord,” i.e., the Mother of God? Didn’t the Virgin Mary herself say that all generations would venerate her by calling her “Blessed.” Didn’t Jesus Christ himself venerate the Virgin Mary by being obedient to her (Luke 2:51)? Didn’t Jesus Christ himself venerate the Virgin Mary when he changed water into wine at the wedding feast at Cana, performing “the first of his signs (his first public miracle) … and manifested his glory,” at her prompting, even though his “hour had not yet come.” From the Cross, didn’t Jesus Christ himself, the Second Adam, venerate the Virgin Mary, as the Second Eve, by calling her, “Woman” and naming her his beloved disciple’s “Mother,” titles (“Woman” and “Mother”) once given to the first Eve by the first Adam.
And, if you will allow that the male child whose birth is mentioned in Revelation 12 is Jesus Christ himself, who “will rule all the nations with a rod of iron” and who “was caught up to God and to his throne,” who, it seems, appears later in Revelation 19, as the rider on the white horse, who is called “The Word of God” and who will lead the armies of heaven and ultimately defeat the beast and the false prophet, then the woman in Revelation 12, who gave birth to him, is none other than the Virgin Mary, who is described there as the queen of heaven, “clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars” and at the end of that same chapter is described as the mother of all Christians, “the rest of her offspring … those who keep the commandments of God and bear testimony to Jesus.”
However, I think the opinion of the article’s author that the venerate Catholics give to the Virgin Mary is unwarranted by the New Testament is simply wrong. Didn’t the angel, the messenger of God, venerate the Virgin Mary by addressing her, not by her given name, but by the title, Kecharitomeme, traditionally translated as “Full of Grace” or translated more literally as “Highly Favored One”? And, in some ancient manuscripts, didn’t that same angel venerated her by calling her, “Blessed … among women”? Didn’t the Virgin Mary refer to herself by the title, “The Handmaid of the Lord”? All this New Testament veneration of the Virgin Mary occurred even before the Holy Spirit came upon her and the power of the Most High overshadowed her and the Son of God was conceived in her womb. Didn’t Elizabeth venerate the Virgin Mary by calling her, “Blessed … among women,” i.e., the most blessed of all women, and as “the Mother of my Lord,” i.e., the Mother of God? Didn’t the Virgin Mary herself say that all generations would venerate her by calling her “Blessed.” Didn’t Jesus Christ himself venerate the Virgin Mary by being obedient to her (Luke 2:51)? Didn’t Jesus Christ himself venerate the Virgin Mary when he changed water into wine at the wedding feast at Cana, performing “the first of his signs (his first public miracle) … and manifested his glory,” at her prompting, even though his “hour had not yet come.” From the Cross, didn’t Jesus Christ himself, the Second Adam, venerate the Virgin Mary, as the Second Eve, by calling her, “Woman” and naming her his beloved disciple’s “Mother,” titles (“Woman” and “Mother”) once given to the first Eve by the first Adam.
And, if you will allow that the male child whose birth is mentioned in Revelation 12 is Jesus Christ himself, who “will rule all the nations with a rod of iron” and who “was caught up to God and to his throne,” who, it seems, appears later in Revelation 19, as the rider on the white horse, who is called “The Word of God” and who will lead the armies of heaven and ultimately defeat the beast and the false prophet, then the woman in Revelation 12, who gave birth to him, is none other than the Virgin Mary, who is described there as the queen of heaven, “clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars” and at the end of that same chapter is described as the mother of all Christians, “the rest of her offspring … those who keep the commandments of God and bear testimony to Jesus.”
Last edited:
C
Crocus
Guest
Everything in scripture is important. Some truths were accepted so well they needed less repeating. What was said about Mary was sufficient for understanding her son Jesus, and for giving glory to God.
It is remarkable that the house at Ephesus where Mary lived with the disciple John, was remembered from generation to generation, as “the house of the virgin” by her neighbors in the village, until the present day.
Last edited:
D
Dan_Defender
Guest
It is also remarkable that Mary’s house is a site of pilgrimage today, even for Muslims who hold Mary in high honor.
H
HeDa
Guest
That pastor needs to read Mulieris Dignitatem - on the dignity and vocation of women by Pope John Paul II, who is now a saint. Recommend it to everyone. Take your time reading the document, as it is not a quick read, even though it is only about 60 pages in a normal sized book. It is my Lenten read this year!
https://w2.vatican.va/content/john-...f_jp-ii_apl_19880815_mulieris-dignitatem.html
https://w2.vatican.va/content/john-...f_jp-ii_apl_19880815_mulieris-dignitatem.html
- Status