If Mariology didn't come from the Scriptures or the Early Church, then how can it be viewed as truth?

[pritchard85]

I have heard Catholics say many different things to try and justify the titles that they attach to Mary that the Bible nor the Early Church do. I am still far from convinced that God himself would want us to view Mary as unblemished by sin and the queen of heaven etc.

 

[Zooey]

It does come from the Bible.
It was taught & believed from the very first days of the church.

By the bye, the correct term is “mariology”= "what is taught & believed about Mary, the Virgin Mother of God.

 

[BrianH]

After being on this forum for many years, reading the Ante-Nicene writings, and reading this debate and watching debates on youtube, I firmly believe that the answer is in the middle. Protestants views are inadequate. Catholic views are overstated.
I suppose I would fall in the Anglican camp. Although too be fair I do not know the official positions of the other apostolic churches like Oriental Orthodoxy or the Church of the East. I do know the position of the Eastern Orthodox.
Its a big topic, welcome

 

[manualman]

Scripture DOES give hints, so do the EF. I’m not half enough a scholar to remember and cite all I’ve heard. But I do have some logical tidbits for you.

First, do you believe slavery is morally acceptable? No? Can you find explicit condemnation of it in Scripture or the EF? It was routinely practised in their culture and there is virtually no condemnation of it in the record. Isn’t our modern anti-slavery notion disconnected from Scripture and Tradition? The answer is no. It just took a LONG time for christians to recognize the conflict between their slavery-friendly cultural inheritance with the principles of human dignity in divine revelation.

Mary doesn’t precisely fall into the same category, I’m just demonstrating that things are planted early and sometimes take a while to sprout.

There are two other cultural issues to remember:

1. There was a significant struggle in the early church between “the 12” and the relatives of Jesus for control of christianity early on. Jesus’ family tended to be the Judaizer sort (one of the James was one, IIRC). The 12, obviously, were Jesus’s actual hand picked choice for leadership, but this would have been a hard pill to swallow for Jews who had been expected Messiah to re-establish the Davidic Kingdom (with associated perks for David’s OTHER descendents!). The fact that Mary played a low key role after the Ascension may have had a lot to do with dispelling pre-Incarnation notions of what the Messianic Age would be like.
2. Mary was a woman in a man’s world. St. Paul gives us glimpses of that in some of his (infamous to some) passages about women’s behavior in public. Lost in today’s uproar is the fact that St. Paul’s goal was to avoid creating a distraction from the key elements of the gospel so that people missed the key points for focusing on following implications (dignity of woman).

So I would caution people not to assume that Scripture and the EF tell the full story of Mary and dismiss her role as a result. Tradition tells the full story of Mary. The Scriptures were never intended to be a complete catechism.

It’s worth reading more on the subject than I can give!

 

[pritchard85]

It does come from the Bible.

It was taught & believed from the very first days of the church.

 

[Scoobyshme]

Keep in mind that not everything Jesus said, did, or taught is in the Bible. (See John 21:25). Yet, He commanded the Apostles (and their successors) to go forth and teach all that He had taught them. (Matt. 28:20) Jesus taught orally. He never wrote a book of the Bible, nor did He command anyone else to do so. He did establish a (one) Church, however, and promised to be with that Church till the end of the world and to send the Holy Spirit to lead it “into all truth.” Even St. Paul, in 1 Tim 3:15, says that the Church is the “pillar and foundation of truth.”

So, the real question should not be, “Where is this or that in the Bible.” The real question should be, “What does the Church founded by Jesus teach about this or that.”

Had Jesus taken the approach of Protestantism, He would’ve required massive classes for everyone to learn how to read. The vast majority of earth’s population was illiterate until about 100 years ago. Then, He would’ve had to find some way to mass produce the Bible for them to read. Kinko’s wasn’t around for almost 2000 years after He ascended to heaven, remember.

 

[regression]

Mary being unblemished by sin is refuted by Scripture where she herself declared God as her Savior.

That doesn’t refute it. Who do you think preserved Mary from original sin? God did. Therefore God is her savior.

Mary being Immaculately conceived was not taught in the Early Church and in fact didn’t become catholic teaching until the 19th century either.

There is a difference between something being taught and something being declared dogma. Being declared dogma doesn’t mean that it was just thought up or is a completely new concept. I will have to dig up my early church father’s book when I get home for example of what early Christians believed about Mary.

 

[WhatMeWorry]

With alll due respect, if you do not wish to believe in any Marian beliefs, then don’t. No one is forcing you to believe or not. If Catholics wish to believe them, then why should that be any skin off your nose? To each his own.

 

[Nicea325]

I have heard Catholics say many different things to try and justify the titles that they attach to Mary that the Bible nor the Early Church do. I am still far from convinced that God himself would want us to view Mary as unblemished by sin and the queen of heaven etc.

First of all,where does Jesus or the Apostles explicitly teach everything must be explicitly stated in the Bible? Second, where does the Bible teach explicitness? Third,show me one verse where Jesus or the Apostles even mention the canon of scripture? Why do you believe it,if it is not mentioned explicitly or implicitly?

 

[Scoobyshme]

No, its not and no it wasn’t. Mary being assumed into heaven is NOT in the Bible and Mary being unblemished by sin is refuted by Scripture where she herself declared God as her Savior. These are only two examples of the Many. Mary being Immaculately conceived was not taught in the Early Church and in fact didn’t become catholic teaching until the 19th century either. There seems to be a very large gap between Scipture/EC and many of the Roman teachings. The Dogmas of Mary are just some of the many.

 

[Nevermore22]

pritchard85:

Mary being unblemished by sin is refuted by Scripture where she herself declared God as her Savior.

No Catholic will deny that Mary needed a Savior. She did. And she was in fact saved by her sins. Christ’s death that cleans all of us from sin, happens after the event. Catholics believe, that God used a singular grace (from the cross) to clean mary from the stain of Original Sin at the moment of her conception.

pritchard85:

Mary being Immaculately conceived was not taught in the Early Church and in fact didn’t become catholic teaching until the 19th century either.

Lies.

“Blessed Virgin, immaculate and pure you are the sinless Mother of your Son, the mighty Lord of the universe. You are holy and inviolate, the hope of the hopeless and sinful; we sing your praises. We praise you as full of every grace, for you bore the God-Man. We all venerate you; we invoke you and implore your aid…Holy and immaculate Virgin…be our intercessor and advocate at the hour of death and judgment…you are holy in the sight of God, to Whom be honor and glory, majesty, and power forever (373 AD, St. Ephem of Edessa)”

Look at the date. St. Ephem is an ECF.
Also, the oldest known prayer to Mary: “We fly to your patronage, O holy Theotokos;
despise not our petition in our necessities, but deliver us always from all dangers,
O ever-glorious and blessed Virgin.” it dates back to 300 A.D.

pritchard85:

There seems to be a very large gap between Scipture/EC and many of the Roman teachings. The Dogmas of Mary are just some of the many.

There is only a gap between what the Church teaches and Scripture if you believe Sola Scriptura (which is unbiblical, and no ECF taught it).

In Christ through Mary,
Nevermore

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

I have heard Catholics say many different things to try and justify the titles that they attach to Mary that the Bible nor the Early Church do. I am still far from convinced that God himself would want us to view Mary as unblemished by sin and the queen of heaven etc.

A priori: Marianology comes from the Scriptures and the Early Church. Otherwise, the present Church could not consider it a Dogma. The Revelation ended with the Apostles. If it was not in the Scriptures, then our Catholic Church would be Apostate for saying what She says.

Having said this, what is the question?

Of course, anyone is free to believe whatever he/she believes.

But the Credo of the CC is that Mary was free from sin, Her body is in Heaven and she is “Mediatrix of All Graces”, Mother of God and Mother of Men.

Viva! Mary, The Lord was and is and will be always with You, You are the First among all women of all times, We owe to You Everything for saying Yes to God and bearing the Son of God, raising Him and being at all times with Him, Our Lord, Jesus the Christ.

 

[Dorothy]

I have heard Catholics say many different things to try and justify the titles that they attach to Mary that the Bible nor the Early Church do. I am still far from convinced that God himself would want us to view Mary as unblemished by sin and the queen of heaven etc.

This may help you understand where Catholics are coming from:

catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=2803

 

[GaryTaylor]

Guess you already know, there’s much Love for the BVM here.

Tell you what, we can all have passing throughts on if this Catholic or that Catholic is rooted in faith. And obviously many are on the early steps of faith.

However I do not know anyone praying the Rosary daily not seriously rooted in faith. They simply do not fit in that catagory. There is a Blessing there thats something to witness. Thats for sure.

Matter of fact I pray for the strength to continue as they do.

Peace

 

[Jim_Dandy]

No, its not and no it wasn’t. Mary being assumed into heaven is NOT in the Bible and Mary being unblemished by sin is refuted by Scripture where she herself declared God as her Savior. These are only two examples of the Many. Mary being Immaculately conceived was not taught in the Early Church and in fact didn’t become catholic teaching until the 19th century either. There seems to be a very large gap between Scipture/EC and many of the Roman teachings. The Dogmas of Mary are just some of the many.

 

[Brendan]

No, its not and no it wasn’t. Mary being assumed into heaven is NOT in the Bible and Mary being unblemished by sin is refuted by Scripture where she herself declared God as her Savior. .

 

[runningdude]

No, its not and no it wasn’t. Mary being assumed into heaven is NOT in the Bible and Mary being unblemished by sin is refuted by Scripture where she herself declared God as her Savior. These are only two examples of the Many. Mary being Immaculately conceived was not taught in the Early Church and in fact didn’t become catholic teaching until the 19th century either. There seems to be a very large gap between Scipture/EC and many of the Roman teachings. The Dogmas of Mary are just some of the many.

As you can see, you have opened the flood gates. Not a single Catholic on this forum will deny that Mary needed a savior. Mary was a mere human human being, and as such, needed an external source divine grace to protect her from sin. That source, was of course, her son, God the Son, Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ, as true God and true Man, was the only human with an internal source of grace to be free from sin. Only Jesus Christ could save Himself!

 

[Lancer]

After being on this forum for many years, reading the Ante-Nicene writings, and reading this debate and watching debates on youtube, I firmly believe that the answer is in the middle. ** Protestants views** are inadequate. Catholic views are overstated.
I suppose I would fall in the Anglican camp. Although too be fair I do not know the official positions of the other apostolic churches like Oriental Orthodoxy or the Church of the East. I do know the position of the Eastern Orthodox.
Its a big topic, welcome

FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION:

Your use of the characterization…"Protestant views"…is correct…there are a multitude of views but nothing unified or official – except the rejection of Marianology.

However, your use of the characterization…"Catholic views"…is a erroneous and misleading… because there is a Catholic Teaching and Truth on The Blessed Virgin Mary…

ARTICLE 1
I BELIEVE

I. THE OBEDIENCE OF FAITH

144 To obey (from the Latin ob-audire, to “hear or listen to”) in faith is to submit freely to the word that has been heard, because its truth is guaranteed by God, who is Truth itself. Abraham is the model of such obedience offered us by Sacred Scripture.** The Virgin Mary is its most perfect embodiment.**

Mary - “Blessed is she who believed”

148 The** Virgin Mary most perfectly embodies the obedience of faith**. By faith Mary welcomes the tidings and promise brought by the angel Gabriel, believing that “with God nothing will be impossible” and so giving her assent: "Behold I am the handmaid of the Lord; let it be [done] to me according to your word."12 Elizabeth greeted her: "Blessed is she who believed that there would be a fulfillment of what was spoken to her from the Lord."13 It is for this faith that all generations have called Mary blessed.

149 Throughout her life and until her last ordeal15 when Jesus her son died on the cross, Mary’s faith never wavered. She never ceased to believe in the fulfillment of God’s word. And so the Church venerates in Mary the purest realization of faith.

II. DEVOTION TO THE BLESSED VIRGIN

971 “All generations will call me blessed”: "The Church’s devotion to the Blessed Virgin is intrinsic to Christian worship."515 The Church rightly honors “the Blessed Virgin with special devotion. From the most ancient times the Blessed Virgin has been honored with the title of ‘Mother of God,’ to whose protection the faithful fly in all their dangers and needs. . . . **This very special devotion . . . differs essentially from the adoration which is given to the incarnate Word and equally to the Father and the Holy Spirit, and greatly fosters this adoration.”**516 The liturgical feasts dedicated to the Mother of God and Marian prayer, such as the rosary, an “epitome of the whole Gospel,” express this devotion to the Virgin Mary.517

So, if you think or believe (re: Blessed Virgin Mary) that the Catholic views are overstated find something on Her in the Catechism of the Catholic Church

scborromeo.org/ccc.htm​

and explain how or why you believe or think that it is* overstated* and your basis for that view…the authority for your view.

Pax Christi

 

[vsedriver]

No, its not and no it wasn’t. Mary being assumed into heaven is NOT in the Bible and Mary being unblemished by sin is refuted by Scripture where she herself declared God as her Savior. These are only two examples of the Many. Mary being Immaculately conceived was not taught in the Early Church and in fact didn’t become catholic teaching until the 19th century either. There seems to be a very large gap between Scipture/EC and many of the Roman teachings. The Dogmas of Mary are just some of the many.

 

[RyanK]

With alll due respect, if you do not wish to believe in any Marian beliefs, then don’t. No one is forcing you to believe or not. If Catholics wish to believe them, then why should that be any skin off your nose? To each his own.

Be careful, my friend. This is a very common expression of relativism which does not coincide with the Catholic church.