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

[Faithdancer]

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.”

Very well argued indeed, Schoobyshme! I’m a Mariologist-in-training, so to speak, taking my first Mariology class (Holy Apostles) and also planning to become a Marian catechist. Your post speaks to the validity of Apostolic succession and its teachings, which is de fide for Catholics and, as you observe, if we accept that the church continues to elaborate and expound on the articles of faith, and is always guided by divine inspiration, than Mariology must be viewed not as a latter day heresy, as some Protestant critics seem to say, but as a deeper understanding of the role of Mary as the sinless mother of the Redeemer, the culmination of centuries of thought and prayer within the church. Mary is Ex Corde Ecclesiae, plain and simple.

One difference between Catholicism and Protestantism, in general, is that in the Catholic Church, developments such as the cult of the Virgin occur over even millennia and in the case of Mary, are supported by miracles and visions such as those of Lourdes and Guadalupe. In a Protestant denomination, any time there is any significantly new development in dogmatic theology or liturgy, and often for much less substantial differences, schism occurs and a new denomination is born. Not that this is necessary a bad thing, I’m just pointing out that what seems to outsiders as a monolithic and unyielding church, the Catholic church, has actually accommodated many developments in dogma over the centuries, while retaining its cohesion.

We need to continue to patiently inform our separated brethren that yes, we pray to Mary. We also pray to saints, and we pray to both Mary and saints as intercessors, not as Gods. Mary is elevated above all the saints but is not worshipped or elevated to the status of a goddess. On that, the magisterium is very clear.

p.s. if one doesn’t believe in visions and miracles, then how can one believe in the Annunciation of Mary, or all the miracles recorded in the Gospel? Visions and miracles, integral to the cult of the Virgin, are also integral to the human incarnation of Christ, and to His works.

 

[CopticChristian]

I have never met anyone that couldn’t use a little brainwashing. What you are describing is being transformed by the renewal of your mind.

Strongs Concordance 3340

Repent.

metanoeó:shrug:

I repent, change my mind, change the inner man (particularly with reference to acceptance of the will of God), repent.

Amen:thumbsup:

 

[OHCAC]

I have never met anyone that couldn’t use a little brainwashing. What you are describing is being transformed by the renewal of your mind.

Absolutely! And I continue to wash my brain as I learn more about this Church Christ built on earth - feels good too! :extrahappy:

 

[GaryTaylor]

Absolutely! And I continue to wash my brain as I learn more about this Church Christ built on earth - feels good too! :extrahappy:

Oh schools never out. The learning process simply cannot end, nor should we even entertain the thought.

 

[Faithdancer]

---

And Pritchard, really, calling Mary the Queen of Heaven is really just simple logic:

1. 
   *]The King of Heaven is Jesus Christ our Lord & Saviour.
   *]In ancient Israel, the queen was always the mother of the king.
   *]Mary is the mother of the King; ergo:
   *]Mary is the Queen of Heaven.
   
   

1. 
   Amen. It is a title of veneration, not of worship; a title showing our honor and respect, similar to the “queen mother” of England.

 

[Gelnhausener]

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.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Right, actually the search engine here will also provide much on the IC and the Assumption. As will the internet since all this has been discussed at length.

You assume Our Lady was born into original sin, First no-where does the Bible state the BVM ever sinned. Nor could Jesus Christ be born into one, born into a state of original sin. So your going to have to reconcile this, for He has NO-SIN and has a completely Human/Divine Nature not a seperation of the two which is the “hypostatic union”. And the teaching is much older than what you assume on the IC. In fact its older than the reformation. It was first approved in the 14th century at the Council of Basil.

The Assumption/Dormition is also very old teaching dating to the 4-5th century. But yes as mentioned the difference in Infallible Dogma and Doctrine is their. Stephan J Shoemaker. “Ancient traditions of the Virgin Mary’s dormition and assumption.” Might also help you learn about this, his work is from 2002. What was proclaimed Ex-Cathedra is another issue mentioned above.

Early Church Fathers is another issue as is Scripture. However, all one has to do is type in the words “Early Church Fathers on the Immaculate Conception” and you can read more comments from the ECFs than you probly care to, New Ark would be the Bible Search which will provide all the Biblical Verse’s for those who desire to read.

Peace

 

[Faithdancer]

And look at the fruits…never ending, splitting denominations.

That is so! The Magisterium, in documents such as Lumen Gentium, has explained that Catholic doctrine is a vitally alive, organic thing. Whenever there are contradicting ideas in Catholic doctrine, rather than a faction splitting off and creating a new church (with rare exceptions), there is reasoned debate and discourse among the leaders of the Church. This process may seem glacially slow to outsiders, but aside from two major schisms, it has preserved the integrity of the Catholic Church for nearly 2000 years. By contrast, how many schisms have occurred within the entire movement known as Protestantism in the last 500 years?

p.s. I wouldn’t consider SSPX a major schism, either, and I think that they will soon be completely back into the fold, given the joint efforts of the SSPX bishops and our conciliatory Pope Benedict XVI, a future Doctor of the Church (in more ways than one!).

 

[Faithdancer]

pritchard85;8256512:

Since you apparently are interested in Catholic doctrine and dogma [there is a difference] and since you are willing to explore the differences between your faith and that of the Catholic Church, I strongly suggest you study the beliefs of the CC before you set off trying to refute them. I would start with a study of the CC see Sola Scriptura and proceed from there. Isn’t it better the discuss a topic you know and understand instead of heading directly into a refutation of CC teaching and having others posters defend them?

I would suggest you start by buying “Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma” by Ludwig Lott.
Then you can enter into an informed discussion.

Good points. I would also suggest reading the Proto-Gospel of James. Regardless of its true authorship, but it was widely read in the first few centuries A.D., and the theological explanation therein for Mary’s sinlessness may well have influenced early doctrine on Mary. If nothing else, its existence proves that Mariology is indeed far older than many Protestants might assert.

Personally, I think that there is revealed truth in much of the Apocrypha, and the fact that these writings were not included in the final version of the NT that has been handed down to us does not prima facie invalidate their truths.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Gelnhausener;8316747:

Good points. I would also suggest reading the Proto-Gospel of James. Regardless of its true authorship, but it was widely read in the first few centuries A.D., and the theological explanation therein for Mary’s sinlessness may well have influenced early doctrine on Mary. If nothing else, its existence proves that Mariology is indeed far older than many Protestants might assert.

Personally, I think that there is revealed truth in much of the Apocrypha, and the fact that these writings were not included in the final version of the NT that has been handed down to us does not prima facie invalidate their truths.

Without a doubt. Might also be in context here to view the Othrodox in their tradition to place the veneration dates in aspect here.

Here’s a cut and paste from Wiki-pedia link which is titled “Dormition of the Theotokos”

"The Dormition tradition is associated with various places, most notably with Jerusalem, which contains Mary’s Tomb and the Basilica of the Dormition, and Ephesus, which contains the House of the Virgin Mary, and also with Constantinople[citation needed].

The first four Christian centuries are silent regarding the end of the Virgin Mary’s life, though it is asserted, without surviving documentation, that the feast of the Dormition was being observed in Jerusalem shortly after the Council of Ephesus.[4]

At the point in the later fifth century when the earliest Dormition traditions surface in manuscripts, Stephen Shoemaker has detected[5] the sudden appearance of three distinct narrative traditions describing the end of Mary’s life: he has characterised them as the “Palm of the Tree of Life” narratives, the “Bethlehem” narratives, and the “Coptic” narratives—aside from a handful of atypical narratives.

One might notice the similarities between the traditional depictions of the Dormition of the Theotokos in Byzantine iconography and the account of the death of the Egyptian Desert Father, Sisoes the Great.[6] In both Christ is seen coming to receive the soul of the dying saint surrounded by an aureola or cloud of blinding light and accompanied by the angels and prophets. In Byzantine iconography the other Christ is shown surrounded by such a cloud of light are those of also seen in icons of the Transfiguration, the Resurrection and the Last Judgment. One might further note that in some icons of the Dormition the Theotokos is depicted at the top of the icon in a similar aureola before the opening gates of heaven. This suggests that contemporary accounts of the deaths of the Desert Fathers accompanied by sudden burst of light came to influence the development of the iconography of the Dormition."

To see how close the Dormition and Assumption are, one night read the entire link. However as we can clearly all the Christian Churchs venerated St Mary from very early on. Knowing how long approval takes, we can assume the St Mary was venerated much earlier than stated.

Also now in relation to the Protestant Church, St Mary was also venerated by Luther and even the Baptist church as close back as 1906 in the Hymns.

So we must then state for fact that the denial of St Mary is a very new theory not based on Christian history. Its this stated anywhere in Christianity before the reformation? As a matter of fact the BVM is considered the the neck of the body of Christ, with Christ being the head. And that no-one pass’s to Christ except through Mary. Thats is Catholic Church teaching which you will see any time you chose to turn on EWTN and watch and learn from the elect of the CC.

Whats the oldest link one can supply to state the disbelief of the St. Mary/BVM in the early church?

Maybe you should be more into specifics here. For Our Lady is in the History of the Church since Bible. The Arts date St Mary back to the 2nd century, and the Black Madonna is claimed to have been Painted by St Luke on the table top the Holy Family ate meals on.

No female in the History of the WORLD History has been more venerated. Their are over 2500 biographys on Our Lady, and in Art no women is painted more than Our Lady. No Woman has had more Hymns or Literature written about her.

Peace

 

[absolute]

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.”

)

And what has the Catholic Church brought forth through this history? Did it lead the world into all truth? Millions who have been slaughtered by the catholics to believe in Christ would disagree.

Here’s my problem with this fallacy. Catholics want to explain away the horror of decisions it has made but seems to want to include, as from Almighty God, what it chooses. You cant have it both ways…either your church was always right or not. If it was not then it did not lead anything into ALL truth. You simply dont have a corner on the truth --so you clearly misrepresent what Jesus meant.

The Gospel is simple. You seem to think Jesus meant there are mountains of rituals to be learned-- when the Holy Spirit DID lead us into all truth when the Bible was put to paper. Thousands were converted by a single sermon by the disciples–thats how simple the message is and how powerful the Holy Spirit. Not good enough for you?

You pick and choose what your right about. Millions upon millions who received the Holy Spirit when they believed see absolutely nothing to Maryology. They see it as the Catholic church including the very errors Paul and the apostles were trying to combat–the perversion of the Gospel. NEVER, in their very clear explanation of God’s word, do they ever highlight Mary.

But here is the crux of the matter. Your on such a house of cards you can never concede one single point, because once you do it all comes falling down. There is a bias that simply cant be overcome. If you examined your church from the outside you might possibly see this. What do you think Paul would say if he saw the Popes ring being kissed dressed to the nines? Come on, there is a mountain of rubble covering Jesus Christ and the simplicity of the Gospel has been lathered in ritual.

10 hail mary’s and 2 our fathers? Do you honestly think a single one of them would even know what your talking about? Trust me, I know what its like to fool myself and explain away the obvious like I was a defense attorney–and its exhausting:thumbsup:

 

[CopticChristian]

And what has the Catholic Church brought forth through this history? Did it lead the world into all truth? Millions who have been slaughtered by the catholics to believe in Christ would disagree.

10 hail mary’s and 2 our fathers? Do you honestly think a single one of them would even know what your talking about? Trust me, I know what its like to fool myself and explain away the obvious like I was a defense attorney–and its exhausting:thumbsup:

I have read all of your posts. You have not asked one question. You have provided one long sermon on what you believe attacking The One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church. Your advice is to wake up and leave because all I need to do is listen to the Bible be read to me and then I can get saved and go to heaven. I have heard this before. You ask no questions, you offer no insights, you preach and poorly I might add.

The Gospel is simple. You seem to think Jesus meant there are mountains of rituals to be learned-- when the Holy Spirit DID lead us into all truth when the Bible was put to paper. Thousands were converted by a single sermon by the disciples–thats how simple the message is and how powerful the Holy Spirit. Not good enough for you?

You pick and choose what your right about. Millions upon millions who received the Holy Spirit when they believed see absolutely nothing to Maryology. They see it as the Catholic church including the very errors Paul and the apostles were trying to combat–the perversion of the Gospel. NEVER, in their very clear explanation of God’s word, do they ever highlight Mary.

But here is the crux of the matter. Your on such a house of cards you can never concede one single point, because once you do it all comes falling down. There is a bias that simply cant be overcome. If you examined your church from the outside you might possibly see this. What do you think Paul would say if he saw the Popes ring being kissed dressed to the nines? Come on, there is a mountain of rubble covering Jesus Christ and the simplicity of the Gospel has been lathered in ritual.

10 hail mary’s and 2 our fathers? Do you honestly think a single one of them would even know what your talking about? Trust me, I know what its like to fool myself and explain away the obvious like I was a defense attorney–and its exhausting

Your view is twisted and distorted by your inability to look beyond what you think you know.

 

[PRmerger]

You cant have it both ways…either your church was always right or not

The Church has been always right in its orthodoxy, but often wrong in its orthopraxy.

This is an important distinction lost on many uninformed folks. :sad_yes:

 

[Trebor135]

And what has the Catholic Church brought forth through this history? Did it lead the world into all truth? Millions who have been slaughtered by the catholics to believe in Christ would disagree.

Give us some scholarly references for these “millions” supposedly killed in the name of Christ by Catholics. Otherwise, please leave this discussion.

Here’s my problem with this fallacy. Catholics want to explain away the horror of decisions it has made but seems to want to include, as from Almighty God, what it chooses. You cant have it both ways…either your church was always right or not. If it was not then it did not lead anything into ALL truth. You simply dont have a corner on the truth --so you clearly misrepresent what Jesus meant.

And I should take your word for it on any matter of importance concerning Christian belief and practice, two thousand years after Christ, exactly why?

The Gospel is simple. You seem to think Jesus meant there are mountains of rituals to be learned-- when the Holy Spirit DID lead us into all truth when the Bible was put to paper. Thousands were converted by a single sermon by the disciples–thats how simple the message is and how powerful the Holy Spirit. Not good enough for you?

Catholics and Orthodox (both would be equally wayward in your eyes) don’t have anything against “simple” summaries of faith and “single sermons” that lead to conversion. Jesus attended synagogue every Saturday, being a good Jew, and the service he thereby condoned and sanctioned was… liturgical. I’d like you to explain why we should throw all that out now? And show us where the Bible says that everything related to Christian belief and practice has to be found in the Bible?

You pick and choose what your right about.

You pick and choose what you want to believe; you’re effectively your own pope. Where you got your mandate to come here and screech at us I’d very much like to know. Go read Numbers chapter 16 and the epistle of Jude.

Millions upon millions who received the Holy Spirit when they believed see absolutely nothing to Maryology.

That’s because they’ve thrown away even more of the faith their Protestant ancestors had decided to keep. Luther and Calvin believed in the perpetual virginity of Mary, Luther–in some form–her protection from sin, and Bullinger her assumption. Are you going to tell us that the men who supposedly “rescued” the Christian faith from the “corruption” it had fallen into were so blind as to not look at mariology and pour the same scorn on it that you insist on doing?

They see it as the Catholic church including the very errors Paul and the apostles were trying to combat–the perversion of the Gospel.

How is Jesus doing great things for his mother “perversion of the Gospel”? Responding to your statements is getting duller and duller by the minute: they’re about as original as ignorance and prejudice can be.

But for the common good I’ll continue my refutation in the next post–this one is getting too long.

 

[Trebor135]

NEVER, in their very clear explanation of God’s word, do they ever highlight Mary.

If the Bible is so “very clear”, why haven’t Christians come to a consensus on just about everything by now? Look at the differences over the one question of baptism among your Protestant brethren:

• Lutherans: infant, regenerative baptism
• Presbyterians: infant, non-regenerative baptism
• Baptists: adult, non-regenerative baptism
• Church of Christ: adult, regenerative baptism
• Salvation Army: no baptism

How is any ordinary Christian going to figure out who’s right when they investigate the various options on the menu and everyone will just point them back to the same “very clear” Bible?

But here is the crux of the matter. Your on such a house of cards you can never concede one single point, because once you do it all comes falling down. There is a bias that simply cant be overcome. If you examined your church from the outside you might possibly see this. What do you think Paul would say if he saw the Popes ring being kissed dressed to the nines? Come on, there is a mountain of rubble covering Jesus Christ and the simplicity of the Gospel has been lathered in ritual.

Your despising of ritual is frankly bizarre. Ever read the book of Revelation? What do you expect to find if/when you get to heaven: a worship team that might as well hit the road as the next Christian rock band playing for an audience that’s clapping, dancing, and perhaps rolling on the floor?

10 hail mary’s and 2 our fathers? Do you honestly think a single one of them would even know what your talking about?

The Hail Mary is two-thirds straight from the Bible, with slight modification for clarity:

“Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee!” (cf. Luke 1:28)

“Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus!” (cf. Luke 1:42)

And the remaining one-third can be deduced from Scripture as well:

“Holy Mary,” (can sin coexist with grace, of which Mary had been given an abundance, as per Luke 1:28?–cf. Romans chapter 6) “mother of God,” (cf. Luke 1:43) “pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death.” (cf. the passages below)

Revelation 5:8: And when he had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and with golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints;

Revelation 8:3-4: And another angel came and stood at the altar with a golden censer; and he was given much incense to mingle with the prayers of all the saints upon the golden altar before the throne;
and the smoke of the incense rose with the prayers of the saints from the hand of the angel before God.

What are dead humans and an angel doing with the “prayers of the saints” up there, anyway?

And interestingly enough, Jesus instructed his followers about a set prayer–the Our Father, which can be found in Matthew 6:9b-13–but in all the Protestant churches I’ve been to, I’ve never heard the congregation recite it once! Maybe your church is different? Perhaps it actually obeys Christ when he said, “Pray then like this” (v. 9a)?

Trust me, I know what its like to fool myself and explain away the obvious like I was a defense attorney–and its exhausting:thumbsup:

If you want to throw away what the Bible and history say in exchange for how you opine the Christian faith should “really” be, that’s certainly your prerogative. Just don’t expect us to follow suit… because it was a church that was “ritualistic” and taught a “perversion of [your imagined] Gospel” which wrote, compiled, and preserved the Bible for you to employ against anyone who disagrees with your infallible proclamations.

 

[guanophore]

And what has the Catholic Church brought forth through this history? Did it lead the world into all truth? Millions who have been slaughtered by the catholics to believe in Christ would disagree.

Can you provide some documentation with regard to these millions? I would like to read about this.

In answer to your question, yes the Catholic Church leads the world into truth. This is the way Jesus set things up. He wanted the world to know HIm through the Church.

 Here's my problem with this fallacy. Catholics want to explain away the horror of decisions it has made but seems to want to include, as from Almighty God, what it chooses. You cant have it both ways..either your church was always right or not. If it was not then it did not lead anything into ALL truth. You simply dont have a corner on the truth --so you clearly misrepresent what Jesus meant.

Jesus promised that the gates of hell would not prevail. Teaching error leads souls into hell. It is his promise that makes the church infallible.

The people that are members of His One Body, the Church, are not infallible. They make mistakes, commit sins, and sometimes do heinous acts. This does not mean the Church teaches error, any more that Judas betraying Christ makes His Teaching in error.

 The Gospel is simple. You seem to think Jesus meant there are mountains of rituals to be learned--

I agree that the Gospel is simple, but if you think that God is not fond of ritual, then you need to re-read the book of Leviticus!

when the Holy Spirit DID lead us into all truth when the Bible was put to paper.

I agree. The Word of God was put onto that paper by, for, and about Catholics. The Holy Spirit inspired them, led them into Truth, by leading the Catholic Church to write, preserve, promulgate and canonize that Bible. It is part of the “all Truth” that He has given to the Catholic Church.

Thousands were converted by a single sermon by the disciples–thats how simple the message is and how powerful the Holy Spirit. Not good enough for you?

Was there something that made you think it was not? How did you get so hostile toward Catholics?

 You pick and choose what your right about. Millions upon millions who received the Holy Spirit when they believed see absolutely nothing to Maryology.

It is not their fault they are ignorant. Why blame them? They cling very strongly to the small portion of the Truth they have. It is the best they can do.

They see it as the Catholic church including the very errors Paul and the apostles were trying to combat--the perversion of the Gospel. NEVER, in their very clear explanation of God's word, do they ever highlight Mary.

I guess we read it differently.

Jesus’ highlight of Mary needs nothing else.

But here is the crux of the matter. Your on such a house of cards you can never concede one single point, because once you do it all comes falling down.

To some extent, there is truth to this. The faith is One, and when certain threads are detached and torn away, the whole garment begins to shred. This is why there are so many denominations.

There is a bias that simply cant be overcome. If you examined your church from the outside you might possibly see this. What do you think Paul would say if he saw the Popes ring being kissed dressed to the nines?

Glory to God, He has kept His promises!

What do you think Paul would say about your judgmental attitude about the attire of one of God’s servants?

James 4:12
But who are you that you judge your neighbor?

By what authority do you declare that the Pope can’t wear a ring, or a hat, or carry a staff?

Come on, there is a mountain of rubble covering Jesus Christ and the simplicity of the Gospel has been lathered in ritual.

Wow. You do have a lot of unresolved issues. You sound like a person who was baptized Catholic, then left the Church, and found Jesus.

10 hail mary’s and 2 our fathers? Do you honestly think a single one of them would even know what your talking about? Trust me, I know what its like to fool myself and explain away the obvious like I was a defense attorney–and its exhausting:thumbsup:

I am glad you gave it up. It does not make sense to try to defend something that makes no sense to you.

 

[Dan_Daly]

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

Not something we really need to worry about, since it did come from the Scriptures AND the Early Church.

Pax

 

[amber_lux]

Give us some scholarly references for these “millions” supposedly killed in the name of Christ by Catholics.

Knights Templar would be one group.

The Christians in India that were forced to convert to Jesuit Catholicism or of be killed, would be a second group.

The First Crusade would be a third group.

Amber