I'm getting tired of hearing from Protestants that we worship Mary and the saints!

[brkn1]

I am puzzled to read this, since it seems to contradict what you wrote above. The term “theotokos” or “God-bearer”, rendered in the Latin “mother of God”, was derived from the development of the doctrine of Christ. We believe that He is God in the flesh, therefore, Mary is the Mother of God. She did not originate his divine nature, but neither was His human nature separated from the divine. She did not give birth to a “nature” but to a Person, who had both a divine (eternal) and a human nature.

Phil 2:5-7
Christ Jesus,
6 who, though he was in the form of God,
did not regard equality with God
as something to be exploited,
7 but emptied himself,
taking the form of a slave,
being born in human likeness.

Mary is the mother of Christ Jesus, the second person of the Trinity, who emptied Himself, so that He could be born of her.

This was the term that was selected by the council to clarify the nature of Jesus.

This is an essential question, and represents centuries of debate among the most advanced theologians. I commend you for asking it.

The nature of Mary does not change or define who Christ is, on the other hand, the nature of Christ changes and defines who Mary is. All the Marian doctrines were developed from the nature of Christ. If He is really flesh, then He took His human flesh from Mary, in whose womb He was formed.

She was both! She gave her “yes”, and “produced” God from her womb. She did not produce the eternal nature of God, but His human nature was not separated from the divine nature.

The Council of Calcedon (451AD) used the term “Mother of God ACCORDING TO THE MANHOOD” .
That term correctly defines Mary’s role.
When you remove the “according to the manhood” from the term, you end up with a title for Mary that is dishonest, since it most definitely implies that Mary is also a god. The mother of a god must also be a god. You can play with all of the excuses why the title is necessary, but you know that the arguments against the use of such a title has validity.
The title “Mother of God” is not found in Scripture for good reason. Deviating from God’s Word is where all false doctrine comes from.

 

[adstrinity]

Forgive me, I have passed over the past 10 pages of this thread, but, is this thread still trying to define prayer?

 

[guanophore]

I don’t think you and others quite grasp the significance of this work in regards to how it has impacted marian doctrines and practices and the millions of lives it has affected. This is what the introduction to this work says:
(snip)

He was not just writing some “poetry” but was making “a defense of our Lady’s sublime position in traditional Catholic devotion.”

The portion that you posted, ja4, was a poetic expression. I realize that he wrote and taught a great deal more, not just about Mary, but a number of subjects.

Catholic devotion belongs to the persons making devotion. and the Glories of Mary are not Catholic Teaching nor are the prayers required of Catholics. Why does it bother you so much if certain people want to be devoted to the mother of our Lord? Why do you find this so offensive?

I suspect many catholics are just familar with saying the Hail Mary and don’t really give it much thought.

If people are saying the Hail Mary with out giving it much thought, then they are not benefittng, and may be harming themselves. Any kind of rote, reptetitive prayer that does not include mindfulness goes into the realm of vain activity. The whole point of the Rosary is to meditate on the life of Christ. If this is not happening, then it is not going to be very fruitful, in my not so humble opinion.

Its works like these that really shows how this kind of thing does in fact support Catholic Teachings on Mary.

You have it backwards, ja4. This work is a reflection on the Catholic Teaching, not the source of it. Reverence for Mary began in the church with the Apostles, and the women who, with Mary, followed Jesus. She was given into the care of the Church at Jesus’ death on the cross, and she has been beloved by the Church since that time. She has also been a mother to all who obey the commandments of Christ, as it says in Revelation.

The doctrines about Mary were developed as corollaries from the doctrines about the Trinity and the hypostatic union, in response to heresies in the early Church. This is why your notion that they were 'unheard of for centuries" makes no sense. The Church always believed that Jesus was the Son of God made flesh. This did not need to be made into dogma until heretics emerged that started denying His nature.

It is like saying the church did not believe in the Trinity for centuries because it was not written about before.

You strike me as one who does not want this kind of thing to be known and if you were for the truth would want this to be known widely. I can only guess why you don’t…

As you pointed out in your quotation, the widespread effects of Ligouri’s work is a matter of recorded history. This happened long before I was born, and will still be the case long after I am gone!

What I don’t want to be widespread are the lies that are perpetrated against the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church that we worship Mary.

 

[hays1122]

Lets not forget that Mary according to Saint Alfonso Ligori in conjunction with the Catholic church says she is omnipotent. Only God is omnipotent. We see this from the Glories of Mary:

“Therefore, to use the words of St. Antonine, God has put the whole Church not only under the patronage, but even under the power and authority, of Mary. Since, then, the Mother must have the same power as the Son, Mary became omnipotent because Jesus is omnipotent. Of course, the Son is omnipotent by nature, where Mary is omnipotent only by grace. This is proved by the fact that the Son never refuses the Mother anything she seeks, as St. Bridget learned in a revelation.”

This passage is from his book in
chapter 6
TURN, THEN, MOST GRACIOUS ADVOCATE

It is not really a stretch to think that she would be included in the Trinity with this kind of teaching.

so if Mary is Omnipotent because Jesus is omnipotent then you in fact do worship Mary as Jesus should be worshiped.
“God has put the whole Church not only under the patronage, but even under the power and authority, of Mary.”
Sounds like what I have been taught about Jesus.
Now we’re getting somewhere.
Jesus is Lord!

 

[hays1122]

The portion that you posted, ja4, was a poetic expression. I realize that he wrote and taught a great deal more, not just about Mary, but a number of subjects.

Catholic devotion belongs to the persons making devotion. and the Glories of Mary are not Catholic Teaching nor are the prayers required of Catholics. Why does it bother you so much if certain people want to be devoted to the mother of our Lord? Why do you find this so offensive?

If people are saying the Hail Mary with out giving it much thought, then they are not benefittng, and may be harming themselves. Any kind of rote, reptetitive prayer that does not include mindfulness goes into the realm of vain activity. The whole point of the Rosary is to meditate on the life of Christ. If this is not happening, then it is not going to be very fruitful, in my not so humble opinion.

You have it backwards, ja4. This work is a reflection on the Catholic Teaching, not the source of it. Reverence for Mary began in the church with the Apostles, and the women who, with Mary, followed Jesus. She was given into the care of the Church at Jesus’ death on the cross, and she has been beloved by the Church since that time. She has also been a mother to all who obey the commandments of Christ, as it says in Revelation.

The doctrines about Mary were developed as corollaries from the doctrines about the Trinity and the hypostatic union, in response to heresies in the early Church. This is why your notion that they were 'unheard of for centuries" makes no sense. The Church always believed that Jesus was the Son of God made flesh. This did not need to be made into dogma until heretics emerged that started denying His nature.

It is like saying the church did not believe in the Trinity for centuries because it was not written about before.

As you pointed out in your quotation, the widespread effects of Ligouri’s work is a matter of recorded history. This happened long before I was born, and will still be the case long after I am gone!

What I don’t want to be widespread are the lies that are perpetrated against the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church that we worship Mary.

Maybe you and other Catholics see it as a lie that Catholics worship Mary,but there are many Catholics and writings by Catholics that sound like they worship Mary.
Maybe there is division in the Catholic church after all.

 

[adstrinity]

Maybe you and other Catholics see it as a lie that Catholics worship Mary,but there are many Catholics and writings by Catholics that sound like they worship Mary.
Maybe there is division in the Catholic church after all.

Objection: hearsay.

Your Honor, just because it sounds like to ONE person something is happening, does not, by fact, mean that that is the case.

Objection: Relevance?

 

[SIA]

Maybe you and other Catholics see it as a lie that Catholics worship Mary,but there are many Catholics and writings by Catholics that sound like they worship Mary.
Maybe there is division in the Catholic church after all.

The whole adoration thing gets very scary. I was there many times and it was never a comfortable thing. I believe that many Catholics do worship Mary and they do expect supernatural things from her. Other Catholics do not. Some that I used to go to church with refused to sing songs to Mary during mass like Hail Holy Queen and Ave Maria.

 

[Peter_J]

I don’t think you and others quite grasp the significance of this work in regards to how it has impacted marian doctrines and practices and the millions of lives it has affected. This is what the introduction to this work says:

"INTRODUCTION

St. Alphonsus wrote The Glories of Mary as a defense of our Lady’s sublime position in traditional Catholic devotion. Certain writers of his time, tainted with Jansenism, were busy ridiculing devotion to Mary, singling out the Hail Holy Queen [Salve Regina] for particular criticism.

St. Alphonsus’ admirable handling of their false scandal over common Catholic practice was simple enough, but overwhelming in its effect. He quoted Saints, Doctors, popes, theologians, Sacred Scripture, the Liturgy, the mind of the Church, the whole vast treasury of Catholic tradition and said, equivalently, “Here is your answer.”

St. Alphonsus did not argue, except now and then. Where was the need for argument? His tone was quiet but devastating, full of the calm assurance which comes from reliance on unimpeachable authority. He was tender, at times rapturous, particularly when directly addressing our Blessed Lady in his beautiful prayers. He wrote with the mind of a genius and the heart of a child, a great theologian who was also a Saint.

No one will ever know the extent of his influence over those millions of genuinely Catholic spirits who want to be devoted to our Lady."

He was not just writing some “poetry” but was making “a defense of our Lady’s sublime position in traditional Catholic devotion.”
I suspect many catholics are just familar with saying the Hail Mary and don’t really give it much thought. Its works like these that really shows how this kind of thing does in fact support Catholic Teachings on Mary.

You strike me as one who does not want this kind of thing to be known and if you were for the truth would want this to be known widely. I can only guess why you don’t…

Ps-- would not this work be considered part of the “fullness of the Truth” that is in the Catholic church?

justasking4,

I haven’t been involved in this thread a lot lately, but I’d like to jump in here to point out that the Introduction you’re quoting from has, if anything, even less weight than St. Alphonsus’ writings do.

Incidentally, perhaps the Catholic Church would have been slightly more reluctant to canonize St. Alphonsus if his cause for canonization had come up in our own day instead of in the 19th century (he was canonized in 1839, and declared a Doctor of the Church in 1871). Don’t get me wrong, I’m not doubting that he’s in heaven; it just seems like now-a-days we (Catholics) are a little more cautious about doing things that might possibly put a “stumbling” block in front of our fellow Christians. (And, to be fair, some non-Catholic Christians seem a little more reluctant to place a stumbling block in front of Catholics.)

 

[hays1122]

Objection: hearsay.

Your Honor, just because it sounds like to ONE person something is happening, does not, by fact, mean that that is the case.

Objection: Relevance?

“hearsay”,yes, the virgin Mary has not appeared to me yet. I have been reading all I can so I can understand the Catholic faith and what they say about Mary.
The relevance in the division is that Catholics take pride in the fact that there are not hundreds of denominations that call themselves Catholic as there are in the protestant religion.

 

[justasking4]

The portion that you posted, ja4, was a poetic expression. I realize that he wrote and taught a great deal more, not just about Mary, but a number of subjects.

Catholic devotion belongs to the persons making devotion. and the Glories of Mary are not Catholic Teaching nor are the prayers required of Catholics. Why does it bother you so much if certain people want to be devoted to the mother of our Lord? Why do you find this so offensive?

If people are saying the Hail Mary with out giving it much thought, then they are not benefittng, and may be harming themselves. Any kind of rote, reptetitive prayer that does not include mindfulness goes into the realm of vain activity. The whole point of the Rosary is to meditate on the life of Christ. If this is not happening, then it is not going to be very fruitful, in my not so humble opinion.

You have it backwards, ja4. This work is a reflection on the Catholic Teaching, not the source of it. Reverence for Mary began in the church with the Apostles, and the women who, with Mary, followed Jesus. She was given into the care of the Church at Jesus’ death on the cross, and she has been beloved by the Church since that time. She has also been a mother to all who obey the commandments of Christ, as it says in Revelation.

The doctrines about Mary were developed as corollaries from the doctrines about the Trinity and the hypostatic union, in response to heresies in the early Church. This is why your notion that they were 'unheard of for centuries" makes no sense. The Church always believed that Jesus was the Son of God made flesh. This did not need to be made into dogma until heretics emerged that started denying His nature.

It is like saying the church did not believe in the Trinity for centuries because it was not written about before.

As you pointed out in your quotation, the widespread effects of Ligouri’s work is a matter of recorded history. This happened long before I was born, and will still be the case long after I am gone!

What I don’t want to be widespread are the lies that are perpetrated against the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church that we worship Mary.

If one were to worship Mary what would it look like? What do you think would be the characteristics be?

 

[Truthfaithlove]

Exodus 20:4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

EXCUSES ASIDE…You can use these graven images (images of mary or of ‘saints’) in cathedrals for concentration purposes for adoration or just for decoration. BUT…whatever excuses you may use, it is in vain, you are violating the above commandment 2.

The 2nd commandment STARE you in the face, while you blatatly violate. There’s plainly put…NO EXCUSE.

 

[hays1122]

If one were to worship Mary what would it look like? What do you think would be the characteristics be?

The dictionary says: “to render religious reverence and homage”
My definition:
The one I put first in my life. The one I believe is most important.
The one whom I give credit for all that is good in my life.
I was raised to believe that Jesus is the only one who deserves such adoration.
Catholics can’t help what they believe about Mary. There are many reasons why they believe the way thy do.
You just have to do your own research. There is so much to learn and I wish I could fill you in on all of it.
I was reading about Saint Dionysius. He wrote about meeting Mary and how he was so amazed by her.
First you can read about Dionysus in Acts Chapter 17. Where Paul preaches and Dionysus was converted.
Acts 17:34
“But certain men adhering to him, did believe; among whom was also Dionysius, the Areopagite, and a woman named Damaris, and others with them.”
Dionysius writes to Paul about meeting Mary.
"During the lifetime of the Holy Mother of God, Saint Dionysius had journeyed from Athens to Jerusalem, to meet Her. He wrote to his teacher the Apostle Paul: “I witness by God, that besides the very most God Himself, there is nothing else filled with Divine power and grace. No one among mankind can fully grasp in mind, what I beheld. I confess before God: when I was with John, who shone among the Apostles, like the sun in the sky – when I was brought before the countenance of the Most Holy Virgin, I experienced an inexpressible sensation. Before me gleamed a sort of Divine radiance which transfixed my spirit. I perceived the fragrance of indescribable aromas and was filled with such delight, that my very body became faint, and my spirit could bearly endure these signs and marks of eternal majesty and heavenly power. The grace from her overwhelmed my heart, and shook my very spirit. If I did not have in mind your instruction, I should have mistaken Her for the very God. It is impossible to stand before greater blessedness than this, which I beheld.”
When I read things like this I just can’t help but believe that Catholics feel the same way about Mary as Dionysius.
Plus too you must look into all the apparitions of Mary.
Read all you can then you’ll understand. You may not agree but you’ll see things in a whole new light.

 

[hays1122]

Exodus 20:4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

EXCUSES ASIDE…You can use these graven images (images of mary or of ‘saints’) in cathedrals for concentration purposes for adoration or just for decoration. BUT…whatever excuses you may use, it is in vain, you are violating the above commandment 2.

The 2nd commandment STARE you in the face, while you blatatly violate. There’s plainly put…NO EXCUSE.

Casting stones ?
You must be so proud of yourself,that you qualify for such a duty.
The law is spiritual, and takes knowledge of the secret thoughts, desires, and dispositions of the heart.
Its grand demand is love, without which outward obedience is mere hypocrisy. It requires perfect, unfailing, constant obedience; no law in the world admits disobedience to itself.
Whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all, James 2:10.
Whether in the heart or the conduct, in thought, word,
or deed, to omit or to vary any thing, is sin, and the wages of sin is death.

 

[Cinette]

According to the Church’s teaching we have a great reverence for Mother Mary. Most people identify with a Mother and she is the Mother of all Mothers, the Mother of Our Lord - our Mother

In every age one will find different expressions and manifestations. If one were to read Shakespeare’s English today one would not understand.

There was a time when one would address people as Mr and Mrs etc but today, especially among Americans, it is Bob and Mary. You might call your boss by his first name. You see journalists addressing people they are interviewing for the first time by their first name!

I also speak Portuguese and one would address a woman as Senhora Dona Maria. As you get to know her better you might drop the Senhora and just say Dona Maria (which also means Lady). I knew someone for years who never stopped addressing me as Senhora Dona… In a formal business letter you would instead of Dear Sirs you would say Exmos. Senhores (your excellencies!)

You might find among peasants that some may exaggerate their veneration but if you were to ask them if they place Mary on a par with Jesus they will think you are mad.

In court one says My Lord and Your Worship. Does that mean that the Judge is being worshipped? Of course not.:whacky:

We Catholics look upon Jesus, Mary and Joseph as the Holy Family.

Mary conceived through the Holy Spirit. She was the Mother of Jesus and since Jesus was also God the Son she is called Mother of God. But no she is not a God! The person who suggested this in an above post is :whacky:

We earthlings can only conceive of 4 dimensions - the rest we accept in Faith. We also follow our common sense.

I can’t for the life of me understand people like justasking4 who insists and persists in telling Catholics what they believe. Doesn’t he have anything better to do?

P S I am sure that Jesus must get the needle with these Christians who do not honour his Mother:yup:

 

[Monkey1976]

I’ve noticed that this charge is generally laid against Catholics by those whose faith tradition is non-liturgical. For Catholics, true worship is the offering of the Sacrifice of the Mass, which can only ever be offered to God. There was a short-lived heresy, called Collyridianism, which counted Mary as truly divine and offered sacrifice to her in a severely distorted imitation of Holy Mass. It was condemned in the 4th century.by St. Epiphanius of Salamis in his Panarion. For those whose view of worship is non-liturgical, it would appear to them that we, in our devotions, worship Mary and the saints, because of their view of what constitutes worship. While we can understand this view, that doesn’t mean that it is correct or has merit. God has specified throughout the centuries that the proper means of worshiping Him is the offering of sacrifice. As Christ’s Sacrifice completed all need for the sacrifices of the Old Covenant, that makes the His Sacrifice the proper means of worshiping God. Through Holy Mass, we are present at that event. What non-liturgical Christians call “worship”, we call by another, more exact name - devotion.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Our worship is truly Liturgical. I am please that some Protestants who mainly liturgy keep their worship that way. I am even more please with Eastern Orthodox for having revere its Liturgy and preserve it.

 

[guanophore]

The Council of Calcedon (451AD) used the term “Mother of God ACCORDING TO THE MANHOOD” .
That term correctly defines Mary’s role.
When you remove the “according to the manhood” from the term, you end up with a title for Mary that is dishonest, since it most definitely implies that Mary is also a god.

I understand the difficulty. I think it is a result of being separated from the Apostolic Tradition. Those of us who partake of the Apostolic Tradition understand with clarity that Mary is not divine,and that “Mother of God” means exactly what the Council of Calcedon says - she became the mother of the second person of the Trinity when He became man.

The mother of a god must also be a god.

I understand this reasoning, even though it is false, this is exactly what discussion was being had which resulted in the proclamation of the Council. There is nothing new under the sun!

You can play with all of the excuses why the title is necessary, but you know that the arguments against the use of such a title has validity.

If it is not properly understood, of course it does, just as the nature of Christ, if not properly understood, causes the same sort of problem. This issue was addressed by the Church with the Arian and Gnostic heresies, which were put to rest in the early centuries, and are raising their ugly heads once again. Just as in the post-Apostolic times, the problems originate from persons deriving doctrine when they are separated from the One Church that Jesus founded. Whenever this happens, errors and heresies result.

The title “Mother of God” is not found in Scripture for good reason. Deviating from God’s Word is where all false doctrine comes from.

It seems at times as though people forget that the NT did not exist when the Church was formed. The entire doctrine was delivered “once for all” before one word of the NT was written. The Teaching of Jesus did not become invalid or less authentic when some of it was written in the form of gospels and letters. If you do take it upon yourself to study the early heresies, you will find that they were combatted with Apostolic Teaching through Sacred Tradition. This is how the Church has always refuted heresy, and always will.

He is God. She is His Mother. She is the Mother of God.

 

[onenow1]

Hi, brkn
Originally Posted by brkn1
The title “Mother of God” is not found in Scripture for good reason. Deviating from God’s Word is where all false doctrine comes from.

Quote= onenow1 , I Respectfully disagree brkn.

Luke 1
43 And why is this granted me, that the mother of my Lord ]should come to me.

Who Elizabeth’s Lord ?

Peace, onenow1

 

[guanophore]

so if Mary is Omnipotent because Jesus is omnipotent then you in fact do worship Mary as Jesus should be worshiped.

No. Having power does not mean that a person is divine. Besides, she is mother of the Church, and has this role because Jesus gave it to her, in grace, not because she has a divine nature. Jesus giving power to others does not make people divine. When power worked through Peter to heal the sick, it did not make him less human.

“God has put the whole Church not only under the patronage, but even under the power and authority, of Mary.”
Sounds like what I have been taught about Jesus.
Now we’re getting somewhere.
Jesus is Lord!

Indeed, Mary has what she does because of her Divine Son. He has elevated her.

Luke 1:49
“…the Mighty One has done great things for me…”

Maybe you and other Catholics see it as a lie that Catholics worship Mary,but there are many Catholics and writings by Catholics that sound like they worship Mary.
Maybe there is division in the Catholic church after all.

No, I know that there are people, some calling themselves Catholic, that have excessive practices such as these. I personally know a woman, baptized Catholic, who believes that Our Lady of Guadelupe is the Goddess, and she does worship her.

What I say is the lie is that this is not the teaching of the Church. I do understand, also, why many Protestants think we worship saints. I think this emanates from a very narrow understanding of the nature of prayer, and rejection of the apostolic teaching on the communion of saints.

There is no division in the Catholic Church. There are people who do not follow the Teaching of the One church, and there fore, are separated from the One Faith.

 

[justasking4]

guanophore;4286978]
Originally Posted by hays1122
so if Mary is Omnipotent because Jesus is omnipotent then you in fact do worship Mary as Jesus should be worshiped.

guanophore
No. Having power does not mean that a person is divine. Besides, she is mother of the Church, and has this role because Jesus gave it to her, in grace, not because she has a divine nature.

Where is it recorded that Jesus gave Mary this position? Did the apostles recognize this?

Jesus giving power to others does not make people divine. When power worked through Peter to heal the sick, it did not make him less human.

Do you agree then that Mary is omnipotent?