Jesus, Mary, and Martin

  • Thread starter Thread starter TriuneUnity
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

TriuneUnity

Guest
In the following series of threads, I want to begin a, hopefully, fruitful discussion between Roman Catholics and Lutherans (and those sympathetic to our understanding of Scripture and the faith) about the subject of Mary. I will present, what I believe to be, the view of the Blessed Virgin as held by our beloved Confessions of faith, as well as those Lutheran fathers from what is known as the era of Lutheran Orthodoxy (roughly from the late 16th to early 18th centuries). As always, may such conversations further only to heal the wounds between respective communions and further reunification in Christ.

“Mary the Virgin is found obedient, saying, “Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word.” But Eve was disobedient; for she did not obey when as yet she was a virgin. . . . the knot of Eve’s disobedience was loosed by the obedience of Mary. For what the virgin Eve had bound fast through unbelief, this did the virgin Mary set free through faith.” – Saint Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses III.22.4

It may seem to most Lutherans that the Blessed Virgin Mary is of little consequence to their faith. Marian devotion is almost non-existent within the Lutheran churches: the rosary is not prayed, medals of the Mother of God are not worn, and pictures of her are rarely if even seen in Lutheran churches and homes. In fact, in their daily or weekly practice Lutherans barely take note Mary at all.

Despite this neglect, Lutherans should care about Mary.

First, Mary is spoken of highly in the Book of Concord. Although the Lutheran reformers sought to correct many abuses within the Roman Church of their day concerning Mary, they did not at the same time ‘correct’ her right out of their theology. Mary is still spoken of as “the Blessed Virgin” and, according to the Apology of the Augsburg Confession, “is worthy of the highest honors”. The Blessed Virgin Mary is a living member of the church triumphant praying for the church militant. She is rightly called “Theotokos,” Mother of God.

Secondly, the Blessed Virgin is spoken of highly in Martin Luther’s various writings. In fact, Luther tells us Mary is the “highest woman and the noblest gem in Christianity after Christ”. High praise indeed! And challenging words for today’s Lutherans who have largely forgotten the importance of Mary in the church and in God’s plan for our salvation.

Why did Luther pen such words? Mary is the “highest woman” for being chosen by God to bear His only Son. Because of this, Mary has no equal in the history of humanity. And yet she never took this blessing by God to be a source of pride or boastfulness. Through the Magnificat (Luke 1: 46-55), Mary shows us how to live, how to be Christians. In fact, by accepting the Lord’s choice of her to bear His Son, Mary became the first Christian. She believed before Christ was even born; “Behold, the maidservant of the Lord! Let it be to me according to your word.” (Luke 1: 38) Luther tells us Mary is the example of faith which we all should strive to emulate.

Why is Mary the “noblest gem in Christianity after Christ”? Luther accepted all the Roman doctrines concerning the Blessed Virgin: her status as Mother of God, her perpetual virginity, her sinlessness, and her assumption into heaven. He even kept a picture of the Blessed Virgin in his private study.

Not only is Mary the Mother of God and the model of our faith, she is also the Mother of the Church. In a simple manner this is understandable in that the Church is the body of Christ (Eph. 5: 23; Col. 1: 18), and Mary gave birth to that body and gave Christ his human nature. More significantly, however, Mary’s fiat is a necessary part of the salvation of the world. Without Mary’s consent, Christ cannot come into the world. The angel Gabriel does not simply tell Mary what is to be, but tells her what is to be with her consent. “Let it be to me according to your word.” Only then does the angel depart.
 
Saint Paul speaks of Christ in his first letter to the church in Corinth as the second Adam undoing the work of the first Adam which led us into sin. Likewise, some one hundred years later St. Justin Martyr, paralleling Saint Paul’s comparison of the first and second Adam, is the first to speak of Mary as the second or new Eve undoing the work of the first:

“[Jesus] became man by the Virgin so that the course which was taken by disobedience in the beginning through the agency of the serpent might be also the very course by which it would be put down. Eve, a virgin and undefiled, conceived the word of the serpent and bore disobedience and death. But the Virgin Mary received faith and joy when the angel Gabriel announced to her the glad tidings that the Spirit of the Lord would come upon her and the power of the Most High would overshadow her, for which reason the Holy One being born of her is the Son of God. And she replied `Be it done unto me according to your word’” [Luke 1:38] (Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, 100).

Likewise St. Irenaeus says:

“In accordance with this design, Mary the Virgin is found obedient, saying, “Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word.” But Eve was disobedient; for she did not obey when as yet she was a virgin. And even as she, having indeed a husband, Adam, but being nevertheless as yet a virgin (for in Paradise “they were both naked, and were not ashamed,” inasmuch as they, having been created a short time previously, had no understanding of the procreation of children: for it was necessary that they should first come to adult age, and then multiply from that time onward), having become disobedient, was made the cause of death, both to herself and to the entire human race; so also did Mary, having a man betrothed [to her], and being nevertheless a virgin, by yielding obedience, become the cause of salvation, both to herself and the whole human race. And on this account does the law term a woman betrothed to a man, the wife of him who had betrothed her, although she was as yet a virgin; thus indicating the back-reference from Mary to Eve, because what is joined together could not otherwise be put asunder than by inversion of the process by which these bonds of union had arisen; so that the former ties be cancelled by the latter, that the latter may set the former again at liberty. And it has, in fact, happened that the first compact looses from the second tie, but that the second tie takes the position of the first which has been cancelled. For this reason did the Lord declare that the first should in truth be last, and the last first. And the prophet, too, indicates the same, saying, “instead of fathers, children have been born unto thee.” For the Lord, having been born “the First-begotten of the dead,” and receiving into His bosom the ancient fathers, has regenerated them into the life of God, He having been made Himself the beginning of those that live, as Adam became the beginning of those who die. Wherefore also Luke, commencing the genealogy with the Lord, carried it back to Adam, indicating that it was He who regenerated them into the Gospel of life, and not they Him. And thus also it was that the knot of Eve’s disobedience was loosed by the obedience of Mary. For what the virgin Eve had bound fast through unbelief, this did the virgin Mary set free through faith.” (Adversus Haereses III.22.4)

Lest we think these sentiments are only works of distant Fathers of the Church lost to the mists of time, we should remember that Luther himself repeated this same argument:

“For just as through Eve the curse took over, and in her and with her took possession of the whole human race . . . so through the blessed Virgin, in her and with her, the curse has been removed and the blessing bestowed, so that as the former would produce the children and fruit of death, so the latter would produce the Son and Fruit of life and salvation. The former brought forth thorns and thistles (that is, evil men and sinners), and mankind itself similarly brought forth thorns and thistles (that is, evil works). But the latter brought forward the Lily of the valleys, the Rose, the Grape, and the Almond; and through her mankind has likewise brought forward grapes, figs, etc. (that is, good works).” (Luther’s Works, vol. 11, p. 153).

Luther and his followers in the Reformation were keen to emphasize that Christ alone is our path to God. Mary gives us nothing and does not want us to go to her for the good things that come from God. Yet she is nonetheless worthy of praise as the Mother of this God who became man for our sake, who responded to the Word in faith, who suffered at the foot of the cross, who waited in the upper room, who experienced the first Pentecost, and who was and remains the Mother of the Church.

“This is the great joy, of which the angel [of the Lord (Luke 2: 9-12)] speaks, this is the consolation and the superabundant goodness of God, that man (if he has this faith) may boast of such treasure as that Mary is his real mother, Christ his brother, and God his father. For these things are, all of them, true and they come to pass, provided we believe them” (Luther’s Works, vol. 52, p. 15).
 
I like to think many Lutherans, at least those I know, see Mary as a key figure and realize her importance, but at the same time Catholics would view us as very distant toward her as we do not ask for her intercession, etc. In fact, my own mother in law has the very skewed view of Lutherans as “being just like Catholics except they don’t believe in Mary.” I think that is a kind of a common view among some older Catholics. As for Lutheran view of Mary, I think one can look to the Augsburg Confession: “… But the Scripture teaches not the invocation of saints or to ask help of saints, since it sets before us the one Christ as the Mediator, Propitiation, High Priest, and Intercessor. 3] He is to be prayed to, and has promised that He will hear our prayer; and this worship He approves above all, to wit, that in all afflictions He be called upon, 1 John 2:1: 4] If any man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, etc.” You want to show an example of someone who is obedient to God, a real role model. Mary, hands down #1. But as for doing more, no.
 
I like to think many Lutherans, at least those I know, see Mary as a key figure and realize her importance, but at the same time Catholics would view us as very distant toward her as we do not ask for her intercession, etc. In fact, my own mother in law has the very skewed view of Lutherans as “being just like Catholics except they don’t believe in Mary.” I think that is a kind of a common view among some older Catholics. As for Lutheran view of Mary, I think one can look to the Augsburg Confession: “… But the Scripture teaches not the invocation of saints or to ask help of saints, since it sets before us the one Christ as the Mediator, Propitiation, High Priest, and Intercessor. 3] He is to be prayed to, and has promised that He will hear our prayer; and this worship He approves above all, to wit, that in all afflictions He be called upon, 1 John 2:1: 4] If any man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, etc.” You want to show an example of someone who is obedient to God, a real role model. Mary, hands down #1. But as for doing more, no.
Yes, invocation is usually the sticking point. I hope to address it at some point. I think, though, we need to step back from that issue and address the commonalities first. I agree that many Roman Catholics believe we have a zero sum view of her because we don’t ask for her intercession. On the flip side, in my experience, the zero sum view is reinforced by most Lutherans. Most of whom, would never know how men like Luther, Chemnitz, Gerhard, and Melancthon viewed her.
 
This thread title sounds like a folk group from the 60’s? Puff the magic dragon…etc. 😃
 
Yes, invocation is usually the sticking point. I hope to address it at some point. I think, though, we need to step back from that issue and address the commonalities first. I agree that many Roman Catholics believe we have a zero sum view of her because we don’t ask for her intercession. On the flip side, in my experience, the zero sum view is reinforced by most Lutherans. Most of whom, would never know how men like Luther, Chemnitz, Gerhard, and Melancthon viewed her.
I look forward to hearing invocation and intercession addressed. In the meantime, your point about Lutherans not being aware of the Reformer’s devotion to the Blessed Virgin is a good one. I love this picture of Chemnitz with his rosary beads.
Jon
 
I look forward to hearing invocation and intercession addressed. In the meantime, your point about Lutherans not being aware of the Reformer’s devotion to the Blessed Virgin is a good one. I love this picture of Chemnitz with his rosary beads.
Jon
I will have to at some point! Right now, I’m looking at the 4 Marian dogmas held by Rome. Hopefully you enjoy the two of those I’ve posted so far!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top