Protestant View of Mariology

[PRmerger]

The Trinitarian Doctrine was established by the Apostles and the Catholic Church CAN explain it, but any other Church can also explain it without being Catholic. After all, in order to be a Christian one has to accept the Trinity, and the Trinity is found throughout Scripture. Even its complexity:

Actually, no, dronald. That is why there are so many bible-alone denominations which deny the Trinity. They use the bible alone and come to completely different understandings of the nature of Jesus.

That is why it is so very dangerous to read the bible outside the lens of the Tradition which gave you your bible.

Jehovah’s witnesses are fond of saying, “If you were raised on a desert island and came across a bible, would you be able to extract from that the concept of a Trinitarian god?”

And, of course, they are correct.

Fortunately for Catholics we can say, “We don’t extract our dogmas from the Bible. Rather, the Bible reflects our dogmas. And the Trinity was part of Apostolic Tradition, and was handed down through Sacred Tradition, not only from the bible.”

 

[PRmerger]

You’re right, now we don’t. What we do need (or believe we need now) is to have the authority to break off of one strict authority when they begin telling us to say hail Mary’s. Now we have that, and it’s much needed.

Really? So you think that anyone who disagrees with their fallible pastor’s interpretation of Scripture can break off and form his own church?

Really?

 

[Richca]

You’re right, now we don’t. What we do need (or believe we need now) is to have the authority to break off of one strict authority when they begin telling us to say hail Mary’s. Now we have that, and it’s much needed.

The Catholic Church’s teachings on Mary is founded on Holy Scripture. To say that we don’t need Mary is quite frankly, unbiblical. For it was through Mary alone that the Son of God, the Savior of the human race, became incarnate through the power of the Holy Spirit. Through Mary’s free consent to the incarnation of the Son of God, Christ was given to the world. It stands to reason that we owe an enormous debt of gratitude to our Blessed Lady.

 

[Nicea325]

Really? So you think that anyone who disagrees with their fallible pastor’s interpretation of Scripture can break off and form his own church?

Really?

Of course, it is common practice in the Protestant world.

 

[Nicea325]

The Catholic Church’s teachings on Mary is founded on Holy Scripture. To say that we don’t need Mary is quite frankly, unbiblical. For it was through Mary alone that the Son of God, the Savior of the human race, became incarnate through the power of the Holy Spirit. Through Mary’s free consent to the incarnation of the Son of God, Christ was given to the world. It stands to reason that we owe an enormous debt of gratitude to our Blessed Lady.

This the whole issue with many Protestants. They fail to accept the simple fact,without Mary there is no Jesus. However, they will tell you:

Not true. Either way God would have made it happen.

Really? No they know God’s intentions?

 

[PRmerger]

Of course, it is common practice in the Protestant world.

Yes. Thanks to this paradigm there has been an obscene onslaught of churches like this one:

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/...ZwIKS6wodiQfIuBbQ_ZnnHAP3Wux155MmdH6zdbJyNzMQ

which have started when one righteous member disagreed vehemently with the pastor’s interpretation of the bible…and then felt it was his right to start his own church down the street.

Now we have tens of thousands of churches like these, with no authority save their own fallible pastor’s authority, to proclaim doctrines different from the church they defected from.

It’s the recipe for chaos and confusion.

 

[pablope]

But she’s the blessed Mary! How could he never bring up something so extremely important unless it wasn’t that important. Paul mentions Christ’s death on the cross, His resurrection, what it does for us, etc. He mentions the story in the Acts of him being lowered from a basket, he mentions many of the Apostles, and he doesn’t even say one thing on Mary in a way that should ever make us feel like she’s an important part of being a faithful Christian.

Sure…there were a lot of things that were not written either…the Trinity, the divinity of Christ, the hypostatic union…there were defined centuries later…and it tool a while for the Church to understand these dogmas…does this make this untrue?

Same with Mary, Christ had to be fully understood before we could get an understanding of Mary.

And if for you to believe about the Holy Mother for something to be written in the Bible about her…then are you not putting your own condition to God about what to believe?

 

[pablope]

The Trinitarian Doctrine was established by the Apostles and the Catholic Church CAN explain it, but any other Church can also explain it without being Catholic. After all, in order to be a Christian one has to accept the Trinity, and the Trinity is found throughout Scripture. Even its complexity:

.

How did the Apostles define the Trinitarian doctrine?

Can you point to an Apostle writing and explaining the Trinitarian doctrine?

And can how explain how is it that the Catholic Church can explain the Trinitarian doctrine?

What is with the Catholic church that they were the first one to explain it?

And why is it that there are denominations out there that deny the Trinity, arguing that the Bible does not teach it?

What makes the CC correct and those that deny it wrong?

 

[pablope]

You’re right, now we don’t. What we do need (or believe we need now) is to have the authority to break off of one strict authority when they begin telling us to say hail Mary’s. Now we have that, and it’s much needed.

And what has breaking off from authority done? Thousands of competing truths…so how does one sift through the competing truths and find the one truth?

Or do you think there are a thousand versions of the Truth?

Do you see anything wrong saying the Hail Mary, Dronald?

This is from Luke’s gospel…so do you see anything wrong the saying this passage from Luke’s?

Hail Mary,
Full of Grace,
The Lord is with thee.
Blessed art thou among women,
and blessed is the fruit
of thy womb, Jesus.

And on this second part…I assume you are a sinner too, like the rest of us…do you see anything wrong with asking the Mother of God to pray for sinners?

Holy Mary,
Mother of God,
pray for us sinners now,
and at the hour of death

 

[brumano]

You are correct. Catholic theology states that it was** fitting** but not “needed” for Mary to be immaculately conceived.

The fittingness, to coin a word, was that Anna and Joachim were very holy parents; the necessity is in Mary’s Immaculate Conception so as to conceive, give birth, and be mother to God’s only begotten Son and to all God’s children. It is of course altogether fitting, because it’s absolutely true… we have no other truth to look at to be able to make a distinction from what was absolutely necessary and what in theory only could have been just fitting. If we take another theory in place of the absolute revelled truth, we deprecate the truth not only about Mary, the Mother of God but about Jesus, would we not? Please bear in mind in this another teaching of Catholic theology; Mary conceived by the Holy Spirit in her heart, what takes place in this deepest of mysteries is for greater reason and purposes above and beyond only to be fitting.

To say It was fitting but not necessary for Mary to be conceived without any any stain of sin would be akin to saying that it was fitting that our Lord should suffer to the full extent that He did and to die as we die for the complete atonement of all sin, but it was not necessary that He did so.

 

[ufamtobie]

Paul touches on many extremely important components of Christianity but ignores Mary completely. So do James, John and Peter. This wasn’t just Scripture, they were letters to Churches. Surely in a letter to a Church, used to help Churches understand their faith more Mary should have been mentioned.

Dronald,

You seem to worry about "Paul, James, John, and Peter, I tell you there is one greater than these Apostles, and his Name is Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ, himself speaks Regarding His Mother Mary. Have you not read John 19: 26 When Jesus therefore had seen his mother and the disciple standing whom he loved, he saith to his mother: Woman, behold thy son. 27After that, he saith to the disciple: Behold thy mother. And from that hour, the disciple took her to his own.

Dronald, Now look what Jesus Christ says right after, in John 28 Afterwards, Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the scripture might be fulfilled, said: I thirst.

Dronald, That was the Last command that Jesus Christ gave to the world while on the Cross, is, that we take Mary as Our Mother and we are her sons and daughter…Jesus Chris knew right after saying this, “that all things were now accomplished, that the Scriptures might be full filled”… Amen And Again you worry about Paul James John, and Peter, not referring to Mary in Scripture. lol

Dronald, in order to full fill Scriptures Jesus Christ had to give us Christians Virgin Mary as our Mother and we Her sons and daughters. Scripture say so, not me.

Dronald, If you call yourself a Christian then you must have Mary as your Mother and you should treat Her Like a son would His Mother, John did, and took her into His Home, now why don’t you do the same. We Catholics do.

Jesus Christ Knows that we NEED Her, I know I and my household do.

Ufam Tobie

 

[Nicea325]

Yes. Thanks to this paradigm there has been an obscene onslaught of churches like this one:

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/...ZwIKS6wodiQfIuBbQ_ZnnHAP3Wux155MmdH6zdbJyNzMQ

which have started when one righteous member disagreed vehemently with the pastor’s interpretation of the bible…and then felt it was his right to start his own church down the street.

Now we have tens of thousands of churches like these, with no authority save their own fallible pastor’s authority, to proclaim doctrines different from the church they defected from.

It’s the recipe for chaos and confusion.

Well look at this way, at least after their services they have the choice of pizza or tacos for lunch-since many are located at strip malls…

 

[Nicea325]

How did the Apostles define the Trinitarian doctrine?

Can you point to an Apostle writing and explaining the Trinitarian doctrine?

And can how explain how is it that the Catholic Church can explain the Trinitarian doctrine?

What is with the Catholic church that they were the first one to explain it?

And why is it that there are denominations out there that deny the Trinity, arguing that the Bible does not teach it?

What makes the CC correct and those that deny it wrong?

Which is the reason why dronald has not answered:

**Again,if it is important according to you, how come not ONE of the NT authors or the 12 apostles or Paul mention a NT canon? **

 

[dronald]

Which is the reason why dronald has not answered:

I wouldn’t jump to conclusions. Idk if you’re attempting to be psychic but I’m back from work, and obviously I have a lot of work to do getting back to all these answers so I’ll do my best. The previous page is just quotations and quotations of what I have said and refutations.

**Again,if it is important according to you, how come not ONE of the NT authors or the 12 apostles or Paul mention a NT canon? **

Paul did not have Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John with him as they had not come into existence yet. Paul’s letters were the first, they were claimed to be Scripture by Peter. Paul did however quote a saying in the Gospel of Luke as Scripture in 1 Timothy. Obviously Peter believed that Paul’s letters should be a part of the NT canon.

Actually, no, dronald. That is why there are so many bible-alone denominations which deny the Trinity. They use the bible alone and come to completely different understandings of the nature of Jesus.

That is why it is so very dangerous to read the bible outside the lens of the Tradition which gave you your bible.

Jehovah’s witnesses are fond of saying, “If you were raised on a desert island and came across a bible, would you be able to extract from that the concept of a Trinitarian god?”

And, of course, they are correct.

Actually, they’re incorrect. One cannot ignore John 1 and say that it doesn’t point to Jesus as God unless one changes what it says. The Word was God vs the Word was a god.

Anyone who has the translation “The Word was God / The Word became flesh” would accept the Trinitarian view. JW’s are considered un-Christian by every Trinitarian denomination, which would make up the majority of Protestant denominations. The existence of a sect that denies Christ’s divinity doesn’t make the ones who accept His divinity any less valid.

This the whole issue with many Protestants. They fail to accept the simple fact,without Mary there is no Jesus. However, they will tell you:

Not true. Either way God would have made it happen.

Really? No they know God’s intentions?

God certainly used Mary. When God uses let’s say me to help my brother learn more about Jesus, would you say that God couldn’t have done it without me? I believe that would be limiting God.

Yes. Thanks to this paradigm there has been an obscene onslaught of churches like this one:

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/...ZwIKS6wodiQfIuBbQ_ZnnHAP3Wux155MmdH6zdbJyNzMQ

Replace this Church with a Catholic Church that has brought people to know Jesus and I would rejoice. I would be so glad, I would praise God for that. If this Church has brought a single soul to know Jesus Christ who would otherwise never learnt about Him than I am grateful and so should you be. Anyways, I did a quick wiki on, “storefront Church” and it doesn’t sound so terrible. Give a read! en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Storefront_church Sounds like they actually have done some good, and you can’t argue with that.

Sure…there were a lot of things that were not written either…the Trinity, the divinity of Christ, the hypostatic union…there were defined centuries later…and it tool a while for the Church to understand these dogmas…does this make this untrue?

So you admit then that people could come to a truth centuries later? I suppose this destroys the argument that the late existence of the first Protestant Church makes any Protestant denomination a failure.

How did the Apostles define the Trinitarian doctrine?

If you were to explain the Trinity to a fellow Catholic I would assume you would point to many of Paul’s writings. I know I would.

And what has breaking off from authority done? Thousands of competing truths…so how does one sift through the competing truths and find the one truth?

 

[dronald]

But when the heads of this truth (the Pope) start saying things that are un-biblical wouldn’t it make sense for a reformation at that point in time? Are you saying that everything a Pope has ever said or done has been Biblical? So why would it be bad for us to separate us from un-Biblical Pope’s when they’re doing a poor job running the Catholic Church?

The Catholic Church’s teachings on Mary is founded on Holy Scripture. To say that we don’t need Mary is quite frankly, unbiblical. For it was **through Mary alone **that the Son of God, the Savior of the human race, became incarnate through the power of the Holy Spirit. Through Mary’s free consent to the incarnation of the Son of God, Christ was given to the world. It stands to reason that we owe an enormous debt of gratitude to our Blessed Lady.

Yikes.

Do you see anything wrong saying the Hail Mary, Dronald?

This is from Luke’s gospel…so do you see anything wrong the saying this passage from Luke’s?

Hail Mary,
Full of Grace,
The Lord is with thee.
Blessed art thou among women,
and blessed is the fruit
of thy womb, Jesus.
And on this second part…I assume you are a sinner too, like the rest of us…do you see anything wrong with asking the Mother of God to pray for sinners?
Holy Mary,
Mother of God,
pray for us sinners now,
and at the hour of death

Yes, and the rosary combined I do disagree with. Although, it doesn’t bother me but I feel as if I don’t have to do some of these things that the CC teaches we must do.

Dronald,

You seem to worry about "Paul, James, John, and Peter, I tell you there is one greater than these Apostles, and his Name is Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ, himself speaks Regarding His Mother Mary. Have you not read John 19: 26 When Jesus therefore had seen his mother and the disciple standing whom he loved, he saith to his mother: Woman, behold thy son. 27After that, he saith to the disciple: Behold thy mother. And from that hour, the disciple took her to his own.

Dronald, Now look what Jesus Christ says right after, in John 28 Afterwards, Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the scripture might be fulfilled, said: I thirst.

Dronald, That was the Last command that Jesus Christ gave to the world while on the Cross, is, that we take Mary as Our Mother and we are her sons and daughter…Jesus Chris knew right after saying this, “that all things were now accomplished, that the Scriptures might be full filled”… Amen And Again you worry about Paul James John, and Peter, not referring to Mary in Scripture. lol

Dronald, in order to full fill Scriptures Jesus Christ had to give us Christians Virgin Mary as our Mother and we Her sons and daughters. Scripture say so, not me.

Dronald, If you call yourself a Christian then you must have Mary as your Mother and you should treat Her Like a son would His Mother, John did, and took her into His Home, now why don’t you do the same. We Catholics do.

Jesus Christ Knows that we NEED Her, I know I and my household do.

Ufam Tobie

I agree that Mother Mary is Jesus’s mother and mine as well! As well as all Christians being my brothers and sisters.

Luke 8:20Someone told him, "Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to see you."21He replied, “My mother and brothers are those who hear God’s word and put it into practice.”

I’ll add by saying, don’t think because I don’t get to you right away that I’ve given up, I’m ignoring you or I am too scared to answer. I may be busy so I can’t always get back to you quickly. God bless, and even though we disagree I most certainly love you all.

 

[ufamtobie]

But when the heads of this truth (the Pope) start saying things that are un-biblical wouldn’t it make sense for a reformation at that point in time? Are you saying that everything a Pope has ever said or done has been Biblical? So why would it be bad for us to separate us from un-Biblical Pope’s when they’re doing a poor job running the Catholic Church?

Yikes.

Yes, and the rosary combined I do disagree with. Although, it doesn’t bother me but I feel as if I don’t have to do some of these things that the CC teaches we must do.

I agree that Mother Mary is Jesus’s mother and mine as well! As well as all Christians being my brothers and sisters.

 

[Nicea325]

Originally Posted by Nicea325
Again,if it is important according to you, how come not ONE of the NT authors or the 12 apostles or Paul mention a NT canon?

dronald:
Paul did not have Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John with him as they had not come into existence yet. Paul’s letters were the first, they were claimed to be Scripture by Peter. Paul did however quote a saying in the Gospel of Luke as Scripture in 1 Timothy**. Obviously Peter believed that Paul’s letters should be a part of the NT canon**.

Really? Peter was already discussing and formulating the NT canon? Where else does Peter remotely mention the NT canon? Why? Because he believes Paul’s letters were Scripture? Sorry,but one’s belief (Peter) was not the only criteria in determing the NT canon, goes a lot deeper. If Peter knew it should have been in the NT canon, then how odd the NT canon was not finalized for another 400 years?

Where are the ancient writings outside the NT supporting your claim? Funny you say such a thing,when not one other NT author seems to mention a word about Peter believing Paul’s letters should be part of the NT canon? Yet you ask the same about Paul not mentioning Mary? Why is that with Protestants? Because it conflicts with their novelties or their lack of understanding the term Apostolic Traditions?

You still have failed to answer. Why? Because you know what I am telling you cannot be answered because not ONE NT author or Apostle ever mentions the NT canon-right? You evidently like every Protestant accepts the 27 NT canon,yet not ONE Apostle or NT author ever bothers to mention or hint…anywhere. Why do you accept the NT canon if the Bible says nothing and I mean nothing about formulating a 27 NT canon.

You are making the big leap of assuming because Peter claimed Paul’s letters were Scripture, it proves the canon was in progress. Sorry,but you are leaving a lot of factors out which involved in the process of the NT canon. Just because Peter said Pauls letters were Scripture does not conclusively prove the NT canon is being mentioned implicitly. That is pure conjecture and simply fabricating false ideas about formulation of the NT canon and its history.

 

[Nicea325]

Nicea325
This the whole issue with many Protestants. They fail to accept the simple fact,without Mary there is no Jesus. However, they will tell you:

Not true. Either way God would have made it happen.

Really? No they know God’s intentions?

dronald:
God certainly used Mary. When God uses let’s say me to help my brother learn more about Jesus, would you say that God couldn’t have done it without me? I believe that would be limiting God.

Sorry,but that is a bad comparison. We are talking about the woman who brought the Incarnate God into the world. As for limits? Last time I checked Protestants are the one’s placing limits on God in regards to Mary.

 

[SteveVH]

But when the heads of this truth (the Pope) start saying things that are un-biblical wouldn’t it make sense for a reformation at that point in time? Are you saying that everything a Pope has ever said or done has been Biblical? So why would it be bad for us to separate us from un-Biblical Pope’s when they’re doing a poor job running the Catholic Church?

First of all, in responding I am assuming that the word “un-biblical” means something that contradicts Scripture, rather than something that just isn’t in Scripture. Can you give an example of one of our Popes saying something that contradicts Sacred Scripture? It would really help the discussion if you could give a concrete example, rather than just a general statement in this regard.

Secondly, how do you arrive at a determination as to what practices or beliefs, or statements are biblical and what are un-biblical? Is this based upon your opinion of Scripture or is there some other authority on which you rely for truth?

And no, not everything a pope has ever said is biblical. They are only infallible in matters of faith and morals, but when speaking on faith and morals, no we have zero popes who have ever changed Catholic doctrine which covers both faith and morals. And this includes not only Sacred Scripture but Sacred Tradition as well. They both make up the one deposit of faith handed down by the Apostles. The New Testament was born out of Sacred Tradition, but is only that part committed to writing. Together they comprise the fullness of truth and none of it is unbiblical.

Peace.

 

[PRmerger]

the necessity is in Mary’s Immaculate Conception so as to conceive, give birth, and be mother to God’s only begotten Son and to all God’s children

No, brumano.

Our hosts, the Catholic Answers staff, completely disagree with your position regarding the “argument of necessity.” They state, “The reason we don’t use that argument is precisely that it’s not a good one.”

They go on to state:

"Don’t use the easily refutable argument of necessity; the argument of fittingness is much better. It was fitting that God willed that Mary was conceived free from all sin, since she was chosen to be the Ark of the New Covenant, the mother of the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, the incarnate Word of God. The Father didn’t have to do it that way, but it was fitting that he did. For a more detailed discussion of the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception see Bishop Ullathorne, The Immaculate Conception of the Mother of God (Westminster, MD: Christian Classics, 1988 ed.) and Patrick Madrid, “Ark of the New Covenant” (This Rock, December 1991).

Answered by: Catholic Answers Staff
source: catholic.com/quickquestions/without-the-immaculate-conception-would-jesus-have-inherited-his-mothers-sinful-natur (bold mine)