Still confused about Mary

  • Thread starter Thread starter cheddarsox
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Still confused about Mary? Then tell her so and she will lead you to the truth!

But do not be surprised if she lead you also to her Son 👍
 
Even as an Anglican I have no problem honoring Mary and giving her the proper veneration that is due to her as the Mother of our Lord, as the Theotokos, the God-bearer. I have a statue of her in my home chapel along with my patron saint, Saint Philomena. The problem I do have is with the idea that is often portrayed that I somehow need Mary for my salvation. The cross of Christ gave me complete and free access to the Savior, Mary’s Son, even though I am a sinful person in need of forgiveness. When I come to Christ I come in humility for I have nothing to offer him except a life in need of redemption and grace.

Mary does indeed draw us closer to her Son. But it was her Son who shed his blood on Calvary’s cross so that I could be saved. The Son, not the Mother. Mary is indeed an example, the best example, of a human fully surrendering to the Divine Will and thus one we should seek to pattern ourselves after.

But I must agree with Cheddarsox in that much of what I see in Marian devotion comes across as worship of the Mother not just veneration and respect. I am not trying to imply that this is the practice of all Catholics or of those in this forum.

To Cheddarsox I would say this though… until I came to see Mary as my spiritual Mother, I did not have a complete spiritual family., I had the Father and I had the elder Brother but no Mother. Mary has given me the Mother of the family. For this I am most grateful. Perhaps if you come to see her in this light, as completing the family, it will help you out a bit.

Regarding the redeemed in heaven, they now see things as God sees things and they see them with his perspective. That is why there is no sadness in heaven. Our loved ones now with the Lord are indeed part of the great cloud of witnesses that surround us. Their prayers go up for us before the Throne like incense as the Book of Revelation so wonderfully portrays. What about their loved ones who are going to hell? They now see them not only with the eyes of love but also with the eyes and knowledge of divine justice. They are also not bound by time. So they see the end results not just what we see here and now.

They are seeing things unfold from the Throne, the center of the universe and all that is.

++Mark
 
Archbishop said:
Even as an Anglican I have no problem honoring Mary and giving her the proper veneration that is due to her as the Mother of our Lord, as the Theotokos, the God-bearer. I have a statue of her in my home chapel along with my patron saint, Saint Philomena. The problem I do have is with the idea that is often portrayed that I somehow need Mary for my salvation. The cross of Christ gave me complete and free access to the Savior, Mary’s Son, even though I am a sinful person in need of forgiveness. When I come to Christ I come in humility for I have nothing to offer him except a life in need of redemption and grace.

Mary does indeed draw us closer to her Son. But it was her Son who shed his blood on Calvary’s cross so that I could be saved. The Son, not the Mother. Mary is indeed an example, the best example, of a human fully surrendering to the Divine Will and thus one we should seek to pattern ourselves after.

But I must agree with Cheddarsox in that much of what I see in Marian devotion comes across as worship of the Mother not just veneration and respect. I am not trying to imply that this is the practice of all Catholics or of those in this forum.

To Cheddarsox I would say this though… until I came to see Mary as my spiritual Mother, I did not have a complete spiritual family., I had the Father and I had the elder Brother but no Mother. Mary has given me the Mother of the family. For this I am most grateful. Perhaps if you come to see her in this light, as completing the family, it will help you out a bit.

Regarding the redeemed in heaven, they now see things as God sees things and they see them with his perspective. That is why there is no sadness in heaven. Our loved ones now with the Lord are indeed part of the great cloud of witnesses that surround us. Their prayers go up for us before the Throne like incense as the Book of Revelation so wonderfully portrays. What about their loved ones who are going to hell? They now see them not only with the eyes of love but also with the eyes and knowledge of divine justice. They are also not bound by time. So they see the end results not just what we see here and now.

They are seeing things unfold from the Throne, the center of the universe and all that is.

++Mark
Click to expand...
Hi Mark,

That is the best post I have ever read on why we love Mary.

And from an Anglican too 😛

Can you please tell me what St Philomena is the patron saint of?

Thanks and God bless
 
kellie said:
Hi Mark,

That is the best post I have ever read on why we love Mary.

And from an Anglican too 😛

Can you please tell me what St Philomena is the patron saint of?

Thanks and God bless
Click to expand...
Kellie: Grace and peace to you. According to the Patron Saints index web site, St. Philomena is the patron of:

babies, barrenness, bodily ills, children, children of Mary, desperate causes, forgotten causes, impossible causes, infants, infertility, lost causes, Living Rosary, newborns, poor people, priests, sick people, sickness, sterility, toddlers, young people, youth

I have a few patron saints. As a Third Order Franciscan I also have St. Francis. Besides being a bishop I am also a police officer so I have St. Michael. I also chose Philomena recently because of my Mother who passed away in October. At birth her name was Philomena. My Mother was always very involved with the youth of the Church, young ladies, and young mothers. As an honor to my Mother I have also chosen St. Philomena. It is interesting in light of this thread, that she is also the patron of the children of Mary.

As a former Baptist and Baptist pastor, I always knew there was something missing. It was the sacramental aspects of the Church as well as the Communion of the Saints (not to mention the Real Presence, Body Blood Soul and Divinity of our Lord). Coming to an understanding of these two things has made a profound impact on my life and ministry.

It gives me great comfort to know that my Mother continues to pray for me now at the Throne of Grace where she is rejoicing with the saints of the ages for whom Christ died.

May you be filled with the power of the Holy Spirit. Always do the work of an evangelist.

++Mark
 
Thanks Mark, and others,

When people share their personal experiences, that is the biggest help to me in understanding these things. Sometimes theology just feels far away and hard to grasp, but hearing real people share their stories makes it all make sense.

Within the context of real lives is where the rubber hits the road!

cheddar
 
Archbishop said:
But I must agree with Cheddarsox in that much of what I see in Marian devotion comes across as worship of the Mother not just veneration and respect. I am not trying to imply that this is the practice of all Catholics or of those in this forum.
Click to expand...
As Newman articulated so well: we must make the distinction between doctrine and devotion.

Moreover, where devotion has become topheavy towards Our Lady, we must recognize that this cannot be pleasing to her.

Even with permissible devotions to Our Lady, Newman could never embrace the more Italianate forms, which he found unsuitable to the English temperament.
 
NotWorthy said:
No, but when we say the Hail Mary, we are simply:

a) quoting Scripture - “Hail Mary, Full of Grace, the Lord is with the. Blessed art though among women, and blessed is the Fruit of thy Womb, Jesus.”
b) asking someone to pray for us (just like you may ask a friend) - “Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death, Amen.”
Click to expand...
Hi, Where is “Holy Mary” or “Mother of God” in scripture?
 
mercygate said:
In the early Church, non-Christians thought they were cannibals. The tone of your observation indicates that Catholics might do well not to do things that confuse others. If the early Christians had modified their worship in order not to confuse the pagans about cannibalism, where would that have taken them?
Click to expand...
Sounds like it would have taken them to where the modern Protestant/Evangelical church is today, worshipping without the Body and Blood of Christ. 😉

You know what they say, history repeats itself!
 
JayJ said:
This is a fascinating topic. I am a convert to Catholicism, and I have always had a wonderful, close relationship with Christ. He is the center of my faith life. The whole “Mary thing” has always been very confusing for me as well. Mary is NOT God. Perhaps someone can tell me (honestly - I really want to know), why do I need Mary to bring me closer to Christ when I can go directly to Christ? I live in a very large parish and I know many Catholics whose entire faith life is based on Mary. This seems scary, and possibly worshipping false gods? I’m not trying to be inflammatory, but this is an honest issue I struggle with. I teach my children to pray to God/Jesus directly. I have always felt very close to Jesus and believe he listens directly to me, whether I am just praying for help, repenting of sins, etc.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
I, too, am a convert and I am in the early stages of understanding the Marian devotions. I may never see her or have the same relationship with her as someone who was raised with her, who didn’t have those nasty mental blocks instilled in them from childhood onward like I did as a Protestant. To most Catholics it is just such a natural relationship with Mary, I envy that of them. They honestly cannot understand why we can’t love her as they do, and I don’t know whether that aspect will ever completely happen for me, as I feel as though I was *brainwashed *in the opposite way, to see her as a threat to my Christianity.😦

Anyway, I can say that in praying the Rosary, I have come to see Christ and His life in a much deeper way, a more personal way. My focus has always been on Christ while saying the Rosary, and in viewing His life and especially His Sufferings through her eyes, I can honestly say my relationship with Him is becoming richer, more empathetic, more flavorful (if I can use that image)!

So, maybe for me this will always be the way she works in my life, by allowing me to see Him and feel Him the way she came to see Him and feel Him. And that works for me. I’m certainly not going to stress over it, I’ll leave that to my Evangelical family! 😉
 
 
believers said:
Sorry, maybe I should have been more specific. Could you please point out the book, chapter, & verse in the Word of God? Thanks
Click to expand...
It is obvious you did not check one link I posted what is your agenda?

Marriage to the Holy Spirit

We also have to take into consideration that when Mary was told by the archangel Gabriel “Behold, you shall conceive in your womb, and bring forth a Son, and you shall call His name Jesus” (Lk 1:31), he also added that this was to come about because “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the Holy one to be born shall be called the Son of God” (Lk 1:35).

By stating it in those terms the archangel declared to Mary that God would enter into a marital relationship with her, causing her to conceive His Son in her womb, For “to lay one’s power (reshuth) over a woman” (Targum to Dt 21:4) was a euphemism for “to have a marital relationship with her.”

Likewise “to overshadow” (Lk 1:35) by spreading the “wing” or “cloak” over a woman was another euphemism for marital relations. Thus, the rabbis commented (Midrash Genesis Rabbah 39.7; Midrash Ruth Rabbah 3.9) that Ruth was chaste in her wording when she asked Boaz to have marital relations with her by saying to him “I am Ruth you handmaid, spread therefore your cloak ( literally, “wing”: kanaph) over your handmaid for you are my next-of-kin” (Ruth 3:9).

Tallith, another Aramaic-Hebrew word for cloak, is derived from tellal = shadow. Thus, “to spread one’s cloak (tallith) over a woman” means to cohabit with her (Kiddushin 18b, see also Mekhilta on Exodus 21:8). Did not the Lord say to His bride Israel: “I am married to you” (Jr 3:14) and “your Maker is your husband”? (Is 54-5:5; Jr 31:32)? And what is more intimate than what the Lord said to His bride: “You developed, you grew, you came to full womanhood; your breasts became firm and your hair grew… you were naked… and I saw that you were now old enough for love so I spread my cloak over you… I gave you My oath, I entered into a covenant with you and you became Mine, says the Lord God” (Ezk 16:7, 8).

ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ95.HTM
198.62.75.5/www1/ofm/san/TSmary1.html
ewtn.com/faith/teachings/marymenu.htm
cin.org/users/james/files/talmud.htm
ewtn.com/vondemand/audio/…6668&T1=ma ry
ewtn.com/vondemand/audio/…6536& T1=mary
ewtn.com/vondemand/audio/…5288& T1=mary
 
believers said:
Hi, Where is “Holy Mary” or “Mother of God” in scripture?
Click to expand...
The cousin of Mary, Elizabeth said to Mary when she visited, “How is it that the Mother of My Lord, come to me?” In the Jewish understanding of God, God is often called Lord. For a Hebrew saying God’s name was forbidden. In many of their writings they write G-d, instead of God.

It was also common to call God Lord. When Elizabeth said, Mother of my Lord? Who is she calling Lord? Jesus, who is God made flesh. Does this mean that Mary is the mother of God, the Father? By no means no! She is the Mother of God, the Son, Jesus Christ.

Nestorius rejected the traditional doctrine of the Incarnation by implicitly denying the hypostatic union of human and divine natures in the one divine person of Jesus. This denial was characterized notably by the rejection of the title “Theotokos” (“God bearer” or “Mother of God”) for the mother of Jesus. He claimed that Mary was the mother of Christ’s human nature but not the mother of God and concluded that only Jesus the man suffered and died on the cross.

To deny that Mary is the Mother of God, is to be guilty of a heresy called Nectorism, which denies Jesus’ divinity as God. The Apostles, their successors, and many Catholics today acknowledge that the title Mary, Mother of God is proper and very Christian in its thinking.

It was a belief by early Christians that Mary is the Mother of God.

Here are some historical reference where many Early Church Fathers refer Mary as Mother of God.

Irenaeus

“The Virgin Mary, being obedient to his word, received from an angel the glad tidings that she would bear God” (Against Heresies, 5:19:1 [A.D. 189]).

Hippolytus

“[T]o all generations they [the prophets] have pictured forth the grandest subjects for contemplation and for action. Thus, too, they preached of the advent of God in the flesh to the world, his advent by the spotless and God-bearing (theotokos) Mary in the way of birth and growth, and the manner of his life and conversation with men, and his manifestation by baptism, and the new birth that was to be to all men, and the regeneration by the laver [of baptism]” (Discourse on the End of the World 1 [A.D. 217]).

Gregory the Wonderworker

“For Luke, in the inspired Gospel narratives, delivers a testimony not to Joseph only, but also to Mary, the Mother of God, and gives this account with reference to the very family and house of David” (Four Homilies 1 [A.D. 262]).

“It is our duty to present to God, like sacrifices, all the festivals and hymnal celebrations; and first of all, [the feast of] the Annunciation to the holy Mother of God, to wit, the salutation made to her by the angel, ‘Hail, full of grace!’” (ibid., 2).

Peter of Alexandria

“They came to the church of the most blessed Mother of God, and ever-virgin Mary, which, as we began to say, he had constructed in the western quarter, in a suburb, for a cemetery of the martyrs” (The Genuine Acts of Peter of Alexandria [A.D. 305]).

“We acknowledge the resurrection of the dead, of which Jesus Christ our Lord became the firstling; he bore a body not in appearance but in truth derived from Mary the Mother of God” (Letter to All Non-Egyptian Bishops 12 [A.D. 324]).

Methodius

“While the old man [Simeon] was thus exultant, and rejoicing with exceeding great and holy joy, that which had before been spoken of in a figure by the prophet Isaiah, the holy Mother of God now manifestly fulfilled” (Oration on Simeon and Anna 7 [A.D. 305]).

“Hail to you forever, you virgin Mother of God, our unceasing joy, for unto you do I again return. . . . Hail, you fount of the Son’s love for man. . . . Wherefore, we pray you, the most excellent among women, who boast in the confidence of your maternal honors, that you would unceasingly keep us in remembrance. O holy Mother of God, remember us, I say, who make our boast in you, and who in august hymns celebrate your memory, which will ever live, and never fade away” (ibid., 14).

Cyril of Jerusalem

“The Father bears witness from heaven to his Son. The Holy Spirit bears witness, coming down bodily in the form of a dove. The archangel Gabriel bears witness, bringing the good tidings to Mary. The Virgin Mother of God bears witness” (Catechetical Lectures 10:19 [A.D. 350]).
 
believers said:
Hi, Where is “Holy Mary” or “Mother of God” in scripture?
Click to expand...
Well, St. Paul calls all Christians “holy” - the Greek word translated as “saints” in his epistles is “hagios” – in English that can be rendered either “holy” or “saint”. In fact, in the Eastern Churches, they refer to all their human saints as well as the theological gifts and virtues as “hagios.” Mary is “Panagia” - all-holy. Wisdom is “hagia sophia” and so forth. So to call Mary “holy” is just to use St. Paul’s term for all Christians. Mary certainly is a Christian, would you not agree?

As for the title, “Mother of God,” there are many threads on this subject and . Although the title is not in Scripture, it was defined at the Council of Ephesus in 451 a.d. as a way of affirming without doubt the true divinity of Jesus, which was being severely challenged by the Nestorian heresy. There is a good tract-length article on it in the CA Library. But you don’t need to ask Catholics about this. Go to any well educated Episcopalian, Lutheran, Presbyterian, Methodist or Baptist. All of those denominations understand that title in exactly the same way Catholics understand it.
 
mercygate said:
As for the title, “Mother of God,” there are many threads on this subject and . Although the title is not in Scripture,
Click to expand...
I would say the Title is very “Scriptural”, but it’s not “Versed”, which is what tends to throw our brethren off. That also goes for Mary as “The Ark of the New Covenant”, the “New Eve”, the "Mother of God, the “Queen of Heaven”, etc., etc., etc.

In my opinion, if you can’t see the Scripture references for these titles for Mary, you’re not going below the surface of the Bible.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top