The most intense debate between Catholic and Protestant:Mary the Mother of God

[1holycatholic]

That said, last Sunday was the Feast of…?

The Dormition of the Theotokos.

 

[inkaneer]

Quote:
Originally Posted by inkaneer
Quote:
Protestants understand Mary as the mother of Jesus human nature and not His divine nature.

I would have to say that’s where I stand. His humanity came from Mary, while his divinity was pre-existing. In some mysterious way, the two independent natures were fused into one being, to which Mary was blessed to give birth. In that sense I think I fully agree with what’s called the Chalcedonian position. AFAIK, my church does too. If the Catholic position is that Mary “contributed” something divine, how could Mary to contribute to the already absolutely divine nature of Jesus? Why would it be necessary to contribute to that which already existed?

No the Catholic position is that Mary did not contribute anything divine but it is also the Catholic position that Mary gave birth to a person not a nature. And the two natures in Jesus are joined inseparately. So the baby born of Mary was God.

Quote:
Originally Posted by inkaneer
Quote:
Catholics understand Mary not as the mother of a nature but the mother of a person… liken it to human conception. A human baby is the product of DNA from both mother and father. The mother only contributes half of the baby’s DNA but she is considered to be the mother of the whole baby…

To follow your DNA line of thinking, if Jesus was already existing prior to Mary giving birth, and was already divine, then why was the immaculate conception necessary? Why did Mary need any extra supernatural elements about her life? .

Why skirt the issue? Is the mother of a child considered to be the mother of the whole child and not just that portion of the child that she contributed? You tell me. You ask any mother that and they would think you were absurd for even asking it but that is the position you paint yourself in when you claim Mary was only the Mother of Jesus’ humanity.
As for Mary’s Immaculate Conception there is a very good reason why she was rewarded by God. It is because God doesn’t do anything half way. He gave His only Son the best mother He could. Tell me why is it when protestants pray they expect God to answer their prayer and cite Mt 7: 9-11:

“9 Or what man of you, if his son asks him for bread, will give him a stone? 10 Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a serpent? 11 If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him!” {Mt 7:9-11]

So protestants, wretched sinners that they claim to be, expect to get bread instead of a stone, a fish instead of a serpent but yet they claim that the only begotten Son of God gets the stone or the serpent for a mother. Does the term ‘hypocrits’ ring a bell? The Book of Revelation says that nothing unclean shall enter heaven so why would you think God would inhabit a sinful woman for nine months? Furthermore the angel greets Mary not by her name but by a quality she posesses. He says “Hail, full of grace…” Tell me how can Mary be full of grace before the age of grace began.

I find it sufficient to assume that God could make it happen without any need for extra-human nature in Mary. Call it Occam’s razor, the simpler answer seems more likely to me.

The early church did not think so. In fact your position only became popular within the last 200 years. It is, therefore, a man made tradition.

Quote:
Originally Posted by inkaneer
Quote:
Today we see the protestant world repeating what the dualist did 1700=1800 years ago; trying to split Jesus into two.

I completely disagree. I’ve never heard any other sort of teaching in any Protestant church that considers the nature of Christ to be different than what I understand that Catholics believe. There may be some who teach that, but I’ve never seen or heard it. So IMO you are painting with an overly broad brush, and seem to be doing it with intent to impugn the faith of all non-Catholic Christians.

The difference is in the understanding of the supernatural aspects of Blessed Mary that Catholics believe. I think it’s perfectly reasonable to hold the Chalcedonian position on the nature of Christ, but not assent to immaculate conception, assumption, etc. of Mary.

And by “not assent”, I don’t mean deny. I only mean that I’ve seen no evidence of it in scripture. While I don’t reject it as false, I only say that I don’t know enough to say whether it’s true or false. I understand that I could never join the Catholic Church without assenting to Marianism, but I don’t believe that receiving salvation hinges on that assent.

But regarding these Marian beliefs, what are the earliest references to them? Are they first century? Can anyone provide enlightening links?

Well you are wrong. I have engaged in discussions with protestants, mostly evangelical fundamentalists, who make the very same arguments that the dualists and the Nestorians did. I am sure they did not know that because they don’t study the early church. They are content with ignoring the early church writers because they are not inspired. The historical witness of their writings mean nothing. Your problem is that, like them, you are indoctrinated with sola scriptura even though it is unscriptural. Tell me what does 2 Thess 2:15 mean to you. A clear denounciation of sola scriptura if there ever was one.

 

[inkaneer]

You took my comments out of context. My mother is the mother of my human nature because she gave birth to me and is the mother of me. If we do not say that Mary is the mother of Christ who has a human and divine nature then there can be no belief that she is the Mother of God.
Of course Mary is the mother of a person, Christ, who has two natures. It is in this context that I stated she is the mother of his natures because she is fully his mother and He has two natures. That is indeed Catholic teaching.

If all one says is that Mary is the mother of a nature then obviously that is incorrect.

Your analogy isn’t the best one because the DNA can be separated into parts where the two natures are not separated into parts. Jesus is wholy human and wholy divine.

Don’t the Anglicans/Epicsocals and the Lutherans believe as we do on this point? I don’t really know.

Mary is the mother of a person not two natures, not one nature, a person. That person is a God and that makes Mary the mother of God. You mother was the mother of a person with one nature that person had a human nature and only a human nature. woman do not give birth to natures they give birth to persons.

As for my analogy I can assure you that my DNA cannot be separated. If it is I die. As for the Lutherans and Anglicans they are all over th place on this. Some are very Catholic some are very fundamental/evangelical. There is no unity in protestantism.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, PLeeD,

There really is an ‘ignore function’ - and it lies in our use of judgment. We can simply ignore the statement and move on from there. This would be in the spirit of Matthew 5:39 and just turn the other cheek. It still takes two to make a fight.

Personally, I did not find the comment adding anything to the discussion - even though I believe the statement to be accurate. I think we can discuss and even disagree and still kind to others. “So’s your old man”, did not add anything helpful, either …

God bless

So’s your old man.

Guess I should just leave the forum at this point? I find that post really offensive and hurtful. What does it add to the discussion?

Seriously, there should be an “ignore” function on this board. Then these useless posts wouldn’t get in the way.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Nickybr38,

That was funny. Thanks for sharing…

God bless

Haha. It’s so hard to keep threads on topic. So much gets brought up.

That said, last Sunday was the Feast of…?

Our priest made a cute joke. The punchline was basically that Protestants think the Assumption of Mary is Catholic’s assuming Mary made it to heaven.

 

[PLeeD]

Hi, PLeeD,
“So’s your old man”, did not add anything helpful, either …

That quote was an obvious non-sequitur meant to illustrate both the irrelevance and obtuse nature of the “your church isn’t a church” barb.

I thought it was quite humorous!

 

[PLeeD]

Perhaps you missed it in the posts since then. I’d like to know what you think of my explanation of the Chalcedonian position in Post #243.

I can easily say that I have no problem with the idea of Mary as Mother of God. I just wouldn’t have come up with it on my own.

But even prior to having been presented with that idea, I definitely held fully to the Chalcedonian position regarding the nature of Christ. That is also what has been taught at my church. I’ve just never had call to extrapolate that idea out to the extent that it affects Mary. It’s just nothing I’ve ever heard discussed, and so never thought about it.

To quickly answer your question: the triple-immersion is not an essential part of Baptism.

Phew! That means my baptism is valid.

 

[Chris258]

I can easily say that I have no problem with the idea of Mary as Mother of God. I just wouldn’t have come up with it on my own.

But even prior to having been presented with that idea, I definitely held fully to the Chalcedonian position regarding the nature of Christ. That is also what has been taught at my church. I’ve just never had call to extrapolate that idea out to the extent that it affects Mary. It’s just nothing I’ve ever heard discussed, and so never thought about it.

That is understandable, of course. You should try to find some good material that discusses the Incarnation if you haven’t already; many of the Church fathers are quite good, but many modern theologians are also wonderful. Reading the orthodox piercings into this great Mystery can have a joyful affect on our faith. For myself, the most recent exploration of the Incarnation that I’ve read is Thomas Weinandy’s Does God Suffer? While the proper thesis of the book is to defend the classical idea of God’s impassibility (that the eternal, immutable God is free from suffering and emotional pathos and emotional changes of state), I found his piercing into the Incarnation, following the lead of the Church fathers, to be at once immediately understandable while simultaneously bringing out the mystery’s profundity in a way I had never seen.

Phew! That means my baptism is valid.

Indeed. If you were baptized in the Assemblies of God tradition, you are validly baptized. There are few situations and few traditions (the pseudo-Christian Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, for instance) whose baptisms the Church does not accept as valid. I’m glad the overwhelming majority of Protestants have chosen to preserve the ancient and apostolic formula, though the absolute insistence of some denominations on immersion as opposed to other forms gets a little silly.

 

[roveau]

This has certainly not been a showcase of informed Catholic debate. I have come away with a very unpleasant feeling after reading (most of) the responses. Where is the love of Christ in a lot of these contributions?

I’ll have to say that our Protestant bretheren have showed more self control in their correspondence than many of the despotic pronouncements of some Catholics.

I feel very sorry for some of our flegling Catholics or non Catholic people who are attracted to our religion. Our Lord and Brother Jesus would not be very happy if we offended these infants in the faith. What would our Dear Lady think of the tone of some of these contributions?

If I had known about the ignore button in this debate would have taken me 30 minutes to read instead of four hours. I can’t say that I have learned anything constructive but I was hoping I would as I ploughed through the debate.

 

[FNDRB58]

Mary is the mother of a person not two natures, not one nature, a person. That person is a God and that makes Mary the mother of God. You mother was the mother of a person with one nature that person had a human nature and only a human nature. woman do not give birth to natures they give birth to persons.

As for my analogy I can assure you that my DNA cannot be separated. If it is I die. As for the Lutherans and Anglicans they are all over th place on this. Some are very Catholic some are very fundamental/evangelical. There is no unity in protestantism.

I am in total agreement with you on the definition of Hypostatic Union. So as not to confuse others on Catholic teaching, I retract my previous statement about Mary being the mother of Jesus’ two natures as it is being taken out of context.

I didn’t say that DNA can physically be separated just as Jesus’ humanity and divinity cannot be physically separated. I said they are separate parts or aspects of a human being…you get some DNA from your mother and some from your father. But I won’t harp on your analogy as I and others I think understand the point you were making.

We are in agreement that some Protestants believe it and some don’t.

 

[Pitcharan]

… As for the Lutherans and Anglicans they are all over th place on this. Some are very Catholic some are very fundamental/evangelical. There is no unity in protestantism.

But all non-catholic denominations as well as Eastern orthodoxies unite for CC bashing. Deep in their hearts they are in awe of us, but yet bash us on veneration of statues, Marian devotion, Eucharistic adoration and what not. So strange and difficult to comprehend. They love us but yet hate us. I wish a sudden flash of the HS will enlighten all believers simultaneously and we all unite for good never again to separate

 

[FNDRB58]

I think it was Bishop Fulton Sheen who said that Protestants love the Church, they just don’t know it yet. So its our job to spread the word and help them understand the teachings. There are just so many misconceptions as is evident in this post alone. I hope those in this thread are at least looking into what is being said here with curious minds thirsting for the truth. There must be a reason the Catholic Church has been the only Christian church from Jesus to the 16th century

 

[Pitcharan]

I think it was Bishop Fulton Sheen who said that Protestants love the Church, they just don’t know it yet. So its our job to spread the word and help them understand the teachings. There are just so many misconceptions as is evident in this post alone. I hope those in this thread are at least looking into what is being said here with curious minds thirsting for the truth.

This is the time for us to vigorously extend olive branches to non-catholics. Much is happening in my home state where our seminaries regularly invite their Bishops to Chair seminars and our Archbishops hold joint public rallies with their Bishops to celebrate Christmas. All Souls’ Day prayer services are also done jointly at cemetries which are mostly common for all christians. Atleast in death we are united. How about your country?

 

[FNDRB58]

This has certainly not been a showcase of informed Catholic debate. I have come away with a very unpleasant feeling after reading (most of) the responses. Where is the love of Christ in a lot of these contributions?

I’ll have to say that our Protestant bretheren have showed more self control in their correspondence than many of the despotic pronouncements of some Catholics.

I feel very sorry for some of our flegling Catholics or non Catholic people who are attracted to our religion. Our Lord and Brother Jesus would not be very happy if we offended these infants in the faith. What would our Dear Lady think of the tone of some of these contributions?

If I had known about the ignore button in this debate would have taken me 30 minutes to read instead of four hours. I can’t say that I have learned anything constructive but I was hoping I would as I ploughed through the debate.

Sometimes one must sift through the sand unfortunately. Some are indeed harsher than others. I think the concept of defending the faith is misunderstood by some. It often turns into a debate instead of a discussion. Every Catholic who responds to a Protestant should do so with respect and with the intention to inform hoping to plant a seed that may lead one of our fellow bretheren to the faith. I personally come on here to clear up misconceptions of our faith which seem to hang some people up and preclude them from moving toward the Church…and along the way I learn something.

 

[Pitcharan]

Sometimes one must sift through the sand unfortunately. Some are indeed harsher than others. I think the concept of defending the faith is misunderstood by some. It often turns into a debate instead of a discussion. Every Catholic who responds to a Protestant should do so with respect and with the intention to inform hoping to plant a seed that may lead one of our fellow bretheren to the faith. I personally come on here to clear up misconceptions of our faith and along the way I learn something.

Both Roveau and you have observed rightly; but you have missed is the fact that CAF administrators, are sharp at detecting, warning (suspension) and weeding (banning) all rabid and shameless bashers of protestants.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Roveau,

Here is a wonderful opportunity to set the good example. This ‘ignore feature’ appears to be an opportunity to totally ‘turn off’ someone - and that is a curious approach for those who want to spread the, “…love of Christ…”. Don’t you think so?

Additionally, I would go easy on identifying just what would make make, “…Our Lord and Brother Jesus not very happy…”. Please recall, that those who genuinely sought the Kingdom of God He embraced - and those who were intent on setting traps for Him and His Teachings, He rebuked. God is Love - and He also can be seen as Tough Love.

I do not see room for just insulting people - but, the idea of debate is to clearly set fort a position, defend it and identify error.

God bless

This has certainly not been a showcase of informed Catholic debate. I have come away with a very unpleasant feeling after reading (most of) the responses. Where is the love of Christ in a lot of these contributions?

I’ll have to say that our Protestant bretheren have showed more self control in their correspondence than many of the despotic pronouncements of some Catholics.

I feel very sorry for some of our flegling Catholics or non Catholic people who are attracted to our religion. Our Lord and Brother Jesus would not be very happy if we offended these infants in the faith. What would our Dear Lady think of the tone of some of these contributions?

If I had known about the ignore button in this debate would have taken me 30 minutes to read instead of four hours. I can’t say that I have learned anything constructive but I was hoping I would as I ploughed through the debate.

 

[Sandalwood]

I have been so disheartened since joining CAF because of threads like this. I was seriously questioning whether I wanted to remain a Catholic. I am so sad to see Catholics behave like this. I took some time away and realized, that it’s people acting like this, not the “Catholic faith”. I am going to embrace my faith, but definitely avoid these threads. This is not helping to bring people to the Church. This is why people DON’T join the church, or like me, think they’ve made a mistake by joining.

this is very sad to see.

 

[FNDRB58]

I have been so disheartened since joining CAF because of threads like this. I was seriously questioning whether I wanted to remain a Catholic. I am so sad to see Catholics behave like this. I took some time away and realized, that it’s people acting like this, not the “Catholic faith”. I am going to embrace my faith, but definitely avoid these threads. This is not helping to bring people to the Church. This is why people DON’T join the church, or like me, think they’ve made a mistake by joining.

this is very sad to see.

I have to say, except for a handful of harsh posts, I don’t understand why some of you are so upset. Are some being a bit too sensitive? I really have to ask this. One should not allow one less than perfect thread on one Catholic website to determine one’s decision to become or not become Catholic. Just sift out and ignore the few who seem a bit too zealous and see the good that is being presented by many, many others. It is human nature that some become over protective of their faith to the point that sensitivity becomes compromised. Believe me, if any of us posted on an all Protestant forum the treatment would not be all that different unfortunately.

 

[Axion]

I have to say, except for a handful of harsh posts, I don’t understand why some of you are so upset. Are some being a bit too sensitive? I really have to ask this. One should not allow one less than perfect thread on one Catholic website to determine one’s decision to become or not become Catholic. Just sift out and ignore the few who seem a bit too zealous and see the good that is being presented by many, many others. It is human nature that some become over protective of their faith to the point that sensitivity becomes compromised. Believe me, if any of us posted on an all Protestant forum the treatment would not be all that different unfortunately.

Things would be an AWFUL lot worse. I’ve been on some protestant and ecumenical forums, and I know. Constant twisting of and rabid accusations against Catholic belief from many quarters.

The point is that while it is best not to bite the newcomers here, it is quite proper to tell them if they are misrepresenting Catholic belief or on completely the wrong track. I’m sure that, if instead of taking a holier than thou attitude to other posters, some people would contribute positively, things would get even better.

 

[inkaneer]

I have been so disheartened since joining CAF because of threads like this. I was seriously questioning whether I wanted to remain a Catholic. I am so sad to see Catholics behave like this. I took some time away and realized, that it’s people acting like this, not the “Catholic faith”. I am going to embrace my faith, but definitely avoid these threads. This is not helping to bring people to the Church. This is why people DON’T join the church, or like me, think they’ve made a mistake by joining.

this is very sad to see.

I’m sorry Sandalwood but I don’t quite understand. When you say, " I took some time away…" what exactly do you mean? Did you take some time away on retreat or just from the forum or what? Also you say, “This is why people DON’T join the church, or like me, think they’ve made a mistake by joining.” What then were your reasons for joining the Catholic Church? Were you seeking the truth? Did you think that Catholics were nice people? Were you looking for something warm and fuzzy? I don’t know what your reason was but your comment, “… or like me, think they’ve made a mistake by joining” indicates to me that something is wrong.