Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Catholic Analysis: Mariology is Biblical
Vivificat! - A Catholic Blog of Commentary and Opinion ^ | 27 December 2005 | Teófilo

Posted on 12/27/2005 8:38:08 AM PST by Teófilo

Folks, my blogger colleague, Oswald Sobrino of Catholic Analysis, has written a good essay regarding "Mariology," that is, the theological study and liturgical recognition of the place of Mary, the Mother of the Lord, the Theotokos, in the economy of salvation. It is entitled Mariology is Biblical. Here's an extract:

Mater Ter Admirabilis - SchoenstattOne of the great stumbling blocks for our Protestant brethren who are on the verge of crossing the Tiber, i.e., entering into full communion with the Catholic Church, is the great attention paid to the Mother of Jesus by Catholics. This hesitation is understandable: Protestantism is a reaction against Catholicism, and one of the reactions has been, historically, to exile the Mother of Jesus from salvation history. In recent times, some Protestants have sought to correct this strange exile of the Mother of God by looking back to the writings of the Church Fathers and to the early ecumenical councils, especially the fifth century Council of Ephesus. Yet, even Catholics can have a hard time responding to the insistent Protestant plea that to venerate Mary is to somehow detract from the one Mediator between God and man, Jesus Christ (1 Timothy 2:5).

...

The crux of the matter is that Mary's extraordinary mediation as Mother of Jesus derives from and is included in the unique mediatorship of Christ himself. What we ask our Protestant brethren to consider prayerfully, and, yes, quite biblically, is that the mediatorship of Christ is inclusive and admits of and even insists upon our participation. If we participate, as Paul did, then certainly the one whom the ecumenical Council of Ephesus termed the "Mother of God" or "God-bearer" in 431 A.D. does also. Interestingly, today, even some conservative evangelical Protestant scholars openly refer to Mary as "Mother of God" based on the significance they ascribe to the Council of Ephesus. They are discovering the riches of the faith preserved for them through the centuries preceding the Reformation by none other than the Catholic Church.

- I urge all of you to read the entire piece at Catholic Analysis.


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: mariology; prayingatajewishmama; theotokos; virginmary
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260 ... 301-318 next last
To: no_turnipseed

I want to understand what "theanthropos" means, so I object to it. No, matter of fact, I don't think the Son was eternally of two natures, because that is not what the Creed says: "by the power of the Holy Spirit He was born of the Virgin Mary and became man".


221 posted on 12/28/2005 1:28:50 PM PST by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 219 | View Replies]

Comment #222 Removed by Moderator

To: no_turnipseed

Athanasian Creed

Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic Faith. Which Faith except everyone do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the Catholic Faith is this, that we worship one God in Trinity and Trinity in Unity. Neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Substance. For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son and of the Holy Ghost is all One, the Glory Equal, the Majesty Co-Eternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father Uncreate, the Son Uncreate, and the Holy Ghost Uncreate. The Father Incomprehensible, the Son Incomprehensible, and the Holy Ghost Incomprehensible. The Father Eternal, the Son Eternal, and the Holy Ghost Etneral and yet they are not Three Eternals but One Eternal. As also there are not Three Uncreated, nor Three Incomprehensibles, but One Uncreated, and One Uncomprehensible. So likewise the Father is Almighty, the Son Almighty, and the Holy Ghost Almighty. And yet they are not Three Almighties but One Almighty. So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not Three Gods, but One God. So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Ghost Lord. And yet not Three Lords but One Lord. For, like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by Himself to be God and Lord, so are we forbidden by the Catholic Religion to say, there be Three Gods or Three Lords. The Father is made of none, neither created, nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone; not made, nor created, but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father, and of the Son neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.

So there is One Father, not Three Fathers; one Son, not Three Sons; One Holy Ghost, not Three Holy Ghosts. And in this Trinity none is afore or after Other, None is greater or less than Another, but the whole Three Persons are Co-eternal together, and Co-equal. So that in all things, as is aforesaid, the Unity is Trinity, and the Trinity is Unity is to be worshipped. He therefore that will be saved, must thus think of the Trinity.

Furthermore, it is necessary to everlasting Salvation, that he also believe rightly the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. For the right Faith is, that we believe and confess, that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man.

God, of the substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; and Man, of the substance of His mother, born into the world. Perfect God and Perfect Man, of a reasonable Soul and human Flesh subsisting. Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead, and inferior to the Father as touching His Manhood. Who, although He be God and Man, yet He is not two, but One Christ. One, not by conversion of the Godhead into Flesh, but by taking of the Manhood into God. One altogether, not by confusion of substance, but by Unity of Person. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one Man, so God and Man is one Christ. Who suffered for our salvation, descended into Hell, rose again the third day from the dead. He ascended into Heaven, He sitteth on the right hand of the Father, God Almighty, from whence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies, and shall give account for their own works. And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting, and they that have done evil into everlasting fire. This is the Catholic Faith, which except a man believe faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved.

So? Where's the theanthropos?
223 posted on 12/28/2005 1:32:57 PM PST by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 220 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom
Well, your heart is the rule and I cannot judge your heart.

We are unlikely to agree on other matters Marian, so I wish you well.

we hold a general conservative view of society in which these views can live side by side. Accentuate the positive!

Kind regards, from vimto (not such a nasty Prot as you might think).
224 posted on 12/28/2005 1:35:55 PM PST by vimto (Life isn't a dry run)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: annalex
I found this link: http://www.eastern-orthodoxy.com/orthodoxy1.htm
225 posted on 12/28/2005 1:37:07 PM PST by Pyro7480 (Sancte Joseph, terror daemonum, ora pro nobis!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 223 | View Replies]

Comment #226 Removed by Moderator

To: gcruse
Tradition is enough to give your Churches authority "If it's wrong long enough, it's right," doesn't work for me. It doesn't work for me either - I am just stating how Catholics view Catholic doctrine's authority.
227 posted on 12/28/2005 1:39:29 PM PST by vimto (Life isn't a dry run)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

Comment #228 Removed by Moderator

Comment #229 Removed by Moderator

Comment #230 Removed by Moderator

Comment #231 Removed by Moderator

To: gcruse
Yet the first quote says scriptuality is not necessary to justify beliefs.

Which should be a matter of concern to you, but not to me.

-Theo

232 posted on 12/28/2005 1:53:54 PM PST by Teófilo (Visit Vivificat! - http://www.vivificat.org - A Catholic Blog of News, Commentary and Opinion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: no_turnipseed; Pyro7480

In 214 you seem to object to my "Mary gave birth to the entire Second Person of the Holy Trinity that pre-existed her" with "Mary gave birth to Theanthropos".

I understand what "theanthopos" morphologically means, "theos" and "athropos", and I am aware of how the Orthodox sometimes use the term (thank you, Pyro, for the link in 225) but I need to understand where you see the dividing line between the Eternal Son and "theanthropos" that means that Mary gave birth to the latter but not the former. If you don't see any, then what is it your objection about? If you do, where is it in the Athanasian Creed? It is the division between the Eternal Son and the Incarnate Son that I find nonsensical, because I am not familiar with any authority on the matter that supports your view. I think you are reading into the Creed what has not been put there.


233 posted on 12/28/2005 2:03:54 PM PST by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 231 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom
Talk to them as well as chastising us. That poster apologized for the tone but not for the statement that we practice idolotry. Is that correct in your eyes?

No, sister, it isn't correct. However, the thing is, knowing that we Catholics are right precludes me from believing that I have to vanquish every foe and thoroughly anhilate every argument, to somehow rectify the right balance of the Universe. No, that's not my role. I say with St. Paul, for

...who shall separate us [me] from the Love of Christ? For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons,[m] neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans VIII, 35, 38-39)
To that I add, no well-intentioned Protestant proselytizer, and even less, no two-bit anti-Catholic controversialist will cut me off from the Love of Christ and the communion of His One, True Church.

Doesn't this realization make you happy, sister? Doesn't it put things into their proper perspective?

Therefore, sister, charges and countercharges against the Church do not sour day, nor need turn me into sourpuss, nor will deter me from giving testimony to the Truth. Let us pray that those who have ears to ear, that they would listen.

Pace!

-Theo

234 posted on 12/28/2005 2:23:14 PM PST by Teófilo (Visit Vivificat! - http://www.vivificat.org - A Catholic Blog of News, Commentary and Opinion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: Teófilo
Yet the first quote says scriptuality is not necessary to justify beliefs.

Which should be a matter of concern to you, but not to me.

So, you just make it up as you go along?
235 posted on 12/28/2005 2:29:17 PM PST by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 232 | View Replies]

To: vimto

>> Kind regards, from vimto (not such a nasty Prot as you might think).<<

Honestly, FRiend, I think that most Protestants are not nasty. In fact I'm married to one! I do think that they are misinformed and try to help but go at it the wrong way.

Catholics do too sometimes. We need to understand that it's all our relationship with Our Lord and not our religion that counts.


236 posted on 12/28/2005 2:31:09 PM PST by netmilsmom (God blessed me with a wonderful husband.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 224 | View Replies]

To: Invincibly Ignorant

>>I can't tell you whom to pray or not pray for.<<

Good! Then if you don't mind....


237 posted on 12/28/2005 2:33:20 PM PST by netmilsmom (God blessed me with a wonderful husband.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: Teófilo

I get where you are coming from!
And Peace to you as well.


238 posted on 12/28/2005 2:35:38 PM PST by netmilsmom (God blessed me with a wonderful husband.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 234 | View Replies]

To: gcruse; Teófilo
just make it up as you go along?

Teo and I just came accross this by accident and for a different reason, but this is an excellent explanation of what Christianity is all about.

DIVINE REVELATION

According to the orthodox faith the Church is not founded upon written texts, rather on the admission that Christ is Theanthropos ; in other words that in the face of Christ, God was united to man "without confusion, without change, without division and without separation" (c.f. Theotokion of the Third Tone), and man came in a true communion with God. He was united "hypostatically" in Christ's person, i.e. in a one and unique "hypostasis", God and man.

The Son and Word of God continues to be hypostatically united with His Body and as the Head of the Church He is always thus united with us as well (Matt. 18: 20/28: 20). The presence of Christ is energised by the Holy Spirit in the life of the Church (1 Corinth. 12: 3); for this and the Church is "the pillar and ground of the truth" (1 Tim. 3:15; see also 1 Corinth. 2 : 7-11).

It was in the Body of Christ, to "the saints", that our holy faith was delivered "once and for all"; the one who does not belong to this Body cannot interpret correctly the holy Bible (2 Thessalonians. 3: 6. 2 Peter 3:16. Jude 3-4). In this context, the Divine Tradition is the experience of the Church, the divine memory of the Church , which is kept like a priceless treasure (2 Tim. 1:13-14).

The holy Bible does not include the completeness of the divine revelation. The importance of the spoken tradition and the care taken for its spreading from generation to generation was already underlined from Old Testament times (Psalm. 43:2 / 44:1 and Joel 1:3). The New Testament notes that it does not contain the completeness of the words and works of Christ (John 21:25).

That very book, the Holy Bible, makes use of the tradition (Numbers 21: 14-15. Matt.2: 23. Acts 20: 35. 2 Tim. 3: 8. Jude 14). Christ did not motion his disciples to write books but to preach, promising that He will always be among them (Matt. 28: 20) and that He will send them the Holy Spirit to stay with them (John 14: 16), to teach them and to remind them of His preaching (John 14: 25-26); to lead them "to the whole truth", revealing to them the deeper meaning of His words: all those things that they could not "hold" by their own powers (John 16: 12-15).

But even the Apostles did not limit themselves in writing the written texts; they spread to the first Christians (in spoken) much more than what was written "with paper and ink" (2 John 12. 3 John 13-14. 1 Corinth. 11: 34). Some of the written words proved to have an importance only at the time period of writing, for they were not kept in the Church: the number of the deacons (Acts 6: 3), the order of the widows (1 Tim. 5: 9), the cover of women (1 Corinth. 11: 5), the washing of the feet (John 13:14).

At the centre of the holy Bible is Christ's face (John 5: 38-39. Gal. 3: 24). Without Christ we cannot understand the Holy Bible (2 Corinth. 3: 14). Thus, the union in the body of Christ, i.e. in the Church, ascertains the purity of the evangelic truth (1 Tim. 3: 15).

The Holy Bible does not address itself to scattered individuals, but to devotees that are organised in one body. The Divine Tradition is the atmosphere inside which this body lives and understands correctly (orthos) the truth; it is the continuing experience of the Church, her conscience and not personal opinions, teachings, warrants or writs of men (c.f. Isaiah 29: 13. Matt. 15: 3.4.9. Mark 7: 8. Coll. 2:8).

Based on the treasure of the divine memory of the Church, the study of the Holy Bible leads to unity, not to division of the Church. In this way Christ's wish for unity of the devotees is fulfilled (John 17: 20-21). For this reason the apostles too would suggest to the Christians that they keep the traditions, i.e. the treasure they trusted upon them (1 Corinth. 11: 2. Philip. 4: 9), "whether by word, or our epistle" (2 Thessalonians 2: 15. c.f. 2 Tim. 1: 13).

The shepherds of the Church were placed in this position to stay awake, i.e. to be overseers (= bishops) of the purity of the life and teachings of the Church (Acts 20: 28-31): "...thou stir up the gift of God, which is in thee by the putting on my hands...hold fast the form of sound words which thou hast heard of me...that good thing which was committed unto thee keep by the Holy Ghost which dwelleth in us"; "and the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also" (2 Tim. 2:2).

In other words, the apostolic succession coexists with the apostolic teaching. In this context we understand the words of St. Ignatius (d. 110): "For Jesus Christ, our true life, is the opinion of the Father, as the bishops too, who have been placed at the ends of the earth, are in accord with the opinion of Jesus Christ. So, you too must also follow the opinion of the bishop; something that you do, because the worth of his name is your presbytery, which is also God's worthy, and is connected to the bishop, much like the strings are to the guitar" (Ign. Eph. III, 2-IV,1).

This teaching is not today's; it is first-christian belief: "From the dogmas and the truths that the Church keeps, others have been taken from the written teaching, and others that secretly reached us have become accepted [stemming] from the tradition of the apostles. Both these elements, the written and the spoken tradition, hold the same importance for the faith. And nobody from the people that have even a small knowledge of the ecclesiastical decrees raises any objection to this. For if we tried to abandon any of the unwritten things, because apparently they have no great importance, without realising it we would harm the Bible in its essence, or, rather, would transform the sermon to a name void of any meaning" (Basil the Great, On the Holy Spirit, 27: 66).

In Basil the Great's times, therefore, we see that whoever had even a "small knowledge of the ecclesiastical decrees", would admit that the divine revelation had been secretly kept in the Church in all its completeness. For example, Basil the Great mentions the habit of "those hoping in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ" to show their faith "by doing the sign of the Cross".

Here therefore we have a basic difference with the protestant world. The axiom "only the Bible" leaves the Bible itself "exposed"; exposed to the "interpretational superiority" and to the "infallibility" of every pastor!

The Holy Bible cannot become absolute, for that would substitute the alive Christ with the word of the Bible, that becomes "a god" in its own right, if cut from the body of Christ, from the life of the saints (Jude 3). The holy Bible is "word for God that passed from the heart of the saints; it is God's word about God", as someone once put it nicely; the truth that was delivered "once and for all" to the saints (Jude 3) and actually not the whole truth, but part of it. It cannot make sense cut off from the Church (1 Tim. 3: 15).

DIVINE REVELATION


239 posted on 12/28/2005 2:47:39 PM PST by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 235 | View Replies]

To: Teófilo; Pyro7480
Teo and I

Actually, Pyro and I.

240 posted on 12/28/2005 2:48:59 PM PST by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 239 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260 ... 301-318 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson