Catholic Analysis: Mariology is Biblical

Vivificat! - A Catholic Blog of Commentary and Opinion ^ | 27 December 2005 | Teófilo

[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:

One 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.

[Mr. Lucky]

I'm not Roman Catholic; I'm Lutheran.

Be that as it may, Luke 1 verses 27 through about 50 say what they say.

[Invincibly Ignorant]

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

You just trying to get the last word? Or is it really going to make a diff if I mind? :-)

[Teófilo]

So, you just make it up as you go along?

No. I am just saying that the Rule of Faith is a bigger reality than the Bible, which is but one part of it.

I have access to a Rule of Faith, Apostolic in origin, and binding on a Christian's conscience, that you either lack or reject. To argue with you and provide "a biblical argument" would mean that I buy the classical Reformed tenet that the Bible is a container of propositional truths to be extracted by dilligent individual interpreters and to be believed by all, and that all matters of Christian belief must have positive support from some biblical proposition, while ignoring the "problem of the interpreter!" Those are the kinds of arguments that would convince you, but those are the kinds of arguments that I am not going to give.

But that is precisely what I don't buy, and that sola scriptura tenet is what I find self-defeating, for it itself lacks scriptural support, and that's why it should be of concern to you, since you buy into a self-defeating hermeneutical principle, and I don't.

To understand what I am trying to say you must learn to set aside the sola scriptura bias for a moment, and then test that bias against the experience of the Church and her self-understanding throughout the ages, down to the Reformation. Now, you might be unable, or unwilling to do that, and I can respect that, fine, follow your conscience. But that's the only way you might be able to appreciate the consistency of the Catholic Christian Tradition.

Sure, you might demand of me reciprocity, and I would reply that I have given it. For I am a Catholic Revert, and I left the Church once through a Reformed Protestant door, only to return to the Church after a 4-year sojourn in the Eastern Orthodox Church. In a very real sense, I returned to the Church while in Eastern Orthodoxy but that, is another story.

The Reformation, particularly Calvin's version of it, may pride itself--inaccurately--of having rescued Christian belief from a morass of Medieval superstition and corruptions, but what it really achieved was to desacralize a culture that was suffused with a Christocentric worldview and effectively consigned the Incarnation to a problem to be studied in biblical commentaries, tracts, and academic papers. We see its logical outcome today in the rampant subjectivism and moral relativism that we see. Reformed Protestantism, and not Catholicism, brought us to today's cultural quandary and the Age of Unbelief.

Now, coming full circle: the truths about the Blessed Virgin Mary, theotokos, Dei Genitrix, "God-Bearer," and Mother of the Incarnate Word, are not inconsistent with that part of the Rule of Faith that got written in what we now call the Bible, nor her veneration, and the veneration of images, etc. Yet, these truths were passed down orally, in sacrament, liturgy, and art, and were well known in the first centuries. They do belong to the larger, more encompassing Rule of Faith, a Rule of Faith that in their enthusiasm to purify the Church from real and imagined excesses, the Reformers tossed through the window.

I am a bad Catholic apologist, at least, bad in true form. A good Catholic apologist would condescend to meet you where you are, playing in your sola scriptura field and that's fine, and good and holy and probably the correct way to do it. But that's not me. The Catholic Church possesses the full Rule of Faith and I am disinclined to deny part of it, even for the sake of argument. And there I stand.

Thank you for your comments. May the Lord richly bless you.

-Theo

ps. This is being crossposted to Vivificat!

[Dionysiusdecordealcis]

You evaded my point again. The ball's in your court, not mine. I'm not interested in bean-counting Scriptures. I'm waiting for your acknowledgement that your belief in the Trinity rests on implicit, interpreted Scriptures. That I think there are fewer such Scriptures for the Trinity than for Mary is secondary. When you acknowledge that the implications of your statement about "knowing where to look" for the Trinity in Scripture mean that Catholic veneration of Mary is just as Scriptural as our joint belief in the Trinity because both rest on interpretations of less-than-explicit Scriptures, I'll start the bean-counting game.

[Buggman]

Nope, you're the one that said, quote, "If one lined up all the implicit, nearly-explicit passages regarding veneration of Mary on one side of sheet of paper and all the passages implying the Trinity on the other side, I do think the Mary side of the sheet would be more impressive."

Put up or shut up, and please do not ping me back to this thread unless you are prepared to put up.

[Dionysiusdecordealcis]

Don't give me this nonsense. You selected one item out of what I wrote, which I explicitly described as secondary. Take you bait and go home. I have twice made the same main point and twice you have evaded it, you wimp. Don't tell me to put up or shut up. Put up yourself or shut up. Respond to my point. This is your method again and again and again and again--when countered decisively on one point you ignore the point and seize on a secondary one, using a pile of bluster to disguise your evasion. I won't be baited. Put up or shut up.

[netmilsmom]

:-)

[gcruse]

Okay. So rule of faith is more than what's in the Bible, but since sola scriptura ISN'T in the Bible, you reject it. Do you see no conflict here?

[Michael Goldsberry]

no_turnipseed,

I would like to publicly thank you for the private discussion we had today. (Not from this thread.)

Take care.

Leapfrog

[packrat01]

braVO!

Now, if you could just get them to see their idolatry in their christmas traditions, as well.

[Pyro7480]

Non serviam is the spirit of your theology. Sounds familiar somehow...

[packrat01]

to what does your reference refer; not serve, or not transgress?

John 2:3-5 Mary complains: And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine.

Jesus tries to correct her: Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.

Mary doesn't get it, and intrudes where she ought not: His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do [it].

Sounds kinda like my ma...

[Titanites]

Mary doesn't get it

It's you who didn't get it.

[packrat01]

'splain it to me, then...

[annalex]

Teófilo can aswer for himself, but no, there is no conflict. The Church is protected by the Holy Ghost from teaching anything self-contradictory, because the "gates of Hell shall not prevail against her". Since the Church teaches, among other things, the Holy Scripture, she cannot teach anything against the Holy Scripture. Hence, a community that teaches sola scriptura, which is not scriptural, cannot be the True Church, but a community that teaches the entirety of what it received from the apostles through the sacramets of the Holy Orders is.

[xzins]

Please give the steadfast rules for when one spiritualizes scripture and when one doesn't.

[xzins]

I also take a dim view to your objection of proselytizing protestants,

Actually, I wasn't objecting to the proselytization of protestants. I was simply acknowledging that this thread is of that variety.

I view some of the catholic threads as "in house" discussion of doctrine, interests, church policies, etc. I am not an insider on those kinds of threads, so I tend to bypass them out of courtesy, or, if I do comment, I'm careful not to be confrontive.

This thread, on the other hand, was overtly of a proselytizing nature, so I didn't mind registering an alternative viewpoint.

I have no problem with any church/sect/group proselytizing. After all, we are free, we are instructed, and this is America.

[xzins]

You're still ignorant of Scripture.

How to win friends and influence people.

[xzins]

Mary the Mother of God...

Net & anna, answer this one question and you will understand where marlowe & I come from.

Did the eternal God exist before the birth of Mary?

[netmilsmom]

Please understand, I am not debating my beliefs.
Others here are experts and I am not.

My debate is with cold hearted people who come onto a religion thread and feel that they can insult the beliefs of others.

My jump into this thread came with a statement of idolotry. Tons of examples are given where it "seems" that Catholics are into Idolotry because of statues. No one knows what goes on in my head nor my heart. Some Catholics go too far with veneration of Mary, I conceed that, but to paint Catholics with the same broad brush that Conservatives are painted is unfair.

In the same vein, this article has stated clearly that it is for Protestants who are searching. If you are not searching, it is not for you. I was involved with different Protestant churches for long time. I have no problem with your right to your beliefs. I have a problem with anyone namecalling for mine.


That is where I am at.
I got nothing done in my house yesterday because of posting on this thread, so if I don't answer you in a timely fashion, please don't think I am avoiding you or being rude. I'm thinking of you while I'm doing laundry!

God Bless You!