Posted on 03/13/2005 7:16:00 PM PST by churchillbuff
....In a shift whose ideological breadth is unusual in the fragmented Protestant world, a long-standing wall around Mary appears to be eroding. It is not that Protestants are converting to Catholicism's dramatic exaltation: the singing of Salve Regina, the Rosary's Marian Mysteries, the entreaty to her in the Hail Mary to "pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death." Rather, a growing number of Christian thinkers who are neither Catholic nor Eastern Orthodox (another branch of faith to which Mary is central) have concluded that their various traditions have shortchanged her in the very arena in which Protestantism most prides itself: the careful and full reading of Scripture.
Arguments on the Virgin's behalf have appeared in a flurry of scholarly essays and popular articles, on the covers of the usually conservative Christianity Today (headline: The Blessed Evangelical Mary) and the usually liberal Christian Century (St. Mary for protestants). They are being preached, if not yet in many churches then in a denominational cross section—and not just at modest addresses like Maguire's in Xenia but also from mighty pulpits like that at Chicago's Fourth Presbyterian Church, where longtime senior pastor John Buchanan recently delivered a major message on the Virgin ending with the words "Hail Mary ... Blessed are you among us all."
This could probably not have happened at some other time. Robert Jenson, author of the respected text Systematic Theology, chuckles when asked whether the pastor of his Lutheran youth would have approved of his (fairly extreme) position that Protestants, like Catholics, should pray for Mary's intercession. "My pastor would have been horrified," he says, adding, "The pastor was my father." Yet today Catholics and Protestants feel freer to explore each other's beliefs and practices. Feminism has encouraged popular speculations on the lives of female biblical figures and the role of the divine feminine (think The Red Tent and The Da Vinci Code). A growing interest, on both the Protestant right and left, in practices and texts from Christianity's first 1,500 years has led to immersion in the habitual Marianism of the early and medieval church. And the influx of millions of Hispanic immigrants from Catholic cultures into American Protestantism may eventually accelerate progress toward a pro-Marian tipping point—on whose other side may lie changes not just in sermon topic but in liturgy, personal piety and a re-evaluation of the actual messages of the Reformation.
The movement is not yet prevalent in the pews. And it has its critics. While granting that Mary shows up more in the New Testament than some churches recognize, Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Convention's Southern Seminary, charges that those who use her full record to justify new "theological constructions" around her are guilty of "overreaching," "wishful thinking" and effectively "flirting with Catholic devotion." Yet Lutheran theologian Carl Braaten, co-editor of an essay collection on what might be called Marian upgrade, claims, "We don't have to go back to Catholicism. We can go back to our own roots and sources. It could be done without shocking the congregation. I can't predict how exactly it will happen. Some of it will be good, and some of it may be bad.
But I think it's going to happen." .....
I'm not sure what you're saying. Shortly after the apostles died, the Church had the letters and gospels and they were passing them around all over the place, albeit not in book form. This was the Bible.
Also, the apostles and NT church also had the Old Testament which, as you know, is also the Bible. Paul and the others used the Old Testament over and over again to proved that Jesus was the Messiah and Savior of all.
"I have been told by a number of Catholics that I am going to hell because I don't pray to Mary, and that Jesus won't save those who haven't come through Mary to Him."
In all my years as a Catholic, I never heard such nonsense from any priest or laity (and yes, I agree, it is nonsense). Such statements do not conform to true church teaching.
Thank you for your kind reply...you know, when my son was at the end of his life, one day he just looked at me, and reminded me, that when he died, he would be healed, he would be well, he would be happy with his God...being as he saw me cry so much during his illness, he sought to remind me, that his faith was such, that once he was dead, he no longer wanted me to cry...he wanted me to get on with my life, enjoy life with my hubby and our other son, and not remember him in sorrow, but remember him with joy...
He always laughed, that he did not want to look down at me from Heaven, and see me crying...he wanted to see me laugh, and be happy...he said, soon enough we would be together...he sure had a lot of faith...he did not want to die, but I must say, he truly did not fear it...he certainly is, as you say, my treasure in heaven...
Again, thanks...
Thanks...It is always good for me, to tell stories of my sons struggle...I enjoy bringing him to others...
Thanks...
My son who died was named Michael...my other son, is Andrew...it was very hard on Andrew when his big brother died...Andy lives life very large, enjoys every single minute...somehow, my hubby and I think that Andy is so in love with life, and all that it offers, because he saw his brothers life cut short, and Andy figures he will live life double, once for himself, and once for his brother...
Thanks for asking...
Thank you so much for your kind reply...and thanks for the lovely picture....mother and child, there is nothing more beautiful...
"While many Catholics are fine, upstanding people (and they have done a excellent job opposing abortion), the Roman Sect is ridden with liberal heresies."
"What, like woman "priests"? openly gay clergy? artificial birth control? "prosperity" gospel? pro-abortion? pro-gay marriage?
You may have the Church confused with some other denomination."
Indeed!
With all the problems in Christendom today, you are worried about people who might give too much respect to Mary, Mother of our Lord Jesus Christ? Orthodoxies that were hashed out for hundreds of years and (as noted) Martin Luther believed are now 'liberal heresies'?
Glass houses, throwing stones and all ...
Maybe you ought to reread some of the posts.
Are you saying this makes Mary God also?
oops, I used "you" when in fact you clearly are not a believer in the "Roman sect" view of the catholic church.
I liked your retort and wanted to amplify it.
This is vague. What posts do you mean exactly? It's a long thread.
1. You are ignorant of Mary's status under Catholic dogma. (let her get in their way with Jesus all the time )
2. Catholics neither care if Protestants disagree, nor are they forcing anything on Protestants. Frankly, it's your sect, do what you wish. I'm sure Catholics will still pray for Mary's intercession on your behalf during the end times.
3. My read of the article was that Protestants are becoming interested in the status of Mary. Nowhere do I see Catholics strapping down Protestants and forcing them to accept, as you purport, a polytheistic dogma. Protestant theologians are the impetus here.
I guess you don't have a specific topic/issue/post in mind?
"Mary was told to name Christ "God With Us".
Are you saying this makes Mary God also?"
No, of course not. Nobody has made that statement except you. This inference is as much of a strawman as Muslims saying belief in Jesus Christ is polytheism. It's not what any orthodox Christian believes.
Since you need the hints wrt the scriptural prophesy, let me spell it out:
Read Isaiah 7:14: "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign"
This is the Lord's work.
"Behold, a virgin shall conceive..."
Virgin Mary
"bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel."
gave birth to Jesus Christ.
So a miracle of God brought the Christ, "God with us", into the world through the virgin Mary. What does that make Mary?
Jesus Christ is God.
Mary is the mother of Jesus Christ.
Ergo, Mary is the "mother of God".
This is the appellation the catholic church uses; it is grounded in scripture.
There is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all men. --1 Timothy 2:5-6
"So you think correction of false Mary doctrine is hate. "
Creating a strawman set of beliefs that are NOT true church doctrine, and going around saying "Catholics think X" when catholics are on this board telling you "no, we don't" ... well it may not be hate, but it does border on being an unhealthy obsession. The least helpful posts on this thread are the hyperventilating posts from non-catholics that misstate what catholics believe.
I would gently suggest that rather than assume what catholics think, non-catholics would do better to have a conversation with a few believing catholics and draw conclusions from that.
"The only priest that I heard say something close was Malachi Martin, and that was on the infamous Art Bell show."
ROFL ... that's like saying you heard it from DEBKA ... or Dan Rather.
Let's see if this can be explained in a better manner.
Original sin was a matter of defying the order of God. But it was not a mere case of defying God, such as you or I do on an everyday basis - it differed in its very nature from everyday sins in that the ones who committed it were created perfect, without stain of sin. It was a pure act of the will against the one commandment by which they had to live. The intent to commit sin, by its very nature, involved a form of rebellion quite unlike the rebellion we commit regularly through our sins. They knew better and had every means of resisting. Their natures were not fallen.
The sin they committed was not merely eating the forbidden fruit, but rather eating the forbidden fruit so that they might "Be as gods" (Genesis 3:5). In committing that act, they put themselves in God's place, choosing their will instead of His.
Original sin is not simply about being punished by God for something that was done long ago. When Adam and Eve committed sin, they radically changed the nature of their relationship with God, the author of life. Death was a direct result of their actions. Sin and rebellion became a part of their natures as well.
Original sin is a terminal disease at sorts on a spiritual level, one that, like many other diseases, is passed on from parent to child.
Personally, I've always considered Original Sin to be one of the parts of Christian doctrine that is most observable in the world around us. Man has a definite tendency towards corruption, and I have yet to meet a man who has not sinned against God in some way. It is a horrible disease that affects every aspect of our life, yet, fortunately, it is also a disease that God provided a cure for by sending His Son to atone for us.
I suggest reading Mere Christianity. C.S. Lewis explains these matters in a way that is much more beautiful than I could ever hope to do.
"This has to do with the communion of saints, part of the Apostles Creed. It's interesting to me that many protestants hold this creed, but apparently we disagree on the meaning of the communion of saints therein."
What faith does it take to believe in communion of the saints if it is just with living saints on earth? It is in the Creed included with the resurrection of the body, forgiveness of sins, belief in God the Father Almighty, He will come again to judge the living and the dead, because it takes faith to believe all of that and no less faith to believe in communion of the saints who've left this earth.
Technically she was the mother of Jesus, God has no beginning or end. If she was to have had a bigger role in the scheme of things why isn't there more about her actions in the scriptures?
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.