Posted on 12/12/2006 10:51:32 PM PST by Coleus
The following text is adapted from a lecture Prof. Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira gave on June 15, 1973. It has been translated and edited for publication without his revision. Note, in this text, he uses the words Revolution and Counter-Revolution as he defined them in his book Revolution and Counter-Revolution. In this sense, the Revolution is a centuries-old process, motivated by pride and sensuality, and therefore egalitarianism and liberalism, that dominates the modern world and seeks to destroy Christian civilization. Counter-Revolutionaries are those dedicated to defeating this process and defending the rights of God. Ed.
One of the truly Counter-Revolutionary acts of Pope Pius IXs pontificate was the proclamation of the Immaculate Conception.
There are three reasons the definition of this dogma was especially Counter-Revolutionary and therefore hateful to the enemies of the Church.
First Reason: An Anti-Egalitarian Dogma
As you know, this dogma teaches that Our Lady was immaculate at her conception, meaning that, at no moment, did she have even the slightest stain of Original Sin. Both she, and naturally Our Lord Jesus Christ, were exempt from that rigid law that subjugates all other descendants of Adam and Eve. Thus, Our Lady was not subject to the miseries of fallen man. She did not have bad influences, inclinations and tendencies. In her, everything moved harmonically towards truth, goodness and therefore God. In this sense, Our Lady is an example of perfect liberty, meaning that everything her reason, illuminated by Faith, determined as good, her will desired entirely. She had no interior obstacles to impede her practice of virtue.
Being full of grace increased these effects. Thus, her will advanced with an unimaginable impetus towards everything that was true and good. Declaring that a mere human creature had this extraordinary privilege makes this dogma fundamentally anti-egalitarian, because it points out an enormous inequality in the work of God. It demonstrates the total superiority of Our Lady over all other beings. Thus, its proclamation made Revolutionary egalitarian spirits boil with hatred.
Second Reason: The Unsullied Purity of Our Lady
However, there is a more profound reason why the Revolution hates this dogma. The Revolution loves evil and is in harmony with those who are bad, and thus tries to find evil in everything. On the contrary, those who are irreproachable are a cause of intense hatred. Therefore, the idea that a being could be utterly spotless from the first moment of her existence is abhorrent to Revolutionaries. For example: Imagine a man who is consumed with impurity. When besieged by impure inclinations, he is ashamed of his consent to them. This leaves him depressed and utterly devastated.
Imagine this man considering Our Lady, who, being the personification of transcendental purity, did not have even the least appetite for lust. He feels hatred and scorn because her virtue smashes his pride. Furthermore, by declaring Our Lady to be so free from pride, sensuality and the desire for anything Revolutionary, the proclamation of the Immaculate Conception affirmed that she was utterly Counter-Revolutionary. This only inflamed the Revolutionary hatred of the dogma all the more.
Disputing the Doctrine: A Counter-Revolutionary Struggle
![]() |
Declaring that Our Lady was so free from pride, sensuality and the desire for anything Revolutionary, affirmed that she was utterly Counter-Revolutionary and inflamed the Revolutionary hatred of the dogma all the more. |
For centuries, there were two opposing currents of thought about the Immaculate Conception in the Church. While it would be an exaggeration to suggest that everyone who fought against the doctrine was acting with Revolutionary intentions; it is a fact that all those who were acting with Revolutionary intentions fought against it. On the other hand, all those who favored its proclamation, at least on that point, expressed a Counter-Revolutionary attitude. Thus, in some way the fight between the Revolution and Counter-Revolution was present in the fight between these two theological currents.
Third Reason: The Exercise of Papal Infallibility
There is still another reason this dogma is hateful to Revolutionaries: it was the first dogma proclaimed through Papal Infallibility. At that time, the dogma of Papal Infallibility had not yet been defined and there was a current in the Church maintaining that the Pope was only infallible when presiding over a council. Nevertheless, Pius IX invoked Papal Infallibility when he defined the Immaculate Conception after merely consulting some theologians and bishops. For liberal theologians, this seemed like circular reasoning. If his infallibility had not been defined, how could he use it? On the contrary, by using his infallibility, he affirmed that he had it.
This daring affirmation provoked an explosion of indignation among Revolutionaries, but enormous enthusiasm among Counter-Revolutionaries. In praise of the new dogma, children all over the world were baptized under the name: Conception, Concepcion or Concepta to consecrate them to the Immaculate Conception of Our Lady.
Pius IX: Bringing the Fight to the Enemy
It is not surprising that Pius IX so adamantly affirmed Papal Infallibility. Very different from those who succeeded him, he was ever ready to bring the fight to the enemy. He did this in Geneva, Switzerland, which then was the breeding ground of Calvinism, which is the most radical form of Protestantism. When Swiss laws changed to allow a Catholic Cathedral in Geneva, Pius IX ordered that a statue of the Immaculate Conception be placed in the middle of the city, to proclaim this dogma in the place where Calvinists, Lutherans and other Protestants denied it more than anywhere else. This is an example of Pius IXs leadership in the fight against the Revolution. It is therefore entirely proper that all Catholics entertain a special affection for the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, which is so detested by the enemies of the Church today.
To read another commentary on the Immaculate Conception, click here.
To read Fr. Saint-Laurent's commentary on the Immaculate Conception, click here.
To order your free copy of a picture of Our Lady of the Immaculate Conception, click here.
Jesus is the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, three persons in one. So he is God also. And since Mary is his mother, wouldn't you say that Mary is the Mother of God?
So are you saying that you do not believe in the Holy Trinity -- three persons in ONE trinity?
Christ was begotten by the Holy Spirit as St. Luke tells us.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1752704/reply?c=489
No, that is not Catholic theology. But just because Mary is not the mother of "God the Father" or the mother of the "Holy Spirit", that does not mean that it is false that she is the "Mother of God". Here's the syllogism:
(1) Jesus Christ is God.
(2) Mary is the mother of Jesus Christ.
Therefore,
(3) Mary is the Mother of God.
To deny the conclusion, one must deny one of the two premises. To deny the first premise is to fall into Ebionism/Arianism, denying that Jesus was really God. To deny the second premise is to fall into Nestorianism or Docetism, either denying that Mary gave birth to the divine person or denying that the divine person was truly born.
-A8
So, you are saying that the Son is the Father???
I've seldom heard anyone claim that before.
You believe in the unity of the Godhead but not in the separateness of the members.
Interesting, That's sort of like the "Jesus-only" pentecostals, isn't it?
You claim to be a Trinitarian but you haven't the foggiest idea of what you are saying. There are THREE Persons in God: Father, Son and Holy Spirit. They have ONE nature: Divine. You cannot subdivide God's nature in the manner you wish or that you believe. If you pray to the Holy Spirit, for example, you pray to God--the Divine!
This explains the nature of the Creed of Nicea and those later which categorized Christian Trinitarian belief. Where did this come from? From Jesus, largely, in the Gospel of John in which He reveals this unfathomable secret to us. If it were not for Christ, we would not know these amazing facts.
The Trinity is the deepest Mystery of Christian Faith. You have doubtless heard the story of Saint Augustine pondering the Trinity and finding a child trying to empty the sea into a hole in the sand using a sea shell. The Bishop asked the child what he is doing and the boy tells him that he is emptying the sea into the hole. The saint responds that this is impossible. The child responds that he will empty the sea into the hole before Augustine ever comprehends the Trinity.
There is a nice book that deals largely with the Trinity called "Theology and Sanity" written by Frank Sheed (the real Sheed from whom I derive my name). You would be well advised to read it or one similar. You are very confused on this fundamental point of Christianity.
Jesus Christ is God. Of that I am sure beyond any doubt. And Mary was the mother of Jesus the Christ, the Logos, the Word....the mother of God.
Well all I know is what the Didache says since I was directed to that for the authentic tradition of the early church and from what it says it is the church that appoints the deacons and bishops. It says nothing about ordinations by the bishops or other ordained persons. In fact it lists them as appointed like the deacons, teachers and prophets just as the bible says.
You are stating a logical fallacy.
Worship is adoration and honor of the sort that is due only to that one Being who created us. Adoration is the acknowledgment of God as God, Creator and Savior, the Lord and Master of everything that exists.
Veneration is showing devotion and respect that is befitting to rational creatures who by their extraordinary example of virtue show us how to follow God.
We do not venerate God, for that would treat God like a creature. Nor do we worship or adore any saint, for that would treat a mere creature like God.
-A8
Beware of the fallacy of the argument from silence.
-A8
Dave Armstrong
http://ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ101.HTM
A DEFINITION OF THE TRINITY: THE ATHANASIAN CREED
In the early centuries of its existence, the Catholic Church, in order to codify and crystallize all of the biblical data on the Holy Trinity, and to counter various heresies, produced Creeds. The most famous of these are the Apostles' and Nicene Creeds, recited in church by most Christians regularly. But the Athanasian Creed is the classic statement of trinitarian theology. It was not written by St. Athanasius, but was later named after this great saint who fought (almost singlehandedly at times) against the Arian heretics of the fourth century, who denied the Trinity. Its authorship and precise dating are, strangely enough, shrouded in mystery, but scholars believe it probably originated in the middle of the fifth century in southern France (by literary deduction, it can almost certainly be dated no earlier than 415, nor later than 542).
The Creed is clearly Augustinian in influence and character, and is in fact directly derived in several places from St. Augustine's work On the Trinity (c.415), as well as St. Vincent of Lerins' Notebooks (c.434), and Excerpta (c.440). Accordingly, St. Vincent, or perhaps an admirer of his, have been considered by some as possible authors. In the context of its historical period, the Athanasian Creed was written in opposition to the Nestorian and Eutychian heresies. It does not allude to the Monophysite and Monothelite errors (which fact offers a strong indication as to its date of composition). In a general way it opposes Unitarianism, tritheism, and Arianism.
Protestant church historian Philip Schaff comments on it with the following glowing words:
Beyond [the Athanasian Creed] the orthodox development of the doctrine in the Roman and Evangelical churches to this day has made no advance. This Creed is unsurpassed as a masterpiece of logical clearness, rigor, and precision; and so far as it is possible at all to state in limited dialectic form, and to protect against heresy, the inexhaustible depths of a mystery of faith into which the angels desire to look, this liturgical theological confession achieves the task . . . The Athanasian Creed . . . clearly and concisely sums up the results of the trinitarian and Christological controversies of the ancient church . . . The anathema is to be referred to the heresies, and may not be applied to particular persons, whose judge is God alone.
(History of the Christian Church, vol. 3, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1974; orig. rev. ed., 1910; 690, 697)
The Athanasian Creed follows, taken from Schaff's work:
1. Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith.
2. Which faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly.
3. But this is the catholic faith: That we worship one God in trinity, and trinity in unity;
4. Neither confounding the persons; nor dividing the substance.
5. For there is one person of the Father: another of the Son: another of the Holy Spirit.
6. But the Godhead of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit is all one: the glory equal, the majesty co-eternal.
7. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Spirit.
8. The Father is uncreated: the Son is uncreated: the Holy Spirit is uncreated.
9. The Father is immeasurable: the Son is immeasurable: the Holy Spirit is immeasurable.
10. The Father is eternal: the Son eternal: the Holy Spirit eternal.
11. And yet there are not three eternals; but one eternal.
12. As also there are not three uncreated: nor three immeasurable: but one uncreated, and one immeasurable.
13. So likewise the Father is almighty: the Son almighty: and the Holy Spirit almighty.
14. And yet there are not three almighties: but one almighty.
15. So the Father is God: the Son is God: and the Holy Spirit is God.
16. And yet there are not three Gods; but one God.
17. So the Father is Lord: the Son Lord: and the Holy Spirit Lord.
18. And yet not three Lords; but one Lord.
19. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord:
20. So are we forbidden by the catholic religion to say, there are three Gods, or three Lords.
21. The Father is made of none; neither created; nor begotten.
22. The Son is of the Father alone: not made; nor created; but begotten.
23. The Holy Spirit is of the Father and the Son: not made; neither created; nor begotten; but proceeding.
24. Thus there is one father, not three Fathers: one Son, not three Sons: one Holy Spirit, not three Holy Spirits.
25. And in this Trinity none is before or after another: none is greater or less than another.
26. But the whole three Persons are co-eternal together, and co-equal.
27. So that in all things, as aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshiped.
28. He therefore that will be saved, must thus think of the Trinity.
29. Furthermore, it is necessary to everlasting salvation, that we believe also rightly in the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ.
30. Now the right faith is, that we believe and confess, that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man.
31. God, of the substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds: and Man, of the substance of His mother, born in the world.
32. Perfect God: perfect Man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting.
33. Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead: inferior to the Father as touching His Manhood.
34. And although He be God and Man; yet He is not two, but one Christ.
35. One, not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh; but by assumption of the Manhood into God.
36. One altogether, not by confusion of substance; but by unity of person.
37. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man; so God and Man is one Christ.
38. Who suffered for our salvation: descended into Hades: rose again the third day from the dead.
39. He ascended into heaven. He sits on the right hand of God, the Father almighty:
40. From whence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead.
41. At whose coming all men must rise again with their bodies;
42. And shall give account for their own works.
43. And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting; but they that have done evil, into everlasting fire.
44. This is the catholic faith; which except a man believe truly and firmly, he cannot be saved.
You seem to be talking is circles.
The thesaurus and the dictionary give us definitions of words.
They use veneration and worship interchangeably.
I'm more interested in the acts that are taking place when one venerates and/or worships.
If the acts are the same, or substantially the same, then the burden is on the actor to demonstrate the distinction (s)he sees.
For example, in praying to Mary, since Mary is not omniscient or omnipresent, how exactly are these prayers heard?
Excellent, Frank.
When Gabriel greets Mary, the world changes. Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. Each human being is caught up in the mystery that comes to life in the womb of the Blessed Virgin Mary. What we call the grace of adoption achieves its completion in baptism. But the mystery begins when the Word becomes man in the immaculate womb of a virgin whose name was Mary. Thenceforth her womb occupies a privileged place in the life of Christians. There we are molded into the image of Jesus Christ. We receive Gods favor. To live without Gods favor means to remain sterile and alone. It is a frightening prospect. There is never cause for discouragement, however. God made Mary immaculate to protect us from the vicious blackmail of the devil. His voice that, like the serpent in the garden, whispers, Youll never change. Youll always be alone. Only God can change mans original plight. To announce this great reversal, he made the mother of his Son immaculate from the first moment of her conception. What happened to Mary in an instant happens to us progressively. She alone is the Morning Star. The rest of us find consolation in her Immaculate Conception. Like a good mother, Mary encourages us. She wants us to become fruitful and holy companions of her Son.
The Athanasian Creed is widely misunderstood and seldom cited. Dave Armstrong, a former Protestant, has capsulized its full measure beautifully. All Protestants held this to be true. Sadly, it is not understood any longer (it seems) as some questions on this board suggest.
F
Now this is where I see the (potential) error of calling Mary the Mother of God.
Would you call her: Mary the Mother of the Godhead?
where did the local leaders come from?
if the protestants saw such a report they'd omit it like malachi and the end of mark
Three Persons but ONE GOD!
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.