Posted on 09/24/2008 4:03:51 PM PDT by NYer
LONDON (CNS) -- Anglican Archbishop Rowan Williams of Canterbury, England, has come under fire for his homily during a pilgrimage to the Marian sanctuaries in Lourdes, France.
Archbishop Williams, leader of the worldwide Anglican Communion, said in a homily during a Sept. 24 international Mass at Lourdes that when Mary appeared to St. Bernadette Soubirous in 1858 "she came at first as an anonymous figure, a beautiful lady, a mysterious thing, not yet identified as the Lord's spotless mother.
"And Bernadette -- uneducated, uninstructed in doctrine -- leaped with joy, recognizing that here was life, here was healing," he said. "Only bit by bit does Bernadette find the words to let the world know; only bit by bit, we might say, does she discover how to listen to the Lady and echo what she has to tell us."
He also praised the lives of the saints, saying that their examples "matter so much."
The archbishop later was criticized by the England-based Protestant Truth Society, a group of Anglicans and nonconformists committed to upholding the ideals of the Protestant Reformation.
The Rev. Jeremy Brooks, the group's director of ministry, said: "All true Protestants will be appalled that the archbishop of Canterbury has visited Lourdes and preached there.
"Lourdes represents everything about Roman Catholicism that the Protestant Reformation rejected, including apparitions, Mariolatry and the veneration of saints," he said in a Sept. 24 statement. "The archbishop's simple presence there is a wholesale compromise, and his sermon -- which included a reference to Mary as 'the mother of God' -- is a complete denial of Protestant orthodoxy."
He added, "At a time when our country is crying out for clear biblical leadership, it is nothing short of tragic that our supposedly Protestant archbishop is behaving as little more than a papal puppet."
Archbishop Williams was invited to the sanctuaries, where Mary appeared to St. Bernadette 150 years ago, by Bishop Jacques Perrier of Tarbes and Lourdes. His visit is the first in modern times by an archbishop of Canterbury. Archbishop Williams held talks there with German Cardinal Walter Kasper, president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, who celebrated the international Mass.
Archbishop Williams was joined by an unprecedented pilgrimage of 10 Church of England bishops, some 60 Anglican priests and about 400 Anglican lay worshippers.
“So you are, I take it, a Nestorian. And here I thought Nestorianism was stamped out 1500 years ago and now I find its alive and well here in Protestant America!”
I’m a saved by the blood born again Christian who looks to the The Word for Truth. If that’s Nestorian, than so be it. You and another poster brought that up. I will have to read up on it—I’m unaware of that philosophy. Thanks for mentioning Nestorianism to me.
Mary is the mother of God to the extent that Jesus came from her womb. It doesn’t mean she shares his divinity, which belongs to him alone.
Mary is “theotokos”, meaning “God-bearer”. Protestants accept this concept as it is firmly rooted in the teachings of the Apostles. Translating “theotokos” as “Mother of God” is common, but not entirely correct since God does not have a mother.
Mary is the mother of Christ in regards to His human nature. She is not the mother of Christ in regards to His divine nature. Christ, in His divine nature, is eternally begotten of the Father, and through Him all things were made. He existed before Mary.
The term “theotokos” was used by the Faithful to refute those heretics who claimed that Jesus was entirely human and later, at His baptism, recieved divine powers from God. “Theotokos” was not used, and should not be used, to exalt Mary.
“To say that Mary is not the Theotokos is a Christological heresy and has been since the 5th century, VLL.”
“Theotokos” and “Mother of God” are two different things. “Theotokos” means “God-bearer”.
I suggest you review the Definition of Chalcedon and the subsequent councils.
“I suggest you review the Definition of Chalcedon and the subsequent councils.”
Gee, thanks for the advice. Why didn’t I think to ask an Anglican what Greek means and go to one for an interpretation of what Greek bishops did at Chalcedon? Silly me!
Theotokos, bobjam, means absolutely Mother of God in that she gave birth to Jesus Christ, The Logos, here on Earth. That’s what “God Bearer” means as opposed to the Nestorian formuation of “Christotokos”. To claim that Panagia is the Christotokos is an anathemized heresy.
“Mary is the mother of God to the extent that Jesus came from her womb.”
Correct.
“It doesn’t mean she shares his divinity, which belongs to him alone.”
Also, and even more importantly in light of the efforts of some to virtually deify her, correct!
“Thanks for mentioning Nestorianism to me.”
You’re very welcome. A proper understanding of the Christology of The Church is fundamental to our lives as Christians. The reason the bishops of The Church anathemized Nestorius was that his teaching that Mary was the “Christotokos”, the Mother (birthgiver actually) of the Christ, as opposed to the “Theotokos”, the Mother of God diminished Jesus. In other words, Jesus here on earth was less than The Logos, God. That’s heresy as I am sure any Christian would agree today.
“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 substance of His mother, born in the world.”
St. Athanasius
No, not of substance but of nature. He did not just 'cake" himself with Mary's flesh so we could see him. He became man (in flesh and nature) and remained God by nature.
Jesus is the same Person that eternal Logos is. One Person, two natures, united but not confused. If you don't understand it, that's okay, no one does. We don't have to understand it to know it as revealed truth.
From the Third Ecumnical Councuil record, +Ahanasius' anathema against Nestorius:
Repeating: "in the flesh she bore the Word of God."
To which Nestorius responded:
God of the substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; and man of substance of His mother, born in the world.”
I have a feeling that the quote you have from +Athanasius is (mis)traslated Greek, confusing substance (which in English means matter) and hypostasis (that which has existence) or with ousia (nature, essence). Both Greek terms are translated as "substance."
I am quite certain that the root of this error is in translation because, think about it, God doesn't have 'matter' ('body') so the only rational thing would be to conclude that +Atanasius meant nature, i.e. Christ has two natures, divine and human.
Indeed. Don't you know +Augustine and Erasmus knew their Greek better than Greeks?/s
+Paul actually says man Christ Jesus (1 Tim 2:5). The whole verse is actually a perfect example of +Paul's treatment of Jesus as not being equal to the Father.
I am, as I have often noted in the past, merely the simple grandson of simple Greek peasants. Who am I to question the understandings of Greek by the Χενοι? :)
Bobjam, look up the Greek word "τοκος".
You think maybe I haven't done this? I hope you don't seriously believe that Catholics never read the Bible . . .
I was an Episcopalian before I converted, and I have my 12 year Sunday School pin, thank you very much. My Presbyterian high school required two Bible courses, Old and New Testament, for graduation. Moreover, I have read John's Gospel in the original, thanks to good solid Classics instruction in my undergraduate years.
What a sweet story. I have told unhappy children (including my own!) that if they feel their mother has let them down or hurt them or made a mistake, they can always turn for comfort to the Blessed Virgin, who is the Best Mother in the Whole Wide World.
Did the Second Person of the Trinity exist prior to the Annunciation? Yes.
Did God Incarnate exist prior to the Annunciation? No.
“You think maybe I haven’t done this? I hope you don’t seriously believe that Catholics never read the Bible .”
I was raised a Catholic and we NEVER studied the Bible directly. Any biblical knowledge was explained to us by the priest or nun in catechism. We were warned not to study the Bible on our own in case we misunderstood something. I don’t know if this is typical, but that’s how it was back then.
It wasn’t until I started to read the Bible directly and participating in Bible studies did I realize that a lot of the things taught in catechism or things we practiced were not biblical at all.
From the Definition of Chalcedon:
“..but yet as regards his manhood begotten, for us men and for our salvation, of Mary the Virgin, the Theotokos..”
As I said before, Mary is the mother of Christ in regards to only His humanitity. She is not the Mother of Him in regards to His divinity. The term “Mother of God” for too many people conveys the notion that Mary is the mother of Christ in regard to both His divinty and His humanity.
I like the practice that I have observed among my Orthodox friends of not translating “Theotokos” into “Mother of God” or “God Bearer” or anything else. They just simply say (or chant) “Theotokos” and when somebody asks what that means, they explain it easily.
“I am not trying to convince you on this but trying to explain it to you, as your terms are confused a bit. “
I appreciate your explanations. Sorry if my comments are confusing. That’s what happens when I try to write too early in the morning.
I understand what you are saying about Mary being an intercessor. It’s just that many protestants don’t believe in the ascension of Mary, so she is now sleeping in Christ.
Do you believe Jesus Christ actually has a co-redeemer? Because this is what I was taught as a Catholic... that Mary is Christ’s co-redemptrix, and that she is actually the woman who would crush the serpent’s head and save the world. And we were also taught that Mary was sinless, and we practiced Marian worship, which is not biblical. Yes, it’s Catholic doctrine, but I only believe what the Bible teaches.
I trust then that they are explaining it correctly. Theotokos has a very specific meaning and that meaning is not Christotokos. The meaning, in English, admittedly a very, very bad language to discuss Christian theology in, is "Birthgiver", or "Birther" of God. The "of God" part is absolutely vital to an understanding of Who Jesus is.
It is unfortunate that the English translation causes heartburn for some Westerners and it would no doubt be better to use the "Theotokos" or even "Bogoritsa" or "Wālidat Allah", both of which mean the exact same thing, Slavonic and Arabic not suffering from the profound defects of English when discussing Christian theology.
With the renewal under JPII and BXVI, such rogue parishes are hopefully going to be a thing of the past.
All I can tell you is that our parish has solid Biblical instruction and the concordances and Bibles are very well thumbed (although I still use KJV and Douay-Rheims where that edition varies, because the language of the NAB is . . . underwhelming.) Moreover, my personal Bible study and reading led me into the Catholic Church . . . so simply reading Scripture is not an open-and-shut condemnation of Catholic doctrine. In fact, private personal interpretation of Scripture has gotten a lot of folks into trouble over the years.
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.