Nora Lozano
Posted on 08/01/2009 1:51:11 PM PDT by NYer
EDE, Netherlands (ABP) -- A Latina theologian says overreaction to Catholic veneration of the Virgin Mary has caused Baptists to miss important biblical teaching associated with the mother of Jesus.
Nora Lozano
|
Lozano, a participant in theological conversations between the Baptist World Alliance and the Vatican, made the remarks in a presentation to the BWA Commission on Doctrine and Interchurch Cooperation at a meeting of global Baptists in the Netherlands.
She noted the Mexican story of the Virgin of Guadalupe -- a purported apparition of Mary to an indigenous peasant in Mexico City in the 16th century -- and how closely it ties the identity of the nation's Catholicism with Mary, who serves as a sort of "demi-goddess."
There are analogous Virgin Mary cults of devotion in other Latin American countries.
Lozano said Mexican Baptists and other Protestants, meanwhile, actively ignore Mary, to the extent of giving the biblical character short shrift.
"It seems that there is a consensus among these Baptists to disregard, neglect or reject the Virgin Mary," Lozano said, speaking of an informal survey she had done of some of her global Baptist colleagues.
And, in countries where Catholics are a majority, she added, "Baptists tend to move back and forth between actively rejecting and simply ignoring Mary."
In those countries, Lozano noted, "This becomes one of the major barriers to relations between Catholics and Baptists."
Because Mary is so perfect in popular Catholic theology in Latin America -- perpetually a virgin, although a mother; blameless, even sinless -- Lozano said she becomes an impossible standard of womanhood. Nonetheless, many men look for this standard in the mother of their children.
On the other hand, Lozano noted, Mary's opposite -- the wanton harlot -- is what many men tend to look for in sex partners. Being forced to choose between the two stereotypes can be deadly for women.
"When these [images of Mary and her opposite] are misused, they become oppressive and a source of suffering for women," she said. "Neither one of these models is a good one for women, because they do not present women as complete human beings."
Lozano said that embracing the "life-giving" aspects of Marian veneration can be both healthy for all women and a bridge between Latin American Protestants and Catholics, she contended.
Lozano pointed to two passages dealing with Mary in the Christmas story as recorded in Luke's Gospel: The angel's announcement to Mary that she would bear Christ (Luke 1:26-38), and Mary's song of praise to God, often called the Magnificat (Luke 1:46-55).
Mary is not a passive presence in those stories, Lozano pointed out, but an active and willing participant in God's work who was "well aware of social injustices," she said.
"She is subject with a strong will and a social consciousness," Lozano noted.
Lozano delivered her remarks on the second day of the BWA's Annual Gathering in Ede, Netherlands. Hundreds of Baptists from around the world came to conduct BWA General Council business as well as observe the 400th anniversary of the Baptist movement, which began in the summer of 1609 in nearby Amsterdam.
Every time a priest is called 'Father' by another believer in Christ, the person being placed before God and being called 'Father' is allowing and promoting himself to be placed as the object of false worship.
That kind of hyper-literalism ridiculous.
What did you call your male parent?
Correct.
Of course, that doesn't happen at Holy Mass, so your point is what?
My genetic father is my father. A priest is not my spiritual father. A Catholic priest has no spiritual power to regenerate my human spirit, only God has that power, authority, and work in my soul and human spirit.
The relevant passage from Scripture does not specify “spiritual father.”
It says “call no man father.”
From Barnes:
“Verse 9. And call no man your father, etc. This does not of course forbid us to apply the term to our real father. Religion requires all proper honour to be shown to him, Exodus 20:12; Matthew 15:4; Ephesians 6:1-3. But the word father also denotes authority, eminence, superiority, a right to command, and a claim to particular respect. In this sense it is used here. In this sense it belongs eminently to God, and it is not right to give it to men. Christian brethren are equal. God only has supreme authority. He only has a right to give laws, to declare doctrines to bind the conscience, to punish disobedience. The Jewish teachers affected that title because they seem to have supposed that a teacher formed the man, or gave him real life, and sought therefore to be called father. Christ taught them that the source of all life and truth was God; and they ought not to seek or receive a title which properly belongs to him.”
John Wesley:
“The Jewish rabbis were also called father and master, by their several disciples, whom they required, 1. To believe implicitly what they affirmed, without asking any farther reason; 2. To obey implicitly what they enjoined, without seeking farther authority. Our Lord, therefore, by forbidding us either to give or receive the title of rabbi, master, or father, forbids us either to receive any such reverence, or to pay any such to any but God.”
Gill:
“And call no man your father upon the earth…
Not but that children may, and should call their natural parents, fathers; and such who have been instrumental in the conversion of souls, may be rightly called by them their spiritual fathers; as servants and scholars also, may call those that are over them, and instruct them, their masters: our Lord does not mean, by any of these expressions, to set aside all names and titles, of natural and civil distinction among men, but only to reject all such names and titles, as are used to signify an authoritative power over men’s consciences, in matters of faith and obedience; in which, God and Christ are only to be attended to.
Christ’s sense is, that he would have his disciples not fond of any titles of honour at all; and much less assume an authority over men, as if they were to depend on them, as the founders of the Christian religion, the authors of its doctrines and ordinances; and to take that honour to themselves, which did not belong to them; nor even choose to be called by such names, as would lead people to entertain too high an opinion of them, and take off of their dependence on God the Father, and himself, as these titles the Scribes and Pharisees loved to be called by, did: and who were called not only by the name of Rabbi, but Abba, “Father”, also: hence we read of Abba Saul, or “Father” Saul; Abba Jose ben Jochanan...and others; and this name was...”a name of honour, even as Rabbi”, and of great authority: the wise men are said to be “the fathers of all”, to whom all gave heed, and upon whom all depended, as so many oracles.
There is a whole treatise in their Misna, called Pirke Abot, which contains some of the oracles, and peculiar sayings of these “fathers”, the Misnic doctors, and which are preferred to the writings of Moses, and the prophets. In this sense, and upon this score, our Lord inveighs against them, and cautions his disciples against giving or taking all such titles, in such sense. “For one is your Father, which is in heaven”; who is so, both by creation and adoption, and is possessed of all paternal authority; and is to be honoured and obeyed by all; from whom all wisdom and knowledge is derived, and who has the care and government of all in heaven and in earth.”
Traditions of men.
***Please tell me you are NOT claiming Romans 8 is referring to angels...***
No. But I am saying that one must be very careful about making claims based on English terminology when that terminology is used in many different contexts throughout Scripture. The claim that since we are called sons of God, then God wants to be our close fellowship relationship daddy, must be examined in the light of all the other individuals throughout Scripture who are also called sons of God. The example used does not justify the point.
***Are you seriously denying that we are called to be God’s children? Family?***
No. I just point out the context of what is meant here. We are His creatures; He is the Creator. He is the Shepherd and we are the sheep. Put it into context of what Jesus is saying.
If we are to be true Sons of God, then we will be like Jesus. A man does not adopt a bacterium and treat it as he would a biological son of his. The adoption is the intent to have us live eternally with Him. Not as equals (as in true human adoption), but to live forever in His Glory.
***Every time a priest is called ‘Father’ by another believer in Christ, the person being placed before God and being called ‘Father’ is allowing and promoting himself to be placed as the object of false worship.***
Let us see what Paul has to say about that. 1 Cor 4:
14
I am writing you this not to shame you, but to admonish you as my beloved children. 5
15
Even if you should have countless guides to Christ, yet you do not have many fathers, for I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel.
16
Therefore, I urge you, be imitators of me.
17
For this reason I am sending you Timothy, who is my beloved and faithful son in the Lord;
Paul calls himself the father in Christ and the Corinthians and Timothy are his children.
Paul says in Philemon:
10
I urge you on behalf of my child Onesimus, whose father I have become in my imprisonment,
11
who was once useless to you but is now useful 10 to (both) you and me.
that he is the father of Onesimus. Even Peter does it. 1 Peter 5:
13
The chosen one at Babylon sends you greeting, as does Mark, my son.
Therefore either you are interpreting Scripture wrong or else both Peter and Paul (first great leaders of the Church) are wrong. Do you have any thoughts on the matter?
Indeed. A man doesn't adopt a bacterium at all. Nor does a man BECOME a bacterium so he can die for the bacteria.
"28And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. 29For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. 30And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.
31What, then, shall we say in response to this? If God is for us, who can be against us? 32He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all—how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things? 33Who will bring any charge against those whom God has chosen? It is God who justifies. 34Who is he that condemns? Christ Jesus, who died—more than that, who was raised to life—is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us. 35Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall trouble or hardship or persecution or famine or nakedness or danger or sword...No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us.
38For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, 39neither 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."
Sons.
"15For you did not receive a spirit that makes you a slave again to fear, but you received the Spirit of sonship. And by him we cry, "Abba, Father." 16The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God's children. 17Now if we are children, then we are heirs—heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ, if indeed we share in his sufferings in order that we may also share in his glory."
Not bacteria. For the Holy Spirit - God Himself - is in me, making me call Him "Father!"...or even "Dad!"
“Abba
This Syriac or Chaldee word is found three times in the New Testament (Mark 14:36; Romans 8:15; Galatians 4:6), and in each case is followed by its Greek equivalent, which is translated “father.” It is a term expressing warm affection and filial confidence.” - Easton’s Bible Dictionary
Abba is a term used by adults as well as children, so ‘Daddy’ isn’t a correct translation, but it is a term reserved for family or those like family. It is closer than the typical English ‘Father’.
In the Old Testament, the term “Father” is used for God 15 times. In the New Testament, it is used 165 times in the Gospels alone, and 40 times in the Pauline Epistles.
KJV+ 1Cor 4:15 ForG1063 thoughG1437 ye haveG2192 ten thousandG3463 instructorsG3807 inG1722 Christ,G5547 yetG235 have ye notG3756 manyG4183 fathers:G3962 forG1063 inG1722 ChristG5547 JesusG2424 IG1473 have begottenG1080 youG5209 throughG1223 theG3588 gospel.G2098
Looks to me as though Paul begat through the gospel, not by himself as a father.
Are you proposing that we shall become equals to Jesus? The LDS theology states it; there are a small handful of others which believe similarly.
***In the Old Testament, the term “Father” is used for God 15 times. In the New Testament, it is used 165 times in the Gospels alone, and 40 times in the Pauline Epistles.***
Certainly our perception of God changed with the New Testament. But God the Father is not our biological father; we are not gods nor will we become gods. Or God.
***Looks to me as though Paul begat through the gospel, not by himself as a father.***
I have given you quotes from Paul which do not relate to this one. As well, I have given you Peter. Both men tell their flocks that they (Peter and Paul) are the spiritual fathers of those flocks.
I have not claimed in any way that we become gods. I have said that God has invited us to be family - so we pray to God as our Dad, and we can approach Jesus as our brother...which suggests we don’t have any reason to go to Him thru Mary, or to fear His judgment.
***I have not claimed in any way that we become gods. I have said that God has invited us to be family - so we pray to God as our Dad, and we can approach Jesus as our brother***
Jesus is not our brother. He is our Lord and Saviour. In order for him to be our brother we would have to be God. Jesus states that we are to become part of the Christian family and we can consider God as our Father - which is for our benefit in understanding the differences between Him and the pagan gods.
But for what you state, we must be equals to God and I for one do not even begin to start to consider thinking about acquiring a Godhood for myself.
"28And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. 29For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. 30And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified." - Romans 8
" 19Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow citizens with God's people and members of God's household, 20built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone." - Ephesians 2
Of course, we are also slaves of Christ, so one needs some perspective - but if you deny that God has chosen to make us family, then you deny the Word of God. No one is snatching at equality with God, but son, father, abba, brother - those are terms God has invited us to use.
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.