A Protestant Discovers Mary

NC Register ^ | March 13, 2010

[NYer]

Romano Guardini wrote in his book on the Rosary, “To linger in the domain of Mary is a divinely great thing. One does not ask about the utility of truly noble things, because they have their meaning within themselves. So it is of infinite meaning to draw a deep breath of this purity, to be secure in the peace of this union with God.”

Guardini was speaking of spending time with Mary in praying the Rosary, but David Mills, in his latest book, Discovering Mary, helps us linger in the domain of Mary by opening up to us the riches of divine revelation, both from tradition and Scripture. Mills, a convert from the Episcopal Church, former editor of the Christian journal Touchstone and editor of the 1998 book of essays commemorating the centennial of C.S. Lewis’ birth The Pilgrim’s Guide: C. S. Lewis and the Art of Witness, as well as the author of Knowing the Real Jesus (2001), has written a rock-solid introduction to the Blessed Virgin Mary, and done so with intellectual rigor and an affable tone.

His book begins with an introduction in which he describes how he came to discover the riches of the Church’s teachings on Mary: “I began to see how a sacred vessel is made holy by the sacred thing it carries,” he writes. “I began to feel this in a way I had not before. I found myself developing an experiential understanding of Mary and indeed a Marian devotion. Which surprised me. It surprised me a lot.”

Unfortunately, he notes, he did not learn about Mary from contemporary Catholics, nor in homilies, “even on Marian feast days.” It seems he learned on his own by reading magisterial documents and going back to Scriptures in light of those documents.

This book shares the fruit of that study. Mills examines the life of Mary, Mary in the Bible, Mary in Catholic doctrine, Marian feast days and the names of Mary. He includes an appendix full of references to papal documents and books on Mary.

Most of the book is done in a question-and-answer format, which usually works well, although at times it feels awkward. Would someone really ask, for instance, “What is happening in the liturgy on the Marian feast days?”

But most of the questions are natural. “What is the point of Marian devotion?” Mills asks. It is “to live the Catholic life as well as we can,” he answers. “This means going ever more deeply into the mystery of Christ, to become saintlier, more conformed to his image, by following Mary’s example and by turning to her for help and comfort.”

Next question: “Does devotion to Mary detract from our devotion to Christ?”

“Christians since the beginning of serious Marian devotion have been careful to emphasize Mary’s subordination to her son,” Mills replies. “In fact, they have said it so often that the reader begins to expect it. In the fifth century St. Ambrose put it nicely: ‘Mary was the temple of God, not the god of the temple.’”

David Mills, with the same radical clarity he showed in Knowing the Real Jesus, has written what has to be one of the best, if not the very best, short introductions to Catholic teaching on Mary, the Mother of God. Discovering Mary is ideal for those wanting to know more about her, whether they be skeptics, Protestants, or Catholics who don’t know the Mother of the Church well enough.

Franklin Freeman writes from Saco, Maine.

DISCOVERING MARY

Answers to Questions About the Mother of God

By David Mills

Servant Books, 2009

148 pages, $12.99

To order: servantbooks.org

[Tax-chick]

He has some hair, it just doesn’t show up in that picture. It’s light red and curly, what there is.

[fatima]

I was just teasing you.Beautiful family.

[Iscool]

The prerogatives of this teaching authority are made sufficiently clear by the texts and they are to a certain extent implied in the very institution. The Church, according to St. Paul's Epistle to Timothy, is the pillar and ground of truth; the Apostles and consequently their successors have the right to impose their doctrine; whosoever refuses to believe them shall be condemned, whosoever rejects anything is shipwrecked in the Faith.

Your religion may condemn Christians for not following the Catholic doctrines but that's fine with me because God condemns your Catholic doctrines...

Mat 16:12 Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

And here's your priests and bishops...

Luk 20:46 Beware of the scribes, which desire to walk in long robes, and love greetings in the markets, and the highest seats in the synagogues, and the chief rooms at feasts;
Luk 20:47 Which devour widows' houses, and for a shew make long prayers: the same shall receive greater damnation.

Joh 7:16 Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me.

And your religion is going to condemn me for following the God given doctrine of the scriptures and not following the doctrine of your apostolic successors??? Man O Man, am I ever glad I won't have to stand at the same Judgement you'll be at...

Rom 16:17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.

That's the doctrine in the written scriptures...

2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

2Ti 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;

It didn't take very long for your religion to turn from sound doctrine and start engineering it's own doctrine...

2Jn 1:9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God.

There you go...

He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.

And no, God did not give anyone in your religion any new doctrine to push on His children...

2Jn 1:10 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:
2Jn 1:11 For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

Is that clear enough for those looking to join the Catholic church, with it's own doctrine???

[Iscool]

2 Peter is the last will and testament of the apostle Peter, but was probably composed within two decades after his death. No book in the Bible had more difficulty establishing itself in the canon.

You mean your Catholic canon...It's in my bible...That means it is part of the bible canon...

b. The first generation of christians (here called "the fathers") had already died

2Pe 3:4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.

Here's a little secret...The Old Testament Jews were looking for the coming of their Messiah...That's what this verse is referring to...

2Pe 3:2 That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour:

The holy prophets were the 'fathers'...

[wmfights]

Ambrose was a saintly man -- whether he started out bad (like Paul or Augstine), he was saved and became a Doctor of The Church and spread and taught Church doctrine.

From what I've seen he was a political appointment that helped your church become an integral part of the state. Ambrose came from the ruling class and was comfortable at the highest levels of imperial power. He was a masterful politician who was very good at creating enemies of the state out of any Jews, pagans, or non conforming Christians.

Ambrose is a clear point where aristocrats began to control your church. It can be claimed he came from a good Christian home, but there is no indication of it in his actions or his father. Once in power his crowning achievement is increasing your church's power. He supported the persecution of the Jews and was involved in the growth of the cult of relics, not the behavior of someone I would consider a notable Christian.

[Tax-chick]

Thanks! His little hairs really didn’t appear in that picture ;-).

[Cronos]

wmfights: It can be claimed he came from a good Christian home,

So then you retract your statement made in post 14
where you said

Not surprising coming from a man who went from being a pagan to a Bishop in your church in about 2 weeks time

Do you retract that statement?

The fact that you made this error and more importantly kept stubbornly sticking to this despite seeing the complete text (as opposed to making a flawed individual interpretation based on incomplete text)shows how incorrect individual interpretation is a common sola interpretura error which also plays out in the sola's folks's reading of The Bible -- sola interpretura folks may read one thing like " St Ambrose was baptized, " and ASSUME that he was born a pagan. That error comes from not having a complete knowledge and presuming that the incomplete knowledge is complete -- you didn't lie, but you made an incorrect assumption based on incomplete and misunderstood facts.

That is the folly of relying on an individuals (as opposed to a community of believers stretching back 2000 years) interpretation.

[Cronos]

You evidently aren't reading the posts. This is from post 531

Proceeding to the basilica in which the disunited clergy and people were assembled, he began a conciliatory discourse in the interest of peace and moderation, but was interrupted by a voice (according to Paulinus, the voice of an infant) crying, "Ambrose, Bishop". The cry was instantly repeated by the entire assembly, and Ambrose, to his surprise and dismay, was unanimously pronounced elected.

Simple -- a group of laity and clergy gather and then they start changing for Ambrose to become bishop. Are you saying that he should have been disqualified?

[Cronos]

Ha ha — the Catholic canon IS what gave you your Bible...

[Cronos]

Furthermore, do you ever read the links or posts or the Bible? As I linked and pasted in the above post, this is what Biblical scholars have written about 2 Peter. Do you believe that your individual interpretation is better? And these aren’t Catholic Biblical scholars

[Cronos]

No, we condemn Gnostics, Manicheans, etc. who are not Christian and pretend to be — like Mormons or JWs. Oh, sorry about the JW bit if that offends you

[Cronos]

And of course, you now read allegory into the Bible when early you said it was literal. Jesus is talking about the pharisees. You remember those guys -- the ancestors of modern-day rabbinical judaism?

And, if the Christians of the 1st and 2nd centuries point out things as heresies -- Christians just a generation away from the Apostles -- then you honestly think your opinion and faith is better?

[Cronos]

2Jn 1:10 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:
2Jn 1:11 For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

Clear sign that you should join the community of believers started by JEsus Christ and his apostles, continued for 2000 years. The Church has seen all the heresies die and we'll see the current ones die too (we're seeing the death throes of the 1st generation Protestant groups die) -- as another article says that it takes about 500 years for a heresy to die and that's the time limit now for the 1st gen. Yours will too, don't worry, as it is man-made, not from God.

Come, be saved, accept Christ as your Lord and God, not your pastor or your individualness as an interpretation.

[Cronos]

All the writers you mentioned, the Didache

Ha -- you've never read or heard of the Didache, have you?

[Cronos]

and everything you posted to deny what I said is also flawed individual interpretations..... They got some things right, IMHO, but in other things they were so far out in left field that they wandered out of the ballpark.

And yet these are not individual interpretations -- this is what the community of Christians has believed since the apostles. Do you honestly believe that your individual interpretation is better than that of the 1st century Christians who lived and knew the apostles? Or the generation after that?

[Cronos]

The first statement by Harden I can basically agree with. But the bold emphasized statement is flawed seriously - can he, or you, or for that matter, anyone prove any one of the many supposed "sacred traditions" actually were "part of God's revealed word that were not contained in the sacred Scriptures"?

Yes, these traditions are what birthed the Bible -- these sacred traditions were canon before the Bible was compiled. These sacred traditions are subject to scripture in the same way Mary is subject to Jesus Christ her God -- scripture and tradition do not contradict each other.

[Cronos]

It's hardly individual -- as I pointed out in the links, even the 1st and 2nd century Christians held Mary in high esteem as filled with Grace, a creature made exceptionally (but still a creature) -- right down to the tradition about Anne and Joachim which stretches back to those times.

1500 or 2000 years later, you seek to contradict those who heard the apostles?

[Cronos]

I've never heard predestination as the source of salvation

Of course, if you believe the Calvinist argument, that is the conclusion -- Calvin would say that you were predestined to be saved.

[Cronos]

But thanks for telling me what Lutherans believe --> you're right -- that was wrong of me, I apologize.

[Cronos]

As a reply to Iscool, YES, we’re supposed to. It seems that Iscool has seen or heard of some Catholics who support Obama and hence the conclusion in the post that The Church is wrong on it’s doctrine. How one leads to the other, I don’t know, it’s not logical to me