Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Because of the Protestant Reformers Beliefs On Mary
Why I Am a Catholic ^ | 12/16/10 | Frank Weathers

Posted on 12/17/2010 7:31:07 AM PST by marshmallow

Back when I first joined YIMCatholic, I was going to write posts about my conversion. I hammered out seven posts in pretty rapid succession and then, I stopped writing them until recently.

Many of my posts now are simply my observations of the world which are colored through the lens of a convert to Catholicism. It would be difficult for them not to be. Other posts I've written are of the "look what I just found!" variety, and the "I want to share this with you" type. Call them the discovery posts if you will.

Recently I gave a talk on the Communion of Saints for my parishes RCIA group. Consequently, I've been answering questions of potential converts that have prompted me to explain my conversion to others.

Basically, this has resulted in my having become a neophyte evangelist of sorts for the Church. And though this blog space isn't the forum for heavy-duty apologetics, because others do that better elsewhere, I have always seen my role here at YIMC as one of evangelizing.

Back to my conversion story, when I was first confronting the idea of becoming a Catholic, I had to look hard at the question "Why am I Protestant?" Having just moved cross-country following my retirement from the Marines, I found out that my mother no longer went to church where we had gone when I was growing up. Instead of the non-denominational church I grew up in (and which we were a founding family of), I learned that she now went to a Presbyterian church instead. Hmmm.

Rather than start visiting all kinds of churches, which appealed to me about as much as shopping for a new car, my family and I kept going to the local Catholic parish in our new town while I did research and home improvement projects. One of the first things I looked into was the problem of Catholics and their obviously misguided devotion to the Virgin Mary.

The funny thing is, I had sat in the pews in the Catholic Church with my wife for close to 18 years and I had never really noticed any wacky or overly zealous devotion to Mary. Not at Mass, anyway, and as we didn't stick around much after the conclusion of Mass, I didn't see anything that made me uncomfortable. Truthfully, I was surprised about this and it's probably a big reason why I continued to sit in the pews with my patient Catholic wife for that long a time.

This didn't stop me from believing that weird Marian devotions were happening though, and I assumed talk of her perpetual virginity was just "crazy talk." Like most, I had no idea what the Immaculate Conception was either and I just thought people were referring to Our Lord's conception. I was ignorant, plain and simple. But I had in mind a mission to correct the wrong religious track that my family was on so I started planning the military campaign to retake the spiritual territory I had ceded to the Church. My first target was what I thought would be the easiest: Mary.

Before I went on my "destroy Marian Devotion" offensive, though, I knew I would have to do a little homework. Planning ahead, you see, I figured the best place to start was with the guys who picked up the Protestant Reformation football and ran with it for touchdowns. Follow the winners Frank, and victory will be yours!

But get this. Much to my surprise, nay, shock(!) I had to throw a penalty flag on myself and look for a different angle of attack. Because what I found out was that the Big Three "Reformers" all agreed with the Catholic Church's teachings on the Mother of God!

Here is what I found, courtesy of the site catholicapologetics.info,

Martin Luther:

Mary the Mother of God

Throughout his life Luther maintained without change the historic Christian affirmation that Mary was the Mother of God:

"She is rightly called not only the mother of the man, but also the Mother of God ... It is certain that Mary is the Mother of the real and true God."

Perpetual Virginity

Again throughout his life Luther held that Mary's perpetual virginity was an article of faith for all Christians - and interpreted Galatians 4:4 to mean that Christ was "born of a woman" alone.

"It is an article of faith that Mary is Mother of the Lord and still a Virgin."

The Immaculate Conception

Yet again the Immaculate Conception was a doctrine Luther defended to his death (as confirmed by Lutheran scholars like Arthur Piepkorn). Like Augustine, Luther saw an unbreakable link between Mary's divine maternity, perpetual virginity and Immaculate Conception. Although his formulation of the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception was not clear-cut, he held that her soul was devoid of sin from the beginning:

"But the other conception, namely the infusion of the soul, it is piously and suitably believed, was without any sin, so that while the soul was being infused, she would at the same time be cleansed from original sin and adorned with the gifts of God to receive the holy soul thus infused. And thus, in the very moment in which she began to live, she was without all sin..."

Assumption

Although he did not make it an article of faith, Luther said of the doctrine of the Assumption:

"There can be no doubt that the Virgin Mary is in heaven. How it happened we do not know."

Honor to Mary

Despite his unremitting criticism of the traditional doctrines of Marian mediation and intercession, to the end Luther continued to proclaim that Mary should be honored. He made it a point to preach on her feast days.

"The veneration of Mary is inscribed in the very depths of the human heart."

"Is Christ only to be adored? Or is the holy Mother of God rather not to be honoured? This is the woman who crushed the Serpent's head. Hear us. For your Son denies you nothing." Luther made this statement in his last sermon at Wittenberg in January 1546.

John Calvin:

It has been said that John Calvin belonged to the second generation of the Reformers and certainly his theology of double predestination governed his views on Marian and all other Christian doctrine . Although Calvin was not as profuse in his praise of Mary as Martin Luther he did not deny her perpetual virginity. The term he used most commonly in referring to Mary was "Holy Virgin".

"Elizabeth called Mary Mother of the Lord, because the unity of the person in the two natures of Christ was such that she could have said that the mortal man engendered in the womb of Mary was at the same time the eternal God."

"Helvidius has shown himself too ignorant, in saying that Mary had several sons, because mention is made in some passages of the brothers of Christ." Calvin translated "brothers" in this context to mean cousins or relatives.

"It cannot be denied that God in choosing and destining Mary to be the Mother of his Son, granted her the highest honor."

"To this day we cannot enjoy the blessing brought to us in Christ without thinking at the same time of that which God gave as adornment and honour to Mary, in willing her to be the mother of his only-begotten Son."

Ulrich Zwingli:

"It was given to her what belongs to no creature, that in the flesh she should bring forth the Son of God."

"I firmly believe that Mary, according to the words of the gospel as a pure Virgin brought forth for us the Son of God and in childbirth and after childbirth forever remained a pure, intact Virgin." Zwingli used Exodus 4:22 to defend the doctrine of Mary's perpetual virginity.

"I esteem immensely the Mother of God, the ever chaste, immaculate Virgin Mary."

"Christ ... was born of a most undefiled Virgin."

"It was fitting that such a holy Son should have a holy Mother."

"The more the honor and love of Christ increases among men, so much the esteem and honor given to Mary should grow."

I remember being blown away by these revelations. I had gone to Christian churches my whole life and I had been told what I was supposed to believe, and I had never been told these things about Mary. I felt a little bit like the fellow wearing tan below, even though I was really acting like the guy wearing black.

And then I thought, "methinks they dost protest too much." And like young Skywalker above, I too leaped with faith and lived to tell the tale. I didn't land on my feet though. Instead, I landed in the lap of Blaise Pascal.

And so began the process of my going back to the Scriptures and to the Church Fathers and back through the history of the Catholic Church, and finally back into the arms of Christ's Church Herself.

Perhaps this post is a prequel in the 2BFrank saga. Sheeeesh!

To read more about the Protestant Reformers views on the Blessed Virgin Mary, and to track down the footnotes too, head on over to catholicapologetics.info. Head over to Scripture Catholic too, and bring your Bibles. Then head over to the Vatican and look at the Catechism of the Catholic Church as well.


TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; Theology
KEYWORDS: freformed
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 1,541-1,558 next last
To: Vegasrugrat

“There is only one holy Christian church. We cannot see it, but this assembly brings together everyone who has faith in Jesus Christ as Savior.

The true church includes people from many denominations, even Catholic. But it is not exclusive to Catholics.”

That’s not what the bible teaches, unfortunately. The Church is the Bride of Christ. This is not an ‘invisible’ union, just as we ought not marry in secret. This is a visible union.


81 posted on 12/17/2010 10:02:49 AM PST by BenKenobi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Dutchboy88
"The implication here is that somehow the perverted view of Mary held by the RCC is shared by those in the Reformation."

Are you one of the milkmaids or one of the farmhands Luther complained about?

82 posted on 12/17/2010 10:04:01 AM PST by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: jagusafr

Isn’t it clear that James was the brother of Jesus? Well, no. Quite apart from the cousins approach —and incidentally, Sam and John Adams were sometimes referred to as “the brothers Adams”—there is the alternative, never ruled out that James was the son of Joseph, that Joseph was a widow—much older than Mary —later 20s, say, and Mary was a young girl. Then there is much confusion about who the several James (or Jacobs) who are mentioned in the New Testament and their relation to Jesus. John and James, sons of Zebedee, may have been his cousins. Maybe not. Likewise the several Marys. These were. after all, common names. Beyond this is the general approach of the Gospels. They are not interested in the question we are talking about, Or they don’t bother to explain to US what, after all, they expected their readers to know. Paul’s letters are full of names that have no significance to us but were known to his readers. We have a great saint—Apollos—about whom we know almost nothing. We don’t know the author of “Hebrews, one of the greatest of Christian works. FAME, which is something we moderns lust for, was not something these people care much about. Back to the point, the Bible tells us very little about the Holy Family, is largely silent about his earthly life, tells us so little about his person that we haven’t a clue what he looked like. What we do know is the emphasis on her virginity. She is always the Virgin Mary as far back as we can trace. Joseph’s role is that of Guardian of mother and child. Luke says NOTHING about any siblings. That is one of the disjunctions between the writings, not unlike those between the nativity stories in Luke and Matthew. I don’t think absent tradition one can make sense of Scripture.


83 posted on 12/17/2010 10:04:47 AM PST by RobbyS (Pray with the suffering souls.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law

There are 5 solas:

Sola Scriptura—by Scripture alone
Sola Gratia—by grace alone
Sola Fide—by faith alone
Solo Christo—by Christ alone
Soli Deo Gloria—glory to God alone

I do not have any special ability to interpret scripture and I do not believe any human has/had an infallible ability to interpret scripture.

I believe you have me confused with a Catholic, for they believe their Pope is infallible and the only reliable source for interpretation.

God Bless


84 posted on 12/17/2010 10:13:08 AM PST by Vegasrugrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: BenKenobi

When people are still under the law it is not uncommon the need for “something” else...or “something more” than Christ and His sufficiency... and becomes necessary in which to validate to themselves they are worthy “enough”.

The fact you mentioned being “Permitted” to make images attest to an attitude of law...of which we are no longer bound to.

No..my arguement is not only that of making images..which is where you want to take this discussion...my arguement is that of Mary worship, and that of other departed people being sought as intercessor’s. Christ is the only mediator need and has asked us to bring all our requests to Him...never once has He directed we go thru people who have departed...and in fact warned us not to attempt to do such things.

Trying to make an arguement of the departed as being alive or dead is fruitless. They are not here....and indeed He is the God of the Living who are Here. You are attempting to evade the issue that catholics do place the departed and Mary on the same or higher level than Christ..their behavior attest to this.


85 posted on 12/17/2010 10:25:04 AM PST by caww
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law; Dutchboy88
Are you one of the milkmaids or one of the farmhands Luther complained about?

And here you are once again with a cutting remark. It doesn't take long for the appearance of ungodly statements, by those who are quick to show their hand, once they are up against the wall...it is expected as part of the very heart and nature of some. Beat 'em up and knock them around should be some mottos...and that with no conviction or shame.

86 posted on 12/17/2010 10:32:28 AM PST by caww
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: caww

” catholics do place the departed and Mary on the same or higher level than Christ...”

All Catholics as your sentence implies?


87 posted on 12/17/2010 10:32:56 AM PST by OpusatFR
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Dutchboy88; marshmallow; TSgt; RnMomof7; Alex Murphy; HarleyD; wmfights; Forest Keeper; ...
These kinds of stories are trotted out now and then to try and establish some shared guilt in the blasphemous error of Mariology.

Fat chance.

One of the major tenets of the world-wide Reformation was a call to end the worship of Mary and the saints which has always been a hallmark of the corrupted church of Rome.

Luther had a lot of learning to undo. A few of the earliest Reformers may have still believed Mary remained an eternal virgin, but the similarity between the truth and Rome's lies ends there.

The Protestant Reformers did not believe Mary was sinless, nor that she was assumed into heaven bodily, and certainly Mary was NOT men's intercessor, mediator, nor co-redemptrix.

All those blasphemies were heaped on Mary by the papacy. They belong to Rome alone.

Here's a great link from Albert Mohler, President of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary...

THE NEW DEBATE OVER MARY

Currently, the (RC) church recognizes four Marian dogmas. The most important of these, Mary’s divine maternity, was defined by the Council of Ephesus in 431, granting that Mary is rightly called “God-bearer” because she was the mother of Christ. Later dogmas declared Mary’s perpetual virginity (649), Immaculate Conception (1854), and Bodily Assumption (1950).

Tragically, each new Marian doctrine has moved Roman Catholic theology and devotion increasingly away from the Holy Scriptures and toward human innovation. In reality, the declaration of Mary as “God-bearer” brought ill effects upon the Catholic church. The original issue in that fifth-century debate was not Mary at all, but Christ. The council acknowledged Mary was the “God-bearer” in order to affirm the deity of Christ without question.

Quickly, however, the doctrine came to magnify Mary. In popular Catholic devotion — and in the writings and sermons of popes — Mary is now called the Queen of Heaven, the Mother of all Graces, and an abundance of other unbiblical titles. By the time of the Reformation, the veneration of Mary was established Catholic piety and theology. John Calvin warned of “those titles full of anathema, by which, while they would honor the Virgin, they most grievously insult her.” And to those many others have been added.

In the medieval church, Mary was already understood in a mediatorial role, and as intercessor to her Son. As Calvin retorted, praying to Mary “is assuredly altogether alien from the Word of God.” As the Bible clearly reveals, there is but one Mediator, Jesus Christ, and his mediatorial work cannot be supplemented by Mary.

While careful Catholic theologians insist their Marian doctrines do not diminish or impugn the saving work of Christ, this is the inevitable result. And, though Catholics claim their veneration of Mary does not distract from the worship of the Trinity, Marian devotion has virtually eclipsed the worship of God in many quarters.

Marian devotion is profoundly lacking in biblical support. Scripture reveals Mary to be a worthy model of humble submission to the will of God, as the virgin who was the mother of our Lord Jesus Christ. But Scripture does not reveal any suggestion that Mary is to be venerated, that she should be honored with unbiblical titles, that she was perpetually a virgin, that she was conceived without sin, that she was assumed into heaven before death, that she participated in any way in the atonement, or that she serves in any mediatorial role. To the contrary, the Bible makes clear the only true worship is the worship of the one true God—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. This God is a jealous God who will not allow the worship of any creature—even the earthly mother of Jesus the Christ.

The debates over Mary emerged anew in the Reformation and remain a major divide between evangelicals and Roman Catholics. Unfortunately, few Protestant theologians have been willing to address the debates head-on. Despite his own theological deficiencies, Karl Barth did get to the bottom of this issue. Mariology, he said, “is an excrescence” — ”a diseased construct of theological thought.” Further, “In the doctrine and worship of Mary there is disclosed the one heresy of the Roman Catholic Church which explains all the rest.” What should be our response? Barth suggested one simple word — No.

Clearly, some Catholics are concerned about the ecumenical impact of the proposed new doctrines. They should well be warned. Nothing will more clearly demonstrate the profoundly unbiblical temptations of Roman Catholic theology than the adoption of these new Marian doctrines. Mary is not in any sense a co-redeemer, co-mediator, or advocate. She is not a dispenser of grace. Like all Christians, she is a sinner saved by the grace of God through the redeeming work of our Lord Jesus Christ.

In reality, new papal declarations may not mean much anyway, because the proposed Marian doctrines are already firmly ensconced in popular Catholic piety. This is an infusion of paganism all evangelicals must resist.

We have no right to grant to Mary—or to any saint, or to anyone else—what the Bible does not explicitly ascribe. In this we should all take Mary’s advice given as Jesus performed his first miracle: “Whatever He says to you, do it.” Nothing more—and nothing less.


88 posted on 12/17/2010 10:34:35 AM PST by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: BenKenobi

Together all believers form the holy Christian church, a “spiritual house” made up of living stones chosen by God. When the Holy Spirit works faith in our hearts, we become part of this structure. The Lord Jesus can see the faith in our hearts. We, however, can only see the fruits of faith and not the faith itself. Because we cannot see faith, the church is invisible to our eyes.


89 posted on 12/17/2010 10:36:58 AM PST by Vegasrugrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: OpusatFR

If the shoe fits....

If I was attending a catholic church and the behavior catholics do, as well as what they believe went against the clear teaching of scripture I would not go there and in fact would leave. Catholics do not.. as their allegiance is to the catholic system of operation (Rome and or the doctrines of) and the belief if they leave they put their salvation in jeapordy.

If you are saying there are catholics who remain in the church knowing full well it’s teaching opposes what Christ teaches..then I would agree some remain..many who infact believe they are called to remain in order to “evangelize” people within the church...they see their mission as that and the catholic church as a mission field.


90 posted on 12/17/2010 10:41:04 AM PST by caww
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg

Good read Dr. E.....thanks.


91 posted on 12/17/2010 10:43:05 AM PST by caww
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: caww

It is sweet to hear the truth preached, isn’t it?

And so we kneel to none but Christ.

Thank God.


92 posted on 12/17/2010 10:48:26 AM PST by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: Vegasrugrat
"I believe you have me confused with a Catholic, for they believe their Pope is infallible and the only reliable source for interpretation."

If that is what you believe than you are tragically ill informed. The doctrine Papal infallibility is a very highly limited condition. The infallible teachings of the Pope must be based on, or at least not contradict, Sacred Tradition or Sacred Scripture. It has only been exercised twice.

Interpretation is the function of the Magesterium to whom the task of interpreting the Word of God authentically has been solely entrusted. It is comprised of the episcopacy, which is the aggregation of the current bishops of the Church in union with the Pope.

93 posted on 12/17/2010 10:51:03 AM PST by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg

As Bishop Fulton Sheen wrote, “It may be objected: ‘Our Lord is enough for me. I have no need of her.’ But He needed her, whether we do or not. God, Who made the sun, also made the moon. The moon does not take away from the brilliance of the sun. All its light is reflected from the sun. The Blessed Mother reflects her Divine Son; without Him, she is nothing. With Him, she is the Mother of Men.”


94 posted on 12/17/2010 10:54:38 AM PST by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg

It is sweet to hear the truth preached, isn’t it?

And so we kneel to none but Christ.

Thank God.

Yes indeed..and Amen!


95 posted on 12/17/2010 10:55:00 AM PST by caww
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: caww

“If you are saying there are catholics who remain in the church knowing full well it’s teaching opposes what Christ teaches”

The Catholic Church does not oppose what Christ teaches. It IS what Christ teaches.

Giving your opinion as the definitive of Christianity is just that, your opinion.

However, Merry Christmas to you and yours.

“III. CHRIST JESUS — “MEDIATOR AND FULLNESS OF ALL REVELATION”25

God has said everything in his Word”

http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p122a5p2.htm


96 posted on 12/17/2010 10:55:28 AM PST by OpusatFR
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Vegasrugrat
There are 5 solas:

Sola Scriptura—by Scripture alone
Sola Gratia—by grace alone
Sola Fide—by faith alone
Solo Christo—by Christ alone
Soli Deo Gloria—glory to God alone

AMEN!

That is the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

97 posted on 12/17/2010 10:55:48 AM PST by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg

Huh. I thought the OPC website said that the Good News of Jesus Christ was John 3:16.


98 posted on 12/17/2010 10:57:37 AM PST by Judith Anne (Holy Mary, Mother of God, please pray for us sinners now, and at the hour of our death.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law
...she is the Mother of Men.” No... in fact she is the mother of Jesus...who is the redeemer of men and all who come to Him. He alone is the Savior, mediator between God and man. It is His brith we are celebrating..."The Savior has arrived" that we celebrate.
99 posted on 12/17/2010 10:58:45 AM PST by caww
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: OpusatFR; caww
”catholics do place the departed and Mary on the same or higher level than Christ...”

All Catholics as your sentence implies?

Roman Catholics proudly tell us that as Mary told Jesus what to do, we should likewise do what Mary tells us to do.

That perspective, giving the creature any authority over the Creator, is an abomination to God.

Flee from the idolatry Rome teaches.

100 posted on 12/17/2010 10:59:28 AM PST by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 1,541-1,558 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson