Catholics, Protestants, and Immaculate Mary

The Catholic Thing ^ | December 8, 2012 | David G. Bonagura, Jr.

[NYer]

Do Catholics worship Mary? This question is as old as the Protestant Reformation itself, and it rests, like other disputed doctrinal points, on a false premise that has been turned into a wedge: the veneration of Mary detracts from the worship of Christ.

This seeming opposition between Mary and Christ is symptomatic of the Protestant tendency, begun by Luther, to view the entirety of Christian life through a dialectical lens – a lens of conflict and division. With the Reformation the integrity of Christianity is broken and its formerly coherent elements are now set in opposition. The Gospel versus the Law. Faith versus Works. Scripture versus Tradition. Authority versus Individuality. Faith versus Reason. Christ versus Mary.

The Catholic tradition rightly sees the mutual complementarity of these elements of the faith, as they all contribute to our ultimate end – living with God now and in eternity. To choose any one of these is to choose them all.

By contrast, to assert that Catholics worship Mary along with or in place of Christ, or that praying to Mary somehow impedes Christ’s role as “the one mediator between God and men” (1 Tim 2:5) is to create a false dichotomy between the Word made flesh and the woman who gave the Word his flesh. No such opposition exists. The one Mediator entrusted his mediation to the will and womb of Mary. She does not impede his mediation – she helps to make it possible.

Within this context we see the ancillary role that the ancilla Domini plays in her divine Son’s mission. Mary’s is not a surrogate womb rented and then forgotten in God’s plan. She is physically connected to Christ and his life, and because of this she is even more deeply connected to him in the order of grace. She is, in fact, “full of grace,” as only one who is redeemed by Christ could be.

The feast of Mary’s Immaculate Conception celebrates the very first act of salvation by Christ in the world. Redemption is made possible for all by his precious blood shed on the cross. Yet Mary’s role in the Savior’s life and mission is so critical and so unique that God saw it necessary to wash her in the blood of the Lamb in advance, at the first moment of her conception.

Called (from the series Woman) ©2006 Bruce Herman

  [oil on wood, 65 x 48”; collection of Bjorn and Barbara Iwarsson] For more information visit http://bruceherman.com

This reality could not be more Biblical: the angel greets Mary as “full of grace” (Luke 1:28), which is literally rendered as “already graced” (kecharitōmenē). Following Mary, the Church has “pondered what sort of greeting this might be” for centuries. The dogma of the Immaculate Conception, ultimately defined in 1854, is nothing other than a rational expression of the angel’s greeting contained in Scripture: Mary is “already graced” with Christ’s redemption at the very moment of her creation.

Because God called Mary to the unique vocation of serving as the Mother of God, it is not just her soul that is graced, as is the case for us when we receive the sacraments. Mary’s entire being, body and soul, is full of grace so that she may be a worthy ark for the New Covenant. And just as the ark of the old covenant was adorned with gold to be a worthy house for God’s word, Mary is conceived without original sin to be the living and holy house for God’s Word.

Thus Mary is not only conceived immaculately, that is, without stain of sin. She also is the Immaculate Conception. Her entire being was specifically created by God with unique privilege so that she could fulfill her role in God’s plan of salvation. “Free from sin,” both original and personal, is the necessary consequence of being “full of grace.”

Protestants claim that veneration of Mary as it is practiced by Catholics is not biblical. St. Paul encouraged the Corinthians to “be imitators of me, as I am of Christ” (1 Cor 11:1). Paul is not holding himself up as the end goal, but as a means to Christ, the true end. And if a person is imitated, he is simultaneously venerated.

If we should imitate Paul, how much more should we imitate Mary, who fulfilled God’s will to the greatest degree a human being could. Throughout her life she humbled herself so that God could be exalted, and because of this, Christ has fulfilled his promise by exalting his lowly mother to the seat closest to him in God’s kingdom.

Mary is the model of humility, charity, and openness to the will of God. She allows a sword to pierce her heart for the sake of the world’s salvation. She shows us the greatness to which we are called: a life free from sin and filled with God’s grace that leads to union with God in Heaven. She is the model disciple, and therefore worthy of imitation and veneration, not as an end in herself, but as the means to the very purpose of her – and our – existence: Christ himself.

God’s lowly handmaiden would not want it any other way.

[RnMomof7]

You are thinking as a human thinks, and not as God thinks.

And How do YOU know how God "thinks?

[CynicalBear]

>>I don’t see how various attributes of Mary deny the sovereignty of Christ<<

Well, I’ll tell ya. There is no one other than Christ on this earth who was sinless. There is no one we need to go to but Christ. He is our only high priest. Mary does not now, nor did she ever have the attributes Catholics ascribe to her. Giving attributes to Mary that are Christ’s alone is blasphemy.

[Natural Law]

"And How do YOU know how God "thinks?"

No one knows the mind of God, but He has given us, through His Revealed Word, a limited understanding of His perspective. We must all make presumptions in order that we may walk as Jesus walked (1 John 2:6). What is sure is that it is far easier to conclude what is incompatible with His thoughts than what is.

Sursem Corda

[RnMomof7]

Well, I’ll tell ya. There is no one other than Christ on this earth who was sinless. There is no one we need to go to but Christ. He is our only high priest. Mary does not now, nor did she ever have the attributes Catholics ascribe to her. Giving attributes to Mary that are Christ’s alone is blasphemy.

No where does scripture attribute sinlessness, or any authority to her ...no where does it affirm the Catholics doctrine on her, suggest that she be prayed to or that she was anything more than a woman chosen to be the human mother of God made man ..and mostly she does not claim any special position for herself..

[RnMomof7]

Salvation asked met mom how she knew the mind of God... so you would agree with me that surely Salvation does not either..so her defense of Rc marilogy is nothing more than her personal opinion

[CynicalBear]

>> I’ll pray only to God as Jesus taught us, thank you.<<

Amen, Amen and Amen!! Just as Jesus taught.

>> No need to waste time praying to dead people who can’t help me in disobedience to Jesus’ teaching.<<

Putting people in place of Christ will have dire consequences.

[Natural Law]

"There is no one other than Christ on this earth who was sinless."

Every mother, including the Blessed Virgin, are colonized by millions of embryonic stem cells from the baby in her womb. These cells remain with her for her entire life. Mary's body literally contained parts of the literal body of Christ. That Mary was sinless and incorrupt as Jesus was sinless and incorrupt and like Jesus ascended into heaven, Mary was assumed into heaven body and soul makes perfect sense, but I never needed proof.

"Then Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”" - John 20:29.

Peace be with you.

[RnMomof7]

The Immaculate Conception is all about Jesus. A pure womb for him in the Ark of the New Covenant.

Why did Jesus NEED a pure womb?Where are we told that in scripture? He did not shrink from sinful men

He came to walk in a sinful would, to get his feet dirty, to eat with drunkards and thieves..

I think xzins missed your reference to the "ark of the covenant" being ..NOT A TYPE OF CHRIST.. but a type of Mary ..just one more error of Rome The Mercy seat sits atop the ark... so if She was the ark, she is the one that issues judgement This kind of teaching shows the perversion of scripture and how it is passed on. The entire OT Bible is about Christ. All of the "types" are pointing to Christ.

[Natural Law]

"so you would agree with me that surely Salvation does not either"

We only know what has been revealed to us through Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture and in a very few instances private revelation. Salvation's defense of Mariology may not contained the phrasing I would have chosen, but it was perfectly valid.

Peace be with you.

[RnMomof7]

Most people with passing knowledge of this jerk's biography know this. Martin Luther married Katharina von Bora,one of 12 nuns he had helped escape from the Nimbschen Cistercian convent in April 1523, when he arranged for them to be smuggled out in herring barrels.

Only a Catholic would calling marring someone fornication.. LOL...What do you call raping little boys? A Sacrament??

[CynicalBear]

>>Every mother, including the Blessed Virgin, are colonized by millions of embryonic stem cells from the baby in her womb. These cells remain with her for her entire life. Mary's body literally contained parts of the literal body of Christ.<<

So you finally admit that you believe that Mary is God!

[CynicalBear]

See post 291

[BlueDragon]

Your last post reveals much. Champion or dupe. How about spark plug? And the methane-like gasses were dense enough to ignite, and the flames spread. Luther did not cause the concentration of the flammable gasses in the first place. Those had been building up for some time...

"... but Luther could not have publicly opposed the Church had the Renaissance not created a political environment for a public opposition."

The charter was to go and preach the Gospel to every creature, not go and seek to CONTROL every creature using the gospel, and the powers of Church "authority", combined with powers of State, sending armies at times to KILL those whom would not bow the knee towards Rome's claim to authority, and prostrate themselves to the tender mercies of the Latin church, be those what they may... (with the winning generals amongst the armies divvying the land, real estate, and wealth).

That last is doing it Islam style, and that's how it was (at times) done in centuries prior to Luther.

yeah, the Latin church wanted Luther hanged or burned, but by then had lost some of the pull they once had over German princes, to have them do that dirty work for them. Is this the Renaissance you speak of? A renewal of freedom of conscience? If so, it reveals much as to the true nature of things doesn't it?

[RnMomof7]

We only know what has been revealed to us through Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture and in a very few instances private revelation. Salvation's defense of Mariology may not contained the phrasing I would have chosen, but it was perfectly valid.

But YOU and Sal,CANNOT know that because you have to wait until the Pope tells you what God thinks

I found her entire post interesting, showing a complete lack of scriptural understanding and then pointing to metmom .

Sal God did just not "know" that Jesus was going to die on the cross..HE ORDAINED IT BEFORE THE WORLD BEGAN..ask Peter...(Acts 2:23)(Acts 4 :26-28)

[Natural Law]

"So you finally admit that you believe that Mary is God!"

Every first year philosophy student knows that while mu body is mine, I am not my body's. Mary was no exception. Contained within her body was a Real physical Presence of Jesus. For a Catholic that is not hard to comprehend or accept. We do not worship Mary, we venerate her. Once you become familiar with the words dulia, hyperdulia and latria and their meanings you will not make those foolish statements about what Catholics and I do and do not believe.

Peace be with you

[RnMomof7]

Ohhh Mercy..May God open eyes to see the blasphemy

[boatbums]

And, as promised, here are Luther's words IN CONTEXT:

From http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2009/01/luther-i-confess-that-i-cannot-forbid.html

In a 1526 letter, Luther stated:

As regards the other matter, my faithful warning and advice is that no man, Christians in particular, should have more than one wife, not only for the reason that offense would be given, and Christians must not needlessly give, but most diligently avoid giving, offense, but also for the reason that we have no word of God regarding this matter on which we might base a belief that such action would be well-pleasing to God and to Christians. Let heathen and Turks do what they please. Some of the ancient fathers had many wives, but they were urged to this by necessity, as Abraham and Jacob, and later many kings, who according to the law of Moses obtained the wives of their friends, on the death of the latter, as an inheritance. The example of the fathers is not a sufficient argument to convince a Christian: he must have, in addition, a divine word that makes him sure, just as they had a word of that kind from God. For where there was no need or cause, the ancient fathers did not have more than one wife, as Isaac, Joseph, Moses, and many others. For this reason I cannot advise for, but must advise against, your intention, particularly since you are a Christian, unless there were an extreme necessity, as, for instance, if the wife were leprous or the husband were deprived of her for some other reason. On what grounds to forbid other people such marriages I know not" (21a, 900 f.) This letter effected that the Landgrave did not carry out his intention, but failing, nevertheless, to lead a chaste life, he did not commune, except once in extreme illness, because of his accusing conscience." ( Luther Examined and Reexamined: A Review of Catholic Criticism and a Plea for Reevaluation (St Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1917, 103-104).

W.H.T. Dau points out that Catholics should use caution in this charge against Luther:

"Ought not this remark of the Landgrave caution Luther's Catholic critics to be very careful in what they say about the heinousness of Luther's offense in granting a dispensation from a moral precept? Have they really no such thing as a "dispensation" at Rome? Has not the married relationship come up for "dispensation" in the chancelleries of the Vatican innumerable times? Has not one of the canonized saints of Rome, St. Augustine, declared that bigamy might be permitted if a wife was sterile? Was not concubinage still recognized by law in the sixteenth century in Ireland? Did not King Diarmid have two legitimate wives and two concubines? And he was a Catholic. What have Catholics to say in rejoinder to Sir Henry Maine's assertion that the Canon Law of their Church brought about numerous sexual inequalities? Or to Joseph MacCabe's statement that not until 1060 was there any authoritative mandate of the Church against polygamy, and that even after this prohibition there were numerous instances of concubinage and polygamic marriages in Christian communities? Or to Hallam in his Middle Ages, where he reports concubinage in Europe? Or to Lea, who proves that this evil was not confined to the laity? (See Gallighan, Women under Polygamy, pp. 43. 292. 295. 303. 330. 339.) ( Luther Examined and Reexamined: A Review of Catholic Criticism and a Plea for Reevaluation (St Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1917, 106)

My conclusion? Catholics chastising Luther with this quote tend to make it mean more than was intended. Luther was not an "out-and-out believer in polygamy." For Luther, it was an exception. Do I agree with Luther? not at all, I would argue that even his exception is wrong, and that a case for monogamy can be made from the Bible. Once again, we find Catholics taking a very minor point made by Luther, and blowing it out proportion.

[RnMomof7]

Ohhh Mercy..May God open eyes to see the blasphemy

[RnMomof7]

Ohhh Mercy..May God open eyes to see the blasphemy

[RnMomof7]

Every mother, including the Blessed Virgin, are colonized by millions of embryonic stem cells from the baby in her womb. These cells remain with her for her entire life. Mary's body literally contained parts of the literal body of Christ. That Mary was sinless and incorrupt as Jesus was sinless and incorrupt and like Jesus ascended into heaven, Mary was assumed into heaven body and soul makes perfect sense, but I never needed proof.

Really ?? I must have missed that little factoid in school ...so you are trying to tell us that Jesus always lived in Mary??..

It is interesting that your jesus leaves the bread before it hits the bowl..but lived in Mary womb...

Its a good thing you do not need proof... cause there is none