Posted on 06/16/2015 11:58:25 AM PDT by ReformationFan
The attempt to change God the Father to God the Mother is full bore idolatry—a syncretism of the spirit of the age.
I remember some of the most emotionally powerful moments of worship that I have experienced occurred in a context where there was the least amount of belief. There was a time in my life when I regularly went to worship at Grace Cathedral in San Francisco, a beautiful church building that had this glorious liturgy. And it would be my habit to go there on Sunday morning and to sit in the pew and listen to the music and to work through the liturgy. And then when the pastor got up to preach I also would get up and walk out of the building because I knew what I was going to hear was not going to be faithful to God’s Word. I’m old, but I’m not old enough to remember when the Episcopal Church was a faithful church, generally speaking.
More recently, the Church of England has ordained their very first female Bishop, her name is Libby Lane. Not long after her installation as a bishop, she proposed some significant changes that would take away what yet remains the best part of the church of England: so much of the liturgy that is in the Book of Common Prayer. You see, that is why I loved that worship service, because that Book of Common Prayer was infused with Scripture and infused with sound doctrine even though the people saying it, the ones leading the liturgy, didn’t believe it. The actual words were the words of life.
But now comes Bishop Lane and she has some changes in mind for the Book of Common Prayer. It is not changing the doctrine of how we have peace with God, it is not changing the doctrine of man, it is not choosing Arminianism over Calvinism, she just wants “a few changes.” Instead of referring to God the way the Bible does, in masculine language, she would like to see it include some feminine language for who God is—referring to Him as Her, referring to our Heavenly Father as our Heavenly Mother.
Now the reasoning is pretty simple; her thought is that this would be more inclusive and make other people feel more welcome because, somehow, referring to God in the masculine is off-putting to a certain class of people. I agree. This class of people, however, are those who do not like God.
When we read through the historical accounts of the Old Testament, I’ve often argued that the most frequent sin that we see crop up among God’s people is idolatry. And that idolatry almost always takes the form of syncretism. That’s a big word but is really not that complicated of a concept. Syncretism is the blending together of two things. In this context, the blending together of the worship of the true and living God with the spirit of the age. With the children of Israel start worshiping Baal, they don’t say, “Yesterday we worshipped Yahweh, but this is not going well so let’s worship Baal instead.” Rather, what they did was that they would blend together the qualities, the characteristics, and the liturgies of Baal to mix them with the qualities and characteristics of the true and living God. Well, that should be instructive to us. The temptation isn’t going to be those who show up and say, “You know, that whole God thing, the whole Trinity thing, let’s try a whole different God.” Rather it is an attempt to redefine and reshape who we think God to be and to do so in a way that accommodates the broader unbelieving culture. That is exactly what we have in this proposal, in this suggestion.
If we can take the true and living God and we can reshape Him, remold Him, and in fact rename him, or put Him through the liturgical equivalent of the surgery of Bruce Jenner, we can turn Him into a Her, our God into a goddess. I wish Miss Lane would heed the wisdom of my favorite Anglican, C.S. Lewis. It was Lewis who told us that–recognizing that God in one sense transcends gender, God is not a man–God is so utterly masculine that all of us are feminine in comparison. Masculinity is essential to what God is. That is the reason that God is described to us as our Father, that is the reason His son is called the Son. There is a reality about who He is and we have to hold onto it and not accommodate or mold and shape God into our own image. We have to, being feminine, respond to His leadership. And when God says He is our Father, our calling is to say “Yes, Father” in return.
Please, it’s embarrassing to see people lamely explain away errors and continue to claim inerrantcy. There are 2500 documented errors of fact in the bible. Accept it as alegorical or continue to drink your own bath water.
Years ago I knew a Cuban-American guy who was a Santeria priest: he’s the only Mariolator I ever met. He was also into the recovery (or reconstruction) of Taino culture, esp. dancing and trancing.
If you know anyone who prays to Mary, "venerates" Mary, asks anything of Mary, or believes Rome's teaching about Mary espoused in CCC 969, then you know a Mariolater.
Do you agree with CCC 969? If you do, then you might know someone else who fits the bill. I hope you don't.
Hoss
Prove each and every one. Just saying it doesn’t make it true.
Hoss
Scripture is a compendium of extraordinary claims. The burden of proof is on you.
You make the claim, you back it up.
Hoss
CCC 969: 969 "This motherhood of Mary in the order of grace continues uninterruptedly from the consent which she loyally gave at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation . . . . Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix."
This is true and very beautiful, and no, it is not Mariolatry. It is necessary to see all this in the context of the Body of Christ. We each of us have a role in Christ's saving work, since we are members of His Body and the whole Church is incorporated into Christ. We are to be conformed to Christ, transformed.
In this context, whatever is said of Mary, is said to some degree or in some way to all who are in Christ. It is Christ who vivifies us, as the True Vine of Whom we are fruitful branches. It is Christ who is, above all and through all, Advocate, Helper, Benefactor, and Mediator.
Any other person --- or all persons --- who are united in Christ, have a share in this great work precisely because we are in Him. What is said of Mary, then, is emblematic of the whole Church (and here I do not mean, of course, just dues-paying pewsitters in a Catholic parish!)
Mary exhibits this cooperation with Christ to a uniquely high degree because "He Who is mighty has done great things" for His maidservant.
If you see this without context, you might be mistaken and think she is being called equal to Christ. This is not so. This could never be so, because she is a contingent, finite, dependent, created being, a human person; while Jesus Christi is a Divine Person: absolute, infinite, in and through whom all things were made.
In the Triune God we live and move and have our being. Mary --- like us --- is a member of His Body and under her Head, who is Christ.
Here's some context for you:
DECLARATION "DOMINUS IESUS": ON THE UNICITY AND SALVIFIC UNIVERSALITY OF JESUS CHRIST AND THE CHURCH
A good pull-quote from Paragraph 15:
"One can and must say that Jesus Christ has a significance and a value for the human race and its history, which are unique and singular, proper to him alone, exclusive, universal, and absolute."
Do you agree with that paragraph? I do. Which is why a Catholic cannot be a Mariolator.
Sorry but I’m not responsible for your education. Any claim of water into wine, walking on water or resurrection from the dead requires proof. Doubting those claims does not. That’s how the discipline known as “logic” works.
Works for me. I hope you detected a strong presence of sarcasm; it was intended.
"5 For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,"
Now. Do YOU believe THAT? CCC 969 teaches that Mary is a "mediatrix" -- and she is nothing of the sort. God's word says there is ONE mediator between God and men, the Man Jesus Christ.
One means one. Not two. One. Not Mary, not any other "saint" -- ONLY Jesus.
CCC 969 teaches a false gospel. It teaches that Mary in some way has a "saving office" -- NO ONE comes to the Father except through Christ Jesus -- remember, Jesus said, "no one comes to the Father but through me" in John 14:6. Where in scripture is this refuted? Where in "Holy Tradition" is the very word of God Almighty himself in Christ Jesus refuted? Did Christ lie?
Mary provides no intercession. Remember 2 Tim. 2:5 -- ONE mediator? It goes for intercession also:
Romans 8:34:
"Who is to condemn? Christ Jesus is the one who died—more than that, who was raised—who is at the right hand of God, who indeed is interceding for us."
Where is Mary shown to be an intercessor except in the bilge of CCC 969? No one comes to the Father (is provided salvation) but through Jesus... but CCC 969 teaches that Mary provides... SALVATION? This is a false gospel. Only CHRIST provides salvation through his shed blood. No one participates with Christ in the act of salvation; that is by faith through grace... faith that is given to us by God, and grace extended to us by God. We were dead in trespasses and sins... dead. The dead can not participate in acting in some salvific way... God provides it ALL.
Attributing this kind of unbiblical and untrue authority to Mary by the Roman Catholic Church is the DEFINITION of idolatry... or, in this case, Mariolatry.
Hoss
And for that I'm manifestly thankful.
Doubting those claims does not.
Doubt away... but your discipline for logic and how it "works" is something then that I can doubt. And I do.
Hoss
I don’t think you quite addressed the part about the Body of Christ.
**God is beyond sex. God is not male, and he’s not a father**
We call male inventors the ‘father’ of this or that. Some may have not even had any help from a woman when thinking up their idea.
But, if you want to rewrite the Bible, I guess that’s as good a place to start as any.
That wasn't the issue; the issue was the Mariolatry practiced by the Roman Catholic Church, its false gospel presented in the CCC, and the scriptural refutations of it.
What's your take on that?
Hoss
No one participates with Christ in the act of salvation; that is by faith through grace... faith that is given to us by God, and grace extended to us by God. We were dead in trespasses and sins... dead. The dead can not participate in acting in some salvific way... God provides it ALL.
Hoss
**There are 2500 documented errors of fact in the bible.**
Isn’t that sort of amazing,....that all of the errors would end up in a nice sort of round number like ‘2,500’?
(I’m wondering why you post such opinions on a religion forum, since, imo, you seem to show no faith in God)
Cheerio!
Not sure what your point is, since you gave an example of NON-literalism, which is my point about the Bible.
As for re-writing the Bible, isn't that what every commentary does? I mean, since all of the commentators always agree with each other, right?
I take the word ‘father’ to mean the originator of anything whether it be visible or invisible.
Commentaries? The Bible does a marvelous job of commenting on itself. That’s why I haven’t bought a commentary in over 32 years of living for God.
Then how do you take the word "mother"?
Commentaries? The Bible does a marvelous job of commenting on itself. That’s why I haven’t bought a commentary in over 32 years of living for God.
Then you need to tell everyone of your discoveries - especially the Catholics and the, what, over a thousand Protestant denominations? Because I think - I'm not sure, but I think - the basis for their differences is, in fact, nothing other than different readings of the same Bible.
"God provides it ALL" is true, and fits in seamlessly with another truth: "God provides it ALL by His saving death on the Cross, the fruits of which come to us via the many means He has graciously provided, that is, many helps, instruments, channels of grace, and by the cooperation of the whole Body."
Do we need the cooperation of the whole Body? Of course we do:
1 Corinthians 12:21
The eye cannot say to the hand, “I do not need you,” nor again the head to the feet, “I do not need you.”
"How are we saved?" The Catholic Church goes nowhere for the answer to this question, except to Scripture.
How Christ teaches, through the Scriptures which were entrusted to us, that we are saved:
It's not so very complicated. All of the above could be summarized this way: "By union with Christ," as the branches are united to the True Vine; "By being incorporated into Christ" as members of His Body.
Philippians 2:12
"So then, my beloved, obedient as you have always been, not only when I am present but all the more now when I am absent, work out your salvation with fear and trembling."
How necessary it is to heed every line of the Scriptures listed above, because
2 Timothy 3:16
"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, and for instruction in righteousness."
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.