How I Changed My Mind About Mary

It once seemed perfectly obvious to me that Catholics honored Mary too much. All those feasts, rosaries, icons, statues and whatnot were ridiculously excessive. Yes, the gospel of Luke said something about her being "blessed" and yes I thought her a good person. But that was that.

People who celebrated her or called her "Mother" or did all the million things which Catholic piety encourages bordered on idolatry. It was all too much. Jesus, after all, is our Savior, not Mary.

However, after looking at the gospel of Luke afresh and thinking more and more about the humanity of Jesus Christ, some things dawned on me. For it turns out that Luke said more than "something" about Mary. He reports that God was conceived in her womb and thereby made a son of Adam! This means more than merely saying that Mary was an incubator unit for the Incarnation. It means that the Logos, the Second Person of the Trinity derives his humanity--all of it--from her! Why does this matter? Because the entire reason we are able to call Jesus "savior" at all is because the God who cannot die became a man who could die. And he chose to do it through Mary's free "yes" to him. No Mary, no human nature for Christ. No human nature for Christ, no death on the cross. No death, no resurrection. No resurrection, no salvation. Without Mary, we are still in our sins.

This made me see Mary very differently. The Incarnation is vastly more than God zipping on a disposable man-suit. He remains man eternally. Therefore, his joining with the human race through the womb of Mary means (since he is the savior of us all), that she is the mother of us all (John 19:27). Moreover, it means that her remarkable choice to say "Yes" to the Incarnation was not merely a one-time incident, it was an offering of her own heart to God and us. Her heart was pierced by the sword that opened the fountain of blood and water in Christ's human heart, for it was she who, by the grace of God, gave him that heart (Luke 2:35; John 19:34).

Seeing this, I began to wonder again: If Catholics honor Mary "too much", where did we Evangelicals honor her "just enough." Mary herself said "henceforth, all generations will call me blessed." When was the last time I had heard a contemporary Christian tune on the radio sung in honor of Mary? Or a prayer in church to extol her? How about a teensy weensy bit of verse or a little article in some magazine singling out Mary as blessed among women? Aside from "Silent Night" was there anything in Evangelical piety which dared to praise her for even a moment? I was an Evangelical for seven years and I never saw so much as a dram of it.

So the question became for me, "How could we talk about something being 'excessive' when we had virtually no experience of it ourselves?" What if it was we Evangelicals who were excessive in our horror of Marian piety and Catholics who are normal? Judging from the witness of the early Fathers and even of Martin Luther (who had a very robust Marian devotion and whose tomb is decorated with an illustration of the Assumption of the Virgin into Heaven) it seemed to me that it was we Evangelicals who were excessive in our fear of her rather than Catholics who were excessive in their devotion.

"Hail Mary, full of grace. The Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou among women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen."

MPI: "Do you know why Paul commended them?"

BC: "they did NOT embrace sola scriptura as you do."

MPI: "That answer doesn't tell us why he commended them."

"Please just tell us what the apostle of Jesus Christ actually said. Use the precise, plain words of the apostle Paul to show us the details of why he commended the Bereans."

BC: "I do not find it particularly significant that Paul commended the Bereans. ... [14 line paragraph that continues to not answer the question snipped]"

That is twice now that I have asked you to supply the exact words of the apostle of Jesus Christ and you have instead chosen to give me your words or the words of others instead of the words I asked for.

In #239, drstevej said: "Brices, as an attorney you know that you did not answer the question asked. Would you let a witness avoid answering a direct question?"

WOW! An attorney --- and you aren't embarrassed to expose yourself as deliberately evading a direct question TWICE now?

I must assume that you, like Clinton, et.al., must be counting on your readers being emotion-driven obtuse, dolts incapable of critical thought in order to maintain your credibility. As you know from your own experience, I'm sure, only mentalities of that sort (like the O.J. jurors) will applaud evasive antics such as yours.

Now, giving you an opportunity to redeem yourself, let's try this again: Please just tell us what the apostle of Jesus Christ actually said. Use the precise, plain words of the apostle Paul to show us the details of why he commended the Bereans.

I am not interested in reading anyone else's words except for the apostle Paul's words --- with no added comments.

As you can see, drstevej has given you a paraphrased reference: "Paul said the Bereans were more noble than those in Thessalonica because they searched the Scriptures daily to see if what Paul said was true."

Now, please quote Paul's exact words, and give us the Scriptural reference, will you?

Why don't you supply them? This is not 20 questions. I have already explained that I do not consider the Bereans significant nor do I consider any comments Paul made to them before the New Testament was even written significant. I have told you the reasons in some detail and all you can do is tell me to look it up and compare me to Bill Clinton and the OJ jurors. These are precisely the kind of ad hominems for which Ann Coulter justly comdemns liberals. The fact that you resort to them is more a commentary on the weakness of your argument than on my character.

MPI: "That is twice now that I have asked you to supply the exact words of the apostle of Jesus Christ and you have instead chosen to give me your words or the words of others instead of the words I asked for."

BC: "Why don't you supply them? ... I have already explained that I do not consider the Bereans significant .... I have told you ...in some detail..."

Now you've missed a third opportunity to supply the words of Paul -- the apostle of Jesus Christ, and merely reiterated your words.

Unlike you, Paul did think the Berean's attitude and actions were quite significant and worthy of emulation.

In fact he singled them out as possessing outstanding qualities --- superiority of mind, character and ideals --- when he called them "noble". He commended them and called them "noble" because they accepted with readiness of mind what he had to say, but they searched the Scriptures daily to see if the things God's apostle HIMSELF was telling them were so".

But Paul had to admonish the church in Galatia who were beginning to turn to a different gospel [of works], and tell them this: "But even if we (an apostle of Jesus Christ) ---- or an angel from heaven ---- preach any other gospel than what we have [already] preached to you --- let him be accursed." [Gal.6-9]

BC: "... and all you can do is tell me to look it up and compare me to Bill Clinton and the OJ jurors. These are precisely the kind of ad hominems for which Ann Coulter justly comdemns liberals. The fact that you resort to them is more a commentary on the weakness of your argument than on my character."

The opinions of the intellectually honest are the only ones I care about. Those who would applaud and uphold the evasiveness you have displayed three times here, don't belong in that camp.

Bringing Ann Coulter into it in an attempt to give yourself credibility is quite transparent and laughable.

Jesus called the legalists blind guides and sons of hell. He told them "You are of your father the devil" (Mat. 23:15-16, 24; John 8:44)

And the legalist said, "These are precisely the kind of ad hominems for which God justly condemns the unrighteous. The fact that you resort to them is more a commentary on the weakness of your arguments than on our character."

2. You shall love your neighbor as yourself. [This commandment relates to the last seven of the ten commandments.]

this goes to the heart of my point

How loving is it to moisen the lips of a dying man , when your refusal to give him the gospel condems him to hell's fire for eternity?

Some times real love is saying difficult things to people and not just trying to be loved yourself. Giving the gospel is eternal love, not giveing it is compromise .

We are ORDERED to do both. Not one to the exclusion of the other.There is NO evidence that Mother Teresa ever preaced the gospel to one dying man. Her words indicate that an indifference to the gospel

This to is the word of the Lord

Rom 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

Rom 10:14

How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

Rom 10:15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things

Every one of us have an obligation to Go and tell !

Sorry Terry, you look at a Mother Teresa, and condemn her to hell? You really are deceived. Don't try to evangelize Catholics when you so claerly need evangelization yourself. (And be thankful I deleted my initial response here and re wrote it.)

No that is what YOU say I wrote,that is not what I wrote, I said purposely that I made no judgement on HER eternity, that judgement belongs to God .

I do not believe salvation rests on any ones works.

I held HER MINISTRY up to the same standards I hold Billy Graham or any minister of the gospel

I asked what fruit was born from her ministry? How many souls were saved? Was it truly a spiritual ministry or was it a temporal one?

I was doing fruit inspection on the ministry

But you are so vested in the theology of Rome and not the word of God that you can not see that Brian.

The Beatitudes

Blessed are the poor in spirit,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Blessed are the meek,
for they shall possess the earth.

Blessed are they who mourn,
for they shall be comforted.

Blessed are they who hunger and thirst for justice,
for they shall be satisfied.

Blessed are the merciful,
for they shall obtain mercy.

Blessed are the clean of heart,
for they shall see God.

Blessed are the peacemakers,
for they shall be called children of God.

Blessed are they who suffer persecution for justice' sake,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

When I read the Beatutides, I am reminded that Mother Theresa lived them and she is (was) a living example of the Gospel. Actions do speak louder than words. We are all probably typing words from the comfort of our own homes, donating money and maybe a little time once and a while (at our convenience, of course) to charity. Mother Theresa lived within the worst squalor imaginable, among the most reviled creatures there. She once said that she saw Christ in the eyes of every person she ministered to. She physically lifted people out of the gutter - and most of us would turn away and cover our noses in revulsion, all the while quoting scripture.

Here you thought we had common ground..Oppsss

I love the Beatitudes..and they do speak to the fruit that should be visible in our lives , that is not the question.

Coleen Mother Teresa was a very special loving woman . I am not judging or commenting on her spiritual state. That is not mine to judge. But we are called to be fruit inspectors (discernment)

The end of all our good works MUST be sharing Jesus ..IF we really love someone we want the eternal best for them..that means giving them the Good news.

If it is true encouraging the dying to pray to their false gods is not loving.

Mother Teresa has met and discussed this with God and He has judged her life and her eternity.

Please read #251

You missed my point. Mother Teresa was sharing Jesus by living the Gospel herself. She ministered to human beings that most of us would shun or pretend don't exist.

To criticize someone is really easy... I suggest: stop criticizing her and do it better than she did.

Who knows how many she converted? Not you, not I. Only God. And I suspect Mother Teresa has made Christian converts of more souls than either you or I have made.

Mother Tereas did what she did because of her faith, because she was a Christian. Because loving one's fellow man and giving of oneself is what Christianity is all about. It is what God calls Christians to do. She is a role model for Christians - Catholic or otherwise, because she responded to that call so completely. Her actions challenge our faith and our complacency.

Mother Teresa's life is role model in our secular world. I think it is best explained by the words of her most famous English convert - Malcolm Muggeridge - "It will be for posterity to decide whether she is a saint. I only say of her that in a dark time she is burning a shining light; in a cruel time, a living embodiment of Christ's gospe1 of love: In a godless time, the Word dwelling among us, full of grace and truth".

How loving is it to mois[t]en the lips of a dying man , when your refusal to give him the gospel condems him to hell's fire for eternity?

What evidence do you have that she refused the gospel to anyone?

Your name - "Rn"Momof7 - leads me to believe that you are a nurse. Are your patients required to listen to you preach the gospel in order to be treated? Would you refuse them treatment? If you were dieing and the only person who could help was a Muslim, would you refuse their assistance? Your arguments are nonsensical, as always - a bellicose windbag with little understanding of Christ's message, other than your interpretation of the bible.

This post is on the subject of the Blessed Mother.

Because the entire reason we are able to call Jesus "savior" at all is because the God who cannot die became a man who could die. And he chose to do it through Mary's free "yes" to him. No Mary, no human nature for Christ. No human nature for Christ, no death on the cross. No death, no resurrection. No resurrection, no salvation. Without Mary, we are still in our sins.

If you cannot stick to the topic, then please refrain from posting.

Mother Teresa was sharing Jesus by living the Gospel herself. She ministered to human beings that most of us would shun or pretend don't exist. To criticize someone is really easy... I suggest: stop criticizing her and do it better than she did.

No Coleen you missed my point..carnal heathans do humane things too.

Did you read the scripture? HOW WILL THEY KNOW UNLESS YOU TELL THEM

If she never told them the reason for her hope..she may have thought she did it in His name ...but to the heathans it was in the name of the gods she told them to pray to.

It was NO witness to Christ..it was a witness to her kindness..nothing more

Coleen the bible tells us all of us have gone astray and that none of us is righteous..it also says that all our works are like a womans dirty menstral rag...so IF she did not tell them in whos name she worked it was filthy rags to God ...now you may not like hearing that ..but that is what God says not me.

When I am obedient to God ..I do as well as HE wants me too..He is my only measuring stick (what canon means)

I asked what evidence there is that Chrisitanity grew in India as a result of her ministry in the last 40 or so years?

There are published quotes of hers that she told the dying to pray to their gods..and that she said

Mother Teresa: "He [God] is our father, He is father to us all whatever religion we are" (Meditations From A Simple Path, p. 6).

The Bible: Jesus told unrepentant Jews, "Ye are of your father the devil" (Jn. 8:44). Paul told Elymas the sorcerer, "Thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord?" (Acts 13:10).

Mother Teresa: "I've always said we should help a Hindu become a better Hindu, a Muslim become a better Muslim, a Catholic become a better Catholic" (ibid, p. 40).

The Bible: Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me" (Jn. 14:6); "I am the door of the sheep. All that ever came before [or after] me are thieves and robbers" (Jn. 10:7-8); "Neither is there salvation in any other [besides Jesus]: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved" (Acts 4:12).

These are not the words of some one interested in bringing Christ... She may have been and was a very kind lady..I am looking at what she believed was her role in her ministry.

So far, I have been compared to Clinton, the OJ jurors, damned to hell, told that my father is the devil and advised that I am afraid to read the Bible. I have listened to these people compare Our Lady to a doorpost and judge that intercessory prayer to her is a sin. I have heard Mother Theresa called a heathen and listened as the poor beggars to whom she ministered are consigned to the infernal regions.

And this was supposed to be a thread about how some protestant changed his mind about Mary. That topic must have struck a collective nerve.(Mary does seem to have that effect on some particularly those in the infernal regions with which some on this thread profess to be greatly familiar). The posters who have engaged in this invective are not interested in any dialogue. They merely want hurl imprecations toward the Catholic Church, spew hate and call names. Too bad. I have had enough of it.

I am looking at what she believed was her role in her ministry.

You have not answered my questions. The response to yours has been posted.

Christianity in India is as old as Christianity itself, and it was brought to India by a disciple of Christ himself. There are 25 million Christians in India which is just below 3% of the total population of the country. This number is slightly more than the entire population of Australia and New Zealand, or slightly below the total population of Canada, or total population of several countries in Europe. There are parts of India as heavily Christian as any part of Europe or America, e.g., Kerala, Goa, Misoram. Kerala has the largest number of Christians among the states. However, in North India, the Church is represented only by small and scattered communities. Christians including Catholics, Orthodox and Protestants, form the third largest group in India. It is estimated that about 73% of the Christians in India are Catholics.

Now, you tell me, which christian faith has reaped the greatest harvest?

Reminder, this post is on the subject of Mary.

If you would like to start a post on Mother Teresa, I am confidant that other posters will happily engage you on the subject. If you have nothing to post on the Blessed Virgin Mother of God, then please take your contentious discussions elsewhere.

I am looking at what she believed was her role in her ministry.

From the National Prayer Breakfast, Washington, D.C., February, 1994

Mother Teresa:

"On the last day, Jesus will say to those on His right hand, 'Come enter the Kingdom. For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was sick and you visited me.' Then Jesus will turn to those on His left hand and say, 'Depart from me because I was hungry and you did not feed me, I was thirsty and you did not give me to drink, I was sick and you did not visit me.' These will ask Him, 'When did we see You hungry, or thirsty or sick and did not come to Your help?'. And Jesus will answer then, 'Whatever you neglected to do unto one of the least of these, you neglected to do unto Me!

I'd say she understood her roll rather well.

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.