Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why Mary Appears/The Mariology Gap (Cath-Orth Caucus)
Zenit News ^ | 2008-09-03 | Irene Lagan

Posted on 09/04/2008 3:24:18 PM PDT by annalex

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061 next last
To: annalex
That is your interpretation. Or should I say your misinterpretation.

The woman in Gen is not speaking of Mary.And as far as the bible says that Joseph was a just man, and many believe that he died when Jesus was young so it is a streach that he was a saint.

What is a 4c is that anything like the 4h?

21 posted on 09/04/2008 9:31:30 PM PDT by guitarplayer1953 (Psalm 83:1-8 is on the horizon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: annalex; Kolokotronis
neither is noticing the redemptive role of Mary -- to whom the Orthodox, after all, pray "Theotokos, save us", -- heretical

Based on †Paul's “I have become all things to all men, that I might by all means and in any way, save them.” (1 Cor 9:22).

Apparently †Paul believed he was endowed with this power as God's "deputy," a co-worker of God.

We are also told that we are our own co-redeemers, as well as of others who hear us (1 Tim 4:16).

This takes away the unique role ascribed by the Latin Church to Mary's exclusive co-redemptive role.

The word pray also doesn't always mean "taking to God." That is somewhat of a Protestant innovation. The word used to mean "ask." It could be anyone. You can even say "pray tell" and no one thbinks you are praying to God. The same way the word kyrios was used: a title that applies to humans as well as to God.

The prayer in the Orthodox Church I am familiar with is the one that says "Though the prayers of the Theotokos, O Savior, save us." [Feast of Transfiguration of Our Lord God Jesus Christ, August 6th] That makes sense to me. Theotokos save us doesn't.

Only God saves. It is his prerogative. Excluding Christ, no human is divine, period.

22 posted on 09/04/2008 10:01:23 PM PDT by kosta50 (Eastern Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: guitarplayer1953

The woman in Genesis is promised that her seed will crush the serpent. That is Mary.

The rest of your questions I don’t understand, will you rephrase?


23 posted on 09/04/2008 11:43:56 PM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: kosta50; Kolokotronis
But the Church does not teach a unique co-redemptive role. Mark Miravalle likewise speaks of us all being participants in the redemptive work of Christ. Of course, Mary is the only one who gave birth to Him, and of course only Christ is divine.

A Google on "Theotokos, Save Us" yields dozens of entries.

Some modern Orthodox Christians don't like the words "Most Holy Theotokos, Save Us." They would prefer the words "intercede for us," reminding us that the exclamation "Save Us" is confusing to non-Orthodox. The veneration of Mary is not for the non-Orthodox. Once people have been fully converted to Christ, the love of the Panagia follows naturally.

Most Holy Theotokos, Save Us


24 posted on 09/04/2008 11:50:55 PM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: annalex

That was written rather hastily. Yes the woman in Gen is Mary but the comment from Jesus at the marriage about using the word woman did not refer back to the Gen woman.


25 posted on 09/05/2008 1:55:59 AM PDT by guitarplayer1953 (Psalm 83:1-8 is on the horizon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: guitarplayer1953

This is a caucus thread. Are you Catholic/Orthodox?


26 posted on 09/05/2008 3:44:51 AM PDT by Judith Anne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: annalex; kosta50

“Some modern Orthodox Christians don’t like the words “Most Holy Theotokos, Save Us.” They would prefer the words “intercede for us,” reminding us that the exclamation “Save Us” is confusing to non-Orthodox. The veneration of Mary is not for the non-Orthodox. Once people have been fully converted to Christ, the love of the Panagia follows naturally.”

Yup.


27 posted on 09/05/2008 4:52:39 AM PDT by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: guitarplayer1953
did not refer back to the Gen woman.

Right, -- we both interpret. You read "woman" and think "condescension", and I read "woman" and think "propoevangelion". Now, who reads scripture and who injects his modern outlook?

Note that if Mary "meddled" then she succeeded in her "meddling" as Christ did start His ministry of miracles and conversion at Cana. She also had a strange way of "meddling" by saying "they have no wine" and "do what He tells you". The notion that Jesus was irritated at His mother doesn't fit the context, let alone anything else.

28 posted on 09/05/2008 8:00:53 AM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Judith Anne; guitarplayer1953

I invited all to come with questions, see #2. The caucus designation permits that. My ping list is for non-Catholics, and is unlikely to have any Orthodox.

You know me: I’d have it open if the subject were not the person of the Blessed Mother.


29 posted on 09/05/2008 8:05:23 AM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Here in Georgia (USofA), Conyers, between 1990 and 1998, an apparition of Mary was allegedly seen by the owner of the property there. Coming from an Assemblies of God background, and knowing how easy it is for people to blindly believe without "VETTING" I didn't go visit. A friend did and brought back a photo. In the photo there is a mist in a leafless tree (it was winterish) that greatly resembled a human female form dressed in a robe with her hands down to her side. The mist ONLY showed in the photo and did not show when looked at by my friend. She said she "felt this stronge urge to photograph that one tree," so she did. And SHE was amazed at the photo.

For the Church to approve an apparition is a long process and someone who tries to make money (for parking, food and drink, etc) from an alleged apparition, is a red flag for me. Some people did look at the sun in Conyers and see the sun dance. I am not one for staring at the sun, either, though I do encourage looking at the Son on the Cross.

I prefer the Teresa of Avila way . . . Interior Castles . . . myself. And no publicity. If you're supposed to publicize, God will take care of it and someone else will be given that task. True saints are humble.

Now I shall read the article.

30 posted on 09/05/2008 9:40:55 AM PDT by HighlyOpinionated (The Number of the Beast:"six hundred threescore six." Barack Hussein Obama can translate:"Lucifer.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: HighlyOpinionated
I am not one for staring at the sun, either, though I do encourage looking at the Son on the Cross.

:-)

I totally concur with your commentary. The world, unfortunately, is filled with doubting Thomases who seek proof and profiteers who know how to capitalize on their weaknesses.

31 posted on 09/05/2008 9:57:44 AM PDT by NYer ("Ignorance of scripture is ignorance of Christ." - St. Jerome)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: annalex; guitarplayer1953

propoevangelion -> protoevangelion, verse 15 of Gen. 3.


32 posted on 09/05/2008 9:59:18 AM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: guitarplayer1953; annalex
Therefore Mary is but a vessel that carried the man God. It would be the same if you and your wife could not have children and you took an egg from her and a seed from you and placed it in a third person to carry the baby, that person gave birth to you and your wife’s egg and seed. The same is with Mary she was only a vessel.

In Luke 1:31,34, the angel tells Mary that you "will" conceive (using the future tense). Mary responds by saying, "How shall this be?" Mary's response demonstrates that she had taken a vow of lifelong virginity by having no intention to have relations with a man. If Mary did not take such a vow of lifelong virginity, her question would make no sense at all (for we can assume she knew how a child is conceived). She was a consecrated Temple virgin as was an acceptable custom of the times.

33 posted on 09/05/2008 10:07:39 AM PDT by NYer ("Ignorance of scripture is ignorance of Christ." - St. Jerome)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: annalex; Kolokotronis
But the Church does not teach a unique co-redemptive role

Technically, no, but there are may in the Western Church who would like to make it a dogma that Mary is the Co-Redemptrix, and no one else. Certainly the Western Church is not opposed to Catholics holding such beliefs.

Some modern Orthodox Christians don't like the words "Most Holy Theotokos, Save Us."

It's not a matter of "liking" or "disliking," but a matter of theological concern that a human being is being elevated to a demi-god.

"Once people have been fully converted to Christ, the love of the Panagia follows naturally."

Goes without saying.

34 posted on 09/05/2008 10:22:25 AM PDT by kosta50 (Eastern Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: guitarplayer1953; annalex
Therefore Mary is but a vessel that carried the man God.

Or to use the more common phrase, she was His mother.

So, do you send your mother a "Vessel Card" on Mother's Day?

35 posted on 09/05/2008 10:25:14 AM PDT by FormerLib (Sacrificing our land and our blood cannot buy protection from jihad.-Bishop Artemije of Kosovo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: NYer; guitarplayer1953

Guitarplayer was not arguing that point, but yes, good to remind people of this scriptural evidence for her perpetual virginity.


36 posted on 09/05/2008 2:47:16 PM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: kosta50; Kolokotronis
who would like to make it a dogma that Mary is the Co-Redemptrix, and no one else

The "no one else" part I dispute. Here we have a proponent of such dogma and he clearly writes that the co-redemptive status of Mary is an icon of the co-redemptive Church and so all of us. See the passage I highlighted a few posts ago. Now, you would not dispute that there are things about Mary that are unique, but the proposed dogma is designed to underscore rather than deny our own participation in the redemptive work of Christ.

a matter of theological concern that a human being is being elevated to a demi-god

My point with "Theotokos save us" is not that there is no concern like that, but that the Orthodox Church has this devotion, and I am sure millions of the Orthodox repeat the prayer understanding it correctly, not as demi-godship of Mary but as her unique participation in the economy of salvation. But that Orthodox prayer is diagrammatically not that Mary is a co-Redemptrix, but the she is, gasp, Redemptrix. Just like I do not make it my business to presume that the Orthodox praying that are idolaters, please do not make it your business to presume that the Catohlics, who pray less strident a prayer with the "co-" attached, are.

37 posted on 09/05/2008 2:58:55 PM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: NYer
How do you get a vow of life long virginity from this statement?

She like all other has sinned and was a sinner

Romans 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

Isaiah 64:6 But we are all as an unclean [thing], and all our righteousnesses [are] as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.

38 posted on 09/05/2008 3:14:34 PM PDT by guitarplayer1953 (Psalm 83:1-8 is on the horizon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Judith Anne

I am part of the universal church of Jesus.


39 posted on 09/05/2008 3:31:25 PM PDT by guitarplayer1953 (Psalm 83:1-8 is on the horizon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: guitarplayer1953; NYer
What follows from Luke 1:31,34 is simply a determination not to consummate the marriage with Joseph. The entirety of the story is known from tradition, and of course Luke 1 does not spell it out. See The Protoevangelium of James

Romans 3:23 does not apply to Mary; if it did she would be not merely a sinner but also someone who is not seeking God, whose "mouth is is full of cursing and bitterness" and whose "feet are quick to shed blood" (vv 11-15). What you cite are generalized statements of human sinfullness.

40 posted on 09/05/2008 4:12:41 PM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061 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