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.
On this we agree. The rest of it.....not so much.
“Asked and answered,” as the lawyers say . . . over and over and over.
Quix, if you want to throw in your lot with the Nestorians, feel free!
I think your phrasing is more than debatable, but I'm way too tired to go into it.
“On this we agree. The rest of it.....not so much.”
Wonderful that we agree on that. Now, show me in Scripture where Mary participated WITH Jesus in our redemption. Or that she intercedes FOR us in ANY way...
I already showed you several that contradict any indication of her participation. Augustine no doubt got quite a few things right; on this, he’s all wet. And all wrong.
Hoss
Nope. She is he mother of Jesus. You start adding “God” the way Roman Catholics do, and it makes the inference that she is in some way elevated to any other status but fallen sinner saved by her Savior.
Hoss
Not so fast. Show me first where Scripture claims 100% of the revealed Word is contained in Scripture and where Scripture defines which books and works comprise the entorety of Scripture and only then will I agree to restrict the discussion to a "show me in Scripture" precondition.
Isn’t Jesus God?
Isn’t Mary His mother?
Omit adding "God" and it makes the inference that Jesus Christ was NOT God. Was He? or wasn't He? That's why I said, the phrase "Mother of God" says more about Jesus Christ than it does about Mary.
Of COURSE Mary needed a Savior. Jesus Christ, her son, was her Savior. Christ said, "Before Abraham was, I AM." He saved her before she bore Him. God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit are from all eternity, God is the Author of time, not the slave of time. Time obeys God, not vice versa.
Omitting God makes Jesus less God? Everyone’s been arguing that it’s a known fact! That is just silly!!!!
“That’s why I said, the phrase “Mother of God” says more about Jesus Christ than it does about Mary.”
Let’s look at it. “Mother of God.” Where is Christ in there? Who is the subject? Mother OF God. Mary. Sheesh.
Sorry, but that fails also.
Hoss
Jesus is God Incarnate. God has no mother. He is eternal. By saying “Mother of God” the implication is that Mary is something she’s not.
Hoss
Oh yes so fast. Do you not believe the Bible to be God’s inspired word? Are you that disingenuous? Or is it that there IS no reference, no scriptural authority that justifies these ludicrous claims?
We get what we know from Scripture. Only the Roman Catholic Church dreams up making things up from whole cloth and calling it Tradition. Sorry — but scripture is the common denominator between us: if you’re telling me that scripture isn’t authoritative, then there are more problems than this debate that need to be cleared up.
Hoss
2. My convictions have always been that Christ, in His earthly trek, was fully God and fully man. Your accusation--however par-for-the-course off the wall--is brazenly wrong, false, erroneous, untrue.
3. Regardless of Christ merging His humanness and God-ness into one form on earth . . . it remains true that Mary could only offer her humanness. She did NOT carry and did NOT birth from her essence His God-ness.
4. Mary was a blessed Courier.
5. Mary was not, per se, legally, existentially, factually, actively sinless. She was obviously typically too much of a "Jewish Mother," to be sinless.
6. Mary had other blood children as Scripture makes plainly clear. Weasel worded rationalizations otherwise are:
--not honest to the Biblical facts,
--not scholarly,
--not historical,
--not accurate,
--not Biblical,
--not honorable,
--not logical,
--not culturally congruent with the historical record,
--not Christian--
REGARDLESS of the mental gymnastics and contortions designed to pretend and fantasize otherwise.
5. It is not plausible that one can build even a healthy, much less factual, Biblical dogma on such brazen, idolatrous, blasphemous falsehoods, deceptions, fantasies from hell. Leading folks down the yellow brick road of deception with such horrors cannot produce Biblically honorable prized fruit.
6. Poisonous foundations, poisonous trees yield poisonous fruit. What an insult to the authentic Mary for the Vatican AIWSOTARM to abuse her name that way!
RC's will not be answering, per se, to Proddys regarding such poisonous fantasies and fruit. They will be answering to God. Mary herself may provide testimony for the Prosecution.
Choosing to not understand or to disbelieve the validity and factual veracity of the following words does NOT make them false:
Y’all are bright enough to know that
MOTHER OF GOD
carrys a long list of implications with it.
THAT’S THE ONLY LOGICAL REASON I CAN SEE THAT JUSTIFIES WHY Y’ALL DO IT! Y’ALL SEEM TO RELISH THOSE IMPLICATIONS AND THE CONTRARINESS THEY STAND FOR VIS A VIS THE REST OF CHRISTENDOM.
Y’ALL SEEM TO RELISH THE FACT THAT ALL AND SUNDRY GET INJECTED WITH SUCH IMPLICATIONS EVERY TIME THEY HEAR OR READ THAT MARY IS THE PURPORTED MOTHER OF GOD.
Y’ALL SEEM TO RELISH THE FACT THAT EVERY MENTION OF THAT ELEVATES MARY TO HER PURPORTED “HYPOSTATIC UNION WITH THE TRINITY.”
Y’ALL SCARF UP ON THAT BIG TIME AND !!!!DEMAND!!!! THAT THE REST OF THE WORLD JOIN IN SUCH BLASPHEMOUS IDOLTRY.
Oh, SURE, when pinned down, y’all quickly retreat into the farcical noise about how it’s techincally true because Jesus is God etc. etc. yada yada yada.
When actually, that has nothing to do with it. Y’all know full well what MOTHER OF GOD IMPLIES and you seem to love forcing it down the world’s throat in contrary rebellion against Scripture vis a vis not elevating mortals to God-like status.
How is Jesus separate from God? How was God split into man/God so that Mary could bear the “man” part, and the “God” part would just “happen”?
Here's a hint. What is a "failed Catholic"? You, know, the label that gets slapped on every former Catholic who leaves. Someone who was a Protestant who leaves to become Catholic, can be just as easily called a "failed Protestant".
If you are correct you should have no problem whatsoever showing me where Scripture claims 100% of the revealed Word is contained in Scripture and where Scripture defines which books and works comprise the entirety of Scripture.
Where else would we get the revealed Word of God? Why not just show me in Scripture the passage(s) that support your position? Why try to shift the argument? Can you not find one passage from the Bible that shows where Mary would have been granted these lofty offices that the Roman Catholic Church claims she has? Since the Roman Catholic Church (and several folks here) claim that without the RCC we would have no Bible, I would think you would consider it at least authoritative in matters like this!!!
One passage? One?
Hoss
I also believe what the Bible (God’s Word) says about Jesus (The Word) being present with God in the beginning — John 1:1. Jesus, The Word made flesh, was born of Mary — she is his mother as she bore him in the flesh. But God the Son was, is, and will ever be, eternal; without beginning or end.
AMEN!
THAT is Christianity. Anything else is something less. Something ersatz. Something to be avoided.
I am loving your spunk, Hoss!!! :o)
The end result - the salvation of God's people - would still be the same.
Roman Catholics' view of life is clouded by their untoward veneration of Jesus' mother. Christ goes so far as to tell us not to look to His mother as our family, but to His followers - those who believe in His name.
Mary is simply one of those most fortunate of human beings, a sinner saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ ALONE.
If venerating and praying to Mary were important or necessary, Christ would have told us so in the Bible. The apostles would have written about it.
None did.
Instead, fallen men add insult to injury as centuries pass and Christ fades as the goddess grows to celestial heights - "Queen of the Universe."
God forbid.
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.