Because of the Protestant Reformers Beliefs On Mary

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!

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."

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."

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..."

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."

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.

"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.

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."

"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."

"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.

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.

"he proclaims by a definitive act a doctrine pertaining to faith or morals... This infallibility extends as far as the deposit of divine Revelation itself" You see where it says a definitive act? Why is this there? This is there because not everything the Pope says either pertains to faith and morals, and even if so, not everything he says is an infalliable pronouncement. Now, here's another question. Who was the last pope to issue an infalliable pronouncement?

In the spirit of full disclosure, I will say that I am a Southern Baptist by birth and, after some years of testing other denominations, a SoBap now by choice.

Mary was chosen to be the mother of Jesus long before any conception. She should be honored by us since God obviously chose her for a reason. That said, Mary was a human, a sinner, and required a redeemer. That isn't just MY assumption ... read Romans 3:23.

Interestingly, many (not all) Catholic churches in the Philippines (I lived there 7 years) actually teach that the "immaculate conception" also included Mary's own birth. Thus, Mary herself became a semi-deity. I've been in the congregation when a priest actually instructed us to "pray to Mary for..." for some reason or another.

Obviously my experiences are not the norm for Catholic churches but I am more than a little wary of ANY church that teaches praying to anyone but the Trinity.

In the book of Acts, Simon came to the first pope, Peter, wanting to buy the power of the Holy Spirit. How did Peter respond to this sin? Did he suggest that Simon make a confession to him right there? No, Peter told him to repent and confess his sin to God and ask God to forgive him.

Considering I was a Protestant, I find this statement rather hilarious. I was a protestant for close to 20 years.

Many Protestants do regard Luther, Calvin and Zwingli as authoritative.

Those that follow Calvin and Luther to the letter have done so by their own election, and because they personally find agreement with Calvin and Luther ... not because Protestant doctrine sees infallibility in Calvin or Luther.

Doctrinally, I think we’re all probably wrong about something. There are just too many instances of justifiable differences in Biblical interpretation for any one man or group of men to be right about everything. I am a Baptist because I believe the Baptist interpretation is the closest to the right one.

For the big picture ... so long as we’re getting the essentials (which most Christian denominations seem to be), honest doctrinal misintepretation is simply one of many sins for which can be forgiven through Christ.

SnakeDoc

The walls go up for catholics the moment anyone disagrees with their self adulation...and that of their worship of the departed. Hard to give up ingrained practices...especially when the Vatican demands or encourages them.

Protestants don't hate catholics...another lie....they hate the false teachings and twisted use of scripture in order to support what their leadership uses to keep them in bondage and away from the truth and the freedom we have in Christ. Further they hate the occult like practices which are taken from pagan rites and rituals.

"The first one is clearly biblical but the later is not."

Much of Catholic Mariology is derived from Sacred Tradition and rpedates Scripture. The idea that all revealed truth is to be found in "66 books" is not only not in Scripture, it is contradicted by Scripture (1 Corinthians 11:2, 2 Thessalonians 2:15, 2 Thessalonians 3:6, 1 Timothy 3:15, 2 Peter 1:20-21, 2 Peter 3:16).

Sola Scriptura or the notion that all of the Revealed Word is contained in the Torah is a concept unheard of in the Old Testament, where the authority of those who sat on the Chair of Moses (Matthew 23:2-3) existed. For over 400 years, there was no defined canon of "Sacred Scripture" aside from that same Old Testament; there was no "New Testament"; there was only Tradition and non-canonical books and letters. Scripture was defined from the many competing books by the very Tradition and Apostolic Succession denied by Protestants as being non-Biblical.

I'm glad I amused you. I know lots of Protestants that have been so all their lives and some of them don't know anymore about it than you do. I even know some Catholics that don't know , or refuse to know, what Rome is blinding them with, and they have been Catholics all their life.

Do Catholics do any of these things?

Very odd you would even question that they do.

I have a question, are we permitted to make images of God?

I prefer not to take your bait...typical catholic baiting is well known on these threads...your question is one of them. Which by the way you'll find discussed prior on this thread in detail...might be advantageous you refresh.

“Those that follow Calvin and Luther to the letter have done so by their own election, and because they personally find agreement with Calvin and Luther ... not because Protestant doctrine sees infallibility in Calvin or Luther.”

I never said that Protestants believed they were infalliable. I said that they found them authoritative, particularly in their intepretation and application of Scripture. Many have modelled their churches, even if they don’t understand why, after the principles of Luther, Calvin and Zwingli.

Why for example, do you have a cross instead of a crucifix? Or a bare room without adornment? All these questions have their answers in them from Calvin, Luther and Zwingli for the most part.

Even your argument here, that the conscious should stand supreme, is the same.

I was a Mennonite myself, and I am thankful for my time with them. They are good people. I have known a great number of Baptists and they are salt and light. However, my path was not with them. Peace and blessings, sir.

But the Pope is not infallible, especially this one who is wishing for a “United Nations with more teeth” and advocating a one world government, while at the same time being the titular head of his own country.
__________________________________________________________

Agreed on every point, but the rabbit trail.

This Pope’s call for universal charity, even by way of the UN, and his titular heading of his own country, is a side line arguement that begs the point we were on, a sideline path located over there in the weeds, and away from the scriptural foundation for the Seat of Moses, on which he solidly sits, whether we have been informed of the fact or removed from the fact. I too could go on and on, but must suffice to say the mystery in our differences is one I must respect for whatever reason they were permitted to occur.

And a blessed & merry Christmas in return. Thanks for your civility sans the arrogance of runaway bias prevalent among many in and out of the Church.

You’ve made an assertion that they do all of these things, to which I asked a pertinent question.

Are we permitted to make images of God? I’m not trying to bait or lure you in any fashion.

I have seen Catholics, every year, at Good Friday, proceed and kiss the foot of Christ on the cross, to commemorate his death. I have seen Catholics pray the Rosary, to which they ask Mary to pray for them.

Do they believe that Christ and Mary are equal? No. And the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception demonstrates why this is not so. Christ chose Mary, before she was born to be his mother. If Christ chose Mary, than he is God and she is not, Mary is Christ’s creation, not the other way around, even though Christ was born of Mary.

Where have I gotten it wrong? Please explain. I have seen many protestants who regard Calvin, Luther and Zwingli as authoritative.

This does not mean that they are infallliable.

Many Lutheran parishes have crucifixes (depending on where the original members immigrated from), most have stain glass windows with various Biblical and theology scenes. Though with the rising cost of such things, they are rare in many newer churches. We don't have many statues in the altar area, because of the general aversion to relics as worship of such, but that isn't universal either.

My Lutheran parish has more of that stuff than my wife's Catholic one. What is interesting is the latter is by choice. For a while, they only had the processional crucifix, and only one statue in the corner.

If what you say is correct, that the Catholic Church isn’t the ‘one true church’, than Christ did in fact abandon his people for 1500 years until the Protestant Reformation.

There is only one holy Christian church. We cannot see it, but this assembly brings together everyone who has faith in Jesus Christ as Savior.

The true church includes people from many denominations, even Catholic. But it is not exclusive to Catholics.

Calvin and Luther were right about many things, and wrong about some others. Their opinion is noteworthy as the opinion of an educated scholar of Protestant Christian theology (just as the opinion of the Pope/Vatican is noteworthy as that of a Christian scholar). They’re probably more noteworthy to Protestants than the Pope/Vatican simply because we are more likely to find merit in their particular interpretations.

I fully understand that Protestant denominations have independently adopted many Calvinist and Lutheran interpretatations of Scripture ... not simply because Calvin and Luther said them, but because we believe find them Biblically justifiable.

Still ... quoting Luther or Calvin is insufficient justification for any specific doctrine. The sinlessness and/or perpetual virginity of Mary are among the beliefs of Calvin and Luther that I (and many other Protestants) have found unjustifiable.

>> I have known a great number of Baptists and they are salt and light. However, my path was not with them. Peace and blessings, sir.

Thanks. Back at ya.

SnakeDoc

.....”I have seen Catholics.... kiss the foot of Christ on the cross, to commemorate his death. I have seen Catholics pray the Rosary, to which they ask Mary to pray for them.”......

Why would someone have a need to kiss a statue? Especially when Christ is alive and lives within us, readily accessable to us as He is?

As for making requests to Mary to pray for them....Again why go to a departed person...(which btw God has made very clear we are not to attempt contact with)....when we can commune directly with Christ Himself?

While my Mennonite church had just the Cross and the altar in a spare room.

There’s quite a bit of variance in it, isn’t it? My tastes trend more towards the spare than the ornate. My current parish though is very beautiful.

“Why would someone have a need to kiss a statue? Especially when Christ is alive and lives within us, readily accessable to us as He is?”

Which is why I asked the question if we are in fact permitted to make an image of God.

Are we, or are we not? Your issue has nothing to do with Mary, but everything to do with the fact that you believe that it is improper to have an image representing God. Fair enough. However, we *are* in fact permitted to do so.

If Catholics sincerely believed that Mary were the equal of Christ, they would kiss her feet in the same ceremony. They do not. Clearly, saying that Catholics do in fact regard them as equal is incorrect.

“As for making requests to Mary to pray for them. Again why go to a departed person”

God is a God not of the dead but of the Living. Christ himself said so. For if we believe they are alive in Christ, then we have that hope also. If they are dead, then there is no hope and we are living a lie.

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.