All you have to do is look at the RC's with their goddess worship of Mary and you see why he objected to the term.
Posted on 05/31/2011 11:53:33 AM PDT by marshmallow
The Protoevangelium of James
“And behold, an angel of the Lord stood by [St. Anne], saying, ‘Anne! Anne! The Lord has heard your prayer, and you shall conceive and shall bring forth, and your seed shall be spoken of in all the world.’ And Anne said, ‘As the Lord my God lives, if I beget either male or female, I will bring it as a gift to the Lord my God, and it shall minister to him in the holy things all the days of its life.’ . . . And [from the time she was three] Mary was in the temple of the Lord as if she were a dove that dwelt there” (Protoevangelium of James 4, 7 [A.D. 120]).
“And when she was twelve years old there was held a council of priests, saying, ‘Behold, Mary has reached the age of twelve years in the temple of the Lord. What then shall we do with her, lest perchance she defile the sanctuary of the Lord?’ And they said to the high priest, ‘You stand by the altar of the Lord; go in and pray concerning her, and whatever the Lord shall manifest to you, that also will we do.’ . . . [A]nd he prayed concerning her, and behold, an angel of the Lord stood by him saying, ‘Zechariah! Zechariah! Go out and assemble the widowers of the people and let them bring each his rod, and to whomsoever the Lord shall show a sign, his wife shall she be. . . . And Joseph [was chosen]. . . . And the priest said to Joseph, ‘You have been chosen by lot to take into your keeping the Virgin of the Lord.’ But Joseph refused, saying, ‘I have children, and I am an old man, and she is a young girl’” (ibid., 8–9).
“And Annas the scribe came to him [Joseph] . . . and saw that Mary was with child. And he ran away to the priest and said to him, ‘Joseph, whom you did vouch for, has committed a grievous crime.’ And the priest said, ‘How so?’ And he said, ‘He has defiled the virgin whom he received out of the temple of the Lord and has married her by stealth’” (ibid., 15).
“And the priest said, ‘Mary, why have you done this? And why have you brought your soul low and forgotten the Lord your God?’ . . . And she wept bitterly saying, ‘As the Lord my God lives, I am pure before him, and know not man’” (ibid.).
Origen
“The Book [the Protoevangelium] of James [records] that the brethren of Jesus were sons of Joseph by a former wife, whom he married before Mary. Now those who say so wish to preserve the honor of Mary in virginity to the end, so that body of hers which was appointed to minister to the Word . . . might not know intercourse with a man after the Holy Spirit came into her and the power from on high overshadowed her. And I think it in harmony with reason that Jesus was the firstfruit among men of the purity which consists in [perpetual] chastity, and Mary was among women. For it were not pious to ascribe to any other than to her the firstfruit of virginity” (Commentary on Matthew 2:17 [A.D. 248]).
Hilary of Poitiers
“If they [the brethren of the Lord] had been Mary’s sons and not those taken from Joseph’s former marriage, she would never have been given over in the moment of the passion [crucifixion] to the apostle John as his mother, the Lord saying to each, ‘Woman, behold your son,’ and to John, ‘Behold your mother’ [John 19:26–27), as he bequeathed filial love to a disciple as a consolation to the one desolate" (Commentary on Matthew 1:4 [A.D. 354]).
Athanasius
“Let those, therefore, who deny that the Son is by nature from the Father and proper to his essence deny also that he took true human flesh from the ever-virgin Mary” (Discourses Against the Arians 2:70 [A.D. 360]).
Epiphanius of Salamis
“We believe in one God, the Father almighty, maker of all things, both visible and invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God . . . who for us men and for our salvation came down and took flesh, that is, was born perfectly of the holy ever-virgin Mary by the Holy Spirit” (The Man Well-Anchored 120 [A.D. 374]).
“And to holy Mary, [the title] ‘Virgin’ is invariably added, for that holy woman remains undefiled” (Medicine Chest Against All Heresies 78:6 [A.D. 375]).
Jerome
“[Helvidius] produces Tertullian as a witness [to his view] and quotes Victorinus, bishop of Petavium. Of Tertullian, I say no more than that he did not belong to the Church. But as regards Victorinus, I assert what has already been proven from the gospel—that he [Victorinus] spoke of the brethren of the Lord not as being sons of Mary but brethren in the sense I have explained, that is to say, brethren in point of kinship, not by nature. [By discussing such things we] are . . . following the tiny streams of opinion. Might I not array against you the whole series of ancient writers? Ignatius, Polycarp, Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, and many other apostolic and eloquent men, who against [the heretics] Ebion, Theodotus of Byzantium, and Valentinus, held these same views and wrote volumes replete with wisdom. If you had ever read what they wrote, you would be a wiser man” (Against Helvidius: The Perpetual Virginity of Mary 19 [A.D. 383]).
“We believe that God was born of a virgin, because we read it. We do not believe that Mary was married after she brought forth her Son, because we do not read it. . . . You [Helvidius] say that Mary did not remain a virgin. As for myself, I claim that Joseph himself was a virgin, through Mary, so that a virgin Son might be born of a virginal wedlock” (ibid., 21).
Didymus the Blind
“It helps us to understand the terms ‘first-born’ and ‘only-begotten’ when the Evangelist tells that Mary remained a virgin ‘until she brought forth her first-born son’ [Matt. 1:25]; for neither did Mary, who is to be honored and praised above all others, marry anyone else, nor did she ever become the Mother of anyone else, but even after childbirth she remained always and forever an immaculate virgin” (The Trinity 3:4 [A.D. 386]).
Ambrose of Milan
“Imitate her [Mary], holy mothers, who in her only dearly beloved Son set forth so great an example of material virtue; for neither have you sweeter children [than Jesus], nor did the Virgin seek the consolation of being able to bear another son” (Letters 63:111 [A.D. 388]).
Pope Siricius I
“You had good reason to be horrified at the thought that another birth might issue from the same virginal womb from which Christ was born according to the flesh. For the Lord Jesus would never have chosen to be born of a virgin if he had ever judged that she would be so incontinent as to contaminate with the seed of human intercourse the birthplace of the Lord’s body, that court of the eternal king” (Letter to Bishop Anysius [A.D. 392]).
Augustine
“In being born of a Virgin who chose to remain a Virgin even before she knew who was to be born of her, Christ wanted to approve virginity rather than to impose it. And he wanted virginity to be of free choice even in that woman in whom he took upon himself the form of a slave” (Holy Virginity 4:4 [A.D. 401]).
“It was not the visible sun, but its invisible Creator who consecrated this day for us, when the Virgin Mother, fertile of womb and integral in her virginity, brought him forth, made visible for us, by whom, when he was invisible, she too was created. A Virgin conceiving, a Virgin bearing, a Virgin pregnant, a Virgin bringing forth, a Virgin perpetual. Why do you wonder at this, O man?” (Sermons 186:1 [A.D. 411]).
“Heretics called Antidicomarites are those who contradict the perpetual virginity of Mary and affirm that after Christ was born she was joined as one with her husband” (Heresies 56 [A.D. 428]).
Leporius
“We confess, therefore, that our Lord and God, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, born of the Father before the ages, and in times most recent, made man of the Holy Spirit and the ever-virgin Mary” (Document of Amendment 3 [A.D. 426]).
Cyril of Alexandria
“[T]he Word himself, coming into the Blessed Virgin herself, assumed for himself his own temple from the substance of the Virgin and came forth from her a man in all that could be externally discerned, while interiorly he was true God. Therefore he kept his Mother a virgin even after her childbearing” (Against Those Who Do Not Wish to Confess That the Holy Virgin is the Mother of God 4 [A.D. 430]).
Pope Leo I
“His [Christ’s] origin is different, but his [human] nature is the same. Human usage and custom were lacking, but by divine power a Virgin conceived, a Virgin bore, and Virgin she remained” (Sermons 22:2 [A.D. 450]).
That's what you say but that's not the way I see Nestorius as coming across...I don't see where he denied Jesus as the 2nd person of the Trinity...
You wrote:
“Hello vladimir998...I love your passion.”
I have not shown any. I am simply dealing with logic.
“This is a Catholic post and you are convinced the Catholics are the true church and others have strayed.”
No. You yourself have essentially confirmed that you yourself believe that the Catholic Church is THE Christian Church. I agree with that assessment. I am just wondering why your logic stops there. If there is logic, there should be follow through. Whether or not someone strayed is essentially immaterial to the main issue.
“I have no quarrel with your heart felt convictions on that.”
I haven’t expressed any heart felt convictions. Again, I am just going by logic and your own statements here.
“The root meaning for “church” is a called out assembly. As for the Christ-made church, she is composed of those Christ has called out to Himself - His body. And believers have affliliated themselves as Catholics (Greek, Roman), Lutherans, Baptists, Methodist, ... and even Presbyterians.”
No. I am not talking about any “church”. I am talking about THE Church. Christ made one. It is not diffused in competing recent sects established by men. The idea you are putting forward is not only not scriptural, but was never heard of until the Protestant Revolution. The Lutheran idea of the “invisible church” was necessary because of Martin Luther’s other heretical ideas. It has no real basis in orthodox theology, or history or scripture. It’s a man-made idea.
“In the Old Testament, God’s people were saved by faith - looking forward to Christ. (Jesus said Abraham saw His day and was glad.) In the first century to the twenty-first, we look back to Christ and are saved by faith in him.”
Faith alone? And where did Jesus say it was only faith that was necessary for salvation? Did he not say that baptism also is part of salvation? Presbyterianism was invented by John Knox. It was not sent by Christ. It, and its doctrines, never existed until the 16th century.
“Our doctrine is indeed based on Christ and the Apostles.”
Not if your doctrine is Protestant. There were no Protestants until after 1517. Protestant doctrines did not exist until the 16th century too. Thus, it is logically impossible that your doctrines are based on Christ or the Apostles if they differ from the Church that came from Christ.
“And as one who takes authority from Holy Scriptures, we all can thank the Catholics for putting it all together for us.”
And that makes no sense. Logically, if you trust the Catholic CHurch as the guardian who assembled scripture why would you not trust its interpretation of scripture? If you can’t trust its interpretation, then how can you trust its canon? Some Protestants, pursuing a more dangerous, but more logical stance than yours, say that the canon is a fallible collection of infallible books. The end result is the same: based on what do you trust it?
If scripture is your authority, then please show me the verse that says the Gospel of Matthew is inspired. Come to think of it, show me the verse that says Matthew wrote a gospel. Can you do that?
“If we all were perfect, we wouldn’t be so divided and quarrel like we do.”
Is Christ perfect? I bet you agree He is. So, would a perfect God leave it up to imperfect man to produce a unified Church? Are we all just quarrelling or is it that someone has truth and others do not? We cannot all be equalling wrong - not if we believe Christ is Who He said He is. Again, logic.
“But in Heaven ... we all with agree and be with Jesus forever.”
We will not all be in heaven. Sad, but true.
* Is God’s Word The Final Authority? *
Yes.
You are making this so difficult and losing Jesus in the Church. Our eyes need to be on Him.
John 3:16
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
whosoever will - you, me, (name here)
Eternal Life - we cannot lose it if we believe on Him. If we could, it would not be eternal life, but something else.
It is so simple that a child can understand it.
It's not a denigration of Mary that you're hearing from me, but the idolatrous elevation that you ascribe to her that is disrespectful.This link explains the Catholic viewpoint better than I ever could: Link.
I believe Nestorious the Bishop of Constantinople questioned the divinity of the infant Jesus. He did not deny His divinity though. Part of this controversy was in response to the Arians who were arguing that because the Son was "begotten" He had a beginning, but God is without beginning.
Nestorius was right though in his objection to the term "theotokos" because it leads to the implication Mary was a goddess. All you have to do is look at the RC's with their goddess worship of Mary and you see why he objected to the term.
FWIW, I don't think you will have any kind of a fruitful discussion with the Maryolators. It seems to be a constant with them to ascribe all the beliefs of a controversial person to those that disagree. In this case Nestorius.
I agree with Nestorius about the term "God bearer" but not about the divinity of Jesus as an infant.
All you have to do is look at the RC's with their goddess worship of Mary and you see why he objected to the term.
Oh, please! What is anyone to make of this Marian Prayer?:
"O Mary, Virgin most powerful and Mother of mercy, Queen of Heaven and Refuge of sinners, we consecrate ourselves to thine Immaculate Heart.We consecrate to thee our very being and our whole life; all that we have, all that we love, all that we are. To thee we give our bodies, our hearts and our souls; to thee we give our homes, our families, our country."
Pure blasphemy.
My soul magnifies the Lord,
And my spirit rejoices in God my Savior.
For He has regarded the low estate of His handmaiden,
For behold, henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.
For He who is mighty has done great things for me, and holy is His name. And His mercy is on those who fear Him from generation to generation.
He has shown strength with His arm:
He has scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts.
He has put down the mighty from their thrones,
and exalted those of low degree.
He has filled the hungry with good things;
and the rich He has sent empty away.
He has helped His servant Israel, in remembrance of His mercy;
As He spoke to our fathers, to Abraham and to His posterity forever.
Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit.
As it was in the beginning, is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen
Magníficat ánima mea Dóminum,
et exsultávit spíritus meus
in Deo salvatóre meo,
quia respéxit humilitátem
ancíllæ suæ.
Ecce enim ex hoc beátam
me dicent omnes generatiónes,
quia fecit mihi magna,
qui potens est,
et sanctum nomen eius,
et misericórdia eius in progénies
et progénies timéntibus eum.
Fecit poténtiam in bráchio suo,
dispérsit supérbos mente cordis sui;
depósuit poténtes de sede
et exaltávit húmiles.
Esuriéntes implévit bonis
et dívites dimísit inánes.
Suscépit Ísrael púerum suum,
recordátus misericórdiæ,
sicut locútus est ad patres nostros,
Ábraham et sémini eius in sæcula.
Glória Patri et Fílio
et Spirítui Sancto.
Sicut erat in princípio,
et nunc et semper,
et in sæcula sæculórum.
Amen.
She became the Mother of God, in which work so many and such great good things are bestowed on her as pass man’s understanding. For on this there follows all honor, all blessedness, and her unique place in the whole of mankind, among which she has no equal, namely, that she had a child by the Father in heaven, and such a Child . . . Hence men have crowded all her glory into a single word, calling her the Mother of God . . . None can say of her nor announce to her greater things, even though he had as many tongues as the earth possesses flowers and blades of grass: the sky, stars; and the sea, grains of sand. It needs to be pondered in the heart what it means to be the Mother of God.
(Commentary on the Magnificat, 1521; in Luther’s Works, Pelikan et al, vol. 21, 326)
Actually, no. This elevation comes directly from the Roman Catholic Church as shown in this entry from the RCC Catechism:
'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 fulfilment 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"'
Emphasis mine. So...first, where in scripture does it say that Mary was "taken up to heaven"?
Where in scripture does it say that Mary intercedes for anyone? Please see the following from 1 Timothy 2:5-6:
"5For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave himself as a ransom for all, which is the testimony given at the proper time."
There are how many mediators? Two? Christ and Mary? NO!!! Only Christ -- ONLY Christ. Yet, the Roman Catholic Catechism teaches Mary as an intercessor and a "Mediatrix" -- since scripture, God-breathed, states plainly that Christ is the only mediator, WHY does the RCC ELEVATE MARY to a co-equal status with God? Is that not a perfect example of idolatry? I believe so.
[...} and she leads (with tenderness) souls straight to her Son ....
Uhhhh.....NO. She does nothing of the sort. Because if she did, God would be made a liar -- and God is NOT A LIAR as proven in John 6:44 where Christ says:
"44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day."
The only way we come to Christ is by being drawn by God the Father. No one else. Not Mary. But, again, the Church teaches this falsehood.
So, it seems to me that the idolatrous elevation doesn't come from anyone or anything but the Roman Catholic Church.
Hoss "
Well put, Hoss. I just posted a part of one of but many Marian Prayers used in the RCC. The idolatry is impossible to deny.
So the prayer I posted in #789 is incorrect and not in conformance with Catholic teaching?
You wrote:
“You are making this so difficult and losing Jesus in the Church.”
1) Everything I have said is factually correct and logic. Thus, it is incredibly unlikely that I am making anything “so difficult”.
2) I have questions that you apparently cannot answer. The difficulty seems to be all yours.
3) No one can lose Jesus in the Church since the Church is His Bride. The two are inseparable.
“Our eyes need to be on Him.”
Exactly. And when you truly look at Him there is no way you cannot see His Bride - unless you choose to. Remember, Christ sent the Church.
“John 3:16
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.”
And then Jesus sent the Church just as the Father sent Him (John 20:19-23).
“whosoever will - you, me, (name here)”
You forget that Jesus was speaking to those in the Church and who would be brought into the Church. There’s no reason to think His promise extended directly to sectarians. Also, it must be remembered that Jesus spoke elsewhere of other things He expected - such as obedience to His commandments (John 14:15, 21; 15:10).
“Eternal Life - we cannot lose it if we believe on Him.”
Clearly He believes more than mere belief or even faith is involved.
“If we could, it would not be eternal life, but something else.”
But people do lose out on eternal life - by rejecting Jesus, denying Him. We must cling absolutely to Christ. And that clinging must include clinging to His Bride for He gave His Bride to us. As Sacred Scripture tells us, the Church is the ark of salvation (1 Peter 3:19-21).
“It is so simple that a child can understand it.”
Since you cannot answer my simple questions, I don’t have any reason to believe you know what you’re talking about. And if you really believe it is “so simple that a child can understand it” then you must ask why every child - and adult, and saint - failed to understand it as you present it until the 16th century while still insisting what you do about the Catholic Church. Your view is inconsistent and illogical. What I am presenting is entirely logical and consistent. Logic and consistency do not make things more difficult. They make things more plain and understandable while actually discussing verse and theological points in their fuller context rather than falsely isolating quotes.
To understand John 3:16 you have to read and understand John 3:5 - “Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.””
Will you even attempt to answer the questions I asked?
I DO know that even Catholics are ornery and cantankerous and think pretty much what they want.
But as far as I know from what I have read and the discussions I have, what the Magisterium teaches is what I said.
Zzzzz. Another wedding tomorrow and I'm in the choir for that one as well.
Wise response.
Some folks seem to have a knack for offering microscopic amounts of rational discourse—even when they try—which may be rare.
Bias—blind bias—seems to be rife in the Vatican Cult.
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.