Veneration of Mary in Luke 11:27-28

August 15, 2013 | Annalex

[annalex]

Once a woman in the crowd surrounding Christ and His disciples cries out to Him:

Blessed is the womb that bore thee, and the paps that gave thee suck. (Luke 11:27)

What is it? We have, clearly, an act of venerating Mary. Note that the Blessed Virgin is venerated properly: not on her own but as the mother of Christ. Yet the reason for venerating is indeed concerning: it is her physiological and physiologically unique relationship with Jesus that is emphasized. That is not yet paganism with its crude theories of gods giving birth to other gods, but it is lacking proper focus and Jesus corrects it:

Yea rather, blessed are they who hear the word of God, and keep it. (Luke 11:28)

The Virgin with the Child on her knees and a prophet pointing at the star. Catacomb of Priscilla, late 2nd c. Source

Note that there is no condemnation here, not even asking the woman to stop; the "yea rather" (μενουνγε) is not a negation. It is used other times in the New Testament without a hint of negation. In Philippians 3:8 "αλλα μενουνγε και ηγουμαι παντα ζημιαν ειναι", "Furthermore I count all things to be but loss" (Textus Receptus 1550/1894, Byzantine/Majority Text 2000 has here "αλλα μεν ουν και ηγουμαι…" which is the same word morphology spelled separately and colliding affirmative "γε" with the following "και"). Romans 9:20 "μενουνγε ω ανθρωπε συ τις ει ο ανταποκρινομενος τω θεω" and Romans 10:18 "μενουνγε εις πασαν την γην εξηλθεν ο φθογγος αυτων" use the word reinforcing the subsequent statement. Some translations obscure this linguistic fact: in King James for example, the same word is rendered correctly, "yea rather" in Luke 11:28, wholly incongruously, "nay but" in Romans 9:20, but in Romans 10:18 the translation is again correct, "Yes verily". NRSV has both correct and elegant translations for all three. (See The Holy Mother and the "ΜΕΝΟΥΝΓΕ")

Having gotten past this linguistic hurdle, we can understand clearly what this passage, Luke 11:27-28, does: it establishes veneration of saints based not on their blood relation to Christ but on their obedience to God. It is in that sense that we venerate Our Lady: given that Christ is the Word of God personified, she heard and kept both Him in person as her Child and His teaching, figuratively. In Mary the essence of sainthood is seen in the flesh as well as in the mind. We could say that by the late second century at the latest, when we find evidence of the veneration of both the prophets and the Mother of God in the catacombs, the two reasons to venerate a saint: his martyrdom as in the case of Polycarp, or his obedience to the Word, as in Mary, -- unite into a single practice.

[metmom]

But as Cardinal Newman said, "to be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant."

My faith is not based on history. It's based on the Jesus, through the word of God.

Romans 10:17 So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.

John 8:31-32 So Jesus said to the Jews who had believed him, “If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

John 17:17 Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth.

The words of Jesus are spiritual food for us. Being familiar with it, memorizing it and meditating on it brings great benefit to the believer.

Psalm 1:1-3 Blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel of the wicked, nor stands in the way of sinners, nor sits in the seat of scoffers; but his delight is in the law of the Lord, and on his law he meditates day and night.

He is like a tree planted by streams of water that yields its fruit in its season, and its leaf does not wither. In all that he does, he prospers.

Psalm 119:9-16 How can a young man keep his way pure?
By guarding it according to your word.
With my whole heart I seek you; let me not wander from your commandments!
I have stored up your word in my heart, that I might not sin against you.
Blessed are you, O Lord; teach me your statutes!
With my lips I declare all the rules of your mouth.
In the way of your testimonies I delight as much as in all riches.
I will meditate on your precepts and fix my eyes on your ways.
I will delight in your statutes; I will not forget your word.

Psalm 19:7-11 The law of the Lord is perfect, reviving the soul;
the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple;
the precepts of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart; the commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes;
the fear of the Lord is clean, enduring forever; the rules of the Lord are true, and righteous altogether.
More to be desired are they than gold, even much fine gold; sweeter also than honey and drippings of the honeycomb.
Moreover, by them is your servant warned; in keeping them there is great reward.

Psalm 119:105 Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path.

King David, the man after God's own heart, delighted in knowing the word of God.

Psalm 119 as a whole is praise to God for His word.

Do not fall for the deception that God's word is anything less that God speaking to us. It is God breathed, Holy Spirit inspired. Satan loves nothing more than to question it and to get people to question it. The very first recorded words of him in the Bible were *Did God really say...?*

God said and it is established FOREVER in heaven.

Psalm 119:89 Forever, O Lord, your word is firmly fixed in the heavens.

Not one jot or tittle of the Law will pass away.

Matthew 5:18 For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.

Jeremiah 15:16 Your words were found, and I ate them, and your words became to me a joy and the delight of my heart, for I am called by your name, O Lord, God of hosts.

[CynicalBear]

>> But what if the Catholic Church (the "Roman" prefix is a Reformation-era pejorative) is the Church that Christ founded?<

It is not the church that Christ founded. It’s simply a perverted usurpation of not only the word “church” but the idea of the body of believers Christ began. No where in scripture are we taught about an overriding governing authority over all believers other than Christ. All throughout scripture each local assembly is an autonomous group of believers. The RCC is simply an amalgamation of paganism and Christianity which God clearly condemned in scripture.

[CynicalBear]

>>The Bible Itself cannot answer the question as to whether the Catholic Church is the Church that Christ founded.<<

Of course it can. One simply needs to see the things the RCC has added to scripture and the things the RCC has incorporated from the worship of other gods. It’s clear that the RCC is not what Christ or the apostles were setting up.

[CynicalBear]

>>Is this Church still in existence?<<

Of course the body of Christ that Jesus began is still in existence. What it is not is an earthly organizational institution such as the RCC. It consists of all true believers who follow the precepts set up by Him without addition of rituals, vestments, and other trappings of those who worshiped other gods.

[CynicalBear]

>>But how do you know that Scripture contains what Christ and the Apostles taught,<<

Faith that God is able to preserve His word for us today. The perversions of the RCC which are clearly evident when reading word for word translations from the original scripts are evidence of apostasy on a grand scale.

[CynicalBear]

>>Scripture calls Christ's Church, "the pillar and foundation of truth." (1 Tim 3:15)

That most certainly is NOT the RCC. The upholders of truth are those true believers who Christ adhere to the teachings of Christ and His apostles. They are not those who add to what Christ taught which is clearly what the RCC has done.

[CynicalBear]

>>You could call this, "Sola Old Testament," since Jesus was referring to the Old Testament here. The New Testament was yet to be written.<<

First of all Christ promised the apostles that the Holy Spirit would “bring to their remembrance” all that He taught and did. What they wrote was thus clearly inspired by the Holy Spirit just as the Old Testament was. No other writers were given that promise other than Paul who was chosen by Christ. No writers or teachers of other writings can be considered to be authoritative unless they agree with those writings and conform to them.

Peter believed the writings of Paul to be scripture as he included them with scripture.

2 Peter 3:15b. As also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you, according to the wisdom given him, [16] as in all his letters, speaking concerning these matters, in which some things are hard to understand, which those who are untaught and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do also THE OTHER SCRIPTURES. [17] You then, beloved ones, being forewarned, watch lest you also fall from your own steadfastness, being let away with the delusion of the lawless.

You’re insinuation that the RCC was the organization that decided what was scripture is clearly in error.

Things that can not be considered scripture are writings that contain errors.

Ezekiel 13:9. My hand shall be against the prophets who see falsehood and who divine lies. They shall not be in the council of My people, nor be written among the Scriptures2 of the house of Israel, and they shall not enter into the land of Israel. And you shall know that I am the Master Yahweh.

The RCC has included the apocrypha which clearly contain errors into it’s scripture. Another evidence that they are not the “church” Christ formed.

[CynicalBear]

>> Now about the need to find scriptural references for every religious teaching. It seems to me that you're presuming the necessity of the doctrine of "Scripture alone."<<

So are you basically saying there is no scriptural support for the assumption of Mary?

[CynicalBear]

>>Works show faith because they are the tangible part of faith, not because they mysteriously "follow" it.<<

Do you not realize what you just said there? You just said “works show faith”. Now, who in their right mind wouldn’t think that the faith must have come first? And that is exactly what we have been saying all along!

[CynicalBear]

Oh good grief. Would you please re read your post 973 again? Now you claim you have shown me that my faith is dead? Are you kidding me? Would you please find and show me the post where I said that faith does not lead to good deeds. I swear the double speak from Catholics is astounding.

>> Are you going to convert to the true working faith now?<<

I’m already there thanks. I’m pleading with Catholics to “come out” of the perverse amalgamation of paganism and Christianity that the RCC is just as God did in Revelation 18.

[CynicalBear]

>> Where does the Bible say that no teaching may come from the Apostolic Church apart from the Bible? Words of Christ indicate otherwise:<<

Surely you must be attempting to obfuscate. You can’t possibly expect us to believe that somehow those who came after the apostles would “remember” what Christ said could you? They weren’t there for crying out loud.

Let’s look at that verse 26 again in detail.

John 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

The word used in that text is hypomnēsei which is rightly translated “will bring to remembrance”. [http://biblehub.com/interlinear/john/14-26.htm]

Those who believe the RCC surely should see that the RCC is deceiving it’s followers. They couldn’t possibly “remember” what Christ said and did. And to try to say that Christ taught that the RCC can teach what is not in scripture especially from that text is ludicrous.

>> And this: in Matthew 18:15-20 Christ gives the Christians the rule of faith, and teaches them how to resolve disputes. He says: "hear the Church".<<

Matthew 18:17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

Once again the RCC deceives. The “church” there is referencing the local autonomous “assembly” of believers. Not some overriding central governing authority.

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

No where in scripture are we taught about an overriding governing authority over all believers other than Christ

Do Jesus' words count? I don't know how He could be clearer.

"But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that by the mouth of two or three witnesses every fact may be confirmed. "If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector."

St. Paul calls the church "the pillar and foundation of truth."

[metmom]

Now about the need to find scriptural references for every religious teaching.

And what other measure of KNOWN truth is there?

Truth claims need to be held to some standard. If they cannot be verified by the words of God Himself, then they are of necessity suspect.

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

So are you basically saying there is no scriptural support for the assumption of Mary?

So what?

Is there scriptural support for the idea that every religious teaching must be referenced in the Bible? That's Luther's human tradition, not an Apostolic Tradition.

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

And what other measure of KNOWN truth is there?

Perhaps the truths taught by the Church that Christ founded, "the pillar and foundation of truth," against which the gates of hell would not prevail. The place where Christ commands His followers to settle disputes.

The sources of Christian truths are Written and Oral Tradition, and the Church Magisterium.

If you reject the Church's teaching authority, you are rejecting the Bible, which the Church wrote, preserved and canonized.

King James didn't hand out Bibles at Pentecost.

[CynicalBear]

>> St. Paul calls the church "the pillar and foundation of truth."<<

Not once in scripture is the word assembly which has been erroneously translated “church” referencing some earthly overriding organization such as the RCC purports to be. Every time the word assembly is used it is referring to an autonomous local group of believers. Only Christ is the head of each of those and in Him they are considered the bride of Christ collectively. Even at that, not each individual in those assemblies is considered part of the bride of Christ as we see in Revelation.

The definition of what the “church” is has been just another example of how the RCC has corrupted what Christ and the apostles taught.

[CynicalBear]

>>If they cannot be verified by the words of God Himself, then they are of necessity suspect.<<

And constitutes the teachings of man. How terrifying it will be when they realize that they have been following man instead of Christ.

[Iscool]

Do you not realize what you just said there? You just said “works show faith”. Now, who in their right mind wouldn’t think that the faith must have come first? And that is exactly what we have been saying all along!

In that other thread, their pope says you don't even need faith to be a Christian...

[CynicalBear]

So you basically admit that you trust your salvation to the teachings of man? How on earth can you be assured that after nearly 2000 years the story handed down is the same on told by those who wrote scripture? Bottom line is you can’t. We, on the other hand, can be assured that what the apostles wrote is truth.

[metmom]

Since you yourself admitted in post 969 that "To determine whether the Catholic Church today is Christ's Church, one must examine history. The Bible Itself cannot answer the question as to whether the Catholic Church is the Church that Christ founded."

there is simply no way that anyone can claim that the Catholic church is the pillar and foundation of truth to which Paul was referring.