Posted on 10/08/2015 8:02:23 AM PDT by Salvation
As a young child I was very close to God. I spoke to Him in a very natural way and He spoke plainly to me. Although I have very few memories of my early childhood, I vividly remember how close I was to God. When early puberty approached, though, I began to slip away, drifting into the rebellious and angry years of my teens. As the flesh came more alive, my spirit submerged.
The culture of the time didn’t help, either. It was the late 1960s and early 1970s and rebelliousness and the flesh were celebrated as “virtues.” Somehow we thought ourselves more mature than our pathetic forebears, who were hopelessly “repressed.” There was the attitude among the young that we had come of age somehow. We collectively deluded ourselves, aided by the messages of rock music and the haze of drug use, that we were somehow “better.”
So it was the winter of my soul. The vivid faith of my childhood gave way to a kind of indifferent agnosticism. Though I never formally left Church (my mother would never had permitted that as long as I lived in under my parents’ roof), I no longer heard God or spoke to Him. I’ve mentioned in previous posts that when I was in high school I joined the youth choir of my parish church. This was not precipitated by a religious passion, but rather by a passion of another kind: there were pretty girls in the choir and I “sought their company,” shall we say. But God has a way of using beauty to draw us to the truth. Week after week, year after year, as we sang those old religious classics a buried faith began to awaken within me.
But what to do? How to pray? I heard that I was supposed to pray. But how? As a child it had been natural to talk with God. But now He seemed distant, aloof, and likely angry with me. And I’ll admit it, prayer seemed a little “goofy” to me, a high school senior still struggling to be “cool” in his own eyes and in the eyes of his friends. Not only that, but prayer was “boring.” It seemed an unfocused, unstructured, and “goofy” thing.
But I knew someone who did pray. My paternal grandmother, “Nana,” was a real prayer warrior. Every day she took out her beads and sat by the window to pray. I had seen my mother pray now and again, but she was more private about it. But Nana, who lived with us off and on in her last years, knew how to pray and you could see it every day.
Rosary Redivivus – In my parish church of the 1970s, the rosary was non-existent. Devotions and adoration were on the outs during that sterile time. Even the Crucifix was gone. But Nana had that “old-time religion” and I learned to appreciate it through her.
Ad Jesum per Mariam – There are some, non-Catholics especially, who think that talking of Mary or focusing on her in any way takes away from Christ. It is as though they consider it a zero-sum game, in which our hearts cannot love both Mary and Jesus. But my own experience was that Mary led me to Christ. I had struggled to know and worship Christ, but somehow a mother’s love felt more natural, safer, and more accessible to me. So I began there, where I could. Simply pole-vaulting right into a mature faith from where I was did not seem possible. So I began, as a little child again, holding my Mother’s hand. And gently, Mother Mary led me to Christ, her son. Through the rosary, that “Gospel on a string,” I became reacquainted with the basic gospel story.
The thing about Marian devotion is that it opens up a whole world. For with this devotion comes an open door into so many of the other traditions and devotions of the Church: Eucharistic adoration, litanies, traditional Marian hymns, lighting candles, modesty, pious demeanor, and so forth. So as Mary led me, she also reconnected me to many things that I only vaguely remembered. The suburban Catholicism of the 1970s had all but cast these things aside, and I had lost them as well. Now in my late teens, I was going up into the Church “attic” and bringing things down. Thus, little by little, Mother Mary was helping me to put things back in place. I remember my own mother being pleased to discover that I had taken some old religious statues, stashed away in a drawer in my room, and placed them out on my dresser once again. I also took down the crazy rock-and-roll posters, one by one, and replaced them with traditional art, including a picture of Mary.
Over time, praying the Rosary and talking to Mary began to feel natural. And, sure enough, little by little, I began to speak with God. It was when I was in the middle of college that I began to sense the call to the priesthood. I had become the choir director by that time and took a new job in a city parish: you guessed it, “St. Mary’s.” There, the sterility of suburban Catholicism had never taken hold. The candles burned brightly at the side altars. The beautiful windows, marble altars, statues, and traditional novenas were all on display in Mother Mary’s parish. The rest is history. Mary cemented the deal between me and her Son, Jesus. I became His priest and now I can’t stop talking about Him! He is my hero, my savior and Lord. And praying again to God has become more natural and more deeply spiritual for me.
It all began one day when I took Mary’s hand and let her lead me to Christ. And hasn’t that always been her role? She, by God’s grace, brought Christ to us, showed Him to us at Bethlehem, presented Him in the Temple, and ushered in His first miracle (even despite His reluctance). She said to the stewards that day at Cana, and to us now, “Do whatever he tells you.” The Gospel of John says, Jesus did this as the beginning of his signs in Cana in Galilee and so revealed his glory, and his disciples began to believe in him (John 2:11). And so Mary’s intercession strengthened the faith of others in her Son. That has always been her role: to take us by the hand and lead us to Christ. Her rosary has been called the “Gospel on a string” because she bids us to reflect on the central mysteries of the Scripture as we pray.
And what do you mean, and not mean, by saying she is the “mother of God”?
Is she eternal? Is she a creature? Was she there with God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, before the world began.
Explain what you mean by “mother of God.”
Mother of God means that she gave birth to Jesus. She is a creature. Created by God. She is why Jesus is both God and man. Because he was man he was able to suffer and die for our sins and to redeem us from original sin.
“Mother of God” is inherently confusing. I know many Catholics do not believe in the “Quadrinity” but it usually takes a few minutes of conversation to figure out who is who.
Stick with “Mother of Christ” or “Mother of the Messiah.” Precisely in what way are these much more clear descriptions to be considered inadequate terminologies?
.
Mother of God was the ancient title of Semeramis, the harlot wife of Nimrod.
It was Constantine’s way of saying “I’m not really a Christian folks, I’m still a devoted worshiper of Mithras.”
.
And your point is?
And the angel being come in, said unto her: Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women. Luke 1:28 DR
Of the major translations, only DR and the Aramaic Bible in Plain English translate κεχαριτωμένη as "full of grace."
The NASB, which is the most literal translation we have in English renders it this way:
And coming in, he said to her, "Greetings, favored one! The Lord is with you."
Why is she the favored one? Gabriel tells her in Luke 1:30-33. She's going to bear a son and His name will be Jesus. He was to be called the Son of the Most High.
Notice also in this passage no special title or accord, other than she has found favor with God for this unique event, is accorded to Mary.
When you read all of Luke 1 in context the meaning becomes clear what is happening to Mary and why it is happening to her.
Below are some commentaries addressing Luke 1:28
Expositor's Greek Testament Luke 1:28. χαῖρε, κεχαριτωμένη: ave plena gratiâ, Vulg[4], on which Farrar (C. G. T.) comments: “not gratiâ plena, but gratiâ cumulata”; much graced or favoured by God.—χαριτόω is Hellenistic, and is found, besides here, only in Ephesians 1:6 in N. T.—ὁ Κύριος μετὰ σοῦ, the Lord (Jehovah) is or be with thee, ἐστί or ἔστω understood; the two renderings come practically to the same thing.
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 28. highly favoured] marg. “graciously accepted” or “much graced.” Literally, having been graced (by God). Ephesians 1:6, “accepted.” Not as in the Vulgate “Gratiâ plena” but “gratiâ cumulata.” “Not a mother of grace, but a daughter.” Bengel.
(28) Highly favoured.—The verb is the same as that which is translated, “hath made us accepted “in Ephesians 1:6; and, on the whole, this, which is expressed in one of the marginal readings, seems the truest. The plena gratiâ of the Vulgate has no warrant in the meaning of the word.
You might want to check that with the Word.
If you go back to 1:32 we see Gabriel telling Mary the name of her son to be will be called the Son of the Most High. This is referencing Jesus....not God.
The Catholic Church teaches no such thing about salvation.
Even if it did, though, I still fail to see how such a doctrine could hurt you.
But do continue to come to these threads, open your heart, and learn the truth about the Catholic Church. I will pray for you.
Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it. (CCC 846)
Amazing how catholics don't know what their church teaches.
Amen and AMEN to your whole post! Bless you.
18 of the 20 mysteries in the Rosary ARE in the Bible. Do you have a problem with that?
Well Personally I disagree with you on this subject. I think Dave armstrong explains it best in this piece. —————A few years back I ran across a woman online who used to be a Baptist and had become a Catholic. She expressed perfectly how the term “Mother of God” is so vastly misunderstood by a good portion of Protestants, in describing how she used to think:
I felt that I was saying that a human being born at a certain time in history (a creature) had “created,” had given life to, God Himself, Who had not previously existed.
Such an outrageous, blasphemous thing was, of course, never the intent of the phrase or title (which goes back to the early Church fathers) in the first place. Given these rather extraordinary misperceptions, it’s always good to clarify: “Mary is the mother of God the Son.” No Christian can argue with that.
If they deny that she is the mother of God (the Son), then they deny that Jesus is God, which they don’t want to do. If, on the other hand, they deny that she is the mother of God (the Son), then they deny the virgin birth, and in effect, also the incarnation, which they don’t want to do, either.
This resolves the problem altogether. The original Greek term Theotokos (literally, “God-bearer”) isn’t in Scripture, but it doesn’t have to be, since Scripture teaches that:
1) Jesus is God (many biblical proofs; Jn 1:1; Col 2:9).
2) Mary is His true mother (Is 7:14; Mt 1:16,18; 2:11, 13, 20; 12:46; Lk 1:31, 35, 43; Jn 1:15; 2:1; Gal 4:4).
Ergo, “Mary is the Mother of God” [the Son].
Another, less direct, but equally effective way of arguing the point is noting Elizabeth’s exclamation to the Blessed Virgin Mary: “And why is this granted me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?” (Luke 1:43, RSV). The Greek word for “Lord” here (as usually in the New Testament) is Kurios. It’s widely applied both to God the Father and to Jesus, since they are both “Lord” and God” and equal as the Father and Son in the Holy Trinity. In fact, in a single passage, both the Father and the Son are called “Lord” (Kurios):
Romans 10:9-13 (RSV) because, if you confess with your lips that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. [10] For man believes with his heart and so is justified, and he confesses with his lips and so is saved. [11] The scripture says, “No one who believes in him will be put to shame.” [12] For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; the same Lord is Lord of all and bestows his riches upon all who call upon him. [13] For, “every one who calls upon the name of the Lord will be saved.” (cf. also Mt 22:41-45; Mk 12:36-37; Lk 20:42-44; Acts 2:34)
Romans 10:13 cites Joel 2:32: “And it shall come to pass that all who call upon the name of the LORD shall be delivered; . . .” Thus, the New Testament applies Old Testament passages about God directly to Jesus, since He is God, and He and His Father are one (Jn 10:30).
Therefore, in calling Mary “mother of my Lord,” Elizabeth is at the same time calling her the “mother of God.” It takes a little digging into Scripture to discover that, but it’s plain and definite biblical teaching: part of the massive biblical evidence of the divinity or deity of Jesus Christ.
John Calvin, the most influential early Protestant leader after Martin Luther, wrote about this passage:
She [Elizabeth] calls Mary the mother of her Lord This denotes a unity of person in the two natures of Christ; as if she had said, that he who was begotten a mortal man in the womb of Mary is, at the same time, the eternal God. (Harmony of the Synoptic Gospels, comment under Luke 1:43)
Martin Luther also made many affirming statements about Theotokos. Here are two of the most striking ones:
We, too, know very well that Christ did not derive his deity from Mary; but it does not follow that it must, therefore, be false to say, “God was born of Mary” and “God is Mary’s Son” and “Mary is God’s mother.”
Mary is the true, natural mother of the child called Jesus Christ, and the truemother and bearer of God . . . Mary suckled God, rocked God, made broth and soup for God. For God and man are one Person, one Christ, one Son, one Jesus, not two persons . . . just as your son is not two sons . . . even though he has two natures, body and soul, — body from you, soul from God alone.
(On the Councils and the Church, 1539)
And still no citation/ legitimate source.
Only in the narrow view of those that engage in eisegesis.
Words really do mean things sadly too many non-Catholics like to twist those meanings, as has been seen here too many times.
If the Holy spirit is leading you it is to the Catholic Church, if you believe you are being "lead to correct errors", it is not he Holy Spirit guiding you.
I didn’t say anything about who Jesus is.
I was talking about who Mary was.
She is the mother of Jesus, not the mother of God.
The word for *Lord* is not the same word as the word for *God*.
By presuming that it means GOD, it is only by presumption, not what is actually being said.
Saying that God has a mother, makes Deity under Mary, it gives Deity a beginning, making God less than God and elevates Mary above the Godhead.
To say that Mary is not the mother of Jesus and therefore of God denies the humanity of Christ. His humanity did enter into time on March 25th when Mary said “yes.”
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.