- Joined
- Jun 12, 2015
- Messages
- 13,927
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Lutheran
- Political Affiliation
- Conservative
- Marital Status
- Married
- Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
- Yes
I wrote and posted this at "the-website-that-shall-not-be-named" 14 years ago. I repost it here and now
Mary - the Mother of Our Lord
Where Mary is mentioned in Holy Scriptures:
Matthew 1:23
Mark 3:31-35; 6:1-6
Luke 1:27, 31-33, 39-55
Luke 2:1-24, 49
John 2:4
John 19:26-27
Acts 1:14
That's it. That's all.
That's EVERYTHING Scripture says about Mary.
Divine Maternity: ("Matre Dei" "Theodokos")
See CCC 495 and 509
More a title than a dogma. Since Mary is the mother of Jesus and Jesus has a divine nature, in THAT sense, this is normed.
Tradition affirms this interpretation.
IMO: Accepted as a title but potentially misleading (I prefer "theotokos")
Title is used in the Roman Catholic and Easter Orthodox churches, and often among Anglicans and Lutherans.
Immaculate Conception:
The dogma that Mary (uniquely) was preserved from the stain of original sin
See CCC 491-492
Proclaimed dogma by Papal Proclamation (not a Council) in 1854
No Scripture remotely confirms it.
No Scripture clearly denies it (although some make it problematic)
Which leaves it AT BEST an abilical but a traditional opinion.
No other church teaches it (although the EO has a similar opinion, not doctrine)
IMO: Not dogma, not heresy.
Perpetual Virginity:
The dogma that Mary remained a virgin all her life, the PERPETUAL virgin.
See CCC 496 and 499
First mentioned in the Second Century, gained popularity in the Third. Some claim 431 or 553 or 649 as for when it became doctrine but it's unclear if it ever was officially declared dogma.
No Scripture remotely confirms it.
No Scripture clearly denies it.
Which leaves an unnormed but tradtional view, dating back as early as the mid Second Century
IMO: Not dogma, not heresy. Possible opinion.
Dogma in the Catholic Church, official teaching in the EOC. Embraced as pious opinion by some Anglican and Lutheran Christians.
Assumption of Mary:
The dogma that Mary, "when her course of life was concluded" was assumed into heaven - body and soul.
See CCC 966 and 974
Made dogma in the Catholic Church in 1950 by Papal Proclamation (no Council)
Nothing in Scripture remotely states this.
Nothing in Scripture clearly denies this.
Which leaves an unnormed but traditional opinion.
IMO: Not dogma, not heresy. Opinion.
New dogma in the CC; not dogma but generally embraced in the Eastern Orthodox Church
Mediatrix of all Graces:
More a title than a doctrine,
'The office she continuously fills by the side of the throne of God as Mediatrix of Divine grace. As a very new teaching, the exact meaning and application of this varies enormously.
Papal Proclamation in 1894. Affirmed by Vatican II of The Catholic Church in the 1960's The status of this is very unclear.
Nothing in Scripture remotely confirms this.
Nothing in Scripture clearly denies this, although 1 Tim. 2:5 may make this problemmatic.
IMO: Not dogma, not heresy if property understood. Opinion.
Coredemptrix:
More a title than a dogma, it once was universally taught but Pope Francis has ordered it no longer taught, but it often still is. Some suggest that the next Pope must proclaim this (and the Mediatrix) as dogma.
The teaching that Mary has an essential participation in redemption of the world
Often associated with the Mediatrix of All Graces.
Not found in Eastern Orthodox Christianity.
Nothing in Scripture remotely confirms this.
Nothing in Scripture clearly denied this, although several verses make it problemmatic. Many feel this diminishes the work of Christ and essentially elevates Mary to Savior (although Catholics deny this)l
Some quotes:
Pope Pius IX Eneffabilis Deus (1854), "Let the most dear children of the Catholic Church hear these words and with more ardent zeal of piety, religion and love, proceed to worship, invoke and pray to the most Blessed Virgin Mary."
Pope Pius XII Coronation at Fatima (1948), "Mary is indeed worthy to receive honor and might and glory. She is exalted to hypostatic union with the Blessed Trinity. Her Kingdom is as great as her Son's and God's."
Some Misc. thoughts....
1. God focused very little on Mary in His holy written Word to the church - the Scriptures. Like Mary, it's focus is on Christ.
2. While Catholics DO speak of a certain "worship" of Mary, they make it very clear they do not worship her as divine. "Mary belongs to the offspring of Adam and is one with all human beings in their need for salvation" (Vatican II) In modern English, "worship" has taken on that meaning it didn't have until recently. NONE of the current Marian dogmas in any sense or manner embrace Mary as The Lord God or divine in any way; the words often used in relation to her (respect, adore, revere, venerate, worship, esteem) are admittedly all words that (rarely) are applied to the divine but that's not the case with Catholics (or Protestants or any other Christians).
3. At one time, Protestants (especially Lutherans and Anglicans) shared a certain veneration of Mary nearly the same as Catholics. As Catholics have become far more focused on Mary (note the dates of the quotes above, the Immaculate Conception was not declared dogma until 1854, the Assumption of Mary not until 1950), Protestants have moved away - in what I consider foolish and tragic - it seems just so as to not see "Catholic."
4. Luther, Calvin, Wesley (and Protestants in general) affirmed SOME of the above teachings but not as dogma (note some weren't such in the Catholic Church then either!) but as "pious opinion." A "pious opinion" is a belief that is neither confirmed or denied in Scripture but has ancient and ecumenical embrace: it is a belief (not doctrine!) that MAY be embraced but is not REQUIRED to be embraced.
5. In my Catholic days, I saw a FEW (really a tiny percentage) of Catholics who were ... well, let's say WEIRD when it came to Mary, they just seemed to go way overboard. This bothers many Catholics. Unfortunately, what they say and did at times became known to Protestants who THINK such is common among Catholics. There are Mary wackos in the Roman Catholic Church and Catholics often will admit that. I think too a FEW (a tiny percentage) of Catholics have a very emotional relationship to Mary (consider a teen in love, LOL) and this IMO at times causes them to say and do things that maybe are hard to objectively understand (just like teens in love, LOL). In my Catholic days, I could easily cut these people some slack. On the one hand, if this relationship to Mary gives them comfort and strength - good. On the other hand, if they use it to base some superiority over others or in some divisive way - bad.
- Josiah
.
Mary - the Mother of Our Lord
Where Mary is mentioned in Holy Scriptures:
Matthew 1:23
Mark 3:31-35; 6:1-6
Luke 1:27, 31-33, 39-55
Luke 2:1-24, 49
John 2:4
John 19:26-27
Acts 1:14
That's it. That's all.
That's EVERYTHING Scripture says about Mary.
Divine Maternity: ("Matre Dei" "Theodokos")
See CCC 495 and 509
More a title than a dogma. Since Mary is the mother of Jesus and Jesus has a divine nature, in THAT sense, this is normed.
Tradition affirms this interpretation.
IMO: Accepted as a title but potentially misleading (I prefer "theotokos")
Title is used in the Roman Catholic and Easter Orthodox churches, and often among Anglicans and Lutherans.
Immaculate Conception:
The dogma that Mary (uniquely) was preserved from the stain of original sin
See CCC 491-492
Proclaimed dogma by Papal Proclamation (not a Council) in 1854
No Scripture remotely confirms it.
No Scripture clearly denies it (although some make it problematic)
Which leaves it AT BEST an abilical but a traditional opinion.
No other church teaches it (although the EO has a similar opinion, not doctrine)
IMO: Not dogma, not heresy.
Perpetual Virginity:
The dogma that Mary remained a virgin all her life, the PERPETUAL virgin.
See CCC 496 and 499
First mentioned in the Second Century, gained popularity in the Third. Some claim 431 or 553 or 649 as for when it became doctrine but it's unclear if it ever was officially declared dogma.
No Scripture remotely confirms it.
No Scripture clearly denies it.
Which leaves an unnormed but tradtional view, dating back as early as the mid Second Century
IMO: Not dogma, not heresy. Possible opinion.
Dogma in the Catholic Church, official teaching in the EOC. Embraced as pious opinion by some Anglican and Lutheran Christians.
Assumption of Mary:
The dogma that Mary, "when her course of life was concluded" was assumed into heaven - body and soul.
See CCC 966 and 974
Made dogma in the Catholic Church in 1950 by Papal Proclamation (no Council)
Nothing in Scripture remotely states this.
Nothing in Scripture clearly denies this.
Which leaves an unnormed but traditional opinion.
IMO: Not dogma, not heresy. Opinion.
New dogma in the CC; not dogma but generally embraced in the Eastern Orthodox Church
Mediatrix of all Graces:
More a title than a doctrine,
'The office she continuously fills by the side of the throne of God as Mediatrix of Divine grace. As a very new teaching, the exact meaning and application of this varies enormously.
Papal Proclamation in 1894. Affirmed by Vatican II of The Catholic Church in the 1960's The status of this is very unclear.
Nothing in Scripture remotely confirms this.
Nothing in Scripture clearly denies this, although 1 Tim. 2:5 may make this problemmatic.
IMO: Not dogma, not heresy if property understood. Opinion.
Coredemptrix:
More a title than a dogma, it once was universally taught but Pope Francis has ordered it no longer taught, but it often still is. Some suggest that the next Pope must proclaim this (and the Mediatrix) as dogma.
The teaching that Mary has an essential participation in redemption of the world
Often associated with the Mediatrix of All Graces.
Not found in Eastern Orthodox Christianity.
Nothing in Scripture remotely confirms this.
Nothing in Scripture clearly denied this, although several verses make it problemmatic. Many feel this diminishes the work of Christ and essentially elevates Mary to Savior (although Catholics deny this)l
Some quotes:
Pope Pius IX Eneffabilis Deus (1854), "Let the most dear children of the Catholic Church hear these words and with more ardent zeal of piety, religion and love, proceed to worship, invoke and pray to the most Blessed Virgin Mary."
Pope Pius XII Coronation at Fatima (1948), "Mary is indeed worthy to receive honor and might and glory. She is exalted to hypostatic union with the Blessed Trinity. Her Kingdom is as great as her Son's and God's."
Some Misc. thoughts....
1. God focused very little on Mary in His holy written Word to the church - the Scriptures. Like Mary, it's focus is on Christ.
2. While Catholics DO speak of a certain "worship" of Mary, they make it very clear they do not worship her as divine. "Mary belongs to the offspring of Adam and is one with all human beings in their need for salvation" (Vatican II) In modern English, "worship" has taken on that meaning it didn't have until recently. NONE of the current Marian dogmas in any sense or manner embrace Mary as The Lord God or divine in any way; the words often used in relation to her (respect, adore, revere, venerate, worship, esteem) are admittedly all words that (rarely) are applied to the divine but that's not the case with Catholics (or Protestants or any other Christians).
3. At one time, Protestants (especially Lutherans and Anglicans) shared a certain veneration of Mary nearly the same as Catholics. As Catholics have become far more focused on Mary (note the dates of the quotes above, the Immaculate Conception was not declared dogma until 1854, the Assumption of Mary not until 1950), Protestants have moved away - in what I consider foolish and tragic - it seems just so as to not see "Catholic."
4. Luther, Calvin, Wesley (and Protestants in general) affirmed SOME of the above teachings but not as dogma (note some weren't such in the Catholic Church then either!) but as "pious opinion." A "pious opinion" is a belief that is neither confirmed or denied in Scripture but has ancient and ecumenical embrace: it is a belief (not doctrine!) that MAY be embraced but is not REQUIRED to be embraced.
5. In my Catholic days, I saw a FEW (really a tiny percentage) of Catholics who were ... well, let's say WEIRD when it came to Mary, they just seemed to go way overboard. This bothers many Catholics. Unfortunately, what they say and did at times became known to Protestants who THINK such is common among Catholics. There are Mary wackos in the Roman Catholic Church and Catholics often will admit that. I think too a FEW (a tiny percentage) of Catholics have a very emotional relationship to Mary (consider a teen in love, LOL) and this IMO at times causes them to say and do things that maybe are hard to objectively understand (just like teens in love, LOL). In my Catholic days, I could easily cut these people some slack. On the one hand, if this relationship to Mary gives them comfort and strength - good. On the other hand, if they use it to base some superiority over others or in some divisive way - bad.
- Josiah
.
Last edited:
