Mary, the Mother of God
According to Scripture and the Early
Church Fathers
“Virtually every heresy begins with the misconception of the nature of
God.”
– Anonymous
Preface
Just as virtually every heresy
begins with the misconception of the nature of God - every attack on
Catholicism begins with the misconception of Christ’s Church.
Since its establishment by Jesus Christ 2000 years ago,
the Catholic Church has held certain beliefs drawn from the written and oral
traditions passed on by Jesus and the Apostles.
Some are explicitly taught in
the written and oral Word and some are implicitly taught.
Some explicitly-taught
beliefs, like the Eucharist (John 6:31-71, Matt. 26: 26-29, Mark 14:
22-25, Luke 22: 7-20,1 Cor. 11:23–26) were so passionately believed by
the Early Church that many early Christians willingly went to their deaths for this
belief. They were persecuted by the Jews
and Romans and accused of being “Cannibals” for their belief in the Real Presence in the Eucharist.
Some of these
implicitly-taught, yet widely-held beliefs of the Early Church,
such as the Holy Trinity, Purgatory,
Mary’s Perpetual Virginity or the Filioque
clause, were declared in Doctrines or Creeds when dissenters and heretics
called these beliefs into question or began teaching contrary beliefs. Our Lord
and Savior warned of these people who teach another message other than the
Gospel:
Matt. 7:15-23
"Beware of false prophets, who come to
you in sheep's clothing, but underneath are ravenous wolves.
By their fruits you will know them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?
Just so, every good
tree bears good fruit, and a rotten tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a
rotten tree bear good fruit. Every tree
that does not bear good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire. So by
their fruits you will know them. "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom
of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven. Many will say to me on
that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name? Did we not drive out
demons in your name? Did we not do mighty deeds in your name?'
Then I will declare to
them solemnly, 'I never knew you.
Depart from me, you evildoers.' It is disingenuous and quite frankly, dishonest
of former and anti-Catholics to misrepresent the beliefs on the Church based
on either bitterness or their own personal ignorance. These misrepresentations, half-truths and
falsehoods make charitable dialogue between Protestants and Catholics
impossible.
Each of us will be held accountable before God.
As it says in Scripture:
“…from everyone who has been given much, much will be required; and to whom they entrusted much, of him they
will ask all the more” (Luke 12:48)We are
indeed responsible for what we
know.
First Things First
. . .
One of the problems that many
Protestants have with Catholic theology is the honor we give Mary, the Mother
of God.
In fact, they even find the
title,
“Mother of God”
offensive.
However, a rudimentary
knowledge of the Scriptures and history of the Early Church Fathers shows not
only the truth of this title, but also the honor given to her in the early
Church.
To fully understand why the early
Christians (and Catholics today) hold Mary in such high regard, we must begin
with the nature of Christ himself.
Jesus
is both fully human and fully divine and these two natures
cannot be
separated. This is the doctrine of the
Hypostatic
Union, which was declared at the
Council
of Ephesus in
431. To say Mary gave birth only to Jesus’ human
nature is to misunderstand this doctrine and speak heresy.
Mary bore God –
not just a man
Another doctrine declared at Ephesus
was one concerning Mary. This is the
doctrine of Theotokos (God-bearer). This decree was actually proclaimed in
order to define the nature of our Lord Jesus even more so than it was to
proclaim Mary’s role. It was to defeat
the Nestorian
Heresy, which held that Jesus was not divine, but merely human and that
God only dwelt in Him as in a temple - and therein
lies the heresy.
In the 5th century, the
Patriarch of Constantinople, Nestorius,
held that there were two persons in Christ, making Mary Christotokos (Mother of
Christ), instead of Theotokos (Mother of God).
Mary gave birth not simply to a human being but to a divine person who united to himself a
human and divine nature. This must be
clearly understood before embarking on a discussion concerning Mary’s role in
salvation history. For the Christian of
today, to deny the doctrine of the Hypostatic Union is to fall back into the
Nestorian heresy.
God-given
Authority of the Church
The anti-Catholic cannot understand
the teachings of the Church until they first understand the Authority given her
by our Lord Jesus. Jesus told the Apostles
that the Church would have the final
say on matters concerning the Body
(Matt. 18:15-18), that even the gates of hell wouldn’t prevail against his
Church (Matt. 16:18), and gave them the
power to retain and forgive sins (Matt.
16:19, 18:18, John 20:23).
He also assured the Apostles that
the Holy Spirit would guide the Church to ALL
truth about the things that were coming and that the Holy Spirit would take
from what was Jesus’ and declare it to the Church (John 16:13-15). He never said “some truth” or “only
up until the 16th century” He said, “ALL
truth.”Paul asserts that the Church is the
“pillar and foundation of truth”
(1 Tim. 3:15).
In Acts 9:4-5, Jesus equates his Body – the Church - with his very self:
He fell to the ground
and heard a voice saying to him, "Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?" He said, "Who are you, sir?" The
reply came, "I am Jesus, whom
you are persecuting.
Notice that Jesus DOESN’T
say, “Why are you persecuting the Church?” (which is EXACTLY
what Paul was doing). Jesus chose to
equate the church with himself.
Acts 15:28-29 is further proof that this Authority rests on the
Church.
The early Church didn’t appeal
solely to Scripture when making doctrinal decisions.
At the Council of Jerusalem, the leaders said
in a letter:
'It is the decision of the
holy Spirit and of us not to
place on you any burden beyond these necessities, namely, to abstain from meat
sacrificed to idols, from blood, from meats of strangled animals, and from
unlawful marriage. If you keep free of these, you will be doing what is right.
Farewell.'"
The writings of the Early Church
Fathers – some of whom
knew the Apostles – are further
proof that the Church has always held these beliefs.
We will examine their positions on the
various topics addressed in this document.
The
Errors of the Two Pillars of Protestantism
Lastly, the ecclesiastical divorce
that is Protestantism was founded on the false doctrines of Sola Fide (faith alone) and Sola Scriptura (the Bible alone).
Sola Fide
Nowhere is all of Scripture is the term “faith alone” found to
buttress this belief. In fact, the only
place in Scripture where this phrase exists is in James 2:24 where it explicitly says:
“See how a person is
justified by works and not by
faith alone.” The Scriptures are replete with admonitions
about cooperating with God’s grace in order to be saved:
Matt. 7:21 - Not everyone who says to me, "Lord, Lord"
shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but only
the one who does the will of my Father in heaven."
Luke 9:23 - "If anyone
wishes to come after me, he must deny
himself and take up his cross daily and follow me.
Rom. 11:22 - “See, then, the
kindness and severity of God: severity toward those who fell, but God's
kindness to you, provided you remain
in his kindness; otherwise you too will be cut off.”
Heb. 10:26-27 - “If we sin
deliberately after receiving knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains sacrifice for sins but a fearful prospect
of judgment and a flaming fire that is going to consume the
adversaries.”
2 Pet. 2:26-27 - For if they,
having escaped the defilements of the world through the knowledge of (our) Lord
and savior Jesus Christ, again become entangled and overcome by them, their last condition is worse than their
first.
For it would have been better for them not
to have known the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from
the holy commandment handed down to them.
Paul speaks of the virtues of
faith, hope and love.
He says that the
greatest virtue is
not faith – but
LOVE.
1 Cor. 13:13 - So faith,
hope, love remain, these three; but
the greatest of these is love.
Paul also speaks of Faith
working
through Love:
Gal 5:6 - For in Christ Jesus, neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for
anything, but only faith working
through love.
Rom. 1:5-6 - Through him we
have received the grace of apostleship, to bring about the obedience of faith, for the sake of his name, among all
the Gentiles, among whom are you also, who are called to belong to Jesus
Christ;
Sola
Scriptura
Just as with the error of Sola
Fide, the doctrine of Sola Scriptura
is also unsupported by the context of Scripture and Early
Church teachings. This false doctrine
holds that the Bible alone is our sole rule of faith –
the last arbiter of truth, discarding Sacred Tradition by the wayside. Sola Scriptura is simply not found anywhere
in the Bible and is, in fact, refuted by the Scriptures which hold that the Church
is the final authority on earth. Protestants
will usually provide the following verses to support this false doctrine:
John 20:31 - “These are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the
Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name”.
2 Timothy 3:16–17 - “All Scripture
is inspired by God and profitable
for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness;
so that the man of God may be equipped, prepared for every good work."
The Catholic Church agrees that Scripture
is
profitable for teaching, training and correction but
NOWHERE do these
passages claim that the written word is all you need.
In fact the following passages speak of the
word of God being passed on
orally as well as the written
word and that they are equally binding on the believer:
2 Thess. 2:15 - Therefore,
brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions
that you were taught, either by an
oral statement OR by
a letter of ours.
2 Tim. 2:2 - "What you have heard from me
before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others
also".
1 Cor. 11:2 - "I commend
you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you".
2 Tim. 12:14 - On this account
I am suffering these things; but I am not ashamed, for I know him in whom I
have believed and am confident that he is able to guard what has been entrusted
to me until
that day. Take as your norm the sound
words that you heard from me, in the faith and love that are
in Christ Jesus. Guard this rich
trust with the help of the Holy Spirit that dwells within us.
John 21:25 explicitly tells us: “
But Jesus did many other things; if all were written down, the world
itself would not hold the books recording them.”
It is interesting to note that the
following verses of the New Testament draw upon words and ideas from the Old
Testament – yet they are
not found
in the Old Testament Scriptures:
Matt. 2:23, Matt. 23:1-2, 1 Cor. 10:4, 2
Timothy 3:8.
The Early Church
Fathers were Catholic
The writings of the Early Church
Fathers show that the Early Catholic Church interpreted the Scriptures and held
the oral and written traditions just as the Catholic Church does to this day:
Ignatius of Antioch - on the Catholic Church - Follow
your bishop, every one of you, as obediently as Jesus Christ followed the
Father. Obey your clergy too as
you would the apostles; give your deacons the same reverence that you would to
a command of God. Make sure that no step affecting the Church is ever taken by
anyone without the bishop’s sanction. The sole Eucharist you should consider valid
is one that is celebrated by the bishop himself, or by some person authorized
by him. Where the bishop is to be seen, there let all his people be; just as, wherever
Jesus Christ is present, there is the Catholic Church (
Letter
to the Smyrnaeans 8:2 [
A.D. 110]).
Papias - on Oral Tradition - Whenever
anyone came my way, who had been a follower of my seniors, I would ask for the
accounts of our seniors: What did Andrew or Peter say? Or Phillip or Thomas or
James or John or Matthew, or any of the Lord’s disciples? I also asked: What
did Aristion and John the Presbyter, disciples of the Lord say. For, as I see it, it is not so much from books
as from the living and permanent voice that I must draw profit (The Sayings of the Lord [between
A.D. 115 and 140] as recorded by Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 3:39 [A.D. 325]).
Irenaeus - on Church Authority and Tradition - For
even creation reveals Him who formed it, and the very work made suggests Him
who made it, and the world manifests Him who ordered it. The Universal [Catholic] Church, moreover, through the whole world, has
received this tradition from the Apostles (Against Heresies 2:9 [A.D. 189]).
True knowledge is the
doctrine of the Apostles, and the ancient constitution of the Church throughout
all the world, and the distinctive
manifestation of the body of Christ according to the successions of the
bishops, by which they have handed down that Church which exists in every
place, and has come even unto us, being guarded and preserved, without any
forging of Scriptures, by a very complete system of doctrine, and neither
addition nor curtailment … (ibid. 4:33 [A.D. 189]).
Tertullian - on Tradition - For wherever both the true Christian rule
and faith shall be shown to be, there will be the true Scriptures, and the true expositions, of all the true
Christian traditions (The
Prescription of Heretics 19 [A.D. 200]).
Athanasius - on Church Authority and Tradition - Without
prefixing Consulate, month, and day, [the Fathers] wrote concerning Easter,
"It seemed good as follows," for it did then seem good that there
should be a general compliance; but about the faith they wrote not, "It
seemed good" but, "Thus believes the Catholic Church"; and
thereupon they confessed how they believed, in order to show that their own
sentiments were not novel, but Apostolic; and
what they wrote down was no discovery of theirs, but is the same as was taught
by the Apostles (Letter on the
Councils of Ariminum and Seleucia [A.D. 359]).
Jerome - on Tradition - Don’t
you know that the laying on of hands after baptism and then the invocation of
the Holy Spirit is a custom of the Churches? Do you demand Scripture proof? You
may find it in the Acts of the Apostles. And
even if it did not rest on the authority of Scripture the consensus of the
whole world in this respect would have the force of a command. For many other observances of the Churches,
which are do to tradition, have acquired the authority of the written law (The Dialogue Against the Luciferians 8
[A.D. 382]).
John Chrysostom - on Oral Tradition - "So then brethren, stand fast, and hold
the traditions which you were taught, whether by word, or by epistle of
ours" (2 Thessalonians 2:15). Hence it is manifest, that they did not deliver all things by
epistle, but many things also unwritten, and in like manner both the one and
the other are worthy of credit. Therefore
let us think the tradition of the Church also worthy of credit. It is a tradition,
seek no farther (Homilies
on Second Thessalonians [circa A.D. 400]).
Augustine - on Church Authority
- "Number the priests
even from that seat of Peter. And in that order of fathers see to whom
succeeded: that is the rock which the
proud gates of hades do not conquer."
“You see, there have already been two councils about this matter, and their
decisions sent to the Apostolic [Roman]
See; from there rescripts have been sent back here. The case is finished; if only the error were finished too,
sometime! So, let us all warn them to take notice of this, teach them to learn
the lesson of it, pray for them to change their ideas."
“For
my part, I should not believe the
gospel except moved by the authority of the Catholic Church. So when
those on whose authority I have consented to believe in the gospel tell me not
to believe in Manicheus, how can I but
consent?"
It must also be noted that
statements and teachings of the Early Church Fathers on Mary are in
complete
harmony with the Catholic teachings of today, which are in
complete harmony with Scripture.
If these men
(some of whom shed their blood for the faith), who kept the faith
alive after the Apostolic era, were teaching heresy and a fraudulent
Christianity, then 21
st Century Protestants
must ask themselves:
What
was their motive for doing so?
Why
were they willing to die for these beliefs if they were
not the truth?
” Didn’t Jesus promise that the gates
of hell
wouldn’t prevail against his Church
(Matt. 16:18)?
Simply put, to believe that the Church was apostate until the Reformation
is to render our Lord and Savior a
liar.
Relics and Images
The
Protestant charge that Catholics are idolaters is a false accusation as
is the charge that we worship Mary. Catholics see images and relics as
worship aids – not as
idols. God’s prohibition on the People
of Israel against idols was not the creation of statues. It was against the worship of images
as gods:
Ex. 20:2-6
I am the Lord your
God, who brought you out of the land
of Egypt, out of the
house of slavery;
Do not have any other gods before me.
You shall not make for
yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or
that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
You shall not bow down
to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing
children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and the fourth generation of
those who reject me, but showing steadfast love to the thousandth generation of
those who love me and keep my commandments.
We must not forget that God
commanded
Moses to make 2 golden Cherubim to place atop the Ark
(Exod. 25:18-20) and they prostrated themselves before it
(Joshua 7:6).
He also commanded him to fashion a bronze
serpent and mount it on a pole so that those who gazed upon it would be healed
(Num. 21:4-9).
Images aren’t necessarily idols and
therefore, the Protestant position against images would render
all
statues and paintings created by Catholic
and Protestant artists over
the centuries
idolatrous.
It is simply
not a cohesive argument, given the
context of Scripture.
Mary-Worship?
As for the charge of worshipping Mary, the anti-Catholic is
guilty of bearing false witness.
Dulia is theological term signifying the honor paid to the
saints, while latria means worship given to God alone. Hyperdulia is the veneration offered
to the Blessed Virgin Mary.
We adore and worship God alone, whereas, we give
honor to the great saints of the past and give special honor to Mary, the
vessel of Christ.
Whereas the word,
“worship”
can be used more loosely, if applied to all of us, we would
all
be guilty of some form of the word which has several meanings, including:
1. The honor given to a person of
importance — (such as magistrates and some mayors)
2. Reverence offered a divine being or supernatural power; an act of
expressing such reverence
3. A form of religious practice with its creed and ritual
4. Extravagant respect or admiration for or devotion to an object of
esteem
When a person kisses a
picture of a loved one, they are guilty of “worship” in this sense. However, anybody
using reason would understand that they do not worship them as gods.
Also, contrary to what the
anti-Catholic says, the Bible does
not condemn serving each other, but
rather
supports it
(John
13:14-15, Romans 12:10, 14:19,15:7, Galatians 6:2, I Peter 4:9, 5).
Praying to Mary and the Saints
The ancient Church practice of petitioning those in Heaven to pray for us is one that doesn’t sit well with many Protestants. They charge that “if it isn’t explicitly taught in the Bible, we are forbidden to do it.” What they don’t understand is that many of the truths of God are taught implicitly.
For example, the word,
“Bible” isn’t in the Bible and neither is a list of books that are supposed to comprise the Bible. The
Holy Trinity isn’t even explicitly named in the Bible.
These terminologies came from the Church –
not the Bible.
Using the Protestant rule, they have no business believing in these doctrines because they’re not explicitly named.
Even the
Beroeans, who studied the Scriptures to insure that Paul's oral teaching (Tradition) was in line with what was written, ultimately believed a truth that was
not explicitly there:
The fact that Jesus of Nazareth is the Christ, the Messiah.
We first find the word
Trinity in the writings of Tertullian
(c.155-230).
The doctrine was decreed by the Catholic Church at the
Council of Nicaea in
325 AD because of the
Arian Heresy, which claimed that saying that Jesus was not of one substance with the Father and that he had not existed in Eternity with the Father.
To prove that we are not to ask those in Heaven for help, Protestants will quote
1 Tim. 2:5, where Paul writes,
"For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus."
The Catholic Church
agrees with this verse.
Jesus
IS our only mediator before God in that only
his sacrifice could atone for our sins and bring peace between us and the Father.
However, to say that there are no other intercessors goes against Scripture.
We are
ALL called upon to intercede for one another with prayer and supplications –
2 Cor. 1:10-11, Eph. 6:18-20, 1Tim. 2:1-4, James 5:16.
Protestants often say that to
“pray” to somebody in heaven to ask them to for pray for us is idolatry because prayer is reserved for God alone.
This is a complete
failure to understand the word.
To pray,
in the most rudimentary definition of the word, is to
petition – to ask something of someone.
We pray to each other
daily. Whereas prayers of adoration, worship, confession are reserved for God alone, asking a saint in Heaven to pray for us is
no different than asking a saint on earth to do the same.
To deny this is to deny the reality that is the Body of Christ (
1 Cor. 12:12-31).
We are all parts of the Body of Christ and are more
radically joined together than the finger is to the hand because we are joined in Christ – and
not by mere flesh.
Heb. 12:1 tells us that
“we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses” and that we are to live accordingly.
A witness is somebody who sees and hears things
(Acts 1:8, 2:32) – otherwise they are
not witnesses.
Revelation 5:8 shows the Elders in heaven bringing our prayers before God and
Rev. 8:3-4 speaks of the Angels in heaven doing the same thing.
Lev. 20:6 – “Should anyone turn to mediums and fortune-tellers and follow their wanton ways, I will turn against such a one and cut him off from his people.”
Deut. 18:10-12 “Let there not be found among you anyone who immolates his son or daughter in the fire, nor a fortune-teller, soothsayer, charmer, diviner, or caster of spells, nor one who consults ghosts and spirits or seeks oracles from the dead.
Anyone who does such things is an abomination to the LORD, and because of such abominations the LORD, your God, is driving these nations out of your way.”
Lev. 20:6 and
Deut. 18:10-12 strictly prohibit the practice of fortune-telling, necromancy and seeking oracles from the dead.
However – this is
not what Catholics do by asking for prayers and intercession.
The anti-Catholic
misrepresents the Catholic position by saying that this is the case.
The charge that Mary or others in Heaven would have to be omnipresent and omniscient to hear the petitions of many people at once is to
fail to understand the reality of Heaven.
2 Pet. 3:8 tells us that
“with the Lord one day is like a thousand years and a thousand years like one day.” Heaven is outside of time.
There is not yesterday, today and tomorrow - no sun or moon
(Rev. 21:23) It’s all eternal. To indicate that Mary or another saint must be omnipresent and omniscient to hear the petitions of many people at once is to
fail to understand this fact.
Again, intercessory prayer is supported by the writings of the Early Church Fathers:
Origen - But not the high priest [Christ] alone prays for those who pray sincerely, but also the angels... as also the souls of the saints who have already fallen asleep (On Prayer II [A.D. 233]).
Pectorius - Aschandius, my father, dearly beloved of my heart, with my sweet mother and my brethren, remember your Pectorius in the peace of the Fish [Christ] (Epitaph [A.D. 250]).
Cyprian - Let us remember one another in concord and unanimity. Let us on both sides always pray for one another. Let us relieve burdens and afflictions by mutual love, that if one of us, by the swiftness of divine condescension, shall go hence the first, our love may continue in the presence of the Lord, and our prayers for our brethren and sisters not cease in the presence of the Father's mercy (Letters 56[60]:5 [A.D. 252]).
Cyril of Jerusalem - Then [during the Eucharistic prayer] we make mention also of those who have already fallen asleep: first, the patriarchs, prophets, apostles, and martyrs, that through their prayers and supplications God would receive our petition... (Catechetical Lectures 23:9 [A.D. 350]).
Hilary of Poitiers - To those who would fain to stand, neither the guardianship of saints nor the defenses of angels are wanting (Commentary on the Psalms 124:5:6 [A.D. 365]).
Ephraem of Syria - Remember me, you heirs of God, you brethren of Christ; supplicate the Savior earnestly for me, that I may be freed through Christ from him that fights against me day by day (De Timore, Anim. in fin. [A.D. 370]).
Liturgy of St. Basil - By the command of your only-begotten Son we communicate with the memory of your saints . . . by whose prayers and supplications have mercy upon us all, and deliver us for the sake of your holy name (Liturgy of St. Basil [A.D. 373]).
Gregory Nazianzen - Yes, I am well assured that [my father's] intercession is of more avail now than was his instruction in former days, since he is closer to God, now that he has shaken off his bodily fetters, and freed his mind from the clay that obscured it, and holds conversation naked with the nakedness of the prime and purest mind . . . (Orations 18:4 [A.D. 374]).
May you [Cyprian] look down from above propitiously upon us, and guide our word and life; and shepherd this sacred flock . . . gladden the Holy Trinity, before which you stand (Orations 17 [24] [A.D. 376]),
Gregory of Nyssa - Do you, [Ephraem] that art standing at the divine altar . . . bear us all in remembrance, petitioning for us the remission of sins, and the fruition of an everlasting kingdom (Sermon on Ephraem the Syrian [A.D. 380]).
Ambrose of Milan - May Peter, who wept so efficaciously for himself, weep for us and turn towards us Christ's benign countenance (Hexameron 5:25:90 [A.D. 388]).
John Chrysostom - He that wears the purple . . . stands begging of the saints to be his patrons with God, and he that wears a diadem begs the tent-maker [Paul] and the fisherman [Peter] as patrons, even though they be dead" (Homilies on 2 Corinthians 26 [A.D. 392]).
When you perceive that God is chastening you, fly not to his enemies . . . but to his friends, the martyrs, the saints, and those who were pleasing to him, and who have great power [in God] (Orations 8:6 [A.D. 396]).
Augustine - A Christian people celebrate together in religious solemnity the memorials of the martyrs, both to encourage their being imitated and so that it can share in their merits and be aided by their prayers (Against Faustus the Manichean [A.D. 400]).
Mary is the New Eve
In about 155 AD, Justin Martyr (in his Dialogue with Trypho) made the Mary-Eve parallel by saying:
“Christ became a man
by a virgin to overcome the disobedience caused by the serpent …For Eve, a
virgin and undefiled, conceived the word of the serpent, and bore disobedience
and death. But the Virgin Mary received faith and joy when the angel Gabriel announced
to her the glad tidings that the Spirit of the Lord would come upon her and the
powers of the Most High would overshadow her, for which reason the Holy One
being born of her would be called the Son of God. And she replied: ‘Be it done
unto me according to thy word.”
Just as Eve’s name means that she
was
“the
mother of all the living” (
Gen
3:20), it is not far-fetched to then come to the realization that Mary became
“the
mother of all living in Christ”. Jesus’ words from the cross
“woman behold thy son” and
“behold thy mother” in John’s Gospel can
certainly be interpreted in this way. If Jesus spoke these words only to tie up
loose ends and make sure that his mother was cared for, they make no sense because
he had plenty of time to make those provision for her before his death.
He knew far in advance that he was going to
die.
In John’s Gospel, Jesus never
refers to his mother as
“mother” (John 2:4, 19:26).
Whenever he addresses his mother, he calls
her
“woman”.
The anti-Catholic will point to this as proof
that there was nothing special about Mary or that Jesus didn’t hold her in very
high regard.
This couldn’t be
further
from the truth. This correlates directly to the
Woman in
Gen. 3:15 and
in
Rev. 12.
Jesus defeats death on
Calvary (Skull
place) and fulfills the prophecy in
Gen.
3:15 about the offspring of the woman.
Mary is present at the foot of the cross while this is happening - and
what does Jesus call her in
John 19:26?
He calls her
“WOMAN”, because the prophecy about the head of the serpent being
crushed in
Genesis is taking place right
there on
Calvary.
SIDE NOTE:
Our Lady of
Guadalupe
The name in the Aztecan dialect
(Nahuatl) was
“Coatlaxopeuh”, pronounced
“Quatlasupe”.
The name was corrupted by the Spanish to
“Guadalupe”.
Coatlaxopeuh, means
“crushed serpent.” Ironically, in the Aztec religion the
highest idol and creator of mankind is Quetzalcóatl, which means
“Feather-Serpent.”
So Our Lady of Guadalupe is
“Our Lady of the crushed serpent”, which is
exactly what we read
about her in
Gen. 3:15:
“And
I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and
hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.”
The Early Church
Fathers knew well Mary’s role as the New Eve:
Ireneus, circa 180-199 AD wrote, “Against Heresies”. In it, he wrote of Mary: “Consequently,
then, Mary the Virgin is found to be obedient, saying: “Behold, O Lord, your
handmaid; be it done to me according to your word.” Eve, however, was disobedient; and when yet a virgin, she
did not obey…. having become disobedient, was
made the cause of death for herself and for the whole human race; so
also Mary, betrothed to a man
but nevertheless still a virgin, being obedient, was made the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human
race…. Thus, the knot of Eve’s
disobedience was loosed by the obedience of Mary. What the virgin Eve had
bound in unbelief, the Virgin Mary
loosed through faith.”
Tertullian wrote in his “The Flesh of Christ” in about 208-212
AD: “For it was while Eve was still a virgin that the word of the devil
crept in to erect an edifice of death. Likewise, through a Virgin, the Word of
God was introduced to set up a structure of life. Thus, what had been laid
waste in ruin by this sex, was by the same sex re-established in salvation. Eve had believed the serpent; Mary believed Gabriel. That
which the one destroyed by believing, the other, by believing, set straight.”
From this you can see that the idea
of Mary as
“the mother of all living in Christ” was something that the
Church interpreted from the Scriptures from the
very beginning, and would not have been alien to a first century
reader at all -
especially if they had John’s Gospel in front of them.
Mary Was
a Perpetual Virgin
The charge that Mary had other
children is ludicrous at best. If Mary indeed had other children, why would we
be inclined to believe that Jesus was different from his siblings? Or that he
was the 2nd Person in the Godhead? Mary’s perpetual virginity is the first evidence
we have that Christ’s miraculous conception and birth provide proof of His
eternal existence.
The
Septuagint is a
collection of 46 Old Testament books which includes 7 Books that are not found
in Protestant Bibles. It can be illustrated that Jesus himself and the Apostles
studied and quoted from the Septuagint.
The fact is that over 100 passages in the New Testament are directly
correlated to these 7 books from the Septuagint.
Some
examples include: Matt. 27:42/Wis. 2:18-20, Luke 24:4/2 Macc. 3:26, John 10:22/1Macc
4:36 & 52-59, Rom. 11:33/Judith 8:14, 1 Cor. 10:20/4:7 and 1 Pet. 1:6-7/Wis. 3:5-6.
In the Septuagint, the normal Greek
words for “brother(s)
“adelphos” and
“adelphoi” were used much more
liberally than the normal meaning.
It
was applied to cousins, uncles, nephews and kinsmen alike.
The Aramaic word,
“ach”, encompasses the
meanings for
brother of same parents, half-brother (same father), relative,
kinship, same tribe, and even
a fellow countryman.
The attempt by some Protestants to apply one
word for
all of these meanings in 21
st century English is
ludicrous.
Just as languages differ – so
do the meanings of different words.
Furthermore, there was no term for
the word
“cousin” in the Aramaic language that Jesus spoke. When the Old
Testament was translated into Greek in the centuries before the birth of Christ
(the Septuagint), the words
“adelphos” and
“adelphoi” were used in places where
“ach” was.
This is why we have many examples in the
Septuagint of the following:
In
Gen. 14:14, Lot is called Abraham’s
"brother", even though he was the son of
Haran, Abraham’s brother
(Gen. 11:26–28).
In
Gen.
29:15, Jacob is referred to as the
"brother" of his uncle
Laban.
Brothers
Kish and Eleazar were the sons of Mahli.
Kish had sons
of his own, but Eleazar’s daughters married their
"brethren”, the sons
of
Kish - who
were actually their cousins
(1 Chr.
23:21–22).
There is another quandary for
Protestants who attempt to prove that Mary had other children and list the
names given in the Bible.
They give the
names of these
adelphoi, James, Joseph (Joses), Jude (Judas), and list the
passages that mention these
adelphoi,
(Matt. 12:46; Matt. 13:55; Mark 3:31–34; Mark 6:3; Luke 8:19–20; John
2:12, 7:3, 5, 10; Acts 1:14; 1 Cor. 9:5).
According to the 2
nd
century document,
The Protoevangelium of James, these brothers and sisters of the
Lord were Joseph’s children from another marriage.
However, there is even stronger Scriptural
evidence that would debunk the myth of these “siblings”.
The “other Mary” at the foot of the
cross is described as being the mother of James and Joses and Salome.
She is also described as being Mary’s (mother
of Jesus)
“sister” (adelphe) (John 19:25).
James is elsewhere described as the
son of
Alphaeus (Matt. 10:3),
which would mean this other Mary,
whoever she was, was the wife of
both
Clopas
and Alphaeus. However, Alphaeus and Clopas are the same person, since the
Aramaic name for Alphaeus could be rendered in Greek either as Alphaeus or as
Clopas. It’s also possible that Alphaeus took a Greek name similar to his
Jewish name, the same way that Saul took the name Paul. The 2
nd century
historian
Hegesippus explains that Clopas was the
brother of Joseph, the foster-father of Jesus. James would
thus be Joseph’s nephew and a
cousin of Jesus, who was Joseph’s acknowledged
son.
What do the Scriptures have to say
about the women standing at the cross and their children?
Matt. 27:56 says, "…among whom were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joseph,
and the mother of the sons of Zebedee".
Mark 15:40 states,
"There
were also women looking on from afar, among whom were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the younger and of
Joses, and Salome").
Finally,
John 19:25 states,
"But standing by the cross of Jesus
were his mother, and his
mother’s sister, Mary the wife of
Clopas, and Mary Magdalene".
When you compare the different
accounts of the crucifixion, they clearly show the mother of James and Joseph to
be the wife of Clopas (also called, Alphaeus) –
not Mary, the
Mother of Jesus. Any attempt to connect these people as
uterine brothers of Jesus are squashed by the Bible.
Another Protestant “proof” against
the idea of Mary’s perpetual virginity is the word
“until”.
Matt. 1:25 says:
but kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son; and he called His
name Jesus.
Did Mary have other children after
Jesus?
As we have examined – the Bible
does not support this idea.
Let’s see
what the Scriptures say about the use of the word,
“until”.
2 Samuel 6:23 tells us:
Therefore
Michal the daughter of Saul had no child until
the day of her death.
Are we to assume that Michal had children
after she died
?
Let’s also examine
Acts 2:34-35 (also see Psalm 110:1, Matt
22:44): For
David did not go up into heaven, but he himself said: 'The Lord said to my
Lord, "Sit at my right hand until
I make your enemies your footstool."'
Are we to surmise that Jesus will cease to sit at the right
hand of the Father after his enemies are made his footstool? The problem here is that the anti-Catholic
attempts to apply 21st century English to Hebrew and Greek from a
culture thousands of years ago.
Finally, Mary’s question to the
Angel Gabriel is very telling about her intention to remain a virgin:
Luke 1:34: Then Mary said to
the angel, “How can this be, since I do not know a man?”
Mary was a betrothed girl who knew about marital relations. She didn’t say
“How can this be, since I have not known a man?” She said “How can this be, since I do not know a man?”
She was stating her intention to remain a virgin and was puzzled by
Gabriel’s announcement that she was to have a child.
She
knew that God was aware of her
intentions.
Her bewilderment and the
words
“I do not know”, as opposed to “
I have not known”,
is clear evidence that she had no intention of having marital relations.
This actually supports the 2
nd
century document,
The Protoevangelium of James, which said Mary was consecrated a
Temple virgin by her parents – much like the prophetess, Anna
(Luke 2:36-38).
She was to marry the older Joseph, a widower,
who was to be her protector.
It is also interesting to note that
the idea of Mary’s perpetual virginity is one that was held by the early
Protestant Reformers.
Men like
Martin Luther, John Calvin and
Ulrich Zwingli held Mary in high regard
venerated her as a sinless person and/or perpetual virgin:
Not only was Mary the mother of him who is born [in Bethlehem], but of
him who, before the world, was eternally born of the Father, from a Mother in
time and at the same time man and God.
(Weimer's The Works of Luther,
English translation by Pelikan, Concordia, St. Louis, v. 7, p. 572.)
“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 Opera, Corpus Reformatorum, Berlin, 1905, v. 1, p.
424.)
As a matter of fact, the
abandonment of these beliefs has evolved over time by those seeking to further
divorce themselves from the only Church established by Christ himself,
following instead the precepts and traditions of men that our Lord spoke
against
(Mark 7:5-9).
Once again, the teachings of Early Church Fathers put the
subject of Mary’s perpetual virginity to rest:
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 first fruit
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
first fruit 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 - 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]).
Jerome - 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. (Against
Helvidius: The Perpetual Virginity of Mary 19 [A.D. 383]).
Didymus the Blind
- It helps us to
understand the terms "firstborn" and "only begotten" when
the Evangelist tells that Mary remained a virgin "until she brought forth
her firstborn 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 maternal 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])
Augustine - In being born of a virgin who chose to
remain a virgin even before she knew
who was to be born other, 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 is written [quoting Ez 44:2]: 'This gate
shall be shut, it shall not be opened, and no man shall pass through it.
Because the Lord God of Israel hath entered it . . .' What means this closed
gate in the house of the Lord, except that Mary is ever to be inviolate?
What does it mean that 'no man shall pass through it,' save Joseph shall
not know her? And what is this--'The Lord alone enters in and goeth
out by it.' except that the Holy Ghost shall impregnate her, and that the
Lord of Angels shall be born of her? And what means this--'It shall be
shut for evermore,' but Mary is a Virgin before His birth, a Virgin
in His birth, and a Virgin after His birth."
Cyril of Alexandria - The 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]).
Council of Constantinople II (553 - 554) twice referred to Mary as
"ever-virgin."
Mary is the Ark
of the New Covenant (Jesus)
Whereas the symbols of God’s word were contained in the Ark of the Covenant in
the Old Testament, Mary actually carried God himself - the Word - in her womb in
the New Testament. And, whereas the Old
Testament Ark had to be made of pure materials and blessed and undefiled, how
much more
pure and undefiled would the vessel that actually carried God have to
be?
Non-Catholics charge that it
doesn’t matter who gave birth to Jesus.
They
say that Jesus could have been born from
anybody and still been the Messiah -
he could have even been born of a harlot.
Yes, Jesus
could have been
born of a harlot – but in order to fulfill all righteousness, his coming
had
to be more glorious than the Old Testament type.
He chose Mary out of all of the women in
history to be his mother.
New Testament fulfillments of types
found in the Old Testament are more glorious and perfect than the type itself.
This rule of Scripture is
without exception.
Adam/ Jesus Moses/ Jesus Ark of the Covenant/ Mary Jonah/ Jesus
Eve/Mary Joseph/Jesus Paschal Lamb/ Jesus David/Jesus
Jesus/Melchizedek Manna/Jesus
(Bread of Life)
The following comparison chart illustrates the Old Testament
type, the
Ark of the Covenant with the New Testament fulfillments of that
type,
Mary:
COMPARISON
CHART – Ark of the Covenant and Mary
OT type: [The New Covenant] will not be like
the covenant that... they broke though I was their husband (Jer. 31:31)
NT Fulfillment: The Holy Spirit (God) is Mary's spouse (Luke
1:35)
OT type: "Who am I that the Ark of my Lord should come to me?" (2 Sam. 6:9)
NT Fulfillment: "Who am I that the mother of my Lord should come to me?" (Luke 1:43)
OT type: When the Ark carrying the Word of God returned “David was leaping and
dancing before the Lord” (2 Sam. 6:14)
NT Fulfillment: When Mary came into Elizabeth's presence carrying the word of God, the baby
“leaped for joy” in Elizabeth's womb (Luke
2:38)
OT type: The Ark carrying the Word of God is brought to the house of Obed-Edom for 3
months, where it was a blessing. (2
Sam. 6:11)
NT Fulfillment: Mary (the new Ark) carrying the Word of God goes to Elizabeth's house for 3
months, where she is a blessing (Luke
1:56)
OT type: The Ark is captured (1 Sam 4:11)
and brought to a foreign land and later returns (1 Sam 6:13)
NT Fulfillment: Mary (the new Ark) is exiled to a foreign land (Egypt) and later returns (Matt. 2:14)
Augustine,
speaking with the wisdom of the Early Church Fathers, wrote that the “New Testament
lies hidden in the Old and the Old Testament is revealed in the New”.
This statement means that
unless one understands the Old Testament, one cannot understand the New Testament.
In the Book of Revelation, we see the New Ark of the Covenant in Heaven
being spoken of at the very end of Chapter
11, verse 19: Then God's temple in heaven
was opened, and the ark of his covenant could be seen in the temple. There were
flashes of lightning, rumblings, and peals of thunder, an earthquake, and a
violent hailstorm.
The very next verse is in Chapter 12 (Rev 12:1): A great
sign appeared in the sky, a woman 2
clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of
twelve stars.
Verse 2
says: She was with child and wailed aloud in pain as she labored to give
birth.
We know that this child is Jesus because in verse 4, we read:
She
gave birth to a son, a male child, destined to rule all the nations with an
iron rod.
There is simply no getting around the fact that
the Woman here in
Revelation 12 is
Mary.
Mary, as Queen Mother
The anti-Catholic misunderstands Luke 11:27-28, which says that a "woman in the crowd raised
her voice and said to him [Jesus], 'Blessed
is the womb that carried you and the breasts at which you nursed.'
But he said, 'Blessed rather are those
who hear the word of God and keep it!" This wasn’t an insult
against his mother. It was a commendation
because Mary's example is the fact that she heard the word of God and kept it by doing His will.
Mary, like Adam and Eve, is born without the stain of
original sin by reason of the merits of Jesus Christ, who selected her from all
women in history to be His mother.
The charge that Mary’s Queenship is based on pagan
religions and practices is made very
loosely by anti-Catholics who have
no understanding of the history of
Israel.
This ridiculous notion and others spread by
staunch anti-Catholics like
Alexander
Hislop, Loraine Boettner and
Jack T.
Chick are less rampant today then in the past but are still nonetheless
based in an anti-Catholic agenda or an otherwise abject ignorance of history.
For example, Hislop’s 19
th century attack on Christ’s Church,
“The
Two Babylons”, is an exercise in sloppy historical research, personal
vendetta and false accusations. This book has been debunked, not only by
informed Catholics but by Protestants and former Hislop devotees such as
Ralph Woodrow in his book,
The Babylon Connection? Woodrow debunked the false charges by Hislop
that the Catholic Church gleaned their practice of pagan idolatry and goddess
worship from the Mesopotamian ruler, Nimrod and his mother,
Semiramis (some sources claim she was also his wife).
The
Kingdom of Heaven
is modeled after the Davidic
Kingdom. We can see this
from the references to Isaiah 22:20-22
when Jesus appointed Peter as the bearer of the “keys to the kingdom” (Matt. 16:18-19).
Isaiah 22:20–22 - In that day I will call my servant Eliakim
the son of Hilkiah, and I will clothe him with your robe, and will bind your
girdle on him, and will commit your
authority to his hand; and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem
and to the house of Judah. And
I will place on his shoulder the key
of the house of David; he
shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open.
Matt. 16:18-19 - And so I say to you, you are Peter, and
upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall
not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom
of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound
in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
In
the Davidic Kingdom, the wife of the King was not
the Queen – but rather, his mother was elevated to that station.
The title Gebirah
(Gebira), meaning “Great Lady”
or “Queen Mother” was a royal title
and an office which was bestowed upon the mothers of the Kings of Israel but
only to those in the line of David.
Jesus Christ is the heir of David.
He is the fulfillment of the covenant
promises made to David in
2 Samuel 7:16;
23:5, and repeated to Mary in
Luke
1:26-36. Mary’s son rules from the Kingdom of the heavenly
Jerusalem. It is
fitting that His mother should enjoy the same role that other Davidic Queen
mothers enjoyed, that is the royal office of the heavenly
Gebirah.
This is the understanding that
Catholics
have when calling her “the Queen of Heaven” - not in the pagan sense of that
title as it is translated in English and found in
Jeremiah 7:18; 44:17, 18, 19, & 25, which is a designation for
an Egyptian goddess.
1 Kings 2:19-20
tells us: So Bathsheba went to King Solomon to speak to him about Adonijah; the
king got up to meet her and bowed before her; he then sat down on his throne; a
seat was brought for the king’s mother, and she sat down on his right.
“There is one small favor I would ask of you,” she said. “Do
not refuse me.” “Ask it, my mother,” the king said to her, “for I will not refuse you.”
Just as with the Davidic Kingdom,
as Jesus is the
King, Mary is the
Queen Mother.
Mary
was Immaculately Conceived
The
Greek word is kecharitomene that Luke used in his Gospel (v.1:28), which is the perfect passive
participle, indicates a completed action with permanent result. Thus it
translates, “completely, perfectly, enduringly endowed with grace.” By
comparison, the word used in Ephesians
1:6 and applied to the saints is charis. Kecharitomene
is
not a mere description here. It is used
as a title – a name.
The Angel didn’t say, “Hail Mary, full of grace.” He said kecharitomene.
St. Thomas Aquinas, one of the great
doctors of the Church writes, "The
Blessed Virgin Mary is full of grace both with respect to operation and to the
avoidance of evil. Second, she was full of grace with respect to the overflow
of soul to flesh or body. For it is a great thing for the saints to have enough
grace to sanctify their soul; but the soul of the Blessed Virgin Mary was so
full that from it graces flowed into her body, in order that with it she might
conceive the Son of God."
In
short, Adam, the
FIRST creation was
formed from the earth which was untouched by the stain of original sin.
Fittingly, Jesus, the
NEW creation would need to be born from a source that was
also
without sin.
As we have examined, New
Testament
fulfillments are always
more glorious and perfect that their Old Testament
types.
The
Fathers of the Eastern Church (Orthodox), who shared the same tradition with
the Catholic Church until they split in
1054 A.D., refer to Mary as
"the All-Holy" (Panagia) and the Church believes she "remained free of every
personal sin her whole life long” by the grace of God.
Protestants often use Romans 3 to try to disprove the idea of
Mary’s sinlessness. They point to the notion
that Mary MUST have been in need of a Savior because of the words she
spoke in the presences of her relative, Elizabeth:
Luke 1:46-47:“My soul proclaims the
greatness of the Lord; my spirit rejoices in God my savior.”This is one place where the
Catholic Church agrees with the
Protestant. We believe that Mary – as do
all of us – needed a Savior. However,
because of the special role she was about to play in salvation history, the
Church teaches that Mary was saved from the time of her conception to be the
fitting and proper vessel to carry God.
One ancient analogy speaks of a puddle of mud that all believers fall
into. God rescues us out of the mud, whereas, Mary
was rescued before she was able to fall in.
In Romans 3:10, 23, the idea that Paul was speaking literally about
everybody is sometimes pointed to by those who twist the Scriptures to their
own destruction (2 Pet. 3:16).
Paul says: “There is no one righteous, not even one; For
there is no distinction; all
have sinned and are deprived of the glory of God.” Is that right? How about babies or toddlers below the age of
reason? What about those who are mentally challenged and may not have full use
of their intellect and will? What about
Jesus? In this passage, St. Paul is actually
quoting Psalm
14, where it says, "The fool (the evil) says
in his heart, ‘There is no God. They
are corrupt...there is none that does good.’” Later in the same Psalm, we
hear that “God is present in the company
of the “righteous.”St. Paul
was using inclusive language, as was the Psalmist. This would be similar to somebody saying that
“everybody
in town” came to the celebration. The mass of mankind is what is being
referred to in these passages – not every individual human being ever born.
The anti-Catholic will also point to Luke 2:22-24 as proof of Mary’s sinfulness:
“When the days
were completed for their purification according to the law of Moses, they took
him up to Jerusalem to present him to the Lord, just as it is written in the
law of the Lord, "Every male that opens the womb shall be consecrated to
the Lord," and to offer the sacrifice of "a pair of turtledoves or
two young pigeons," in accordance with the dictate in the law of the Lord.”
Mary was a faithful, obedient
Jewish girl that would have done everything that was required by the
Law. This would include all of the
dietary laws with their restrictions and observance of the Passover – just
as Jesus did. It’s silly – and
somewhat ignorant - to think that she would have done otherwise.
Martin Luther on Mary’s Immaculate
Conception:
It is a sweet and pious
belief that the infusion of Mary's soul was effected without original sin; so
that in
the very infusion of her soul she was also purified from original sin and
adorned with God's gifts, receiving a pure soul infused by God; thus from the first moment she began to live
she was free from all sin" (Sermon: "On the Day of the Conception
of the Mother of God," 1527).
Once again, the Church Fathers are in accordance with the Catholic
Position on Mary:
Origen - This Virgin Mother of
the Only-begotten of God is called Mary, worthy of God, immaculate of the immaculate, one of the one (Homily 1 [A.D. 244]).
Hippolytus - He [Jesus] was the ark formed of
incorruptible wood. For by this is
signified that His tabernacle [Mary] was exempt from defilement and corruption
(Orat. In Illud, Dominus pascit me, in Gallandi, Bibl.
Patrum, II, 496 ante [A.D. 235]).
Ephraim the Syrian
- You alone and your
Mother are more beautiful than any others, for
there is neither blemish in you nor any stains upon your Mother. Who of my
children can compare in beauty to these? (Nisibene Hymns 27:8 [A. D. 361]).
Ambrose of Milan
- Come, then, and search
out your sheep, not through your servants or hired men, but do it yourself.
Lift me up bodily and in the flesh, which is fallen in Adam. Lift me up not
from Sarah but from Mary, a Virgin not
only undefiled but a Virgin whom grace had made inviolate, free of every stain
of sin (Commentary on Psalm
118:22-30 [A.D. 387]).
Gregory Nazianzen
- He was conceived by the virgin, who had been first purified by
the Spirit in soul and body; for, as it was fitting that childbearing
should receive its share of honor, so it was necessary that virginity should
receive even greater honor (Sermon 38
[d. A.D. 390]).
Augustine - We must except the Holy Virgin Mary,
concerning whom I wish to raise no question when it touches the subject of
sins, out of honor to the Lord; for from
Him we know what abundance of grace for overcoming sin in every particular was
conferred upon her who had the merit to conceive and bear Him who undoubtedly
had no sin (Nature and Grace
36:42 [A.D. 415]).
Theodotus of Ancrya - A virgin, innocent, spotless, free of all defect, untouched,
unsullied, holy in soul and body,
like a lily sprouting among thorns (Homily
6:11[ante A.D. 446]).
Proclus of Constantinople - As He formed her without any stain of her own, so He proceeded from her
contracting no stain (Homily
1[ante A.D. 446]).
Jacob of Sarug - [T]he very fact that God has elected her proves that none was ever
holier than Mary, if any stain had disfigured her soul, if any other virgin had
been purer and holier, God would have selected her and rejected Mary[ante A.D.
521].
Romanos the Melodist - Then the tribes of Israel heard that Anna had conceived the immaculate
one. So everyone took part in the rejoicing. Joachim gave a banquet, and great
was the merriment in the garden. He invited the priests and Levites to prayer;
then he called Mary into the center of the crowd, that she might be magnified (On the Birth of Mary 1 [d. ca A.D.
560]).
Conclusion
The attack on the Church and its
alleged
“Mary worship” is unfounded and unwarranted, given the context
of Scripture and historical evidence.
As
was mentioned earlier, false charges, unfounded attacks and half-truths can
only serve to further divide Catholic and Protestants.
It has been shown that these false
accusations and ad hominem attacks have no basis in fact and seem to have their
roots in poor catechesis, bad hermeneutics and a lack of historical research.
The great 19
th century convert to
Catholicism, John Henry Newman, once said,
“To
be steeped in history is to cease
being Protestant.” Conversely, it
may be said that to refuse knowledge of history is to
continue being
Protestant.
The night before he was crucified
for our sins, our Lord Jesus prayed for the
unity of his Church
(John
17).
He fervently prayed to the
Father and asked that his Church remain
ONE
– as he and the Father are
ONE.
This hope for the unity of his Body was
breached in
1054 with the
Great Schism of the Eastern Orthodox Church.
It was further splintered during the
Reformation and continues to splinter
to this day – as is evidenced by the tens of thousands of Protestant denominations
that exist.
Jesus promised the Church he
established 2000 years ago that the Holy Spirit would guide it to
all
truth and that the Holy Spirit would take from what was his and declare it to
the Church.
When other splinter groups
part from that truth, it becomes all the more evident that the Catholic Church
is the Body of believers that has been there from the beginning.
One glaring 20
th century example
of this evidence is the Catholic Church’s position on contraception.
Up until 1930, every Christian denomination was against
the idea of artificial contraception. That was the year the Anglican Church
parted with the rest of the Christian world at their
Lambeth Conference, declaring that contraception was acceptable in
some circumstances. Soon afterward, they caved in completely and in the years
that followed, virtually
every Protestant denomination also
accepted this practice. Since then, some Protestant denominations have reversed
their position but the Catholic Church has always remained steadfast in its
condemnation of this
unbiblical practice.
The truth is the
truth and to rationalize that truth
because of some personal hostility or dispute is nothing short of moral
relativism.
To be ignorant of the truth
is one thing but to misrepresent the truth by promulgating falsehoods about the
Church is to bear false witness
(John
9:41).
As was stated earlier, we are
indeed responsible for
what we know.
Now, a few words from the Reformers
themselves:
The Reformers on Mary, the Mother of God:
Martin Luther:
"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."
"St. Paul says 'God sent
his Son born of a woman, ' These words which I hold for true, really sustain
quite firmly that Mary is the Mother of God."
(Martin Luther, Martin Luther's Works, vol. 7, pg 592)
"This article
of faith- that Mary is the Mother of God- is present in the Church from the
beginning and is not a new creation of the council but the presentation of the
Gospel and the Scriptures."
(Martin Luther, Martin Luther's Works, vol. 7, pg 572)
"It is
certain that Mary is the Mother of the real and true God."
(Martin Luther, Martin Luther's Works, vol. 24, pg107)
John Calvin
It cannot be denied that God in choosing and destining
Mary to be the Mother of his Son, granted her the highest honor. ... 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 as at the same time the eternal God.
(Calvini
Opera, Corpus Reformatorum, Braunschweig-Berlin, 1863-1900, v. 45, p.
348, 35)
John Wycliffe
"It seems to me impossible that we should obtain
the reward of Heaven without the help of Mary. There is no sex or age, no rank
or position, of anyone in the whole human race, which has no need to call for
the help of the Holy Virgin." [Sermon on Mary]
Ulrich
Zwingli
"I esteem immensely the Mother of God".
"The more the honor and love of Christ increases
among men, so much the esteem and honor given to Mary should grow".
[The
Works of Zwingli, Corpus Reformatorum, Berlin, 1905].
Heinrich Bullinger, Ulrich
Zwingli’s successor
"Nestorius,
the heretic, recognized two natures in Christ, and he understood them as being
TWO PERSONS. Indeed he taught that the Word had not been united in ONE PERSON
with the flesh, but had only been its habitation in the flesh: that is why he
would not admit that the Blessed Virgin Mary was called “Theotokos” or “Mother
of God.”
Charles Drelincourt, the French Reformed pastor, 1633
"On account of this close and unaccountable union
(of the natures of Christ), what belonged to one of those natures can be
attributed generally to the PERSON. Hence just as the Apostle, St. Paul, said
that the Jews crucified the Lord of Glory (1 Cor 2)...we find no difficulty in
saying with the Ancients, that the VIRGIN MARY IS THE MOTHER OF GOD; for he
whom she bore is GOD above all else, eternally blest (Rom 9)."
