Council of Chalcedon and Mariology?


#1

Hi,

I read the Council of Chalcedon today. I want to read them all, yeehaw!!:bounce: I get my Council documents from The Daily Catholic. Now, maybe their sources only contain the main parts, and that’s understandable. But I’ve read from a very trustworthy source:ehh: (The Trail Of Blood, Landmark Baptist Anti-Catholic publication) that this council promulgated the doctrine of Mariolatry (p. 21 of my TOB).

Ok, well, whatever.

But, though Pope Leo’s letter to Flavian spoke of the Virgin Mary, and the “Definition of the Faith” from the Council did as well, nothing was said about praying to her, perpetual virginity, or even the immaculate conception. Not even in the Canons!! The references to Mary were in the context of proving Christ’s having a human nature distinct from His divine nature.

Like, are there some other writings that bring up Marian Doctrines (I prefer that term better than Mariolatry) from the Council of Chalcedon (451 A.D.)???


#2

Like, are there some other writings that bring up Marian Doctrines (I prefer that term better than Mariolatry) from the Council of Chalcedon (451 A.D.)???

First off, you’re confusing the words Mariology * and Mariolatry*. The former is the study of Mary, the latter the (idolatrous) worship of Mary.

Secondly, why does this bother you so much? The Council was not convened to deal with all the Marain dogmas; it was convened specifically to defend her title “Theotokos” and condemn Nestorianism, which appeared to deny the unique Personhood of Christ. What’s the prob?


#3

It was an earlier council, the Council of Ephesus (A.D. 431), that formally declared Mary to be the mother of God (Theotokos, God-bearer) (www.ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/EPHESUS.HTM):If anyone does not confess that Emmanuel is God in truth, and therefore that the holy virgin is the mother of God (for she bore in a fleshly way the Word of God become flesh), let him be anathema.

However, the council fathers were not the first fathers to give the description or title of ‘the mother of God’ to Mary:

The Virgin Mary, . . . being obedient to His word, received from an angel the glad tidings that she** would bear God**.” (Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book 5, Chap. 19, para. 1)

“After this, we acknowledge the resurrection of the dead, of which Jesus Christ our Lord became the firstling; who bore a body not in appearance but in truth derived from Mary the Mother of God” (Alexander of Alexandria (A.D. 324), Letter to Another Bishop Alexander and to all Non-Egyptian Bishops, 12)

"This Virgin became a Mother
while preserving her virginity;
And though still a Virgin
she carried a Child in her womb;
And the handmaid and word of His Wisdom
became the Mother of God.
(Ephraim (d. A.D. 373), Songs of Praise, 1, 20)

"The Word begotten of the Father from on high, inexpressibly, inexplicably, incomprehensi ly and eternally, is He that is born in time here below, of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, — so that those who are in the first place born here below might have a second birth from on high, that is, of God. (Athanasius (A.D. 365), On the Incarnation, 8)


#4

[quote=Todd Easton]However, the council fathers were not the first fathers to give the description or title of ‘the mother of God’ to Mary
[/quote]

An even larger list of early Church fathers on Mary, the mother of God at:
www.catholic.com/library/Mary_Mother_of_God.asp


#5

[quote=DominvsVobiscvm]First off, you’re confusing the words Mariology * and Mariolatry*. The former is the study of Mary, the latter the (idolatrous) worship of Mary.

Secondly, why does this bother you so much? The Council was not convened to deal with all the :)Marain dogmas; it was convened specifically to defend her title “Theotokos” and condemn Nestorianism, which appeared to deny the unique Personhood of Christ. What’s the prob?
[/quote]

Yes, thank you for that Domin,

Sit down, prepare to be shocked…

I don’t have a problem with it!!! It doesn’t bother me. I was just asking the question. I put smiley’s next to the :)Blessed Virgin Mary’s:) name!

From everything in the Council, I gathered that this council was against the Eutychian error, that taught that Christ had 2 natures before the incarnation, but only one (the divine) after the incarnation. Therefore, it was important for Pope Leo (pre-conciliarly) and the Council Bishops to stress that He was born of the :)Virgin Mary and did indeed receive His human nature from her, which He did not have before. So they built on what was taught at the previous 3 councils.

I was just wondering where in the world people come up with these ideas that the :)Marian doctrines began at that council!! Like Todd has pointed out, they were already being believed and taught. My primary suspicions are 1. they (the anti-catholics) are wrong, or 2. there was a part of the council that I didn’t read.


#6

Note that Mary was first proclaimed * Mother of God* at the Council of Ephesus [431 AD]. Chalcedon [451 AD] followed up on this.


#7

[quote=Joe Kelley]Note that Mary was first proclaimed * Mother of God* at the Council of Ephesus [431 AD]. Chalcedon [451 AD] followed up on this.
[/quote]

Ok, so is that what people mean when they say “Mariolatry in Council of Chalcedon?” I thought it would take more than that. They should be aware that Luke 1:43 is in the Bible.

So, I’m not missing anything from the Council of Chalcedon? It’s just an unfounded criticism?


#8

In those Acts he not only approves the letters and doctrine of Cyril, but disapproves, too, the perverse dogma of Nestorius, and that distinctly, because he was unwilling to call the blessed Virgin Mother of God: and he decrees that he should be deprived of the Episcopate and Communion unless, within ten days from the date of the announcing of the sentence, he openly rejects this faithless innovation, which endeavours to separate what Scripture joineth together–that is, the Person of Christ. Council of Ephesis

Moreover we confess that one of the same holy consubstantial Trinity, God the Word, who was begotten of the Father before the worlds, in the last days of the world for us and for our salvation came down from heaven, and was incarnate of the Holy Ghost, and of our Lady, the holy, immaculate, ever-virgin and glorious Mary, truly and properly the Mother of God, that is to say according to the flesh which was born of her; Third Council of Constantinople


these doctrines we assent to as the unbroken strength of piety, teaching that Christ the incarnate Son of God is one; and declaring that she who bare him without human seed was the immaculate Ever-Virgin, glorifying her as literally and in very truth the Mother of God. We condemn as foreign to the divine scheme the absurd division of Nestorius, who teaches that the one Christ consists of a man separately and of the Godhead separately and renews the Jewish impiety. Council of Trullo

With the Fathers of this synod we confess that he who was incarnate of the** immaculate Mother of God and Ever-Virgin Mary** has two natures, Second Council of Nicea

If anyone shall not confess the holy ever-virgin Mary, truly and properly the Mother of God, to be higher than every creature whether visible or invisible, and does not with sincere faith seek her intercessions as of one having confidence in her access to our God, since she bare him, etc. Second Council of Nicea


Likewise we venerate the image of the Virgin Mary, we lift up our mind to her the most holy Mother of God, bowing both head and knees before her; calling her blessed above all men and women, with the Archangel Gabriel. The veneration, moreover, of the holy images as received in the orthodox Church, in no respect transgresses this commandment. Second Council of Nicea

The things which we have decreed, being thus well supported, it is confessedly and beyond all question acceptable and well-pleasing before God, that the images of our Lord Jesus Christ as man, and those of the undefiled Mother of God, the ever-virgin Mary, and of the honourable Angels and of all Saints, should be venerated and saluted. And if anyone does not so believe, but undertakes to debate the matter further and is evil affected with regard to the veneration due the sacred images, such an one our holy ecumenical council (fortified by the inward working of the Spirit of God, and by the traditions of the Fathers and of the Church) anathematises Second Council of Nicea


#9

[quote=Reformed Rob]Ok, so is that what people mean when they say “Mariolatry in Council of Chalcedon?” I thought it would take more than that. They should be aware that Luke 1:43 is in the Bible.

So, I’m not missing anything from the Council of Chalcedon? It’s just an unfounded criticism?
[/quote]

Your not missing anything. Anti-Catholcis make things up as they go.


#10

Allrighty then.

Thank you very much. All that information and your observation are very helpful.

This thread is rated PG.

Historical sexual references, otherwise civilized and clean.


#11

[quote=Reformed Rob]Ok, so is that what people mean when they say “Mariolatry in Council of Chalcedon?” I thought it would take more than that. They should be aware that Luke 1:43 is in the Bible.

So, I’m not missing anything from the Council of Chalcedon? It’s just an unfounded criticism?
[/quote]

You are correct about Chalcedon, nothing really there to criticize. However, the events surrounding the Councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon I find fascinating…it’s almost like a soap opera. You have Eutyches excommunicated by Flavian for monophysitism, Theodoret excommunicated by Dioscoros for Nestorianism. Both of them appealing to Pope Leo. The pope then being “excommunicated” by Dioscoros, who ended up being deposed and exiled along with Eutyches at Chalcedon :whacky:

In order not to hijack this thread, I posted alot of info on these councils here starting at post #488.


#12

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.