Mary - a different question


#1

My husband brought home a question from his RCIA (2nd year follow up) class –

Most Protestant & Evangelical groups keep Mary at arm’s length. She is mostly seen as a smiling figure in the Christmas Pageant. The misconceptions – myths about the worship of Mary by Catholics has been explained and most Catholic apologists cut their teeth on this one.

We know that Martin Luther maintained a devotion to Our Lady, and she was never any part of his protestations. From my understanding of the C of E, they also revere Mary.

The question is this – from Luther to today, when did Mary fall out of favor with the rest of the Christian world? Someone had to begin teaching against Mary – who was it and when?


#2

The question is this – from Luther to today, when did Mary fall out of favor with the rest of the Christian world? Someone had to begin teaching against Mary – who was it and when?

The Serpent. It was always since the beginning of Mary’s existence.

In addition, though I don’t know who those guys who started preaching against Mary, it was pretty much clear that their purpose was to disassociate themselves from anything Catholic, and one of them was our Holy Mother.

Pio


#3

[quote=hlgomez]The Serpent. It was always since the beginning of Mary’s existence.

In addition, though I don’t know who those guys who started preaching against Mary, it was pretty much clear that their purpose was to disassociate themselves from anything Catholic, and one of them was our Holy Mother.

Pio
[/quote]

How sad … :frowning:

Lose sight of the Mother and you lose sight of the Son… :frowning:


#4

Whoever he is, he certainly did the Blessed Mother a great disservice. How can one honestly claim to love Christ when His mother is ignored and insulted.

Gerry :slight_smile:


#5

We might wonder why the Marian affirmations of the Reformers did not survive in the teaching of their heirs - particularly the Fundamentalists. This break with the past did not come through any new discovery or revelation. The Reformers themselves (see above) took a benign even positive view of Marian doctrine - although they did reject Marian mediation because of their rejection of all human mediation. Moreover, while there were some excesses in popular Marian piety, Marian doctrine as taught in the pre-Reformation era drew its inspiration from the witness of Scripture and was rooted in Christology. The real reason for the break with the past must be attributed to the iconoclastic passion of the followers of the Reformation and the consequences of some Reformation principles. Even more influential in the break with Mary was the influence of the Enlightenment Era which essentially questioned or denied the mysteries of faith.

Unfortunately the Marian teachings and preachings of the Reformers have been “covered up” by their most zealous followers - with damaging theological and practical consequences. This “cover-up” can be detected even in Chosen by God: Mary in Evangelical Perspective, an Evangelical critique of Mariology. One of the contributors admits that “Most remarkable to modern Protestants is the Reformers’ almost universal acceptance of Mary’s continuing virginity, and their widespread reluctance to declare Mary a sinner”. He then asks if it is “a favourable providence” that kept these Marian teachings of the Reformers from being “transmitted to the Protestant churches”!
David F. Wright, ed., Chosen by God: Mary in Evangelical Perspective (London: Marshall Pickering, 1989), 180.
What is interpreted as “Providence” by a Marian critic may legitimately be interpreted as a force of a very different kind by a Christian who has recognized the role of Mary in God’s plan.
mariology.com/sections/reformers.html

hlgomez got it right on, I think.


#6

[quote=mrS4ntA]How sad … :frowning:

Lose sight of the Mother and you lose sight of the Son… :frowning:
[/quote]

Hi mrS4ntA,
Can you explain what you mean please.
To me it reads, if one loses Mary, one loses Christ. So Christ is not able or unwilling to save or help without Mary. Mary comes first is also involved. Because how could you have Christ without Mary, because initially you dont have Mary.
I always thougth that the order of acceptance into Christ was first the leading of the Holy Spirit who takes us to Christ and then our believe in Christ and then the circumcision of the heart. Now does this mean that the Holy Spirit leads us to Mary and when we have Mary then we are able to have Jesus.
Christ be with you
walk in lovehttp://forums.catholic.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
edwinG


#7

[quote=edwinG]Hi mrS4ntA,
Can you explain what you mean please.
To me it reads, if one loses Mary, one loses Christ. So Christ is not able or unwilling to save or help without Mary. Mary comes first is also involved. Because how could you have Christ without Mary, because initially you dont have Mary.
I always thougth that the order of acceptance into Christ was first the leading of the Holy Spirit who takes us to Christ and then our believe in Christ and then the circumcision of the heart. Now does this mean that the Holy Spirit leads us to Mary and when we have Mary then we are able to have Jesus.
Christ be with you
walk in lovehttp://forums.catholic.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
edwinG
[/quote]

obviously that’s not what I mean! Can’t you understand that we, too, understand the Divinity of Christ? Whatever God is doing, He is not wanting. He lacks nothing. And whatever Mary does for us, she does it from the grace of God, with the grace of God. Never have we honour her for her own merit, and never will we.

I’ll echo St Louis de Montfort, one of the Church’s greatest Marian devotees and advocates of her devotion:

With the whole Church I acknowledge that Mary, being a mere creature fashioned by the hands of God is, compared to his infinite majesty, less than an atom, or rather is simply nothing, since he alone can say, “I am he who is”. Consequently, this great Lord, who is ever independent and self-sufficient, never had and does not now have any absolute need of the Blessed Virgin for the accomplishment of his will and the manifestation of his glory. To do all things he has only to will them.

Now that being said, Mary ever leads us to her Son. She fixes our gazes upon Him – for she herself never strays from that gaze. I speak from personal experiences. Whilst it is not in absolute sense necessary to be devoted to Mary to leads one’s self to God, it is normatively and morally. St Louis put it in this way: since Mary is a perfect mold of Christ, it is easier for one to be Christ-like by following Him through her examples. He compared it with making a statue by 1. sculpting and 2. casting, the latter being easier and less prune to fail.

So I did not mean that in an absolute sense. I meant that losing sight of her, one risks losing sight of her Son, having abandoned the loving hands that only lead one softly to Him. Again, you can have my testimony for that. Often our faith to the Lord hangs by a thread, and for many that thread is Mary.

Ad Christum via Maria,
S4ntA.


#8

I don’t know enough of history of various protestant sects in the era following the Reformation in the 16th century, but I would guess, at least from English history, that the theological movement, the “Reform of the Reform” that in the 17th century culminated in the Puritan revolution, and on the continent sects like the Dutch Reformed, Anabaptists, etc., with its de-emphasis on celebrations like Christmas and denial of formal credal statements and of all sacraments, is the root of the dethronement of Mary.


#9

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.