One of the tragedies of the Reformation as it progressed was that narrow and literal minded men not only lost contact with the age-old devotion of Christians to Our Lady, but, in their ignorance, sought to suggest that her place in Christian devotion was, in some unspecified way, a version of the worship of Diana which had taken place in Ephesus. Quite how it was that a Church which canonised St Luke’s Acts of the Apostles, which mentions this tradition at Ephesus, but makes clear Paul made converts there, came to adopt ‘Diana worship’, is never explained by such people. Being both rather ignorant and literal minded, and perhaps with a trace or three of misogyny, they see veneration of the Mother of God, they vaguely know there was a cult of Diana at Ephesus, so they put 1 and 1 together and come up with 11, never stopping to explain two things: why Christians would worship Diana in another guise; and why none of their bishops would have noticed?
Ephesus was, as Cyril knew, the place where the Blessed Virgin had come to live with St John, the pair of them fulfilling Jesus’ charge to them. Our friend Bosco poured scorn on the idea, it is not, after all, in the Bible. Well, of course, the charge from Jesus is there, and unless we suppose the pair of them disobeyed that command, we believe they were faithful to Him. But why Ephesus? It was certainly traditional by the time of Cyril, but where did the tradition originate?
One of the Churches to whom St John addressed a letter in the Book of the Apocalypse, was that at Smyrna. Now known as Izmir and the third largest city in Turkey, it is located just north of the old capital of Roman Ephesus. St Polycarp, who was martyred in 156, lived there, and was a disciple of St John, whom he had known as a young man, and by whom he had been brought to Christ. St Irenaeus, the Bishop of Lyons who died in 200, was a disciple of Polycarp’s, and carried forward the traditions he was taught by the disciple of St John. Among those traditions was that the two saints, John and Our Lady, lived in Ephesus; that house has been uncovered by archaeologists. Naturally, those who prefer their own unaided interpretation of Scripture to the traditions handed on by the Church will do what some of St John’s own disciples did, which is to deny his testimony. The rest of us will respect that a faithful disciple of a faithful disciple of St John knew what he was talking about.
All of that is by way of prelude to an examination of St Cyril’s speech at the opening of the Council at Ephesus, a city steeped in stories of the life of Our Lady and St John. The first of the Church Fathers to have a developed Mariology was Irenaeus. He made no claim to originality in what he wrote, and was recording systematically what the generation before him had taken for granted – it was, after all, a time when first-hand testimony of those who had known the Apostles was beginning to fade – hence the need to note it down. He saw Our Lady as the New Eve, through whose obedience the disobedience of the first Eve was redeemed. Where Eve’s disobedience had condemned mankind, Mary’s obedience brought into the world Our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ. In emphasising the reality of Jesus as a man incarnate of the Virgin, Irenaeus fought the heresy of docestism, which taught that Jesus was just a man filled with the Spirit (a statement recently made here by our friend Bosco, who was unaware he was repeating the earliest heresy). All of these themes we find in St Cyril’s address to the Fathers at the opening of the Council.
I see here a joyful company of Christian men met together in ready response to the call of Mary, the holy and ever-virgin Mother of God. The great grief that weighed upon me is changed into joy by your presence, venerable Fathers. Now the beautiful saying of David the psalmist: How good and pleasant it is for brothers to live together in unity (Psalm 133) has come true for us.
Therefore, holy and incomprehensible Trinity, we salute you at whose summons we have come together to this church of Mary, the Mother of God.
Mary, Mother of God, we salute you. Precious vessel, worthy of the whole worldโs reverence, you are an ever-shining light, the crown of virginity, the symbol of orthodoxy, an indestructible temple, the place that held him whom no place can contain, mother and virgin. Because of you the holy gospels could say: Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.
We salute you, for in your holy womb was confined him who is beyond all limitation. Because of you the holy Trinity is glorified and adored; the cross is called precious and is venerated throughout the world; the heavens exult; the angels and archangels make merry; demons are put to flight; the devil, that tempter, is thrust down from heaven; the fallen race of man is taken up on high; all creatures possessed by the madness of idolatry have attained knowledge of the truth; believers receive holy baptism; the oil of gladness is poured out; the Church is established throughout the world; pagans are brought to repentance.
And there, of course, we come to the heart of the matter. For Cyril, as for all Christians, the fact of the Incarnation is a cause of overwhelming joy, and that leads him to praise Our Lady extensively. This, of course, is the sort of thing which dour Protestants tend not to get, which makes one wonder what they do when they are taken up with the sheer joy of Christ? St Cyril, however, has only just begun:
What more is there to say? Because of you the light of the only-begotten Son of God has shone upon those who sat in darkness and in the shadow of death; prophets pronounced the word of God; the apostles preached salvation to the Gentiles; the dead are raised to life, and kings rule by the power of the holy Trinity.
Who can put Maryโs high honor into words? She is both mother and virgin. I am overwhelmed by the wonder of this miracle. Of course no one could be prevented from living in the house he had built for himself, yet who would invite mockery by asking his own servant to become his mother?
Behold then the joy of the whole universe. Let the union of God and man in the Son of the Virgin Mary fill us with awe and adoration. Let us fear and worship the undivided Trinity as we sing the praise of the ever-virgin Mary, the holy temple of God, and of God himself, her Son and spotless Bridegroom. To him be glory for ever and ever. Amen.
Formulaic language? No, there is a depth of devotion there which, as events were to show, was shared by so many others. This was no expression of a new doctrine. It was the eloquent restatement of one always held by Christians. Reading it gives one some idea of the depth of Cyril’s devotion – and an insight into why he fought this fight as fiercely as he did.
Great post. Devotion to Mary, by way of St. Louis de Montfort’s total consecration, is something that I undertook several years ago (though I wasn’t very faithful to it), and renewed during Lent. Preparation for my consecration renewal was my primary Lenten practice, now I’m a member of the Militia Immaculata. I don’t know how to explain any of this stuff to people, but I can say that I returned to the Catholic Church after almost 2 year’s absence because of Mary’s intercession. First came interest in praying the rosary again, then before you know it I was talking to a priest and made a return confession.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Interesting, Steven, I owe my own conversion to the Blessed Virgin too ๐
LikeLiked by 4 people
As I do my return to active faith, and a few other (not so) minor things. ๐
Seems to be quite common amongst us here, and not only our Catholic members.
LikeLiked by 4 people
I find myself saying the Ave Maria a lot, particularly when I am stressed.
LikeLiked by 4 people
When I am overstressed is when her support has often been revealed.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Yes, my devotion began before I was a Catholic ๐
LikeLiked by 3 people
I’m not surprised, particularly given your journey. ๐
LikeLiked by 2 people
Indeed. I have a post on this coming up on Wednesday – got to finish St Cyril first ๐
LikeLiked by 3 people
Absolutely; looking forward to it. ๐
LikeLiked by 1 person
I find it rather amazing that devotion to Mary is subject of ecumenical discussion here. That’s something I never would have imagined, outside of perhaps discussions between RC’s and EO’s.
LikeLiked by 3 people
It’s part of tradition in part of Anglicanism and Lutheranism as well, although not as well known, and pretty far up the candlestick, in both cases. ๐
When it first came up here, I hadn’t either, and did some research, and then it became part of my daily devotions, as well. Now, it’s important to me.
LikeLiked by 4 people
That is good to hear, Neo. Luther, of course, was devoted to Our Lady ๐
LikeLiked by 2 people
Finding that out is when I became comfortable with her. Of course for me it started with that candle at Walsingham. Gosh, almost five years ago, now. ๐
LikeLiked by 3 people
Indeed – yes, almost 5!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Funny, I was reading somewhere yesterday that Lutheranism (I’d add Anglicanism, myself) forms sort of the hinge between Catholicism and Protestantism. Pretty close, I think.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I think so too.
LikeLiked by 1 person
๐
LikeLike
Funny you mention that Lutheranism and Anglicanism form sort of a hinge between Catholicism and Protestantism. This has certainly been my experience as well. When I took my hiatus from the Catholic Church more than 2 years ago, it was Lutheranism that I returned to (I had a brief flirtation with Lutheranism prior entering the RCC). The Lutheran church is where my faith re-awakened and where I began to spiritually heal, before I was ready to be reconciled again with Rome. I think it was divine Providence that lead me into the Lutheran communion to recover from the spiritual malady I was suffering, and also divine Providence, as I mentioned earlier, that I returned to Rome at the beginning of this year after regaining a significant amount of spiritual strength.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Not so strangely, it’s a story I’ve heard a few times, and in reverse from yours as well. I stumbled into the Lutheran church from the Evangelical Kirche, essentially when I got married, and I wouldn’t be surprised if I ended up LCMS or Confessional, but I doubt that I’ll take that last step, but that’s not entirely up to me, as you know. ๐
If you haven’t figured it out, I see Lutheranism and Anglicanism as nearly twins, not least because of history. Increasingly, I see the Reformation as a revolt of the Germanic peoples from a new incarnation of Rome. Luther as Arminius? Well, not quite, but it has some of the flavor. ๐
LikeLiked by 2 people
I first attended a NALC parish when I started going back to church again; it was the only Lutheran parish in my town, but I really liked it. After my wife and I moved to a bigger city I attended a fairly high-church LCMS parish for a while, before settling into a more “evangelical” LCMS parish where my wife and I attended jointly until recently (even after I returned to the RCC we kept going there for a few months afterward). There were times I really wanted to be Confessional, but after reading the BOC and studying Lutheran, Catholic, and Orthodox theology, I concluded I couldn’t be strictly Confessional, not the least because I realized I still believed essentially in Roman doctrine, and my Mariology was way too “Roman” to fit in with the Confessional crowd. Thus began my gradual return back to Rome.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I can see that, strangely the supply pastor that brought me into the ELCA was a high church Episcopalian. That was when I started seeing the parallels.
I can see how that worked for you, and is why I likely won’t. I was confirmed with the Evangelical Catechism, although my church was actually a split off from a MS one. The wonders of a prussian community! ๐ If I had the background of the full Roman doctrine, it would probably be more likely for me, as well. There are a few things in LCMS and Confessional that I haven’t worked through to my satisfaction yet, plus logistical problems where I am, so for now, I’m taking the easy way out! ๐
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah, I thought LCMS would be a natural fit for me until I began attending and studying what it meant to be a Confessional Lutheran. Like I said before, I really liked the NALC parish I first attended and only left because I moved. Had I remained within the Lutheran community and had better access to NALC parish where I currently live, it’s likely I would have been content being an NALC Lutheran. They’re more moderate and not so strict about stuff, which better suits how my temperament has developed to this day.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yep, LCMS strikes me as quite like some of the dogmatic traditional Catholics – not really wrong but maybe ‘dour’ is the word. I’m a bit more relaxed, I’m gonna sin, so is everybody else, that’s why we confess. Meantime, if we’re gonna sin, might as well have fun doing it – or something! ๐
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, especially if you peruse websites like Brothers of John the Steadfast–they’re basically the Lutheran version of so-called “traditional Catholics” who post things on the internet condemning everybody. The two LCMS parishes I went to, though quite different (one high church and very Catholic-like and the other low-church and very evangelical-like), the pastors of both were very laid back guys who didn’t get all that wrapped up in dogmatics. I really liked the pastor of the high-church parish, and we’d meet for lunch periodically and discuss whatever came to mind. He sort of broke my LCMS stereotype of being somewhat dour.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I’ve known some like that, and in fact, a lot of the Lutheran stuff I use comes from LCMS, they’ve got some very good people. Most pastors, in my experience, are too busy pastoring to get all that hung up on dogmatics, it’s rarely black and white in the real world. That’s authentic, one can see it in Luther himself.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m starting to think that the internet facilitates the development of unhealthy stereotypes, especially when it comes to matters of religion. For example, based on “traditionalist” Catholic websites I’ve perused, I’ve come to loathe that label and associate it with legalism and self-righteousness, Phillip Augustine being an exemption from my stereotype. And yet, I don’t think I’ve actually met a Catholic who talks or acts like this in person. Most priests I’ve encountered are the opposite of dour, though strictly based on internet personalities I would have thought the opposite. Likewise, I’ve found the Catholic Church on paper to be rather strict, a stickler for the rules, but my consistent experience in real like has been that the Catholic Church is quite pastoral and laid back, with exception of maybe a few priests here and there. But others have had different experiences though.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree, in widening our contacts, we have also narrowed them, often to an echo chamber. I don’t think I’ve met a Catholic (or any sort of Protestant, for that matter) who is like that in real life, either. I think that goes for Priest, as well, they’re busy pastoring in the real world, as they’ve been for 2000 years, dogma and catechism are a guide, of course, as to what is right, but they must be applied with mercy, and the real world teaches that.
LikeLiked by 1 person
But he also was still more Confessional than I realized I could be. I haven’t spoken to him since leaving the Lutheran community and going back to Rome, maybe I should contact him again. He was one of my favorite pastors I’ve met in my lifetime.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Never hurts, he may have had his feeelings hurt by your move, even though he likely didn’t know it himself.
LikeLike
I don’t think he knows I left Lutheranism, we fell out of contact before I left.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sometimes that just happens, and if we value them, we should try and repair it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I believe you are correct. When I attended his parish he encouraged me to explore what works for my wife and me, as the two of us are very different in theological persuasion. He said that what matters is we both can follow God in good conscience together as husband and wife, and if that involves losing me as a parishoner, so be it. I lost contact when I began attending the other LCMS parish with my wife. But yes, I think you are correct, he’s too good a friend to lose contact with over something as mundane as changing churches.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Experience. There’s one pastor from when I was young that I lost contact with, and wish I hadn’t (some other people, as well, of course). But he and I specifically clicked, if fact, he was the only pastor that my dad liked, near as I can tell, in his entire lifetime. Sad that it happens.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It also seems to me that the more significant difference between Lutheranism and Anglicanism is that Anglicanism concerns itself a lot more with the concept of apostolic succession, whereas at least the American variations of Lutheranism bypass that discussion entirely and don’t worry about it. Other than that, I think the differences are largely minor.
LikeLiked by 2 people
True, although the ELCA (at least) does claim it through the Archbishop of Stockholm. But yes, Lutheranism, at least in the US, is essentially driven bottom up. I wonder if some of that, and it seems mostly in the CofE is a reaction to Parliament more than anything.
I had barely heard of the NALC, looks interesting, and there is one fairly near me, so I’ll have to check it out. The ELCA is fine in doctrine (we all read the same stuff, but they have some rather strange conclusions, not unlike the CofE, of course). Which strikes me as a good reason for not pushing authority overmuch.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I like the NALC, they occupy a middle ground between ELCA and LCMS. NALC is basically a reaction against the revisionism/radicalism within the ELCA, and the NALC parish I attended used to be an ELCA church (lots of alphabet soup, I admit). NALC has bishops and is not strictly Confessional (as the LCMS fancies itself), they ordain women and are open to a higher criticism approach to the Bible. Like any entity, I’m sure there’s great variation between individual parishes.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sounds quite close to my beliefs, in fact. I’ve always had trouble pulling the LCMS trigger, and yet the ELCA is too radical for me. Maybe for everybody else we should specify that we are speaking of personal confession (similar to Catholic practice here) we all confess to the High Priest, at least.
There’s always that variation, and I note that the one near me is in the same small town as a fairly large (for the area) ELCA church. In case I forget later, Thanks. It sounds quite good.
Yep,, lots of alphabet soup in Lutheranism, we haven’t even mentioned WELS. ๐
LikeLiked by 1 person
And the NALC parish used the ELCA’s most recent liturgical text, “Evangelical Worship”, so in some aspects there wasn’t a great deal of difference, other than you won’t be seeing any open homosexuals at the pulpit, nor will there be any interfaith worship with Wiccans.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Always a good thing! ๐ I could do without Moslems telling me Jesus isn’t divine as well. It’s not a bad book, although one of the appeals of the breakaway Anglicans is that they often use the old prayer book, but that’s mostly personal prejudice, I expect.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, the liturgy wars know no boundaries. 1928 BCP vs 1979 BCP, the “green book” versus Evangelical Lutheran Worship vs Lutheran Service Book, Novus Ordo versus Extraordinary Form. ๐
LikeLiked by 1 person
Very much so. Well I can always go home and read my 1865 CofE BCP, besides since the KJV is in the same book, it’s easy to find. ๐
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m not extremely familiar with Anglican breviaries, though I do have a copy of the 1928 BCP that I sometimes skim through. I was a Green Book person, all the way. It was what Jesus and the apostles used when Luther learned about the gospel, after all ๐
LikeLiked by 1 person
Not very different from the 1928 BCP, as far as I can see. I mostly bought it because it’s in lovely shape. I haven’t read the green book in quite a while, although I really confused myself with the Sarum Mass (Missal/ whatever) one foolish day. ๐
I did try the Luther Bible, and well sort of made it make sense. But my German is weak, and my medieval German nearly nonexistent.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You’re a smarter man than I, if an old German Bible made any sense to you whatever.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I sort of cheated, and used Wycliffe as a cheat sheet, his English was quite a bit more Germanic. Worked in the OT better than the New, though.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Fr Leon Pereira O.P. is also very eloquent about Our Lady.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I shall have to look him up – thank you.
LikeLike
A sample …
http://english.op.org/torch/mediatrix-of-all-graces
LikeLiked by 1 person
Another …
http://english.op.org/torch/house-of-gold
LikeLiked by 1 person
In heaven, for our sake, Our Lady appears more clearly as Co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix and Advocate
http://english.op.org/torch/mediatrix-of-all-graces
“That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else.”
Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else.
Book of isaiah
LikeLike
And which of those terms do you have the faintest comprehension of?
LikeLike
For I the LORD thy God will hold thy right hand, saying unto thee, Fear not; I will help thee.
LikeLike
โขThe Early Church concept of the “New Eve” is the first sign of the teaching of Our Lady as co-redeemer; Her title as “Redemptrix” to point to her suffering with Our Lord at Calvary (10th century); acknowledgment of Her being “co-crucified” with Our Lord (12th century); the “Co-Redemptrix” title (15th century); the “golden age” of Co-Redemptrix (17th century); the title of “Co-Redemptrix” applied by Pope Pius XI and Pope St. John Paul II (19th and 20th centuries);
https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/intl-marian-commission-asks-pope-to-declare-mary-co-redemptrix
And I looked, and there was none to help; and I wondered that there was none to uphold: therefore mine own arm brought salvation unto me; and my fury, it upheld me.
Isaiah 63 vs 5
LikeLike
I am not sure you understand what you cut and paste.
LikeLike
That would be my problem, wouldn’t it.
LikeLike
It would.
LikeLike
3.This most terrible of all the enemies which God has set up against the devil is His holy Mother Mary.
4.He has inspired herโwith so much hatred against that cursed enemy of God, with so much ingenuity in unveiling the malice of that ancient serpent, with so much power to conquer, to overthrow and to crush that proud, impious rebelโ that he fears her not only more than all angels and men, but in a sense more than God Himself.
5.Satan, being proud, suffers infinitely more from being beaten and punished by a little and humble handmaid of God, and Her humility has humbled him the more than the divine power;
http://catholicexchange.com/de-montfort-mary-in-the-struggle-against-satan
The Catholics are told that Rev 12 is Mary. I see cathols saying…..say hello to Mary. Lets see the Mary of Rev 12;
And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child.
14 And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.
15 And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood.
16 And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth.
This isn’t the big bad all powerful Mary of catholic fables. She flees from the Devil and hides and then the earth has to help her.
A false religion that has anti biblical dogma will have glaring contradictions. They are not hard to find.
The woman is the bride of Christ, the body of the saved, by the way.
hell has made more room to accommodate the expanding population of the fearful and whoremongering.
LikeLike
Bosco, you are living proof that an inability to read is a sign of stupidity. No one but you and a few nutjobs reads the poetic book of the Apocalypse as though it were a description of reality. No one but you and a few nujobs reads de Montfort’s poetic language as though it were a computer manual. Tell me, do you read poetry of classic literature? I doubt it. It is like watching a monkey trying to operate a computer.
LikeLike
Im sorry, but I don’t understand. I thought, and see, that cathols believe every word of catholic Maryology.
Good brother John said many times in the book of Rev that he did see or did hear. He saw these events with his eyes. Rev isn’t a poetry book, as cathols hope it its. But to those who follow the Lamb, it is Life.
LikeLike
It was called ‘the Apocalypse’ not ‘Revelation’ in Greek, and it is a recognised genre of literature. He is recording a vision he had you numpty.
LikeLike
Uh, that would be a negative. I don’t read poetry.
But I am a poet
and I didn’t know it
LikeLike
It shows.
LikeLike
I’m reading Pope Saint John Paul II’s spiritual diaries. It appears during his early years as priest and bishop it was St. Louis De Montfort that led to his strong devotion to Mary. JPII is rather convincing in his diaries that Mary is the gate to Christ and devotion to her is entirely Christological. It’s comforting in many ways to my spirituality, as I do not have a strong devotion to Mary, but I do have a strong devotion to the Pope of my childhood who has a strong devotion to Mary.
I figure it equals out.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Who can put Maryโs high honor into words?
We don’t worsip Mary….we only like her alittle.
Behold then the joy of the whole universe.
Now why in the world would those stupid protestants think we worship Mary?
LikeLike
Because you are really very stupid. You start with a prejudice and because you are so poorly-educated on anything to do with the humanities, confirmation bias kicks in. Google confirmation bias and look into the mirrot.
LikeLike
Hey, I cant win. I didn’t say you Marys worship Mary. I said you guys just like her alittle.
LikeLike
Of course we like her – but you have been banging on about ‘Diana-worship’, which in nonsense.
LikeLike
I thought you fancied yourself as sort of a historian? How come you don’t know the CC changed Diana statues into Mary statues just by changing the name plate. This is like common knowledge. I guess you are free to say it aint so.
LikeLike
Give me evidence – I am an historian. You do know Diana didn’t have children, so there are no statues of her with a baby
LikeLike
Stop playing dumb good brother. You know even better than I do that the mother child statues are the Babylonian goddess semiramis and Tammuz. Its the biggest part of the Romanish religion. The church on Vaticanus Hill is full to the top of babylo0inian idols. Weve gone over this a million times. Catholicism is the religion of Nimrod, it just uses Christian names for everything. But it never fooled the elect. that’s why the Church on Haunted Vaticanus Hill killed those who refused its offer of membership.
LikeLike
Dumb? I have seldom read more nonsense. Can you kindly explain why Jesus got it wrong? He founded the Church and said it would endure. You are telling me he was wrong. That’s some claim.
LikeLike
โCโ, that argument only works if it is first accepted that the Church is defined as that which is in full communion with Rome and that such a church was indeed the church that Christ founded.
LikeLike
As that is what the majority of the world’s Christians believe it is hardly a novel claim.
LikeLike
Genuine question Bosco. Why is it than not a single well-educated person agrees with you, and all those who do are as poorly-educated as yourself? Which group is more likely to be taken in by websites and pamphlets peddling lies? Ask yourself that. Give me one well-educated person who supports what you write, and give me the evidence they use. If you cannot do this, I will ask you to stop making nonsense claims, it makes you look like a blithering idiot, and it is my duty to protect you from yourself.
LikeLike
I am currently in St. Petersburg (Russia) and we attended the Russian Orthodox Church of St. Nicholas yesterday. There was quite at large crowd at least 350 people from children to elderly. The singing was incredible and everyone was clearly very engaged and sincere.
This speaks so much to the strength of Christian faith that 2 generations of communist suppression could not overcome.
During the service, I meditated on what it meant that Mary beside giving birth to Him had โmothered Godโ.
It obviously said much for the young woman that God chose to mother Him, particularly through the infancy of His incarnation.
But my concentration focused on considering the sort of God that this implied.
LikeLiked by 3 people
What a wonderful experience. Cyril knew it mattered hugely because of what it told us about God – that he became man and suffered for us, his creation – that is love, and he loved us first. All we are doing is returning that love as best we can. But what a God we have who loves us thus – mind-blowing when you think about it.
LikeLike
My thoughts were mainly about the condensation and humility of a God that would be mothered by (and for the sake of) His creation.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Very much part of the same God – and wonderful to contemplate
LikeLike
Good brother Rob, do you seriously think God looked around for a nice lady to be his mother?
God knows the beginning and the ending. He already knew who it was going to be and the city and the time. Well, that’s what people who know the Lord know of him. Either one knows him personally or one doesn’t.Its really that simple.
LikeLike
Of course he chose Mary beforehand, whoever said he didn’t? But as everyone except you know, Mary’s ‘let it be done unto me’ was a long way of saying ‘yes’, which means she had free will and could have said ‘no’. The god you worship may make roboits with no free choice, or he may be a rapist, but the Living God gives his creation a choice. If your God does not, I recommend worshipping the true God, not one you made up from a muddled reading of a book you don’t begin to understand.
LikeLike
The lack of necessity to search does not mean that a choice was not involved. One had to be chosen and there are many types that would be unfit for purpose.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Choice is something that sets us apart from the angels. We have free will to accept Christ or reject him. Its tragic that most people chose to reject Him.
But sometimes god takes what he wants. if he wants you to do something, you do it…..like it or not. I don’t think I need to site examples for all you bible scholars.
LikeLike
It’s clear that God chose Mary. Taking still requires a choice and NOT doing so without Mary’s consent has already been answered.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Amazing. Its all said and done. Now you all want to look back and say that Mary had a choice. re writing history. Without her consent? I thought you knew your bible better than that good brother Rob. Don’t join in the hellish chorus with these idolatrous mary worshipers. Re read the account. Show me where Gabe asked Marys permission. if you can, I will make public apology and I will go away and never come back.
Deal or No Deal?
LikeLike
No one has ever said that Gabriel asked Mary’s permission. What has been pointed out many times is that Mary acquiesced or offered her permission. You could argue that the text does not make it specific that God would have required such permission, which is your approach. But that would seem to me to defame the character of God
LikeLiked by 1 person
As we have said before, Mary gave her assent. If she didn’t that makes God a rapist; you are welcome to grovel before such a monster.
LikeLike
We have gone over this. Mary wasn’t asked if she would have the baby. You and other idolaters haven’t been able to show Gabe asking if she would have it. For heavens sake man, he told her she was going to have it. He didn’t say would you, pretty please with a matzo ball on top. Your lying murdering religion has you believing in phantoms. I guess it don’t matter. The music I used to listen to had me believing in phantoms. Well hell, I still listen to that music.
LikeLike
So you believe in a rapist god. Why do you worship a rapist? Explain the meaning of ‘be it according to your will’?
LikeLike
Of course he chose Mary beforehand, whoever said he didnโt?
You….and others in here.
LikeLike
No, we said she had a choice.
LikeLike
Come on good brother Chalcedon, show us what a big bad catholic you are. I want you to tell us all about how good brother Jonas had a choice.
LikeLike
What has that go to do with Mary having a choice? You lost that argument so you are changing the subject.
LikeLike
You Mary worshipers have told me over and over again how god doesn’t force people to do anything. Its all a choice. Get with the program. Tell us all how Jona had a choice. Im not changing the subject. The subject is choice. The object is God. Does he rely on us or do we rely on Him.?
LikeLike
Of course Jonah had a choice – how did he end iup in the belly of the whale? Do try upping your reading skills.
LikeLike
I didn’t have a choice. I was minding my own business, upset that I didn’t catch a broad, and I was changed. I remember exactly where I was. I was glad to be away from those holy rollers. Then something happened to me. I tried to shake it off. I figured that I had finally gone off the deep end.
LikeLike
You are possessed by the spirit – of the father of lies,
LikeLike
Im possessed by the father of lies eh. Maybe your fearless leader will tap you with his pine cone staff of Nimrod and heal you. Why doesn’t he go around and heal the sick? After all, hes the vicar of Christ. How come he just sticks his head out of a window and says something. Why doesn’t he go to hospitals and heal all the sick?
Ill tell you why he doesn’t. Because he cant. Father of lies. take a good look at your religion. Its full of lesbian nuns and homosexual priests and a murderous history. I suggest you don’t throw stones. One might hit your glass house, my brother.
LikeLike
He doesn’t heal the sick for the same reason you don’t.
LikeLike
It obviously said much for the young woman that God chose to mother Him, particularly through the infancy of His incarnation.
But my concentration focused on considering the sort of God that this implied.
Oh yes, oh yes. God, inHis infinite wisdom, has always chosen godly wonderful serene prayerful beautiful, calm, respectful, obedient sit with hands folded in prayer all day kinda people to be in His lineage. jesus spoke of little else. (;-D
LikeLike
It’s you here painting a Mary word picture, not me Bosco. I do not presume on what basis or by what criteria God selected Mary.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes you are. Don’t try to jive me. I don’t care enough to worry about it. I just point it out and let you deal with it. You brown nose these cathol idolaters. That’s all I need to know.
LikeLike
I do not presume on what basis or by what criteria God selected Mary.
I thought you were Mr Bible Scholar. Marys lineage is spelled out in the gospels. And both lead to David, and even to Adam. But if you don’t believe the gospels, you have a bigger problem than Mary and her lineage.
LikeLike
God chose her, she accepted, that is the Christian version. God raped her, is the Bosco version: go figure.
LikeLike