The Deification of Mary?

[Elijah John]

Over the past few centuries, even dating back to the third, we seem to be witnessing a progression in Marian devotion.

In modern times as in antiquity, people pray to Mary as an intercessor. Parish Churches are named after her, statues are enshrined to her. Litanies are recited, and of course there is the Rosary and apparitions.

Some even refer to her as "co-redeemer".

Consider this summary timeline of Marian veneration, and what led up to all this.

-In 431 at the council of Ephesus Mary was declared "Theotokos", or "God bearer", from whence the Church derived her title "Mother of God".

-In 1854 Pope Pius the IX declared Mary born without original sin, a dogma known as the "immaculate conception"

-In 1950, Pope Pius the XII declared that Mary was transported body and soul into Heaven without tasting death in a dogma known as the "Assumption"

Throughout the ages various apparitions and visitations of Mary have been reported, some considered authentic by the Roman Catholic Church. Among these are Lourdes and Fatima.

Compare this to the progression of Jesus' Deification.

-Starting with the belief in his resurrection and ascension, which led to New Testament declarations that Jesus was "Son of God".

-New Testament accounts include the vision of the ascended Christ to Paul on the road to Damascus.

-The Council of Nicea in 325 AD refutes Arius claim that Christ was a created being, and affirms that Jesus is God, and was always God.

And today, as in ages past, people pray to Jesus, consider him mediator, recite litanies to his name, and enshine statues for his devotion. (sound familiar?)

For debate,:

-Despite Church insistance to the contrary, ("veneration not worship") are we witnessing a progression in Marian devotion that can be considered her Deification? And is this analagous to Jesus' elevation from Son of God to "God the Son"?

-Do you think Mary will become a fourth member of the Godhead in the minds and hearts of devoted Catholics? And according to future Church dogma? Thus completing a Christian pantheon?

If things keep progressing as they seem to be, that is.

[RightReason]

[Replying to post 19 by otseng]

Moderator Comment

Please do not respond publicly to moderator actions. If you do wish to challenge it, there is a proper protocol for it. Please review the Ruleson how to properly challenge moderator actions.

Sorry, I am not interested in spending time on such nonsense. I have not, nor ever would report another person just because I felt his/her words bothered me. I have little interest in drama. I prefer to focus on debate and conversation.

[Elijah John]

To clarify. This is an open ended thread. Two "no-s" to an OP question does not end debate, nor does it settle the matter. If a person does not want to participate, or considers it "nonesense" they do not have to participate.

Those who are not offended by debate and inquiry are welcome to engage. Others, please do not derail.

[Elijah John]

I will leave this here. Hosea 12:6 Yet YHVH, the God of Hosts, Must be invoked as LORD. (YHVH). h: footnote.: IE, one should not invoke any of the angelic host. So, the rest is moot. We as believers pray and depend on God·(YHVH) alone. We should address Him only. No intercession. That is diefying others.

Brian, I agree that we should go directly to YHVH, with humility, faith, reverence and contrition as our only mediators. But Hosea 12.6 does not read the way you have it presented. Rather, the verse reads:

Therefore turn thou to thy God: keep mercy and judgement, and wait on thy God continually.

.

Waiting on God implies turning directly to YHVH, but does not really say that verbatim.

Were you thinking of another verse from Hosea?

THe way I see it is that using intercessors does not necessarily deify them, but when those intercessors overtake the hearts of the petitioner, and become more important to them than Father YHVH God Himself, then it comes very close to deification. Such seems to be the case with Jesus, who sadly seems to command more devotion in the hearts of the faithful than even Father YHVH, and now with Mary, desipite protests to the contrary.

As I recall, for every ten "Hail Marys" in the Rosary, there is only one "Our Father". And during those recitations of the Hail Marys, one is supposed to focus one's mind on life events of Jesus, (and perhaps only indirectly on the Father). Did Jesus ever teach such a focus? (Rhetorical quesion.)

[RightReason]

[Replying to Elijah John]

THe way I see it is that using intercessors does not necessarily deify them, but when those intercessors overtake the hearts of the petitioner, and become more important to them than Father YHVH God Himself, then it comes very close to deification.

Agree.

Such seems to be the case with Jesus

Disagree. First, since Christians believe Jesus is God, then there is no conflict of interest in praising Jesus. And there certainly is no problem in deifying Jesus, because He should be deified. He is true God and true man. Jesus does have a divine nature. There is no level of importance between God, the Father, God, the son, and God, the Holy Spirit.

, who sadly seems to command more devotion in the hearts of the faithful than even Father YHVH,

Scripture tells us God is well pleased with His son, Jesus. It would not fit God’s nature to be jealous of His beloved son.

As I recall, for every ten "Hail Marys" in the Rosary, there is only one "Our Father". And during those recitations of the Hail Marys, one is supposed to focus one's mind on life events of Jesus, (and perhaps only indirectly on the Father). Did Jesus ever teach such a focus? (Rhetorical quesion.)

Yes. I think such a focus was taught.

We see throught Scripture examples of intercessory prayer, so unless one wants to claim God doesn’t know what He is doing, he/she would have to admit we in fact are encouraged to utilize means like intercessory prayer, devotion to Mary, and going through Jesus to bring us closer to God.

The recitation of the prayers of the Holy Rosary are to draw one closer to God. So, again not sure what the problem is. Again, can something be abused? Of course. Anything good can be abused – that does not mean if used as intended it is not good. Marriage can be bad and abused. Does that mean marriage should not be practiced?

How do you reconcile Scripture’s, “All generations shall call me blessed� if you are afraid to refer to Mary as our blessed mother?


And these Scriptural passages show how we are all in this together. Helping one another . . .


1 Therefore I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men, 2 for kings and all who are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence. 3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time, 7 for which I was appointed a preacher and an apostle -- I am speaking the truth in Christ and not lying-- a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth. 8 I desire therefore that men pray everywhere..." 1 Timothy 2:1-8


1 Therefore, we also, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which so easily ensnares us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us. -Hebrews 12:1

**************

Mary, by agreeing to bring Jesus into the world, became a "cause" of our Salvation.

In doing so, she mediated between Heaven and earth. Therefore, the Church gives Mary certain titles such as Mediatrix of all Grace and Co-Redemptrix.

Again, when we hear titles such as these, we must always remember that these titles are in no way equating Mary to Jesus. To the contrary, they are meant to be understood in relationship to Jesus Christ. Mary is what she is by grace and by virtue of being "in Christ." Since Jesus Christ is the source of all grace and Mary brought Jesus into the world, Mary is the Mediatrix of grace. Since she cooperated with God's redemptive plan, she is Co-Redemptrix.

https://www.askacatholic.com/_webpostin ... eHeart.cfm

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 22 by RightReason]


The first two lines of the Magnificat:

My soul doth magnify the Lord.

And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Savior.

There is a poetic parallel structure, reminicient of the Psalms in this prayer.

The first line uses the word "Lord", the second "God my Savior". If the word "Lord" in the first line means YHVH, and YHVH is equated with God her Savior, that sounds like a prayer a good Jewish girl would pray.

Or do apologists suppose that the "Lord" in this context means Jesus? Does it make any sense that a good Jewish woman would call her Son her Savior instead of Father YHVH?

To hold that position seems to me to wrench that prayer out of Mary's Jewish context and impose Trinitarian theology on it. Do we know for sure that was Luke's intention?

So it seems to me that Mary began as a blessed but entirely human devotee to YHVH God. I doubt very much that Mary was a "Trinitarian" or that she would have believed herself to have been concieved without "original sin".

Otherwise, why would she need a "Savior"?

On the other hand, Judaism does not even teach the doctrine of "original sin". And Mary was a Jew, not a Catholic.

[RightReason]

[Replying to Elijah John]

The first line uses the word "Lord", the second "God my Savior". If the word "Lord" in the first line means YHVH, and YHVH is equated with God her Savior, that sounds like a prayer a good Jewish girl would pray.

Or

do apologists suppose that the "Lord" in this context means Jesus? Does it make any sense that a good Jewish woman would call her Son her Savior instead of Father YHVH?

We see Jesus referred to as Lord throughout Scripture by others and Himself, so again not sure why it would be problematic. Trinitarian belief was there from the get go . . .

**************

. . . the leper called Jesus “Lord� in Matthew 8:2

. . . Thomas’ exclamation when Jesus appeared to the disciples after His resurrection: “Thomas said to him, ‘My Lord and my God!’� (John 20:28). From then on, the apostles’ message was that Jesus is Lord, meaning “Jesus is God.� Peter’s sermon on the Day of Pentecost contained that theme: “Let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Messiah� (Acts 2:36). Later, in Cornelius’s house, Peter declared that Jesus is “Lord of all� (Acts 10:36). Note how in Romans 10:9 Jesus’ lordship is linked to His resurrection: “If you declare with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.�


The statement “Jesus is Lord� means that Jesus is God. Jesus has “all authority in heaven and on earth� (Matthew 28:18). He is Lord of the Sabbath (Luke 6:5). He is “our only Sovereign and Lord� (Jude 1:4). He is, in fact, the Lord of lords (Revelation 17:14).


Jesus referred to Himself as “Lord� many times (e.g., Luke 19:31; John 13:13). And when we compare the Old Testament with the New, we find several times when the “LORD� (Yahweh) of the Hebrew Bible is equated with the “Lord Jesus� by the apostles. For example, Psalm 34:8 says, “Taste and see that the LORD is good,� and that passage is alluded to in 1 Peter 2:3, except there Jesus is the “Lord� who is good. Isaiah 8:13 says that “the LORD Almighty is the one you are to regard as holy�; in 1 Peter 3:15 we are commanded, “In your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy� (ESV).

A person who says, “Jesus is Lord,� with a full understanding of what that means (Jesus is God and has supreme authority over all things) has been divinely enlightened: “No one can say, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ except by the Holy Spirit� (1 Corinthians 12:3). Faith in the Lord Jesus is required for salvation (Acts 16:31).


Jesus is Lord. It’s the truth, whether or not people acknowledge the fact. He is more than the Messiah, more than the Savior; He is the Lord of all. Someday, all will submit to that truth: “God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father� (Philippians 2:9–11).


https://www.gotquestions.org/Jesus-is-Lord.html

To hold that position seems to me to wrench that prayer out of Mary's Jewish context and impose Trinitarian theology on it.

I disagree. As shown with all the Scripture above, it would be a natural conclusion.

So it seems to me that Mary began as a blessed but entirely human devotee to YHVH God. I doubt very much that Mary was a "Trinitarian" or that she would have believed herself to have been concieved without "original sin".

I doubt she would have believed anything else, especially since the moment the angel came to her, he addressed her “Mary, full of grace . . . “ At that moment she would have realized she was special/different.

************

In a theological context, grace is a free and unmerited gift of God. Grace is something given to someone.


After Mary’s initial apprehension, the angel tells her, “Fear not, Mary, for thou hast found grace with God� (Luke 1:30). Grace here is the noun charis, which we’ve already established usually means grace and only rarely favor (in the New Testament at least)


Kecharit�menē is the “perfect� tense of charito�. According to Herbert Weir Smyth’s A Greek Grammar for Colleges—still the bible for Greek grammar today—defines the perfect tense this way: “The perfect denotes a completed action the effects of which still continue in the present.� So Mary received grace in some complete way and remains completed in that grace.


“It is permissible, on Greek grammatical and linguistic grounds, to paraphrase kecharit�menē as completely, perfectly, enduringly endowed with grace� (Blass and DeBrunner, Greek Grammar of the New Testament, as cited by Catholic apologist Phil Vaz here).


. . . in the Greek text, as Aquinas points out, Mary’s name is missing from Luke 1:28. The text literally reads as “Hail, full of grace.� Mary has become so “full of grace� that it has consumed her completely—it has become more who she is even than even her very name.


https://catholicexchange.com/mean-full-grace

Otherwise, why would she need a "Savior"?

She still had a savior, whether conceived without sin or not. I’ve heard it explained like this . . .

If there is a pit and you fall into it and then God comes along and pulls you out – you have been saved.

If there is a pit and God prevents you from falling into it in the first place – you have been saved.

It is God’s right to do as He wishes. We all need Him. And think about it. How appropriate that Jesus would reside in a sinless womb, right?

[William]

[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]

-Despite Church insistance to the contrary, ("veneration not worship") are we witnessing a progression in Marian devotion that can be considered her Deification? And is this analagous to Jesus' elevation from Son of God to "God the Son"?

I would answer that if it is 'yes' then it isn't entirely incorrect to do so, despite the prolific push by the general Abrahamic community to condemn acknowledgement of the feminine in all ideas of GOD.

Fathers and Sons are just one aspect of the human condition regarding nature itself, which is also something Abrahamic attitudes can readily ignore in favor of the masculine.
The Earth itself is slightly bias toward the feminine and in that, Abrahamic attitudes have invented such excessive doctrine as 'the spirit of the Earth is demonic', 'the Earth is GODs footstool', 'the Earth is not heavenly', 'burn witches' etc et al...

Inclusion of the feminine may help achieve a more balanced outlook in general. If not for the Earth, we could not appreciate the masculinity of the Sun, nor indeed see any gender-like parallels in nature at all. In that, She (The Earth) is an anomaly. Without the Mother, the Fathers seed has no where in which to purchase a hold and grow life from the stuff of stars.

-Do you think Mary will become a fourth member of the Godhead in the minds and hearts of devoted Catholics? And according to future Church dogma? Thus completing a Christian pantheon?

I think the 'Christian pantheon' is more complex than that, and the Catholic branch attempts - in its own way - to acknowledge this. Far more so than deism can hope to do, given the cold and distant proximity of its idea of GOD in relation to this universe.

Paganism was/is the closest humans got to understanding GOD+Nature=Special Revelation. Abrahamic intrusion and overt insistence on the masculine alone, seeks to suffocate that, and deism in its coldness can only help to support that suffocation process.

The Earth is harmed as a result of this. Mary represents the earthen aspect of GOD, but with the understanding that the Earth is indeed 'in heaven' (in the heavens).

Thus the Earth being the Mother of GOD(s) ie all conscious life forms (recognized or not) is to say that in a physical world, GOD requires a mother to be the medium between the metaphysical and the physical.

And;

The evidence of GOD is found in nature Herself, specific to The Earth, but also in connect with the Sun. The Earth is the egg and the Sun provides the sperm. A Galaxy is a type of womb.

[bjs]

The 11th century movement known as the Cult of Mary did claim that Mary was co-equal God with the other members of the Trinity. The Roman Catholic Church immediately declared it a hearsay and said that its members must renounce that claim or be excommunicated from the Church. The Cult of Mary died out quickly. It’s only lasting contribution to society is that it greatly effected the way western culture thinks of romantic love.

So to all the questions of this thread: No, that does not seem likely. It was tried once and it, so to speak, did not stick.

Fair enough. The OP was attempting to draw a comparison, not only attempting to prove Mary's progession would end up with her Deification. There's no way for us to know if that will be the end result, really. Rather, the OP wonders if the apparent progression toward that end gives us a glimpse into what happened with Jesus in the first few centuries, when Jesus did indeed progress from the "Son of God" in the Bible, to "God the Son" the second person of the Trinity according to Church Councils.

Or conversley, does Jesus Deification give us a glimpse as to what may well happen with Mary, in the minds and hearts of her devotees, and in RCC official doctrine.

I was not aware of the episode you present. So that is evidence that ending up as part of the Godhead will not be the likely outcome with Mary. Still perhaps the comparison to Jesus Deification could be illuminating..

I am glad we could find some areas of agreement.

I understand your comparison between the Mary’s increased role in the church and view of Jesus as God.

As you probably know, I think that the disciples probably taught that Jesus was God more or less from the beginning. However, if we assume a slower process in which Jesus was elevated to the status of God, then I don’t think the comparison with Mary is the way to go.

First, Mary took too long. Even if we are argue that most Christian didn’t view Jesus as God until the mid-second century (enough document from that time say it explicitly, so I don’t think it can be any later), that view was still we established in about a century. Mary’s rise took nearly 10 times that long.

Beyond that, Mary’s increased role had a lot to do with the view and place of women in the church. I know that there are those who say that the church was always sexist towards women, but the of course the reality is more complicated than that.

Within the Christianity women and men have almost always been viewed as interdependent. God became incarnate as a male (according to the RCC). The lordship of Jesus left a void of female importance in the church, and the Mary’s increase in importance had a lot to do with filling that void.

I don’t think that we can apply the same thinking to Jesus. If Jesus was slowly elevated to God status, it probably had to happen in a significantly different way.

[RightReason]

[Replying to bjs]

Mary took too long. Even if we are argue that most Christian didn’t view Jesus as God until the mid-second century (enough document from that time say it explicitly, so I don’t think it can be any later), that view was still we established in about a century. Mary’s rise took nearly 10 times that long.

I am unclear on what either of you consider ‘Mary’s rise’. Early Church writings show devotion and honor to Mary as well as belief in the Immaculate Conception and Assumption, even prior to formally becoming dogmas. Scripture describes her as ‘full of grace’. And as I previously explained in an earlier post there is much more to those words then many might think-- “It is permissible, on Greek grammatical and linguistic grounds, to paraphrase kecharit�menē as completely, perfectly, enduringly endowed with grace� (Blass and DeBrunner, Greek Grammar of the New Testament, as cited by Catholic apologist Phil Vaz here). Scripture also tells of Mary prophesying, “and all generations shall call me blessed�. So how is it one could claim Mary was not highly regarded from the beginning?

Beyond that, Mary’s increased role had a lot to do with the view and place of women in the church.

I wonder of you could elaborate what you mean by this. I would suggest it is the culture who held the lowly view of women and the Church always recognized the dignity and role of women. Jesus spoke to the woman at the well at a time when women were disregarded. It was women who were privileged to be the first to discover the empty tomb. It was a woman whom God chose to bring the Savior into the world. God’s chosen people were always told to take care of their wives and widows again at a time when in that culture they were permitted to simply be left to the dogs. From the beginning Christians were held to a higher standard.

Within the Christianity women and men have almost always been viewed as interdependent.

So true. Great observation. The Church describes it as complimentary and has taught this beautiful plan from the beginning.

God became incarnate as a male (according to the RCC). The lordship of Jesus left a void of female importance in the church

You mean the culture saw that the lordship of Jesus left a void of female importance. The Church did not believe or teach that.

, and the Mary’s increase in importance had a lot to do with filling that void.

You mean Mary’s role from the beginning. Again, I disagree that there was an increase in her role. Her role was and is the same. And you would think the world would recognize such, but no . . . instead some to this day claim she was raped by the Holy Spirit – that she was a mere incubator – a slave. They don’t get it and consequently they don’t get her. These are the same people who see motherhood as oppression and enslavement. The Church has never viewed women or motherhood in this manner. Mary was exalted above all – above any other human being (other than Jesus, who is both human and divine). She outranks any prophet or Pope. So, no in my opinion it isn’t the Church who has a problem with women. Perhaps it just took the culture a little longer to figure this out.

[brianbbs67]

I will leave this here. Hosea 12:6 Yet YHVH, the God of Hosts, Must be invoked as LORD. (YHVH). h: footnote.: IE, one should not invoke any of the angelic host. So, the rest is moot. We as believers pray and depend on God·(YHVH) alone. We should address Him only. No intercession. That is diefying others.

Brian, I agree that we should go directly to YHVH, with humility, faith, reverence and contrition as our only mediators. But Hosea 12.6 does not read the way you have it presented. Rather, the verse reads:

Therefore turn thou to thy God: keep mercy and judgement, and wait on thy God continually.

.

Waiting on God implies turning directly to YHVH, but does not really say that verbatim.

Were you thinking of another verse from Hosea?

THe way I see it is that using intercessors does not necessarily deify them, but when those intercessors overtake the hearts of the petitioner, and become more important to them than Father YHVH God Himself, then it comes very close to deification. Such seems to be the case with Jesus, who sadly seems to command more devotion in the hearts of the faithful than even Father YHVH, and now with Mary, desipite protests to the contrary.

As I recall, for every ten "Hail Marys" in the Rosary, there is only one "Our Father". And during those recitations of the Hail Marys, one is supposed to focus one's mind on life events of Jesus, (and perhaps only indirectly on the Father). Did Jesus ever teach such a focus? (Rhetorical quesion.)

Sorry, I mixed up threads.