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.

[ElCodeMonkey]

I've always thought that Catholics essentially worshiped Mary among other egregious errors that Jesus specifically said not to do. Call no one father or teacher, for example, and certainly make no graven image. In fact, Seventh Day Adventists believe that Catholicism is the beast itself for how far they've gone and establishing Sunday as the day of worship. I really can't imagine the religion adding in a fourth member though. The Trinity is so hard-fast in the language of all of Christendom and a Quatrinary just sounds terrible. They'll continue to venerate/worship Mary as they always have, but I doubt they'll ever officially give her a place in Godhead even if they act like she is. Who knows though. Maybe it will be a last ditch effort to real in more feminist sentiments. I think religion is tapering out rather than ramping up though, and it's less plausible to add in new doctrines. But will religion ever be eliminated? Hard to say, really.... Not within my life unless science finds the cure to death/degradation. But I'd imagine that new doctrines of that level of importance are much harder to come by without a whole new religion.

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 2 by ElCodeMonkey]

They could always call the new pantheon a "Divine Quartet", or the "Holy Quartet".

But I agree, that even if the RCC never reaches the point of official declaration, in the minds and hearts of many Catholic (and Orthodox?) they may as well for all practical purposes.

I also agree that the RCC practices things that don't seem entirely Biblical. Though I would not consider the Church "evil" for getting their theology wrong, nor would I label it as the "Beast" or any other such epithet.

To put it more mildly, if anything is "heresy", (deviating from Jesus teachings) it seems to be the doctrine of the Trinity, which Protestants also share.

[ElCodeMonkey]

[Replying to post 3 by Elijah John]

Haha, the Quartet sounds good . Not sure why that word didn't spring to mind. Personally, I think the whole modern church, including the Seventh Day Adventists, is the beast. Well, sorta, cuz I don't really believe in the beast prophesy. But I believe in the prophesy from 2 Thess that indicates that "someone" will be lifted on high as if he is God and I think that "someone" is the Bible itself. It replaced God and silenced him. Perhaps a separate topic though...

[RightReason]

[Replying to 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?

Only if you’re looking for it and need to promote your anti-Catholic propaganda.

And is this analagous to Jesus' elevation from Son of God to "God the Son"?

Only if you insist on getting the facts wrong.

-Do you think Mary will become a fourth member of the Godhead in the minds and hearts of devoted Catholics?

No.

Apparently, even though you aren’t Catholic, you think so. Uuuummm . . . all I can say, as a Catholic myself, is you misrepresent the Catholic faith. I also might ask why the need to push your anti-Catholic agenda? Do you feel threatened? Are you worried truth will prevail?

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 5 by RightReason]

I would advise you to refrain from personal speculation and characterization of other debaters here. You are treading...

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 5 by RightReason]

You don't know me, or my background. Or my motives for that matter. You say I am getting my facts wrong. Why don't you show us where, and how?

Was I wrong about the various declarations and pronouncements about Mary? By the Popes or the Councils? Or of Jesus?

Fair game to disagree about the possible trend line of those facts presented. Not so much to be personal and dismissive without demonstrating why.

[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.

[RightReason]

[Replying to Elijah John]

You don't know me, or my background. Or my motives for that matter. You say I am getting my facts wrong. Why don't you show us where, and how?

Was I wrong about the various declarations and pronouncements about Mary? By the Popes or the Councils? Or of Jesus?

Yes! You were wrong . . . see below . . .

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

Devotion to Mary has always existed.

First, Scripture teaches devotion to Mary -- why it’s right there in the Gospel of St. Luke, verse 26 to verse 55.

And who can overlook this . . .

“"Behold from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed"� -Luke 1:48

So, who is fulfilling this prophecy? Those who refuse to apply the adjective blessed to the Virgin Mary or those who do?

The Magnificat recorded from the earliest times by the same inspired author of Scripture, Luke is one of the eight most ancient Christian hymns.

Mary's Magnificat, recorded only in Luke's Gospel, is one of four hymns, distilled from a collection of early Jewish-Christian canticles, which complement the promise-fulfillment theme of Luke's infancy narrative. These songs are Mary's Magnificat; Zechariah's Benedictus (1:67–79); the angels' Gloria in Excelsis Deo (2:13–14); and Simeon's Nunc dimittis (2:28–32). In form and content, these four canticles are patterned on the "hymns of praise" in Israel's Psalter. In structure, these songs reflect the compositions of pre-Christian contemporary Jewish hymnology.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnificat



It is worth discussing that the Fathers of the Church saw Mary as Mediator of All Grace. Cyril of Alexandria in the fourth century writes:

Hail, Mary Mother of God, venerable treasure of the whole world . . . it is you through whom the Holy Trinity is glorified and adored . . . through whom the tempter, the devil is cast down from heaven, through whom the fallen creature is raised up to heaven, through whom all creation, once imprisoned by idolatry, has reached knowledge of the truth, through whom nations are brought to repentance. (qtd. in Luigi Gambero, Mary and the Fathers of the Church: The Blessed Virgin Mary in Patristic Thought)
Ephrem the Syrian says, "With the Mediator, you are the Mediatrix of the entire world"; and Antipater of Bostra, a father of the Council of Ephesus, wrote about the Blessed Virgin in the fifth century, "Hail, you who acceptably intercede as Mediatrix for mankind" (qtd. in Gambero, Mary and the Fathers).

https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print ... -salvation


Sooo . . . not exactly a new phenomenon – looks like Marian devotion goes way back.

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

This term, if properly understood, is accurate.

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

We cannot add anything to the Trinity but the plain truth is that Redemption without Mary is simply NOT POSSIBLE!

GOD took our nature by becoming human Through HER.
That does not make Her a GOD but a Collaborator OF GOD
Isn't that what co-redeemer means? She collaborated with GOD's redemption plan.

Mary is inextricably involved in God's plan of redemption of mankind. It is her "fiat", her "yes" to God that brought Christ's flesh from plan to perfection. She is integrally involved in mankind's redemption, not because of anything the Church has believed, or ruled on, or declared, but because of the will of God Himself.

https://forums.catholic.com/t/mary-as-c ... ptrix/1152

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"

Your timeline is misleading. For example just because it wasn’t until 1854 when the dogma of the Immaculate Conception was declared does not mean that Mary was not always born without sin or something the Church did not always believe and teach. Quite the contrary. Often things are formally declared to combat heresies that begin popping up. Mary’s place of devotion and respect had always existed throughout Christendom and only because some heretics came along teaching something contrary to Christ’s original church, did the Church have to issue a formal declaration. There is evidence that goes back to writings of the very first Christians and early Church fathers regarding Mary being born without sin. So, no this teaching did not come about in 1854.

And the exact can be said regarding the Assumption and pretty much all your points. You seem to simply not get it. You are looking for something that isn’t there and using a faulty line of reasoning to do so.

And perhaps biggest of all you misrepresent the Church if you suggest she usurps Glory to God. God alone is our Supreme being and is alone to be adored. To adore any other creature would be to commit idolatry. Therefore, it is wrong and unfair to suggest Catholics adore Mary. We do not, even though you continue to make that false claim.

[Elijah John]

Yes! You were wrong . . . see below . . .

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

Devotion to Mary has always existed.

First, Scripture teaches devotion to Mary -- why it’s right there in the Gospel of St. Luke, verse 26 to verse 55.

And who can overlook this . . .

“"Behold from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed"� -Luke 1:48

Good point, Marian devotion has existed before the third century. And the Magnificat is evidence for this. My point though, regardless of the exact starting point, is there has been a progression. The doctrines of the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption were not there from day one. If we extend that progression into the future, will we get Mary's actual Deification? I think it seems likely, and you say no. Reasonable people can disagree on their speculation. Even the RCC changes it's doctrine over the years, as the two "modern" (Immaculate Conception and Assumption) developments in Mariology demonstrate.

Sooo . . . not exactly a new phenomenon – looks like Marian devotion goes way back.

And I never said otherwise. I just forgot about the starting point of the "way back".
And my point is there has been a progression and an evolution in Church thinking about Mary and her place (role) in the Cosmos, and (as you indicate) her role in the plan of salvation. (Theotokos, God-bearer, "Mother of God")

We cannot add anything to the Trinity but the plain truth is that Redemption without Mary is simply NOT POSSIBLE!

Unless the Almighty in His wisdom and sovereignty simply and directly forgives the contrite., as Jesus taught. But that is another discussion.

Your timeline is misleading. For example just because it wasn’t until 1854 when the dogma of the Immaculate Conception was declared does not mean that Mary was not always born without sin or something the Church did not always believe and teach. Quite the contrary. Often things are formally declared to combat heresies that begin popping up. Mary’s place of devotion and respect had always existed throughout Christendom and only because some heretics came along teaching something contrary to Christ’s original church, did the Church have to issue a formal declaration. There is evidence that goes back to writings of the very first Christians and early Church fathers regarding Mary being born without sin. So, no this teaching did not come about in 1854.

Can you provide this evidence?

And the exact can be said regarding the Assumption and pretty much all your points. You seem to simply not get it.

Needlessly personal. You could have made the same point without that last sentence.

And perhaps biggest of all you misrepresent the Church if you suggest she usurps Glory to God. God alone is our Supreme being and is alone to be adored. To adore any other creature would be to commit idolatry. Therefore, it is wrong and unfair to suggest Catholics adore Mary. We do not, even though you continue to make that false claim.

If Jesus is not God, then Jesus-worship is a soft idolatry at the very least. And if Jesus is not God, then Marian veneration comes very close to worship, and thus another form of soft idolatry.

But fair protest, you well state the position of the Church. But it sure seems to me, and many others that the RCC splits hairs with the disctinction between "veneration" vs. adoration and worship.

The underlying point of the OP, (not just directed at you, and which I didn't fully articulate in the OP) is that there seems to be a paralell between what we are seeing today (and going way back) with Mary, to a similar process which happened in first three centuries or so with the progressive Deification of Jesus. That is my hypothesis, certainly open to debate.