Is John Mcarthur guilty of heresy?

[OldAbramBrown]

... I agree that MacArthur is a hostile source. Which is why I think a Catholic should go over what he said point by point in rebuttal.

It's been done piecemeal here already. In any case;

- we all have taken on board some things, both bad and good, from catholics, which is why so many of the viewpoints that have been expressed are valid (if one thinks about them)
- no two catholics believe the same - and we've had lots of their input already
- catholics don't necessarily follow the strangely worded publicity material of the "hierarchy"
- some local padres especially in America may imply that irrelevant and unhelpful excrescences are de rigueur

Functional heretics (those who take up their congregants' time) are clever enough not to promote the more famous canonical heresies.

All readers would help each other and non-members by abandoning essentialist fallacies (the word is the thing).

 

[OldAbramBrown]

Pragmatism.

Have you read The Metaphysical Club pubd 2001 in which Louis Menand traces how William James and others departed from the honest semiotics of Charles Sanders Peirce? (Susan Haack is critical of their trend.)

Dallas Willard's footnote to his chapter, 'Knowledge', in the 1995 Cambridge Companion to Husserl, relates how W James and colleagues had brought about a delay in the publication, in English, of Edmund Husserl's works on honest phenomenology (Walter Hopp is a good Husserl disciple now) (the Hegel and Heidegger versions of so called "phenomenology" are unreliable).

Disastrously, fundamentalists (Bible Minus) endorsed the essentialist fallacy (what they bound on earth . . .).

 

[OldAbramBrown]

... Now, would you elaborate on your parenthesis above? It interests me.

I posted this in the "apparent contradictions" thread specifically in response to another thread participant (willing collaborator). I think I am not breaching the spirit of site regulations by pasting it here for convenience.

I think there is significance that Jesus inbreathed (indwelling) after His resurrection but before Ascension, announcing then that He would send Holy Spirit strengthening after Ascension, which He then did.

The 150 or so repaired to the room where they prayed, already gifted as they began (low key).

This is supposed to be our core norm as ministers: supplicating.

Words of wisdom and knowledge confirming Scripture, coming through any of us, will guide our prayer intentions and our judgment on issues in living. The other various gifts (which are to be likewise unvetoed, just cultivated) will take proportion in such an atmosphere.

Hitherto many devout believers have received this without it being explicitly explained, but others haven't so they try "in the flesh" out of dutifulness to perhaps overbearing authority in a church.

The Pentecost occurrence was an epiphany (some of the 3,000 may have been catechised by Jesus or the disciples before anyway) but the 150 weren't a reserved elite when they entered the room to pray.

The ministry in the room is our core norm in ministry.

We then see some receiving inbreathing (indwelling) and strengthening simultaneously, and others who upon checking appear to not have received distinct enough teaching yet, receive the latter subsequently.

(The first 150 received in two parts either side of Ascension to show us the two sides.)

BTW pentecost is not a ceremony or mannerism needing copying.

Rom 10: 14-15 dealing with the reception of the Gospel of which this is such a big part of its vital core says why will anyone believe if others aren't equipped to tell them distinctly?

I've spent my life witnessing how people have remained confused in all sorts of fallacies.

Ministering had to be reserved for an elite (new apostolics); those who were in the know (often of a distorted version) were better than those who weren't through no fault of their own; etc

The corollary which is scarcely different is to put down children, wives, the poor, those who went to the wrong seminary, etc because the Bible is misread that way by those with no sense of meaning.

In my opinion hiding that Christ sent Holy Spirit gifts immediately after His Ascension (as the 150 mainly non-elite obeyed Him) makes it easier for the overbearing to usurp wrongful charge.

That's my short version, and it hasn't been easy to figure out like that: what do you think so far?

Mrs Jessie Penn-Lewis strived to avert distortions in "pentecostalism" whilst she believed in the genuine version (she had also evangelised in Russia before the revolution).

Dr Martyn Lloyd-Jones a congregationalist was a truthful charismatic believer and warned fellow evangelicals against "influencing".

Both got a bad reception from those who set store by making a splash of varying kinds whether politically or as showmanship.

NT and even OT usage appears to overlap (either or both) but once one "sees" one knows what is meant at any point.

That was that post and I'm glad you too have dug to the deeper meaning of this thread.

 

[All Becomes New]

I still like "Mary, Mother of Christ" or adjacently, "Mary, Mother of our Lord." Of course, I'm not going to push that on anyone. Different traditions (and people) are going to differ on this. I offered a suggestion. No need to take it if you don't want to.

However, making things more specific makes things less confusing. If you say to a Muslim, "Mary, Mother of God," that is not going to work in evangelism. Of course, it is not up to us to debate people into the Kingdom, obviously. But tact can be beneficial at times. No need to deliberately scare people away if we can help it.

My concern, if you have not gathered it yet, has nothing to do with JMac as I don't even like the guy. It's not some anti-Catholic thing or anything like that either. I just think that it would be problematic in the use of evangelism (several different religions now that I think about it would have quite a problem with this language). And I know we should not fence sit to appease non-Christians (or heretics). But I think there are better and worse ways of wording things. "Mary, mother of God" in a religion that is supposed to be theistic, could be problematic. "Mary, mother of Christ," or "Mary, mother of our Lord" seems to work fine. I personally like, "Mary, Mother of our Lord" better because it seems to fit better with "Year of our Lord." But that's a tangent. Anyways...

 

[OldAbramBrown]

Audio of his claims Exposing the Idolatry of Mary Worship: An Overview

I read some apparently accompanying text.

I haven't seen anyone crawl on their knees. I would just let them by if they did. I think there are lots of Romans or then Romans who didn't and don't set store by cardinals of New York of that time or our own time either. Only some would consider themselves partly duty bound to some extent towards Pius or any pope (and most catholics hate Leo XIII). I couldn't count or hold something while I was praying (and no-one told me to).

My non Jewish asssociates were Lubavitcher associates, rather comically. I was semi detached towards them.

In fact Romanism has become far more bossy as well as shallower in the last 40 years; I also think it was far bossier in the USA than I've seen in my perhaps unusual corner. With all the other weird movements in his district also and not much Holy Spirit trust, no wonder JMac's nerves are frazzled!

Perhaps he transmits his materials mainly to Mexico or the Phillippines.

Romanism (which encompasses most "catholics") is a complex organisation containing other organisations within it, which cloud relations.

This brings me to my point which is that JMac didn't - in the accompanying text - keep his promise to explain how living in Christ is better.

I heard somewhere else that "Tree of Life" means "Tree of Lives". "Tree of knowledge of Good and evil" means that someone who disrespects my boundaries pushes me into what they decided in their flesh, was "good" for me (i.e they were "influencing").

Evangelicalism doesn't believe there is life after you joined them.

 

[GDL]

"Bible only" (without all the meanings, received distinctly) is coded language for Bible Minus.

So, Bible only without the Spirit (charism I think I saw you or someone say earlier) is Bible Minus?

I'm going to use "charism" as I proceed.

That's my short version, and it hasn't been easy to figure out like that: what do you think so far?

I've little doubt we are missing something important. Whether nor not that is charism or charism is part of it, I do not know.

Here's what I do know though I do not claim this knowledge to be my final thoughts on the matter:

• I was raised in teachings that were cessationist.
• I came to disagree with many of the teachings I was raised under.
• As I said elsewhere, I lived and went to seminary close to TBN headquarters at the time. The area was full of charismatics and not in a good sense. I had close neighbors who were such.
• I was negatively influenced by many who were just Christian infants who were running to any charismatic event they heard of - this or that latest movement of the Spirit. They were always looking for some experience and knew very little about Scripture. If it was "holy laughter," being "slain in the Spirit," barking like dogs, the latest pseudo-tongues, Benny Hinn's or this or that latest TBN popular person's latest gathering at the local stadium, I was exposed to "christians" seeking it all and growing nowhere.
• I moved to HI to live a simpler life of study and contemplation with some learned exegetical skills. I ran into more of what I just described. More negative charisma influence.
• Fast forward:
  • I've never been exposed to anything remotely mature in charism.
  • I trend towards cessation (past experience above) but see enough in Scripture to say I cannot be emphatic about it and I'm open to truth and Spiritual reality.
  • I have had my own experiences, and they were astounding.
  • My best times are me and His Spirit and His Book and I don't say this just for effect.
  • I sense strongly something is wrong in the Body in this time.

I don't know if this answers you, but it is in truth where I am. It's kind of like the Mother of God discussion and what I mentioned about the Protestant slogan of Faith Alone; certain things get abused and truth and reality get lost. For the most part I just try to stay apart from all the chatter and find some of that purity and innocence I had right after I asked Him to take over what I had messed up - you know, that thing called life... I immersed myself in Him in prayer, contemplation, His Word His Spirit as best I knew, and my beginnings were something. I'm good now too, but...

 

[All Becomes New]

@GDL, if you had experienced anything like what I have you would be turned off to cessationism pretty quickly.

I'm not a charismania guy, though, so please don't think of me like that. But, for example, I prayed for a guy's dislocated shoulder after he got in a fight with someone and prayed for healing in Jesus' name and when he went to the ER they said his shoulder was "fine." I have an even crazier (and less refutable) story than that, but I don't think you are quite ready for that yet.

 

[Valletta]

12 is also the number of the tribes of Israel.

Then he dreamed still another dream and told it to his brothers, and said, “Look, I have dreamed another dream. And this time, the sun, the moon, and the eleven stars bowed down to me.” Genesis 37:9

(Joseph himself is the twelfth star of course)

That's not everyone. Certainly the crown that Mary wears can represent not just the twelve Apostles but the twelve tribes as well. In the Davidic kingdom, beginning with Solomon, the mother of the king is considered to be the queen mother. According to Holy Scripture the queen makes requests of the king.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

He's not denying that Jesus is God and that Mary was his mother.

He is explicitly denying that Blessed Mary is the mother of God and for the sorts of reasons that some here have put forward. It is a Christological heresy to make that denial, the specifics of the heresy depend on the specific reason or reasons advanced for the denial.

 

[OldAbramBrown]

He is explicitly denying that Blessed Mary is the mother of God and for the sorts of reasons that some here have put forward. It is a Christological heresy to make that denial, the specifics of the heresy depend on the specific reason or reasons advanced for the denial.

This may be if he believes in the Eternal Subordination of the Son? Is this named after some "-ism"? I just call it ESS.

Almost all christendom claims ESS now, certainly most RCC and C of E, and restorationists, dispensationists and dominionists do. And their "Father" ain't much good to them, and they haven't heard of Holy Spirit even though they claim to be "charismatic".

JM shows himself to be legalist. Dispensationism is the fruit of legalism. One of the slippery things about JM is that he pulls punches about his motivations (as is de rigueur among most christian leaders). Everything they say passes under almost everybody's radar. He may simply think he is fitting in.

 

[The Liturgist]

@GDL, if you had experienced anything like what I have you would be turned off to cessationism pretty quickly.

I'm not a charismania guy, though, so please don't think of me like that. But, for example, I prayed for a guy's dislocated shoulder after he got in a fight with someone and prayed for healing in Jesus' name and when he went to the ER they said his shoulder was "fine." I have an even crazier (and less refutable) story than that, but I don't think you are quite ready for that yet.

Indeed, a Coptic monk gave my mother Holy Unction (anointing of the sick with holy oil, consecrated on the last Friday in Lent in a beautiful service that consists of a set of seven relevant scripture lessons, such as the verse from the Epistle of James directing us to anoint the sick with oil, and prayers followed by one of seven oil lamps or wicks into a bowl of the oil being consecrated being lit, and at the end, once all seven lamps or seven wicks are lit, the consecrated oI’ll is drained and put into containers for later use; the Eastern Orthodox use the same rite but preface it with a long hymn called a canon, and sometimes celebrate it on Wednesday in Holy Week or after the main liturgy on Palm Sunday), this liturgy is not magic, of course, since the Syriac Orthodox and Western Rite Christians use completely different liturgies for consecrating the Oil for the Sick, and those are also efficacious, rather, I happen to like the Coptic-Byzantine Rite because it is structured around seven sets of scripture lessons and prayers (multiple lessons in each) separated by hymns, and also its historically interesting because it is quite ancient, we don’t know how, but also the main part of the liturgy is identical in the Coptic and Byzantine Rites, the only difference being the Byzantine preface with the Canon hymn, and this amount of similarity between the two liturgies is unusual.

At any rate, my mother had a horrible skin cancer on the side of her face, that an MRI had indicated was deep enough so that the surgery would take at least 9 hours, possibly requiring two separate visits to the plastic surgeon, who used the microsurgery technique known as MOHS, in order to remove it, and it would have entailed removing a section of the nerve that controls the left eyebrow, meaning that eyebrow would have permanently drooped uncontrollably. The MRI was performed before the monk saw the cancer and anointed her, and put holy oil directly on it, at St. Anthony’s Coptic Orthodox Monastery.

When the day of the surgery arrived, the tumor was found to be entirely superficial and was completely removed in 30 minutes, and the wound healed perfectly, so that you can’t really tell that there was ever a cancer there.

This is miraculous, because the MRI with contrast showed it to be not superficial but very deep, and the event happened so long that if the doctor made a mistake, the cancer would have metastized and probably gotten into her eye, her brain and her lymph nodes resulting in non-survivability. Kylie eleison.

So I am not a cessationist for the same reason you are. I have a file which contains even more remarkable incidents which make me believe the gifts of the Holy Spirit are still active. Also a disproportionate number of these incidents have involved clergy in the Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Assyrian and Roman Catholic Churches, and there were also some in Anglican and Methodist churches, and I suspect @MarkRohfrietsch or @ViaCrucis have seen some in the Lutheran church; I have reason to believe all these denominations, and several others, where if I were to name them all my post would be fifty pages long, have efficacious sacraments and other mysteries, and the grace of the Holy Spirit. In fact I recall one incident at a Lutheran church.

However, I do not believe that glossolalia as seen in Charismatic churches, or related practices like being “slain in the spirit” or uncontrollable laughter are manifestations of the Holy Spirit, and they also contradict the directive of St. Paul that everything in worship be done decently and in order.

Furthermore, the practice of venomous snake handling by Pentecostals in Appalachia is simply reckless, being based on a very unusual reading of the Longer Ending of Mark, whose authenticity is furthermore disputed by many scholars and several churches, and it has resulted in people being bit and even having limbs amputated.

 

[The Liturgist]

This may be if he believes in the Eternal Subordination of the Son? Is this named after some "-ism"? I just call it ESS.

Almost all christendom claims ESS now, certainly most RCC and C of E, and restorationists, dispensationists and dominionists do. And their "Father" ain't much good to them, and they haven't heard of Holy Spirit even though they claim to be "charismatic".

JM shows himself to be legalist. Dispensationism is the fruit of legalism. One of the slippery things about JM is that he pulls punches about his motivations (as is de rigueur among most christian leaders). Everything they say passes under almost everybody's radar. He may simply think he is fitting in.

Where did the C of E claim Eternal Subordination? Certainly not the High Church and Anglo Catholic parishes like All Saints Margaret Street, St. Bartholomew the Great, St. Stephen Walbrook, the Temple Church and St. Magnus the Martyr.

Now maybe a low church parish like Holy Trinity Brampton has a vicar who would say that.

By the way @Paidiske correct me if I’m wrong but no province of the Anglican Church in Australia teaches Eternal Subordination of the Son?

Insofar as Quincunque Vult is still an official creed of the Church of England, by the way, it expressly teaches the co-equality of the three persons of the Trinity. Of course this creed has become unpopular with Anglican clergy in recent years due to the so-called “damnatory clause”, which states that without belief in the doctrine stated in the creed one cannot be saved.

This creed, by the way, is also known as the Athanasian Creed, which is doubly inaccurate since it wasn’t written by. St. Athanasius and was intended as a confessional canticle and not a creed, as it dated from the era after the Council of Ephesus had prohibited writing new creeds or tampering with the Constantinopolitan creed of 382, and the Council of Chalcedon had reiterated that prohibtion, and the Roman Church still followed it, not having added the filioque.*. And the Apostles Creed was historically part of the Baptismal legend. However, I do not oppose, nor do I think anyone should oppose, of the use of these in addition to the Nicene Creed because they reinforce it on key points. For that matter, the hymns Te Deum Laudamus, Ho Monogenes and Haw Nurone originally composed in Latin, Greek and Syriac by Saints Ambrose and Augustine, St. Severus of Antioch, and St. Jacob of Sarugh respectively, are of strong Creedal value, as are some of the chorales of Charles Wesley that had a heavy input from his brother John (who kept Charles out of trouble doctrinally speaking and tried to make sure his hymns had a dogmatic content, and the partnership worked very well; I would liken it to Gilbert and Sullivan, except for the fact that Arthur Sullivan was also a fantastic hymn composer, who wrote Nearer my God to Thee, famously performed by the string quartet (or was it a quintet?) on RMS Titanic in the last moments before she sank, on April 12th of 1912 at about 2:30 AM in the freezing cold waters of the North Atlantic.**

*This first appeared in Spain in the Dark Ages in response to an outbreak of Adoptionism in the hopes of strengthening the divinity of Christ, but it is known to cause issues with Pneumatology, which is why many Anglicans and others have been advocating for it to be removed so their creed will align with that of the Orthodox and the Assyrian churches, the “Drop the Filioque” movement, and there is a version of Quincunque Vult which lacks the Filioque.

That said, in my opinion there is a way of reconciling the Filioque with Orthodox doctrine, and that is to interpret the Filioque as referring to Christ sending the Holy Spirit into the world, as opposed to the eternal origin of the Spirit. Also interestingly the Filioque is regarded by the Roman Catholic Church as heretical if it is read in Greek, and for this and other reasons the Eastern Catholic churches, especially the Greek Catholic Church, do not use it (Except for some which are unrelated to the Greek Orthodox, like the Maronites).

** The tragic incident on the submersible Titan due to hubristic engineering was an ironic reminder of the earlier disaster whose wreckage they were visiting; I am not entirely sure we should have tourism to the Titanic and other shipwrecks since these are literally watery graves. I like the approach the US Navy took in with the USS Arizona Memorial in Pearl Harbor.

 

[OldAbramBrown]

So, Bible only ... now too, but...

How will Holy Spirit (how I spell His personal name), be Comforter to us in a contingent world? The newfangled christian substitute for philosophy, which God had intended to be open to all honest people, is dominionism, which insists it is in control. One of the last few scientists to embrace contingency was S J Gould.

If I may presume to describe you to yourself, based on my hard won experience (and I mean hard), you have shut the door on the false charismatic and are (we hope) keeping it open for the real kind.

False charismatic and anti-charismatic from widely differing motives, are not the full story. A pincer movement is a material dialectic. False charismatic is the same thing as devious anti-charismatic: put down the agency, discretion and inference of the individual. The real gifts come through children, the frail, the poor, those without connections, far more than the high status personalities.

 

[OldAbramBrown]

... the mother of the king is considered to be the queen mother. According to Holy Scripture the queen makes requests of the king.

To those who eschew the materialist "interpretation", this is non-spooky! We are meant to emulate "her" (whether she is important to us or not) in doing just that!

Perhaps JMac has never realised it or, perhaps he didn't have space in his article / speech . . .

 

[OldAbramBrown]

Where did the ... in Pearl Harbor.

- You have given me some clues - I'll follow them up if I get the energy
- some Pentecostals were "onenesses" in an ineffectual attempt to combat legalism elsewhere, and this has been greatly copied where it isn't formally embraced
- On the subject of engineering (an analogue of church practice as St Paul pointed out in reverse as he was not a dominionist), the YT channel Mentour Pilot contains many clear explanations vividly relevant to church management.
- rest of response later
- some traditions tied Our Lady closely in with church practice in a relatively good sense, at one time, hence we are not remotely OT. Something about bearing Christ.

 

[Servus]

He is explicitly denying that Blessed Mary is the mother of God and for the sorts of reasons that some here have put forward. It is a Christological heresy to make that denial, the specifics of the heresy depend on the specific reason or reasons advanced for the denial.

Nah. MacArthur is a Trinitarian. What you're expressing is Catholic umbrage.

 

[Servus]

That's not everyone. Certainly the crown that Mary wears can represent not just the twelve Apostles but the twelve tribes as well. In the Davidic kingdom, beginning with Solomon, the mother of the king is considered to be the queen mother. According to Holy Scripture the queen makes requests of the king.

If folks want it to be the "Queen of Heaven" that's up to them.

 

[The Liturgist]

- You have given me some clues - I'll follow them up if I get the energy
- On the subject of engineering (an analogue of church practice as St Paul pointed out in reverse as he was not a dominionist), the YT channel Mentour Pilot contains many clear explanations vividly relevant to church management.
- rest of response later
- some traditions tied Our Lady closely in with church practice in a relatively good sense, at one time, hence we are not remotely OT. Something about bearing Christ.

I love Mentour Pilot. Are you an aviation enthusiast? I have a particular soft spot for some British and British influenced jetliners such as the DeHavilland Comet, the Vickers Vanguard, the Bristol Brittania, the Airspeed Ambassador, the Sud Aviation Caravelle, which used the same nose design as the Comet, but different, rounded triangle shaped windows, the BAC 1-11, the BAe 146/Avro RJ, and especially the exquisite Hawker Siddeley Trident, Vickers VC-10 and the Anglo-French Concorde. Also France produced some elegant aircraft before Airbus Industrie took over everything except the ATR, for example, the 1970s Boeing 737 competitor the Dassault Bregeuet Mercury, which sadly did not sell well due to limited range; indeed it was only operated on French domestic routes by Air Inter (there was a planned -200 version however which could have been a serious rival to the Boeing 727 that never went into production).

Also, prewar British aircraft were lovely, like the Short Scipio, the Handley-Paige HP 42 Hannibal and Heracles class, the Short Scylla, of which two were built when HP refused to manufacture extra HP 42s to meet the demand of Imperial Airways, the Armstrong Whitworth Atalanta class, and the Short Canopus and related flying boats, including the interesting experimental two-stage aircraft, the flying boat Mercury and the attached seaplane Maia (I might have the names backwards), where, to achieve transatlantic Service, the flying boat would fly part way into the Atlantic and then transfer passengers to the sea plane which piggy-backed on top to complete the journey, which I think influenced how the Space Shuttle would later be transported by the Boeing 747, and how the Russian Space Shuttle Buran and her sister ships would be transported by modified bombers and later by the Antonov An-225 which was sadly destroyed in its hangar last year. Of course the Mercury/Maia concept did not work out, as the Boeing 314 flying boat delivered to Pan Am just as WWII started could do the Atlantic non-stop, and so could the Focke-Wulf Condor built by the Germans, whose design I suspect influenced the Lockheed Constellation and Douglas DC-4E, DC-4, DC-6 and DC-7.

In addition to Petter (Mentour Pilot), another great aviation YouTuber who I watch every Sunday, whose content is much like what Mentour’s used to be before he switched to covering disasters during the Covid Pandemic, when his flying hours were radically cut by Ryanair (they have since been restored mostly; he is a line check airman, meaning he qualifies new pilots on the Boeing 737-800 and 737-Max8, is 74Gear (Kelsey) a 747 pilot with American cargo and charter airline Atlas Air, who once did a joint video with Mentour, and if you are looking for something more technical I like Juan Brown Colirio’s channel, blancolirio - he is a 777 pilot mainly flying transpacific routes for United. And another great channel with a focus on flight planning and vlogging the pilot life is FlyingWithBigErn - he is a 737 pilot with the pioneering Amerrican low cost carrier Southwest Airlines, who recently upgraded from First Officer to Captain, and before he was with Southwest he flew the KC-135 Stratotanker, a derivative of the Boeing 707 (or rather a close cousin; since the C-135 has a narrower fuselage that would only seat five passengers abreast, and the airlines started switching orders to the wider Doughlas DC-8, which could seat six abreast, so Boeing at great expense had to modify the civilian 707 production line so that all civilian 707s, and also several military aircraft like the E-3, E-8 and VC-137 (which was used as Air Force One, with two aircraft, serial number 26000 which was the first to enter service during the Kennedy administration and famously flew his body back to Washington DC, and 27000, which was introduced in the Nixon administration, I think, and by the Reagan era was the main aircraft, with 26000 occasionally being used as a backup and to fly missions as Air Force Two with the Vice President. Then George HW Bush ordered the 747-200Bs, which are related to the E4 “Doomsday Plane” which are about to be replaced by the 747-8, and these came online in the Clinton adminstration, and the 707s are in museums, with 27000 being at the Reagan Presidential Library, which is near one of my residences. Boeing called the narrower C=135 and its derivatives the KC-135 Stratotanker and the EC-135 electronic warfare aircraft “Boeing 717s” until after the acquisition of McDonnell Douglas, they reassigned that model number to the MD-95, which became the 717-200, and was the final aircraft based on the Douglas DC-9.

 

[OldAbramBrown]

There is an older and "official" deposit of teaching, and there is functional and expressly implicit teaching.

Also one can teach ESS without admitting it, or while insisting one isn't.

The C of E in England is dreadfully prone to the whims of politicians.

 

[OldAbramBrown]

If folks want it to be the "Queen of Heaven" that's up to them.

I got the impression only a subset of Romans found that name of importance to them, but I may have been too on the fringes to realise.

JM doesn't touch on the implications for the place we give a pope in our relating, that imbalanced mariology has. He stays very safe by not getting to core issues.