A troubling confession - Extra ecclesiam nulla salus!

[Xeno.of.athens]

Two separate "tings" (sic)?

Your quote talks about two separate persons. Body is not a person of its own (though it has its own collective "will" and goals, in mitochondria and microbiome).

Body, soul, and spirit are the one person, Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, and God.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

When a Asian woman gives birth to a baby whose father is African, who gave the baby his African atibutes?

The father gave to the child African attributes, and the mother gave the child Asian attributes, and both gave the child human attributes; the Lord, Jesus Christ has God as his Father, the Blessed Virgin Mary as his mother, and as such he received his deity from God, his humanity from Blessed Mary, and his personhood from both. There is one Lord, just as there is one God and Father of us all, one faith, one baptism. Christ is one person, not two, he is fully human and fully God. This is why we confess Blessed Mary as the mother of God, because she gave birth to the whole person, the Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[trophy33]

Body, soul, and spirit are the one person, Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, and God.

Was Jesus God and person before incarnation? If so, his body is not what constitutes His deity or personality.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Was Jesus God and person before incarnation? If so, his body is not what constitutes His deity or personality.

Spend less time speculating and more time following Jesus and all will become clear.

 

[trophy33]

Spend less time speculating and more time following Jesus and all will become clear.

Its not a speculation. Answer the question, if you can, for yourself. If the answer does not fit the views you have been taught, you do not have to admit it publicly, but consider it at least privately.

 

[ozso]

Spend less time speculating and more time following Jesus and all will become clear.

There you go with the condescending sniping again.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

There you go with the condescending sniping again.

One become exhausted answering nonsense questions, so I offered sincere advice; trust and obey ought to work. It is better than speculating.

 

[ozso]

One become exhausted answering nonsense questions,

You're still being condescending and rude.

so I offered sincere advice; trust and obey ought to work. It is better than speculating.

You accused someone of inadequacy in following Jesus.

I think the real problem is when you can't maintain a proper argument you resort to personal attacks.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

You're still being condescending and rude.

You accused someone of inadequacy in following Jesus.

I think the real problem is when you can't maintain a proper argument you resort to personal attacks.

seems to me that you are the one attacking me.

 

[tampasteve]

AMBASSADOR HAT ON

Let's keep this on track and not from becoming personal. Just a reminder.

AMBASSADOR HAT OFF

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Returning to the thread's OP and topic, it is true that the Catholic Church does not condemn Protestants hollos bolus to hell. The Catechism of the Catholic Church explicitly says otherwise in the two sections quoted in the original post.

 

[Fervent]

Nestorianism is a Christian doctrine that originated in the 5th century and was promoted by Nestorius, the Patriarch of Constantinople 1. The doctrine asserts that there were two separate persons, one human and one divine, in the incarnate Christ 1. Nestorianism was condemned as a heresy by the ecumenical councils of Ephesus (431) and Chalcedon (451) 2. The Oxford English Dictionary defines Nestorianism as “The doctrine of Nestorius, patriarch of Constantinople (appointed in 428), by which Christ is asserted to have had distinct human and divine persons” 1.
1: OxfordDictionaries 2: Britannica

People who refuse to acknowledge that Mary is the mother of God do so through asserting that Mary is mother only of the human flesh of Christ, thus they divide the person of Christ into two separate things.

It is entirely possible to deny Mary an honorific on the grounds that undue attention is paid to Mary and such talk distracts from the gospel of Jesus Christ, without denying that Mary gave birth to a single baby that is both divine and human. Nestorias' heresy came from what he said about the atonement, and his denial of Mary as theotokos was secondary/supplementary. While a Nestorian would deny Mary as Theotokos, refusing to call Mary Theotokos does not necessarily spring from Nestorianism.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

It is entirely possible to deny Mary an honorific on the grounds that undue attention is paid to Mary and such talk distracts from the gospel of Jesus Christ, without denying that Mary gave birth to a single baby that is both divine and human. Nestorias' heresy came from what he said about the atonement, and his denial of Mary as theotokos was secondary/supplementary. While a Nestorian would deny Mary as Theotokos, refusing to call Mary Theotokos does not necessarily spring from Nestorianism.

What you've written is not accurate.

 

[Fervent]

What you've written is not accurate.

In what way?

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

In what way?

Catholics call Mary Blessed in accordance with the teaching of the holy scriptures; to withhold this from her is not a prudent measure used to save the crowds from giving to Blessed Mary too much honour, it is to fulfil the prophecy that Blessed Mary spoke in Luke Chapter one. Nor does calling Mary Blessed distract from the gospel because it is part of the gospel to do so. And the nature of Nestorianism was given in a definition in one of my previous posts and it differs from what you wrote. Furthermore

Nestorianism is a term used in Christian theology and Church history to refer to several mutually related but doctrinarily distinct sets of teachings.[1] The first meaning of the term is related to the original teachings of Christian theologian Nestorius (d. c. 450 AD), who promoted specific doctrines in the fields of Christology and Mariology. The second meaning of the term is much wider, and relates to a set of later theological teachings, that were traditionally labelled as Nestorian, but differ from the teachings of Nestorius in origin, scope and terminology.[2] The Oxford English Dictionary defines Nestorianism as "The doctrine of Nestorius, patriarch of Constantinople (appointed in 428), by which Christ is asserted to have had distinct human and divine persons."[3]​

 

[Fervent]

Catholics call Mary Blessed in accordance with the teaching of the holy scriptures; to withhold this from her is not a prudent measure used to save the crowds from giving to Blessed Mary too much honour, it is to fulfil the prophecy that Blessed Mary spoke in Luke Chapter one. Nor does calling Mary Blessed distract from the gospel because it is part of the gospel to do so. And the nature of Nestorianism was given in a definition in one of my previous posts and it differs from what you wrote. Furthermore

Nestorianism is a term used in Christian theology and Church history to refer to several mutually related but doctrinarily distinct sets of teachings.[1] The first meaning of the term is related to the original teachings of Christian theologian Nestorius (d. c. 450 AD), who promoted specific doctrines in the fields of Christology and Mariology. The second meaning of the term is much wider, and relates to a set of later theological teachings, that were traditionally labelled as Nestorian, but differ from the teachings of Nestorius in origin, scope and terminology.[2] The Oxford English Dictionary defines Nestorianism as "The doctrine of Nestorius, patriarch of Constantinople (appointed in 428), by which Christ is asserted to have had distinct human and divine persons."[3]​

That doesn't answer my question, it's simply editorializing and then repeating a definition that lacks specific information. The objection of Nestorius was "God was born" and "God suffered," objections which aren't necessarily present in people who object to Marian titles today.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

That doesn't answer my question, it's simply editorializing and then repeating a definition that lacks specific information. The objection of Nestorius was "God was born" and "God suffered," objections which aren't necessarily present in people who object to Marian titles today.

The early church fathers together in two councils ruled that to refuse to confess Blessed Mary as the mother of God was to deny that the Lord Jesus Christ was one person and not two. That was at the heart of Nestorius' heresy and it is why his heresy and he himself were condemned by those councils. Your posts do not acknowledge that. Nevertheless history does acknowledge it.

 

[Fervent]

The early church fathers together in two councils ruled that to refuse to confess Blessed Mary as the mother of God was to deny that the Lord Jesus Christ was one person and not two. That was at the heart of Nestorius' heresy and it is why his heresy and he himself were condemned by those councils. Your posts do not acknowledge that. Nevertheless history does acknowledge it.

The heresy is dividing Christ into two persons, as heresies have to do with the person of Christ. That you include honorifics for Mary in the same realm as Christ's person speaks to an issue on your end. The Christological error has Marion consequences, but it does not follow that refusing Mary a title has Christological consequences. And to insist that it must simply means you are not taking the time to understand what the critics are saying and instead attempting to paint them with a false charge.

 

[dzheremi]

The Christological error has Marion consequences, but it does not follow that refusing Mary a title has Christological consequences.

Refusing to refer to her as Theotokos in particular absolutely does have Christological consequences. Nestorius even proposed his own alternative title for her that was more in line with his Christology (Christotokos), but the fathers rejected that as part of rejecting his Christology.

 

[Fervent]

Refusing to refer to her as Theotokos in particular absolutely does have Christological consequences. Nestorius even proposed his own alternative title for her that was more in line with his Christology (Christotokos), but the fathers rejected that as part of rejecting his Christology.

That would depend on what lays behind the refusal, because Nestorius' objection was at the idea of saying God was born. It is the Christology that drove the objection to the Marian title, whereas objections to Marian titles among most modern critics is driven by a belief that Mary is borderline(or outright) the object of worship with those titles. The objection is not necessarily evidence of a defective Christology, and insisting that it must is nothing more than a refusal to attempt to understand the critics.