Mariology

[Placemat]

Why does it exist and for what purpose?

 

[HTacianas]

Why does it exist and for what purpose?

The righteous saints live in heaven in the presence of God. We venerate the saints for their righteousness and service to God. Of those righteous saints, only one was chosen to give birth to Christ giving her a very special place among them. She is the chief of saints and worthy of greater veneration.

 

[Placemat]

The righteous saints live in heaven in the presence of God. We venerate the saints for their righteousness and service to God. Of those righteous saints, only one was chosen to give birth to Christ giving her a very special place among them. She is the chief of saints and worthy of greater veneration.

I apologise ...I wasn't very clear in my wording....I meant what is Mariology and why does it exist - for what purpose?

 

[chevyontheriver]

I apologise ...I wasn't very clear in my wording....I meant what is Mariology and why does it exist - for what purpose?

Mariology is simply the study of Mary. Like geology is the study of the geosphere. Or harmatology is the study of sin. Is there something you are getting at that I'm missing?

 

[Placemat]

Mariology is simply the study of Mary. Like geology is the study of the geosphere. Or harmatology is the study of sin. Is there something you are getting at that I'm missing?

Can't ask any clearer than what I've posted.......thank you for responding to the first part about 'what' it is.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

and for what purpose?

1) The purpose really is about Christology, aka the theology around Christ especially concerning the nature of his humanity and the Incarnation, his being the Son of Man, his being the Second Adam etc.


2) Their is also a second role, concerning Ecclesiology, especially the role of the saints .


3) She also has a lot of significance when it comes to the various types and shadows of the Old Testament as well as certain New Testament symbols and allusions like the scene of the Woman and the Dragon in the book of Revelation.

 

[thecolorsblend]

.

 

[GreekOrthodox]

To expand on what Pavel said, one early controversy was the nature of Jesus, was He God in a human shell, or a creation, or co-equal with God. These were answered by the first three Ecumenical councils held in the 4th century. The next question that came up is how Jesus is man and God at the same time. One bishop, Nestorius, taught that Mary gave birth only to the human nature of Jesus, aka Nestorianism. However, more importantly this teaching was along the lines that the human nature and divine nature of Jesus were "glued" together like two boards and that whatever happened to one, did not happen to the other.

This causes problems down the road. Basically, the God-side of Jesus never experiences his birth, life, suffering, death and resurrection. It is simply along for the ride. However, what becomes the orthodox teaching for the church, and I use orthodox to mean 90% of Christian denominations, is that the two natures are united in the person of Jesus so that what happens to one, happens to the other, through this union. Therefore we can say, in the person of Jesus, the second person of the Trinity, was born, lived, suffered, died and was resurrected.

Where this leads to is what Nestorius believed that Mary should be called the mother of Christ, or Christophorous, in Greek. The rest of the church taught that she should be called the mother of God, because she gave birth to the united natures of the God-man, Jesus. That's why Mariology became an important part of Christian theology.

 

[Placemat]

1) The purpose really is about Christology, aka the theology around Christ especially concerning the nature of his humanity and the Incarnation, his being the Son of Man, his being the Second Adam etc.


2) Their is also a second role, concerning Ecclesiology, especially the role of the saints .


3) She also has a lot of significance when it comes to the various types and shadows of the Old Testament as well as certain New Testament symbols and allusions like the scene of the Woman and the Dragon in the book of Revelation.

Thank you for your response.

 

[Placemat]

To expand on what Pavel said, one early controversy was the nature of Jesus, was He God in a human shell, or a creation, or co-equal with God. These were answered by the first three Ecumenical councils held in the 4th century. The next question that came up is how Jesus is man and God at the same time. One bishop, Nestorius, taught that Mary gave birth only to the human nature of Jesus, aka Nestorianism. However, more importantly this teaching was along the lines that the human nature and divine nature of Jesus were "glued" together like two boards and that whatever happened to one, did not happen to the other.

This causes problems down the road. Basically, the God-side of Jesus never experiences his birth, life, suffering, death and resurrection. It is simply along for the ride. However, what becomes the orthodox teaching for the church, and I use orthodox to mean 90% of Christian denominations, is that the two natures are united in the person of Jesus so that what happens to one, happens to the other, through this union. Therefore we can say, in the person of Jesus, the second person of the Trinity, was born, lived, suffered, died and was resurrected.

Where this leads to is what Nestorius believed that Mary should be called the mother of Christ, or Christophorous, in Greek. The rest of the church taught that she should be called the mother of God, because she gave birth to the united natures of the God-man, Jesus. That's why Mariology became an important part of Christian theology.

Thank you also for responding.

Allowing that there are many Christians who have little interest in Mariology, or any study about her, would your statement bolded above be more to the point if it said - it became important for Catholic theology...as the previous two posters explained? More to do with upholding their teachings and practices that have been developed with regards to Mary over the centuries.

 

[Placemat]

I want to clarify, I should state that I am a born again Christian, water immersed baptized, believing in and trusting in Jesus Christ, my lord and Saviour - born of a virgin,(Mary), truly God and man as He walked this earth, suffered and died on the cross, shedding His precious blood for me a sinner and for all who would believe....rose from the dead and is now sitting on the right hand of God the Father in Heaven and will return one day. I can accept the word 'trinity' as from what has been revealed through scripture to be correct. And I love Mary - she was an amazing young woman, truly blessed by God and deserves respect and recognition for all that she accomplished in her lifetime.

Hope this makes sense....attempting to key in on my phone as I listen to my grandson in the other room during his online schooling (covid restrictions)...what a joy that is!

 

[GreekOrthodox]

Thank you also for responding.

Allowing that there are many Christians who have little interest in Mariology, or any study about her, would your statement bolded above be more to the point if it said - it became important for Catholic theology...as the previous two posters explained? More to do with upholding their teachings and practices that have been developed with regards to Mary over the centuries.

Not just Roman Catholic... Pavel is Oriental Orthodox and I am Eastern Orthodox. Even the Lutheran Confessions state the following:

This belief was officially confessed by Lutherans in their Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration, article VIII.24:

On account of this personal union and communion of the natures, Mary, the most blessed virgin, did not conceive a mere, ordinary human being, but a human being who is truly the Son of the most high God, as the angel testifies. He demonstrated his divine majesty even in his mother’s womb in that he was born of a virgin without violating her virginity. Therefore she is truly the mother of God and yet remained a virgin.[14]

I believe Calvin and other early Reformers have similar statements.

The Orthodox Presbyterian Church which is about as conservative Presbyterian as you can find states:
Question & Answer: The Orthodox Presbyterian Church

Deity and humanity united in one person, even from the instant of conception in Mary, so that she truly bore God (the second person of the Godhead) in her womb and the One to whom she gave birth was both man and God (in the one person of Jesus). God did not owe his existence to her, but God was pleased to be borne within her.

 

[Placemat]

Not just Roman Catholic... Pavel is Oriental Orthodox and I am Eastern Orthodox.

Yes, I could see that you are GreekOrthodox - not Roman Catholic - that is why I posted just "Catholic", as I was of the understanding that Greek ....Orthodox was still 'Catholic'....not of Rome, but nevertheless Catholic. And with Pavel...thank you....I didn't know, but obviously they too have Marian practices.

Even the Lutheran Confessions state the following:

This belief was officially confessed by Lutherans in their Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration, article VIII.24:

On account of this personal union and communion of the natures, Mary, the most blessed virgin, did not conceive a mere, ordinary human being, but a human being who is truly the Son of the most high God, as the angel testifies. He demonstrated his divine majesty even in his mother’s womb in that he was born of a virgin without violating her virginity. Therefore she is truly the mother of God and yet remained a virgin.[14]

I believe Calvin and other early Reformers have similar statements.

Yes, similar statements - but as you are aware, not to the extent of Catholic Marian statements, dogmas and practices.

The Orthodox Presbyterian Church which is about as conservative Presbyterian as you can find states:
Question & Answer: The Orthodox Presbyterian Church
,
Deity and humanity united in one person, even from the instant of conception in Mary, so that she truly bore God (the second person of the Godhead) in her womb and the One to whom she gave birth was both man and God (in the one person of Jesus). God did not owe his existence to her, but God was pleased to be borne within her.

And of course, the paragraph immediately following the one you posted above from that article clarifies what they believe and adhere too with regards to Mary, and as opposed to Catholic teachings.

These statements are true, but in the history of the church they have often been used in the interests of exalting Mary beyond Scriptural warrant as an object of devotion, worship, and prayer. The problem is not with the truths stated above. The problem lies elsewhere. Mary was a humble servant of the Lord (by His grace) who was given the unique and amazing privilege of bringing the promised Messiah into the world. He is the Redeemer, He is the Lord, He is the One we must worship (John 5:23, 17:3, 16:13, 14, Colossians 1:16-20, etc.). He is the only Mediator between God and men (1 Timothy 2:5). There is no other name given among men whereby we must be saved (Acts 4:12, see John 14:6). Mary, a fallen daughter of Eve, was as much in need of His saving work as we all. By God's grace she played a key role, but she with us bows to worship her Son and give thanks to Him for her salvation.

 

[GreekOrthodox]

Yes, I could see that you are GreekOrthodox - not Roman Catholic - that is why I posted just "Catholic", as I was of the understanding that Greek ....Orthodox was still 'Catholic'....not of Rome, but nevertheless Catholic. And with Pavel...thank you....I didn't know, but obviously they too have Marian practices.

I'm mainly trying to cover where Mariology gets its start from theologically. The oldest hymn and prayer we have is from the 3rd century in a Coptic fragment:
Beneath your compassion,
We take refuge, O Theotokos [God-bearer]:
do not despise our petitions in time of trouble:
but rescue us from dangers,
only pure, only blessed one.

 

[Placemat]

I'm mainly trying to cover where Mariology gets its start from theologically. The oldest hymn and prayer we have is from the 3rd century in a Coptic fragment:
Beneath your compassion,
We take refuge, O Theotokos [God-bearer]:
do not despise our petitions in time of trouble:
but rescue us from dangers,
only pure, only blessed one.

And I appreciate your responses.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

Yes, I could see that you are GreekOrthodox - not Roman Catholic - that is why I posted just "Catholic", as I was of the understanding that Greek ....Orthodox was still 'Catholic'....not of Rome, but nevertheless Catholic. And with Pavel...thank you....I didn't know, but obviously they too have Marian practices.

If you could go back in time to pretty much the earliest days of Christianity you are going to run into
Marian practices, and this is not about paganism etc. but actually comes from the legacy of Judaism and its worship customs etc. as well as various kinds of controversies etc.


1) Judaism in the OT and later times had a place for the saints. The saints for them represented things like the Covenant they had with God etc.

IF you pay attention you can see this in a number of places: like "setting a place for Elijah", the children of Israel carried out the bones of Joseph during the Exodus so they could be buried in the Promised Land.

And their are a number of times we can see a reverence for the saints in the New Testament as well.

Hebrews 12:1

12 Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, let us throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles. And let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us,



2) Controversies about Christ
"Scattered throughout the Talmud, the founding document of rabbinic Judaism in late antiquity, can be found quite a few references to Jesus — and they’re not flattering. In this lucid, richly detailed, and accessible book, Peter Schäfer examines how the rabbis of the Talmud read, understood, and used the New Testament Jesus narrative to assert, ultimately, Judaism’s superiority over Christianity.


The Talmudic stories make fun of Jesus’ birth from a virgin, fervently contest his claim to be the Messiah and Son of God, and maintain that he was rightfully executed as a blasphemer and idolater. They subvert the Christian idea of Jesus’ resurrection and insist he got the punishment he deserved in hell — and that a similar fate awaits his followers."

Jesus in the Talmud


Boy its hard to get good quotes on this subject strait from the Talmud with the new Google algorithms but suffice it to say the Talmud at times portrays Jesus as a sorceror, born out of wedlock between Mary and a Roman Centurion, and it paints a picture of what the first generation of believers had to deal with from the Pharisees, hostile rabbi's etc in the earliest days of the Faith.


Anyway while that was the major controversy to kick things off as far as Early Christianity goes later their would be later ones like Arianism etc. that would affect Christian theology as well.



3) The Rule of Prayer is the rule of Belief. The previous statement is a Latin saying that reflects the Jewish attitudes of Prayer and worship that states or recognizes that our Prayers are not just messages to God but theological statements that show what we believe and profess. We can see that in one of Israel's oldest prayers "Hear oh Israel, the Lord thy God is One". aka the Shema
(Deuteronomy 6:4–9, 11:13–21; Numbers 15:37–41),


Anyway professions of Mary are not about worshipping Mary but about professing Christ. Like Mary as the Mother of God, was a profession of Faith against Arianism, which taught that Christ was divine but not fully or truly divine like God the Father. etc. (Jesus was most likely considered like a demigod or angelic being that had supernatural power but not having God's infinite attributes).


And people who are hung up on this stuff should do more reading about what was going on in the first few centuries of Christianity. Because people like to accept a lot of things from the Classic Age like having a completed New Testament canon, belief that Jesus is "true God and true Man" but they are completely ignorant of what it took to establish that kind of truth / inheritance etc. This didn't just happen by accident, or by God creating it out of thin air, but lots of people labored for centuries over many problems and struggles.

 

[Placemat]

If you could go back in time to pretty much the earliest days of Christianity you are going to run into
Marian practices, and this is not about paganism etc. but actually comes from the legacy of Judaism and its worship customs etc. as well as various kinds of controversies etc.


1) Judaism in the OT and later times had a place for the saints. The saints for them represented things like the Covenant they had with God etc.

IF you pay attention you can see this in a number of places: like "setting a place for Elijah", the children of Israel carried out the bones of Joseph during the Exodus so they could be buried in the Promised Land.

And their are a number of times we can see a reverence for the saints in the New Testament as well.

Hebrews 12:1

12 Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, let us throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles. And let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us,



2) Controversies about Christ
"Scattered throughout the Talmud, the founding document of rabbinic Judaism in late antiquity, can be found quite a few references to Jesus — and they’re not flattering. In this lucid, richly detailed, and accessible book, Peter Schäfer examines how the rabbis of the Talmud read, understood, and used the New Testament Jesus narrative to assert, ultimately, Judaism’s superiority over Christianity.


The Talmudic stories make fun of Jesus’ birth from a virgin, fervently contest his claim to be the Messiah and Son of God, and maintain that he was rightfully executed as a blasphemer and idolater. They subvert the Christian idea of Jesus’ resurrection and insist he got the punishment he deserved in hell — and that a similar fate awaits his followers."

Jesus in the Talmud


Boy its hard to get good quotes on this subject strait from the Talmud with the new Google algorithms but suffice it to say the Talmud at times portrays Jesus as a sorceror, born out of wedlock between Mary and a Roman Centurion, and it paints a picture of what the first generation of believers had to deal with from the Pharisees, hostile rabbi's etc in the earliest days of the Faith.


Anyway while that was the major controversy to kick things off as far as Early Christianity goes later their would be later ones like Arianism etc. that would affect Christian theology as well.



3) The Rule of Prayer is the rule of Belief. The previous statement is a Latin saying that reflects the Jewish attitudes of Prayer and worship that states or recognizes that our Prayers are not just messages to God but theological statements that show what we believe and profess. We can see that in one of Israel's oldest prayers "Hear oh Israel, the Lord thy God is One". aka the Shema
(Deuteronomy 6:4–9, 11:13–21; Numbers 15:37–41),


Anyway professions of Mary are not about worshipping Mary but about professing Christ. Like Mary as the Mother of God, was a profession of Faith against Arianism, which taught that Christ was divine but not fully or truly divine like God the Father. etc. (Jesus was most likely considered like a demigod or angelic being that had supernatural power but not having God's infinite attributes).


And people who are hung up on this stuff should do more reading about what was going on in the first few centuries of Christianity. Because people like to accept a lot of things from the Classic Age like having a completed New Testament canon, belief that Jesus is "true God and true Man" but they are completely ignorant of what it took to establish that kind of truth / inheritance etc. This didn't just happen by accident, or by God creating it out of thin air, but lots of people labored for centuries over many problems and struggles.

If you go back to the actual beginning of Christianity, as outlined in scripture, there doesn't appear to be any 'Marian practices' at all, at least none that the Apostles taught or referred too.
As for the Talmud references for Jesus...not surprising considering how they were blinded to Who He truly was and of course the Pharisees, hostile rabbis,.... examples throughout the gospels.

As to the professions of Mary being used against Arianism...it brings to mind also, how the Apostles had to make professions about Christ and Who He was when controversial understandings rose up, but they never found it necessary to make "professions of Mary" when doing so...they preached and taught with the authority and power of the Holy Spirit about Him and Who He was/is.

I do agree that these things did not happen by accident. God has always been in control and thorough in delivering His message and by sending the Holy Spirit to ensure the truth to those who believe and put their trust and faith in Him.

It appears that over the centuries, at times when people relied upon their own understanding to 'explain things' that they either fell too short in their understanding and development of doctrines - or- went too far the other way and developed doctrines, that in either case, caused many problems and struggles that were totally unnecessary.
The Apostles had His authority and power and preached and taught His Truth, nothing more and nothing less.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

If you go back to the actual beginning of Christianity, as outlined in scripture, there doesn't appear to be any 'Marian practices' at all, at least none that the Apostles taught or referred too.

That we know of via the New Testament except for this.


John 19:25-29
New King James Version

Behold Your Mother
25 Now there stood by the cross of Jesus His mother, and His mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. 26 When Jesus therefore saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing by, He said to His mother, “Woman, behold your son!” 27 Then He said to the disciple, “Behold your mother!” And from that hour that disciple took her to his own home.


But yes I would mostly agree but would remind you of this passage.


JOHN 21:25
KJ21
And there are also many other things which Jesus did, which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.


Scripture in general is written from a specific writers point of view, and does not claim to be all inclusive of every subject that later future believers might be interested in.

It appears that over the centuries, at times when people relied upon their own understanding to 'explain things' that they either fell too short in their understanding and development of doctrines - or- went too far the other way and developed doctrines, that in either case, caused many problems and struggles that were totally unnecessary.

Not unnecessary, Arianism came about from people trying to be more "Biblical" than most Fundamentalist Protestants. That is the thing about proof texting, it cuts more ways than most Protestants realize, snake handling Pentecostals being the most interesting example of that fact.

 

[Placemat]

That we know of via the New Testament except for this.

By its Holy inspiration I believe it to be the most accurate and reliable source when it comes to determining the practices that the Apostles adhered too and taught during the earliest years of Christianity. The verses posted below, are interpreted by the Catholic church to support the teachings on their own developed Marian practices, but are not evidence of what the Apostles practiced or of something they taught themselves.

John 19:25-29
New King James Version

Behold Your Mother
25 Now there stood by the cross of Jesus His mother, and His mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. 26 When Jesus therefore saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing by, He said to His mother, “Woman, behold your son!” 27 Then He said to the disciple, “Behold your mother!” And from that hour that disciple took her to his own home.

But yes I would mostly agree but would remind you of this passage.

JOHN 21:25
KJ21
And there are also many other things which Jesus did, which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

Scripture in general is written from a specific writers point of view, and does not claim to be all inclusive of every subject that later future believers might be interested in.

It doesn't matter what "future believers might be interested in" - when it pertains to the very salvation of our souls, scripture is very clear on what believers back then, right now, and in the future should be interested in and on Whom their focus should be - where life is found....the chapter just previous to the above one you quoted....John 20....ends with a similiar verse that clarifies it all....

JOHN 20:30 NKJV

30 And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; 31 but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.

When read in context with all the other verses in those chapters it shows some of the things He did pertaining to the Apostles, (Appearing through a locked door in the upper room/later appearing again for Thomas...finger in His side/Peter...bountiful catch of fish) after His resurrection.

Not unnecessary, Arianism came about from people trying to be more "Biblical" than most Fundamentalist Protestants.

Sorry, I know little about Fundamentalist Protestants so I couldn't say..... and have already posted on how the Apostles handled beliefs that arose that were conflicting with their teachings....they continued to teach and preach with authority and power about JESUS and Who He was....not about anyone else.

From previous post:
As to the professions of Mary being used against Arianism...it brings to mind also, how the Apostles had to make professions about Christ and Who He was when controversial understandings rose up, but they never found it necessary to make "professions of Mary" when doing so...they preached and taught with the authority and power of the Holy Spirit about Him and Who He was/is.

That is the thing about proof texting, it cuts more ways than most Protestants realize, snake handling Pentecostals being the most interesting example of that fact.

I know even less about snake handling Pentecostals...but agree that proof texting can pull us all up on occasion. I have done it myself I admit - just as you've done it yourself in this very post by quoting John 21:25 in order to support developed Marian practices,which I myself find most interesting.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

By its Holy inspiration I believe it to be the most accurate and reliable source when it comes to determining the practices

Where in the Scriptures does it give this kind of view point or philosophy? (I assume you are talking about Sola Scriptura even though you did not specifically mention that term)


And by the way I don't care what the Catholic church teaches as far as this thread goes.


Inadvertently I believe in something similar about the scriptures but for completely different reasons. I do not believe that "belief in Mary" is necessary for Salvation. Mary however in many ways is a role model for believers etc.

It doesn't matter what "future believers might be interested in" ..

lol apparently it does! I said that rhetorically in reference to you and what you seem to be assuming and nit picking.