Neo-Nestorianism in Modern Protestant thought?

[Christos Anesti]

I'm not understanding why I should change my definition? Theotokos means literally "birth giver of God". Thats what I said from the get go. She gave birth to Jesus and He is God. If one rejects the term "theotokos" as accurate than they are making an unorthodox Christological statement.

 

[Rhamiel]

since Jesus is True God and True Man, and Mary is the Mother of Jesus, then that means Mary is the Mother of God
Theotokos is a good term to remember

 

[Livindesert]

While Mary is the Mother of God i.e. Mother of the Son/Christ but not the Holy Spirit or the Father. Mary cannot be the advocate of the faithful since she needs God’s grace as much as any other human being.

 

[Livindesert]

As to why Evangelicals are turning to Neo-Nestorianism 1. The giving of Latria to Mary from some churches and 2. Bad to no catechisms due to frontier Evangelism. Bascially a bit of a over reaction to Mary veneration and no real history of the reformation or otherwise being taught in most Evangelical churches today.

Of course one interesting note is that even though the Assyrian church has made amends today for thier Christology , Nestorius is still a Saint in the church.

BTW I assume you mean American Evangelical thought when you say Modern Protestantism.

 

[Rhamiel]

While Mary is the Mother of God i.e. Mother of the Son/Christ but not the Holy Spirit or the Father. Mary cannot be the advocate of the faithful since she needs God’s grace as much as any other human being.

I would say that all Catholics can agree with this

 

[Livindesert]

I would say that all Catholics can agree with this

Good to know I am not totally off base today

 

[PilgrimToChrist]

So what? Is God going to condemn anyone who says that Mary was the mother of Jesus Christ the Son of man? If He does I will be condemned.

Of course Mary is the Mother of Jesus Christ, the Son of Man. Who has said otherwise? But the Bible also asserts clearly that Jesus Christ is more than a Man, He is God Incarnate:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (...) And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, -- Jn 1:1,14

Every spirit which confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is of God: And every spirit that dissolveth Jesus, is not of God -- 1Jn 4:2-3

The proposition that Jesus Christ is not God in the flesh is a condemned proposition. Who God condemns is up to Him, particular judgments are hidden decrees.

The Jehovah Witnesses rewrite Jn 1:1 to say that the Word is a god, that is to say, a sort of demigod. But I would hope that you affirm the Christian proposition that Jesus Christ is God Incarnate.

When the angel told Mary she was to become with child by the Holy Spirit what was her response? "Luke 1:38, "And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word." She was simply being obediant to God like we all should be.

Exactly. Mary was and is perfectly obedient to God. Through Her "fiat" ("fiat mihi secundum verbum tuum" -- "be it unto me according to thy word"), She became the Mother of God. Jesus said the "first shall be last, and the last shall be first." (Mt. 19:30) God rewards humility and obedience. Even though Jesus Christ was God from all eternity, Paul writes in his letter to the Church in Philipi, that:

Who being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men, and in habit found as a man. He humbled himself, becoming obedient unto death, even to the death of the cross. For which cause God also hath exalted him, and hath given him a name which is above all names: That in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those that are in heaven, on earth, and under the earth: And that every tongue should confess that the Lord Jesus Christ is in the glory of God the Father. -- Phil. 2:6-11

That is to say that Jesus, who is already "equal with God (the Father)", as the Second Person of the Holy Trinity, humbled Himself (condescended) to become Man, to take on the human nature. For that reason, for his humility, God the Father raised Him back up and He was glorified all the more. The Incarnation was "for us and for our salvation" (Nicene Creed) but fundamentally, for the greater glory of God. God rewards humility.

And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be humbled: and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted. -- Mt. 23:12

The Virgin was humblest of the creatures of God. She was fully "hidden with Christ in God" (Col 3:3). For this reason, she was raised above all the creatures of God and crowned Queen of Heaven (Apoc. 12:1). Did not the God of the Universe get down on His knees and wash the disciples feet? Did He not humble Himself at every possible moment? Jesus, God Almighty, calls Himself "meek, and humble of heart" (Mt. 11:29). Because of His humility and obedience, God the Father raised God the Son, Jesus Christ, back up to His full glory and "gave Him a Name which is above all names" . Because of Her humility and obedience, God raised the Blessed Virgin up to Heaven, body and soul, and glorified Her as Queen of Heaven.

Are we to bow down or worship or serve Mary? No according to Exodus 20:4 and 5. These are reserved for God alone.

Thou shalt not make to thyself a graven thing, nor the likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, nor of those things that are in the waters under the earth. Thou shalt not adore them, nor serve them: I am the Lord thy God, mighty, jealous, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me:

The Mother of God is a stone idol, a pagan goddess? You have me quite confused there. There is no conflict in Heaven, Mary and Jesus aren't tallying up scores for everything that Mary has is from Jesus and everything that Jesus gives passes through the hands of Mary. Mary is fully God's handmaid and God subjects Himself to Mary.

"Latria" is worship reserved for God. Mary is not God, therefore veneration of the saints is "dulia" and Mary as greastest of the saints receives "hyperdulia". Our joy is not what Mary has done for Herself but what God has done for Her:

"Because he that is mighty, hath done great things to me; and holy is his name." -- Lk. 1:49

If we admire a sunset or the Grand Canyon, the Pacific Ocean or a newborn child, our joy is in God who created those things and how they reflect Him. Mary is the perfect Mirror of God ("Speculum iustitiae" - "Mirror of justice", in the Litany of Loreto). She is the Moon, who reflects the light of God. We who are children of Mary serve Her because, through Her, we can more perfectly serve Jesus Christ.

If then we are establishing sound devotion to our Blessed Lady, it is only in order to establish devotion to our Lord more perfectly, by providing a smooth but certain way of reaching Jesus Christ. If devotion to our Lady distracted us from our Lord, we would have to reject it as an illusion of the devil. But this is far from being the case. As I have already shown and will show again later on, this devotion is necessary, simply and solely because it is a way of reaching Jesus perfectly, loving him tenderly, and serving him faithfully.
-- St. Louis Marie de Montfort, "True Devotion to the Blessed Virgin"

 

[Livindesert]

Mary is fully God's handmaid and God subjects Himself to Mary.

O.k. this is wayyyyyyyyyyyyyy off base! I have never heard a Catholic say God subjects himself to Mary. I believe that would be an example of Latria given to Mary. Rhameil correct me if I am off base but I don't think so.

 

[Polycarp1]

I looked up "Theotokos" and found the following:

Definition: "The Theotokos is the Virgin Mary, the mother of Jesus Christ. Theotokos refers to the person who gave birth to God and Christotokos means the woman who gave birth to Jesus." You may want to adjust your definition a bit.

LST

The point, friend, is that Nestorius rejected the identity of Yeshua bar Mariam the man with the Second Person of the Trinity, considering that God the Son somehow infilled the human person. So he was prepared to allow Mary the title Christotokos but denied her that of Theotokos. That is why the Council of Chalcedon defined the hypostatic union of Christ, in which there is one Jesus Christ, truly God and truly man, from conception on.

The point is not to make anything special of Mary; it's to preserve the unity of Christ. Jesus was not a man that God the Son sometimes occupied; he was one Person, always truly God and truly man.

And that's why people who don't focus on Mary still defend the importance of the Theotokos doctrine.

 

[Dorothea]

I don't reject the divinity of Christ. I reject the worship, adoration, veneration and glorification of His mother Mary. At least two churches that I know of twist scripture to make Mary out to be more than what she is. Jesus is not only the Son of God but also the offspring of the nation of Israel, God's chosen race.

LST

It sounds like you were taught to believe that those "two churches" twisted te scriptures to make Mary out to be more than she was. Learn the history of the Church, what the Bible actually read before the Reformers decided to take the translated Bibles from the Jews of the time and not the New Testament Church.

 

[Dorothea]

The point, friend, is that Nestorius rejected the identity of Yeshua bar Mariam the man with the Second Person of the Trinity, considering that God the Son somehow infilled the human person. So he was prepared to allow Mary the title Christotokos but denied her that of Theotokos. That is why the Council of Chalcedon defined the hypostatic union of Christ, in which there is one Jesus Christ, truly God and truly man, from conception on.

The point is not to make anything special of Mary; it's to preserve the unity of Christ. Jesus was not a man that God the Son sometimes occupied; he was one Person, always truly God and truly man.

And that's why people who don't focus on Mary still defend the importance of the Theotokos doctrine.

 

[Livindesert]

It sounds like you were taught to believe that those "two churches" twisted te scriptures to make Mary out to be more than she was. Learn the history of the Church, what the Bible actually read before the Reformers decided to take the translated Bibles from the Jews of the time and not the New Testament Church.

Got to love that Apocypha

Sirach 9:2Give not thy soul unto a woman to set her foot upon thy substance.

Sirach 25:19All wickedness is but little to the wickedness of a woman: let the portion of a sinner fall upon her.

 

[Dorothea]

Got to love that Apocypha

Sirach 9:2Give not thy soul unto a woman to set her foot upon thy substance.

Sirach 25:19All wickedness is but little to the wickedness of a woman: let the portion of a sinner fall upon her.

How you doing, Livin?

 

[PilgrimToChrist]

O.k. this is wayyyyyyyyyyyyyy off base! I have never heard a Catholic say God subjects himself to Mary. I believe that would be an example of Latria given to Mary. Rhameil correct me if I am off base but I don't think so.

You have never heard a Catholic say that God subjects himself to Mary?

Let's look at the great Catholic, Saint Luke:

And he went down with them, and came to Nazareth, and was subject to them.
-- Lk. 2:51

So St. Luke says that God was subject to Mary for the first 30 years of His earthly life. Do you think things have radically changed now? That is an eternal submission. God subjects Himself to Mary.

Your gut rejects the thought of God being a servant to someone. So did St. Peter's:

He cometh therefore to Simon Peter. And Peter saith to him: Lord, dost thou wash my feet? Jesus answered, and said to him: What I do thou knowest not now; but thou shalt know hereafter. Peter saith to him: Thou shalt never wash my feet. Jesus answered him: If I wash thee not, thou shalt have no part with me. Simon Peter saith to him: Lord, not only my feet, but also my hands and my head.
-- Jn 13:6-9

For the Son of man also is not come to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a redemption for many.
-- Mk 10:45

But emptied himself, taking the form of a servant... -- Phil 2:7

Jesus Christ, God come in the flesh, constantly extolled the virtues of servitude. Perfection consists of being like God. If loving servitude, "slavery of love" (in de Montfort's words), is a virtue, would not God practice that virtue? Scripture says that He does -- He submitted Himself to His Mother and earthly father, He humbled Himself before the feet of the Apostles and even proclaimed that His purpose in coming to Earth was to be a servant!

And the third day, there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee: and the mother of Jesus was there. And Jesus also was invited, and his disciples, to the marriage. And the wine failing, the mother of Jesus saith to him: They have no wine. And Jesus saith to her: Woman, what is that to me and to thee? my hour is not yet come. His mother saith to the waiters: Whatsoever he shall say to you, do ye.
-- Jn 2:1-5

Jesus performed His first public miracle at the behest of His Mother. Remember, He subjected Himself to Her in Luke's account and does not refuse Her anything.

Neither does Mary Herself, perfect image She is of Her Divine Son, refuse anything to Her children. So proclaims the much beloved prayer:

Remember, O Most Gracious Virgin Mary,
that never was it known that anyone who fled to Thy protection,
implored Thy help or sought Thy intercession,
was left unaided.
Inspired by this confidence,
I fly unto Thee, O Virgin of Virgins, my Mother;
to Thee do I come, before thee I kneel, sinful and sorrowful.
O Mother of the Word Incarnate,
despise not my petitions,
but in Thy clemency, hear and answer me.
Amen.

We have confidence in the intercession of Our Queen before Her Son because She refuses nothing to Her children and Christ refuses Her nothing.

Ask, and it shall be given you: seek, and you shall find: knock, and it shall be opened to you. For every one that asketh, receiveth: and he that seeketh, findeth: and to him that knocketh, it shall be opened. Or what man is there among you, of whom if his son shall ask bread, will he reach him a stone? Or if he shall ask him a fish, will he reach him a serpent? If you then being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children: how much more will your Father who is in heaven, give good things to them that ask him?
-- Mt. 7:7-11

St. Bernardine of Siena exclaimed that, "At the command of Mary, all obey, even God." I shall relate an extended comment from St. Louis Marie de Montfort (True Devotion):

Inasmuch as grace perfects nature and glory perfects grace, it is certain that Our Lord remains in heaven just as much the Son of Mary as He was on earth; and that, consequently, He has retained the submission and obedience of the most perfect of all children towards the best of all mothers. But we must take care not to consider this dependence as an abasement or imperfection in Jesus Christ. For Mary, infinitely inferior to her Son who is God, does not command Him as an earthly mother commands her child who is inferior to her. Mary, completely transformed in God by that grace and glory which transforms all the Saints in Him, neither asks, wishes nor does anything contrary to the eternal and unchangeable Will of God. When, therefore, we read in the writings of St. Bernard, St. Bernardine, St. Bonaventure, etc., that in heaven and on earth all, even God Himself, is subject to the Blessed Virgin, they mean this: the authority which God has been pleased to give her is so great that she seems to have the same power as God; her prayers and requests are so powerful with Him that they are taken as commands by the Divine Majesty, who never resists His dear Mother's prayer because it is always humble and conformed to His Will.

If Moses, by the power of his prayer, curbed God's anger against the Israelites so effectively that the Most High and infinitely merciful Lord, unable to withstand him, asked him to let Him grow angry and punish that rebellious people, what then must we not think, with all the more reason, of the prayer of the humble Mary, worthy Mother of God, which is more powerful with His Majesty than the prayers and intercession of all the Angels and Saints in heaven and on earth?

(de Montfort refers to the conversation between Moses and God in Ex. 32:9-14)

 

[Anglian]

Dear PilgrimtoChrist,

I wonder if what you say is the official teaching of the Church? I ask because I can find no warrant for it in the Catechism, and I have not seen any offical pronouncements which would support the view that 'God subjects Himself to Mary.'

There is no doubt that the Incarnate Word was, indeed, subject to His mother as an infant, but nowhere in the Greek of Luke, or in any Catholic commentary (and I have several) have I seen any exegesis of the passage which says that the Godhead is subject to Mary forever. The idea that she is the perfect image of her Son is also, surely, debatable? He was wholly divine and wholly human, she was fully human and in no wise divine.

On the GT boards I have long defended the honour and the veneration which are due to the Blessed Theotokos, but I do wonder here whether you are not going further than the teaching of the Catholic Church? The comments of St. Bernadine and St. Louis de Montfort are just that - pious comments of the faithful, no doctrines or dogma are founded on them.

My veneration for the Blessed Theotokos is profound, but I would simply ask whether the Church itself teaches what you say here my dear sister?

peace,

Anglian

 

[Livindesert]

How you doing, Livin?

Doing pretty good I just offically changed my mind about the statement Mother of God after some reasearch. I use to have a problem with the title Mother of God, but after some reasearch and a talk with my (Reformed) Spiritual Father he pointed out my errors and pointed me in the right direction.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Dear PilgrimtoChrist,

I wonder if what you say is the official teaching of the Church? I ask because I can find no warrant for it in the Catechism, and I have not seen any offical pronouncements which would support the view that 'God subjects Himself to Mary.'

There is no doubt that the Incarnate Word was, indeed, subject to His mother as an infant, but nowhere in the Greek of Luke, or in any Catholic commentary (and I have several) have I seen any exegesis of the passage which says that the Godhead is subject to Mary forever. The idea that she is the perfect image of her Son is also, surely, debatable? He was wholly divine and wholly human, she was fully human and in no wise divine.

On the GT boards I have long defended the honour and the veneration which are due to the Blessed Theotokos, but I do wonder here whether you are not going further than the teaching of the Catholic Church? The comments of St. Bernadine and St. Louis de Montfort are just that - pious comments of the faithful, no doctrines or dogma are founded on them.

My veneration for the Blessed Theotokos is profound, but I would simply ask whether the Church itself teaches what you say here my dear sister?

peace,

Anglian

Thank you, Anglian, for a balanced post on this issue. I find that it is very easy to become reactionary and migrate to one extreme or the other when the truth is in the middle.

 

[Anglian]

Thank you, Anglian, for a balanced post on this issue. I find that it is very easy to become reactionary and migrate to one extreme or the other when the truth is in the middle.

Thank you my friend. As you say, this can be an issue on which extremes manifest themselves. The Church has declared the Blessed Virgin to be the Theotokos, an honour given to no other human. We Copts call her 'the Crown of our race' for that very reason. But in eschewing Nestorianism, we must likewise avoid the other extreme. Our Blessed Lady is not a 'goddess' nor does she have equality with the Godhead - although she does have a unique relationship with its Three Persons.

peace,

Anglian

 

[bbbbbbb]

Back to the OP. I would like some definitions before I can (hopefully) respond more intelligently. As seen in an earlier post I pointed out that this is hardly a recent (modern?) development in Protestant thought unless, as Rhamiel responded, 400 years is recent. I would like the following points clarified if possible.

1. Which Protestant theologians have promulgated neo-Nestorianism and could you cite them or provide a link to the writings?
2. Is this true of all of Protestantism or segments of it? If it is the latter then which segments in particular are guilty?
3. Is this considered part and parcel with Modern theology (as a twentieth-century movement) and, if so, which Modern theologians in particular are guilty? If not, do you mean modern in the sense of contemporary?

Thank you.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Thank you my friend. As you say, this can be an issue on which extremes manifest themselves. The Church has declared the Blessed Virgin to be the Theotokos, an honour given to no other human. We Copts call her 'the Crown of our race' for that very reason. But in eschewing Nestorianism, we must likewise avoid the other extreme. Our Blessed Lady is not a 'goddess' nor does she have equality with the Godhead - although she does have a unique relationship with its Three Persons.

peace,

Anglian

Thank you, as well. I believe we are in agreement on Mary and sincerely regret those who have wandered to the extremes. She is hardly the insignificant personage that some would make her to be nor, as you say, is she a "goddess" nor does she have equality with the Godhead. She is, indeed, the Theotokos.