Neo-Nestorianism in Modern Protestant thought?

[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.

Indeed, it is even as the Blessed St. Cyril and the Council at Ephesus established.

peace,

Anglian

 

[Christos Anesti]

1. Which Protestant theologians have promulgated neo-Nestorianism and could you cite them or provide a link to the writings?

My discussion with the "theologians" here on this and other message boards prompted me to write this. Whenever a discussion of the Theotokos comes up you will see people rejecting the term using Nestorian like arguments. This may very well be "pop theology" and in many cases might not even be the official teachings of their denominations. It seems to be fairly common however.

Is this true of all of Protestantism or segments of it? If it is the latter then which segments in particular are guilty?

I already noted that many Protestants do not reject the term Theotokos and provided quotes from some of the Protestant reformers showing how they agreed with it. Among those that do reject the term I get the impression that it's often a knee jerk reaction against anything that sounds "too catholic" and that it isn't a well thought out theological opinion.

Is this considered part and parcel with Modern theology (as a twentieth-century movement)

People are starting to reject the term recently in denominations that traditionally held to Mary being Theotokos. Thats why I said "modern". Maybe "contemporary" would have been a better word?

 

[Dorothea]

My discussion with the "theologians" here on this and other message boards prompted me to write this. Whenever a discussion of the Theotokos comes up you will see people rejecting the term using Nestorian like arguments. This may very well be "pop theology" and in many cases might not even be the official teachings of their denominations. It seems to be fairly common however.



I already noted that many Protestants do not reject the term Theotokos and provided quotes from some of the Protestant reformers showing how they agreed with it. Among those that do reject the term I get the impression that it's often a knee jerk reaction against anything that sounds "too catholic" and that it isn't a well thought out theological opinion.



People are starting to reject the term recently in denominations that traditionally held to Mary being Theotokos. Thats why I said "modern". Maybe "contemporary" would have been a better word?

Well, you know, as Fr. Thomas Hopko said, many Christians will fall away from the Church and their beliefs at the end of this world.

 

[MamaZ]

Well, you know, as Fr. Thomas Hopko said, many Christians will fall away from the Church and their beliefs at the end of this world.

And when is the end?

 

[Dorothea]

And when is the end?

Only God knows.

 

[bbbbbbb]

My discussion with the "theologians" here on this and other message boards prompted me to write this. Whenever a discussion of the Theotokos comes up you will see people rejecting the term using Nestorian like arguments. This may very well be "pop theology" and in many cases might not even be the official teachings of their denominations. It seems to be fairly common however.



I already noted that many Protestants do not reject the term Theotokos and provided quotes from some of the Protestant reformers showing how they agreed with it. Among those that do reject the term I get the impression that it's often a knee jerk reaction against anything that sounds "too catholic" and that it isn't a well thought out theological opinion.



People are starting to reject the term recently in denominations that traditionally held to Mary being Theotokos. Thats why I said "modern". Maybe "contemporary" would have been a better word?

Thank you for your clarification and the clear answers to my questions. As we both know, popular culture contains a large amount of theological error which has never been accepted by any church. On another thread I had an interesting discussion concerning the concept (which is widely held) that God assigns a particular angel to each individual as a personal body guard.

As you can read in my earlier posts, I am of the opinion that an issue such as this does tend to polarize people to one extreme or the other so that, at best, what they are saying really is not their true understanding, or, at worst, they end up believing something that is quite untrue.

 

[katherine2001]

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

I'm not Catholic, but I believe you are right. When I attended an Orthodox mission before my move, we didn't have a building of our own and had services in a chapel on the campus of a Catholic college. An older priest would often come to our liturgies when our priest came once a month on Saturday and Vespers on Friday night. One night we got into a conversation about this very issue and he told me that some Catholics do put her way too high (some almost make her a 4th member of the Trinity), and that this is not a teaching of the Catholic Church and that he often has to correct people about that.

 

[Anglian]

I'm not Catholic, but I believe you are right. When I attended an Orthodox mission before my move, we didn't have a building of our own and had services in a chapel on the campus of a Catholic college. An older priest would often come to our liturgies when our priest came once a month on Saturday and Vespers on Friday night. One night we got into a conversation about this very issue and he told me that some Catholics do put her way too high (some almost make her a 4th member of the Trinity), and that this is not a teaching of the Catholic Church and that he often has to correct people about that.

Dear Katherine,

Many thanks for this. Yes, we have had a little example of that on this thread


peace,

Anglian

 

[CathNancy]

Mary is the most perfect of God's creatures, the greatest of all the saints, but she is still created, not the creator. Mary is an example of how we should trust in God, how we should strive to do His will, she is to be honored, not worshiped. Mary, when honored as the Catholic Church teaches, will lead us to her Son. The Marian dogmas emphasize who Jesus is not who Mary is. Most Catholics I know hold this view, as do I myself.

Peace and all good,
Nancy

 

[PilgrimToChrist]

I don't think I said anything wrong. Certainly, many great saints have said similar things and Scripture attests to the truth of what I said.

We have to seek to understand Mary's role and Her deification if we want to understand our own since she is the most fully deified of all humanity, our perfect example (after Our Lord Himself). Ignorance of the role of Mary leads to ignorance of the role of the Church and our own role.

Christ redeemed His own Sacred Humanity but firstly pre-redeemed His own Mother. Indeed, the Blessed Virgin's role in the economy of salvation is so fundamental that the words of the Lord to the prophet Jeremiah apply to her, "Before I formed thee in the bowels of thy mother, I knew thee: and before thou camest forth out of the womb, I sanctified thee" (Jer 1:5). Also, the exultation of Wisdom, "I came out of the mouth of the most High, the firstborn before all creatures" (Sir 24:5).

St. Irenaeus said that Eve was "causa mortis" ("cause of our death") and that Mary was "causa salutis" ("cause of our salvation"). She is fundamental to the story of Creation and Redemption and for Her humble "fiat", she was glorified by God as Queen of Heaven. Adrienne von Speyr, in "Mary in the Redemption", addresses the commonly analogy of Mary as the Second Eve and says that Mary is actually the first Eve because she has been in the mind of God from all eternity, the original plan of Creation. Daughter of the Father, Mother of the Son and Spouse of the Holy Spirit, she is truly the "whole hope of our salvation" (St. Thomas Aquinas).

Mary is called "Ianua coeli" ("Gate of Heaven") in the Litany of Loreto and St. Bernard of Clairvaux said that "No one can enter Heaven unless by Mary, as though through a door." In the West, in the Litany of Loreto, we pray, "Causa nostrae laetitiae, ora pro nobis" ("Cause of our joy, pray for us"). In the East, the Akathist to the Theotokos exclaims to Her to "Rejoice, cause of deification for all!"

"No divine gift can reach either angels or men, save through her mediation. [...] [E]very movement towards God, every impulse towards good coming from Him is unrealizable save through the mediation of the Virgin." -- St. Gregory Palamas

"The Blessed Virgin is very properly called 'gate of heaven,' for every created or uncreated grace that ever came or will ever come into this world came through her." -- St. Albert the Great (Doctor of the Church)

"O Theotokos, no one secured a gift of mercy, save through you" -- St Germain of Constantinople

"And all My saints shall marvel at the glory which I shall give unto thee in that place, for it is thou who shalt make God and His angels to be reconciled with man." -- St. Cyril of Jerusalem

"y the will of God, Mary is the intermediary through whom is distributed unto us this immense treasure of mercies gathered by God, for mercy and truth were created by Jesus Christ. Thus as no man goeth to the Father but by the Son, so no man goeth to Christ but by His Mother." -- Pope Leo XIII, "Octobri mense"

 

[Anglian]

Dear PilgrimtoChrist,

Not to sidetrack this thread, which is about the neo-Nestorianism of some tendencies in modern theology, nor to say you have said anything 'wrong', but simply to clarify things in order that some of our Protestant brothers and sisters are not misled, I wonder if I might make a few comments about your last post?

Is it not important to understand the teaching of the Church here? A casual reading of something like this:

"No divine gift can reach either angels or men, save through her mediation. [...] [E]very movement towards God, every impulse towards good coming from Him is unrealizable save through the mediation of the Virgin." -- St. Gregory Palamas
...
"And all My saints shall marvel at the glory which I shall give unto thee in that place, for it is thou who shalt make God and His angels to be reconciled with man." -- St. Cyril of Jerusalem

might well prompt some of our Protestant brothers and sisters to quote Scripture such as 1 Tim. 2:5 where we are told there is one mediator, Christ Jesus; it is necessary to gloss what the Church means to show that there is no contradiction with Scripture (something some Protestants seem to believe is the case). We are all parts of the Body of Christ, and as such we can ask other members of that Body to pray for us. In asking the Blessed Theotokos we ask the one member of our race who lived a life without sin to pray for us. We pray to Christ directly, but we can also ask for the intercession of the Saints; if we believe in the 'communion of saints' then it follows naturally we ask our fellow Christians to pray for us.

St. Gregory and St. Cyril are both referring to the fact that the Blessed Theotokos, through her obedience to God's will, was indeed the gateway through which we receive salvation.

What would be incorrect would be to attribute divine powers to St. Mary. Deification is an easily misunderstood word, as the JW's demonstrate. It means that we realise the image of God in which we are made; it does not mean that we literally become 'God' or 'gods'.

I am sure, dear sister, that these things are known to you; but I know from experience that some can be mislead by some of the language we use of the Blessed Theotokos - especially in cultures where some emphasis is laid upon the equality of all men and women.

peace,

Anglian

 

[bbbbbbb]

Dear PilgrimtoChrist,

Not to sidetrack this thread, which is about the neo-Nestorianism of some tendencies in modern theology, nor to say you have said anything 'wrong', but simply to clarify things in order that some of our Protestant brothers and sisters are not misled, I wonder if I might make a few comments about your last post?

Is it not important to understand the teaching of the Church here? A casual reading of something like this:


might well prompt some of our Protestant brothers and sisters to quote Scripture such as 1 Tim. 2:5 where we are told there is one mediator, Christ Jesus; it is necessary to gloss what the Church means to show that there is no contradiction with Scripture (something some Protestants seem to believe is the case). We are all parts of the Body of Christ, and as such we can ask other members of that Body to pray for us. In asking the Blessed Theotokos we ask the one member of our race who lived a life without sin to pray for us. We pray to Christ directly, but we can also ask for the intercession of the Saints; if we believe in the 'communion of saints' then it follows naturally we ask our fellow Christians to pray for us.

St. Gregory and St. Cyril are both referring to the fact that the Blessed Theotokos, through her obedience to God's will, was indeed the gateway through which we receive salvation.

What would be incorrect would be to attribute divine powers to St. Mary. Deification is an easily misunderstood word, as the JW's demonstrate. It means that we realise the image of God in which we are made; it does not mean that we literally become 'God' or 'gods'.

I am sure, dear sister, that these things are known to you; but I know from experience that some can be mislead by some of the language we use of the Blessed Theotokos - especially in cultures where some emphasis is laid upon the equality of all men and women.

peace,

Anglian

Dear Anglian,

Thank you for your gracious response to PilgrimtoChrist. I winced as I read her post, especially at the inaccurate phraseology of the "deification" of Mary. I understand that her views are those of the extreme fringe of Catholicism. Thus, this Protestant appreciates your gracious response to her and I trust that she will accept it in the manner in which it was given.

 

[Anglian]

Dear b7,

Thank you for your kind words.

I have no problem with our sister's general drift, but do know, as you say, that many non-Catholics have a problem with the use of hyperbolic language.

Properly understood, as she says, veneration of the Virgin centres us on Christ Himself. Some prefer to leave her out; I sometimes wonder if they know what they are missing?

peace,


Anglian

 

[PilgrimToChrist]

What would be incorrect would be to attribute divine powers to St. Mary. Deification is an easily misunderstood word, as the JW's demonstrate. It means that we realise the image of God in which we are made; it does not mean that we literally become 'God' or 'gods'.

I think you mean Mormons, not Jehovah's Witnesses (who are Arians). I have heard that Mormon apologists have been quoting the Greek Fathers in defense of their perverse heresy. Mormons reading those apologetic works see the term "divinization" or "deification" and they think the Fathers are talking about the same thing the Mormon false teachers are.

Compare these two statements:

As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become. -- Mormon "prophet" Joseph Smith

God became Man, that man might become god. -- St. Athanasius

Those reading with understanding see the sublime understanding of St. Athanasius and the satanic perversion of the Mormon "prophet". It is the same satanic perversion that is expressed in Scripture:

For God knows that in what day soever you shall eat thereof, your eyes shall be opened: and you shall be as Gods, knowing good and evil. -- Gen 3:5 (the serpent tempting Eve)

Dearly beloved, we are now the sons of God; and it hath not yet appeared what we shall be. We know, that, when he shall appear, we shall be like to him: because we shall see him as he is. -- 1Jn 3:2

The difference between orthodoxy and heresy is often the satanic lens of a perversion. The orthodox doctrine of predestination as taught by St. Paul and St. Augustine becomes the perverse teachings of John Calvin (which they call "double predestination"). The orthodox doctrine of deification as taught by St. Paul, St. Athanasius and other Early Church Fathers becomes the perverse teachings of the Mormon religion (which they call "exaltation").

Then Saul, otherwise Paul, filled with the Holy Ghost, looking upon him, Said: O full of all guile, and of all deceit, child of the devil, enemy of all justice, thou ceasest not to pervert the right ways of the Lord.

I wonder that you are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ, unto another gospel. Which is not another, only there are some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.

I quipped elsewhere a while ago that the problem with Mormonism isn't that they think too much of man but that they think too little of God. They have a boring, little God if they think that God was once a man (cf. Num 23:19 and Is 55:8-9). They thus deny the infinitude, greatness and transcendence of God. What small-minded thinking it is to think that there could be more than one perfect Will? There is the perfect Will of God and a multitude of imperfect and evil wills. The Saints are in Heaven because they conformed to the Will of God. It is far harder and more crucial for a martyr to say "yes" to God than "no" to their captors. It seems at first glance that the Mormon religion offers a greater hope for the afterlife than the Christian religion but it is a much greater thing to behold our great God than to be like their God, who is like one of the pagan gods.

This notion of deification notion is not foreign to Protestants, they refer to the glorification and sanctification. Christian perfectionism is a Protestant a doctrine that an individual could become perfectly conformed to God while on earth and thus free from sin and unable to progress further in Grace (declared a heresy by the Catholic Church in 1311). Wesleyan denominations (Methodists) teach a variant of this doctrine called "entire sanctification". Lutheran pastor, activist and victim of Auschwitz, Deitrich Bonhoeffer said of Christ (echoing St. Athanasius): "He has become like a man, so that men should be like him."

Speaking very broadly, just as your signature quotes Bar-Hebraeus in saying that all of us (EO, OO, RC and most Protestants) accept that Christ is two natures with two wills in one Person, I would suggest that the various ways that we speak of salvation, the Resurrection and the sharing of the glory of God, partaking of the divine nature -- St. Paul refers to it in several ways -- is our weak attempts to express with human language the incalculable glories which await us, God willing, as the elect. Whether we say "salvation", "theosis", "deification", "divinization", or "glorification", we all mean the same thing. None of us in this thread are followers of Joseph Smith or Herbert Armstrong, we believe in the Trinity. We don't believe that a human being can possess the divine nature, become God, but rather that we may "partake of the divine nature", to be eternally with God and to "see Him as He is" (what we Catholics call "the Beatific Vision").

Quomodo omnia nobis divinæ virtutis suæ, quæ ad vitam et pietatem donata sunt, per cognitionem ejus, qui vocavit nos propria gloria, et virtute, per quem maxima, et pretiosa nobis promissa donavit : ut per hæc efficiamini divinæ consortes naturæ : fugientes ejus, quæ in mundo est, concupiscentiæ corruptionem.

As all things of his divine power which appertain to life and godliness are given us through the knowledge of him who has called us by his own proper glory and virtue. By whom he has given us most great and precious promises: that by these you may be made partakers of the divine nature: flying the corruption of that concupiscence which is in the world.

 

[PilgrimToChrist]

Dear Anglian,

Thank you for your gracious response to PilgrimtoChrist. I winced as I read her post, especially at the inaccurate phraseology of the "deification" of Mary. I understand that her views are those of the extreme fringe of Catholicism. Thus, this Protestant appreciates your gracious response to her and I trust that she will accept it in the manner in which it was given.

I do not understand what you mean by wincing at the "inaccurate phraseology of the 'deification' of Mary", which part did I say that was inaccurate? I also do not know what you mean by "the extreme fringe of Catholicism".

Anglian exhorted me to not use the term "deification" without explaining it because it is a term unfamiliar to many Protestants. Some Protestants use the word "glorification" to express the process by which we are made "in the image of Christ", at St. Paul says. That is to say, the process by which we become holy, like God, and able to live in Heaven with Him. I'm sorry if I caused confusion. I believe I said, "deification (salvation)" to equivocate between those two terms. I hope that clarifies things.

 

[Polycarp1]

Metanoein may be familiar to readers who have studied Romans 12. We are made over into the image of Christ by the renewing of our minds and hearts in His image. This is called "sanctification" in Wesleyan/Holiness traditions, theosis in Orthodox parlance, and "deification" in those with a Latin-based piety. It does not mean "turned into God" (in this context, at least; it's also the technical term in mythology for turning a mortal into a god, like Hercules and Ganymede) -- but rather, made over into a more Christlike person, in mind and faith.

 

[PilgrimToChrist]

Metanoein may be familiar to readers who have studied Romans 12. We are made over into the image of Christ by the renewing of our minds and hearts in His image. This is called "sanctification" in Wesleyan/Holiness traditions, theosis in Orthodox parlance, and "deification" in those with a Latin-based piety. It does not mean "turned into God" (in this context, at least; it's also the technical term in mythology for turning a mortal into a god, like Hercules and Ganymede) -- but rather, made over into a more Christlike person, in mind and faith.

While I appreciate your clarification, the word μετανοεῖν (metanoein - repent) doesn't appear in Romans 12 (mGNT). The word μεταμορφοῦσθε (metamorphousthe -- metamorphose, reform, transform), however, is used in v. 2:

mGNT: καὶ μὴ συσχηματίζεσθε τῷ αἰῶνι τούτῳ ἀλλὰ μεταμορφοῦσθε τῇ ἀνακαινώσει τοῦ νοός εἰς τὸ δοκιμάζειν ὑμᾶς τί τὸ θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ τὸ ἀγαθὸν καὶ εὐάρεστον καὶ τέλειον

VUL: Et nolite conformari huic sæculo, sed reformamini in novitate sensus vestri : ut probetis quæ sit voluntas Dei bona, et beneplacens, et perfecta.

D-R: And be not conformed to this world: but be reformed in the newness of your mind, that you may prove what is the good and the acceptable and the perfect will of God.

 

[lionroar0]

Neo-Nestorianism in Modern Protestant thought?

It's not the only thing I have witness. One of Mary's title (if memory serves me right) is destroyer of heresies. When speaking about Mary the threads(here in this subforum) runs it's natural course and ends up being about Jesus. More specifically Christology and that's when things start coming out into the light.

 

[PilgrimToChrist]

It's not the only thing I have witness. One of Mary's title (if memory serves me right) is destroyer of heresies. When speaking about Mary the threads(here in this subforum) runs it's natural course and ends up being about Jesus. More specifically Christology and that's when things start coming out into the light.

Everything Mariological is Christological. That's why we have these discussions.


To Jesus through Mary!

 

[Anglian]

Dear PilgrimtoChrist,

Yes, I quite agree. I'm glad you saw that what I was trying to do was to clarify things for those less familiar with the notion of deification.

Most interested in what you say here:

I would suggest that the various ways that we speak of salvation, the Resurrection and the sharing of the glory of God, partaking of the divine nature -- St. Paul refers to it in several ways -- is our weak attempts to express with human language the incalculable glories which await us, God willing, as the elect. Whether we say "salvation", "theosis", "deification", "divinization", or "glorification", we all mean the same thing. None of us in this thread are followers of Joseph Smith or Herbert Armstrong, we believe in the Trinity. We don't believe that a human being can possess the divine nature, become God, but rather that we may "partake of the divine nature", to be eternally with God and to "see Him as He is" (what we Catholics call "the Beatific Vision").

I would agree with that. Thank you for it.

peace,

Anglian