Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Indeed, it is even as the Blessed St. Cyril and the Council at Ephesus established.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.
1. Which Protestant theologians have promulgated neo-Nestorianism and could you cite them or provide a link to the writings?
Is this true of all of Protestantism or segments of it? If it is the latter then which segments in particular are guilty?
Is this considered part and parcel with Modern theology (as a twentieth-century movement)
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.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?
And when is the end?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.
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 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
Dear Katherine,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.
"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
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
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'.
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
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
Acts 13:9-10 said: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.
Gal 1:6-7 said: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.
2Pe 1:3-4 said: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.
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.
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.
Rom 12:2 said: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.
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.
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").
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?