Thank you for your explanation. It was most insightful. Open dialog will
contribute a great deal toward mutual understanding.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Phil Scovell" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, January 07, 2008 6:48 PM
Subject: Marian Theology
> Angel,
>
> I think the objection that many fundamentalists have is not just
> Mary being called one's mother, but speaks more to the Marian
> doctrine that she is the mother of God. Of course, I understand
> that Catholics, and they are certainly not the only ones, in fact
> do believe Mary was the mother of God. Other Christian
> fundamentalist don't find this in Scripture so it is the
> implication of Mother Mary that rubs the doctrinal fur wrong. I'm
> quite aware of all the passages of Scripture used in attempting to
> prove Mary was not only the mother of Jesus but, since Jesus is
> God, thus she must likewise be the Mother of God. Jesus, of
> course, referred to Mary as His mother but it is obvious He was
> referring to Mary as His earthly, or human, mother by which He
> entered the world as Messiah. If Jesus is God, and the Scriptures
> are loaded with the confirmation of that doctrine, then He, Jesus,
> as God, cannot by human nature have a mother, that is, God was not
> born. Jesus was but He was the Messiah. God is not the Messiah
> but we call Him, based upon Scriptures, Father. My point is this.
> If I said to you, God is my Father, but completed my statement by
> saying He is my earthly father and by Him I was born, this would
> be theologically and Biblically incorrect. If I refer to Him as
> my spiritual Father, then no doctrine is violated. I guess you
> could say, so I will, that it is in the believing of the doctrinal
> details that makes truth real and final. I understand what you
> said below but you and I both know that you are not just referring
> to Mary as Mother in the same way we all refer to God as our
> Father. I've written and researched Vatican statements
> extensively to try and understand the Catholic belief in Marian
> theology so it isn't my purpose to try and reinvent the Marian
> wheel here on this list. Furthermore, there is no reason for you
> to read my findings because you wouldn't agree with them anyway.
> I'm not trying to change your mind here but just trying to turn a
> little light on why fundamentalists disagree calling Mary our
> Mother. Even Jesus insisted His mother wasn't a doctrine in which
> to believe when one woman tried proclaiming her as such but
> instead elevated, without hesitation, all peoples of the world who
> made Him, Jesus, the Lord of their lives, through salvitic
> conversion. This means, regardless of what one calls Mary, born
> again believers in the Messiah, whom Jesus is, theologically held
> in an even higher position than Mary ever did, or could, upon
> earth. Yes, I know you believe she was also resurrected, thus
> making her even spiritually superior to born again believers, but
> there is no Biblical record of that. There is likewise no
> Biblical record of her becoming the Redemptoris, that is, becoming
> through a hypostatic union with the Messiah, as co-redeemer of all
> those who receive and accept Christ as Lord and Savior. This is,
> of course, only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to explaining
> Marian theology. It is that first step away from Biblical
> evidence of Mary's humanity as the one chosen to give birth to,
> God with us, that continually reduces and diminishes, the
> personage and nature of the Messiah to the point He is
> theologically morphed into something other than the true God of
> the Bible.
>
> Phil.
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Angel238" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Monday, January 07, 2008 3:34 PM
> Subject: Re: A cinnical attitude
>
>
>> What ought I to say. Eve was the mother of us all, and Jesus was the
> second
>> adam. Mary was his mother. As we Christians are all his brothers and
>> sisters, and as Mary was his mother why is she not our mother as well. I
>> don't understand this objection. As I feel her to be my mother would
>> calling her my mother be more appropriate?
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Carol Pearson" <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Monday, January 07, 2008 4:07 PM
>> Subject: Re: A cinnical attitude
>>
>>
>> >I think your wording "our mother" gave the impression that we all
>> >embrace
>> >her as our mother, whereas this is not the case. Most on the list would
>> >freely recognize that Mary had a very special role to play in the life
>> >of
>> >Jesus, but we don't hold her in such high esteem as those of the
>> >Catholic
>> >faith.
>> >
>> > Perhaps you also need to respect others' views on the list and be
> careful
>> > in how you write these things. None of us want to cause offence, but
>> > we
>> > do all have a belief in what we see to be true ... and that's where
>> > most
>> > of us stand.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Carol
>> > [log in to unmask]
>> >
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: "Angel238" <[log in to unmask]>
>> > To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> > Sent: Monday, January 07, 2008 4:51 PM
>> > Subject: Re: A cinnical attitude
>> >
>> >
>> >>I don't want to get into a debate with you as this is not what the list
> is
>> >>for. I wanted to make a basic point here which I did. Jesus is my
>> >>brother, God is my father, and as the mother of Our Lord, mary is my
>> >>mother. I assumed you felt the same. This list should be
>> >>understanding
>> >>of all Christian faiths. We Catholics believe Mary to be our mother.
>> >>Just leave it at that and regard the point I was trying to make. There
>> >>had to be a reason God chose her to be one of the first earthly
> enfluences
>> >>and to make one of the first empressions on the baby Jesus. This
>> >>virtue
>> >>was one of them I feel.
>> >> ----- Original Message -----
>> >> From: "John Schwery" <[log in to unmask]>
>> >> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> >> Sent: Monday, January 07, 2008 8:37 AM
>> >> Subject: Re: A cinnical attitude
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>> Mary is not our mother. As God, He had no mother: as man, He had no
>> >>> father.
>> >>>
>> >>> earlier, Angel238, wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>>This is one of the things for which I admire our mother. She didn't
>> >>>>seem to fret over things. Rather, she pondered in her heart what was
>> >>>>meant by occurances and their significance. This is one of the many
>> >>>>reasons God in his infinite wisdom chose her to be the mother of our
>> >>>>blessed Lord. This is an virtue we would do well to emulate. It would
>> >>>>save us much unwelcome stress, and would fill us with much Pease. I
>> >>>>have fallen short many times of this. Each time our Lord brings me
>> >>>>through a crisis safely, I vow to practice this virtue and to allow
> him
>> >>>>to take care of the troubling situations in my life which beset me.
>> >>>>Perhaps this will be my new years resolution. I, however, shall just
>> >>>>continue to try till it happens for me.
>> >>>>----- Original Message ----- From: "Phil Scovell"
>> >>>><[log in to unmask]>
>> >>>>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> >>>>Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2008 9:09 PM
>> >>>>Subject: Re: A cinnical attitude
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>>Kathy,
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>Well, that's good to know I'm not alone, haw. Strange you should
>> >>>>>mention
>> >>>>>Mary. I was thinking of the birth of Christ during Christmas, of
>> >>>>>course,
>> >>>>>but that took me, for some reason, to thinking about Mary and how
>> >>>>>courageous
>> >>>>>she must have been when Gabriel appeared to her and gave her the
> news.
>> >>>>>Then
>> >>>>>my mind suddenly jumped to the cross and how it must have torn her
>> >>>>>heart out
>> >>>>>to see her own son hanging naked on the cross while at the same
>> >>>>>time,
>> >>>>>knowing it was for her sins, too. Jesus telling John to take care
>> >>>>>of
>> >>>>>her is
>> >>>>>so powerful to me whenever I think about it.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>Phil.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>--
>> >>>>No virus found in this incoming message.
>> >>>>Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database:
>> >>>>269.17.13/1211 - Release Date: 1/6/2008 11:57 AM
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>--
>> >>>>No virus found in this incoming message.
>> >>>>Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database:
>> >>>>269.17.13/1211 - Release Date: 1/6/2008 11:57 AM
>> >>>
>> >>> John
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> No virus found in this outgoing message.
>> >>> Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database:
>> >>> 269.17.13/1211 - Release Date: 1/6/2008 11:57 AM
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
|
