Irishmaestro
Member
- Joined
- May 31, 2005
- Messages
- 42
I've recently read the document "Mary - grace and hope in Christ", and I must say that it aroused feelings of grave concern and, dare I say anger, in me. Was there, in reality, one single Anglican on the committee that produced this document? How can it claim to be an agreement between a Reformed faith and the Roman Catholic church?
The document begins very innocently. Firstly, it gives an account of the descriptions of Mary in the New Testament (which, I think you'll all agree, are by no means copious). Then, it proceeds to chronicle the rise of Marianism in Christendom (correctly stating that it arose early with the church "fathers" declaring that she never conceived a child by Joseph - which by Matthew 12:46, we know to be incorrect, unless Mary had further children by the Holy Ghost, about which God declined to tell us!).
However, it is the conclusions of the sections from "From the Reformation to the present day" onwards that trouble me. The committee cites a document written by the previous pope, I believe, which says that: "The Rosary, though clearly Marian in character, is at heart a Christocentric prayer". Anyone who has researched the Catholic Rosary will laugh at the seriousness with which this statement is quoted.
Next up is a rather puzzling leap from 2 Corinthians 1:20 (from a misleading translation, of course) to this: "It enables her to speak the 'Amen' in which, through the Spirit's overshadowing, God's 'Yes' of new creation is inaugurated. As we have seen, this fiat of Mary was distinctive, in its openness to God's Word, and in the path to the foot of the cross and beyond on which the Spirit led her."
The answer to the statement "all these ways of including Mary in praise and prayer belong to our common heritage" is simple: no, they do not! Another sentence refers to Mary as "mother of the Lord", but sadly, this document portrays her more as MOTHER of the Lord rather than the more scriptural Mother of the LORD, the key figure being Jesus Christ, to whom alone belongs our prayers.
Their summary of what is apparently the common faith of Anglicans and Roman Catholics is thus:
• Any interpretation of the role of Mary must not obscure the unique mediation of Christ;
• Any consideration of Mary must be linked with the doctrines of Christ and the Church;
• We recognise the Blessed Virgin Mary as the Theotókos, the mother of God incarnate, and so observe her festivals and accord her honour among the saints;
• Mary was prepared by grace to be the mother of our Redeemer, by whom she herself was redeemed and received into glory;
• We recognise Mary as a model of holiness, faith and obedience for all Christians; and
• Mary can be seen as a prophetic figure of the Church.
• This study has led us to the conclusion that it is impossible to be faithful to Scripture without giving due attention to the person of Mary (paragraphs 6-30).
• In recalling together the ancient common traditions, we have discerned afresh the central importance of the Theotókos in the Christological controversies, and the Fathers' use of biblical images to interpret and celebrate Mary's place in the plan of salvation (paragraphs 31-40).
• We have reviewed the growth of devotion to Mary in the medieval centuries, and the theological controversies associated with them. We have seen how some excesses in late medieval devotion, and reactions against them by the Reformers, contributed to the breach of communion between us, following which attitudes toward Mary took divergent paths (paragraphs 41-46).
• We have also noted evidence of subsequent developments in both our Communions, which opened the way for a re-reception of the place of Mary in the faith and life of the Church (paragraphs 47-51).
• This growing convergence has also allowed us to approach in a fresh way the questions about Mary which our two Communions have set before us. In doing so, we have framed our work within the pattern of grace and hope which we discover in Scripture – "predestined ... called ... justified ... glorified" (Romans 8:30) (paragraphs 52-57).
A sham of a document, which purports to be an agreement between Anglicans and Catholics on the subject of Mary! To quote the composer Charles Villiers Stanford (he was referring to Elgar's oratorio The Dream of Gerontius, but whether or not it applies to Elgar, it definitely applies here), "the whole thing stinks of incense"!
The truth, however, is simple, is that the biblical Mary is not the same person as the Roman Catholic Mary. The former was a person, a sinner like the rest of us - a godly person, certainly, in that she obeyed the will of God, but as a human, she was a sinner. The latter is effectively a goddess who is placed as a sort of co-Christ.
To God alone be the glory. God bless you all.
The document begins very innocently. Firstly, it gives an account of the descriptions of Mary in the New Testament (which, I think you'll all agree, are by no means copious). Then, it proceeds to chronicle the rise of Marianism in Christendom (correctly stating that it arose early with the church "fathers" declaring that she never conceived a child by Joseph - which by Matthew 12:46, we know to be incorrect, unless Mary had further children by the Holy Ghost, about which God declined to tell us!).
However, it is the conclusions of the sections from "From the Reformation to the present day" onwards that trouble me. The committee cites a document written by the previous pope, I believe, which says that: "The Rosary, though clearly Marian in character, is at heart a Christocentric prayer". Anyone who has researched the Catholic Rosary will laugh at the seriousness with which this statement is quoted.
Next up is a rather puzzling leap from 2 Corinthians 1:20 (from a misleading translation, of course) to this: "It enables her to speak the 'Amen' in which, through the Spirit's overshadowing, God's 'Yes' of new creation is inaugurated. As we have seen, this fiat of Mary was distinctive, in its openness to God's Word, and in the path to the foot of the cross and beyond on which the Spirit led her."
The answer to the statement "all these ways of including Mary in praise and prayer belong to our common heritage" is simple: no, they do not! Another sentence refers to Mary as "mother of the Lord", but sadly, this document portrays her more as MOTHER of the Lord rather than the more scriptural Mother of the LORD, the key figure being Jesus Christ, to whom alone belongs our prayers.
Their summary of what is apparently the common faith of Anglicans and Roman Catholics is thus:
• Any interpretation of the role of Mary must not obscure the unique mediation of Christ;
• Any consideration of Mary must be linked with the doctrines of Christ and the Church;
• We recognise the Blessed Virgin Mary as the Theotókos, the mother of God incarnate, and so observe her festivals and accord her honour among the saints;
• Mary was prepared by grace to be the mother of our Redeemer, by whom she herself was redeemed and received into glory;
• We recognise Mary as a model of holiness, faith and obedience for all Christians; and
• Mary can be seen as a prophetic figure of the Church.
• This study has led us to the conclusion that it is impossible to be faithful to Scripture without giving due attention to the person of Mary (paragraphs 6-30).
• In recalling together the ancient common traditions, we have discerned afresh the central importance of the Theotókos in the Christological controversies, and the Fathers' use of biblical images to interpret and celebrate Mary's place in the plan of salvation (paragraphs 31-40).
• We have reviewed the growth of devotion to Mary in the medieval centuries, and the theological controversies associated with them. We have seen how some excesses in late medieval devotion, and reactions against them by the Reformers, contributed to the breach of communion between us, following which attitudes toward Mary took divergent paths (paragraphs 41-46).
• We have also noted evidence of subsequent developments in both our Communions, which opened the way for a re-reception of the place of Mary in the faith and life of the Church (paragraphs 47-51).
• This growing convergence has also allowed us to approach in a fresh way the questions about Mary which our two Communions have set before us. In doing so, we have framed our work within the pattern of grace and hope which we discover in Scripture – "predestined ... called ... justified ... glorified" (Romans 8:30) (paragraphs 52-57).
A sham of a document, which purports to be an agreement between Anglicans and Catholics on the subject of Mary! To quote the composer Charles Villiers Stanford (he was referring to Elgar's oratorio The Dream of Gerontius, but whether or not it applies to Elgar, it definitely applies here), "the whole thing stinks of incense"!
The truth, however, is simple, is that the biblical Mary is not the same person as the Roman Catholic Mary. The former was a person, a sinner like the rest of us - a godly person, certainly, in that she obeyed the will of God, but as a human, she was a sinner. The latter is effectively a goddess who is placed as a sort of co-Christ.
To God alone be the glory. God bless you all.
Last edited:
