The Byzantine Forum
Newest Members
Vigilante, Poliscifi, The Cub, P H, Hardrada
5603 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
1 registered members (P H), 81 guests, and 458 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Photos
Church of the Holy Trinity (UGCC) - Brazil
Papal Audience 10 November 2017
Upgraded Russian icon corner
Russian Greek Catholic Global Congress
OL EuroEast II (2007) Group
Forum Statistics
Forums26
Topics34,737
Posts411,934
Members5,603
Most Online2,716
Jun 7th, 2012
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Re: Protestantism and the Holy Theotokos [Re: theophan] #419340 06/27/19 02:30 AM
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 545
U
Utroque Offline
Member
Offline
Member
U
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 545
Originally Posted by theophan
Christ is in our midst!!

The term "Mother of God" was adopted by one of the first Ecumenical Councils. The term predates the adoption of the accepted New Testament canon of Scripture. It is a statement of the Church's theology that is related to who Jesus Christ is. It is actually auxiliary to this latter point. The whole idea of our salvation hinges on getting Jesus Christ right--Who He is. He is God in the flesh. If we don't get Him right, then we actually don't get our salvation right.


He is and shall be!

I certainly did not mean to deny or denigrate that beautiful title. Although "Mother of God" is of ancient usage, I do not believe it was used at the Council of Ephesus where Mary was proclaimed "Theotokos" (Deipara, in Latin) in contrast to the Nestorian "Christotokos". My point was that those who might have difficulty with the term, Mater Dei, might find the term Theotokos, prevalent among the Orthodox, more palatable. They could also ponder deeply the significance of Elizabeth's cry to Mary in the Gospel of Luke: "How should the Mother of My Lord come to me?", paralleling King David's cry in 2 Samuel 6:
"How should the Ark of My Lord come to me?" And as David danced before the Ark, the unborn John leapt in his mother's womb in the presence of the Theotokos.

Re: Protestantism and the Holy Theotokos [Re: Utroque] #419341 06/27/19 04:12 AM
Joined: Dec 2018
Posts: 77
S
Santiago Tarsicio Offline
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Dec 2018
Posts: 77
Originally Posted by Utroque
Originally Posted by theophan
Christ is in our midst!!

The term "Mother of God" was adopted by one of the first Ecumenical Councils. The term predates the adoption of the accepted New Testament canon of Scripture. It is a statement of the Church's theology that is related to who Jesus Christ is. It is actually auxiliary to this latter point. The whole idea of our salvation hinges on getting Jesus Christ right--Who He is. He is God in the flesh. If we don't get Him right, then we actually don't get our salvation right.


He is and shall be!

I certainly did not mean to deny or denigrate that beautiful title. Although "Mother of God" is of ancient usage, I do not believe it was used at the Council of Ephesus where Mary was proclaimed "Theotokos" (Deipara, in Latin) in contrast to the Nestorian "Christotokos". My point was that those who might have difficulty with the term, Mater Dei, might find the term Theotokos, prevalent among the Orthodox, more palatable. They could also ponder deeply the significance of Elizabeth's cry to Mary in the Gospel of Luke: "How should the Mother of My Lord come to me?", paralleling King David's cry in 2 Samuel 6:
"How should the Ark of My Lord come to me?" And as David danced before the Ark, the unborn John leapt in his mother's womb in the presence of the Theotokos.


Correct me if I'm wrong, but yes, the oldest ' Western ' translations of Thetokos were Deipara and Dei Genetrix... Mater Dei would have been more used later, I think (on the other hand, in the gospel when St. Elizabeth salutes Our Lady, she says mother of my lord).

But I don't see where to run away; being Christ totally God and totally man by hypostatic union, the Virgin is truly the Mother of God - it will take a lot of juggling to oppose.

Re: Protestantism and the Holy Theotokos [Re: Utroque] #419343 06/27/19 06:32 AM
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,983
ajk Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,983
Originally Posted by Utroque
... I feel the phrase "Mother of God" (Mater Dei) which is used prominently in the west, can be misleading and does seem to convey the sense that Mary somehow generates and is prior to God, and so gives umbrage to our Protestant brethren.

Originally Posted by Utroque
I certainly did not mean to deny or denigrate that beautiful title. Although "Mother of God" is of ancient usage, ... My point was that those who might have difficulty with the term, Mater Dei, might find the term Theotokos, prevalent among the Orthodox, more palatable.

Consider, however, that in the Chrysostom Divine Liturgy, the Ἄξιόν ἐστιν (It is truly proper...), has the phrase μητέρα τοῦ Θεοῦ (Mother of God). Also in iconography, Mary's title is usually the abbreviation ΜΡ ΘΥ, Μήτηρ Θεοῦ, Mother of God.

Re: Protestantism and the Holy Theotokos [Re: Anaphora] #419349 06/29/19 06:17 PM
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,457
theophan Offline
Moderator
Member
Offline
Moderator
Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,457
Christ is in our midst!!

The term Mother of God came out of the Christological formulations of the first seven Ecumenical Councils. In defining the answer to the question "Who is Jesus Christ?" and its next question "How does this explain His Saving Passion?" the term Mother of God comes out.

Christ is both God and man; eternal and without beginning and also born in time; He has two natures in one Hypostasis or Person. As God He is eternal and without beginning; as perfect man, He is born of a woman. There is a long theology that others may better lay out, but to deny His humanity throws doubt on whether He died as a man in His Saving Passion. One has only to look at all the old heresies about who He is and what is His nature to see how this all evolved.

The Council of Chalcedon, number 4, is where this was finally defined.

Now for Protestants who deny that anything happened in the Church prior to 1517, this all may be something hard to take. But it goes to show that Sola Scriptura has limits. Nowhere do the Christological definitions of the first seven Ecumenical Councils appear in the New or Old Testaments. The question then becomes "How do we know Who and What Jesus Christ is?" IMHO, without the Tradition that has come to us--of which the final definition of what books would constitute the new Testament has also come--there is no way to say with authority Who Jesus is or how our claim that he is God in the flesh has any more validity than the Islamic claim that He is merely another prophet.

Re: Protestantism and the Holy Theotokos [Re: theophan] #419375 07/04/19 08:53 PM
Joined: Dec 2018
Posts: 77
S
Santiago Tarsicio Offline
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Dec 2018
Posts: 77
Originally Posted by theophan
Christ is in our midst!!

The term Mother of God came out of the Christological formulations of the first seven Ecumenical Councils. In defining the answer to the question "Who is Jesus Christ?" and its next question "How does this explain His Saving Passion?" the term Mother of God comes out.

Christ is both God and man; eternal and without beginning and also born in time; He has two natures in one Hypostasis or Person. As God He is eternal and without beginning; as perfect man, He is born of a woman. There is a long theology that others may better lay out, but to deny His humanity throws doubt on whether He died as a man in His Saving Passion. One has only to look at all the old heresies about who He is and what is His nature to see how this all evolved.

The Council of Chalcedon, number 4, is where this was finally defined.

Now for Protestants who deny that anything happened in the Church prior to 1517, this all may be something hard to take. But it goes to show that Sola Scriptura has limits. Nowhere do the Christological definitions of the first seven Ecumenical Councils appear in the New or Old Testaments. The question then becomes "How do we know Who and What Jesus Christ is?" IMHO, without the Tradition that has come to us--of which the final definition of what books would constitute the new Testament has also come--there is no way to say with authority Who Jesus is or how our claim that he is God in the flesh has any more validity than the Islamic claim that He is merely another prophet.


Yes, but some Lutheran may argue that in the Lutheran church for a correct exposition of Sacred Scripture there are the Confessions of Faith and that, therefore, it is no problem for him the divine motherhood of Mary (not by chance that I said earlier that this understanding is not uniform in Protestantism):

The Augsburg Confession:

"Article III: Of the Son of God.

Also they teach that the Word, that is, the Son of God, did assume the human nature in 2] the womb of the blessed Virgin Mary, so that there are two natures, the divine and the human, inseparably enjoined in one Person, one Christ, true God and true man, who was born of the Virgin Mary, truly suffered, was crucified, dead, and 3] buried, that He might reconcile the Father unto us, and be a sacrifice, not only for original guilt, but also for all actual sins of men."


http://bookofconcord.org/augsburgconfession.php#article3


Epitome of the Formula of Concord:

"VIII. The Person of Christ.
7. Hence we believe, teach, and confess that Mary conceived and bore not a mere man and no more, but the true Son of God; therefore she also is rightly called and truly is the mother of God.

9. Therefore the Son of God truly suffered for us, however, according to the property of the human nature which He assumed into the unity of His divine person and made His own, so that He might be able to suffer and be our High Priest for our reconciliation with God, as it is written 1 Cor. 2:8: They have crucfied the Lord of glory. And Acts 20:28: We are purchased with God's blood.

10. Hence we believe, teach, and confess that the Son of Man is realiter, that is, in deed and truth, exalted according to His human nature to the right hand of the almighty majesty and power of God, because He [that man] was assumed into God when He was conceived of the Holy Ghost in His mother's womb, and His human nature was personally united with the Son of the Highest."


http://bookofconcord.org/fc-ep.php


The Solid Declaration of the Formula of Concord:

VIII. The Person of Christ

24: On account of this personal union and communion of the natures, Mary, the most blessed Virgin, bore not a mere man, but, as the angel [Gabriel] testifies, such a man as is truly the Son of the most high God, who showed His divine majesty even in His mother's womb, inasmuch as He was born of a virgin, with her virginity inviolate. Therefore she is truly the mother of God, and nevertheless remained a virgin.


http://bookofconcord.org/sd-person.php

Re: Protestantism and the Holy Theotokos [Re: Anaphora] #419455 09/18/19 04:08 PM
Joined: Sep 2019
Posts: 6
The Cub Offline
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
Joined: Sep 2019
Posts: 6

Much could be said of this.

In short, Protestants are eisegesists; and recoil from anything telling them otherwise. They respect those who practice the same (regardless of whether they agree with their interpretations); and reject anything and anyone that involves the notion of ‘obedience’.
Make no mistake about it: They flee from obedience.

They do not follow Holy Scripture (or even the KJV Book); and:
• delete whole books that present obstacles,
• add words to the text that do not exist, and/or
• pay no attention to text that contradicts or is problematic to their previously-conceived positions.

Simply stated: “They ignore the truth when presented to them.”

To wit (from a recent encounter with a Protestant objecting to the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin):
Holy Scripture tells us that it is the will of Almighty God that all people seek to obtain the Truth. Make no mistake about it, God does not care about what makes man feel good (cf. Mt 22:16); but directs man to seek the Truth.

"This is good and pleasing to God our savior, who wills everyone to be saved and to come to knowledge of the truth." (1 Tm 2:3-4)

And then, later in the same letter to Timothy, St. Paul tells us where to find the truth:

“…if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth.” (1Tm 3:15)

To reiterate: God wants all men to seek and come to the knowledge of truth, and the truth is found in the Church of the Living God. (NB: He did not say that the Holy Bible was the pillar and bulwark of truth, but the Church who wrote and defined the Holy Bible in the Decree of Pope St. Damassus I. Refer to 2nd link provided below.)

We see also that it is Jesus who is guiding His Church on earth from Heaven: "He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me." (Lk 10:16).

Then in St. Matthew’s Gospel, Jesus made it very clear how the teachings of His Church will be treated by God:

"He said to them, ‘But who do you say that I am?’ Simon Peter replied, ‘You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ And Jesus answered him, ‘Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church [NB: one singular church], and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.’" (Mt 16:15-19)

Ex cathedra teachings, and much more are discussed in:

Upon this Rock
www.call2holiness.org/UponThisRock/Ron/UponThisRock.htm

Thereafter, Jesus told us to obey His Church:
"If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” (Mt 18:15-18)

Now, in the previous citation, which Church is Jesus referring to? Whatever Church it is, clearly it would have to be one of unified doctrine, purpose, teaching and guidance. Further, it would have to date back to the days of Jesus.

There is only one Church that can satisfy those requirements, and that is the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

It certainly does not refer to any Protestant ecclesial community. Protestantism did not arise for another 1,500 years. If one asserts that this citation referred to one of the Protestant ecclesial communities, who could believe that Almighty God expected man to comply with Mt 18:15-18 for 1,500 years without such Protestant ecclesial community being in existence to serve as judge?

If for the simple sake of argument, we assume that Mat 18:15-18 refers to one of the Protestant ecclesial communities, which of the 40,000 – 45,000 would it be? No two of them can agree? And then how many are there within each Protestant ecclesial community who in their Sunday school, bicker on their respective personal interpretations of this verse of Scripture or that verse of Scripture? And then there are the thousands of Protestants each of whom believe they are a ‘religion of one’. Which of them would be the judge contemplated in Mt 18:15-18? Do they judge and obey themselves?

There is only one Church, and that is the Catholic Church, founded by Jesus Christ, true God and true man; founded by Jesus upon the Apostles; guided by the Holy Spirit and thus forming the ‘pillar and bulwark of truth’.

Holy Scripture is clear; all are called to obey the Church or be treated as Gentiles AND tax collectors. (NB: He said AND…i.e. a double curse.)

St. Paul added: “But even if we or an angel from heaven should proclaim to you a gospel contrary to what we proclaimed to you, let that one be accursed! As we have said before, so now I repeat, if anyone proclaims to you a gospel contrary to what you received, let that one be accursed!” (Gal 1:8-9)

Scripture Alone? Is Half the Story Sufficient?
www.call2holiness.org/ScriptureAlone/ScriptureAlone.htm

How We Know That Holy Scripture is Truly the Word of God
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/era-of-peace/conversations/topics/433


The foregoing was rejected completely by the Protestant in question, simply because it interfered with his religion of eisegesis. My experience has been that this is the typical reaction.

My point is that they do not practice belief in Scripture, as they profess. As St. Augustine stated (paraphrased from memory): “If you find anything within Holy Scripture that you do not believe; it is not Holy Scripture that you believe, but yourself.”

Re: Protestantism and the Holy Theotokos [Re: Anaphora] #419458 09/21/19 12:58 AM
Joined: Sep 2019
Posts: 6
The Cub Offline
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
Joined: Sep 2019
Posts: 6

“You search the scriptures, because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness to me; yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life.” (Jn 5:39-40)

“And he took bread, and when he had given thanks he broke it and gave it to them, saying, "This is my body which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me." (Lk 22:19)

“So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me. This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live for ever." (Jn 6:53-58)

Page 2 of 2 1 2

Moderated by  Alice, Father Deacon Ed, theophan 

The Byzantine Forum provides message boards for discussions focusing on Eastern Christianity (though discussions of other topics are welcome). The views expressed herein are those of the participants and may or may not reflect the teachings of the Byzantine Catholic or any other Church. The Byzantine Forum and the www.byzcath.org site exist to help build up the Church but are unofficial, have no connection with any Church entity, and should not be looked to as a source for official information for any Church. All posts become property of byzcath.org. Contents copyright - 1996-2019 (Forum 1998-2019). All rights reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.3