You posted this in atheism. You do NOT want to know what I think of Charlie Kirk.
So I will move it and I will ask that we refrain from referring to the killer's motive as "demonic," which (under the umbrella of the atheism forum) is a lazy scapegoating that robs a homicidal a-hole of responsibility for his despicable act.
And I will ask that we refrain from politics, which is impossible in a conversation about Charlie Kirk (which is why I feel compelled to change the name of the thread).
So henceforth, this thread is narrowed to the following:
Quote
Kirk said that "I think we as Protestants and Evangelicals under-venerate Mary. She was very important. She was a vessel for our Lord and Savior....We don't talk about Mary enough. We don't venerate her enough. Mary was clearly important to early Christians."
This seems rather disingenuous and hypocritical, coming from someone who was known to be an outspoken misogynist. One might even suspect he was pandering.
You posted this in atheism. You do NOT want to know what I think of Charlie Kirk.
So I will move it and I will ask that we refrain from referring to the killer's motive as "demonic," which (under the umbrella of the atheism forum) is a lazy scapegoating that robs a homicidal a-hole of responsibility for his despicable act.
And I will ask that we refrain from politics, which is impossible in a conversation about Charlie Kirk (which is why I feel compelled to change the name of the thread).
So henceforth, this thread is narrowed to the following:
Do we agree? [moving to doctrinal).
Raf please do what you feel is best. My sole reason for this post was to discuss Mary the Mother of Jesus and what Kirk said about Christians not venerating her enough. If he was right then we, whoever wants to, may do good to give it some appreciable thought...thx
(Yes, I think it was crazy to post this in the sub forum in which it started. That was just BEGGING for a flame post...which would have been on subject for the sub forum.
I think there is a False Dilemma at work, and I am going to identify it.
Mrs Wolf has suggested to me previously (with merit, I believe) that Mary veneration, at least the modern type and much of what led to it, springs from the practice of Christianity being an Old Boys Club. Women can easily feel left out of things, and Mary veneration helps address that.
My problem is that I feel that the usual methods of addressing that would be veneration of Mary (prayers to her, etc.) or veneration of female saints (prayers to them, etc.), and I find EITHER to be doctrinal error, at best.
I think we may agree on the problem but not with the solution. I find Mary veneration to be a lazy solution to a deeper problem, one that calls for answers that are doctrinally sound while still addressing the problem.
It seems ridiculous to have to say it, but Christianity needs women, and Christianity has room for women, and there is a lot for women there, both to offer them and for them to do, if action is the goal.
We do not need to address that by embracing error.
(I'm not aiming this at any posters here, just at the doctrine. Please try not to see offense in it. If I've offended in passing, I'm sorry.)
(Yes, I think it was crazy to post this in the sub forum in which it started. That was just BEGGING for a flame post...which would have been on subject for the sub forum.
I think there is a False Dilemma at work, and I am going to identify it.
Mrs Wolf has suggested to me previously (with merit, I believe) that Mary veneration, at least the modern type and much of what led to it, springs from the practice of Christianity being an Old Boys Club. Women can easily feel left out of things, and Mary veneration helps address that.
My problem is that I feel that the usual methods of addressing that would be veneration of Mary (prayers to her, etc.) or veneration of female saints (prayers to them, etc.), and I find EITHER to be doctrinal error, at best.
I think we may agree on the problem but not with the solution. I find Mary veneration to be a lazy solution to a deeper problem, one that calls for answers that are doctrinally sound while still addressing the problem.
It seems ridiculous to have to say it, but Christianity needs women, and Christianity has room for women, and there is a lot for women there, both to offer them and for them to do, if action is the goal.
We do not need to address that by embracing error.
(I'm not aiming this at any posters here, just at the doctrine. Please try not to see offense in it. If I've offended in passing, I'm sorry.)
Thank you WordWolf. Please explain what the error in doctrine is. If you like, please post what iAsk says what Mary veneration actually is, so we may proceed with the same frame of reference. Thx.
This was in today's church bulletin and thought it would be appropriate to discuss inside this thread:
Seven Sorrows of the Blessed Virgin Mary
The seven sorrows of the Blessed Virgin Mary, also known as Our Lady of Sorrows or Mater Dolorosa, are significant events in Mary's life that caused her profound grief and are a popular devotion in the Catholic Church. These sorrows are frequently depicted in art and are distinct from the five Sorrowful Mysteries of the Rosary[1][2].
According to www.iAsk.Ai - Ask AI:
The traditional seven sorrows are:
The Prophecy of Simeon: When Mary and Joseph presented the infant Jesus at the Temple, Simeon prophesied to Mary, "And you yourself a sword will pierce" (Luke 2:35), indicating the future suffering she would endure because of her son[3][4][5]. This prophecy foreshadowed the immense pain Mary would experience throughout Jesus' life and passion[6].
The Flight into Egypt: Warned by an angel in a dream that King Herod intended to kill Jesus, Joseph took Mary and the child and fled to Egypt to escape the persecution (Matthew 2:13-14)[3][4][5]. This forced journey into a foreign land brought hardship and fear to the Holy Family[6].
The Loss of the Child Jesus in the Temple: When Jesus was twelve years old, Mary and Joseph lost him for three days during their return journey from Jerusalem after the Passover feast. They found him in the Temple, listening to and questioning the teachers (Luke 2:43-50)[3][4][5]. This period of anxious searching caused Mary great distress[6].
Mary Meets Jesus on the Way to Calvary: As Jesus carried his cross to his crucifixion, Mary met him on the Via Dolorosa. This encounter, though not explicitly detailed in the Gospels, is a traditional Fourth Station of the Cross, depicting her immense sorrow at seeing her son's suffering and humiliation[3][4][5][7].
The Crucifixion of Jesus: Mary stood at the foot of the cross as Jesus was crucified (John 19:25-27)[3][4][5]. Witnessing her son's agonizing death was an unspeakable sorrow, fulfilling Simeon's prophecy[6].
Jesus' Body is Taken Down from the Cross: After Jesus' death, his body was taken down from the cross and placed in Mary's arms, a scene often depicted in art as the Pietà (Mark 15:42-46)[3][4][5]. This moment represented profound grief as she held her lifeless son[6].
The Burial of Jesus: Mary witnessed the burial of Jesus in the tomb (John 19:38-42)[3][4][5]. This final act of laying her son to rest brought immense sorrow and a sense of finality, though her faith in God's plan remained[6].
Devotion to Our Lady of Sorrows has a long history, particularly gaining prominence around the 11th century in Western Christianity[2]. The Servite Order, founded in 1233, significantly contributed to the spread of this devotion, developing practices such as the Rosary of the Seven Sorrows and the Black Scapular of the Seven Dolours of Mary[2][8]. The feast of Our Lady of Sorrows is celebrated liturgically every September 15th[1][4].
This seems rather disingenuous and hypocritical, coming from someone who was known to be an outspoken misogynist. One might even suspect he was pandering.
This was in today's church bulletin and thought it would be appropriate to discuss inside this thread:
Seven Sorrows of the Blessed Virgin Mary
The seven sorrows of the Blessed Virgin Mary, also known as Our Lady of Sorrows or Mater Dolorosa, are significant events in Mary's life that caused her profound grief and are a popular devotion in the Catholic Church. These sorrows are frequently depicted in art and are distinct from the five Sorrowful Mysteries of the Rosary[1][2].
...
And THIS is why this post had to be removed from ATHEISM/Questioning Faith.
Because as an unbeliever I would have torn this to shreds.
But believers should feel comfortable discussing it without worrying about what unbelievers think, which, let's be honest, if kinda predictable.
And THIS is why this post had to be removed from ATHEISM/Questioning Faith.
Because as an unbeliever I would have torn this to shreds.
But believers should feel comfortable discussing it without worrying about what unbelievers think, which, let's be honest, if kinda predictable.
Thank Raf. Also if you would, please change the name of this thread to "Mary Veneration" as you suggested earlier....and if you feel like starting a thread debunking "Mary Veneration" please do so and I will read your side of the story. Thx...
Thank you WordWolf. Please explain what the error in doctrine is. If you like, please post what iAsk says what Mary veneration actually is, so we may proceed with the same frame of reference. Thx.
I'll explain the error in doctrine.
First of all, I'm using the term "veneration" since it's the least objectionable term for those who perform it. I could just as easily say "worship". Naturally, this would produce a subtopic of discussion.
"Mrs Wolf has suggested to me previously (with merit, I believe) that Mary veneration, at least the modern type and much of what led to it, springs from the practice of Christianity being an Old Boys Club. Women can easily feel left out of things, and Mary veneration helps address that.
My problem is that I feel that the usual methods of addressing that would be veneration of Mary (prayers to her, etc.) or veneration of female saints (prayers to them, etc.), and I find EITHER to be doctrinal error, at best.
I think we may agree on the problem but not with the solution. I find Mary veneration to be a lazy solution to a deeper problem, one that calls for answers that are doctrinally sound while still addressing the problem. "
I thought I was clear enough here, but I'll try to make it clearer, and I'll try to remain somewhat tactful.
I think that the entire fuss over Mary- and any number of female saints- stems from a feeling of disenfranchisement felt by females concerning Christianity, and church, and so on. It's easy to portray Christianity as a religion that emphasizes men and marginalizes women. A case can be made for it. On paper, I don't think that's the case- we see women in the Gospels, and in Acts, and mentioned in the Epistles. In practice, I think it had often looked that way. Worse, in the pulpit, it's been that way at times- there have been men who've turned sermons to condemn bad things- and any number of them have blamed (scapegoated, really) women as those bad things, or their source, or their carriers, and so on.
So, how do we address that? We can do it with sounder doctrine. Another way we can do that is faster. We can adopt some of the practices that the other religions have, and adulterate Christianity with them. (It can happen whether or not we mean to, of course.) We can adopt some of the "mother goddess" religious practices, and just direct them to Mary. This is also a cheap way to gain converts. If they can maintain their same practices but just swap the labels, they're more likely to adopt Christianity. If one's goal is numbers and retention, this is a good idea. If one's goal is doctrinal purity, this is a horrifying prospect.
I do think it's a given that early Christians of the first few centuries DID end up adopting any number of practices and doctrines in use by practitioners of other religions at the time- either intentionally to gain converts, or accidentally by having converts join whose ideas slowly spread through the church. ("A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.") So, their ideas on all sorts of things effected ideas of Christians, and in some cases, became doctrine. (It is outside the scope of this thread to get into all of them.) I think any number of ideas got attached to Mary in this fashion as well- some of them by well-meaning Christians.
So, I think proper doctrine and proper teaching should accord women a more balanced role in the church- without having to offer prayers to Mary or anyone else.
I think I answered the question while remaining reasonably tactful. I'm sure you'll let me know if I was unsuccessful.
Since you asked, I'll post what iAsk said on the matter- and 2 other sources rather than just relying on a machine.
"In religious discussions, what is Mary veneration?"
Mary veneration, particularly within the Catholic Church, refers to the practice of honoring Mary, the mother of Jesus, with special reverence and devotion. This practice is distinct from the worship (latria) reserved for God alone, and is instead categorized as hyperdulia, a higher form of veneration (dulia) given to other saints.[1][3]
According to www.iAsk.Ai - Ask AI:
The theological basis for Mary veneration stems from her unique role in salvation history as the Mother of God (Theotokos), a title affirmed at the Council of Ephesus in 431 CE.[1][2][3][5] Catholics believe that Mary's "yes" to God's plan, as recorded in the Gospel of Luke, made the Incarnation possible, thus making her a crucial figure in the process of salvation and redemption.[1][3][5]
Key Aspects of Mary Veneration:
Distinction from Worship: The Catholic Church explicitly distinguishes veneration from adoration or worship. Adoration is due only to the Triune God, while veneration is an honor given to Mary due to her unique privileges and role in God's plan.[1][3][5] Protestants often accuse Catholics of "Mariolatry" (Mary-worship), but Catholics deny this, emphasizing the difference between hyperdulia (highest veneration for Mary) and latria (worship for God).[5][6]
Biblical Foundations: Proponents of Mary veneration point to biblical passages such as the Angel Gabriel's greeting to Mary as "highly favored" and Elizabeth's exclamation, "Blessed are you among women," as scriptural support for her special honor.[3][5] Her presence at the beginning and end of Jesus' public ministry, including at the foot of the Cross, is also cited as evidence of her cooperation in salvation.[1][3]
Historical Development: The practice of Mary veneration developed gradually over centuries. Early Christian art from the 2nd century depicts Mary as the mother of Jesus.[1][2] The theological emphasis on Mary grew in response to heresies like Docetism, which questioned Jesus' humanity. The concept of Mary as the "Second Eve," who reversed the disobedience of the first Eve through her faithfulness, emerged in the 2nd century with figures like Justin Martyr and Irenaeus.[1][2] The official endorsement of "Theotokos" (Mother of God) at the Council of Ephesus in 431 CE marked a significant turning point, leading to increased emphasis on Mary and the dedication of churches in her honor.[1][2]
Forms of Veneration: Mary veneration encompasses various devotions, including prayers, pious acts, visual arts, poetry, and music.[1] Common practices include:
Prayers: The "Hail Mary" is a prominent prayer, incorporating biblical greetings from Gabriel and Elizabeth.[1][5] Other prayers include the "Salve Regina," "Magnificat," and the "Angelus."[1]
Feast Days: Numerous Marian feast days are celebrated throughout the liturgical year, some of which are holy days of obligation, such as the Feast of the Immaculate Conception, Mary, Mother of God, and the Assumption.[1]
Titles: A wide array of titles are used to honor Mary, such as "Mother of God," "Queen of Heaven," "Star of the Sea," and "Mother of All Sorrows."[1]
Art and Music: Marian art, particularly the "Madonna and Child," is a central icon in Christian art. Marian hymns and antiphons are also integral to liturgical and devotional practices.[1]
Devotions: Popular devotions include the Rosary, the wearing of scapulars, and Marian pilgrimages to shrines like Lourdes, Fatima, and Guadalupe.[1][5]
Role as Intercessor: Catholics view Mary as a powerful intercessor with her Son, Jesus. They believe that through her compassion and prayers, she can bring petitions to God.[1][5] This is exemplified by the story of the Wedding at Cana, where Jesus performed his first miracle at Mary's request.[1]
Marian Apparitions: Reported Marian apparitions, such as those at Lourdes and Fatima, have significantly influenced Marian devotion. While not required for belief, some apparitions have received official Church approval and are widely believed by Catholics.[1]
Protestant Perspective: Protestants generally ceased the practice of Mary veneration during the Reformation, seeking to return to what they perceived as the basics of early Christianity and a radical emphasis on Scripture. They argue that the Bible does not explicitly command or model prayer to Mary or her elevated status beyond being Jesus' mother.[2][6]
In essence, Mary veneration in the Catholic Church is a deeply rooted practice that honors Mary as a unique and essential figure in Christian faith, distinct from the worship of God, and expressed through various devotional forms and theological understandings.[1][3][5]
Authoritative Sources
Veneration of Mary in the Catholic Church. [Wikipedia]↩
The History of Mary Veneration: A Protestant Prospective. [Classic Theology]↩
In 2005 in Chicago, a young woman was driving home from work and looked at the wall of an underpass where she saw an image of the Virgin Mary. For a short while, “Our Lady of the Underpass” became national news and a local pilgrimage site. Where some saw a miraculous image, however, others saw a mere salt stain.
Although the excitement has died down, there are still those who ensure that the underpass remains adorned with candles, flowers, and a makeshift altar. There are thousands of stories like this. Some Marian shrines become permanent pilgrimage sites, such as Lourdes and Medjugorje. Others simply fade away.
The veneration and adoration of Mary is as old as the church itself. The earliest record of Mary’s veneration probably comes from the Third Ecumenical Council at Ephesus in A.D. 431. There church fathers affirmed Mary as the Theotokos, or God-bearer. The title stuck, and today we refer to her as the “Mother of God.”
This designation of Mary as the mother of God is really at the root of Roman Catholic veneration. Mary is the link between our broken humanity and the boundless divinity present in the triune God. Mary is redeemed, as she is human, but she is also considered to have a special and unique relationship with God, as she shares DNA with Christ. Mother Teresa once remarked, “She gave Jesus his body, and his body is what saved us.”
In the many years since 431, Mary has come to occupy a powerful place in Roman Catholic spirituality. She has many faces and innumerable names, among them Our Lady of Guadalupe, She Who Ripens the Wheat, Queen of Angels, and the Light Cloud of Heavenly Rain. She is said to appear on occasion, mostly to children or others who are weak, disempowered, or on the margins of society. She is said, in some cases, to procure miracles. Some have even said that in the last days, Mary will lead the army of angels in the final battle against evil.
But all of the titles and all of the miracles are considered to be a result of Mary’s close relationship with her son, Jesus. As mother of the King of Kings, she is the saint of saints. Furthermore, because the church is the body of Christ, and Mary is Christ’s mother, she is also the mother of the church. This means that in addition to having a special relationship with Jesus, Mary also has a special relationship with the church. She belongs to the church and the church belongs to her.
So when we pray the rosary, or bow our heads during the creed, we are honoring our mother, and the mother of our Lord. Although she is not God, she has earned our respect and devotion.
I'll try to be relatively brief and relatively on-topic.
-I'm well aware that some Christians posit Mary as a "mediatrix"- that is, a mediator between God and man, and a co-mediator with Jesus. For those of us who believe the verse that there is ONE God and ONE mediator between God and man, and that mediator is "the man Christ Jesus", this doctrine is nothing less than error. I'm aware that Pope John Paul II declared it during the Marian Year in the 1980s, when he dedicated an entire year to Mary. I liked the man, but in this he was just plain wrong.
-I'm aware that the usual argument for Mary worship is that "adoration" and "worship" are two different things, that "worship" is directed at God, and "adoration" is directed at Mary, saints, etc. I consider the distinction mere sophistry. In "adoration", prayers are being directed to a person, and statues are made of them, where one prays, lights candles, and offers devotions. That's "worship" with a few cosmetic distinctions even a lawyer would have trouble making stick. If someone made a statue of Zeus, knelt before it, prayed before it, lit candles before it, and offered devotions to Zeus at it, you'd say they were "worshipping" Zeus- and you'd be correct.
-It was in Vatican II in the 1950s when the doctrine of "The Assumption" was codified. The then-Pope declared that Mary never died- he said she had ascended to heaven, where she was made "queen of heaven." (His term, not mine.) Obviously, I can't buy into any of that.
-I'm also aware that some people have said that Mary is related to all three members of the Trinity- as the mother of the Son, the daughter of the Father, and the spouse of the Holy Spirit. Not aware of this? Pope John Paul II said as much in L'Osservatore Romano. You can read the official English translation here:
If you're on board with these doctrines, we'll have to agree to disagree. I do not mind interacting with Catholics, but I'm not going to sign on to all their doctrines. I don't have to get on their case about them, either.
Recommended Posts
oldiesman
Oops I guess the links are working...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Human without the bean
They are now.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Out of respect:
You posted this in atheism. You do NOT want to know what I think of Charlie Kirk.
So I will move it and I will ask that we refrain from referring to the killer's motive as "demonic," which (under the umbrella of the atheism forum) is a lazy scapegoating that robs a homicidal a-hole of responsibility for his despicable act.
And I will ask that we refrain from politics, which is impossible in a conversation about Charlie Kirk (which is why I feel compelled to change the name of the thread).
So henceforth, this thread is narrowed to the following:
Do we agree? [moving to doctrinal).
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
This seems rather disingenuous and hypocritical, coming from someone who was known to be an outspoken misogynist. One might even suspect he was pandering.
Is that too far off topic? Remove if necessary.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Raf please do what you feel is best. My sole reason for this post was to discuss Mary the Mother of Jesus and what Kirk said about Christians not venerating her enough. If he was right then we, whoever wants to, may do good to give it some appreciable thought...thx
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Will that work?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
(Yes, I think it was crazy to post this in the sub forum in which it started. That was just BEGGING for a flame post...which would have been on subject for the sub forum.
I think there is a False Dilemma at work, and I am going to identify it.
Mrs Wolf has suggested to me previously (with merit, I believe) that Mary veneration, at least the modern type and much of what led to it, springs from the practice of Christianity being an Old Boys Club. Women can easily feel left out of things, and Mary veneration helps address that.
My problem is that I feel that the usual methods of addressing that would be veneration of Mary (prayers to her, etc.) or veneration of female saints (prayers to them, etc.), and I find EITHER to be doctrinal error, at best.
I think we may agree on the problem but not with the solution. I find Mary veneration to be a lazy solution to a deeper problem, one that calls for answers that are doctrinally sound while still addressing the problem.
It seems ridiculous to have to say it, but Christianity needs women, and Christianity has room for women, and there is a lot for women there, both to offer them and for them to do, if action is the goal.
We do not need to address that by embracing error.
(I'm not aiming this at any posters here, just at the doctrine. Please try not to see offense in it. If I've offended in passing, I'm sorry.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
I didn't believe in striking the guy's name since it was his idea in the first place, but whatever Raf wants to do with this thread is fine by me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Thank you WordWolf. Please explain what the error in doctrine is. If you like, please post what iAsk says what Mary veneration actually is, so we may proceed with the same frame of reference. Thx.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Frankly, I don't believe the idea originated with Kirk. I concur w/ the edit.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
This was in today's church bulletin and thought it would be appropriate to discuss inside this thread:
Seven Sorrows of the Blessed Virgin Mary
The seven sorrows of the Blessed Virgin Mary, also known as Our Lady of Sorrows or Mater Dolorosa, are significant events in Mary's life that caused her profound grief and are a popular devotion in the Catholic Church. These sorrows are frequently depicted in art and are distinct from the five Sorrowful Mysteries of the Rosary [1] [2].
According to www.iAsk.Ai - Ask AI:
The traditional seven sorrows are:
Devotion to Our Lady of Sorrows has a long history, particularly gaining prominence around the 11th century in Western Christianity [2]. The Servite Order, founded in 1233, significantly contributed to the spread of this devotion, developing practices such as the Rosary of the Seven Sorrows and the Black Scapular of the Seven Dolours of Mary [2] [8]. The feast of Our Lady of Sorrows is celebrated liturgically every September 15th [1] [4].
Authoritative Sources
Answer Provided by iAsk.ai – Ask AI.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
modcat5
Yah, necessary ;)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
And THIS is why this post had to be removed from ATHEISM/Questioning Faith.
Because as an unbeliever I would have torn this to shreds.
But believers should feel comfortable discussing it without worrying about what unbelievers think, which, let's be honest, if kinda predictable.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Thank Raf. Also if you would, please change the name of this thread to "Mary Veneration" as you suggested earlier....and if you feel like starting a thread debunking "Mary Veneration" please do so and I will read your side of the story. Thx...
Edited by oldiesmanLink to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Ok?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Yes, thank you...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
I'll explain the error in doctrine.
First of all, I'm using the term "veneration" since it's the least objectionable term for those who perform it. I could just as easily say "worship". Naturally, this would produce a subtopic of discussion.
"Mrs Wolf has suggested to me previously (with merit, I believe) that Mary veneration, at least the modern type and much of what led to it, springs from the practice of Christianity being an Old Boys Club. Women can easily feel left out of things, and Mary veneration helps address that.
My problem is that I feel that the usual methods of addressing that would be veneration of Mary (prayers to her, etc.) or veneration of female saints (prayers to them, etc.), and I find EITHER to be doctrinal error, at best.
I think we may agree on the problem but not with the solution. I find Mary veneration to be a lazy solution to a deeper problem, one that calls for answers that are doctrinally sound while still addressing the problem. "
I thought I was clear enough here, but I'll try to make it clearer, and I'll try to remain somewhat tactful.
I think that the entire fuss over Mary- and any number of female saints- stems from a feeling of disenfranchisement felt by females concerning Christianity, and church, and so on. It's easy to portray Christianity as a religion that emphasizes men and marginalizes women. A case can be made for it. On paper, I don't think that's the case- we see women in the Gospels, and in Acts, and mentioned in the Epistles. In practice, I think it had often looked that way. Worse, in the pulpit, it's been that way at times- there have been men who've turned sermons to condemn bad things- and any number of them have blamed (scapegoated, really) women as those bad things, or their source, or their carriers, and so on.
So, how do we address that? We can do it with sounder doctrine. Another way we can do that is faster. We can adopt some of the practices that the other religions have, and adulterate Christianity with them. (It can happen whether or not we mean to, of course.) We can adopt some of the "mother goddess" religious practices, and just direct them to Mary. This is also a cheap way to gain converts. If they can maintain their same practices but just swap the labels, they're more likely to adopt Christianity. If one's goal is numbers and retention, this is a good idea. If one's goal is doctrinal purity, this is a horrifying prospect.
I do think it's a given that early Christians of the first few centuries DID end up adopting any number of practices and doctrines in use by practitioners of other religions at the time- either intentionally to gain converts, or accidentally by having converts join whose ideas slowly spread through the church. ("A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.") So, their ideas on all sorts of things effected ideas of Christians, and in some cases, became doctrine. (It is outside the scope of this thread to get into all of them.) I think any number of ideas got attached to Mary in this fashion as well- some of them by well-meaning Christians.
So, I think proper doctrine and proper teaching should accord women a more balanced role in the church- without having to offer prayers to Mary or anyone else.
I think I answered the question while remaining reasonably tactful. I'm sure you'll let me know if I was unsuccessful.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Since you asked, I'll post what iAsk said on the matter- and 2 other sources rather than just relying on a machine.
"In religious discussions, what is Mary veneration?"
Mary veneration, particularly within the Catholic Church, refers to the practice of honoring Mary, the mother of Jesus, with special reverence and devotion. This practice is distinct from the worship (latria) reserved for God alone, and is instead categorized as hyperdulia, a higher form of veneration (dulia) given to other saints.[1] [3]
According to www.iAsk.Ai - Ask AI:
The theological basis for Mary veneration stems from her unique role in salvation history as the Mother of God (Theotokos), a title affirmed at the Council of Ephesus in 431 CE.[1] [2] [3] [5] Catholics believe that Mary's "yes" to God's plan, as recorded in the Gospel of Luke, made the Incarnation possible, thus making her a crucial figure in the process of salvation and redemption.[1] [3] [5]
Key Aspects of Mary Veneration:
In essence, Mary veneration in the Catholic Church is a deeply rooted practice that honors Mary as a unique and essential figure in Christian faith, distinct from the worship of God, and expressed through various devotional forms and theological understandings.[1] [3] [5]
Authoritative Sources
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
https://uscatholic.org/articles/201405/why-do-catholics-venerate-mary/
In 2005 in Chicago, a young woman was driving home from work and looked at the wall of an underpass where she saw an image of the Virgin Mary. For a short while, “Our Lady of the Underpass” became national news and a local pilgrimage site. Where some saw a miraculous image, however, others saw a mere salt stain.
Although the excitement has died down, there are still those who ensure that the underpass remains adorned with candles, flowers, and a makeshift altar. There are thousands of stories like this. Some Marian shrines become permanent pilgrimage sites, such as Lourdes and Medjugorje. Others simply fade away.
The veneration and adoration of Mary is as old as the church itself. The earliest record of Mary’s veneration probably comes from the Third Ecumenical Council at Ephesus in A.D. 431. There church fathers affirmed Mary as the Theotokos, or God-bearer. The title stuck, and today we refer to her as the “Mother of God.”
This designation of Mary as the mother of God is really at the root of Roman Catholic veneration. Mary is the link between our broken humanity and the boundless divinity present in the triune God. Mary is redeemed, as she is human, but she is also considered to have a special and unique relationship with God, as she shares DNA with Christ. Mother Teresa once remarked, “She gave Jesus his body, and his body is what saved us.”
In the many years since 431, Mary has come to occupy a powerful place in Roman Catholic spirituality. She has many faces and innumerable names, among them Our Lady of Guadalupe, She Who Ripens the Wheat, Queen of Angels, and the Light Cloud of Heavenly Rain. She is said to appear on occasion, mostly to children or others who are weak, disempowered, or on the margins of society. She is said, in some cases, to procure miracles. Some have even said that in the last days, Mary will lead the army of angels in the final battle against evil.
But all of the titles and all of the miracles are considered to be a result of Mary’s close relationship with her son, Jesus. As mother of the King of Kings, she is the saint of saints. Furthermore, because the church is the body of Christ, and Mary is Christ’s mother, she is also the mother of the church. This means that in addition to having a special relationship with Jesus, Mary also has a special relationship with the church. She belongs to the church and the church belongs to her.
So when we pray the rosary, or bow our heads during the creed, we are honoring our mother, and the mother of our Lord. Although she is not God, she has earned our respect and devotion.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
A dissenting point of view is on this page:
https://www.bibletools.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Topical.show/RTD/cgg/ID/3051/Veneration-of-Mary.htm
In the interests of polite discussion, I won't paste the contents, but they speak for themselves.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
I'll try to be relatively brief and relatively on-topic.
-I'm well aware that some Christians posit Mary as a "mediatrix"- that is, a mediator between God and man, and a co-mediator with Jesus. For those of us who believe the verse that there is ONE God and ONE mediator between God and man, and that mediator is "the man Christ Jesus", this doctrine is nothing less than error. I'm aware that Pope John Paul II declared it during the Marian Year in the 1980s, when he dedicated an entire year to Mary. I liked the man, but in this he was just plain wrong.
-I'm aware that the usual argument for Mary worship is that "adoration" and "worship" are two different things, that "worship" is directed at God, and "adoration" is directed at Mary, saints, etc. I consider the distinction mere sophistry. In "adoration", prayers are being directed to a person, and statues are made of them, where one prays, lights candles, and offers devotions. That's "worship" with a few cosmetic distinctions even a lawyer would have trouble making stick. If someone made a statue of Zeus, knelt before it, prayed before it, lit candles before it, and offered devotions to Zeus at it, you'd say they were "worshipping" Zeus- and you'd be correct.
-It was in Vatican II in the 1950s when the doctrine of "The Assumption" was codified. The then-Pope declared that Mary never died- he said she had ascended to heaven, where she was made "queen of heaven." (His term, not mine.) Obviously, I can't buy into any of that.
-I'm also aware that some people have said that Mary is related to all three members of the Trinity- as the mother of the Son, the daughter of the Father, and the spouse of the Holy Spirit. Not aware of this? Pope John Paul II said as much in L'Osservatore Romano. You can read the official English translation here:
https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/marys-relationship-with-the-trinity-8027
If you're on board with these doctrines, we'll have to agree to disagree. I do not mind interacting with Catholics, but I'm not going to sign on to all their doctrines. I don't have to get on their case about them, either.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.