The Orthodox/Roman Catholic Veneration of Mary, the Mother of God (Jesus, testimony)

[Linus7]

In looking over some of these threads, I saw this from a news article about the Pope's recent stay in a hospital:

After leaving the Gemelli Polyclinic, Bulgarian Ambassador Vladimir Gradev recalled on Vatican Radio that some of the Pope's first words after his tracheotomy were dedicated to the Virgin Mary: "Totus tuus" (All yours).

When I see things like that, I wonder about the tendency of some to overdo devotion to the Blessed Virgin.

I think there are two principal errors to avoid relative to the Mother of God:

1. The Protestant error of completely ignoring and even denigrating the Mother of God, and
2. The Latin error of nearly deifying her.

I know I will be accused of retaining some baggage from my Protestant past, but I think it is possible to overdo devotion to a created being, even the Blessed Virgin.

Has anyone here besides me read St. John Maximovitch's book, The Orthodox Veneration of Mary, The Birthgiver of God (St. Herman of Alaska Brotherhood, 1996)?

What are your thoughts on this subject?

[may]

Catholic reference works freely admit that worship of Mary does not go back to apostolic times. The Catholic Encyclopedia states:

"Devotion to Our Blessed Lady in its ultimate analysis must be regarded as a practical application of the doctrine of the Communion of Saints. Seeing that this doctrine is not contained, at least explicitly, in the earlier forms of the Apostles’ Creed, there is perhaps no ground for surprise if we do not meet with any clear traces of the cultus [worship] of the Blessed Virgin in the first Christian centuries.

The original Nicene Creed (325 C.E.) makes no mention of the "Virgin Mary." It was not until the Council of Ephesus, held in 431 C.E., that Mary was defined in Catholic dogma as the "Mother of God" (Greek: Theotokos, literally "God-bearer"). And even then, this was more for Trinitarian reasons (to combat Nestorius, who denied that Jesus was brought forth God-Man) than to encourage devotion to Mary. Why this lack of attention to the devotion to Mary?

Because the practice is based, not on the Bible, but on Apocryphal literature, such as the so-called "Gospel of St. James" and the Sibylline Oracles

[Matrona]

Originally Posted by may

Catholic reference works freely admit that worship of Mary does not go back to apostolic times.

1: This is not a Roman Catholic forum, we are Eastern Orthodox.

2: Eastern Orthodox do not worship Mary. She is, however, the greatest woman who ever lived, because she had the closest earthly relationship with Christ. She risked her life and reputation so that God could become an incarnate human. She cared for Him and nourished Him and was His first follower. She stood near His cross when He poured out His life for the world, and was in the room when the Holy Spirit descended at Pentecost. None of this makes her a goddess or anyone worthy of worship. But we commemorate her memory because she gave everything she had out of love for God, and served Him ceaselessly throughout her life.

The original Nicene Creed (325 C.E.) makes no mention of the "Virgin Mary."

The Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed of 381 does mention the Virgin Mary and is the creed used by all Eastern Orthodox churches ever since. The original Nicene Creed of 325 didn't have much to do with the incarnation because Nicea was mainly concerned with pre-Incarnation Christology, debunking the heretical teachings of Arius, who claimed Jesus was created. Constantinople I addressed the heresy of Apollinarianism, which basically said that Jesus was God in a man-suit, so the Incarnation received more treatment there.

It was not until the Council of Ephesus, held in 431 C.E., that Mary was defined in Catholic dogma as the "Mother of God" (Greek: Theotokos, literally "God-bearer"). And even then, this was more for Trinitarian reasons (to combat Nestorius, who denied that Jesus was brought forth God-Man) than to encourage devotion to Mary. Why this lack of attention to the devotion to Mary?

Because veneration of Mary didn't lead to Christological heresy, therefore it didn't warrant treatment by the councils. Everyone knew better than to worship her, save for one sad heretical group that died out many centuries ago.

I remember reading a tale about Mary after Pentecost, when she was travelling around with John. She was described as being a little shy because so many people wanted to see her and touch her. Does anybody know where I might find out more about this? I can't remember the source for the life of me.

[Linus7]

Originally Posted by may

Catholic reference works freely admit that worship of Mary does not go back to apostolic times. The Catholic Encyclopedia states:

"Devotion to Our Blessed Lady in its ultimate analysis must be regarded as a practical application of the doctrine of the Communion of Saints. Seeing that this doctrine is not contained, at least explicitly, in the earlier forms of the Apostles’ Creed, there is perhaps no ground for surprise if we do not meet with any clear traces of the cultus [worship] of the Blessed Virgin in the first Christian centuries.

The original Nicene Creed (325 C.E.) makes no mention of the "Virgin Mary." It was not until the Council of Ephesus, held in 431 C.E., that Mary was defined in Catholic dogma as the "Mother of God" (Greek: Theotokos, literally "God-bearer"). And even then, this was more for Trinitarian reasons (to combat Nestorius, who denied that Jesus was brought forth God-Man) than to encourage devotion to Mary. Why this lack of attention to the devotion to Mary?

Because the practice is based, not on the Bible, but on Apocryphal literature, such as the so-called "Gospel of St. James" and the Sibylline Oracles

Veneration of the Mother of God is apostolic in origin. The Council of Ephesus in A.D. 431 defined the dogma in response to the heresy of Nestorius, who said that Mary should be called only Christotokos (Christ Bearer) and not Theotokos (God Bearer). That's what councils do: they act in response to heretical teachings in order to declare and preserve the truths that the Church has always believed.

"And it happened, when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, that the babe leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. Then she spoke out with a loud voice and said, 'Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb. But why is it granted to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? For, indeed, as soon as the voice of your greeting sounded in my ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy' " (Luke 1:41-44; underlining mine for emphasis).

The "babe" who leaped in the womb of St. Elizabeth was none other than St. John the Baptist. Compare those verses in Luke 1 with the account of how David leaped and danced before the Ark of the (Old) Covenant in 2 Samuel 6. Just as God was present in and with the old Ark, so He was present in the womb of the Ark of the New Covenant, Mary, the Mother of God.

Many of the early Fathers of the Church - men like St. Irenaeus, Tertullian, St. Hippolytus, St. Gregory Thaumaturges, Peter of Alexandria, St. Methodius, St. Alexander of Alexandria, St. Cyril of Jerusalem, St. Ephraim the Syrian, St. Athanasius, St. Epiphanius of Salamis, St. Ambrose of Milan, St. Gregory Nazianzen, St. Jerome, Theodore of Mopsuestia, St. Cyril of Alexandria, and St. John Cassian, to name a few - wrote in praise of Mary long before Ephesus or even Nicea I.

Here are a couple of samples from well before Ephesus and Nicea:

"[T]o all generations they [the prophets] have pictured forth the grandest subjects for contemplation and for action. Thus, too, they preached of the advent of God in the flesh to the world, His advent by the spotless and God-bearing Mary in the way of birth and growth, and the manner of His life and conversation with men, and His manifestation by baptism, and the new birth that was to be to all men, and the regeneration by the laver [of baptism]" (St. Hippolytus, Discourse on the End of the World; A.D. 217).

" For Luke, in the inspired Gospel narratives, delivers a testimony not to Joseph only, but also to Mary the Mother of God, and gives this account with reference to the very family and house of David" (St. Gregory Thaumaturges, Four Homilies 1; A.D. 262).

[No*s]

There's another thread for debating this topic over in the Same-Faiths debates :

Christian: Is The Perpetual Virginity of Mary a true Christan Doctrine

There is no need to debate it in the discussion forum .

[Linus7]

Originally Posted by No*s

There's another thread for debating this topic over in the Same-Faiths debates :

Christian: Is The Perpetual Virginity of Mary a true Christan Doctrine

There is no need to debate it in the discussion forum .

Of course, my purpose in starting the thread was discussion among Orthodox Christians, not debate.

Had I known a non-Orthodox person would appear here attacking the veneration of the Mother of God rather than asking sincere questions, I never would have started it.

[No*s]

Originally Posted by Linus7

Of course, my purpose in starting the thread was discussion among Orthodox Christians, not debate.

Had I known a non-Orthodox person would appear here attacking the veneration of the Mother of God rather than asking sincere questions, I never would have started it.

Precisely. That is why I have "suggested" the debate continue in that thread, and we discuss the Orthodox view here .

[Linus7]

Originally Posted by Linus7

I think there are two principal errors to avoid relative to the Mother of God:

1. The Protestant error of completely ignoring and even denigrating the Mother of God, and
2. The Latin error of nearly deifying her.

What are your thoughts on this subject?

Well, now that we have had an early illustration of Error #1, perhaps we can move on to a more general discussion.

[No*s]

I'm not the most deep in this area, and I understand point 1. However, you'll have to explain more of point 2. I've not seen many RCs nearly deifying her. So, some explanation there would be good .

[Linus7]

Originally Posted by No*s

I'm not the most deep in this area, and I understand point 1. However, you'll have to explain more of point 2. I've not seen many RCs nearly deifying her. So, some explanation there would be good .

Of course, there is the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, but that is really a problem that arises from the Western misunderstanding of Original Sin and not an example of the near-deification of Mary.

How about the need felt in some Latin circles to refer to the Mother of God as "Co-Redemptrix"?

Of course, some Latin apologists say they use the term merely to emphasize Mary's role in bringing Jesus into the world, but what need is there for it?

The Apostles cooperated in the salvation of souls by spreading the Gospel. Should we call them all "Co-Redeemers"?

Latin theologians say that Mary participated in the sufferings of Christ for the sins of the world through her torments and sufferings while standing at the foot of her Son's cross.

"In the act of Redemption, She, in a certain way, helped Christ" (Catechism of Dr. Weimar, quoted in St. John Maximovitch's The Orthodox Veneration of Mary, The Birthgiver of God, p. 52).

The Latin theologian Dr. Lentz wrote that Mary is "a complement of the Holy Trinity" and that "just as Her Son is the only intermediary chosen by God between His offended majesty and sinful men, so also, precisely, the chief Mediatress placed by Him between His Son and us is the Blessed Virgin" (ibid).

Latin Bishop Malou of Bourges wrote, "In three respects - as Daughter, as Mother, and as Spouse of God - the Holy Virgin is exalted to a certain equality with the Father, to a certain superiority over the Son, to a certain nearness to the Holy Spirit" (The Immaculate Conception, quoted in St. John Maximovitch's Veneration, p. 52).

While I realize these things are not yet regarded as dogmas of the Latin Church, they do display a certain tendency to overdo the veneration of the Blessed Virgin.