Hey, who's this "John Clavin" guy?
Posted on 05/19/2008 6:44:32 PM PDT by Manfred the Wonder Dawg
Acknowledging she has a Savior is NOT the same as acknowledging she was a sinner.
No, if you read the book of Acts you will read where she said she was a sinner in needing of saving .....which is different than saying she needs a savior ...
Indeed, that’s why I said, “in my view”, but it is also the view of many more than just myself.
The Scriptural basis of the unity of God, the eternity of the Word and the Incarnation is actually sufficient in itself to arrive at the conclusion that Mary is the Mother of God. God gave us reason and guided by the Holy Spirit the Church comes to an ever deeper penetration of the profound depths of Divine Revelation (Jn 16:13), which being the Word of God cannot be exhausted by a bare-bones literal reading - “if it isn’t explicitly in Scripture then it is revealed.” By this logic most prophetic matters referring to Christ in the Old Testament could be dismissed because they were hidden in types and presented as shadows. Thus the simple logic of the Church is that if Scripture reveals that Mary is the Mother of the Word-made-Flesh, and the Word-made-flesh is God, then Mary is the Mother of God (the Word), not from eternity of course, but beginning in time and for eternity. To say only that Mary is the Mother of Jesus or only the Mother of Christ, is to subscribe unwittingly to the doctrines of heretics who denied the unity of the Christ’s Divine and Human Natures.
But is it in Scripture? Yes, in addition to the above way we find that God reveals to the heart of Elizabeth the truth about the Incarnation, God-made-flesh. When Mary arrives to assist her in her pregnancy with St. John the Baptist, on seeing the Blessed Mother St. Elizabeth declares,
“blessed art thou among women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, how is it that the Mother of the Lord (mater tou kyrios) comes to me” (Lk 1:42-43).
In both the first half and the second half of this inspired address mother and child are inseparably united. In the first, Mary and the fruit of her womb, Jesus, are praised. In the second the unity of their relationship is revealed, as well as the unity of Christ. Mary is not merely the mother of Jesus the Messiah, somehow conceived, but the mother of the Lord. The text preserves the Greek, kyrios, although the language that would have been spoken was Aramaic. Among the Jews the name of God was not spoken, but a substitution was made to preserve respect. By convention when translating Hebrew and its sister language Aramaic into Greek, such as in the Greek Old Testament (Septuagint) used to evangelize Greek-speaking Jews and gentiles, the word substituted for God’s name was Kyrios, which we translate as Lord. This was in lieu of I AM, Christ’s use of which for Himself would later scandalized the Jews. Elizabeth would never have been so bold, however, instead calling the fruit of Mary’s womb, the Lord, with all the meaning which the Jews attributed to it and which the Catholic Church continues to understand of the Word-made-flesh in Mary’s womb.
MARIAN INTREP
Well that about says it doesn’t it.
The flaw is with NAB, not the Vulgate.
Comprehensiveness is its own reward. ;O)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_LaHaye
Anti-Catholicism
LaHaye has been a harsh critic of Roman Catholicism, which he has called “a false religion.”[9] In his 1973 book Revelation Illustrated and Made Plain, he stated that the Catholic Church “is more dangerous than no religion because she substitutes religion for truth” and “is also dangerous because some of her doctrines are pseudo-Christian.”[3] Elsewhere the same book compared Catholic ceremonies to pagan rituals.[9] It was these statements that were largely responsible for LaHaye’s dismissal from Jack Kemp’s presidential campaign. It was later revealed that the San Diego church that LaHaye had pastored throughout the 1970s had sponsored an anti-Catholic group called Mission to Catholics; one of their pamphlets asserted that Pope Paul VI was the “archpriest of Satan, a deceiver, and an antichrist, who has, like Judas, gone to his own place.”[9]
The issue of anti-Catholicism also comes up in regard to the Left Behind series. The books say that many “who called themselves Catholics” but did not truly believe in Jesus were not raptured, but it does not mention the proportion who were. While the fictional Pope John XXIV was raptured, he is described as having “stirred up controversy in the church with a new doctrine that seemed to coincide more with the ‘heresy’ of Martin Luther than with the historic orthodoxy they were used to,” and this is implied as the reason he was raptured. His successor, Pope Peter II, who espouses what LaHaye and Jenkins regard as traditional Catholic doctrine, becomes Pontifex Maximus of Enigma Babylon One World Faith, an amalgamation of all remaining world faiths and religions.[23] Other Catholic writers have said that while the books aren’t “anti-Catholic per se” they reflect LaHaye’s other writings on the subject.[24]
[edit] Other
He has also been criticized for “pseudo-psychological” temperament theory and mixing in theology.[6] The basic ideas in this theory — that people have temperaments that can be described as sanguine, choleric, melancholic, and phlegmatic — are very old and actually go all the way back to Hippocrates.[25] A common temperament theory is the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI).
LaHaye has also been accused of promoting Theocracy by the organisation TheocracyWatch.[26]
According to Jimmy Akin, LaHaye, though had made clear that he does not endorse Sun Myung Moon’s theological ideas, he was affiliated to the Unification Church. He was the chair of Moon’s Coalition for Religious Freedom, and he and his wife have attended and spoken at Moon-sponsored events[23]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.
Martin Luther: “In this work whereby she was made the Mother of God, so many and such good things were given her that no one can grasp them…Not only was Mary the mother of Him who is born in Bethlemem but of Him who, before, the world, was eternally born of the Father, from a Mother in time and at the same time man and God” (Weimer, The Works of Luther, English translation by Pelikan, Concordia, St. Souis, V7, P572)
Christ . . . was the only Son of Mary, and the Virgin Mary bore no children besides Him . . . “brothers” really means “cousins” here, for Holy Writ and the Jews always call cousins brothers. (Sermons on John, chapters 1-4, 1537-39)
He, Christ, our Savior, was the real and natural fruit of Mary’s virginal womb . . . This was without the cooperation of a man, and she remained a virgin after that. (Ibid.)
God says . . . : “Mary’s Son is My only Son.” Thus Mary is the Mother of God.(Ibid.)
God did not derive his divinity from Mary; but it does not follow that it is therefore wrong to say that God was born of Mary, that God is Mary’s Son, and that Mary is God’s mother . . . She is the true mother of God and bearer of God . . . Mary suckled God, rocked God to sleep, prepared broth and soup for God, etc. For God and man are one person, one Christ, one Son, one Jesus, not two Christs . . . just as your son is not two sons . . . even though he has two natures, body and soul, the body from you, the soul from God alone.(On the Councils and the Church, 1539)
John Clavin: “I cannot be denied that God in Choosing and destining Mary to be the Mother of His Son, granted her the highest
honor…Elizabeth calls mary Mother of the Lord, because the unity of the person in the two natures of Christ was such that she could have said that the mortal man engendered in the womb of Mary was at the same time the eternal God.” (Calvin Opera, Corpus Reformatorum, Braunschweig-Berlin, 1863-1900, V. 45 p 348, 35)Ulrich Zwingli: “It was given to her what belongs to no creature, that in the flesh she sould bring forth the Son of God.” (Zwingli Opera, Corpus Reformatorum, Berlin, 1905, in Evang. Luc., Op. comp., V6,1 P. 639
Isn't that special.
Chapter, verse please.
Qwerty ego typo.
Good grief.
On the whole, a fairly accurate report, surprisingly. I’d take issue with several points.
Most urgently, there are no sane, orthodox Catholics pushing for Mary to be granted status within the trinity. The earliest mention of this I’d ever seen was from Carl Jung, who, ironically, was from the Swiss Reformed Church.
Also, the wierd bit about the Genesis passage: Catholics do acknowledge it is through the seed of the woman that the serpent is defeated.
Lastly, the blessed virgin has not been called co-redemptrix by the Catholic Church. Some elements have pushed for this appellation, which the Vatican has resisted for exactly the reason one would expect if one weren’t anti-Catholic: since all witnesses participate in redemption, and Mary is the embodiment of the Church herself, the appellation is accurate, however, it is potentially misleading in that it seems to elevate her to equal partner with Christ, which she is not.
I know this is taken from a place that has been ruled by the mods “Not a hate” site.
Is it ruled a “Loon site”?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.