Skip to comments.A Protestant Discovers Mary
Posted on 03/14/2010 12:14:46 PM PDT by NYer
Romano Guardini wrote in his book on the Rosary, To linger in the domain of Mary is a divinely great thing. One does not ask about the utility of truly noble things, because they have their meaning within themselves. So it is of infinite meaning to draw a deep breath of this purity, to be secure in the peace of this union with God.
Guardini was speaking of spending time with Mary in praying the Rosary, but David Mills, in his latest book, Discovering Mary, helps us linger in the domain of Mary by opening up to us the riches of divine revelation, both from tradition and Scripture. Mills, a convert from the Episcopal Church, former editor of the Christian journal Touchstone and editor of the 1998 book of essays commemorating the centennial of C.S. Lewis birth The Pilgrims Guide: C. S. Lewis and the Art of Witness, as well as the author of Knowing the Real Jesus (2001), has written a rock-solid introduction to the Blessed Virgin Mary, and done so with intellectual rigor and an affable tone.
His book begins with an introduction in which he describes how he came to discover the riches of the Churchs teachings on Mary: I began to see how a sacred vessel is made holy by the sacred thing it carries, he writes. I began to feel this in a way I had not before. I found myself developing an experiential understanding of Mary and indeed a Marian devotion. Which surprised me. It surprised me a lot.
Unfortunately, he notes, he did not learn about Mary from contemporary Catholics, nor in homilies, even on Marian feast days. It seems he learned on his own by reading magisterial documents and going back to Scriptures in light of those documents.
This book shares the fruit of that study. Mills examines the life of Mary, Mary in the Bible, Mary in Catholic doctrine, Marian feast days and the names of Mary. He includes an appendix full of references to papal documents and books on Mary.
Most of the book is done in a question-and-answer format, which usually works well, although at times it feels awkward. Would someone really ask, for instance, What is happening in the liturgy on the Marian feast days?
But most of the questions are natural. What is the point of Marian devotion? Mills asks. It is to live the Catholic life as well as we can, he answers. This means going ever more deeply into the mystery of Christ, to become saintlier, more conformed to his image, by following Marys example and by turning to her for help and comfort.
Next question: Does devotion to Mary detract from our devotion to Christ?
Christians since the beginning of serious Marian devotion have been careful to emphasize Marys subordination to her son, Mills replies. In fact, they have said it so often that the reader begins to expect it. In the fifth century St. Ambrose put it nicely: Mary was the temple of God, not the god of the temple.
David Mills, with the same radical clarity he showed in Knowing the Real Jesus, has written what has to be one of the best, if not the very best, short introductions to Catholic teaching on Mary, the Mother of God. Discovering Mary is ideal for those wanting to know more about her, whether they be skeptics, Protestants, or Catholics who dont know the Mother of the Church well enough.
Franklin Freeman writes from Saco, Maine.
Answers to Questions About the Mother of God
By David Mills
Servant Books, 2009
148 pages, $12.99
To order: servantbooks.org
As long as you realize that Luther could have opinions.
yes, of course, like every mortal being, whether laity or clergy (which Luther and all popes, priests, etc are/were). Increasingly on reading of the life of Luther I see how he was co-opted by many means beyond his control (the German princelings etc) and in his initial theology, I see no direness as I see in Calvin’s theology.
I do like Luther as far as he goes, but doesn’t work affect faith as well?
Ezekiel 16:49-50 (New International Reader’s Version)
49 “Here is the sin your sister Sodom committed. She and her daughters were proud. They ate too much. They were not concerned about others. They did not help those who were poor and in need. 50 They were very proud. They did many things that were evil in my sight. I hated those things. So I got rid of Sodom and her daughters, just as you have seen.”
As above, failure in works leads to faithlessness. The failure in works is called a sin by God himself. Abomination is not following the Divine Will, not fulfilling all righteousness as best we can, not hearkening and acting.
Faith obviously comes first, but we must knock and only then is the door opened. Don’t the parables speak of the difference efforts, our efforts make to our salvation? I don’t mean to imply that we can make it on our own, without the Blood of the Lamb - Jesus Christ - but His theme throughout is action not words, no?
Why has baptism lost its ordinal powers among Baptists? No Priesthood? The following of false traditions?
Immaterial to my questions.
Your "Tradition" is a mere story passed on by an uninspired writer from an unknown place and time. Substantiate it if you can.
Your assertion is meaningless. Prove the IC of Mary from your "Tradition" AND the Scriptures - if you can!
BTW, history is not on your side on this issue!
1. See previous post.
2. Absolutely not - unless there is something written between the lines that no one else can find.
3. Substantiate your assertion - if you can! BTW, no one has ever done this yet!
The first time that designation was used for the bishop of Rome is attributed to Damasus in the 4th century. I will agree that many of those in the office of "episkopes" (oversight - I Tim. 3:1) were called "papa", but not with all the rhetorical claims made for that office CENTURIES LATER! The bold statement above is immaterial to anything that I had said...ridiculous of you to even say it!
I realize you may not read the above, but some on this thread may do so, and gain a better insight on what Jesus and the Apostles instituted as the leadership of the Church of Christ for us to follow.
Infant "baptism" (so-called) was not practiced in Apostlic times, period! It seems that you need some education in church history on this issue. Explain the catechumens in the first few centuries of Christianity! They sure weren't baptised (immersed) before they spent a long time as students learning of Christ and His sacrifice on the cross for us.
I was reading a study of Jewish theological history recently which painted 4 general areas of Judaism at the time of the Incarnation per Josephus.
There were Sadducees, Pharisees, Essenes, and Zealots.
The Pharisees became the rabbinical leaders who held the authority of both the Written and Oral Torahs.
The Zealots were a patriotic apocalyptic group though to have split off from the Pharisees in the last decades of the Temple to revolt against Roman rule.
The Sadducees were associated with the traditional priesthood descended from Zadok ultimately from Aaron’s son Eleazar. They were noted for their adherence only to the Written Torah and rejection of the Mosaic tradition of the Oral Torah.
The Essenes, who rejected not only the Oral Torah, but the Temple sacrifices offered by the politically appointed Hasmonaean high priests and whose communities were governed by the Pythagorean rule.
Kabbalah is a word meaning ‘tradition’.
It’s been said that Church age believers who fail to study and learn from the errors of the Hebrew nation from Old Testament times, are likely to repeat those errors today, even when salvation is so much closer at hand.
I find the parallels between those Judaic groups, holding fast to tradition or Kabbalah, which in many facets was an esoteric secretive study in geometry, language/sound and number, to uncannily match those who adhere to “the Tradition” of the Catholic Church, yet deny teaching Scripture only to those those believers who seek God through faith in Christ by Scripture only.
Yes, that seem right; and we have religions that don't understand the OT and how the Hebrews relegated their traditions to overthrow God's commandments.
I find the parallels between those Judaic groups, holding fast to tradition or Kabbalah, which in many facets was an esoteric secretive study in geometry, language/sound and number, to uncannily match those who adhere to the Tradition of the Catholic Church, yet deny teaching Scripture only to those those believers who seek God through faith in Christ by Scripture only.
Yes, that is somewhat the same as I have found out. It's sad, very sad. The "broad road" can accommodate multitudes of souls across its width and length to enter a very wide gate that leads to destruction. Small is the gate and narrow is the road that leads to life, and only a few find it. Tradition is a very dangerous thing to believe in/or on - and it is deadly in its deception!
21and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you alsonot the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge[a] of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ,
Acts 2:38-39 (New International Version)
38Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far offfor all whom the Lord our God will call."
Titus 3:5-6 (New International Version)
5he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, 6whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior,
Matthew 18:6 (New International Version)
6But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea. (little children believing)
13But the angel said to him: "Do not be afraid, Zechariah; your prayer has been heard. Your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you are to give him the name John. 14He will be a joy and delight to you, and many will rejoice because of his birth, 15for he will be great in the sight of the Lord. He is never to take wine or other fermented drink, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit even from birth. (Holy Spirit in a babe from birth; John the Baptist)
14But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, because you know those from whom you learned it, 15and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. ( Another infant knowing the Scripture)
26You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, 27for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
Matthew 28:18-20 (New International Version)
18Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in[a] the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."
Mark 16:16 (New International Version)
16Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned
Acts 2:38 (New International Version)
38Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. (Everyone one of you not all you adults!!)
Acts 22:16 (New International Version)
16And now what are you waiting for? Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name.
There is not a single passage in Scripture which instructs us not to baptize for reasons of age, race, or gender. On the contrary, the divine commands to baptize in Scripture are all universal in nature. The promises and power of Baptism are extended to all in Scripture--including infants-and are available to all.
While I agree with all the Scriptures you quoted - minus your bracketed comments, I think you are sadly mistaken. I could post a very long article addressing your assertions but I'm short of time at this moment.
Let me just leave you with this comment: I have traced the practice of the early churches relative to baptism, from their commencement until the time that sprinkling was first introduced among them; and I find that in the first three centuries no mode other than immersion, and no one was baptized other than those old enough to understand the Gospel and make a profession of their faith. After infant baptism was introduced (it was still an immersion) many writers rose up to condemn it as an innovation of the command of Christ that believers only were to get baptized. Baptism by immersion continued to be the prevailing practice of all churches as late as the 14th century. And, BTW, infant baptism had not come into general use before the time of Tertullian, and he was openly against that practice - read his writings!
Actually, it was material to your question — if you were Calvin, you came 1500 years after The Church was formed and you contradict what the 1st century Christians believed If you are you (which you are:-P), then you come 2000 years after Christ formed His Church and contradict 1st century Christians
And, here you go contradicting people who came before you. How do you know that the scriptures are “inspired” by the way? Why don’t you include The Acts of Paul and Theda as scripture?
The IC is based on scripture as I said and it does not in any way CONTRADICT scripture.
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.