Nestorius on Mary as the Mother of God

Monachos ^ | Nestorius of Constantinople

[presently no screen name]

The JWs, Seventh Day Adventists, Church of Christ, etc. adhere to Sola Scriptura.

That's antagonism.

[rzman21]

TRUTH is antagonism? God’s WORD is antagonism? I only know what paganism is by HIS WORD!
>>You are stating your subjective opinion, which is just that.

Baselessly attacking Catholics as “pagans” or “idolaters”, etc. without constructing a reasoned statement of your perspective without resorting to ad hominems is antagonistic.

It’s your truth. Accusing Catholics of believing in idolatry and paganism without substantiation equals antagonism.

[metmom]

no, i did not hit the abuse button, never have, never will. i would let those that oppose the Body of Christ expose themselves. that’s just me. but if someone is going to post on FR, they need to follow the rules of FR.

Then why do it on an ecumencial thread were the comments are being pulled?

Seems to me that there are two problems.

One is the clearly apparent baiting. The other is that when pinged to the thread, someone makes a comment, the other party is offended and hits the abuse button and the comment is gone.

Now who's being exposed? With a comment nobody can read? Really?

Seems like the being exposed is backfiring.

[rzman21]

The JWs, Seventh Day Adventists, Church of Christ, etc. adhere to Sola Scriptura.

That’s antagonism.

>>How so? They all claim that the Bible alone justifies their positions.

I’m stating their beliefs, not projecting my feelings about what they believe.

Is it antagonistic to point out that Lutherans believe in Sola Scriptura, yet believe that Mary is the Mother of God, Queen of Heaven, that Jesus is physically present in communion, no one can be saved who is not baptized, sacramental grace, a believer can lose his/her salvation, etc.?

[presently no screen name]

I’m interested in what God says is TRUTH - not whatever sect you claim believes like catholics.

There is no queen in heaven. And God always was from the beginning - He has no mother. John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. It’s ALL in His Word for a reason. He needed to become flesh and how does that happen? He followed His own creation - how ‘flesh/man’ comes into existence.

[one Lord one faith one baptism]

it is as they define it. and there in lies the problem, is everyone supposed to read Scripture and decide doctrine on their own or

did Jesus establish a Church that He promised to be with until the end of time and that He gave His authority to teach and baptize? All those that have departed from the historical othodox Faith believed by Christians universally for 2,000 years claim Biblical authority for their position, JW’s and Mormons are just two extreme examples.

[one Lord one faith one baptism]

i invite the moderator to confirm that i have never hit the abuse button and that would cover this thread as well.

can you make the same statement?

[metmom]

Did I say YOU hit the abuse button?

I can read.

[Mr Rogers]

No. Those who change the text of scripture to make it agree with their theology do NOT believe in sola scriptura. That is silly.

[one Lord one faith one baptism]

i can read as well. your post #123 is in reply to my post #110 and quotes me and goes on to ask me questions.

if you are not accusing me of hitting the abuse button, i accept that.

[BlueDragon]

“Mother of Christ”...?

Straight from the source, excellent post. Thanks.

In light of churches which proclaim Christ to truly be "the only begotten Son of God" the usages of each term, both "mother of God" and "mother of Christ" have been found to be acceptable, without hint of the charge "heretic" being justifiably applied to those whom prefer to use the term "mother of Christ".

Straight from a more contemporary source;

"The humanity to which the Blessed Virgin Mary gave birth always was that of the Son of God himself. That is the reason why the Assyrian Church of the East is praying the Virgin Mary as "the Mother of Christ our God and Saviour". In the light of this same faith the Catholic tradition addresses the Virgin Mary as "the Mother of God" and also as "the Mother of Christ". We both recognize the legitimacy and rightness of these expressions of the same faith and we both respect the preference of each Church in her liturgical life and piety."

I'm deliberately not providing a link at this time, to the above quoted statement.

With that being said, I would hope for in the future, that the hints of and charges of Nestorism be limited to that which he was actually condemned for, by the prosecutor/judge combo in the person of Cyril, leaving behind as innocent enough the usages of some form of "mother of Christ" when speaking of Mary, for such usages are not the equivalent of being the makings of the heresy itself, or even inexorably leading to the same or similar.

It's either that, or IOANNES PAULUS PP. II, himself, flung his own arms wide open, and said to the heresy, "come to papa", embracing it as his own.

It can be reasonably induced that this last "full embracing" did in no wise occur.

Cronos: I pinged you to this comment due to your previous presence on this thread, and my impression of you that you are a reasonable man. I do thank you for your own efforts towards ecumenicism, here and elsewhere.

[metmom]

I can see how it could have been interpreted that way.

*party* can refer to a group as well and that’s what I had in mind when I typed the response.

I did not mean to imply that you did it when you said you didn’t.

[D-fendr]

Thanks for your reply. I think as far as I remember the objections to Nestorianism on these threads most often did not refer to the Mother of Christ, but to the underlying theology, though sometimes the “Mother of Christ” appellation was also preferred.

Secondly, I believe it was in the council of Ephesus or perhaps a Church Father that one of the objections to Mother of Christ is that the title ‘Christ’ or anointed by God is not unique to Jesus, so “Mother of Christ” applies to other mothers who did not bear God.

thanks again..

[one Lord one faith one baptism]

thanks for the clarification.

[Religion Moderator]

Nestorian doctrine is built on a pagan Aristotelian framework that Evangelicalism, despite its commitment to abhor paganism and be unphilosophical, has imbibed.

This is antagnostic and the ecumenical label must now be removed.

[rzman21]

Nestorian doctrine is built on a pagan Aristotelian framework that Evangelicalism, despite its commitment to abhor paganism and be unphilosophical, has imbibed.

That’s antagonism.

>>It’s history, read the other post I did on the history of the School of Antioch. It’s fact. Not some cooked up fantasy about ancient Christians somehow looking to Babylonian religion for inspiration.

Nestorianism was built upon the Aristotelian framework of the School of Antioch that Evangelicals by fiat of defending Nestorius have imbibed.

You can’t accuse Catholics of being “pagans” for incorporating Platonism in their enunciation of doctrine without looking at the pagan philosophy undergirding the Nestorianism that those on your side seem to be embracing.

[rzman21]

Nestorian doctrine is built on a pagan Aristotelian framework that Evangelicalism, despite its commitment to abhor paganism and be unphilosophical, has imbibed.

That’s antagonism.

>>It’s history, read the other post I did on the history of the School of Antioch. It’s fact. Not some cooked up fantasy about ancient Christians somehow looking to Babylonian religion for inspiration.

Nestorianism was built upon the Aristotelian framework of the School of Antioch that Evangelicals by fiat of defending Nestorius have imbibed.

You can’t accuse Catholics of being “pagans” for incorporating Platonism in their enunciation of doctrine without looking at the pagan philosophy undergirding the Nestorianism that those on your side seem to be embracing.

[rzman21]

The Chaldean Catholic liturgy gives the priest the discretion to decide whether to say “Mother of Christ” or “Mother of God” in their liturgy.

But the use of the term “Mother of Christ” may not be used to deny the definition of the Council of Ephesus.

[Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit. Let there be a remembrance of the Virgin Mary, Mother of God (or: Christ), upon the holy altar.]

http://kaldu.org/14_Reformed_ChaldeanMass/PeopleBook_Eng.html

The Chaldeans descend from the same liturgical tradition as the Assyrian Church of the East, aka the “Nestorian Church.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaldean_Catholic_Church

[rzman21]

Let’s understand this. The poster repeatedly said Catholics were pagans, idolaters, etc. without reprobation.

How is that not antagonism that should have been expunged?

Then I pointed out the historical fact that Nestorianism was rooted in pagan Aristotelianism, which I cited a post from a Georgetown University professor as having stated.

Then by extension, the Evangelical defenders of Nestorius had embraced that same pagan philosophical tradition that undergirded Nestorius’s thinking.

The Evangelicals are fond of attacking Catholics for “philosophizing” and have done so in this thread without any consequences.

How is stating historical fact about Nestorius antagonism?

[AnalogReigns]

I don’t know of any educated and thoughtful thoughtful Protestants who dispute Jesus was God from His conception...even though God the Son (with God the Father and God the Holy Spirit, One Being) subsisted from all eternity. In that sense, then of course Theotokos is an accurate description for Saint Mary, especially since it emphasizes the hypostatic union of two natures in one Person, Jesus.

This is not something orthodox Christians—of any stripe—dispute.

Nestorianism was...and still is, heretical.