Replies

"If I had known you were ignorant about this ancient Christian idea..."

Neither of the persons whom you addressed were displaying "ignorance" of the idea of Mary as a "new Eve".

What they were doing more precisely was expressing incredulity towards Bergoglio's remark that Paul had said such a thing.

For you to declare of yourself in subsequent postings on this thread that you have been right all along, would be to neglect the instances where you have not, as exampled in the above here highlighted misrepresentation of what you alleged others "displayed", for they could otherwise have known well enough about the "New Eve" sort of rhetoric, even likely enough knowing a bit about how that sort of concept first developed such as exemplified by the quote brought to these pages from Ireneus, with that sourced from that man (not Paul) yet leaving the attachment of the concept as allegedly portion of Gospel and theology associated with that, ancient perhaps, but not *quite* ancient enough.

Certainly not ancient enough to have been attributed to Paul, other than by a form of imposition of that additional concept onto the text and additionally on top of the theology which was expounded upon by Paul.

As for the rather extensive(?) writings of Ireneus, it will serve us all well to take a moment to consider the wider context.

Below is a portion of Introductory Note to Irenæus Against Heresies in Ante-Nicene Fathers;

Irenæus had manifestly taken great pains to make himself acquainted with the various heretical systems which he describes. His mode of exposing and refuting these is generally very effective. It is plain that he possessed a good share of learning, and that he had a firm grasp of the doctrines of Scripture. Not unfrequently he indulges in a kind of sarcastic humour, while inveighing against the folly and impiety of the heretics. But at times he gives expression to very strange opinions. He is, for example, quite peculiar in imagining that our Lord lived to be an old man, and that His public ministry embraced at least ten years. But though, on these and some other points, the judgment of Irenæus is clearly at fault, his work contains a vast deal of sound and valuable exposition of Scripture, in opposition to the fanciful systems of interpretation which prevailed in his day.
[bolding for emphasis added]

After dealing with all the "fanciful systems" which Gnostics and various other speculators of religious matters employed, I suggest at place where Ireneus was pressing the case that the Messiah of Israel ("Jesus Christ" as known in the English language) had come to the world in the flesh, born of the virgin Mary surely enough (as the Synoptic Gospels testify, and as the Church widely testified from the very beginnings) that; Ireneus himself at this juncture became a bit too wound up in his own reasoning in regards to both Eve and Mary when he went to the lengths which he did in comparing them.

Compared to what Paul wrote concerning how sin entered the world, and how the Redeemer by his own self alone "by one man", established righteousness gifting that same to we who have none of our own (or if anything much -- not nearly enough) all the "extra" later expansion of Mary's role has made of her singularly above all other "saints" into being a name under heaven by which we may be saved, beginning with Ireneus own expansion.

There is only one name under heaven by which we may be saved. It is not spelled "Mary" nor either is it spelled Roman Catholic Church, with this latter, according to Bergoglio and hosts (hordes?) of other [Roman] Catholics being both mother figures, the RCC having for centuries now proclaimed Mary as being each Christian's mother, then in the next breath proclaim themselves THE "mother church" when in now distant past centuries the Church of Rome was spoken of as being but one "mother church" and was indeed something of a daughter herself to Greek proto-missionaries whom did their own works "of the church" in the territories which later came to be seen as included within the later developing "patriarchate" of the bishop of Rome, with this last mention (Greek missionaries) sourced from Paul Johnson in his book The History of Christianity a copy of which I have presently in my possession.

Rome wasn't built in a day, as the saying goes...