Cases of aberrant devotions to Mary in the Roman Church

Discussion in 'Non-Anglican Discussion' started by Stalwart, Oct 14, 2019.

  1. Botolph

    Botolph Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    1,266
    Likes Received:
    1,457
    Country:
    Australia
    Religion:
    Anglican
    A proper understanding of the importance of "I am the handmaid of the Lord, Let it be to me according to your word" underlines the truth that "the word became flesh and tabernacled in our midst". Without an embrace of the depth of the enormity of incarnation the resurrection is robbed of its power to save. Conversion is not a change of mind, but rather a redirection of the whole person. I think many underplay the importance of Mary lest they embrace some of the detestable enormities of Rome. Our concern should rather be to embrace the whole truth. I find this maxim handy.

    Mary matters much. Mass matter more. Mission matters most.​
     
    Lowly Layman, Brigid and Liturgyworks like this.
  2. Liturgyworks

    Liturgyworks Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    758
    Likes Received:
    398
    Country:
    US
    Religion:
    Christian Orthodoxy
    @Stalwart, I have PMed you my reply as it concerns the veracity of the letter and I prefer to discuss that aspect privately.

    Publicly, my view is largely that expressed by @Botolph , albeit I agree with the Anglican formularies and also regard his quote as insufficiently Christocentric and also deprecatory to Holy Communion. I believe a Roman Catholic said that, and I disagree with it.

    I would prefer @Botolph to say that St. Mary points the way to the Incarnate Word of God, our Lord, God and Savior Jesus Christ, who she did give birth to, that we might partake of the Divine Nature in the Eucharist.

    Also @Stalwart on some reflection I am not sure we should ever venerate the persons of the Trinity but rather only offer to God divine worship, because to God alone is due worship, and any act that falls short of adoration is not sufficient as a form of Worship. I think veneration vs. Worship is a binary choice and assuming one could do both, one should only do the latter. I could be spectacularly wrong on this point, but so many ancient prayers in the Eastern church end “This we pray to you O Father, together with thy Son, our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, and Thy Holy Spirit, for to Thee are due all honor, glory and worship now and ever and unto the ages of ages.”

    Now honor and glory might refer to veneration, but I think not, I think rather, worship alone can be offered.
     
  3. Stalwart

    Stalwart Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    1,540
    Likes Received:
    1,509
    Country:
    America
    Religion:
    Anglican
    EWPgY6AU8AEECEG.jpeg

    A classic 'Marian' image. Can anyone see problems with this?
     
    Dave Kemp likes this.
  4. AnglicanAgnostic

    AnglicanAgnostic Active Member

    Posts:
    297
    Likes Received:
    93
    Country:
    New Zealand
    Religion:
    none
    Yes!
    Mary appears to be wearing a dress of the later medieval period or even tudor.
    Jesus' cross wouldn't have been made of nicely dressed 6x4 timber.
    Jesus' hair on what maybe St Veronica's hankie probably wouldn't have been long. (Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? 1 Corinthians 11:14)
    The crown also looks early medieval.
    I don't think there are any female angels.
    The dice are ok they have been around since ancient Egyptian days.
     
    Last edited: Jun 12, 2020
  5. Symphorian

    Symphorian Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    352
    Likes Received:
    487
    Country:
    UK
    Religion:
    Anglican, CofE
    I presume it's an image of Our Lady of Solitude depicting Mary's solitude on Holy Saturday. The image shows objects associated with the Passion and Crucifixion. The pillar and scourge, the stick with a sponge, crown of thorns, dice for casting lots for Jesus' cloak etc. etc.

    I don't know who the artist is in this case but the picture has a strange arrangement. The layout has elements reminiscent of Masonic or esoteric symbolism. Mary is central... Mary as goddess, Mary as saviour even.
     
    Stalwart likes this.
  6. Botolph

    Botolph Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    1,266
    Likes Received:
    1,457
    Country:
    Australia
    Religion:
    Anglican
    @Liturgyworks I more or less accept your point. I was not writing a theology essay. The 3M sermon I first heard from Grahaeme Leonard when he was Bishop of Truro. I have never heard Catholics speak in that way. I have consistently declared that Mary points to Jesus, and have said in this forum and in other places that the moment Mary is presented in a way that does not point to Jesus the alarm bells should sound. And that is exactly the problem I have with the image at #23.

    Mary and Pontius Pilate are the only twp mere mortals mentioned by name in the Nicene Creed.
     
  7. Rexlion

    Rexlion Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    1,204
    Likes Received:
    605
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Christian
    The angels kneel to Mary and appear to possibly be praying to her. Should mortals do likewise?

    The circular image at Mary's feet is too small for me to make out who's in it. However, I note that Mary's heart, stabbed many times and burning with everlasting fire (of love? zeal?) is placed at the very top center of this entire panoply, elevated above even the cross. Mary is definitely the 'star' here, and Jesus is relegated to the lesser role.
     
  8. Botolph

    Botolph Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    1,266
    Likes Received:
    1,457
    Country:
    Australia
    Religion:
    Anglican
    Of course if angels have any reason to envy humans it would be Holy Communion.
     
  9. Rexlion

    Rexlion Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    1,204
    Likes Received:
    605
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Christian
    1Pe 1:7 so that the tested genuineness of your faith—more precious than gold that perishes though it is tested by fire—may be found to result in praise and glory and honor at the revelation of Jesus Christ.
    1Pe 1:8 Though you have not seen him, you love him. Though you do not now see him, you believe in him and rejoice with joy that is inexpressible and filled with glory,
    1Pe 1:9 obtaining the outcome of your faith, the salvation of your souls.
    1Pe 1:10 Concerning this salvation, the prophets who prophesied about the grace that was to be yours searched and inquired carefully,
    1Pe 1:11 inquiring what person or time the Spirit of Christ in them was indicating when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glories.
    1Pe 1:12 It was revealed to them that they were serving not themselves but you, in the things that have now been announced to you through those who preached the good news to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven, things into which angels long to look.

    Even the angels could not imagine the great thing God would do for the sake of human beings: becoming human Himself and giving up His mortal life to redeem our own lives. This was the true mystery, for no angel has been so loved or likewise redeemed as we are. (Nor are angels said to be created in the image of God, but we are.)

    Heb 1:13 And to which of the angels has he ever said, “Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet”?
    Heb 1:14 Are they not all ministering spirits sent out to serve for the sake of those who are to inherit salvation?
     
  10. CFLawrence

    CFLawrence Active Member

    Posts:
    122
    Likes Received:
    74
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Evangelical Episcopalian
    You know reading this thread was enlightening. I heard about the push for Mary Advocate, Co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix of all graces a long time ago. The fifth Marian Dogma so-called.

    after reading everything here I fall in line with Anglican Mariology completely. Yes, I pray the rosary, but these RCC excesses I abhor, and @Stalwart has made me examine my view of Marian apparitions more closely..

    when I identify my religion I am reconciled with the RCC, I am a communicant, but I consider myself an Anglican Papalist. Thank you to the posters for this beautiful piece of apologetics. I’ll refer to it a few more times to correct wrong views I may harbor. This is most helpful
     
  11. Rexlion

    Rexlion Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    1,204
    Likes Received:
    605
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Christian
    A few things could be said about Papalism. The RCC counts every bishop overseeing the area of early Rome as a "Pope." But no bishop of Rome called himself "Pope" for the first few hundred years of the church.

    Nor were they chosen by a college of Cardinals, because no Cardinals then existed. A church region (whether Rome, Alexandria, or elsewhere) simply had a practice of choosing for itself a 'homegrown' successor from among the local presbytery. For example, Eleutherius became a deacon in Rome at the time when Anicetus was the bishop at Rome. Anicetus passed away and Soter was chosen to be the next bishop. When Soter passed away, Eleutherius was chosen. We don't know for certain who did the choosing (the local priests and deacon, or priests only, or the body of local believers) but we have no indication that it was a vote of bishope (distances, slow travel, and poor communication would have made this impossible), let alone some imaginary college of cardinals.

    No papal decretals (decrees pertaining to canon law) exist prior to the reign of "Pope" Siricius, 384-398 A.D.

    Hippolytus, Bishop of Portus, had a long-running controversy with “Pope” Calixtus I. Hippolytus’ writings (Refutation of Heresies, Bk. IX. Ch. vii) show that “the Bishop of Rome, in the commencement of the third century, had no recognized supremacy even over the suburbicarian sees; and though, not long before, Irenaeus had declared the Roman see to possess a ‘otieorem principalitatem’ in the church...his account of the debates between Polycarp and Pope Anicetus respecting the observance of Easter shows that this wa merely a primacy of honor, and not of authority.” (C.H. Lea LL.D., History of Confession and Absolution, 1896, P. 105)

    Dionysius of Corinth addressed Soter of Rome as an equal, not as a superior.

    Tertullian wrote about the bishop of Rome becoming authoritarian, and Tertullian maintained that this was an unfounded usurpation of authority.

    In the Apostolic Canons (late 200s), “each province is directed to determine for itself which of its churches shall be deemed to hold the primacy... no reference being made to any power outside of his [the bishop’s] patriarchate.” The 2nd general council (in Constantinople, 381 AD), expressly forbade any prelate from interfering with the concerns of his brethren.

    The Council of Nicea changed this. They assigned highest rank to Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch sees.

    After Constantine made Christianity the official religion, the Church was under the dominion and control of the emperors. Popes of the 300s and 400s were often chosen by the emperor. Major papal decisions had to be ratified by the emperor. But as the Roman empire weakened, the Roman church gained strength and greater independence.

    In the 700s and 800s, two factors combined to greatly expand papal power. One was the publication of the False Decretals (fake decrees allegedly made by the earliest bishops of Rome, starting with Clement) by certain parties. At least one of these decretals gave the pontiff expanded authority, and subsequently people accused of crimes would journey to Rome for a pardon which held the force of law in their home country. These decretals were ruled genuine by a pope, and they remained in that status for several hundred years.

    The second factor was a forged donation from Emperor Constantine to Pope Sylvester I of the entire Western Empire and all its appurtenances; the document included “puerile directions as to the trappings and stage-properties of the pope and his spiritual court, crowns, white horse, linen garments, and felt shoes.” How do we know that Constantine did not make this donation in the 4th Century? We know because it actually was written around 776 A.D. in the style of an 8th Century notary! This phony grant was gradually used to force kings of Europe to be subservient to the Pope. This "gift from Constantine to the Church" became recognized as established fact for the next 500 years.

    Nicholas I used both factors, in the case of Lothair and his wives, to cement the papacy as the judge of last resort for temporal matters as well as the ascendant power over the outlying provinces’ prelates. The main enforcement weapons wielded by the RCC in this case was withholding communion and exclusion from the Church (which implied salvation in jeopardy); thus the perceived powers of 'binding and loosing' were strengthened in the minds of the populace.
    (primary source of this information: History of Confession and Absolution, C. H. Lea LL.D., 1896)
     
    CFLawrence likes this.
  12. CFLawrence

    CFLawrence Active Member

    Posts:
    122
    Likes Received:
    74
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Evangelical Episcopalian
    thank you @Rexlion, I can’t believe the education I’ve received in the past two or three days. I am grateful.
     
  13. Stalwart

    Stalwart Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    1,540
    Likes Received:
    1,509
    Country:
    America
    Religion:
    Anglican
    Just saw this over a celebration of July 4th:
    52583291-FF6B-4E04-A2AF-401C0CCC4B5F.jpeg
     
  14. Rexlion

    Rexlion Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    1,204
    Likes Received:
    605
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Christian
    :sick:

    She's an A-Mary-can patriot? :rolleyes: I had no idea!

    And positioned above the crucifix... :facepalm:
     
  15. Dave Kemp

    Dave Kemp Member Anglican

    Posts:
    74
    Likes Received:
    70
    Country:
    United States of America
    Religion:
    Church of England
    God help us!
     
    Stalwart likes this.
  16. S. DeVault

    S. DeVault New Member

    Posts:
    26
    Likes Received:
    16
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Anglican (ACC)
    I try to pray the rosary daily, and say the angelus once in a while, but that's about as far as I go. I completely agree that granting the Blessed Virgin Mary the titles of "Co-Redemptrix" or Mediatrix of Grace are Romish nonsense. Luckily my Metropolitan has spoken out against the use of these terms among Anglo-Catholics
     
    Stalwart likes this.
  17. Tiffy

    Tiffy Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    1,276
    Likes Received:
    414
    Country:
    UK
    Religion:
    CofE
    You could also add that:
    Mary appears to placed on a pedestool rather like an idol.
    The image of Jesus is anything but representing the face of a Palastinian Jew
    Mary herself is anything but the image of a Semite Maiden and, by that time, Mother.
    The leftovers from open heart surgery undergoing further disection and incineration on a piece of wood.
    .
     
    Last edited: Jul 8, 2020
  18. Tiffy

    Tiffy Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    1,276
    Likes Received:
    414
    Country:
    UK
    Religion:
    CofE
    As Anglicans I think we would normally define 'veneration of Mary' as being restricted to having a reverential and respectful attitude to the mother of Our Lord Jesus Christ. This should certainly not go beyond according her the honour she rightly deserves for becoming the vessel in which our Saviour developed and through which our Saviour entered the world, nurturing and caring for him throughout his childhood and remaing by his side in his humiliating death upon the accursed cross.

    Any idea of turning her into an idol capable of being 'worshipped', should be rigourously resisted. I'm quite certain she would be appalled at the antics of her most enthusitic venerators, nay even worshippers.
    .
     
    Last edited: Jul 8, 2020
  19. Stalwart

    Stalwart Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    1,540
    Likes Received:
    1,509
    Country:
    America
    Religion:
    Anglican
    The Chinese churches paint Jesus as Chinese; the Africans paint him as Black; the Europeans paint him as White. So let's put the woke nihilism aside.


    ChineseJesus.jpg BlackChrist_md_web.jpg


    Anyway let's not derail this, so back to the thread at hand.
     
  20. Tiffy

    Tiffy Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    1,276
    Likes Received:
    414
    Country:
    UK
    Religion:
    CofE
    No 'nihilism' involved just pointing out the literal inaccuracy of the white Jesus with the auburn flowing locks. As for 'woke' I think that is just another slang term for 'decent, self aware and compassionate', isn't it? I might be wrong, but wasn't Jesus 'woke'?

    No objection to ethnic Jesuses whatever, the more the merrier. He is a supreme internationalist and probably a lot more universalist than most of his 'followers' would probably care for. :laugh:
    .