Tag Archives: Catholic

And the Wind Cried Mary

10 Replies

Sadly, I still haven't had time to properly respond to Ed Heckman's difficulties with the Church's beliefs concerning Mary. I did get one answer to my call for rebuttals from the peanut gallery. Here's Anonymous' defense of Marian doctrines. The opinions expressed by him/her may or may not reflect my beliefs or the beliefs of the Church.

1. Ed's first point is that Mary cannot be the most perfect example of human faithfulness because: a) she's no more faithful than Abraham; and b) she seems to have had doubts over the course of Christ's life.

In response, I would note that: a) Before God asked Abraham to be faithful, He promised Abraham a number of rewards for faithfulness. See Gen. 17. But He promised nothing to Mary directly, yet she was nevertheless willing to do his will. See Luke 1. Being faithful without knowing what the consequences will be is better than being faithful for a reward.

And b) the doubts that Mary had were not, as Ed claims, evidence of a weak faith; they were tests of faith that Mary passed. Simeon warned Mary that "you yourself a sword will pierce," Luke 2:35, and his prophecy came true in each of the instances Ed cites. See this.

2. Ed's second point is that Mary cannot rightly be considered a sinless "New Eve" because: a) she calls God her Savior in Luke 1, and the sinless do not need a savior; and b) there is no explicit scriptural support for Mary as a sinless "New Eve."

In response, I would note that: a) you can "save" people in two ways: getting them out of trouble, or keeping them from getting into it in the first place. Knocking someone out of the path of a speeding car saves that person just as much as providing medical care in the event that he is hit. God saved Mary from sin by keeping her from it; he saves us from sin by getting us out of it.

And b) Ed is right that there is no explicit scriptural support for calling Mary a sinless "New Eve." But this is not a problem for Catholics, who don't demand explicit scriptural support in the way that Protestants do. Catholics believe that the Church came before the Bible in that it preached before the Bible was written, and it chose the Books that were to become part of the Bible (choosing the synoptic Gospels over the gnostic ones, etc.). For this reason, the Church can proclaim a doctrine without explicit scripural support, for the Bible is a creature of the Church, and not the other way round.

It seems Jay is having similar discussions at Deo Omnis Gloria.

Linguistic Issues Regarding the Perpetual Virginity of Mary [regarding Jesus' "brothers"]
Linguistic Issues Regarding the Perpetual Virginity of Mary, Part II [regarding Joseph not knowing Mary "until" Jesus' birth]

Carnivals 02/18/05

Leave a reply

I’m a little late posting this, but here’s this week’s carnival roundup.

The
57th Christian Carnival is up at Wittenburg Gate. Vox
Apologia 5 is also at WG. The theme is “Three Governments: Family, Civil,
and Church”. The
17th Catholic Carnival is up at Living Catholicism. The post hoc theme is “Spiritual
Nourishment During Lent”.

Tempus Fugit

1 Reply

If only I had more time to blog. Between class, research, RCIA, choir, and spending time with my wife, I can’t spend nearly as much time writing as I would like. I’ve been trying to cut back on blogging so as to not neglect my wife, so I try to pick one big topic to tackle each week.

My exchange with Adrian Warnock regarding "the simple gospel" seems to be winding down, which opens up a "slot" for something else. On the other hand, I’ve been outlining an article I’d like to write on imitation of Christ, directly and by proxy through imitation of the saints. That leaves me little or no time to respond to Ed Heckman’s well-constructed thoughts regarding Mary, the Catholic Church, and Scripture.

In his latest post, Ed does what no other Protestant with whom I’ve debated has done – actually read the Catechism. I’m so thoroughly pleased and impressed that I wish all the more that I had time to respond. He does a pretty thorough job fisking some of the Catechism’s statements about Mary. Obviously I disagree with him, but I respect his analysis none the less. I would be overjoyed if some of my knowledgeable Catholic readers would respond to him criticisms.

Go to it!

Romanism, Mary and The Catechism, Part 1

Update: If you’d like to write a post-length rebuttal but don’t have a blog of your own, send your post to me and I’ll consider posting it here.

A Comfort

Leave a reply

Sometimes I worry about how dissident so many Catholics are these days. In Born Fundamentalist, Born Again Catholic, David Currie offers this bit of hope.

“From time to time, the proclamation of the truth will solidify the opposition.
The victory of God’s way over man’s way will appear to be in peril. Even some Christians
will not agree to put God’s glory first. Human dignity will suffer. But Jesus promised
that even the gates of hell would not prevail against the Church that he would build
upon Peter. The teaching authority of the Church will not be compromised. She will
always preserve the truth handed down from those original twelve men who turned
the world on its head.”

Arminian and Catholic Soteriologies, Part Deux

7 Replies

After some conversations with knowledgeable folks, it seems there are indeed some differences between Arminian and Catholic soteriologies. Here’s how I’d formulate Catholic teaching (with thanks to Jimmy Akin and Wikipedia). I cannot guarantee it is free of error.

Total Deparavity: God gave man free will so that we might choose freely to love Him. Unfortunately, the Fall impaired our free will. Grace restores our unfallen goodness, if only for a time (i.e until we sin).

Semi-Conditional Election: God has told us through Scripture that there is a guaranteed way to be saved. We must accept Jesus Christ by our own free will and live by His commandments. However, God also saves whomever He wills, and we, as mere mortals, have no right to judge which individuals will and will not receive eternal life. We may only say that certain actions are contrary to God’s law and unpleasing to Him.

Unlimited Atonement With Limited Intent: Jesus Christ died for all mankind, but the saving grace He made available is only guaranteed to be efficacious if we accept Jesus Christ by our own free will and live by His commandments. By opening ourselves to grace through faith, we become members of the elect who shall receive eternal life.

Irresistable Grace: The sacraments of initiation, baptism and confirmation, confer grace unconditionally. That is, one need not already be in a state of grace to receive the grace conferred by these sacraments.

Resistable Grace: Grace is not forced upon us. We open ourselves to grace and by doing so restore the free will we were intended to inherit from our progenitors. Grace is conferred conditionally in the Eucharist and annointing of the sick. We must already be in a state of grace to participate in those sacraments. For instance, if we take the Eucharist unworthily, we eat and drink condemnation upon ourselves.

Uncertain Perceverance: Membership in the elect is not made permanent at initiation. God gives us sustaining grace, spiritual sustenance if you will, if we ask for it and through sacraments. However, there are choices we can make (i.e sins we can commit) that separate us from God and remove us from the company of the elect. Like Paul, we must work out our salvation with fear and trembling and strive to finish the good race. We must also seek sustaining grace through praying, reading scripture, receiving the sacraments, etc. In particular, the sacrament of confession restores us to a state of grace if are truly contrite and repentant. There is no such thing as "once saved, always saved" according to the Church. We were saved by Christ’s salvific act. We are being saved as we grow in faith. We hope to persevere to the end and be saved at the judgement.

Questions? Comments? I’m not sure where to put marriage and holy orders. Any suggestions?