Featured Irenaeus

I don't see it as an origin of Mariolatry, but certainly a forced and exaggerated view of both Mary and Eve.

It appears that Irenaeus focused on a truth (Jesus as the "second Adam", obedient as opposed to Adam's disobedience) and chose to use that as a lens through which to view Scripture.

Having a theory he looked to support that theory (a common mistake).


The Catholic Church could have been influenced by those writings, but I believe it is more probable they were influenced by Roman paganism (which already had that type of idolatry). Mary simply replaced the existing goddess.

 

Another problem is reading those writings with "modern eyes". That's the same with reading Scripture as well.

Is Mary blessed among women? Did Mary really find favor with God (apart from other women)? Was Elizabeth really astonished that the mother of her Lord would come to her?

Do all generations really count Mary as blessed.....or do we tend to minimize Mary as just a vehicle God used for His purposes?

I'm not disagreeing with you, but I can see how people view the words of others within their own context.

We have a history of (rightly) condemning the idolatry of the Catholic Church. But there is also a danger of allowing that just condemnation to color our view of earlier writings and even Scripture.

 

lol...and that was the last thing He called her.

Yes....some things can certainly be lost in translation.

That is a good example about the "modern eyes" problem.

In Jesus' culture that use of "woman" would be like saying "ma’am". But it certainly sounds rude to our ears.

Another is comparing a woman to a dog. Rather than the woman going along with the example, today you'd be in for a fight.


We even see this across generations within our own lifetimes.

 

I agree.

Your post just had me thinking about calling my mother....or calling my wife...."woman". If we do that we have to be very careful about choosing the words that follow .

But yes, Mary was blessed among women, she was honored (not worshipped but counted by blessed because she was highly favored by God among women) by all generations, and she was the one God chose to give birth to Jesus.

My point is sometimes we, as Baptists, reduce the account of Mary to merely a vessel (not considering her highly favored by God, blessed among women) as a reaction to the Catholic practice of making Mary an idol.


For example, if I were to post that Mary was highly esteemed, favored by God, blessed among women, and that Elizabeth was honored by Mary, the mother of her Lord, visiting her....how long do you think it would take before some member objected or offered counter posts to prevent the idea of Mary worship?

I bet it would take no more than 3 posts.

The irony is that my post would not have anything to do with worshipping Mary. It would be simply speaking God's Word.

BUT because of our experience with Catholic paganism we (myself included) would automatically go to defending against the heresy.

We would read such a post in light of the Catholic Church, which did not even exist when those words were written.


It is easy to assume Irenaeus had some type of vibration towards Mary in mind. But there is no evidence that this is true. It is reading what came later into his writings.

 

Because Catholics do not hold Penal Substitution Theory but Substitution Theory (Aquinas rather than Calvin). Their system of Atonement is based on merit, not justice.

 

And never start a conversation with your father by saying "Dude...". That's another no go (one I do not know by experience.....I am smarter than that).

 

I know (and don't want to detail this thread either).

But you are talking Penal Substitution. Catholics are not (they hold Substitution).

Aquinas developed Substitution where Jesus is punished for us but not for sins. He distinguished between simple punishment (a man being punished for a crime) and substitution (a punishment for that man but not for the crime). God could punish Christ for us because He is not punishing Christ for our sins.

But where Anselm based Atonement on restoring God's honor Aquinas based Atonement on merit. This is where things like penance, indulgences, and the "treasury of merit" become important.

In context of this discussion, you asked how Mary could meditate for sinners if she was not herself a sinner.

Under Penal Substitution Theory Christ does because God laid our sins on Him and viewed Him as if He were a sinner. So Mary could not mediate for sinners.

But the Catholic Atonement is not Penal Substitution. It is Substitution based not on justice but merit. Mary can mediate precisely because (per their doctrine) she was not a sinner.

 

?

I am saying that the Catholic doctrine that Mary is sinless does not pose a difficulty in their theology because they hold a system of Atonement based on merit rather than justice

I was answering your earlier question of how Mary could be sinless and a mediator for sinners. The answer is they hold a different theory of Atonement.

I'm not sure what you are asking now.