And we have yet to see you disapprove any Catholic Church Doctrine ol' timer
Really..... maybe you can enlighten us on who this "majority' was/are/when. Last time I looked, the Catholic Church is the largest Christian denominatin with 1.2 billion members wordlwide! Lol
Maybe in the book of valiant.Lol. The Gospels and the early Church fathers say otherwise. Mary's Divine motherhood is based on the teaching of the Gospels, on the writings of the Fathers, and on the express definition of the Church. St. Matthew (1:25) testifies that Mary "brought forth her first-born son" and that He was called Jesus. According to St. John (1:15) Jesus is the Word made flesh, the Word Who assumed human nature in the womb of Mary. As Mary was truly the mother of Jesus, and as Jesus was truly God from the first moment of His conception, Mary is truly the mother of God. Even the earliest Fathers did not hesitate to draw this conclusion as may be seen in the writings of St. Ignatius (ad Ephes., 7, P.G., V, 652) , St. Irenaeus(adv. haer., III, 19, P.G., VIII, 940, 941), and Tertullian (Against Praxeas 27) The contention of Nestorius denying to Mary the title "Mother of God" (Serm. I, 6, 7, P.G., XLVIII, 760-761) was followed by the teaching of the Council of Ephesus proclaiming Mary to be Theotokos in the true sense of the word. (Cf. Ambr., in Luc. II, 25, P.L., XV, 1521; St. Cyril of Alex., Apol. pro XII cap.; c. Julian., VIII; ep. ad Acac., 14; P.G., LXXVI, 320, 901; LXXVII, 97; John of Antioch, ep. ad Nestor., 4, P.G., LXXVII, 1456; Theodoret, haer. fab., IV, 2, P.G., LXXXIII, 436; St. Gregory Nazianzen, ep. ad Cledon., I, P.G., XXXVII, 177; Proclus, hom. de Matre Dei, P.G., LXV, 680; etc. Among recent writers must be noticed Terrien, La mère de Dieu et la mere des hommes, Paris, 1902, I, 3-14; Turnel, Histoire de la théologie positive, Paris, 1904, 210-211.)
When Mary gave birth, she did not give birth to a nature, or even two natures; she gave birth to one, divine Person. For you to deny this essential truth of the faith, as the Council of Ephesus (A.D. 431) declared, is to cut yourself off from full communion with Christ and his Church. The first of many "anathemas" that would be accepted by the Council decreed: "If anyone does not confess that God is truly Emmanuel, and that on this account the Holy Virgin is the Mother of God (for according to the flesh she gave birth to the Word of God become flesh by birth), let him be anathema." Notice the Council referred to the prophecy of Isaiah 7:14 in its definition. This text prophesied over 700 years before the birth of Christ that the Messiah was to be born of a woman and yet he was to be "God with us."
Your problem valiant with denying Mary as Mother of God and affirming Mary to be only the mother of the man Christ Jesus, is that in doing so, you invariably either deny the divinity of Christ (as the fourth-century Arians did), or you create two persons with regard to Jesus Christ. Either error results in heresy. The Councils of Nicaea (325) and Constantinople (381) dealt decisively with the Arian heresy. Rather than teaching the truth that Christ is one divine person with two natures—one human, and one divine—hypostatically unified, or joined together without admixture in the one divine Person of Christ, they were teaching Christ to be two persons with a merely moral union. The Council fathers understood Christians could never affirm this. The Bible declares to us: ". . . in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily" (Col. 2:9). And, ". . . in him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible . . ." (Col. 1:16). Nowhere do we read in them; we only read of him. The error proposes essentially different Christs. Jesus is truly one divine Person. If one prays to a Jesus who is two persons, one prays to a "Jesus" who does not exist!
In reality Ol' Timer, Jesus in both these passages places the bond that unites the soul with God above the natural bond of parentage which unites the Mother of God with her Divine Son. The latter dignity is not belittled; as men naturally appreciate it more easily, it is employed by Our Lord as a means to make known the real value of holiness. Jesus, therefore, really, praises His mother in a most emphatic way; for she excelled the rest of men in holiness not less than in dignity. (cf. St. Augustin, de virgin., 3, P.L., XL, 398; pseudo-Justin, quaest. et respons. ad orthod., I, q. 136, P.G., VI, 1389)
You know ol' timer, there is also another saying.... "When the sun appears, even the brightest stars become invisible."
Pax Christi
"from henceforth, all generations shall cal me Blessed." ---Luke 1:48
Really..... maybe you can enlighten us on who this "majority' was/are/when. Last time I looked, the Catholic Church is the largest Christian denominatin with 1.2 billion members wordlwide! Lol
Maybe in the book of valiant.Lol. The Gospels and the early Church fathers say otherwise. Mary's Divine motherhood is based on the teaching of the Gospels, on the writings of the Fathers, and on the express definition of the Church. St. Matthew (1:25) testifies that Mary "brought forth her first-born son" and that He was called Jesus. According to St. John (1:15) Jesus is the Word made flesh, the Word Who assumed human nature in the womb of Mary. As Mary was truly the mother of Jesus, and as Jesus was truly God from the first moment of His conception, Mary is truly the mother of God. Even the earliest Fathers did not hesitate to draw this conclusion as may be seen in the writings of St. Ignatius (ad Ephes., 7, P.G., V, 652) , St. Irenaeus(adv. haer., III, 19, P.G., VIII, 940, 941), and Tertullian (Against Praxeas 27) The contention of Nestorius denying to Mary the title "Mother of God" (Serm. I, 6, 7, P.G., XLVIII, 760-761) was followed by the teaching of the Council of Ephesus proclaiming Mary to be Theotokos in the true sense of the word. (Cf. Ambr., in Luc. II, 25, P.L., XV, 1521; St. Cyril of Alex., Apol. pro XII cap.; c. Julian., VIII; ep. ad Acac., 14; P.G., LXXVI, 320, 901; LXXVII, 97; John of Antioch, ep. ad Nestor., 4, P.G., LXXVII, 1456; Theodoret, haer. fab., IV, 2, P.G., LXXXIII, 436; St. Gregory Nazianzen, ep. ad Cledon., I, P.G., XXXVII, 177; Proclus, hom. de Matre Dei, P.G., LXV, 680; etc. Among recent writers must be noticed Terrien, La mère de Dieu et la mere des hommes, Paris, 1902, I, 3-14; Turnel, Histoire de la théologie positive, Paris, 1904, 210-211.)
When Mary gave birth, she did not give birth to a nature, or even two natures; she gave birth to one, divine Person. For you to deny this essential truth of the faith, as the Council of Ephesus (A.D. 431) declared, is to cut yourself off from full communion with Christ and his Church. The first of many "anathemas" that would be accepted by the Council decreed: "If anyone does not confess that God is truly Emmanuel, and that on this account the Holy Virgin is the Mother of God (for according to the flesh she gave birth to the Word of God become flesh by birth), let him be anathema." Notice the Council referred to the prophecy of Isaiah 7:14 in its definition. This text prophesied over 700 years before the birth of Christ that the Messiah was to be born of a woman and yet he was to be "God with us."
Your problem valiant with denying Mary as Mother of God and affirming Mary to be only the mother of the man Christ Jesus, is that in doing so, you invariably either deny the divinity of Christ (as the fourth-century Arians did), or you create two persons with regard to Jesus Christ. Either error results in heresy. The Councils of Nicaea (325) and Constantinople (381) dealt decisively with the Arian heresy. Rather than teaching the truth that Christ is one divine person with two natures—one human, and one divine—hypostatically unified, or joined together without admixture in the one divine Person of Christ, they were teaching Christ to be two persons with a merely moral union. The Council fathers understood Christians could never affirm this. The Bible declares to us: ". . . in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily" (Col. 2:9). And, ". . . in him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible . . ." (Col. 1:16). Nowhere do we read in them; we only read of him. The error proposes essentially different Christs. Jesus is truly one divine Person. If one prays to a Jesus who is two persons, one prays to a "Jesus" who does not exist!
In reality Ol' Timer, Jesus in both these passages places the bond that unites the soul with God above the natural bond of parentage which unites the Mother of God with her Divine Son. The latter dignity is not belittled; as men naturally appreciate it more easily, it is employed by Our Lord as a means to make known the real value of holiness. Jesus, therefore, really, praises His mother in a most emphatic way; for she excelled the rest of men in holiness not less than in dignity. (cf. St. Augustin, de virgin., 3, P.L., XL, 398; pseudo-Justin, quaest. et respons. ad orthod., I, q. 136, P.G., VI, 1389)
You know ol' timer, there is also another saying.... "When the sun appears, even the brightest stars become invisible."
Pax Christi
"from henceforth, all generations shall cal me Blessed." ---Luke 1:48
