One Final Look At The Marian Idea

Jesus and Mary
Glory be to The Father, The Son, The Mother, and The Holy Ghost.

In my previous two articles, I examined what I saw were the pros and cons of Roman Catholicism and directly challenged the veneration of Mary that is a major part of the Roman Catholic faith. In this third article, I want to lay out my reasoning behind my rejection of the Marian doctrines. I am coming at this from a position of observations I have made over the years, which frees me from the box of Protestant thought.

According to scripture, in the beginning there is Adam and Eve in Eden. There is the command from God. There is the disobedience. There is the fall.

Then to Adam He said, “Because you have heeded the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree of which I commanded you, saying, ‘You shall not eat of it’: “Cursed is the ground for your sake; In toil you shall eat of it all the days of your life” (Genesis 3:17 NKJV).

So the curse of the material world, sin, came through Adam. Paul confirms this idea:

For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous (Romans 5:19 NKJV).

What I see is that inherited sin is a particularly male attribute. It is passed from father to child. The sin nature of king David was inherited from his father and he passed on the sin nature to his son, Solomon, and so on and so on.

Now we come to Joseph and Mary. In keeping with biblical history, Joseph had inherited the curse of Adam through his father and Mary through her father. But – and this is the big ‘but’ – only Joseph was culpable for passing on the sin to any children he might have. Though Mary was a sinner she nonetheless could not pass on sin to any children she might have.

So it makes sense that God interrupted the male lineage by supernaturally impregnating Mary with male seed, but not interrupted the female lineage through Mary. For Jesus to be born sinless, it was only necessary to remove Joseph from the process, but not Mary.

With this, the entire concept of the Immaculate Conception and the thought behind it looks unnecessary and unfounded. In fact, there is no biblical basis for the dogma. It is purely grounded in the tradition of the Church.

The core idea is that original sin infects both sexes and is passed on by both sexes. Jesus’ perfection had to be protected from both Joseph and Mary. So while the biblical account records a supernatural conception, church tradition holds the Immaculate Conception, which states that Mary was supernaturally born perfect and without sin.

But this raises questions. If Mary was born without sin to protect Jesus, why wasn’t Joseph also born without sin? Why didn’t God just give a special grace to a child conceived by Joseph and Mary so that Jesus was immaculately conceived? From the Catholic view, Joseph was dismissed as a sinful father and Mary was placed on a supernatural pedestal as the perfect mother.

As I revisit this doctrine, I cannot but help conclude that the Roman Church is in error and has tacked on the heavy weight of an unnecessary teaching that has very questionable foundations. And in this age of feminism, where the deception that befell Eve is spreading en mass, the Marian doctrine is feminism officially sanctioned by tradition, as it elevates Mary to equality to Jesus.

It makes a mere woman equal to God, which is the great temptation that struck Eve in Eden.

it pains me because I really admire the Roman Church in all its greatness. That admiration, however, does not nullify what I see as a serious and grevious error.

Avoiding The Catholic Church

Jesus and Mary
Equality on earth as it is in heaven.

In my previous article, I gave a brief overview of what I had observed in my interaction with and study of Roman Catholicism. The singular objection I had to the Church was the Marian doctrines, those teachings surrounding the Jewish woman who conceived while a virgin and gave birth to Jesus. One commentator wrote:

Romanism/Papism is not Christianity.

This is a common answer and one of the main points of criticism from the Reformed Protestants against the Catholic Church. Unfortunately, it misses a larger picture. There is nothing inherently wrong in the Roman Church having a single leader of authority in the Pope. Standing against the Church because of the Pope sounds like a parallel of the cause of democracy against a monarchy. The conflict between democracy and monarchy are not good reasons for a man to reject entry into the Church.

There is, however, a much older and ancient conflict rooted in the origins of man that has plagued man throughout history and is manifesting itself today in blatant and defiant ways. Though the first man to exist is responsible for the fallen state of our world, his fall followed the voice of a woman.

And to Adam he said, “Because you have listened to the voice of your wife and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, ‘You shall not eat of it,’ cursed is the ground because of you; in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life (Genesis 3:17 ESV).

Heeding the voice of women can be good if the women are wise, but treacherous if the woman are fools. Yet, even when there are wise women around, a man should always first and foremost heed the words of God (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit).

The modern movement of feminism, which has been around since well before the nineteen sixties, counters this idea by proposing two fundamental ideas. One, that women should always been heeded, and, two, women are always wise.

Protestant Christianity posits that no person has ever lived a perfect life without sin save for Jesus Christ. Through one man, Adam, disaster has befallen us, and through one perfect man, Jesus, hope has enveloped us. Nothing in the history of the Christian faith allows for a perfect woman.

Yet, not only does Catholicism allow for a perfect woman, but the rational conclusion that as the Son of Man came to seek and save that which was lost, so has the Daughter of Woman. There are no formal doctrines of Mary’s divinity, but she is given a perfect humanity, like Jesus, and is considered always wise, like Jesus. Her divinity is implied. None of Jesus’ disciples were perfect and neither were the apostles that followed. It would be considered blasphemy to attribute St. Peter what has been attributed to Mary.

So, then, the Marian doctrines of the Catholic Church, which are rejected by the Eastern Orthodox Church and are not supported in the recorded history found in scripture, look very much like modern feminism. The core relationship in heaven is no longer Father and Son, to be reflected in families on earth, but rather it is Mother and Son, with fatherhood considered secondary or simply utilitarian. The early church dealt with feminism as well.

This would not be so horrible if the doctrines on Mary were secondary and the practice of veneration optional. Mary, however, is a pivotal figure of the Catholic faith. To cut Mary out of the Catholic fabric would be to leave the faith naked and abandoned. To be Catholic, a man must venerate Mary, accept her perfect humanity, submit to her heavenly authority, doubt nothing concering her modern manifestations, devote one’s life to her completely, and glorify her implied divinity. To be Catholic, one must sing, “Holy, Holy, Holy, is Mary, Queen Mother Almighty.” One has but to read through official prayers and see the worship. To be Catholic, one must bow with the knee and confess with the tongue that not only is Jesus Lord to the glory of the Father, but Mary is Lady to the glory of Her son.

That is one reason to avoid the Roman Catholic Church.

Considering Catholicism

Jesus and Mary
Two halves of God?

I grew up under Protestant influences in as much as the sixty-six books of the Protestant Bible were heralded as final authority. Having experienced everything from fundamentalist to Baptist to charismatic to non-denominational to liturgical churches, I have come to realize that it is the individual Christian’s interpretation that carries as much authority as the text itself. The evidence is the brilliant colors of the fractured prisms that make up Protestant denominations. Unity is strained, even to the breaking point. The rebellion of the Reformation looks like a bad mistake.

So, over the past couple of years I have begun to read church history in the forbidden zone of time between the book of Acts and the Reformation in the seventeenth century. Having engaged a local Catholic community and observing as well as reading Catholic writers and studying church doctrines, I have developed some thoughts on the Roman Catholic Church.

The Positive

The Roman Catholic identity is incredibly powerful. Catholics from numerous places within and without the United States can find instant unity at a single Mass. The rituals and prayers are all practiced and uttered in unison between people who have never met. It is quite a powerful moment to witness.

Much of the greatness of Western Civilization comes from the Roman Catholic Church. From the writings of early church fathers to the grandeur of the Latin language to artistry of the Cathedral to the literary heritage (Shakespeare, Tolkien, etc.) to the romantic ideas of honor and justice, the Church has been the soil from which these seeds emerged to make Western Civilization shine brightly in a dark world.

The Crusades were fought under Catholic Christendom, ensuring that the West remained Christian.

Marriage is highly exalted and the producing of children is taken very seriously. Things as common as divorce and contraception are considered evil, not to mention abortion.

The Catholic Church takes the presence of spiritual evil seriously. The authority of priests use the rite of excorcism to deal with things beyond mere psychological problems.

The Negative

The Marian doctrines. Regardless of what the official position of the Church, I see Catholics worshiping Mary as much as Jesus. For example, I have uncovered the following ideas about Mary:

  • Jesus was born perfect and without sin by divine appointment. By the doctrine of The Immaculate conception, so was Mary.
  • Jesus is the intercessor between God and man. Mary is also sought as an intercessor between God and man.
  • Jesus is seated at the right hand of God the Father as a king. Mary is seated at the right hand of Jesus as a Queen. Jesus rules heaven and earth as a King. Mary rules heaven and earth as a Queen.
  • Jesus saves souls from sin and death. Mary saves souls from sin and death (Seen in the prayer, “Jesus, Mary, I Love You! Save Souls!).
  • Jesus performed miracles, made predictions, and appeared in glory. Mary performs miracles, makes predictions, and appears in glory.
  • It is not unreasonable to argue that as Jesus is God in the flesh, Mary is also God in the flesh. Jesus and Mary are both endowed with the same place and powers reserved for deity. Mary is no mere woman as Jesus is no mere man.

It would not surprise me to one day see female priests and a female Pope. There are Catholics who are not opposed to the idea.

Also, Catholicism is compromised by modernity. Though the laity may partially practice an orthodox faith, the leadership has entrusted its intellectual space to modern academia, which is atheist in its basic views of the world. And the Pope and those under him are promoting the social justice narrative, a narrative that is directly opposed to much of what the Church has historically stood for. This is found in their bible translations and homilies I have heard.

In Conclusion

So much good is found the Roman Church. The Catholic Church is the church of Western Civilization. That alone warrants a measure of serious respect and consideration. Almost everything that Protestants and the West hold today can trace its roots back to the Catholic Church. The highly fragmented and weakened place of the Protestant Church in the West looks pitiful in the shadow of the Cathedrals of old.

And yet, the Church’s most prominent feature is its most egregious problem. The line between worshiping Mary and merely venerating her is razor thin and to invoke the name of Mary in a Catholic way gives serious concern to the conscience. Modernity has infected the Church, like many mainline Protestant churches, further tarnishing Rome’s shiny appeal.

Magical Atheist Dust

In response to the new found rape culture that has been established in Germany by Arab and African immigrants, German officials have created a series of signs and memes meant to publicly instruct the immigrants on how to be civilized.

Dont touch

Don't fight

The absurdity of this is obvious. Europe was already full of civilized men until Christendom was dismantled and replaced by atheism, with all of its lusts for equality and the dream of heaven on earth without heavenly things. Civilized culture has replaced civilized men with domesticated pets for when women need manual labor or sperm donation.

Of course, these nice guys that Euro-feminists love have proven to be so utterly ineffective in protecting women from sexual assault that women are told, in a strange mix of feminism and sexism, to protect themselves.

These memes and signs beg the question. If the immigrants are not naturally civilized toward the opposite sex, why would a government allow them in en mass to threaten its women?

The answer is simple. The European atheists believe in magic. They believe that if these immigrants come in contact with the soil of European secular culture, it will magically convert them to civilized knights in exotic, dark armor that will replace the shrinking population of weak German Christian men whom were long ago stripped of their shiny European armor.

And they say only the Christians are primitive and superstitious.

This all stems from the materilist view that humans are merely evolutionary products of their environment and by manufacturing better environments through social engineering, humans can evolve into better people. So, by transplanting Arabs and Africans from their uncivilized, religious cuilture to the Socialist culture of the European atheist, the natural forces of engineered evolution will magically do the work of transforming the barbarian into a civilized man.

Of course, that assumes that the magic culture can stop the barbarians from burning it to the ground.

Progressives Do Not Fear Islam

muslim_american_girl1
The Left loves you!

As refugees from Arab and Africa carry out acts of blatant barbarism, European leaders do not seem bothered by the consequences of their policies of unfettered immigration. The concept that European leaders should care about what happens to their fellow European citizens seems absent. Perhaps this is result of Europe moving away from belief in Christ, which values charity, to belief in man, which values evolution toward perfection at any cost.

German leaders have chosen loyalty to Muslim immigrants over loyalty to their fellow Germans, who were once citizens of a civilization called Christendom. This has gone as far as a female leader of the German city of Cologne telling women that they are responsible for their own rapes and not the Muslim immigrants who are raping them.

While the left does not fear hoards of Islamic immigrants raping and pillaging, they are deftly opposed to any sort of nationalist identity. German citizens, especially men, standing up as Germans and defending German women for sake of Germany is considered racist, and racism is equated to terrorism.

Given the now obvious destruction of European cities that is being seeded, one would think that European leaders would take a cue from the French and put Europe on lock down. However, immigrants in Europe are given free rein and their crimes deliberately covered up. The citizen may be afraid, but the leaders are not.

The reason why European leftists do not fear Islam taking over Europe is that they believe themselves superior. Islam to them is a religion, like Christianity, like Buddhism, and all religions are considered fundamentally inferior to the secular culture. European Christianity was conquered from within by a combination of nineteenth century scientific theories (Evolution, Communism, Psychology, etc.) and the ensuing philosophy of skepticism that became the hallmark of all intellectual inquiry.

What the left did to Christianity, it believes it can do to Islam. European leaders believe they can convert the Muslim away from his belief in Allah and Muhammed to the soft atheism of humanist thought, in the same way much of Christendom was converted away from Jesus Christ.

It is the same in the United States. Science and skepticism are the foundations of the American university system where the faith of progress toward perfection is preached. American Christianity has suffered incredible losses in its intellectual strength as it has succumbed to the soft atheism adopted by Europe and Canada.

Islam is not nearly the threat to the United States as it is to Europe, at least not yet, but for the Progressive, they welcome Islam with open arms in an attempt to convert them to their ideas. American Christians who have not converted are marginalized as racists and haters.

The reason why it will fail is because Christianity and Islam are not as similar as the Progressives think them to be.

The reason why Christianity was so easy subverted was that giving consideration to its enemies is a primary doctrine. Believing they were fulfilling the admonishment by Christ Himself to love their enemies and withhold judgment, Christians gave equal credence to ideas that directly countered the faith. In the name of love, Christians became fools. Once a dialogue had begun, the compromises came easier until Christianity became merely a religion of human invention and not a preserver of truth and reality.

Islam has no directive to love one’s enemies. Its founder lived a life of violent conquest with little mercy shown toward his enemies. While some Muslims may find the intellectual superiority complex of America academia alluring, Islam has nothing that says it must dialogue with the atheists. The direct confrontation of secular culture with Sharia Law is well within its cultural mandate. It is not the atheist who will convert the Muslim, but the Muslim who will convert the atheist, by dialogue or death threat.

Inspirational poetry

I saw this over at Free Northerner and had to post on my own blog:

Song of the White Men

Rudyard Kipling

Now, this is the cup the White Men drink
When they go to right a wrong,
And that is the cup of the old world’s hate–
Cruel and strained and strong.
We have drunk that cup–and a bitter, bitter cup–
And tossed the dregs away.
But well for the world when the White Men drink
To the dawn of the White Man’s day!

Now, this is the road that the White Men tread
When they go to clean a land–
Iron underfoot and levin overhead
And the deep on either hand.
We have trod that road–and a wet and windy road–
Our chosen star for guide.
Oh, well for the world when the White Men tread
Their highway side by side!

Now, this is the faith that the White Men hold–
When they build their homes afar–
“Freedom for ourselves and freedom for our sons
And, failing freedom, War.”
We have proved our faith–bear witness to our faith,
Dear souls of freemen slain!
Oh, well for the world when the White Men join
To prove their faith again!