Do you love the Virgin Mary?

Status
Not open for further replies.
steadfast7

steadfast7

Puritan Board Junior
Have our Reformed forebears thrown out the baby with the bath water when it comes to Mary? It most years of the church's existence, there has been a high respect (to say the least) of Mary, such that the church has almost uniformly confessed a great adoration of her and a desire to imitate her. We, in our day, hardly mention her, even as a excellent human model of godliness and obedience. We would much rather pick from David or Moses as our examples. Have we reacted too strongly to Roman paganism so as to abandon a healthy respect for Mary?
 
Yes I love the Virgin Mary. I do not see her as a "comediatrix", whatever that means, but she was the woman through whom my Savior entered the world. She is a great example of humility and devotion to God. The early Reformers- Luther, Calvin, ect.- though they did not have the same almost idolatrous view of her as the RCC, did hold her in high esteem, as did the Wesley brothers, and others in the past. I think there is too much effort to make her just another person and not the mother of God. (that term is Biblical based on the fact that Jesus is both God and man. They said so at WTS). I have not reached a conclusion yet on her "perpetual virginity" and do not see it as a salvation issue.
 
Hi Dennis. Good question. My take is this...I love Mary just as I love all my brothers and sisters in Christ. I do not revere her any more than I do any man, including Apostle Paul, Moses, King David, my mom and dad etc. I have Catholic friends that honestly believe that she was without sin. It is very sad to see how the Catholic church has distorted the gospel and turned it into an idol and works (false) religion. I have a healthy respect for the woman that God chose to bring His Son into the world through, but we cannot forget that she was a fallen human just like you and I.
 
It's possible that in reaction to the excessive claims of Rome we've sidelined Mary on a practical level, just as the absurd elevation of the Apocrypha to the level of inspired Scripture sometimes makes us reject them so vigorously we forget there are some excellent things in there. But it's not entirely reasonable to compare Mary to Moses and David; there is far more in Scripture about those two men than there is about Mary. But in hiding things in her heart, in submitting to the will of God as a handmaid, in continuing steadfastly with the disciples, Mary is a beautiful example; and certainly we should join our voices to the chorus of generations that call her blessed.
 
I know that Calvin and Luther never referred to her as other than the Virgin Mary or the Blessed Virgin, so it seems that they believed in her virginity. As for her assumption and sinlessness, obvious corruptions. But it still seems to me that valuing and esteeming her is about as orthodox as affirming the creeds and liturgy. After all, she is the theotokos, which is likewise orthodox.
 
steadfast7 said:
I know that Calvin and Luther never referred to her as other than the Virgin Mary or the Blessed Virgin, so it seems that they believed in her virginity. As for her assumption and sinlessness, obvious corruptions. But it still seems to me that valuing and esteeming her is about as orthodox as affirming the creeds and liturgy. After all, she is the theotokos, which is likewise orthodox.
Click to expand...

1. Luther and Calvin were men of their day. The world as they knew it was steeped in centuries of Catholicism.

2. Mary being called the God-bearer in no way makes her, in her person, worthy of a particular reverence or honor more than any other faithful man or woman of God.
 
Right there is no reason to say she was without sin to revere her as a great example of humility, faith and devotion to God. She was blessed above all women as the mother of our Lord. Evangelicals, in reaction to the RCC view, try to make her just like anyone else. Yes she was a sinner in need of a Savior, but God blessed her to be the mother of God and to deny that is to ignore Scripture, and even the teaching of the early Reformers.
 
Our Lord's commentary on Mary:

Matthew 12:46 While he was still speaking to the people, behold, his mother and his brothers stood outside, asking to speak to him. 48 But he replied to the man who told him, “Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?” 49 And stretching out his hand toward his disciples, he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers! 50 For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.”

In as much as Mary did the will of our Father I love her for it. She deserves to be called 'blessed' for her part in the birth of Jesus. She is to be greatly admired for her role in fulfilling God's will but should receive no sentimental or ritual exultation. There must be no doctrine or prayers or days built around her memory or deeds and it is right for us to be extra cautious in encouraging others not to violate the commandment regarding idolatry. She is similar to the angels in that there is a propensity in our idol making hearts to elevate her worth beyond the role of God's faithful servant.

There is an efficacy to using her as an example of faithful service and bearing up under horrific suffering.
 
I agree that sometimes we protestants have been a bit hesitant to speak highly of Mary due to the excessive views of others, but I don't think we're too far off. She's an example of a sinner who received God's grace. As such, she has some good things to teach us in the areas of submission to God and believing the Good News, but even more to show us about the power and love of God's intervening mercy.

Reading the gospels, we should not miss that Mary could be headstrong (the incident at Cana, the scolding in Jerusalem when Jesus was 12, the "intervention" she attempted with Jesus' brothers), which makes her humble faith at the angel's announcement and continuing into Acts particularly interesting. It seems she was much like each of us—arrogant and controlling at times—but God broke into her life with the Good News and opened her heart to it so that, despite her natural bent, it bowled her over and produced faithful obedience.
 
Last edited:
I am not sure how we can love someone that we have no relationship with, however we should respect her and acknowledge the great honour God placed upon her, and the suffering that came with that honour. We can learn from her example we see in scripture and yes sometimes we do go to far in responce to error, sometimes the Holy Spirit is underplayed because we don't want to come across as charismatic, and sometimes if we seem to be holding Mary in to favourable light then we are becoming catholic, that saddens me a little I must admit, the amount of reading into peoples words and actions that takes place these days.
 
Dennis,

A question about the OP, why did you refer to her as the Virgin Mary instead of just Mary?

And, yes, I praise God for Mary and her great example.
 
steadfast7 said:
According to all ecumenical creeds she is the Virgin Mary. Have we any reason to call her otherwise?
Click to expand...

She is called "virgin" Mary in reference to the virgin birth. Outside of that context, one reason to call her simply "Mary" is the place that her "perpetual virginity" occupies in Romish idolatry.
 
In the words of a friend of mine: "While I don't think she was sinless, I gotta say, Mary must have been one special chick."
 
Maybe we should appreciate Mary more as one of the biblical saints along with all the others, and maybe we sometimes soft pedal on her because she's been turned into an idol by some sections of the Church.

You have to take action because of dangers. Joseph, Moses, David and Paul haven't been turned into idols, so we feel more free to expatiate on them as biblical characters, and the Bible has more to say on them.

She's no longer a virgin, of course. Hasn't been for a long time. I don't think we should regard her as any less for having had marital relations.

Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge. (Heb 13:4)
Click to expand...
 
P. F. Pugh said:
In the words of a friend of mine: "While I don't think she was sinless, I gotta say, Mary must have been one special chick."
Click to expand...

The irony is that your friends words actually come across as highly disrespectful. I could be wrong, but I don't think refering to women as "chicks" denotes much esteem.
 
P. F. Pugh said:
Andres said:
P. F. Pugh said:
In the words of a friend of mine: "While I don't think she was sinless, I gotta say, Mary must have been one special chick."
Click to expand...

The irony is that your friends words actually come across as highly disrespectful. I could be wrong, but I don't think refering to women as "chicks" denotes much esteem.
Click to expand...

I should have mentioned that the friend was a woman.
Click to expand...

Still doesn't change the fact that her words come across as disrespectful, but I won't lose any sleep over it.
 
It's very strange to see her continually referred to as "virgin," considering she and Joseph had other kids.
 
the virginity of Mary is one of those things which have been affirmed by the church from earliest times. It's even a part of the Eastern Orthodox and Catholic liturgies. It's kind of like the argument for paedobaptism in some ways, but we won't go there!
Apparently the Biblical language does not distinguish brothers and sisters from cousins, which is true in some languages today. I don't think there's anything particularly Roman about affirming her virginity, just that on this side of the enlightenment, we have dismissed the idea.

---------- Post added at 06:00 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:55 AM ----------
louis_jp said:
steadfast7 said:
According to all ecumenical creeds she is the Virgin Mary. Have we any reason to call her otherwise?
Click to expand...

She is called "virgin" Mary in reference to the virgin birth. Outside of that context, one reason to call her simply "Mary" is the place that her "perpetual virginity" occupies in Romish idolatry.
Click to expand...
Calvin calls her the "Virgin" or "Blessed Virgin" at least a few times in his institutes. Are you saying that this is the one instance in which Romanism had a stranglehold on his vocabulary? It is more appropriate to consider her virginity an ecumenical rather than a Romish affirmation.
 
If you mean Virgin in the sense of the Immaculate conception, I'm good with it. But as said before, she deserves attention to the extent that any other saint does: no more, no less. Should we ignore her? Absolutely not. She is an example of a godly woman, and her Magnificat is beautiful. But to exalt her in any unscriptural way is a step in the direction of Rome.
 
Phil D. said:
J. Dean said:
If you mean Virgin in the sense of the Immaculate conception, I'm good with it.
Click to expand...

Just a note on common terminology: the Immaculate Conception actually refers to the belief that Mary herself, in distinction from every other human being other than Christ, was conceived without the transfer of original sin.
Click to expand...
Oh! In that case, let me rephrase: if you mean Virgin in the sense of the Immaculate Conception OF Christ, then I'm good with it.

I certainly do not believe in the sinlessness of Mary.

Thank you for pointing that out, Phil. If I'm ever in your neck of the woods, your next prime rib is on me!
 
She is called the virgin Mary (WCF 8.2), not merely because she was a virgin when she conceived and gave birth to Christ, but because she always remained the virgin mother of the person we call the God-man. As Richard Sibbes explains, “It is said of the Virgin Mary, ‘All generations shall call her blessed,’ Luke i. 48. Why? Because she was the mother of the person that was God; she was the mother of Christ in human nature, and of God, because we may not sever the persons. And shall we bless the Virgin Mary, as mother of God, and not God as Father of Christ?” (Works 6:462.)
 
steadfast7 said:
Have our Reformed forebears thrown out the baby with the bath water when it comes to Mary?
Click to expand...

I think John Owen clearly and accurately answers the question: "as the Protestants believe every thing that is spoken of the blessed Virgin in the Scripture, or creed, or whatever may be lawfully deduced from what is so spoken, so they have all that honour and respect for her, which God will allow to be given to any creature." (Works, 14:120).
 
Thanks Rev. Winzer for those references! I must take back what I said about our Reformed fathers. They seemed to have esteemed her highly, but it is perhaps only modern Protestantism who has diminished her significance.
 
J. Dean said:
If you mean Virgin in the sense of the Immaculate conception, I'm good with it.
Click to expand...

I hope that you don't know what the 'immaculate conception' means. It's Roman Catholic talk for their belief that Mary was born without sin.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top