The Roman Catholic Doctrine Of Mary Considered Biblically

The Virgin Mary is probably the most adored and loved woman in the history of the world. Even in our modern, sometimes skeptical world, her popularity is on the rise. In fact, according to “Time” magazine, there has been an explosion in visits to her shrines and reported sightings of her (Ostling 62). Pope John Paul II had a golden M emblazoned on his coat of arms when ordained a bishop, calls upon Mary in most of his public prayers and speeches, and believes that Mary’s intercession saved his life during an assassination attempt and also freed Europe from the clutches of communism (Ostling 64). Obviously, the Virgin Mary is a central figure in Roman Catholic theology. This paper will trace the development of the Roman Catholic Marian doctrine from its quiet beginning to the prominent position it now holds in Catholic theology and then assess the doctrine in light of the Scriptures.

 References to Mary in second century writings are not very common (The Encyclopedia of Religion, vol. 9, 251). Justin Martyr compares and contrasts her with Eve, and Irenaeus picks up on this theme and develops it even further (Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church 882). The Protevangelium of James, written in the mid-second century, was the first writing to assert the perpetual virginity of Mary (The Encyclopedia of Religion, vol. 9, 251). However, in 222, Tertullian, one of the greatest leaders in the early church, raised a voice in protest to the assertions of the Protevangelium (Boettner 136). Therefore, it seems clear that Marian doctrine was not highly important or extremely clear during the first century after the completion of the New Testament.

In contrast, twentieth century Marian doctrine is both clear and important. For example, Pope Pius, XII proclaimed 1945 as Marian Year (New Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 9, 368). The New Catholic Encyclopedia quotes from the Mediator Dei, written in 1947, that devotion to Mary is a “sign of predestination” (365). Hopefully, these examples demonstrate the vast difference in Catholic thought about Mary between the second and twentieth centuries. The paper will now chronologically trace the development of the Marian doctrine over the intervening years.

Even though it was not officially defined as dogma until 1854, the first doctrine about Mary to be recognized by the Church was the doctrine of her complete sinlessness (New Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 9, 348). It probably originated in the fourth century and then evolved into a doctrine (Scott 69). In her case, “perfect sinlessness implies more than merely the absence of sin; it implies also a complete indefectibility in the moral order, or the actual inability to sin” (New Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 9, 347). However, Catholic theology does teach that God’s grace brought about her sinlessness. Mary is not considered to have been innately perfect (New Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 9, 348). The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception was disputed even through the Middle Ages (Oxford 883). However, in 1854, Pius IX, defined this concept as dogma in Ineffabilis Deus. He wrote, “The most blessed Virgin Mary…. was preserved free from all stain of original sin” (Encyclopedia of Religion, vol. 9, 252).

Another doctrine that developed fairly early was the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary. As stated earlier, it was first mentioned int he apocryphal book of James. This view was certainly held by Athanasius who referred to Mary as “ever virgin,” and it has been accepted by both the eastern and western orthodox fathers since the fifth century (Oxford 882).

A third doctrine that developed, and the first to cause a great deal of controversy, was the doctrine that conferred upon Mary the title of “Mother of God”. This title began to be used in either the third or the fourth century. It grew out of the official establishment of the doctrine of the full deity of Christ (New Encyclopedia Brittanica, vol. 7, 898). Nestorius fought this doctrine. He insisted on Mary being called christotokos (“the one who bore Christ”) rather than theotokos. However, Cyril of Alexandria stood for “God-bearer”, and this was officially established as a title for Mary at the council of Ephesus in 431 A.D. and the council of Chalcedon in 451 A.D. (Encyclopedia of Religion, vol. 9, 251).

A fourth doctrine that developed over the years was the Assumption of Mary. Despite the absence of valid historical information concerning her death, Roman Catholics assert that “three days after death her body was carried by angels up to heaven, and her tomb was found empty” (Scott 72). The Church celebrates the feast of her Assumption on August 15th (Scott 72). Gregory of Tours formulated the doctrine in the sixth century, and it spread without much opposition (Oxford 882). It was an unofficial doctrine of the church for hundreds of years. However, in 1950, Pope Pius XII made it official dogma when he stated that “the Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, when the course of her earthly life was run, was assumed in body and soul to heavenly glory” (New Encyclopedia Brittanica, vol. 7, 898).

A fifth and final doctrine that is widely accepted but not official church doctrine is that of Mary being “Mediatrix of All Graces” and “Co-Redemptress”. There has been an effort to secure papal sanction for these titles during the last two centuries. However, at the Second Vatican Council, a chapter on Mary was added to the Constitution on the Church instead of a separate document on Mary as many had desired. The chapter stresses Mary’s full reliance on her Son (Oxford 883). On the other hand, many Catholics believe that Mary does co- operate with Christ in imparting grace. In fact, “the vast majority of theologians” believe Mary “is to be styled Coredemptrix because she cooperated directly and immediately in the redemptive process itself” (New Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 9, 359). Catholic theology also teaches that Mary participates in the actual application of graces to individuals (New Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 9, 362). This concept may or may not become part of official church dogma.

The Roman Catholic doctrine of Mary can be summarized by saying that she is officially regarded as immaculately conceived, sinless, perpetually a virgin, the mother of God, and resurrected into heaven. Unofficially, she is regarded by many as co-redeemer and co-mediator with Christ. This doctrine developed over a lengthy period of time. Factors in its growth include “growing Christian emphasis on asceticism, with Mary as virgin model, and contacts with ‘mother goddesses’ in other religions (Encyclopedia of Religion, vol. 9, 251).

I would like to conclude by giving a biblical assessment of Roman Catholic teaching regarding Mary. It is my personal conviction that the Bible, and not any person or religious organization, is the authority for our lives because “all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16, King James Version). Therefore, I the Marian doctrine must be assessed by comparing it to Scripture.

First, Mary could not have been sinless according to the Scriptures. Romans 3:23 says, “For all have sinned and come short of the glory of
God” (KJV). In Luke 1:26-30, the angel speaks to Mary in very positive terms but never speaks of her as sinless or says anything to indicate she is anything more than a regular human being graced and chosen by God for a special task.

Second, the New Testament refutes the concept of Mary’s perpetual virginity because Matthew 13:55-56 names Jesus as having brothers named James, Joses, Simon, and Judas. The text also says that Jesus has sisters. Roman Catholics attempt to explain this away by calling them cousins, but this is eisegesis and not exegesis of the text. Obviously, Mary had children so she was not a virgin (see the Appendix to this paper for a more details explanation of this).

Third, it must be remembered that Mary was only the earthly mother of Jesus. She was chosen by God in His grace to bear His only begotten Son. Mary is not the heavenly mother of the eternal Word (John 1:1).

Fourth, there is no Scripture that indicates that Mary was assumed into heaven. Furthermore, one of the titles given to Mary because of the doctrine of the assumption is “Queen of Heaven.” Jeremiah 44 states that at one time the Jews burned incense to one known as the queen of heaven (a pagan goddess). Jeremiah 44:22 states that God considered this evil and an abomination.

Fifth, as far as the unofficial doctrine of being co-redeemer goes, the Bible declares, “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus” (1 Timothy 2:5,KJV). The Bible also teaches that we were redeemed by the “precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot” (1 Peter 1:19, KJV).

I believe that the Roman Catholic doctrine concerning Mary takes too much away from her humanity and exalts her to a position that no human being deserves. In my opinion, it would be better to present her as the trusting, faithful, obedient, loving, courageous woman the Bible presents her to be.

Bibliography

Boettner, Loraine. Roman Catholicism. Philadelphia: The Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1962.

Cross, F.L., editor. Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church. London: Oxford University Press, 1974.

Eliade, Mircea, editor. The Encyclopedia of Religion, vol. 9. New York: Mac Millan Publishing Company, 1987.

New Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 9. McGraw—Hill Book Company, 1967.

New Encyclopedia Britannica, vol.7. Chicago, 1990.

Ostling, Richard N. “Handmaid or Feminist?”, Time Magazine, Dec. 30, 1991.

Scott, C. Anderson. Romanism and the Gospel. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1937.

Appendix

Question: Did Jesus Christ truly have half brothers and sisters from Mary and Joseph?
Answer: Yes

According to the following Scriptures Jesus did have half brothers and sisters:

Mt. 12:46-50       * Matthew 13:53-58          John 2:12
Mk. 3:31-35         * Mark 6:1-6
* Luke 8:19-21                   John 7:3
* Matthew 1-24-25
* Galatians 1:19

Reasons:

1.  Brothers is used in these passages of “male children of the same mother” (Vine’s, 154).
2.  Sister is used “of the sisters of Christ, the children of Joseph and Mary after the virgin birth of Christ” (Vine’s 36).
3.  The Greek word used in these passages (adelphos) means “male children of the same mother.”
4.  In Matthew 13:53-58, the reference to Jesus as “the carpenter’s son” (v. 55) and “His mother called Mary” followed by the naming of “His brothers” and a reference to “His sisters” definitely place this in the context of His physical family.
5.  In Luke 8:19-20 it is stated, “Now Jesus’ mother and brothers came to see him, but they were not able to get near him because of the crowd. Someone told him, “Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to see you.”In Luke 8:21, Jesus said, “My mother and my brothers are these who hear the Word of God and do it.” Here Jesus is speaking of His spiritual family. The contrast does not make sense if His physical family is not actually being referred to in verse 20.
6.  James is referred to as “the Lord’s brother” in Galatians 1:19.
7.  The belief that Mary and Joseph did not have children together is based on the presupposition of the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary first asserted during the 2nd century in The Protevangelium of James (The Encyclopedia of Religion, vol. 9, 251). Obviously, she could not have borne children if she remained a virgin. However, the Bible teaches very clearly that she did not remain a virgin because Matthew 1:24-25 says Joseph “did not know her till she had brought forth her firstborn Son. “Know

means” to know carnally” (The New Analytical Greek Lexicon, 81). “Know her till”

clearly indicates that they had sexual relations after the birth of Jesus.