Mariology

romishpopishorganist

Well-known member
Why does this even exist and for what purpose?
Um, well, the name "Mariology" pretty much explains it.

Mariology is a branch within Systematic Theology that studies---wait for it-----Mary!

Why is it necessary? That depends on what you mean by "necessary." Catholics freely grant that issues concerning Mary and the Saints are peripheral. Christ is central. Without Christ, nothing else matters and nothing else makes sense. Hence, strictly speaking, it isn't "necessary." But when you ask the wrong question, you are going to get the wrong answer. Unlike Protestants, Catholics do not think in binary terms like "necessary" vs "not necessary." For Catholics, just because something is not "necessary" in the absolute sense does not entail it isn't important or worth knowing about.

The question is not "Why is Mariology necessary" but "Why is Mariology important?" The answer is because if you understand Mary, you understand redemption. If you understand redemption, you understand what it means to be saved and possess/have eternal life. If you understand eternal life, you understand what it is to be citizens of heaven and sons and daughters of the most high God. If you understand that, then you understand what God has prepared for us in the next life. In short: Mary takes what is abstract and makes them concrete. In her, we see a mirror of the Church, we see what redemption looks like, we see what God created humanity to be, we see what God created us to be, we see our ultimate end. Mary is the Church and the Church is Mary. Why is Mariology important? Because if we understand Mary, we understand the Church. If we understand the Church, then we understand what it is to be members of the Body of Christ.

It is also important because if you understand Mary, you understand Christ. If you find Mary, you cannot but help be lead to Christ. Christ leads us to the Father, Mary leads us to Christ.

Let me anticipate a question about why it took so long for the Church to define things like the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption. The Church did not define the full equality of Jesus Christ with the Father until 325AD, yet no Protestant believes that prior to 325AD the Church did not believe that Christ is God from God, light from light, true God from true God. The Church also did not formally define the extent of the New Testament until 325AD yet no Protestant believes that prior to 325AD there was no Bible or that the Church was not in possession of the Bible.

So it is with the definitions concerning Mary. What difference does it make how late they came when 1000 years are no more than a watch in the night for God? When the Church defines something, the Church does not believe it because the Church defines it, rather, the Church defines it because the Church believes it. Protestants seem to think that Catholics believe something because it is defined. No; it is defined because Catholics believe it.
 
Last edited:

Kerwyn

Active member
Why does this even exist and for what purpose?
Mariology is the propagation of pagan goddess worship which was blended into Christianity. It started with the founding of the RCC in 325 AD by the pagan emperor Constantine and just got worse as time went on. Many of these "traditions" claimed by the RCC are pagan in origin; holy water fonts, incense, statuary, etc. J.H. Newman calls it "re-claiming religious rituals for Christ" or some foolish nonsense. Mary was declared "Theotokos" at the Council of Ephesus in 431. Ephesus also happens to be the location of the ruins of the Temple of Artemis, who was the main deity in the area prior to the spread of the Gospel. Artemis was the patron goddess of the hunt. She was also the goddess of the moon and of chastity, and who was believed to be a virgin goddess :unsure: Notice what Our Lady of Guadalupe is standing on? Or what is Mary reclining on?

edit image violation
 
Last edited by a moderator:

romishpopishorganist

Well-known member
Mariology is the propagation of pagan goddess worship which was blended into Christianity. It started with the founding of the RCC in 325 AD by the pagan emperor Constantine and just got worse as time went on. Many of these "traditions" claimed by the RCC are pagan in origin; holy water fonts, incense, statuary, etc. J.H. Newman calls it "re-claiming religious rituals for Christ" or some foolish nonsense. Mary was declared "Theotokos" at the Council of Ephesus in 431. Ephesus also happens to be the location of the ruins of the Temple of Artemis, who was the main deity in the area prior to the spread of the Gospel. Artemis was the patron goddess of the hunt. She was also the goddess of the moon and of chastity, and who was believed to be a virgin goddess :unsure: Notice what Our Lady of Guadalupe is standing on? Or reclining on?

View attachment 1316
Sure-----just like truths about Jesus are nothing more than recycled paganism too. You do realize your arguments read like something out of "New Atheists" book critiquing Christianity. They are bad arguments in their works and your argument is just as bad.

Do you even understand the symbolism behind the Our lady of Guadalupe image, or do you just post these images and assume the meanings must be the same without bothering to check your facts?

We have to understand the image according to the culture of the people in whom this image was revealed. I admit, to me--this is just yet another image of Mary among hundreds if not thousands of images. But the culture to whom this was revealed, it wasn't just an image. Everything in the image meant something.

Right away, if you were an Indian, you would know that this woman is important, but not a goddess. You would know this because the eyes are looking down. Indian gods were never depicted with eyes looking down. Note the eyes in the image you posted next to the Guadalupe image; note the direction of the eyes. They are looking forward, not down.

The hands are presented in the traditional manner of Indian offering. The hands indicate that she is going to offer something that is to come from her. Note the hands are not folded in such a manner in the pagan image you posted.

The maternity band around her waist means that she is pregnant and about to give birth. Note the absence of such a band in the pagan image you posted.

The stars suggest that a new era is beginning. In the Indian culture, stars indicated the destruction of a civilization and the beginning of a new era. The stars also suggest that she comes from heaven. Interestingly a study was conducted on the stars; the claim is that the stars on the Tilma match up with the way the stars appeared at the time. I will admit--I have no idea how they can figure this out. The stars just look like random stars----but then again, I am not an astronomer. Note the stars in the pagan image you posted; they look nothing like the stars on the Tilma.

The Indians worshipped the sun. The fact that she stands in front of the sun shows that she is greater than the sun god. It also suggests that she is the Mother of Light as she does not fully eclipse the sun. That she does not fully eclipse the sun suggests that she is the Mother of Light, but not the light itself. The Light is greater than she is. Note in the pagan image you posted, there is no suggestion of sun or light.

The garment around her neck suggests holiness. Note the absence of this in the pagan image you posted.

The angel transporting Mary suggests royalty. Only kings and queens were transported on the shoulders of someone. The angel also suggests that a new age has come. Note the absence of this in the pagan image you posted.

Standing on the moon indicates she is greater than the night and the god of the moon. The symbolism also hearkens to Revelation 12 and the lady standing with the moon under her feet. Note in the pagan image you posted, the woman is laying on the moon, not standing on it.

The color of the mantle she wears, turquoise, was reserved for the chief God of the Indians; the source of unity for everything that exists. Note that in the pagan image you posted, the color is a dark blue, not turquoise.

As you can see, the images, when you actually analyze them in detail are nothing alike.
 
Last edited:

pilgrim

Well-known member
Mariology is the propagation of pagan goddess worship which was blended into Christianity. It started with the founding of the RCC in 325 AD by the pagan emperor Constantine and just got worse as time went on. Many of these "traditions" claimed by the RCC are pagan in origin; holy water fonts, incense, statuary, etc. J.H. Newman calls it "re-claiming religious rituals for Christ" or some foolish nonsense. Mary was declared "Theotokos" at the Council of Ephesus in 431. Ephesus also happens to be the location of the ruins of the Temple of Artemis, who was the main deity in the area prior to the spread of the Gospel. Artemis was the patron goddess of the hunt. She was also the goddess of the moon and of chastity, and who was believed to be a virgin goddess :unsure: Notice what Our Lady of Guadalupe is standing on? Or what is Mary reclining on?

View attachment 1316
Were you like many others who ran outside on September 23, 2017, expecting the Lord's return, because the configuration of the sun, moon and stars aligned perfectly with Rev 12:1-2 ?
This miraculous image (OLG) represents the same: the Woman of Rev 12.
And, btw, the moon that evening at sunset was exactly the same as represented above.
 

Kerwyn

Active member
Sure-----just like truths about Jesus are nothing more than recycled paganism too. You do realize your arguments read like something out of "New Atheists" book critiquing Christianity. They are bad arguments in their works and your argument is just as bad.

Do you even understand the symbolism behind the Our lady of Guadalupe image, or do you just post these images and assume the meanings must be the same without bothering to check your facts?

We have to understand the image according to the culture of the people in whom this image was revealed. I admit, to me--this is just yet another image of Mary among hundreds if not thousands of images. But the culture to whom this was revealed, it wasn't just an image. Everything in the image meant something.

Right away, if you were an Indian, you would know that this woman is important, but not a goddess. You would know this because the eyes are looking down. Indian gods were never depicted with eyes looking down. Note the eyes in the image you posted next to the Guadalupe image; note the direction of the eyes. They are looking forward, not down.

The hands are presented in the traditional manner of Indian offering. The hands indicate that she is going to offer something that is to come from her. Note the hands are not folded in such a manner in the pagan image you posted.

The maternity band around her waist means that she is pregnant and about to give birth. Note the absence of such a band in the pagan image you posted.

The stars suggest that a new era is beginning. In the Indian culture, stars indicated the destruction of a civilization and the beginning of a new era. The stars also suggest that she comes from heaven. Interestingly a study was conducted on the stars; the claim is that the stars on the Tilma match up with the way the stars appeared at the time. I will admit--I have no idea how they can figure this out. The stars just look like random stars----but then again, I am not an astronomer. Note the stars in the pagan image you posted; they look nothing like the stars on the Tilma.

The Indians worshipped the sun. The fact that she stands in front of the sun shows that she is greater than the sun god. It also suggests that she is the Mother of Light as she does not fully eclipse the sun. That she does not fully eclipse the sun suggests that she is the Mother of Light, but not the light itself. The Light is greater than she is. Note in the pagan image you posted, there is no suggestion of sun or light.

The garment around her neck suggests holiness. Note the absence of this in the pagan image you posted.

The angel transporting Mary suggests royalty. Only kings and queens were transported on the shoulders of someone. The angel also suggests that a new age has come. Note the absence of this in the pagan image you posted.

Standing on the moon indicates she is greater than the night and the god of the moon. The symbolism also hearkens to Revelation 12 and the lady standing with the moon under her feet. Note in the pagan image you posted, the woman is laying on the moon, not standing on it.

The color of the mantle she wears, turquoise, was reserved for the chief God of the Indians; the source of unity for everything that exists. Note that in the pagan image you posted, the color is a dark blue, not turquoise.

As you can see, the images, when you actually analyze them in detail are nothing alike.
Thank you for illustrating my point. Based on your description that our Lady of Guadalupe, you freely admit that Mary is depicted with all kinds of pagan symbolism. At least you admit that the RCC does in fact blend Christianity with paganism. By the way, the second image is supposed to be a depiction of the Virgin Mary with Jesus on her lap. How can someone who has never heard the Gospel supposed to differentiate between paganism and Catholicism if teacher of Theology can't?
 

Kerwyn

Active member
Were you like many others who ran outside on September 23, 2017, expecting the Lord's return, because the configuration of the sun, moon and stars aligned perfectly with Rev 12:1-2 ?
This miraculous image (OLG) represents the same: the Woman of Rev 12.
And, btw, the moon that evening at sunset was exactly the same as represented above.
Um, no. Astrology is a no-no.

Isaiah 47:13-15
13 All the counsel you have received has only worn you out!
Let your astrologers come forward,
those stargazers who make predictions month by month,
let them save you from what is coming upon you.
14 Surely they are like stubble;
the fire will burn them up.
They cannot even save themselves
from the power of the flame.
These are not coals for warmth;
this is not a fire to sit by.
15 That is all they are to you—
these you have dealt with
and labored with since childhood.
All of them go on in their error;
there is not one that can save you.
 

pilgrim

Well-known member
Um, no. Astrology is a no-no.

Isaiah 47:13-15
13 All the counsel you have received has only worn you out!
Let your astrologers come forward,
those stargazers who make predictions month by month,
let them save you from what is coming upon you.
14 Surely they are like stubble;
the fire will burn them up.
They cannot even save themselves
from the power of the flame.
These are not coals for warmth;
this is not a fire to sit by.
15 That is all they are to you—
these you have dealt with
and labored with since childhood.
All of them go on in their error;
there is not one that can save you.
"There will be signs in sun and moon and stars, and on the earth dismay among nations, in perplexity at the roaring of the sea and the waves,"
Luke 21:25
 

Kerwyn

Active member
"There will be signs in sun and moon and stars, and on the earth dismay among nations, in perplexity at the roaring of the sea and the waves,"
Luke 21:25
Yes, I am aware. There is a difference between biblical signs in the sky and Astrology. Let's put it in a way you may agree with; astrologers are using their own personal interpretation whilst divining future events from the stars.
 
B

Bonlee1

Guest
Um, well, the name "Mariology" pretty much explains it.

Mariology is a branch within Systematic Theology that studies---wait for it-----Mary!
I asked why it existed and for what purpose....edited rule 12 violation
Why is it necessary? That depends on what you mean by "necessary." Catholics freely grant that issues concerning Mary and the Saints are peripheral. Christ is central. Without Christ, nothing else matters and nothing else makes sense. Hence, strictly speaking, it isn't "necessary." But when you ask the wrong question, you are going to get the wrong answer. Unlike Protestants, Catholics do not think in binary terms like "necessary" vs "not necessary." For Catholics, just because something is not "necessary" in the absolute sense does not entail it isn't important or worth knowing about.
😂😂😂 ....all in answer to a question I never asked....edited rule 12 violation
The question is not "Why is Mariology necessary" but "Why is Mariology important?"
That was not the question.....but you go right ahead as I see you're on a roll...😂
The answer is because if you understand Mary, you understand redemption. If you understand redemption, you understand what it means to be saved and possess/have eternal life. If you understand eternal life, you understand what it is to be citizens of heaven and sons and daughters of the most high God. If you understand that, then you understand what God has prepared for us in the next life. In short: Mary takes what is abstract and makes them concrete. In her, we see a mirror of the Church, we see what redemption looks like, we see what God created humanity to be, we see what God created us to be, we see our ultimate end. Mary is the Church and the Church is Mary. Why is Mariology important? Because if we understand Mary, we understand the Church. If we understand the Church, then we understand what it is to be members of the Body of Christ.

It is also important because if you understand Mary, you understand Christ. If you find Mary, you cannot but help be lead to Christ. Christ leads us to the Father, Mary leads us to Christ.
.....and thank you for answering your own question.
Let me anticipate a question
Sure...why not....just make them up and answer them as you go along...😂
about why it took so long for the Church to define things like the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption. The Church did not define the full equality of Jesus Christ with the Father until 325AD, yet no Protestant believes that prior to 325AD the Church did not believe that Christ is God from God, light from light, true God from true God. The Church also did not formally define the extent of the New Testament until 325AD yet no Protestant believes that prior to 325AD there was no Bible or that the Church was not in possession of the Bible.

So it is with the definitions concerning Mary. What difference does it make how late they came when 1000 years are no more than a watch in the night for God? When the Church defines something, the Church does not believe it because the Church defines it, rather, the Church defines it because the Church believes it. Protestants seem to think that Catholics believe something because it is defined. No; it is defined because Catholics believe it.
The end.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

pilgrim

Well-known member
Yes, I am aware. There is a difference between biblical signs in the sky and Astrology. Let's put it in a way you may agree with; astrologers are using their own personal interpretation whilst divining future events from the stars.
I disagree that this is astrology. Why would God send these signs, then? To trip us up? No.
You see in sacred art the moon as representing fertility: the crescent moon associated with virginity and the full moon with maternity. In the images above, Mary stands on a crescent moon but fills it with her divine maternity, representing the Virgin Birth.
 

Bonnie

Super Member
Um, well, the name "Mariology" pretty much explains it.

Mariology is a branch within Systematic Theology that studies---wait for it-----Mary!

Why is it necessary? That depends on what you mean by "necessary." Catholics freely grant that issues concerning Mary and the Saints are peripheral. Christ is central. Without Christ, nothing else matters and nothing else makes sense. Hence, strictly speaking, it isn't "necessary." But when you ask the wrong question, you are going to get the wrong answer. Unlike Protestants, Catholics do not think in binary terms like "necessary" vs "not necessary." For Catholics, just because something is not "necessary" in the absolute sense does not entail it isn't important or worth knowing about.

The question is not "Why is Mariology necessary" but "Why is Mariology important?" The answer is because if you understand Mary, you understand redemption. If you understand redemption, you understand what it means to be saved and possess/have eternal life. If you understand eternal life, you understand what it is to be citizens of heaven and sons and daughters of the most high God. If you understand that, then you understand what God has prepared for us in the next life. In short: Mary takes what is abstract and makes them concrete. In her, we see a mirror of the Church, we see what redemption looks like, we see what God created humanity to be, we see what God created us to be, we see our ultimate end. Mary is the Church and the Church is Mary. Why is Mariology important? Because if we understand Mary, we understand the Church. If we understand the Church, then we understand what it is to be members of the Body of Christ.

It is also important because if you understand Mary, you understand Christ. If you find Mary, you cannot but help be lead to Christ. Christ leads us to the Father, Mary leads us to Christ.

Let me anticipate a question about why it took so long for the Church to define things like the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption. The Church did not define the full equality of Jesus Christ with the Father until 325AD, yet no Protestant believes that prior to 325AD the Church did not believe that Christ is God from God, light from light, true God from true God. The Church also did not formally define the extent of the New Testament until 325AD yet no Protestant believes that prior to 325AD there was no Bible or that the Church was not in possession of the Bible.

So it is with the definitions concerning Mary. What difference does it make how late they came when 1000 years are no more than a watch in the night for God? When the Church defines something, the Church does not believe it because the Church defines it, rather, the Church defines it because the Church believes it. Protestants seem to think that Catholics believe something because it is defined. No; it is defined because Catholics believe it.
If Christ is so central in your church, then why all the prayers to Mary, instead of to Christ Jesus? Why did JPII cry out to Mary to save him, ,when he was shot? Why all of that gross and disgusting hyperbole about Mary in diLiguouri's book THE GLORIES OF MARY? Why is it the majority of churches in Rome are named after Mary and her titles, instead of Jesus Christ? Why did the apparition at Fatima claim that more people needed to be dedicated to her "immaculate heart" and build churches to her (paraphrasing)? And if Jesus is so central to Catholicism, why is there even Mariology?

And if Mariology is so important....why does Mary disappear from the pages of the NT after Pentecost?

Mary is not the church, nor is the church Mary; she is just part of the church, which is made up of all believers everywhere, who profess Jesus Christ as Lord and God and Savior.

But you are wrong--we know about and learn of Mary in our churches. We do not despise her or make light of her being the mother of Jesus Christ in His humanity. We know the role she played.

Redemption is in and from Jesus Christ, not Mary. If one would REALLY like to see an example of redemption, it would be Paul--going from a blaspheming violent persecutor of the church into one of the greatest Christians the world has ever known, to the point that he died for his faith--now THERE IS REDEMPTION IN JESUS CHRIST!

the Bible disagrees with you about redemption being IN Mary:

Eph. 1:7--In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace.

Titus 2:14--
...who gave Himself for us to redeem us from every lawless deed, and to purify for Himself a people for His own possession, zealous for good deeds.

Romans 3:24--
...being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is IN Christ Jesus;

Colossians 1:4--..in Whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins....

Heb. 9:12--
...and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption.

Redemption is NOT IN MARY, but in JESUS CHRIST. Why do you add to the word of God?
 
Last edited:

Mike McK

Well-known member
Why does this even exist and for what purpose?
Mary isn't the enemy. There's nothing wrong with looking to Mary as an example or role model. But if we're going to be honest, we have to admit that the Bible actually says very little about her.

The problem is that the Catholic Cult goes so wildly outside the Biblical teaching about Mary that it's no longer "Mariology", but Mariolatry.
 

Kerwyn

Active member
You see in sacred art the moon as representing fertility: the crescent moon associated with virginity and the full moon with maternity. In the images above, Mary stands on a crescent moon but fills it with her divine maternity, representing the Virgin Birth.
Sacred to whom? So then are you also saying that this would be the fusion of pagan beliefs (associating fertility with the moon) and Christianity?
 
B

Bonlee1

Guest
Mary isn't the enemy.
Preaching to the choir here....I never suggested she was.
There's nothing wrong with looking to Mary as an example or role model. But if we're going to be honest, we have to admit that the Bible actually says very little about her.
The problem is that the Catholic Cult goes so wildly outside the Biblical teaching about Mary that it's no longer "Mariology", but Mariolatry.
Exactly....hence the thread.
 

Bob Carabbio

Well-known member
Sure-----just like truths about Jesus are nothing more than recycled paganism too. You do realize your arguments read like something out of "New Atheists" book critiquing Christianity. They are bad arguments in their works and your argument is just as bad.

Do you even understand the symbolism behind the Our lady of Guadalupe image, or do you just post these images and assume the meanings must be the same without bothering to check your facts?

We have to understand the image according to the culture of the people in whom this image was revealed. I admit, to me--this is just yet another image of Mary among hundreds if not thousands of images. But the culture to whom this was revealed, it wasn't just an image. Everything in the image meant something.

Right away, if you were an Indian, you would know that this woman is important, but not a goddess. You would know this because the eyes are looking down. Indian gods were never depicted with eyes looking down. Note the eyes in the image you posted next to the Guadalupe image; note the direction of the eyes. They are looking forward, not down.

The hands are presented in the traditional manner of Indian offering. The hands indicate that she is going to offer something that is to come from her. Note the hands are not folded in such a manner in the pagan image you posted.

The maternity band around her waist means that she is pregnant and about to give birth. Note the absence of such a band in the pagan image you posted.

The stars suggest that a new era is beginning. In the Indian culture, stars indicated the destruction of a civilization and the beginning of a new era. The stars also suggest that she comes from heaven. Interestingly a study was conducted on the stars; the claim is that the stars on the Tilma match up with the way the stars appeared at the time. I will admit--I have no idea how they can figure this out. The stars just look like random stars----but then again, I am not an astronomer. Note the stars in the pagan image you posted; they look nothing like the stars on the Tilma.

The Indians worshipped the sun. The fact that she stands in front of the sun shows that she is greater than the sun god. It also suggests that she is the Mother of Light as she does not fully eclipse the sun. That she does not fully eclipse the sun suggests that she is the Mother of Light, but not the light itself. The Light is greater than she is. Note in the pagan image you posted, there is no suggestion of sun or light.

The garment around her neck suggests holiness. Note the absence of this in the pagan image you posted.

The angel transporting Mary suggests royalty. Only kings and queens were transported on the shoulders of someone. The angel also suggests that a new age has come. Note the absence of this in the pagan image you posted.

Standing on the moon indicates she is greater than the night and the god of the moon. The symbolism also hearkens to Revelation 12 and the lady standing with the moon under her feet. Note in the pagan image you posted, the woman is laying on the moon, not standing on it.

The color of the mantle she wears, turquoise, was reserved for the chief God of the Indians; the source of unity for everything that exists. Note that in the pagan image you posted, the color is a dark blue, not turquoise.

As you can see, the images, when you actually analyze them in detail are nothing alike.
That was a lot of work for nothing!!!!.

Rome would be a THOUSAND MILES closer to the truth If they simply Put Mary back into her Biblical reality, and Honored her (As protestants do) as the Chosen Vessel through which God brought His only Begotten SON. All the blasphemous baggage Rome as added to their "blessed virgin thing" is worthless garbage that satan inspired to DE-FOCUS the Roman "Church" from the simplicity of the gospel.
 
Top