Unpublished Letter to the English Churchman (Mary: Grace and Hope in Christ)
Dear Sir,
RE: ARCIC ON MARY (GRACE & HOPE IN CHRIST)
The ARCIC joint-declaration on the subject of Mary represents a de facto capitulation by pseudo-Anglicans to the dogmatic pronouncements of the Roman See, and not a convergence of apprehension of the Sacred Mysteries as constituted by Divine Revelation and transmitted alongside developed, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, through Apostolic Succession: the instrument of demonstrable organic continuity with the faith & practice of the Church of Pentecost.
As an Anglican, I deplore the acceptance of the Marian teachings concerning the Immaculate Conception & Bodily Assumption - as being definitively reflected in Holy Scripture - in bearing witness to the motifs of grace & hope respectively. This is, in effect, an implicit consent to its status as de fide (i.e. an article of faith) rather than merely a "pious opinion" - especially in relation to the latter – in consonant with the consensus fidelium as historically received within the "broader" Anglican tradition.
The Immaculate Conception of Our Lady cannot be legitimately deduced from Scriptural data in the absence of & in contradiction to express statements. Indeed, Roman theologians do not assert its "theological necessity" (notwithstanding the Protoevangelium in Gen 3:15). Creationism (until now not declared as de fide) which posits an immediate infusion of the soul into the body by God defies the doctrine of Original Sin - as explicated by St. Augustine of Hippo and grounded no less in the Pauline corpus as the primary theological source - wherein Adam’s fault or guilt (reatus) and not only the corruption (a.k.a. "stain") of Man’s nature is propagated, i.e. inherited generatively a.k.a. Traducianism (cf. Article IX). That is to say, the ‘person’ or the Idea of the Species (to employ Realist language) is wholly derived by lineal descent. Hence, the absolute silence of the Bible on Mary’s alleged sinless-ness.
A second theological difficulty is that, at the Incarnation, Our Lord assumed an "un-individualised" human nature common to us all (His Personhood deriving from the Father by eternal generation). If the Blessed Virgin was conceived without sin, then the redemption of humanity as a genus-race would have necessarily (though not exhaustively) begun at the Immaculate Conception, thus effectually subordinating Christ’s role as Mediator - on the Cross - to Mary, the indirect instrumental cause of our salvation!
However, sin did not affect Our Blessed Saviour since it is only proper to the person; the body suffering its effects or temporal liability, i.e. in the state of a weakened or mortal nature. This is why Article XV was wisely inserted, in consonant with Scripture!
Having said this, Co-Redemptrix (i.e. Co-Saviour!!!) represents the "summit of heresy," with the Roman Mary exemplifying perfectly the role of the Synergist in cooperating by way of faith and obedience to the will and call of God manifested at the Annunciation in the Angelus. The theological motivation essential to Co-Redemption is none other than bringing the synergism of Rome to its logical climax. Nonetheless, Post-Tridentine Catholicism has never repudiated predestination to glory (cf. Thomism), but like Amyraldianism, Arminianism (except the decrees of God) & (post-Luther) Lutheranism reject reprobation, affirm a universal salvific will of God, teaches Sufficient Redemption in actu primo (otherwise the rest as per above, Hypothetical Universalism, Universal Atonement & Objective Justification respectively), and not least, resistible sufficient (i.e. prevenient) grace.
By contrast, Article XI affirms total depravity, by virtue of which concupiscence (fomes pecatti sometimes known as ad agonem) is sin and in coordination with Articles XII & XIII denies common grace, thus positing the distinction (not separation) between grace and nature. In other words, the Articles are clear about the singularity of grace in common with orthodox Reformed theology. The Lambeth Articles (1595) & Irish Articles (1615) supplement & complement the 39 Articles of Religion; together they embody the substance of Pauline teaching. This faith is held by the Church of England (Continuing), the true inheritors of Mother Church, standing in statu confesionis (i.e. in the state of confessional protest) against the Synergistic error (in all its expressions).
The proposed elevation into dogma of Co-Redemption outside the context of the Ecumenical Church and therefore without broader consultation & appeal also violates the spirit of lex orandi, lex credendi not to mention the implausibility of deducing the dogma from e.g. the Apostles’ Creed. The role of Mary at the Eucharist has yet to be clarified satisfactorily, especially as it is generally recognised she does not share in the Priesthood of Melchizedek. Her so-called Compassion and Co-Offering with Christ at the foot of the Cross is not alluded to in the Liturgy of the Faithful, in particular the Canon of the Mass. One is hard pressed to discern any explicit role attributed to Mary other than her prominent intercession in the accompaniment of the Saints in Heaven.
Personally, I affirm Our Lady as Queen OF Heaven ONLY for her typological representation in redemptive history as the Church, the Bride of Christ. Mary qua believer is – like the rest of the elect women – a queen IN Heaven. Furthermore, like Zwingli, Luther, the English Reformers & even Calvin I prefer not to question the traditional view of Mary’s sexuality (i.e. her perpetual virginity) or speculate about the married life of the Holy Couple. Having said this, my views do not - in its entirety - necessarily represent the Church of England (Continuing).
The Continuing Church hereby professes to be an authentic claimant to Apostolic Succession as it is grounded in our adherence to the Received Text ("Eastern" origin) & substance of the Book of Common Prayer ("Western" origin) …
"Almighty and everlasting Father, Whose righteousness was revealed at the Cross in Christ Jesus, Our Saviour, for the utter deliverance of us poor and miserable sinners from condemnation; Give us, O Lord, the same faith by which we are justified by the word of the Gospel, and even as I behold the Crucifixion and doth steadfastly cling to the symbol of my salvation amidst the ever-present trials & tribulations of this life: We wouldst continue steadfast in the reception & reverence of Thy Word, which self-same Text hast been preserved and passed down by the Catholic faithful, the Church Remnant, whereby by Thy grace we were chosen to belong, to the attainment of our eternal joy. This we beseech Thee, through the mediation of Jesus Christ and in His merits alone, now & forever: Amen."
RE: ARCIC ON MARY (GRACE & HOPE IN CHRIST)
The ARCIC joint-declaration on the subject of Mary represents a de facto capitulation by pseudo-Anglicans to the dogmatic pronouncements of the Roman See, and not a convergence of apprehension of the Sacred Mysteries as constituted by Divine Revelation and transmitted alongside developed, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, through Apostolic Succession: the instrument of demonstrable organic continuity with the faith & practice of the Church of Pentecost.
As an Anglican, I deplore the acceptance of the Marian teachings concerning the Immaculate Conception & Bodily Assumption - as being definitively reflected in Holy Scripture - in bearing witness to the motifs of grace & hope respectively. This is, in effect, an implicit consent to its status as de fide (i.e. an article of faith) rather than merely a "pious opinion" - especially in relation to the latter – in consonant with the consensus fidelium as historically received within the "broader" Anglican tradition.
The Immaculate Conception of Our Lady cannot be legitimately deduced from Scriptural data in the absence of & in contradiction to express statements. Indeed, Roman theologians do not assert its "theological necessity" (notwithstanding the Protoevangelium in Gen 3:15). Creationism (until now not declared as de fide) which posits an immediate infusion of the soul into the body by God defies the doctrine of Original Sin - as explicated by St. Augustine of Hippo and grounded no less in the Pauline corpus as the primary theological source - wherein Adam’s fault or guilt (reatus) and not only the corruption (a.k.a. "stain") of Man’s nature is propagated, i.e. inherited generatively a.k.a. Traducianism (cf. Article IX). That is to say, the ‘person’ or the Idea of the Species (to employ Realist language) is wholly derived by lineal descent. Hence, the absolute silence of the Bible on Mary’s alleged sinless-ness.
A second theological difficulty is that, at the Incarnation, Our Lord assumed an "un-individualised" human nature common to us all (His Personhood deriving from the Father by eternal generation). If the Blessed Virgin was conceived without sin, then the redemption of humanity as a genus-race would have necessarily (though not exhaustively) begun at the Immaculate Conception, thus effectually subordinating Christ’s role as Mediator - on the Cross - to Mary, the indirect instrumental cause of our salvation!
However, sin did not affect Our Blessed Saviour since it is only proper to the person; the body suffering its effects or temporal liability, i.e. in the state of a weakened or mortal nature. This is why Article XV was wisely inserted, in consonant with Scripture!
Having said this, Co-Redemptrix (i.e. Co-Saviour!!!) represents the "summit of heresy," with the Roman Mary exemplifying perfectly the role of the Synergist in cooperating by way of faith and obedience to the will and call of God manifested at the Annunciation in the Angelus. The theological motivation essential to Co-Redemption is none other than bringing the synergism of Rome to its logical climax. Nonetheless, Post-Tridentine Catholicism has never repudiated predestination to glory (cf. Thomism), but like Amyraldianism, Arminianism (except the decrees of God) & (post-Luther) Lutheranism reject reprobation, affirm a universal salvific will of God, teaches Sufficient Redemption in actu primo (otherwise the rest as per above, Hypothetical Universalism, Universal Atonement & Objective Justification respectively), and not least, resistible sufficient (i.e. prevenient) grace.
By contrast, Article XI affirms total depravity, by virtue of which concupiscence (fomes pecatti sometimes known as ad agonem) is sin and in coordination with Articles XII & XIII denies common grace, thus positing the distinction (not separation) between grace and nature. In other words, the Articles are clear about the singularity of grace in common with orthodox Reformed theology. The Lambeth Articles (1595) & Irish Articles (1615) supplement & complement the 39 Articles of Religion; together they embody the substance of Pauline teaching. This faith is held by the Church of England (Continuing), the true inheritors of Mother Church, standing in statu confesionis (i.e. in the state of confessional protest) against the Synergistic error (in all its expressions).
The proposed elevation into dogma of Co-Redemption outside the context of the Ecumenical Church and therefore without broader consultation & appeal also violates the spirit of lex orandi, lex credendi not to mention the implausibility of deducing the dogma from e.g. the Apostles’ Creed. The role of Mary at the Eucharist has yet to be clarified satisfactorily, especially as it is generally recognised she does not share in the Priesthood of Melchizedek. Her so-called Compassion and Co-Offering with Christ at the foot of the Cross is not alluded to in the Liturgy of the Faithful, in particular the Canon of the Mass. One is hard pressed to discern any explicit role attributed to Mary other than her prominent intercession in the accompaniment of the Saints in Heaven.
Personally, I affirm Our Lady as Queen OF Heaven ONLY for her typological representation in redemptive history as the Church, the Bride of Christ. Mary qua believer is – like the rest of the elect women – a queen IN Heaven. Furthermore, like Zwingli, Luther, the English Reformers & even Calvin I prefer not to question the traditional view of Mary’s sexuality (i.e. her perpetual virginity) or speculate about the married life of the Holy Couple. Having said this, my views do not - in its entirety - necessarily represent the Church of England (Continuing).
The Continuing Church hereby professes to be an authentic claimant to Apostolic Succession as it is grounded in our adherence to the Received Text ("Eastern" origin) & substance of the Book of Common Prayer ("Western" origin) …
"Almighty and everlasting Father, Whose righteousness was revealed at the Cross in Christ Jesus, Our Saviour, for the utter deliverance of us poor and miserable sinners from condemnation; Give us, O Lord, the same faith by which we are justified by the word of the Gospel, and even as I behold the Crucifixion and doth steadfastly cling to the symbol of my salvation amidst the ever-present trials & tribulations of this life: We wouldst continue steadfast in the reception & reverence of Thy Word, which self-same Text hast been preserved and passed down by the Catholic faithful, the Church Remnant, whereby by Thy grace we were chosen to belong, to the attainment of our eternal joy. This we beseech Thee, through the mediation of Jesus Christ and in His merits alone, now & forever: Amen."
Labels: Christology, Mariology
posted by Augustinian Successor at
4:58 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home