25.

 Give some differences between the Orthodox veneration of the Theotokos and the non-Orthodox attitude toward her.

            The West, cut loose from its Orthodox moorings for one thousand years, has forgotten the biblico-patristic teaching of theosis (divinization by grace). Thus the Latino-Protestant tradition can comprehend only two equally distorted attitudes that developed toward the Mother of God after the West severed itself from Christ's Church in 1054. One view is held by the Reformed Churches, while the other is maintained by the Roman Catholic Church.

            The Protestant Reformers rejected the distorted view of Mary that developed after Rome left the Apostolic Church in the eleventh century, a view that ultimately resulted in the false teaching of the Immaculate Conception. Protestantism not only rejected the incorrect Western view of Mary, but it went on to ignore her completely, thus denying her role in the Incarnation and the part she plays in people's salvation. In spite of the Gospel words “all generations shall call me blessed” (Lk 1:48), Protestantism, which claims to be based “on the Bible,” denies all veneration of the Mother of God, and denies calling on her in prayer.

            In addition, as the writer Peter Jackson points out, Protestantism is always quick to identify the veneration of Mary with the worship of pagan goddesses, although for the sake of consistency, he also notes, they would also have to associate the worship of Christ with His pagan counterfeits. If Christians can discern between the true Christ and the false, then we should be able to distinguish between the Theotokos and ancient pagan goddesses, Mr. Jackson concludes.

            Western Christendom's second incorrect view of the Mother of God is one invented by the Roman Catholics: a super-human creature, one without a fallen nature, a goddess and a fourth person of the Holy Trinity. While Latin commentators say that Mary was saved by Christ, they understand this fact in the distorted sense that she was preserved without taint of original sin in the future merits of Christ (as defined in the Bull of the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception). In the Latin teaching, Mary received in advance the gift which Christ brought to mankind by His suffering and death on the Cross. Also, with regard to those torments that Mary endured at the foot of the Cross of her Son, and in those sorrows which filled her life, Roman Catholicism consider these an addition to the suffering of Christ. Latin theologians therefore see Mary as an associate with Christ the Redeemer as a Co-Redemptress. As the Catechism of Dr. Weimar states: “In the act of redemption, she [Mary], in a certain way, helped Christ.” Or, in the words of the Catholic Bishop Malou of Broughes: “In three respects — as Daughter, as Mother, and as Spouse of God, the Holy Virgin is exalted to a certain equality with the Father, to a certain superiority to her Son, and to a certain nearness to the Holy Spirit.” Thus, in the teachings of the representatives of Latin theology, Mary is placed side by side with Christ Himself in the matter of redemption, and she is exalted to an equality with God. Although the Latin Church has not yet proclaimed such teachings to be dogma, it is presently on the path to a complete deification of the Mother of God. At present, Roman Catholic authorities call Mary a complement to the Holy Trinity.

            Orthodoxy highly exalts the Mother of God, but it does not dare to ascribe any qualities that have not been communicated about her in Sacred Scripture or Sacred Apostolic Tradition. Thus Orthodoxy venerates the Mother of God in the sense of honoring her, but it does not give her the worship which is given to God alone. Greek theology is very clear on this point. The Greek language distinguishes between latreia, which is the worship of God, and duleia, hyperdu-leia, and proskynesis, which describe the veneration of the Virgin.

            Orthodoxy rejects the Roman Catholic Church's false doctrine that Mary is “a creature, but also no longer a creature,” that she is a Co-Redemptress, that she is a complement and a fourth person of the Holy Trinity, and that she is equal to God. All of Rome's teachings in this regard strive to glorify Mary more than God has glorified her, and all are the fruit of vain, false wisdom which is not satisfied with what the Church has held since the time of the Apostles. In Rome's false teachings about Mary are the words of St. Epiphanius of Cyprus (fourth century) fulfilled: “Certain senseless ones in their opinion about the Holy Ever-Virgin have striven and are striving to put her in place of God.” [Against the Antidikomarionites].

            Orthodoxy and Rome part company again over the matter of the Latin Church's dogma of the Immaculate Conception, for the doctrine is an extension of the West's incorrect understanding of the ancestral sin (what the West calls original sin), and it is based upon the false assumption that Christ might have been tainted by ancestral sin. Orthodoxy likewise rejects Rome's dogma of the Assumption of the Virgin insofar as it implies that Mary did not undergo a bodily death.