Coredemptrix

[Luciano Di Cocco]

This discussion is obviously only marginally connected with the main topic of this ML, but I find it very interesting. In particular, and more to the topic, I am interested in differences, even early ones, between Roman Catholicism and Orthodoxy, of which I have only a rough understanding.

Anyway...

I find that part of the problem is using the term "deity" without giving the context. A deity in a polytheistic context is _very_ different from a deity in a monotheistic context. Even monotheistic contexts can have very different interpretations of "deity". To a Jew or a Muslim the Trinity can and do appear a polytheistic concept. On the other hand even the atheistic forms of Buddhism do have the concept of deity, similar to that of Mediterranean polytheism.

I stated that as far as I know no major branch of Christianity (and I include Jeovah Witnesses and LDS, divergent as they are, in the major branches), present or past, include in their specific mainstream definition of deity Mary the mother of Jesus (or other Mary for what matter).

_Do_ exist single theologians that have a different vision. As _do_ exist theologians in the major branches of Christianity that negate the perfection of the Godhead. To me these positions appear somehow connected. And personally, as an atheist, I find these positions very interesting. On philosophical and moral grounds I cannot believe in a perfect God. But I cannot, on the same grounds, negate the possibility of an immensely powerful but not perfect Godhead that is moving toward perfection.

Anyway, if we take a definition of "deity" more close to Mediterranean polytheism, especially after the development of Neo-Platonism, one could argue that Mary can be considered a deity. At the cost of considering, in a RC context, all the saints deity, minor to Mary but deity anyway. Interestingly, as far as we know, Gnosticism (strongly Neo-Platonic) never asserted that Mary was a deity. 

In the Mediterranean polytheism, deities where non perfect nor omnipotent. They could learn from errors. They were immensely more powerful than humans, as humans (according to them) are superior to animals, but in no way omnipotent. There were things, logically possible, that even them couldn't do.

And the distinction between gods and humans were in many points blurred. Not only there were demi-gods of mixed origins, but there were humans that for exceptional feats (even morally negative) were conceded a cult similar to a minor deity. I don't remember the name and the place, but it is reported that in Greece an exceptional athlete in an excess or wrath provoked the destruction of a gym, killing himself and many people in the gym. A small temple were built for the athlete, and sacrifices were made to him. In effect Greco-roman cult was more connected with keeping deities out of human affairs than with receiving benefits, The latter was considered magic, practiced a lot but suspected from the institutions.

With Neo-Platonism, that developed more or less at the time in which the Jesus movement defined itself, it was defined the concept of a Godhead (the One) perfect but not connected with the World, and various levels of deities.

Saint Augustine used part of this system to give a system that is the basis for western Christianity. He specifically refers to "some books by some Platonists" but unfortunately didn't say which ones.

If we accept the monotheistic standard definition of a deity as an uncreated perfect entity, the only way to have Mary as a deity is including her in the Trinity. As far as I know no branch of Christianity has done so. Carl Gustav Jung, on psychological grounds, expected and hoped that RC would in the future do so, but it is his opinion.
And the concept of a minor deity, perfectly standard in polytheism, would be stretching monotheism beyond its limit.

Roman Catholicism however, especially in folk piety, comes very close to defining a second level of divinity, in the form of humans (Saints) that can answer requests from the faithful. In RC folk piety it is very common to ask Mary or other Saints miracles (grazie in Italian, graces, but unconnected with the theological concept of Grace). The official RC doctrine is that in these miracles Mary or the saint is an intermediary between the faithful and the Godhead. But the language is very ambiguous and I would say that the majority of Roman Catholics believe that the miracles are actually performed by May or the Saint. Anyway, the RC canonical procedure of sanctification requires at least a miracle to declare a Saint.

In this specific sense we could argue (polemically of course) that many Roman Catholics act in a way very similar to Greco-Roman Pagans and functionally consider Mary and the Saints very similar to a Mediterranean Polytheistic deity. And even that, while the Greco-Roman public  cult was more connected with the Pax Deorum (non interference of the deities in human affairs), although magic was widespread, Roman Catholics are practicing unknowingly a kind of magic.

This is an extremization of course. RC theology is very accurate in avoiding this pitfall.

I am very interested in knowing something on this point in an Orthodox context. If this ambiguity in folk piety exists in the Orthodox context or if it is specific of Roman Catholicism.

Regards
Luciano Di Cocco

> "Deified" means nothing other than "made a god of; raised to the
> position of
> a god," of course.  If your objection to referring to Mary as a deity
> is (if
> I may summarize how the argument progressed), "no Orthodox Christian,
> nor
> any other Christian. nor _anyone_ who has looked deeply into the matter
> thinks of or would refer to Mary as a deity," then the quotations cited
> are
> quite to the point.  You ignore "quod _est demonstratum_" at your
> peril.
> 
> Prof. Dumanis' assertion that "обожествлять" merely means "to admire"
> is
> much more pertinent.  However, is it tenable?   See, for instance, the
> online version of the Ushakov dictionary, which says:
> 
> ОБОЖЕСТВИ́ТЬ, обожествлю, обожествишь, ·совер. (к обожествлять), кого-что
> (·книж. ). Признать имеющим сверхъестественную, божественную силу,
> божеством. Древние обожествили силы природы.
> 
> [koi8-r encoding, see
> <http://www.classes.ru/all-russian/russian-dictionary-Ushakov-term-
> 37283.htm>
> if my quotation is scrambled in transmission].
> 
> Ernie Sjogren

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Use your web browser to search the archives, control your subscription
  options, and more.  Visit and bookmark the SEELANGS Web Interface at:
                    http://seelangs.home.comcast.net/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------