Posted on 12/16/2007 4:05:55 PM PST by NYer
God has a mother and she was chosen before the beginning of time.
This is an amazing belief, one that is sometimes mocked and often misunderstood, and misrepresented, sometimes even by Catholics. Yet this truth is at the heart of Advent and Christmas–as well as at the heart of the entire Christian Faith.
This belief is also captured in a short phrase in the Hail Mary: "Holy Mary, Mother of God." They are just five simple words, but words bursting with mystery and meaning. They tell us many things about Mary and about the Triune God and His loving plan of salvation for mankind, in which Mary has such a significant place.
Mary is holy. To be holy is to be set apart, to be pure, and to be filled with the life of God. The call to holiness, the Catechism of the Catholic Church states, is summarized in Jesus' words: "Be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect" (Matt 5:48; CCC 2013). Mary's holiness comes from the same source as the holiness that fills all who are baptized and are in a state of race. But Mary's relationship with the Triune God is unique, as Luke makes evident in his description of Gabriel appearing to Mary:
And the angel answered and said to her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy offspring shall be called the Son of God" (Lk 1:35)
Possessing perfect faith, itself a gift from God, Mary was overshadowed by God the Father, anointed by the Holy Spirit, and filled by the Son. She was chosen by God to bear the God-man, the One in whom the "whole fullness of deity" would dwell (CCC 484). Completely filled by God, she is completely holy. Chosen by God, she is saved. Called to share intimately and eternally in the life of her Son, she was, the Catechism explains, "redeemed from the moment of her conception" (CCC 49) and "preserved from the stain of original sin" (CCC 508).
The Pentateuch contains the account of how God chose a small, nondescript nomadic tribe, the Hebrews, to be His "holy people" for "His own possession out of all the peoples who are on the face of the earth" (Deut 7:6). Many years later, in the fullness of time, God chose a young Jewish woman from a place of little consequence to be the Mother of God. This, in turn, would result in the birth of the Church, which Peter describes as a "chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God's own possession" (1 Pet 2:9).
Mary, faithful and holy, is chosen so that others can also be chosen and made holy, transformed by her Son into the sons and daughters of God and joined to the Body of Christ. Mary "is the Virgo fidelis, the faithful virgin, who was never anything but faithful," writes Fr. Jean Daniélou, "whose fidelity was the perfect answer to the fidelity of God; she was always entirely consecrated to the one true God."
It has been said many ways and in many places but bears repeating that "Mother of God" is the greatest and most sublime title that Mary can ever be given. It sums up all that she is, all that she does, and all that she desires. The title of Theotokos ("God-bearer", or "Mother of God"), far from being some late addition to Church teaching, is rooted in Scripture and the Advent story. The Catechism explains that Mary was "called in the Gospels 'the mother of Jesus'" and that she "is acclaimed by Elizabeth, at the prompting of the Spirit and even before the birth of her son, as 'the mother of my Lord'" (CCC 495).
Mary, the Mother of God, is also the first disciple of her Son, the God-man. She is also the New Eve, whose obedience and gift of her entire being overturns the sin and rebellion of the first Eve. Her Son is the New Adam, who comes to give everlasting, supernatural life and heal the mortal wound inflicted by the sin of the first Adam (cf. 1 Cor 15:45).
The lives and the love of the New Adam and the New Eve fill the season of Advent. Mary quietly and patiently calls all men to Bethlehem to see and worship the Christ Child. Jesus waits for mankind to recognize Him as Lord and Savior. But He doesn't just wait for us; He comes to us. But His coming awaits completion, both in our individual lives and in the life of the world. Which is why James, in today's epistle, writes, " Be patient, brothers and sisters, until the coming of the Lord. . . . . You too must be patient. Make your hearts firm,because the coming of the Lord is at hand" (Jas 5:7-10).
Fr. Daniélou explains beautifully this paradox of Advent, of Jesus having come already and yet coming still:
"We live always during Advent, we are always waiting for the Messiah to come. He has come, but is not yet fully manifest. He is not fully manifest in each of our souls; He is not fully manifest in mankind as a whole; that is to say, that just as Christ was born according to the flesh in Bethlehem of Judea so must He be born according to the spirit in each of our souls."
Although young, poor, and faced with incredible challenges, Mary waited patiently on the promises and the coming of her Lord and Son. The Catechism says that because Mary "gives us Jesus, her son, Mary is Mother of God and our mother; we can entrust all our cares and petitions to her: she prays for us as she prayed for herself: 'Let it be to me according to your word.' By entrusting ourselves to her prayer, we abandon ourselves to the will of God together with her: 'Thy will be done.'" (CCC 2677). That is indeed the perfect prayer, from the perfect woman and mother, for Advent: "Thy will be done."
God’s grace redeems the Virgin
The Church recently celebrated the great Feast of the Immaculate Conception, situated to draw Catholics more deeply into the mystery of God's grace, Mary's faith, and the plan of salvation. Although not formally defined as a doctrine of the Catholic Church until 1854 by Pope Pius IX, belief in Mary's sinlessness goes back to the earliest centuries of the Church and is rooted in Scripture, especially the first chapter of Luke's Gospel.
In the encyclical Ineffabilis Deus, Pope Pius IX formally stated the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception:
The most Blessed Virgin Mary was, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God and by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, Saviour of the human race, preserved immune from all stain of original sin. [135 Pius IX, Ineffabilis Deus (1854); CCC 491]
Although the Eastern Orthodox recognize and celebrate Mary's sinlessness, many Protestants do not. Some, in fact, take great offense with this belief, insisting that it makes light of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection, and that it implies that Mary is more than a creature, perhaps even equal to her Son.
But the Church makes very clear that Mary's Immaculate Conception is a gift of God. After all, Mary was "redeemed from the moment of her conception," making it difficult for her redemption to be her own work. And Pope Pius IX's definition strongly states that the Immaculate Conception was "by a singular grace and privilege of Almighty God" and by the work and merits of Mary's Son. Sadly, some Christians not only reject this truth, they even resort of saying that Mary "not special" or "not worthy of praise"–even though Mary, inspired by the Holy Spirit, declared that "from this time on all generations will count me blessed" (Lk 1:48).
John Cardinal Newman once noted that Catholic beliefs about Jesus and His Mother are intimately connected and cannot be torn apart from one another. "Catholics who have honoured the Mother, still worship the Son," he wrote, "while Protestants, who now have ceased to confess the Son, began . . . by scoffing at the Mother." It is a cautionary statement that all Christians, including Catholics, should take to heart during the Advent season.
We can't, strictly speaking,and yet people do it all the time. Ever hear anyone say, "Prayer works?" Prayer doesn't work, God works, right?
I hit the cue ball. It kisses off the seven and hits the nine squarely. The nine drops the thirteen in the corner pocket. But strictly speaking, I dropped the 13 in the corner.
Discussing causality in the pool hall is hard enough. It gets really difficult when we're talking about God acting in His saints.
My daughter sits by the side of the road and prays for the toe tow-truck to get there. When he gets there she thaks God AND she thanks the tow-truck driver. Why thank the driver?
I often thank my wife for having our baby.
So, yeah, Aristotle reigns and all, but the way we attribute cause and the way we offer thanks shows that maybe it's not quite as simple as it might appear.
Why? The doctrine doesn't deny Mary's humanity at all.
Heck,compared to Jesus, none of us registers. I’m still glad to know you and won’t hesitate to ask you to pray for me.
Jesus didn't need a sinless vessel to be born sinless, any more than the Ten Commandments needed perfect contour and ornamentation of the ark to be efficacious. But a certain dignity was required of God. They may have been wandering around impoverished in the desert, but the vessel in which God would be carted around was meticulously planned, by His own decree, with immense dignity for His presence. Nazareth was likewise an impoverished, scorned community, but that did not lessen the dignity required of the vessel which would carry God's physical and spiritual presence for nine months. Anything short of perfect would place the dignity of Jesus Christ below the dignity of the Old Law, which Jesus came to fulfill. Insisting that Jesus could be born to any old "broad" in any spiritual condition doesn't jive at all with the rest of the Bible and relegates the Lord to a place lesser than Aaron's staff.
And it has been said that the dogma was proclaimed, when it was proclaimed, because it affirmed the divinity of Christ at a time when liberal Protestantism--followed within a generation or two by Catholic modernists--were rejecting it and the whole mindset of the early councils, as Greek essentialsm.
I'm still looking for the verse where Jesus says, "write this down". Can you help me?
“Why? The doctrine doesn’t deny Mary’s humanity at all.”
Of course it does, P. Every other human being since Adam was either (a) born distorted in such a way by the sin of Adam so as not to be able to fulfill their created purpose [Eastern Christianity] or (b)stained with “Original Sin” [Latin Christianity]. In either case, humanity needs a savior...except of course Panagia in the Latin way of thinking. Now if Panagia was born either free from “Original Sin” or not subject to the distortions of ancestral sin, then she was not a woman. She was a goddess and her Son not “True Man”. This is of course the most serious implication of the doctrine of the IC, but there are others. For example, what sort of example is a goddess to us insofar as our Theosis is concerned? If Panagia was ontologically different from us and had no need for a savior, how does she teach us that we do need one? Isn’t it precisely the point of the Incarnation that God became Man and dwelt among us? Doesn’t +Athanasius the Great teach us that all those divine “appearances” throughout the OT just were getting the job done? Why would God only choose a human form and not true humanity (another Christological heresy)through a goddess if more direct divine intervention wasn’t working. And why would some “goddess” do any good at all? Another IC problem is this whole Co-Redemptrix thing which logically follows from a notion that Panagia was ontologically different from the rest of humanity. It also, sadly, leads some beyond veneration and right into worship of the Theotokos.
Ah, but it doesn't say that at all. From Ineffabilis Deus
We declare, pronounce, and define that the doctrine which holds that the most Blessed Virgin Mary, in the first instance of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege granted by Almighty God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the human race, was preserved free from all stain of original sin, is a doctrine revealed by God and therefore to be believed firmly and constantly by all the faithful.
“And it has been said that the dogma was proclaimed, when it was proclaimed, because it affirmed the divinity of Christ at a time when liberal Protestantism—followed within a generation or two by Catholic modernists—were rejecting it and the whole mindset of the early councils, as Greek essentialsm.”
No kidding! I never knew that, but I will agree that it certainly might tend to reinforce exactly that. I doubt any Eastern Christian could, at least since Ephesus (where we condemned poor old Pelagius btw), doubt the divinity of Christ.You understand that such a thing could only happen in the West, where the idea of some sort of sissy, wimp Christ seems to have taken root as opposed to the Eastern concept of the Pantokrator! :)But tell me, what was seen as deficient about Ephesus? I feel constrained to say that messing around with what the Ecumenical Councils proclaimed has seldom turned out good for the West (filioque, for example).
What?
Does Col 3:16 mean anything to you?
“... in view of the merits of Jesus Christ,...”
Created grace, P? Sure looks like it and we all know what the East thinks of that medieval notion. But beyond that, doesn’t such a notion negate her free will acceptance of the angel’s announcement? Isn’t this Panagia a sinless automoton and thus not in the least worthy of emulation? Isn’t she ontologically different from all the rest of us? Why is this creature human, Pyro? Isn’t the Panagia of the Eastern Church fully human, in every sense conceived and “ensouled” just like you and me, thus transmitting humanity to her Son and in her manifest sinlessness, testified to by the consensus patrum (if not by all the Fathers)worthy of emulation and veneration because it was through her perfect response to God’s grace that she never sinned?
Her words in Luke 1 should answer that question for you.
Isn’t she ontologically different from all the rest of us? Why is this creature human, Pyro?
Her humanity is like Christ's - human in all things but sin.
It relates to the influence of Kant, whose philosophy came to dominate Protestant thought in the 19th Century, the abandoment of metaphysics as a hopeless enterprise, and the growing acceptance of the claims of modern science as the only way to Truth. I think it is also a matter of the believe that
Greek—read pagan- thought had now contaminated Christianity. It is the whole “dehellenization” thing. Since the Christological dogmas are expressed in Greek terms that they are no longer persuasive.
No more of an automaton than Eve, who was also created sinless.
This is what ya’ll get when you try and mix
mystery religions and paganism with Judaism.
“Her words in Luke 1 should answer that question for you.”
If that were so there wouldn’t have been, since the 19th century, any division in the Mariology of The Church would there?
“Her humanity is like Christ’s - human in all things but sin”
True Goddess, True Woman, P? I don’t think you want to go there, my young friend! :)
Let’s look at it another way. Is Christ worthy of emulation because He didn’t sin? I am not asking if our created purpose is to become like God, btw.
Is Panagia worthy of emulation because she didn’t, by the exercise of her free will in responding to God, sin or was she “preserved” from it and thus couldn’t sin?
“I think it is also a matter of the believe that
Greek—read pagan- thought had now contaminated Christianity. It is the whole “dehellenization” thing. Since the Christological dogmas are expressed in Greek terms that they are no longer persuasive.”
I take it these Western philosophers confused pagan Hellenism with the New Israel of The Fathers because both expressed ideas in Greek? Ironic that it was the West which was truly the heir to Hellenic paganism.
You know that's not what I meant! :-P
Jesus is human.
Jesus has no trace of sin or its effects.
So one can be human without a trace of sin or its effects.
So Mary can be human without a trace of sin or its effects.
Further:
A Maxim is (or could be), “Waking understands sleeping; sleeping does not understand waking. That is, the distorting effect of sin distorts the inellective and apprehensive faculties so that the sinner’s understanding of virtue or vice, sinlessness or sin, is not as good as that of a sinless person. Similarly, it is not necessarily that case that to have compassion for the guilty requires one to be guilty.
Further:
Isn’t sinlessness part of the Xtian hope? Do we expect to be less human or more human “in heaven”? I’d submit that we will be more human than ever when we are finally sinless. And similarly IHS is more truly human than I am and the Panagia as proleptically benefiting from the Victory of Christ is also more truly human than I am.
Is it an implication of your stand that sinfulness of some kind is part of the “ontos” of humanity?
Don't think I'm claiming more for this line of arguing than I am. I'm just tossing it out like steak to a hungry attorney pitbull to be torn apart.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.