Following The Truth: What If Mary Said “No”? (Catholic or Open)

CE.com ^ | October 13th, 2009 | Gary Zimak

[Salvation]

What If Mary Said “No”?

October 13th, 2009 by Gary Zimak

Most of us are familiar with the story of the Annunciation as told in Chapter 1 of Luke’s gospel. The angel Gabriel appeared to the Virgin Mary and informed her that she had been chosen to be the Mother of the Savior. Mary agreed, Jesus was born and the entire human race was redeemed. Sounds simple, right? Did you ever consider what would have happened if Mary said, “no”?

Sometimes we forget that Mary had free will and wasn’t forced to go along with the plan that would result in the birth of our Savior. It’s easy to get caught up in the story and ignore the fact that the Blessed Mother could have refused God’s offer. According to the Vatican II document Lumen Gentium ,  “The Father of mercies willed that the Incarnation should be preceded by assent on the part of the predestined mother, so that just as a woman (Eve) had a share in the coming of death, so also should a woman contribute to the coming of life.” St. Irenaeus, one of the early Church Fathers, stated, “Being obedient she became the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race.” Let’s examine Mary’s life and see how her “yes” occurred not only on that special day, but continued throughout her life. By looking at her constant submission to God’s will, we’ll explore how Mary’s life can be a model for each of us.

The Bible tells us that Mary was “greatly troubled” when visited by the angel Gabriel. Why? It wasn’t because of the fact that she didn’t trust God. In fact, once the angel revealed God’s plan there is no further mention of Mary being troubled. For most of us, our worrying would start as soon as God revealed His plan. However, Mary embraced God’s plan without needing to know all of the details. The most likely reason for Mary being troubled is because of her humility. She couldn’t understand why the angel would visit her and address her as “full of grace”. A truly humble individual doesn’t recognize their humility and our Blessed Mother’s concern is an illustration of that virtue.

Continuing with the story, the angel informed Mary that she had been chosen to be the mother of the long awaited Savior. Having most probably made a lifetime vow of virginity (in the opinion of Pope John Paul II and many others), Mary asked how this would be possible. Gabriel informed her that it would take place by the power of the Holy Spirit. Mary responded with the words, “Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord. May it be done to me according to your word.” If anything, the angel’s explanation should have made Mary more reluctant, but her incredible trust in God enabled her to agree to the plan without hesitation.

To put things in perspective, imagine the angel Gabriel visiting you today and asking you to become a religious education teacher, to start attending daily Mass, to speak about Christ in your workplace, to read the Bible more frequently, to contribute a greater amount to charity, etc. Would your answer be “May it be done to me according to your word” or would it be a series of questions or excuses? As Pope John Paul II stated in his address on July 3, 1996, “Mary was asked to assent to a truth never expressed before (a virginal motherhood). She accepted it with a simple yet daring heart.” How do we respond to the comparatively minor tasks asked of us by the Lord? Do we accept willingly or do we cite numerous reasons why it isn’t possible? While most of us have not experienced the visible presence of an angel, we have all felt this call to increased service or devotion at some point in our lives. That request may come in the form of a thought, a suggestion from a friend or a statement in a homily or television program. We may brush it off as being unimportant, but that is usually how the Lord calls us. Have we responded to His call with the same willingness exhibited by Mary?

This eagerness to submit to God’s will continued throughout the Blessed Mother’s life. As soon as Jesus was conceived in her womb, Mary traveled “in haste” to assist her relative, Elizabeth, who was 6 months pregnant with John the Baptist. When Mary arrived, Elizabeth proclaimed her to be “blessed among women” and questioned why she was honored to be visited by “the mother of my Lord”. Desiring to give all the glory to God, Mary responded with her famous Magnificat (Lk 1:46-55), which acknowledged God’s greatness and her own lowliness. Even though Mary had been chosen to deliver the Savior of the world, she still managed to give all the credit to God and boast only of her own weakness. Despite all of the turmoil that was going on in her own life, Mary stayed with Elizabeth for 3 months. This display of charity gives us a great example of how to serve others without counting the cost. Do we always serve others with the same selflessness exhibited by Mary? When we receive Jesus in the Eucharist, do we then share Him with others as Mary did with Elizabeth?

After Jesus was born, Mary continued to seek God’s will for her life. As events occurred in her daily life as the mother of Jesus, scripture tells us that she meditated and “kept them in her heart” (Lk 2:19,50) In fact, her last appearance in scripture finds her praying with the apostles for the coming of the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:14). Do we imitate Mary by frequently praying for an increase of the gifts of the Holy Spirit? Do we attempt to discern God’s will in our own lives through meditation and prayer?

When Mary and Joseph presented the baby Jesus in the temple, the holy man Simeon informed Mary of the great suffering that would be a part of her life (Lk 2:35). This prophecy would be fulfilled as she stood at the foot of the cross and watched the crucifixion of her Son (Jn 19:25). Mary never tried to avoid this suffering, knowing that it was part of God’s will. How do we handle the suffering that we encounter in our own lives? Do we lash out and attempt to avoid it or, like Mary, do we unite our suffering with the sacrifice of Christ as He hangs on the cross?

Would you like to get closer to Jesus and discover His plan for your life? Turn to Mary and ask for her help. Her entire life consisted of submitting to God’s will and she will help you to do the same. When He was dying on the cross, Jesus gave Mary to the “beloved disciple” John. Recognizing that we are all beloved disciples, the Church extends that offer of motherhood to each one of us. Your mother will help lead you to Jesus. Her last recorded words in scripture (at the wedding feast in Cana), provide us with the advice that is guaranteed to keep us on the right path – “Do whatever He (Jesus) tells you.”

Since Mary didn’t say “no” to God, we can only speculate on what would have happened had she done so. However, we do know what happened because she said “yes.” God used her to deliver our Savior! Throughout her life, the Blessed Mother repeatedly trusted in God’s plan. By meditating on her life and asking for her intercession, we can begin to trust God with our lives. Each day we have the opportunity to say “yes” or “no” to God. When things happen to us that we don’t understand, do we trust God or do we complain? Do we always obey the teachings of the Church founded by Jesus, or do we only obey those teachings with which we agree? Do we seek to become closer to Christ by meditating upon His life and keeping Him “in our hearts”? Do we make an effort to encounter Jesus through the sacraments of Holy Communion and Confession as often as possible? Throughout her life, Mary always said “yes” to God … How about you?

Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us!

[suzyjaruki]

Does it combine the determinate side with the free will side? No more schizophrenia!

[Salvation]

Start with Luke 1:26 and keep reading.

[Alex Murphy]

I knew what you would do, but you still freely chose it.

The answer is still not "helicopter".

[vladimir998]

You wrote:

“The answer is still not “helicopter”.”

Right, the answer is “denial of the Annunciation”.

[Biggirl]

AMEN to that!

[Alex Murphy]

AMEN to that [post #39]!

"Amen" to a cheap carny mindreading act?

[MayflowerMadam]

“Martha actually said no first and then the angel went to Mary.”

LOL! Guess the chapter and verse on that are in the book of Hezekiah.

[Biggirl]

It is a freely offered gift from God, the gift of faith and of saying “yes” to Him. I just do not understand what you said.

[supercat]

The paradox of how we can have free will and still make choices which are already known to God is one of many brain twisters in Catholic dogma. It’s best not to think about it.

It's easily resolved. Imagine that you sit down with a deck of cards to play a game of Klondike Solitaire. Once you've dealt out the first 28 cards, you notice that among the face up cards are the Diamond Five and the Spade Jack. Can you place the Spade Jack on the Diamond Five? Why or why not? What would possibly prevent you from doing so? If you were to attempt to place the Spade Jack on the Diamond Five, would the two cards develop such strong electric charges that the Spade Jack wouldn't sit flat on the Diamond Five? Or would the Solitaire Police burst into your home for placing a card on another card whose rank is not numerically one higher than the card being placed? Unless you have a very odd deck, or live in a place with really weird cops, neither of those things would happen. In what sense, then, could one really say that one "can't" place a Spade Jack on a Diamond Five?

The answer is that there is nothing physically that would prevent one from arranging the cards however one would want, or peeking at any cards he sees fit. The player is in some sense omnipotent and omniscient when it comes to the cards on the table before him. In another sense, however, the player is comparatively powerless: the player, despite his omnipotence, cannot act in a way contrary to the rules of Klondike Solitaire while still playing the game. The moment the player behaves in ways not permitted by the rules, the player would cease to be playing Klondike Solitaire.

When God decided to give Man free will, He decided that He would run the universe, and allow it to run itself, according to certain rules. He would have the capability, at any time He chose, to disregard those rules, but only at the expense of abandoning the "game". The moment he would decide that it was okay to disregard any rule in any way, all of the rules would become meaningless. If He follows the rules, then many of the things that happen in the world would happen as a result of man's free will. Were God to intervene in ways not permitted by the rules he set for himself, that would imply that anything bad that happened would be a result not of man's free will, but of God's decision not to intervene.

With regard to the question in the original post, I don't think there's any great mystery. Mary received a calling to play a part in God's plan, as do many other people. Some people answer their callings; others do not. If God calls to someone to do something for Him and that person refuses, God usually doesn't push the issue. He simply finds someone else. If Mary had decided to refuse God's calling, that wouldn't have been a major obstacle to His "plan": she'd simply have joined the throng of forgettable and forgotten people throughout history while some other woman was chosen to be the Mother of Christ. Indeed, while it's possible Mary was God's first choice, she wouldn't have to have been. Perhaps God called to someone else first, but that person said "no", and thus Mary was called upon. She's the first person who history remembers as having been called upon in that way, because anyone who had said "no" would have long since been forgotten.

[supercat]

But to suggest that she could have thwarted the redemptive plan of God is ludicrous, perhaps even heretical. It elevates a human above God.

God gave humans free will. Individuals are free to either participate in God's plan, or to resist it. If God's plan calls for someone to play a particular role, and that person refuses, that portion of God's plan will not proceed as intended, and alternate arrangements will have to be made. That does not imply that humans are above God, however. An individual standing in the ocean can push his hands through the water, and the water will get out of his hands' way. That does not, however, mean the individual is more powerful than the ocean. Likewise, if individuals want to resist God's plan, they will be free to do so, but God will call upon other individuals to do what needs to be done.

[supercat]

God knows what we will choose, but He allows free will.

God could know, if he wanted to, but that doesn't imply that he does. For God's gift of free will to have meaning, he must be open to the possibility of being "surprised". If He were to make his decisions based upon knowledge of people's future actions, so as to ensure that nobody would ever have the power to do things that He would really dislike, then He would be substituting His own will for those of his people, and his gift would be meaningless.

[giotto]

But asking Mary was merely a formality. Why? Because of the Immaculate Conception. Whoever said "yes" to His request must have been born without sin. Are you saying that God created a whole shelf full of sinless girls, just to increase His odds? Or did He, upon the refusal by one of them, go back in time and make the next candidate's conception immaculate? He is God, after all.

The paradox becomes less puzzling at this point. Mary, being humble and wise beyond her years, discerned His plan, recognized her part in it, and agreed--free will to the extent that she chose to accept His will, but no free will at all when you realize that it was against her nature not to. In other words, God had created a perfect creature who was programmed to carry out His plan. And being born without sin simply guaranteed that she could never be corrupted. Again, not really a choice.

[vladimir998]

You wrote:

“God could know, if he wanted to, but that doesn’t imply that he does.”

God knows. He can only know. If He did not know, He would not be God.

“For God’s gift of free will to have meaning, he must be open to the possibility of being “surprised”.”

Completely false. His gift is to us, not Himself. Thus, His experience of our choices is irrelevant.

“If He were to make his decisions based upon knowledge of people’s future actions, so as to ensure that nobody would ever have the power to do things that He would really dislike, then He would be substituting His own will for those of his people, and his gift would be meaningless.”

No. God knows all. He still gives us free will. His knowledge of all has absolutely nothing to do with the extent of the gift He has given us.

[supercat]

God knows. He can only know. If He did not know, He would not be God.

If God's knew everything that was going to happen "in advance", then the fact that any of it actually did happen would be meaningless.

Who is more powerful--you, or a deck of playing cards? If you sit down to play a game of Klondike Solitaire, is there any reason why you couldn't know and control the position of all the cards at the start? Would peeking at all the cards, and arranging them with the advantage of that knowledge, make the game more or less fun than it would be with the cards hidden?

Or, let me ask a biblical question: Could God destroy humanity with a flood starting December 26, 2011, and lasting forty days and forty nights? It would certainly be within His power to do so, as He has demonstrated once in the past. He could not do so, however, without rendering completely meaningless any promise He has ever made to mankind. His power is not limited in a "physical" sense, but it is nonetheless absolutely restrained.

[vladimir998]

You wrote:

“If God’s knew everything that was going to happen “in advance”, then the fact that any of it actually did happen would be meaningless.”

Not to us.

“Who is more powerful—you, or a deck of playing cards? If you sit down to play a game of Klondike Solitaire, is there any reason why you couldn’t know and control the position of all the cards at the start?”

So, to you, we are merely cards that God is playing with? Would God send His Son to die on a cross for playing cards?

“Would peeking at all the cards, and arranging them with the advantage of that knowledge, make the game more or less fun than it would be with the cards hidden?”

So, this is about fun for God? I think your whole outlook is skewed if your statements are anything to go by.

“Or, let me ask a biblical question: Could God destroy humanity with a flood starting December 26, 2011, and lasting forty days and forty nights?”

He could, but won’t for He said He would not destroy the world with a flood again.

“It would certainly be within His power to do so, as He has demonstrated once in the past. He could not do so, however, without rendering completely meaningless any promise He has ever made to mankind. His power is not limited in a “physical” sense, but it is nonetheless absolutely restrained.”

That has nothing to do with His knowledge. He knows all. That doesn’t mean He does all.

[Bobsvainbabblings]

If Mary had said no, God would have had Gabriele ask another virgin. The Catholic Church would have done with her as they did with Mary. You would have this same article with her name every place Mary’s is and her graven images would not be worshipped just like the graven images of Mary aren’t.

May God lead us into His truth, BVB

[Salvation]

BTTT for that answer!

[Hegewisch Dupa]

Just as a matter of style points, I’m not sure using the most predictable clown here is the best example of free will ;)

[supercat]

Not to us.

But in what way would we be meaningful to Him? If God knows exactly what anyone will do before the person does it, in what way would anyone's decisions be able to please or displease God? I would aver that God has a plan for this world, and things that facilitate the plan would please him more than things that would obstruct it.

So, to you, we are merely cards that God is playing with? Would God send His Son to die on a cross for playing cards?

No single analogy can cover every single aspect of God; any analogy is going to have its limitations. The playing card analogy is good, I think, for emphasizing that while a person could exercise complete authority over the cards, interacting with them from a standpoint of limited authority is often much more satisfying. The fact that a person playing cards wouldn't generally have any particular feelings for the cards he's using is simply a weakness in the analogy, and is not in any way meant to imply that God doesn't care about people.

So, this is about fun for God? I think your whole outlook is skewed if your statements are anything to go by.

The very notion of endeavoring to please God would seem rather meaningless if God was incapable of pleasure, would it not? Analogies have their limits, but I think the type of pleasure God is after would be one more associated with satisfaction than "fun". Something akin to the satisfaction a parent might feel when a son performs some challenging task that demonstrates his parents taught him well. The parents might have been capable of performing the task themselves, but only by letting the son do it could they receive the satisfaction. That has nothing to do with His knowledge. He knows all. That doesn’t mean He does all.

Suppose someone made a promise to someone else to help rescue the other person's house if it was ever flooded. Such an offer might seem generous. Suppose, however, that the person making the offer knew the house was going to be seized under eminent domain and flattened to make way for an roadway before there was any possibility of it flooding. Would that affect the level of generosity implicit in the offer?

A promise is only meaningful if there is some possibility of circumstances arising where it would compel action. To my mind, there would be a huge difference between a God who promised, without knowing what the future holds, that he would never again destroy mankind as he had done in Genesis, versus one who looked at the future and simply declared that he knew mankind would never again go so far off track as to merit destruction.

To my mind, any causal model which implies that everything that will ever happen is preordained is a causal model in which nobody has any moral accountability for anything. Some people try to claim that predestination does not contradict moral accountability, but any such models I've seen appear to hand-wave over the contradiction without resolving it. My view of God and the universe resolves the issue, by observing that God has a plan, and God knows what that plan is, but humans can decide of their own free will to either assist or fight it. In no sense are the individual actions of individual people preordained; individuals are fully morally accountable for their own actions.

[7MMmag]

prove it. on the other thread.