Posted on 03/25/2015 10:46:15 PM PDT by Steelfish
Because Mary Said “Yes…” — A Reflection For The Solemnity of the Annunciation of Our Lord
March 25, 2011 by Fr. Thomas Rosica
Standing in the middle of the present day city of Nazareth is the mammoth Basilica of the Annunciation, built around what is believed to be the dwelling of Mary. In a grotto-like room at the heart of the basilica is a small inscription on an altar. It reads, “verbum caro hic factum est,” here the Word became flesh. There, it is believed, the angel Gabriel appeared to Mary, and her response changed the world forever.
Imagine yourself in Mary’s place, asked to say “yes” to a divine plan so vast, so profound and so seemingly impossible that you cannot comprehend it. “How can this be?” she asks, bewildered. She is rooted in the faith of her ancestors, and yet now an angel has appeared in the midst of everyday life, extending a startling invitation. “You have found favor with God,” the angel says, “and you will conceive and bear His Son.” Will she accept?
It is Mary above all others who can teach us what it means to live by faith, and how to respond when God’s providence disrupts the daily course of our lives, overturning its rhythms and expectations. Despite her fears and uncertainty over how this promise could be fulfilled, she still answered “Yes.” Are we able to respond to God this way?
When we reflect on the Annunciation to Mary, and her acceptance of the angel’s message, we also reflect on our own vocation — our own calling from God. In the Lord’s Prayer, we pray, “Thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven” — an echo of Mary’s “Be it done unto me according to your word.”
Each time we commit ourselves to embracing God’s call and accepting His will, we mark a new point on the path of our relationship with Him. For the rest of her life, Mary pondered her extraordinary encounter with God, turning the weight of the angel’s message over and over again in her heart. From the manger to the cross, Mary’s life was radically changed — her relationship with God profoundly deepened — the moment she said “Yes.”
Mary received and welcomed God’s Word in the fullest sense — becoming impregnated with it, and bearing it to the world. Angels might not appear in our doorsteps, but we do encounter God in each of our daily prayers, and he whispers to us a similar invitation: Will we accept His love and bring it joyously to those around us? Will we trust in His providence, even when we can’t see the path ahead? Amid the noise of everyday life, will we listen for and embrace his call?
When making his pilgrimage to the Basilica of the Annunciation, Pope Benedict XVI offered this prayer to the humble Virgin of Nazareth. It speaks for all of us who likewise seek to accept God’s will with joy:
Mary, Mother of the “Yes,” you listened to Jesus, and know the tone of his voice and the beating of his heart. Morning Star, speak to us of him, and tell us about your journey of following him on the path of faith."
Thank you for that. I couldn’t imagine that all Catholics follow the line that they serve the same god as Muslims. I was getting concerned that there were no Catholics standing to refute that.
“Further, not only was there NOT wine for the wedding party, there was NO wine for Mary, Jesus’ brethern, or he and his disciples.”
You said this:
“The testamony by the governor of the feast indicates his appreciation of the better wine; nothing about going without for a bit.”
So first you say there was no proof they ran out of wine and now you’re saying that you said they ran out of wine. So when did you realize you were wrong?
“You see?.... I DID mention that they were out of wine. So, now you can retract the following statement:”
Nope. It stands because you wrote: “nothing about going without for a bit.”
THEY HAVE NO MORE WINE.
The rest of what you posted seems like so much desperate footwork to avoid the inevitable anti-Catholic self-knockout.
What do you think of this?:
“[John] 2:3-5 Here is an example of Mary’s gift of intercession. Even now, Mary continually speaks to her Son on our behalf and is our preeminent intercessor before Hid throne.”
“Why, because that means Lumen Gentium and Nostra Aetate will have to go out the window too?”
No, nothing has to go out the window.
“Just so everyone else gets a chance to understand how unambiguous the VatII position on islam is let’s take a look at NA3:”
What exactly are you trying to prove? Today, Saturday, we think of the time Christ spent in the tomb. And what is it that you are doing? You’re attacking a Church council, a Catholic catechism? There isn’t something better you could be doing with your time than that?
“The Church doesn’t build doctrine based on the diplomatic correspondence of a pope, sainted or not.”
It’s a footnote. The Church has never built doctrine on a footnote. A footnote reference is merely a footnote reference. Using a quote already written is simply done to show an idea was already long since put to paper. Didn’t you ever write a paper in high school or college?
“How many more years do we have until that same pagan race is slaughtering Christians in the streets of New York (assuming they can find any)?”
Not many. And? Seriously, what are you saying? Are you saying that the outrages of some Muslims (even MANY Muslims) should some how change Catholic doctrine concerning God and those who profess to believe in Him? Really? So if Jews were slaughtering Christians in New York would that mean we some how change what the CCC says about Jews?
“THIS is what keeps me from sleeping at night, the very idea that the Catholic Church would proclaim that the Almighty God and Father of Jesus Christ is one and the same as the pagan moon god of islam.”
But you don’t lose any sleep at night that the Church acknowledges that the same God of the Jews is in fact THE God of all men - including Muslims? Aren’t you missing the point? If the Church says all three groups (Jews, Christians, Muslims) all acknowledge and adore the same God of Abraham, but also tacitly points out that two of those groups deny the Trinity, the Redeemer’s divinity, and the divinity of the Holy Spirit, how does that make you lose sleep?
“No, no, it cannot be,”
But it is. Shaking your fist and cursing at the sun won’t make it go away. No, just use your head, put on sunscreen and you won’t get burned.
“CCC841 and the documents supporting it must be thrown on the trash heap of history before we find ourselves dragged out into the streets and beheaded in front of our children.”
The one has nothing to do with the other. Christians have been killed by Muslims for almost 1400 years. The CCC came out in 1993. Someone could argue that the slaughter was WORSE in the century before and after the Catechism of Trent came out. Are you arguing that that should be revised as well to reflect that fact?
“There must be a new crusade, that unites all who call on the Holy Name of Jesus, to rid this world of the worship of the very devil himself before it’s too late.”
There are two problems with what you wrote there:
1) If there is to be a crusade, it must be a Catholic thing. Perhaps the Orthodox can do their part as well. It is doubtful that a crusade could include those who are obstinately heretical, however.
2) Satan worshipers do not agree with Muslims and Muslims do not agree with Satan worshipers. One of the reasons Muslims have been persecuting the Yazidis is that they are viewed by almost everyone in the Middle East as devil worshipers. They really aren’t devil worshipers either, but that is how they are viewed. Since Muslims and Satan worshipers are not the same group (for they disagree) it must simply be that Muslims are inclined to evil actions, sinful actions rather than that they actually worship the devil. In other words, they aren’t much different than other men in that regard but they are shackled with a belief system filled with errors and which actually exalts some sinful activities as morally sound practices (slavery for war captives would be an example).
A crusade is fine with me - and I know more about crusades and their history than probably anyone else here at FR. But if we are to go on crusade it will never be to “rid this world of [Muslim] worship” for that is not how or why crusades are fought. Crusades are fought to liberate holy places from occupation by a persecuting enemy, to liberate fellow Christians, to force a groups which has closed itself to Christian missionaries to accept them (even if no conversions might take place), and to push back the tide of a persecuting enemy. They are not to be fought to wipe out a people, or to destroy a monotheistic religion no matter how erroneous, nor to forcibly convert a people to Christianity. Those essentially are the rules of crusade.
“I will not have my three daughters raped and my two sons impaled in the name of the Second Vatican Council’s Decrees on religious liberty and inter-religious dialogue with pagans.”
Again, the one has nothing to do with the other. I too hope nothing ever happens to your children. Mind you, if something does, it will most likely be something done to them by another American who is NOT Muslim but who is interested in persecuting Christians. You do realize that, right? Also, if you lived centuries ago, your children would still be at risk of abuse and murder by Muslims so to blame such a possibility NOW on the existence of CCC 841 is ridiculous. You are building an impossible mountain out of molehill. If a Muslim harms your children he won’t be doing it because of CCC 841. He has never heard of CCC 841, doesn’t know what it says and doesn’t care. Neither did his ancestors when they went raping and pillaging centuries ago. What you’re saying just doesn’t make sense.
“No, there’s your “No”.”
No. My earlier “No” still stands. The very fact that you resort to talking about the possible rape and murder of your children being the result of CCC 841 shows you are not posting a rational argument against it.
**So first you say there was no proof they ran out of wine and now you’re saying that you said they ran out of wine. So when did you realize you were wrong?**
And you accused ME, a while back, of being poorly educated at public schools?
You quote THIS from me (from 682):
*The testamony by the governor of the feast indicates his appreciation of the better wine; nothing about going without for a bit.*
You take notice of that, and ingnore the rest of that paragraph:
*He said: “..thou hast kept the good wine until now.” He had apparently drank enough to expect some poorer wine by then.*
Then I said this (in post 693):
*Oh, I believe that the wedding had run out of wine, but that the governor makes no comment about that. Meaning that MAYBE he hadn’t caught on to the shortfall yet. Jesus Christ is never late.*
Did you even read this from my last post?
*I said that the governor was apparently unaware of that fact: “And he said unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men HAVE well drunk, THEN that which is WORSE: but thou HAST KEPT the good wine UNTIL NOW.” Jn 2:10*
I said the governor of the feast seemed to be unaware of the shortage. His own words show that to be the case.
“thou HAST KEPT the good wine UNTIL NOW.” The governor was in the dark.
You can assume that the wedding party was going to be horribly ashamed if they couldn’t find more wine and fast, and paint Mary as a heroine (your own words: **She interceded with Jesus.**) But, you also prove me to be a prophet, in how you dodged the my main focus; just as predicted:
I said: You just couldn’t resist using the word ‘with’, as though she was nearly equal in the rescue of the wedding feast. (now, you’ll probably focus on what I just said, and ignore what follows).
Which you basically did, responding with this blanket statement:
**The rest of what you posted seems like so much desperate footwork to avoid the inevitable anti-Catholic self-knockout.**
And then more non-answer with this:
**“[John] 2:3-5 Here is an example of Mary’s gift of intercession. Even now, Mary continually speaks to her Son on our behalf and is our preeminent intercessor before Hid throne.”**
So, you basically ignored the last half of my post, using the leftist style; where they accuse conservatives of intolerance, while ignoring facts.
Have you asked Abraham, or Moses, or David, or the centurion, to intercede for you? If not, why not?
Excellent post Legatus. I would add additional quotes from saints and popes regarding the Muslims and their religion (none of which even suggest they worship or adore the same God as we do):
Which sounds like VatII until one realizes that this same sainted pope called muslims a pagan race when calling a crusade in 1074. So which has more weight, diplomatic correspondence or:
Gregory, bishop, servant of the servants of God, to all who are willing to defend the Christian faith, greeting and apostolic benediction. We hereby inform you that the bearer of this letter, on his recent return from across the sea, came to Rome to visit us. He repeated what we had heard from many others, that a pagan race had overcome the Christians and with horrible cruelty had devastated everything almost to the walls of Constantinople, and were now governing the conquered lands with tyrannical violence, and that they had slain many thousands of Christians as if they were but sheep.
Interesting. So these two documents contradict one another (and Vatican II chose to use the former)? The first is a letter, but what is the second one? Legatus, could you provide links to these two documents?
.
>> “Have you asked Abraham, or Moses, or David, or the centurion, to intercede for you? If not, why not?” <<
Excellent!
And here is the true answer:
Because none of them could possibly be twisted into a proxy for Easter, the ‘goddess’ of reproductive rights.
Pagan is as pagan does.
Some catholics here do demonstrate a modicum of understanding of how and why Yeshua died for the sins of men, but nevertheless, they still insist on injecting humanism between themselves and Yeshua.
.
The second is nothing less than a call for a Crusade by Pope St. Gregory VII. Check Fordham.edu for the complete text. The letter that Nostra Aetate builds the case for muslims worshiping God comes from here.
I find the contradiction glaring. Something’s not adding up for me.
Where did this novel understanding of islam come from? Please enlighten everyone, because I'd truly like to know when, why and how exactly the Catholic Church changed Her teaching. Because that's what happened if Lumen Gentium and Nostra Aetate are doctrinally binding.
If on the other hand as Cardinal Brandmüller says the declarations on non-Christian religions are non-binding... then perhaps muslims are still pagans after all. For that is the Church's perennial teaching. Islam is paganism and mohammed's "monotheism" was to a moon god.
Paragraph 841 of the CCC is an error, and the fact that it is promulgated as truth should keep EVERY Catholic up nights.
“CCC841 and the supporting text from Lumen Gentium and Nostra Aetate give aid and comfort to the enemy by legitimizing islam.”
Nonsense. You’re making the mistake of saying that because the Catholic Church recognizes a fact or truth that that means the “enemy” is legitimized. It isn’t. Does recognizing that Jews profess belief in the God of Abraham legitimize Jewish denial of the Trinity?
“It’s not what the muslims think about CCC841, it’s what CCC841 makes everyone else think about islam.”
You’re wrong again. I am all for a crusade. CCC 841 doesn’t in any way lessen my desire to see a crusade. I know of no one who believes CCC 841 means Muslims should not be stopped from killing people for instance. I know of no Catholic who believes Islam’s denial of Christ and the Trinity is legitimized because of 841. I don’t even think you believe that! And if you did believe that is the end result on others you sure don’t believe any differently about Islam now do you? So your whole arguments falls to pieces. Again.
“Where did this novel understanding of islam come from?”
It isn’t novel.
“Please enlighten everyone, because I’d truly like to know when, why and how exactly the Catholic Church changed Her teaching.”
It didn’t change. Now, I would not be surprised if you ONCE AGAIN take two different statements and mistake them for being about the same thing. The anti-Catholics will fall for that I suppose because they’re not very bright to begin with, but you’re not going to fool me. Do you even know that in the Middle Ages Islam was considered a Christological heresy? Do you even know what that really means?
“Because that’s what happened if Lumen Gentium and Nostra Aetate are doctrinally binding.”
Nope.
“If on the other hand as Cardinal Brandmüller says the declarations on non-Christian religions are non-binding... then perhaps muslims are still pagans after all.” As non-baptized people they can be referred to pagans in that sense (as unbaptized people). The only non-Christians we usually don’t refer to as pagans are Jews. See CCC 498 where you see “Jews and pagans alike”. In other words, no distinction is made for Sikhs and Muslims even though both are monotheists like Jews. The problem is that the term “pagans” is usually used to refer to people who believe in many gods. The term is a Latin one having to do with the rustic Romans who held onto their Greco-Roman polytheistic beliefs.
“For that is the Church’s perennial teaching. Islam is paganism and mohammed’s “monotheism” was to a moon god.”
Islam is paganism - in the sense that its adherents are unbaptized. “Paganism” is not a precise term don’t forget and the CCC only uses it sparingly for that very reason. Your opinion about the “moon god” is meaningless for two reasons:
1) No matter how “Allah” was originally viewed by Arabs, the name came to be synonymous with the God of Abraham. Christians use it all the time throughout the Arabic and Muslim world to refer to God (yes, YHWH and the Trinity). That includes Catholics AND Protestants by the way.
“Paragraph 841 of the CCC is an error,”
You have no authority to decide that. You do realize that, right?
“and the fact that it is promulgated as truth should keep EVERY Catholic up nights.”
No. We just keep in mind that it doesn’t matter that Muslims profess to believe in the God of Abraham since 2 John 1:9 is in play no matter what.
So, besides the obscure letter which contradicts another letter written by the same person, could you please provide Traditional Catholic teaching that supports Lumen Gentium/Nostrate Aetate re: Islam/Muslims?
Out of your entire post the above is the only bit worth remembering.
As I wrote earlier, I think on the whole, your posts represent the most abusive, anti-Catholic, uncharitable posts on the entire religion forum.
[RM: This time please ignore me if I express regrets]
I'd ping people to this post but I wouldn't even know where to begin, do you have anti-Catholics hiding under your bed or something? Maybe Elsie might know who the not very bright anti-Catholics are... Frankly I'd rather stand with a non-Catholic who can tell the difference between God Almighty and a moon rock than a "Catholic" who can't.
“So, besides the obscure letter which contradicts another letter written by the same person, could you please provide Traditional Catholic teaching that supports Lumen Gentium/Nostrate Aetate re: Islam/Muslims?”
Look it up. Use the internet. Try.
“Out of your entire post the above is the only bit worth remembering.”
No, there was more worth remembering. What you should focus on is your own errors.
“As I wrote earlier, I think on the whole, your posts represent the most abusive, anti-Catholic, uncharitable posts on the entire religion forum.”
Even if that were true, and it is not, you should be more focused on your own errors.
“[RM: This time please ignore me if I express regrets]”
Cute.
“I’d ping people to this post but I wouldn’t even know where to begin,”
You would ping people? How about you just stand on your own two feet?
“...do you have anti-Catholics hiding under your bed or something?”
No, do you? After all if you think a Catholic is anti-Catholic, then it seems you have more of a fixation on anti-Catholics than I ever possibly could.
“Maybe Elsie might know who the not very bright anti-Catholics are...”
Oh, I think you might know some.
“Frankly I’d rather stand with a non-Catholic who can tell the difference between God Almighty and a moon rock than a “Catholic” who can’t.”
The problem is you’re not standing with non-Catholics. You’re standing with ANTI-CATHOLICS. These people hate what you claim - if you’re Catholic - to believe in as a Catholic. I don’t. Look at your own profile page. You go after anti-Catholics who attacked Mother Theresa. You know, the thread in which you said to anti-Catholics “Your side makes me sick” and “How ridiculous your side seems! A little Albanian woman, made mighty with the might of God, so terrifies you that you must pronounce her damned and adduce lies to justify your sentence.”
Kettle. Pot.
The difference is I always oppose anti-Catholics when they are in the wrong (i.e. when they attack the Catholic Faith, Catholic teachings). You apparently attack them when they don’t agree with you. You disagree with them on Mother Theresa so they sicken you you say. When they agree with your erroneous evaluation of CCC 841 you’re fine with that.
**Would your last post cancel out your earlier errors?**
What errors? You found no errors.
The miracle at Cana shows that the Lord can answer prayer for the small things (like wine at a wedding, or putting dew on a fleece and the next night keeping the dew off), or the big things (like sparing Israel from God’s wrath, at the request of Moses, or raising Lazarus from the dead).
Speaking of Lazarus; by your choice of declaration, Martha interceded with Jesus to raise him up:
“Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died. But I know, that even now, whatsoever thou wilt ask of God, God will give it thee.” Jn 11:21,22
So I’m guessing that you also pray to Martha.
**So, if I said: “Yesterday, I interceded with a police officer to not give someone a ticket” you’re claiming that means I am equal to the police officer.**
So, If you die tomorrow, and a police officer is planning on giving me a traffic ticket, are you saying that you can STILL help me out?
**Mary interceded WITH Jesus because that’s how English grammar works.**
And that’s one of the word power means to help build Mary up in importance. Did the centurion intercede with Jesus to heal his servant? Did Abraham intercede with God to spare Lot? Did Moses intercede with God to spare Israel from being consumed by God’s wrath?
To me, it is all under this category: Let your requests be made known unto God.
**The point - which you missed - is that that quote is from the Orthodox Study Bible. The Eastern Orthodox believe in the intercession of Mary.**
I guess I should have known that there are others that are just as confused as the RCs. But you guys are basically joined at the hip anyway, right?
If you, and whoever else (on this earth that you also ask to pray) want to call on someone other than God, so be it. Knock yourself out. It’s not scriptural, but that hasn’t stopped you in other ‘traditions’.
“What errors? You found no errors.”
That’s another error of yours right there. Go back and check the posts.
“The miracle at Cana shows that the Lord can answer prayer for the small things (like wine at a wedding,”
Ooooohhhh, you mean He responded to Mary’s intercession? You’re the one who just called her plea to Jesus about the wine a “prayer”.
Case closed. With that stunning comment of yours you render the rest of your post meaningless.
What follows is only my personal opinion and is not to be considered directed at any person, living or dead.
I think if one had been paying attention one would have noticed that was a post by mad dawg, not me. I liked the post and wanted it preserved because mad dawg (sorry to drag you into this but someone has demonstrated reading comprehension issues)
a) doesn't go off like that often and
b) it was an eloquent demonstration of righteous anger...
that is, it wasn't about himself and his own ego it was about the subject of his post... something a few people could learn a lot about around here. I leave it up to the reader to decide where that finger is pointing.
As for the rest of what I think is a pitiful post I think you should try reading your own mind and not mine.
Moving on to a more general topic, I am tired of a very few people treating fellow freepers like things or opportunities to stroke their own egos. I especially find that habit disgusting in my fellow Catholics. Oh we can all trip up from time to time, I'm as guilty as anyone else of forgetting that real people live on the other side of the monitor. Sometimes I even let my irritation gallop out in front of my reason. But it shouldn't be allowed to become a habitual manner of dealing with people.
Furthermore I think that just because a person belongs to my Faith he doesn't have carte blanche to act like a complete and total idiot to everyone who has the extreme misfortune of bumping into him on Free Republic.
These people hate what you claim - if you’re Catholic - to believe in as a Catholic.
Well why wouldn't they when they have such shining Catholic exemplars hurling abuse at them in a constant barrage? What does that kind of Catholicism have to offer ANYBODY?
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.