How I Changed My Mind About Mary

e3mil.com ^ | 5/6/02 | Mark Shea

[nickcarraway]

by Mark Shea

How I Changed My Mind About Mary

5/6/02

It once seemed perfectly obvious to me that Catholics honored Mary too much. All those feasts, rosaries, icons, statues and whatnot were ridiculously excessive. Yes, the gospel of Luke said something about her being "blessed" and yes I thought her a good person. But that was that.

No Mary, No Salvation

People who celebrated her or called her "Mother" or did all the million things which Catholic piety encourages bordered on idolatry. It was all too much. Jesus, after all, is our Savior, not Mary.

However, after looking at the gospel of Luke afresh and thinking more and more about the humanity of Jesus Christ, some things dawned on me. For it turns out that Luke said more than "something" about Mary. He reports that God was conceived in her womb and thereby made a son of Adam! This means more than merely saying that Mary was an incubator unit for the Incarnation. It means that the Logos, the Second Person of the Trinity derives his humanity--all of it--from her! Why does this matter? Because the entire reason we are able to call Jesus "savior" at all is because the God who cannot die became a man who could die. And he chose to do it through Mary's free "yes" to him. No Mary, no human nature for Christ. No human nature for Christ, no death on the cross. No death, no resurrection. No resurrection, no salvation. Without Mary, we are still in our sins.

Too Much vs. Just Enough

This made me see Mary very differently. The Incarnation is vastly more than God zipping on a disposable man-suit. He remains man eternally. Therefore, his joining with the human race through the womb of Mary means (since he is the savior of us all), that she is the mother of us all (John 19:27). Moreover, it means that her remarkable choice to say "Yes" to the Incarnation was not merely a one-time incident, it was an offering of her own heart to God and us. Her heart was pierced by the sword that opened the fountain of blood and water in Christ's human heart, for it was she who, by the grace of God, gave him that heart (Luke 2:35; John 19:34).

Seeing this, I began to wonder again: If Catholics honor Mary "too much", where did we Evangelicals honor her "just enough." Mary herself said "henceforth, all generations will call me blessed." When was the last time I had heard a contemporary Christian tune on the radio sung in honor of Mary? Or a prayer in church to extol her? How about a teensy weensy bit of verse or a little article in some magazine singling out Mary as blessed among women? Aside from "Silent Night" was there anything in Evangelical piety which dared to praise her for even a moment? I was an Evangelical for seven years and I never saw so much as a dram of it.

St. Luke? Is That You?</>

So the question became for me, "How could we talk about something being 'excessive' when we had virtually no experience of it ourselves?" What if it was we Evangelicals who were excessive in our horror of Marian piety and Catholics who are normal? Judging from the witness of the early Fathers and even of Martin Luther (who had a very robust Marian devotion and whose tomb is decorated with an illustration of the Assumption of the Virgin into Heaven) it seemed to me that it was we Evangelicals who were excessive in our fear of her rather than Catholics who were excessive in their devotion.

"Hail Mary, full of grace. The Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou among women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen."

There. That didn't hurt a bit. In fact, I think I heard St. Luke pray it too!

[xzins]

This is July and that was May and all you can say is "Sorry, I was busy!!!" LOL

ROTFLOL!!!

[drstevej]

No problem with the delay, the answer is perplexing however,

Grace and power is not Grace.

If you say, "I am hungry and tired" and "I say I am hungry," we are both hungry. This is a very weak argument hardly sufficient to sustain the weight of a claim to Mary's sinlessness.

Plus, one was the message of God delivered by the Angel Gabriel

And the other was the words of Luke written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Again, a weak argument for anyone who believes in the inspiration of the Bible, which I believe you do.

[narses]

FWIW, my conversion was based in no small way on similar thoughts. I started saying a daily Rosary almost seven years before my final decision. I looked at every argument against the Church and found them either false or lacking in substance. Scott Hahn's book (Home Sweet Rome?) was another part of that process. I think almost anyone who does a daily Rosary and meditates on the Mysteries will end up Catholic.

[narses]

Many people confuse veneration with worship. In latin what we offer God as His due is called "Latria". "Dulia" and "hyperdulia" are the reverence we show to the angels, the saints and to the Blessed Virgin.

[nickcarraway]

This is July and that was May and all you can say is "Sorry, I was busy!!!" LOL

Hey, this isn't my full time job or anything, I do have priorities. If someone wants to pay me to post on FR though, I'm willing

[Charles_Bingley]

It is God's Grace filling fully in Mary. A quality we all seek for ourselves.

[drstevej]

I repeat the original post and question...

Acts 6:8 And Stephen, full of grace and power, wrought great wonders and signs among the people.


John 1:14 And the Word [Jesus] was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

=====

These are the same greek expressions. Your logic would conclude that Stephen should be added to the list with Mary as those exempted from the taint of Original Sin.

QUESTION: What does full of grace mean in these two verses that makes sense to say of BOTH Stephen and Jesus? Surely it is not sinlessness, for that only pertains to Jesus. Answer this, and I think the statement of Gabriel will be clear to you.

[Charles_Bingley]

Are you suggesting Mary was sinful?

[drstevej]

Are you suggesting Mary was sinful?

Yes, as was Stephen, Moses, Paul, Rahab, Peter, Adam, Mother Theresa, Martin Luther, my mom, me, you, Rnmom, polycarp and even rdb3. Everyone except Jesus!

[RnMomof7]

Are you suggesting Mary was sinful?
Yes, as was Stephen, Moses, Paul, Rahab, Peter, Adam, Mother Theresa, Martin Luther, my mom, me, you, Rnmom, polycarp and even rdb3. Everyone except Jesus!

Rom 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

Mary proclaimed her own sinful state steve

Luk 1:47   And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.

  

  She KNEW she needed a savior...

[narses]

You make much too much stew from one rabbit. God is the savior of us all, but that doesn't mean He didn't save Mary from Original Sin. You're reading too much into it. Mary simply calls God "my Savior", even as Evangelicals often call Jesus "my Savior", meaning that He saved them at some point in the past. They are not expressing a "present need" for a Savior; in fact, many don't think they have a present need for salvation because of "once saved, always saved". Similarly, Mary was just calling God her "Savior", not expressing a present need.

[narses]

As for Rom 3:10, we cannot take that one verse in isolation; we must look at the whole of Scripture on this subject. The Bible elsewhere states that we are made righteous by Christ's obedience (Romans 5:19). Though we have no innate righteousness due to the Fall, we are "made the righteousness of God in him" (II Co 5:21).

As a daughter of Adam, Mary also has no innate righteousness, and under normal circumstances she would have been conceived in original sin like the rest of us. But God prevented this by imparting His righteousness to her at the moment of her conception, even as He imparts it to us in Baptism. Mary simply received at the beginning of her existence the same gift of salvation which others generally receive later in life.

So Romans 3:10 applies to Mary insofar as she is not sinless because of some innate righteousness, as though she were by very nature exempt from the effects of the Fall. Yet she is not unrighteous, for by grace she became at her conception the very righteousness of God in Christ.

[RnMomof7]

If God could chose to make Mary..born of two sinful parents free of original sin..why was it necessary to make Mary sinless to bear Jesus?

Were Marys parents sinners or were they sinless too?

[drstevej]

***But God prevented this by imparting His righteousness to her at the moment of her conception***

Any Scripture for this? I think your stew has no rabbit in it al all!

[narses]

Who says it was "necessary"?

Proverbs 17:6 states that "parents are the pride of their children". Though Christ is the all-holy God, it would have redounded to His dishonor had His sole human parent been an enemy of God, a child of darkness. Jesus received all his flesh from Mary's flesh. Had she been a sinner, though sinless Himself He would still be uniting to Himself flesh which was once infected with sin. This would be a disgrace to Him!

The Bible says that Jesus is a High Priest who is "holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens" (Hb 7:26). If His closest relative was a sinner, how could we truly say that He is "separate from sinners"? So it was most fitting that the Virgin Mary should never, even for a moment, be a sinner and slave of the devil, so that Jesus could truly be said to be separate from sinners and free from the reproach of having a sinful mother.

[narses]

Mary's sinlessness is not for her own sake, but for Jesus' sake. She had to be holy in order to be a worthy vessel for her utterly holy Son. So this doctrine upholds the holiness and deity of Christ.

Since Jesus Himself preserved her, Mary's sinlessness depends completely upon Him. He is the Savior of all humanity, Mary included. By preserving her from all sin, Jesus shows us that He can indeed save "to the uttermost" (Hebrews 7:25).

(On the other hand, were Jesus born of a sinner as some claim, that would mean either a) the Savior could not save His own Mother from contracting sin or b) He refused to honor His Mother in every way he could. So Jesus would be either a weak Savior or a trangressor of His own Commandment to "Honor your father and your mother" (Exodus 20:12). The Immaculate Conception is clearly a belief which exalts Jesus!)

Genesis 3:15 is a prophecy of the Messiah ("Seed of the woman") and His Virgin Mother (the "woman"). Notice that God says "I will put enmity between you (the serpent) and the woman", that is, between Satan and Mary! God foretold in the Garden that He would put enmity between the Devil and the Mother of the Messiah. Satan would be enemies not only with Mary's Son, but with Mary herself!

Now the Bible says that sin makes us enemies of God (Mt 12:30; Ro 5:8-10; James 4:4) and children of the Devil (Jn 8:44; I Jn 3:10). A sinner is not Satan's enemy, but his ally--even his "child", or seed! Were Mary ever a sinner, she would not be the devil's enemy, as God had decreed; she would have been the devil's daughter and the enemy of God-the enemy of her own Son! God's promise to put enmity between her and the ancient Serpent would then be a lie!

[drstevej]

***had His sole human parent been an enemy of God, a child of darkness****

Mary was a believer, these terms are not applicable to a believer after conversion.

giving thanks unto the Father, who made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light; who delivered us out of the power of darkness, and translated us into the kingdom of the Son of his love; in whom we have our redemption, the forgiveness of our sins COL. 1:12-14

[narses]

Perhaps you could help me here?

[narses]

She wasn't "converted" in the fashion you are talking about, she was created without Original Sin. In Luke 1:28, the angel Gabriel greets Mary as "full of grace". Protestant translations often render this as "highly favored", but this is a weak, inaccurate translation. The Greek term here is kecharitomene, a perfect present participle of the verb charitoo, which denotes "grace". A perfect participle indicates an action completed in the past with existing results, and a present participle denotes continuous or repeated action.

So kecharitomene means "you who were and continue to be full of and completed in grace". Now grace is not mere unmerited favor, but God's gift of spiritual life and communion with Himself. Sin and grace are opposed (Romans 5:20-21), and grace saves us from sin (Eph 2:5, 8). So Mary's fullness of grace indicates a complete absence of sin. Thus Luke 1:28 provides a second hint at Mary's sinlessness.

[drstevej]

****She had to be holy in order to be a worthy vessel for her utterly holy Son.****

WHY? Nothing is impossible for God.... His Holy Spirit indwells believers today who are not sinless!

***The Immaculate Conception is clearly a belief which exalts Jesus!***

Jesus was/is fully exalted apart from this recent dogmatic assertion. It elevates Mary beyond the appropriate biblical honor due her.

Genesis 3 says

15and I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed: he shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

The wider quote shows clearly that the enmity is between Satan and Jesus (Mary's seed).