Posted on 08/07/2019 3:20:08 PM PDT by ebb tide
Marian devotion is the cure for heresy and the healing of all heretics. We must turn to her for refuge from the heretical depravity now consuming the Church. Marian devotion is the destruction of error, the fount of humility, and a potent safeguard for orthodox faith.
Mary Is the Destroyer of All Heresies
In True Devotion to Mary, St. Louis de Montfort writes:
The most infallible and indubitable sign by which we may distinguish a heretic, a man of bad doctrine, a reprobate, from one of the predestinate, is that the heretic and the reprobate have nothing but contempt and indifference for our Blessed Lady, endeavoring by their words and examples to diminish the veneration and love of her. (30)
In the Tract for the Mass Salve Sancta Parens, the Church sings, “Rejoice, O Virgin Mary, thou alone hast destroyed all heresies.” From this, Pope St. Pius X invoked her as “Destroyer of Heresies” in Pascendi 58. And again, it was in the context of St. Dominic’s war against heresy that the Holy Rosary, Mary’s psalter, was revealed.
Thus, it is manifest that Our Lady holds a special place in the relationship of Holy Church with heresy and heretics. Why is this? It is because the root cause of heresy is not anger, lust, or sloth, but pride. A formal heretic pridefully and obstinately rejects the authority of the Church and the authority of the Fathers. His whole opinion hinges on an imaginary antiquarianism created by his pride. And it is against the sin of pride that Our Lady most perfectly shows her power. This is why St. Louis says in another place:
[Satan] fears her not only more than all Angels and men, but in some sense more than God Himself … because Satan, being proud, suffers infinitely more from being beaten and punished by a little and humble handmaid of God, and her humility humbles him more than the Divine power. (True Devotion, 52)
Demons and heretics fear her because she threatens to humble them. The latter impiously attack her under the pretense that they are safeguarding the honor due to God. In reality, they know that Mary will destroy their prideful opinions. “Humility is an abomination to the proud ” (Ecclus. 13:24).
How Mary Humbles the Proud
When the Holy Spirit exalted Mary by the mouth of St. Elizabeth, Mary said:
He hath shewed might in his arm: he hath scattered the proud in the conceit of their heart. He hath put down the mighty from their seat and hath exalted the humble. (Lk. 1:51)
Devotion to Mary brings humility to the soul. Just as St. John heard her voice and leaped for joy, and St. Elizabeth immediately humbled herself, saying “Who am I that the mother of my Lord should come to me?” (Lk. 1:43), we too know this humility when we exalt Mary.
Mary humbles us because God wills that Jesus Christ be manifested to the world through her. According to nature, any man is her equal. According to grace and merit, she is “more honorable than the cherubim, and beyond compare more glorious than the Seraphim” [1]. In Mary, our humility is truly tested because she is a human, not God.
Humility toward God is presumed by all, and heretics falsely think themselves humble because they say they submit to God. But their pride is revealed when they refuse to submit to man — both legitimate authority and the sayings of the wise. “The way of a fool is right in his own eyes: but he that is wise hearkeneth unto counsels” (Prov. 12:15).
A humble man may even debase himself before wicked men, as our Lord did. But heretics have no humility toward men. In reality, heretics are attempting to impose their private opinion on all authorities. They have no humility toward any human but are consumed in their own selves. As the history of Protestantism has shown, it is easy to feign humility toward God while exalting yourself over every man. This is the way of all the heretics.
One who is humble toward Mary will be humble toward authority. Mary especially checks the pride of heretics by proclaiming that they cannot have their own private, “personal Jesus,” since our Lord has forever bound Himself to His mother by His incarnation. In the same way that the Incarnation is the foundation of our redemption — without which there can be no Passion or Resurrection — the human person of Jesus Christ cannot exist without the person of Mary [2]. As I have written in another place, true union with Christ will result in love of Mary as our mother, who was also the first natural cause of His appearance to the world.
Marian Devotion is a test for orthodoxy
Since Marian Devotion is the fount of humility, it becomes a powerful test for orthodoxy. For example, when St. John Vianney’s lack of intelligence presented a barrier to his ordination, he was evaluated like this:
The vicar-general asked the superior of the seminary: ‘Is young Vianney pious? Is he devoted to the Blessed Virgin?’ The authorities were able to assure him fully upon these points. ‘Then,’ said the vicar-general, ‘I will receive him. Divine grace will do the rest.’ [3]
And so the Church ordained the future patron of parish priests. Sometimes it is as simple as asking if a man has Marian devotion. If a man is truly devoted to our Lady, he can be no heretic. St. Louis again:
“If you follow her,” says St. Bernard, “you cannot wander from the road.” Fear not, therefore, that a true child of Mary can be deceived by the evil one, or fall into any formal heresy. There where the guidance of Mary is, neither the evil spirit with his illusions, nor the heretics with their subtleties, can ever come — Ipsa tenente, non corruis. (True Devotion, 209) [4]
Thus, it is unsurprising that when we read through Building a Bridge by James Martin, S.J., a book purported to be about mercy and compassion, not a single page mentions the Mother of mercy and compassion. In fact, on page 130, he even erroneously asserts that at the Resurrection, Mary Magdalene was the first Christian, implicitly denying our Lady and the entire tradition of her Saturday memorial in which her sole faithfulness is commemorated. The examples of his warped or deficient Marian piety are only too easy to find [5].
But it is even more disturbing when we read how the Rhine group at Vatican II successfully suppressed the document on the Mother of God, relegating it, by a narrow vote, to the final section in Lumen Gentium (against the protests from Eastern Catholic bishops and others) [6]. When their efforts to suppress Marian devotion were opposed by Paul VI (to his credit), the time became known to them as “Black Week” [7]. Perhaps more alarming, Ratzinger himself admits that his Marian piety was weak in Last Testament and seems to imply the false dichotomy that Marian piety is not Christocentric [8]. Without succumbing to the sin of rash judgment, it is nevertheless suggestive that this lack of Marian piety correlates with an apparent hubris on the part of many Vatican II “reformers.”
Whatever the true state of these and other men with an apparent reluctance to love and honor their own mother, we can be certain that our Blessed Lady is a sure refuge from heresy. As Fr. Ripperger has stated, without a strong intellectual formation, everyone becomes a Modernist in our corrupt society. That is why we must cling to Our Lady for refuge from heretics and heresy in our time.
True devotion to Mary keeps us safe from the excesses of pride. Even more in our day, let us consider: she stood firm, though she witnessed the Passion and death of our Lord. We also must stand firm, even as we are witnessing the passion and death of the Church. Moreover, it seems clear from her frequent apparitions since the 19th century that Our Lord has purposed His mother for a special role in resolving this crisis. Let us pray our daily rosary and make the First Saturdays. Let us abide with Our Lady in the Passion of the Church and never lose hope for the Glorious Resurrection.
[1] Eastern Catholic Marian antiphon
[2] So too the mediation of the Sacraments — through another human — we receive our Lord.
[3] The Life of Saint John Vianney, The Curé of Ars, ch. 1
[4] It should be noted that Marian devotion is not an infallible test for orthodoxy, but merely a general rule against which there can be significant exceptions. Some Protestants, although material heretics, are in fact humble, and some Catholics are orthodox with little or no Marian piety. However, no man can be truly devoted to Our Lady and be a heretic. Moreover, formal heresy is defined as an error in the intellect and an obstinate will. It is particularly the latter from which Mary keeps us safe.
[5] I refuse to expose the reader to any further abuse of Our Lady from James Martin. Suffice it to say I have searched in vain for a substantial treatment or promotion of Marian devotion from Martin, and he admits in My Life with the Saints, p. 345ff., that his Marian devotion, which was shallow in his youth, was formed by the Jesuits as an imitation model, not the traditional, primarily mediatrix role. If his Marian devotion does go beyond sentimentality, let him publicly and explicitly disavow every heresy of which he is accused.
[6] See Rev. Ralph Wiltgen, The Rhine Flows into the Tiber (Augustine, 1979), 90ff.
[7] See Ibid., 234ff. The Rhine group was opposing Paul VI’s honoring of our Lady as “Mother of the Church” as well as his actions regarding collegiality, religious liberty, and ecumenism.
[8] See Benedict XVI, Last Testament, trans. Jacob Phillips (Bloomsbury, 2016), 70ff. As I have read more into Ratzinger, despite his obvious strengths, more of his theology has concerned me. This point was another red flag
Something not being in Scripture does not give anyone license to make things up and claim they are true.
Your list of names proves nothing. It just mentions four women who were at the cross when Jesus died.
Ah, as usual. The old.
*It doesn’t mean what it says, it means what we say it means.*
The commandment is *Thou shall not MURDER*.
Intentional killing . God made provision for protection for accidental death, which is not the same thing at all.
I looked. It’s not there.
Obviously you have nothing and are unwilling to acknowledge it.
So you're saying that the second person of the trinity is not eternal but came into existance when Mary gave him birth?
Ah, speculation.......
What a great thing to base *truth* on.
So some churches were taught the tradition by word where other churches were taught the tradition by the written epistles...Ought to be clear that the tradition taught was the same whether spoken or written...They certainly couldn't be teaching different things to the various churches...
It appears your Church reads that verse by changing the position of the comma:
(Therefore stand fast and hold the traditions you were taught, by word or by our epistle.2 Thess. 3:6) From here
(Therefore stand fast and hold the traditions you were taught by word, or by our epistle.2 Thess. 3:6) To here
traditions you were taught, by word or by our epistle.
traditions you were taught by word, or by our epistle
First one shows that the tradition of the church is the same whether oral or written...
Moving the comma could separate tradition to being spoken as compared to scripture (but is not tradition) which is written...
Amen!
See you there!
Nope...That would be true only if God IS the flesh...But he isn't...He was IN(side) the flesh...
Yes, I was actually referring to possibilities beyond the 1,000 years into the unknown future.
That final rebellion, IMHO, will be sheer madness at a level probably never seen before. They will attempt to attack Christ Himself while He’s in Jerusalem on His Rightful Throne.
The numbers of those (billions?) will be staggering that try to.
It is, and I’m just speculating. So I sit back down :)
Are you out of touch, or a little touched?
I did not say mary was the mother of God.
you wrote(Jesus existed BEFORE Mary was even born.)
which is totally wrong.
Christ the son existed but not Jesus.
Now; just WHO will be the actual mother?////////
And what the hell does that have to do with this conversation?
Nope...That would be true only if God IS the flesh...But he isn’t...He was IN(side) the flesh...
you have that right , at the same time you are saying Jesus was not God in the flesh, which I will not argue either way on.
Ah, speculation.......
yes, by most any bible scholor, Clopas is the Hebrew name for
Alphaeus. ping.
Ah, speculation.......
What a great thing to base *truth* on.........
It is a lot more than you have given me, excuses,excuses,
excuses.
So you’re saying that the second person of the trinity is not eternal but came into existance when Mary gave him birth?.........
You know very well I did not say that, Christ is the son.
Jesus become Christ the son in the flesh.
Your knowledge and unbelief is really showing.
Have you ever known anyone who was infallible in their knowledge and understanding of divine revelation?
No wonder. They redefine everything else. Why not that, too?
Just what are those traditions Paul was referring to that he handed down that we are to keep that were not included in Scripture?
How do you know?
How do you know they’re from the apostles, Paul in particular?
How do you know they’ve been passed down faithfully?
What is your source for verifying all of the above?
Please provide the sources for verification purposes.
IMPORTANT, CRUCIAL questions that deserve answers, mm. Which is why they will never answer them. Because you dare to say that PROOF is required first. Just like the BEREANS. Their *proof* could be weighed against the SCRIPTURES to SEE IF THE THINGS THEY PROCLAIM ARE TRUE.
And yes, I’m certain there are several of us who “search the SCRIPTURES daily, to see if those things are so.”
Who knows what a person might find who bothers to look up a poster’s information to double check for accuracy..
And a tip o' the hat to you. Did you expect anybody to disagree with you on that?
I'd only change the word "different" to "contradictory."
There can be "different" things even in the written Gospels (e.g. there are teachings and incidents in John that are not in the Synoptics; there are different wordings for even for the Lord's Prayer in Matthew and Luke; the whole chronology of His ministry varies in the various Gospels) -- but what you don't find is flat-out contradiction on the core "deposit of faith" on doctrine and morals.
The same is true is comparing Apostolic Tradition as it was received, preserved, taught and observed in the various Apostolic Sees, i.e. the churches historically founded by Apostles. The ones that come readily to mind:
If you visualize their Apostolic Traditions as being drawn on clear plastic sheets and then laid atop one another, they don't map on each other point-for-point, but all together they give the same coherent picture, not conradicting one another and not, of course, contradicting the written Tradition (the written NT).
The way I would say it, is that the written Tradition (the 27 books of the NT) and the oral Tradition (the practices, teachings, and beliefs of the Apostolic Churches) are not "identical", but they are ONE: they make up one coherent whole, without internal contradiction. They add up to the same picture. This is because they were handed down by the same people: the Apostles and the church leaders of the Apostolic Era (including second and third generation, like Titus and Timothy and many, many others).
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.