Catholic Caucus: Mary, The Power of Her Name [The Most Holy Name of the Blessed Virgin Mary]

Holy Wounds Apostolate ^ | unknown | Holy Wounds Apostolate

[Salvation]

The Holy Name of

Mary The Power of Her Name By St. Alphonsus de Liguori

	Richard of St. Laurence states "there is not such powerful help in any name, nor is there any other name given to men, after that of Jesus, from which so much salvation is poured forth upon men as from the name of Mary." He continues, "that the devout invocation of this sweet and holy name leads to the acquisition of superabundant graces in this life, and a very high degree of glory in the next."    After the most sacred name of Jesus, the name of Mary is so rich in every good thing, that on earth and in heaven there is no other from which devout souls receive so much grace, hope, and sweetness.    Hence Richard of St. Laurence encourages sinners to have recourse to this great name," because it alone will suffice to cure them of all their evils; and "there is no disorder, however malignant, that does not immediately yield to the power of the name of Mary." The Blessed Raymond Jordano says, "that however hardened and diffident a heart may be, the name of this most Blessed Virgin has such efficacy, that if it is only pronounced that heart will be wonderfully softened." Moreover, it is well known, and is daily experienced by the clients of Mary, that her powerful name gives the particular strength necessary to overcome temptations against purity.    In fine, "thy name, 0 Mother of God, is filled with divine graces and blessings," as St. Methodius says. So much so, that St. Bonaventure declares, "that thy name, 0 Mary, cannot be pronounced without bringing some grace to him who does so devoutly.". . grant, 0 Lady, that we may often remember to name thee with love and confidence; for this practice either shows the possession of divine grace, or else is a pledge that we shall soon recover it.    On the other hand, Thomas a Kempis affirms "that the devils fear the Queen of heaven to such a degree, that only on hearing her great name pronounced, they fly from him who does so as from a burning fire." The Blessed Virgin herself revealed to St. Bridget "that there is not on earth a sinner, however devoid he may be of the love of God, from whom the devil is not obliged immediately to fly, if he invokes her holy name with a determination to repent." On another occasion she repeated the same thing to the saint, saying, "that all the devils venerate and fear her name to such a degree, that on hearing it they immediately loosen the claws with which they hold the soul captive." Our Blessed Lady also told St. Bridget, "that in the same way as the rebel angels fly from sinners who invoke the name of Mary, so also do the good angels approach nearer to just souls who pronounce her name with devotion." Promises    Consoling indeed are the promises of help made by Jesus Christ to those who have devotion to the name of Mary; for one day in the hearing of St. Bridget, He promised His most holy Mother that He would grant three special graces to those who invoke that holy name with confidence: first, that He would grant them perfect sorrow for their sins; secondly, that their crimes should be atoned for; and, thirdly, that He would give them strength to attain perfection, and at length the glory of paradise. And then our Divine Savior added: "For thy words, 0 My Mother, are so sweet and agreeable to Me, that I cannot deny what thou askest."    St. Ephrem goes so far as to say, "that the name of Mary is the key of the gates of heaven," in the hands of those who devoutly invoke it. And thus it is not without reason that St. Bonaventure says "that Mary is the salvation of all who call upon her." "0 most sweet name! 0 Mary, what must thou thyself be, since thy name alone is thus amiable and gracious," exclaims Blessed Henry Suso.    Let us, therefore, always take advantage of the beautiful advice given us by St. Bernard, in these words: "In dangers, in perplexities, in doubtful cases, think of Mary, call on Mary; let her not leave thy lips; let her not depart from thy heart." Names of Jesus and Mary    In every danger of forfeiting divine grace, we should think of Mary, and invoke her name, together with that of Jesus; FOR THESE TWO NAMES ALWAYS GO TOGETHER. 0, then, never let us permit these two most sweet names to leave our hearts, or be off our lips; for they will give us strength not only not to yield, but to conquer all our temptations.    "The invocation of the sacred names of Jesus and Mary," says Thomas a Kempis, "is a short prayer which is as sweet to the mind, and as powerful to protect those who use it against the enemies of their salvation, as it is easy to remember." Hour of Death    Thus we see that the most holy name of Mary is sweet indeed to her clients during life, on account of the very great graces that she obtains for them. But sweeter still will it be to them in death, on account of the tranquil and holy end that it will insure them.    Let us then, 0 devout reader, beg God to grant us, that at death the name of Mary may be the last word on our lips. This was the prayer of St. Germanus: "May the last movement of my tongue be to pronounce the name of the Mother of God;" 0 sweet, 0 safe is that death which is accompanied and protected by so saying a name; for God only grants the grace of invoking it to those whom He is about to save.    Father Sertorius Caputo, of the Society of Jesus, exhorted all who assist the dying frequently to pronounce the name of Mary; for this name of life and hope, when repeated at the hour of death, suffices to put the devils to flight, and to comfort such persons in their sufferings.    "Blessed is the man who loves thy name, 0 Mary" exclaims St. Bonaventure. "Yes, truly blessed is he who loves thy sweet name, 0 Mother of God! for," he continues, "thy name is so glorious and admirable, that no one who remembers it has any fears at the hour of death." Such is its power, that none of those who invoke it at the hour of death fear the assaults of their enemies.    St. Camillus de Lellis urged the members of his community to remind the dying often to utter the holy names of Jesus and Mary. Such was his custom when assisting people in their last hour.    Oh, that we may end our lives as did the Capuchin Father, Fulgentius of Ascoli, who expired singing, "0 Mary, 0 Mary, the most beautiful of creatures! let us depart together."     Let us conclude with the tender prayer of St. Bonaventure:    "I ask thee, 0 Mary, for the glory of thy name, to come and meet my soul when it is departing from this world, and to take it in thine arms." Copies of “MARY THE POWER OF HER NAME” available in leaflet form from: Holy Wounds Apostolate, Inc.

[murphE]

Do you?

Don't be silly, of course Catholics aren't even allowed to read the bible on their own, the Church keeps 'em locked up. [roll eyes] =D

I actually prayerfully ask to understand scripture with the mind of the Church, the authority established on earth by Our Lord, and I use a good solid Catholic commentary for difficult passages.

Now, how can you know that your interpretation of scripture is accurate when it conflicts with many sincere Christians who use your method?

[ScubieNuc]

If you read the scripture and arrive to a conclusion not compatible with the prectices of the early Church, you should know that your private interpretation is invalid.

Now in 2 Timothy 2:15 where Paul instructs the early Christians to "study to show yourself approved of God." Or in 2 Timothy 3:16 which says, "All scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine,for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness." This would go against this man-made doctrine of needing the "Magisterium" to interpret it for you.

This touches on something I mentioned before...whose Bible are you using. The KJV is based primarily on Byzantine texts (That many "church fathers"...Justin the Martyr, Irenaeus, and Tertullian to name a few...quote repeatedly from) and Catholic bibles rely on inconsistant Egyptian or Alexandrian texts.

[NormB]

You denied Christ when you refused to have a crucifix in your house. (That post, #343, is now deleted).

So my refusal to have a crucifix in my house is a rejection of Christ glorified? Boy, such an outlandish and baseless statement definately speaks volumes about where your heart lies. Your refusal to answer the question, I will take as an admission of defeat. You lose. I win. If you can't back it up, shut up.

[annalex]

Now when Douay-Rheims doesn't agree with what you want, you jump to a different version.

My point was simply that Acts 6:8 cannot be used to deconstruct Luke 1:28, because the Greek original is different. Now, I checked the Vulgate and found this:

6:8 Stephanus autem plenus gratia et fortitudine faciebat prodigia et signa magna in populo

Acts 6:8 (Vulgata)

So, after all, Douay is not wrong because it follows Vulgate. The question becomes, why would Jerome translate "pleres pisteos" as "plenos gratia". It could be that he had access to another Greek that said "pleres charis". We can only speculate. It is unlikely that Jerome would mistranslate such clear language as this.

Does Vulgate's parallelism of "gratia plena" in Luke 1 and "plenos gratia" (the only difference is gender and insignificant in Latin word order) in Acts 6 deconstruct sinlessness of Mary? It does not because (1) we still don't have the Greek that says "kecharitomenos" in describing St. Stephen and (2) Stephen is described as filled with grace at the time leading up to his martyrdom, while Mary is described by the angel as filled with grace since before the annunciation.

Is Douay always right? No. For example, I don't know of an English translation that does the Commission of Peter (John 21:15-17) right (in the original Christ charges Peter to not only feed but also guide the sheep), and it is also missing from the Vulgate.

That means your doctrine is man-made.

The doctrine is Jesus-made, it is Apostle-made and it is Church-made. Text analysis alone, important as it is, cannot be divorced from the Church that conducts it, guided by the Holy Ghost. I think the above amply illustrates how no single translation can adequately convey the underlying doctrine.

So, is reading the Bible without an apparatus of comparative linguistics and next to the open book of Catechism useless? Of course not, if it is done for inspiration and accompanied with prayer. Some translations, while useless for doctrinal argument, have the benefit of easy to follow, elegant modern language. You may use them as long as the purpose of the reading accords with the purpose of the translation. If you use a translation done for light reading to make doctrinal points, you will fail, and if you use any translation to hurt the body of Christ, not only will you fail to do so, but your soul will perish.

Now in 2 Timothy 2:15 where Paul instructs the early Christians to "study to show yourself approved of God." Or in 2 Timothy 3:16 which says, "All scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine,for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness." This would go against this man-made doctrine of needing the "Magisterium" to interpret it for you. (from #382)

If you re-read 2 Timothy, you will find more references to oral teaching coming from St. Paul than to reading the scripture. Do not forget that St. Paul, with the other Apostles, was the living Magisterium. Also do not forget that Paul is addressing a consecrated bishop, rather than a layman. The scripture referred to in 2 Timothy 3:16 is obviously the Old Testament as the written Gospel was in its formative stages at that time. The letter illustrates how reading the Bible must be accompanied with authoritative teaching, even when it is done by one who had received the Holy Orders.

[annalex]

my refusal to have a crucifix in my house is a rejection of Christ glorified?

Yes, Sir, it is.

[annalex]

KJV is based primarily on Byzantine texts (That many "church fathers"...Justin the Martyr, Irenaeus, and Tertullian to name a few...quote repeatedly from) and Catholic bibles rely on inconsistant Egyptian or Alexandrian texts.

This sounds like one of those fantastic Protestant fables. Do you have a source we can look into? Alexandrian texts are the Septuagint that is the foundation of the Greek (a.k.a. Byzantine) Bible. Jerome, if anything, erred by not looking enough into the Septuagint and instead relying too much on contemporary to him Jewish rabbinical sources. I am pinging people who know more than I do on this.

[Quester]

You denied Christ when you refused to have a crucifix in your house.

Can you explain ... or provide anyone else's explanation ... why not having a crucifix in your home ... is a denial of Christ ?

[annalex]

Not having a crucifix is not having a crucifix. Bad practice, but not a denial of Christ. To refuse a crucifix when offered for the purpose of spiritual healing, on grounds of religion -- and this is what happened in 343 -- is refusal to be reminded of Christ in your home, which is denial of Christ.

[NormB]

horsepuckey.

[Quester]

Not having a crucifix is not having a crucifix. Bad practice, but not a denial of Christ. To refuse a crucifix when offered for the purpose of spiritual healing, on grounds of religion -- and this is what happened in 343 -- is refusal to be reminded of Christ in your home, which is denial of Christ.

What if one already has a Bible in one's home ?

[annalex]

Keep the Bible and take the crucifix.

[Quester]

Keep the Bible and take the crucifix.

What will the crucifix do for you ... that the Bible does not already do ?

[ScubieNuc]

I am not a Bible scholar, just a wanna-be. I can point you to some web sites. Some of them reference Colleges or books written by scholars. you'll undoubtably notice no Catholic historic sites. I searched for catholic sites with description of how we got our Bible, but I found none that had references.

As a short-cut to the obvious end of this Biblical disection....You put your faith in the Catholic church, it's traditions, and it's Bible version. I put my faith in Jesus, and His word as written in the KJ Bible.



www.blueletterbible.org
www.biblelife.org
www.biblebelievers.net
www.wayoflife.org
www.catholic.com (only catholic one I found with some backgroundinfo)

[annalex]

The crucifix is a visual reminder of Christ the Man who suffered and died. It was not a book that felt pain, thirsted, and gave up the last breath. It educates your mind by directing you to an image of a perfect man, so that you be a better man yourself. I offer the crucifix as a tool of spiritual exercise toward this goal. If was refused with vehemence.

[annalex]

found none

Why didn't you ask?

Canon of the Old Testament
Canon of the New Testament

You put your faith in the Catholic church, [its] traditions, and [its] Bible version.

The source of all that you enumerated is Christ, Who is the Word made Man. However, I just got through explaining that no Bible version has an exclusive claim on the deposit of Christian Faith that we get from the Church, although some versions seem to exist only in order to destroy the faith, while others are quite good.

[ScubieNuc]

Thanks for the links. I bookmarked them for future study. (By the way how do you post a link?)

no Bible version has an exclusive claim on the deposit of Christian Faith that we get from the Church, although some versions seem to exist only in order to destroy the faith, while others are quite good.

Are you saying that NO Bible version is greater then the (Catholic) church? When you say "destroy the faith", do you mean the faith in Jesus as savior or faith in the Catholic church?

[annalex]

To post a link, you will be using so-called HTML tags. They are things in angle brackets. Once your post contains even one tag, the entire post will have to be in HTML format, so you habe to also use <p> to separate paragraphs. If you don't use HTML in your post.you can just type normally and the paragraphs come out.

To post a link find out the exact URL of the page. Better start with http://, for example, "http://www.blueletterbible.org". also think of how you want to name your link. For example, you may want to name it "Click Here". Now type this:

<a href=http://www.blueletterbible.org>Click Here</a>

Press Preview, and it will become

Click Here

***

We don't worship the Bible, nor the Church. We worship the Triune God, Who gave us the Church and the revelation of the Bible. The official Latin Rite Catholic version is St. Jerome's Vulgate, and the official Eastern Rite and Orthodox version is in Greek, closely related to the Alexandrine Septaguint. The Old Testament is known through its Maronite Hebrew edition, although it is not what Christ and Apostles knew, as it post-dates them. These are versions of great authority (admittedly, Latin was not used by the Apostles, but Jerome's translation was done in contact with the Hellenized Jews of Palestine whose language was close to the Greek of the Apostles; Jerome also had access to material now lost). Douay follows the Vulgate word-for-word and so is as close to the official Catholic version as one can get in English. But it often lacks in elegance.

The Church teaches that all written scripture has to be understood within the Apostolic Tradition, and the Church is the deposit of it. I don't know if that means the Church is "greater" or not. The readings at today's Latin Rite Mass are said in New Amercian Bible and are on occasion inaccurate in comparison with Douay. But they have certain flow and are easy to follow by ear. Also, for most part all the versions, including those we don't particularly like, say the same thing; the subtle and sometimes not so subtle mistranslations occur when the translator's theology influences his choices, so closer inspection is needed when the subject matter divides us from the Protestants: Mary, priesthood, Eucharist.

I do not make a distinction between Faith in Jesus and Faith in the Church. The Church is what informs my faith in Jesus, thanks to its apostolicity. I suppose, it is inaccurate to speak of "faith in the Church" because we do not pray to the Church or worship it, but we pray to and worship Jesus. When a translation is grossly inaccurate, it distorts our knowledge of what it attempts to describe, and so our faith suffers. For example, when the way in which the angel addresses Mary is translated as "most favored one", it trivializes the meaning of "keharetomene" by removing the connotation that Mary had been filled with grace even before the Angel appeared. "Most favored one" is not telling us anything we cannot deduce from the rest of the scripture. Of course, she was most favored, -- no other woman gave birth to Jesus. The translator could just as easily have omitted that phrase altogether. Also, grace is a technical term in Christianity as it is the opposite of sin. "Favor with God" is a weaker term, not necessarily opposite of all sin. Only from this verse we learn something about her condition since birth. This is how a sloppy translation leaves us uninformed, and weakens our faith. Look at all the energy people spend arguing about veneration of Mary and how often it comes from not reading from the same scripture and with the apostolic eye.

[ScubieNuc]

Thanks for the HTML lesson. 8^)

When you say "Apostolic Tradition" or "Apostolic eye", are you referring to the Matthew 16:18 account? (meaning Peter is the "stone" and he can tie or loose anything in heaven)

When a translation is grossly inaccurate, it distorts our knowledge of what it attempts to describe, and so our faith suffers.

Do you believe that at least one of the translations is correct?

Or do you think that they all should be compared? Kind of like this:

Click Here

Then what directs you to which one is correct? Is it what the Catholic Church says alone, or do you compare it to what other evidences exist in the Bible?

As far as our "faith suffering", I personally don't see that. Since I accepted God's free gift of salvation, any challenge to my faith, has made me stronger. Whether it be Evolution, Mormonism, 7th Dayers, etc. When I don't know the immediate answer, I have searched scripture for a clearer understanding. This is because I know, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that I am saved. This is something internal that would be hard if not impossible to explain. (Sometimes I use the example of trying to explain to some primal tribesman in New Guinea that I can breath air under water. They could condemn me as a lunatic, but I already know, because I've experience it.)

[Quester]

If you re-read 2 Timothy, you will find more references to oral teaching coming from St. Paul than to reading the scripture. Do not forget that St. Paul, with the other Apostles, was the living Magisterium. Also do not forget that Paul is addressing a consecrated bishop, rather than a layman. The scripture referred to in 2 Timothy 3:16 is obviously the Old Testament as the written Gospel was in its formative stages at that time. The letter illustrates how reading the Bible must be accompanied with authoritative teaching, even when it is done by one who had received the Holy Orders.

1 John 2:27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.

[Quester]

The crucifix is a visual reminder of Christ the Man who suffered and died. It was not a book that felt pain, thirsted, and gave up the last breath. It educates your mind by directing you to an image of a perfect man, so that you be a better man yourself. I offer the crucifix as a tool of spiritual exercise toward this goal. If was refused with vehemence.

Certainly you know that Protestants and other Non-Catholics have a different regard for graven images than do Catholics.

The scriptures tell the story of Jesus' life, ministry, suffering, and death as well, or better ... than any image could.