Setting the Record Straight on Mary

Catholic Exchange ^ | December 17, 2006 | Fr. Thomas Euteneuer

[NYer]

The new movie that debuted on December 1st, The Nativity Story, has received many positive reviews around the country already and also a fair number of attacks by the standard group of village atheists.

Criticisms notwithstanding, the movie certainly has many redeeming qualities to it including its portrayal of Joseph and the touching scene of Mary's visit to Elizabeth, but at the same time I feel it necessary to correct the record about its presentation of Mary. More to the point, twenty centuries of theological reflection on the Virgin Mary have been effectively glossed over in the movie, and we have been given someone's private interpretation of Mary's role in salvation history which does not match the public record of historical Christianity. The Catholic Church has made it clear from the beginning that we do not understand Jesus as a historical and theological figure without Mary, and so a Nativity story that gets Mary wrong also skews our understanding of Jesus.

First and foremost, any portrayal of Mary as giving birth in pain is simply contrary to the Christian Church's long tradition of Mary as virginal before, during and after birth. In this view, her intact physical integrity during birth was accompanied by a psychic integrity that admitted of no pains during childbirth in any form. That may be a surprise to some, but it is nonetheless the historical Christian view of this event. The movie's portrayal of her childbirth is thus not the Church's mainstream understanding and qualifies as a strictly private interpretation of the event. In fact, the movie had a chance to contrast the painful childbirth of John the Baptist to Elizabeth with the miraculous birth of Jesus to Mary, and it missed the perfect opportunity to provoke a good theological debate!

Biblical Christians should know that there is a Scriptural reason for this doctrine. The virtually unanimous opinion of the Fathers of the Church in the first six centuries was that Mary is the "New Eve," the necessary counterpart to Christ, the New Adam (cf. Rom 5:12-14). Just as the old Eve collaborated in the sin of Adam, so the New Eve, with the New Adam, reverses the original disobedience and undoes the curse brought upon the human race by the first sinners. That same curse also brought about the grim consequence of labor pains for all of Eve's daughters (cf. Gn 3:16), but the New Eve who broke the curse was not subject to its dictates.

Secondly, Mary was not an immature adolescent as she is portrayed in the movie. The director of the movie, Catherine Hardwicke, intended to portray her as such in order to make her more "real" to teens. That is fine as an evangelistic motive, but depicting her in a quasi-feminist tizzy against her father's authority when he addresses the delicate subject of pre-marital relations is simply inaccurate to the historical record and doesn't help kids to take her as a role model.

The immaculate Mary's passions were first and foremost totally consecrated to the Lord and without the slightest disorder in any sense; she is not your typical teen in western society. She is the teen Mother of the Messiah, the perfect role model for all kids and adults alike. Not only would it not have entered the mind of the all-pure Mary to have pre-marital relations, she could not have had a fit of rebellion against her father's legitimate authority that concretized God's will for her. This presentation of Mary is quintessentially Hollywood and reflects neither historical Christianity nor even the biblical evidence. It is also a reflection of the Protestant view that Mary is just another person who happened to follow Jesus.

No, Mary is the Mother of God, perfectly pure in every respect and, even as a teenager dedicated heart, mind, soul and strength to God's plan of salvation. "Behold the handmaid of the Lord, be it done unto me as you say" (Lk 1:38).  Let the historical record speak for itself.

[Frank Sheed]

A different Jewish perspective....

[Uncle Chip]

Biblical Christians should know that there is a Scriptural reason for this doctrine. The virtually unanimous opinion of the Fathers of the Church in the first six centuries was that Mary is the "New Eve," the necessary counterpart to Christ, the New Adam

What???? Eve was the wife of Adam, Mary was the mother of Jesus. How does that make Eve and Mary counterparts?

Rather, Mary is the new Hanna, the mother of Samuel, who was dedicated to the service of God, and then afterwards had a house load of kids that were a blessing to her.

[mockingbyrd]

Did I read you right? Watching the Raiders is NOT a waste of time? What alternate universe do you live in?

Geeze louise bc, just when I thought you were completely reliable........

[Frank Sheed]

Sadly and stupidly, I bought the abridged commentary of the entire New Testament in one volume. It is helpful but WAY too short and truncated.

I was speaking with a friend only yesterday and we are going to collect the Synoptic Gospels one book at a time and then complete the New Testament beginning with John.

From what I have read, it is smashing. Fr. John Corapi recommends that Bible and none other for commentary.

[Frank Sheed]

Rather, Mary is the new Hanna, the mother of Samuel, who was dedicated to the service of God, and then afterwards had a house load of kids that were a blessing to her.

Mary's Magnificat is patterned after that of Hanna's canticle but her role in salvation history is quite different, Chip. Mary is the woman in Revelation who John refers to.

[trisham]

Therefore..A=B?

[bornacatholic]

I used to live in the dead Diocese of Maine. I was totally own my own. Several of us guys got together and learnt ourselves. The Navarre Bible - along with Ott, Denziger, Premm, Catena Aurea, Summa, Jurgens, Douay,Jungmann, Gaume, Spirago-Clarke, Trent, Cathechisms, Liturgical Year,and a Jebbie lecturer, who later got permission to quit so he could join the FSSP - was one we all bought - after reading "The Work"

Oh, and we all owned a ton of Sheed :). He was a genius

Do yourself a favor, get the entire new testament collection

[bornacatholic]

Sister, Advent is a time of penance :)

[mockingbyrd]

ahhhhh, I gotcha.....

Suffer away then my good man! (are you in the Oakland area, that alone should be at least two lifetimes worth of penance)

[Uncle Chip]

Read about Hanna in Samuel in the OT and pay close attention to how similar she is to Mary. Hanna's name means "Grace" and if there is any word associated with Mary in the NT, it is the word "Grace".

[bornacatholic]

I have a friend who has a pure Alto voice. He plays guitar and sings "Holy is His Name" and makes me cry. I often sing it to myself while I set-up the driving range on the golf course where I wsrk. That is one of the few new hymns I like. He has promised to sing it when they plant me.

He is happy I have decided to get to room temperature before he does

[bornacatholic]

I live in Florida. The land of warmth in temoperature and tepidity and stupidity in Faith - 'cept for my Pastor.

[pjr12345]

It's a pity that so many folks don't bother to actually read their Bibles, yet believe themselves to be Christians.

The Bible is THE ONLY valid source of doctrine. It mentions none of the folkloric stories and philosophies of men put forth by so many about Mary (and other topics). If one were to perform an exhaustive study of Mary in actual Scripture, one would find that she is called "blessed" by the Angel Gabriel to have been chosen to be the mother of Jesus. There are other references to her, but she is not centrally important to the redemption mission of Christ, which is the Good News! Certainly Scripture provides no basis for the many false doctrines that surround her.

Mary is not a co-savior with Jesus. Myriads of passages speak to this. Even Peter teaches very clearly that Jesus is sufficient,

Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved. (Acts 4:12).

And, he weren't talkin' 'bout Mama.

While Jesus is the "second Adam" (1Cor15:45), you will find nary a reference to Mary as the "second Eve".

There are so many other non-scriptural deceptions, that I shudder to continue! Rather, Let's go over a few basics.

(1) Don't fall victim to man's vain philosophies and doctrines.

Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ. (Col 2:8)

Therefore, if you died with Christ from the basic principles of the world, why, as though living in the world, do you subject yourselves to regulations— “Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle,” which all concern things which perish with the using—according to the commandments and doctrines of men? These things indeed have an appearance of wisdom in self-imposed religion, false humility, and neglect of the body, but are of no value against the indulgence of the flesh. (Col 2:20-23)

(2) Learn the Truth for yourself! It's all there in God's Word.

Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; (Phil 2:12)

Imitate me, just as I also imitate Christ. Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the traditions just as I delivered them to you. (1Cor 11:1-2)

(3) Teach the Truth!

But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed. (Gal 1:8-9).

Rather than be accursed... I suggest we all learn and teach the truth of the Gospel as delivered by the Holy Spirit, through the eyewitness accounts of the Apostles, and as recorded in their God-inspired writings we call the Bible.

[kawaii]

I agree.

The hardest part folks old and young have with Christianity is the submitting to God's will.

This submitting is also echoed throughout the relationship between the Church and the Laity, and in truly Christian marriage.

Making mary into someone who toils against this notion, which is integral to Christianity, makes for an aweful role model for all who view it.

[Biggirl]

Excellent article, thank you and Merry Christmas.

[kawaii]

The Bible is THE ONLY valid source of doctrine.

Too Bad the Bible never thought so, nor did the folks who wrote the Bible, nor did the churches they established.

Too bad the Sola-Scriptura is only 489 years old AT BEST.

[Biggirl]

...But also thank the Church for being inspired by the Holy Spirit for putting together the Bible as we know of today.

[trisham]

pjr12345

Since Nov 7, 2006

**************

Welcome to Free Republic.

[Uncle Chip]

Mary is the woman in Revelation who John refers to.

I thought the RCC belief is that Mary had a painless delivery, but the woman in Rev 12:2 is having a painful delivery:

"and she, being with child, cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered."

So this can't be Mary, right?

[OLD REGGIE]

Dave Armstrong...former Protestant.

I am always amused when you wring in your obligatory "Former Protestant" as your clincher. Are there no "Former Catholics" or "Former Catholic Priest" who think differently and who have any degree of credibility?

Just for the fun of it Let's try one - here. Richard Bennet Ex Catholic Priest.