"If We Ignore the Mother, We Can't See the Child"

ROME, DEC. 25, 2002 (Zenit.org).- Scholar Scott Hahn roundly rejects the idea held by some outside the Church that Catholics, by honoring Mary, somehow detract from God.

"The glories we honor in Mary are merely her own reflections of God's glory," says the author of books such as "Rome Sweet Home" and "Hail, Holy Queen." Here, the one-time Presbyterian minister spells out his ideas.

Q: Why do you say that Catholics should love Mary a lot more than they do?

Hahn: Because God does! And he wants us to love her as much as he does.

At the time of the annunciation, the angel Gabriel prophesied that all generations would call Mary blessed. In our generation, we need to fulfill that prophesy. We need to call her blessed. We need to honor her -- again, because God did.

Jesus himself, as a faithful Jew, kept the Fourth Commandment and
honored his mother. Since Christ is our brother, she is our mother too. Indeed, at the end of John's Gospel, Jesus named her as the mother of all of us beloved disciples. So we too have a duty to honor her.

If we look back into the biblical history of ancient Israel, we discover that the Chosen People always paid homage not only to their king, but also to the mother of the king. The "gebirah," the queen mother, loomed large in the affections of Israelites. And the evangelists are very much aware of this.

In Matthew's Gospel especially, we find Jesus portrayed as the royal Son of David and Mary as queen mother. The Wise Men, for example, traveled far to find the Child King with his mother.

We find the mother of the Son of David portrayed in a similar way in the Book of Revelation, Chapter 12. There she is shown to be crowned with 12 stars, for the 12 tribes of Israel. The New Testament writers, you see, were careful to show us Mary's important place in the kingdom, and how we should love and honor her.

In my personal life, I've found the Blessed Mother to be a great intercessor, as she was at the wedding feast in Cana.

Why should we love Mary more? Because of God's grace -- she exemplifies it! Because of God's Word -- she teaches it! And because she is God's masterpiece. The Scriptures provide too many reasons to love her; I couldn't list them in so short a space.

Q: What are the main objections that non-Catholics present against Marian doctrine and devotion?

Hahn: Some non-Catholics believe that, by honoring Mary, we're somehow detracting from God. We're not. The glories we honor in Mary are merely her own reflections of God's glory.

St. Bonaventure put it very well when he said that God created all things not to increase his glory, but to show it forth and to share it. Mary's sinlessness itself was a grace from God.

St. Augustine said: When God rewards us for our labors, he is only crowning his work in us. When God exalted the lowly virgin of Nazareth, he was crowning the greatest of his creations. When we honor Mary, we recognize God's work, and we praise him.

Others object to the Church's dogma of the immaculate conception -- that Mary was without sin from the very first moment of her life. They claim that, if this were true, she would have no need of a redeemer, no need for Jesus. But that's not true. Mary's immaculate conception was itself a fruit of Jesus' redemption.

Even today, we can see that Christ saves some people by deliverance and others by preservation -- some turn away from a life of crime, others are preserved from it by their good upbringing. Mary was preserved by a singular grace. Mary, you see, is dependent upon God for everything. She, by her own admission, is his handmaid.

Some very misguided people try to claim that Catholics make a goddess of the Blessed Virgin. But that is an abominable fiction. As much as we exalt Mary above our own sinful selves, we recognize that she is more like us than she is like God. She is still a creature, though a most wonderful creature. God himself exalted her to show us both the greatness of our human nature and the all-surpassing greatness of divine grace.

Even the early Protestant reformers never called for a wholesale rejection of the Marian dogmas. Luther and Calvin believed, for example, in Mary's perpetual virginity. Luther even believed in the Assumption and the Immaculate Conception, centuries before the Church solemnly defined it. Not until later generations would Christians come to such a far-reaching rejection of Mary's place in salvation history.

Q: How does Mary help us to understand the mystery of Christmas?

Hahn: Well, it's impossible for us to imagine the Christmas story without her. Her consent, her "yes," made that day possible. When God became man, he was born of a woman, born under the law. Christ is at the center of Christmas, but he chose not to be alone at the center. As a baby, he needed a mother to hold him. If we choose to ignore the mother, we can't see the Child.

In the stories leading up to Christmas, we encounter Mary as the model disciple. God found her humility irresistible, and we have to imitate her. God empowered her to love his Son as much as he deserves to be loved. And so we imitate her in that as well. Mary helps us to understand the mystery of Christmas because she received the greatest Christmas present ever, and she gave it to the world, just as we should.

Q: Why do you most converts to Catholicism have such an intense devotion to the Blessed Virgin?

Hahn: I can only speak for myself. I discovered the Catholic Church as not only the family of God, but as my family too. Mary is not only the mother of Jesus, but my mother too.

That's a wonderful discovery to make so late in one's life. So maybe we're making up for lost time! Or maybe we have a special affection for the practices that are distinctive to the ancient Christian faith -- the practices that we missed in our own upbringing.

And did I say anything about the attributes of the Father or the Son or the Holy Spirit--the Triune God. No, I said Jesus, Our Lord and Brother.

Was the man Jesus omnipresent? Robby you have dodged and weaved to change the ORIGINAL topic...Are Mary and the Saints omnipresent? Do they have the attributes of God? If not how do they hear the prayers of individuals all over the world at the same time? You have said yes ..that Angels are omnipresent. I am still waiting for some proof beyond your word..so now you have once again tried to change the subject..

How did the images of all the people in the room when St. Juan Diego unfurled the tilma, filled with castillian roses, appear in the eyes of the Virgin? No artist could have painted this. It wasn't even discovered until this century when opthomologists studied the eyes of the Virgin on the image.

You gotta admit, that's something. Haven't even made a scratch in all the tilma has been through, and symbolizes.

I was at a dinner party..one of the guests was telling us how she went to spiritualists at the Lilli Dale compound for readings.

She said she got great comfort from them

I asked if she realized that Satan deceived people and that the news and comfort cam not from God but Satan

She said "I do not care , I take comfort where I can find it

I then asked if she was a Christian..she said " No I am not a christian I am a Catholic"....truer words could not have been spoken

Jhn 16:7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.

At the close of the conversation she said that she would have lots of company in hell and laughed..that is also true

Rev 16:10 And the fifth angel poured out his vial upon the seat of the beast; and his kingdom was full of darkness; and they gnawed their tongues for pain,

Rev 16:11 And blasphemed the God of heaven because of their pains and their sores, and repented not of their deeds.

You don't believe God's Word? Why not?

John 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

40 And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.

41 I receive not honour from men.

42 But I know you, that ye have not the love of God in you.

43 I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.

44 How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only?

which repeatedly promoted these occultist websites

Ah, still content to misrepresent my anti occult posts.
Not surprised coming from someone who prays to the dead, instead of Jesus Christ.

I hardly think the religion forum of a major newspaper is me promoting an occult website.

One must wonder here, why you would keep seeking to paint me as something I am not, while you yourself have voiced approval of the occult. Very strange.

Dear Jael,

"And yet you claim that my saying witchcraft is real and evil is creepy?"

At the risk of becoming boringly repetitious, what is creepy is that you encouraged posters, in about 24 out of about 43 posts, to go chat with occultists on-line.

That's creepy.

"You don't take it seriously. You just said that your child reads the Lord of the Rings. Listen to me, THERE ARE NO GOOD WITCHES!!! Do you understand that????"

I think that your (mis)understanding of literature may not be widely held, even by many saved Christians.

"'So much so that we would avoid conversing with acknowledged occultists about occult matters. We would not suggest to folks to go converse with these so that they could see firsthand what's going on.'

"My comments were not made with that intention. My comments were made to scoffers who said witches are not real. Read that over again ever so slowly so that you understand it."

A distinction without difference. But heck, Jael, say what you want about your intentions. I have already attributed good intentions to you. It's your ACTIONS with which I have a problem. You encouraged posters repeatedly to chat with occultists about occult matters. The act itself is evil. Whatever your intentions (and I believe that they were good), your actions were bad.

And creepy.

"And since you do involve yourself in the occult, along with your children, I would take your statement to not be true, that 'it creeps you out.' Obviously it does not, as evidenced by your participation in it's reading materials."

That you equate Tolkien and Lewis with occultism is terribly sad. All can see how out of whack is your thinking and belief.

"Why would you even think a book about a witch is good????"

In literature, magic can serve different purposes. I would make a halting effort to explain it, but I'm afraid that even the most eloquent and clear and plain explanation would not move you. You are attached to your own personal interpretation of Scripture, and I doubt that there is anything that I can say to persuade you of your errors.

I won't even try.

As to this, from post #250:

"The stain remains."

You surpass most Protestants in that you are not only your own personal pope, but in being able to impute the stain of sin to others, you are your own deity.

Congratuations.

;-)

sitetest

If anyone should be creeped out, it is everyone on this thread, thinking that a woman claiming to be a "Catholic" Christian would actually try and frame someone and lie about what they said and why.

<>Desdemona explained her intent. I think it Christian to accept the explanation. I think it, frankly, occult (look up the word)you think you know her intent better than she does<>

It should creep you out that the same woman worships Mary and prays to dead people.

<>Bearing false witness is not Christian. St. Augustine, "City of God," was refuting that lie nearly 2000 years ago. Catholics reserve worship to God alone - Latria is the word St. Augustine used and made the, sensible, observation that MILLIONS had observed Mass being offered repeatedly yet NEVER has anyone ever heard Mass being offered to anyone, including Mary, but God and God alone. Mary is not worshipped. Never has been. Never will be.

Old false charges never die.

Prayers for the dead is something I engage in daily. Frankly, I could not care less that creeps you out.

That is the creep out.

<> The creep out, for me, is your attitude and your judgements about the souls of others and what does and does not remain as sin in the souls of other. Frankly, Ma'am, that is just more occultism in action<>

Well I guess were all lost because Mary had a part in the salvation of all of us.

NO those that believe that Mary is a part of their salvation are lost..

Jhn 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me

Not one word about mom..not one word of mom in the churches early doctrine as recorded in the Epistles...

Act 4:12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

Dear angelo,

"2 Beloved, we are God's children now; what we shall be has not yet been revealed. We do know that when it is revealed we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is."

1 John 3:2

It is an uncontroversial point of Catholic, and I believe Orthodox, theology that salvation constitutes union with God, that in Heaven, God shares His Divinity with us. Thus, although we are not of ourselves divine, or of the divine substance, we become divinized in union with Him.

We see this in the Church's view of the Sacraments, as in marriage, which mirrors the union of Christ Jesus and His Bride, the Church (become one flesh), or in baptism, where we die with Christ, and thus are risen with Him.

Frankly, I think that this is more explicitly taught in Orthodoxy, and I welcome any additional comments/corrections from our Orthodox Christian brothers and sisters.

sitetest

A work of art? Who painted it? There are no brush strokes on the Tilma. The fact that it has not rotted away is a miracle in itself. No poncho made of maguey plant has survived for 50 years. The tilma is over 400 years old. How did the images of all the people in the room when St. Juan Diego unfurled the tilma, filled with castillian roses, appear in the eyes of the Virgin? No artist could have painted this. It wasn't even discovered until this century when opthomologists studied the eyes of the Virgin on the image. You gotta admit, that's something. Haven't even made a scratch in all the tilma has been through, and symbolizes.

You credulously accept the entire story. Your choice.

For those who are inclined to be more skeptical of such claims:

'Miraculous' Image of Guadalupe

Juan Diego never existed, critics argue

This probably jumps out at me more today because I've been discussing the nature of God with LDSers over the past week.

I don't want to be a god. I lack the resume and the qualifications.

Wouldn't that call into question your own salvation then? Since everything you know about Jesus Christ came from the Catholic church. Including your Bible.

For the first 1700 years Christianity was wrong? It wasn't until then that people held the same view about Our Lady as you do. And it wasn't until the 20th century that the "doctrine" of being "saved" came into being.

I'd be worried about that.

What does these verses from scripture mean anyway:

Luke 2:25 through 35. paraphrasing here: "He (Simeon) was just and pious, and the Holy Spirit was upon him.....Simeon blessed them (Mary & Joseph) and said to Mary his mother: "and you yourself shall be pierced with a sword-so that the thoughts of many hearts may be laid bare." (well, Simeon, you scripture says 'the Holy Spirit was upon' must have been wrong, Mary's heart was never pierced by a sword-was it?)

What's the other one mean: John 19: 26 & 27 "Woman, there is your son." In turn he said to the disciple, "There is your mother."

Did Jesus forget about taking care of His mother until He was about to die? Was Mary's heart pierced with a sword, like Simeon said? We're Jesus and Simeon saying something more than scripture tells us?

I think they were, and apparently so did everyone upon whom you base your faith. Read their writings.

The author of the first 'Miraculous' Image of Guadalupe' didn't do much homework. The book I have by TAN books tells that an overzealous person did add a few unauthorized bit of painting on the tilma. However, there is no underlying sketch or brush strokes on the original tilma.

Different people also touched up the Shroud of Turin. I believe this is the burial cloth of Jesus Christ.

The author also says the images in the eyes appear to be "ink blots" and that Juan Diego never existed. I'm looking at an enlarged photo of Juan Diego from the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe right now. That is one amazing ink blot.

Alot of scientists also say Jesus Christ never existed. Scientists are funny that way.

The author also got a section of the story wrong, the part about the statue of Our Lady found in a river in Spain.

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.