PRAYING TO MARY
Do Catholics adore the Virgin Mary, and consider her omnipresent, so that she can answer their prayers? No, Catholics adore God alone, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. They love and reverence the Blessed Virgin, because God honored her above all creatures by choosing her to be the Mother of His only Son. St. Epiphanius in the fourth century condemned the Collyridians, the only sect in history, who gave her divine honors, saying: "We do not adore the saints. . . . Let Mary then be honored, but the Father, Son and Holy Ghost alone be adored" (Adv. Collyrid., 29).
God alone is Omnipresent. The power of the Blessed Virgin to know our particular wants, and to answer our prayers no more implies omnipresence than my power to grant the request of a friend thousands of miles away implies my presence in that place. When Eliseus saw the ambush prepared for the King of Israel was he necessarily in Syria at the time (4 Kings vi.. 9)? God can make known to His saints what we need, as we learn from His words in Job: "Go to My servant Job, and offer up a holocaust for yourselves; and My servant Job shall pray for you; for him I wi11 accept lest I deal with you according to your folly" (Job xlii. 8). The saints see God "face to face as He is" (I Cor. iii. 12; 1 John iii. 2), and in seeing God, they see in Him as in a mirror all that happens upon earth.
THE VENERATION OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN
Why do Catholics pay so much honor to Mary, when
she was only an ordinary woman? Does not Catholic devotion to her detract from the worship due to Christ?The Catholic Church has always paid special honor to the
Biessed Virgin, because God honored her above all creatures by bestowing upon her the highest dignity He could conferthe divine maternity. The Scriptures tell us that Jesus honored her by dwelling with her under the same roof at Nazareth for thirty years until He began His public ministry, and that He showed His love to her on the Cross, when He left her to the kindly care of His beloved disciple, St. John (John xix:26). I could never understand how intelligent men hoped to extol the Son of God by making little of the Mother of God. We do not win the affections of our fellowmen by despising or making little of their mothers.How can you call Mary an ordinary woman, and at the same time pretend that you have studied the Scriptures? Would God choose an ordinary woman to be the Mother of His only Son, when He had countless millions of women to choose from? The prophet Isaias spoke of her coming centuries before (vii. 14), and God sent from heaven a special ambassador to announce her supereminent dignity (Luke i. 26), and another to comfort St. Joseph in his doubting (Matt. i. 20). Both the angel and St. Elizabeth called her "blessed among women" (Luke 1. 28, 43), and her own prophecy that "henceforth all generations shall call me blessed" (Luke i. 48) is fufilled to the letter every day by Catholics tbe world over.
Instead of detracting frpm the love of Christ, devotion to Mary increases our love for Him. The devout client of Mary is ever the strong defender of the divinity of Jesus Christ, her Son. The divine maternity, as the Council of Ephesus dearly recognized in 431, has ever been the standard of orthodox belief in the true doctrine of the Incarnation.
Love for Mary, the masterpiece of Gods creation, by its very nature leads us to the love of Christ her Son. He cannot be jealous of the praise we give her, for every one of her privileges and prerogatives are His own free gift. Is the artist jealous of the praise you give his masterpiece? Is the author jealous of the praise you give his book?
MEDIEVAL LEGENDS Are Catholics bound to believe all the legends of the Blessed Virgin that were current in the Middle Ages? Did not medieval devotion to the Virgin encourage harmful superstition, and go counter to the unique mediatorship of Christ? Are not some of the expressions used by Catholic writers in speaking of the Blessed Virgin inaccurate and blasphemous? What is your opinion of The Glories of Mary?
Catholics are not bound to believe the legends of the saints. The Church has always been most careful in weighing the evidence, before she sanctioned any miracle in the lives of her saints (Macken, The Canonization of Saints; Delehaye, The Legends of the Saints). If you would learn how carefully her critical scholars separate the true miracle from the false, I would ask you to read the Bollandists Lives of the Saints, the most critical work of expert scholarship that has appeared during the past three hundred years (Delehaye, The Work of the Bol1andists).
Even unbelievers grant that the medieval devotion to the Blessed Virgin fostered a respect for women, which nothing else could have effected. Lecky writes: "The world is governed by ideals, and seldom or never has there been one that has exercised a more salutary influence than the medieval conception of the Virgin." He says again: "There is, I think, little doubt that the Catholic reverence for the Virgin has done much to elevate and purify the ideal woman, and to soften the manners of men" (Rationalism in Europe, iii., 234; History of European Morals, ii., 389)
We readily admit that by falsely interpreting the fervid expressions of devotion of some Catholic writers, you may read into their books heresy or blasphemy, but is this honest? When Blackstone in his commentaries says that "the king can do no wrong," or that "the king never dies," or that "the king is the fountain of justice" (Commentaries, i., ch. 7, 246, 249, 270) would you call him a heretic or a blasphemer, and say that he ascribed impeccability or immortality to the king of England?
An intelligent Catholic always distinguishes carefully the language of devotion from the language of dogma, and instinctively imterprets an exaggerated expression of some pious Latin writer by the exact wording of the creed, the catechism or a manual of theology.
St. Alphonsus, for example, wrote his Glories of Mary for the simple, uneducated, and imaginative peasant of Southern Italy. You may reject the legends he records if you will, but do not forget that his doctrine regarding the Blessed Virgin is thoroughly Catholic from start to finish. Let me quote a few passages. "No one denies that Jesus is the only Mediator of justice, who alone by His merits reconciles us with God." . . . "It would be a serious error to believe that God could not give us grace without the intercession of Mary." . . . "We acknowledge that God is the only Source of good, and that Mary is only a creature; all she has received is due to the grace of God."
The expressions of an ardent lover may not all be literally true, for warmth of feeling often produces exaggeration in language. But who cavils at this, and who asks the lover to speak in matter of fact terms? Must there be no warmth in the expression of our love of the saints of God?
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Hollweck, Biographical Dictionary of the Saints. A.Q. 1887, 312.S. Sept., 1925.
Did not Christ speak harshly to the Virgin, saying to her at the marriage of Cana: "Woman, what have I to do with thee" (John ii.4)?
The Catholic version is more accurate: "What (is it) to me and to thee?" According to Father Lagrange the Arabs of Palestine still use this same expression: "What to thee?" It has a two-fold meaning, either "attend to your own affairs," or when said smilingly, "Do not worry, all will turn out well." This second meaning is certainly the meaning here, for Christ immediately works the miracle of changing water into wine at His Mothers request.
The use of the word "woman" does not in the slightest degree imply any disrespect, or even emphasize, as some have falsely held, the infinite distinction between Mary, the creature, and her divine Son. It is simply a solemn mode of addressing anyone, as we know from our Lords use of it on the Cross (John XX. 26).
Many honest Protestant commentatorsWestcott, Bloomfield, Ellicott, Alford, Trenchadmit that our Lord did not speak harshly to His mother in this passage. Trench writes: "It is true that in the address woman there is nothing of severity or harshness, however much it may have some such sound to Eng1ish ears. In those last and tenderest words which our, Lord addressed to His Mother, He used the same language: Woman, behold thy Son. So far from any harshness, the compellation has something solemn in it, and cannot but have such where the dignity of woman is truly felt. But it is otherwise with the words: What have I to do with thee? . . . Any severity which these words may seem to have in reading, we cannot doubt was mitigated in the manner of speaking; suffering, as it did, a near compliance with her request to look as though an apparent refusal" (On Miracles, Ser. 1).
Bibliography: Lagrange, Evangile selon Saint Jean, 56, 57).
Did not Christ make little of His Mother, when in answer to the woman in the crowd who called her blessed He said: "Yea rather, blessed are they who hear the word of God and keep it" (Luke xi. 28)?
He did not. Father Ryder, answering this objection, said: "The comparison is one of relations, not of persons, and the perfection of both relationships might culminate in the one person, as indeed was the case; for was she not Athe handmaid of the Lord@ (Luke i. 38) as well as His Mother, and did she not Akeep all these things and ponder them in her heart?@ (Luke ii. 19.) If in Christ=s Ayea rather@ He be supposed to deprecate His Mother=s cultus, He must no less be supposed to deprecate His own, for the woman in the crowd primarily extolled Him, and His Mother only for His sake. Doubtless He would turn men=s minds from the external greatness of His Mother=s prerogative as of His own, to fix them rather upon His and His Mother=s truer glory, as when He said: ACallest thou Me good?@ (Matt. xix. 17.)
Bibliography: Ryder, Catholic Controversy. A. Q. 1895, 399.
Did not Christ disown His Mother, when He said, "My Mother and My brethren are those which hear the word of God and do It" (Luke viii. 21; Cf. Matt. xii. 46, 50)?
Not at all. He is simply taking occasion of the presence of His Mother and cousins to teach the people the necessity of keeping the word of God, as Mary did (Luke i. 38, 45; ii. 19, 51), and the necessity of detachment from even one
=s kinsfolk for the love of God. Tertullian writes: AChrist is wont to do everything that He enjoins upon others. How strange then would it certainly have been if, while He was teaching others not to esteem mother or father or brother as highly as the word of God, He were Himself to leave the word of God as soon as His Mother and brethren were announced to Him. He denied His parents, therefore, in the same sense in which He has taught us to deny oursCfor God=s sake@ (De Carrie Christi, 7).St. Ambrose writes: AJesus did not mean to reject the attentions of His Mother, for He Himself commands; >Let whosoever dishonors father or mother die the death=; but He acknowledges Himself obliged to attend rather to the mysteries of His Father than to indulge maternal affection. His Mother is not disowned here, as some heretics insidiously pretend; even from the Cross He acknowledges her@ (In Luc, viii., 20).
Bibliography: Lagrange, L'Evangile selon Saint Luc, 244. A.Q. 1894, 712.
THE ROSARY What is the origin and meaning of the Rosary? Why do uneducated Catholics mechanically count their prayers on strings of beads? Did not Christ rebuke repetitions in prayer: "Use not vain repetitions as the heathens do" (Matt. vi. 7)? The chief object of the Rosary devotion is meditation upon the mysteries of our Redemption. The fifteen mysteries---the Annunciation, the Visitation, the Nativity, the Presentation, the Finding in the Temple, the Agony, the Scourging, the Crowning with Thorns, the Carrying of the Cross, the Crucifixion, the Resurrection, the Ascension, the Descent of the Holy Spirit, the Assumption and the Coronation of the Blessed VirginC-are an excellent summary of the Gospel. Catholics try to realize them clearly and to feel them deeply, while they recite fifteen decades or tens of Hail Marys with an Our Father between each one. From the ninth to the twelfth century the priests of the monastic orders said Masses for their deceased brethren, while the uneducated lay brothers recited fifty Psalms or fifty Our Fathers. The recitation of fifty Hail Marys, divided in sets of ten, is first mentioned in the Ancren Riwle of. the English anchoresses of the twelfth century. The counting of these prayers on strings of beads to prevent distraction soon became prevalent, and two hundred years later the practice of meditation on the mysteries was introdluced by a Carthusian named Dominic.
The words ascribed to Christ in the faulty paraphase, Aavoid vain repetitions,@ are correctly translated in. the Douay version, Aspeak not much@ (battologein) as the heathens do. He was referring to the wordy eloquence, whereby the pagans endeavored to make the gods do their bidding (Seneca, Epis., zxxi., 5; Martial, vii., 60). As St. Augustine wrote on this passage: "Truly >much speaking= comes from the Gentiles who give more attention to the elegant delivery of their prayers than to the cleansing of their souls." Christ was teaching the Apostles how to pray by giving them the most perfect of all prayers, the Lord=s Prayer (Matt. vi. 9-1 5). At the same time He was condemning the Pharisees, Awho loved to stand in the corners of the streets that they might be seen by men@ (Matt. vi. 5). Such prayers were lip service only, for Athey honored God with their lips, while their hearts were far from Him@ (Matt. xv. 8; Isa. xxix. 13).
Christ never condemned repetitions in prayer, for He repeated the self-same prayer thrice in the Garden of Gethsemanil (Matt. xxvi. 39, 42, 44), nd He granted the gift of sight to the repeated prayers of the blind men (Matt. xx. 31). One of the most beautiful of the Psalms contains the recurrent antiphon:
APraise the Lord for He is good; for His mercy endureth forever@ (Pa. cxxxv.), and the angels of God in heaven nevet tire of repeating day and night the canticle: AHoly, Holy, Holy, Lord God Almighty, who was, and who is, and who is to come@ lApoc. iv. 8; Isa. vi. 3).Repeated prayers are not necessarily mechanical. A pianist like Paderewski may play the same concerto over and over again, and always play it with a perfect interpretation; an actor like Forbes Robertson may play the part of Hamlet night after night for months, and always reveal some new meaning in his lines. A mother can talk by the hour the most unintelligible baby talk to her child, and yet express in every word the deepest affection. Why then cannot Catholics repeat the Lord
=s Prayer and the Hail Mary, most of which is scriptural (Luke i. 28), over and over again without being accused of a lack of devotion. Bibliography: Lagrange, Evangile selon S. Matthieu, 122-124; Mother Loyola, Hail Full of Grace; McKenna, Treasures of the Rosary; Sheehan, Vain Repetitions. C. E. xiii. 184-188. HOW TO PRAY THE ROSARY: http://www.teleport.com/~rosary/howto.htm
THE ANGELUS
What Is the meaning of the Angelus?
The Angelus is a beautiful devotional custom of reciting three Hail Marys in the morning, noon and evening, in honor of the Incarnation. It derives its name from the first words of the prayer; "The angel of the Lord declared unto Mary.
@ It goes back to the fourteenth century, and was originally a popular imitation of the night prayers of the monks. The morning Angelus bell was called the peace bell, as the Bishops often urged their people to pray for peace while it was being tolled. The midday Angelus in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries was generally associated with the commemoration of our Lord=s Death upon the Cross. The evening Angelus, in honor of our Lady of the Annunciation, probably goes back to the time of Pope Gregory IX (1239). Bibliography: Bridgett, Our Lady=s Dowry; Rock, The Church of Our Fathers, iii. C. E. i. 486-488.CD. Jan., 1885.CE. Oct., 1917. ----R. C. xxix. 5; xxxi. 71.