Several years ago, I had a discussion with a Protestant friend about the Catholic practice of consecrating oneself to Mary. Like many Protestants, he thought the practice was completely foreign to authentic Christian spirituality, so he asked me to explain the logic behind it. I started out by saying that it basically means that we entrust ourselves to Mary and put ourselves under her tutelage; we ask her to teach us to be holy just like she was.
To help my friend understand this better, I used the example of basketball. I said that if you want to become the best basketball player you can be, you should learn from the best. If you can, you should go to the best basketball player of all time, Michael Jordan, and he would be able to help you more than anyone else on earth. (Granted, great performers are not always great teachers, but no analogy is perfect.)
Similarly, I said, if we want to be as holy as possible, we should learn the art of holiness from the most perfect person who ever walked the earth. Then, I was going to say that the holiest human being in history (according to the Catholic faith) was Mary, whose Immaculate Conception kept her from committing even the smallest sin during her time on earth, but my friend interjected and said it was Jesus. He said this with a sly grin on his face.
The implication was clear. He was subtly arguing that consecration to Mary is unnecessary because we can learn straight from Jesus Himself, the holiest of all.
On the surface, that appears to make sense. Mary may have been kept free from sin by God, but Jesus is God in the flesh, so it seems like a no-brainer. According to this common Protestant logic, we should just skip the middle (wo)man and go straight to the source of all holiness.
What to say to something like this?
Who Do We Look Up To
I don’t remember my exact response in that particular discussion, but if I were to answer my friend’s challenge today, I wouldn’t try to refute his logic head-on. Instead, I would try to outflank it, and I would begin by changing the subject slightly and considering the holy people whose lives we should imitate.
According to my friend, we should only imitate Jesus, not the saints. The saints may have been holy, but Jesus surpassed them all. He was (and eternally is!) holiness incarnate, so He is the best possible example for us to look up to. My friend’s idea is that we should cut out the middle (wo)men and hold Jesus up as our sole model of holiness.
However, Scripture says something very different. The New Testament tells us that we should imitate Jesus (see John 13:34, 1 Peter 2:21), but it also exhorts us to imitate the saints. For instance, St. Paul often told his readers to imitate him (1 Corinthians 4:16, Philippians 3:17, 2 Thessalonians 3:7-9), and in one passage, he even said, “Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ” (1 Corinthians 11:1).
So, not only did Paul tell his spiritual children to imitate him in general, but he even told them to look to him as an example when they could have just as easily looked to Jesus. He told his spiritual children to imitate him rather than just look to the example of the One he himself was following.
To be clear, this does not mean that St. Paul discouraged people from holding up Jesus as an example too. On the contrary, he explicitly told his readers to do that as well (Philippians 2:5, Colossians 3:13), so his point was not that they should imitate him instead of Jesus. Rather, it was that people should imitate him along with Jesus. In fact, we could even say that he wanted his readers to imitate Jesus precisely by imitating him.
Spiritually Depending on One Another
And why would that be? It is because God does not want us to keep our eyes so focused on him that we lose sight of everyone else.
God does not deal with us in such an exclusive way that we become spiritually independent of the rest of the Church. No. Just as He created us to depend on one another to survive physically, so too does He want us to depend on one another spiritually. Even though Jesus could theoretically serve as our sole example of holiness, God wants us to look up to others as well.
Turning back to the main topic of this article – the Catholic practice of consecrating ourselves to Mary – the same principle applies here as well. God Himself, the source of all holiness, is without a doubt the best possible teacher of the spiritual life, but He does not want to play that role all by Himself. Instead, He wants to share it with His children so we can learn from one another. More specifically, we can say that He wants to teach us through the example and tutelage of others.
So the idea of cutting out the middle (wo)man and ignoring Mary actually contradicts the spirit of the New Testament. Yes, God teaches us directly Himself in many ways, but that is not always how He wants to deal with His children. Rather, He wants to teach us and guide us through others, and this is as true in spiritual matters as it is in earthly matters like basketball.
Now, the best teacher we can possibly entrust ourselves to is Mary, so it makes perfect sense for us to consecrate ourselves to her. By doing so, we put ourselves under her tutelage and ask her to teach us to be holy like she was.
That’s why the Catholic practice of consecrating oneself to Mary is totally reasonable.
JP
As I already communicated to you, I’m not your judge, but Jesus is.
Good luck with presenting your case before him.
I’m facing the same situation.
JP
Pretty sure that we will all be held accountable for what we say in this lifetime.
You seem to be contradicting the words of Jesus. And He is our judge.
Good luck on Judgement Day!
I’m not contradicting Jesus’ words. I’m interpreting them in the light of the entirety of God’s revelation to us, and when we do that, it becomes clear that when Scripture describes sleep as death, it’s just a euphemism, not a literal description of what death is actually like. If it wasn’t, then why would Paul so desperately want to die and be with Jesus (Philippians 1:21-23)? That doesn’t sound like he expected to be asleep. Or why would Jesus promise the good thief that he would be with Him in paradise that very day (Luke 23:43)? Again, if death is just sleep, then that’s a very misleading promise. Or take Revelation 6:9-11, which shows the souls of the martyrs talking. That’s not something you can do while sleeping.
On top of that, let me ask you a question: how do you know that Jesus was speaking literally when He described death as sleep? How do you know that He wasn’t just using a euphemism? Is it really so inconceivable that ancient people used sleep as a euphemism for death just like we use the phrase “pass away”? Admittedly, that was more than just one question, but you get the idea.
Again, we can’t just look at the verses that support our own view. We have to take EVERYTHING Scripture says into account, and we have to find a way to synthesize it coherently. I’ve done exactly that, and if you want to maintain your belief that the dead are literally asleep, you have to do that as well. Just looking at a few verses that support your view and ignoring the rest doesn’t cut it.
JP
It indicates that the dead are asleep until His coming.
And the last enemy to be destroyed is death.
And Paul reiterates this “revelation” to us in verses 50-58.
By the way, Jesus described death as being asleep in John 11.
We already went over the “sleep” issue. That’s just an ancient euphemism for death, much like how we today say that people “pass away.” You can look at our previous discussion for the evidence, or if you’d like, I can go over it again.
As for death being the last enemy, you’re missing the point. I don’t disagree that the ultimate defeat of death will come in the future, and I don’t disagree that Scripture says exactly that. However, that’s only half the story. Elsewhere, Paul explicitly says that Jesus “abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel” (2 Timothy 1:1), and that causes a problem for us. He says both that death has already been destroyed and that it will be destroyed in the future, so how do we explain that? We can’t just cherry-pick the verses that support our own theological view while ignoring the ones that contradict it. We have to take into account EVERYTHING Scripture says about a topic. Now, I’ve given an explanation for the entirety of the Scriptural evidence on this issue, so if you want to disagree with it, you have to give an alternative explanation of ALL of the biblical evidence. You can’t just keep pointing to one set of passages and ignoring the other set that contradicts your view.
JP
At first blush, your points seem to be convincing.
But further examination of the Scriptures still make me wonder about your conclusions.
For example, Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 15:20-26:
20 But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21 For since death came through a human being, the resurrection of the dead came also through a human being. 22 For just as in Adam all die, so too in Christ shall all be brought to life, 23 but each one in proper order: Christ the firstfruits; then, at his coming, those who belong to Christ; 24 then comes the end, when he hands over the kingdom to his God and Father, when he has destroyed every sovereignty and every authority and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death,
What specific conclusion do you think this passage contradicts?
JP
Read it. I believe what the Book of Revelation has to say about Satan. He hasn’t been defeated yet. It is a future event.
Death hasn’t been destroyed yet, according to Paul, nor has immortality been imparted to humans. Another future event.
I believe that you are imparting your beliefs on the interpretation of the scriptures to come to your conclusions.
Yes, Revelation says that Satan will be defeated in the future, but elsewhere, Scripture also says that he’s been defeated already. Check out this verse:
“Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same nature, that through death he might destroy him who has the power of death, that is, the devil” (Hebrews 2:14)
You can also check out Colossians 2:13-15 and John 12:31, 16:11.
So how do we explain this discrepancy? Well, let’s look at a few other examples first. You say death hasn’t been destroyed yet, but Paul says in 2 Timothy 1:10 that Jesus “abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel.” (You also talk about immortality, and as I explained in one of our previous comment threads here, that’s only talking about bodily immortality, not the ongoing life of the spirit after death, so it’s irrelevant to the question of Mary’s spiritual motherhood). And we all know that the resurrection of the dead is a future event too, but in Ephesians 2:5-6, Paul says that God has “made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), and raised us up with him, and made us sit with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus.” And let’s do one more. Revelation tells us that the new creation will come in the future as well (Revelation 21:1), but Paul tells us that “if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come: The old has gone, the new is here” (2 Corinthians 5:17).
So the question isn’t just how we explain the discrepancy about the defeat of Satan. It’s much deeper than that. There are several things that Scripture says both have happened already and will happen in the future, so how do we explain all of these apparent contradictions?
The key is that for Christians, the end times, the goal of all of human history (so the resurrection, the new creation, and all that kind of stuff) has invaded the present. Yes, those are future realities, but we can experience a foretaste of them now. That’s why Paul often tells us that the Holy Spirit is our “down payment” (2 Corinthians 1:22; 5:5; Ephesians 1:13-14). A lot of English translations use the word “guarantee,” in those verses, but the Greek word literally refers to a down payment. That’s also why Jesus’ resurrection isn’t just some random guy risen from the dead at a random point in history. No, as Paul says, He’s “the first fruits” of the general resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:20). The future has invaded the present, and even though the consummation and goal of salvation history isn’t here in its fullness yet, we can experience it in a preliminary manner.
And this also applies to the defeat of Satan. Yes, his ultimate, final defeat will come in the future, but he was also defeated by Jesus on the cross. That was the beginning of his defeat, and the fullness of that defeat will come with the new creation. Anything less is a denial of the fullness of Scripture’s teaching on the topic.
JP
How do the words in John 19 of Jesus on the cross to Mary and the apostle he loved equate to a declaration that she is our spiritual mother?
Here’s the article about it that I linked to in our previous conversation:
https://catholicstand.com/when-mary-became-our-mother/
JP:
I guess that you missed this part of the instructions – “ teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you.”
We certainly agreed that Jesus did not command us to pray for or to the dead.
I didn’t say that Jesus never told us to pray to the saints. I said He doesn’t say that in the Gospels, and those are two very different things. We know that Jesus did a lot more than just what’s recorded in the four Gospels (John 21:25), so it stands to reason that He taught a lot more than just what’s in them as well. And if there’s any doubt, two more considerations seal the deal for us:
1) The fact that we have the other 23 books of the New Testament. If Jesus’ teachings in the Gospels were the extent of Christian revelation, the New Testament wouldn’t include anything else. But it includes 23 other books, so the Gospels can’t contain the entirety of Christian revelation.
2) In the Gospels, Jesus explicitly says that the Holy Spirit will continue to teach the Apostles after He leaves them:
“I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you. All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you.” (John 16:12-15)
On top of like, like I said before in one of our earlier comment threads, from the cross Jesus gave us Mary as our spiritual mother, so if you’re looking for teaching in the Gospels, there it is. Sure, He doesn’t explicitly say, “Christians should pray to Mary,” but it’s implicit in the idea of her being our mother.
JP
Instructions from Jesus.
Matthew 28:18-20
New American Bible (Revised Edition)
18 Then Jesus approached and said to them, “All power in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age.”
How does this text speak to our current discussion?
JP:
You agree with me about Paul’s statement about Jesus being the only mediator between man and God, but then proceed to claim that it means something else.
With regard to when Mary died, so far I have found information that it occurred 11 years after Jesus departed.
“According to the widely accepted oral tradition of the early church Mary lived 11 years after the Ascension of Christ. … Hyppolitus of Thebes claims that Mary lived for 11 years after the death of her Son, and that she passed away (or fell asleep) in A.D. 41 (so she was 58 or 59 years old at the time of her dormition).”
Are you going to suggest that all of the New Testament was written before 41 AD?
Did Jesus instruct us to pray to the dead? He taught us how to pray to God.
I claim that the “one mediator” passage means something else because that’s what he context demands. One of the cardinal rules of biblical interpretation is that we have to understand every passage in its context, and that’s especially important here. The word “mediator” can mean a few things, and by itself, the verse doesn’t tell us which meaning Paul intends. To figure that out, we need to look at the context, and that’s all I’m doing when I give my take on the verse.
As for Mary’s death, I’m not sure where you’re quoting that from, but Hippolytus of Thebes lived in the 7th or 8th century, so he’s not a reliable source for the date of Mary’s death. He’s way too late for that.
To answer your last question, no, Jesus doesn’t say anything in the Gospels about praying to the saints. But our faith isn’t based on the Gospels alone.
I still don’t understand. Lets say the CEO has an open door policy and encourages the lowliest, most imperfect employee of the company to come in and talk to him directly. Why waste time taking our problems to the middle management (the saints), and even to the CEO’s mother, when we are encouraged to go to the CEO HImself?
Doesn’t Paul tells us that Jesus is the sole mediator between man and God?
Check out 1 Timothy 2:1-6. No mention of Mary. It is likely that all of the books of the New Testament were written after her death, yet there is no mention of her assumption.
So why should we Catholics pray to her for intercession when we can call on Jesus?
The problem with the CEO analogy is that it’s a zero-sum game. When you’re talking to the CEO, you’re not talking to other employees, and when you’re talking to the other employees, you’re not talking to the CEO. But God isn’t like that. It’s not God or Mary; it’s God through and in Mary.
Just as Paul can say that “it is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me” (Galatians 2:20) and that “God is at work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure” (Philippians 2:13), so too can we say that when Mary teaches us to be holy, it’s truly God working in and through her.
Or think about earthly matters. If we ask God to rescue us from a difficult situation, do we expect Him to personally come down and miraculously deliver us? Not usually. Instead, we expect Him to work through other people to answer our prayers, and the same principle applies with Marian consecration. Just like God works through human beings in many other ways, so too does He work through Mary to bring us to holiness.
Robert, you’re right that Paul calls Jesus the only mediator between God and man, but that simply means that He’s the one who reconciled the entire human race to God. It doesn’t mean that no human being can ever be an intermediary between God and other humans in any sense. If that were the case, then he wouldn’t have told us to pray for others in the preceding verses.
And of course Paul doesn’t mention Mary in that passage. Why would he? You say that all the New Testament books were probably written after her death, but how do you know that? We don’t know when Mary died, so it’s very possible that she was alive when some, many, or maybe even all the New Testament books were written.
Finally, why should we ask for Mary’s intercession? Well, it’s the same reason Paul tells us to pray for other people in 1 Timothy 2:1. It’s the same reason Paul asked his readers to pray for him in 2 Thessalonians 3:1. And it’s the same reason we Christians today ask other people to pray for us all the time. The more people praying for us, the better, so we ask Mary and the saints to add their prayers to ours.
The greatest love on earth is the love between a mother and child. By taking Mary as our Mother, as Jesus told us to do from the cross, we have her mold us into the image of Christ. Her love for her Son now becomes our love for her Son. We become less self-righteous and condescending to our fellow Christians, and begin to love Jesus as she did.
JP
Thanks for taking the time to respond to my concerns.
One final bit of scripture to share with you.
2 Timothy 3
New American Bible (Revised Edition)
Chapter 3
The Dangers of the Last Days. 1 But understand this: there will be terrifying times in the last days. 2 People will be self-centered and lovers of money, proud, haughty, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, irreligious, 3 callous, implacable, slanderous, licentious, brutal, hating what is good, 4 traitors, reckless, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, 5 as they make a pretense of religion but deny its power. Reject them. 6 For some of these slip into homes and make captives of women weighed down by sins, led by various desires, 7 always trying to learn but never able to reach a knowledge of the truth. 8 Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so they also oppose the truth—people of depraved mind, unqualified in the faith. 9 But they will not make further progress, for their foolishness will be plain to all, as it was with those two.
Paul’s Example and Teaching. 10 You have followed my teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, endurance, 11 persecutions, and sufferings, such as happened to me in Antioch, Iconium, and Lystra, persecutions that I endured. Yet from all these things the Lord delivered me. 12 In fact, all who want to live religiously in Christ Jesus will be persecuted. 13 But wicked people and charlatans will go from bad to worse, deceivers and deceived. 14 But you, remain faithful to what you have learned and believed, because you know from whom you learned it, 15 and that from infancy you have known [the] sacred scriptures, which are capable of giving you wisdom for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16 All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 so that one who belongs to God may be competent, equipped for every good work.
2 Timothy 4:1-4
New American Bible (Revised Edition)
Chapter 4
Solemn Charge. 1 I charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who will judge the living and the dead, and by his appearing and his kingly power: 2 proclaim the word; be persistent whether it is convenient or inconvenient; convince, reprimand, encourage through all patience and teaching. 3 For the time will come when people will not tolerate sound doctrine but, following their own desires and insatiable curiosity, will accumulate teachers 4 and will stop listening to the truth and will be diverted to myths.
Yes, these are very important passages. Getting the faith right is essential.
JP:
Actually Peter says that King David is not in heaven:
Acts 2:34-35. This occurs on Pentecost.
New American Bible (Revised Edition)
34 For David did not go up into heaven, but he himself said:
‘The Lord said to my Lord,
“Sit at my right hand
35 until I make your enemies your footstool.”’ (This phrase is also found in Psalm 110:1, Luke 20:43, and Hebrews 10:13).
In 2 Corinthians 12, Paul says that he will boast about the man who claimed to have been snatched up to the 3rd heaven. But he further states that he will do no boasting about himself unless it is about his weaknesses. And he twice makes the point of not knowing if the man was in or outside his body.
Nothing in the Bible about the Assumption of Mary despite the fact that all New Testament books were more than likely written after her death. Such an extraordinary event surely would have been recorded.
With respect to Revelation 6: 9-10, the martyrs are pictured “under the altar”, pleading for the judgment of their cause and avenging their death. Does this seem like they are in heaven?
Suggesting that the scriptures reveal that souls are now in heaven and conscious is a stretch. As I already pointed out, Paul wrote that immortality occurs at the last trumpet.
In John 14: 2-3, Jesus tells his apostles that he is going to prepare a place for them. And he will come back for them. Since the Second Coming hasn’t occurred, can they be in heaven?
In 1 Kings, a phrase is repeated regarding the kings of Israel about their deaths, i.e. “rested with his ancestors”.
Other scriptures for you to consider:
Genesis 4:10, Daniel 12:13, Job 14:10-12, Revelation 14:14-16 (The Harvest of the Earth), 1 Thessalonians 4:13-17, Ecclesiastes 9.
And finally 2 Thessalonians 2:1-5:
New American Bible (Revised Edition)
II. Warning Against Deception Concerning the Parousia
Chapter 2
Christ and the Lawless One. 1 We ask you, brothers, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, 2 not to be shaken out of your minds suddenly, or to be alarmed either by a “spirit,” or by an oral statement, or by a letter allegedly from us to the effect that the day of the Lord is at hand. 3 Let no one deceive you in any way. For unless the apostasy comes first and the lawless one is revealed, the one doomed to perdition, 4 who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god and object of worship, so as to seat himself in the temple of God, claiming that he is a god— 5 do you not recall that while I was still with you I told you these things?
Paul is telling us that two events have to occur before the dead rise and the living survivors are gathered to meet the Lord in the air. And henceforth, remain with Him forever. (1 Thessalonians 4:16-17).
All the passages you bring up talk about the resurrection of the dead at Jesus’ second coming, but they don’t say anything about the state of people’s souls between their death and the resurrection. For example, when Paul says that we will receive immortality, he’s talking about bodily immortality, but that doesn’t tell us anything about the status of people’s souls before that event. Even Acts 2, which explicitly says that David didn’t go to heaven, doesn’t say that he didn’t go to heaven after Jesus opened it up to us through His death and resurrection. Peter’s point was about what happened to David immediately after death, not what may or may not have happened to him centuries later.
I’m not sure what relevance your comments about 2 Corinthians 12 have. It doesn’t matter whether this person was Paul or someone else, and it likewise doesn’t matter if this was a bodily experience or not. The fact is that this person went up to heaven, so Jesus’ words in John 3 must only be referring to the time before the Incarnation, not the time after it. And since that’s the case, that saying doesn’t prove that Mary isn’t in heaven.
The Assumption is a whole other topic. This article is about consecration to Mary, and whether Mary is in heaven with her body and soul or just her soul is completely irrelevant. If you want to talk about that, go ahead and shoot me an email ([email protected]) and we can talk about it, but I don’t want to clutter this discussion with tangential topics.
Revelation 6 is talking about heaven, and the only way to deny that is to rip it out of context. Everything John is seeing up until this point is taking place in heaven. For example, chapter 5 is all about the worship God receives in heaven, so when the very next chapter mentions an altar without telling us that the vision has moved away from heaven, we have to conclude that these souls are in fact in heaven.
You didn’t comment on Philippians 1:21-24. Paul refers to dying as being “with Christ,” and since Jesus is in heaven, that means that the souls of the just must be in heaven when they die. On top of that, if he’s referring to an unconscious state, there’s no reason why he would prefer it to being alive. So sure, Paul may not explicitly say, “The souls of the just are in heaven and are conscious,” but that’s the only way to make sense of what he does say.
In John 14, the identity of “my Father’s house” isn’t quite as clear as it may seem at first. Remember, Paul clearly refers to death as being “with Christ,” so the souls of the righteous do in fact go to heaven when they die. Consequently, John 14 can’t mean that we only go to heaven at Jesus’ second coming. On top of that, Jesus says that His Father’s house has many “dwellings,” and in His subsequent discourse, He talks a lot about the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit “dwelling” in one another and in believers. In that discourse, He often uses the verb “to dwell” (14:10, 17; 15:4-7, 9-10) which is simply the verb form of the noun that He used for “dwellings.” But one time He even uses the exact same word that He used in 14:2. In 14:23, He says that He and the Father will come and make their “dwelling” (some translations use a different word, but it’s the same Greek word that He used in 14:2) with those who love Him. Now, the fact that He continues this theme of “dwelling” in His subsequent discourse means that there’s a clear connection here. He’s explaining what He means when He talks about the many “dwellings” in His Father’s house. He’s not talking about a place apart from earth. Rather, His Father’s house is just the communion of love that the Father, Son, and Spirit share. He’s saying that He’s returning back to the fullness of that communion, and after He rises from the dead (that’s when He comes back), He’ll incorporate His disciples into that communion as well.
At best, 1 Kings simply tells us that people didn’t go to heaven before Jesus came, but that doesn’t tell us anything about what happened after He won salvation for us by His death and resurrection.
Admittedly, I didn’t look at all the passages you cited at the end. If you think any of them add anything that the other verses we’ve already been talking about don’t add, then let me know.
Paul’s words from 1 Corinthians 15 reiterates the message of Jesus in John 3 that no one has yet gone to heaven, as well as Peter’s message in Acts 2.
Paul reveals a mystery later in 1 Corinthians 15, starting at verse 50, that immortality doesn’t take place until the last trumpet (when Christ will return).
So how can Mary provide tutelage, since she is asleep in Christ?
To JP:
At each mass we pronounce this:
“Lord Jesus Christ, Only Begotten Son, Lord God, Lamb of God, Son of the Father, you take away the sins of the world, have mercy on us; you take away the sins of the world, receive our prayer; you are seated at the right hand of the Father, have mercy on us.
For You alone are the Holy One, you alone are the Lord, you alone are the Most High, Jesus Christ, with the Holy Spirit, in the glory of God the Father. Amen.”
“You alone are the Holy One”
“You are seated at the right hand of the Father”
It has been a tradition” from the early Church. No mention of Mary.
Yes, John 3 says that nobody has gone up to heaven, but that doesn’t mean that nobody else has gone up in the time since Jesus uttered those words. In fact, Paul in 2 Corinthians 12:2-4 says that he knows someone (probably himself) who was mystically taken up to heaven, so we know for a fact that Jesus was only saying that nobody went up to heaven before He became incarnate.
1 Corinthians 15 is talking about the resurrection that will happen at His second coming, but it doesn’t say anything about the state of the dead before that. So it doesn’t mean that nobody is currently in heaven. The same applies to Acts 2 as well.
As for what we pray at Mass, you’re right that those particular prayers don’t mention Mary, and for good reason. Mary doesn’t sit at the right hand of the Father. Only Jesus does, but that doesn’t mean that nobody else is in heaven. The right hand of the Father isn’t a synonym for heaven; rather, it’s an image of authority, so it doesn’t mean that nobody else is heaven. As for the phrase “You alone are the holy one,” for this to have any relevance to our discussion, it has to mean that nobody else is holy, but that’s not true (for example, Hebrews 12:23 contradicts it). It simply means that Jesus is the source of holiness, the only one who’s holy in Himself and who doesn’t receive it from someone else the way we have to. Simply put, these are both divine honors, not just fancy ways of saying “in heaven.”
On the flipside, we have plenty of biblical evidence that the souls of the righteous go to heaven when they die. For example, on the cross, Jesus promised that the good thief would be with Him in paradise that day. And in Philippians 1:21-24, Paul agonizes over whether he’d rather remain alive and help his spiritual children or die and “be with Christ,” a clear reference to dying and going to heaven. On top of that, in Revelation 6:9-11, John sees the souls of the martyrs in heaven.
So if by “asleep in Christ” you mean that Mary (and the souls of all the dead who are awaiting the resurrection) is unconscious, that’s simply not what Scripture says. The Bible is very clear that the souls of the dead are in fact in heaven, and they are conscious, so if Mary is our spiritual mother, then it makes perfect sense that she can guide us to holiness.
[…] Register Nancy Pelosi On. . . The Real Presence? – Kathryn Jean Lopez at Angelus News The Logic Behind Marian Consecration – J.P. Nunez at Catholic Stand Dom Alcuin Reid in CWR: Does Traditionis Custodes pass […]
Words from Paul to ponder.
20 But the fact is, Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep. 21 For since by a man death came, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. 23 But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ’s at His coming, 24 then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to our God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power. 25 For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. 26 The last enemy that will be abolished is death.
I’m very familiar with this passage. How does it fit into this discussion about consecration to Mary?
I believe Marion devotion in whatever form is the highest respect we Catholics can attain; this holy vessel that delivered us a Savior indubitably results in grace bestowed and favors
granted through her Son. I’d go long for anyone who respected my mother. Try it.
Thanks for the comment. You’re right, Jesus does love it when we honor His mother, just like we love it when people honor our mothers.
JP,
I’m saying that consecration to Mary is not following the word of God.
Isn’t Jesus the only one who has been resurrected and ascended to heaven?
Is there anything in the Bible to support your position that Mary can provide tutelage?
Why not consecrate yourself to Jesus?
Thanks for the clarification.
We Catholics believe that Mary has also experienced resurrection when she was assumed into heaven, but I’m not sure how that’s relevant to this discussion. Whether Mary is in heaven with both body and soul or with just her soul doesn’t seem like it would make much of a difference.
The idea that Mary can provide tutelage isn’t explicitly stated in Scripture, but it’s implicit in the idea that she’s our spiritual mother. That’s a huge part of what mothers do. And for the scriptural basis of that belief, I’ll point you to some articles I’ve written on the subject:
https://catholicstand.com/when-mary-became-our-mother/
https://catholicexchange.com/why-jesus-called-mary-woman-at-cana
As for your last question, why we don’t we just consecrate ourselves to Jesus, that’s what this whole article is about, so if you want to go down that route, please respond to the argument I make in this article rather than simply reposing the question I start out with.
Since the scriptures are the prime source of our faith, I believe that Jesus made a clear statement for all of us to consider. Our path to eternal life is plainly explained in the Bible. Why do you suggest an alternative route?
I think you’re saying that consecration to Mary is an alternative to following the word of God. If that’s not what you mean, then please explain your point further. If it is, then here is what I would say. Consecration to Mary isn’t an alternative to following the word of God. The whole point is that Mary helps us to do exactly that, just like she did.
After reading your article, I was reminded of this exchange in the Bible.
Luke 11:27-28
New American Bible (Revised Edition)
27 While he was speaking, a woman from the crowd called out and said to him, “Blessed is the womb that carried you and the breasts at which you nursed.” 28 He replied, “Rather, blessed are those who hear the word of God and observe it.”
I think your Protestant friend was right.
Hi Robert, thanks for the comment. Can you please explain how that passage refutes my argument in this article? I want to make sure I respond to your actual point rather than just to what I (potentially incorrectly) think your point is.