False Devotion to Mary

  • Thread starter Thread starter USMC_Convert
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
So no - one besides the Marine is doing First Saturdays, as Our Lady at Fatima requested?

Seriously? No-one else? No Marian devotees of St Louis ilk?
At my age my comfort zone for driving is not too far. Years back I used to go every Saturday morning to Mass. Now, I can go to First Saturdays when a friend can drive me to another parish.

My parish does not have Mass on Saturday mornings; but for those who can stay longer after weekday Mass we pray the rosary together.
 
Our Bishop had a special Mass, Rosary and crowing of a Statue of OL of Fatima on May 13th. We had the International Statue of Our Lady of Fatima here in our City at a number of our Churches. I went to several of them. God Bless, Memaw/👍 I need to learn how to combine quotes
 
At my age my comfort zone for driving is not too far. Years back I used to go every Saturday morning to Mass. Now, I can go to First Saturdays when a friend can drive me to another parish.

My parish does not have Mass on Saturday mornings; but for those who can stay longer after weekday Mass we pray the rosary together.
I find its tough at this time of year here too, getting out and about. Winter
 
Just enjoyed reading this!

'[62] Look upon the rainbow, and bless Him that made it; surely it is beautiful in its brightness. It encompasses the heaven about with the circle of its glory, the hands of the Most High have displayed it."[63] Whoever, therefore, reverences the Queen of heaven and earth – and let no one consider himself exempt from this tribute of a grateful and loving soul – let him invoke the most effective of Queens, the Mediatrix of peace; let him respect and preserve peace, which is not wickedness unpunished nor freedom without restraint, but a well-ordered harmony under the rule of the will of God; to its safeguarding and growth the gentle urgings and commands of the Virgin Mary impel us.’

🙂
Friard,

This quotation from Pius 12 is similar to a statement from Pope Pius 10, who also implies that the rainbow is a symbol of the Queen of Peace:

"Yet in the midst of this deluge of evil, the Virgin Most Clement rises before our eyes like a rainbow, as the arbiter of peace between God and man: “I will set my bow in the clouds and it shall be the sign of a covenant between me and between the earth” (Gen. ix.,13). Let the storm rage and sky darken - not for that shall we be dismayed. “And the bow shall be in the clouds, and I shall see it and shall remember the everlasting covenant” (Ibid.16). “And there shall no more be waters of a flood to destroy all flesh” (Ibid.15.). Oh yes, if we trust as we should in Mary, now especially when we are about to celebrate, with more than usual fervor, her Immaculate Conception, we shall recognize in her that Virgin most powerful “who with virginal foot did crush the head of the serpent” (Off. Immac. Conc.).
w2.vatican.va/content/pius-x/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-x_enc_02021904_ad-diem-illum-laetissimum.html
 
👍 Thanks for that ,for all the people who said the Douay-Rheims Bible got it wrong.
Right. And I love your signature about Dame Julian to whom Jesus said “all shall be well, and all manner of thing shall be well”

Dame Julian’s book The Revelation of Divine Love is one of my favorite books. She is so hopeful in the Goodness of God.

I also love Pope Pius 10ths Encyclical “Ad Diem Illum”, where he confirms the traditional idea that Mary is the neck of the mystical body of Christ.

He also basically quotes Pius 9th’s most consoling statement about how with Mary, who mediates between us and Jesus our Lord, nothing is to be feared, and nothing is hopeless.

How consoling for us people who are in such seemingly hopeless situations!

Here it is:

"14. We are then, it will be seen, very far from attributing to the Mother of God a productive power of grace – a power which belongs to God alone. Yet, since Mary carries it over all in holiness and union with Jesus Christ, and has been associated by Jesus Christ in the work of redemption, she merits for us “de congruo,” in the language of theologians, what Jesus Christ merits for us “de condigno,” and she is the supreme Minister of the distribution of graces. Jesus “sitteth on the right hand of the majesty on high” (Hebrews i. b.). Mary sitteth at the right hand of her Son – a refuge so secure and a help so trusty against all dangers that we have nothing to fear or to despair of under her guidance, her patronage, her protection. (Pius IX. in Bull Ineffabilis).
papalencyclicals.net/Pius10/p10imcon.htm
 
Right. And I love your signature about Dame Julian to whom Jesus said “all shall be well, and all manner of thing shall be well”

Dame Julian’s book The Revelation of Divine Love is one of my favorite books. She is so hopeful in the Goodness of God.

I also love Pope Pius 10ths Encyclical “Ad Diem Illum”, where he confirms the traditional idea that Mary is the neck of the mystical body of Christ.

He also basically quotes Pius 9th’s most consoling statement about how with Mary, who mediates between us and Jesus our Lord, nothing is to be feared, and nothing is hopeless.

How consoling for us people who are in such seemingly hopeless situations!

Here it is:

"14. We are then, it will be seen, very far from attributing to the Mother of God a productive power of grace – a power which belongs to God alone. Yet, since Mary carries it over all in holiness and union with Jesus Christ, and has been associated by Jesus Christ in the work of redemption, she merits for us “de congruo,” in the language of theologians, what Jesus Christ merits for us “de condigno,” and she is the supreme Minister of the distribution of graces. Jesus “sitteth on the right hand of the majesty on high” (Hebrews i. b.). Mary sitteth at the right hand of her Son – a refuge so secure and a help so trusty against all dangers that we have nothing to fear or to despair of under her guidance, her patronage, her protection. (Pius IX. in Bull Ineffabilis).
papalencyclicals.net/Pius10/p10imcon.htm
Hi again. To interject, I do believe Pope Pius 10th, was quoting St. Augustine of Hippo, with use of his pictorial device to help explain the movement of grace as through the mystical channel/hierarchy.
 
Hi again. To interject, I do believe Pope Pius 10th, was quoting St. Augustine of Hippo, with use of his pictorial image to help explain the movement of grace as through the mystical channel/hierarchy.
Thanks, Friard.

Was Augustine the first to formulate the idea that Mary is the neck of the mystical Body of Christ?

Maybe so. in the Encylical, Pope St. Pius 10th quotes Bernard and Bernardine I think:

"13. It cannot, of course, be denied that the dispensation of these treasures is the particular and peculiar right of Jesus Christ, for they are the exclusive fruit of His Death, who by His nature is the mediator between God and man. Nevertheless, by this companionship in sorrow and suffering already mentioned between the Mother and the Son, it has been allowed to the august Virgin to be the most powerful mediatrix and advocate of the whole world with her Divine Son (Pius IX. Ineffabilis). The source, then, is Jesus Christ “of whose fullness we have all received” (John i., 16), “from whom the whole body, being compacted and fitly joined together by what every joint supplieth, according to the operation in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in charity” (Ephesians iv., 16). But Mary, as St. Bernard justly remarks, is the channel (Serm. de temp on the Nativ. B. V. De Aquaeductu n. 4); or, if you will, the connecting portion the function of which is to join the body to the head and to transmit to the body the influences and volitions of the head – We mean the neck. Yes, says St. Bernardine of Sienna, “she is the neck of Our Head, by which He communicates to His mystical body all spiritual gifts” (Quadrag. de Evangel. aetern. Serm. x., a. 3, c. iii.).
papalencyclicals.net/Pius10/p10imcon.htm
 
Thanks, Friard.

Was Augustine the first to formulate the idea that Mary is the neck of the mystical Body of Christ?

Maybe so. in the Encylical, Pope St. Pius 10th quotes Bernard and Bernardine I think:

"13. It cannot, of course, be denied that the dispensation of these treasures is the particular and peculiar right of Jesus Christ, for they are the exclusive fruit of His Death, who by His nature is the mediator between God and man. Nevertheless, by this companionship in sorrow and suffering already mentioned between the Mother and the Son, it has been allowed to the august Virgin to be the most powerful mediatrix and advocate of the whole world with her Divine Son (Pius IX. Ineffabilis). The source, then, is Jesus Christ “of whose fullness we have all received” (John i., 16), “from whom the whole body, being compacted and fitly joined together by what every joint supplieth, according to the operation in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in charity” (Ephesians iv., 16). But Mary, as St. Bernard justly remarks, is the channel (Serm. de temp on the Nativ. B. V. De Aquaeductu n. 4); or, if you will, the connecting portion the function of which is to join the body to the head and to transmit to the body the influences and volitions of the head – We mean the neck. Yes, says St. Bernardine of Sienna, “she is the neck of Our Head, by which He communicates to His mystical body all spiritual gifts” (Quadrag. de Evangel. aetern. Serm. x., a. 3, c. iii.).
papalencyclicals.net/Pius10/p10imcon.htm
Thank you for pointing this out. I don’t think it was St. Augustine. Must have been St. Bernard, as you’ve said. I tried to search back but couldn’t find the quote by St. Augustine. Others in later years have used this imagery, too.

I think Mary’s neck in the image also relates to ‘The Tower of David’?!
 
The Prophecies and Revelations of
Saint Bridget (Birgitta) of Sweden
Chapter 13 :

Excerpt…

The Virgin Mary speaks to Lady Bridget and says: ”I want to tell you what I did
for the soul of your son Charles when it was being separated from his body. I acted
like a woman standing by another woman who is giving birth, in order that she
might help the infant, lest it die in the flow of blood or suffocate in that narrow place
through which an infant exits and so that, by her watchful care, the infant’s enemies,
who are in the same house, might not be able to kill it. I acted in the same way.

SECOND REVELATION ON THE SAME MATTER

The angel answered: ”When his mother first understood that his will was
wavering toward sin, she immediately rushed to his aid with works of mercy and
daily prayers that God might deign to have mercy on him lest he withdraw himself
from him. Because of those works of his mother, he finally obtained a godly fear so
that, as often as he fell into sin, he immediately hurried to make his confession.”

The devil answered, ”I must tell his sins.” And at the very moment he intended
to begin, he immediately started to exclaim and lament and carefully search himself,
including his head and all the limbs that he seemed to have; and he was seen to
tremble all over; and with great confusion he cried out: ”Woe to me in my misery!
How have I wasted my long labor? Not only is the text blotted out and ruined, but
even the material on which everything was written has burnt up completely.
Moreover, the material indicates the times that he sinned. And I do not recall the
times any more than the sins written down in connection with them.” The angel
answered: ”This was done by his mother’s tears and long labors and many prayers.
God sympathized with her sighs and gave to her son this grace: namely, that for
every sin he committed, he obtained contrition, making a humble confession out of
love for God. Therefore those sins have been blotted out and are unheeded by your
memory.”
The devil answered, asserting that he still had a sack full of those writings
according to which the above said knight had purposed to make amends for his sins
but did not take care [to do so and asserting that the writings gave grounds on
which] to torture him until, through punishment, satisfaction had been made. And
indeed that same knight had not yet taken care to amend those sins during his
lifetime. The angel answered: ”Open the sack and seek a judgment on those sins for
which you must chastise him.” At those words, the devil cried out like a madman,
saying: ”I have been plundered in my power. Not only my sack has been taken, but
also the sins that filled it! The sack in which I put all the reasons that I had to punish
him was his laziness; for, because of his laziness, he omitted many good things.”
The angel answered: ”His mother’s tears have plundered you and have burst
the sack and have destroyed the writing. So greatly did her tears please God!” The
devil answered: ”I still have here a few things to bring forth: namely, his venial sins.”
The angel answered: ”He had the intention to make a pilgrimage from his
fatherland, leaving his goods and his friends and visiting, by many labors, the holy
places. He complemented these things, furthermore, by so preparing himself that he
was worthy to gain an indulgence from Holy Church. Moreover, he desired, by
making amends for his sins, to appease God his Creator. As a result, all those
charges, which you just said that you had written down, have been pardoned.”

The devil answered: ”Nevertheless, I still must punish him for all those venial
sins that he committed; and therefore, through indulgences, they have not been
deleted at all. For there are thousands upon thousands of them, and they have all
been written on my tongue.” The angel answered: ”Extend your tongue and show
the writing.” The devil answered with loud howling and clamor like a maniac; and he
said: ”Woe is me. I have not one word to say; for my tongue has been cut off at the
root together with its strength!”

The angel answered: ”His mother did this with her continual prayers and her
labor; for she loved his soul with her whole heart. Therefore, for the sake of her love,
it pleased God to pardon all the venial sins that he committed from his infancy right
up to his death; and therefore your tongue is said to have lost its strength.”
 
Here is Blessed John Henry Newman on Marian Devotion…I take solace in his teaching and know that there will always be those who try to force their personal devotion on others; which Newman calls ‘as repulsive as love letters in a police report’. I have learned to leave those with, what I consider disordered devotional practices, to their own devices…

It is impossible, I say, in a doctrine like this, to draw {79} the line cleanly between truth and error, right and wrong. This is ever the case in concrete matters, which have life. Life in this world is motion, and involves a continual process of change. Living things grow into their perfection, into their decline, into their death. No rule of art will suffice to stop the operation of this natural law, whether in the material world or in the human mind. We can indeed encounter disorders, when they occur, by external antagonism and remedies; but we cannot eradicate the process itself, out of which they arise. Life has the same right to decay, as it has to wax strong. This is specially the case with great ideas. You may stifle them; or you may refuse them elbow-room; or again, you may torment them with your continual meddling; or you may let them have free course and range, and be content, instead of anticipating their excesses, to expose and restrain those excesses after they have occurred. But you have only this alternative; and for myself, I prefer much wherever it is possible, to be first generous and then just; to grant full liberty of thought, and to call it to account when abused.

‘If what I have been saying be true of energetic ideas generally, much more is it the case in matters of religion. Religion acts on the affections; who is to hinder these, when once roused, from gathering in their strength and running wild? They are not gifted with any connatural principle within them, which renders them self-governing, and self-adjusting. They hurry right on to their object, and often in their case it is, the more haste, the worse speed. Their object engrosses {80} them, and they see nothing else. And of all passions love is the most unmanageable; nay more, I would not give much for that love which is never extravagant, which always observes the proprieties, and can move about in perfect good taste, under all emergencies. What mother, what husband or wife, what youth or maiden in love, but says a thousand foolish things, in the way of endearment, which the speaker would be sorry for strangers to hear; yet they are not on that account unwelcome to the parties to whom they are addressed. Sometimes by bad luck they are written down, sometimes they get into the newspapers; and what might be even graceful, when it was fresh from the heart, and interpreted by the voice and the countenance, presents but a melancholy exhibition when served up cold for the public eye. So it is with devotional feelings. Burning thoughts and words are as open to criticism as they are beyond it. What is abstractedly extravagant, may in particular persons be becoming and beautiful, and only fall under blame when it is found in others who imitate them. When it is formalized into meditations or exercises, it is as repulsive as love-letters in a police report. Moreover, even holy minds readily adopt and become familiar with language which they would never have originated themselves, when it proceeds from a writer who has the same objects of devotion as they have; and, if they find a stranger ridicule or reprobate supplication or praise which has come to them so recommended, they feel it as keenly as if a direct insult were offered to those to whom that homage is addressed. In the next place, what has {81} power to stir holy and refined souls is potent also with the multitude; and the religion of the multitude is ever vulgar and abnormal; it ever will be tinctured with fanaticism and superstition, while men are what they are. A people’s religion is ever a corrupt religion, in spite of the provisions of Holy Church. If she is to be Catholic, you must admit within her net fish of every kind, guests good and had, vessels of gold, vessels of earth. You may beat religion out of men, if you will, and then their excesses will take a different direction; but if you make use of religion to improve them, they will make use of religion to corrupt it. And then you will have effected that compromise of which our countrymen report so unfavourably from abroad:—a high grand faith and worship which compels their admiration, and puerile absurdities among the people which excite their contempt.’
 
I have learned to leave those with, what I consider disordered devotional practices, to their own devices…
To be clear, are you saying that Saint Louis-Marie Grignion de Montfort’s True Devotion to Mary, and Our Lady of Fatima’s First Five Saturdays devotion are disordered?

Peace, Mark***
 
To be clear, are you saying that Saint Louis-Marie Grignion de Montfort’s True Devotion to Mary, and Our Lady of Fatima’s First Five Saturdays devotion are disordered?

Peace, Mark***
I think Newman is pretty eloquent in how he talks about personal devotion. I don’t personally subscribe to de Montfort’s methods… if that answers your question.

Relative to Fatima, that is a private revelation and not part of the deposit of faith. I really don’t pay too much attention to it. I know I’ll be beat up for that here, but the Church allows for diversity in devotional practices
 
I don’t personally subscribe to de Montfort’s methods… if that answers your question.

Relative to Fatima, that is a private revelation and not part of the deposit of faith. I really don’t pay too much attention to it. I know I’ll be beat up for that here,** but the Church allows for diversity in devotional practices.**
That’s correct, that is your prerogative. And no one has the right to shame one into devotions they’re not comfortable with. But I was specifically concerned with the part of your post in which you used the term *“disordered devotional practices.” *Just to be clear here to those who may be new to de Montfort’s True Devotion to Mary, or Our Lady of Fatima’s First Five Saturday Devotion etc. These devotions are completely sanctioned by the RCC. No priest, bishop, cardinal or pope that I’m aware of would ever utter the phrase that you used to describe these special devotions to the Blessed Mother.

Peace, Mark
 
That’s correct, that is your prerogative. And no one has the right to shame one into devotions they’re not comfortable with. But I was specifically concerned with the part of your post in which you used the term *“disordered devotional practices.” *Just to be clear here to those who may be new to de Montfort’s True Devotion to Mary, or Our Lady of Fatima’s First Five Saturday Devotion etc. These devotions are completely sanctioned by the RCC. No priest, bishop, cardinal or pope that I’m aware of would ever utter the phrase that you used to describe these special devotions to the Blessed Mother.

Peace, Mark
Totally fair and correct. The Church does indeed allow he faithful practice those devotions.

Also for those new to De Montfort, St. John Paul II, a great Marian devotee, placed a moderating influence on De Montfort’s methods when he wrote to the Montfort religious family in this letter … michaeljournal.org/articles/roman-catholic-church/item/true-devotion-to-mary-leads-us-closer-to-jesus?/montfort.htm

In this letter the Saint Pope said of Montfort’s practices ‘This Saint’s teaching has had a profound influence on the Marian devotion of many of the faithful and on my own life. It is a lived teaching of outstanding ascetic and mystical depth, expressed in a lively and passionate style that makes frequent use of images and symbols. However, the considerable development of Marian theology since St. Louis Marie’s time is largely due to the crucial contribution made by the Second Vatican Council. The Montfort teaching, therefore, which has retained its essential validity should be reread and reinterpreted today in the light of the Council.’

It is easy to see that De Montfort loved Mary so very much… When I read his work, I view it as love poetry, not theology or any authoritative teaching, but inspiring. I read his writing in light of Newman’s teaching which I referenced earlier where the duplication of another’s love poetry can be ‘as repulsive as love letters in a police report’. Ultimately, one must admit that Marian devotion has been open to corruption more than other personal devotions…the VII council recognized that fact officially and warned us to carefully avoid excesses and corruption.
 
Ultimately, one must admit that Marian devotion has been open to corruption more than other personal devotions…the VII council recognized that fact officially and warned us to carefully avoid excesses and corruption.
And there are those, many whom are converts to the faith, who take it to the opposite extreme in excess and corruption. Namely, that they want nothing at all to do with the Blessed Mother. They see the RCC’s dogmas on Mary as an obstacle to their faith. They seem to think that somehow the church has gone overboard with it’s teachings about Mary. It’s as though they wish these dogmas never even existed. And I’ve noticed these trends in certain members who frequently post on the various threads here at CAF with regard to Mary.
CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
  • II. DEVOTION TO THE BLESSED VIRGIN
971 “All generations will call me blessed”: "The Church’s devotion to the Blessed Virgin is intrinsic to Christian worship."515 The Church rightly honors "the Blessed Virgin with special devotion. From the most ancient times the Blessed Virgin has been honored with the title of ‘Mother of God,’ to whose protection the faithful fly in all their dangers and needs. . . . This very special devotion . . . differs essentially from the adoration which is given to the incarnate Word and equally to the Father and the Holy Spirit, and greatly fosters this adoration."516 The liturgical feasts dedicated to the Mother of God and Marian prayer, such as the rosary, an “epitome of the whole Gospel,” express this devotion to the Virgin Mary.517
Peace, Mark
 
Here is Blessed John Henry Newman on Marian Devotion…I take solace in his teaching and know that there will always be those who try to force their personal devotion on others; which Newman calls ‘as repulsive as love letters in a police report’. I have learned to leave those with, what I consider disordered devotional practices, to their own devices…
Three points:
  • Was this written before or after Blessed John Henry Newman’s conversion to Catholicism?
  • There are plenty of Saints who absolutely followed, resolutely, every truthful teaching of the Church, including her Devotions.
  • This document mentions not anything specific to do with devotion to Our Lady.
If you want people to read what you post, it is a good idea not to just snatch large segments of text wildly out of context and throw them up on here without stopping for a moment to think twice as to whether you might be acting insensitively.

I doubt whether this Blessed soul would appreciate you misusing his words to rail attacks against she who is his Mother in Heaven this very moment.
 
And there are those, many whom are converts to the faith, who take it to the opposite extreme in excess and corruption. Namely, that they want nothing at all to do with the Blessed Mother. They see the RCC’s dogmas on Mary as an obstacle to their faith. They seem to think that somehow the church has gone overboard with it’s teachings about Mary. It’s as though they wish these dogmas never even existed. And I’ve noticed these trends in certain members who frequently post on the various threads here at CAF with regard to Mary.

Peace, Mark
Very true… there are maximalist and minimalist tendencies in Marian devotion. I recommend the book ‘The Question of Mary’ by Fr Rene Laurentin - one of the foremost Marian scholars in the planet - for a insightful look at Marian devotion.
 
  • Was this written before or after Blessed John Henry Newman’s conversion to Catholicism?
After his conversion. This piece was taken from his famous Letter to Pusey which defends Catholic devotion to Mary.
  • There are plenty of Saints who absolutely followed , resolutely, every truthful teaching of the Church, including her Devotions.
Of course there are.
  • This document mentions not anything specific to do with devotion to Our Lady.
I disagree… it was written specifically to address Marian Devotion
If you want people to read what you post, it is a good idea not to just snatch large segments of text wildly out of context and throw them up on here without stopping for a moment to think twice as to whether you might be acting insensitively.
**I did not mean to offend… I’m simply starting my opinion and backing it up with thought from Saint and scholars. The text I quoted was written for this type of discussion; in fact it is as written to a Anglican in defense of Marian devotion. I apologize if it is too long for you, but if you have ever read Newman, you know he was verbose.

If hearing someone else’s thought on the subject offends you, I can’t help that… we are on a discussion board after all. I would be open to your thoughts on how I’m being insensitive though.**
I doubt whether this Blessed soul would appreciate you misusing his words to rail attacks against she who is his Mother in Heaven this very moment.
I’m not railing attacks as you say… can one not hold a different belief than you without being attacked? An opinion that is presented in a non-emotional way??
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top