Is this a valid interpretation?

[cocot]

Upon receiving my beautiful picture of the crucifixion at the Monastery of the Precious Blood confraternitypb.org/joinus.html
It had this to say on the back:

“BEHOLD THY MOTHER” - Mary stood beneath the cross, the Gospel tells us, and not swooning as we see her in some pictures. There she stands as the high-priestess, clothed in her mantle of Blue; her beautiful sorrowing immaculate face, gazing on the face of her dying son, “close to Jesus to the last”.

Something about that high-priestess reference I don’t like.

What do you think?

 

[Verbum]

Hi Cocot,

The author is correct in condemning those representations that have Mary swooning at the foot of the cross. Scripture is very clear : She stood.

However, the high-priestess reference goes overboard. We have only one high-priest : Christ.(cf. Heb 4,14)

Jesus came to us through Mary, and He even began his public ministry and Way of the Cross at Mary’s request (Wedding at Cana.) Thus she is a collaborator in our salvation, but she is not the one saving us.

Verbum

 

[JRKH]

The High Priestess reference is, in opinion a horrible gaff.
I have no doubt that it was done innocently enough, but it is bad for 2 reasons.

1. I know of no official references calling Mary a priestess. She is the Mother most pure and the queen of Heaven but she is no priestess.
2. This is just the kind of nonsense that feeds the anti-catholic culture. Some anti-catholic preacher gets ahold of one of these, holds it up and says -
   “SEE HERE?? CATHOLICS WORSHIP A PRIESTESS!!! IT SAYS RIGHT HERE - BLAH BLAH BLAH! ! !”

James

 

[mercygate]

High Priestess??? Confusing at best and downright dangerous at worst.

Yes: I see Mary as a “proto-Priest” – after all, Priests bring Jesus into the world on the altar; Mary first brought Christ into the world in her flesh. Priests offer the Holy Sacrifice; Mary also offered the Sacrifice of her son.

But this is an intimate, devotional response to the Mystery. I would never use those words in print where someone could easily misunderstand/misconstrue the meaning (and you KNOW they will).

 

[cocot]

I agree with your replies.
Let me also quote from another part of the description that I thought was a commentary that is rarely heard, one that I agree with I might add.

Quote " St. John, here, is true to the description given by the Gospel which depicts him as the Thinker, and the “Son of Thunder”, not an effeminate youth as he is frequently represented by most painters."