Mary Did You Know???

[Hislittlelady]

I don’t know what the big problem with this is. The song is so beautiful and meaningful. Mary was a human being after all, and I doubt she could see into the future, and her human mind only had so much understanding just as ours does, so I doubt she could have known exactly what was going to happen, even in spite of what Angel Gabriel told her. Did she really know what 'A sword will pierce your own soul" mean? I wouldn’t think so.

Mary, although a perfect and pure vessel without sin, I believe the part in the song that references how Mary would also be saved, I definitely would interpret that as meaning she would be saved and set free from the suffering of this world and not implying that she had the stain of original sin, which for me is an impossible concept to even entertain. I’m sure the writer of this song, being a Protestant, didn’t mean it as we see it, but probably implied in the song that she did have the stain of original sin. That’s neither or nor there, we know better and we may interpret the song as we know it to be truth. So I do not have a problem with that one line in the song.

Mary, as we know, and the only absolute to the mind of a Catholic, through the inspiration from the Holy Spirit, and the graces given from same, Mary was perfect, pure, sinless, and prepared by God alone for His purpose. After all, God knew ahead of time that she would be willing to obey HIm, and that’s another issue about free will that we cannot understand. So, whatever the writer meant, it doesn’t matter because it very nicely fits in with our own belief as Catholics.

Enjoy the beautiful song and stop picking every little thing apart. I’m sure this person was a God filled human being to have written such a lovely song.

 

[Freshman88]

Return to chant only and voila, problem solved.

 

[CWBetts]

Not every song that mentions God or Mary is a song suitable for worship. Heck if it was, then why aren’t we singing “Let it Be” by the Beatles and “Something to Believe in” by Poison? I think we would do good to avoid “religious” songs that contain blatantly wrong teachings.

 

[MusicMan]

I do believe that even though Mary certainly had free will, she made the choice to give her Fiat to God. Remember that Eve came into the world sinless. However, she succumbed to the temptation of the serpent. Mary, having been given the grace of the salviffic act of her Son beforehand, was free of concupisence and pride. The pride that was Eve’s downfall, Mary undid with her humble acceptance. The fact that Mary was conceived sinless was what laid the groundwork for her fiat. It was her conception, I believe, that set the wheels in motion for God’s redemptive work to take place.

So God coerced her?

 

[Hislittlelady]

Not every song that mentions God or Mary is a song suitable for worship. Heck if it was, then why aren’t we singing “Let it Be” by the Beatles and “Something to Believe in” by Poison? I think we would do good to avoid “religious” songs that contain blatantly wrong teachings

This I agree with. It may be a beautiful song and worthy of listening to, but Mass is a different matter altogether.

Return to chant only and voila, problem solved.

Bingo!

 

[4HisChurch]

Don’t think it hasn’t been done.

 

[CWBetts]

Iguess peopke don’t realize the Mother Mary" in the song is not the Blessed Virgin, but Paul’s mother, Mary McCartney.

 

[FrDavid96]

hmmmm…
I’m not “familiar” with the song, but I do recognize it when I hear it. I’ve done a search for the lyrics, and the version that I found has the following lines:
Mary did you know…
That your baby boy has come to make you new?
This child that you’ve delivered
Will soon deliver you

Those seem to be the only words that might cause a problem–depending upon just how one interprets them. Perhaps the version that I found is missing the other words which are more problematic? If that’s the case, would someone post the other lines please.

 

[mary_bobo]

With regards to what is acceptible for Mass, there is no such thing as"just a song" with that attitude, we’d be singing Baetles songs before long. Second, even when I was Protestant I thought it was stupid because it is contrary to scripture. As a Catholoic, the incorrect teachings about Mary were jumping out at me. I wasn’t looking, but some problems are obvious.

Did I say it was appropriate for Mass? And my attitude comes from many, many years as a traditional Catholic.

 

[MusicMan]

Consider also, that the lyrics merely ask the question of Mary. They do not confirm one way or another what she does or does not know.

It would seem to me, that the lyricist is actually addressing us, as all of the questions actually tell the story of Jesus’s life.

The only problematic line, when looked at from that perspective, then is the “Soon deliver you,” line. That calls the Immaculate Conception into question. However, I’m a Star Trek and a Doctor Who fan. I’m going to err on the side of time being “timey-wimey, weebly-wobbly” and claim that Jesus still needed to endure the Cross and Resurrection for Mary to be born Immaculate. Thus, she was delivered, but if he hadn’t died for us, then her Immaculate Conception would not have happened. Effect, then Cause.

Not theological teaching, but, it works.

Either that, or you change the line to “Has delivered you,” which fits the melody, and 'tis all good.

 

[palmas85]

I don’t know what the big problem with this is. The song is so beautiful and meaningful. Mary was a human being after all, and I doubt she could see into the future, and her human mind only had so much understanding just as ours does, so I doubt she could have known exactly what was going to happen, even in spite of what Angel Gabriel told her. Did she really know what 'A sword will pierce your own soul" mean? I wouldn’t think so.

Mary, although a perfect and pure vessel without sin, I believe the part in the song that references how Mary would also be saved, I definitely would interpret that as meaning she would be saved and set free from the suffering of this world and not implying that she had the stain of original sin, which for me is an impossible concept to even entertain. I’m sure the writer of this song, being a Protestant, didn’t mean it as we see it, but probably implied in the song that she did have the stain of original sin. That’s neither or nor there, we know better and we may interpret the song as we know it to be truth. So I do not have a problem with that one line in the song.

Mary, as we know, and the only absolute to the mind of a Catholic, through the inspiration from the Holy Spirit, and the graces given from same, Mary was perfect, pure, sinless, and prepared by God alone for His purpose. After all, God knew ahead of time that she would be willing to obey HIm, and that’s another issue about free will that we cannot understand. So, whatever the writer meant, it doesn’t matter because it very nicely fits in with our own belief as Catholics.

Enjoy the beautiful song and stop picking every little thing apart. I’m sure this person was a God filled human being to have written such a lovely song.

Actually by questioning Mary’s knowledge of who Jesus was the song denies Catholic teaching totally. In fact, since the exact same wording about the Annunciation appears in most protestant bibles as well as the Catholic the song actually questions the truthfulness and accuracy of scripture itself.

The angel Gabriel was sent from God to a town of Galilee called Nazareth,to a virgin betrothed to a man named Joseph,
of the house of David,and the virgin’s name was Mary.
And coming to her, he said,“Hail, full of grace! The Lord is with you.”But she was greatly troubled at what was said
and pondered what sort of greeting this might be.
Then the angel said to her,
“Do not be afraid, Mary,for you have found favor with God.
Behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son,
and you shall name him Jesus.
He will be great and will be called Son of the Most High,
and the Lord God will give him the throne of David his father,
and he will rule over the house of Jacob forever,
and of his Kingdom there will be no end.”But Mary said to the angel,“How can this be,since I have no relations with a man?”
And the angel said to her in reply,“The Holy Spirit will come upon you,and the power of the Most High will overshadow you.
Therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God.

That seems pretty clear to me

Now how do the following lyrics reflect what is written above?

Mary did you know that your baby boy is Lord of all creation?
Mary did you know that your baby boy will one day rule the nations? Did you know that your baby boy is heaven’s perfect Lamb? This sleeping child you’re holding is the Great I Am.

If you think they do then please explain it to me, because I don’t see it.

 

[Lujack]

Actually, it’s the whole song that is problematic. I am perplexed as to why you would still continue to defend a song that goes against what we believe as Catholics. It goes squarely against the Church’s doctrine on Mary.

Look, I don’t even like the song that much, but the only problem I see is with the one line. That’s the only line that is outright wrong, and like I said, the lyrics can be changed with minimal effort (“will soon deliver you” to “has delivered you”). Where else does the song contradict Church teachings.

She knew that her Son was the Son of God. At the Annunciation, the account that we heard proclaimed this past Sunday, St. Gabriel tells her that:

And, let’s examine what the angel told St. Joseph regarding Mary’s pregnancy:

Do you not think that the Blessed Virign Mary and St. Joseph discussed Jesus and the role he would play? Most certainly they did. Thus, even if St. Gabriel didn’t tell her outright that He would be the Messiah and “save people from their sins”, he certainly told that to St. Joseph. Certainly they would have discussed the matter.

If they had to discuss the matter, that means there was a moment where they didn’t grasp it all, doesn’t it?

Thus, Mary certainly had an idea. Do you really think that God would purposely hide this from His own mother? I don’t think so. I mention Abraham because he had faith that God would restore Isaac to him even though the patriarch was about to sacrifice the son of the promise. Mary, too, had faith that her own Son, the true Son of the promise, would be restored to her. This effectively refutes the song. She had the certainty within her. That is because she had a profound relationship with God, something that this song doesn’t take into account.

She had an idea. She knew her son would be the Messiah and would redeem the world. But that’s so awe-inspiring of a concept that’s it hard to grasp now. Mary probably had never even seen a map of the Middle East, let alone the entire world.

She had certainty that Christ would be the Messiah, but why would she have certainty of anything else? Knowing what will happen is one thing, but knowing what that will entail is something else entirely.

Besides, it isn’t possible to refute a question. If the answer is yes, it can still be something to reflect on.

While a song doesn’t need to reflect every aspect of Mary, a song used in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass needs to reflect the correct Marian aspect, most especially dogma and doctrine that the Church holds true. The song in question fails miserably because it was written by a Protestant who does not believe in Mary as the Church does nor understand our teaching on her.

Being written by a Protestant is irrelevant. What matters is what the words say, and the one line that goes against Church teaching (and only semantically at that, even though semantics are obviously important) can be changed in 30 seconds.

 

[CWBetts]

Look, I don’t even like the song that much, but the only problem I see is with the one line. That’s the only line that is outright wrong, and like I said, the lyrics can be changed with minimal effort (“will soon deliver you” to “has delivered you”). Where else does the song contradict Church teachings.

If they had to discuss the matter, that means there was a moment where they didn’t grasp it all, doesn’t it?

She had an idea. She knew her son would be the Messiah and would redeem the world. But that’s so awe-inspiring of a concept that’s it hard to grasp now. Mary probably had never even seen a map of the Middle East, let alone the entire world.

She had certainty that Christ would be the Messiah, but why would she have certainty of anything else? Knowing what will happen is one thing, but knowing what that will entail is something else entirely.

Besides, it isn’t possible to refute a question. If the answer is yes, it can still be something to reflect on.

Being written by a Protestant is irrelevant. What matters is what the words say, and the one line that goes against Church teaching (and only semantically at that, even though semantics are obviously important) can be changed in 30 seconds.

Lujack, we have debated on may threads, and seems that this one will be no exception. Mary DID know she would be the Mother of the saviour. Even Elizabeth and her yet unborn son knew. Joseph knew. Tis song relegates Mary to just some jewish girl used by god with no knowledge of her role.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Consider also, that the lyrics merely ask the question of Mary. They do not confirm one way or another what she does or does not know.

It would seem to me, that the lyricist is actually addressing us, as all of the questions actually tell the story of Jesus’s life.

The only problematic line, when looked at from that perspective, then is the “Soon deliver you,” line. That calls the Immaculate Conception into question. However, I’m a Star Trek and a Doctor Who fan. I’m going to err on the side of time being “timey-wimey, weebly-wobbly” and claim that Jesus still needed to endure the Cross and Resurrection for Mary to be born Immaculate. Thus, she was delivered, but if he hadn’t died for us, then her Immaculate Conception would not have happened. Effect, then Cause.

Not theological teaching, but, it works.

Either that, or you change the line to “Has delivered you,” which fits the melody, and 'tis all good.

I agree that the song seems to be designed to make us ask ourselves questions and think of the Incarnation in an unusual way, rather than to define doctrine respecting Mary or express uncertainty on her part.

I agree the “soon deliver you” part is problematic. However, since there is no “time” to God, and since the Crucifixion was essential to salvation, Mary’s sinlessness could have certainly been a retroactive effect of that, in the same sort of way that Moses and the other just people were “saved” from damnation retroactively, inasmuch as the damned would not accept heaven even if it was offered to them, and the “harrowing of hell” would have liberated no souls.

But again, it’s a simple song, addressed to very basic human thoughts and emotions. It reminds me, in a way, of the ancient Polish carol “Lulajze Jezuniu”, in which the singer directs the listener to bring to baby Jesus things to eat like bread and butter and raisins. You don’t give bread and butter and raisins to a newborn, and the listener can’t do it anyway. The Poles absolutely revere that carol, and have for centuries; doubtless because it communicates a touchingly simple message of human kindness and love at a very basic level. I admire people who are adept at theology. I really do. But (paraphrasing Freud) sometimes a song is just a song.

 

[Lujack]

Lujack, we have debated on may threads, and seems that this one will be no exception. Mary DID know she would be the Mother of the saviour. Even Elizabeth and her yet unborn son knew. Joseph knew. Tis song relegates Mary to just some jewish girl used by god with no knowledge of her role.

Its reassuring to know that the more things change (I don’t usually come into this forum), the more they stay the same.

I agree that she knew Jesus was the Christ and would redeem the world, but did she know everything that this would entail? Could she foresee the Cross and the Resurrection? Unless she was blessed with divine understanding, it would have been an overwhelming concept to try and grasp. Depending on how the song is presented, it can capture that moment of reflection, of trying to understand that yes, she is carrying the savior of the world, but where will that lead?

 

[CWBetts]

Sometimes a song IS just a song. *Jingle Bells *is just a song. I Can’t Help falling in Love is just a song. But when a song has theological ramifications, it ceses being “just a song” and we must look at the implications of what it is saying. Mary Did You Know? is a song that has anti-Catholic undertones, and should be avoided by Catholics. Some Christmas songs have the proper attitude and contain proper teaching(O Holy Night). Others are purely secular (Sleigh Ride) but this song is neither. It presents false teaching. I don’t see how this can be so casually dismissed.

 

[Lujack]

Sometimes a song IS just a song. *Jingle Bells *is just a song. I Can’t Help falling in Love is just a song. But when a song has theological ramifications, it ceses being “just a song” and we must look at the implications of what it is saying. Mary Did You Know? is a song that has anti-Catholic undertones, and should be avoided by Catholics. Some Christmas songs have the proper attitude and contain proper teaching(O Holy Night). Others are purely secular (Sleigh Ride) but this song is neither. It presents false teaching. I don’t see how this can be so casually dismissed.

I don’t know if one can say that the song has an anti-Catholic undertone. I suppose at worst it has a non-Catholic undertone, but I wouldn’t call it anti-Catholic merely because it doesn’t line up with Church teaching about Mary.

 

[agapewolf]

As I said in my last post, I don’t care for the song, and because it can be confusing, then it probably shouldn’t be done at mass.

HOWEVER…

I think what many people here are missing is…

IT IS A SONG! Meaning, it is art. (maybe bad art), but the medium is STILL art.

There are a lot of sensate people here who forget the fact that art uses a lot more tools and means for expression than just statement of facts. It brings in different concepts and images for communication.

The artistic vehicle that this song is using is the phrase “did you know”

I completely agree…yes, she did know.

But as I said before, one could say to a mother “did you know how cute your baby is”?

It is an artistic tool. That is why I don’t think the absolute outrage is necessary. Get out of the literal meaning of the words.

I mean really. Do we really think there was a drummer at the birth like expressed in Drummer boy? (no dont’ go off on me, I’m not saying it should be used at mass). It’s an artistic tool to express a deeper meaning.

 

[Newbie2]

As far as I can tell, there is no Church teaching that indicates that she didn’t grasp the mysteries of the Faith.

Here we go again…and I suppose you have a reference that says that she did.

There’s no reason to think she grasped all of it. I mean, look at the story of Christ in the Temple. Mary couldn’t understand why He had stayed behind to teach the elders. If she didn’t understand that, why would she know about the Cross and Resurrection before He was even born?

She was sinless, immaculately conceived, and knew Christ was going to the Messiah. There is nothing in Scripture or Church tradition that says whether or not she was gifted with a divine understanding of the method of that redemption, and I don’t see any particular reason why she should be ascribed that understanding.

Exactomundo.

Actually, it’s the whole song that is problematic. I am perplexed as to why you would still continue to defend a song that goes against what we believe as Catholics. It goes squarely against the Church’s doctrine on Mary.

The song in question fails miserably because it was written by a Protestant who does not believe in Mary as the Church does nor understand our teaching on her.

Double See next quoted post

I think what many people here are missing is…

IT IS A SONG! Meaning, it is art. (maybe bad art), but the medium is STILL art.

There are a lot of sensate people here who forget the fact that art uses a lot more tools and means for expression than just statement of facts. It brings in different concepts and images for communication.

The artistic vehicle that this song is using is the phrase “did you know”

I completely agree…yes, she did know.

But as I said before, one could say to a mother “did you know how cute your baby is”?

It is an artistic tool. That is why I don’t think the absolute outrage is necessary. Get out of the literal meaning of the words.

I mean really. Do we really think there was a drummer at the birth like expressed in Drummer boy? (no dont’ go off on me, I’m not saying it should be used at mass). It’s an artistic tool to express a deeper meaning.

Exactomundo!! I think you hit the nail on the head here, AW. It seems that some here would want all our liturgical music to lack artistic reflection, perhaps going back to the gregorian chants? Just a littany of singing church documents?

Something like this, perhaps, might be acceptable:

Mary, you must have known
That your baby boy will one day walk on water
you must have known
That your baby boy will save our sons and daughters
you must have known
That your baby boy has come to make you newalthoughyou’vebeenpreservedfromoriginalsin
This child that youve delivered
Will soon deliver youalthoughyou’vebeenpreservedfromoriginalsin
Mary, you must have known

 

[ibkc]

But again, it’s a simple song, addressed to very basic human thoughts and emotions. It reminds me, in a way, of the ancient Polish carol “Lulajze Jezuniu”, in which the singer directs the listener to bring to baby Jesus things to eat like bread and butter and raisins. You don’t give bread and butter and raisins to a newborn, and the listener can’t do it anyway. The Poles absolutely revere that carol, and have for centuries; doubtless because it communicates a touchingly simple message of human kindness and love at a very basic level. I admire people who are adept at theology. I really do. But (paraphrasing Freud) sometimes a song is just a song.

Agreed to all points; but I think what is in dispute here is whether this song in particular (and, by extension, any old song) is appropriate for use in a liturgical setting. I am of the opinion that songs used for Mass must be carefully selected so as to enhance the mass and to reinforce Church teachings. This song, while it is nice, doesn’t meet those requirements for use in Mass. I’m not sure that any song that is “just a song” meets those requirements. For Mass, we should be using only the best.