Mary, Did You Know

[JimR-OCDS]

Morningkill

Jim, you are repeatedly missing the point - deliberately, I can only assume. The point is not that the song denies this aspect of Marian theology, but rather the fact it denies the fact that the deliverance occurs PRIOR to her birth. That’s the bottom line.

Actually Mary’s deliverance did not come prior to Jesus birth. Removal of original sin was done prior to Jesus birth, but Mary still had free will and could’ve sinned after her birth, and then God would have had to make other plans. Also, Mary had the free will to refuse to become the mother of Jesus. Had Jesus not come, Mary would not have been born free of original sin. It was only because God knew that He would bring Salvation to the world, through Mary, that she was given this gift.

Also, what DOES the author (a Protestant) mean?

I really don’t care that the author is protestant. What the words mean to me as I hear them, is all that matters.

Is it really appropriate for us to be singing a song by a Protestant which can be read as supporting a uniquely Protestant understanding of Mary and challenging the Catholic doctine?

This borders on bigotry. Just because a song is written and sung by a protestant, doesn’t make it wrong for Catholics to sing.

Also - what do you mean by stating that the Dogma was only promulgated in 1854?

The dogma of Mary’s Immaculate Conception, was not declared officially until 1854. What we don’t know, is whether Mary herself, knew, that she was conceived free of original sin.

I don’t understand your motive with that statement - we all know then the Dogma was promulgated. The belief is far, far, far older.

Until it became dogma, Catholics were not obligated to believe it. It was believed and debated over the centuries. In fact, when the Pope declared the dogma, it nearly caused a schism.

Jim

 

[Morningkill]

But even if they were, I see nothing here that contradicts the catechism

The line “soon deliver you” implies that Mary is not yet delivered - this is a denial of the Immaculate Conception. Jesus will not “soon” deliver her - He has already done so. He will “soon” go the Cross, but He has already delivered her. The Catechism is very clear on the fact that Mary was preserved from original sin from the moment of her conception.

 

[Morningkill]

Actually Mary’s deliverance did not come prior to Jesus birth.

As I asked above, this is a question of what “deliverance” means - does it refer to the preservation from original sin, or something else?

God would have had to make other plans.

That is a phrase which is FULL of problems, given the omniscience of God.

What the words mean to me as I hear them, is all that matters.

Can I ask, would you apply that to everything you read? Because, as a Catholic, you are not permitted to do so.

Just because a song is written and sung by a protestant, doesn’t make it wrong for Catholics to sing.

If you read my post and decided to react to the whole sentence, rather than an element, you would understand that I am not suggesting it it wrong for Catholics to use something which was made by a Protestant. I am saying it is wrong for a Catholic to sing a song written by a Protestant which advances a notion which can be seen to be contrary to the faith.

Until it became dogma, Catholics were not obligated to believe it. It was believed and debated over the centuries. In fact, when the Pope declared the dogma, it nearly caused a schism.

Even putting aside the fact I wholy disagree with your assessment of history (I can find no mention of a near schism, and it was widely accepted by the vast majority), can I ask what relevance this has? I could, for example, say that until the Assumption was declared Catholics did not HAVE to believe it.

Such a statement is irrelevant to the discussion - and rather does raise the suspision that you are implying that, therefore, it doesn’t matter if we believe it now.

The song was written after 1854. The intent of the author is paramount - if an employer says (as an example, using hypothetical names here) that “Rebecca is fired” and means that she is “fired up”, does that mean that she is no longer employed, if others think it means she’s been let go? No - of course not.

The authors are Protestants - they do not believe the Immaculate Conception. Their intent in writing this is to advance a notion about Mary which is not Catholic. That is the bottom line here - why are we suggesting that we should sing a song like this when there are so many good Catholic songs which accurately reflect Catholic doctrine?

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Morningkill

As I asked above, this is a question of what “deliverance” means - does it refer to the preservation from original sin, or something else?

Deliverance from sin. Did Mary know, that she was born free of orignal sin?

That is a phrase which is FULL of problems, given the omniscience of God.

God did not remove Mary’s free will. Mary could have sinned, prior to the annunciation and God would’ve had to make different plans for the salvation of mankind. However, he knew she would not sin.

Can I ask, would you apply that to everything you read? Because, as a Catholic, you are not permitted to do so.

Yes, I think when I read, if that’s what you’re getting at. What I read and what I believe is in accord with Catholic doctrine, even though you apparently don’t think so.

If you read my post and decided to react to the whole sentence, rather than an element, you would understand that I am not suggesting it it wrong for Catholics to use something which was made by a Protestant. I am saying it is wrong for a Catholic to sing a song written by a Protestant which advances a notion which can be seen to be contrary to the faith.

The song wasn’t written to advance a notion. It is you who are reading into the notion of it being something other than what lines up with Catholic doctrine.

Even putting aside the fact I wholy disagree with your assessment of history (I can find no mention of a near schism, and it was widely accepted by the vast majority), can I ask what relevance this has?

The point is the Church did not know, whether Mary knew she was conceived without sin. There is no Scriptural evidence that even suggest it and within the Church herself, there was strong disagreement over this dogma. The dogma was proven to be true, (at least for those who believe it), at Lourdes, 1858.

I could, for example, say that until the Assumption was declared Catholics did not HAVE to believe it.

Until it became a dogma, Catholics were not obligated to believe it.

Such a statement is irrelevant to the discussion - and rather does raise the suspision that you are implying that, therefore, it doesn’t matter if we believe it now.

What it implies is that we don’t know is, whether Mary knew that she was immaculately conceived, at the time of the annunciation.

Their intent in writing this is to advance a notion about Mary which is not Catholic.

You don’t know what the intent of the author was. Give it up.

That is the bottom line here - why are we suggesting that we should sing a song like this when there are so many good Catholic songs which accurately reflect Catholic doctrine?

The bottom line is, you and a few others have a problem with the song, other Catholics do not. The problem isn’t mine, but yours.

Jim

 

[Morningkill]

You know, Jim - it is becoming increasingly difficult to respond to your messages charitably; partially because you are not addressing the key issue and partially because you seem to willfully misunderstand what I am saying. There is also a certain element in your writing style which I find abrasive and accusatory.

I am certain that this is not your intention, but - as I have made all the points I wish to make concerning this matter and I have no desire to respond in an uncharitable way and cause any offense - I see no real point in this discussion. I am, accordingly, no longer going to get reply notification for this topic and won’t be bothering to view this thread any more.

 

[pprimeau1976]

Actually Mary’s deliverance did not come prior to Jesus birth. Removal of original sin was done prior to Jesus birth, but Mary still had free will and could’ve sinned after her birth, and then God would have had to make other plans. Also, Mary had the free will to refuse to become the mother of Jesus. Had Jesus not come, Mary would not have been born free of original sin. It was only because God knew that He would bring Salvation to the world, through Mary, that she was given this gift.

That’s not really true. Original sin is just the lack of sanctifying grace. By saying that Mary was concieved without original sin, we actually say that Mary was concieved with sanctifying grace. If she would have refused to become the mother of Jesus, (and supposing this act was sinful) she would have just lost her sanctifying grace similar to anyone who mortally sins after they are baptised.

What we don’t know, is whether Mary herself, knew, that she was conceived free of original sin.

What would Mary’s knowledge of her immaculate conception matter?

Until it became dogma, Catholics were not obligated to believe it. It was believed and debated over the centuries. In fact, when the Pope declared the dogma, it nearly caused a schism.

What does this matter? So it wasn’t dogma then. Does that mean that it didn’t happen or that it’s not a belief that’s “up there” with Jesus being both God and man?

 

[JimR-OCDS]

pprimeau

That’s not really true. Original sin is just the lack of sanctifying grace. By saying that Mary was concieved without original sin, we actually say that Mary was concieved with sanctifying grace.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church;

2023 Sanctifying grace is the gratuitous gift of his life that God makes to us; it is infused by the Holy Spirit into the soul to heal it of sin and to sanctify it.

Mary was conceived without sin and never sinned, so she did not require the healing gift of sanctifying grace. The grace Mary received from God was complete and full, because she was without sin.

If she would have refused to become the mother of Jesus, (and supposing this act was sinful) she would have just lost her sanctifying grace similar to anyone who mortally sins after they are baptised.

If she wouldn’t have agreed to become the mother of Jesus, nothing would have happen, because God gave her free will. Just as Jesus could’ve refused the cross, he would not have ceased being God the Son.

What would Mary’s knowledge of her immaculate conception matter?

Nothing in the context of the hymn being discussed, which is the point.

Jim

 

[benedictgal]

pprimeau

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church;

Mary was conceived without sin and never sinned, so she did not require the healing gift of sanctifying grace. The grace Mary received from God was complete and full, because she was without sin.

If she wouldn’t have agreed to become the mother of Jesus, nothing would have happen, because God gave her free will. Just as Jesus could’ve refused the cross, he would not have ceased being God the Son.

Nothing in the context of the hymn being discussed, which is the point.

Jim

Jim, even though you are quoting the Catechism, you still do not understand why this hymn is so very problematic. You also don’t seem to understand Mary’s perfect agreement with the will of God. Only one who can love God completely and totally will be perfectly open to the Father’s will. In fact, Mary’s Yes, her Fiat, if you will, was a sign that she was totally free and had no attachments that hindered her from accepting God’s will that she be the Mother of His Son.

You can quote things up and down to fit your notions, but, that still does not change the fact that this song is heretical.

 

[pnewton]

I love this song, at least on the radio. It’s good to here Protestant’s sing anything related to Mary. Of course the lyrics contain an error. Music lyrics are fallable. I like the song for the same reason that I like fellowship with Protestants. I focus on the truth we have in common and accept that without the teaching of the Church and her 2000 years of wisdom, they will have some points a little screwy.

On the other hand, I would never do this song in Mass, or in any venue where I thought the mistakes in the lyrics would be a stumbling block for Catholics lackinin knowledge of their faith. (and I incorporate quite a bit of Protestant music)

There is one other ad hominem issue I feel strongly about, but I do not mind posting it since it is a positive. Benedictgal was shown a lot of solid ideas on liturgy over this forum. I have learned a lot from her and others like her (puzzleannie pops to mind), even though we do not always think alike. Her credentials with me have been established over time and I do not question her orthodoxy, motivation or intellegence. If she is of the belief that it was an inappropriate use of the song in her specific situation, then I am sure it was.

 

[agapewolf]

Jim, even though you are quoting the Catechism, you still do not understand why this hymn is so very problematic. You also don’t seem to understand Mary’s perfect agreement with the will of God. Only one who can love God completely and totally will be perfectly open to the Father’s will. In fact, Mary’s Yes, her Fiat, if you will, was a sign that she was totally free and had no attachments that hindered her from accepting God’s will that she be the Mother of His Son.

You can quote things up and down to fit your notions, but, that still does not change the fact that this song is heretical.

Why did you even ask what people thought then? It doesn’t make sense.

Even though there are several arguements overlapping here, I don’t see a problem with the way someone is interpreting some literary device in order to ENJOY a song. In fact, I listen to music on the radio that isn’t perfectly in line with church teacing.
I haven’t seen much promotion for actually using it at mass, that doesn’t seem to be any part of the arguments later on.

I don’t understand why people aren’t allowed to LIKE and ENJOY a song.

It seems that so many people here want to argue for the sake of arguing.

 

[ncjohn]

Why did you even ask what people thought then? It doesn’t make sense.

Apparently some have been given the authority to proclaim heresy and to judge others deficient in their understanding. Like some other similar threads in which every which thing is deemed “inappropriate” or “heretical” it appears to be a stage set up to speak from rather than for actual discussion.

My cynical 2 cents worth.

 

[pnewton]

Earlier the poetic nature of the song was mentioned. I would like to use that as another reason the song is problematic. The question “did you know” in some of the lines is a rhetorical question in which the the implied answer is “no.” For example:

Mary did you know
That your baby boy
Will give sight to a blind man?
Mary did you know
That your baby boy
Will calm the storm with his hand?

When this same rhetoric is applied to to other question and the implied answer of “no” is considered, it becomes problematic even for a sola scriptura Baptist. My Baptist mom pointed this out to me. For example:

Mary did you know
That your baby boy
Will save our sons and daughters?

Did you know that your baby boy
Has walked where angels trod?
When you kiss your little baby
You’ve kissed the face of God.

So even the poetic device is not consistent.

 

[pprimeau1976]

pprimeau

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church;2023 Sanctifying grace is the gratuitous gift of his life that God makes to us; it is infused by the Holy Spirit into the soul to heal it of sin and to sanctify it.
Mary was conceived without sin and never sinned, so she did not require the healing gift of sanctifying grace. The grace Mary received from God was complete and full, because she was without sin.

I said that Original Sin was essentially the lack of sactifying grace. That’s how the Catholic Encyclopedia defined it:

Original sin is the privation of sanctifying grace in consequence of the sin of Adam. This solution, which is that of St. Thomas, goes back to St. Anselm and even to the traditions of the early Church, as we see by the declaration of the Second Council of Orange (A.D. 529): one man has transmitted to the whole human race not only the death of the body, which is the punishment of sin, but even sin itself, which is the death of the soul [Denz., n. 175 (145)]. As death is the privation of the principle of life, the death of the soul is the privation of sanctifying grace which according to all theologians is the principle of supernatural life. Therefore, if original sin is “the death of the soul”, it is the privation of sanctifying grace.

The Catechism has a slightly different explanation:

405 Although it is proper to each individual, original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam’s descendants. It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it, subject to ignorance, suffering and the dominion of death, and inclined to sin - an inclination to evil that is called concupiscence". Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle.

Whether you want to call original sin a lack of “original holiness and justice” or “sanctifying grace” really doesn’t matter. Mary was given at her conception the stuff that we were deprived of at the time of our conceptions.

Those four little words “would soon deliver you” presupposes that she either sinned or had the stain of original sin on her soul. Both ideas are against church teaching.

I am not against the song being sung at Mass. I am against those four little words that imply alot.

 

[benedictgal]

Our children’s choir performed this song right before Christmas. It was very troubling for me, especially as I heard the line, “Mary did you know that the child you delivered would soon deliver you?”

I asked this with some sincerity as it didn’t sit well with me that this kind of song was being performed by our parish’s children’s choir. It was only within the confines of this thread that I learned that the song was written by a Protestant evangelical minister, which explains a lot about the line in question.

My concern remains that when we teach our children songs of this nature we are, in effect, opening the door to confusion. A lot of times, music is used to teach the Faith because notes and lyrics are easy to remember.

I was wrong about attributing this song to OCP. I made this attribution because our parish is up to its collective eyeballs with stuff from that publishing house. Thank you, agapewolf, for setting me straight that OCP isn’t to blame for this particular song.

I don’t have children; but, I think that as a Catholic, it is my responsibility to point out error when it happens so as to ensure that whatever we hand our children to sing is in line and in conformity with the teachings of the Catholic Church. That is why, as pnewton noted, I have strong opinions regarding this hymn, especially since now I know the song’s origins. There are some Protestant songs that are rather nice, including A Mighty Fortress is Our God, that seem to conform with Catholic teaching. I am not 100% allergic to these older hymns. Furthermore, on the surface (and a little deeper, if you will), they don’t contradict what the Church teaches. Mary Did You Know, however, is not in that category.

Jim, you and Joysong argue that this song doesn’t seem to contradict Church dogma on Mary. Let me remind you, however, that in this day and age, with catechesis being watered down so much, that we can’t be assured of what is taught and believed anymore. There are a few Catholics out there who don’t acknowledge the Real Presence, much less Mary’s Immaculate Conception or Perpetual Virginity. When songs like Mary Did You Know are performed in Catholic Churches, this only gtives further credence to the point and further contributes to the confusion.

 

[Cristiano]

Earlier the poetic nature of the song was mentioned. I would like to use that as another reason the song is problematic. The question “did you know” in some of the lines is a rhetorical question in which the the implied answer is “no.” For example:

When this same rhetoric is applied to to other question and the implied answer of “no” is considered, it becomes problematic even for a sola scriptura Baptist. My Baptist mom pointed this out to me. For example:

So even the poetic device is not consistent.

I think that here you are using a good approach to make a point. If I just look at the words I do not automatically see a wrong doctrinal statement and I explained my take in a previous post; however if I follow your point on the use of the poetic device (rhetorical question and implied answer) then I can see a red flag coming up immediately.

 

[Cristiano]

Our children’s choir performed this song right before Christmas. It was very troubling for me, especially as I heard the line, “Mary did you know that the child you delivered would soon deliver you?”

I asked this with some sincerity as it didn’t sit well with me that this kind of song was being performed by our parish’s children’s choir. It was only within the confines of this thread that I learned that the song was written by a Protestant evangelical minister, which explains a lot about the line in question.

My concern remains that when we teach our children songs of this nature we are, in effect, opening the door to confusion. A lot of times, music is used to teach the Faith because notes and lyrics are easy to remember.

I was wrong about attributing this song to OCP. I made this attribution because our parish is up to its collective eyeballs with stuff from that publishing house. Thank you, agapewolf, for setting me straight that OCP isn’t to blame for this particular song.

I don’t have children; but, I think that as a Catholic, it is my responsibility to point out error when it happens so as to ensure that whatever we hand our children to sing is in line and in conformity with the teachings of the Catholic Church.

Jim, you and Joysong argue that this song doesn’t seem to contradict Church dogma on Mary. Let me remind you, however, that in this day and age, with catechesis being watered down so much, that we can’t be assured of what is taught and believed anymore. There are a few Catholics out there who don’t acknowledge the Real Presence, much less Mary’s Immaculate Conception or Perpetual Virginity. When songs like Mary Did You Know are performed in Catholic Churches, this only gtives further credence to the point and further contributes to the confusion.

Sadly your concerns are very valid and that is why more people really willing to study should be involved in teaching the catechism. In my class I had a child stating that after you died you can still choose to go to heaven or hell. She was 100% sure because her mother said so. I decided to become a catechist when my son’s Familiy Faith Formation teacher said that the Immaculate Conception was the name for the virgin birth of Jesus.

 

[benedictgal]

Earlier the poetic nature of the song was mentioned. I would like to use that as another reason the song is problematic. The question “did you know” in some of the lines is a rhetorical question in which the the implied answer is “no.” For example:

When this same rhetoric is applied to to other question and the implied answer of “no” is considered, it becomes problematic even for a sola scriptura Baptist. My Baptist mom pointed this out to me. For example:

So even the poetic device is not consistent.

Your aim on this is more accurate than Lucas McCain (Rifleman). No, I’m not dating myself. My dad and I sometimes watch the reruns on the Westerns channel.

Seriously, though, your poetic deconstruction is on target. This brings up another interesting point: Of course she knew she was kissing the face of God. After all, didn’t the Archangel Gabriel tell Mary that the child she was going to conceive would be the Son of God?

 

[Joysong]

Jim, you and Joysong argue that this song doesn’t seem to contradict Church dogma on Mary.

Sorry, you missed the mark there B.G. I never said a single word about dogma. Kindly re-read my posts. I refused to offer my opinion, but it seems you are anxious to put me in a category that invites controversy.

My complaint, if you remember, is the condescending attitude you demonstrated after inviting people’s opinions, insinuating they do not know Marian theology and questioning if they are Catholic.

This is really getting out of hand. The only beef seems to be yours because your children’s choir performed it. Since neither OCP nor GIA have this in their hymnals, it is highly unlikely that any other parish besides yours used this song. Not a single poster alluded to that being the case. No doubt the argument lies uniquely with your own parish.

Incidentally, can you link us the what the AAA forum had to say, since you had browsed there?

 

[benedictgal]

Sorry, you missed the mark there B.G. I never said a single word about dogma. Kindly re-read my posts. I refused to offer my opinion, but it seems you are anxious to put me in a category that invites controversy.

My complaint, if you remember, is the condescending attitude you demonstrated after inviting people’s opinions, insinuating they do not know Marian theology and questioning if they are Catholic.

This is really getting out of hand. The only beef seems to be yours because your children’s choir performed it. Since neither OCP nor GIA have this in their hymnals, it is highly unlikely that any other parish besides yours used this song. Not a single poster alluded to that being the case. No doubt the argument lies uniquely with your own parish.

Incidentally, can link us the what the AAA forum had to say, since you had browsed there?

Let’s hope I’ve got the hang of posting links from the Catholic answers site:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=163486

Joysong, inasmuh as no one else has indicated that this hymn was used in their parishes, maybe the other folks who are viewing this thread (and not commenting) are faced with a similar circumstance. I also erred in lumping you into the discussion. Mea culpa.

The song is just very problematic.

 

[Indyann]

Sadly your concerns are very valid and that is why more people really willing to study should be involved in teaching the catechism. In my class I had a child stating that after you died you can still choose to go to heaven or hell. She was 100% sure because her mother said so. I decided to become a catechist when my son’s Familiy Faith Formation teacher said that the Immaculate Conception was the name for the virgin birth of Jesus.

Perhaps that child’s mother has read St. Faustina’s diary. That is exactly what Jesus told her. Jesus loves a soul so much that He gives them more than one chance to turn to Him at the moment of death.

I know that Catholics are not bound to believe this, but I choose to believe.

As far as the song goes, it’s just a song. I sincerely doubt that any child’s faith is compromised by a mere Christmas song. Way too many other things to worry about in these times.