The song “Mary Did You Know” is heretical.

[Brendan]

**

No, we, as Catholics, are not supposed to be in the role of assisting in the promulgation of that which is not true, and when it comes to this particular song, our conscience can rest easy since this song is faithful to supreme truth that Jesus Christ is Lord of all Creation and was born of a woman…

No one is denying that the song got that one correctly. It’s the part where Mary was ALREADY saved by Christ from the first moments of her existance that it gets wrong.

And there is no excuse for promulgating the falsehood that she was not already delivered even before she delivered Christ.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

And there is no excuse for promulgating the falsehood that she was not already delivered even before she delivered Christ.

Well, I suppose she would have to have been already delivered, at least so long as her mother didn’t have a C-section.

Just kidding!

 

[Rach620]

No one is denying that the song got that one correctly. It’s the part where Mary was ALREADY saved by Christ from the first moments of her existance that it gets wrong.

And there is no excuse for promulgating the falsehood that she was not already delivered even before she delivered Christ.

Exactly. The Catholic problem with this song is not so much the fact that Mary is asked a series of questions, but in particular one specific question:

“Mary, did you know that the baby you delivered, would soon deliver you?”

Even at the Nativity, Catholics believe that Mary has already been delivered by her Son. From the moment of HER conception, she has been delivered by the Word who has yet to become Incarnate. And what’s more, she was ‘delivered’ in such a special and unique way, out of the love of her Son, that she never was tainted by sin, that she was delivered from even touching original sin. This is what we celebrate tomorrow in the Immaculate Conception.

Did she know this when she was growing up? Probably not, since she is so astounded when the Angel Gabriel comes at the Annunciation. The problem is in the phrasing of the question, not in its asking. The question itself assumes that Mary, at the Annunciation, during her pregnancy, and again at the Nativity, is herself in need of deliverance, that she is a sinner. This goes against everything that Catholics believe about the Mother of God.

 

[Brendan]

Mary was not a Scripture scholar, and it is very unlikely that she had the idea that the Messiah would die an agonizing death.

St. Joachim was a Priest of the Temple, she knew far more than most about the Word of God.

Let’s look at what Scripture tells us she knew:

Yes, how about this

Let us lie in wait for the righteous man, because he is inconvenient to us and opposes our actions; he reproaches us for sins against the law, and accuses us of sins against our training. He professes to have knowledge of God, and calls himself a child of the Lord. He became to us a reproof of our thoughts; the very sight of him is a burden to us, because his manner of life is unlike that of others, and his ways are strange. We are considered by him as something base, and he avoids our ways as unclean; he calls the last end of the righteous happy, and boasts that God is his father. Let us see if his words are true, and let us test what will happen at the end of his life; for if the righteous man is God’s son, He will help him, and will deliver him from the hand of his adversaries. Let us test him with insult and torture, that we may find out how gentle he is, and make trial of his forbearance. Let us condemn him to a shameful death, for, according to what he says, he will be protected."

Wisdom 2:12-20

Yes, Mary knew the manner in which the Messiah would die. That He would be tortured, insulted and die a painful and shameful death.

 

[Epistemes]

And there is no excuse for promulgating the falsehood that she was not already delivered even before she delivered Christ.

I concede your point that there is no excuse for “promulgating the falsehood” regarding the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, and we Catholics can, of course, bar this song from our “venues,” but I’m sticking by my original point that at least some credence is being given to Our Blessed Mother and, ultimately, to Christ while we still can. So we’ve come to the conclusion that a Catholic didn’t write this song? How surprising! Catholics didn’t write a majority of songs which are currently being played at Christmas, but how funny it is that some Catholics jump on the “let’s save orthodoxy” bandwagon when a single religiously-themed song does get air time. It’s refreshing to hear my Mother’s name on the radio instead of hearing Burl Ives, Perry Como, or even a song that advocates shacking up for the night ("Let it Snow!) for the zillionth time. I, for one, don’t expect most Christmas songs on the radio to be orthodox representations of my Catholic faith, however. It’s nice when one comes within an inch of being close.

So, no excuse for promulgating falsehood? Perhaps not. So, I recommend *you *not play it in your local Catholic venue. However, if it draws one secular-minded person closer to wondering about the mystery of the Incarnation - oh, I’m sorry - Nativity, then perhaps Mary might forgive that “promulgation.” She does, of course, only want to draw all people to her Son.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

St. Joachim was a Priest of the Temple, she knew far more than most about the Word of God.

You may very well be right, but I would point out that most Scripture scholars at the time thought that the Messiah would come in glory as an earthly king, not that He would suffer and die. I’m sure there were exceptions, however.

The point about Mary’s deliverance is a good criticism, but I hardly think this error is reason enough to make the song worthless. Heresy is teaching falsehood, not making a mistake. We need not play this song during Mass, but it is nonetheless a powerful meditative tool.

 

[Brendan]

You may very well be right, but I would point out that most Scripture scholars at the time thought that the Messiah would come in glory as an earthly king, not that He would suffer and die. I’m sure there were exceptions, however.

Mary, unlike the Pharisees, was concieved without Original Sin. That mean that her soul, including all it’s powers and faculties, was uncorrupted by concupicence. This includes the intellect…

Others could read the Scriptures (like Wisdon 2) and overlay their personal selfishness and petty desires. That was something the Grace with which Mary was endowed with allowed her to see past.

The point about Mary’s deliverance is a good criticism, but I hardly think this error is reason enough to make the song worthless. Heresy is teaching falsehood, not making a mistake. .

Correct, assuming the author was not Catholic and aware of the truthfulness of the Immaculate Conception, it’s lyrics are a mistake.

But since Catholics know the false nature of these lyrics, it’s use at Mass would be heretical.

I’m glad we all agree

Now I think I’ll go play “Mary’s Boy Child”

 

[beafedor]

You may very well be right, but I would point out that most Scripture scholars at the time thought that the Messiah would come in glory as an earthly king, not that He would suffer and die. I’m sure there were exceptions, however.

The point about Mary’s deliverance is a good criticism, but I hardly think this error is reason enough to make the song worthless. Heresy is teaching falsehood, not making a mistake. We need not play this song during Mass, but it is nonetheless a powerful meditative tool.

The only 2 times I have heard that song is during Mass and I too am shocked by the lyrics.

 

[Mom2Bruno]

I never heard the song, but I did read the lyrics. They seem a bit too folksy for my tastes.

I always thought Mary did know what would happen to Jesus. And didn’t she spend a lot of time in the temple? I like the icons of the Annunciation where Mary is studying the Scripture.

 

[pnewton]

Simple solution. If one does not like it, don’t listen to it. Stick to* Frosty the Snowman* or* Santa Claus is Coming to Town*.

Using a poetic device is not a heresy.

 

[thistle]

Fr. A, Wrote:

"You hit the nail on the head re: the lyrics of the song. My concerns are the same as yours. The song is an appeal to the mystery surrounding the Incarnation and Nativity. That’s fine, as far as it goes. The lyrics, however, leave the door open to erroneous and heretical opinions, thanks to their ambiguity. I would avoid performing or promoting the song for that reason".

Perhaps I should have said the song is theologically inaccurate. In any case, both priests reccomended that the song not be performed in Catholic venues.

As I said they did not say the song is heretical.

 

[aicirt]

I’ve got to say, I think many of you are missing the message of the song entirely. The question the song explores is: “*How *can a woman possibly fathom the mystery incarnate in the Christ, much less in being the *mother *of that very Christ?”

We ought to agree to this much: that Mary was a human being, with the thoughts and emotions and limitations that are entailed by humanness. (So was Jesus, although perhaps “limitations” ought not apply when one has chosen those limitations). Mary was not a Scripture scholar, and it is very unlikely that she had the idea that the Messiah would die an agonizing death.

Let’s look at what Scripture tells us she knew:

There is no indication that she was anything but joyous before Jesus was born, although there is a sense of some anxiety when we hear (in Jesus’ childhood) that she “kept all these things in her heart”. This is likely due to Simeon’s prophecy:

We have no reason to suppose that Mary received any other extraordinary revelations, although it is certainly likely that she “knew”, in some sense, that “when she kissed her little baby, she kissed the face of God”. And yet…

How could she *know *such a thing? That is, how could she comprehend it? Who can fathom the glory of the Most High, and who can take in God under her own humble roof? There is a richness of mystery here, which cannot simply be swept away by answering the song’s questions with “Yes”.

My own humble belief: Mary did not know, in any amount of fullness, the power and the glory and the majesty of God until Jesus died on the Cross. For only then the curtain was torn; only then could we truly behold His glory, as we had the freedom to walk into the Holy of Holies and yet live! Mary was the first to take that step, but I highly doubt she was fully aware of her calling before the very end.

Disagree. She answered when she was asked to be the Mother of God…“And all nations shall call me blessed.” Also knew at Cana that her Son was capable of miracles when she told Him they were without wine and He answered that it wasn’t His time but did it anyway for her. Also knew when they found him at the Temple preaching that He had to be about His Father’s business. She knew the prophecies, the prophets, was a daughter of the house of David from whom the Messiah would come. I believe the prophet Isiaha spoke of Christ’s death. She always knew.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Disagree. She answered when she was asked to be the Mother of God…“And all nations shall call me blessed.” Also knew at Cana that her Son was capable of miracles when she told Him they were without wine and He answered that it wasn’t His time but did it anyway for her. Also knew when they found him at the Temple preaching that He had to be about His Father’s business. She knew the prophecies, the prophets, was a daughter of the house of David from whom the Messiah would come. I believe the prophet Isiaha spoke of Christ’s death. She always knew.

In my post, I myself said that she knew.

But in my opinion, she didn’t know fully. In other words, I am saying that she knew that Jesus was God, but it was through her relationship with Jesus that she came to the fullness of revelation of who God is.

A comparison: there’s a tremendous difference between knowing that Benedict is pope, and knowing Pope Benedict. Not even Adam and Eve were born knowing God; they had to meet Him and become familiar with Him. I think this is a very important distinction.

 

[centurionguard]

In my post, I myself said that she knew.

But in my opinion, she didn’t know fully. In other words, I am saying that she knew that Jesus was God, but it was through her relationship with Jesus that she came to the fullness of revelation of who God is.

A comparison: there’s a tremendous difference between knowing that Benedict is pope, and knowing Pope Benedict. Not even Adam and Eve were born knowing God; they had to meet Him and become familiar with Him. I think this is a very important distinction.

But in my opinion, she didn’t know

I think what you state here is a matter of prospective strictly from OUR limited human understanding. And I’m not referring in anyway shape or form to song itself in this thread.

God created Mary in His mind from eternity. Her soul was perfect without sin.
Supernaturally; she would have been endowed spiritually with knowledge far superior than any human being that will ever be created in history.

How could you say for instance: that she could not know the Holy Presence of God Tabernacled inside her Immaculate womb in the nine months she carried Jesus her infant?

I believe the Blessed Virgin had a far greater knowledge than any human mother who has a mental and spiritual attachment to the unborn babe in a woman’s womb.

Let us examine the Blessed Virgin Mary’s FIAT:

Mary’s fiat is found in Lk 1:38. It is her “yes” to God, which she declared once the Angel explained to her that she would conceive a son by the power of the Holy Spirit. Her specific words were, “Behold the handmaid of the Lord: be it done to me according to thy word.” In Latin, it is, “Ecce ancilla Domini; fiat mihi secundum verbum tuum.” The Latin word for “be it done” (or “let it be done”) is fiat, so that is the name used by scholars to refer to Mary’s response to the angel.

“My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior, for he has regarded the low estate of his handmaiden. For behold, henceforth all generations will call me blessed; for he who is mighty has done great things for me, and holy is his name. And his mercy is on those who fear him from generation to generation. He has shown strength with his arm, he has scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts, he has put down the mighty from their thrones, and exalted those of low degree; he has filled the hungry with good things, and the rich he has sent empty away. He has helped his servant Israel, in remembrance of his mercy, as he spoke to our fathers, to Abraham and to his posterity for ever.”

Mary Did Know.

 

[tinalewis]

Yes, and I’m sure you’ll waste no time in letting our consecrated religious sisters of the Daughters of St. Paul know that they’re singing a song that’s heretical.

 

[centurionguard]

Yes, and I’m sure you’ll waste no time in letting our consecrated religious sisters of the Daughters of St. Paul know that they’re singing a song that’s heretical.

Personally for what little it may be worth I have absolutely NO interest in this secular song “Mary Did You Know” In my last post if you perceived correctly I said;

I’m not referring in anyway shape or form to song itself in this thread.

Peace
Chris

 

[DihydrogenOxide]

It’s a protestant song that doesn’t acknowledge the immaculate conception of Mary.

Why would a catholic listen to it? It’s warped truth.

 

[mangy_dog]

Many Catholics are not aware of the fact that the song “Mary Did You Know”, is heretical.

“Mary Did You Know” is a very popular song with many Catholics. Many, however, are not aware that the song in heretical and should not be performed in Catholic venues. Below is a critique of this song by two orthodox priests.

Fr. M. Wrote:

Your suspicions regarding “Mary, Did You Know?” are correct. The very title of the song is misleading. We need to remember some of the effects of Mary’s Immaculate Conception. One effect was that she received the same gifts that Adam and Eve had before the Fall. One set of gifts Adam and Eve had are the preternatural gifts, of which there were 3 kinds. The one of most interest to this discussion is infused knowledge. Infused knowledge is a special knowledge of the providence of God. It is the ability to see in the natural the supernatural of what God is doing. Mary saw the supernatural ramifications of all that Jesus said and did. Recall that Luke tells us that Mary “pondered all these things in her heart.”

Also, Mary was “full of grace” from the moment of her conception. Her will was completely united to the will of God at all times. She experienced throughout her life the “transforming union”, the pinnacle of the spiritual life possible here one earth. Souls in that state of union have a much greater knowledge and love of God, the spiritual writers teach us. Plus, Mary knew the Hebrew Scriptures intimately. So she knew that Jesus was the Incarnate Word of God (Lk. 1) as well as the Suffering Servant of Yahweh (Is 52-53). She also knew from Simeon’s words that she would suffer with Him. Conclusion: she knew a lot more than is implied by the song “Mary, Did You Know?”. Please do not include that song in your repertoire. Hope all this helps.

Fr. A, Wrote:

You hit the nail on the head re: the lyrics of the song. My concerns are the same as yours. The song is an appeal to the mystery surrounding the Incarnation and Nativity. That’s fine, as far as it goes. The lyrics, however, leave the door open to erroneous and heretical opinions, thanks to their ambiguity. I would avoid performing or promoting the song for that reason.

Many catholics are carried away with the nice melody without listening and applying what we profess about Mary to the heretical nature of this “song”.

Yes, it is heretical and yes some catholics are inadvertantly negligent in their understanding of the Theotokos as it pertains to this [song].

 

[Melissa]

Simple solution. If one does not like it, don’t listen to it. Stick to* Frosty the Snowman* or* Santa Claus is Coming to Town*.

Using a poetic device is not a heresy.

That’s getting a bit absurd. Can we at least agree that this song has no place whatsoever at Mass?

Aside from the one line which, at minimum, skirts right up to outright denial of the Immaculate Conception, the other lines have struck me as being delivered in a rather smug tone as though the singer knows something with an expected “no” in response. It’s wrapped up in a bit of saccharine, but it’s still inappropriate in Catholic venues.

Much better, as one of the choices at my parish yesterday–Stainless the Maiden which is on far superior ground, both musically (IMNHO) and theologically.

 

[Holly3278]

Well, I must say, I don’t like the song either. I don’t know if it’s heretical or not but I definitely don’t like the lyrics.