|
Question 66: Are there today, or have there ever been in the history of Islam movements which recognize the value of celibacy? (DE)
Answer: The Qur’an is in favor of marriage (24:32). It praises monks in general, however, it has reservations about celibacy (57:27). Islamic tradition also knows the saying: “There is no monasticism in Islam!, or: ”There is no celibacy in Islam“ (in the Hadith collection ofAbu Dawūd). Muhammad, so tradition has it, once said to a Muslim who did not want to marry and had no plausible reason: ”So you have decided to be counted among the brothers of the devil! Either you want to become a Christian monk, then join them openly, or you are one of us, then you have to follow our way. Our way is marriage.“
Despite this and further similar expressions, some ascetics or Sufis have chosen a life without marriage. Those who were married nevertheless stressed the advantages of a celibate life and the difficulties marriage and family life present to an ascetic. It was commented that the married man sees his inner peace threatened and that his search for the face of God is made harder by the worries about his family. Because of this, some ascetics wish to be released from these ties. In some cases, it has even been considered acceptable for them to leave their wives and families, if an ascetic wanted to dedicate himself exclusively to his devotions. Many Muslims have occasionally lived celibate lives away from their families for a while in search of increased closeness to God (taqarrub bi Allāh. cf. sura 56:7-11; 88-94). Sura 3:45 confirms Jesus as one of those who ”will be among those closest to me”. Furthermore, contemporary movements like the Tablīghi Jamā‛at (literally:”community of preaching“), an important contemporary world-wide Islamic missionary movement) calls on all its active members to leave their families for an average of one month every year to be free to travel in the name of mission.
Some ascetics understood turning your back on the world to mean turning away from all human company. In solitude they searched for the peace that might make it easier for them to carry out their devotions. They were convinced that the company of people would only bring with it external activities and would draw them closer to sinful men. At his very best, the ascetic should lead his life as if he was alone before God and as if other people did not exist. Such views and attitudes are certainly also influenced by pre- and non-Islamic religions schools of thought that are hostile to the world and or the body cf. Tor Andrae, Islamische Mystik. 2. Edition. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1980, p. 56-58). (This answer summarised to a large extent the last contribution „ascetics“ by Th. A. Khoury from Khoury/Hagemnann/Heine, Islam-Lexikon I, p. 85f.)
The virginity of Mary, the mother of Jesus – as depicted in the Qur’an – can help Muslims to understand the Christian option of a celibate life. The Qur’an teaches that Mary, whose body was chaste, is an example and a model for those who believe (cf. sura 66:11-12). While, according to Muslim faith Jesus was a prophet and Word and Spirit from God, the Qur’an depicts Mary as a god-fearing, pious woman, in other words, as “belonging to those who humbly serve [God]” (min al-qānitīn) (66:12), in other words: as a woman who trusts completely in God’s message and as a “true” woman (siddīqa, sura 5:75).) The Qur’an describes her as someone who withdrew from normal busy life to a remote place, where she could concentrate on prayer. (cf. sura 19:16-17). The great Hadith-collector al-Tirmidhi (d. 892) commented this last Qur’an reference as follows: „Mary was asked to live in a state of inner prayer, or, ”the prayer of the God-thinking ones“ (dhikr), while her heart would be solely focused on God. Thus, He would fill it with love, and her soul would be completely overwhelmed by Him so that He could protect her. And so He would prevent the fading and dispersal of Mary’s pious desires. Mary was asked to live in a state of internal prayer and peace, in the search of the glory of God, completely desirous of remaining in Him.”
According to the Qur’an, God makes Mary into a model for “all believers”. Christians who, like her, retain their chastity, follow her example from the same attitude of devotion to God. Al-Tirmidhi’s explanation of Mary’s inner prayer is a good description of what it is that Christian contemplative orders aspire to and try to follow. Other Christian orders, which strive for “contemplatives in action”, have the same ideal and goal as Mary. In the words of Tirmidhi: “to seek without ceasing the glory of God and to endeavor as much as possible to remain with this effort.“
It can therefore be said that: the value of singleness and virginity chosen for religious reasons by those who try to exceed what the law requires of them, and who strive for His intimate love – those of whom the Qur’an says that they are „min al-muqarrabīn“ – is not foreign to the Islamic tradition. The early Sufis encouraged their pupils to a life without marriage. Some even considered singleness to be superior to the married state, as long as this singleness is dedicated to God and prepares the person especially for Islam, meaning that it helps him to dedicate himself solely to God. In his masterpiece Ihyā ‛ulūm al-dīn al-Ghazāli (d. 1111) cites the Sufi Sufi al-Darāni when he says: “The sweetness of adoration and the uninterrupted devotion of the heart, which the non-married person can feel, can never be experienced by the married person” (cf. Thomas Michel, “The vows of religious life in an Islamic context“ in: Encounter (Rome), no. 132. Feb. 1987.)
The famous reformer Jamāl al-Dīn al-Afghāni (1838-1897) and teacher of Muhammad ‛Abduh (1849-1905) never married. In the course of his active and extremely dynamic life, which brought him to all corners of the Islamic world, many admiring pupils and leaders offered him their daughters’ hands in marriage. Al-Afghāni’s reply was always: „Die umma (Islamic community) is my bride“. This is comparable to one of the important arguments or motivations for the Christian celibate: the determination to complete, exclusive dedication to the Christian community or the church, which the believer takes to be the “mystical body of Jesus Christ, the crucified and resurrected.
It should not be forgotten that sexual restrictions are also an integral part of some central acts of Islamic worship. Ramadan not only means abstaining from food and drink, but also from any sexual activity during the hours of fasting. The holy period of ihrām, which occurs during the hadsch also requires complete, if not limited, abstention from sexual activity. What we mean is: Muslims abstain from sex during these holy periods not because they consider sex to be evil, degrading or unworthy, but because God has called upon them to deny themselves this legitimate activity so that they can focus their attention and their hearts purely to God.
In summary it can be said that although Islam stresses the value and goodness of family life, there are elements within the Islamic faith and life which can help Muslims to understand the promise of a ”virginal“ life dedicated to God which some Christians make. For some individuals among them, maybe those who tend towards debate and arguments, this possible Christian life choice appears to be unnatural and contradictory to God’s revelation. Many other Muslims, on the other hand, are simply curious. They genuinely would like to understand the motivation behind the Christian option of celibacy, because Muslims feel a natural affinity with "persons dedicated to God“. The questions of these Muslims cannot and should not be answered at a theoretical level; the example and witness of real lives dedicated solely to God, according to the gospel virtues of poverty, chastity and obedience, speaks louder than mere words.
Question 67: In chapter 9 you mention the concept of "Liberation Theology“. What does this mean and who are its proponents? (DE)
Answer: In many countries in the world people are no longer willing to accept their conditions as unchangeable fate, especially because the unjust structures that cause oppression, illiteracy, dereliction, hopelessness and despair are the responsibility of man and can be changed by him.
Some peoples, therefore, understand their resistance against these existing structures to be a means to liberation from unjust structures and systems, which have been tainted by personal injustice, corruption, waste, striving for power and contempt of human life, so that these structures themselves have become a kind of social sins“. Some of the liberation movements which arose in recent decades strive for a violent change through revolution. Others want to achieve change through reforms. Others again, especially the Christian grassroots communities, are basing their views on a liberation theology and a special “option for the poor”. Based on this, they provide solidarity and support to reduce poverty and want, and to achieve a change in the structures, institutions and systems through different means.
Liberation theology starts with the question of how it is possible to speak of the love of God and His care of the poor in the face of the immeasurable suffering of the poor in Latin American countries, and how this suffering can be overcome through united help. These are the basic motives of liberation theology. With its “preferential option for the poor” the Latin American Bishops’ Conference adopted a principal commitment to Liberation Theology at their general Synod in Medelin in 1968. Pope Paul VI pointed out that the vocabulary of liberation and salvation can, at some level, be understood to be the same: “The word liberation deserves its place in the Christian vocabulary, not only because of its expressiveness, but because of its underlying content”. (Address of 31.7.1974). Pope John Paul II speaks especially of the Latin American Theology, which raises liberation to a basic category and guiding principle for the solution of the problems of suffering and underdevelopment.
According to Catholic teaching it is “entirely justified that those who suffer from oppression at the hands of the overlords of riches or political power apply morally acceptable means to achieve those structures and institutions in which their rights are truly respected“(Instruction of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on Christian freedom and liberation, dated 22.3.1986, 75 ff). The moral judgment as to which means of concrete actions are be allowed in such dire situations, has to be based on focusing on human dignity and freedom. Because if the rights of freedom are not respected from the very beginning, there can be no true liberation.
Furthermore, it has to be taken into account that the command to love one’s neighbor cannot be reconciled with hatred against other people, be they individuals or a community. Liberation in the spirit of the gospels allows the conclusion that someone may believe that the only legitimate resistance against unjust violence is peaceful resistance. Peaceful resistance makes it possible to show that only love leads to true freedom, while violence always leads to further violence.
It may be possible to think of peaceful resistance as a strategy, the kind of which has been lived in modern history in exemplary fashion by Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. Whether this path leads to success depends largely on whether those in power are able and willing to change the unjust circumstances.
Any kind of reform of structures and institutions has to be preferred to an (armed) revolution as a path towards the liberation from unjust violence, especially as in modern times, revolutions are generally linked with ideologies and result in renewed oppression and disregard for human rights within just a short period of time.
If a people is so oppressed that peaceful resistance does not bring about any changes, the right to violent resistance can be exerted as a last option, but only if there is no further alternative of (for example passive) resistance.
In his Encyclical “Populorum Progressio” (“The Progress of Peoples”)(nr. 31) Pope Paul VI speaks of this last option and says that armed battle could be justified as a last resort to end a “clearly established and long lasting reign of violence, which strongly violates basic human rights and severely damages the common good of the country“. However, a “systematic use of violence as a supposedly necessary way to liberation” is considered by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith as a “damaging illusion…. which opens up the way to new oppression“(Instruction on Christian freedom and liberation, nr. 76).
Today, all countries and the church are called to do their share to ensure that in no country on earth situations arise in which unbearably violent oppression forces people to liberate themselves with means they deeply abhor.” (see Katholischer Erwachsenen-Katechismus. 2. Bd. Leben aus dem Glauben [Freiburg: Herder , 1995],p. 260-262).
The major liberation theologians are: G. Gutierrez, A Theology of Liberation, 1974; J. Segundo, The Liberation of Theology, 1978; J. Sobrino, Christology at the Crossroads, 1978.
Question 68: Why did God forbid the Jews to eat pork? Only because of the trichinosis, or also for other reasons? Why does Jesus allow the eating of pork – does it mean that hygiene was better at the times of Jesus, of could it be said that eating pork was never bad and that the Jews only thought this up, for example for reasons of demarcation? Was it dangerous to eat pork at the times of Mohammad, because he lived in a desert and it was not so easy to test for trichinosis? Some people believe that pork is not so valuable – is that true or is it nonsense? What is the scientific thinking here? (DE)
Answer: Leviticus 11:7 ff. and Deuteronomy 14:8 declare that pork is unclean and forbid that pork be eaten or a dead pig be touched. The Old Testament gives no reason for this prohibition, and it is therefore possible to discuss various motivations: religious (pigs as cult animals for heathens), moral (the ”unclean“ ways of pigs), culture dependent anthropology (”taxonomic anomaly“, i.e. the difficulty to determine the zoological category to which pigs belong), medical (e.g. protection from trichinosis), and ecological (man’s competitor for food). The Jews understand the prohibition to be a mark of identity (see Maccabees 6:18-31 et al) and non-Jews interpret it as a mark of difference. The Qur’an, too, prohibits the eating of pork (Sura 2:173 et al). The New Testament still shares the Jewish disgust of pigs, but in the Apostle’s creed in Acts (15:23-29) the prohibition is already ignored, in the Epistle of Barnabas it is allegorized, and in the early church it is finally abandoned. The gospel pericopes, in which Jesus discusses the question of purity and impurity of food (Mark 7:14-23 and Matthew 15:10-20), are likely to have played a major part in this.
”He summoned the crowd and said to them, ‘Hear and understand. It is not what enters one’s mouth that defiles that person; but what comes out of the mouth that defiles one.’ Then his disciples approached and said to him, ‘Do you know that the Pharisees took offense when they heard what you said?’ He said on reply, ‘Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be uprooted. Let them alone; they are blind guides [of the blind]. If a blind person leads a blind person, both will fall into a pit.’ Then Peter said to him in reply, ‘Explain [this] parable to us’. He said to them, ‘Are even you still without understanding? Do you not realize that everything that enters the mouth passes into the stomach and is expelled into the latrine? But the things that come out of the mouth are from the heart, and they defile. For from the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, unchaste, theft, false witness, blasphemy. These are what defile a person, but to eat with unwashed hands does not defile.” (Matthew 15:10-20)
Question 69: On your website it says in Chapter 2, The Divinity of Jesus, The 2nd Muslim View: in Detail: Section 3, Line 1: “Jesus, whose coming was announced by John the Baptist (Yahyá), was born from the virgin Mary without a human father.“ How do you know that it was Yahyá (Peace be with him) who brought Jesus (Peace be with him) this message, whereas the Qu’ran in Sura 3:39 speaks of angels who brought Zakariyya a message from God? (DE)
Answer: What I want to say in the sentence you quoted is that according to the Qur’an Isa ibn Maryam was believed by Yahya ibn Zakariyya as “a word of God”. It is possible that my statement goes beyond the actual text of the Qur’an, in as far as I assume from the word saddaqa that Yahya also declared his belief concerning Isa in public and that he therefore “announced” the coming of Isa.
I refer to Sura 3:39 and the usual interpretation of this verse (e.g. in the Tafsīr al-Manār on this verse. Dār ul-Fikr Ausgabe, Band III, p. 297 ff.)
I am not saying, and the Qur’an text doesn’t really allow the interpretation that, as you put it: Yahya "brought the message“ to Isa (God’s peace be with him), as you said, but only that Yahya believed it to be true that Isa "was a word from God".
As regards the interpretation of verses 39 of Sura 3, you can find a summary of the interpretations of these verses and therefore also the words that we are discussing here, in Mahmoud M. Ayoub, The Qur'an and its Interpreters, Vol. II (The House of 'Imran) (Albany: State of New York University Press, 1992) , pp. 107-112. Ayoub shows that most of the famous classic commentators of the Qur'an share the view I described here.
I assume that you have read the scriptures of the Old Testament, or the First Testament, which represent a whole library of writings over many centuries and have been written under the most different circumstances. The books of the prophets are found in the Old Testament. Many of these prophets and their writings are not mentioned in the Qur’an. For Jews and Christians, they are an important part of the Bible. I cannot explain in detail here how Christians over the centuries have interpreted the prophetic writings of the Old Testament in the light of their faith in Jesus of Nazareth as the Messiah. Contrary to the Jews, Christians consider the Old Testament, and especially the writings of the prophets, as announcing a future in which God’s anointed one will come and with Him “the Kingdom of God”. Also contrary to the Jewish faith, Christians, many of whom came from the world of Jewish faith, especially in the early centuries, have always seen and confessed Jesus Christ to be the Messiah the Jews were expecting. While the Jews still expect the Messiah to come, Christians believe that Jesus of Nazareth, the crucified and resurrected one, is the true expected Messiah (God’s Anointed One), who in the Jewish scriptures has been expected for centuries to come from God. More than this cannot be said here. If you are interested in understanding the principles of the Christian faith in more detail, I would refer you to the Katholischer Erwachsenen-Katechismus: Das Glaubensbekenntnis der Kirche, hrg. von der deutschen Bischofskonferenz. Kevelaar: Butzon &Bercker, 1985, bes. pp. 60-63; 143 ff. See also the relevant chapters in Richard P. McBrien, Catholicism. New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 1981.
My statement that Jesus Christ has been announced by the prophets, is therefore to be understood as a one of the principles of faith of the Church. Jewish believers interpret the relevant texts of the Old Testament differently. Regretfully, there is still no consistent Muslim commentary on the writings of the Old and the New Testaments.
Christians have always understood these and similar verses to relate to the Holy Spirit. There is not enough space here to explain in detail why it would be wrong to read the Greek text as periklytos instead of parakletos. Nor can I summarize the Christian exegeses on these texts which fill volumes. I would like to make only one point: Christians understand the paraclete to be the supporter, the comforter, e.g. the Holy Spirit. It will reveal that Jesus was right to call himself “the Son of God” (see John 10:33; 19:7). The “evidence“ for this is Jesus “going to“ the Father (13:1; 20:17); it will show His heavenly origin and His heavenly nature (6:62). Through revealing Jesus, the Spirit will glorify Him. Jesus himself glorifies the Father (17:4). The revelation is therefore completely one; it originates in the Father, is effected through the Son, and is completed in the Holy Spirit to the glory of God, the Son and the Father. (see Katholischer Erwachsenen-Katechismus, pp. 221 ff.)
His name is Ahmad: or: whose name is more worthy. This means that the word is not to be understood as a name. The Muslim commentators recognize the Prophet Mohammad under this name. The apologists of Islam have tried against the claims of Christians, to find a text in the gospels that contains this announcement of Jesus. There are 2 sides of the argument here: either they accuse Christians of having removed the relevant texts from the gospels, or, as happens more frequently, they point to His promise to His disciples that He would send them support (parakletos) (Gospel of St John 14,16,26. In this case, parakletos was interpreted in the sense of periklytos (very famous).
Question 70: What is the ideal age to get married? (TR)
Answer: The minimum age for getting married in the Catholic Church is 16 years for men and 14 years for women. The Bishop’s Conference can, however, determine a higher minimum age for its region. Behind this is the conviction that the best age for getting married depends on the relevant culture. It is the priests’ role to prevent young people from getting married until they have reached the minimum age expected for marriage according to the customs of each individual country. Compared with traditional cultures, married couples in the western, individualized culture can generally expect much less support from a large family and have to rely much more on themselves. This requires a greater level of maturity and therefore also a greater age.
According to Catholic doctrine, it is the nature of marriage to be for the good of the couple and also for the creation and raising of children. When thinking about the right age for marriage, it is therefore advisable to consider also the physical and mental wellbeing of the children. Those who are determined not to have children cannot “rightfully” marry according to Catholic doctrine.
But those who cannot have children for whatever reasons (e.g. health reasons, age) can still marry. It is possible to marry at an advanced age (e.g. widows and widowers after the death of their first spouse).
Question 71: If Christianity is a monotheistic faith, how can it make sense to give Mary the title “Mother of God“? (TR)
Question 72: If you pray to the mother of Jesus, do you not place her alongside God? (TR)
Answer: I will answer these two questions and further, possibly connected questions, by speaking (1) about Mary as written about in the Bible, then in particular about (2) the meaning of Mary’s title “Mother of God“ in the Christian faith, and finally about (3) the church’s “new” dogmas about Mary
1. Mary as written about in the Bible
It is not Mary who is the center of the New Testament, but Jesus Christ. Mary, however, is his mother. This is why the Bible speaks of her. Not in the form of a biography, certainly not. What the Bible says about Mary is much more: It describes her importance for the salvation of God’s people. Mary is talked about in the larger context of God’s activity, which we already come across in the Old Testament. What we mean is:
Women save God’s people. Sometimes they are heroines (Deborah, Judith, Esther), sometimes mothers who give life to one of the great (Sarah, Rebecca, Hannah). Mary is the pinnacle of this biblical line. She gives life to the Messiah, the Son of God. She fulfills the faith of her patriarchs (Abraham!). She herself is the "daughter of Zion“, the personification of God’s people. In her great song the “Canticle of Mary” or the “Magnificat” (Luke 1:46-55), she places herself in the history of Israel and she herself speaks as a prophet, like the great prophets of old: to God alone be the glory, worldly powers and worldly riches have no meaning before Him! She realized this principle in her own life. She lives only for her godly son. In the days of His big triumphs, she remains in the background, but she is with Him at the foot of the cross. Searching and questioning, she travels her path, she “keeps all these things, reflecting on them in her heart” (Luke 2:19), lives through uncertainty and disappointment. She is the mother who knows all pain. All this is what the Bible speaks of.
Mary’s whole love belongs to God, without any reservation she devotes her life to this incomprehensible high calling which has been given to her. Therefore she remains a virgin, wants only to be one thing “the handmaid of the Lord“ – as she has promised to God (Luke 1:38).
The Protestant Catechism for Adults summarizes what the Bible says about Mary: “She is described as the exemplary listener to God’s word, as the handmaiden of the Lord, who says ‘Yes’ to God’s will, as the favored one who is nothing herself, but everything through God’s favor. Thus, Mary is the quintessential image of human beings who open themselves to God and allow themselves to receive His gifts, the image of the Community of believers, of the Church”. Mary belongs in the gospels. Without her something important would be missing from God’s saving work.
And so it becomes understandable, why Christians revere Mary. There is only one who has given us salvation, God through and in Jesus. But is it not important that it was a woman who received this salvation for us all? She said to the angel: “May it be done to me according to your word” – and so she became the mother of our savior. It was mankind’s “Yes” to God.
2. Mary, the „Mother of God“
The creed says “…born of the virgin Mary“, and it thus summarizes what the Bible is telling us. The Christmas story tells us very pictorially that Mary carried Jesus, her child, inside her like any other mother and that she then gave birth to Him for us. She is His mother in a much deeper sense than normal: Before she conceived the Son of God she accepted Him in faith.…
At first, Mary did not fully understand the angel’s message: “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”. Here, the Bible uses words that remind us of the Old Testament: God himself “overshadowed“ Israel in a cloud and “took residence“ in the holy tabernacle. In other words, the Bible says that Mary is God’s dwelling place, that God comes to us through her.
According to Matthew (1:20): “It is through the Holy Spirit that she that this child has been conceived in her.” This is the doctrine of the Church: Mary conceived her child as a virgin without having relations with a man. Some find this a big problem. But why should God not intervene in an unusual way when His own son becomes man? Especially the immaculate conception explains that the new beginning which is happening through Jesus, is from God alone!
All this could happen only because Mary believed and agreed to it. And so she becomes the Mother of God. In the year 431 AD the Council of Ephesus determined this title for her, which Luther and other reformers retained. Of course, she did not give birth to God “as God herself”, for she is a creature like us. She gave birth to Jesus, who is God and a human in one person. If you believe in Christ as the Son of God you have to revere Mary as the Mother of God.
And so Mary is our mother too, because we Christians are one in Christ, we are the limbs of his body. Her love is for the whole Christ, and therefore also for us. We can all upon her as our advocate, our mother, our hope. We can tell her all our suffering. It is no more than what we do among each other. Because we all belong to Christ and are one in Him, we call on each other’s advocacy: Pray for me! This call is all the more valid for the Mother of God, who among all of us is closest to the Lord.
Of course, Mary must not be worshipped. Worship is due to God alone. But we may call on her, without affecting the unique position of Jesus Christ, because her advocacy, too, draws its power only from the salvation that God has achieved through Jesus. He who calls on Mary and reveres her confesses in this way his belief in Jesus Christ, the son of Mary and the Son of God.
One should not only speak theoretically of Mary. One should simply love her. Only then can one understand the meaning she has not only for Christians, but for all mankind. She is the Mother of Jesus Christ and therefore our mother, the mother of all mankind.
3. The “new“ dogmas about Mary
Why are new doctrines still created in our time, almost 2000 years after Jesus? Why can the Pope announce the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception in 1854, why can he declare only in 1950 that Mary ascended into heaven, body and soul?
Valid questions! Yes, everything God has to tell us has already been said. Nothing can be said over and above Jesus’ message which is passed on in the doctrine of the apostles. It all lays before us. But it lays before us more like a still unexplored land. From the beginning, the church has tried to understand the secrets of faith more and more deeply, to make new discoveries, and find new connections.
Let us explain this with a comparison: We want to project a transparency, the picture appears on the screen. But it is still fuzzy. The main image is already recognizable, but much is still unclear. Now we slowly sharpen the lens. New details appear. They were certainly there before, but they can only be recognized now. Faith is like that. Through the thinking and praying of the church the “lens of faith “ has been further sharpened throughout the centuries. We will not complete the discovery of the riches of faith before the end of time.
My comparison clarifies something else: the details only become clear in the context of an overall picture. On their own, they would either not be seen at all or be misunderstood. The same is true for the two dogmas about Mary. They arise out of the overall picture of faith, not from individual sentences in the Bible. Therefore:
Mary is the quintessential image of a human being on whom God bestows His favor. She was determined by God to bring us Christ, the full light, life and grace of God. In her, Israel as a chosen people is fulfilled. Therefore, she herself is said to be “full of grace” (Luke 1:28). The meaning of this has been elevated to a doctrine by the Church in 1854 after centuries of deliberation: From the first moment of her life, that is to say from her conception, Mary has been free of any distance from God and from darkness, has been filled by His light and is without original sin. What Jesus has earned for us on the cross, what we are given at Baptism, she has already been given at the beginning of her life, because she was to be His mother.
Much nonsense is said especially about this doctrine. Many mistake the conception of Mary with that of Christ. They should study the church calendar: Mary’s Immaculate Conception is celebrated on 8th December, exactly nine months before the feast of Mary’s birth (8th September). What those people mean is the conception of the Lord, which is celebrated at the feast of the Annunciation of the Lord, nine months before Christmas…
The view that the church considers sexuality to be something tainted is completely wrong. We do not start our lives as “tainted” because of our human conception, but because we are part of the dark part of the world that has turned away from God. Mary has never been part of that world. From the first moment of her life she stood in God’s light. That Mary has been assumed into heaven, body and soul, is a consequence of her close link with Christ. What we will all receive at the end of time, the “resurrection of the body“, has already happened to her because she is His mother. This doctrine is especially important in our times in which the body is being so dreadfully debased: by wars, by drugs, by pornography – when it is meant to be for the glory of God.
In Mary, we always see our own dignity and hope. In her we recognize the greatness God wants to achieve with us. Once you have understood this you will never cease to revere Mary.
(With small changes from: Winfried Henze, Glauben ist schön. Ein katholischer Familienkatechismus. Harsum: Druckhaus Köhler, 2001. ISBN 3-7698-0887-8., p. 69-76)
Text of the Magnificat (Luke 1:46 -49):
“My soul proclaims the greatness of the Lord;
my spirit rejoices in God my savior. For he has
looked upon his handmaid’s lowliness;
behold, from now on will all ages call me blessed.
The Mighty One has done great things for me,
And holy is his name.”
Ave Maria
full of grace,
the Lord is with you,
you are blessed
among women,
and blessed is the fruit
of your body, Jesus.
Holy Mary, Mother of God,
intercede for us sinners
now and in the hour of
our death!
Amen.
“We must try to love Jesus as His holy mother has loved Him. She is nearest to God. If we approach her, we approach God Himself.“
(Maximilan Kolbe (1894 -1941), Polish Franciscan, organizer of the Catholic press in Poland and Japan, sacrificed his life in Auschwitz for a young man with a family who was to be murdered as a hostage.)
This page was translated by Erika Baker and Leanne Cvetan.
|
