Obama’s not the only amateur, apparently

posted at 12:45 pm on March 28, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

When I started the Obamateurism of the Day, I didn’t expect it to turn into a franchise.  Demonstrating that Amateur Hour continues at the State Department, Hillary Clinton managed to display an amazing degree of ignorance while making a pilgrimage to the shrine of Our Lady of Guadalupe in Mexico yesterday afternoon.  While viewing the famous image of Mary as a native peasant that Mexicans believe was divinely created, Hillary asked — well, you have to read the story:

During her recent visit to Mexico, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made an unexpected stop at the Basilica of Our Lady of Guadalupe and left a bouquet of white flowers “on behalf of the American people,” after asking who painted the famous image.

The image of Our Lady of Guadalupe was miraculously imprinted by Mary on the tilma, or cloak, of St. Juan Diego in 1531. The image has numerous unexplainable phenomena, such as the appearance on Mary’s eyes of those present in the room when the tilma was opened and the image’s lack of decay.

Mrs. Clinton was received on Thursday at 8:15 a.m. by the rector of the Basilica, Msgr. Diego Monroy.

Msgr. Monroy took Mrs. Clinton to the famous image of Our Lady of Guadalupe, which had been previously lowered from its usual altar for the occasion.

After observing it for a while, Mrs. Clinton asked “who painted it?” to which Msgr. Monroy responded “God!”

Who painted it? Didn’t anyone brief Hillary on the history of the Guadalupe apparition?  As it turns out, no one should have had to brief the Secretary of State.  She told the Monsignor that she had visited once before, thirty years ago. She must have thought it was just a good place to take tourist pictures.

The Anchoress notes:

Doh! Another State Department error! It’s a good thing we have a “smart” State Department, now, instead of the “dumb” one we had for the last 8 years!

Some “smart diplomacy,” huh?  First Hillary doesn’t understand multiparty democracy, then she fumbles a snarky “reset button” by mistranslating it and putting it in Latin rather than Cyrillic script.  She can’t even get names straight, let alone sound intelligent when visiting national shrines.  A few more of these and we may have a new feature here at Hot Air.

Update: I just noticed that SondraK sent me this to my Obamateurism folder earlier.  Be sure to read her thoughts.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5

I understand why Hillary’s staff had no idea what the Basilica of Our Lady of Guadalupe is all about.

atemely on March 28, 2009 at 8:54 PM

I respect your passion but you are wrong on giving Hillary Clinton a pass here. Unlike you, she was not on a pilgrimage. This was an official state visit. She did not go to the basilica after joyful prayer and reflection. This was “event 26.3″ on her calendar.

highhopes on March 28, 2009 at 9:09 PM

You know what? I haven’t attacked anyone’s religion on HA, I haven’t called anyone sick for believing in a faith , well except Islam I will admit, so I’ll say this and be done this crap….. Shut up about Catholicism. You don’t agree or you dislike it? Fine, don’t practice, read about it or follow it. This thread had to do with Clinton not being prepared to visit something of a culture’s value, which any representative of a country should be aware of… so she screwed up. But, no, you folks had to go off on a screed about Catholicism and the Virgin Mary…. to use a troll’s name in vain Get a fricken life.

MNDavenotPC on March 28, 2009 at 9:10 PM

My observation in the U.S. is that there are some extremely devout Catholics who believe that they have a special relationship with Mary. Maybe they are ultimately wrong about Mary’s role, but it does inspire them to practice Christian values on a daily basis.

dedalus on March 28, 2009 at 9:08 PM

They are not practicing “Christian values” if the only reason they are doing what they are doing is their special relationship with Mary.

highhopes on March 28, 2009 at 9:14 PM

truth is, you’re heretical.

right4life on March 28, 2009 at 8:51 PM

I know you are but what am I?

nanner nanner, neener neener. (:ppppppp)

ericdijon on March 28, 2009 at 9:17 PM

They are not practicing “Christian values” if the only reason they are doing what they are doing is their special relationship with Mary.

highhopes on March 28, 2009 at 9:14 PM

It isn’t the only reason, but it is something that provides inspiration and motivation. The values that they practice are those in the Commandments and the Sermon on the Mount. They believe in the Resurrection and accept Christ as their savior. If that doesn’t get them into heaven then I’m guessing heaven won’t be a very crowded place.

dedalus on March 28, 2009 at 9:20 PM

MNDavenotPC on March 28, 2009 at 9:10 PM

Personally I think such discussion has value. Not when it devolves down to “My God is the only one and you are doomed to hell.” But, there are differences in faith. The blogs are an outlet where Protestants, Catholics, and Christ-haters like Allahpundit are intermingled. Before you condemn this format for discussing these issues, tell me exactly where in your life you debate faith with those who don’t see the world like you do. I’m not talking about the normal acceptance of others like what you get in the workplace but deep-down discussion about the essentials of faith.

highhopes on March 28, 2009 at 9:23 PM

hint: anti-semitic means you hate the jews…

right4life on March 28, 2009 at 8:58 PM

Semitic comes from the word Shem. Shem is an evasive name. Noah is the father of Shem and Shem begins the lineage to Abraham.

Anti-Semitic includes Jews and non-Jews that are descendants of Shem.

ericdijon on March 28, 2009 at 9:24 PM

Anti-Semitic includes Jews and non-Jews that are descendants of Shem.

ericdijon on March 28, 2009 at 9:24 PM

whatever….the common usage is to indicate hatred of jews…

right4life on March 28, 2009 at 9:28 PM

nanner nanner, neener neener. (:ppppppp)

ericdijon on March 28, 2009 at 9:17 PM

and you’re an idiot obviously.

right4life on March 28, 2009 at 9:29 PM

and that reason (identical on both sides) is what I find detestable.

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2009 at 9:08 PM

the old ‘moral equivalence’ BS. you’re a wacko and a hateful anti-semite.

right4life on March 28, 2009 at 9:31 PM

right4life on March 28, 2009 at 9:28 PM

Ok, so the common practice of bashing Catholicism is relatively new as well – say since the mid 16th century.

ericdijon on March 28, 2009 at 9:35 PM

And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth

clarifides on March 28, 2009 at 9:07 PM

good point.

Luke 1

46And Mary said:
“My soul glorifies the Lord
47and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,
48for he has been mindful
of the humble state of his servant.
From now on all generations will call me blessed,
49for the Mighty One has done great things for me—
holy is his name.

why does she need a savior then? and if she is so exalted, then why does she say she is in a humble state?

right4life on March 28, 2009 at 9:36 PM

Ok, so the common practice of bashing Catholicism is relatively new as well – say since the mid 16th century.

ericdijon on March 28, 2009 at 9:35 PM

I’m not sure you’re a catholic…but you don’t think what the pope said about protestants, and orthodox, isn’t ‘bashing’ them??? hmmmm??

right4life on March 28, 2009 at 9:37 PM

The values that they practice are those in the Commandments and the Sermon on the Mount. They believe in the Resurrection and accept Christ as their savior. If that doesn’t get them into heaven then I’m guessing heaven won’t be a very crowded place.

dedalus on March 28, 2009 at 9:20 PM

None of this has anything to do with Mary worship. It is the part of Christianity that all Christians would agree with.

highhopes on March 28, 2009 at 9:39 PM

Next thing this bimbo from winenetka will eat a tamale with the corn husk on.
Multi cultural ignorant yankee.
Send her back to Chappaqua and have here read a book on world cultures.Does not State have charm school and people who can clue her in or are they letting her gaff to death.No doubt a plot by ram and oh.

Col.John Wm. Reed on March 28, 2009 at 9:39 PM

How many funny lines could a comic do on this one statement?…you could do a 5 minute monologue on this every night for a week.
She lives in New York, when was the last time she saw a virgin…?

right2bright on March 28, 2009 at 8:44 PM

She’s never been to Virginia?

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2009 at 9:40 PM

This woman is a total complete philistine, completely power hungry, and a total liar. Oh, and if morals could be registered on a number scale, hers would be in the negatives. Not a thing she does (that is bad, immoral, ignorant, dishonest) could surprise me.

4shoes on March 28, 2009 at 9:40 PM

oh you may want to investigate this phrase ‘full of grace’ a bit more…

The phrase “full of grace” in Greek is “plaras karitos” and it occurs in only two places in the New Testament, neither one is in reference to Mary.

“And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth,” (John 1:14).
“And Stephen, full of grace and power, was performing great wonders and signs among the people,” (Acts 6:8).
The first citation refers to Jesus who is obviously full of grace. Jesus is God in flesh, the crucified and risen Lord, who cleanses us from our sins. In the second citation it is Stephen who is full of grace. We can certainly affirm that Jesus was conceived without sin and remained sinless, but can we conclude this about Stephen as well? Certainly not. The phrase “full of grace” does not necessitate sinlessness by virtue of its use. In Stephen’s case it signifies that he was “full of the Spirit and of wisdom,” along with faith and the Holy Spirit (Acts 6:3, 5). But Stephen was a sinner. Nevertheless, where does the phrase “full of grace” come from regarding Mary?

link

right4life on March 28, 2009 at 9:41 PM

Oh, and I can’t wait for the riots she will cause when she goes to a Muslim country and insults their religion.

/sarc

4shoes on March 28, 2009 at 9:43 PM

For what is grace other than a state of sanctification by God? Someone without sin (whether born that way or otherwise) would certainly fall into that category.

So, on to something worthy of your theologic skills: How many angels do you think dance upon the head of a pin?

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2009 at 9:00 PM

then show me in the bible where Mary was born sinless…you cannot.

oh and how much of the bible did she write?

right4life on March 28, 2009 at 9:45 PM

None of this has anything to do with Mary worship. It is the part of Christianity that all Christians would agree with.

highhopes on March 28, 2009 at 9:39 PM

My point is that Mary provides a mechanism, as do the saints, for people to relate to the message of Christ. Even Christ used parables to personify the messages he was teaching.

dedalus on March 28, 2009 at 9:49 PM

From now on all generations will call me blessed,
49for the Mighty One has done great things for me—
holy is his name.

why does she need a savior then? and if she is so exalted, then why does she say she is in a humble state?

right4life on March 28, 2009 at 9:36 PM

She is exalted because the Bible says she is! Didn’t you even read one word of what you posted? And who would not be humbled when so gifted by God? As for needing a savior, whether or not she needed one, the world got one — her Son.

And, in passing, I think clarifides’ “good point” completely demolished one of your posts.

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2009 at 9:49 PM

hmmm.

and you’re an idiot obviously.

right4life on March 28, 2009 at 9:29 PM

I’m not sure you’re a catholic…but you don’t think what the pope said about protestants, and orthodox, isn’t ‘bashing’ them??? hmmmm??

right4life on March 28, 2009 at 9:37 PM

Is my opinion now esteemed, somehow? I’m at somewhat of a loss for wind in my sails and you are uncertain of my faith. Would not being Catholic have any bearing on what I have written? Would you accept my words as a faith I have chosen or as more blaspheme?

Do you think you are pushing me into denying my faith to you? I’m merely pointing out an object-oriented system, I’m not proselytizing.

What I’m getting from your Pope question is “C’mon you know that apple will be delicious – don’t you now!”

ericdijon on March 28, 2009 at 9:51 PM

then show me in the bible where Mary was born sinless…you cannot.

oh and how much of the bible did she write?

right4life on March 28, 2009 at 9:45 PM

Rather, show me in the Bible where she was born with sin — you cannot.

And as for how much of the Bible she wrote — as much as you did, but she’s mentioned in it in a positive light far more than you ever will be.

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2009 at 9:51 PM

And, in passing, I think clarifides’ “good point” completely demolished one of your posts.

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2009 at 9:49 PM

obviously you didn’t read what I posted earlier…

What does the Greek say here for “highly favored one? It is the single Greek word kexaritomena and means highly favored, make accepted, make graceful, etc. It does not mean “full of grace” which is “plaras karitos” (plaras = full and karitos = Grace) in the Greek.

5923 χαριτόω (charitoō): vb.; Str 5487; TDNT 9.372—LN 88.66 show kindness graciously give, freely give (Eph 1:6); as a passive participle, subst., “one highly favored.”1
5487 χαριτόω [charitoo /khar·ee·to·o/] v. From 5485; TDNT 9:372; TDNTA 1298; GK 5923; Two occurrences; AV translates as “be highly favoured” once, and “make accepted” once. 1 to make graceful. 1a charming, lovely, agreeable. 2 to peruse with grace, compass with favour. 3 to honour with blessings.2
Therefore, we conclude that the Roman Catholic Church has manufactured far too much doctrine concerning Mary out of the erroneous translation of the Latin Vulgate Bible and that the RCC needs to recant its false teaching concerning Mary.

try reading, you might learn something…

She is exalted because the Bible says she is! Didn’t you even read one word of what you posted? And who would not be humbled when so gifted by God? As for needing a savior, whether or not she needed one, the world got one — her Son

whether or not huh? amazing…well you trust in mary, and I’ll trust in Jesus and we’ll see who wins in the end…

right4life on March 28, 2009 at 9:52 PM

Rather, show me in the Bible where she was born with sin — you cannot.

And as for how much of the Bible she wrote — as much as you did, but she’s mentioned in it in a positive light far more than you ever will be.

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2009 at 9:51 PM

obviously she was, or she wouldn’t have called God HER SAVIOR…she wouldn’t have needed a savior…and God would NOT have been her savior if she didn’t need one…its logic 101 duhhhhhhh

Moses is mentioned far more than she is..he wrote large parts of it…so why not worship him?

you denigrate Jesus with this worship of mary, you make her equal to God, and you think Jesus is like some mafia thug, listening to his ‘favorites’

right4life on March 28, 2009 at 9:54 PM

Is my opinion now esteemed, somehow? I’m at somewhat of a loss for wind in my sails and you are uncertain of my faith. Would not being Catholic have any bearing on what I have written? Would you accept my words as a faith I have chosen or as more blaspheme?

Do you think you are pushing me into denying my faith to you? I’m merely pointing out an object-oriented system, I’m not proselytizing.

What I’m getting from your Pope question is “C’mon you know that apple will be delicious – don’t you now!”

ericdijon on March 28, 2009 at 9:51 PM

as far as I know catholic doctrine says that salvation relies upon what Jesus did, not what you do.

your last statement is idiotic. you may want to take the spec out of your eye before you take the log out of mine…

as far as calling me a devil…well anyone who preaches a doctrine of works is preaching doctrines of demons…

right4life on March 28, 2009 at 9:56 PM

why does she need a savior then? and if she is so exalted, then why does she say she is in a humble state?

right4life on March 28, 2009 at 9:36 PM

She was preserved by God at her conception, she was saved prior to falling into sin however we can be saved after we have sinned.
Humility is the understanding of your true self, she is acknowledging the greatness of God and thanking Him.

clarifides on March 28, 2009 at 9:56 PM

She was preserved by God at her conception, she was saved prior to falling into sin however we can be saved after we have sinned.

clarifides on March 28, 2009 at 9:56 PM

so you don’t believe in original sin? and please post your bible verse that shows she was ‘preserved’ at conception…

Humility is the understanding of your true self, she is acknowledging the greatness of God and thanking Him.

clarifides on March 28, 2009 at 9:56 PM

she called God her Savior…if she was as you say, she wouldn’t need a savior..

right4life on March 28, 2009 at 9:59 PM

right4life on March 28, 2009 at 9:56 PM

Then I guess what you know won’t go further than the dribble that has to be all over your shoes.

I have to get into my pajamas now and go to bed. It has been fun playing with you tonight.

ericdijon on March 28, 2009 at 10:03 PM

This is a very dangerous world and we have elected a clown who is appointing clowns.

davo on March 28, 2009 at 10:04 PM

ericdijon on March 28, 2009 at 10:03 PM

get some help, seriously.

right4life on March 28, 2009 at 10:04 PM

Her staff consists of Atheists…who the heck was she going to have brief her on this visit?

aigle on March 28, 2009 at 10:06 PM

Huh? I don’t hate the Jews. Whatever gave you that idea? Quote quotes, please.

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2009 at 8:35 PM

of course you do, it’s a mortal sin not to hate jews…

RealDemocrat on March 28, 2009 at 10:08 PM

right4life on March 28, 2009 at 9:59 PM

I did not deny original sin. Are you saying that God could not have preserved her from the stain of original sin as a unique and special privilege as she was to carry his only Son?
Luke 1:28 the greeting of the angel Gabriel.
My simple take is Full of grace = no room for sin

clarifides on March 28, 2009 at 10:18 PM

I did not deny original sin. Are you saying that God could not have preserved her from the stain of original sin as a unique and special privilege as she was to carry his only Son?
Luke 1:28 the greeting of the angel Gabriel.
My simple take is Full of grace = no room for sin

clarifides on March 28, 2009 at 10:18 PM

as we have both found out, she wasn’t addressed as being ‘full of grace’ Stephen and Jesus were…so why don’t you ‘venerate’ ie worship stephen? (let me guess, you do..)

again show me the verse where she was preserved from original sin…

and yes she had other children…

right4life on March 28, 2009 at 10:21 PM

Why would we expect anything else, Ed? The administration just raided the Walmart DVD bin (for incorrect region DVDS, making them unwatchable) to exchange historical gifts with the Brits a couple of weeks ago. Hillary’s handlers look like geniuses by comparison.

RightWinged on March 28, 2009 at 10:29 PM

My point is that Mary provides a mechanism, as do the saints, for people to relate to the message of Christ. Even Christ used parables to personify the messages he was teaching.

dedalus on March 28, 2009 at 9:49 PM

My point is that you don’t have a cult of “Christians” worshiping the good Samaritan or the mustard seed.

highhopes on March 28, 2009 at 10:33 PM

aigle on March 28, 2009 at 10:06 PM

Unfortunately, that is exactly where Hillary shows her most inept aspect. If you are not sure of the story and wish to be diplomatic, as a Secretary of State is expected to be, then you politely ask the Monsignor to relate the story of the image for you. You remain polite and neutral at all times. No humor, show a proper deference and respect.

The thing that disturbs me most is that Hillary seems incapable of getting the role of Secretary of State right. I fear that Condoleeza Rice has set a bar too high for Hillary to reach. Hillary is too egotistical, arrogant, and self-absorbed to get these things right. Hence she falls into the trap of looking stupid.

Hawthorne on March 28, 2009 at 10:36 PM

Hillary should just start wearing short dresses…that would even scare PUTIN!!!

right4life on March 28, 2009 at 10:39 PM

highhopes on March 28, 2009 at 10:33 PM

The veneration of the Virgin Mother Mary is a Catholic tradition, not a Christian tradition. The Protestant movement was specific in their criticism of this practice by the Catholic Church and pointed to it as one of the reasons for the separation from the Catholic catechism.

The Protestants have always felt that the idea of venerating other figures besides God is a form of idolatry. They also reject the concept of intercession.

Hawthorne on March 28, 2009 at 10:41 PM

The veneration of the Virgin Mother Mary is a Catholic tradition, not a Christian tradition.

Hawthorne on March 28, 2009 at 10:41 PM

Any Eastern or Russian Orthodox people here who care to comment on this revisionism?

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2009 at 10:42 PM

The Protestants have always felt that the idea of venerating other figures besides God is a form of idolatry. They also reject the concept of intercession.

Hawthorne on March 28, 2009 at 10:41 PM

So Protestants don’t pray for each other. Wow.

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2009 at 10:43 PM

One more point. Interestingly, the Islamic faith has a similar rift between the Sunni and Shiite sects. The Shiites allow for iconic representations and the Sunni do not.

Hawthorne on March 28, 2009 at 10:44 PM

I am a Catholic. I know the story of Our Lady of Guadalope who is btw the patron saint for aborted fetuses. :)

It is ironic that straight after seeing the tilma of St. Juan Diego, Hillary Clinton was being presented with an award by Planned Parenthood.

Her response and question was in my opinion absolutely hilarious.

What on earth were the American people thinking when they elected such an idiot to be President, but then think what might have been the choice and one has to wonder would things have been better if this woman had achieved her obvious ambition. What an embarrassment to women all over the world.

Maybe, just maybe Our Lady of Guadalope can work a miracle – the conversion of Hillary Clinton away from being pro-abortion. It certainly would be a coup.

For those who do not know the story of Our Lady of Guadalope, Juan Diego was a simple villager. He had been converted to the Catholic faith and it is quite some story about how Our Lady visited him on the mountain. He went to see the Bishop and the Bishop wanted proof. Diego then asked the lady and she told him to gather up the flowers into his tilma and take them to the Bishop. He did this, and when he opened the tilma in the Bishop’s office the image appeared on the tilma. As a result of this first miracle, the biggest miracle of all, was the conversion of his own people to Christianity – they used to make human sacrifices to their gods. It is really quite some story about Juan Diego and the lady.

In the meantime I will try to stop laughing so much over this latest gaffe from the one who must be the worst SOS ever in the USA.

maggieo on March 28, 2009 at 10:46 PM

My point is that you don’t have a cult of “Christians” worshiping the good Samaritan or the mustard seed.

highhopes on March 28, 2009 at 10:33 PM

Those characters were presented as fictional by Christ so they are functionally different. You do have religious orders dedicated to various saints, as well as Mary. It is likely that their good works are motivated by those figures.

dedalus on March 28, 2009 at 10:47 PM

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2009 at 10:42 PM

You must realize that I am Byzantine Catholic. It is very closely related to Greek or Russian Orthodox and we say the same basic mass. That of St. John Crysostom.

You also need to understand that the Orthodox Church is also a schism of the Catholic Church. It is just that they did not reject Mary or the Saints.

Maybe you need to learn about Catholic history before you accuse revisionism.

Hawthorne on March 28, 2009 at 10:48 PM

My point is that you don’t have a cult of “Christians” worshiping the good Samaritan or the mustard seed.

highhopes on March 28, 2009 at 10:33 PM

Putting aside the concept of worship, the Good Samaritan and the mustard seed are fictitious elements of stories Jesus told to illustrate correct behavior (works), and how works with their accompanying reasons relate to faith.

Mary and the various saints are part of our history, and several of them occupy prominent positions in Jesus’ real life. That’s a substantial difference.

With regard to worship, Catholics don’t worship Mary or the saints, any more than we worship the Pope. We worship God.

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2009 at 10:48 PM

Hey, there’s nothing like pretending to care about a Holy shrine in Mexico, which you haven’t taken even the most perfunctory steps to study, and then skipping off to salute the polar opposite of Our Lady of Guadalupe:

This evening Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is set to receive the highest award given by Planned Parenthood Federation of America — the Margaret Sanger Award, named for the organization’s founder, a noted eugenicist. The award will be presented at a gala event in Houston, Texas.

Marvelous timing, Hillary. What’s next on your agenda?

Buy Danish on March 28, 2009 at 10:48 PM

Mary is the chosen vessel of GOD to bring Christ into the world. GOD is mans savior, For “You Are Saved By Grace Through Faith, And This Faith Is Not Of Yourselves, It Is The Gift Of GOD” this means that man is saved from his ungodliness by GOD-given faith in GODS word to wit: GOD destroyed mans sin in Jesus Christ. The message of Mary is for man to humble himself and serve the will of GOD in his life, in his body. (Marys’ body was used in a very great way) For Paul Wrote “Know You Not That Your Bodies Are Holy Temples Of The Lord?”

GD on March 28, 2009 at 10:55 PM

Maybe you need to learn about Catholic history before you accuse revisionism.

Hawthorne on March 28, 2009 at 10:48 PM

My question still stands, but with a significant change: Does the Byzantine Catholic Church use the prayer commonly called the “Hail Mary”?

I frequently attend a Greek Orthodox church in the South Bay, and they have icons of Mary displayed. I am aware of their order of worship and its differences from the Mass. As far as I know, the “Hail Mary” prayer is used there too.

So yes, I’m accusing you of revisionism. If all major roots of the Church except Protestantism give a special place to Mary, then the difference is slightly different in nature than either you or right4life are claiming.

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2009 at 10:56 PM

With regard to worship, Catholics don’t worship Mary or the saints, any more than we worship the Pope. We worship God.

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2009 at 10:48 PM

Which is exactly why I used the word “venerate” rather than worship. It is similar to the idea that you can love many people yet still worship only God. Catholics are taught very clearly in the catechism that it is not appropriate to worship Mary or the Saints.

Hawthorne on March 28, 2009 at 10:56 PM

Dear Right 4 Life,

First, let’s define terms.

1. Defective – The Catholic church uses this word not pejoratively, but as a way to describe the lack of an essential element.

2. The Catholic Church has for 2000 years taught that it was the one true church. Pope Benedict isn’t making news when he reiterates this teaching. It is literally ancient and has always been held. That does not translate into an insult to any other church unless you want to distort it in that way. Besides, of the 26, 000 other churches that we know of that exist today, I don’t think any of them think they are the one true church, so, good on them.

3. The four essential elements that comprise the true church are:

One
Holy
Catholic
Apostolic

Each of these elements can be studied in depth as to their meaning and importance in the last 2000 years. Again, check out http://www.vatican.va

4. The 26, 000 Protestant churches in existence are lacking in one or more of these essential elements, thus the term defective is used to describe this lack.

5. Historically true also, there was only the Catholic church from the time of Christ, (Peter being the first Pope) until Constantinople in 1100 and the mess with Henry VIII and Martin Luther in the 1500’s.

6. Many posters have illustrated for you with Scripture passages about the singular and most exalted position in the human race of Blessed Mother. If the fact that she is the MOTHER OF THE ETERNAL SAVIOR AND CREATOR OF HEAVEN AND EARTH doesn’t grab you, then nothing will.

So many posters have charitably explained Catholic teaching to you, but you have replied to some with nastiness and name calling. Unclesmrgol has been trashed by you no end. You have called us heretics. It seems you have a deeply rooted bias, perhaps from years of hearing mistruths about Catholics …. No matter, nothing sinks in and so I wish you well and hope you might consider reading some of the things recommended.

A shout out to highhopes – I’m sorry that you will not believe when you are told that veneration is just that. You insist that what we are really doing is adoring Blessed Mother as a god.

That would be a serious sin, and not to be trifled with in any way. But, you are the mind reader, and if you say that is what we are doing, you must be right – as in my use of the word non-Catholic really meaning non-believer. Why do you take such a negative view? But, you really could make some good $$ in these hard times with your mind reading.

In closing to you highopes, I do enjoy most of your posts, and hope that we remain friendly.

If we realize what a firestorm has happened here we should all realize that we are all just weak little humans. Let’s forgive and pray to be unified against our real enemies – the world, the flesh and the devil.

To all I say good night and God Bless.

tigerlily on March 28, 2009 at 10:57 PM

Who painted it? Didn’t anyone brief Hillary on the history of the Guadalupe apparition? As it turns out, no one should have had to brief the Secretary of State. She told the Monsignor that she had visited once before, thirty years ago. She must have thought it was just a good place to take tourist pictures.

I miss Condi Rice and the other grown ups!

TN Mom on March 28, 2009 at 11:03 PM

highhopes on March 28, 2009 at 9:09 PM
If you perceive my post as giving Hillary a pass, so be it. Ed wrote: ‘pilgrimage to the shrine of Our Lady of Guadalupe in Mexico’. It was an ‘unexpected stop’ according to CatholicNewsAgency. Catholic or not, she was a pilgrim, was in front of the miraculous imprint of our Lady, which ordinary pilgrim like me can only view at a distance or on running walkway. For Hillary to support Life from conception to natural death is a miracle. For Hillary to visit the Basilica twice, brought white flowers and lighted a green candle at the open air area where pilgrims do for our Lady is a miracle in the making. Our Lady has perform many miracles. Catholics pray the Rosary and the Divine Mercy chaplet everyday for the unborn.

atemely on March 28, 2009 at 11:06 PM

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2009 at 10:56 PM

Indeed we do say the Hail Mary. We are Catholics just like you and practice the same catechism, just a different mass.

I feel that I need to clarify in order for you to understand my meaning. The Catholic Church is the original root of all Christianity. It is the Church founded by St. Peter as commanded by Jesus himself.

During the course of history the Catholic Church has suffered several schisms where portion of the Church broke off to form unique and independent Christian doctrines. The Protestants and the Othodox religions are some of these.

While all Catholics are Christians, not all Christians are Catholics. Therefore stating that veneration of Mary or the Saints is a Christian tradition is incorrect. That is because some of the offshoot religions do not practice such veneration, especially the Protestant faiths.

The veneration of Mary was started by the Catholic faith. Some of the offshoots did keep it such as the Orthodox faiths then they split from the mother Church. That means it remains originally a Catholic tradition. Even if SOME of the offshoots kept it, it started there, as did all Christianity.

I can make the same claims about many things. I can claim that reading the Gospel is a Catholic tradition as well, because it was started there and retained by some offshoots. The practice of receiving the Communion of Christ is another example that was adopted by some. Yet they remain Catholic traditions.

Hawthorne on March 28, 2009 at 11:09 PM

atemely on March 28, 2009 at 11:06 PM

If it was an “unexpected” stop then why was the tilma of St. Juan Diego lowered from the alter in preparation for her visit?

Hawthorne on March 28, 2009 at 11:11 PM

Our Lady has perform many miracles. Catholics pray the Rosary and the Divine Mercy chaplet everyday for the unborn.

atemely on March 28, 2009 at 11:06 PM

And with all due respect, your “pilgrim Hillary” couldn’t care less about unborn life. The fetus needs to graduate from college before she cares about it.

highhopes on March 28, 2009 at 11:28 PM

No one who does not believe in the miraculous nature of the image will be made to believe in it here, nor, will anyone who does be changed. Curious that some of those who obviously do not believe must descend to mockery or cant. Feeling a bit uncertain in your doubt maybe…? (I will answer my own question. It is easier not to believe, because belief means one must change. I will suggest it is better to go to one’s knees of one’s own volition, than because of circumstances.) No one has yet mentioned this about the tilma; it is made from mayguey fiber, a type of cactus. (I may have misspelled mayguey. It’s pronounced my-gay.) It is not a very durable fiber and, as I have read, lasts about thirty years. The image was imprinted, not painted, in 1531. When Diego opened his tilma before the Bishop, having been commanded to tell the Bishop to build a church on Tepayac hill, Castillian roses spilled out onto the floor. As in Castile, Spain. These roses did not grow in Mexico, and especially not in the winter. Here’s a nice site: http://www.traditioninaction.org/SOD/j158sd_OLofGuadalupe_12-12.shtml
If you go there, look in at Our Lady of Las Lajas, in Columbia, South America.

Broadsword on March 28, 2009 at 11:33 PM

Hawthorne on March 28, 2009 at 11:11 PM

Don’t know who lied. Hillary or CNA. She might have fib too about being there in 1979. But we, pro-lifers lost big time this election. All we can do is protest, rally and pray, pray, pray. Holy God, Holy Mighty One, Holy Immortal One, have mercy on us and the whole world.

atemely on March 28, 2009 at 11:33 PM

right4life on March 28, 2009 at 10:21 PM

It would be good if you would calm down a bit. You obviously do not understand Catholicism and that is fine. What isn’t fine is using your misconceptions as a platform to attack your won brothers and sisters in Christ. You need to be very careful on this. Remember that you will be judged as you judge others. If you choose to be accusatory and inflammatory in your judgment, then you judgment will be the same in Heaven. There is only one prayer given to us by Jesus, and it asks to “forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive others.”

Please remember that we all share the same Bible. If you are a Christian, then the faith that you practice is the same as ours. Only the window dressing changes. Condemning another Christian over doctrinal differences is a lot like saying you hate somebody because they wear ugly shoes.

You have a right to your beliefs. I applaud you in trying to express them. But you must learn to teach and not condemn. That was the way of Jesus and one of the most important examples that he gave to us.

Hawthorne on March 28, 2009 at 11:35 PM

Highhopes, Hillary is not a real pilgrim…. but who knows how God will work :)

If there is any miracle at all, that is Hillary actually converts from being pro-abortion or pro-choice, then that miracle will be through God’s Grace.

If by chance Hillary is in fact drawn to Guadalope then that is God’s Grace working through the miracle of the image on the tilma that should have disintegrated within 20 years of being made.

We can only hope and pray that Hillary is converted away from her pro-abortion stance.

maggieo on March 28, 2009 at 11:41 PM

atemely on March 28, 2009 at 11:33 PM

It is indeed fortunate for each of us that we answer to God as individuals. Keep to your faith and trust in the Grace of Christ to secure you place in Heaven. All any of us can do is keep working to explain our faith to others.

Christ did not fight or kill to teach his message. He did not force people to listen or accept. All Christ did was talk to people and show them the glory and power of God. Salvation comes only to the willing. It requires each person to accept the Grace of Christ out of free will to be saved.

Remember the parable of the seeds. Most of your words will fall upon rocky or infertile ground. It is the way of the world. Keep trying and help save who you can. It can be discouraging at times. But saving even one soul is worth a lifetime of effort.

Hawthorne on March 28, 2009 at 11:48 PM

Wisdom and Truth, man tastes these by Grace. Let man pray the Gracious GOD for Truth in a deceived world – Amen. One man believes in a doctrine as divinely inspired, another man hallows a different discipline. “O GOD, grant man the light to discern between your word and mans word” – Amen

GD on March 28, 2009 at 11:51 PM

highhopes on March 28, 2009 at 11:28 PM

I wouldn’t go that far. Hillary wants the whole village to be involved in raising our kids, remember?

Hawthorne on March 28, 2009 at 11:51 PM

GD on March 28, 2009 at 11:51 PM

I agree completely that you have this right. I am a Catholic, but I am not so naive that I do not understand that some Catholic doctrine and policy has been put in p[lace by men who were not divinely inspired. Satan is the great liar and the corrupter. He will use the weakness of man to corrupt those that are meant to be our teachers.

This is why it is VERY important for every Christian to get a good Bible (or several) and a good concordance (or several) and to seek truth themselves as well. Finding truth is not a passive act. You need to work at it.

Hawthorne on March 28, 2009 at 11:56 PM

χαῖρε, κεχαριτωμένη

The second word is the one right4life is in such a huff about. It’s the present perfect passive participle of χαριτόω, with the meaning “having been filled with grace” or “having been highly favored” (cognate to “charity”)

Since a Catholic Bible (Hail, full of grace) won’t do for Mr. right4life, here’s the KJV version of this phrase:

Hail, you that are highly favored…

With regard to God, grace is certainly the same as favor. Only when we talk about humans bestowing “χαριτόω” does the word “favor” become preferred. Again, what does grace, which even right4life admits is given by God, mean, and how is that meaning different from saying “God favors”?

Now, let’s look at John 1:14:

πλήρης χάριτος καὶ ἀληθείας.

Anybody notice anything interesting here which puts the complete lie to right4life’s claim that the word applied to Mary is not the same word applied to Jesus? How about the fact that χάριτος is a noun (in particular, genitive singular) of the same Greek root forming the verb χαριτόω?

The difference is πλήρης, which is certainly emphatic, given that the genitive noun attached to it already indicates emphasis. Best translation — “full of the fullest grace”, or “full of the highest favor”. What one would expect of Jesus.

Hawthorne, are you versed in Greek? Care to comment on this? I only minored in Greek — my major was Latin.

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2009 at 11:57 PM

Hawthorne on March 28, 2009 at 11:09 PM

Understood, and quite agreeable. If it is a Catholic which predates schism, then I would posit that it is the Protestants who have lost something rather than we who have erroneously gained it.

The Orthodox Churches would indeed, however, find fault with your timeline — they state that they existed and were co-equal with Rome from the beginning, and that it was Rome that made a “power grab” leading to schism.

I’ve also seen Baptist writings which claim that the Baptists existed as a pure form of Christianity within the Church from the beginning as well, and that they broke from the Church when it became apparent that Catholicism was in error due to its reliance upon Tradition as an aid to understanding Scripture.

In any case, we’re still tossing popcorn at each other because the movie is boring. Except for right4life and myself — as you can see, there’s a bit of animosity involved between us that transcends just this particular thread, and neither of us is about to give it up — although I’ve already heard right4life use the word “uncle” more than once ;-)

unclesmrgol on March 29, 2009 at 12:09 AM

As a Catholic, I feel that I should comment on this.

First, as pointed out elsewhere, our Secretary of State has no excuse for the question she asked. The origins of the image on the tilma can be found on the Internet in under a minute. She was either misinformed, or blatantly questioning the miracle of the uncorrupted nature of the tilma.

Second, I know for a fact that (at the very least) the Melkite Catholics (one of the Eastern Catholic churches) and the Syriac Orthodox pray the Rosary, and generally give it a much higher priority than most Catholics in America.

Third, Mary is nothing; she even says so herself. This makes her all the more special. Just like the Ark of the Covenant was mere wood and ornamentation that was _consecrated to the Lord to hold his Word (the Commandments)_, Mary was mere flesh similarly _consecrated to the Lord to hold his Word (Jesus Christ)_.

Mary has been useful to the Church. Among other places, the Church was able to defeat the heresies about the dual nature of Christ by stating that Mary was the Mother of God.

FYI, AFAIK Martin Luther had a great Marian devotion. Anti-Marian belief crept into the Reformation after him.

Disagree with the Church if you wish, but do so honestly. Neither side can afford to waste time and effort in this era.

Scott H on March 29, 2009 at 12:09 AM

Uncle: Having friends in both the Eastern Catholic and Orthodox churches, I can agree that their PsOV are indeed interesting. Luckily, that particular schism is finally ending.

Scott H on March 29, 2009 at 12:12 AM

The discipline I adhere to is the belief in a promised end to this fallen world. I am persuaded that Heaven is full of prayers for and joy over that promised time. The end time shall require great refining in the minds of man (he is most assuredly in an unready state). The trial shall be great and abundant Grace shall be given. But the chastened should never forget, this is the work and hope of the Saints, and even the Son. Yea, GOD himself rejoices! Rejoice in that fellowship!

GD on March 29, 2009 at 12:13 AM

Wow! This thread has gotten very interesting.

Point 1: I think Hillary has been set up and will be used as a scapegoat when something bad happens. That will effectively leave her on the outside of the Democratic Party, looking in (unless she manages to land the head of the party).

Point 2: I am Lutheran (just to get that fact out of the way). I believe what made Mary blessed (not sinless – which I cannot find anywhere in the Bible) was her faith, not her purity. Just like Abraham who was blessed by God to be the father of His people. Also, to describe Mary as pure and sinless detracts from the fact that Jesus was human and tempted by sin. It wouldn’t be much of an accomplishment for Christ to be without sin if He was entirely divine. John 1:14 Also remember that Jesus slept, wept, hungered, thirsted, and was tempted – He came as a human so that He might live under the Law and be the payment for our sins. Galatians 4:4-5

Point 3: Traditions, which are instituted by man, must not be elevated to the level of or higher than scripture, which is God’s Word. Also, most traditions seem to focus on how much we can do to earn salvation or favor with God. Salvation cannot be earned, it is a free gift of God through Christ, our Lord. 1Peter 1:18-19

Point 4: In the Old Testament, the prophets and priests offered up prayers and sacrifices to God on behalf of the people. With His death and resurrection, Christ has become our High Priest and gives us access directly to God. Hebrews 7: 26-27 Praying with someone or offering up prayers for someone is different than praying to someone who is dead. God is not so deaf that He will not hear our prayers but only those of departed saints, and we have His promise in His Word that He will hear us. Matthew 21:22, 1John 5:14

gobblemom on March 29, 2009 at 12:15 AM

so questioning catholic doctrine is anti-catholocism..nice…what about when the pope says protestants aren’t part of the church? what would you call that??

right4life on March 28, 2009 at 7:02 PM

You are not “questioning” , rather, you relish in baiting then mocking Catholics with skewed logic and narrow perspectives. You are not interested in clarification rather you sit at your keyboard salivating at the chance of typing out an “ah-ha!” moment merely for your own glee. That is bashing and it’s all you practice.

Your religion is nothing without the requisite bashing of Catholics. It’s like petitioning your boss for a raise by only citing examples of why your co-worker looks bad in plaid.

You mam’, are lame.

geckomon on March 29, 2009 at 12:16 AM

By the way, hawthorne, I am aware of the Eastern Rite Churches and their differences in worship form and vernacular, and my question to you about the Hail Mary was rhetorical, since I know all about the Byzantine Catholic Church, if from nowhere else other than via commentary from our dear departed (banned) St. Olaf.

Personally, I think some Latin Rite additions (such as the medieval one of obligatory priestly celibacy) will eventually be abandoned.

unclesmrgol on March 29, 2009 at 12:19 AM

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2009 at at 8:49 PM

In my previous post when I mentioned that I will defer to those much better equipped to argue the points on merit,I wanted you to know that I was not referring to any one person,particularly. I also wanted you to know when I professed earlier about not being Catholic,it is because I no longer consider myself as belonging to that or one major religion.I went to a convent school for much of my youth. I seek now to respect all religions, and to leave the in depth discussions to those for whom it is more important to sway or to reinforce theirs or anothers faith. In no way was what I said meant to offend anyone,it was merely me stating that I was secure enough in my spirituality in order to take myself out of the discussion while others attempted to discuss the wherefores and whatfores of their own. Thank you for the advice.I hope that we all can meet on these blogs and continue to discuss topics in a calm rational way. I appreciate both Mr.Morrissey and Allahpundit for the topics they post that inspire us to such prolific and occasionally substantially productive communications.

canditaylor68 on March 29, 2009 at 12:20 AM

Point 2: I am Lutheran (just to get that fact out of the way).

gobblemom on March 29, 2009 at 12:15 AM

I get to use my favorite line — You’ve got our Bach! Or, maybe, we’ve got yours.

[The only stained glass window I've ever seen honoring J.S.Bach is in my local Lutheran church.]

unclesmrgol on March 29, 2009 at 12:27 AM

Gobble:

Point 1: Wow, now that’s a sinister look at it. I wouldn’t put it past our President, though.

Point 2: Well, clearly it was her faith. ‘Purity’, per se, means very little. However, I disagree that Mary’s state detracts from Christ’s. First, she says, “My soul doth magnify the Lord. And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Savior.” (Luke 1:46-47) Also, at the wedding feast (IIRC, the only time that Mary was seen during Christ’s ministry until His passion), she says, “Do whatever He tells you.” Mary, by her nature, directs attention to her Son.

Point 3: If you could, please tell me where you get the Scriptures, if not from the Authority of the Church. Who has the Authority to state, definitively, what constitutes Scripture? Realize as well that the first Christians didn’t have the Scriptures. What converted so many on Pentecost? It wasn’t the Scripture, because it didn’t exist at that point.

Point 4: I see nothing that I disagree with, except that Catholics do not believe that we can only speak to God through intercession. That would be awkward. :p

Scott H on March 29, 2009 at 12:28 AM

canditaylor68 on March 29, 2009 at 12:20 AM

Good luck on your journey. The last person I know who decided they didn’t belong to one major religion wound up becoming a Bah’ai, which isn’t quite the same as belonging to all major religions, but it’s close.

unclesmrgol on March 29, 2009 at 12:32 AM

Oh, I’ll also note that the _only_ term I’ve ever heard Orthodox use to refer to Mary is ‘Theotokos’. I think that’s a pretty good indication of her standing among them.

Scott H on March 29, 2009 at 12:32 AM

very true…and what is grace??? UNMERITED favor…

if she was sinless, as you say, she would not need grace..

right4life on March 28, 2009 at 8:28 PM

if you’re conceived without sin, you do not need grace at all. the word is meaningless to you.

right4life on March 28, 2009 at 8:54 PM

right4life, I’ve been following your debate here, with interest, particularly as to how you’ve waged the argument surrounding the word “grace” as applied to Mary (being full of grace), and as such having been chosen to be the Mother of Jesus.

English is a vastly complex language, with particular words often having multiple meanings. Contextual usage is what designates a word’s particular meaning, for the most part. And often slight variations of particular meanings depend upon the scholar or scholars who compiled the particular dictionary used as the source reference.

The dictionary I use most often is the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 4th Edition. That dictionary has multiple definitional usages for the word “grace”, of which this one, I think, is the most pertinent one for the discussion:

“grace:

b. The state of being protected or sanctified by the favor of God.”

And so, when the Archangel appeared to Mary, and indicated to her that she was full of grace, it seems clear that his purpose was to advise her that she had special status and protection through God’s own blessings because God had a sacred task for her. At no time was it mentioned that it was a willy-nilly decision on God’s part, nor was it mentioned that God’s favor was “unmerited”. That wasn’t clarified, but it would make sense that God had a reason for doing so, which would seem to point to Mary have special attributes which did, indeed, merit God’s special favor.

For you to stand stuck on one meaning for the word “grace” as it is being used contextually in this debate simply warns others that you are not open to correction should it be shown that your original word definitions are not quite appropriate contextually for the usages applied.

And frankly, we’d really need to be capable of time travel to go back and witness for ourselves what actually transpired and was said between the major parties involved surrounding the birth of Jesus. Because the fact is that human beings set down in writing the words describing the events (and what people said) that comprise the texts that are today called the Bible. And humans are inherently fallible, and subject to cultural prejudices and/or norms and mores.

Words mean things, it’s true. But English, as I said early on, is a complex language, subject to slight variations within even a given definition as every new scholarly edition of a dictionary is printed and distributed, updating the language to include new dialectical variations plus slang usages.

IMHO, there have been far too many dictionaries printed in recent years without a scholarly review board for reviewing and unifying definitions. As such, we must all attempt, when communicating with others, to make sure we understand the thought and/or meaning being conveyed by the person writing and/or speaking the words, rather than attempting to define the meaning based on our own personal experiences and biases.

HTH.

KendraWilder on March 29, 2009 at 12:34 AM

In considering this Obama admin. and the radical changes of traditions, beliefs and customs among the people of this land (and thusly affecting the world population). I must decide if this is but a brief time in history when a less reverant people came to power, or that this extreme fashion shall bring greater changes to the world than they could have ever imagined. I am persuaded that it is the latter, As the great Bette Davis once said, “Buckle up, its going to be a bumpy ride”

GD on March 29, 2009 at 12:34 AM

unclesmrgol on March 29, 2009 at

Not a choice I would make. In my field I really cannot choose one or the other or it taints the thought processes. I have to be able to interpret in a non biased fashion. So forgive me if I appear more arrogant than I mean to when I write I assure you its not arrogance or “wandering lost” but simply a necessary evil,no pun intended.

canditaylor68 on March 29, 2009 at 12:36 AM

I apologize for coming to this discussion late, Candi, but may I ask what your field is?

Scott H on March 29, 2009 at 12:37 AM

I am a glorified garbologist=)

canditaylor68 on March 29, 2009 at 12:38 AM

Er, in layman’s terms?

Scott H on March 29, 2009 at 12:40 AM

Christ did not fight or kill to teach his message.

Hawthorne on March 28, 2009 at 11:48 PM

About the killing part, agreed. But the moneychangers in the Temple probably have a slightly different view of Jesus’ martial arts skills.

unclesmrgol on March 29, 2009 at 12:41 AM

Ah… I knew if I waited long enough to join in the fun of THIS thread of comments, I’d be welcomed with some nonsensical accusations about “Mary Worship” sprinkled throughout the conversation. :-)

As a practicing Catholic, I am aware of the history surrounding Our Lady of Guadalupe and the very image which Sec. of State Clinton was viewing. Someone at State(Nick Burns, perhaps – a good Catholic boy) could of told her, or someone on her staff should have told her about it… but heck, I’d be willing to bet a fair number of Catholics don’t know the history of it, either; especially when you consider that there are some Catholics who don’t even know what the Immaculate Conception is…

D2Boston on March 29, 2009 at 12:41 AM

D2: Rather normal, no? ;)

While you are correct about the lack of familiarity, it’s a simple matter to research it. ;)

Scott H on March 29, 2009 at 12:43 AM

Archaeology.Anthropology to some extent. Ethnographies,but research is my bliss,Im catching some field time before I get too old,then moving into museology.Possibly teaching not sure,about it yet,Ive been offered a position but well you know how that goes, its a dog eat dog in teaching…

canditaylor68 on March 29, 2009 at 12:44 AM

What a scene that must have been! The zeal of GOD in his Son chastising and chasing out the corrupt from his temple!

GD on March 29, 2009 at 12:45 AM

Candi: Ah! Very nice. Though, I don’t see the issue. Certainly you can have your own beliefs while studying others?

Scott H on March 29, 2009 at 12:46 AM

I’m surprised she didn’t laugh and say, “But of course, there is no God. No, really, who painted it?”

Dr. ZhivBlago on March 29, 2009 at 12:46 AM

Hawthorne, are you versed in Greek? Care to comment on this? I only minored in Greek — my major was Latin.

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2009 at 11:57 PM

Unfortunately, my Greek is very poor.

I can only comment on the catechism of the Catholic Church and how that differs from the misconceptions that have been voiced by some. When we are talking about the Hail Mary prayer, we must consider it in the context that Catholics are taught or else we are not arguing about the true doctrine that some object to. Instead the argument devolves into misconceptions as it has here.

“Hail Mary, full of grace” is often a misinterpreted passage. The grace of Mary is not the same as the Grace of Jesus Christ. In the case of Mary, it is an acknowledgment that God chose Mary above all other women and bestowed her with certain gifts from the Grace of God. These gifts are a representation of the favor that God placed upon Mary and were fulfilled in the Immaculate Conception, the Assumption, and the spiritual motherhood that Mary represents to all Christians.

So the term that Mary is “full of grace” is not any form of worship. It is only an acknowledgment of the favor that God placed upon her above all women. It is not any type of attempt to place the grace given to Mary as an equivalent to that of Jesus. In fact it is not really much more significant than recognizing the gift of Grace given by Jesus upon any avowed Christian. It is only a matter of degree in exactly how much we have been favored by God.

If you are going to deny that Mary was filled with the Grace of God in the context of this passage, then you are essentially denying that Mary was chosen above all women by God and granted these gifts. I believe these are core tenets of all Christianity and not just Catholicism. So if the detractors care to continue their argument then they are not only denying Catholic teachings, but in this context, those of all Christians. So in this sense we are in total agreement about this part of the argument.

Hawthorne on March 29, 2009 at 12:47 AM

About the killing part, agreed. But the moneychangers in the Temple probably have a slightly different view of Jesus’ martial arts skills.

unclesmrgol on March 29, 2009 at 12:41 AM

LOL agreed, this is the only example of Jesus becoming violent in any fashion. But his anger was expressed by overturning tables and was not directed at people in any more than harsh words. But note that such anger was reserved only for those that chose to corrupt the place of God. It was never expressed in any fashion for those who did not believe or did not understand.

Hawthorne on March 29, 2009 at 12:51 AM

About the killing part, agreed. But the moneychangers in the Temple probably have a slightly different view of Jesus’ martial arts skills.

unclesmrgol on March 29, 2009 at 12:41 AM

Although it led to his execution and the money changers likely remained there until the Romans destroyed the temple about 30 years later.

The Catholic church itself over the millenia has struggled with the interaction of commerce with faith.

dedalus on March 29, 2009 at 12:58 AM

Scott H on March 29, 2009 at 12:46 AM

There is always a danger of ethnocentrism when dealing with other cultures particularly when attempting to interpret artifacts from the past. Its very easy to find onesself looking at an object or judging with a bias only to recognize later that the bias was present,or occasionally, gasp, someone else catching the bias. So I made the decision early on that I would become educated in quite a number of religions,but yet learn to distance myself from them in a respectful way, it is this that led me into my field.

Certainly you can have your own beliefs while studying others?

Absolutely and its this that has given me over to be secure in my own beliefs where I do not question my own,and I ask for information about others only to inform myself of them and not to make judgements as best I can.Sometimes this is impossible and so I take myself out of the situation and leave those discussions to others who are more adept than I at it.

canditaylor68 on March 29, 2009 at 1:00 AM

LOL agreed, this is the only example of Jesus becoming violent in any fashion. But his anger was expressed by overturning tables and was not directed at people in any more than harsh words.

Hawthorne on March 29, 2009 at 12:51 AM

Really. I sort of had a vision of ninchucks and a large flaming sword, and don’t forget that there weren’t just moneychangers but dove salesmen too, and we all know how nasty doves can be… You’re probably right, though. Sigh.

unclesmrgol on March 29, 2009 at 1:07 AM

I thought Joe Biden allready established that President FDR painted Our Lady of Guadalupe right before he went on TV in 1929 to calm the nation about the Stock Marlet Crash.

Ted Mack’s Amateurs have nothing on this Administration.

Although The Gong Show is strictly more accurate.

profitsbeard on March 29, 2009 at 1:10 AM

For those who do not know the story of Our Lady of Guadalope, Juan Diego was a simple villager. He had been converted to the Catholic faith and it is quite some story about how Our Lady visited him on the mountain. He went to see the Bishop and the Bishop wanted proof. Diego then asked the lady and she told him to gather up the flowers into his tilma and take them to the Bishop. He did this, and when he opened the tilma in the Bishop’s office the image appeared on the tilma. As a result of this first miracle, the biggest miracle of all, was the conversion of his own people to Christianity – they used to make human sacrifices to their gods. It is really quite some story about Juan Diego and the lady.

Great post, Maggie O!

It’s amazing that Hillary wouldn’t know the story of Guadalupe, but she has probably been promoting abortion too long to worry about Catholic history. Pope John Paul II traveled to Guadalupe, and declared December 12 as a Holy Day of Obligation in the Americas, as the anniversary of the tilma miracle. Maybe Hillary might want to ask her “practicing Catholic” friend, San Fran Nan Pelosi.

There have been many scientific analyses of the tilma of Juan Diego, and none of them have found any paint, and the tilma material itself usually decomposes within about 20 years, and this one lasted over 400 years before it was put in an airtight display case. A close-up magnification of the Virgin’s eyes in the image shows a reflection of the people present before Juan Diego when he opened the tilma, including the bishop, as if someone was looking very closely at her pupils–but this could only be seen using modern optical equipment, which was unavailable at the time of Juan Diego.

Something Hillary might want to know, if she cared to ask–the Virgin in the tilma image is PREGNANT, and she does not want her baby killed!

Steve Z on March 29, 2009 at 1:23 AM

Although it led to his execution and the money changers likely remained there until the Romans destroyed the temple about 30 years later.

The Catholic church itself over the millenia has struggled with the interaction of commerce with faith.

dedalus on March 29, 2009 at 12:58 AM

Not sure that driving the moneychangers out had much to do — it would have made him seem more like a kook than anything else. I suspect it was more his public disdain for the scribes and pharisees (a substantial number of whom were probably moneychangers themselves) — both groups at the pinnacle of wealth and religious orthodoxy. Somebody mentioned the Good Samaritan earlier — Samaritans were Judaism’s heretics, and for Jesus to have a heretic portrayed as the protagonist while a Levite (priest) is portrayed antagonistically has to have galled the orthodox to no end.

Samaritans were relatively nonviolent and not prone to advocacy of their rights, so the orthodox tended to leave them alone — relegating them to their own ghettos so to speak, but these newfangled Christians (I class them as such) were far more assertive of their rights and the orthodoxy of their new faith.

With regard to the moneychangers themselves, Josephus (the Jewish historian who lived during the period where the Romans destroyed the Temple) recounts both their cruelty (Annas, one of his relatives, was one) and recounts the burning of the Temple archives by the commoners (to try to destroy the loan records of the moneychangers). So your feeling that they were around after Jesus’ death is borne out by Josephus’ writings.

unclesmrgol on March 29, 2009 at 1:33 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5