Preface
I originally hesitated to write this post because
the subject of the post is so sensitive and the one to whom I am responding in
this post is a man I love and cherish very much, my father-in-law, Rev. Steve
Schlissel from New York. If he does decide to read this, he should know that
this post is written by somebody who not only loves him dearly, but admires him
and looks up to him for many of his character traits. So whilst nothing is
intended to be given or taken personally, it is inevitable that some may see it
this way. Nevertheless, I write this with a spirit of charity and not
hostility. I do disagree with him vehemently, but that should say nothing of my
opinion of him personally.
Benedicta tu in mulieribus et benedictus fructus ventri tui, Jesus
In a recent post on his blog, Rev. Schlissel writes
at length about the Roman Catholic “idolatry” of Mary. He asserts that if Mary
were to be included in the Godhead – a “Quadrinity” he calls it – that nothing
in all of Roman Catholic faith or practise would change. Either he is grossly
ignorant of the actual practise of the Church, or this is simply inflated
rhetoric. I cannot imagine him to be so ignorant of Catholic worship on this
matter, so I will assume that it is just rhetoric. And as a rhetorical device,
it conveys that he thinks that we honour Mary too much, and that is
understandable from his perspective, but for those who actually are ignorant of
Catholic practise, there are some things they ought to know.
The Mass, which is the highest form of worship for Catholic Christians,
has only one object: the Holy Trinity. In the Novus Ordo Missæ, Mary is
mentioned only twice: in the Confiteor (along with a list of other saints and
apostles) and in the Nicene Creed. Surely nobody could object to those things.
Even in the Traditional Latin Mass, Mary is mentioned only six times, once in
the Nicene Creed, and all other five times she is listed with groups of other
saints. She is absent from the Roman Canon, absent from any invocation of the
Holy Trinity, and absent from the Eucharistic liturgy altogether.
So to say that nothing would change if she were part of the
“Quadrinity” is utter nonsense. It would change so much of the Catholic
practise that I cannot even imagine where to start. Even the Rosary would have
to change since no longer would we be asking for Mary’s intercessions, but
rather praying the “Our Mother”.
His claim is that Catholics worship Mary, and in a sense this is
absolutely correct. There is a sense in which it is not correct, but that does
not take away from the fact that there is a sense in which it is. The word
worship means simply to render to that which is worthy. King David was
worshipped by one of his subjects in this passage from the Bible:
And going out he worshipped
the king, bowing with his face to the earth, and said: Wherefore is my lord the
king come to his servant? And David said to him: To buy the thrashing floor of
thee, and build an altar to the Lord, that the plague, which rageth among the
people, may cease. (II Kings XXIV:xxi)
Are we to understand that this man idolised David or
merely that he rendered the honour which was due to him? Clearly the latter is
the case. The virtuous woman is to be praised (Proverbs XXXI:xxx), and what
woman on earth possessed as much virtue as the Mother of God? Is it not fitting
then, to worship her the same way that Gabriel did when he saw her and called
her blessed amongst women?
Something here ought to be said about the Protestant’s understanding of
worship. A Protestant accuses a Catholic of idolatry because we honour Mary in
the same way that they honour God. Why is this? It is because for the
Protestant, his highest form of worship involves sitting on his posterior for
two hours whilst a man takes centre stage, and talks about his views of the
Bible for seventy-five minutes, followed by a song or two and maybe the passing
of a collection plate. And that is it. The Protestant will have no problem
telling you that he has no altar, no sacrifice, no incense, no nothing. Just a
long time of listening to a man in a business suit talk about his opinions. And
that is their highest form of worship.
Since we might honour Mary with things slightly more glorious and
substantially less boring than that, we are accused of idolatry. But the Mass,
the highest form of Catholic worship, is reserved for God alone, and for nobody
else. And it is a sacrifice on an altar to the Most High God – if anyone dared
to do this for Mary, he would be rightly accused of idolatry. But has any
Catholic ever done this? Ever? Not to my knowledge. Based on the anecdote
provided, I see no idolatry, only devotion and love.
Take a moment and look at a common way of honouring men in our culture.
Suppose a man serves for fifty years as a distinguished professor at a
prestigious academic institution, and upon his retirement, his fellows throw a
grand ball in his honour. One might imagine a time of socialisation in the main
hall, followed by the singing of the Alma Mater, a few short speeches by his
closest colleagues, a long keynote address, a time for a collection to his
charitable foundation, and ending with a round of “For He’s a Jolly Good
Fellow”. And all of this would be entirely appropriate for a man of great
accomplishments. And it differs little – if it indeed differs at all – from the
Protestant concept of worship.
So Rev. Schlissel has been to a May Crowning. What sacrifice was given
to Mary? None at all. Was she blessed and praised for her virtue? I should hope
so, as that would be a fulfillment of biblical prophecy. Yet, notice the flurry
of criticism even when she is honoured as the Bible says that she should be
honoured. From whence does this irrational hatred of our Mother come?
So whilst he is shaking his
head wondering where we Romanists get off honouring the Blessed Mother, we
shake our own heads at the myriad displays of ahistorical belief and practise
within the Protestant sects.
Finally, regarding the Salve
Regina, one of his commentators said that the prayer was Christocentric. To
which he replied, “However, the veracity of your own claim about the
Christocentric nature of the Salve Regina is doubted. In support, I will
simply include the English translation in which Christ is incidental and at
best an indirect object.”
Hail, holy Queen,
Mother of Mercy,
our life, our
sweetness and our hope.
To thee do we cry,
poor banished children of Eve;
to thee do we send
up our sighs,
mourning and weeping
in this valley of tears.
Turn then, most
gracious advocate,
thine eyes of mercy
toward us;
and after this our
exile,
show unto us the blessed
fruit of thy womb, Jesus.
O clement, O loving,
O sweet Virgin Mary.
V: Pray for
us O holy Mother of God,
R: that we
may be made worthy of the promises of Christ.
Actually, the indirect object
of the central petition of the Salve Regina is the faithful, whilst the
direct object is Christ: “[Mary, subject] Show unto us [the faithful, indirect
object] the blessed fruit of thy womb Jesus [direct object].” The prayer is
highly Christocentric. The entire purpose for Marian devotion is summed up
beautifully in this wonderful hymn: we follow Mary so that we may be led to
Christ, just as St. Paul said to the church in Corinth: “Be ye followers of me,
as I also am of Christ.” He followed Christ, and he hoped that others would
follow Him to reach the same goal. Is it such a stretch to see that our Blessed
Mother, like all mothers, functions to lead her children to Jesus? | 
