Singularíssimo Parto - por Nuno Serras Pereira

Um conhecimento mais profundo do judaísmo antecedente e contemporâneo de Jesus tem contribuído, nas últimas décadas, para iluminar alguns aspectos, que antes passavam despercebidos ou, pelo menos, não se viam tão claramente, do Novo Testamento. No entanto, alguns eruditos poderão, sem se dar conta, estar tão prenhes desses conhecimentos que façam deles uma grelha de leitura demasiado rígida para a interpretação adequada da Revelação, diminuindo a transcendência sobrenatural única, singular, original, que tudo permeia. 

Já em tempos anteriores procurando reagir a uma acentuação excessivamente espiritualista, desencarnada, por parte de um devocionismo falsificado, da parte de bastantes, se tem vindo a cair numa banalização-meramente-humana quer de Jesus Cristo, quer de Sua Mãe Santíssima.

Todos saberão que a excepcionalidade de Maria: os Seus privilégios, a Sua proeminência entre todos os Santos, os Seus méritos eminentes, as Suas glórias, tudo, mas mesmo tudo, são Graças e dons concedidos gratuitamente por Seu Filho Jesus Cristo, que na Sua imensa Misericórdia e desmedida benignidade quis associar a Si e à Sua Redenção Aquela que Ele resgatou, por antecipação, não permitindo que fosse tocada, nem ao de leve, pelo pecado, tornando-A Imaculada, desde a Concepção; enchendo-A da Sua Graça, do Seu Espírito, de tal modo a que nunca nele caísse nem tivesse o mais pequeno defeito ou imperfeição.

Este deslumbrante Mistério do Amor Infinito de Deus pode e deve ser considerado, meditado e contemplado, com espanto, com estupor, com assombro e maravilha mas, embora concorde com a razão, só muito parcialmente compreendido. É, por isso, que aqueles filmes televisivos que nos apresentam pelo Natal sobre José e Maria, e o presépio não são convincentes. Ela é apresentada como uma Maria mais ou menos como as outras; e José como alguém que chega seriamente a questionar o comportamento sexual da sua noiva! Que tristeza ver isto irrompendo desabridamente pelos lares em Noite tão Santa apresentado, com aparências de verossimilhança às multidões crédulas, ou incrédulas…

Tudo aquilo que aconteceu na Anunciação e no Natal tem a marca do prodígio miraculoso não cabendo, por isso, na estreiteza do nosso sentir e raciocinar. Não é possível fazer da nossa natureza decaída, das nossas limitações e pecados o critério de avaliação dos personagens destas acções Divinas. Aquilo que o Anjo diz à sempre Virgem Maria, “… A Deus nada é impossível”, não se aplica somente à Concepção Virginal mas irrompe e permeia tudo o mais. Por isso, não se pode despedir que Maria tivesse um voto, isto é, um desejo, um propósito, de virgindade com base no argumento de que isso era alheio à mentalidade do Seu tempo. De facto, toda a novidade do Evangelho está cheia de acontecimentos e Revelações estranhas às crenças e hábitos de então: a Trindade, a Divindade de Jesus, as Suas curas, os Seus milagres, a Sua atitude para com as mulheres e crianças, a Eucaristia, o poder de perdoar pecados, a Ressurreição, etc., etc., etc. Por todo o lado encontramos uma “subversão” do natural, do comum e dos costumes.

É Deus Omnipotente prorrompendo na história, o Eterno no tempo, o Imenso no limitado, o Infinito no finito, o Todo-Poderoso na debilidade. Acresce que se a sempre Virgem Maria não tivesse tal propósito de entrega total, na inteireza de corpo e alma, a Deus a Sua pergunta ao Arcanjo – “Como será isso, se não conheço homem? (isto é, se não tenho nem penso vir a ter actos conjugais) ” -, não faria, rigorosamente, qualquer sentido. Ora não se pode pensar nem mesmo imaginar que a Mãe de Deus faça perguntas desajuizadas. Mas então por que aceitou ser noiva de José? Uma hipótese muito provável é a de que José nos diálogos que teve com Maria tenha sido informado da Sua entrega e, não obstante o desuso e inesperado da circunstância, tenha aceitado o noivado, e concordado, com natural sobrenaturalidade, num futuro casamento. Haverá aí alguém que alcance considerar convenientemente qual seria o casto fascínio, a virginal atractividade, o continente encanto, o puro deslumbramento que Aquela jovem transbordante de Graça, embebida do Espírito de Deus, exercia naquele homem Justo? Não é verdade que toda a verdadeira beleza criada, toda a sedução do amor autêntico remetem, são uma promessa, do Único capaz de saciar o coração da pessoa humana? Pois se esse Único, se Deus, habita Aquela Mulher como não se sentira um homem Justo gozosamente sossegado e saciado na Sua companhia, na Sua presença, no trato com Ela? Quem tendo encontrado todos os contentamentos, todas as consolações, todas as alegrias espirituais quererá, ou ousará!, abandonar a Sagrada Bica que tudo isto lhe escorre directamente da Fonte?

Mas coloquemos outra hipótese, não menos provável que a anterior. Pode ser que Maria não tenha dito nada a S. José, antes do noivado, desse Seu desejo. Mas que simplesmente, à semelhança de Abraão (que quando caminhava com o seu filho Isaac para o imolar em holocausto, quando este lhe perguntou onde estava do cordeiro para o sacrifício aquele lhe respondeu que Deus providenciaria, como de facto veio a suceder), avançou na escureza luminosa de uma Fé imensa, muito maior que a do Seu antepassado, na certeza de que Deus providenciaria, como verdadeiramente se veio a verificar. 

A verdade, porém, assim a tenho como tal, na companhia de alguns Padres da Igreja antiga bem como de alguns exegetas contemporâneos, é que José, quando soube da gravidez da Virgem Santa Maria, sentiu-se indigno da Sua presença, pois intuiu sobrenaturalmente o Mistério de Deus, sem embora entender o como, e procura repudia-la em segredo, uma vez que a Lei, a qual ele seguia escrupulosamente por amor ao Altíssimo, assim o mandava. Foi então que o Anjo do Senhor em um sonho lhe confirmou as Santas suspeitas que tinha (não aborreço o leitor com a tradução grega do Evangelho que justifica esta leitura; quem estiver interessado poderá ler, por exemplo, Ignacio de La Potterie, Maria nel mistero dell'alleanza, Marietti, 280 pp.) e lhe adiantou que era vontade de Deus que recebesse a Mãe de Deus humanado como Esposa em sua casa. Esta união Mística e Espiritual de José com a Sua Esposa, Nova Arca da Aliança, Templo de Deus, Sacrário vivo, só pode ter dilatado largamente a sua Santidade. Quem saberá ponderar devidamente este viver quotidiano mergulhado na contemplação e serviço de Maria Santíssima e Seu Filho nosso Redentor?

Estando, desde a Sua concepção, isenta de qualquer pecado, em virtude dos méritos futuros da Paixão do Seu Filho, Maria não padeceu ruptura na Sua integridade, mesmo corporal, nem as dores de parto (que entraram no mundo como consequência do pecado original), porque o Seu Filho nela entrou e de Ela saiu como, depois da Ressurreição, ingressava e deixava a sala do cenáculo estando embora as portas e as janelas fechadas. Aquelas aflições e angústias representadas nos tais filmes televisivos não passam de uma reles falsificação daquele jubilosíssimo parto. 

20. 12. 2012

Adoração, Reparação, Consagração e Súplica - Nuno Serras Pereira

A Imaculada Conceição, Senhora Nossa, Sempre Virgem Mãe de Deus humanado, é a Padroeira dos USA. Em razão da conjuntura difícil por que passa essa nação, resolveu a Igreja Católica fazer uma novena à Imaculada, pela vida e pela liberdade religiosa, com celebração Eucarística, adoração do Senhor, verdadeira, real e substancialmente presente no Santíssimo Sacramento e recitação do Rosário.

Todos saberemos que a Imaculada é não só a Padroeira de Portugal mas também sua Rainha. D. João IV coroou-a em Vila Viçosa e desde então nenhum rei português foi coroado em sinal de Amor, Comunhão e Obediência à Mãe do Céu.

Um excelente amigo que vive nos USA ficou muito entusiasmado, tendo aliás participado na celebração Eucarística presidida pelo Arcebispo William Lori, com esta mobilização da Igreja e aventou o projecto de realizarmos algo semelhante aqui em Portugal. Adiantou ainda que eu poderia escrever um texto sobre o assunto com o intento de acender os corações nesta obra de Amor e Misericórdia. Logo lhe respondi, que embora achasse esplêndida a iniciativa, eu não redigiria nada uma vez que sempre que lanço propostas nos meus artigos elas são ignoradas e desprezadas; dando, a alguns, a impressão de que elas, ou algumas delas, não são acolhidas precisamente por virem de mim. Fazê-lo seria pois condená-la à morte prematura, “abortá-la”. Entretanto, considerei que dado que a concepção não era minha mas de outrem, limitando-me eu a ser o mensageiro talvez tivesse uma sorte diversa do que tem saído desta cachimónia. Começou então a consciência a ladrar, como um pregador vigilante, e eu arreceado de que ela se tornasse mais feroz e me viesse a morder sentei-me ao computador, e eis-me a escrevinhar estes desabafos.

Alguns cuidarão, com alguma razão, que existe uma diferença entre o que Obama quer, a saber, obrigar os seguros de saúde de católicos e instituições religiosas a pagarem a contracepção, a esterilização e o aborto químico, e aquilo que sucede em Portugal, a saber, um pagamento de impostos difuso, indirecto, mais distante que financia a contracepção, a esterilização, o aborto químico e cirúrgico, e os subsídios, negados a qualquer mãe grávida que tenha dificuldades económicas e queira levar a gravidez a seu termo, pagos às mães que condenaram à morte os seus filhos. Mas é evidente que aquilo a que estamos forçados, no nosso país, por um estado totalitário, embora de um modo mais subtil, constitui uma tremenda violência à consciência de todas as pessoas de boa vontade e, em particular, aos católicos que o são de facto, e não só de nome ou de conveniência ou de astúcia, e um grave atropelo à liberdade cristã e religiosa.

A Imaculada, como sabemos, celebra-se a 8 de Dezembro. Se alguns grupos de oração, movimentos eclesiais, paróquias, etc., quiserem rezar a novena são libérrimos de o fazer. Poderão ou não entender-se entre si para algo em conjunto a nível nacional e o que mais o Espírito Santo sugerir. Ninguém precisa de autorização para rezar nem para salvar vidas ou combater pelos direitos humanos. Tem não só o direito mas o dever de o fazer.

Em primeiro lugar está Deus e por isso Lhe deve ser dada primazia absoluta, como nos ensina o Pai-nosso. Daqui que a oração deva começar pela adoração, o louvor e a acção de graças – a celebração da Eucaristia e a adoração do Santíssimo Sacramento são pois o primeiro passo a dar. Considerando Aquele que nos criou e deu a vida por nós na Cruz e confundidos com tanto Amor tão mal correspondido da nossa parte e dos portugueses em geral somos levados a, como dizia, o pastorinho Francisco, consolar Jesus, e Sua Mãe, cujos corações estão muito ofendidos. Essa dor do Filho, e n’ Ele do Pai e do Espírito Santo, e da Sua e nossa Mãe empuxa-nos num ímpeto de amor a Consagrarmos-nos inteiramente ao Sagrado Coração (Amor) de Jesus através da entrega total ao Coração (Amor) Imaculado de Maria para que vivendo n’ Eles e d’ Eles, como Eles, nos dediquemos pela oração de súplica, de intercessão, à conversão e salvação dos pecadores.

17. 10. 2012

Elvis Presley - Miracle of the rosary.(subtitulado español)

Algumas dicas sobre a Fé - por Nuno Serras Pereira

A Fé que acontece na Igreja e através da Igreja é sempre um encontro vital entre Jesus Cristo, Deus Filho feito homem, e cada pessoa concreta. Este dom ou Graça de Deus antecipa-se à nossa liberdade, suscita-a, acompanha-a, purifica-a e eleva-a tornando-a capaz de um assentimento e de uma adesão incondicionais e absolutos à Palavra de Deus, o Verbo feito carne, em virtude da Sua autoridade Divina, a qual por sê-La, não Se pode enganar nem nos pode enganar. Evidentemente que a Fé no Logos, no Verbo, na Palavra, na Razão eterna, incriada e Criadora, é dirigida somente a seres que Dela participam – pessoas humanas racionais criadas à Sua imagem e semelhança que verificam uma compatibilidade entre os dados da razão e a Fé que a vem purificar, aperfeiçoar e completar.

Viver a Fé será então consentir que o eu de cada um, por virtude do Espírito Santo, seja enxertado no Eu de Jesus Cristo entrando em Comunhão, com a Santíssima Trindade e com todos os eus que o Senhor chamou e acolheu em Si, de tal modo que possamos, com S. Paulo, dizer “já não sou eu que vivo mas é Cristo que vive em mim”. Este Eu de Jesus Cristo alargado a todos aqueles que em Si incorporou plenamente chama-se Corpo Místico de Cristo, isto é a Igreja.

Esta amizade com o único Deus Pai, Filho e Espírito Santo uma vez que é um dom tem de ser incessantemente implorada e alimentada. Esta nutrição e trato de amor incremental vêm até nós através dos Sacramentos - que são acções, por sinais, de Cristo Ressuscitado na Sua Igreja e através dela que contêm e efectuam aquilo que significam -, em especial o da penitência (confissão ou reconciliação) e o da Eucaristia; e também pela oração que sendo um colóquio ou conversa com Deus nos ensina a estar na Sua presença, a escutá-Lo e a pedir-lhe tudo aquilo que é para nosso bem, em particular o mesmo Bem que é o próprio Deus, que nos é dado no Espírito Santo. Mendicantes de Deus suplicamos-Lhe como o pai do Evangelho que queria a cura de seu filho “Senhor, eu tenho Fé mas aumenta a minha Fé”.

Como nos ensina S. Tiago, em plena concordância com S. Paulo, a “Fé sem obras é morta”, de facto, como ele adianta, fé sem obras também os demónios a têm e de nada lhes adianta. Como nós, embora furiosos, sabem de cor e salteado o Credo. Por isso S. Paulo advertia que a Fé opera (isto é, obra) pela Caridade, pelo Amor. Daqui que para fortalecer, solidificar e revigorar a Fé importe muito a dedicação, a entrega de si mesmo, a doação, daquilo que temos e daquilo que somos, aos outros. Esta dádiva, cujo nome é amor, deve, nas palavras da Bem-aventurada Teresa de Calcutá, outorgar-se até doer e assim continuar até deixar de magoar – é no abraço à Cruz de Cristo, ou se quisermos, a Cristo Crucificado que encontramos nos mais vulneráveis, pobres e desfavorecidos, que encontramos a Ressurreição. O voluntariado da Caridade não consiste, no entanto, num mero bem-fazer filantrópico mas sim num tornar “capilarmente” o próprio Cristo manso e humilde de Coração, o Coração Sagrado do Amor que Se deixou trespassar pela cruel lançada para jorrar sobre nós a Sua Misericórdia infinita.

Creio que nos dias de hoje importará recordar que, não obstante, a enorme importância das obras de misericórdia corporais há uma justa hierarquia que dá precedência ontológica às Espirituais (com E maiúsculo), enquanto sobrenaturais, as quais aliás, bem vistas as coisas são a fonte das primeiras. Não há duvidar que o menor dos dons sobrenaturais supera imensamente o maior dos dons temporais ou naturais, como lembra S. Tomás.

Embora, como ensina S. Boaventura, Jesus Cristo seja o Livro pelo qual devemos estudar, no qual tudo se aprende, pois Ele é a própria Sabedoria, isso não exclui, antes, pede uma boa formação intelectual ou, se quisermos, catecumenato doutrinal. Não é possível que uma catequese indicada para crianças ou adolescentes seja suficiente para dar resposta às questões e interrogações de gente madura, com novas responsabilidades familiares e profissionais, com formação superior, dotadas de uma alta cultura. Por isso, é necessário recorrer a bons livros, a retiros, a sessões de formação, a um experimentado assistente espiritual para que possamos conhecer “as razões da nossa Esperança”.

Que a Imaculada Virgem Maria Mãe de Deus feito homem no seu seio, Sede e Mãe da Sabedoria, Ela, a Esposa do Espírito Santo o qual é a Imaculada Conceição Incriada, que Se quis espelhar na Imaculada Conceição Criada, feita, por Deus Medianeira de todas as Graças, nos alcance uma Fé viva e firme, uma Esperança certa, uma Caridade perfeita e a Graça da perseverança final.

14. 08. 2012

Las apariciones de la Virgen en Akita

En 1988, el entonces cardenal Joseph Ratzinger en calidad de Prefecto de la Congregación para la Doctrina de la Fe impartió un juicio definitivo sobre los hechos de Akita, juzgándolos dignos de fe y fiables

Javier Garralda Alonso

In ForumLibertas

Estos hechos extraordinarios empezaron en 1973 en la ciudad japonesa de Akita y fue protagonista una monja católica japonesa. La Virgen dio sólo tres mensajes, relativamente cortos, pero de gran trascendencia. En 1975 la estatua de la Virgen en la capilla de las religiosas empezó a verter lágrimas y esto se repitió 101 veces. Se cuenta con el testimonio de este hecho sorprendente y conmovedor por parte de más de 500 cristianos y no cristianos, incluido el alcalde budista de la villa.

En 1984, el obispo del lugar declaró los hechos como sobrenaturales y autorizó en toda la diócesis la veneración de la Santa Madre de Akita. En 1988, el entonces cardenal Joseph Ratzinger (hoy, nuestro Papa, Benedicto XVI), en su calidad de Prefecto de la Congregación para la Doctrina de la Fe, impartió un juicio definitivo sobre los hechos de Akita, juzgándolos dignos de fe y fiables. (El entonces cardenal observó que Akita es una continuación de los mensajes de Fátima).

Es natural que si las instancias supremas de la Iglesia consideran dignas de confianza estas apariciones busquemos, aunque sea brevemente, conocer lo más esencial de sus mensajes y de otros hechos extraordinarios relacionados. Ante todo, la Virgen nos habla de cuál ha de ser nuestra vida interior, pues lo que dice a esta religiosa, Sor Agnes Sasagawa, nos lo podemos aplicar todos. Así ora con ella en estos términos:

“Sacratísimo Corazón de Jesús, verdaderamente presente en la Santa Eucaristía, te consagro mi cuerpo y alma para ser enteramente una con tu Corazón, sacrificado cada instante en todos los altares del mundo (...)”.

“Ruego que recibas esta humilde ofrenda de mi ser. Utilízame como quieras para gloria del Padre y la salvación de las almas”.

El día 28 de Junio de 1973, una llaga en forma de cruz apareció en la palma de la mano izquierda de Sor Agnes. La Virgen le dijo en su primer mensaje: “¿Te causa sufrimiento la herida de tu mano? Reza en reparación por los pecados de los hombres.”

¿Cuál es la causa del llanto de la Virgen?: Nos lo dice ella misma: “Pensar en la pérdida de tantas almas es la causa de mi tristeza”. (Participa María de los acerbos dolores espirituales de su divino Hijo, contemplando la inutilidad de su infinito sufrimiento para tantos que no querrán acogerse a su misericordia insondable). Por otra parte ¿qué madre no lloraría viendo dirigirse a su hijo a un precipicio?

¿Cómo podemos consolarla?: Cooperando para que muchas almas se salven, uniendo nuestras penas y alegrías a las del Señor y a imagen de la Virgen ser corredentores con Cristo de nuestros hermanos “completando en nuestro cuerpo lo que falta a la Pasión de Cristo”. Nos dice la Virgen: “Que cada uno se esfuerce, según su capacidad y posición, en ofrecerse enteramente al Señor”.

Nos dice María: “Muchos hombres en este mundo afligen al Señor. Yo deseo almas que lo consuelen para suavizar la ira del Padre Celestial. Yo deseo, con mi Hijo, almas que reparen, con sus sufrimientos y pobreza, por los pecadores e ingratos”. “Oración, penitencia y sacrificios valientes pueden suavizar la cólera del Padre”.

Hablando humanamente, la ira del Padre pende sobre esta humanidad disoluta que se hunde, en gran parte, en todo tipo de pecados. Por eso la Virgen nos anuncia un terrible castigo si los hombres y mujeres no cambian. Este castigo podría evitarse si la humanidad deja la senda del mal y se convierte. Y podrá suavizarse y aplazarse si muchos fieles unidos a los dolores de Cristo y su santa Madre interceden por dicha humanidad.

Dice así nuestra Madre: “Si los hombres no se arrepienten y se mejoran, el Padre infligirá un terrible castigo a toda la humanidad. (...) Fuego caerá del cielo y eliminará a gran parte de la humanidad, tanto a los buenos como a los malos, sin hacer excepción de sacerdotes y fieles”. (Para los malos será castigo, para los buenos ocasión de merecer para sí y los demás con sus sufrimientos).

Mención aparte merece la profecía de la crisis en la Iglesia. Parece un eco de las palabras del Papa Pablo VI: “El humo de Satanás ha penetrado en la Iglesia”.Y también un anuncio de las heridas a la unidad interior de la Iglesia, que recuerdan otros mensajes de otras apariciones: “La obra del demonio se infiltrará hasta dentro de la Iglesia, de tal manera que se verán cardenales contra cardenales, obispos contra obispos. Los sacerdotes que me veneran serán despreciados (...),”

En estos tiempos críticos nos llama la Virgen a la oración por sacerdotes, obispos y Papa. Y da alas a nuestra esperanza y confianza:

“Reza mucho la oración del Rosario. Sólo yo puedo salvarles de las calamidades que se acercan. Aquellos que ponen su confianza en mí se salvarán”.

(Información procedente de las “Siervas de los Corazones Traspasados de Jesús y María”)

Fátima atraiçoada?

Tem quase noventa anos, uma saúde débil obriga-o a passar longo tempo nos hospitais, espaço que aproveita para rezar o Rosário completo (20 mistérios), é professor universitário, dotado de uma inteligência aguda, memória precisa, e um coração ardente de amor por Jesus e Maria, Sua e nossa Mãe, que, como escrevia o nosso P. Manuel Bernardes, são um só Coração em virtude da sua estreitíssima união mística de Amor. Não se conforma com a perdição dos homens pelo pecado e particularmente com esse horror, com essa injustiça tremenda, o qual conduz tantas almas ao Inferno, que é o aborto provocado. Sabe que a Misericórdia do Redentor é maior do que a enormidade das nossas fragilidades podendo operar em nós o arrependimento e a conversão. Por isso nunca desiste na sua entrega a Deus e aos homens seus irmãos, pese embora todas as indiferenças e humilhações com que tem sido provado ao longo da vida. É um guerreiro, um batalhador destemido, infatigável, um conquistador determinado às ordens do Amor para que este impere em Portugal e no mundo inteiro. A sua fidelidade à Igreja é exemplar e o abrasado amor à Eucaristia e, consequentemente, ao Sacerdócio Ministerial mete espanto, deslumbra por seu esplendor, fazendo lembrar os excessos de S. Francisco de Assis.

Na sua solicitude pelo bem de todos passou o dia doze (12), do corrente, em Fátima mendigando assinaturas para uma petição a favor de um novo referendo sobre o aborto que tem como propósito abrogar a “lei” injusta e iníqua em vigor. Chegou a casa, em Lisboa, às três horas da madrugada do dia treze (13). Nesse dia, mais tarde, confidenciou-me amargurado: “Nunca imaginei que houvesse tanta gente em Portugal a favor do aborto enquanto outros numa indiferença confrangedora nem me respondiam ao apelo contra o aborto e mostravam uma indiferença total…! E isto em Fátima!”.

Mais tarde enviou-me uma “mensagem de Nossa Senhora” (advirto que quanto me é dado saber estas revelações particulares ainda não foram aprovadas pela Igreja, o que não significa que não possam vir a sê-lo) do mesmo dia 13, colhida no sítio http://www.holylove.org , que assim reza: «Blessed Mother says: "Praise be to Jesus."

"Today, on the day of commemoration of My apparitions at Fatima, I have come to address the world at large. The decades that have passed since God sent Me to Fatima have not borne the good fruits of love, peace and unity which the Fatima message was intended to bear. Self has become a new god - the god of hedonism."

 

"New war fronts continue to be established around the world, and none of them find resolution in Holy Love. Lives are continually lost in the battlefield of the womb. God's Commandments carry little purpose today. God's Will is disregarded."

"You cannot become a godless country and expect to prosper. You cannot withdraw from the Will of God and be at peace."

"My warnings at Fatima were left unheeded, and you experienced the loss of millions of lives in World War II." 

"Today I have come to ask you, My children, to pay attention to My call and do not wait for someone to approve. Do not repeat the same mistake of the generation past. Consecrate your hearts, your lives and the heart of the world to Our United Hearts."

"The world does not comprehend God's Justice; nor does the world respect the great weapon of Holy Love. There is still time to transform hearts, lives, government and church leaders, in and through, Holy Love."

"I have chosen each of you to hear this Message. Make it known."

No final uma nota do próprio explicava: “Holy Love significa o Santo Amor que existe nos Unidos Corações de Jesus e Maria.”

Nuno Serras Pereira

14. 05. 2012

Dios nombró a cada madre guardiana de la vida de los hijos, afirma Mons. Gómez

LOS ANGELES, 12 May. 12 / 04:01 pm (ACI/EWTN Noticias).- El Arzobispo de Los Ángeles (Estados Unidos), Mons. José Gómez, llamó a los fieles a agradecer a Dios por el don de la maternidad, pues puso a cada madre como guardiana "para cuidar de su precioso regalo de vida" que son los hijos.

En su última columna publicada en ACI Prensa, Mons. Gómez se refirió a la próxima celebración del Día de la Madre, a quien los católicos deben agradecer "todos sus sacrificios y su amor".

"Para los católicos, la maternidad es una vocación, una llamada especial de Jesucristo.

Dios confía a cada madre el deber de compartir en el misterio de su creación. En el designio de nuestro Padre, cada nueva vida es concebida y crece bajo el corazón amante de una madre", afirmó.

Recordó que "las madres especialmente, son nuestras primeras maestras en la oración, la caridad y las prácticas de nuestra fe cristiana. Por su ejemplo, nuestras madres nos enseñan la verdad del amor cristiano, amando sin esperar nada a cambio".

En ese sentido, el Arzobispo de Los Ángeles destacó que "como cristianos, somos bendecidos de tener dos madres. Tenemos nuestras madres naturales que nos trajeron a este mundo, y tenemos nuestra madre espiritual, la Santísima Virgen María". "Es apropiado que mayo, cuando celebramos el Día de la Madre, sea tradicionalmente el ‘Mes de María’ en nuestra Iglesia", añadió.

Mons. Gómez, que tiene una devoción especial por la Virgen de Guadalupe, invitó por tanto a los católicos a orar esta semana "para que crezcamos en nuestro amor por nuestras madres, nuestras madres naturales en la tierra, y nuestra Santísima Madre en el cielo".

"Así como nuestras madres nos enseñaron a caminar, María nos enseña cómo seguir a Jesús. Ella nos enseña cómo escuchar la voz de Dios y cómo confiar en su plan para nuestra vida", afirmó.

El Arzobispo aseguró que "en el corazón de cada familia está el amante corazón de la madre" y que María, como una buena madre, "está siempre cerca de nosotros, lista para sostenernos si estamos por caer. También la llamamos cuando estamos en problemas. Podemos buscar su ayuda en nuestras luchas".

Mary the Virgin Mother (Part 4) - by Mark P. Shea

In CRISIS magazine

Last week we spoke of Mary as the New Eve and Virgin Bride and noted that virginity always speaks of purity. The purity of Mary’s faith, so closely bound up with her virginity, leads to the other great Marian image found in John’s Gospel: Mary as the Virgin Mother. For at the very climax of the story, a curious thing happens that John obviously regards as extremely important. He writes:

One of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear, and at once there came out blood and water. He who saw it has borne witness – his testimony is true, and he knows that he tells the truth – that you also may believe. (Jn 19:34-35)

Why does John interrupt the narrative of his Gospel here, of all places, to make sure we believe blood and water gushed from Jesus’ side? Is he really interested in the anatomical details of pericardial rupture? No. He is interested in pointing out the meaning of this event, which he saw with his own eyes: namely, that the Church, the bride of the second Adam, is born from Jesus’ side in the waters of baptism, just as the first Eve was made from the side of the first Adam. For John, there’s a clear and obvious connection between “the spirit, the water, and the blood” (1 Jn 5:8). It is by “water and the Spirit,” flowing from the bleeding side of Jesus, that Christ cleansed the bride “by the washing of water with the word, that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish” (Eph 5:26-27). The creation of the second Eve parallels the creation of the first. Moreover, it brings us back with immense force to the mystical vision of Ezekiel we discussed last week. For now we’re seeing the source of the waters that flowed from that mystical temple: the heart of Jesus Himself whose temple was destroyed but raised up in three days.

So Mary is shown at the wedding of Cana as the icon of the bride but at the cross as the mother of the children of the second Adam. For John carefully preserves this scene from the crucifixion:

Standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. When Jesus saw his mother, and the disciple whom he loved standing near, he said to his mother, “Woman, behold, your son!” Then he said to the disciple, “Behold, your mother!” And from that hour the disciple took her to his own home. (Jn 19:25-27)

John is not simply interested in chatting about first-century domestic arrangements for Jewish widows. As with all the details from his Gospel, this scene also is written down for a theological purpose: “that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name” (Jn 20:31). In other words, he means for us to understand that we are the beloved disciple, that Mary is our mother and we are her children. For Jesus is our older brother, the “firstborn of many brethren” (Rom 8:29). Therefore, Mary is the mother of all Jesus’ brothers and sisters.

So the paradox of the gospel is made complete. You lose your life to save it. You must admit you’re blind to see. And, as Isaiah prophesied of Israel, so it’s even truer of Mary that the virgin daughter of Zion becomes the mother of a billion people:

For the children of the desolate one will be more
than the children of her that is married, says the Lord.
Enlarge the place of your tent,
and let the curtains of your habitations be stretched out;
hold not back, lengthen your cords
and strengthen your stakes.
For you will spread abroad to the right and to the left,
and your descendants will possess the nations
and will people the desolate cities.

Fear not, for you will not be ashamed;
be not confounded, for you will not be put to shame;
for you will forget the shame of your youth,
and the reproach of your widowhood you will remember no more.
For your Maker is your husband, the Lord of hosts is his name;
and the Holy One of Israel is your Redeemer,
the God of the whole earth he is called. (Is 54:1–5)

The thing to note here is that, once again, Mary’s life is a referred life. The point of the perpetual virginity of Mary, as of the virgin birth, is that – again – the point is not about Mary. It’s about Christ and His Church.

Mary Guards the Truth about our Relationship to God . . .

In the virginity of Mary, we see reflected to us the essential truth of the gospel: that it’s God who is the author of our salvation. That’s as deeply offensive to us today as it has ever been, because people don’t want to hear that we can no more save ourselves than a corpse can jump. We are much more comfortable thinking of ourselves as heroes who achieve something great and earn the respect of God and our peers through our achievements. In short, we believe in power, not love. It is the poison that has gnawed at our vitals since the serpent bit us in the Garden. It is pride.

And so, the world teaches us to treat life as a power struggle among economic classes, races, man, and woman – and between God and us. Mary’s self-surrendering virginity offends this approach to life deeply because she says, “It’s about love, not power.” To the power addict who can only conceive of a world neatly divided between the cunning and the stupid, Mary’s way is the way of death. So, for instance, Simone de Beauvoir recoils from such surrender when she writes of Mary:

For the first time in history the mother kneels before her son; she freely accepts her inferiority. This is the supreme masculine victory, consummated in the cult of the Virgin – it is the rehabilitation of woman through the accomplishment of her defeat.

For surrender is death, according to the world. And so the world produces men and women who distill the worship of power down to ever more bitter dregs, to gain the whole world while losing their own souls. But Mary’s surrender to God leads to the mystery of total dependence on God – and the paradox of happiness through the cross. The Son before whom she kneels is not some selfish boor of this fallen world, but the second Adam who undergoes a defeat far more profound than her own self-surrender so that He may exalt her to a glory above all other creatures. In Him and Him alone, power and love are reconciled, and we find not servility crushed by domination but humility crowned with glory.

. . . and the Truth about Our Relationship with One Another

That’s not, however, all that Mary’s virginity shows us. It is not just a sign calling us to our own complete dependence on God. It guards another truth at once profoundly repugnant and profoundly attractive to our culture: the truth that purity is fruitful.

Mary’s purity reflects and signifies the purity of the Church, the bride without wrinkle, spot, or blemish. G. K. Chesterton, in one of his typically insightful remarks, noted that heresy has always tended to identify purity with sterility, while Catholic teaching “always connects purity with fruitfulness; whether it be natural or supernatural.” This is seen not only in ancient forms of false teaching that tried to scrape spirit clean of all contact with icky disgusting matter, but in more modern heresies as well. For example, it’s one of the strange contradictions of our age that the cultural apostles of sexual insanity constantly declare that “sex is nothing to be afraid of,” while at the same time desperately urging everyone to have “safe sex.” By this, they mean sex that is something like the Roman vomitorium, where you get all the pleasures of a bodily act but none of the consequences. With perfect tone-deafness, the emissaries of “safe sex” thereby set themselves squarely against the only two things sex is actually for: union with the beloved and fruitfulness. For that’s precisely what God is saying when He tells us that the two shall be “one flesh” and then bids us to “be fruitful and multiply” (Gen 1:28; 2:24).

Sex is the pledge of one’s total self to another. It is, as Pope John Paul II has pointed out, a kind of language that says, whether we admit it or not, “I give all of myself to you.” Sex is the only human activity that creates people – other beings in the image of God. Even a moment’s contemplation of these facts reveals the sheer idiocy of saying sex is nothing to be afraid of. One may as well say walking through a dry forest with a lit torch is nothing to be afraid of. And, if we’re honest, we are afraid of it – and none more so than the timid creatures who try to keep all the commitments sex implies – promises to husbands, wives, and children – at bay with a thin layer of latex (give or take a few hundred million abortions, STDs, ruined hearts, and broken lives).

We fear fire enough to keep it in the fireplace, but we’ve lost the elementary knowledge that God has ordained the fireplace of marriage for the fire of sex. The problem is not with wanting the fire, but with not wanting the fireplace. So our culture avoids the blessing of sex and makes it a curse instead. And we do it by making sex artificially virginal and virginity artificially sexual.

The artificial virginity of contraceptive sex boils down to the permanent attempt to strip mine the gold of pleasure from the sacramental union of love and fruitfulness, enthrone autonomy and pleasure, and declare love and fruitfulness “optional” rather than what revelation declares them to be: the very heart of reality. It is the attempt to replace love with power. But as power exalts itself over love, it naturally preys upon the weak, which leads to the artificial sexualization of virginity. For the simple fact is, a culture that despises virginity is a culture that despises children, who are both its weakest members and the last images we have of both purity and virginity. A culture that dedicates all its psychological resources to despising virginity is a culture ready, willing, and able to make war on childhood. The most obvious manifestation of this is, of course, abortion. But less obvious (and more insidious) is the insistent sexualization of children with clothes, media, and music urging them at ever earlier ages to be “bratz,” “studs,” and even to “explore same-sex attraction.” So, for instance, a fairly typical story fished at random from daily headlines tells us:

Push-up bras. Thong underwear. Eyeliner and mascara. Skirts up to here and shirts down to there. Bare bellies and low riders. Sexually explicit rap lyrics and racy adult television shows.

They’re not just the domain of young women anymore. Before parental anger forced them off the shelves, Abercrombie & Fitch marketed a line of thongs decorated with phrases such as ”wink wink” and ”eye candy” to youngsters. In a recent survey, the steamy adult series ”Desperate Housewives” ranked as the most popular network television show among kids ages 9 to 12.

Prime-time television, with its ubiquitous commercials for Viagra and Cialis, tells youngsters about erectile dysfunction. Nielsen ratings show that 6.6 million children ages 2 to 11 watched Janet Jackson’s ”wardrobe malfunction” during [2004's] Super Bowl. The Internet offers kids a whole new source of information on sex, including pornography. Even the children’s film ”Shrek 2″ contains scenes in which the honeymooning Shreks are making out, clearly preparing for sex.

Constantly bombarded with sexual images and lyrics, girls today seem to be going straight from toys to boys, without a stop at the tween years.

”The idea of girlhood as being a time of playfulness seems to have gone away,” says Jill Taylor, who teaches in the women’s studies department at Simmons College. ”I think the culture is pushing them to grow up faster. You see the girls and they’re 12 going on 16.”

Last Halloween a group of 13-year-old girls in Brockton dressed up as prostitutes, with fishnet stockings, tube tops, miniskirts, and high heels. ”We’re ho’s,” one girl told the local newspaper. The news that a 15-year-old girl at Milton Academy performed oral sex on five older boys has prompted a wide discussion about sexualized behavior among kids. And it’s not just sex – girls today, on average, take their first alcoholic drink at age 13, according to the American Medical Association.

Catherine Steiner-Adair, a clinical psychologist who works with adolescent girls, says cultural forces are causing girls to grow up fast today. ”We’ve really lost what used to be called middle school years,” says Steiner-Adair. ”It’s almost like kids go from elementary school to teenagers. There’s no pause.”

This sickness has only one cure: the return to making sex sexual and virginity virginal. That is, a return to honoring the sacrament of marriage, which can only be fully honored by honoring the even higher call of virginity. It’s the only medicine that will heal and, therefore, it’s a medicine that will provoke a violent reaction for the reason summed up by Chesterton long ago:

The Saint is a medicine because he is an antidote. Indeed that is why the saint is often a martyr; he is mistaken for a poison because he is an antidote.

In few places is this truer than in the reaction of contemporary culture to virginity. On the one hand, the horror of our sex-soaked, sex-marinated, sex-obsessed, sex-enslaved culture at the thought of any restraint is palpable. The sheer loathing directed at Christ’s virginity (in, for instance, The Da Vinci Code or the play Corpus Christi‘s portrayal of Jesus as an active homosexual) hits you in the face like the heat of a furnace. The same is true for Mary as she endures the “honors” the world has ever bestowed on Christ’s faithful ones (such as Chris Ofili’s painting Holy Virgin Mary, which features a clump of elephant dung on one breast and cutouts of genitalia from pornographic magazines in the background).

Yet, at the same time, the world rings with longing for true love and total self-giving. People paid a billion dollars to watch Jack save Rose from the Titanic (albeit after the obligatory Hollywood sex scene in the backseat of a car). They bawl their eyes out at a woman who loves a man so much she will risk death with him, and at a man who loves her so much he undergoes a baptism of death in the icy deep to save her “in every way a person can be saved.” People pay billions more to songwriters to assure us either that such love exists and will find us or that the terrible pain we feel when it doesn’t is something we will laughingly crush by our own power. There is a massive hunger for pure, self-sacrificing love – and a terrible devouring fear of it, whether it comes in the form of marriage or virginity. Karl Stern describes that confrontation between burgeoning hope for self-sacrificial love and the primal terror that goes with it. He noted that:

Besides a thousand natural obstacles, besides the fear of cowardly betrayal, besides the anxiety of isolation, [there is] something else; there is a seemingly invincible horror, something which reaches deep down beneath the social and biological strata of the personality, something that seems to arrest the pulse and make the blood curdle in the veins, there is a cosmic fear, a panic of death and dissolution.

And with good reason: in a fallen world, love and death are alike. They are both forms of self-sacrifice and, in the mystery of Christ, therefore inseparable. So we have only two choices: live our lives trying to get love without death, or else find the courage to take the plunge, however ineptly, and die to ourselves for love. We may think we’re only trying to help a co-worker who needs a little time off, or cutting grandma some slack, or being nicer to that irritating neighbor. But if we continue down any road that starts with the attempt to love, we will sooner or later discover that we did not build the road; that Jesus has walked it before us; and that the little voice that prompted us to take that first step, and all the steps after that, was His, however faint it may have been. And should we continue to walk that road, we will discover it leads to still more calls to sacrifice until we reach the sacrifice of our lives. For as the great Lutheran theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer observed, “When Christ calls a man, he bids him come and die.”

St. Teresa of Ávila, confronted with this painful truth after falling from a horse and being unceremoniously dragged through the mud, was told by the Lord, “This is the way I treat all my friends.” To which the plain-spoken saint responded, “Then, Lord, it is no wonder you have so few.”

No wonder indeed. In fact, it’s a wonder that the terrible and frightening goodness of God found – in at least one of the Church’s members – a welcome at all when it came to earth. But it did – in Mary. And the welcome continued, even when she was warned that the one her soul loved was “set for the fall and rising of many in Israel, and for a sign that is spoken against (and a sword will pierce through your own soul also)” (Lk 2:34-35).

That was a miracle of grace as well: a miracle that planted some of Christ’s own holiness in the very heart of the Church as a kind of outpost or colony to assure that, no matter how weak, sleazy, or lukewarm the Church’s members became, Mary would always be the sign that the Church was, in her deepest being, holy by the grace of Christ. And that would be the ultimate fruit of the virgin who was given the singular grace to be, in the words of Georges Bernanos, “younger than sin” in the miracle of the Immaculate Conception.

But that story must wait for another time.

Mary’s Perpetual Virginity: Why Does It Matter? (Part 3) - by Mark P. Shea

In Crisis magazine

The first thing to note about the perpetual virginity of Mary is that it’s the natural extension of the dogma of the virgin birth. Many modern people assume that, at its core, the virgin birth was basically a stunt. That is, the common modern assumption is that the meaning of Mary’s virginity is pretty much exhausted when somebody says, “Wow! She had a kid without the assistance of a man! Cool! He must be God Incarnate or something! Let’s check him out!”

The problem is that this approach to the miraculous is constantly repudiated by Jesus:

Then the devil took him to the holy city, and set him on the pinnacle of the temple, and said to him, “If you are the Son of God, throw yourself down; for it is written, ‘He will give his angels charge of you,’ and ‘On their hands they will bear you up, lest you strike your foot against a stone.’” Jesus said to him, “Again it is written, ‘You shall not tempt the Lord your God.’” (Mt 4:5-7)

And the Pharisees and Sadducees came, and to test him they asked him to show them a sign from heaven. He answered them, “When it is evening, you say, ‘It will be fair weather; for the sky is red.’ And in the morning, ‘It will be stormy today, for the sky is red and threatening.’ You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you cannot interpret the signs of the times. An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign, but no sign shall be given to it except the sign of Jonah.” So he left them and departed. (Mt 16:1-4)

God does perform miracles, but He does them in His own time and for His own reasons, not because curiosity seekers like Herod Antipas want to see nifty stunts as though God has to prove Himself to them. Those people are met with silence, as Jesus met Herod Antipas’s requests with silence (Lk 23:8-9).

So if the virgin birth is not a stunt to prove that Jesus, being born of a virgin, must be one amazing guy, what is the point of it?

The point is that the virginity of Mary is a sign, not a stunt. Stunts merely draw attention. They often don’t mean much beyond, “HEY!” And, at any rate, Jesus’ virgin birth drew no attention at the time it took place. But signs – and especially divine signs – are crammed with meaning. That is, signs signify. So the question becomes, “What did the virginity of Mary signify?” And the answer of the Catholic Church is that Mary’s perpetual virginity signifies crucial things, both about the “person of Christ and his redemptive mission” and “the welcome Mary gave that mission on behalf of all men” (CCC 499). And since, like all divine signs, this one goes on signifying long after its immediate time, Mary’s virginity is appropriate, fitting, and significant on a perpetual basis.

God Is in Charge

The first thing the perpetual virginity of Mary makes clear is that the entire project of salvation is God’s initiative, not ours. That’s not me talking. That’s the Catechism of the Catholic Church – the Catholic Church that, as an Evangelical, I had often been told denies God’s grace and teaches “salvation by works”:

Mary’s virginity manifests God’s absolute initiative in the Incarnation. Jesus has only God as Father. “He was never estranged from the Father because of the human nature which he assumed . . . He is naturally Son of the Father as to his divinity and naturally son of his mother as to his humanity, but properly Son of the Father in both natures.” (CCC 503)

Jesus, like all of us children of God who call Him our older brother, is born “not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God” (Jn 1:13). Jesus has God as His Father not as a stunt, but because this is the deepest truth about Him. And because it’s true of Him, it becomes true of us when we’re adopted by God through His grace.

Because of this, we are, so to speak, made members of a new human race headed by a New Adam (1 Cor 15:45-50). But that New Adam has a corresponding figure: the New Eve whose “yes” to God allows life to enter into the world, just as the “no” of the first Eve brought death into the world. And that “yes” is the fruit both of God’s predestining grace and of her own free assent:

Thus, giving her consent to God’s word, Mary becomes the mother of Jesus. Espousing the divine will for salvation wholeheartedly, without a single sin to restrain her, she gave herself entirely to the person and to the work of her Son; she did so in order to serve the mystery of redemption with him and dependent on him, by God’s grace:

As St. Irenaeus says, “Being obedient she became the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race.” Hence not a few of the early Fathers gladly assert . . . : “The knot of Eve’s disobedience was untied by Mary’s obedience: what the virgin Eve bound through her disbelief, Mary loosened by her faith.” Comparing her with Eve, they call Mary “the Mother of the living” and frequently claim: “Death through Eve, life through Mary.” (CCC 494)

All of which means that Mary is identified with the family of the New Adam just as much as the old Eve was identified with the family of the old Adam. Therefore, Mary’s virginity is a sign of joy that echoes down the ages even more than the weeping from the fall of Eve.

Virginity and Consecration to God

The notions of consecration and virginity have always been part of the Christian tradition. Indeed, as we have seen, pre-Christian tradition (both pagan and Jewish) also recognized at some instinctive level that the two went together. For virginity entails self-denial and, in some mysterious way, new life in God. It is a kind of sacrifice and, contrary to modern notions, it’s the sacrifice of something supremely good, not of something “dirty.” As David said, he would not offer “burnt offerings which cost me nothing” (1 Chr 21:24). The entire principle of sacrifice rests upon the reality that something really good – not a piece of trash – is being offered to God.

Whoever offers the sacrifice recognizes that God is the author of the very gift being offered back to Him – a gift that is (like the offerer himself) next to nothing in comparison to God. Our Father receives such gifts gladly and pours out on the worshipper abundances of grace and glory absurdly beyond the value of the sacrifice. And so, says St. Paul, we go from glory to glory (2 Cor 3:18).

The great exemplar of this pattern is, of course, Jesus Himself, who is both God and High Priest – and a virgin totally consecrated to God. The power of such virginity is indisputable. And so our culture still recognizes the “fitness” of virginity in someone especially close to God. That’s why The Da Vinci Code irritates the devout and titillates those who delight in attacking the gospel. Both sides recognize that the idea of a Jesus with an active sex life is a jab at the notion that He was specially consecrated to God. Yet though we feel this instinctively, we still need to ask why virginity is so bound up with the idea of consecration to God.

Certainly not because there’s something wrong with marriage. Indeed, it’s one of the great paradoxes of the Church that, while she exalts virginity as a higher estate than marriage, she simultaneously understands that Jesus established marriage – not virginity – as one of the seven sacraments.

Yes, you read that right: Virginity is a higher estate than marriage. That’s not some bitter anti-human enthusiasm left over from the Dark Ages. That’s Paul of Tarsus, who sums up the Catholic picture succinctly: “He who marries his betrothed does well; and he who refrains from marriage will do better” (1 Cor 7:38). St. Paul is just repeating the teaching of his Master, whose disciples once shrugged at His teaching on lifetime fidelity in marriage by saying, “If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is not expedient to marry” (Mt 19:10). Those disciples were surprised when He didn’t correct their wisecrack, but agreed with them, saying,

Not all men can receive this saying, but only those to whom it is given. For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to receive this, let him receive it. (Mt 19:10-12)

So the relationship between marital sex and virginity is not “bad/good,” but “good/better.” And the proof of it is Jesus Himself, who lived a life of earthly virginity so He could live a life of heavenly marriage with His bride the Church. It’s the classic pattern: Die to yourself and live to God, and you get back thirty, sixty, or a hundredfold more than you sacrificed (Mt 13:23). Jesus gave up the good of marriage for the greater good of the heavenly wedding banquet. That’s why the “first of His signs” was done at a wedding (Jn 2:1-11). John’s point is not that the sign was the first in a series of signs. He means for us to understand this sign as the archetypal sign, the sign that makes sense of all the other signs. If you want to understand what Jesus is about, John is saying, start here. And if you want to know who the real bridegroom at the real wedding is, says John the Baptist, then understand that it’s Jesus, the virgin who turns out to be the bridegroom of all bridegrooms (Jn 3:29).

Such nuptial language pervades the gospels. The Kingdom of Heaven is like a wedding feast (Mt 22:1-14). Paul tells us that not just the wedding at Cana but every marriage is an image of Christ the groom and His bride the Church (Eph 5:31-32). The book of Revelation portrays the cosmic consummation of all things as the marriage feast of the Lamb (Rv 19:5-7). The ultimate love story is the story of Jesus and the Church, according to Scripture. All our earthly love stories are just dim shadows of that reality. But love stories require two lovers, not just one. And that leads to the question, “What does total consecration in holiness look like, not for Jesus, but for His bride?”

Happily, it’s a question that John has already answered. For, as we already know, the holiest thing in the old covenant was the Ark of the Covenant. And for John, as for Luke, the ark of the New Covenant is Mary, who was overshadowed by the Holy Spirit, and who is the cosmic woman of the Book of Revelation, and who therefore is the icon both of the virgin daughter of Zion and of the Church. And that, in turn, leads us to the reality summarized in the words of Ambrose of Milan: “Mary is the type of the Church.”

Mary Signifies the Church’s Consecration to God

John sees Mary as a sign and icon of the Church, just as the early Fathers did. All of them thought her virginity, like Christ’s, was significant. For Mary is the model disciple whose sacrificial offering of virginity responds to Christ’s sacrificial offering, just as the disciple’s offering of the body as a “living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God” is the fitting response of worship to the Lord (Rom 12:1). More than anybody, Mary models the self-donating love of the disciple in imitation of Christ. For her face is, as Dante said, “the face that is most like the face of Christ’s.”

That’s more than poetry. For Jesus, we must remember, took His humanity from her. At the very level of physical appearance, it is quite likely that they strongly resembled one another. But even more profoundly, she was the disciple who spent more time in the direct presence of Jesus, loving and learning from God Incarnate more than anyone else who ever lived. And she didn’t begin her discipleship by crying, “Depart from me, for I am a sinner” (Lk 5:8), nor with the necessity of being knocked to the ground and blinded to get her attention (cf. Acts 9), but with immediate, complete, and loving submission to the will of God (Lk 1:38).

In every other case, the overture of grace is received imperfectly. But in one case – Mary’s – it received a perfect welcome on behalf of the whole Church, enabled (like all sacrificial gifts) by the power of God’s grace. Mary was the disciple who loved Jesus more deeply and lived with Him more closely than anyone, and the living sacrificial offering she made of her body was like nobody else’s. For Jesus Himself was the living sacrifice of her body and the very fruit of her womb. When the lance pierced His heart, it pierced hers, too (cf. Lk 2:34-35). No other disciple of Jesus has ever offered more to God than she offered.

“But,” says the Protestant doubter, “mere physical relationship doesn’t save! Remember when the woman in the crowd raised her voice and said to him, ‘Blessed is the womb that bore you, and the breasts that you sucked!’ Jesus replied, ‘Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and keep it!’” (Lk 11:27-28).

All true – which is why virginity matters as a sign not of deprivation and sexlessness but of faith. For “Mary is a virgin because her virginity is the sign of her faith ‘unadulterated by any doubt,’ and of her undivided gift of herself to God’s will. It is her faith that enables her to become the mother of the Savior: ‘Mary is more blessed because she embraces faith in Christ than because she conceives the flesh of Christ’” (CCC 506). Mary was not blessed because she gave birth; she gave birth because she was blessed: blessed to be chosen by God and more blessed still to have the pure faith to respond with an unreserved “yes” to God’s call – a pure faith she never lost or tainted, all the way through the bitterness of Golgotha. It’s not just her face, but her love for God, that most resembles Christ’s.

The Significance of the Wedding at Cana

That’s why John is careful to note that Jesus’ first miracle (at Cana) is done in response to Mary’s intercession (Jn 2:1-11). Mary, the icon of the bride and the counterpoint to Jesus the groom, is exactly the importunate supplicant Jesus tells us He is looking for in the Parable of the Unjust Judge (Lk 18:1-8). She doesn’t take “no” for an answer but first taps Jesus on the shoulder and says, “They have no wine” and, after a seeming rebuff, goes with perfect trust to the servants and tells them, “Do whatever he tells you.”

There is a strong tendency in Protestant circles to read this story as yet another example of Jesus “rebuking” Mary. But the longer I contemplated it, the more problematic that way of seeing it became. For instance, if Mary is being “rebuked,” the question is, “Why?” For her “faithlessness”? That makes no sense. She obviously expects Jesus to be able to do something about the wine. But such an expectation is clearly an act of faith in Him as Messiah, since there’s no reason, humanly speaking, to think a poor carpenter would be able to do anything. So she’s obviously expecting something supernatural here.

At this point, many an Evangelical replies, “Yes, she had faith, of a sort. But it was a worldly faith. She wanted Jesus to perform wonders, but didn’t understand the depth of what His mission would ultimately mean. That’s why Jesus rebuked her with the words, ‘O woman, what have you to do with me? My hour has not yet come’” (Jn 2:4).

But this makes no sense, either. If Jesus is displeased with her allegedly worldly faith and her supposed hankering after mere publicity stunts, why does He grant her request? Everybody else who comes to Him with worldly demands and requests for publicity stunts is invariably refused. Whether it’s Herod Antipas (Lk 23:8-9), or the man who wanted Jesus to adjudicate an inheritance dispute with his brother (Lk 12:13-21), or a mob who wanted to crown Him king (Jn 6:15), or Pharisees seeking a cool special effect from heaven (Mt 16:1-4), or His own disciples wanting a dazzling display of divine artillery against the Samaritans (Lk 9:51-56), all such crude demands for worldly power and selfish stunts are flatly refused. Yet, according to a common Protestant take on this story, Jesus allegedly “rebukes” Mary’s supposed crude desire for a publicity stunt – and then capitulates completely and does the stunt anyway.

Once again, this picture of Mary as pushy stage mother and of Jesus as a sort of sullen young actor shoved – whining about His unreadiness – on to the stage of history tells us far more about some Protestant attitudes toward Mary than it tells us about the actual events at Cana. Once again, the specter of Mary as Mommy Dearest is conjured, but now with the added absurdity of an omnipotent divine Son too wimpy to stand up to His domineering Jewish mom. It is simply insupportable to anyone of common sense. So are there other alternatives?

Rev. Sam Harris at Evangelical John Ankerberg’s ministry offers a less harsh but still unsatisfactory take. After noting (accurately) that the address “Woman” (Greek: gunai) is perfectly polite and does not have the cold ring in Jesus’ native language that it has in English, he continues:

“What have I to do with you” was a common conversational phrase. Again, it meant no disrespect. Jesus answers Mary’s request, not because she is His mother, but as part of His work as the Messiah. According to a footnote in the New Geneva Study Bible, “This indicates that Mary’s special role as Jesus’ mother gives her no authority to intervene in Christ’s messianic career.” Barclay suggests that Jesus was saying: “Don’t worry, you don’t quite understand what is going on; leave things to Me, and I will settle them in my own way.” It must always be understood that Jesus was respectful of His mother, but He was beginning to distance Himself from His previous role as a dutiful son.

This reading also fails for a number of reasons. To begin with, it is difficult to see why Jesus’ first miracle, done in direct response to Mary’s request and even over His apparent protests, signifies Mary is powerless to intervene in Christ’s messianic career. It would appear, judging from the end of the story, that Mary’s intervention here had a rather pronounced impact on Jesus’ messianic career.

Second, it is not at all clear that Mary “doesn’t quite understand what is going on.” Still less is it clear that Jesus thinks Mary doesn’t quite understand what is going on. On the contrary, Jesus’ response shows He thinks Mary knows perfectly well what is going on: He’s the Messiah, and she wants Him to manifest Himself to Israel.

And finally, it’s difficult to see in the text just what is compelling Jesus to “distance Himself from His previous role as a dutiful son.” The subtext of that statement is that Mary (again) has some sort of false or worldly notion of what “Messiah” means (i.e., military hero, or miraculous stunt man, etc.) and so Jesus must “distance Himself” from her false expectations to pursue His true mission. But, in fact, nothing in the text of the story justifies the assumption that Mary has false expectations of the Messiah. On the contrary, this assumption about Mary originates not with the text of Scripture, but with a prejudice brought to the text by Harris and the sources he cites.

A Catholic reading would urge us to move away from the assumption that Jesus and Mary are in conflict at all. Indeed, my former pastor, Rev. Michael Sweeney, O.P., now the president of the Dominican School of Philosophy and Theology in Oakland, California, has repeatedly remarked to me that it is legitimate to note a certain playfulness in their exchange. What we’re seeing here is not Jesus the Teenage Messiah hagridden by mom and her neurotic need to impress the ladies from the Women’s Auxiliary with “My son, the Miracle Worker.” Nor are we seeing Jesus politely trying to escape the false expectations of a well-meaning but dim disciple. Rather, we’re seeing a piece of conversation – almost banter – between two people who are both acutely aware of who Jesus is and what He is called to do.

Mary, after all, is no fool. She knows her Bible. She knows the meaning of the mission of Israel. And most of all, she knows her Son. A quick read of her Magnificat (Lk 1:46-55) shows that she has spent a long time pondering how, in the coming of Jesus, God “has helped his servant Israel, in remembrance of his mercy, as he spoke to our fathers, to Abraham and to his posterity for ever.” Every word both Jesus and Mary speak is spoken in light of their shared awareness of that messianic mission and of the words of the prophets who taught Israel to await His coming. With all that as the backdrop of their conversation, Mary is revealed to be using language laden with double meaning to lovingly call Jesus to get on with His mission, not to impress the neighbors with a special effect or publicity stunt. Her point is not simply that the wedding guests have no wine; it’s that the whole nation has no wine. All Israel is waiting for the coming of the Messianic Son of David when

the Lord of hosts will make for all peoples a feast of fat things, a feast of wine on the lees, of fat things full of marrow, of wine on the lees well refined. And he will destroy on this mountain the covering that is cast over all peoples, the veil that is spread over all nations. He will swallow up death for ever, and the Lord God will wipe away tears from all faces, and the reproach of his people he will take away from all the earth; for the Lord has spoken. (Is 25:6-8)

This image of the “new wine” of the messianic age is not unfamiliar to Jesus. He has read the prophets, too, and their imagery is His own. Indeed, Mary was one of the people who taught Him to read the prophets. And so He announces the dawn of the Messianic Age in language that once again links the image of a wedding with the image of wine:

Then the disciples of John came to him, saying, “Why do we and the Pharisees fast, but your disciples do not fast?” And Jesus said to them, “Can the wedding guests mourn as long as the bridegroom is with them? The days will come, when the bridegroom is taken away from them, and then they will fast. And no one puts a piece of unshrunk cloth on an old garment, for the patch tears away from the garment, and a worse tear is made. Neither is new wine put into old wineskins; if it is, the skins burst, and the wine is spilled, and the skins are destroyed; but new wine is put into fresh wineskins, and so both are preserved.” (Mt 9:14-17)

So Jesus acknowledges Mary’s messianic expectation by replying that His “hour” has not yet come (a reply that makes no sense unless He knows Mary is calling Him to begin His messianic mission). More subtly still, He acknowledges His messianic mission by calling her “Woman.” This is more than simply a polite address. It is, like all the rest of their exchange, as allusive to larger Old Testament prophetic realities as Mary’s request is. For in addressing her so, he is reminding us of another woman and the promise she and her seed were given long ago (Gen 3:15) to “crush the serpent’s head.” The whole conversation makes it clear that Mary believes it’s time for Jesus to announce His identity as Messiah and inaugurate the final decisive battle, not with Rome, but with “that ancient serpent, who is called the Devil and Satan” (Rev 12:9); that Jesus knows perfectly well this is what she means; and that she knows He knows it. Rather than some inane request for drinks all ’round followed by a meaningless “rebuke,” what we’re really looking at here is a profound conversation in which Jesus and Mary know and understand each other perfectly.

Which is why Mary doesn’t back down, and Jesus doesn’t expect her to. The bride – the second Eve confronting the second Adam – seeks the new wine of the kingdom. Indeed, she does so with just the brass and stick-to-itiveness her Son urges all His disciples to have. And the result is precisely what she sought: “This, the first of his signs, Jesus did at Cana in Galilee, and manifested his glory; and his disciples believed in him” (Jn 2:11). Mary, standing as a kind of icon of the whole Church in persistent and importunate prayer, chases Jesus until He catches her, and the courtship of Jesus and His bride the Church begins with Mary as the consecrated icon of the consecrated bride saying, in effect, “Maranatha! Show yourself, O Lord!” It is the cry of the Church down through history.

Which brings us, finally, to the other great image of Mary in John’s thought: not merely the virgin bride, but the virgin mother. Of which more next week.