To commemorate Christmas, CNN ran an opinion piece today by Dr. Jay Parini entitled Jesus and Mary: It's complicated.
After asserting that Mary and Jesus had significant disagreements, he concludes that "their relations ended on a note of deep accord, with Mary taking on
her role as "mother of God," becoming an important figure in the early
church."
But before he got there, he drags out a series of tired Modernist claims about Mary's behavior during Jesus' ministry that are designed to challenge the appropriate honor we Orthodox and Catholic believers accord her.
So here, one by one, are the erroneous Modernist claims (I say this as a former Modernist Protestant), and why they are a misinterpretation of Holy Scripture.
1) The Finding of Our Lord in the Temple
Dr. Parini asserts that the first "complicated" exchange between Jesus and Mary is when the family is on their way back from Jerusalem, only to find that Jesus has stayed behind and was debating matters of law with the teachers in the Temple. Jesus tells his mother, "Did you not know that I must be in my Father's house?" Dr. Parini states that "He was smart, perhaps a bit sassy. As the only glimpse we get of Jesus before the age of 30, it's a telling instance, however."
Telling of what? Few mothers, even Modernist Protestants, sympathize with the boy who put his mother through hell by disappearing for several days. But unless Dr. Parini has a lot more evidence to come, this will not really serve, retrospectively, as proof of a pattern of conflict between Jesus and Mary.
2) Mark 3:21. Jesus' Family says he is "Out of his mind."
Dr. Parini informs us that "In Mark 3:21, it's clear the family wishes he would cease and desist. 'He is out of his mind', they cry."
The Greek of this passage tells us that those who thought he was crazy were, literally, "Those of him" ( οι παρ' αυτου ). There is no reason to believe that Jesus' mother was part of this group. This could have been a group of his extended family with no involvement of Mary.
3) Jesus tells Mary "Woman, what have I to do with thee?" ( τι εμοι και σοι )
Dr. Parini informs us, 'This sounds harsh."
The context is the Wedding at Cana, John 2:4. Mary has asked her son to make wine out of thin water (a thing she apparently knows he can do).
The phrase "What have I to do with thee?" ( τι εμοι και σοι ) is exactly repeated in an exchange between Jesus and a demon in Mark 5:7. I've even heard Radical Protestants latch onto this fact and assert that this is proof that Jesus rebukes his mother in the same way as he rebukes a demon.
Only one problem. It's the demon who says this in Mark And it's Jesus who says it in John.
Now, the use of plural to denote respect was not operative for spoken Greek at that time. So neither the demon nor Jesus was disrespectful as such by the use of singular. The fact that the demon in Mark 5:7 speaks this phrase just prior to begging, from a position of weakness, to be sent into the pigs (as opposed to being cast out of the country), shows that the phrase "What (is there) to me and to you" is spoken by someone who acknowledges they are inferior to the one they are speaking with. So for Jesus to use this phrase shows us that, even though he is the Son of God, he also expresses filial piety toward the Mother of God. Not harsh at all.
4) Jesus speaks dismissively of his mother in Mark 3:35
Dr. Parini informs us that "Jesus says dismissively: "Here are my mother and my brothers! Whoever does God's will is my brother and sister and mother."
The
context here is that someone told Jesus that his mother and brothers
were seeking to see him. This is only a diss and only dismissive if the
wider context of Scripture teaches that Jesus mother and brothers were
not doing God's will. And therefore, the gathered crowd were his real
mother and brothers and not those of his genetic stock.
But
if Scripture does not present Mary as opposing God's will, then Jesus
was simply teaching people that a relationship with God does not require
genetic relation to him. Thank God.
Yet Scripture clearly teaches that Mary is a paragon of doing God's will.
She it was that proclaimed "Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord. May it be done to be according to your word." (Luke 1:38).
John
the Baptist leaped in the womb of Elizabeth when he heard Mary's voice.
(Luke 1:41) In the Holy Spirit, Elizabeth declared to Mary "Blessed art
thou among women and blessed is the fruit of your womb" (Luke 1: 42).
In the Holy Spirit Mary proclaimed "Henceforth all generations will call
me blessed (Luke 1:48)."
This passage is quite similar
to another which some misquote and mistranslate to dismiss Mary.
In Luke 11; 27-28 we read that a woman in the crowd called out, "Blessed
is the womb that carried you and the breasts at which you nursed."
Jesus replied, as oft quoted, "No, rather, blessed are those who hear
the word of God and do it."
Only problem, the word frequently rendered as "No, rather" is menounge ( μενουνγε ). The eminent Greek scholar Dr. Chrys Caragounis points out that this word actually means "Yes, and what's more..." In other words, once again what is translated as a diss on Mary is anything but.
And so, every passage paraded out as evidence that Mary did not support her son's ministry is a mistranslation or misunderstood reading of Scripture. The Mother of God sits in the front pew of every Church, leading us to follow and worship her son. Christ is born. Glorify Him!
Free Gift! Subscribe to receive Dr. Keith's Six Basic Tips for Mastering Any Language.
The Romanian Orthodox Church is facing a bit of a quandary today. One of their own, but one they once disowned, has turned up, well, having failed to decay after seven years. And in Catholic-Orthodox circles, that's a pretty big thing.
We're talking about Fr. Gheorghe Calciu-Dumitreasa.
He lived a remarkable life. For the fullest description of his journey, you can read the Washington Post article published upon his death in 2006. But I'll briefly summarize it for you as follows.
He was a medical student when the Communist regime seized control of Romania after WWII. He spoke out publicly against the Communists and went to jail for 16 years. During that confinement, he seems to have had a faith experience and when he was finally released, he secretly pursued theological education. He was ordained a priest in 1972. The Communist government tolerated his anti-Communist preaching for five years but finally the Church itself, probably under significant pressure from the Communist government, defrocked him.
He was jailed again and was tortured while in confinement. The US President Ronald Reagan eventually demanded his release from prison as a condition for favorable trade with Romania. The Communist government released him.
He and his wife Adriana and their son Andrei were allowed to go into exile to America in 1985. They settled in Virginia. Having been defrocked by the Romanian Orthodox Church, he was accepted into ministry by the anti-Communist Romanian Archdiocese of the Orthodox Church in America.
He lived to see the end of Communism in Romania. But, being defrocked by the Romanian Orthodox Church, and serving with a Church body that had described the Romanian Bishops as nothing but Secret Police lackeys, in the few trips he made to Romania after Communism, he was not allowed official recognition or access to Churches for the saying of Mass.
I want to say, that, having spent quite a bit of time in Romania and getting to know people that had to survive the brutal Communist regime, including people of the Church, I don't judge the hierarchs of the Church. I believe that they did what they thought was necessary for the survival of the Church there in Romania. And the men who defrocked Fr. Gheorghe did so out of fear, fear for their own lives, and also fear for the survival of the Church in Romania. It was what it was.
That does not make Fr. Gheorghe any less brave for the outspoken stance he took.
He fell asleep in the Lord in 2006. He had spent his twilight years serving a Romanian parish in Virginia. But his body was sent for burial to the Petru-Voda Monastery in Romania.
Now, it is routine at monasteries to disinter bodies after seven years. That's the point after which we expect to find nothing but bones. There's a ritual for it. Monks and Nuns spend their lives looking forward to having their bones gathered into the community collection after those seven years.
I have often kissed glass cases of hundred of monastic skulls, venerating the lives of prayer that these men and women led for the Church.
But when they disinterred Fr. Gheorghe they found something strange.
He had not decomposed.
There is an ancient teaching in the Great Tradition (the Catholic and Orthodox Churches before they sadly split) wherein a body that does not decay is held as proof of sanctity, meaning, such a person should then be proclaimed a Saint.
So, Fr. Gheorghe presents a quandary for the Romanian Orthodox Church. He was officially sanctioned, defrocked, by the Church at a time when they were fighting for their lives.
Now, he presents himself as a candidate for sainthood. How do you canonize a defrocked priest?
The solution may be that perhaps the Orthodox Church in America could canonize him. Reciprocally all Orthodox Churches accept the canonization of each Church.
At any rate, pray for us, Fr. Gheorghe. Let me tell you, Fr. Gheorghe, the Churches in Romania today are full every Sunday. I have no doubt that leaders in the Church committed sins against other members of the Church during Communist times. You were one of many people wronged. But the Church leaders erred while trying to preserve the Church. I know that hurt you. You are before the face of God now. And I know you forgive, just as you have been forgiven.
But, in Romania, the Church did finally win.
May God bless the Orthodox Church in Romania.
Here is a Romanian news article about the finding of his incorrupt body:
