Dark Night of the Soul

I first heard the term, Dark Night of the Soul from spiritual speaker and writer Carolyn Myss. She describes a prolonged period of sadness and feeling of separation as one prays to move away from the false voices--those people, situations, and events that distract a person from his or her higher purpose--into a closer relationship with God and a deeper spiritual orientation. This can be mistaken for depression. One feels alienated and abandoned. But the Dark Night is a necessary step on the path to wholeness and an authentic way of living. Mother Theresa is said to have experienced such a Dark Night for many years. She was known for praying the Memorare nine times in a row on a regular basis:

Remember, O most gracious Virgin Mary, that never was it known that any one who fled to thy protection, implored thy help, or sought thy intercession, was left unaided. Inspired with this confidence, I fly to thee, O Virgin of virgins, my Mother; to thee I come, before thee I stand sinful and sorrowful. O Mother of the Word Incarnate! despise not my petitions, but in thy mercy, hear and answer me. Amen. 

 Our Lady of La Salette

I have experienced at least one Dark Night of the Soul in the past, and it occurred to me today that I may be in that space once again, as a part of turning my eyes back to God and traveling on this journey to the Catholic faith. External events have certainly contributed to my sorrow, which was so intense yesterday that I started crying, really hard, in the shower. My family did not hear me, which is good, because I did not want to alarm my child.

For a number of years I have felt that somehow I have become the black sheep of my family of origin. As a kid I never got into any trouble like some siblings did, was an excellent student, went to college, got married and had a child. Until recently I was the only one to start a family. Along the way I also pursued additional education twice, paying for both schools and becoming a successful esthetician at a prestigious day spa. I paid off all my debts and have had excellent credit for many years. By most standards, I am a productive member of society! So what happened?

Instead of bringing my family closer together, becoming a mother has caused rifts, hurt feelings, and a profound sense of alienation. I thought that healing was taking place, and past disagreements and misunderstandings had been put behind us, but evidently I was wrong, and my wounds have been torn back open. Add to that the sudden death of my next door neighbor last month, and this week the death of my best friend's grandpa. Beezy's favorite little cousin and playmate suddenly moved far away. A school shooting in my state, natural disasters with tornadoes destroying entire towns and taking people's lives, and the continuing unrest in the Middle East are among the contributors to a chain of suffering.

Agony in the Garden of Gethsemane

What a lenten season it has been so far! I had a 10 day long menstrual period, and then a family member uninvited my child to a special event, while other children are still welcome. How to handle the rejection? I have been in the habit of praying my Rosary every night, and so I pray for all of these trials and tribulations, for myself and for others that are also going through difficult times. I relate my pain to events in the lives of Jesus and Mary, and also my hope. I read my daily lenten meditation book, the Bible, and Catholic literature. I offer up my sorrow for the blessing of another. Since becoming Catholic, I am learning that suffering purifies us. It is a part of the life of faith and cannot be avoided, should not be run away from. It is a chance to grow closer to God and rely on Him in these tests. Jesus was tempted for 40 days in the wilderness. We walk with Him and imitate Him, also fasting and praying. We give alms to the poor to remind us of our abundance. We do penance for our sins, and we turn away from sin and toward the gospel. And at the end of the season, spring arrives and we rise again.

 Assumption of Mary

If you are experiencing a Dark Night of the Soul, allow yourself to feel your feelings. Have that good, awful cry and let it all pour out. Be open to God's grace and healing. When others turn against you, remember how Jesus was turned against to the point of death, and carry your cross with dignity. This too shall pass. And all will be well, and all will be well, and all manner of things shall be well.

Homeschooling as Vocation

As some of you are already aware, homeschooling is not always a popular choice. I would go so far as to say that it is rare that one would not encounter any negativity or opposition. While I felt called to homeschool my child, only recently have I come to really understand it as a vocation. Every day I have the opportunity to choose to see teaching my child as God's calling, as my work for him and for his glory, acting in cooperation with his will.

In modern society, the emphasis is on "What do I want to do with my life?" I graduated from college in a poor job market, with hopes of working in the field of public relations, doing something with my speaking and writing skills. I went to a career counselor at Ohio State, who suggested looking into working for a non-profit agency, and I read a book called Profitable Careers in Non-Profits, or something like that. Feeling like I was having trouble pinpointing the right career for myself, I read another book called What Color Is Your Parachute? I had so many interests that it was difficult to choose just one thing. There is a reason that self-help books are such a popular category.

Even when one focuses on what she wants and spends a lot of time trying to figure out who she is and what her great work in life will be (always imagining something fabulous involving fame and wealth), making God's choice secondary in the matter, if conferring with him at all, God still has a way of leading one to his plan. When Beezy was a baby and the idea of homeschooling came up, I told my husband that I would not do that, because when she was five, I wanted my life back! My mom had told me on a number of occasions, "This is your life now," and of course she was right, but I just didn't get it yet. I did not comprehend that I was never to have my old life back again. And thank goodness! For it is far richer now than it could ever have been had I not become a mother. That is the truth for me. 

I recently started reading to Beezy from the Loyola Kids Book of Saints by Amy Welbourn. This is a great resource for teaching history and religion. The notion of who saints are is perfectly explained at an elementary age level, without dumbing anything down, and the stories are told in an interesting way, helping to relate each saint's life to the life of the child. Today we read about Catherine Siena, who made an unusual, unpopular choice of vocation, especially for a woman of her times. She knew even as a child that she wanted more than anything else to be close to Jesus, and she decided that the best way to put him first was to never get married. Living from 1347-1380, about the only other acceptable choice for a woman in those times was to become a nun, but she was certain that God did not want that for her either!


Prayer was the most important thing in Catherine's life, and some of her choices baffled and even frightened people. She ate nothing but a spoonful of herbs a day, and she only slept about thirty minutes a night--on hard boards. People thought she was so strange! But Catherine was concentrating her whole self, body and soul, on God. She wasn't trying to worry her parents or upset people. She knew God was preparing her for a big job, and in order to carry out his will, she had to be free, strong, and close to God. Through the example of her life and teaching others about God, people all over Europe knew about her. And they listened to her. Even the pope himself, as it turns out.

The pope was living in splendor in France instead of in Rome where he was supposed to be, because the king of France controlled him and the Church. Christians everywhere were confused, not knowing if the pope was speaking for God anymore. Catherine stood before him unafraid and gave him a message from God. He was to return to Rome and freely lead the Church, as Jesus wanted him to do. Late one night, the pope secretly left France and returned to Italy.

At the end of the story the author says, "St. Catherine of Siena didn't care about other people's opinions or expectations. The only opinion that mattered to her was God's. Can you think of times when you've had to follow your conscience and do the right thing even though other people discouraged you?"

Homeschooling can be a lonely vocation. Others, even those closest to you, may not support you, and may openly and harshly disagree with your choice. They may watch you and your children like a hawk, waiting for evidence that you are not doing a good job, that your child is not learning what he should. The first thing to remember is that God is always with you. The second thing is that you only have one day at a time. Just do what needs to be done that day. Don't compare your children to others, as long as they are making progress and are happy little people. Each child learns in his own way, at his own pace, in his own time. It may be many months or many years before the positive results of your efforts will be manifest to others. Be aware that some may never validate your choice, or admit that you did the right thing. Even when 5 kids in Chardon, Ohio are shot by a fellow student and 3 of them die, people will insist that school is where your kids should be.

Ultimately, you are not likely going to be called to stand before the pope and tell him what to do. But you will be required to stand before Jesus and answer for your choices. His mother, Mary, told the servants at the wedding in Cana, "Do whatever he tells you." Did you listen when Jesus called you to your vocation? That should be your only consideration.
 

The Truth About the Apocrypha: A Bible History Lesson

When I was in college, as an English major, I took a class called "The Bible as Literature." The English Bible that we used contained a section called the Apocrypha. I only knew about the Old and New Testaments. What was this mysterious group of books? It stayed in the back of my mind but did not come up often. Occasionally I would come across a reference to Ecclesiasticus (Sirach) or The Book of Wisdom, and I would wonder what these books were. They were not in my Bible. At some point I heard the Apocrypha mentioned as a set of books added to the Bible by Catholics. Those Catholics had their own Bible! Of course this was not the real Bible, so I would not give much attention to such books, thinking them to be inauthentic. I was under the wrong impression, as I'm sure many Christians are, so here I will provide the history of the Apocrypha. ( I have paraphrased and used direct quotes from Born Evangelical, Born Again Catholic by David B. Currie in this essay.)

The first Bibles were all produced by Catholics. The Catholic priest Bede was the first person to translate any part of the Bible into English, in the eighth century. The printer Gutenberg, who was a Catholic, printed the First Catholic Bible centuries later. In 1478, a Low German Bible was printed, so that any literate German could read it. By the end of the Middle Ages, much of the Bible was available in many European languages. Even Luther admitted years later that we would not even have the Bible without the Catholic Church.  

The Apocrypha relates to seven books (or portions) of the Bible included in the Catholic Old Testament but not in the Protestant version. The Septuagint translation (of the Old Testament) was the accepted Greek Bible of the Jews in Palestine and elsewhere for well over a hundred years before Jesus' birth. Both Jews and Christians accepted it as their Bible for over half a century after the Ascension as well. Its canon (list of included books) is not in doubt. The Septuagint included the seven books of the Apocrypha on equal standing with the rest of the inspired Old Testament. There is no doubt that Jesus and his contemporaries all used the Septuagint. The New Testament writers allude to these apocryphal books over two dozen times.

So what happened?  Beginning with Peter's sermon at Pentecost, the Christians and unbelieving Jews were locked in battle over whether Jesus was the Jewish Messiah. In their arguments, the Christians used Old Testament prophesies extensively, many of which were in the seven books that Evangelicals now refer to as the Apocrypha. The Jewish leaders revised their canon about A.D. 90 to exclude 2 Maccabees, Wisdom, Daniel 13-14, Judith, Baruch, Sirach, and 1 Maccabees. By doing this, they excluded many messianic prophesies. The Christians did not confirm this decision. It is a fact that Jesus, his apostles, the New Testament writers, and the early Church all used a Bible that included the Apocrypha. The Catholic Church did not add them after the Protestant Reformation. Rather, the reformers took these books out of the canon accepted by the early Church, borrowing instead a canon developed by non-Christian Jews. Why would they do this?!

While the Jews had found the messianic prophesies objectionable, the reformers disliked passages regarding salvation, prayers for the dead, and purgatory. In addition, some reformers planned on printing editions of the New Testament without four of its books--Hebrews, James, Jude and Revelation, which were to be relegated to an appendix. But without any precedent to point to, those four books were reinserted into the main body of the reformers' Bible. The seven apocryphal books, however, were never returned to the Old Testament.

"For evangelicals and reformers alike, there are not objective criteria sufficient for faith. This is most obvious when we discuss the biblical canon. Evangelicals have no good, objective explanation for accepting the canon they do accept. Catholics did not change the canon of the early Church or the deposit of faith to make them fit preconceived ideas. The fact that the reformers did is one of the saddest chapters in all Christendom."  The Catholic Bible is the complete Bible. Now you know the truth; the lid is off. What will you do?

The Truth About "Sola Fide": Is Faith Alone Justifiable?

I was wary of tackling this topic because of the complexity regarding beliefs about salvation, justification, sanctification--what does it all mean? It wasn't until I started studying Catholicism that I even became aware that this is another big argument between Protestants and Catholics, but I think I have read enough now to comment, and it flows naturally from my previous article on "Sola Scriptura". The other predominant battle cry of the Protestant Reformation was "Sola Fide", the belief that we are saved by faith alone. For this article I will refer to Richard A. White's comments from Catholic for a Reason.

White discusses the Evangelical Christian view that we are saved, once and for all in a specific moment, by faith alone. I think this idea is where the term "born again Christian" comes from. Having been Christian from childhood, I always thought this was a redundant phrase. Was there a difference between born again Christians and plain old Christians? Aren't all Christians born again? In fact, isn't being born again what being a Christian means? In my Catholic studies I found out that some Protestants are under the impression that Catholics think justification comes by works rather than by faith, so Catholics aren't saved. What is the truth about that, and what does the Bible say?

Romans 3:28 is the verse cited to argue that justification is by faith alone. What I didn't know is that Martin Luther added the word alone to his translation. Let's give him the benefit of the doubt that he really thought that's what Paul was getting at and see if he was right.

The conflict Paul actually brings up is not between faith and good works, but between faith and "works of the law." He was combating a group of Jewish Christians called Judaizers who claimed that they were righteous because they obeyed certain religious obligations, especially circumcision, and that these rituals (what Paul called "works of the law") were necessary for salvation. Paul argued that we are justified by faith apart from these ceremonial observances and that the "righteousness of faith" applied to Gentiles, too. Physical descendants of Abraham who are circumcised have no special claim to the covenant promises. It is the one who is obedient to God, Jew or Gentile, who is justified. Paul never refers to justification by faith alone.

Romans 2 says, "For he will render to every man according to his works:  to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life...There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil,...but glory and honor and peace for every one who does good...For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified."  White concludes, "In short, according to Paul, works are the basis for God's judgment! This is a far cry from justification by faith alone." Understanding the historical context of Paul's letter and his opposition to the Judaizers is necessary to get what he is saying about faith vs. works of the law. It is dangerous to simply pull a Bible verse out of context to back up one's point, which is what Martin Luther did, and he even revised it. I don't think any Christian today would suggest that a man would be unable to get into heaven because he was not circumcised!

But in case the distinction from Paul between "good works" and "works of the law" is unclear, James states unequivocally, "faith by itself, if it has no works, is dead" (Jas. 2:17). In other words, the Christian who does not perform good works is lacking in faith. In James 2:20-26 he goes on to remind his readers that Abraham was justified by works when he offered his son Isaac upon the alter. He states, "You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone." Not by faith alone! Could the Bible be more clear on this topic? The two pillars of the Protestant Reformation, sola scriptura, which I have previously covered, and sola fide, do not hold up!

What the Protestant Reformation view leaves out of the equation is that our faith is only possible through God's grace. Ultimately, we are saved by grace. White sums up the Catholic Church's teaching that justification is through grace alone by a living faith working in love, and this is fully supported by Paul and James. God is a merciful Father who, in declaring that our sins are forgiven, actually makes us his sons and daughters. Justification is based on what God has done in generating us anew through grace. We can't earn God's justifying grace through works, but we are expected to grow in maturity in our justification of becoming His children.

According to Catholic teaching, what we do is related to our salvation only because of who we become through divine adoption. We participate in our salvation not only in a single, "born again" moment of conversion, although this may occur, but over the course of our Christian lives, in an ongoing renewal of faith, guided in our works by the indwelling Holy Spirit. What we do with our faith does matter to God and to our salvation, and on this the Bible is clear.

It is telling to note that because he could find no way around the coupling of faith with good works, Martin Luther called the Book of James an "epistle of straw" and was prepared to remove it from the New Testament! It might surprise some fellow Christians to know, as it did me, that 7 books were actually removed by the reformers from the Old Testament. This will lead in to my next consideration, the truth about the Aprocrypha, at another time, on another day...

The Truth About "Sola Scriptura" or "Is That in the Bible?"

I have been amazed to discover that a large number of former Protestant ministers have become Catholic, and while each path was unique, a common thread was the discovery, one by one, that certain Catholic tenets of the faith were indeed scriptural, and that the Evangelical view these men previously held was a misrepresentation of Catholic beliefs and traditions. The Protestant Reformation was based upon the battle cries, "Sola Scriptura" and "Sola Fide," and it is the former that I will focus upon here, through the analysis of David B. Currie's Born Fundamentalist, Born Again Catholic. 

Sola Scriptura means that the Bible is the only Christian authority. Some Protestants think that Catholics do not use the Bible, or think it is important, but that their traditions are the only authority. The truth is that Catholics read the Bible at every mass (church service), and are encouraged to read it on their own, and that the Bible is interpreted through the lens of Church Tradition, which includes those teachings passed down orally, not just those that are written. Tradition and Scripture are interdependent and cannot be separated. This is biblical:  "So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter" (2 Th 2:15).

Currie states, "This verse, even if it were the only one on this topic in the entire Bible (it is not), would mortally wound the Protestant view that Scripture is all we need to know of the will of God for our salvation. Elsewhere Paul instructs Timothy to take this truth he has learned and find men capable of protecting it and passing it on (note the emphasis on the oral nature of this truth): 'And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable men who will also be qualified to teach others' (2 Tim 2:2). This is a natural extension of Jesus' command to 'go and make disciples.' Christianity is a living religion, protected and passed on by people, not paper."

He goes on to say, "The verse I always used to quote on the sufficiency of Scripture actually reinforces the Catholic view:  'All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness' (2 Tim 3:16). The Bible is useful for all these, but this verse certainly never promotes Scripture as the final authority for our faith."  In fact, in his studies of what the earliest Christians believed, Currie found such representative statements as, "The bishop embodies the authority of God the Father,...show him every mark of respect...defer to him". And again: "It is proper for you to act in agreement with the mind of the bishop;...by your unity taking your keynote from God, you may with one voice through Jesus Christ sing a song to the Father...it profits you, therefore, to continue in your flawless unity, that you may at all times have a share in God."  Passages such as these had previously prompted Currie to write to a friend, "For fifteen centuries the bishop was the final authority. Along came Protestant reformers and set up a new authority."

It is poignant to note in the above passages that the unity of the Church was so important. There was supposed to be only one Christian Church. Peter was the first head bishop (pope):  "And I also say that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build by church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven" (Mathew 16: 18, 19).

"By virtue of this divinely-appointed authority, the Catholic Church determined the canon of Scripture (what books belong in the Bible) at the end of the fourth century. We therefore believe in the Scriptures on the authority of the Catholic Church. After all, nothing in Scripture tells us what Scriptures are inspired, what books belong in the Bible, or that Scripture is the final authority on questions concerning the Christian faith. Instead, the Bible says that the Church, not the Scriptures, is the pinnacle and foundation of the truth (1 Tim. 3:15) and the final arbiter on questions of the Christian faith (Matt. 18:17). It is through the teaching authority and Apostolic Tradition (2 Thess. 2:15; 3:6; 1 Cor. 11:2) of this Church, who is guided by the Holy Spirit (John 14:16,26; 16:13), that we know of the divine inspiration of the Scriptures, and the manifold wisdom of God (cf. Ephesians 3:10)."  [This paragraph is from an online source.]

The Church spoken of in the Bible is today called the Catholic Church, which regards other Christian denominations as "separated brethern" and as fully Christian brothers and sisters. In contrast, I have heard Protestants say that Catholics are not real Christians or that they are not saved! Which reflects a truly Christian attitude of love? Here is the thing. Once the lid has been opened, you can't put it back on and deny that you have found the truth. The question should not be exclusively, "Where is that in the Bible?" but also, "What does the Church teach about our faith?" For me, obedience to God as a Christian means membership in his Church. That is why I am becoming Catholic, with all due respect to my fellow Christians who belong to other faith traditions.

The Housewife's Prayer

Lady, who with tender word
Did keep the house of Christ the Lord,
Who set forth the bread and wine
Before the Living Wheat and Vine,
Reverently did make the bed
Whereon was laid the holy Head
That such a cruel pillow prest
For our behoof on Calvary's crest;
Be beside me while I go
About my labors to and fro.
Speed the wheel and speed the loom,
Guide the needle and the broom,
Make my bread rise sweet and light,
Make my cheese come foamy white;
Yellow may my butter be
As cowslips blowing on the lea.
Homely though my tasks and small,
Be beside me at them all.
Then when I stand face to face
Jesu in the judgment place,
To me thy gracious help afford,
Who art the Handmaid of the Lord.

--Mary Blanche Kelly


There are those who would argue that the Virgin Mary was no one special; she was, after all, only the handmaid of the Lord. Wait--read that again. The Handmaid of the Lord!  What mystery is this, that humility and lowliness, servanthood and obedience, are so highly honored? This is the way of God, encapsulated in the conception of Jesus. And here is the vocation of housewife and mother made sacred. I have understood the dignity of this calling as a woman who stays home with her child, but I did not grasp the significance of such a calling in light of the way in which it echoes the life of Mary until I began my journey with her.

By the time I was in college, the designation of "housewife" had been replaced with "homemaker." After all, a woman is not married to her house! And then came the tongue in cheek phrase, "domestic goddess." Elevating the role in the wake of radical feminism was necessary for mothers who chose not to go out into the work force and earn a paycheck, but to dedicate themselves to working within the home, nurturing their families. A stigma soon became attached to this antiquated, "June Cleaver" version of womanhood, no longer relevant and if anything, to be pitied and scorned. This was not real work, and what would a woman do if her husband died or left her? What would become of her children? They would all surely starve.  

Trust in one's husband and, more importantly, God, was simply not feasible. One must have a safety net. A paycheck of one's own. Often, breastfeeding one's babies went out the door, a new, career wardrobe was purchased, along with a second car, and the cost of child care was added to the family's financial burden. One has to wonder whether the benefit of a second income, after deducting all of the expenses deriving from it, add up to enough to justify the strain on a family to keep all of the china juggling in the air while balancing on a tightrope. Yes, some families cannot make ends meet with only one income. But on the other hand, how many cases of dual income necessity are really the victory of a consumerist society declaring that to live the "good life" and be happy one needs to accumulate a never-ending pile of stuff? If you didn't buy the 2nd (or 3rd) car, or the office wardrobe, or pay for child care, or spend the extra gas money, or live in a larger house than you needed, would you be required to obtain the 2nd income?

It still tickles me when I remember my husband telling me that he was not the breadwinner type! I imagine his vocation came as much as a surprise to him as mine did to me. After all, I was college educated and beyond, and I was making excellent money. But the fact that my mother stayed home with me and my siblings, the security that provided us, was so important to me that I could not even imagine not giving this gift to my own child. When my husband suggested I might have to work, I cried with my baby still in my belly. It seemed like such a thing would be the end of the world. Even when I was in high school and my mom left the house for a few hours to buy groceries, how I missed her! Nothing felt right, I could not be at ease, until she came back home. Not every woman has the luxury I have. The luxury to be a humble housewife, cleaning the toilet, homeschooling, making meals, sweeping the floor. We just took a leap of faith, I guess. Kind of like Mary, although I hadn't thought of it that way. I trusted my husband to go out and earn the money (although I contribute a small sum as a dance instructor), and he trusted himself, and now I ponder in wonder, "Behold, the handmaid of the Lord." For as I do my work in my own home, it is the same as doing it for Him. That I might be such a lowly, exalted creature!

Marian Mission Re-envisioned

When reading a story or watching a movie, it is fun to make predictions about the plot and to be right in the end! It is perhaps more interesting, however, to be kept guessing and to have events unfold in an unexpected way. Such is the case with my mission to bring Protestants to Mary and to find an ecumenical, Protestant-Catholic hybrid of Marian theology that could work. Things are not turning out as I had originally planned, but the journey certainly is intriguing (at least for me)!

For instance, it is apparent that Mary intended for me to follow her to the Catholic Church, rather than for me to remain in a Protestant church and carry her there, so to speak. However, I still think that perhaps reading about my particular path could encourage non-Catholic Christians to be more open-minded about the issue of Mary and to do some investigating into the beliefs of the Catholic Church on their own. I think it is a feasible idea to incorporate Marian devotion into a Protestant life, as some have already done.

As far as "blending" Catholic and Protestant teachings about Mary, well, a person could certainly do this if he chose to, but as for me, being Catholic does not provide such freedom. There is the issue of dogma, which is an article of faith revealed by God, which the magisterium of the Church presents to be believed and declares as binding. Mary's perpetual virginity is dogma, so I must believe this teaching on faith, even if I don't intellectually understand it yet.

The Divine Motherhood of Mary is the first dogma, which basically states that Jesus was born of a human woman, and that He is one person whose nature is both fully divine and fully human. This is where Mary's title Mother of God comes from; since these two aspects of Jesus are not separate, Mary is mother of both the divine and human natures contained within the incarnated Son of God, who is one with God. This dogma primarily defines who Jesus is and protects against heresy. All Christians should share in this belief. All Christians should also support the virginity of Mary at the time of Jesus' conception up till the time of his birth, even if they do not hold that Mary remained a virgin after. To say otherwise opposes the Bible and is heresy.

In addition to these beliefs about Mary common to all Christians, there should be no one who does not call Mary "highly favored by God", "blessed among women" and "blessed by every generation", as these descriptions come straight from the Bible. Furthermore, under no circumstances can anyone rightly argue that Jesus did not honor his mother, as He must have perfectly done so in obedience to the Ten Commandments. Therefore, He would not have rebuked her, scorned her, or rejected her in any way, as some have suggested, going so far as to say that Jesus did not even like His mother! Since we are to imitate Jesus, we have no choice as Christians but to honor her as well.

An unfortunate fact is that there are so many biblical interpretations out there, depending upon the Protestant denomination to which one belongs. There are some 40,000 Protestant denominations, showing a huge divisiveness in belief, even regarding what would seem to be the most basic tenets of the faith. This is the result of no clear authority. There is, in contrast, only one Catholic Church, so there is much less confusion over doctrine. As a result, there is a much clearer interpretation of Biblical events, understood through the lens of Tradition. Although there is some room for individual interpretation, in which a person reads the Bible and decides for himself what is meant and how it applies to one's life, this cannot be in opposition to official Church teaching. However, there is some latitude in areas in which the Church has not given detailed, decisive revelation. Some things can be believed one way or another and still be within the parameters of official Church teaching.

What I would like to do in future articles is to consider the scenes of Mary's life, particularly those in which it is argued that Mary is trying to interfere with Jesus' mission or is otherwise thought to be pictured in an unflattering light, and to spin a more likely, accurate portrayal. My hope is to bridge some of the gap between Protestant and Catholic thinking on Mary. Some of that depends upon understanding the basis for the authority of the Catholic Church, which Protestants by nature reject. But even if I can show that the Catholic interpretation of Mary is supported by scripture and is viable and valid, then I will have fulfilled my mission successfully!