![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2024\/08\/Mary8-scaled.jpg\")
<\/a>Dr. Robert A. J. Gagnon<\/a> (see his Facebook page<\/a>; public posts) is a Visiting Scholar in Biblical Studies at Wesley Biblical Seminary; formerly Professor of Biblical Studies at\u00a0Houston Christian University<\/span><\/a> and Associate Professor of New Testament at\u00a0Pittsburgh Theological Seminary.<\/a> He obtained a Master of Theological Studies (MTS): Biblical Studies degree from Harvard Divinity School<\/a> and a (Ph.D.) in New Testament Studies, magna cum laude, from Princeton Theological Seminary<\/a>. <\/span>Dr. Gagnon grew up Catholic, and he wrote on 8-17-24<\/a>:<\/p>\n His words will be in blue<\/span>. I use RSV for biblical citations.<\/span><\/p>\n *****<\/p>\n I\u2019m responding to a post on his Facebook page<\/a>, dated 8-20-24, devoted to massively criticizing alleged idolatrous utterances in the Catholic papal document, Ubi Primum<\/em> (On the Immaculate Conception<\/em>)<\/a>, from Blessed Pope Pius IX, issued on 2 February 1849. The post was \u201cwith\u201d Jerry Walls: another vocal critic of Catholicism (whom I\u2019ve critiqued many times<\/a>), who misguidedly pontificates in the combox<\/a>\u00a0(8-20-24): \u201cIt\u2019s certainly easy to see why lay RCs actually worship Mary and have no qualms at all in doing so.\u201d<\/p>\n Before I start analyzing point-by-point, some preliminary general observations need to be made, in order for readers to properly understand the Catholic worldview, Catholic Mariology, and my own responses. Every worldview has basic premises and presuppositions, and when speaking to others in the same group, it\u2019s not necessary \u2014 and would be foolish and tedious \u2014 to reiterate in every other sentence (in writing), or every two minutes (if speaking) what those are<\/em>. So, for example, all educated Protestant discussions presuppose the self-defined \u201ctwo pillars of the Reformation\u201d: sola Scriptura<\/em> (Scripture Alone<\/em> as the rule of faith) and sola fide<\/em>\u00a0(faith alone<\/em> as the fundamental soteriology or theology of salvation and justification). Many other propositions flow from these assumed, ingrained presuppositions. They need not be repeated over and over.<\/p>\n Catholics are no different. We have a highly developed devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary, whereas Protestantism today has virtually none to speak of; only minimal lip service: mostly at Christmas, where they even habitually set up statues [gasp!] of Mary and St. Joseph, and temporarily forget that \u2014 according to their own theology\u00a0 \u2014 this is an outrageous practice. When it comes to Mary, Catholics will speak in language \u2014 developed over many centuries \u2014 that to Protestant ears unfamiliar with it will automatically sound \u201cidolatrous\u201d at worst and extremely \u201cexcessive\u201d at best. Because Protestantism essentially ditched the doctrine of the communion of saints, it can\u2019t comprehend any veneration \u2014 not worship<\/em>! \u2014 at all towards anyone but God. And so any such devotion sounds horrifying and blasphemous to them.<\/p>\n I\u2019ve defended such \u201cflowery\u201d Marian Catholic language and expressiveness many times. Fortunately, the person perhaps most excoriated in this regard, St. Alphonsus de Liguori, author of The Glories of Mary<\/em> (which I defended 22 years ago<\/a>), often does<\/em> explain in his book, the presuppositions about our Lord Jesus that any informed Catholic always takes for granted when writing or talking (or thinking) about the Blessed Virgin Mary. But Protestants often seem unaware<\/em> of these initial premises, so they mistakenly assume \u2014 in their lack of knowledge of Catholicism \u2014 that Marian devotion in its essence is somehow deliberately attempting to denigrate Jesus or set up an idol in competition with Him. Hence, the problem of communication and one group hugely misunderstanding another. The problem isn\u2019t supposed idolatry, but the ignorance of the accuser. I wrote in my paper defending St. Alphonsus:<\/p>\n In order to properly understand the overall framework of the thoughts and ideas and doctrines expressed in this book, we must examine what St. Alphonsus has to say about the relationship of Mary to God the Father and God the Son, Jesus, since this is [Protestants\u2019] primary and most impassioned charge: that she supposedly usurps and overthrows God\u2019s prerogatives and unique position of supreme honor and glory, in Catholic theology, and attains some sort of divine or quasi-divine or semi-divine status (which would, indeed, be blasphemous and grossly heretical). Nothing could be further from the truth, and this is all expressed in the book itself.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Now here is what St. Alphonsus also<\/em> wrote in this book so hated by Protestant critics of Catholic Mariology. All excerpts are taken from\u00a0The Glories of Mary<\/i>, by St. Alphonsus de Liguori \u2014 a Doctor of the Catholic Church \u2013, edited by Rev. Eugene Grimm, Two Volumes in One, Fourth Reprint Revised, Brooklyn: Redemptorist Fathers, 1931:<\/p>\n [citing another in agreement] \u201cHis divine Son paid and offered the superabundant price of his precious blood in which alone is our salvation, life, and resurrection.\u201d (\u201cTo the Reader,\u201d p. 26)<\/p>\n Jesus our Redeemer, with an excess of mercy and love,\u00a0came to restore this life by his own death on the cross . . . by reconciling us with God he made himself the Father of souls in the law of grace . . . (p. 47)<\/p>\n In us she beholds that which has been purchased at the price of the death of Jesus Christ\u00a0. . . Mary well knows that\u00a0her Son came into the world only to save us poor creatures . . . (pp. 60-61)<\/p>\n \u201cEither pity me,\u201d will I say with the devout St. Anselm, \u201cO my Jesus, and forgive me, and do thou pity me, my Mother Mary, by interceding for me\u201d . . .\u00a0my Jesus, forgive me; My Mother Mary,\u00a0help\u00a0me. (p. 79)<\/p>\n We know that Jesus Christ is our only Saviour, and that he alone by his merits has obtained and obtains salvation for us\u00a0. . . (p. 137)<\/p>\n The price of my salvation is already paid; my Saviour has already shed his blood, which suffices to save an infinity of worlds. This blood has only to be applied even to such a one as I am. And that is thy office, O Blessed Virgin. (pp. 140-141)<\/p>\n No one denies that\u00a0Jesus Christ is our only mediator of justice, and that\u00a0he by his merits has obtained our reconciliation with God\u00a0. . . St. Bernard says, \u201cLet us not imagine that we obscure the glory of the Son by the great praise we lavish on the mother; for the more she is honored, the greater is the glory of her Son.\u201d (p. 153)<\/p>\n It is one thing to say that God cannot, and another that he\u00a0will not, grant graces\u00a0without the intercession of Mary. We willingly admit that\u00a0God is the source of every good, and the absolute master of all graces; and that Mary is only a pure creature, who receives whatever she obtains as a pure favor from God\u00a0. . . We most readily admit that\u00a0Jesus Christ is the only Mediator of justice\u00a0. . . and that\u00a0by his merits he obtains us all graces and salvation; . . . (pp. 156-157)<\/p>\n St. Bonaventure: \u201cAs the\u00a0moon, which stands between the sun and the earth, transmits to this latter\u00a0whatever it receives from the former,\u00a0so does Mary pour out upon us who are in this world the heavenly graces that she receives from the divine sun of justice\u201d . . . it is our Lord, as in the head, from which the vital spirits (that is, divine help to obtain eternal salvation) flow into us, who are the members of the mystical body . . . (pp. 159-160)<\/p>\n . . . the mediation of Christ alone is absolutely necessary; . . . (p. 162)<\/p>\n Whoever places his confidence in a creature independently of God, he certainly is cursed by God; for God is the only source and dispenser of every good, and the creature without God is nothing, and can give nothing. But if our Lord has so disposed it, . . . (p. 174)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Jesus now in heaven sits at the right hand of the Father . . .\u00a0He has supreme dominion\u00a0over all, and also over Mary\u00a0. . . (p. 179)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n \u201cBe comforted, O unfortunate soul, who hast lost thy God,\u201d says St. Bernard; \u201cthy Lord himself has provided thee with\u00a0a mediator, and this is his Son Jesus, who can obtain for thee all that thou desirest. He has given thee Jesus for a mediator; and what is there that such a son cannot obtain from the Father?\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n . . . If your fear arises from having offended God, know that\u00a0Jesus has fastened all your sins on the cross with his own lacerated hands, and having satisfied divine justice for them by his death, he has already effaced them from your souls . . . \u201d . . . What do you fear, O ye of little faith?\u00a0. . . But if by chance,\u201d adds the saint, \u201cthou fearest to have recourse to Jesus Christ because the majesty of God in him overawes thee \u2014 for though he became man, he did not cease to be God \u2014 and thou desirest another advocate with this divine mediator, go to Mary, for\u00a0she will intercede for thee with the Son, who will most certainly hear her; and then he will intercede with the Father, who can deny nothing to such a son.\u201d (pp. 200-201)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Does this sound like the Catholic Church places Mary \u201cabove God,\u201d or that she \u201ccan manipulate God,\u201d or \u201ccan get things for Catholics from God the Father\u00a0 that Jesus can\u2019t\u201d? Hardly. The truth of the matter is plain to see. Protestants believe \u2014 based on their own theological and hermeneutical presuppositions (themselves not above all critique) \u2014 that the notion of Mediatrix is thoroughly unbiblical, and in fact, untrue. But they can\u2019t prove that the Catholic system teaches it in such a way that God is lowered and Mary raised to a goddess-like status. That simply isn\u2019t true, and even in the very book which is \u201cnotorious\u201d in anti-Catholic circles for the most allegedly \u201cextreme\u201d remarks about Mary, we find many statements such as the above.<\/p>\n Now I\u2019ll examine what it is that Dr. Gagnon objects to as allegedly \u201cidolatrous\u201d in Ubi Primum<\/em>.<\/p>\n \u201cPlease Hit \u2018Subscribe\u2019\u201d!<\/strong>\u00a0<\/span>If you have received benefit from this or any of my other 4,800+ articles, please follow my blog by signing up (with your email address) on the sidebar to the right (you may have to scroll down a bit), above where there is an icon bar, \u201cSign Me Up!\u201d: to receive notice when I post a new blog article. This is the equivalent of subscribing to a\u00a0YouTube<\/em>\u00a0channel.\u00a0My blog was rated #1<\/a>\u00a0for Christian sites by leading AI tool, ChatGPT: endorsed by influential Protestant blogger Adrian Warnock. Please also consider following me on Twitter \/ X and purchasing\u00a0one or more of my 55 books<\/a>.\u00a0All of this helps me get more exposure, and (however little!) more income for my full-time apologetics work. Thanks so much and happy reading!<\/p>\n ***<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n
\n
\n
\n