Just recounting here how I untied a little spiritual knot this morning.
Today, August 22nd, the church celebrates the Queenship of the Blessed Virgin Mary. A couple of commentaries I've seen note two things about this day: that it falls on the octave* of the Solemnity of the Assumption; and that it's a fairly recent addition to the liturgical calendar, having been added by Pius XII in 1954. I don't suppose anyone here recalls him doing that? I know the declaration of the dogma of the Assumption was a big deal; not sure whether the declaration of today's memorial pinged on anyone's radar. 1954 was a few years before my time.
But of course, even if the addition to the calendar is within people's living memory, honoring Mary as Queen goes back much farther. It's the fifth Glorious Mystery of the rosary.
Thinking a bit about Mary as Queen this morning, I decided it made me a little uncomfortable. Mary is not a goddess. God as king as not much of a stretch for me, but to call Mary queen seems to put her on the same divine level. For me at least, the power of Mary's story is that she is so emphatically normal: a teenage girl from the middle of nowhere, in serious trouble but acting with astonishing courage and trust. That was surely extraordinary, and something that is worthy of honor and celebration, but isn't beyond the reach of any teen, or anyone else. Without wishing to diminish the unique role of Mary in salvation history, we can note that some people, including some teens, really do manage to do something extraordinary, and extraordinarily admirable, from time to time. So my initial reaction was: by honoring Mary as Queen (of all of heaven and all of earth!) we're elevating her beyond her station.
But then I had another thought. The church teaches us that our baptism raises us to a new status and dignity in God's eyes: all of us who are baptized are a priest, prophet and, yes, king in our own rights. But I wonder whether we really believe that to be the case - that we've been raised to that exalted dignity? Maybe honoring Mary as Queen shouldn't strike us as over the top, because we should be honoring one another as royalty, too.
* That term "octave" means, "A week afterward." It can be confusing - at least it confused me for years - because "octave" means "eight"; but a day that comes a week after another day is only seven days later, not eight. But the way to think of it is: if the Assumption falls on day one, then the Queenship of Mary falls on day eight - hence, the octave. It can confuse our modern minds because, when we calculate how many days one day is after another, we don't think of the first day as falling on day one; we think of it (without even thinking about it) as falling on day zero. If I'm not mistaken, the concept of "zero" wasn't invented (or perhaps I should say, discovered) until several hundred years after the birth of Christ. By the way, the same confusion can happen in music: if you sit down at a piano and locate Middle C, the next C above it is the octave, even though it's seven white keys, not eight, to the right of Middle C.
Mary in my imagination is the middle-aged Mary after the Resurrection, living in a little house in Turkey, maybe among people whose language she had to learn, making bread with them, sharing food, helping with the kids and old people. Maybe she had a cat. Cats were big in Turkey then.
ReplyDeleteCertainly she must have talked about her husband and son, trying to gauge how their stories might best be told among her new neighbors.
Of course we don't know much about Mary's mission after Jesus died. Tradition has her protected and isolated by the Beloved Disciple, frozen under glass. But in Scripture, the glimpses we get of Mary are of a fairly active person.
She gave all she was asked to do, and her martyrdom was of the worst sort: Having to watch them torture and kill her only child and not being allowed to die for him.
I think of "Queen of Heaven" as being first among the saints. She deserves that. Not above her station at all.
OK, I'll quit following you around the blog with my comments now. :-)
I'm flattered that you're stalking me :-). And btw, that is a great comment, from first to last. I don't know if I've ever thought before about that period of Mary's life.
DeleteHere are some pictures and info about the site which is believed to be where Mary's house in Ephesus was.:.
Deletehttps://visitephesus.org/en/where-to-visit/the-house-of-virgin-mary/
Only the foundation is (maybe, probably?) from the original house. The building which is there now is a shrine. From the pictures, it looks like a lovely, peaceful site, with a spring nearby.
It is said to be beloved by Muslim women as well as Christians.
I bet Therese has thought about it.
DeleteMaybe Mary paved the way for St Paul's community there. Her being there first would have marked the beginning of the mission to the Gentiles. She might also have tempered the zealotry of the early missionaries. Young and energetic young men are great, and they can cover a lot of ground and talk loud.
But sometimes a practical and friendly older woman is more willing and able to sit down and explain off-putting ideas that run counter to local norms.
There is a tomb of Mary in Jerusalem (but nothing is in it). Not hard to square this with the Ephesus story. She could have fled to Turkey right after the Crucifixion to escape a purge, but maybe came back to Jerusalem toward the end of her life to be buried in her homeland. This would have been important to someone raised in the Jewish tradition.
Of course, we don't really know because it's all apocryphal and based on oral tradition. Maybe God wants it to be a mystery we can speculate on.
Jean - I see that quite a bit of investigative reporting of Harvest Bible Chapel has been done by an independent reporter, Julie Roys. This page has a synopsis of some of the investigative reporting she's done. https://julieroys.com/about-the-roys-report/ It seems to me she's shone a light into a lot of dark corners.
DeleteI suppose, a generation or two ago, this sort of work would have been done by a newspaper reporter. And some newspapers are still out there investigating. But it seems to me that work is being supplemented by these alternative ways of doing journalism. I get a newsletter once or twice a week from ProPublica, which also seems to be doing long-form reporting and investigative work without a traditional publication behind it. What's your view as a pro: can these independents like Julie Roys fill the gap as newspapers' footprint continues to contract? (I'd describe her as "plucky", but I guess that's sort of a cliche, and I'm not sure men ever are described as "plucky").
"I bet Therese has thought about it."
DeleteYou may be right! I will ask her.
Re indie journalism: Mixed bag. Reporting is the half of the job you see. Editorial slant and fact checking are the half you don't. Some Internet sources are great, some are lies damned lies. Check the "about" section on all purported news platforms. And be skeptical. Local and state news are a mine field. A lot of rural communities like mine rely on a FB page. It's frightening.
DeleteThe Marian Year which ran from December 1953 to December 1954 was a very important year in my life. I think that it was most likely in the Summer of 1953, when I was 11, between the 5th and 6th grade, before my voice changed, that the seminarians in summer school taught us how to sing the Mass in Latin. I was so impressed that I finally responded to my best friend’s plea to become an altar boy.
ReplyDeleteIn either May of 1953 or 1954 we all build Marian altars in our homes. My friend and I practiced being altar boys there. I decided that although we could not say Mass at home, there must be ritual prayers worthy of a home altar. I began to collect favorite prayers from prayer books and organize them into "ceremonies." It is interesting that I included the Gloria, the Magnificat and the Te Deum, all of which were at one time in the Divine Office.
In my search for prayer books, I discovered the Short Breviary for woman religious. Reading the introduction by Cardinal Spellman, I decided that I could cease reinventing the Liturgy of the Hours and make the Short Breviary the center of my home altar.
A whole alcove of my room was converted in a chapel, hidden by drapes. My mother even made me a cope. I had no idea that copes where the appropriate vestment for the Divine Office, I simply liked them better than fiddleback chasubles.
On October 11, 1954, the feast of the Maternity of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Pius XII issued the encyclical Ad Caeli Reginam establishing the feast of the Queenship of Mary. As a child I was very impressed with all these official documents. I decided to write my own official Decree consecrating my home altar on December 8, 1954, the end of the Marian year.
So even before Vatican II, the Holy Spirit was renewing the liturgy in the heart of a young boy, the son of a steelworker in Western Pennsylvania. Renewal does come from the peripheries as much or even more than from Cathedrals.
Jack - that is a great story. I am sure your mom and the rest of your extended family figured you were destined for the priesthood. I've heard similar stories from men who became priests, although writing your own decree is a step farther than the other stories I've heard :-)
DeleteOne of the things that I find interesting is that no one, especially the Jesuits, ever asked me how I became interested in the Divine Office. It wasn't the priesthood, or the religious life. My master of novices thought I should be a Benedictine although I had no experience of the Office in choir.
DeleteRather the desire to reinvent the office came from my own deep sense that there was something that I should be able to do as ritual prayer as a lay person. So rather than
being a sign of a priestly or religious vocation it was directly the opposite. Now at the time I was a Jesuit novice I did not understand that, but my novice master should have asked the question and should have understood the significance of my story.
As for the Decree, I was close enough to the concrete stages of thinking that it went something like "well you need a decree; so I will write a decree."
I have long felt that a problem with calling Mary a queen and Jesus a king is that the notion we have for what reigning monarchs are (and what they do) is radically different from the times when kings were kings and queens were queens and these titles were deemed meaningful for awe-inspiring authority figures. Whatever admiration I may have for Queen Elizabeth II, analogizing Mary the Mother of Jesus to her seems wildly inappropriate. We really don't believe in the divine right of kings or inherited power any more, and since we have no universally admired or impressive queens today, it is necessary to invent an idea of what the title means for Mary.
ReplyDeleteAnd if we are very unlucky, which it looks quite possible we may be, we will fairly soon have King Charles III and Queen Camilla as the two most famous monarchs in the world. If they are to be examples of monarchs, better to come up with other titles for Jesus and Mary.
Will Camilla be given the title of queen? Is she Lady such-and-such right now? I'm a little foggy on how all that works.
DeleteThe Google machine answered my questions. Apparently she's the Duchess of Cornwall, and her title when Charles ascends to the throne will be Queen Consort. Apparently, that is what Elizabeth has decided. When Charles becomes king, maybe he can change the rules.
Deletehttps://www.goodto.com/royal-news/could-kate-middleton-become-queen-before-camilla-parker-bowles-and-will-camilla-be-queen-at-all-567314#:~:text=If%20Prince%20Charles%20is%20King,her%20son%20takes%20the%20throne.
The language problem is deeper than king and queen, it also includes Lord. That word and its predecessors (Kyrie in Greek, Dominus in Latin) were the words used for patriarchs in the ancient world and came to be used as a title for God in the Old and New Testaments in addition to Theos and Deus. (Kyrie Theos, Dominus Deus).
ReplyDeleteThe Hebrew Bible had two names for God. YHWH which was pronounced only by the high priest on the day of atonement, and Elohim which literally means "The gods." Their equivalent of Kyrie Theos, Dominus Deus was Adonai Elohim literally "the chief of the gods." There, of course, was a process over centuries in which the Chief of the Gods became the only God.
The New Testament had the problem of what to call Jesus. They settled mainly on Christ, i.e., God's Anointed which applied to priests, and prophets as well as kings. But they also appropriated Lord for they claimed that we should have allegiance to Jesus more than the Roman Emperor. Christianity was a politically subversive religion. When the Roman first gave us the name "Christians" followers of the Anointed One, it had the ring of something like "terrorists."
Followers of Jesus thought of themselves as followers of the Way, as the Saints, the Brethren (the Greek word is not gender specific!) and the Disciples before they accepted the Roman word, Christians, for themselves.
The Eastern title for Mary Theotokos (literally God-bearer) works better than most of our titles including Mother of God.
ReplyDeleteOur local Orthodox church has many Catholic and Evangelical converts. The priest on feasts of Mary always points out to his converts that the Orthodox conception of Mary does not confuse her with God nor reduce her to a human mother. Rather as the God-bearer she becomes the first among all Christians, the model of what we should all be. This is a better conception than our use of Mother of God, or even Blessed Virgin both of which tend to make her different from us. JP2 did some thinking along these lines when he said that the Church was first the Church of Mary before it was the Church of Peter.
No love for the monarchy here, Brit or otherwise (tho Camilla is barred from ever assuming the title Queen Consort). We fought a war to get shut of these people centuries ago.
ReplyDeleteBut I am not bothered by the metaphorical language. "Queen" also seems somewhat more poetic than "Leader" or "Primate" or "Obergrupenfuhrer" of Heaven. We could call her Mother of Christ and all the Saints, whiich would be my vote.
I don't care for "god bearer." It relegates Mary to a vessel, not a mother whose nurturing and encouragement inspired Jesus. It dehumanized her. It also harkens back to the Bad Old Days when people thought that children were contained in sperm and the uterus was merely their hatching chamber.
I AM WRONG. Apparently QE2 has decreed Camilla can become queen consort. Not that I care. The Brits should wise up and tell Betty Windsor and her inbred and dysfunctional relatives to go get real jobs like the rest of us.
DeleteJim, how is your mom doing with the covid? The Boy had two neg tests and is back at work. He will need to wear a mask for a spell. Very fast recovery, though. Hoping your mom is weathering OK.
ReplyDeleteJean, very glad to hear that your son is feeling better and tested negative. I hope Jim's mom is also making a good recovery.
DeleteJean, thanks for asking. I'm going to see her tonight and will check up on her. I spoke with her on the phone yesterday and she claimed to be over it. She's (allegedly) self-isolated the minimum number of days (5) and was out and about yesterday and, she claimed, feeling fine. Seems she's been on a Paxlovid course - I'm really grateful that she hasn't appropriated the Trumpies' batty views on vaccines and treatments. But she has a giant chunk of the Silent Generation's philosophy of stoicism in the face of suffering, so I'll be watching her closely tonight to gauge how she's actually doing.
Deleteps - very glad to hear your son is back to normal!
DeleteIf she's anything like my parents were, that stoicism hides a pretty wide stubborn streak. Hoping she will take it easy until she's tested neg a couple times.
DeleteI saw my mom last night. She was pretty wiped out, had had a busy day, still insisted on making dinner for us. I'm going to continue to keep an eye on her. She has refused to take at-home tests to confirm she's negative - said she waited five days so it should be gone now. No further comment from me on that line of logic :-)
DeleteShe had COVID once before, and she said it made her brain foggy. She's noticing the same symptoms again. I could see it, too.
One of my sisters has been staying with her throughout this period of her being COVID-positive - the visit was planned long before. My sister tested negative while we were there yesterday. My dad is just sort of trying to roll with it all.
I wish my parents would do what I want them to do, but they used to say the same about me when I was a kid in their household.
Glad your mom seems to be holding her own. Too bad she is test resistant. Those "sandwich years" when you're between dumb young adults and stubborn elderly parents are hard.
DeleteGlad to hear everyone's loved ones are better. Recently attended a birthday party for my close friend Lou's son. He and his fiancee came down with COVID. They are over it except her sense of smell is not fully returned. Surprised to know that the recent variants still cause that scary effect.
DeleteHad two co-workers out with covid last week (fortunately not people I am in direct contact with much) They're back now. I don't think they tested either. Just said "you only have to wait five days." ...'M kay.
DeleteThe longing for a king - and, by extension, a queen - is very human. There is a line of political thought, to which some conservative deep thinkers subscribe, which says that, because we Americans don't have a king, we try to endow our alternative, Enlightenment-begotten leaders with king-like attributes. For example, we instinctively look to the President to save us from COVID, inflation and climate change.
ReplyDeleteThat longing also creates an opening for dangerous men like Donald Trump who want to be king.
To call God our king, it seems to me, is subversive, not only because it dethrones earthly monarchs, but because - as David points out - God is so unlike them.
That's always been my take on it. It turns hierarchy upside down. Kings are usually narcissistic jerks, totally unlike Jesus. Of course, the jerks turned it around to mean they are Jesus' seconds in command with the divine rite of kings concept. Wasn't there a time when Israel had no king? And a prophet (Nathan?) reluctantly annointed one because the people were clamoring for one? Sounds like the Trumpers with their orange messiah?
DeleteI’ve never longed for a king or queen. The notion that people long to have monarchs sounds a bit like someone’s fantasy.
DeleteJesus modeled simplicity and warned repeatedly about the dangers of wealth and power. Using regal titles for Jesus and Mary seems to symbolize the antithesis of what he taught.
My comments are nor disappearing today.
DeleteAnne, you or I or the rest of this forum do not like autocracy but, with the rise of Trump, Orban, Marcos II, Bolsonaro, there is ample evidence that many people do. I see no difference between an autocrat and a king. Even with the toothless British royalty, I am amazed how much Americans are fascinated by their shenanigans. And I think it equally amazing that people think they can vote for a president every four years and that's all it takes to fix everything.
Delete"The notion that people long to have monarchs sounds a bit like someone’s fantasy."
DeleteThe longing for a king is rooted in the longing to be rescued and protected. If we lived in Ukraine, it would be real to us.
To Stanley's point, one theory of why Trump appeals to millions of Americans is because they feel vulnerable (economically and culturally) and see Trump as someone who fights for them. Conservative pundit Peggy Noonan, who I believe has not been sucked into Trump's vortex, calls Trump's base The Unprotected.
Stanley, you are right that many love the royals, for whatever reason. Especially the Brits who support the extended family in unbelievable luxury. But most European monarchs live relatively normal lives, in a style similar to the people at the higher end of the demographic scale. Not unbridled luxury. They, like Elizabeth, are figureheads without much real political power. But they are national symbols, reminders of the country's character and history. In our country we have had family "dynasties" for very short periods - the two Adams presidents early on, the Roosevelt presidents, the two Bush presidents. The Clintons wanted two presidencies. Trump wants to be president for life, and probably wants to be able to choose one of his sons to succeed him.
DeleteI have read a couple of articles about surveys that claimed that people attracted to trump actually do prefer authoritarian government to a genuine democratic government.
"I have read a couple of articles about surveys that claimed that people attracted to trump actually do prefer authoritarian government to a genuine democratic government."
DeleteYes, it's scary. Our system of government isn't instinctive for humans. Each generation needs to re-learn why our system, as frustrating as it can be, is still the best humans have been able to think up so far. And then we have a responsibility to inculcate our children and grandchildren with those same insights.
It feels like that chain of civic responsibility has been broken, and (to mix metaphors) we're reaping the bitter fruits of that civic failure.
At the risk of flogging one of the points in the original post: I mentioned that our baptisms elevate us to royalty (as well as priest and prophet). Maybe it's an American thing, but I don't think that idea of us as kings has caught on too well. I'm sure part of it is the American distaste for British royalty and its trappings. (To the extent we find it distasteful; there seem to be Americans who are captivated by it.)
ReplyDeleteOf course, our regal status isn't in an earthly kingdom. It isn't easy for us to imagine this alternative kingdom of heaven.
Thinking of myself as future heavenly royalty strikes me as real farfetched and kinda childish, though that imagery is in a lot of spirituals that arise from poor and marginalized communities.
DeleteDisney still seems to be getting mileage out of the princess thing. I watched Disney as a child but never identified with any prince . More likely to identify with the dwarves. "Workers of the world, unite!"
DeleteJim, what you said about us sharing in a priestly and prophetic role by virtue of our Baptism resonates with me a whole lot more than the kingship thing. And maybe it is an antidote to the clericalism which seems to be an ongoing problem.
Delete"Disney still seems to be getting mileage out of the princess thing." I think it's a little girl thing. Makes me think of my younger two granddaughters and their dollar store tiaras. One of them was a flower girl for a cousin's wedding. She had a crown of white flowers which she wore all day. The oldest one is a sophisticated high school freshman now and has put those childish things behind.
DeleteNo, heaven is not only beyond understanding, it’s beyond human imagination. It’s a fascinating concept but I’m not totally convinced that it’s real. But if it is, it’s a spiritual state for the soul, and understanding or defining «soul» is equally hard. I suppose people latched onto regal analogies because throughout most of history monarchies were all there was, no elected representatives, and the chasm between royals and most people, who were really poor, was so wide that living like royalty must have been seen as some kind of heaven - no struggling for food, or clean water, or a roof over the head.
ReplyDeleteYes, a spiritual place for the soul. In addition, boilerplate traditional Christianity believes in the resurrection of the body. Just to add another level of difficulty :-)
DeleteAlso, "brute" matter these days ain't what it used to be with spacetime, quantum entanglement, superposition of states, virtual particles, matter/energy equivalence.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWas = were. Regal analogy? or metaphor ? Jean?
ReplyDeleteI remember that the First Communion dresses of my friends always had a little crown or floral wreath that went on top of the veil. Jack noted elsewhere that the crown is a symbol of martyrdom in the Orthodox tradition, but you do see it in the West as well. Just looked at icons for St Hilda and a bunch of other saints. Sometimes she gets a halo AND a crown. Floral wreaths, esp roses, are a little less common on saints, but you do see them. Symbols of "royal" status in Heaven. (Ss Felicity and Perpetua are often shown embracing and sharing a single halo, which I found touching.)
ReplyDeleteTo add a further thought: I wouldn't want to create too stark a division between heaven and earth. When Jesus was baptized, "the heavens opened" before the Holy Spirit descended, i.e. the former barrier between heaven and earth was breached. In his appearance in his hometown synagogue, Jesus announced that the words of the prophet were fulfilled in everyone's hearing: the kingdom was being inaugurated on earth.
ReplyDelete