It seems like quite a while since Mark Shea first mentioned he was writing a book on Mary. I remember his long blog vacation as he went to full time work on it and had been patiently waiting for the release. I have thoroughly enjoyed all of Mark’s other books which were usually in the frame of an Evangelical finding the truth of Catholic teaching.
When it was announced that it would be issued as three books I was somewhat disappointed. I imagined that they would be pamphlet sized works. It turns that indeed these are three volumes each running close to 200 pages. I then wondered how he was going to pull off an apologetics works of this size that was readable. As a convert I have been exposed to plenty of apologetics works concerning Mary and have listened to untold hours of Catholic Radio/TV. As an ex-Atheist coming into the Church, Mary was not a problem for me really. Once you get over the “There is a God” and the fact that the Church teaches the fullness of the truth, understanding the Church;s view of Mary’s role is not that hard to see. I have also heard plenty of testimonies of ex-Protestants and the difficulties they had with the Marian aspects of the Church. But I had some trepidation of this book just being for Protestants.
What Mark Shea has done in this three volume set is really quite amazing and it certainly deserves a much wider audience than only Protestants trying to comes to terms with Marian doctrine. He doesn’t just come in with scripture versus blazing, but spends the necessary time setting up the context. Mark as an ex-Evangelical understands the mind blocks that prevent many Protestants from seeing the true role of Mary. But even if you show Protestants the parallelism of the verses on the Ark of the Covenant and the verses on Mary and how they match in so much detail, it certainly won’t convince them. They have been taught a tradition that minimizes Mary even to the extent of her only being an “incubator.” The prejudice against the Marian doctrines was built up over time after the Reformation and mostly as a separation against Catholics. As so many have shown, including Mark Shea in this book. the Protestant reformers had no such animus against Mary. What he has concentrated on is removing those philosophical road blocks and handling all the arguments that get in the way.
Mark Shea’s own journey included having all of the common biases against the Blessed Virgin Mary and his coming to question so many of the underpinnings of what he believed. The first book discusses a lot of what Mark calls “psuedo-knowledge” those bits of information that everybody believes is true, but are in fact nowhere close to being true. Psuedo-knowledge is a blockage to so many things. Protestant pseudo-knowledge such as how the Catholic Church Paganize Christianity is very prevalent. Though I guess this bit of false knowledge is also part of the secular and even Catholic circles. I remember an uncle of mine who is not a Christian and a bit into the new age telling me all about how Catholics stole things from Pagans and that Christmas was based on a Pagan feast. This pseudo-knowledge was really quite exciting for him to tell me even though I was a young atheist who had no idea what a Catholic was in the first place. One of the most interesting parts of this work is how Mark discovered while researching that it was the Pagan feast that came after Catholic’s already celebrating Dec 25th as the Birth of Christ and was likely a case of Pagans trying to usurp a Christian feast. What Mark shows is most interesting is not proving the day Jesus was born on, but why the very early Church thought he was born on this date. The whole idea of Catholics baptizing Pagan things has merit in the small things such as wedding rings and evergreen trees but in the big things such as the Church’s theology an her Marian doctrines there is no merit or connection at all. Mark in his many examples amply demonstrates this in the first volumes as his prepares the way to going deeper into the Marian dogmas.
The second volume deals with the four Marian dogmas and spends considerable time on them. I have often heard how these Marian dogmas protected the Incarnation. I had also heard that these dogmas were declared at the time when there was some controversy concerning Jesus or when the Church considered them a proper cure to a current error – and not just theological errors. The details of just how true this is is staggering. So we get both a history and context for these dogmas, but also answers to the common objections to each of these dogmas.
The third volume deals with the devotional aspects. Getting to the point that you accept the Marian dogmas does not mean that you instantly are ready to jump into the Marian aspects of the devotional life. Problems bringing belief into practice is something shared by more than just converts. Marks advice in this area is quite sensible. He goes on to devote some time to the Rosary along with providing some thoughts/meditations on each of the mysteries. Of course any book addressing Marian devotion has to look at some of the oddities that make the news such as the Virgin Mary in the grilled cheese sandwich. This chapter shows just how sensible the Church is when it comes to private revelation and the simple fact that even when the Church does “bless” some particular apparition it is only to say that it is “worthy of belief” and no Catholic is required to accept them. The following appendices provide a list with a narrative of some of these apparitions “worthy of belief.”
All of my hesitations about a three volume apologetics book set on Mary were dispelled. Mark’s writing is informative and much of it with a smile behind it. His writing is not adversarial in any way and so any Protestants reading his book will not get any sense of “us against them.” Like so many ex-Catholics, Mark is quite positive about his time as a Protestant, but is also very good at showing the cracks that he started to see when he questioned some basic assumptions or psuedo-knowledge. So I think these are great books to read both as an apologetics work and/or spiritual reading.
I ordered the books via his site and they are also available via Catholic Answers.
18 comments
Like so many ex-Catholics, Mark is quite positive about his time as a Protestant,
You mean ex-Protestant. Mark is still a Catholic.
Good review.
I’m using the books for a course on Mary in our parish. Very nice. Will not overwhelm the layman, and explains what can be tricky theological ideas in pretty good terms, along with very good practical examples.
” … a tradition that minimizes Mary even to the extent of her only being an “incubator.” “
Yah, biggest irony is that this is the attitude of the protesting Christian feminists. Get it?
Sheeeesh.
Jester:
Your lines on “As a convert I have been exposed to plenty of apologetics works concerning Mary and have listened to untold hours of Catholic Radio/TV. As an ex-Atheist coming into the Church, Mary was not a problem for me really… But I had some trepidation of this book just being for Protestants… (Shea) deserves a much wider audience than only Protestants trying to comes to terms with Marian doctrine”.
My comment: your trepidation is right… when a former Protestant starts PONTIFICATING Marian Theology, source of endleess debate in two Catholic milleniums. No doubt Shea’s ebullient enthusiasm is to be commended, unless he starts undermining ROME’S order on Medjugorje (some friar was defrocked to get married), and doesn’t erase this FACT in 27 years: more than 50 million (the entire USA’S Catholic population?) did receive SACRAMENTAL RECONCILIATION THERE!:
VATICAN: ‘Spokesman For Cardinal Confirms That Medjugorje Has Been Taken From Commission Into Direct Hands Of The Vatican. It came as a complete surprise and it is now confirmed. It is nearly as if the hand of John Paul II himself is in it. Or is it simply that Benedict XVI is a bit more mystical than many perceived? In Europe, the press has reported that the matter of Medjugorje — the famed apparition site in Bosnia-Hercegovina that was so dear to John Paul — has shifted directly into the hands of the Vatican. It is true, we are now told authoritatively. The apparitions will not be accepted or rejected by local or regional Church officials until they are directed how and when to do so by Rome, officials now report — in one of the larger development in this case since onset of the apparitions.
“I can confirm it,” states Monsignor Mato Zovkic, vicar general of the Sarajevo archdiocese. Monsignor Zovkic, who is spokesman for the Cardinal of Sarajevo and previously indicated negatively feelings about the site, now tells Spirit Daily that “the situation is that people keep coming to Medjugorje, they feel something nice, and they are reconciled sacramentally. The Vatican seems to be very interested and so this should be respected.”
Rome FINAL order(Roma Locuta, causa finita), was posted three times by me in his blog… and erased by Shea. Repeat: he is a good convert, and can clarify many Marian points to Protestants in USA, but is no Mariologist, and less speaks with Rome´s authority. It’s a pity he doesn’t share your Jester’s humor, (is not humble), as you can read in his:
“I say all this because I’m dropping a note to let you know (I will) unceremoniously delete (comments that contradict my Rome’s theories), this is not due to the Jews, the CIA, the Masons, the One World Government, the Bilderbergers, the Trilateral Commission, the Skull and Bones club, Communist infiltration, Communist subversion, or the intenational Communist conpsiracy to sap and impurify our precious bodily fluids. It’s due to me, acting as lone gunman and shooting your posts dead with my high powered delete button. Be warned.”
Cordially
This is what he does to try to eke out a living. Swell.
Go to his site if you can stomach the near occasion of sin.
He’s in the tank for Obama.
The latest pontification is how you’re going to hell if you don’t support hell care reform.
For the last three years he contended you’re going to hell if you didn’t throw Bush/Cheney under the bus for water-boarding. About them 45,000,000 abortions – that’s okay as long as the dems pay for his hell care and let terrorists kill a couple thousand of us, again.
My experience Pope M. Pontificuss Shea is an uncharitable know-it-all who don’t know so much.
In response to T. Shaw –
I have been edified by reading Mr. Shea’s blog several times a week for the past couple of years.
Somehow I missed all of the posts where Mark points people to hell. Links might have been helpful.
I agree that “Pope M. Pontificuss Shea is an uncharitable know-it-all” if you read his content from a political and not Catholic point of view.
Cheers.
He’s in the tank for Obama.
The latest pontification is how you’re going to hell if you don’t support hell care reform.
It’s a sin to tell a lie, T.
“I say all this because I’m dropping a note to let you know (I will) unceremoniously delete (comments that contradict my Rome’s theories),”
Speaking of telling lies, that bit in parentheses was not written by me. It was written by Giullermo, who seems to think that lying for Our Lady is a good thing.
What I wrote was:
“I say all this because I’m dropping a note to let you know that if you feel the urge to fill my comboxes with conspiracy theories and you find those theories unceremoniously deleted, this is not due to the Jews, the CIA, the Masons, the One World Government, the Bilderbergers, the Trilateral Commission, the Skull and Bones club, Communist infiltration, Communist subversion, or the intenational Communist conpsiracy to sap and impurify our precious bodily fluids. It’s due to me, acting as lone gunman and shooting your posts dead with my high powered delete button.”
The reference was to conspiracy theories (in particular, it was occasioned by somebody going on in my combox about the Big Conspiracy to kill JFK. Indeed, the post does not even mention Medugorje.
Meantime, if you peruse the comboxes on the couple of posts I’ve written about Medugorje, you find… lots of comments, both pro and con. You even find some from Guillermo. Why it’s almost as though I generally allow free and open discussions and only intervene when somebody is rude, a time suck, or a troll.
Moral: Don’t tell lies if you are going to leave a big paper trail, Guillermo. You have every right to your opinion of Medugorje. So do I. You don’t have the right to lie about what I say in order to discredit my opinion. Shame on you.
For Mark and anyone else who happens to frequent the same blogs as Guillermo. Just pass by his comments like I do because it is usually too difficult to dicipher what he is trying to say and not worth the time.
To Guillermo,
Ask Mary to interceed for you that Our Lord may grant you humility through charity. And while you are at it ask the same for me.
Vianney:
Thank you for your sweet spirit. It’s very refreshing.
One of the strange things about the internet is that people think it is fine to attack someone’s friends on their own site. I consider Mark a friend and while I might not agree with every prudential political opinion of his the comments I get about him whenever I post favorably of something he has done surprises me. Though I guess I should not be too surprised since one commenter even took aim at Jimmy Akin being a liberal Catholic.
Mark being in the tank for Obama is also laughable. If he was in a tank it would be facing him guns leveled. But people often mistake what Mark does on his blog. His audience is mostly believing Catholics which include so-called conservative Catholics. HIs habit is often to preach the Gospel to conservative Catholics in those areas they have been blinded to the Gospel such as torture. He does not have to denounce Obama’s policies every day since this is posting to the choir for the most part.
His post on health care was just a reminded that the Church does teach there is a right to health care. He was not saying there was a right to nationalized health care. There is much on the local level that we as Catholics can do in regards to health care, specifically in helping the poor on a personal level.
Thanks, Jeff. You’re a mensch. And thanks very much for the lovely review! The highlight of the Catholic New Media Conference last year was hearing you speak. You have a heart of gold.
Mark:
“Moral: Don’t tell lies if you are going to leave a big paper trail, Guillermo. You have every right to your opinion of Medugorje. So do I. You don’t have the right to lie about what I say in order to discredit my opinion. Shame on you.”
WOW! Call me a liar? I dare your PONTIFICATING EGO to reinstate my THREE REPEATEDLY deleted comments in your blog, which I resumed as (comments that contradict my Rome’s theories),”
What theories? That your opinion-pontification weighs more, than the latest Vatican assertion on Medjugorje, and repeated by me above. This will prove all to see who is lying.
Nevertheless I pray to Our Queen of Peace to bless us all, including those who try to put shame in official Vatican news.
I don’t owe you a forum, Guillermo. You can start your own blog if you want one. Meanwhile, the fact that I have perfect freedom to get rid of whatever I wish to get rid of in my comboxes does not mean you have perfect freedom to make things up and claim that I said it. That’s called “lying”. You should repent and stop doing it instead of digging in deeper and trying to justify it.
Mark:
“A confesión de parte, relevo de prueba”,means, your confession-refusal to reinstate what I posted, makes clear who is lying. I forgive you, and hope that Our Holy Mother, forgives your undermining of the biggest miracle on earth in these late years, benefiting millions of lost souls.
Other witnesses will testify about your lying on Garabandal, and refusal to back down on the word CONDEMNED (NOT USED), by the fallible ordinary bishops (Official: no theological errors, by Rome), or your prideful contention that because St. Pío de Pietralcina endorsement was not infallible, your pontifications were better.
On serious true-false apparition information research, please visit
http://www.catholicplanet.com/apparitions/index.htm
Good by.
Mark’s biggest “flaw” is that he refuses to identify Catholic moral teaching as being coterminous with the Republican Party platform.
And at the risk of stating the blindingly obvious, let me add that he repeatedly points out the izzact same thing about the Democratic platform.
I wish many more Catholics in this country shared that same “flaw”…
Has any authoritative priest/theologians reviewed these books? No offense but since we don’t have the trusty imprimatur anymore it’s easy to end up reading garbage when you go to Catholic book land.
Dymphna, Mark isn’t a priest or member of a religious order, and his books are seemingly designed for personal consumption, rather than textbooks for religious instruction. This means that an imprimatur isn’t to be expected, nor is it really needed here.
I usually get along via the quasi-imprimaturs meted out by the online Catholic community.