www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology To Jesus through Mary-another try

Dear Folks,

Many Catholics, baptised in the Latin rite, live out their spiritual and liturgical and ecclesiastical lives in eastern Churches. Many Catholics, baptised in the eastern Churches or canonically eastern, live out their lives in Latin rite Churches. We share a "common" set of traditions and many of our people are content in and with both. I think it is wrong to disparage that common history now that it is a reality in the lives of people and of the Church.

I would like to try the de Montfort thread again, primarily because there is now a record on this Forum that indicates a very strong point of view that the de Montfort Consecration is not only western but bordering on being evil in its language and bearing. I'd like to be able to off-set that point of view with a calmer discussion.

It is not a devotion that I keep consciously day to day, though I have prepared for and made the Consecration in my life as a Latin rite Catholic, but I own a de Montfort list on Yahoo that I run for one of the de Montfort Missionaries, a very holy priest and deeply devoted spiritual father to many. It is a beautiful devotion and contrary to popular belief, the spirituality is not peopled by those who are excessive in marian devotion. That is a myth.

If we could keep the discussion away from the polemics of negative emotion and fear, I think it would be useful to many.

I do not propose this as a challenge to any of our Moderators, and if they think it cannot be done the I will withdraw my plea immediately.

If this is open when I return today, I will say more...or tomorrow perhaps.

Mary

It certainly is not evil, and Latin Catholics are of course free to do it if they want to, but -- in my opinion -- it (i.e., de Montfort's Marian Consecration) has no place in the Eastern tradition.

God bless,
Todd

I concur.

-- John

I have to agree, there's nothing wrong with Latin devotions for Latins. The problem seems to be that whenever Latin devotions are practiced in eastern Catholic churches, those Latin devotions tend to replace genuine eastern devotions. In many posts, I have referred to the Latin church as the 500 pound gorilla in the parlor. Because it is so many times larger than any eastern church, it has had an overwhelming and overbearing influence on eastern Catholic churches. It's also true that in the past, some of the leadership of the eastern churches have forced Latin practices on the eastern faithful. Many have been working for years to remove latinizations and restore genuine eastern practices. I haven't read the de Montfort book in years, so I need to get a copy and re-read it, having forgotten some of what's in it. However, I do remember my initial impression that de Montfort was a bit over the top. But it is entirely possible that de Montfort is fine and I just don't understand western spirituality that well.

Mary, if I gave you (or anyone else) the impression that I thought it was "bordering on evil," I want to apologize. Truly. I really did not mean to imply that at all.

And, yes, some folks can practice that devotion and become holy thereby.

Nevertheless, I think some folks in the Roman Church --not all folks, not most folks, but not a few either-- seem to me to treat Mary as a quasi substitute for the Holy Spirit. Specifically, they seem to make her into their medium of union with Christ. To my understanding, that seems to be summarized by the saying "to Jesus through Mary", and it seems to be epitomized by total consecration to Mary. And thus, to my understanding, that seems like making Mary into a quasi substitute for the Holy Spirit rather than treating the Theotokos as the chief saint.

Now, I don't want to offend anyone's spirituality or religion. If I have done so by writing that, I apologize. I'm not trying to be polemical.

Instead, I am trying to say how I perceive this devotion and why I think it is incompatible with Eastern Christianity.

-- John

That is so true Todd.

As a devotion, it is clearly western and should not be seen or taught as a part of Eastern devotions.

That being said there is nothing wrong with an eastern Catholic or even an Orthodox Catholic reading Father Louis and making the consecration since it is a private devotion.

The Consecration is not the same situation as, for example, the westernization of the Rosay, and the eastern recovery of the rosary by St. Seraphim of Sarov. These are repetitive prayers that lend themselves to variety of language and form sufficiently, without loosing meaning as one moves from one tradition to the other.

So that in answer to monk Silouan, and in my own personal estimation, I do not think that there should be any attempt to "easternize" either the teaching of Father Louis, nor the actual prayers for making the Consecration.

Several of the things that can be done by those raised on eastern devotions might include keeping the eastern fast during the period of preparation for making the Consecration and using the marian prayers of St. Seraphim rather than the western Rosary, praying Akathists to the Theotokos rather than learning new or different western marian devotions, and keeping a separate marian icon corner for comtemplation and reflection.

The western expression of the devotion often tends to be highly penitential. It is not necessary for that approach, and can be primarily a joyous and contemplative devotion for eastern Catholics, if that is what they choose.

Practices that would be common to both east and west are praying the Canticles regularly, and the Magnificat.

So it is entirely possible for an eastern Catholic to follow the writings of Father Louis and make the Consecration without loosing eastern pray practices and eastern marian devotinal practices.

Also, for example in my life, the Consecration is an enhancement of my marian devotion. For other western Catholics, it may be the very core of their devotion.

For me it is not the center of my marian spirituality but it is part of the binder or the glue of it. It is the kenotic part of my marian devotion in that the core of the devotion is to relinquish all passion and control, and the Christological links are without question as are the links to the Holy Spirit through Father Louis's "Love of Eternal Wisdom".

Perhaps later we can look at some of that work.

Mary

Father Louis is quite a fellow!! Born preacher. And so he has all the florid language and flourishes that go along with that, but he also is quite capable of deep and gentle waters as well. They are there in his hymns and in his other prose writings too.

The other thing is that the Consecration is a private promise and not something that takes the place of other devotions at all.

As I noted a moment ago, for western Catholics, the devotion is very often central. For me, it is part of a much larger picture. It is not even the primary focal point in my spirituality. One is perfectly free to do that without shortchanging either the Mother of God or Father Louis.

Mary

Of course there is nothing wrong with reading de Montfort's writings, nor is there anything wrong with reading Martin Luther's writings, or the writings of any other man for that matter, but the spirituality embodied in de Montfort's writings does not conform to the spiritual tradition of the Eastern Church. That said, as I am sure you are aware, I am opposed to any and all forms of Latinization (liturgical, spiritual, and doctrinal), because I have seen, and continue to witness on a regular basis, the harm it has done to the Ruthenian Church.

God bless,
Todd

Dear John,

Your words here do not invoke any sense of evil or danger, nor did your other note in the other thread, IF I remember correctly. You expressed a concern over an emphasis and that is something quite legitimate to interrogate.

I think we need to be careful in jugments that say that Father Louis is "over the top!" or words to the effect that there is something slightly or majorly 'off' with his expression of the devotion.

These things draw into question the potential for holiness in the devotion and in the world of objective good and evil, there isn't much room for some 'middle ground'. Spirituality is either wholesome or not. De Montfort spirituality withstands the test of time and good fruit in those who follow him, so we must be careful not to disparage, simply because something rubs us the wrong way.

M.

Then perhaps you could stand aside in this discussion because not all eastern Catholics feel or think the way you do, and you should not take it upon yourself to "correct" those who are attracted to the devotion, and that is what I had in mind when I began this new topic: to explore the positive things in the writings of Father Louis and take a look at the emphases in True Devotion with an eye toward their Christology and focus on the Holy Spirit.

Since you have nothing good to say perhaps you'd like to begin an alternate list to discuss your own perspective, so that this discussion topic is not shut down.

Mary

I see. So, since I oppose Latinization of Eastern Christians I should "stand aside" so that it may be promoted.

The devotions a man performs privately are his own business, but I believe that the Eastern Churches should actively discourage their members from adopting Latin practices, which are ultimately foreign to the spiritual and doctrinal tradition of the East.

God bless,
Todd

P.S. - I have no problem with people expressing their own opinions on this forum, but if a thread is created that encourages Latinization of Eastern Christians I will post in opposition to it.

Do as you like. But after this I will be ignoring all efforts that you make to derail the discussion, and will not be responding to your posts.

I am very disappointed in your refusal to give those of us who are not adverse to the spirituality of Father Louis the room to discuss that which is clearly positive in his spirituality.

If I tried that with Orthodox members of this list, my participatoin in the discussion would be very short lived.

Mary

Thank you.

Dear John,

Having been a Greek Orthodox Christian throughout my life, and having parents and relatives born and nurtured in Greece, I can surely say that our Theotokos has also been a quasi substitute for the Holy Spirit in the same sense that it has been for a Latin Catholic.

As an example, when the Pope made a dogma of the Assumption, my mother said that he has now accepted our teachings, and raised our Theotokos to the same level as us.

Saint Gregory Palamas states, that no saint can ever go to paradise, unless it is through our Theotokos, for she alone was/is the boundary between heaven and earth, and that she alone contained that which was 'uncontainable' within her.

I could go on and on, but I won't.

The only difference I can tell between what Saint Gregory said, and what is said by Latin saints, and no doubt Saint Louis de Montfort, is that Saint Gregory explains it better.

God Bless,

Zenovia

Zenovia,

There is a difference, because Eastern Christians refuse to dogmatize these kinds of Marian comments from the Fathers (e.g., Palamas' comments in his homilies in reference to Mary as the "bridge between the created and the uncreated"), while the Roman Church tries to make them into essential aspects of the faith once for all delivered to the saints, and binding upon pain of heresy.

God bless,
Todd