The Honor of Darlings

Bethlehem is emphatically a place where extremes meet. Here begins, it is needless to say, another mighty influence for the humanization of Christendom. If the world wanted what is called a non-controversial aspect of Christianity, it would probably select Christmas. Yet it is obviously bound up with what is supposed to be a controversial aspect (I could never at any stage of my opinions imagine why); the respect paid to the Blessed Virgin. When I was a boy a more Puritan generation objected to a statue upon my parish church representing the Virgin and Child. After much controversy, they compromised by taking away the Child. One would think that this was even more corrupted with Mariolatry, unless the mother was counted less dangerous when deprived of a sort of weapon. But the practical difficulty is also a parable. You cannot chip away the statue of a mother from all round that of a newborn child. You cannot suspend the new-born child in mid-air; indeed you cannot really have a statue of a newborn child at all. Similarly, you cannot suspend the idea of a newborn child in the void or think of him without thinking of his mother. You cannot visit the child without visiting the mother, you cannot in common human life approach the child except through the mother. If we are to think of Christ in this aspect at all, the other idea follows as it is followed in history. We must either leave Christ out of Christmas, or Christmas out of Christ, or we must admit, if only as we admit it in an old picture, that those holy heads are too near together for the haloes not to mingle and cross.

- From "The Everlasting Man" by G.K. Chesterton

I came across this fine quote in the comment box of another blog. I struggled a bit with Marian doctrine through college in the midst of my migration from Methodism to non-denominational evangelicalism. It was the typical knee-jerk reaction to the perceived Mariolatry in the Catholic Church, a deep fear of conflating creation with creator. When I began my journey towards Catholicism, I found that my previous struggles had mysteriously vanished, leaving only a deep respect for and honor towards the Mother of God. I can only conclude that this vanishing coincided with the mysterious revelation of family experienced by most new fathers at the birth of their children. Having been blessed by two beautiful daughters I have obtained a privileged glimpse of the profoundly beautiful bond shared by mother and child. While my joy was properly and necessarily saddled with the husbandly burdens of provision and protection, I have seen the sole burden of love pass between the eyes of my daughters and their mother. To reduce that ethereal connection to the simple act of a tool to bear the required earthly burden is to blaspheme the very nature of holy familial bonds. To cut Mary out of the Holy Family immediately after the birth of Christ is a grave occasion of the sin of dishonoring Motherhood.

If Christ reigns as the fulfillment of the Davidic Kings, what then are we to make of the role of the Davidic Queen? Are we to deny the role of the Queen, Mother of the King and advocate for the people, as an unnecessary expansion of the prophetic fulfillment achieved by Christ? Are we to deny that the New Adam came through the assent and obedience of the New Eve, crushing the serpent under her heel with that amazing look of love I now know so well? Are we so afraid of confusing honor with idolatry that we would conveniently remove the Mother of God from a now crippled image of the Holy Family?

I would hope, as in my own case, that this rift in those baptized in Christ would be healed not by intellectual or rational assent, but by a revelation of the iron-clad ties of motherhood to the life of a cherished child. I can’t in good conscience conveniently sideline Mary after seeing my darling girls in the arms of Mom. Maybe we don’t need more arguments, only more darling boys and girls honoring their Mother.