Our Lady of Perpetual Help?

It’s really something when I notice that social media feeds can be very toxic. Some Catholics still falsely accuse Baptists and Protestants of rejecting and disrespecting the earthy mother of Jesus because they refuse to treat her as some kind of heavenly intercessor, reject her as the Queen of Heaven (which by the way, is a title only for pagan goddesses, not the godly mother of the Lord Jesus in His humanity), and that she’s being diminished. However, there’s blessedness in being falsely accused for Christ’s sake (Matthew 5:11-12). Today is the feast of the Our Lady of Perpetual Help. There are many feasts dedicated to Mary, the earthly mother of Jesus. September 8 is her traditional birthday. December 8 is the feast of the Immaculate Conception. There are many more feasts such as the Our Lady of Guadalupe, Our Lady of whatever. This isn’t a post to disrespect a godly woman. However, I get questions like, “Why do you hate Mary?” I don’t hate Mary the mother of Jesus. What I hate are unbiblical doctrines that surround so godly a woman!

Here’s something from the Catholic News Agency that should be rather disturbing, and gives out the idolatrous devotion to Mary:

The devotion to this Marian advocation revolves around the picture of Our Lady of Perpetual Help, painted on wood, with a background of gold. It is Byzantine in style and is said to have been painted in the thirteenth century. It represents the Mother of God holding the Divine Child while the Archangels Michael and Gabriel presenting Him the instruments of His Passion. Over the figures in the picture are some Greek letters which form the abbreviated words Mother of God, Jesus Christ, Archangel Michael, and Archangel Gabriel respectively.⁣
⁣
The icon was brought to Rome towards the end of the fifteenth century by a pious merchant, who, dying there, ordered by his will that the picture should be exposed in a church for public veneration. It was exposed in the church of San Matteo in the famous Roman street of Via Merulana, which connects the basilicas of Saint Mary Major and Saint John Lateran. Crowds flocked to this church, and for nearly three hundred years many graces were obtained through the intercession of the Blessed Virgin. The picture was then popularly called the Madonna di San Matteo.⁣
⁣
The influence of Eastern icons in the West, around the XII and XIII centuries brought a class of icons called Cardiotissa, from the Greek word kardia, meaning heart. Cardiotissa means “having a heart” or showing sympathy and mercy and compassion. In them the face of Our Lady appears full of sorrow, yet supremely dignified in her contemplation of the sufferings of her Son. ⁣
⁣
The Child Jesus is shown with an adult face and a high brow, indicating His divine Mind of infinite intelligence. As God, He knew that the angelic apparition was prophetic of His future passion. Yet in His human nature as a small child, He is frightened and runs to His Mother for protection. Our Lady hastily picks Him up and clasps Him to her bosom. This action is indicated by the fact that the Lord’s right foot is nervously curled about the left ankle and in such haste that His right sandal has become loosened and hangs by a single strap. Further action is indicated by the way the Child Jesus clasps His Mother’s right hand with both of His, holding tightly to Our Lady’s thumb.⁣

With all of these, do Catholics need to be reminded that Jesus already grew up? Even the late John Paul II told Msgr. Cristobal Garcia that Jesus had already grown up. I remember how the late Mrs. Fe L. Lumagbas would say that Satan loves Christmas, as much as every occasion, because the Devil finds a way to distract us. Satan never wants Jesus to grow up or people to think of a Jesus that grew up. The problem with getting devoted to the Child Jesus is that it’s almost like Jesus never grew up. It’s an attempt to make a “Christian” version of child god venerations or the Buddhist practice of venerating the Child Buddha. All of them are rooted in the sin of idolatry. People saw how Jesus looked like in His humanity during His ministry. However, Exodus 20:4-5 says that there shall be no graven image to be used in worship. People say it helps them concentrate. However, Deuteronomy 4:15 says that God can’t be represented by any image.

In saying Mary is the mother of perpetual help, it diminishes Hebrews 13:6 where it quotes Psalm 118:6. Who is mentioned as the helper but the LORD? Nothing in the Scriptures indicates that Mary became the mother of perpetual help, well, except when Scripture is taken out of context. In looking at Mary’s life, the marriage at Cana is often used to say, “See? Mary intercedes!” However, what’s often ignored is John 2:5 where Mary invited people to Jesus instead of her. Mary pointed people to Jesus, not to herself. Mary was at the foot of the cross, standing still, and accepting the full will of God. Every Mother’s Day, I believe in the need to preach about Mary as a mother to model. However, I’m against the doctrine of Mary as the Our Lady of Perpetual Help, because such idea isn’t in the Scriptures!

What we must understand is that in Jesus’ crucifixion, we read in John 19:26-27, Jesus no longer called Mary “mother” but the respectful term “woman”. Catholics will admit that Jesus called Mary “woman” and not “mother”. However, they still try to use the incident to justify devotion to Mary, even when the Scriptures become respectfully silent about Mary after Acts. Mary hardly got mentioned after she was last seen praying with the disciples, not being prayed to by the disciples.

Arthur W. Pink respectfully commends Mary like every Baptist or Protestant accepts Mary, the earthly mother of Jesus:

 The touching incident of our Lord on the Cross, commending His Mother to the care of John, has often been the subject of comment, and always with the object of pointing out His tender filial care for her, and His wish that she should not be left desolate. Doubtless such was His purpose; but was it all, or nearly all? Had this been all, would He be likely to have chosen almost His last moment, and the most public occasion possible, for the fulfillment of a private family duty, besides using a most strange and peculiar form of expression? Surely not. There seems to be a far deeper purpose, which may appear if we trace the Lord’s treatment of His earthly parent from the beginning. The first recorded words uttered by the Lord to His mother were a gentle remonstrance: “How is it that ye sought Me? wist ye not that I must be about My Father’s business?” “Thy father and I,” had said Mary. She seemed to have been leaving the Heavenly Father for a moment out of sight, and a reminder was necessary. Though the Child Jesus returned and was “subject unto them,” and 18 quiet years of loving intercourse followed–the first strand of the tie which had united Mother and Son had been parted, and their relation to one another can never have been quite the same as before.

The next recorded conversation was at the marriage at Cana: “Woman, what have I to do with thee?” The words sound strangely stern; doubtless they were softened by the tenderest tone and manner, but they were, for all that, a sharp reminder that Mary’s maternal authority was now at an end. Another strand was parted, this one at the opening of His public ministry, as the first one was at the opening of His life or Manhood. A little later on His mother and His brethren stood without desiring to speak with Him, seeking to lay hands on Him, for they said, “He is beside Himself” (Mark 3:21, 31). The Lord’s reply was startling, for it placed His mother on an absolute level with the humblest believers, “Who is My mother and who are My brethren?” “Whosoever shall do the will of My Father which is in Heaven, the same is My brother and sister and mother” (Matt. 12:48-53)! Another strand was gone! The last mention of Mary in the Gospels is the one with which we started, and which is now seen in a stronger light.

One by one we have seen the ties which bound together Divine Son and human mother severed by His own hand, now the last is touched, and she is His no longer. “Woman, behold thy son,” said the dying Saviour. “Then said He unto the disciple, Behold thy mother” (John 19:26-27). A remarkable form of expression it seems. We should have expected Him to say, “I commend unto thee My mother”; but never once is it recorded that the Lord either addressed Mary or spoke of her as My mother, and now as He is about to lay down His earthly life and afterwards assume His resurrection glory, He sets the human relationship aside forever. And Mary, who was wont to ponder things in her heart, seems to have meekly acquiesced, though doubtless this was one of the sharpest thrusts of the sword which pierced through her soul. “From that hour,” apparently an early hour, “that disciple took her unto his own home.” Perhaps she did not see Him die. Certainly her name is not among those present at the empty grave; indeed it is not recorded that she ever saw Him in his resurrection body.

Once more does Mary appear in Holy Writ: Acts 1:14, where, she is seen among the little company of humble believers who continued in prayer and supplication, waiting for the promise of the Father; and then we altogether lose sight of her. Each of the occasions on which our Lord repudiated Mary’s interference was a public one, as if to emphasize and provide ample testimony to His action, and the last was the most public of all, when He finally relinquished the filial relationship and transferred it to another man. Preachers have taken much pains to minimize and explain away the apparent distance of our Lord towards Mary–but that it existed there can be no manner of doubt, and we can see the “needs be” of it. The time was coming when the poor humble human instrument of His incarnation would be styled “the Mother of God” and the “Queen of Heaven” and would be accorded idolatrous reverence, and the Lord foreseeing it took strong measures to discountenance such misplaced devotion; and hard as it may have seemed to Mary at the time, she will understand it all, and “magnify the Lord” for it in that day when she shall “awake” with His “likeness” and be “satisfied.”–(A.M. 1902).

What needs to be understood is Mary’s relationship with Jesus is no different than the biological relation with David. Take a look at Luke 3, we see the lineage of Mary. Heli is the father of Mary, though some say he was also called Joachin, according to Catholic tradition. Mary’s lineage is traced backward, back to Adam. Mary was the woman in Genesis 3:15, but it’s the Seed of the Woman that will crush the serpent. In that genealogy, we discover Mary is also a daughter of David (distant descendant) through Nathan, another son of David and Bathsheba. Jesus is biologically the Son of David in His humanity, as Mary His earthly mother is a descendant of David. Psalm 110 also has David calling Jesus, Lord. People were confused all throughout whenever Jesus was called David’s Lord and Son (Matthew 22:45). In John 8:48-59, Jesus said He was before Abraham. In the Old Testament, Jesus appeared in a visible form such as the Angel of the LORD, the Captain of the LORD’s Army in Joshua, and Abraham in Genesis 18. Jesus came before Abraham, before David, and before Mary. Mary traces her roots to Abraham Isaac, Jacob, Judah, David, and Nathan. The Messiah was prophesied to come from Judah. It couldn’t be any other woman but Mary who would fit. However, the problem is how Mary is given more importance than her Son in action! With Jesus being before Mary, Mary obviously submits to Jesus as much as David calls Jesus “Lord” in Psalm 110. Mary is in no different position. Even in Luke 1, Mary admits her need for a Savior. Mary was a great humble woman. Mary still remains as the mother to model in the pages of the New Testament. The Bible would later respectfully be silent on Mary, for some reason, after her last appearance in the Book of Acts.

Catholics can say that they’re merely venerating or paying respect to Jesus’ mother. “Wouldn’t Jesus be happy if we saw Him respecting His mother?” is a common excuse for devotion to Mary. However, devotion to Mary is really not commanded at all! Devotion to Mary gives a created being more importance than the Creator. If Christians need physical help and prayer intercession, it’s a communion of living saints. A saint is portrayed to be a hagios, or set apart for Christ’s ministry. Sainthood is something granted to every person who truly follows Christ. Paul talks about saints as living and breathing, not people canonized by Peter. Respect and worship are two different things. Mary is respected and I respect her position, like I respect all the dead saints rejoicing in Heaven. However, why would I ask a dead person to pray for me when the intercession should be between living people? Also, to say that Catholics pray to saints, merely asking them to help in their prayer network, why are they asking saint x and saint y for specific needs, even when they can pray to God directly or ask someone to pray for them and with them, who’s still alive?