Why wasn't the Blessed Virgin Mary a socially important person?

[Credo in Deum]

​My issue is not with the life she CHOSE but rather why the Lord chose her given the state of life she was in. the Lord could have chosen anyone more socially important but He didn't. why?

St. Louis Mari DeMonfort answers this beautifuly;

"Because Mary remained hidden during her life she is called by the Holy Spirit and the Church "Alma Mater", Mother hidden and unknown. So great was her humility that she desired nothing more upon earth than to remain unknown to herself and to others, and to be known only to God. In answer to her prayers to remain hidden, poor and lowly, God was pleased to conceal her from nearly every other human creature in her conception, her birth, her life, her mysteries, her resurrection and assumption. Her own parents did not really know her; and the angels would often ask one another, "Who can she possibly be?", for God had hidden her from them, or if he did reveal anything to them, it was nothing compared with what he withheld."

There is more that he wrote but for the sake of not pasting a wall of text I will try to leave you with this.  God chose Mary because her love for God is so great that according to St. Louis it cannot be comprehended by any human being. 

"Finally, we must say in the words of the apostle Paul, "Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, nor has the heart of man understood" the beauty, the grandeur, the excellence of Mary, who is indeed a miracle of miracles of grace, nature and glory. "If you wish to understand the Mother," says a saint, "then understand the Son. She is a worthy Mother of God." Hic taceat omnis lingua : Here let every tongue be silent. "

 

 

[beatitude]

​Whoa, there. All your posts have been amesome so far, but actually, in our times—and Jesus'—having high status DOES mean you're more likely to be listened to. That's one of the perks (and dangers) of high status. Of course, it doesn't mean low-status people can never be heard. But I think that, when it comes to someone like Mother Theresa, you have to ask yourself what counts as "status". Cuz I think Mother Theresa had crazy high status.

​I'm not sure about this. When Malcolm Muggeridge wanted to make that film about the Missionaries of Charity, which was to make them famous, Mother Teresa kept refusing for ages. Her work was still valuable and still reaching many despite that refusal. The MCs still won't have an official website as they believe vocations will come without one. I think Mother Teresa was much like Jesus in the sense that she gained status through what she did, not through what she was born, and the fact that she was so ordinary and had been prepared to work in the slums in obscurity was what allowed people to take her seriously. Oremus1 seems to be asking why Christ didn't have a high-status job like Temple priest or come from a well-known prestigious family, and that description couldn't fit Mother Teresa either.

Regarding PR, I can see your point, but I'm uncomfortable with the term because it sounds too much like marketing - as though we just need a few good high-status celebrities to polish up our image and everything will be fine. Fr Corapi was a celebrity priest and a gifted communicator, and look what became of him, so I'm very cautious about setting too much store by status. All that glitters isn't gold.

[AccountDeleted]

There are a couple of topics being discussed in this thread, related but also different.

As for status, Jesus said that the proud will be humbled and the humble exalted. For most saints, this appears to have happened. St Therese, St Teresa of the Andes, Mother Teresa, etc were all very low status and humble, but they were exalted by God and so people might think they were high status, but they weren't in the beginning - they just ended up that way. Some saints might have been of high birth or status, but the majority seem to have been those that were not great of themselves, but who were great because of God's grace acting in them . They were exalted so that they could exalt Him. The BVM is the same: she was a very humble and lowly woman who was exalted by God to become the Queen of Heaven. And in exalting God, God also allowed her to exalt Him.

As for God choosing a lowly woman for the role of His Mother instead of a high status one, well, he did more than that. He actually created her exactly as He wanted -  holy and Immaculate in the womb - she was the Immaculate Conception. He chose the place of her birth, the parents she would have, and also created her without original sin. So a lot of planning went into His selection. He chose to exalt the lowly, and all generations shall call her blessed.

It is to God's glory and greatness than He is able to exalt the lowly as He does - much more so than choosing important people and allowing them to become objects of worship. We must remember that He chose simple fishermen and a tax collector to be His Apostles as well. And the one who did have status (St Paul) certainly had to be humbled first because of all the persecution he had carried out towards Christians. 

There is nothing to wonder at in God's choices - all of them designed to demonstrate His glory.

[Gabriela]

​I'm not sure about this. When Malcolm Muggeridge wanted to make that film about the Missionaries of Charity, which was to make them famous, Mother Teresa kept refusing for ages. Her work was still valuable and still reaching many despite that refusal. The MCs still won't have an official website as they believe vocations will come without one. I think Mother Teresa was much like Jesus in the sense that she gained status through what she did, not through what she was born, and the fact that she was so ordinary and had been prepared to work in the slums in obscurity was what allowed people to take her seriously. Oremus1 seems to be asking why Christ didn't have a high-status job like Temple priest or come from a well-known prestigious family, and that description couldn't fit Mother Teresa either.

Regarding PR, I can see your point, but I'm uncomfortable with the term because it sounds too much like marketing - as though we just need a few good high-status celebrities to polish up our image and everything will be fine. Fr Corapi was a celebrity priest and a gifted communicator, and look what became of him, so I'm very cautious about setting too much store by status. All that glitters isn't gold.

​Well, if we limit "status" to only what one has by birth or title, then that's a pretty narrow definition, and kinda' pointless, cuz God doesn't care about any of that stuff. But I don't think that's the way most Catholics use the word "status": One can have "status" because one is respected and holy and does much good. By that definition, Mother Theresa has mega-status.

And so does Mary. Even in her own day, she was much revered by the Apostles and other followers of Jesus. So... :-\

PR is much misunderstood. It isn't marketing at all, though the two are often confused. PR is about how one builds relationships with various publics. For the Church, this would mean, for example, how we build our relationship with Muslims, with atheists, with people hostile to the Church, with journalists, etc. It's fallacious to say that just because someone who was gifted at communicating turned out to be a crook, we should be wary of anyone who is gifted at communicating, cuz they're probably just all show. There's enough public incompetence in the Church as it is, and this attitude will only increase it. We need people who are holy, trustworthy, and have a deep love of the Church and a deep faith life, AS WELL AS a gift for communication and building relationships with non-Catholics. The two aren't mutually exclusive, and by casting suspicion on anyone who's good with words and has a "glittering appearance," we alienate precisely those faithful Catholics who could do enormous good for the Church.

 

[Gabriela]

Now it comes to me what's wrong in this thread: The question is misleading. Mary WAS a socially important person, but she wasn't chosen by God because she was socially important a priori. She became socially important a posteriori BECAUSE God chose her.

The basic answer to the OP's question, I think, is: God doesn't care about what or who humans think is "socially important". We often make stupid choices in that regard. Just look at who our celebrities are. Anyway, if God wants someone to get something done, He'll equip them to get it done. So he doesn't need our foolish estimations to accomplish His ends. He can make us esteem what is truly worthy by showing us how good, true, and beautiful it is.

And then there's what others have already said, that by choosing Mary, the lowliest of all maidens, (and even before that, Israel, the lowliest of all nations), He inspires all of us "nobodies" to believe that we are important and have worth, at least in His opinion. And His opinion is the only one that matters, ultimately.

[MarysLittleFlower]

I hope I have phrased this correctly, not being disrespectful just wondering we don't know much about her, but:

> she wasn't a nun with distinguishing garb in a convent with an obvious 'holy' status
> She was not a very important person in the temple. For example, in our churches, we have many important people like Eucharistic Ministers, ladies leading huge organisatins and presidents of SVP etc.
> She did not (from what we know) have a huge resume of churchy activities in her temple
> in her life she was not famous in any way
 

She was just so....normal and ordinary. Obviously she prayed a lot, was charitable etc. But she did normal things like attend weddings with her 'Son' and husband. She was married. She cared for a Baby. she lived in a normal house. She probably did not have a strict horarium or a physical superior or habit or security if life(think of the flight from Egypt). she probably had to do normal things like cooking and cleaning. At the time Jesus was born, to many, she just looked like an ordinary mom in an ordinary family. At the time He died, she looked like a widow and a mother of a criminal

Why did the Lord chose her, and not a) an important lady in the temple who ran many organisations and worked full time for the temple and was well known for her important role b) a jeweish nun with a proper habit who was set apart from the world and only prayed all day all the time to a fixed horarium or c) someone else very socially powerful. maybe a a radical activist or royalty (on earth). During her life, she was just so normal. I don't get it.

 

Because she is so humble she didn't want to draw any attention to herself and as St Louis De Montfort said, God kept her for Himself as His own "world" and reserved the knowledge of her to Himself.

[MarysLittleFlower]

There are apocryphal stories about Mary floating around (see the Protoevangelium of James) but ultimately more is not included in the Gospel because we know all we need to know about her.

Her ordinariness is part of that. Jesus himself spent thirty years living an unseen ordinary life as a carpenter, and during his public ministry he travelled and socialised with men and women who had ordinary jobs in ordinary places. Part of the Gospel message is that Christ sanctifies our everyday life and work, thereby making it extraordinary - there is no need for outward signs of status and prestige.

There is nothing wrong with being ordinary. Nuns who follow a strict horarium are ordinary, and the ordinariness of their life is the first thing that most monastic communities I know try to impress upon discerners who might have a romantic view of it. I think you are perceiving them as far more important and 'special' than they would ever claim to be themselves. You are also trying to compare the Nazareth of 2000 years ago with the modern day Church, when it was a completely different culture and setting. There were no such things as habited Jewish nuns wandering around.

You seem to be very preoccupied with the 'status' of people within the Church, if your comments on your own parish are anything to go by. It's not worth this degree of consideration.

Another thing to consider about nuns is that the point of their life is to live a hidden life like Our Lady... Especially cloistered nuns. Not as a special status. They become unknown to the world by renouncing everything. This is much more beautiful to God than any visibly important status.

I think it also made me consider how to best emulate our Blessed Mother in church

For this reason I think its beautiful for women to just pray at the Altar like Mary and not feel they must be lectors EMHCs etc in order to serve better. Simply praying like Our Lady is not any lesser. 

[MarysLittleFlower]

Mary is often said to be the fairest of the anawim. ​The anawim of the Old Testament were the poor of every sort: the vulnerable, the marginalized, and socio-economically oppressed, those of lowly status without earthly power. In fact, they depended totally on God for whatever they owned. The Hebrew word anawim (inwetan) means those who are bowed down.

Similarly Jesus took the form of a servant

I don't understand the part you described about the sanctification of ordinariness. Or the relevance of the lowly status of Jesus and Mary. Please can you explain?

For example, the Lord could have chosen one of the important people I described in my OP *AND* made them exceptionally holy. then the message of the Gospel would have been more visible and apparent in the time Jesus was alive, and could easily be promoted because of their status. If He could preach in the temple aged 5 then why did he need to spend many years living an ordinary life, and not become a priest or important prelate?

It seems the Lord deliberately chose someone without these external signs, who had to live an ordinary life in ordinary ways. In fact, even poor people, bearing in mind it was a carpenters family.

But why? I think the below of the magnificat is relevant

 

He looks on his servant in her lowliness; *

henceforth all ages will call me blessed.

He puts forth his arm in strength *

and scatters the proud-hearted.

He casts the mighty from their thrones *

and raises the lowly.

He fills the starving with good things, *

sends the rich away empty.

 

But this talks about interior disposition and not exterior status

God could have done anything but choosing someone hidden - shows His own humility, safeguards gifts given to them and its an example to us too

[MarysLittleFlower]

If Mary was living in modern times, would she be an enclosed or apostolic nun? a mother? a consecrated virgin living in the world? what do you think she would spend her life doing? would she have a job?

I don't know but I don't see why it wouldn't be the same as then... Virgin married to St Joseph. Jesus was born in a family... He had a father figure in St Joseph. He is important to. I don't see Our Lady having a job - I read even back then she purposefully didn't handle money.I think she would have been as hidden and simple as then. 

[MarysLittleFlower]

I think the topic here also relates to how usefulness is not found in things we generally see like external things but in humility and depth of prayer. Have you read the Soul of the Apostolate? I highly recommend that book... We become more useful to the Church when we stop focusing on the appearance of 'being useful' and just prayerfully do our duty. The author talked about catechism classes or something similar as one of the examples and how one teacher humanly seemed very talented and had all kinds of ways to keep the kids interested but they learned more from a simple quiet teacher who didn't have fancy methods but a very deep interior life. The foundation is that .  and like St Faustina wrote in her revelations true greatness is in loving God and in humility. Everything passes except this and if we have an important status its so easy to make our work be selfish. Of course Our Lady was immaculate but God arranged her life in what is most pleasing to Him. Just as He was not accepted by the world except those who converted, so was she. She shared in His life. Being hidden and unknown in the world is a trait of many mystics too - they received messages from Heaven not the important leaders like presidents. (Even if there are exceptions I mean in general... Think of St Joan of Arc :))

[John Paul]

what do do you was her horarium ?

[Gabriela]

I don't know but I don't see why it wouldn't be the same as then... Virgin married to St Joseph. Jesus was born in a family... He had a father figure in St Joseph. He is important to. I don't see Our Lady having a job - I read even back then she purposefully didn't handle money.I think she would have been as hidden and simple as then. 

​This brings up an interesting question I asked a bunch of other Catholics a while ago: Are Josephite marriages still permitted? Given that canon law states a marriage is invalid if one or both parties never had the intention of "being open to life", it seems they are not. Does anyone else on here know different?

what do do you was her horarium ?

​What's a mother's "horarium"?

[John Paul]

True.

[MarysLittleFlower]

​This brings up an interesting question I asked a bunch of other Catholics a while ago: Are Josephite marriages still permitted? Given that canon law states a marriage is invalid if one or both parties never had the intention of "being open to life", it seems they are not. Does anyone else on here know different?

​What's a mother's "horarium"?

I read that as long as each spouse gives the other the right to marital union / children then the marriage is valid even if they never use that right and want to live as brother and sister... This article was about such marriages. If that is correct, - I think these marriages are allowed but should be well discerned and both parties should be aware of it. There was a Blessed who lived a while ago who was in a marriage like this. I actually read that the couple from marriage at Cana chose a Josephite marriage and Our Lord spoke of chastity to them. This is found in the revelations of Bl Anne Catherine Emmerich.

Edited April 20, 2015 by MarysLittleFlower

[veritasluxmea]

​This brings up an interesting question I asked a bunch of other Catholics a while ago: Are Josephite marriages still permitted? Given that canon law states a marriage is invalid if one or both parties never had the intention of "being open to life", it seems they are not. Does anyone else on here know different?

​What's a mother's "horarium"?

In order to be properly married, you have to consummate the marriage. Without having sex the marriage isn't done properly. Consider the following:

"A marriage (where they had sex) can be dissolved by no human power and by no cause, except death. 

Can.  1142 For a just cause, the Roman Pontiff can dissolve a non-consummated marriage between baptized persons or between a baptized party and a non-baptized party at the request of both parties or of one of them, even if the other party is unwilling." (So a non-consummated marriage isn't binding like a real marriage and can be dispensed by a human.)

​Some marriages start out the usual way and then later move into a Josephite marriage for various reasons, usually to grow in holiness, and that's ok. (Not common but it can happen, I think St Maximilian Kolbe parents did that after having four children and *possibly* St Therese's parents, but I'm not certain.)