The late renowned Islamic scholar Alfred Guillaume wrote a booklet on a manuscript find, which was kept in the Qarawiyun library at Fez and numbered 727. This manuscript (ms.) contains a report of a person who had heard the lecture of Ibn Ishaq on the life of Muhammad.

Ibn Ishaq is the Muslim who had written a biography on Muhammad in the eighth century AD titled Sirat Rasulullah, which Guillaume has translated into English.  This biography was subsequently edited and purged by Ibn Hisham in the ninth century (c. 830 AD).

The importance of this ms. can be seen from the fact that it confirms that Ibn Ishaq did in fact narrate the event of Satan inspiring Muhammad to recite lines praising the three pagan goddesses of the Quraysh al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat. Unfortunately, Ibn Hisham expunged this report from his editorial reworking of Ibn Ishaq’s sirah.

This lapse into blatant idolatry on Muhammad’s part, where he was duped by Satan to commit the unforgiveable sin of shirk (cf. Q. 2:22; 4:48, 116), was later corrected and the lines abrogated by “Gabriel” who had informed him that Allah had not “revealed” these words to his “messenger.”     

I quote from Guillaume’s booklet which mentions these details:

The Verses Inserted in the Koran at the Instigation of Satan

Ms. fo. 56b; T. pp. 1192f.; S. p. 229; I.H. p. 241; L. p. 165

There can be little doubt that Ibn Hisham cut out some of the text which came to him because he gives no reasons for the sudden conversion of the people of Mecca and leaves it unexplained. The full story hitherto has been known only from Tabari who quoted Ibn Ishaq on the authority of Salama. In that version it is made clear that it was the prophet’s desire to end the estrangement between him and his people and to make it easier for them to accept Islam that prompted him yield to the suggestion of Satan and add the words “These are the exalted cranes (gharaniq) whose intercession is to be hoped for” (or, in another version, “approved”).

The MS. agrees with Salam’s report from Ibn Ishaq that the emigrants returned from Abyssinia because they heard of the conversion of Quraysh in consequence of the concession to polytheism, but strangely enough it does not quote the offending words. Presumably they were deliberately omitted and readers must have known what they were because otherwise the narrative is unintelligible. Two verses are referred to, but the second is not quoted. In view of its interest I give a translation of the MS.: “(The emigrants) remained where they were until they heard that the people of Mecca had accepted Islam and prostrated themselves. That was because the chapter of The Star (53) had been sent down to Muhammad and the apostle recited it. Both Muslim and polytheist listened to it silently until he reached his words ‘Have you seen (or, “considered”) al-Lat and al-Uzza?’ They gave their ear to him attentively while the faithful believed (their prophet). Some apostatized when they heard the saj’ of the Satan and said ‘By Allah we will serve them (the Gharaniq) so that they may bring us near to Allah’. The Satan taught these two verses to every polytheist and their tongue took them easily. This weighed heavily upon the apostle until Gabriel came to him and complained to him of these two verses and the effect that they had upon the people. Gabriel declined responsibility for them and said ‘You recited to the people something which I did not bring you from God and you said what you were not told to say’. The apostle was deeply grieved and afraid. Then God sent down by way of comfort to him: ‘Never did we send an apostle or a prophet before you but when he wished Satan cast a suggestion into his wish’ as far as the words ‘Knowing, Wise’” (Sura 22, 51).¹  

Ibn Kathir gives a fantastic reason for the conversion of the Meccans and says that Ibn Ishaq’s tradition is not sound. He says that he himself has not quoted the story of the gharaniq because there might be some who heard it for the first time and would not able to take a right view of it.

Suhalyi with his customary honesty makes no bones about it. He says that the cause of the return of the emigrants was as we have heard, and he also tells us that besides Ibn Ishaq, Musa ibn ‘Uqba handed on this tradition. He says that traditionists reject this hadith, and those who accept it have ways of explaining it. One of these, he says, namely that Satan spoke the words which were broadcast through the town but the apostle did not utter them, would be excellent were it not for the fact that the tradition asserts that Gabriel said to Muhammad “I did not bring you this.” (Guillaume, New Light on the Life of Muhammad [Manchester University Press], pp. 38-39; emphasis mine)

FURTHER READING

How the Incident of the “Satanic Verses” Exposes Muhammad as an Accursed False Prophet Pt. 1, Pt. 2

THE FRAUD THAT IS ALI ATAIE: THE SATANIC VERSES PT. 1, PT. 2, PT. 3, ADDENDUM

According to Islam’s earliest and most reliable sources, Muhammad was a pagan who used to sacrifice to the pagan gods and goddesses, and only stopped doing so when he was reprimanded by a monotheist (hanif) named Zayd ibn Amr ibn Nufayl:

XVI. That which has been slaughtered on altars and to idols

5180. Salim related that he heard ‘Abdullah report that the Messenger of Allah met Zayd ibn ‘Amr ibn Nufayl at the bottom of Baldah before any revelation had come down on the Messenger of Allah. The Messenger of Allah offered him a dish with some meat in it, but he refused to eat of it. [This is also read, “The Messenger of Allah was offered…] Then he said, ‘I do not eat from what you slaughter to your idols. I only eat from that over which the name of Allah has been mentioned.'” (Aisha Bewley, The Sahih Collection of Al-Bukhari, Chapter 75. Book of Slaughtering and Hunting)

In the Arabic version, the hadith number is 5075 on the chapter on hunting and sacrifices. The title given is, “What has been slaughtered from Images and to Idols”:

Narrated by Mu’ti ibn Asad, narrated by Abd Al-Aziz ibn Al-Mukhtar, narrated by Musa ibn Akbah, narrated by Salim who heard Abdullah narrating that the prophet met Zaid ibn Amr ibn Nufayl at the bottom of Baldah, and this was the time before the prophet received revelation. So the prophet presented to him (Zaid) a table on which was served meat. However, Zaid refused to eat from it and said, “I do not eat what you sacrifice to your idols, and I do not eat except what Allah’s name have been mentioned on.”

Here’s Muslim scholar Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani’s explanation of this hadith from his Fath Al-Bari:

“The Hadith of ibn Amr found in the story of Zaid ibn Amr ibn Nufayl has been transmitted with some variation. According to the majority (of narrators) the phrase ‘The prophet presented to him (Zaid) a table’ IS THE CORRECT ONE.

“According to Al-Kash-mihni the phrase should read, ‘To the prophet was presented a table.’

“However, ibn al-Manbar tried to reconcile this difference by stating that the people who were there presented to the prophet the table (with food sacrificed to idols) and he in turn presented it to Zaid (ibn Amr). Therefore, Zaid gave his response to the people.” 

The foregoing shows that Muhammad ate food sacrificed to idols, which Zaid refused to do so.

The following citations make this point more explicit. According to a tradition reported by Zaid ibn Haritha, who was also present at the event,

The Prophet slaughtered an ewe for one of the idols (nusub min al-ansab); then he roasted it and carried it with him. Then Zayd ibn Amr ibn Nufayl met us in the upper part of the valley; it was one of the hot days of Mecca. When we met we greeted each other with the greeting of the Age of barbarism, in’am sabahan. The Prophet said: “Why do I see you, O son of Amr, hated by your people?” He said, “This (happened) without my being the cause of their hatred; but I found them associating divinities with God and I was reluctant to do the same. I wanted (to worship God according to) the religion of Abraham…” The Prophet said, “Would you like some food?” He said, “Yes.” Then the Prophet put before him the (meat of the ewe). He (that is, Zayd ibn Amr) said: “What did you sacrifice to, O Muhammad?”

“He said, “To one of the idols.” Zayd then said: “I am not the one to eat anything slaughtered for a divinity other than God.” (Al-Kharqushi, Sharaf al-Mustafa, cited in F. E. Peters, Muhammad and the Religion of Islam [State University of New York Press (SUNY), Albany, NY 1994], pp. 126-127)

Ibn al-Kalbi also confirms that Muhammad offered up an ewe to al-Uzza, “in accordance with the religion of the people.” (Ibid., p. 127)

In fact, noted historian of the Arab peoples Philip K. Hitti accepts the veracity of al-Kalbi’s report:

Al-‘Uzza (the most mighty, Venus, the morning star) had her cult in Nakhlah east of Makkah. According to al-Kalbi, hers was the most venerated idol among the Quraysh, and Muhammad as a young man offered her a sacrifice. (Hitti, History of the Arabs from the Earliest Times to the Present, revised tenth edition, new preface by Walid Khalidi [Palgrave Macmillan, 2002; ISBN: 0-333-63142-0 paperback], p. 99)

Renowned Islamic scholar Alfred Guillaume noted that:

The only authentic story of Muhammad’s early years is contained in an unpublished manuscript of his first biographer Ibn Ishaq. It reads as follows:

I was told that the apostle of Allah said, as he was talking about Zayd son of ‘Amr son of Nufayl, ‘He was the first TO UPBRAID ME FOR IDOLATRY AND FORBADE ME TO WORSHIP IDOLS. I had come from al-Ta’if along with Zayd son of Haritha when we passed Zayd son of ‘Amr who was in the highland of Mecca. Quraysh had made a public example of him for abandoning their religion, so that he went out from their midst. I sat down with him. I had a bag containing meat WHICH WE HAD SACRIFICED TO OUR IDOLS – Zayd b. Haritha was carrying it – and I offered it to Zayd b. ‘Amr – I was but a lad at the time – and I said, “Eat some of this food, my uncle.” He replied, “Surely it is part of those sacrifices of theirs which they offer to their idols?” When I said that it was, he said, “Nephew mine, if you were to ask the daughters of ‘Abd al-Muttalib they would tell you that I never eat of these sacrifices, and I have no desire to do so.” THEN HE UPBRAIDED ME FOR IDOLATRY and spoke disparagingly of those who worship idols and sacrifice to them, and said, “They are worthless: they can neither harm nor profit anyone,” or words to that effect.’ The apostle added, ‘AFTER THAT I NEVER KNOWINGLY STROKED ONE OF THEIR IDOLS NOR DID I SACRIFICE TO THEM UNTIL GOD HONOURED ME WITH HIS APOSTLESHIP.’

This tradition clearly shows how the boy Muhammad was influenced by a monotheist of whom we know but little. The prohibition against the eating of meat offered to idols is of course originally Jewish, but as it was taken over into Christianity it is impossible to say whether Zayd was a Jewish or Christian proselyte. Arabic tradition represents him as a man dissatisfied with both Judaism and Christianity and utterly hostile to heathenism. (Guillaume, Islam [Penguin Books, reprinted 1990], pp. 26-27; emphasis mine)

Guillaume elsewhere writes:

A tradition of outstanding importance follows (fos. 37b-38).¹ It is the only extant evidence of the influence of a monotheist on Muhammad by way of admonition. Ibn Ishaq says: “I was told that the apostle of God while speaking of Zayd ibn ‘Amr ibn Nufayl said, ‘He was the first TO BLAME ME FOR WORSHIPPING IDOLS AND FORBADE ME TO DO SO. I had come from al-Ta’if with Zayd ibn Haritha when I passed by Zayd ibn ‘Amr on the high ground above Mecca, for Quraysh had made a public example of him (shaharathu) for abandoning their religion, so that he went forth from among them and (stayed) in the high ground of Mecca. I went and sat with him. I had with me a bag of meat FROM OUR SACRIFICES TO OUR IDOLS which Zayd ibn Haritha was carrying, and I offered it to him. I was a young lad at the time. I said “Eat some of this food, O my uncle”. He replied, “Nephew, it is a part of those sacrifices OF YOURS WHICH YOU OFFER TO YOUR IDOLS, isn’t it?” When I answered THAT IT WAS he said “If you were to ask the daughters of ‘Abdu’l-Muttalib they would tell you that I never eat these sacrifices and I want nothing to do with them”. THEN HE BLAMED ME and those who worship idols and sacrifice to them saying “They are futile: they can do neither good nor harm”, or words to that effect.’ The apostle added, ‘AFTER THAT with that knowledge I NEVER STROKED AN IDOL OF THEIRS NOR DID I SACRIFICE TO THEM until God honoured me with His apostleship’.”

This tradition has been expunged from Ibn Hisham’s recension altogether, but there are traces of it in S. (p. 146) and Bukhari (K. p. 63, bab 24) where there is an imposing isnad going back to ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar to the effect that the prophet met Zayd in the lower part of Baldah before his apostleship. “A bag was brought to the prophet or the prophet brought it to him and he refused to eat of it saying ‘I never eat what you sacrifice before your idols. I eat only that over which the name of God has been mentioned.’ He blamed Quraysh for their sacrifices”, etc.  

¹ See Appendix B. (Alfred Guillaume, New Light on the Life of Muhammad [Manchester University Press], p. 27; emphasis mine)  

These next reports are even more significant since they not only provide further substantiation that the devil caused Muhammad to recite the “Satanic Verses,” they also prove that Muhammad did indeed worship the three pagan goddesses:

Then those who had gone (to Abyssinia) the first time returned before (the departure of) Ja’far b. Abi Talib and his companions. This is when God sent down the surah in which He states, “By the star when it sets.” The Mushrikun had said: “If only this man would speak favourably of our gods [yadhkuru alihata-na bi-khayr], we would secure him [aqrarna-hu] and his companions. He does not speak of any the Jews and Christians who oppose his religion with the abuse and invective [al-shatm wa al-sharr] with which he speaks of our gods.”

When God sent down the surah in which He mentions, “By the star,” he (the Prophet) recited [qara’a], “Have you considered al-Lat, al-‘Uzza and Manat, the third, the other?” At this point, Satan cast into it (Surat al-Najm) [alqa al-shaytanu fi-ha ‘inda dhalika] a mention of the evil ones [dhikr al-tawaghit], and he (the Prophet) said [fa-qala]: “Indeed, they are high-flying cranes! And, indeed, their intercession is to be hoped for! [inna-hunna la-min al-gharaniq al-‘ula wa inna shafa’ata-hum (sic) la turtaja]”; that was the rhyming prose [saj’] of Satan and was an instance of his sedition [min fitnati-hi].

Those two phrases became lodged in the heart of every Mushrik; their tongues were debased by them, they rejoiced at them [dhallat bi-ha alsinatu-hum wa istabsharu bi-ha] and said: “MUHAMMAD HAS RETURNED TO HIS ORIGINAL RELIGION AND THE RELIGION OF HIS TRIBE [qad raja’a Muhammad ila dini-hi al-awwal wa din qawmi-hi]”…

As for the Mushrikun, their minds were set at ease in regard to the Prophet and his Companions when they heard what Satan cast into the umniyyah of the Prophet [lamma sami‘u al-ladhi alqa al-shaytan fi umniyyat al-nabi]. Satan told them that the Messenger of God had recited them (the Satanic verses) when in sajdah, so they made the sajdah in veneration of their gods…

The Messenger of God was greatly distressed by this [wa kabura dhalika ‘ala rasul Allah]. In the evening, Gabriel came to him. He (the Prophet) complained to him [fa-shaka ilay-hi], so he (Gabriel) ordered him (to recite the surah) and he (the Prophet) recited to him [fa-qara’a ‘alay-hi]. When he (the Prophet) reached them (the Satanic verses) [fa-lamma balagha-ha] (OR: when he (Gabriel) heard [sami’a] (the Satanic verses)), Gabriel absolved himself of responsibility for them [tabarra’a min-ha] and said: “God protect me from these! My Lord did not send them down, nor your Lord command me with them! [ma’adh Allah min hatayni ma anzala-huma rabb-i wa la amara-ni bi-hima rabbu-ka].” When the Messenger of God saw this, he was greatly disturbed [shaqqa ‘alay-hi] and said: “I HAVE OBEYED SATAN AND SPOKEN HIS WORDS AND HE HAS BECOME A PARTNER IN GOD’S MATTER WITH ME [ata’tu al-shaytana wa takallamtu bi-kalami-hi wa sharika-ni fi amr Allah].”

So God removed that which Satan cast [fa-nasakha Allahu ‘azza wa jalla ma alqa al-shaytan] and sent down upon him: “We have not sent before you a Messenger or a Prophet but that when he removes that which Satan casts and establishes his Signs clearly – and God is All-Knowing, All-Wise – to make that which Satan cast a trial for those in whose hearts is a sickness, and for those whose hearts are hardened. Indeed, the Wrongdoers are in far dissension.”

This report has been variously transmitted by the following Muslim authorities:

Muhammad Mustafa al-A’zami, Maghazi rasul Allah li-‘Urwah ibn al-Zubayr bi-riwayat Abi al-Aswad ‘an-hu (al-nuskhah al-mustrakhrajah, Maktab al-Tarbiyah al-‘Arabi li-Duwal al-Khalij, Riyad, 1981, pp. 160-161.

Abu al-Qasim Sulayman b. Ahmad al-Tabarani narrated it with the following chain:

Muhammad b. ‘Amr b. Khalid al-Harrani al-Misri (d. 292 AH) – ‘Amr b. Khalid al-Harrani al-Misri (d. 229) – ‘Abd Allah Ibn Lahi’ah al-Misri (97-174) – Muhammad b. ‘Abd al-Rahman Abu al-Aswad al-Madani al-Misri (d. 136/7) – ‘Urwah b. al-Zubayr al-Madani (23-94). (al-Mu’jam al-Kabir, edited by Hamdi ‘Abd al-Majid al-Salafi [Wizarat al-Awqaf wa al-Shu’un al-Diniyyah, Baghdad, 1971], 9:34-36)

Abu Bakr Muhammad b. ‘Ali al-Muttawi’i al-Ghazi al-Naysaburi al-Makki gives the following chain:

Abu al- ‘Abbas Ahmad b. al-Hasan b. Bundar al-Razi al-Makki (d. 409) – Abu al-Qasim Sulayman b. Ahmad al-Tabarani – Muhammad b. ‘Amr b. Khalid al-Harrani al-Misri – ‘Amr b. Khalid al-Harrani al-Misri – ‘Urwah b. al-Zubayr. (Kitab man sabara zafira, pp. 77b-78b)

A modern Muslim writer acknowledges that Muhammad’s sacrificing to the Meccan idols is a well-established tradition, and unashamedly states that the only reason Muhammadans object to it is because of their presupposition that Allah protects his messengers from all major sins such as idolatry even before the start of their respective missions:

There exists a little-known tradition recounting an astonishing meeting between Zayd, the Hanif, and a teen-aged Muhammad. The story seems to have been originally reported by Yunus ibn Bukayr on the authority of Muhammad’s first biographer, Ibn Ishaq. And while it appears to have been expunged from Ibn Hisham’s retelling Muhammad’s life, M. J. Kister has catalogued no fewer than ELEVEN OTHER TRADITIONS that recount nearly identical versions of the story.

It was, the chroniclers say, “one of the hot days of Mecca” when Muhammad and his childhood friend Ibn Haritha were returning home from Ta’if, where they had slaughtered and roasted a ewe in sacrifice to one of the idols (most likely Allat). As the two boys made their way through the upper part of the Meccan Valley, they suddenly came upon Zayd, who was either living as a recluse on the high ground above Mecca or was in the midst of a lengthy spiritual retreat. Recognizing him at once, Muhammad and Ibn Haritha greeted the Hanif with “the greeting of the Jahiliyyah” (in’am sabahan) and sat down to rest next to him.

Muhammad asked, “Why do I see you, O son of Amr, hated by your people?”

“I found them associating divinities with God and I was reluctant to do the same,” Zayd replied. “I wanted the religion of Abraham.”

Muhammad accepted this explanation without comment and opened his bag of sacrificed meat. “Eat some of this food, O my uncle,” he said.

But Zayd reacted with disgust. “Nephew, that is a part of those sacrifices of yours which you offer to your idols, is it not?” Muhammad answered that it was. Zayd became indignant. “I never eat of these sacrifices and I want nothing to do with them,” he cried. “I am not one to eat anything slaughtered for a divinity other than God.”

So struck was Muhammad by Zayd’s rebuke that many years later, when recounting the story, he claimed never again to have “stroked an idol of theirs nor … sacrifice[d] to them until God honored me with his Apostleship.”

The notion that a young pagan Muhammad could have been scolded for his idolatry by a Hanif flies in the face of traditional Muslim views regarding the Prophet’s perpetual monotheistic integrity. It is a common belief in Islam that even before his calling by God, Muhammad never took part in the pagan rituals of his community. In his history of the Prophet, al-Tabari states that God kept Muhammad from ever participating in any pagan rituals, lest he be defiled by them. But this view, which is reminiscent of the Catholic belief in Mary’s perpetual virginity, HAS LITTLE BASIS IN EITHER HISTORY OR SCRIPTURE. Not only does the Quran admit that God found Muhammad “erring” and gave him guidance (93:7), but the ancient traditions clearly show Muhammad deeply involved in the religious customs of Mecca: circumambulating the Ka‘ba, making sacrifices, and going on pagan devotional retreats called tahannuth. Indeed, when the pagan sanctuary was torn down and rebuilt (it was enlarged and finally roofed), Muhammad took an active part in its reconstruction.

All the same, the doctrine of Muhammad’s monotheistic integrity is an important facet of Muslim faith because it appears to support the belief that the Revelation he received came from a divine source. Admitting that Muhammad might have been influenced by someone like Zayd is, for some Muslims, tantamount to denying the heavenly inspiration of Muhammad’s message. But such beliefs are based on the common yet erroneous assumption that religions are born in some sort of cultural vacuum; they most certainly are not. (Reza Aslan, No god but God: The Origins, Evolution, and Future of Islam [Random House Trade Paperback Edition, January 2006], 1. The Sanctuary in the Desert: Pre-Islamic Arabia, pp. 15-17; bold and capital emphasis mine)

I will now conclude this post by citing some of the references which Aslan alluded to. All emphasis is mine.

‏حدثنا ‏ ‏يزيد ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏المسعودي ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏نفيل بن هشام بن سعيد بن زيد بن عمرو بن نفيل ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏أبيه ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏جده ‏ ‏قال ‏‏كان رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏بمكة ‏ ‏هو ‏ ‏وزيد بن حارثة ‏ ‏فمر بهما ‏ ‏زيد بن عمرو بن نفيل ‏ ‏فدعواه ‏ ‏إلى ‏ ‏سفرة ‏ ‏لهما فقال يا ابن أخي ‏ ‏إني لا آكل مما ذبح على ‏ ‏النصب ‏ ‏قال فما رئي النبي ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏بعد ذلك أكل شيئا مما ‏ ‏ذبح على ‏ ‏النصب ‏ ‏قال قلت يا رسول الله إن أبي كان كما قد رأيت وبلغك ولو أدركك لآمن بك واتبعك فاستغفر له قال نعم فأستغفر له فإنه يبعث يوم القيامة أمة واحدة

مسند أحمد .. مسند العشرة المبشرين بالجنة .. ‏مسند سعيد بن زيد بن عمرو بن نفيل رضي الله عنه

Narrated by Yazid, narrated by Al-Masudi, narrated by Nufayl ibn Hisham ibn Sa’id ibn Amr ibn Nufayl, narrated by his father, narrated by his grandfather who related that the prophet was in Mecca with Zaid ibn Haritha. Then Zaid ibn Amr passed by them so THEY invited him to (dine) at a table they had. Zaid (Ibn Amr) said, “O my nephew! I do not eat what was sacrificed to images and idols.”

He then said that he did not see the prophet again eat anything that was offered as a sacrifice to images or idols … (Musnad Ahmad, Hadith Number 1561. Found in section: Musnad of the 10 promised paradise, Musnad Sa’id ibn Zaid ibn Amr Ibn Nufayl)

كنز العمال – للمتقي الهندي

{مسند سعيد} عن نفيل بن هشام بن سعيد بن زيد بن عمرو بن نفيل عن أبيه عن جده أن زيد بن عمرو بن نفيل وورقة بن نوفل خرجا يلتمسان الدين حتى انتهيا إلى

قال: وجاء ابنه إلى النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال: يا رسول الله! إن أبي كان كما رأيت وكما بلغك فاستغفر له، قال: نعم، قال: فإنه يبعث يوم القيامة أمة وحده، قال: وأتى زيد بن عمرو بن نفيل على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ومعه زيد بن حارثة وهما يأكلان من سفرة لهما فدعواه لطعامهما فقال زيد بن حارثة للنبي صلى الله عليه وسلم: يا ابن أخي! إنا لا نأكل مما ذبح على النصب.

Narrated by Nufayl ibn Hisham Ibn Sa’id ibn Zaid ibn Amr ibn Nufayl, narrated by his father, narrated by is grandfather who related that Zaid ibn Amr ibn Nufayl came to the prophet, who had Zaid ibn Haritha with him, and they were both eating from a Sufra (dining blanket) that belonged to them. So THEY BOTH invited Zaid Ibn Amr to eat with them, but Zaid (Ibn Amr) replied to the prophet, “O son of my brother! We do not eat what has been sacrificed to images.” (Al-Mutaki Al-Hindi, Treasure of the Workers)

معجم الطبراني الكبير، – للإمام الطبراني

حدثنا علي بن عبد العزيز ثنا عبد الله بن رجاء أنبأ المسعودي عن نفيل بن هشام بن سعيد بن زيد عن أبيه عن جده قال خرج ورقة بن نوفل وزيد بن عمرو يطلبان الدين حتى مرا بالشام فأما ورقة فتنصر وأما زيد فقيل له إن الذي تطلب أمامك فانطلق حتى أتى الموصل فإذا هو براهب فقال من أين أقبل صاحب المرحلة قال من بيت إبراهيم قال ما تطلب قال الدين فعرض عليه النصرانية فأبى أن يقبل وقال لا حاجة لي فيه قال أما إن الذي تطلب سيظهر بأرضك فأقبل وهو يقول لبيك حقا حقا تعبدا ورقا البر أبغي لا الحال وهل مهاجر كمن قال عذت بما عاذ به إبراهيم وهو قائم وأنفى لك اللهم عان راغم مهما تجشمني فإني جاشم ثم يخر فيسجد للكعبة قال فمر زيد بن عمرو بالنبي صلى الله عليه وسلم وزيد بن حارثة وهما يأكلان من سفرة لهما فدعياه فقال يا بن أخي لا آكل مما ذبح على النصب قال فما رؤي النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم يأكل مما ذبح على النصب من يومه ذلك حتى بعث قال وجاء سعيد بن زيد إلى النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال يا رسول الله إن زيدا كان كما رأيت أو كما بلغك فاستغفر له قال نعم فأستغفر له فإنه يبعث يوم القيامة أمة وحده (1/ 152)

Narrated by Ali ibn Abdul Aziz, narrated by Abdullah ibn Raja’, narrated by Al-Masudi, narrated by Nufayl ibn Hisham ibn Sa’id ibn Zaid, narrated by his father, narrated by his grandfather who related that Waraqa ibn Naufal and Zaid ibn Amr went out seeking the true religion until they came to Syria. Waraqa adopted Christianity, but Zaid was told, “The one you seek is in front of you, so depart until you arrive at Mosul.” When he arrived he found a monk who asked him, “From where have you journeyed from?” Zaid replied, “From the house of Abraham.” The monk asked, “What are you seeking?” Zaid answered, “The (true) religion.”

Thus the monk offered to him Christianity but Zaid did not accept and said, “I have no need of it.” The monk then said, “The one you seek shall appear in your land.” So Zaid departed (to his land)…

Then Zaid Ibn Amr passed by the prophet, who also was accompanied by Zaid Ibn Haritha, and BOTH were eating from a Sufra they had. So THEY BOTH invited Zaid (Ibn Amr) to join them, but he responded, “O son of my brother! I do not eat what was sacrificed to images.”

He then related that from that day, the prophet was never again seen eating what was sacrificed to an idol till the day he was sent (as a prophet). Sa’id Ibn Zaid came to the prophet and said, “O prophet of Allah! Zaid was as you saw him and as you heard about him, so pray for forgiveness for him.” So the prophet agreed and prayed for him and said, “He shall be raised on judgment day as one community.” (Al-Tabarani, The Greater Dictionary of Al-Tabarani)

مجمع الزوائد. الإصدار 2.05 – للحافظ الهيثمي

16180- وعن سعيد بن زيد قال: كان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم بمكة هو وزيد بن حارثة، فمر بهما زيد بن عمرو بن نفيل، فدعواه إلى سفرة لهما فقال: يا ابن أخي إني لا آكل ما ذبح على النصب.
قال: فما رئي رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم بعد ذلك يأكل شيئاً مما ذبح على النصب.
قال: قلت: يا رسول الله إن أبي كان كما قد رأيت وبلغك، ولو أدركك آمن بك واتبعك فاستغفر له، قال:
“نعم فاستغفروا له فإنه يبعث يوم القيامة أمة وحده”.
رواه أحمد وفيه المسعودي وقد اختلط، وبقية رجاله ثقات.

It was narrated by Sa’id ibn Zaid who said, “The prophet was in Mecca with Zaid ibn Haritha when Zaid ibn Amr passed by them while THEY WERE BOTH eating from a Sufra that belonged to them. So THEY BOTH invited Zaid ibn Amr to eat with them, but Zaid (ibn Amr) replied, “O son of my brother! We do not eat what has been sacrificed to images.”

He then related that from that day, the prophet was never again seen eating what was sacrificed to an idol till the day he was sent (as a prophet). Sa’id Ibn Zaid came to the prophet and said, “O prophet of Allah! Zaid was as you saw him and as you heard about him, so pray for forgiveness for him.” So the prophet agreed and prayed for him and said, “He shall be raised on judgment day as one community.” (Al-Hafith Al-Haithami, The Collection of the Excess)

It continues: “And Zayd b. ‘Amr b. Zayd came to the Messenger of God when the latter was in the company of Zayd b. Haritha; THE TWO MEN WERE EATING FROM A DINING-TABLE SET OUT FOR THEM. They invited Zayd b. ‘Amr to eat with them, but he replied, ‘I am not one who eats what has been slaughtered ON SACRIFICIAL STONES.’” (The Life of the Prophet Muhammad (Al-Sira al-Nabawiyya), translated by Professor Trevor Le Gassick, reviewed by Dr. Ahmed Fareed [Garnet Publishing Limited, 8 Southern Court, South Street Reading RG1 4QS, UK; The Center for Muslim Contribution to Civilization, 1998], Volume 1, p. 113)

As for the tradition given by the hafiz Abu Bakr al-Bayhaqi, Abu Sa’d al-Malini informed us, Abu Ahmad b. ‘Adi, the hafiz told us, Ibrahim b. Asbat related to us, as did ‘Uthman b. Abu Shayba, as did Jarir, from Sufyan al-Thawri, from Muhammad b. ‘Abd Allah b. Muhammad b. ‘Uqayl, from Jabir b. ‘Abd Allah as follows: “The Prophet used to attend the ceremonies of the polytheists along with them. But once he heard two angels behind him, one saying to the other, ‘Let’s move up and stand right behind the Messenger of God (SAAS).’ But the other objected, ‘How can we stand right behind WHEN HE IS IN THE HABIT OF SALUTING IDOLS?’“

He went on, “And thereafter he never AGAIN attended such ceremonies with the polytheists.”

This is a tradition several authorities deny being attributed to ‘Uthman b. Abu Shayba. Regarding it Imam Ahmad commented: “His brother would never speak any such words.”

Al-Bayhaqi reported from various sources that his meaning was that he witnessed those who saluted idols, and that that was before God made revelation to him. But God knows best.

Similarly Yunus b. Bukayr said, from Muhammad b. Ishaq, that ‘Abd Allah Jubayr b. Mut’im, from his father Jubayr who said, “I saw the Messenger of God while he was a member of his people’s religion. He would station himself there on a camel of his at ‘Arafat, among his people until he raced away with them, God the Almighty and Glorious giving him blessing thereby.”

Al-Bayhaqi stated, “The meaning of the words ‘a member of his people’s religion’ refers to the remnants of the heritage of Abraham and Ishmael. The Prophet never at any time associated with Allah any other god.”

I also comment, that from these words (of al-Bayhaqi) it is to be understood that he did attend the assembly at ‘Arafat before he received revelation. And it was this that was a “blessing” to him from God the Almighty and Glorious.

The Imam Ahmad related this tradition from Ya’qub, from Muhammad b. Ishaq. The words he used were: “I saw the Messenger of God before he received revelation while he was positioned on a camel of his with his people on ‘Arafat so that he would move forward with them, this being a blessing from God.”

The Imam Ahmad said that Sufyan related to him, from ‘Amr, from Muhammad b. Jubayr b. Mut’im, from his father, saying, “I lost track of a camel of mine in the ‘Urana valley (close to ‘Arafat) and went off to look for it. I found the Prophet in the assembly there. I said, ‘He’s one of the hums (a word used for Quraysh). What’s he doing here?’”

They both derived this from a tradition of Sufyan b. ‘Uyayna to that effect. (Ibid., pp. 182-183)

Notice how al-Bayhaqi engages in circular reasoning and damage control in order to explain away the fact that Muhammad was deeply engaged in the idolatrous practices of the pagan Arabs.

Ibn Kathir provides some background data regarding the meaning and use of the word hums:

Ibn Ishaq related how Quraysh began the practice of calling themselves al-Hums, a word implying intensity in religion, and intolerance.

This is because they gave extreme veneration to the holy places, to the extent that they required people not to leave there on the night of the procession to ‘Arafat. They would say, “We are men of the holy places, the haram, and Quttan, those who dwell at God’s house.”

They would not make the halt on Mt. ‘Arafat, though they knew that was the wish of Abraham, peace be upon him, in order not to abandon the corrupt innovative practices they themselves established. They would not put away for storage sour cheese made from milk or butter, or clarify fat while they were in a state of ritual uncleanliness. While in this state, they would not enter any tent made of hair, and would seek shelter from the sun only under tents made of leather. Similarly they prevented those making the greater or smaller pilgrimage from eating any but Quraysh food while in that state, and these people could not find a gown from one of the Hums, who were Quraysh either by birth or by having joined Quraysh from Kinana and Khuza’a, they would have to circumambulate naked, even if they were women. A woman who happened to go round in this manner would place her hand over her vagina and recite:

“Today all of my part may appear, but visible though it may be, I do not make it available!”

If anyone who had access to the garment of a Hums person were too proud to use it, then he could go round in his own clothes, but when he had finished he had to throw them aside; thereafter, they could not be used again, either by them or by anyone else, nor ever touched. The Arabs used to call such clothes al-luqa, “cast-offs”. A certain poet spoke the lines:

“How sad it is, my returning to it, it being like a proscribed thing cast off before the pilgrims.”

Ibn Ishaq stated, “They continued in these practices until God sent Muhammad and revealed the Qur’an to him, as a retort to them and their innovations. God said, ‘Hasten forth from the place where people hasten from’ (surat al-Baqara, II, v.199). By this is meant the masses of the Arabs from ‘Arafat. And also that same verse reads, ‘and ask the forgiveness of God; surely God is forgiving, merciful.’”

As we have previously shown, the Messenger of God would make the halt at ‘Arafat before he received his prophethood, this being an award granted by God to him.

God also revealed to him a response to their practice of forbidding people certain actions and foods in the words, “O mankind attend to your dress at every prayer meeting and eat and drink, but do not be extreme. God does not love extremists. Say, ‘Who made forbidden clothing (from) God that He brought forth for His worshippers, along with all good provisions?’” (surat al-A’raf, VII, v.31-2).

Ziyad al-Bakka’i stated from Ibn Ishaq, “But I don’t know whether their making these innovations preceded or followed the battle of the elephant.” (Ibid., pp. 205-206)

These next reports provide further substantiation that Muhammad did in fact worship and sacrifice to the three pagan goddesses known as the daughters of Allah:

مسند الإمام أحمد. الإصدار 2.04 – للإمام أحمد ابن حنبل

حدثنا عبد الله حدثني أبي حدثنا أبو أسامة حماد بن أسامة حدثنا هشام يعني ابن عروة عن أبيه قال:
-حدثني جار لخديجة بنت خويلد أنه سمع النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم وهو يقول لخديجة أي خديجة والله لا أعبد اللات والعزى والله لا أعبد أبدا قال فتقول خديجة خل اللات خل العزى قال كانت صنمهم التي كانوا يعبدون ثم يضطجعون.

Narrated by Abdullah, narrated by his father, narrated by Abu Usama Hamad ibn Usama, narrated by Hisham ibn Urwah, narrated from his father who related that a neighbor of Khadija bint Khuwaylid heard the prophet say, “O Khadija! By Allah I do not worship Allat nor Al-Uzza. By Allah I will not worship (them) at all.” Khadija replied, “Leave Allat and leave Al-Uzza.” He said this was their statue WHICH THEY USED TO WORSHIP after which they would lay down to sleep. (Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, Musnad Ahmad)

مجمع الزوائد. الإصدار 2.05 – للحافظ الهيثمي

13861- عن عروة بن الزبير قال: حدثني جار لخديجة بنت خويلد قال: سمعت النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم يقول لخديجة: “أي خديجة ، والله لا أعبد اللات أبداً، والله لا أعبد العزى أبداً”. قال: تقول [خديجة]: خل العزى.
قال: وكان صنمهم الذي يعبدون ثم يضطجعون.
رواه أحمد ورجاله رجال الصحيح.

Narrated by Urwah ibn Al-Zubair who narrated that a neighbor of Khadija bint Khuwaylid heard the prophet say to Khadija, “O Khadija! By Allah I do not worship Allat! By Allah I do not worship Al-Uzza.” Khadija replied, “Leave Al-Uzza.” He said this was their statue WHICH THEY USED TO WORSHIP after which they would lay down to sleep.

This was narrated by Ahmad ibn Hanbal and his disciples AND BY MEN OF SAHIH (correct hadith). (Al-Hafith Al-Haithami, The Collection of the Excess)

Muhammad Ibn ‘Abd Allah al-Asadi informed us: Sufyan al-Thawri informed us; he said: I heard al-Suddi saying about God’s words, “Did He not find thee wandering and direct (thee)?” that he (Prophet) was following the customs of his people FOR YEARS. (Ibn S’ad, Q. 93:7, Kitab Al-Tabaqat Al-Kabir, English translation by S. Moinul Haq, M.A., PH.D assisted by H.K. Ghazanfar M.A. [Kitab Bhavan Exporters & Importers, 1784 Kalan Mahal, Daryaganj, New Delhi, 110 002 India], Volume I, parts I & II, p. 219)

And here’s what a more recent Muslim biographer writes in respect to Khadija sacrificing to her idols:

Muhammad’s Sons

The years passed while Muhammad participated in the public life of Makkah and found in Khadijah, the loving woman who gave him many children, the best of all woman companions. She gave him two sons, al Qasim and ‘Abdullah the last of whom was nicknamed al Tahir and al Tayyib-and four daughters, Zaynab, Ruqayyah, Umm Kulthum and Fatimah. Hardly anything is known of al Qasim and `Abdullah except that they died before the coming of Islam, while still infants. Undoubtedly their loss caused their parents great grief and affected them deeply. As their mother, Khadijah must have received a permanent wound at their loss. She must have turned to her idols, inquisitively asking why the gods did not have mercy on her, and why they did not prevent her happiness from repeated shipwreck by the loss of her children. Certainly, Muhammad must have shared her grief and unhappiness. It is not difficult for us to imagine the depth of their tragedy in an age when daughters used to be buried alive and male descendants were sought after as the substance of life itself indeed more. Sufficient proof of this grief is the fact that Muhammad could not last long without a male heir. When he saw Zayd ibn Harithah offered for sale, he asked Khadijah to buy him; no sooner was the new slave bought than Muhammad manumitted and adopted him as a son. He was called Zayd ibn Muhammad, lived under his protection, and became one of his best followers and companions. There was yet more grief ahead for Muhammad when his third son Ibrahim passed away in the Islamic period, after Islam had prohibited the burial of live daughters and declared paradise to stand under the feet of mothers. It is not surprising, therefore, that Muhammad’s losses in his children should leave their deep mark upon his life and thought. He must, have been quite shocked when on each of these tragic occasions, Khadijah turned to the idols of the Ka’bah, and sacrificed to Hubal, to al Lat, al `Uzza, and Manat in the hope that these deities would intercede on her behalf and prevent the loss of her children. But Muhammad must have then realized the vanity and futility of these hopes and efforts in his tragic bereavement and great sorrow. (Muhammad Husayn Haykal, The Life of Muhammad, Translated by Isma’il Razi A. al-Faruqi [American Trust Publications, USA 1976; Malaysian edition by Islamic Book Trust], 4. From Marriage to Prophethood, pp. 68-69)

Hence, Muhammad was associated and involved with a group of innovators who were engaged in pagan practices.

FURTHER READING

Muhammad and Idolatry

Muhammad’s Idolatry Revisited

Muhammad’s Idolatry and Arabic Grammar 

Revisiting Muhammad’s Idolatry

The aim of this post is to share some of the many reasons why the Islamic deity cannot be the same God revealed in the Person of Jesus Christ and his inspired Word, the Holy Bible. The evidence will prove that Muhammad’s Allah is not the same as the Father of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

GOD AS SPIRITUAL FATHER

Muhammad’s ilah

The god proclaimed by Muhammad isn’t a spiritual father who relates to his people in a loving, intimate filial manner. Allah rejects such a notion and even chides Jews and Christians for thinking they are the spiritual children of God:

The Jews and Christians say: We are sons of Allah and His loved ones. Say: Why then doth He chastise you for your sins? Nay, ye are but mortals of His creating. He forgiveth whom He will, and chastiseth whom He will. Allah’s is the Sovereignty of the heavens and the earth and all that is between them, and unto Him is the journeying. S. 5:18

The highest form of intimacy one has with Allah is that of a slave to master relationship:

And they say: The Beneficent hath taken unto Himself a son. Assuredly ye utter a disastrous thing Whereby almost the heavens are torn, and the earth is split asunder and the mountains fall in ruins, That ye ascribe unto the Beneficent a son, When it is not meet for (the Majesty of) the Beneficent that He should choose a son. There is none in the heavens and the earth but cometh unto the Beneficent as a slave. S. 19:88-93

Allah is clear that he chooses to have no children, especially a son with whom he shares his dominion:

If Allah had willed to choose a son, He could have chosen what He would of that which He hath created. Be He Glorified! He is Allah, the One, the Absolute. S. 39:4

And say: Praise be to Allah, Who hath not taken unto Himself a son, and Who hath no partner in the Sovereignty, nor hath He any protecting friend through dependence. And magnify Him with all magnificence. S. 17:111

He unto Whom belongeth the Sovereignty of the heavens and the earth, He hath chosen no son nor hath He any partner in the Sovereignty. He hath created everything and hath meted out for it a measure. S. 25:2

Muhammad’s deity even goes as far as to threaten to fight and subjugate Christians for believing that Christ is his Son, calling them perverted for holding to such a belief:

And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah. That is their saying with their mouths. They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved of old. Allah (Himself) fighteth against them. How perverse are they! S. 9:30

The God Revealed in Jesus

According to God’s only inspired writings, the true God is the Father of Christ, who personally bears witness to Jesus being his beloved Son whom he delights in and who commands all to obey:   

“Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesare′a Philippi, he asked his disciples, ‘Who do men say that the Son of man is?’ And they said, ‘Some say John the Baptist, others say Eli′jah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.’ He said to them, ‘But who do you say that I am?’ Simon Peter replied, ‘You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ And Jesus answered him, ‘Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.’” Matthew 16:13-17

“In those days Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan. And when he came up out of the water, immediately he saw the heavens opened and the Spirit descending upon him like a dove; and a voice came from heaven, ‘Thou art my beloved Son; with thee I am well pleased.’” Mark 1:9-11

“And after six days Jesus took with him Peter and James and John, and led them up a high mountain apart by themselves; and he was transfigured before them, and his garments became glistening, intensely white, as no fuller on earth could bleach them. And there appeared to them Eli′jah with Moses; and they were talking to Jesus. And Peter said to Jesus, ‘Master, it is well that we are here; let us make three booths, one for you and one for Moses and one for Eli′jah.’ For he did not know what to say, for they were exceedingly afraid. And a cloud overshadowed them, and a voice came out of the cloud, ‘This is my beloved Son; listen to him.’” Mark 9:2-7

“For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For when he received honor and glory from God the Father and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory, ‘This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased,’ we heard this voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain.’” 2 Peter 1:16-18

God also testifies that Jesus is his Son that reigns with him forever, being the Father’s beloved Heir who owns everything that belongs to the Father:  

“But he was silent and made no answer. Again the high priest asked him, ‘Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?’And Jesus said, ‘I am; and you will see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.’” Mark 14:61-62

“He had still one other, a beloved son; finally he sent him to them, saying, ‘They will respect my son.’ But those tenants said to one another, ‘This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and the inheritance will be ours.’ And they took him and killed him, and cast him out of the vineyard.” Mark 12:6-8  

“He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you.  All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you.” John 16:14-15 – Cf. 17:2, 10; Colossians 1:13-18; Hebrews 1:2-3

And since the Father owns all creation, this means every created thing exists for and belongs to the Son, which includes Muhammad and his followers.

Furthermore, as the unique Son Christ is the only One who knows the Father intimately, to the same extent that the Father knows him. As such, Jesus is the only One who is able to perfectly reveal the Father to all who would place their faith in the Son:

“In that same hour he rejoiced in the Holy Spirit and said, ‘I thank thee, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to babes; yea, Father, for such was thy gracious will. All things have been delivered to me by my Father; and no one knows who the Son is except the Father, or who the Father is except the Son and any one to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.’” Luke 10:21-22

“No one has ever seen God; the only Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has made him known.” John 1:18

“Jesus answered them, ‘Do not murmur among yourselves. No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day. It is written in the prophets, “And they shall all be taught by God.” Every one who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me. Not that any one has seen the Father except him who is from God; he has seen the Father.’” John 6:43-46

“‘Let not your hearts be troubled; believe in God, believe also in me. In my Father’s house are many rooms; if it were not so, would I have told you that I go to prepare a place for you? And when I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and will take you to myself, that where I am you may be also. And you know the way where I am going.’ Thomas said to him, ‘Lord, we do not know where you are going; how can we know the way?’ Jesus said to him, ‘I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me. If you had known me, you would have known my Father also; henceforth you know him and have seen him.’ Philip said to him, ‘Lord, show us the Father, and we shall be satisfied.’ Jesus said to him, ‘Have I been with you so long, and yet you do not know me, Philip? He who has seen me has seen the Father; how can you say, “Show us the Father”? Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority; but the Father who dwells in me does his works. Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father in me; or else believe me for the sake of the works themselves.’” John 14:1-11

Moreover, the Father has appointed the Son to be the One who would personally resurrect the dead and judge mankind at the last day. God expressly did this in order that all creation grant to his beloved Son the same honor that they give unto the Father:

“Jesus said to them, ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing; for whatever he does, that the Son does likewise. For the Father loves the Son, and shows him all that he himself is doing; and greater works than these will he show him, that you may marvel. For as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to whom he will. The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, that all may honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him… Truly, truly, I say to you, the hour is coming, and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live. For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself… Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his [the Son’s] voice and come forth, those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of judgment.’” John 5:19-23, 25-26, 28-29  

“‘All that the Father gives me will come to me; and him who comes to me I will not cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me; and this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up at the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that every one who sees the Son and believes in him should have eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.’ The Jews then murmured at him, because he said, ‘I am the bread which came down from heaven.’ They said, ‘Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does he now say, “I have come down from heaven”?’” John 6:37-42

Interestingly, Muhammad is told that if Allah did have a son then he would have to be the first one to worship him:

Say (O Muhammad): If the Beneficent One hath a son, then, I shall be first among the worshippers. (But there is no son). S. 43:81 Pickthall

Note the following translations:

Say: “If (God) Most Gracious had a son, I would be the first to worship.” Yusuf Ali

Say, `If the Gracious God had a son, I would have been the first of worshippers.’ Sher Ali

Say: ‘If the All-merciful has a son, then I am the first to serve him.’ Arberry

Say, ‘If the Merciful One has a son then am I the first to worship him. Palmer

SAY: If the God of Mercy had a son, the first would I be to worship him: Rodwell

Say, if the Merciful had a son, verily I [would be] the first of those who should worship [him]. Sale

And this is exactly what the holy Apostles of the Lord did, namely, worship him for being the unique, divine Son of God who reigns over the winds and seas:

“Then he made the disciples get into the boat and go before him to the other side, while he dismissed the crowds. And after he had dismissed the crowds, he went up into the hills by himself to pray. When evening came, he was there alone, but the boat by this time was many furlongs distant from the land, beaten by the waves; for the wind was against them. And in the fourth watch of the night he came to them, walking on the sea. But when the disciples saw him walking on the sea, they were terrified, saying, ‘It is a ghost!’ And they cried out for fear. But immediately he spoke to them, saying, ‘Take heart, it is I; have no fear.’ And Peter answered him, ‘Lord, if it is you, bid me come to you on the water.’ He said, ‘Come.’ So Peter got out of the boat and walked on the water and came to Jesus; but when he saw the wind, he was afraid, and beginning to sink he cried out, ‘Lord, save me.’ Jesus immediately reached out his hand and caught him, saying to him, ‘O man of little faith, why did you doubt?’ And when they got into the boat, the wind ceased. And those in the boat worshiped him, saying, ‘Truly you are the Son of God.’” Matthew 14:22-33

Finally, Christ and his inspired emissaries taught that a person has to be more than a slave if s/he wants to have a permanent place in God’s abode. S/he must become a child of God through faith in Jesus Christ our Lord:

“When they came to Caper′na-um, the collectors of the half-shekel tax went up to Peter and said, ‘Does not your teacher pay the tax?’He said, ‘Yes.’ And when he came home, Jesus spoke to him first, saying, ‘What do you think, Simon? From whom do kings of the earth take toll or tribute? From their sons or from others?’And when he said, ‘From others,’ Jesus said to him, ‘Then the sons are free.However, not to give offense to them, go to the sea and cast a hook, and take the first fish that comes up, and when you open its mouth you will find a shekel; take that and give it to them for me and for yourself.’” Matthew 17:24-27

“As he spoke thus, many believed in him. Jesus then said to the Jews who had believed in him, ‘If you continue in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.’ They answered him, ‘We are descendants of Abraham, and have never been in bondage to any one. How is it that you say, “You will be made free”?’ Jesus answered them, ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, every one who commits sin is a slave to sin. The slave does not continue in the house for ever; the son continues for ever. So if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed.’” John 8:30-36

“At that time Jesus declared, ‘I thank thee, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to babes; yea, Father, for such was thy gracious will. All things have been delivered to me by my Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and any one to whom the Son chooses to reveal him. Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me; for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.’” Matthew 11:25-30

“But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God; who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.” John 1:12-13

“But when the time had fully come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons. And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, ‘Abba! Father!’ So through God you are no longer a slave but a son, and if a son then an heir.” Galatians 4:4-7 – Cf. Romans 8:9-18

“See what love the Father has given us, that we should be called children of God; and so we are. The reason why the world does not know us is that it did not know him. Beloved, we are God’s children now; it does not yet appear what we shall be, but we know that when he appears we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is. And every one who thus hopes in him purifies himself as he is pure.” 1 John 3:1-3

GOD’S UNIVERSAL LOVE

Muhammad’s ilah doesn’t love everyone

The Quran emphatically teaches that Allah does not love every human being, but only loves those who love him and obey Muhammad, and practice righteousness. The Islamic scripture expressly proclaims that Muhammad’s god does not love the ungodly, miser, prodigal etc. (Cf. Q. 2:190, 195, 222; 3:31-32, 146, 159; 5:13, 42; 6:141; 11:90; 16:23; 19:96; 28:77; 42:40; 49:9; 61:4).

These are facts that are even admitted by Muslim polemicists such as Shabir Ally.

Ally unashamedly affirms that his god doesn’t love everyone, and most definitely doesn’t love sinners:

“Due to a slight misunderstanding, many people see this as an unresolvable contradiction. This question has troubled them to the point of driving them away from religion altogether. This misunderstanding begins with the assumption that God loves everyone, even sinners. Then it becomes difficult to explain why God would punish sinners.

“Some people attempt to explain their way around this by saying that God loves the sinner but hates the sin. This explanation would have been good enough if God would punish the sin and save the sinner. Instead, God will punish the sinner, so the problem remains.

“To survey the problem a little further, consider the following quote from Matthew’s Gospel:

‘You have heard that it was said, “Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.” But I tell you: Love your enemies…’ (Matthew 5:43-44).

“Now this passage indicates that it is a good thing to love one’s enemies. It follows, then, that God, being infinitely good, must love His enemies too. But then, why would He punish them? Why, for example, would God torment some of His creatures day and night for ever and ever in a lake of burning sulphur if He loves them? (see Revelation 20:10)

“The Qur’an resolve this problem by indicating QUITE CLEARLY that although God is full of loving kindness He does not love sinners who refuse to change.

“We know from the Qur’an that Allah does not like the following categories of people:

·      mischief makers

·      treacherous ingrates

·      proud people

·      prodigals

·      rejectors of God’s message.

“It presents, therefore, no difficulty in the mind of a Muslim if God punishes such people. On the other hand, it makes more sense that God will not treat the good and bad in the same manner. Therefore we must all try our best to do what pleases God, and seek His forgiveness for our failings.

“The Qur’an tells us that Allah loves the following categories of people:

·      those who do good

·      those who repent of their sins

·      those who keep themselves clean

·      those who fulfil their pledges and are conscious of Allah

·      those who are steadfast on the right path

·      those who trust in Allah.

“Let us therefore ask God to make us DESERVING of His infinite love.” (Shabir Ally, Common Questions People Ask about Islam [Al Attique Int’l Islamic Publications, Toronto, Ont. Canada], Question 16. If God is Loving, Kind, and Merciful, why would He punish anyone in Hell? pp. 46-48 http://books.google.com/books?id=jixPvnaAR6kC&pg=PA48&lpg=PA48&dq=shabir+ally+allah+loves+the+following+categories+of+people&source=bl&ots=ubgUfrv4aR&sig=zIdO63Gzqaau2ZJRd8e9gQ8VOAM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=7GnzUP3iNILm2QXUu4DQBg&ved=0CEMQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=shabir%20ally%20allah%20loves%20the%20following%20categories%20of%20people&f=false; bold and capital emphasis mine)

The following Islamic scholar concurs with Ally that the Muslim deity doesn’t possess unqualified, unconditional love for mankind:

“Unqualified Divine Love for mankind is an idea completely alien to the Qur’an. In fact ‘to love’ is a phrase too strong to convey the idea of ahaba which can be rendered equally well as ‘to like or to approve.’…

“Even if we adopt the translation ‘loves’ for yuhibbu when it is used with God as the subject, nowhere do we find the idea that God loves mankind. God’s love is conditional. He loves those who do good, ³) those who turn repentant to Him, ⁴) those who keep themselves clean, ¹) those who guard themselves fearfully (against His wrath), ²) those who are patient, ³) those who rely upon Him, ⁴) those who are just, 5) and those who fight in His cause. 6) On the other hand, He loves not those who transgress, 7) nor any sinful misbeliever, ⁸) not the unjust, ⁹) nor the corruption, ¹⁰) nor the extravagant, ¹¹) nor the treacherous, ¹²) nor the proud and boastful, ¹³) nor the fraudulent sinners, ¹⁴) nor those big with pride, ¹⁵) nor misbelieving traitors, 16) nor misbelievers. ¹⁷)” (Daud Rahbar, God of Justice: A Study in the Ethical Doctrine of the Qur’an [E. J. Brill, Leiden,1960], pp. 172-173)

What’s even more disturbing is that the Quran nowhere exhorts believers to love Allah. Rahbar explains why this is so:

“The relationship of love, as we have said earlier, is a reciprocal one. This is because God Himself loves only the strictly pious. To love God one must presuppose that God is reciprocating the sentiment. And to presuppose that is to presume that one is perfectly pious. Such presumption the Qur’an never allows. Even the most virtuous men as prophets are constantly reminded that they are sinful creatures who must ask forgiveness of smallest sins whether they are aware of them or not. Side by side with such a conception of God’s unrelaxing justice love for God would certainly be out of place. It is therefore very rarely that the subject of human love for God is touched at all in the Qur’an…

“It is probable that hubb for God in all these verses is not strictly love, but a regard for God that outweighs the love of worldly things. The following verse brings out this point:

“Say, ‘If your fathers, and your sons, and your brothers, and your wives, and your clansmen, and the wealth which ye have gained, and the merchandise which ye fear may be slack, and the dwellings which ye love, are dearer to you than God and His Apostle (ahabba ilaykum mina Allahi warasulihi…) than fighting strenuously in His way,–then wait awhile, until God brings His bidding, for God guides not a people who work abomination’!” (9:24) 

This is all that the Qur’an has to say on Godward love, On the other hand, fear of God is the most oft-mentioned Godward sentiment in the Qur’an and goes so naturally with the idea of the Lord of justice and authority…” (Ibid., pp. 180-181; bold emphasis mine)

The God revealed in Jesus loves the whole world

The Father of Christ, on the other hand, loves the entire world and desires all mankind to be saved through faith in Jesus Christ our Lord:

“For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. For God sent the Son into the world, not to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through him. He who believes in him is not condemned; he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.” John 3:16-18  

“and hope does not disappoint us, because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us. While we were yet helpless, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. Why, one will hardly die for a righteous man—though perhaps for a good man one will dare even to die. But God shows his love for us in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us.” Romans 5:5-8

“First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all men, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, godly and respectful in every way. This is good, and it is acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all, the testimony to which was borne at the proper time.” 1 Timothy 2:1-6

“My little children, I am writing this to you so that you may not sin; but if any one does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; and he is the expiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.” 1 John 2:1-2

“He who does not love does not know God; for God is love. In this the love of God was made manifest among us, that God sent his only Son into the world, so that we might live through him. In this is love, not that we loved God but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the expiation for our sins. Beloved, if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. No man has ever seen God; if we love one another, God abides in us and his love is perfected in us. By this we know that we abide in him and he in us, because he has given us of his own Spirit. And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent his Son as the Savior of the world. Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God. So we know and believe the love God has for us. God is love, and he who abides in love abides in God, and God abides in him.” 1 John 4:8-16

What makes this so remarkable is that Jesus’s holy commandments condemn Muhammad’s Allah as being no better and no greater than pagans and unbelievers who also love only those who love them:

“If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. And if you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners do the same. And if you lend to those from whom you hope to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to receive as much again. But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return; and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High; for he is kind to the ungrateful and the selfish. Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful.” Luke 6:32-36  

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you salute only your brethren, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.” Matthew 5:43-48

Jesus’ statements against greeting only one’s brethren directly hits at the teachings of the Islamic deity who expressly forbade his jihadis from greeting the disbelievers such as the Jews and Christians. Muhammad’s god even goes so far as to encourage Muhammadans to ridicule, debase, humiliate and disgrace Jews, Christians and idolators:

Paying Jizyah is a Sign of Kufr AND DISGRACE

Allah said …

<until they pay the Jizyah>, if they do not choose to embrace Islam …

<with willing submission>, in defeat and subservience …

<and feel themselves subdued.>, DISGRACED, HUMILIATED AND BELITTLED. Therefore, Muslims are not allowed to honor the people of Dhimmah or elevate them above Muslims, FOR THEY ARE MISERABLE, DISGRACED AND HUMILIATED. Muslim recorded from Abu Hurayrah that the Prophet said…

<<DO NOT INITIATE THE SALAM to the Jews and Christians, and if you meet any of them in a road, FORCE THEM TO ITS NARROWEST ALLEY.>>

This is why the Leader of the faithful `Umar bin Al-Khattab demanded his well-known conditions be met by the Christians, THESE CONDITIONS THAT ENSURED THEIR CONTINUED HUMILIATION, DEGRADATION AND DISGRACE. The scholars of Hadith narrated from `Abdur-Rahman bin Ghanm Al-Ash`ari that he said, “I recorded for `Umar bin Al-Khattab the terms of the treaty of peace he conducted with the Christians of Ash-Sham:

‘In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful. This is a document to the servant of Allah `Umar, the Leader of the faithful, from the Christians of such and such city. When you (Muslims) came to us we requested safety for ourselves, children, property and followers of our religion.

We made a condition on ourselves that we will neither erect in our areas a monastery, church, or a sanctuary for a monk, nor restore any place of worship that needs restoration nor use any of them for the purpose of enmity against Muslims.

We will not prevent any Muslim from resting in our churches whether they come by day or night, and we will open the doors [of our houses of worship] for the wayfarer and passerby.

Those Muslims who come as guests, will enjoy boarding and food for three days.

We will not allow a spy against Muslims into our churches and homes or hide deceit [or betrayal] against Muslims.

We will not teach our children the Qur’an, publicize practices of Shirk, invite anyone to Shirk or prevent any of our fellows from embracing Islam, if they choose to do so.

We will respect Muslims, MOVE FROM THE PLACES WE SIT IN IF THEY CHOOSE TO SIT IN THEM.

We will not imitate their clothing, caps, turbans, sandals, hairstyles, speech, nicknames and title names, or ride on saddles, hang swords on the shoulders, collect weapons of any kind or carry these weapons.

We will not encrypt our stamps in Arabic, or sell liquor.

We will have the front of our hair cut, wear our customary clothes wherever we are, wear belts around our waist, refrain from erecting crosses on the outside of our churches and demonstrating them and our books in public in Muslim fairways and markets.

We will not sound the bells in our churches, except discretely, or raise our voices while reciting our holy books inside our churches in the presence of Muslims, nor raise our voices [with prayer] at our funerals, or light torches in funeral processions in the fairways of Muslims, or their markets.

We will not bury our dead next to Muslim dead, or buy servants who were captured by Muslims. We will be guides for Muslims and refrain from breaching their privacy in their homes.’

When I gave this document to `Umar, he added to it, `We will not beat any Muslim. These are the conditions that we set against ourselves and followers of our religion IN RETURN FOR SAFETY AND PROTECTION. If we break any of these promises that we set for your benefit against ourselves, then our Dhimmah (promise of protection) is broken and you are allowed to do with us what you are allowed of people of defiance and rebellion.’” (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Q. 9:29 https://www.alim.org/quran/tafsir/ibn-kathir/surah/9/28/; emphasis mine)

As if Islam’s disdain towards Jews and Christians couldn’t be any clearer note what the following narratives report:

512. When a dhimmi writes and gives the greeting, he is answered

1101. Abu ‘Uthman an-Nahdi said, “Abu Musa wrote to a Persian grandee and greeted him in his letter. He was asked, ‘Do you greet him when he is an unbeliever?’ He replied, ‘He wrote to me and greeted me, so I have answered him.'”

1102. Abu Basra l-Ghifari reported that the Prophet said, “I will ride to the Jews tomorrow. Do not give them the greeting first. If they greet you, then say, ‘and on you.'”

1103. Abu Hurayra reported that the Prophet said, “Do not give the People of the Book the greeting first. FORCE THEM TO THE NARROWEST PART OF THE ROAD.”

519. The People of the Book are forced to the narrowest part of the road

1111. See 1103.

521. When someone greets a Christian whom he does not recognise

1115. ‘Abdu’r-Rahman said, “Ibn ‘Umar passed by a Christian who greeted him and Ibn ‘Umar returned the greeting. He was told that the man was a Christian. When he learned that, he went back to him and said, ‘Give me back my greeting.'” (Al-Adab al-Mufrad by Al-Bukhari, translated by Aisha Bewley, chapter XDIII. The People of the Book: source; emphasis mine)

What the foregoing indicates is that Muslims can only greet Jews and Christians first, and can allow them to walk on the road alongside of them, when they are in the minority and/or are under the rule of disbelievers. Yet, once they dominate and have the upper-hand they are not allowed to do so, just as the following Muslim source admits:

Chapter 41. What Has Been Related About Greeting The People Of The Book With Salam

1602. Abu Hurairah narrated that the Messenger of Allah said: “Do not precede the Jews and Christians with the Salam. And if one of you meets one of them in the path, then force him to its narrow portion.” (SAHIH)

[He said:] These are narrations on this topic from Ibn ‘Umar, Anas, and Abu Basrah al-Ghifari the Companion of the Prophet.

[Abu ‘Eisa said:] This Hadith is Hasan Sahih. And regarding the meaning of the Hadith: “Do not precede the Jews and Christians”: Some of the people of knowledge said that it only means that it is disliked because it would be honoring them, AND THE MUSLIMS WERE ONLY ORDERED TO HUMILIATE THEM. For this reason, when one of them is met on the path, then the path is not yielded for him, because doing so would amount to honoring them.

Comments:

IN NORMAL CONDITIONS, WHEN MUSLIMS ARE IN POWER AND THEY ARE NOT LIVING AS A MINORITY, AND THEY ARE NOT UNDER ANY COMPULSION OR SUBJUGATION, IT IS AN ORDER for Muslims that they should not give such leeway to the non-Muslims and they should not greet them first nor yield the way for them. Some of the people of knowledge said that it only means that it is disliked because it would amount to honoring them, AND THE MUSLIMS WERE ONLY TO HUMILIATE THEM. FOR THIS REASON, when one of them is met on the path a Muslim is not to yield for him because doing so would amount to honoring them. In a country where Muslims are living as a minority, THEY ARE ALLOWED TO GIVE SUCH LEEWAY TO NON-MUSLIM RULERS FOR THE GREATER INTEREST OF THE MUSLIM COMMUNITY. (Tuhfat Al-Ahwadhi v.2, p.397.) (English Translation of Jami‘ At-Tirmidhi, Compiled by Imam Hafiz Abu ‘Eisa Mohammad Ibn ‘Eisa At-Tirmidhi, translated by Abu Khaliyl (USA), ahadith edited and referenced by Hafiz Tahir Zubair ‘Ali Za’i [Darussalam Publishers & Distributors, First Edition: November 2007], Volume 3, 19. The Chapters On Military Expeditions From The Messenger of Allah, pp. 365-366: https://sunnah.com/tirmidhi:1602; emphasis mine)

Therefore, the god of Muhammad stands condemned by the true God revealed in Christ, namely, the God and Father of our risen Lord and Savior Jesus. As such, they most definitely cannot be the same God. Rather, the Muslim ilah is a false god set up by the enemy to keep people away from the Father of our Lord Jesus so as to prevent them from obtaining everlasting life, which only comes through trusting in God’s uniquely beloved Son:

“If we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater; for this is the testimony of God that he has borne witness to his Son. 10 He who believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself. He who does not believe God has made him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has borne to his Son. And this is the testimony, that God gave us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He who has the Son has life; he who has not the Son of God has not life. I write this to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life. And this is the confidence which we have in him, that if we ask anything according to his will he hears us. And if we know that he hears us in whatever we ask, we know that we have obtained the requests made of him.” 1 John 5:9-15

According to God’s inspired writings, Allah is the spirit of antichrist which makes Muhammad an antichrist:

“Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son. No one who denies the Son has the Father. He who confesses the Son has the Father also.”

There’s simply no way around this revealed truth.

All scriptural references taken from the Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (RSVCE).

FURTHER READING

Divine Love: A Biblical and Quranic Perspective

The Problem of Divine Sovereignty, Predestination, Salvation and Human Free Will

The Creation and Purpose of Hell Pt. 1

In this post I will cite various Catholic authorities to illustrate the Catholic interpretation of Revelation, especially as it relates to the Assumption of the Blessed Mother. All emphasis will be mine.

Verse 1

A woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet. By this woman, interpreters commonly understand the Church of Christ, shining with the light of faith, under the protection of the sun of justice, Jesus Christ. The moon, the Church, hath all changeable things of this world under her feet, the affections of the faithful being raised above them all. — A woman: the Church of God. It may also, by allusion, be applied to our blessed Lady [the Virgin Mary]. The Church is clothed with the sun, that is, with Christ: she hath the moon, that is, the changeable things of the world, under her feet; and the twelve stars with which she is crowned, are the twelve apostles: she is in labour and pain, whilst she brings forth her children, and Christ in them, in the midst of afflictions and persecutions. (Challoner) — On her head….twelve stars, her doctrine being delivered by the twelve apostles and their successors. (Witham) (Haydock’s Catholic Bible Commentary, Chapter 12)

12:1-6 The woman of Revelation is BOTH AN INDIVIDUAL PERSON AND a collective symbol. She is Mary, the mother of the Messiah and the spiritual mother of his disciples (Jn 19:26-27). But she also represents the faithful of Israel, crying out for the Messiah (Rev 12:2), as well as the Church, attacked by the devil for witnessing to Jesus (12:17) (CCC 501, 507, 1138) The depiction of the woman is rich in biblical symbolism. (1) Antagonism between the woman and the dragon, the “ancient serpent” (12:9), recalls Gen 3:15, the first prophecy in Scripture to foretell the demise of the devil through the offspring (Messiah) of a woman (a new Eve). (2) Images of the sun, moon, and stars call to mind Gen 37:9-10, where they symbolize the family of Israel, namely, Jacob, his wife, and his twelve sons. (3) The pangs and anguish of childbirth recall Isaiah’s description of Daughter Zion, a maternal figure that represents the holy remnant of Israel groaning for redemption (Is 26:17; Mic 4:9-10). (4) Because the woman is a queen who wears a crown and a mother who bears a royal male child, she is also the Queen Mother of the Davidic kingdom reestablished by Jesus, the Davidic male child (1 Kings 2:19-20; Jer 13:18) (CCC 489). See essay, Queen Mother at 1 Kings 2. The woman is clearly the Church, endowed with the Word of the Father, whose brightness outshines the sun. Like the moon she is adorned with the heavenly glory, and her crown of twelve stars points to the twelve apostles who founded the Church (St. Hippolytus, On the Antichrist 61). The vision speaks of the Mother of the Savior, depicting her in heaven, not on earth, as pure in body and soul, as equal to an angel, as one of heaven’s citizens, as one who brought about the Incarnation of God. She has nothing in common with this world and its evils but is exalted and worthy of heaven, despite her descent from our mortal nature (Oecumenius, Commentary on the Apocalypse 6, 19). (Ignatius Catholic Study Bible New Testament (Second Edition RSV), with Introduction, Commentary, and notes by Scott Hahn and Curtis Mitch[Ignatius Press, 2010], pp. 506-507)     

Perhaps more than any other, this passage of Revelation has inspired art and iconography. Most Catholics are familiar with images depicting Mary as the woman in this passage, crowned with twelve stars, surrounded by the sun, with the moon at her feet. Like many of the other visions in Revelation, this one has multiple levels of meaning. On the one hand, the woman of this vision symbolizes the faithful people of God of the Old and New Testaments. On the other, she is Mary, the mother of the Messiah, and for that reason the most exalted member of the human race after her son… The dragon’s malice is revealed by its stance before the woman … to devour her child when she gave birth. Herod’s jealous attempt to kill the Christ–child reflects the same mentality (Matt 2:7-16). Herod acted under the influence of Satan, as did those who killed Christ (Luke 22:3; John 13:2, 27), as do those who persecute Christians in John’s time and our own.      

The mention of the woman’s labor pains (see Gen 3:16) and the hostility of the dragon, “the ancient serpent” (12:9), toward the woman’s child recalls God’s words to the serpent in the Gen 3:15: “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will strike your head, and you will strike his heel” (NRSV). This vision in Revelation resumes the story begun in Genesis about the conflict between Satan and the human race. A second Eve has given birth to the one who will strike the serpent’s head. (Peter S. Williamson, Revelation (Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture) [Baker Academic, Illustrated edition; Grand Rapids, MI 2015)], pp. 206-207)

Mary, the Woman Clothed with the Son

In the vision of Rev 12, Mary “represents and is the living icon of the whole church.”^a She is the one who brought forth the divine Messiah (12:5); her soul was pierced by a sword (Luke 2:35) when her Son, the Lamb, was sacrificed. She is the mother of Christians both by being the mother of the one in whom we are born anew, and by assenting to the request of her Son on the cross, “Behold, your son” (John 19:26), indicating the beloved disciple. In tradition, this beloved disciple has been seen to represent all followers of Jesus, whom Mary has adopted.

Assumed into heaven, Mary now reigns with Christ, the martyrs, and saints (20:4-6). With all the saints she intercedes for her children on earth, “those who keep God’s commandments and bear witness to Jesus” who are being pursued by the dragon (12:17).

The woman in John’s vision is radiant, clothed with the light of the sun, moon, and stars, an anticipation of the glory of God that will one day clothe all God’s people in the new Jerusalem (21:9-11).

a. Donald A. Mcllraith, Everyone’s Apocalypse (Suwa, Fiji: Pacific Regional Seminary, 1995), 62. (Ibid., p. 208)

2. The Bodily Assumption of Mary into Heaven

a) Dogma

Mary was assumed body and soul into Heaven. (De fide.)

After Pope Pius XII, on 1st May, 1946, had addressed to all bishops in the world the official query whether the bodily assumption of Mary into Heaven could be defined as a proposition of faith, and whether they with their clergy and people desired the definition, and when almost all the bishops had replied in the affirmative, on 1st November, 1950_ he promulgated by the Apostolic Constitution “Munificentissimus Deus” as a dogma revealed by God that : Mary, the immaculate perpetually Virgin Mother of God, after the completion of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into the glory of Heaven”  (pronuntiamus, declaramus et definimus divinitus revelatum dogma esse: Immaculatam Deiparam semper Virginem Mariam, expleto terrestris vitae cursu, fuisse corpore et anima ad caelestern gloriam assumptam).

In the Marian Epilogue to the Encyclical “Mystici Corporis” It (1943) Pope Pius XII had already taught that Mary “resplendent in glory in body and soul reigns in heaven with her Son” (D 2291).

b) Proof from Scripture and Tradition

Direct and express scriptural proofs are not to be had. The possibility of the bodily assumption before the second coming of Christ is not excluded by 1 Cor. 15, 23, as the objective Redemption was completed with the sacrificial death of Christ, and the beginning 0 the final era foretold by the prophets commenced. Its probability is suggested by Mt. 27, 51-53: “And the graves were opened: and many bodies of the saints that had slept arose, and coming out of the tombs after His Resurrection came into the holy city and appeared to many.” According to the more probable explanation, which was already explained by the Fathers, the awakening of the “saints” was a final resurrection and transfiguration. If, however, the justified of the Old Covenant were called to the perfection of salvation immediately after the conclusion of the redemptive work of Christ, then it is possible and probable that the Mother of the Lord was called to it also.

From her fullness of grace spoken of in Luke 1, 28, Scholastic theology derives the doctrine of the bodily assumption and glorification of Mary. Since she was full of grace she remained preserved from the three-fold curse of sin (Gn. 3, 16-19), as well as from her return to dust (cf. S. Thomas, Expos. salute ang). In the woman of the Apocalypse clothed with the sun (12, 1), which in its literal sense, must be taken to mean the Church, Scholastic theology sees also the transfigured mother of Christ. The Fathers too refer passages such as Ps. 131, 8 in a typical sense to the mystery of the bodily assumption: “Arise, o Lord, into thy resting place; thou and the ark which thou hast sanctified, the ark of the Covenant made from incorruptible wood (a type of the incorruptible body of Mary).” Apoc. 11, 19: “And the temple of God was opened in Heaven and the ark of His Covenant was seen in His temple.” Cant. Of Cant. 8, .5: “Who is this that con1eth up ·from the desert. flowing with delights, leaning upon her beloved?” Modern theology usually cites Gn. 3, 15 in support of the doctrine. Since by the seed of the woman it understands Christ, and by the woman. Mary, it is argued that as Mary had an intimate share in Christ’s battle against Satan and in His victory over Satan and sin, she must also have participated intimately in His victory over death. It is true that the literal reference of the text is to Eve and not Mary. but already since the end of the second century (St. Justin) Tradition has seen in Mary the new Eve.

The speculative grounds on which the Fathers of the closing Patristic era, and the theologians of the scholastic movement, led by Ps.-Augustine (ninth century) base the incorruptibility and transfiguration of the body of Mary, are also based upon Revelation: These are:

a) Freedom from sin. As the dissolution of the body is a punishment consequent on sin, and as Mary, the immaculately conceived and sinless one, was exempt from the general curse of sin, it was fitting that her body should be excepted from the general law of dissolution and immediately assumed into the glory of Heaven, in accordance with God’s original plan for mankind.

b) Motherhood of God. As the body of Christ originated from the body of Mary (cam Jesu caro est Mariae: Ps.-Augustine) it was fitting that Mary’s body, should share the lot of the body of Christ. As a physico-spiritual relationship the Motherhood of Mary demands a likeness to her Divine Son in body and soul.

c) Perpetual virginity. As Mary’s body was preserved unimpaired in virginal integrity, it was fitting that it should not be subject to destruction after death.

d) Participation in the work of Christ. As Mary, in her capacity of Mother of the Redeemer, took a most intimate share in the redemptive work of her Son. it was fitting that, on the completion of her earthly life, she should attain to the full fruit of the Redemption. which consists in the glorification of soul and body. The idea of the bodily assumption of Mary is first expressed in certain transitus-narratives of the fifth and sixth centuries. Even though these are apocryphal they bear witness to the faith of the generation in which they were written despite their legendary clothing. The first Church author to speak of the bodily ascension of Mary, in association with an apocryphal transitus B.M.V., is St. Gregory of Tours (t 594). Early sermons on the Feast of Mary’s entry into heaven are those of Ps.-Modestus of Jerusalem (about 700), Germanus of Constantinople (t 733), Andrew of Crete (740), St. John Damascene (t 749) and Theodore of Studion (t 826).

In the East, at least since the sixth century, and at Rome, at any rate, since the end of the seventh century (Sergius I, 687-701) the Church celebrated the Feast of the Sleeping of Mary (Dormitio, koimesis). The object of the Feast was originally the death of Mary, but very soon the thought appeared of the incorruptibility of her body and of its assumption into Heaven. The original title Dormitio (Sleeping) was changed into assumption (Sacramentarium Gregorianum). In the Liturgical and Patristic texts of the eighth and ninth centuries, the idea of the bodily assumption is clearly attested. Under the influence of Ps.Hieronymus, there was uncertainty for a long time as to whether or not the assumption of the body was signified by the Feast. Since the peak period of the Middle Ages, the affirmative view has gained precedence, and has now been dominant for a long time.

c) Historical Development of the Dogma.

A hindrance to the development of the dogma of the Assumption in the West was a pseudo-Augustinian sermon (Sermo 208: “Adest nobis”); a letter forged under the name of Jerome (Ep. 9: “Cogitis me”); and the Martyrology of the Monk, Usuard. Ps.-Augustine (probably Ambrosius Autpertus, t 784) takes up the stand that we know nothing of the fate of Mary’s body. Ps.Hieronymus (Paschasius Radbertus, t 865) leaves the question open, whether Mary was assumed into heaven with or without her body, but maintains the incorruptibility of her body. Usuard (t about 875) praises the reticence of the Church which prefers not to know the spot “in which that venerable Temple of the Holy Ghost was hidden from view by Divine command,” than to maintain it as something legendary. Usuard’s Martyrology was extensively used in many monasteries and chapters during choir prayers; Part of the letter of Ps.-Hieronymus found its way into the breviary. This delayed the acceptance of the dogma into the theological thought of the Middle Ages.

In favour of the dogma, an anonymous tract appeared (“Ad interrogata”) in the twelfth century, which has been attributed to St. Augustine but the origin of which is not yet certain (9th-11th centuries), decisively advocating, on rational grounds, the bodily assumption of Mary. Since the thirteenth century, the view represented by Ps.-Augustine has gained the upper hand. The great theologians of the scholastic era declared for it. St. Thomas teaches: Ab hac (maledictione, sc. ut in pulverem revertertur) … immunis fuit Beata Virgo, quia cum corpore ascendit in coelum (Epos. salute ang). On the reform of the Breviary under Pope Pius V (1568) the Ps.-Hieronymian lessons were expunged and replaced by others which advocated the bodily assumption. In the year 1668 a violent dispute flamed up in France on the doctrine of the Assumption, when part of the Chapter of Notre-Dame in Paris wished to revert to the Martyrologium of Usuard, which was abolished in 1540 (or 1549). Jean Launoy (t 1678) energetically defended Usuard’s standpoint. Pope Benedict XIV (1740-58) declared the doctrine of the Assumption to be a pious and probable opinion, but in so doing, did not declare that it belonged to the depositum fidei. In the year 1849 the first petitions for dogmatisation were addressed to the Apostolic See. At the Vatican Council nearly 200 Bishops signed a motion for dogmatisation. Since the beginning of this century, the movement grew apace. After the whole Episcopate, following an official inquiry of the Pope (1946) almost unanimously affirmed the possibility of and the desire for the definition, Pope Pius XII confirmed: “the unanimous doctrine of the ordinary Church Teaching Office, and the unanimous belief of the Christian people” in a solemn definition on November 1st, 1950. (Dr. Ludwig Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, Edited in English by James Canon Bastible, D.D., Translated from the German by Patrick Lynch, PH.D. [Roman Catholic Books, Fort Collins, CO 1954], 208-211)

I now conclude with the what the Catecheim states in respect to the assumption and the blessed Mother being both the Mother of and a type of the Church:

Paragraph 2. “CONCEIVED BY THE POWER OF THE HOLY SPIRIT AND BORN OF THE VIRGIN MARY”

I. CONCEIVED BY THE POWER OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. . .

484 The Annunciation to Mary inaugurates “the fullness of time”,¹¹⁹ The time of the fulfilment of God’s promises and preparations. Mary was invited to conceive him in whom the “whole fullness of deity” would dwell “bodily”.¹²⁰ The divine response to her question, “How can this be, since I know not man?”, was given by the power of the Spirit: “The Holy Spirit will come upon you.”¹²¹

485 The mission of the Holy Spirit is always conjoined and ordered to that of the Son.¹²² The Holy Spirit, “the Lord, the giver of Life”, is sent to sanctify the womb of the Virgin Mary and divinely fecundate it, causing her to conceive the eternal Son of the Father in a humanity drawn from her own.

486 The Father’s only Son, conceived as man in the womb of the Virgin Mary, is “Christ”, that is to say, anointed by the Holy Spirit, from the beginning of his human existence, though the manifestation of this fact takes place only progressively: to the shepherds, to the magi, to John the Baptist, to the disciples.¹²³ Thus the whole life of Jesus Christ will make manifest “how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power.”¹²⁴

II…. BORN OF THE VIRGIN MARY

487 What the Catholic faith believes about Mary is based on what it believes about Christ, and what it teaches about Mary illumines in turn its faith in Christ.

Mary’s predestination

488 “God sent forth his Son”, but to prepare a body for him,¹²⁵ he wanted the free co-operation of a creature. For this, from all eternity God chose for the mother of his Son a daughter of Israel, a young Jewish woman of Nazareth in Galilee, “a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin’s name was Mary”:¹²⁶

The Father of mercies willed that the Incarnation should be preceded by assent on the part of the predestined mother, so that just as a woman had a share in the coming of death, so also should a woman contribute to the coming of life.¹²⁷

489 Throughout the Old Covenant the mission of many holy women prepared for that of Mary. At the very beginning there was Eve; despite her disobedience, she receives the promise of a posterity that will be victorious over the evil one, as well as the promise that she will be the mother of all the living.¹²⁸ By virtue of this promise, Sarah conceives a son in spite of her old age.¹²⁹ Against all human expectation God chooses those who were considered powerless and weak to show forth his faithfulness to his promises: Hannah, the mother of Samuel; Deborah; Ruth; Judith and Esther; and many other women.¹³⁰ Mary “stands out among the poor and humble of the Lord, who confidently hope for and receive salvation from him. After a long period of waiting the times are fulfilled in her, the exalted Daughter of Sion, and the new plan of salvation is established.”¹³¹

The Immaculate Conception

490 To become the mother of the Saviour, Mary “was enriched by God with gifts appropriate to such a role.”¹³² The angel Gabriel at the moment of the annunciation salutes her as “full of grace”.¹³³ In fact, in order for Mary to be able to give the free assent of her faith to the announcement of her vocation, it was necessary that she be wholly borne by God’s grace.

491 Through the centuries the Church has become ever more aware that Mary, “full of grace” through God,¹³⁴ was redeemed from the moment of her conception. That is what the dogma of the Immaculate Conception confesses, as Pope Pius IX proclaimed in 1854:

The most Blessed Virgin Mary was, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God and by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, Saviour of the human race, preserved immune from all stain of original sin.¹³⁵

492 The “splendour of an entirely unique holiness” by which Mary is “enriched from the first instant of her conception” comes wholly from Christ: she is “redeemed, in a more exalted fashion, by reason of the merits of her Son“.¹³⁶ The Father blessed Mary more than any other created person “in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places” and chose her “in Christ before the foundation of the world, to be holy and blameless before him in love”.¹³⁷

493 The Fathers of the Eastern tradition call the Mother of God “the All-Holy” (Panagia), and celebrate her as “free from any stain of sin, as though fashioned by the Holy Spirit and formed as a new creature”.¹³⁸ By the grace of God Mary remained free of every personal sin her whole life long.

“Let it be done to me according to your word. . .”

494 At the announcement that she would give birth to “the Son of the Most High” without knowing man, by the power of the Holy Spirit, Mary responded with the obedience of faith, certain that “with God nothing will be impossible”: “Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord; let it be [done] to me according to your word.”¹³⁹ Thus, giving her consent to God’s word, Mary becomes the mother of Jesus. Espousing the divine will for salvation wholeheartedly, without a single sin to restrain her, she gave herself entirely to the person and to the work of her Son; she did so in order to serve the mystery of redemption with him and dependent on him, by God’s grace:¹⁴⁰

As St. Irenaeus says, “Being obedient she became the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race.”¹⁴¹ Hence not a few of the early Fathers gladly assert. . .: “The knot of Eve’s disobedience was untied by Mary’s obedience: what the virgin Eve bound through her disbelief, Mary loosened by her faith.”¹⁴² Comparing her with Eve, they call Mary “the Mother of the living” and frequently claim: “Death through Eve, life through Mary.”¹⁴³

Mary’s divine motherhood

495 Called in the Gospels “the mother of Jesus”, Mary is acclaimed by Elizabeth, at the prompting of the Spirit and even before the birth of her son, as “the mother of my Lord”.¹⁴⁴ In fact, the One whom she conceived as man by the Holy Spirit, who truly became her Son according to the flesh, was none other than the Father’s eternal Son, the second person of the Holy Trinity. Hence the Church confesses that Mary is truly “Mother of God” (Theotokos).¹⁴⁵

Mary’s virginity

496 From the first formulations of her faith, the Church has confessed that Jesus was conceived solely by the power of the Holy Spirit in the womb of the Virgin Mary, affirming also the corporeal aspect of this event: Jesus was conceived “by the Holy Spirit without human seed”.¹⁴⁶ The Fathers see in the virginal conception the sign that it truly was the Son of God who came in a humanity like our own. Thus St. Ignatius of Antioch at the beginning of the second century says:

You are firmly convinced about our Lord, who is truly of the race of David according to the flesh, Son of God according to the will and power of God, truly born of a virgin,. . . he was truly nailed to a tree for us in his flesh under Pontius Pilate. . . he truly suffered, as he is also truly risen.¹⁴⁷

497 The Gospel accounts understand the virginal conception of Jesus as a divine work that surpasses all human understanding and possibility:¹⁴⁸ “That which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit”, said the angel to Joseph about Mary his fiancee.¹⁴⁹ The Church sees here the fulfilment of the divine promise given through the prophet Isaiah: “Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son.”¹⁵⁰

498 People are sometimes troubled by the silence of St. Mark’s Gospel and the New Testament Epistles about Jesus’ virginal conception. Some might wonder if we were merely dealing with legends or theological constructs not claiming to be history. To this we must respond: Faith in the virginal conception of Jesus met with the lively opposition, mockery or incomprehension of non-believers, Jews and pagans alike;¹⁵¹ so it could hardly have been motivated by pagan mythology or by some adaptation to the ideas of the age. The meaning of this event is accessible only to faith, which understands in it the “connection of these mysteries with one another”¹⁵² in the totality of Christ’s mysteries, from his Incarnation to his Passover. St. Ignatius of Antioch already bears witness to this connection: “Mary’s virginity and giving birth, and even the Lord’s death escaped the notice of the prince of this world: these three mysteries worthy of proclamation were accomplished in God’s silence.”¹⁵³

Mary – “ever-virgin”

499 The deepening of faith in the virginal motherhood led the Church to confess Mary’s real and perpetual virginity even in the act of giving birth to the Son of God made man.¹⁵⁴ In fact, Christ’s birth “did not diminish his mother’s virginal integrity but sanctified it.”¹⁵⁵ And so the liturgy of the Church celebrates Mary as Aeiparthenos, the “Ever-virgin“.¹⁵⁶

500 Against this doctrine the objection is sometimes raised that the Bible mentions brothers and sisters of Jesus.¹⁵⁷ The Church has always understood these passages as not referring to other children of the Virgin Mary. In fact James and Joseph, “brothers of Jesus”, are the sons of another Mary, a disciple of Christ, whom St. Matthew significantly calls “the other Mary”.¹⁵⁸ They are close relations of Jesus, according to an Old Testament expression.¹⁵⁹

501 Jesus is Mary’s only son, but her spiritual motherhood extends to all men whom indeed he came to save: “The Son whom she brought forth is he whom God placed as the first-born among many brethren, that is, the faithful in whose generation and formation she co-operates with a mother’s love.”¹⁶⁰

Mary’s virginal motherhood in God’s plan

502 The eyes of faith can discover in the context of the whole of Revelation the

mysterious reasons why God in his saving plan wanted his Son to be born of a virgin. These reasons touch both on the person of Christ and his redemptive mission, and on the welcome Mary gave that mission on behalf of all men.

503 Mary’s virginity manifests God’s absolute initiative in the Incarnation. Jesus has only God as Father. “He was never estranged from the Father because of the human nature which he assumed. . . He is naturally Son of the Father as to his divinity and naturally son of his mother as to his humanity, but properly Son of the Father in both natures.”¹⁶¹

504 Jesus is conceived by the Holy Spirit in the Virgin Mary’s womb because he is the New Adam, who inaugurates the new creation: “The first man was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven.”¹⁶² From his conception, Christ’s humanity is filled with the Holy Spirit, for God “gives him the Spirit without measure.”¹⁶³ From “his fullness” as the head of redeemed humanity “we have all received, grace upon grace.”¹⁶⁴

505 By his virginal conception, Jesus, the New Adam, ushers in the new birth of children adopted in the Holy Spirit through faith. “How can this be?”¹⁶⁵ Participation in the divine life arises “not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God”.¹⁶⁶ The acceptance of this life is virginal because it is entirely the Spirit’s gift to man. the spousal character of the human vocation in relation to God¹⁶⁷ is fulfilled perfectly in Mary’s virginal motherhood.

506 Mary is a virgin because her virginity is the sign of her faith “unadulterated by any doubt”, and of her undivided gift of herself to God’s will.¹⁶⁸ It is her faith that enables her to become the mother of the Saviour: “Mary is more blessed because she embraces faith in Christ than because she conceives the flesh of Christ.”¹⁶⁹

507 At once virgin and mother, Mary is the symbol and the most perfect realization of the Church: “the Church indeed. . . by receiving the word of God in faith becomes herself a mother. By preaching and Baptism she brings forth sons, who are conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of God, to a new and immortal life. She herself is a virgin, who keeps in its entirety and purity the faith she pledged to her spouse.”¹⁷⁰

IN BRIEF

508 From among the descendants of Eve, God chose the Virgin Mary to be the mother of his Son. “Full of grace”, Mary is “the most excellent fruit of redemption” (SC 103): from the first instant of her conception, she was totally preserved from the stain of original sin and she remained pure from all personal sin throughout her life.

509 Mary is truly “Mother of God” since she is the mother of the eternal Son of God made man, who is God himself.

510 Mary “remained a virgin in conceiving her Son, a virgin in giving birth to him, a virgin in carrying him, a virgin in nursing him at her breast, always a virgin” (St. Augustine, Serm. 186, 1: PL 38, 999): with her whole being she is “the handmaid of the Lord” (Lk 1:38).

511 The Virgin Mary “co-operated through free faith and obedience in human salvation” (LG 56). She uttered her yes “in the name of all human nature” (St. Thomas Aquinas, S Th III, 30, 1). By her obedience she became the new Eve, mother of the living.

119 Gal 4:4.

120 Col 2:9.

121 Lk 1:34-35 (Greek).

122 Cf. Jn 16:14-15.

123 Cf. Mt 1:20; 2:1-12; Lk 1:35; 2:8-20; Jn 1:3 1-34; 2:11.

124 Acts 10:38.

125 Gal 4:4; Heb 10:5.

126 Lk 1:26-27.

127 LG 56; cf. LG 61.

128 Cf. Gen 3:15, 20.

129 Cf. Gen 18:10-14; 21:1-2.

130 Cf. I Cor 1:17; I Sam 1.

131 LG 55.

132 LG 56.

133 Lk 1:28.

134 Lk 1:28.

135 Pius IX, Ineffabilis Deus (1854): DS 2803.

136 LG 53, 56.

137 Cf. Eph 1:3-4.

138 LG 56.

139 Lk 1:28-38; cf. Rom 1:5.

140 Cf. LG 56.

141 St. Irenaeus, Adv. haeres. 3, 22, 4: PG 7/1, 959A.

142 St. Irenaeus, Adv. haeres. 3, 22, 4: PG 7/1, 959A.

143 LC 56; St. Epiphanius, Panarion 2, 78, 18: PG 42, 728CD-729AB; St. Jerome, Ep. 22, 21: PL 22, 408.

144 Lk 1:43; Jn 2:1; 19:25; cf. Mt 13:55; et al.

145 Council of Ephesus (431): DS 251.

146 Council of the Lateran (649): DS 503; cf. DS 10-64.

147 St. Ignatius of Antioch, Ad Smyrn 1-2: Apostolic Fathers, ed. J. B. Lightfoot (London: Macmillan, 1889), 11/2, 289-293; SCh 10, 154-156; cf. Rom 1:3; Jn 1:13.

148 Mt 1 18-25; Lk 1:26-38.

149 Mt 1:20.

150 Is 7:14 (LXX), quoted in Mt 1:23 (Greek).

151 Cf. St. Justin, Dial. 99, 7: PG 6, 708-709; Origen, Contra Celsum 1, 32, 69: PG 11, 720-721; et al.

152 Dei Filius 4: DS 3016.

153 St. Ignatius of Antioch, Ad Eph. 19, 1: AF 11/2 76-80: cf. I Cor 2:8.

154 Cf. DS 291; 294; 427; 442; 503; 571; 1880.

155 LG 57.

156 Cf. LG 52.

157 Cf. Mk 3:31-35; 6:3; I Cor 9:5; Gal 1:19.

158 Mt 13:55; 28:1; cf. Mt 27:56.

159 Cf. Gen 13:8; 14:16; 29:15; etc.

160 LG 63; cf. Jn 19:26-27; Rom 8:29; Rev 12:17.

161 Council of Friuli (796): DS 619; cf. Lk 2:48-49.

162 I Cor 15:45, 47.

163 Jn 3:34.

164 Jn 1:16; cf. Col 1:18.

165 Lk 1:34; cf. Jn 3:9[ETML:C/].

166 Jn 1:13.

167 Cf. 2 Cor 11:2.

168 LG 63; cf. l Cor 7:34-35.

169 St. Augustine, De virg. 3: PL 40, 398.

170 LG 64; cf. 63. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, SECTION TWO I. THE CREEDS, CHAPTER TWO I BELIEVE IN JESUS CHRIST, THE ONLY SON OF GOD, Article 3 “HE WAS CONCEIVED BY THE POWER OF THE HOLY SPIRIT, AND WAS BORN OF THE VIRGIN MARY”)

Paragraph 6. MARY – MOTHER OF CHRIST, MOTHER OF THE CHURCH

963 Since the Virgin Mary’s role in the mystery of Christ and the Spirit has been treated, it is fitting now to consider her place in the mystery of the Church. “The Virgin Mary . . . is acknowledged and honored as being truly the Mother of God and of the redeemer…. She is ‘clearly the mother of the members of Christ’ … since she has by her charity joined in bringing about the birth of believers in the Church, who are members of its head.”⁵⁰⁰ “Mary, Mother of Christ, Mother of the Church.”⁵⁰¹

I. MARY’S MOTHERHOOD WITH REGARD TO THE CHURCH

Wholly united with her Son . . .

964 Mary’s role in the Church is inseparable from her union with Christ and flows directly from it. “This union of the mother with the Son in the work of salvation is made manifest from the time of Christ’s virginal conception up to his death”;⁵⁰² it is made manifest above all at the hour of his Passion:

Thus the Blessed Virgin advanced in her pilgrimage of faith, and faithfully persevered in her union with her Son unto the cross. There she stood, in keeping with the divine plan, enduring with her only begotten Son the intensity of his suffering, joining herself with his sacrifice in her mother’s heart, and lovingly consenting to the immolation of this victim, born of her: to be given, by the same Christ Jesus dying on the cross, as a mother to his disciple, with these words: “Woman, behold your son.”⁵⁰³

965 After her Son’s Ascension, Mary “aided the beginnings of the Church by her prayers.”⁵⁰⁴ In her association with the apostles and several women, “we also see Mary by her prayers imploring the gift of the Spirit, who had already overshadowed her in the Annunciation.”⁵⁰⁵

. . . also in her Assumption

966 “Finally the Immaculate Virgin, preserved free from all stain of original sin, when the course of her earthly life was finished, was taken up body and soul into heavenly glory, and exalted by the Lord as Queen over all things, so that she might be the more fully conformed to her Son, the Lord of lords and conqueror of sin and death.”⁵⁰⁶ The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin is a singular participation in her Son’s Resurrection and an anticipation of the resurrection of other Christians:

In giving birth you kept your virginity; in your Dormition you did not leave the world, O Mother of God, but were joined to the source of Life. You conceived the living God and, by your prayers, will deliver our souls from death.⁵⁰⁷

. . . she is our Mother in the order of grace

967 By her complete adherence to the Father’s will, to his Son’s redemptive work, and to every prompting of the Holy Spirit, the Virgin Mary is the Church’s model of faith and charity. Thus she is a “preeminent and . . . wholly unique member of the Church”; indeed, she is the “exemplary realization” (typus)⁵⁰⁸ of the Church.

968 Her role in relation to the Church and to all humanity goes still further. “In a wholly singular way she cooperated by her obedience, faith, hope, and burning charity in the Savior’s work of restoring supernatural life to souls. For this reason she is a mother to us in the order of grace.”⁵⁰⁹

969 “This motherhood of Mary in the order of grace continues uninterruptedly from the consent which she loyally gave at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, until the eternal fulfilment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation …. Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix.”⁵¹⁰

970 “Mary’s function as mother of men in no way obscures or diminishes this unique mediation of Christ, but rather shows its power. But the Blessed Virgin’s salutary influence on men . . . flows forth from the superabundance of the merits of Christ, rests on his mediation, depends entirely on it, and draws all its power from it.”⁵¹¹ “No creature could ever be counted along with the Incarnate Word and Redeemer; but just as the priesthood of Christ is shared in various ways both by his ministers and the faithful, and as the one goodness of God is radiated in different ways among his creatures, so also the unique mediation of the Redeemer does not exclude but rather gives rise to a manifold cooperation which is but a sharing in this one source.”⁵¹²

II. DEVOTION TO THE BLESSED VIRGIN

971 “All generations will call me blessed“: “The Church’s devotion to the Blessed Virgin is intrinsic to Christian worship.”⁵¹³ The Church rightly honors “the Blessed Virgin with special devotion. From the most ancient times the Blessed Virgin has been honored with the title of ‘Mother of God,’ to whose protection the faithful fly in all their dangers and needs…. This very special devotion … differs essentially from the adoration which is given to the incarnate Word and equally to the Father and the Holy Spirit, and greatly fosters this adoration.”⁵¹⁴ The liturgical feasts dedicated to the Mother of God and Marian prayer, such as the rosary, an “epitome of the whole Gospel,” express this devotion to the Virgin Mary.⁵¹⁵

III. MARY – ESCHATOLOGICAL ICON OF THE CHURCH

972 After speaking of the Church, her origin, mission, and destiny, we can find no better way to conclude than by looking to Mary. In her we contemplate what the Church already is in her mystery on her own “pilgrimage of faith,” and what she will be in the homeland at the end of her journey. There, “in the glory of the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity,” “in the communion of all the saints,”⁵¹⁶ The Church is awaited by the one she venerates as Mother of her Lord and as her own mother.

In the meantime the Mother of Jesus, in the glory which she possesses in body and soul in heaven, is the image and beginning of the Church as it is to be perfected in the world to come. Likewise she shines forth on earth until the day of the Lord shall come, a sign of certain hope and comfort to the pilgrim People of God.⁵¹⁷

IN BRIEF

973 By pronouncing her “fiat” at the Annunciation and giving her consent to the Incarnation, Mary was already collaborating with the whole work her Son was to accomplish. She is mother wherever he is Savior and head of the Mystical Body.

974 The Most Blessed Virgin Mary, when the course of her earthly life was completed, was taken up body and soul into the glory of heaven, where she already shares in the glory of her Son’s Resurrection, anticipating the resurrection of all members of his Body.

975 “We believe that the Holy Mother of God, the new Eve, Mother of the Church, continues in heaven to exercise her maternal role on behalf of the members of Christ” (Paul VI, CPG # 15).

500 LG 53; cf. St. Augustine, De virg. 6: PL 40,399.

501 Paul VI, Discourse, November 21,1964.

502 LG 57.

503 LG 58; cf. Jn 19:26-27.

504 LG 69.

505 LG 59.

506 LG 59; cf. Pius XII, Munificentissimus Deus (1950): DS 3903; cf. Rev 19:16.

507 Byzantine Liturgy, Troparion, Feast of the Dormition, August 15th.

508 LG 53; 63.

509 LG 61.

510 LG 62.

511 LG 60.

512 LG 62.

513 Lk 1:48; Paul VI, MC 56.

514 LG 66.

515 Cf. Paul VI, MC 42; SC 103.

516 LG 69.

517 LG 68; Cf. 2 Pet 3 10. (PART ONE: THE PROFESSION OF FAITH, SECTION TWO I. THE CREEDS, CHAPTER THREE I BELIEVE IN THE HOLY SPIRIT)

1138 “Recapitulated in Christ,” these are the ones who take part in the service of the praise of God and the fulfillment of his plan: the heavenly powers, all creation (the four living beings), the servants of the Old and New Covenants (the twenty-four elders), the new People of God (the one hundred and forty-four thousand),⁴ especially the martyrs “slain for the word of God,” and the all-holy Mother of God (the Woman), the Bride of the Lamb,⁵ and finally “a great multitude which no one could number, from every nation, from all tribes, and peoples and tongues.”⁶

4 Cf. Rev 4- 5; 7:1-8; 14:1; Isa 6:2-3.

5 Rev 6:9-11; Rev 21:9; cf. 12.

6 Rev 7:9. (Ibid., CHAPTER TWO THE SACRAMENTAL CELEBRATION OF THE PASCHAL MYSTERY, Article 1 CELEBRATING THE CHURCH’S LITURGY, I. Who Celebrates?)

FURTHER READING

THE WOMAN OF REVELATION 12: MARY OR ANOTHER?

ANCIENT COMMENTARIES ON REVELATION 12

ANCIENT WITNESSES TO MARY’S ASSUMPTION