Mary as Part of the Holy Trinity?: Classic Case of a Botched, Out-of-Context, Twisted Anti-Catholic "Quotation" from Pope Pius XII

I found out about this from a discussion on the CHNI forum. Nothing anti-Catholics ever do or argue surprises me: including this, but I trust that this may enlighten some readers, at least, as to the lengths to which our anti-Catholic brethren in Christ will go to smear the Catholic Church and portray her in a ridiculous light. And for the sake of those readers who don't yet realize how deep the prejudice and hostility and (above all) ignorance runs in some anti-Catholic circles, this paper is well worth the time spent producing it.

[Bible passages: RSV]

* * * * *

Introduction

Hi. I was shown a quote today that I am skeptical of. In an online article (I can provide the link), the author of the article says:

"In 1954, Pope Pius XII said, 'Mary is indeed worthy to receive honor and might and glory. She is exalted to hypostatic union with the Blessed Trinity.' "

The author provides no references of where this quote comes from . . . one other person on a discussion board mentions the quote (also without a reference), but says this was said by Pope Pius XII in 1948 at the Coronation at Fatima.

My co-worker and fellow moderator David W. Emery replied:

The hypostatic union has to do with Jesus Christ, not Mary. He (not she) is God incarnate — one divine Person having both a divine nature and a human nature. The mysterious union of these two natures in a single Person is what we call the hypostatic union — “hypostasis” being the Greek word for “essence” or “person.” Most Christians accept this because it is a biblical concept, although the words themselves come from the post-biblical theology that was used in the early (4th to 6th century) Church councils that defined who and what Christ is, as against the Arians, the Monophysites, the Nestorians and other heretics of the time.

. . . The only “authentication” I see simply states that it was said by Pope Pius XII. Some sources say this happened on the occasion of the crowning of Our Lady of Fatima, but the date is variously given as 1946, 1948 and 1954. The witnesses, therefore, do not agree.

Prominent forum member Jeff Pinyan provided further information:

I've seen that quote attributed to Pius XII twice, but with two different dates: 1946 (source 1) and 1954 (source 2). The book which claims he said it in 1946 links it to an occasion in Fatima where the statue of Mary there was crowned; the source of this is said to be an article by Philip Edgcumbe Hughes titled "The Council and Mary" in the 8 December 1967 issue of "Christianity Today". It would be interesting to see that article and to see Mr. Hughes' source.

The citation as presented above (and below, from anti-Catholic sources) is all the more ludicrous because (as David W. Emery noted above) it uses a technical theological phraseology that betrays a profound ignorance of historic theology, theology proper (theology of God), and Christology. "Hypostatic Union" applies only to the Son Jesus, and has to do with His being both God and Man. It's not used in reference to the Holy Trinity as a whole. Hence, The Catholic Encyclopedia ("Hypostatic Union") states:

A theological term used with reference to the Incarnation to express the revealed truth that in Christ one person subsists in two natures, the Divine and the human.

Thus, the phrase, "hypostatic union with the Blessed Trinity" is a nonsensical one. It is inconceivable that a pope could have been so uninformed as to say this, in this specific manner, even in the outrageous scenario that he actually raised Mary to the Godhead. The Hypostatic Union is a thing upon which Catholics, Protestant, and Orthodox alike are agreed. It is not even a Catholic distinctive.

Known Sources of the Undocumented "Citation"

1) Ian Paisley's website: "Romanism, Mary and the Holy Spirit," by Professor Arthur Noble:

The key to the Romanist dogma of Mary's relationship to the Trinity is a statement of Pope Pius XII in 1954: "Mary is indeed worthy to receive honour and might and glory. She is exalted to hypostatic union with the Blessed Trinity."

[no further documentation provided]

2) Erwin W. Lutzer, The Doctrines That Divide: A Fresh Look at the Historic Doctrines That Separate Christians (Grand Rapids, Michigan, Kregel Publications, second edition, 1998, pp. 59-60):

If there should still be any doubt that Mary is exalted as high as Christ, read the words of Pope Pius XII at the time of the coronation of Mary's statue at Fatima: "Mary is indeed worthy to receive honor and might and glory. She is exalted to hypostatic union with the Blessed Trinity. . . . Her kingdom is as great as her Son's and God's. . . . Mary's kingdom is identical with the kingdom of God."

But Pope Pius spoke those words in 1946.

[footnoted documentation: "The Council and Mary," Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, Christianity Today, 8 December 1967 issue -- for further comment on this source, see the final section below]

3) Let Us Reason Ministries, "Problems With the Mary of Roman Catholicism":

Pope Pius the 12th "Mary is indeed worthy to receive honor and glory and might, she is exalted to hypostatic union with the blessed Trinity." This hypostatic union makes her part of the Godhead.

[no further documentation provided]

The Real Source in Context

Alas, after searching around some more, I found the original source of this material in a hardcover book I have in my own library. It is a reference volume called Papal Teachings: Our Lady, selected and arranged by the Benedictine Monks of Solesmes, translated by The Daughters of St. Paul (Boston, 1961). It's a very convenient and useful systematic compendium of papal utterances on the topic of the Blessed Virgin Mary.

The address in question was a radio message by Pope Pius XII, given on 13 May 1946, "on the occasion of the coronation of the statue of Our Lady of Fatima"; also known as Bendito seia (AAS 38.266). It appears in its entirety on pages 264-270 under the broader title of "Mary's Universal Queenship."

I wrote on the Coming Home Network board prior to posting a link to this paper over there:

It's not a completely made-up quote, but a badly-botched and selectively presented quote. What our esteemed brethren, the anti-Catholics, have done here is similar to how they approach flowery works of Marian piety like those of St. Alphonsus de Liguori and St. Louis de Montfort (as I have documented in the past). The approach is similar to how a butcher approaches a hog. They will ignore the super-important qualifications made, where it is proven that Catholics don't make her a goddess. It's a raggedy collection of out-of-context words, half-truths, selective presentation; botched words, exclusion of crucial explanatory qualifiers and sentences in the middle, etc., etc., complete with a prior profound ignorance of Catholic Marian theology and (ultimately) biblical theology itself. Same thing here: deja vu all over again . . .

It's a far more subtle thing in and of itself (more than just purely made-up) and will be, in fact, a far subtler matter for us to defend as Catholics, involving Mary Mediatrix and Queen of Heaven: which are very poorly understood doctrines as it is: not just among Protestants and the anti-Catholic fringe, but by many Catholics as well (who think they are excessive and extreme).

I have no problem defending Mary Mediatrix. I've done so many times on my site (Mary Index Page) and in a book or two, and I have even defended it by using explicitly biblical categories.

Not everyone will "get" those doctrines right away, but this shouldn't alarm or stagger us. No one gets trigonometry or calculus, either, when they have only mastered simple arithmetic or even geometry and algebra 1. Why should advanced theology be any different?

By twisting the actual words and manipulating them to their heart's content, and engaging in atrocious "scholarship" not worthy of a 4th-grade book report, these anti-Catholics have tried to present a distorted view of what Catholics believe about Mary, that cannot withstand the light of scrutiny. The current attempt exposes this beyond any doubt, I think, but I've seen the same mentality many times.

It is made clear by Pope Pius XII over and over that he is distinguishing between Mary and God, in the way that any sane, conscious Christian of any stripe would, but that's not enough for folks who are determined to see only what they want to see in Catholic teaching: to cynically, dishonestly fit it into their preconceived anti-Catholic mold.

Some of the doctrines and notions seen below will be poorly understood, or completely misunderstood, or not comprehended at all, by Protestant readers, or those unduly influenced by Protestant theology and its rule of faith, or insufficiently acquainted with Catholic theology, piety, and terminology. This is inevitable. But that is a separate issue.

One can only do so much at one time. For now we have to try our best to at least accurately understand what is being expressed in this message, without distortion and nonsense brought on by utter lack of respect for another system of theology; hence, little or no concern for accuracy. Then at a later point each "controversial" point can be more fully explained if needs be. I do so on my site in many places.

I shall now cite the actual source from my own copy of the book, analyze how the citation was botched and butchered, and offer brief theological rationales for the thoughts: all of which I have in turn presented and defended fully elsewhere.

In the citation below, which is itself incomplete, because I don't want to type out almost six pages of text (nor is it necessary for the purpose of this paper), the portions cited (or "kinda-sorta" cited) by anti-Catholics will be bolded. The parts left out without ellipses (. . . ) will be in red. And the parts that provide crucial qualifying explanations of Mary's proper role will be in blue.

I contend that whoever decided to put these "quotations" together in this horrendously sloppy manner should have also (in honesty) included the portions in red, in order to provide immediate context and a legitimate quotation (not a manufactured new one from bits and pieces), and the portions in blue, in order to provide the larger theological backdrop (or "theological context"). But they chose to do neither, which is inexcusable, especially for a "professor," as in the case of #1 above.

And there are other problems: added words, changed words, and so forth. It's atrocious in terms of rudimentary academic standards. I'm flabbergasted and quite disappointed that Kregel Publications (ostensibly a fairly scholarly outfit) decided to print and therefore give sanction to this rotgut.

Here it is:

Venerable Brethren and dearly beloved Sons, "Blessed be the God and father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and the God of all comfort, who comforteth us in all tribulation" [2 Cor. 1:3-4] and with our Lord may she be blessed whom He constituted Mother of Mercy, Queen and our most loving Advocate, Mediatrix of His graces, Dispenser of His treasures! [pp. 264-265]

[ . . . ]

. . . the glorious Virgin, entering triumphantly into heaven, was elevated above the hierarchies of the blessed and the angelic choirs to the throne of the most Holy Trinity who, placing on her brow a triple diadem of glory, presented her to the heavenly court seated at the right hand of the immortal King of the ages and crowned "Queen of the Universe."

And Paradise recognized that she was really worthy of receiving honor, glory and rule, because she is full of grace, holier, more beautiful, more exalted, incomparably more so than the greatest saints and angels, taken individually or all together; because, as the first-born daughter of the Father, the perfect Mother of the Word, the beloved Spouse of the Holy Spirit, she is related in virtue of the Hypostatic Union to the whole Most Holy Trinity, to Him who in Himself alone is is by essence infinite Majesty, the King of kings, Lord of lords; because she was the Mother of the King divine, of Him to whom from His Mother's womb the Lord God gave the throne of David and eternal kingship in the house of Jacob [Cf. Luke 1:32-33] and who, after asserting in His own right that all power was given to Him in heaven and on earth [Cf. Matt. 28:18], He, the Son of God, gave His heavenly Mother a share in His glory, His majesty, His kingship; because, associated as Mother and Minister to the King of martyrs in the ineffable work of Man's Redemption, she is likewise associated with Him forever, with power so to speak infinite, in the distribution of the graces which flow from Redemption.

Jesus is by nature and by conquest the King of the eternal ages; through Him, with Him, subordinated to Him, Mary is Queen by grace, by divine association, by conquest, by singular election. Her kingdom is as vast as that of her divine Son because nothing of His dominion is excluded. [pp. 267-268]

[ . . . ]

In crowning the image of Our Lady, you made an act of faith in her Queenship, of loyal submission to her authority, of filial and continued correspondence with her love. You did something more: you enrolled yourselves as Crusaders for the conquest and the reclamation of her kingdom, which is the kingdom of God; in other words you pledged yourselves to work so that she may be loved, venerated and served everywhere, in the family, in society, in the world. [pp. 269-270]

There is a source for the entire speech available online, too. It occurs in the EWTN-sponsored post, "The True Story of Fatima," by Fr. John de Marchi, I. M. C. It's located near the end of the long article, after the paragraph that begins with the words, "The words of the pope were broadcast to the pilgrims of Fatima . . ." But it is unclear who translated it into English or where exactly it was derived, so I won't cite it, except for a few key phrases, in comparison to the above:

And the King saw that she was truly worthy of such honour, glory and empire, . . . This because she is mysteriously related in the order of the hypostatic union with the Blessed Trinity, with Him who is in essence the Infinite Majesty, King of Kings and Lord of Lords. . . . He alone proclaimed to have received all power in heaven and earth, He the Son of God, decrees for His Mother all the glory, power and majesty of His Kingdom.

Because she is associated as Mother and Helper of the King of Martyrs in the ineffable work of human redemption, she is also, forever, most powerfully associated in the distribution of grace and divine redemption. Jesus is King of the eternal ages by nature and by conquest. By Him, with Him, and under Him, Mary is Queen by grace, by her divine relationship, by conquest and by singular election. And her kingdom is vast, vast as that of her divine Son, because from her dominion none is excluded.

Contextual Monstrosities, Courtesy of Our Esteemed Anti-Catholic Brethren in Christ

1) Professor [?] Arthur Noble: "Mary is indeed worthy to receive honour and might and glory. She is exalted to hypostatic union with the Blessed Trinity."

2) Erwin W. Lutzer: "Mary is indeed worthy to receive honor and might and glory. She is exalted to hypostatic union with the Blessed Trinity. . . . Her kingdom is as great as her Son's and God's. . . . Mary's kingdom is identical with the kingdom of God."

3) Let Us [Butcher] Reason Ministries: "Mary is indeed worthy to receive honor and glory and might, she is exalted to hypostatic union with the blessed Trinity."

Note how #1 and #2 have two sentences separated by a period, whereas #3 has one with a comma where the period is in #1 and #2, and is even quite arguably ungrammatical. Also, the places of "might" and "glory" in #3 are reversed, compared to the other two versions.

(anti-Catholic versions 1, 2, 3): Mary is indeed worthy

Actual: And Paradise recognized that she was really worthy

The only common ground between the butchered anti-Catholic "quotations" and the actual one in the above clause is the word "worthy." It's quite a feat to completely manufacture a good part of a clause. Granted, the thoughts are similar, but that is beside the point. A legitimate quotation quotes the actual words of that from which it is obtained. It seems elementary enough . . .

(1, 2): to receive honour [honor] and might and glory.

(3): to receive honor and glory and might,

Actual: . . . she was really worthy of receiving honor, glory and rule . . .

As we can see, "might" is not in the original. That was added in for some reason. The cynic might suggest that it was done in order to make a close approximation of a phrase in revelation that is applied to God alone, and to make it sound as if she were omnipotent as Christ is omnipotent. More on this whole phrase below . . . All the anti-Catholic versions butcher the context. #1 and #2 put a period where there is none, and then launch into the next section of their "quotation"as if it were the next sentence, when in fact it is about forty-five words away, and all part of one very long sentence. I've already mentioned how #3 can't even get the order of the words right, even when one is made up out of thin air.

(1, 2, 3): She is exalted to hypostatic union with the Blessed Trinity

Actual: . . . she is related in virtue of the Hypostatic Union to the whole Most Holy Trinity, to Him who in Himself alone is is by essence infinite Majesty, the King of kings, Lord of lords . . .

In #3 it is a clause rather than a complete sentence. In all these fanciful, fictional versions, new sentence structures are created where they do not exist in the original. This portion is still part of one hug sentence that includes the section immediately above as well. "Related in virtue of" is changed to "exalted to" -- quite a different notion, that influences the reader to conceptualize a supposedly deified Mary. Also, we see the following section in which it is immediately made clear (especially in the words "in Himself alone") that there is a complete divide between Mary and God. Mary is a creature. God is the Creator.

(2): Her kingdom is as great as her Son's and God's.

Actual: Her kingdom is as vast as that of her divine Son because nothing of His dominion is excluded.

By excluding the entire second half of the sentence the meaning is changed. But this particular matter is more one of understanding the biblical and Catholic worldview than grammar, at least considered apart from the half-truth anti-Catholic presentation.

(2): Mary's kingdom is identical with the kingdom of God.

Actual: You did something more: you enrolled yourselves as Crusaders for the conquest and the reclamation of her kingdom, which is the kingdom of God; . . .

As is plain, the butchered "quotation" bears little resemblance to the original. We have a period where there is none, and the exclusion of all kinds of related thoughts. All the anti-Catholics are interested in, unfortunately for their gullible, exploited, manipulated readers, is offering words that make it sound as if Mary and Christ are being equated. That is by no means required by the (actual!) words used, as will be demonstrated in more detail below.

Brief Commentary and Catholic Explanation and Rationale
[Pope Pius XII's words are in blue]

Venerable Brethren and dearly beloved Sons, "Blessed be the God and father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and the God of all comfort, who comforteth us in all tribulation" [2 Cor. 1:3-4]

The beginning of the address is firmly grounded in the assumed truth of the singular nature of God, not Mary. By omitting this, and thoughts like it throughout, an entirely different impression is conveyed. It's selective presentation.

and with our Lord may she be blessed

"With" our Lord: not equal to Him.

whom He constituted Mother of Mercy, Queen and our most loving Advocate,

Whom He . . . God can decide to use His creatures in any way He so chooses.

Mediatrix of His graces, Dispenser of His treasures!

God can choose to use Mary to distribute His graces and to dispense His treasures (not hers). He used St. Paul (and potentially, any Christian) in exactly the same way, as I never tire pointing out to people who object to this, for some strange reason:

Romans 11:14 in order to make my fellow Jews jealous, and thus save some of them.

1 Corinthians 1:21 . . . it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe.

1 Corinthians 9:22 I have become all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.

2 Corinthians 1:6 If we are afflicted, it is for your comfort and salvation . . .

Ephesians 3:2 assuming that you have heard of the stewardship of God's grace that was given to me for you...

1 Timothy 4:16 Take heed to yourself and to your teaching: hold to that, for by so doing you will save both yourself and your hearers.

2 Timothy 2:10 Therefore I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain salvation in Christ Jesus with its eternal glory.

James 5:20 let him know that whoever brings back a sinner from the error of his way will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins.

1 Peter 4:8b-10 . . . love covers a multitude of sins. Practice hospitality ungrudgingly to one another. As each has received a gift, employ it for one another, as good stewards of God's varied grace.

If St. Paul the great apostle and all Christians can spread God's grace and salvation around in this way, why can't Mary also do so, and why can't she even be involved in every person's salvation, if that is God's will and plan? How in the world does that run contrary to the Bible? And how in heaven's name does that mean that she must somehow be equal to God?!! Paul isn't God; we're not God . . . I don't see that these things are unbiblical or incomprehensible at all. They only are due to a previous "anti-Marianism."

. . . the glorious Virgin, entering triumphantly into heaven, was elevated above the hierarchies of the blessed and the angelic choirs

As she should have been. She was the Mother of our Lord Jesus; the Mother of God the Son, and lived a sinless life.

to the throne of the most Holy Trinity who,

This is not saying that she is on the throne, but was presented "to" or before God's throne. The following context makes these essential differences clear. Moreover, the Bible says that (in some sense) about all Christians:

Hebrews 4:16 Let us then with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need.

Revelation 1:4 refers to " seven spirits who are before his throne." So what's the big deal about Mary doing the same, in God's will? There are lots of people by God's throne:

Matthew 19:28 Jesus said to them, "Truly, I say to you, in the new world, when the Son of man shall sit on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

Revelation 4:4 Round the throne were twenty-four thrones, and seated on the thrones were twenty-four elders, clad in white garments, with golden crowns upon their heads. (cf. 4:6)

Jesus even says that others will sit with Him on His throne!:

Revelation 3:21 He who conquers, I will grant him to sit with me on my throne, as I myself conquered and sat down with my Father on his throne.

So if the phrase above is twisted and distorted, to try to show that Catholics are raising Mary to the Godhead, there is all kinds of Scripture to reckon with that shows quite otherwise.

placing on her brow a triple diadem of glory,

No problem here: many Christians will receive crowns as a reward:

James 1:12 Blessed is the man who endures trial, for when he has stood the test he will receive the crown of life which God has promised to those who love him.

Was not watching her son Jesus' crucifixion a huge "trial"?

Revelation 2:10 . . . Be faithful unto death, and I will give you the crown of life.

Mary was faithful. She never lost faith, even at the darkest hour, while most of the disciples fled, and even Peter was denying Christ three times. She was at the cross. She visited the tomb on Easter Sunday. She was at the Ascension; she was in the Upper Room when the Holy Spirit descended. How much more faithful could any Christian be?

Revelation 4:4 Round the throne were twenty-four thrones, and seated on the thrones were twenty-four elders, clad in white garments, with golden crowns upon their heads.

presented her to the heavenly court seated at the right hand of the immortal King of the ages and crowned "Queen of the Universe."

Mary is specifically "directed" towards a court "at the right hand" of God, not even on the throne, as Jesus in Revelation 3:21 says many Christians will do. She is the Queen of the Universe because she was God's highest creature. For more on the "Queen" aspect of Catholic Mariology, see:

The Blessed Virgin Mary as "Queen Mother" and "Queen of Heaven": Is 1 Kings 2:17-25 a Fatal Counter-Example?

Understanding the Assumption and the Queenship of Mary (Steve Ray)

The Blessed Virgin Mary as the Woman of Revelation 12: According to Popes and Catholic Scholars

The Queenship of Mary (Fr. Paul A. Duffner, O. P.)

And Paradise recognized that she was really worthy of receiving honor,

Again, no problem whatever; nothing contrary to the Bible at all, to believe that Mary was honored by God. There are dozens of scriptural passages commanding us to honor men and women who deserve honor. I recently wrote a long paper about it.

glory and rule,

Jesus gave His disciples "glory" so obviously there is no requirement that application of this word to a person requires them to "become God":

John 17:22 The glory which thou hast given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one,

Are we to believe that Jesus could give the glory which God the Father gave to Him, to His disciples, but not possibly to His own mother? That makes no sense. St. Paul states that lots of people will receive glory:

Romans 2:10 but glory and honor and peace for every one who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek.

Romans 5:2 Through him we have obtained access to this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in our hope of sharing the glory of God.

Romans 9:4 They are Israelites, and to them belong the sonship, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises;

2 Corinthians 3:18 And we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being changed into his likeness from one degree of glory to another; for this comes from the Lord who is the Spirit.

Colossians 3:4 When Christ who is our life appears, then you also will appear with him in glory.

1 Thessalonians 2:12 to lead a life worthy of God, who calls you into his own kingdom and glory.

2 Thessalonians 2:14 To this he called you through our gospel, so that you may obtain the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.

2 Timothy 2:10 Therefore I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain salvation in Christ Jesus with its eternal glory.

Hebrews 2:10 For it was fitting that he, for whom and by whom all things exist, in bringing many sons to glory, should make the pioneer of their salvation perfect through suffering.

1 Peter 1:7 so that the genuineness of your faith, more precious than gold which though perishable is tested by fire, may redound to praise and glory and honor at the revelation of Jesus Christ.

1 Peter 4:14 f you are reproached for the name of Christ, you are blessed, because the spirit of glory and of God rests upon you.

1 Peter 5:1 So I exhort the elders among you, as a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ as well as a partaker in the glory that is to be revealed. (cf. 5:10)

2 Peter 1:3 His divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us to his own glory and excellence,

"Rule" is simply a variation on the theme of "Queen of heaven."

because she is full of grace, holier, more beautiful, more exalted, incomparably more so than the greatest saints and angels, taken individually or all together; because, as the first-born daughter of the Father, the perfect Mother of the Word,

Relative to other creatures, Mary is preeminent, but that doesn't make her God. Not even remotely close . . .

the beloved Spouse of the Holy Spirit,

See my papers:

The Blessed Virgin Mary as the "Spouse of the Holy Spirit": Biblical Analogies and Evidences

Dialogue With a Calvinist About the Propriety of Calling Mary the Spouse of the Holy Spirit, and About Socratic Method and the Nature of True Dialogue

she is related in virtue of the Hypostatic Union to the whole Most Holy Trinity,

In other words, Mary is involved with; related to the Holy Trinity insofar as she was connected with the Incarnation: the birth of the Man Christ Jesus Who is also God. This is indisputable and has nothing to do with her being God. Perhaps that is why the anti-Catholic citations had to butcher and change the actual words used. It would be like saying, "I am related to creation in virtue of being created by the Creator." That is not a statement so much about myself as it is about God. But taking these words and engaging in the wholesale distortion of changing them to "She is exalted to hypostatic union with the Blessed Trinity" completely changes the meaning and intent. Saying someone is "in union with" is by no means the same as saying "related to." And where does the "exalted" here come from? I guess, from fertile, imaginative anti-Catholic brains.

to Him who in Himself alone is is by essence infinite Majesty, the King of kings, Lord of lords;

Note how it is made crystal clear how there is an unbridgeable gap between Mary and God, Who "alone" has all these traits.

because she was the Mother of the King divine, of Him to whom from His Mother's womb the Lord God gave the throne of David and eternal kingship in the house of Jacob [Cf. Luke 1:32-33] and who, after asserting in His own right that all power was given to Him in heaven and on earth [Cf. Matt. 28:18], He, the Son of God, gave His heavenly Mother a share in His glory,

I've shown above how God shares His glory with all kinds of people. Those who know the Bible well know this. Those who don't pretend that it means that Pope Pius XII is turning Mary into God. It's really as simple as that.

His majesty,

God shares this, too, according to Holy Scripture:

Psalm 21:5 His glory is great through thy help; splendor and majesty thou dost bestow upon him.

Daniel 4:36 At the same time my reason returned to me; and for the glory of my kingdom, my majesty and splendor returned to me. (Nebuchadnezzar)

Nahum 2:2 (For the LORD is restoring the majesty of Jacob as the majesty of Israel, . . .

Since Mary is the Queen of heaven, it goes along with the office.

His kingship;

Daniel 5:18 O king, the Most High God gave Nebuchadnez'zar your father kingship and greatness and glory and majesty;

because, associated as Mother and Minister to the King of martyrs in the ineffable work of Man's Redemption,

Just as Paul and many others are presented as being in Scripture, as shown above . . .

she is likewise associated with Him forever,

The Bible also has a strong theme of our being co-workers with God:

Romans 15:17-18 In Christ Jesus, then, I have reason to be proud of my work for God. [18] For I will not venture to speak of anything except what Christ has wrought through me to win obedience from the Gentiles, by word and deed,

1 Corinthians 3:9 For we are God's fellow workers; you are God's field, God's building.

1 Corinthians 15:10 But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace toward me was not in vain. On the contrary, I worked harder than any of them, though it was not I, but the grace of God which is with me.

1 Corinthians 15:58 Therefore, my beloved brethren, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that in the Lord your labor is not in vain.

2 Corinthians 6:1 Working together with him, then, we entreat you not to accept the grace of God in vain.

Philippians 2:12-13 . . . work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; [13] for God is at work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure.

with power so to speak infinite,

"So to speak" because it is not intrinsic or self-generated, but only insofar as it is directly connected with Christ's power (2 Cor 12:9 literally asserts this), per similar examples in the Bible:

Luke 9:1 And he called the twelve together and gave them power and authority over all demons and to cure diseases,

Luke 10:19 Behold, I have given you authority to tread upon serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy; and nothing shall hurt you.

Luke 24:49 And behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you; but stay in the city, until you are clothed with power from on high.

Acts 1:8 But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you . . .

Acts 3:12 And when Peter saw it he addressed the people, "Men of Israel, why do you wonder at this, or why do you stare at us, as though by our own power or piety we had made him walk?

Acts 6:8 And Stephen, full of grace and power, did great wonders and signs among the people.

Romans 15:19 by the power of signs and wonders, by the power of the Holy Spirit, so that from Jerusalem and as far round as Illyr'icum I have fully preached the gospel of Christ,

2 Corinthians 12:9 but he said to me, "My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness." I will all the more gladly boast of my weaknesses, that the power of Christ may rest upon me.(cf. 13:3-4)

Ephesians 1:19 and what is the immeasurable greatness of his power in us who believe, according to the working of his great might

Ephesians 3:20 Now to him who by the power at work within us is able to do far more abundantly than all that we ask or think,

Philippians 3:10 that I may know him and the power of his resurrection, and may share his sufferings, becoming like him in his death,

Colossians 1:11 May you be strengthened with all power, according to his glorious might, for all endurance and patience with joy, (cf. 2 Tim 1:7-8)

in the distribution of the graces which flow from Redemption.

Dealt with above; the grace comes from God; it only flows through Mary as a vessel, just as it did through Paul et al.

Jesus is by nature and by conquest the King of the eternal ages;

By nature means intrinsically and necessarily. That trait is not applied to Mary because Catholics don't believe it is true.

through Him, with Him, subordinated to Him,

Note the superiority of Christ over Mary: Creator to creature.

Mary is Queen by grace, by divine association, by conquest, by singular election.

God elects creatures. He doesn't elect Himself. Thus, Mary is a creature, as has been reiterated a dozen times in this address.

Her kingdom is as vast as that of her divine Son because nothing of His dominion is excluded.

In other words, she is Queen over all of the kingdom that is Christ's because He willed it so. That doesn't mean that the Queen is somehow equal in rank to the King. God shares this aspect, too, with His creatures:

Matthew 16:19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

Matthew 21:43 Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a nation producing the fruits of it."

Matthew 25:34 Then the King will say to those at his right hand, `Come, O blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world;

Mark 4:11 And he said to them, "To you has been given the secret of the kingdom of God, but for those outside everything is in parables" (cf. Lk 8:10)

Luke 6:20 And he lifted up his eyes on his disciples, and said: "Blessed are you poor, for yours is the kingdom of God.

Luke 12:32 Fear not, little flock, for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom.

Hebrews 12:28 Therefore let us be grateful for receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken . . .

James 2:5 Listen, my beloved brethren. Has not God chosen those who are poor in the world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which he has promised to those who love him?

In crowning the image of Our Lady, you made an act of faith in her Queenship, of loyal submission to her authority, of filial and continued correspondence with her love. You did something more: you enrolled yourselves as Crusaders for the conquest and the reclamation of her kingdom, which is the kingdom of God; in other words you pledged yourselves to work so that she may be loved, venerated and served everywhere, in the family, in society, in the world.

This is nothing more than we just saw above: Jesus said, for example of the poor: "yours is the kingdom of God" (Lk 6:20), etc. Likewise, Mary's kingdom is Jesus' kingdom, because there is only one kingdom of heaven.

The ridiculous anti-Catholic effort, then, to "prove" that Catholics think Mary is God, by atrocious citation of words such as these, fails at every turn. In not a single instance can anything contrary to the Bible be shown. But the Catholic can back up the language with direct biblical analogies in virtually every case.

* * * * *

To be fair, I have discovered another anti-Catholic source that quotes this same radio speech properly, without butchering it, and also actually provides complete and accurate documentation:

Salvation is obtained from . . . Mary?, by Michael Scheifler: an anti-Catholic Seventh-Day Adventist.

Scroll about a quarter of the way down and search for the words, "Vatican Radio Message to Fatima." The link provided goes to a paper (mentioned above) that actually includes the entire speech. So this person did it right. He documented correctly, but he still has only a dim understanding of Catholic Mariology.

The Botched and Distorted Reference in Christianity Today
(Philip Edgcumbe Hughes)

As noted above, this source was cited in Erwin W. Lutzer, The Doctrines That Divide: A Fresh Look at the Historic Doctrines That Separate Christians (Grand Rapids, Michigan, Kregel Publications, second edition, 1998, pp. 59-60):

If there should still be any doubt that Mary is exalted as high as Christ, read the words of Pope Pius XII at the time of the coronation of Mary's statue at Fatima: "Mary is indeed worthy to receive honor and might and glory. She is exalted to hypostatic union with the Blessed Trinity. . . . Her kingdom is as great as her Son's and God's. . . . Mary's kingdom is identical with the kingdom of God."

But Pope Pius spoke those words in 1946.

[footnoted documentation: "The Council and Mary," Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, Christianity Today, 8 December 1967 issue]

The article in question (I now have a photocopy of it in front of me, courtesy of a librarian friend) runs from pages 7-10 or [223-226] in brackets (different page numbering systems in the magazine). The writer in question is not the Catholic historian Philip Hughes (as I thought at first), but rather, an anti-Catholic Anglican Calvinist clergyman. One online source describes him as follows:

Philip Edgcumbe Hughes (Bdiv, MA) was an Anglican clergyman and scholar whose life spanned four continents: Australia, where he was born, South Africa, England, where he was ordained, and the USA, where he died in 1990, aged 75.

From 1947 to 1953 he taught at Tyndale Hall, Bristol; for the next three years he was Secretary of Church Society; in 1959 he became editor of the Churchman and continued in that role with great distinction till 1967; but in 1964 he had moved to the United States and thereafter taught in American Seminaries, including Westminster Theological Seminary.

In theology, he was a firm Calvinist, but had the breadth of sympathies of a true scholar. His writings are solid in substance and graceful in style. One of them, The Theology of the English Reformers, has recently been republished.

(Adapted from an article in The Churchman magazine - 1997)

Another web page, that presented his piece, "The Sovereignty of God -- Has God Lost Control?" provided the following blurb:

Philip Edgcumbe Hughes was a visiting professor of New Testament at Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia, Pa. Dr. Hughes received his B.A., M.A., and D.L.H. from the University of Cape Town, his B.D. from the University of London, and his Th.D. from the Australian College of Theology. One of the finest minds in New Testament studies today, Dr. Hughes has written the Commentary on Paul’s Second Epistle to the Corinthians (N.I.C. NT. Series) and has contributed to and edited numerous works including Creative Minds in Contemporary Theology.

The tenor of the article immediately starts out in an anti-Catholic fashion, in a way that would scarcely if ever be seen in the irenic, ecumenical Christianity Today (I used to subscribe to it in the early 80s) in the last 25-30 or so years:

At no point in Romanism is the conflict between tradition and Scripture more evident than in the cult of Mary. One can confidently predict that the more Scripture is studied, the more the foundations of the Marian cult will be shaken. So far, however, official pronouncements have shown no indications of any desire to curb this cult. On the contrary, modern popes have been the foremost in promoting it.

He then goes on to list a number of Marian pronouncements, from 1854 to 1954, mentioning the words under consideration near the end of that section; still on page 7. Lutzer quoted Hughes' words, in turn "citing" Pope Pius XII from 1946, directly, word-for-word:

Mary is indeed worthy to receive honor and might and glory. She is exalted to hypostatic union with the Blessed Trinity. . . . Her kingdom is as great as her Son's and God's. . . . Mary's kingdom is identical with the kingdom of God.

The event and year was listed correctly as "1946 . . . by Pope Pius XII, at the time of the coronation of Mary's statue at Fatima:". Hughes gives no further source information, as to where he obtained his quotation. This is especially important since it is itself a translation of what was originally a Portugese talk, as shown by its title, Bendito seia (AAS 38.266).

Like Lutzer and other anti-Catholics noted above, Hughes comes to the same ridiculous conclusion, stated (right after the "citation" from Pope Pius XII) with melodramatic flourish, for the greatest effect:

To the ear attuned to the teaching of the New Testament such affirmations are blasphemous, both because they derogate from the glory and merit that are due to Christ alone as our unique Redeemer and Mediator and because they exalt to a position of equality with the eternal Creator one who, though blessed, was no more than a creature. This mother -- goddess cult -- which, as has often been pointed out, has its roots in paganism rather than in apostolic Christianity, and which in effect gives to Mary the Holy Spirit's place in the Trinity -- is disruptive of the very heart of the Gospel of the grace of God in and through Christ alone.

(p. 7)

It might help if the words were cited correctly in the first place, if these sweeping conclusions are to be made from them. As it is, based on the examination of the actual texts from (English language) Catholic sources above, it is a twisted caricature of what was actually said, cited using abominable methods unworthy of any scholar or even a pseudo-scholar (indeed, even a high school freshman presenting an essay including citations). Those methods have been examined above in detail.

At this point, it looks like Hughes is the source being used by more modern anti-Catholics, and that he deliberately toyed with the citation (in his manifest anti-Catholic bias) to make it come out as horrifying to Protestant eyes as possible. This is academically inexcusable, to put it mildly.

Yet this man had a doctorate degree, was a professor at a major Reformed Protestant seminary, and authored several ostensibly scholarly books (Library Thing indicates that he wrote 25 volumes).

We've already seen how he distorts what Pope Pius XII actually said. But then he goes further and draws absurd conclusions, making out that Catholicism is almost Mormon-like in its blurring of the distinctions between God and man. Thus he continues:

The distinction between God and man is reduced to one that is no longer absolute but relative, not only in the matter of ability but even in that of being. This human potential is symbolized in a concrete manner in the person of Mary, free from taint of sin, collaborating in redemption -- without whose consent and cooperation, indeed, our redemption would not have been effected -- and exalted to the heights of divinity as the queen-mother of heaven, there to intercede with a mother's compassionate heart and turn aside the displeasure of a less indulgent Mediator.

Those who had hopes that the Second Vatican Council would apply the brakes to the rapidly advancing cult of Mary and seek to restore to Christ the uniqueness of the mediatorial office were soon disillusioned.

(p. 8)

Hughes cites the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church in a rare gesture of magnanimity towards Catholics:

In fairness it must be said that . . . it is explicitly stated that because Mary "belongs to the offspring of Adam" she is "one with all human beings in their need for salvation" . . . and that assurance is given that "the maternal duty of Mary toward men in no way obscures or diminishes" the "unique mediation of Christ" . . .

(p. 9)

But in typical anti-Catholic fashion, he immediately downplays this, and knows better than Catholics what we teach. He's quite unpersuaded that we mean what we say in our official documents:

But there is nothing new about all this; similar admonitions and reassurances have been uttered numerous times in the past. Protestations of scriptural orthodoxy have a hollow ring when they are used to justify teaching manifestly alien to the evangelical doctrine of Scripture. . . .

Despite all the qualifying clauses, the effect, in both logic and practice, of the Mariology of the Roman church is to rob Christ of the uniqueness of his redemptive and mediatorial office. . . .

Far from restraining the tide of Mariolatry, the Second Vatican Council has strongly endorsed it . . .

Nothing less than the Gospel of our redemption is at stake here.

(pp. 9-10)

It's a classic, tragi-comic instance of what anti-Catholic bias does to even a scholarly mind.