Vatican Ii on Mary: the Case for the Definition of the Spiritual Motherhood of Mary

By Douglas Nnamdi Egbuonu

The purpose of this study is to show that the formal definition of the spiritual Motherhood of Mary would constitute a doctrinal development from Vatican IIs teaching on Mary. It is my strong view that Marys spiritual motherhood should be explicitly acknowledged, accepted and stamped with the extra-ordinary infallibility of the Church magisterium so that it would become a dogma of the Church, as the sensus fidelium. Such formal definition would give the doctrine the seal of juridical authenticity and prevent it from denigration and rejection in future.
This study argues that the Catholic Church needs to advance forwards from the Marian teaching of Vatican II by making concerted efforts to maintain the Marian trajectory in the Church. Also portrayed are the efforts of the papal magisterium and some noted Catholic theologians that have gone back to the sources of the early Fathers of the Church in order to teach that Marys spiritual Motherhood has solid foundation on Scripture and the Churchs tradition. The post-conciliar teachings of the above-stated papal magisterium and contemporary theologians have the aim to nurture and sustain the faith and understanding of the people of God about Marys spiritual Motherhood. The study also examines evidence to show that there is much in the Catholic Marian theology that could improve understanding among Christians of different denominations. In particular, it portrays the fact that Mariology always points to Christ, being indissolubly linked with Christology, and also has intrinsic unity with ecclesiology.

• Language: English
• Publisher: AuthorHouse UK
• Release date: Mar 25, 2014
• ISBN: 9781491896457

Douglas Nnamdi Egbuonu

I was born on 30 January 1939 at Aba in Eastern Nigeria. I have been happily married for 45 years to Josephine Ofie Egbuonu (nee Ukpo), and we live together in Bristol, United Kingdom. We have five grown-up children and seven lovely grand-children. I am an active member of St. Mary-on-the-Quay Catholic Church Bristol, wherein I am a Lay-reader and a Catechist. My interest in Christian Theology was kindled in 2004 through a poster from Wesley College Bristol (affiliated to the University of Bristol) inviting applications from people interested in Christian Religious Studies. On verifying the authenticity of Wesley College as a designated ecumenical centre for Christian religious studies, I successfully enrolled therein, in 2004. What for me started as occasional studies soon grew into a full B.A, degree course in Theological Studies. At the end of my second year (in 2006), I was up-graded to commence the M.A. course in Theology and Ministry, which I completed successfully with distinction in 2008. Thence, I was admitted by the University for an M. Litt degree in April 2009. My M.A. dissertation had explored the relationship between Scripture and Tradition in the Documents of Vatican II’s, Lumen Gentium and Dei Verbum. I have not always been a Roman Catholic Christian having begun my early life, first, as an Evangelical (C.M.S.) Anglican; then as a Methodist. Although I was married in the Roman Catholic Church, I was received into the Catholic Church only in 1981. I became a convinced Catholic through my active participation in preparing my children for the Sacraments of First Holy Communion and Confirmation, and by attending Mass regularly with them every Sunday. The methodology of my postgraduate studies involves intensive qualitative research programmes and techniques, which I had cultivated, firstly, as Pfizer’s Pharmaceutical Marketing Manager (in Nigeria) where I had conducted several prospective marketing research programmes, and secondly, during my M. A. Degree course. My earlier professional life and work experience was in Pharmacy, a profession I had practised for almost forty years before I came to Great Britain. Since I retired from Boots Limited in 2009, I have been fully engaged in postgraduate research studies leading to the successful defence of my M. Litt thesis and the writing of three books on the socio- political situation in Africa, and Nigeria, in particular. These are titled: The Nigerian – An African Statesman Unfulfilled; How to Transform Nigeria into a Fulfilled African Nation; and A letter to Ndi-Igbo: Needed, edifying and crucial Attributes.

Book preview

AuthorHouse™ UK Ltd.

1663 Liberty Drive

Bloomington, IN 47403 USA

www.authorhouse.co.uk

Phone: [phone]

© 2014 Douglas Nnamdi Egbuonu. All rights reserved.

No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted by any means without the written permission of the author.

The texts of the Grail Psalms© The Grail (England) 1963, published by HarperCollins Publisher. Used by permission.

Published by AuthorHouse    03/05/2014

ISBN: 978-1-4918-9644-0 (sc)

ISBN: 978-1-4918-9645-7 (e)

Any people depicted in stock imagery provided by Thinkstock are models, and such images are being used for illustrative purposes only.

Certain stock imagery © Thinkstock.

Because of the dynamic nature of the Internet, any web addresses or links contained in this book may have changed since publication and may no longer be valid. The views expressed in this work are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher, and the publisher hereby disclaims any responsibility for them.

CONTENTS

Abstract

Dedication and Acknowledgements

Introduction

Abbreviations

Prologue

The meaning of Mary’s spiritual Motherhood

Chapter 1:   Title: The Development of the Catholic Church’s Marian Dogmas: relevance to Christology, Pneumatology, Ecclesiology and Eschatology.

1.i, Introduction

1.ii, Development of Marian Dogmas

1.iii, Mary and her Son

1.iv, Mary and Pneumatology

1.v, Mary and the Church

1.vi, Mary and Eschatology:

1.vii, The Councils of Trent and Vatican I Marian Teachings

Chapter 2:   Title: Vatican II’s decisions and teaching on Mary: In what way did these lead to the rationalisation of Mariology after the Council?

2.i, Introduction:

2. ii, The major experts in the theological spectrum at Vatican II:

2.iii, Conciliar debate and decision on the Marian Schema:

2.iv, The Conciliar teaching on Mary:

2.v, Post-conciliar Effects of Vatican II’s teaching on Mary:

2.vi, Summary & Conclusion:

Chapter 3:   Title: Sequel to Vatican II’s Marian teaching, the post-conciliar efforts at the rehabilitation of Mariology:

3.i, Introduction:

3.ii, In conformity with Vatican II’s Marian teaching:

3.iii, As an example of the development of Christian doctrine:

3.iv, The role of Tradition vis a vis Scripture on Mariology:

3.v, Recommendations of the Papal Magisterium

3.vi, The teaching of contemporary theologians (of the 20th-21st-century) through Ressourcement to show Mariology’s positive impact on the Christological truths of the faith:

3.vii, Summary and Conclusion:

Chapter 4:   The case for the definition of the Spiritual Motherhood of Mary:

4.i, Introduction:

4.ii, What does the Spiritual Motherhood of Mary involve?

4.iii, Best Arguments in justification of the Title:

4.iv, Arguments against the Title:

4.v, Why the Objections are not tenable:

4.vi, Summary and Conclusion:

Epilogue (including Conclusion)

About the Author

Endnotes

Douglas Egbuonu: Vatican II and Mary’s Spiritual Motherhood

The doctrine of Mary’s spiritual motherhood – that she is mother to all Christians – is taken for granted by many Catholics, but the topic has not been extensively addressed by theologians in the past half century. Douglas Egbuonu’s book brings it back into play. The motif of motherhood is strong in the Second Vatican Council’s chapter on Mary, and an examination of its teaching as it relates to the spiritual motherhood is therefore to be welcomed by those who are concerned with the Church’s continuing reception of the Council’s proclamations.

Sarah Jane Boss

3rd March 2014

Director of Centre of Marian Studies

University of Roehampton

London, SW15 5PU

Information about the Images on the Book:

i)   The image on the front cover (in colour) is the Painting called ‘the Assumption’ by Gaspar de Crayer [1582-1669]. Oscott College, Oscott, Birmingham.

ii)   The full colour Image on the back cover is the stain glass window of Mary and her Child; this is located in the main library, by John Hardman Studio in Birmingham.

iii)   The above Images are used with the permission of Mr. Marcin Mazur with grateful appreciation.

iv)   The Image (in black and white) on the page opposite Chapter 4, is the Statue of the Madonna and her Child in the Marian Shrine in the Catholic Church of St. Mary-on-the-Quay, Bristol (my own parish Church); it is donated by Rev. Fr. Nicodemus Ratu, SVD, with his permission—to be used in my book.

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study is to show that the formal definition of the spiritual Motherhood of Mary would constitute a doctrinal development from Vatican II’s teaching on Mary. It is my strong view that Mary’s spiritual motherhood should be explicitly acknowledged, accepted and stamped with the extra-ordinary infallibility of the Church magisterium so that it would become a dogma of the Church, as the sensus fidelium. Such formal definition would give the doctrine the seal of juridical authenticity and prevent it from denigration and rejection in future. Furthermore, this work shows that Mary’s spiritual motherhood has been taught through the ages in the Church as a truth of faith, confirmed also by the teaching of Vatican II Council.

In undertaking this critical study, I am mindful of the difficulties that tend to becloud studies on Mary, e.g., firstly, the difficulty to explain her position in the Catholic Church vis-ā-vis the continued Protestant opposition (in particular, that of contemporary Evangelical and Latitudinarian Anglicans and the Pentecostal/Fundamentalist Protestants) on the one hand, and on the other the feeling among some Catholic theologians that there should be no further addition to Mary’s titles. Second, is the nagging fear among some Catholic scholars that the definition of any new Marian dogmas, would further exacerbate the ecumenical problem. I intend to show in this study that the Catholic Church needs to advance forwards from the Marian teaching of Vatican II by making concerted efforts to maintain the Marian trajectory in the Church. I will portray the efforts of the papal magisterium and some noted Catholic theologians that have gone back to the sources of the early Fathers of the Church in order to teach that Mary’s spiritual Motherhood has solid foundation on Scripture and the Church’s tradition. The post-conciliar teachings of the above-stated papal magisterium and contemporary theologians have the aim to nurture and sustain the faith and understanding of the people of God about Mary’s spiritual Motherhood. I will also examine evidence to show that there is much in the Catholic Marian theology that could improve understanding among Christians of different denominations. In particular, I intend to portray the fact that Mariology always points to Christ, being indissolubly linked with Christology, and also has intrinsic unity with ecclesiology.

DEDICATION AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I acknowledge with grateful thanks the thorough review and critique of my work and the inspiring supervision that by Professor Gavin D’Costa gave me throughout my postgraduate studies leading to the M. Litt degree. I sincerely thank him also for agreeing to write the Introduction to this work. I wish also to acknowledge the enthusiastic encouragement which Reverend Sandy Williams gave me at the start of my studies in Theology way back in 2004. Her faith in my ability to undertake postgraduate theological studies indeed inspired me to go forward. I am eternally grateful to Professor Michael Hayes and The Pastoral Review Bursary Grant for the financial contribution to the payment of my tuition fees. Likewise, I owe sincere thanks and gratitude to Dr. Mervyn Davies, who taught me most of my MA courses and supervised my MA Dissertation. I will always remember his significant role in encouraging me to proceed beyond MA-level and undertake further postgraduate studies.

I dedicate this work to my dear wife, Josephine Ofie Egbuonu, for her enduring love and support and to our lovely grand-children, God’s gift to us: Ositadimma, Chidozie, Ogonna, Chiamaka, Ikengachi, Olanna, and Nnamdi. Their advent into our life has proved to be extremely inspiring, sobering and joyful.

INTRODUCTION

In recent years the role of Mary, the Mother of God, has been contentious amongst Christians. This was not always the case. In the ancient Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox communities and in the churches of Middle Eastern Christians, a high place was reserved for the Blessed Virgin Mary. Councils pronounced upon her status, including the groundbreaking claim that Mary was ‘Mother of God’ (Theotokos), billions of Christians from all classes and ranks within the church paid devotion to her, and shrines and special locations across the globe dedicated to her became increasingly popular. Apparitions of Mary continue today and worldwide the Catholic Church has formally recognised various apparition claims as trustworthy. In fact, devotion to Mary sometimes cuts across religious lines. In some countries Muslims hold her with special regard, arising from her special mention in the Qur’an, where her virgin birth is explicitly acknowledged. In some countries Muslims and Christians pray together at these shrines.

But in modern times, the status of Mary has become contentious again in two particular ways—among many, but these two are germane to this work. Mary has become contentious between different Christian denominations in so much as some regard others as being practically involved in idolatry. Of course there were important distinctions made between latria, dulia, and hyper-dulia (worship to be paid to God alone; and reverence and special reverence, respectively, reserved for the saints and hyperdulia reserved for Mary). But the actual phenomenon was still troubling for some Christian groups and their relationships with Roman Catholics and Orthodox. These two denominations are not alone in seeing Mary’s role as dogmatically and devotionally central to the Christian faith. The second arena of contention is within the Roman Catholic Church itself as evidenced in the remarkable debates and passionate differences found in the Second Vatican Council debates about Mary.

Mr Douglas Egbuonu, a lay Roman Catholic from Nigeria, provides an important service to Roman Catholics and all Christians in the current work. In chapter one he presents the historical context of Mary’s role in the early Church then focussing on the five dogmas that arose regarding her status. He also examines the teachings advanced by different Church Councils on Mary. In chapter two he examines the Second Vatican Council debates on Mary and looks at the influence of the specialist theological advisors as well as the actual teachings in Lumen gentium. In the Council he argues there was a shift away from the traditional privileges accorded to Mary and a concern with ecumenical bridges that were seen as especially important to the modern Church. In chapter three Egbuonu then argues that subsequently Popes (Paul VI and John Paul II) realised the problems that were developing by losing the Marian dimensions to the Church. They tried to redress the balance. This is not a question of turning back the teachings of the Council, but rather bringing up themes that were perhaps not so strongly stressed. Egbuonu also traces a revival of Marian themes in key theologians immediately after the Council. Chapter four is the heart of the book’s positive proposal: that the logic of the Marian teachings requires the proclamation of the spiritual Motherhood of Mary. Here he looks at arguments for and against the position he is advancing.

This book is another important plank in a growing call for such a formal proclamation. The author sees his proposal as actually contributing to good ecumenism rather than detracting from it. He also sees the proposal as central to the articulation of the fullness of the Christian faith. In that sense, it is a proposal that requires attention, whether you agree with it or not.

Gavin D’Costa, Professor of Catholic Theology

University of Bristol

ABBREVIATIONS

ON CHURCH DOCUMENTS:

AAS   Acta Apostolicae Sedis (Vatican City, Rome, 1909 ff.)

ARCIC   Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission

CCC   Catechism of the Catholic Church

CCL   Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina (Turnhout, 1953—)

CPC   Central Planning Commission, Vatican II

CSCO   Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium (Paris-Louvain, 1903—)

CSEL   Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinarum (Vienna, 1866 ff.)

D   H. Denzinger—C. Rahner, Enchiridon symbolorum, definitionum er declarationum de rebus fidei et morum

DS   Enchiridion symbolorum, edited by Denzinger and Schönmetzer, 32nd Edition (Freiburg: Herder, 1963)

DV   Dei Verbum, Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation, Vatican II, 18 November 1965

GCS   Die Griechischen Christlichen Schriftsteller (Leipzig—Berlin, 1826—)

LG   Lumen Gentium, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Vatican II, 21 November 1964

Mansi   Sacrorum Conciliorum nova et amplissima collection, edited by J.D. Mansi, Continued by L. Petit and J. Martin (Florence, 1559 ff.; Paris and Leipzig, 1901-27)

MG   Mélanges Goguel (Aux Sources de la tradition)

ML   Mélanges Lebreton

MSS   Maria in Sacra Scriptura: Acta Congressus Mariologici—Mariani Anno 1965 in Republica Dominicana Celebrati 5: De Beata Virgine Maria in Evangelico S. Jaonnis et in Apocalypsi, Roma: Pontificia Academia Mariana Internationalis, 1967

PG   Patrologiae cursus completus, series graeca, edited by J.P. Migne (Paris, 1857 ff.)

PL   Patrologiae cursus completes, series latina, edited by J.P. Migne (Paris, 1844 ff.)

PLS   Patrologiae latinae supplementum, ed. A. Hamman (Paris, 1957-1971)

PO   Patrologia orientalis (Paris, 1903—)

SC   Sacrosanctum Concilium, Constitution on Sacred Liturgy, Vatican II, 4 December 1963

TU   Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur (Leipzig—Berlin, 1882—)

ON PAPAL ENCYCLICALS:

MC   Marialis Cultus, Pope Paul VI’s Encyclical, 2 February 1974

OL   Papal Teachings, Our Lady, ed. at Solesmes, [Trans. publ., Boston]

RM   Redemptoris Mater: Encyclical Letter of Pope John Paul II of 25 March 1987 on the Blessed Virgin Mary in the life of the Pilgrim Church

SM   Signum Magnum, Pope Paul VI’s Encyclical, 13 May 1967

ON MARY:

BVM   Blessed Virgin Mary

ESBVM   Ecumenical Society of Blessed Virgin Mary

ON THEOLOGICAL WORKS:

Essay   Newman’s Essay on the development of Christian Doctrine

JTS   Journal of Theological Studies

PROLOGUE

The meaning of Mary’s spiritual Motherhood

I begin this writing with a brief explanation of the meaning of Mary’s spiritual Motherhood. This definition of the term ‘spiritual motherhood’ tries to explain, firstly, what it is that makes Mary’s relationship with the faithful a maternal one; and secondly, how Mary exercises the motherhood mentioned in John 19:26-27 (where ‘Jesus said to his mother, Woman, this is your son. Then to the disciple he said, This is your mother’).

That Mary is ‘Mother of God’. Theotokos, is regarded as her ‘divine motherhood’ or ‘divine maternity’. However, when Mary’s motherhood is extended beyond the person of Jesus and to all followers of Christ, Mary’s condition of being mother of Christians is then known as her ‘spiritual motherhood’.¹ As Michael O’Carroll, C.S.Sp., states it, that Mary the Mother of God is the Mother of all Christians has been for centuries a truth totally accepted by teaching and believing Catholics.² He further affirms, that the Fathers of the Church and early Christian writers did not acclaim per se Mary’s spiritual Motherhood. The development of the idea of Mary’s spiritual Motherhood was slow and did not enter the consciousness of the Church until medieval times.³

The sense in which Mary is said to be a mother to Christians, (i.e., what constitutes Mary’s relationship with all Christians as a maternal one), is as follows: firstly, Mary’s motherhood of the faithful is in virtue of the fact that she is a teacher and exemplar of the two important virtues of chastity and humility. Thus, Alan of Lille (d. 1203) states that by means of these virtues, as by means of breasts, she nourishes the people of faith as a mother feeds her child’.⁴ Secondly, Mary’s spiritual motherhood is a maternity of faith, an apogee of Mary’s faith that makes Mary the first and holiest child of God, the first and most consistent disciple of Christ and exemplar of faith among the community of the faithful. It is worthy of note that St. Augustine bases Mary’s spiritual motherhood on the mystical unity of all those who are related to Christ with him, the mother of those articulated with Christ.⁵ Thirdly too, is Mary’s merciful attitude towards sinners which is manifest in her manifold intercession with Christ and the triune God for her fellow brothers and sisters, members of the pilgrim Church here on earth. On her assumption into heavenly glory, Mary has become the symbol and summary of the Church on earth in her upward pilgrimage to the Church triumphant. Mary is regarded as the icon of the maternal Church that also intercedes for all her children, because Mary is the icon of the Spirit of love. As spiritual mother of the Church, Mary is ‘mother of divine grace’, the mediatrix (= the intercessor) of the holiness of love which binds her to all who believe. Fourthly, in Luke’s Gospel, at the Annunciation to Mary, Luke announces what becomes, perhaps, the central theme of his two-volumes (Luke and Acts): ‘for nothing is impossible to God’ (Lk. 1:37, the New Jerusalem Bible). Mary’s response signals her consent to the role of the Mother of Jesus. In addition, it identifies another central theme: that of the consent of human beings to God’s will. When she consents to God’s will, Mary ipso facto becomes the Mother of Believers.⁶

Fifthly, Mary has become spiritual mother of all the faithful as a consequence of Christ’s mandate on the Cross that has stamped the seal of authenticity on her spiritual motherhood (see John 19:26-27). According to Rupert of Deutz (in his exegesis on Jn. 19:26-27), Mary suffers birth-pangs now in the hour of Christ’s Passion, at the birth of salvation of all Christians, so that she is truly mother of all Christians.⁷ Sixthly, is the parallel between Mary and the Church as mother of God’s people. Thus, Boss states:

This principle of harmonizing or identifying Mary’s spiritual motherhood with the Church’s role as mother of the faithful has continued down through the ages (see also, LG, viii, arts. 63 & 64).⁸

That on his promulgation of LG in 1964, Pope Paul VI proclaimed Mary ‘Mother of the Church’, Mater Ecclesia, is significant as an indicator of the extent to which Mary’s position as a mother is the governing metaphor in the Catholic Church’s understanding of its relationship with Mary.⁹

On how Mary exercises the motherhood pronounced on her by her dying Son’s testament on the Cross (see John 19:26-27): Mary is seen as the woman of faith. She is ‘full of grace’, the eschatological Daughter of Zion, the believer and Jesus’ disciple par excellence. She is full of the Holy Spirit (as an icon of the Holy Spirit) and the model and mentor of Jesus’ followers at Pentecost when the Church of Christ was inaugurated. Mary’s spiritual motherhood depicts her as typos of the Church, the original Mater immaculata from whose holy womb has been born the Word Incarnate and the Body of Christ (i.e., the Church). Thus, Mary exhibits a special relationship with the new humanity as she enters into an intimate relationship with a redeemed humanity born of faith in Jesus who is the new Adam and her Son. All who cling to Jesus Christ, as Leonardo Boff affirms, will form one body (the Body of Christ, the Church), to become sons and daughters in the Son, i.e., those who are with Christ and in Christ. In her spiritual motherhood, therefore, Mary is the mother of all the faithful, the universal mother of the redeemed people of God (see Psalm 87 on Zion, mother of nations).¹⁰ The Church is that portion of humanity that has explicitly accepted the gift of salvation wrought in Jesus Christ on Calvary: the communitas fidelium. Mary stands in a unique relationship with this humanity that has directed its life toward the following and discipleship of her Son in the power of the Spirit. Just as Mary engenders Christ, she continues to engender Christians. Thus, they are engendered in the same power of the Spirit dwelling within her. That is why Mary has been proclaimed Mother of the Church, the spiritual mother of all Christians.¹¹ In Mary, God has shown historically what is desired of the whole Church, and what will be lived in glory by the redeemed. Mary is not a static archetype of the Church. She is dynamic, and awakens new life and she helps build the new humanity in Christ¹² (just as she co-operated in doing at the birth of the Church at Pentecost [see Acts 2:1-41]). That is why for Marina Warner the Virgin Mary is a protagonist in the drama of the Incarnation and the Redemption of Christ, and consequently in the personal salvation of each individual who feels himself/herself to belong to the Christian history and professes Christian beliefs.¹³

The Spirit that en-graced Mary (at her immaculate conception in her mother’s womb, at the Incarnation, at the Lord’s Passover on Calvary and at Pentecost) continues spiritualizing the society of the redeemed. Since Pentecost, the Holy Spirit as promised by Jesus Christ (see Matthew 28:19-20; cf. Luke 24:49; Acts 1:4-5), has never left the Church. The Spirit continues to assume all who are open to redeeming grace, and creates a mystical person in the corporate body of the redeemed (the Church). The Spirit prolongs the generative power of God in the Church through the centuries. Engendering Christ through and with Mary, the Spirit continues to engender Christians, as well, through the Church—the sisters and brothers of Jesus Christ.¹⁴

In conclusion, therefore, one could say with Warner that the Virgin Mary, an ordinary woman who gave birth to Christ, becomes the symbolic mother of the Church, gives each of its members a part in God’s plan, and also stands as a model of perfect humanity.¹⁵ It is therefore an important proposition of this work that in union with the world episcopate, the Church’s teaching authority should stamp a seal of authenticity on Mary’s spiritual motherhood by defining it as a dogma of the sensum fidelium. This juridical act is needed to prevent this truth of faith from denigration and rejection in future by some theologians.

CHAPTER 1

Title: The Development of the Catholic Church’s Marian Dogmas: relevance to Christology, Pneumatology, Ecclesiology and Eschatology.

1.i, Introduction

This chapter looks at the development of the Marian dogmas as an example of development of Christian doctrines, first propounded by John Mőhler of the Tűbingen school in Germany and independently by Blessed John Cardinal Newman in England. The five Marian dogmas, defined by the Catholic Church as Christological truths of faith, derived from the datum of the Revelation given in the prophets, in Christ and by the Apostles, namely: the Incarnation and Theotokos; virginal conception and virgin birth of Jesus; perpetual virginity of Mary; the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption of Mary with its eschatological dimension,¹⁶ are examined in detail. Also dealt with are the relationship between Mary and Pneumatology, the intrinsic and indissoluble unity and relation between Mary and the Church and Mary as an eschatological icon. The teachings of the Councils of Trent and Vatican I are examined to deduce their effect on Marian doctrine and devotion¹⁷, that blossomed fully into the great Marian movement in the Church and produced great clamour for the proclamation of more titles on Mary, e.g., Co-Redemptrix and/or Mediatrix¹⁸; and also often led to aberrant and exaggerated Marian devotions. The need to curb these excesses, as part of the reasons to convoke the Second Vatican Council, is also commented upon.

1.ii, Development of Marian Dogmas

Of all aspects of the Church’s life: morality, governing structures, discipline, liturgy and doctrine, doctrine seems to be the most sensitive of all, especially for Catholics. The Catholic Church is deeply conscious of its responsibility to proclaim, without dissimulation or attenuation, God’s revelation in Christ. Like other Christian bodies, the Catholic Church is irrevocably committed to the teaching of the Bible and to the articles of the Creed—especially those basic articles dealing with the triune God, the Incarnation, the death and resurrection of Jesus, and our hope of unending life. Like most other Christian bodies, too, the Catholic Church cherishes in its own tradition certain specific teachings which it regards as non-negotiable. They are called dogmas which constitute the badges of the Church’s identity;¹⁹ that teach the infallible faith of the Catholic Christians.

Cardinal Dulles states that since the nineteenth century, the term ‘dogma’ has functioned as a code word to signify certain specific and precisely formulated teachings so important and so evidently contained in revelation that the Church can never cease to teach them confidently in the name of the revealing God. Dogma, understood in this sense, provides a limiting case and has been claimed to be irrefragable. This Catholic concept of dogma has become problematic especially in this contemporary age of rapid and radical change marked by pluralism.²⁰ Prior to the nineteenth century, theologians did not approve of the doctrinal change incipient in the development of doctrine. The theologians of the Reformation and Counter Reformation were openly hostile to dogmatic development. Protestants and Catholics alike appealed to Vincent of Lérins’ criterion—‘what has been believed always, everywhere, and by all’ (quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus creditum est)²¹—to prove the immutability of their beliefs. The Protestants generally held that Scripture alone is the touchstone of the pure apostolic faith. The Catholic position, made official at the Council of Trent, was that the apostolic faith was accessible through two equally dependable channels, Scripture and tradition.²² Neither communion would admit that it was innovating, but each accused the other of having done so.²³ Whilst Bossuet had objected to the Protestants: ‘You change, therefore you are not in the truth’, Newman’s objection to the Protestants of his day was the opposite: ‘You are not in the truth because you remain static’.²⁴

In the nineteenth century, evolutionary thinking began to assert itself in many disciplines, for example, G.W.I. Hegel in an all-embracing dialectical philosophy; Charles Darwin in natural science, on the problem of the origin of species. Under the circumstances, it was inevitable that theologians should devise evolutionary theories of their own to tackle the problem of the ‘irreformability’ of dogma.²⁵ In Germany, Johann Adam Mőhler of the Catholic Tűbingen School proclaimed that Christianity, as a living faith, is subject to development and progress under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.²⁶

About the same period, but working independently, in 1845 Newman’s Essay on the development of Christian Doctrine (hereafter, Essay) emerged as a classic text for the theology of the development of doctrine. The Essay is Newman’s apologetic tour de force by which he seeks to provide historical and doctrinal solutions to the problem of explicating that the doctrinal changes that have occurred in the Church from apostolic times, through the centuries to the present era, are not corruptions. They are rather authentic developments of the Christian idea rooted in the original revelation, and as per the apostolic deposit of faith.²⁷ In the Essay, Newman defines the problem of doctrinal development as being focused on finding a solution to the changes and variations undergone by Christianity over the centuries, to ascertain if these have maintained the integrity and real continuity of doctrine and the original apostolic deposit of faith. The process by which aspects of an idea are brought into consistency and form is what Newman calls its development. This is the germination and maturation of some truth or apparent truth on a large neutral field, provided this process involves the assemblage of aspects which constitute its ultimate shape and belong to the idea from which they originate. An idea is brought out rather than obscured by development, being made perfect by the process of much mutability. The Essay is considered as a great piece of seminal theological work. It is ‘the most inevitable starting point for an investigation of development of doctrine’.²⁸

The evolution of Marian dogmas is an example of the development of Christian doctrine. Many of the Church’s doctrines are characterized by the fact that they have not always been present in the Church and in her consciousness in faith in an expressly apprehensible form. For example, the bodily Assumption of the BVM into heaven is an example of a doctrine which has not always been in existence as an explicit statement. It seems not to have been proposed to the faith of every age with the clarity, precision, definiteness and binding character it has today. That is to say it has, in a certain sense, ‘developed’; it still had to be determined within the course of Christian history, for when the Gospel was first preached this doctrine could not be found in its present form.²⁹

Gebara and Bingemer, however, remind all that the most remote origins of dogma must be sought not in the last century but in the early Church, when because of the conflict between Judaizers and non-Judaizers the apostolic community convoked the First Council of Jerusalem and conveyed the position it adopted to other Churches, saying: ‘It is the decision of the Holy Spirit, and ours too…’ (Acts 15:28). Thus, for the early Church dogma was the decision ‘of the Holy Spirit, and ours too’ (that of the apostles in charge of the community) to assure the unity of faith of the community, in the service of the saving truth of the gospel. They affirm, that what is permanent in dogma is its deepest foundation, the original mystery out of which it emerges³⁰

The Catholic Church strongly believes and teaches the truths of faith contained in these dogmas to be implicitly in Scripture and explicitly in the Church tradition. The role and signal privileges of Mary, Mother of God, in the Church’s proclamation of the Christological, ecclesiological and eschatological verities and perspectives are contained therein too. As René Laurentin has pointed out, the double functional meaning of Mary, both as regards Christ and as regards the Church must needs always to be remembered in the Church, ‘for it is precisely in this that the degree and importance of her glory lie’; and the Church ‘must always see that Mary is totally relative to God and totally correlative to the Church’.³¹

In the Marian dogmas development of doctrine is seen not negatively, as defining a specific truth that had been attacked by Protestants, for example, but positively, as extending the body of necessary beliefs.³² In particular, the new dogmas of the Immaculate Conception and Assumption of Mary have been proclaimed as Christological truths revealed by God³³. The Church has remained convinced that they must have been contained, at least, implicitly in the apostolic deposit of faith.³⁴ They do not constitute a new revelation. The Church has claimed infallibility for her assertion that these truths were in fact revealed. Such dogmatic definitions (as those of the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption) necessarily give a new orientation to the research of theologians and the reflection of the faithful, who are obliged to consider the deposit of faith in the light of the new definitions. It is important to note that thus the Church is led to acquire over the course of the centuries a more and more exact awareness of the nature of the primitive deposit and of the riches it contains.³⁵

1.iii, Mary and her Son

The Church’s teaching on Mary, has defined five Marian dogmas namely:

a)   The Incarnation and divine motherhood, Theotokos, Mother of God, in defence of the humanity of her Son, Jesus—defined by the Council of Ephesus in AD 431;

b)   The virginal conception and virgin birth of Jesus Christ, declaring her to be a virgin before the birth, in the birth (Council of Chalcedon 451);

c)   The perpetual virginity of Mary—Mary was declared ever-virgin by the Council of the Lateran (AD 649), to prove the divinity of Jesus Christ;

d)   In 1854, Pope Pius IX defined the dogma of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary; and

e)   In 1950, Pope Pius XII defined the Assumption of Mary, body and soul into heavenly glory.

The above Marian dogmas have been developed in the Church’s memory and praxis through the ages. All these dogmas evolved into a paradigm that may be categorized as Christotypical, i.e., closely related to and pointing to Christ. The link between them has been shown to be dependent upon the over-arching influence of Christology, since Christ is the head and founder of the Church, and also Christ is Mary’s Son. The community of the Church comprises members of Christ, who, therefore, are also sons and daughters of Mary by association and through the mandate given by Jesus Christ from the Cross (of which more, see ‘Mary and the Church’, 1.v, below). As already affirmed by Laurentin, Mary is totally relative to God, and also Mary is totally correlative to the Church. Mary is both these things in Christ through Christ and for Christ (italics the author’s for emphasis). He further asserts that Mary in being relative to God is fundamentally and immediately relative to Christ. It is a relation of total dependence which makes her completely God’s with no reserve and no exception, withholding nothing, unlike the rest of humanity. Thus she is a sign in which Christians are shown God. By all that she is and does Mary tends to lead Christians to Christ.³⁶

1.iii(a), Theotokos: Council of Ephesus (AD 431)

The divine motherhood of Mary, i.e. that Mary is the Mother of God, is derived from the Scriptures, in which Mary is the mother of Christ, who is God the Son, the second Person of the Holy Trinity (see Matt. 1:18-25; Luke I:26-56; 2:1-20; Jn. 1:12-14; 2:1-2; 19:25-27; Gal. 4:4; Rev. 11:19-12:1-17).

As Journet points out, the title, ‘Mother of Christ’ is reserved exclusively to Mary. She is the mother of God our Saviour. It is to be noted at once, that there is no question of stopping at the concept of motherhood considered abstractly in its purely material and physiological sense. This would not yield at all any foundation for Mary’s pre-eminent dignity. What is relevant and concerns the reader is rather the concept of motherhood considered concretely and existentially in the Gospel perspective (italics, the author’s for emphasis). In this perspective, Mary is mother of God not only physically, but freely and consciously, with full knowledge of what was involved: mother in spirit even more than in body. She was proportioned, insofar as this is possible to a pure creature, to the holiness of such a mission. Mary is the worthy Mother of God