[THO] Mary from my mySpace

This is a repost from my mySpace blog. I only use the mySpace blog to either point people here or to chat with a few friends who seem to like the mySpace world. But I thought it might be enjoyed here, even start up a little discussion about Mary. So enjoy. (As a point of interest the icon on the right is a traditional Eastern icon for Christmas. Note the baby Jesus in a cave reflective of this burial tomb (even the swaddling cloths suggest this) and the old guy talking to Joseph (bottom left) is the Devil.)

=============

I recently posted on the Freedom Log about tackling Mariology in an exam. I've been studying (mostly part-time) at a Catholic University for six years now and this is the first year I've really encountered a nuanced teaching on Marian thought and doctrine. I encountered it in an Eastern Studies course with John Jillions and in a Catholic Ecclesiology course with Catherine Clifford. I really enjoyed wrestling with this topic a bit simply because it is not something that really comes up in any of the traditions I have been part of, at least not in a healthy way.

On the Roman Catholic side the focus was Vatican II and beyond. So in the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church (Lumen Gentium) there is a whole chapter on Mary. This document really outlines the importance and structure of Mary's relationship to the Church. But to outline that I should try and crack a few chestnuts with regard to popular protestant thought about Mariology. First the whole idea of saint worship is troubling to all Christians. Anyone faithful to the Catholic teaching would make a clear distinction between veneration and worship. God alone is to be worshipped. The lives of saints are celebrated as both Christian encouragement and as interceders in the Great Cloud of Witness. Second the idea that Mary's role in any way overshadows or replaces Christ's role is also troubling to all Christians. Lumen Gentium (LG) makes this very clear (LG.62).

In the proper Catholic teaching on Mary the Theotokos (God bearer), like all good teaching on Mary is more concerned with what we are saying about Christ and the Incarnation of Christ than about Mary herself. So, for instance, the virgin birth is an important dogma because it expresses our conviction that Jesus was born with both human and Divine natures. He is not a mere human who attains deification, but rather God who humbles himself to take on humanity. In the East there is really only one absolutely necessary dogma on Mary, that she is the Theotokos or the one who bears God. Like Catholocism there are a number of additional interesting Marian streams of thought, but these are more a matter of local devotional practices.

Back to the Catholics. What is cool is that many were pushing (in the 70's IIRC) for Mary to be officially given the title Co-Redemtrix. A confusing term that is meant to capture Mary's necessary role in redemption, meaning her obedience to God. This title was dropped because it could easily be confused with Mary being elevated to the position of Christ. Indeed some theologians have even extrapolated that Mary was the the third person of the Trinity usurping the role of the Holy Spirit (Boff). These are pretty dangerous claims and do not sit well with the mainstream of Catholic Marian teaching.

There are some aspects of Marian thought in LG that are disturbing. Hurdles that I think we should address. LG. 54 says that Mary occupies the highest place in the Church after Christ and that she is closest to us. When she is absent from our ecclesial langauge she is really not that close to us. Also this is based on a heirarchical vision of Church which is being challenged more and more. Mary does deserve a special place in our hearts and church life, but this is taking it a bit far.

LG. 56 talks of Mary as the predestined mother. This is based on flawed fall theology. And it refuses to admit that Mary had any choice in the matter. If she had no choice then her role as an example of faithful obedience is diminished. Also there is some crazy notion of Eve's virginity, Catholics seem to really value virginity in an almost supernatural way. But we'll talk about why in the next problem area.

LG. 57 tells us that, apparently, Jesus' birth consecrated Mary's virginity. This is anatomically impossible to begin with, but what is most interesting is that it is part of the lingering Catholic hangup with all things reproductive. Sex is seen as sinful and so for Mary to continue to be holy there is a myth of her perpetual virginity that is carried on in Catholic tradition. I say myth because some Catholics live or die on this one. But I think there is value in the myth if it says something about Christ (which I bet it does for many Catholics) but for me it is unneccessary. Mostly because it is based on flawed notions of human sexuality and original sin. But more because the important issue is captured already in the dogma of Christ's immaculate conception, this does not need to be carried over to Mary (sorry Pious XI).

I like that the discourse on Mary is placed in the context of the Church. This shows that Mary is also a member of the Church. As a Christian from non-Marian and anti-Marian roots this gives me a framework for understanding why she is venerated as she is. Indeed I've seen similar devotion to living and dead pastors in the movements I come from. And yes sometimes it gets out of hand. But most of it is meant to be encouraging. Is that not the real role of Mary? To encourage us to radical obedience. For myself there is room in my spirituality for encouragement. You won't find me incorporating a Rosary into my devotional practice but I do think I will find space to bring thoughts of Mary into my ownmeditation, especially in this season of Advent.

Love to hear your thoughts and experiences.