The Woman Named Mary

The Woman Named Mary

Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars

Click to get our FREE MOBILE APP and stay connected

| PentecostalTheology.com

               

THE WOMAN NAMED

MARY

by

Rev. Louis P.

Rogge,

O.Carm.

The New Testament

the

inspired

record of how the

how-according

disciples

that Jesus had said and done.

Jesus had

promised

is fundamentally

early

Christian community came to understand more and more

fully

the person

of Jesus and the Good News he came to

proclaim.

It describes

to Jesus’ own

promise-the Holy Spirit gave

the first

of the Lord a

growing

awareness of the

significance

of all

that, upon his

own return to the

Father, he would send the

Spirit

who would be with his

disciples

until the end of time. The

Spirit,

Jesus said, would continue to remind his followers of Jesus’ words and deeds. It was not that the

Holy Spirit

would add

himself had

revealed,

followers of Jesus to an ever

deepening understanding

to what Jesus

revelation

and of its

application

but that he would

guide

the

both of that to the

changing

circumstances be-

lievers would encounter down

through

the

ages.

The New Testament itself contains

examples

of this

process.

many

of the Jerusalem

community

Acts had been

present

at Jesus’ ascension his final command “to be his witnesses

Thus,

for

example, although described in the

early chapters

of

and had themselves heard

in Jerusalem,

throughout

Judea

Louis P. Rogge, (Ph.D. cand., Union Theological Seminary, New York), is a Roman Catholic priest currently serving as Scholar in Residence at Loyola University, Chicago, Illinois. He has been associated with the Catholic Charismatic Renewal since 1969. He has served as a regional coordinator for the Renewal from 1977-80, and was recently elected to serve again in this capacity. Father Rogge has written widely on theological and ecumenical topics. He has been an active participant in the Society for Pentecostal Studies.

– 19-

1

after

persecution

“all the nations”

(Act 1:8),

it was

only

,

that

cf. Mt.

28:19).

the vital

guidance

these

mysteries next

generation

and

Samaria, yes,

even to the ends of the Earth”

broke out that, under the

guidance

of the

Holy Spirit, they began

to

spread

the

Gospel

even as far as Samaria

(Act 8:1-5); and it was

only

after a pair of visions and a sovereign act of God (Act

10) that, again

under the influence of the

Holy Spirit, they

were convinced when Jesus said “to the ends of the earth” he

really

did mean to include

in his church

(Lk. 10:1-11:18;

Nineteen centuries later we are still

experiencing

of the

Holy Spirit. We are,

I believe, under the

guidance

of the

Spirit of Jesus,

continuing

to

plumb

the infinite

mysteries

revealed

by Jesus; we are

continuing

to learn the

significance

of that revelation for our own time and

place.

If we have not been

completely blind,

if we have

opened our ears however

slightly, by

God’s

grace

we do understand more about

than did our fathers, and we can

fully expect

that the

will have an even

deeper

grasp

of their

significance.

to come about.

of God Graduate

probably;

Baptists,

vain effort: Classical Pentecostals Mary. Episcopalians, Lutherans, possibly; Pentecostals,

your pardon, your forgiveness. matic

movement,

costal

fellowship,

It would be

impossible

Ten

years ago

which of us dreamed that the

Society

for Pentecostal Studies would have welcomed a paper by Roman Catholics? Yet Jesus prayed

that his

disciples might

be one. Ten

years ago

how

many

of us would have been

willing

to

pray

with one another? Yet Jesus told us to love one another. I am convinced that it is only under the

guidance

of the Holy Spirit

that such

things really

are

beginning

As late as this

past July

I did not believe we would be

together today. When I wrote to Dr.

Stanley

Horton at the Assemblies

School, I told my

chairman at

Loyola University

of Chicago that it was a

were

simply

not

open

to hear about

Presbyterians,

hardly. Today

I stand before

you convicted;

I ask

After more than ten

years

in the charis-

after more than ten

years

of

experience

I still have much to learn.

to

explore

all the New Testament reveals about

Mary

in the brief time allotted.1 I would like to

begin

with the

1979);

O.P., “Mary

of Pente-

lThe author is indebted for materials in this section especially to Eamon R. Carroll, O.Carm., Understanding the Mother of Jesus (Wilmington, DE: Michael Glazeir, Inc.,

and to as yet unpublished papers delivered at the National Marian Charismatic Conference held at the University of Dayton, July 13-15, 1979, especially those of Eamon R. Carroll, O.Carm., “Mary and the Spirit in the Prayer of the Eucharist,” Frederick Jelly,

and the Gifts and Charisms of the Holy Spirit,” and Rene Laurentin, “Mary, Model of the Charismatic, as seen in Acts 1-2, Luke 1-2, and John” (Tapes of these talks are available from the Marian Library of the University of Dayton, Dayton, Ohio 45469).

– 20-

2

final New Testament the first Christian

community’s Church.

of Mary’s

position

in the

the

were

awaiting

mention of the

Mary

of history. It is a summary of

understanding

In Acts 1 we read that all those who had witnessed Ascension of the

Lord,

in obedience to his

command,

the

promised gift

of the

Holy Spirit.

Vv. 13-14 inform us who

they

were: “…

they

went to the

upstairs

room where

they

were

staying:

Peter and John and James and Andrew;

Philip

and

Thomas,

Matthew, James son of Alphaeus;

Bartholomew and Simon,

the Zealot

party member,

and

Judas son of James.

Together they

devoted themselves to constant prayer.

There were some women in their

company,

and

Mary

the mother

of

Jesus,

and his brothers.”

There is no

question, then,

that

Mary

is

part

of the

Apostolic

com-

munity.

The roll itself is

interesting:

women’-doubtless

first come the

Eleven,

each listed

public

she is the

only

one of

by name,

with Peter, as

always

in first

place.

Second comes ‘some

those who had been active

during

Jesus’ life; Mary;

‘his brothers,’ i.e., members of Jesus’

family. Mary,

as far as we

know,

is the

only

one to

belong

to both

groups

of the second division: the women and the

family.

Moreover

either

group

to be listed

by name,

and she is given her

rightful

title: “the Mother of Jesus” lest there be

any

mistake.

Luke describes the

Apostolic community

in one

place (1:14; 2:1),

but also as “devoted to communal life

(2:42); sharing

all

things (2:44), including meals

(2:46);

in brief, as Luke himself sums it up, a community “of one

and women who came

together

heart and one mind”

(4:32).

Under the

leadership

not

only

as a group of men

Mary

the Mother of Jesus

“When the

day

of Pentecost appeared,

of the

Eleven,

prayed

and waited

along

with the other members of the

community.

came,”

Luke

continues, “Tongues

as of fire

which

parted

and came to rest on each of them. All were filled with the

Holy Spirit. They began

to

express

tongues

and make bold

proclamation 2:1-4). Mary

was one of them.

Mary therefore,

on the

day

of Pentecost;

of praise and

thanksgiving,

themselves as the

Spirit prompted

in

foreign them”

(Ac.

according

to Acts

2, was baptized

in the

Holy Spirit

like the

Apostles,

the women, and the relatives of

Jesus, Mary

too was “filled with the

Holy Spirit,” spoke

in

tongues

and

proclaimed

is not the focal

point

nor the leader of this first charismatic

but she is a part of what charismatic communities

‘core

group’.

the Good News

boldly. Mary

community;

today

would call the

It has

long

been

recognized by

Christian scholars that both the third Gospel

and Acts are the work of St. Luke.

Many parallels

have been pointed

out between the

Gospel according

– 21-

to Luke and the books of

3

Acts. Thus, for

example

the

infancy

narrative of Luke 1-2 is recognized as analagous to what may

be called the

infancy

narrative of the Christian Church. In each case there is an outpouring

the Annunciation

Mary,

overshadowed

wonderful deeds

of the Lord,

and Zachariah,

of the

Spirit

on the

poor:

in by

the

power

of the

Holy Spirit,

the the Lord in the

describes herself as “servant of the Lord” (Lk. 1:38); Elizabeth too is “filled with the

Holy Spirit” (Lk. 1:41);

and the

pious

Simeon is “in- spired by the Spirit” (Lk. 2:27).

As the

early community proclaimed

so

Mary magnifies

beautiful words of the

Magnificat;

Elizabeth ‘cries out in a loud

voice’;

also ‘filled with the

Holy Spirit’

blesses the Lord

(Lk. 1 :42, 67-68). Thus,

in both Luke and Acts,

Mary

is not set

apart

as a sort of prodigy but rather she is shown to be one of the community, one of the anawim,

the

lowly poor

of the Lord; not

apart

from all the

others,

but among

the others.

Mary,

rather than some sort of super-human

of Sion,

prototype

God,

the model of the New Creation that is called to live according to the New Covenant to be sealed in the blood of her Son. Indeed

Mary

is a model of openness to the Holy

Spirit,

and of the exercise of the

gifts

so

of the

Spirit. Mary

is a model Pente-

is

portrayed

as the

Daughter

characteristic of the

presence costal.

let us shift our attention

John as theophanies

prodigy, of the new

people

of

to John.

by

of the third

Much more could be said of the Lucan

portrait

of

Mary,

and I am sure that

many

here are far more able than I, far better informed. But

to the

Gospel according

Mary appears

at the

beginning

and at the end of Jesus’

public life; at Cana

(Jn. 2)

and at

Calvary (Jn. 19).

Both events are described

with clear references to the

theophany

of Sinai

(Ex. 19). At Cana,

and on

Calvary,

there are communalities: Cana is the

sign, Calvary

the fulfillment. It was on ‘the third

day’ (Jn. 2: 1) that

the events at Cana took

place, just

as it was “On the

morning

day …

Moses led the

people

out of the

camp

to meet God”

(Ex. 19:16). In each case there is an affirmation of God’s covenant with man: at the foot of the mountain the

People

of God

promise: “Everything

has said we will do” (Ex. 19:8); while at Cana is recorded l?Tary’s soli- tary

command: “Do whatever he tells

you” (Jn. 2:6). Mary

is indeed the

Daughter

of Sion.

the Lord

is the

age

and the

mentioned in the

Scriptures

At

Calvary,

Jesus’ hour has arrived; his Death-Resurrection moment of his

glory,

the hour when he is lifted

up

to draw all men to himself,

the hour that had not

yet

arrived at Cana. At Cana Jesus changes

water into

wine, certainly symbolic

of that ‘new wine’ so often

as a

sign

of the Messianic

coming

of the

Spirit;

at

Calvary

Jesus tastes the ‘common wine,’ so symbolic

of the Old Law, and then he said: ” `Now it is finished.’ Then

-22-

4

abundant;

he bowed his head, and delivered over the

spirit” (Jn. 19:30).

At Cana the wine

symbolic

of the New

Age

of the

Spirit

is described

at

Calvary

the

symbol

is richly and

abundantly

the

reality

of the

Spirit,

the rich wine of the

nuptials

between and his Church, as Fr. Carroll describes it. At both Cana and

Calvary

Jesus addresses Testament

Mary

as “woman,”

as rich and fulfilled with

Christ

a term

frequently

used in the Old

Jesus to work the

sign

time of

glory-is given

a

ministry

to indicate God’s

People Israel,

and now

applied by

John as a

symbol

of the New Israel to

Mary.

Just as at Cana

Mary

ministers to the needs of the

wedding party by requesting

that “revealed his

glory,

and his

disciples

believed in him”

(Jn. 2:11), so the “woman” who is

present

on

Calvary

as Jesus is “lifted

up”-his

to the

Church, the Body

of

Christ, being

born from her Son’s

open

side:

“Woman,

(Jn. 19:26).

there is

your

son”

John,

like

Luke,

sees

Mary

as an

integral part

of the

community

that is the

Body

of Christ. She ministered to the Child born to her

by

the power

of the

Spirit,

and she is called

by her Son to continue her

maternal

ministry

to His

body.

references between

Cana and Pentecost,

by

St. Gaudentius

use of

thus

a

geneology

the head of the

serpent-it as the New Eve.

Time does not

permit

more than a catalogue of some other Biblical

to

Mary: thus,

for

example,

the

many points

of

similarity

already recognized

of Brescia in the late fourth or

early

fifth

century;

and Matthew’s

to describe the Incarnation as the New

Creation, relating Mary

to the woman of Genesis

3:15,

whose

offspring

is to crush

was common for the Fathers to refer to Mary

“Rather

previously

proclaimed

to which Jesus

replied

had of the same

Spirit (Lk.

Then there is the Lukan account of the enthusiastic woman who cried out “Blest is the womb that bore

you …”

blest are

they

who hear the word of God and

keep

it”

(Lk. 11:27-28).

Far from a rebuke to his Mother, Jesus

points

out that

Mary is to be

praised

not so much for her

physical

motherhood as for her openness

to the

Spirit,

her trust in the word of

God, as Elizabeth

under the

inspiration

1:45).

Similar is the account, found in all three

synoptic Gospels,

of the true

kinsman;

in Luke

(8:19-21)

this is the conclusion of Jesus’

parable of the Sower

(8:4-15)

and the

parable

of the

Lamp (8:16-18).

Who more than

Mary

could Jesus describe as hearing the word of God in a spirit of

openness,

retaining

it,

and

bearing

fruit

through

perseverance;

His

mother is first

among

those who “hear the word of God and act

upon

it”

(cf.

Lk.

1:38).

The New Testament

then teaches

Jesus,

who was born of the

Holy Spirit

with the full

cooperation

– 23-

us that

Mary

is the Mother of

of Mary.

5

Mary certainly

continued to minister and childhood, his adolescence years

Jesus also ministered

to Jesus

throughout

his

infancy

during

all those

and

young manhood,

to

Mary?

Is it not all but certain that

Jesus, the most

perfect

of sons,

helped

his mother

grow

into an ever more

perfect relationship

with God?

The

Scriptures

and that she was

baptized

Pentecostal and charismatic inspired praise,

as

prophesying,

at

Pentecost,

by the Holy Spirit

around

(Jn. 19:27).

She is

depicted

as

uttering

mystically Scriptures

also teach us that

Mary

was

present

in the

Spirit. May

we not

believe,

indeed is it not

indicated,

that she who had been overshadowed

some

thirty years earlier, helped

the other

disciples gathered her in the

Upper

Room to

open

themselves more

fully

to the breath of that same

Spirit being poured

out on the new-born

Body

of her Son? Perhaps

it was then too that these

early disciples

more

fully

understood the

meaning

of Jesus’ words: “Behold

your

mother”

The

Gospels point

out that

Mary

is an

integral part

of that

early

community.

as

speaking

in

tongues.

She heard the word of God,

pondered

it in her heart and acted

upon it; but her ministry is to be Mother of Jesus, a gift unmerited and freely given by God, by the power

of the

Holy Spirit,

for the

building up

of the

Body

of Christ. Her ministry

is therefore

unique, unrepeatable:

of His

Body

the Church. The

Mary

of the

Christ-centered,

Mary,

the Woman of Faith, teaches us to live in “confident assur-

what we

hope for,

and conviction about

things

we do not see”

(Heb. 11:1).

St.

Augustine

reminds us that for

Mary

it was “a

she is Mother is

Spirit-led,

ance

concerning

greater thing

to have been Christ’s mother,”

she is Mother of Jesus and

and charismatic.

disciple

than to have been his

with

Jesus,

the

relationship Lord and her Savior. expressed

it:

a nobler

thing

to have

kept

God’s truth in her mind than to have carried His

Body

in her womb.1 Her

relationship

of mother to child, is

unique,

for her child is also her

As the Irish

theologian

Richard Loehrlein

1 St. Augustine, Sermo 25, 7-8: PL 46:937-938; cited from the English translation in The Liturgy of the Hours (New York: Catholic Book Publishing Co., 1975), IV:1572-1573.

– 24-

6

More than

any

other

mother, Mary

was destined to live in her

son; her whole future was in him, not

by

the flesh but

by

the

spirit, since all creation finds its consecration

That

relationship

has not

changed:

in him.1

the Risen

Lord,

he who is Head

of his

Body

the

Church,

is forever the Son of God and the Son of Mary.

* * * * * * * * *

It is an

indisputable-if Protestant Reformation unacceptable by

their

present-day church historian,

little known-fact held

positions

that

many

leaders of the

on

Mary

that are considered followers. The renowned Protestant

has

pointed

out:

churches

today,

none of the

questioned

the biblical

foundation was ‘conceived

Dr. Ross

Mackenzie,

Whatever

may

be true in Protestant

Reformers or their immediate successors

of the two

phrases

of the ancient

creeds, that Christ

by

the

Holy Spirit,

bom of the

Virgin Mary.’ Calvin,

like Luther and

Zwingli, taught

the

perpetual virginity

of

Mary.

The

early

Reformers

was

constantly

even

applied, though

with some

bore him

will call me blessed’-

reticence,

the title Theotokos to Mary, because… ‘she

who is also God.’ Lutherans and Calvinists were in

agreement that

Mary’s prophecy-‘all generations

being

fulfilled in the Church. Calvin called on his followers to venerate and

praise

her as the teacher who instructs them in her Sons’ commands. Even as late as 1655…the

in their Confession stated that the most

holy Virgin and the

glorified

saints are ‘blessed and

worthy

both of

praise and imitation,’ the

Virgin

herself

being designed

‘blessed

among

Waldensians

women.’2

1973),

1 Richard Loehrlein, S.M., “The Holy Spirit and Mary,” New Creatiort 1:2 (Summer,

12.

2Ross Mackenzie, “Mary As an Ecumenical Problem.” Paper given on April 29,19?6, to the Ecumencial Society of the Blessed

Virgin Mary, Washington, D.C. (London:

2. ,

ESBVM, 1976), p.

25

7

Luther’s

positionl

Theotokos,

God-bearer

during

the course of his life.

his belief in

Mary

as

on

Mary

vacilated

Well

grounded

in

Christology,

he

always

retained

or Mother of God-a term that in its

original context referred directly to Christ and consequently

ever

depart

from his defense of Mary’s perpetual

even at the end of his life he did not forbid

prayer

to and veneration of

Mary, although

with a somewhat Rome.

Calvin too

appears

garding

the

Theotokos, so far as to consider

“plainly … evidence to demonstrate

Thus

present-day

reformed mention of the Theotokos,

to Mary. Nor did he virginity. Moreover,

different

understanding

than that of

the definition of

Ephesus

re-

virginity

he went

those who claimed biblical

was to be

given battle-cry

of the

Reformation

Subsequently,

to eliminate the

supernatural development

trine-the

Logical,

if Reason alone is

supreme, Christian,

is

certainly

was not.

to have

accepted

and with

regard

to

perpetual

ignorant”2

that

Mary

had other children than Jesus.

piety,

which all but forbids a

public

does not

depend

on these

great

reformers themselves. Since

Mary’s

name was no

longer

to be

invoked,

it was

only to be

expected

that even her

place

in the New Testament

scant attention. This dilution of the sola

scriptura

was

due,

no

doubt,

to a fear of

falling

into Romanism.

with the rise of rationalism and the

consequent

from the world of man, it was but a logical

to eliminate both the foundation of the Theotokos doc-

duality

of Jesus’ nature-and the doctrine of the

Virgin

birth.

very symbol

of Romanism,

attempts

it

certainly

was; scriptural

and

devotion to

Mary

and even

to

reject.

they rejected Mary

as well.

studiously

With the

passage

of

time, moreover,

Mary

herself had come to be seen

by

the Reformation churches as the

the

symbol

of all

they

intended

Thus, along

with what

they

understood-often with

good

reason-as abuses within the Church of Rome,

Curiously,

for all their

emphasis

on

Scripture, they

remained

. unaware of Mary’s

significance

in the

History

of Salvation. There can be

but that abuses did exist and that

they

needed

correction; however,

the correction of abuse is proper use, not

elimination,

no

question

‘throw out the baby with the bath.’

lest one

Mary (Wilmington,

1 Much of the information in this section is based on Thomas A. O’Meara, O.P., Mary in Protestant and Catholic Theology (New York: Sheed and Ward, 1966). See also the re- markable work by John de Satge, Down to Earth: The New Protestant Vision of the Virgin

NC: Consortium Books, 1976).

2Commentary on the Harmony, cited in O’Meara, op. ciG, p. 130.

26

8

Karl Barth has stated that “Marian

dogma

is … the critical, central dogma

of the Roman Catholic Church.”l This is

simply

untrue. Never- theless,

from an ecumenical

viewpoint

the Roman

position

on Mary is a crucial issue that must be addressed and understood if

dialogue

is to bear fruit.

Many

non-Catholics consider

Mary

“the visible

symbol

of Catholic idolatry; the Roman abandonment

Christ.”2

Fruitful

among

Christians Protestant

document

scholars have

departed

tantism.

Pentecostals,

of

Scripture,

of history, of

of fundamental differences of

inspiration:

the basic

the Catholic

Roman

Catholic

position;

such from that of liberal Protes-

dialogue among

Christians must be based on

Scripture. Mary’s place

in

theology,

and in

piety,

is a focal

point

of ecumenical dialogue precisely

because it is symptomatic

in the

understanding

position

is that the Bible alone is

revelatory;

position

is that the Bible, more than

merely

an isolated

text,

is a living

whose riches are to be mined within the context of the

living Body

of Christ. However-and let it be said at

once-many

from this

authentically

have taken a stance hardly

distinguishable

I

believe,

find themselves somewhere in be- tween :

they

tend to

accept

the Protestant

but at the same

time, along

with most

Evangelicals orthodox Roman Catholics,

they agree

that the Bible is the

living

Word of God. Thus the

exegesis

of Pentecostal scholars is more

likely

to be in

and official

position

of Rome than with that of the

majority

of liberal Protestant

is

revelatory;

agreement

with the authentic

*********

Not the least of the

‘surprises

position

that the Bible alone

and

scholarship.

by the

of the

Holy Spirit’ experienced People

of God

during

the last several

years

has been a

quickening

of

of the Reformed

interest

among

Christians among Pentecostals,

in

Mary.3

traditions,

and now even

Renewal

Movement

Shortly

after the first

stirrings

of the Catholic Charismatic

in the winter of 1966-67, a group of British scholars and

lchurch

Dogmatics 1 :2, p. 143, cited in O’Meara, op. cuit, p. 23.

2Walter Burghardt, S.J., “Mary and Reunion,” Catholic Mind 60 (June, 1962), 15, cited in O’Meara, op. ciG, p. 23.

Ministry University

3 Some material in this section is included in a paper delivered at the National Marian Charismatic Conference held at the University of Dayton, July 13-15, 1979, “Mary’s

for Unity” (Tapes of this talk are available from the Marian Library of the

of Dayton, Dayton, Ohio 45469).

– 27-

9

churchmen

founded the Ecumenical

from various catholic, orthodox

Society

of the Blessed

and reformed traditions

Virgin Mary

logical questions; ecumenical devotion.1

to advance the

study

at various levels of the

place

of the Blessed Virgin Mary

in the Church under Christ, and of related theo-

and in the

light

of such

study

to

promote

with non-Catholic

in the

Washington,

D.C.,

theologians

has been con-

A branch of the

society

has been

functioning

area since 1976.2 Here in North America a series of

public dialogues

and even non-Christian

ducted on our

Lady’s place

in Revelation and in the Church.

have been aware of the differences between

beliefs about the Mother of God and those of their

Catholic charismatics

their own traditional

fellow Christians of the Reformation.

It has been a source of no little

under-

pain

and confusion and at times even of divisiveness.

Most of the

early

Catholic Pentecostals lacked an

adequate standing

of the

place

of the

Holy Spirit

in the

plan

of salvation. It was

especially

from the classical Pentecostal

largely

from other Christians, denominations and from charismatic discern the movement

of the

Spirit

in their lives: the

importance being

fed

daily

on the Word of God, the

experience

up

their minds and hearts to God in spontaneous

to witness to the

Lordship

of

being

called

personally courage

to allow

themselves-ordinary

Protestants, that they learned to

of

of being able to raise

prayer.

the

giftedness

of Jesus, the Christians-to be used as instru-

experiential Catholic charismatics Scriptural

of the

sacraments,

ments of God’s

grace,

etc. So meaningful were these novel

(to most)

and

insights,

so personally significant, that

many

of those

early

let

slip

from their consciousness the

equally

content of their own Catholic tradition,

the function of the

hierarchy,

saints, and the unique ministry of Mary in the plan of Salvation.

Mary’s

role in man’s

redemption tion,

nor is it a

superstitious

e.g.,

the

importance the communion of

is not the invention of pious tradi-

No

accommodation to

pagan mythology. individual,

no church

assigned

her a part to

play

in the birth of Jesus; it was God

himself, through

the

power

of the

Holy Spirit,

who chose her as

through

whom the Word was made Flesh. In the divine

plan

she is

by

no means

superfluous,

the

channel,

the

intermediary,

by

no means an

lThe Ecumenical Society of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Constitution, paragraph 2.

2The address of the American branch of the ESBVM is Box 4557, Washington. D.C., 20017.

– 28-

10

.

‘optional ‘standard

equipment,’

or to

reject.

She is of Good News without

extra’ Christians are free to

accept

and the

proclamation

Mary

is no

longer

the full

Gospel

of Jesus Christ.

According

to the Pauline

epistles,

God has chosen us in Christ

(Eph. 1:30-10),

and all who believe in Jesus are united in him

(Gal.

3:16-19. Is it possible,

therefore,

to doubt that

Mary

the Mother of Jesus continues to care for and to minister to the members of her Son’s

Body?

If indeed her mother’s heart was

pierced

with a sword as Jesus was

put

to death by those who rejected

him

(Lk. 2:35),

how much more must that heart be torn

today

as she sees the

Body

of her Son rent asunder

by

those who

profess

to follow him?

The authentic Roman

position chapter

of the

Dogmatic

on

Mary,

as found in the

closing

Constitution on the

Church, explicitly

states devotion to

Mary

should in no

way

detract from the biblical

teaching that Jesus alone is Lord, Jesus alone is Savior, Jesus alone is Mediator

between

God and man.

The maternal

originate, pleasure

but from the divine

duty

of Mary toward men in no

way

obscures or diminishes this

unique

mediation of

Christ,

but rather shows its power.

For all the

saving

influences of the Blessed

Virgin

on men

not from some inner

necessity,

(i.e.,

from

grace). They

flow forth from the

super- abundance of the merits of Christ, rest on His mediation,

depend entirely

on it, and draw all their

power

from it. In no

way

do

they impede

the immediate union of the faithful with Christ.

Rather,

they

foster this union

(No. 60).

to Jesus on the

part

of Chris-

.

Catholic doctrine insists that

Mary’s unique calling

to be Mother of the Lord and her function

among

the members of his

Body

“neither take away

from nor add

anything

to the

dignity

and

efficacy

of Christ the one

(No. 62). Although

due to her

singular relationship

special

veneration

that such veneration “differs

essentially from the cult of adoration which is offered to the Incarnate

Word,

as well as to the Father and

Holy Spirit” (No. 66).

This

special

devotion to Mary

Mediator”

Mary

deserves an

altogether tians, the Council

underlines

must be

fundamentally

and

essentially

Christ-centered:

“While honor-

ing

Christ’s Mother, these devotions cause her son to be

rightly known, loved,

and

glorified,

and all His

commands

Catholic charismatics

correctly gratitude

toward Pentecostals

observed”

(No. 67). feel a

deep

and

abiding

sense of

they

their

peculiar experience

of

and other charismatic Christians: have

shared, lovingly

and

enthusiastically,

the

Gospel message.

But how can Catholic charismatics better show

– 29-

11

their

gratitude,

their Christ-centered love for their brothers and sisters

in the Lord, then

by sharing

with them the revealed truths

preserved

in

their own Catholic tradition? Indeed the law of fraternal love

requires

them to do so.

The

euphroia

of Christian brotherhood, so often

experienced

in

gatherings

of Pentecostal and charismatic Christians, does not excuse

the Christian from

continually seeking

in love an ever

deepening

under-

standing

of the truth of Revelation. Love and truth

go

hand in hand: a

love that fails to enlighten is at best

misguided;

a truth that is not shared

leads to a

misrepresentation

and distortion.

To minimalize

any aspect

of the

Gospel

to our brothers and sisters in

the Lord-even out of a fear of offending them-is not love but selfish-

ness. True

Christianity

is not based on the

principle

of the ‘lowest

common denominator,’ as

though

the wholeness of the

Body

of Christ

could be achieved if

only

Christians would

forget

about their differ-

ences.

Christianity

is not

merely

a human

society

established on some

sort of sociological principle of “give and take”:

compromise may

be an

effective means for

peace among nations,

but there is no

place

for it in

dealing

with the fullness of Revelation that is Christ Jesus. The true

ecumenical Christian seeks to

proclaim

the truth in love

(Eph. 4:15): , the complete Gospel as

he

perceives it,

and the love that risks all-even

rejection-for

the benefit of the brothers. Christian Revelation is a whole:

it is vital,

life-giving,

and it builds

up

the

Body

of Christ.

Compromise

with

regard

to Revelation is divisive and it further wounds the

Body

of

Christ.

Catholic charismatics are not

attempting

to force other Christians

to the Catholic

point

of view. It is

understanding,

mutual understand-

ing,

that is the immediate

goal.

Just as

many

sincere Roman Catholics,

due to a variety of factors, are still

today unwilling

or unable to

accept

the

authenticity

of charismatic

spirituality,

so

many

sincere non-

Catholics,

are unable to

put

aside the

training

of centuries that makes

them think of devotion to

Mary

as

Maryolatry.

If both are

truly open

to

the

Spirit,

he will increase their

understanding.

Both must sow the seed

and leave the fruitfulness

up

to the

Spirit.

Christians are

growing impatient

at the

continuing

scandal of the

divided

Body

of Christ. This is good. Yet such an attitude can

easily give

place

to a

misconception;

as the

great

Roman

Archbishop

Michael

Ramsey

stated:

.

Far and wide we have come to realize what the ecumenical task really

is. It doesn’t mean

asking, ‘How may

we unite our Churches s as

they

are now?’ It means

asking,

‘How

may

our Churches be-

– 30-

12

come more Christ like, more obedient to C;hrist’s purpose them?’l

for

It is not Christians

alone,

however dedicated to the Lord

they may be, but the

Holy Spirit working through

them who is the source of

unity in the

Body

of Christ. And the

Spirit

of God works

through

the members of the

Body

to build

up

the

Body.

Can

anyone imagine

a member of the

Body

more

intimately

united with Jesus than

Mary

his mother? Can

any

member of the

Body

be more vitally

concerned with its wholeness than she who

gave

him birth? As Bishop

Alan Clark

recently

wrote: to be sure

Mary

is not the center of Christian

living

and

dying

but she is

found

at the center and leads us to the center. It is the

Holy Spirit

who transforms us into the

Body

of

Christ,

but she is

integral

to that

Body.2

Cardinal Suenens once asked the Roman Catholic

theologian

Karl Rahner

why

so many Christians

today,

even so

many Catholics,

remain aloof with

regard

to our

Lady.

Rahner

replied,

more in reference to liberal Protestantism than to Pentecostal

Christianity:

I think so

many

Christians of today have made

Christianity

into an

ideology,

a

Weltanschauung,

a vision of the

mind,

an abstrac- tion. Abstractions don’t need a mother.3

Christianity

is not an

abstraction,

but a vital

reality,

the

Body

of Christ. Just as,

according

to God’s

plan,

Jesus needed the

ministry

of his Mother as he

grew

to

maturity

and was filled with wisdom

(cf.

Lk. 2:40),

so the

Body

of Christ needs that same

ministry

of the Mother of the Lord, so that its members

“may

one

day

attain full

knowledge of his will

through perfect

wisdom and

spiritual insight” (Col. 1:9),

and “become one in faith and in the

knowledge

of God’s Son, and form that perfect

man is Christ come to full stature”

(Eph. 4:13).

1 Cited in Cardinal Leon Joseph Suenens, Essays on Renewal (Ann Arbor, MI: Servant Books, 1977), p. 130; cf. also the same author’s Ecumenism and Charismatic Renewal: Theological and Pastoral Orientations (Malines Document 2, Ann Arbor; MI: Servant Books, 1978).

2Alan Clark, “The Holy Spirit and Mary,” an address delivered on June 12, 1976, to the ESBVM, Wells Cathedral (London: ESBVM, 1976), p. 4.

3Suenens, Essays on Renewal, p. 127.

– 31-

13

In March, 1976, Karol Wojtyla, soon to become

Pope

John Paul

II, preached

the Lenten retreat to

Pope

Paul VI and the

papal

household. Toward the end of the final conference he

spoke

these words:

Our times are marked by a great

expectation.

All who believe in Christ and

worship

the true God are

seeking ways

of

unity, and their

cry

is: “Christ sets us free and unites us.” The

Church, the

People

of God, senses ever more

profoundly

that she is being called to this

unity.

The

Church,

the

People

of God, is at the same time the

Mystical Body

of Christ. St. Paul likened the Church to the human

body

in order to describe more

clearly

its life and its unity.

The human

body

is

given

its life and its

unity by

the mother.

Nlary, by the working

of the

Holy Spirit, gave unity

to the human

body

of Christ. And that is why our

hope today

turns in a special way towards her,

in these times of ours when the

Mystical Body

of Christ is

being

more

fully

reconstituted in

unity.1

lkarol

Wojytla [sic] (Pope John Paul In, Sign of Contradiction (New York: The Seabury Press, 1979), p.

206.

– 32-

14

Be first to comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.