|
England - The Dowry
of Mary
The Origin of the Title
"Dowry of Mary" and The Shrines of our Lady at
Westminster
by Fr Mark Elvins OFM
Cap of the Franciscan Study Centre in Canterbury.
There is a tradition that the title "Dowry of Mary"
goes back to Edward the Confessor, and yet there is no historical
documentation to support this; the association of Edward with
the great Abbey of Westminster is one thing, but his having any
link with the Dowry tradition is quite another. The Abbey as
founded (or re-founded) by Edward in 1055 was not officially
associated with any such
tradition, as I will endeavour to show, for about three hundred
and twenty-six years. Another contention is that the Dowry tradition
can be traced back to Edward 111(1327-77); however, the shrine
of Our Lady of the Pew, with which this tradition is associated,
was already in existence in the Palace of Westminster before
Edward came to the throne.
It is true that Edward refurbished the Chapel of St Stephen and
rebuilt its associate Chapel of Pew in 1333, but I can find no
reference to the Dowry tradition during his reign. Indeed, at
this time the little Chapel of Pew (reached from St Stephen's
via Edward III's Cloisters) was of no particular
importance. It is known that in 1356 a College of Canons was
founded to serve St Stephen's, and the Calendar of Patent Rolls
(30 Edward III, p.l) mentions the "new Collegiate Church"
and the "old chapel" beside St Stephen's, which could
refer to Our Lady of Pew.
The late Martin Gillett considered that the Pew Chapel was already
old in Edward III's time, and that it could probably be traced
back to Henry III's time as the "chapel in the King's garden"
(Close Rolls, Henry 1111250-51). Edward III undoubtedly rebuilt
the Pew Chapel and increased its importance, and during his reign
it may well have received shrine status. In 1355 a certain Richard
Lackenbury was paid œ3.6s.8d. "for a certain image
of St Mary" (Martin Gillett's unpublished notes). This may
refer to the shrine statue, for in 1369 a priest named John Bulwyk
was given a grant for life to celebrate divine service before
the image of Blessed Mary "in La Piewe" (the Pew Chapel)
by the King's Chapel of
St Stephen within the Palace of Westminster (Close Rolls, Edward
1111367-70).
The origins of the name "pew" are obscure, but there
is good reason for associating it with the French puissant ("powerful"),
as it was common to anglicize French words, and an Englishman
would probably pronounce this word as "pewssant" anyway.
Moreover, there is the association of the French shrine of Our
Lady of Le Puy, and ii, as some contend, the Latin podium ("strong
support")
is the origin, the connection with the hill shrine of Le Puy
as a strong-point further connects with the idea of power, and
with Our Lady's title Virgo Potens.
So far we have considered the Palace shrine, but more familiar
to us today is the shrine in the Abbey Church. There had in fact
been two shrines of Our Lady of Pew from the last quarter of
the fourteenth century until the Reformation. The Palace shrine,
rebuilt after a fire in 1452, survived the Reformation, but was
finally destroyed by fire in 1834. The Abbey shrine was established
in an unprecedented way. The Chapel of Henry VII being the original
Lady Chapel (in the apse beyond the high altar), the little shrine
which has now become the focus of attention began with a widow's
benefaction for the soul of her husband. The Countess of Pembroke
(whose husband Aylmer de Valence, Earl of Pembroke, has a fine
effigy in the Chapel of SS Edmund and Thomas) established a mortuary
chapel for daily Masses for her husband next to the Chapel of
St John, and she presented the Abbot of Westminster with an alabaster
statue of Our Lady. This is probably how the Abbey chapel came
to be, because the monks of Westminster had just lost a battle
with the canons of St Stephen's with regard to ecclesiastical
jurisdiction in the Palace of Westminster, and thus were debarred
from the Palace shrine of Our Lady of Pew. The Abbot therefore
apparently lost no time in establishing with the Countess' gift
a secondary shrine of Pew which, unlike the other, with its restriction
to courtiers, would be accessible to all. The
Countess' will, proved in 1377, records that the statue of Our
Lady was already in position at the secondary shrine of Pew.
And, according to the Sacrist's Roll of 1378-80, the image of
the Blessed Mary called "Le Puwe" was already much
in evidence.
At this point I wish to concentrate on the shrine of Our Lady
of Pew, with its fine alabaster statue, as it is known today,
the cause of not inconsiderable religious initiative and inspiration.
This shrine, I would suggest, has proved the more important of
the two, and it is here that we must look for the origins
of England's title, "Dowry of Mary".
In 1955 a benefactor, who wished to remain anonymous, commissioned
Sister Concordia Stuart of Minster Abbey on the Isle of Thanet
to carve a statue of Our Lady to replace the one lost from the
Pew Chapel at the Reformation. I corresponded with Sister Concordia
at the time, explaining that she was probably replacing a statue
that was first associated with the title Dos Mariae. This description
of England as "Mary's Dowry" moreover suggested an
occasion of ecumenical initiative - of seeking unity once more
- through Mary. Like the original statue presented by the Countess,
the new one had to be in English alabaster, which was hard to
obtain in the required measurements (3 feet by 16 inches by 7
inches), as the model for the work was to be the statue of Our
Lady of Westminster in Westminster Cathedral (a fifteenth-century
English carving of the Nottingham school).
To this statue, though it has no historical connection with the
Pew Chapel, has been ascribed the title Virgo Potens, "Our
Lady of Power". Thus there is perhaps an incidental connection
in the dedication of the two Madonnas. The statue in Westminster
Cathedral found its way back to England via the Paris
Exhibition of 1954, where the scholar S. W. Wolsey spotted it.
Through his efforts and the munificence of an anonymous benefactor,
it was restored to the Church and enshrined in Westminster Cathedral
in 1955. On 10th May 1971 a similar ceremony took place in Westminster
Abbey, when the statue which Sister Concordia had carved, based
on the one in Westminster Cathedral, was placed in
the Pew Chapel, in a niche that had been empty since the Reformation.
This was a splendidly ecumenical occasion, made possible by the
Dean of Westminster Abbey, and it forged a link between the two
great churches of Westminster. On the back of the statue Sister
Concordia had carved UT UNUM SINT ("That they may be one").
It is not certain what the original statue of Our Lady of Pew
looked like, but an inspection of the shrine chapel will give
some clues. In 1896 Sir Gilbert Scott was conducting repairs
in the Chapel of St John the Baptist, to which the Pew Chapel
gives access, when his pupil, John Mickelthwaite, made an interesting
discovery. In the Pew Chapel, with the benefit of extra light,
he found a boss in the ceiling depicting the Assumption of Our
Lady, and against the wall a bracket and an iron fitting which
he deduced had supported the original shrine statue. Against
the north wall he also discovered a painted nimbus or aureole
of light still plainly visible, which must originally have surrounded
the image of
Our Lady. From the size and shape of this aureole, it would seem
reasonable to suppose that the original statue was a standing
one, and, from the style of the vaulting and decoration, Mickelthwaite
concluded that the whole work could be dated around 1380. This
date is of particular importance in establishing the Dowry tradition.
It was in 1381 that England was ravaged by the Peasants' Revolt,
when the imposition of a poll tax caused the southeastern counties
to rise in open rebellion. Froissart's Chronicles gives a vivid
description of how the young King Richard II prepared to meet
the rebels, under Wat Tyler, at Smithfield:
Richard II on the Saturday after Corpus Christi went to Westminster,
where he heard Mass at the Abbey with all his Lords. He made
his devotions at a statue of Our Lady in a little chapel that
had witnessed many miracles and where much grace had been gained,
so that the Kings of England have much faith in it.
Another chronicler, Strype, described the event as follows:
On the coming of the rebels and Wat Tyler, the same King went
to Westminster . . . confessed himself to an anchorite; then
took himself to the chapel of Our Lady of Pew; there he said
his devotions, and went to Smithfield to meet the rebels.
From this and other evidence, we learn that the Pew Chapel had
already been in existence for some time before Richard II's reign.
So what Mickelthwaite discovered in the Pew Chapel in 1869, and
dated around 1380, must have been a refurbishment of the shrine.
What, therefore, was the situation which occasioned Richard II's
re-ordering of the shrine? In the answer to this question lies
the
clue to the origin of England's title, Dos Mariae, "Mary's
Dowry".
The original shrine, as we know, was housed in a chapel within
the Palace of Westminster attached to the Collegiate Church of
St Stephen. This shrine survived the Reformation, but, as I have
explained, was finally destroyed in the fire of1843. Today its
exact location may be determined by the site of
the Speaker's House next to the now restored Church of St Stephen.
It was at this greater shrine that the sovereigns of England
were wont to beseech the help of Our Lady, but the little chapel
in the Abbey survives with evidence to show that it was patronized
by at least one sovereign in particular.
The Abbey shrine is probably more significant as evidence for
England's title, Dos Mariae, as its existence as a shrine dates
from the time of Richard's successful bid to keep his throne,
and it is probably a grateful monarch's gift to his people who
did not have access to the greater shrine within the Palace.
Moreover, the traces of painting on the walls of this little
chapel are irrefutable evidence of King Richard's patronage,
as there are on the east wall remnants of the King's "white
hart" badge. Therefore, what was originally a chantry chapel,
the King by all accounts transformed into a public shrine dedicated
to Our Lady of Pew. This was the lesser shrine, but perhaps the
more significant, as its foundation marked the gratitude of King
Richard to Our Lady for the safe return of his realm, in offering
it to her as her dowry.
A search for clues must perforce include the examination of what
ecclesiastical objets d'art have survived from this period of
Richard's reign, especially those specifically associated with
the monarch. The one noteable example is, of course, the Wilton
Diptych, housed today in the National Gallery.
As to the origin of this Diptych, a theory was first put forward
by the late Everard Green, Rouge Dragon Pursuivant of the College
of Arms. He held that it was a votive offering made to the (greater)
shrine of Our Lady of Pew on the occasion of Richard's coronation
in 1371. W. G. Constable wrote in 1929 concerning this theory
as follows:
The king is known to have visited this shrine shortly after that
ceremony, and to have made a special offering there. It is suggested
that the eleven angels [on the Diptych] wearing the King's badges,
of a white hart, and of a collar and pendant of peascods, stand
for the age of the King at the time of his coronation (eleven
years) or could also be his monetary offering of eleven "angels"
("angel" as a monetary unit apparently not having come
into use until Richard's reign). The red-cross banner [being
offered to Our Lady in the Diptych] Green regarded as an offering
to the Virgin to symbolize England being the Dos Mariae, as described
in a mandate of Archbishop Arundel. ("The Date and Nationality
of the Wilton Diptych", The Burlington Magazine, No. CCCXVI,
Vol. LV.) Cf. Sir
Martin Conway, The Times, 26th June 1929, p.17.
This mandate, at the special desire of the King, was issued at
Lambeth on 10th February 1399, and reads as follows:
The contemplation of the great mystery
of the Incarnation has brought all
Christian nations to venerate her from whom came the beginnings
of redemption.
But we, as the humble servants of her inheritance, and liegemen
of her especial
dower - as we are approved by common parlance ought to excel
all others in the
favour of our praises and devotions to her.
Everard Green's suggestion that the red-cross banner in the Wilton
Diptych symbolizes England's being the Dos Mariae has not so
far been substantiated. However, a closer examination of the
evidence which connects the Diptych with the Pew Chapel will
help to prove his point. A study of the sequence of events surrounding
the young King Richard's meeting with the rebels will help to
show the significance of the red-cross banner. This banner was
that of St George, and it therefore represented the Kingdom of
England. The rebels had produced their own standards under which
they marched to London, but, upon meeting with the young King
at Blackheath and then at Smithfield, they were finally persuaded
to tear down their own standards and accept the standard of the
realm which the King was carrying. To return to Froissart's Chronicles,
this event can be dated approximately to 15th June 1381.
After his success in quelling the rebels, and their acceptance
of the standard of the realm, Richard returned to meet his mother
at Westminster and to give thanks. Froissart records the young
King's words as follows:
"Yes, Madam . . . rejoice and praise God, for today I have
regained my kingdom
which I had lost."
And he placed the Kingdom
under Our Lady's protection - in thanksgiving for having regained
it.
When Mickelthwaite dated the Pew Chapel around 1380, he was influenced
by subsequent refurbishing for which King Richard was undoubtedly
responsible. The occasion of the refurbishing must have been
in thanksgiving for the quelling of the Peasants' Revolt, and
therefore 1381 would seem to be a more accurate date. The evidence
for this and for the connection with the Wilton Diptych will
all
help to establish the tradition of Our Lady's Dowry.
The decoration in the Pew Chapel includes an incomplete survival
on the east wall of the "white hart" badge of Richard
II, which must be compared with the similar badges on the angels
in the Wilton Diptych.
To the right of the shrine is a pillar whose capital bears a
shield displaying the cross of St George; this no doubt has some
connection with the red-cross banner in the Diptych in representing
England as Mary's Dower. This Chapel of Pew provides an entrance
to the Chapel of St John the Baptist, and in
the Diptych St John the Baptist is shown commending King Richard
to Our Lady. In a line south from the Chapel of St John the Baptist,
behind the High Altar, is the shrine of St Edward the Confessor,
and next to this is the Chapel of St Edmund, King and Martyr.
These two saints likewise appear commending King Richard to Our
Lady in the Wilton Diptych. This would appear to establish the
connection of the Diptych with this Pew Chapel, and it was most
likely presented to the shrine by Richard in thanksgiving for
the safe return of his realm. In the Diptych Our Lady is shown
accepting the standard of England in token of her dowry.
The figure of Mary in the Diptych probably most accurately represents
the original shrine statue, as has been ascertained from the
painted aureole, which indicates a standing figure.
The historian F. Alfad (alias Griffiths, SJ), writing before
the French troops sacked Rome in 1798, stated that in his time
at the English College in Rome there existed, although since
destroyed, an ancient painting of a King and Queen who, on their
knees, were making an offering of England to Our Blessed
Lady for her dower through the hands of John the Baptist, with
this inscription: Dos tua pia laec ese, quare leges, Maria. A
rough translation of the rather
obscure Latin begins: "This
is your dowry, pious Virgin . ." (Edmund
Waterton, FSA, Pietas Mariaria Britannica, (1879, pp.11-17).
This surely was a portrait of Richard II and his consort, Ann
of Bohemia. The attitude in which they are represented would
certainly seem to commemorate an offering of the English realm
to Our Blessed Lady as her dowry. In the British Library (11a4.
MS no.360) there
is further evidence of this ancient painting; the manuscript,
from the reign of James I, reads as follows:
In the Church of Saint Thomas Hospitall in Rome [the original
name for the English College] there is a very faire painted and
guilded Table of Imagerie works, standing before the Altars of
Saint Edmund the martire, once a King of England;. . . It is
in length abooue five foote, and about three foote high.
The manuscript goes on to describe a young king kneeling before
the Lady and holding between his hands a "patterne of words,
Dos tua Virgo pia Haec est" ("This is your dowry, 0 pious Virgin").
Archbishop Arundel's mandate of 1399 described England as "Dos
Mariae in common parlance" by the fourteenth century, and
the manuscript of James l's time declares that "it is no
new devised speech to call England Our Ladyes dowerie".
I would suggest that the title was obtained not so much by special
devotion as by the solemn consecration that King Richard II made
of the English realm to
Mary as her Dowry on the Saturday after Corpus Christi in the
eventful year of 1381.
Originally a talk given
to the Ecumenical Society of the Blessed Virgin Mary in September
1989. It was included as an appendix in "Catholic Trivia,
Our Forgotten Heritage," (Harper Collins 1992).
* * *
SOME REFLECTIONS ON OUR LADY AND THE ECUMENICAL MOVEMENT IN THE
LIGHT OF HER MATERNAL PATRONAGE
By Fr Mark Elvins OFM
Cap of the Franciscan Study Centre in Canterbury, UK.
MARY'S MATERNAL PATRONAGE
IN SCRIPTURE
Our Lord 's words from the cross to John , the only apostle who
had not fled, were ' Son behold your Mother ', indicating the
special relationship that was intended between the infant Church,
represented by John and Our Blessed Lady . This relationship
ensured that Mary remained a special focus for the Church in
Jerusalem , indeed the traditional foundation day of the Church
in Jerusalem - Pentecost is usually depicted in devotional art
with Mary as a mother figure surrounded by the apostles , beneath
the pentecostal tongues of fire . Mary was already filled with
the Holy Spirit and she became the natural focus as a mother
and model of the Church.
Since the Council of Ephesus in 431 Mary has been called 'Theotokos",
God-bearer or Mother of God. Christ cannot be truly man as well
as God unless he is born of a human mother. Mary in order to
be Mother of God has to be Mother of Jesus, who is truly God.
Evidence in Scripture directs us to Galatians 4:4,'God sent his
son born of a woman', and to John 's Gospel where Mary is always
called 'the Mother of Jesus' and in 20:31 we find the words 'in
order that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son
of God'. In a fragment of papyrus preserved in the Rylands Library,
Manchester, dated no later than 270 A.D., there is the earliest
recorded prayer to Mary in Greek, which translated reads :'we
fly to thy patronage'. This indicates Mary's maternal role for
followers of her Son.
MARY'S MATERNAL PATRONAGE
IN THE FATHERS
In the writings of the early Fathers Ignatius of Antioch (c.110
A.D.) records 'under the divine dispensation Jesus Christ our
God was conceived by Mary of the seed of David and of the Holy
Spirit of God; he was born and he submitted to baptism so that
by his Passion he might sanctify water (Ad. Eph. 18:2). Irenaeus
(c. 200 A.D.)claimed that the New Testament revealed two things
clearly; 'that the Son of God was born of a virgin, and that
he himself is the Saviour Christ, whom the prophets proclaimed;
not as those men (the heretics) say that Jesus is he who descended
from above' (Adv. haer. 16:2/17:1). These patristic affirmations
which equivalently assert the divine maternity of Mary are summed
up in the creeds, the most ancient of which reads 'born of the
Holy Spirit from the Virgin Mary ', or 'born from the Holy Spirit
and the Virgin Mary' (1).
MARY'S EXTENDED MATERNITY
Mary's maternal patronage implies three aspects, namely Mother
of God, Mother of the Church and Mother of mankind, which presents
a very particular perspective. The Magisterium has taught that
as Mother of the Christ, who is the Head of the body the Church
(cf. Colossians 1:18), Mary is also the Mother of the members
of that body (2). At the end of the third session of the Second
Vatican Council (1964) Pope Paul VI also proclaimed Mary to be
the Mother of the Church.
Mary is also the mother of the members of that body, her maternity
was first proclaimed at the Annunciation, and then before Christ
breathed forth his life upon the cross he extended this motherhood
to the infant Church. Calvary begot the new Israel in the person
of John representing the apostles, and Christ declares Mary to
be mother of both the head and members of that body the Church.
Not only is Mary Mother of the Church but also of all believers,
for as Christ is the Saviour of the human race he assumed from
Mary his human nature that he might be Saviour of all believers.
We are all members of Christ's Body made from his flesh and from
his bones (cf. Ephesians 5:30) and have therefore ' come forth
from the womb of Mary as a body united to its head' (3).
It was Anselm who explained that 'Mary began to bear us all in
her womb 'from the moment of her fiat' . This is clarified by
'Redemptoris Mater" of Pope John Paul II in which he explains
that since Mary 'gave birth to Christ, the Head of the Mystical
Body , she also had have given birth to all the members of that
one Body. New dimensions of motherhood applied to Mary were particularly
stressed by Pope Leo XIII , who in his encyclical 'Aduitricem
Populi" (5 September 1895) said that when Christ from the
cross uttered the words to his mother 'Behold your Son ' he 'designated
the whole human race' but in the first rank are they joined to
him by faith (4).
Thus in a couple of lines he extends Mary 's maternal patronage
to the Church and to the whole of humanity, in this way focusing
on Mary 's ecumenical role as Mother of the Church and the wider
church of all believers and even of the human race. These new
dimensions have now received the ratification of the Second Vatican
Council in the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church ('Lumen"
'Gentium" 54) which describes Mary as 'Mother of Christ
and Mother of mankind', but most of all of those who believe.
Given these aspects of Mary 's maternal patronage she is thus
especially concerned for the unity of all believers and therefore
'par excellence" the patroness of Ecumenism.
MARY'S ROLE REVERSAL
There is however a certain irony in Mary 's role in the ecumenical
movement, for since the Reformation over 500 years of Marian
devotion has contributed more to division than to unity among
the various Christian denominations. In this the late Martin
Gillet recognised the potential of Mary in a role- reversal,
as a promoter of ecumenical devotion and a focus for many Christians
in their search for unity - rather than a stumbling block. It
might be asked how can this be? Martin Gillet founded the Ecumenical
Society of the Blessed Virgin Mary in 1967. He had been inspired
by Cardinal Suenens to work for unity in this way, in using a
cause of division as a means of healing wounds of separation,
and as such the Society seeks to study the place of Mary in the
Church and among all Christians . Like an inoculation, injecting
the bacillus of a disease to produce immunity this problem of
division has been found to have healing properties. Particular
advances have been made in a shared liturgy and Marian devotion,
it is therefore important for branches of the Society
That they maintain this format for their gatherings.
Pope John Paul II has said 'there is a close and important link'
between Mary as Mother and the work for unity (letter to the
ESBVM). It would nevertheless be naive to pretend that as a focus
in the search for unity Mary does not more often, in the wider
dialogue, provide a focus contention and division. In this way
there is little chance of cloaking our divisions in Christendom
with Mary 's mantle, like Luther 's parody of the forgiveness
of sin. It is more likely that divisions will be highlighted
particularly on the level of Marian dogma, but then this can
be an opportunity to Look at the reasons for such divisions in
their historical context and whether or not they can still be
sustained in a rapidly changing climate of opinion.
DEVELOPMENT AND ECCLESIOLOGY
The extended titles of Mother of God to Mother of the Church
and Mother of all believers provide a certain articulation to
Mary as the focus for ecumenical dialogue, as mother of an extended
family seeking closer family union. I would like to add to this
vision of emerging familial unity the idea of the development
of understanding between the various Christian denominations
and the indications of a converging ecclesiology.
Even within the bounds of the Roman and Catholic Church the understanding
of Mary's role has been at times contentious. On the 8th December
1845 in the Bull 'Ineffabilis Deus" Pius IX declared that
'from the first moment of her conception the Blessed Virgin Mary
was by a singular grace and privilege of Almighty God, and in
view of the merits of Christ, Saviour of mankind, kept free from
all stain of sin.' This belief had long been held, but not without
its opponents, indeed the Archbishop of Paris and the Bishop
of Evereux protested against the dogma being adopted without
a general council. To be fair to pope Pius IX he had, prior to
this pronouncement, consulted the entire hierarchy ('Ubi Primum"
2nd February 1849) to avoid such reactions and received favourable
responses, but more particularly he had wished to know the sentiments
of the ordinary people.
CONSULTING THE LAITY
This has a precedent for ecumenical dialogue with other denominations,
for in canvassing ordinary attitudes to Marian dogma Pius IX
had introduced a major ingredient in the development of the understanding
of doctrine. In this development of understanding, particularly
of Marian dogma, the laity acted as a mirror of confirmation
for the teaching authority of the Church. Newman while still
an Anglican had no difficulty in accepting the Immaculate Conception
, twenty years before it was formally declared to be a dogma
of the Church. Newman's journey to Rome ended on the 9th October
1845 and directly afterwards he published his essay
on the 'Development of Doctrine" - a major contribution
to the development of understanding.
In a fascinating way the definition of the dogma of the Immaculate
Conception was indirectly made possible by the work on the development
of understanding of doctrine. When Newman came to publish his
article 'On consulting the faithful on Matters of Doctrine"('The
Rambler" July 1859) he used the example of Pope Pius IX's
consultation of the laity to demonstrate the preparations for
the definition of dogma.
THE CONSULTING FOR
UNITY
This same principle of consultation could be used in the work
for Christian unity, as the same procedure achieved a unity of
belief on Marian dogma. Thus the development of understanding
of Marian dogma could give an example for a context of wider
consultation on ecumenism and be extended across the denominational
divide.
To some extent, in isolated examples, this has already been going
on, but more specifically each congregation represented at meetings
of the ESBVM could instruct their representatives to canvas members
on attitudes beliefs and objections. Some meetings are missing
opportunities by simply handing over the format to local parochial
evangelical considerations. Similar debate has been going on
in the Catholic Church over many centuries before a unity of
belief has been reached. Such great luminaries as Bernard of
Clairvaux, Anselm of Canterbury, Albert the Great, Aquinas and
Bonaventure even opposed the acceptance of the doctrine of the
Immaculate Conception. However a local Benedictine monk, Eadmer
of Canterbury (1055-1154) pointed out that the feast of the Immaculate
Conception had been kept by the people of England since before
the Norman Conquest, adding that God who kept the good angles
sinless could hardly do less for his Mother.
In the end the tide was turned by a practice that was particularly
prominent in the ESBVM, the consistent devotion and liturgical
celebration of a Marian order among the faithful . In this a
swelling and broadening tide of devotion eventually produced
a unifying influence in the development of understanding which
came to overthrow all objections (cf. 'Lumen Gentium" 12).
If liturgical influence can guide unity within the Roman communion
as a principle for wider applications its benefits are obvious.
The fact of our meeting here today is evidence of this development
of understanding through Mary across the denominational divide.
Duns Scotus in the thirteenth century stressed the love and the
will, and these two factors must be uppermost in the desire for
Christian unity, they were certainly the main characteristics
of the laity who finally influenced Pius IX to declare the Immaculate
as a dogma in 1854. Eadmer had already given evidence of the
consistent devotion of the faithful, but Duns Scotus was to finally
break the theological deadlock in furnishing the idea of 'preservative
redemption' in Our Lady. This overcame the conflict in isolating
Mary from universal redemption, moreover Mary even when preserved
from original sin would not be freed from dependence on Christ's
redemptive work, for she would have contracted original sin had
the grace of the Mediator not preserved her state.
MARY AS MODEL
In the growth towards unity, prayer and devotion must come first
and theological explanations will follow later. Mary as a model
as well as a mother gives us the example in accepting the will
of God despite its remaining mysterious for her, she simply pondered
such things in her heart (Luke 2 :19). The mystery of the Immaculate
Conception took centuries of pondering before the development
of understanding enabled Pope Pius IX to declare it a dogma.
Christian unity is similarly a mystery which we ponder and strive
after without fully comprehending its
implications (just like Mary at the Annunciation). Like Mary
moreover with prayer and devotion we grow in understanding; by
our fellowship and discussion we grow in our understanding of
each other and develop in that understanding towards the mystery
of Christian unity. In her own faith journey Mary displayed this
development of understanding, for example the angel 's words
'Hail Mary full of grace' were a cause for puzzlement as well
as pondering until the revelation at Pentecost, when understanding
was given.
THE MARIAN PRINCIPLE
IN ECUMENICAL DEVELOPMENT
If Mary is Mother of the Church she is also a model for the Church
in the institutional sense and in the wider sense of all believers.
We have already seen that she is a model for the Church 's development
of understanding and that of all Christians. Andre Feuillet,
the Catholic scripture scholar has described how Mary 's maternity
and mediation have presented her as the 'archetype of the Church
.... she is the perfect model of the Church. Only by becoming
more and more like Mary,
does the Church realise more and more fully the intentions of
her founder '(5). Lev Gillet, an Orthodox priest stresses Mary
's role in quoting Acts 1:14,'All these with one accord devoted
themselves to prayer, together with the women and Mary the Mother
of Jesus'. This scene he stresses is an authentic image of the
continuing Church, as the Church today must claim an unbroken
continuity With the infant Church gathered around Mary on the
day of Pentecost. He stresses that 'this accord'
must be seen in terms of agreement with Mary 's role and intentions.
Her intentions of course were the 'perfect assent to the will
of God; therefore it is only the conformity of our will to the
divine will that will effectively unite us with Mary '(6). This
unity with Mary is thus the means of growing in Christian unity.
In the Reformed tradition David Carter has said that Mary pondering
on the word of God 'sets a model for future disciples', her 'wholehearted
reception of the Word is an eloquent commentary on the Reformation
principle of the sole sufficiency of Scripture' (7). These three
models Catholic, Orthodox and Reformed have a compatibility that
admits of a definite convergence. The Catholic emphasis on
Mary as the perfect model of the Church stresses that in becoming
more like Mary the Church realises the intentions of her founder.
This image retains the characteristics of development as does
the Orthodox view with the continuing Church, claiming unbroken
continuity with the focus on Mary around whom the apostles were
gathered at Pentecost. The Reformed tradition with the image
of Mary pondering the Word is a development principle that has
already been explained.
These ecclesiologies may not always be consistent within the
different denominations nevertheless there is already evidence
of convergence and potential for its continuance.
CONCLUSION
Mary as a model disciple exercises a maternal example to her
children and is also an exemplar in her obedience to the will
of God. As Our lord declares in Mark 3:35 'whoever does the will
of God is my brother, sister and mother '. this far from diminishing
Mary 's maternal patronage enhances it, for as an exemplar she
is pre-eminently the instrument of God 's will. This obedience
is part of her maternal role, as she tells the servants at the
marriage feast of Cana; 'do whatever he tells you '. as a mother
she is also a reconciler in bringing us together and bringing
together our various theological traditions. As the ancient prayer
states 'we fly ' to her patronage in our need to be reconciled
with our Mother.
Her pondering role prefigures the process of development in the
pondering Church. This process is outlined in the Second Vatican
Council ('Dei Verbum" 8):'The Church is always advancing
towards the plenitude of divine truth, until eventually, the
words of God are fufilled in her '. Mary 's maternal patronage
over an extended family of believers also places her in the role
of chief intercessor of that extended family, and in obedience
to her Son she prays 'that they all may be one '. In Anglicanism
since the seventeenth century there has been a gradual development
in
understanding of Mary 's part in God 's plan of redemption. Fanned
by the Oxford Movement and the subsequent Tractarians, who in
their study of the Fathers rediscovered Mary as 'Theotokos"
. Newman was the great agent of this early development and A.T.
Wirgman 's classic 'The Blessed Virgin Mary and the whole Company
of Heaven" was a natural successor to Pusey's 'Eirenicon"
. In recent years Professor Eric Mascall edited a symposium entitled
'Mother of God" (London 1949) which was a collaboration
with the Orthodox and he went on to become a founder member of
this Society .
This brief evidence confirms how Marian devotion has spread to
every denomination but with the Roman communion the turning point
came in 1958 at the first Mariological -Marian Congress at Lourdes.
There was a departure from old exaggerated opinion that had made
Mariology so contentious with other denominations and Mary was
considered within the context of Christology and ecclesiology
(8). The second turning point was the exhortation of Pope John
Paul II in 'Marianus" 'Cultus" in which the future
of Mariology was declared to be liturgical, biblical and ecumenical,
and now we are gathering the fruits of our mutual development
in understanding, our converging ecclesiologies and our shared
devotion to Mary, the Mother of God, Mother of the Church and
the Mother of all believers.
1. J .N .D. Kelly, 'Early Christian Creeds" , Longmans ,London
1972, pp.144-148.
2. A .B . Calkins ,' Mary 's Spiritual Maternity ' in 'Mary is
for Everyone", Ed. W. McLoughlin & J . Pinnock , Gracewing,
Leominster 1997, p.69 .
3. cf. Encyclical of Pius IX 'Ad Diem Illum" , 2 February
1904.
4. 'Acta Sanctorum" 28 (1895-1896).
5. A .Feuillet , 'Jesus and His Mother" ,Trans. Maluf ,St.Bede
's Publications, Massachuset 1984.p.117.
6. L .Gillet ,' The Veneration of the Blessed Virgin Mary ,Mother
of God'in 'Mother of God",Ed. E . Mascall ,Dacre Press ,1949
,p.79f.
7. D.Carter, 'Mary Servant of the Word' in 'Mary is for Everyone",Ed.
W..McLoughlin & J .Pinnock, Gracewing ,Leominster 1997, p161.
8. C .O'Donnel ,'Growth and Decline in Mariology' in' Mary in
the Church",Ed.J. Hyland,Veritas, Athlone 1989 ,p.39.
|