The implications of Jungian psychology for an interpretation of the rise of the cult of the Virgin

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content THE IMPLICATIONS OF JUNGIAN PSYCHOLOGY
FOR AN INTERPRETATION OF THE RISE
OF THE CULT OF THE VIRGIN
by
James C a lv in Thompson
A T h e s is P r e se n te d to the
FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In P a r t i a l F u lf illm e n t of th e
R equirem ents fo r th e D egree
MASTER OF ARTS
( R e lig io n )
A ugust 1 9 5 5
UMI Number: EP65250
All rights reserved
INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.
Diss®rtat{i©n
UMI EP65250
Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author.
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This work is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346
R r ^ 7 3
This thesis, written by
Janies C a lv in Thompson
under the guidance of hi,B....Faculty Committee,
and approved by all its members, has been
presented to and accepted by the Faculty of the
Graduate School in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of
D ate.......
Dean
Faculty Committee
Chairman
I TABLE OF CONTENTS
I
IChapter Pagq
i I . AN INTRODUCTION TO THE PROBLEM OF THE CULT . . 1
I I . THE JUN3IAN BASIS OF EXPLORATION............................... 5
!
I I I . THE RISE OF THE CULT OF THE V IR G IN .......................... Ig
I ■ I
I IV. MARY AS THE THEOLOGIAN SEES HER .......................... 39
I V. THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE CULT OF THE VIRGIN . .
iaiBLIOGRAPHY......................... 53
I CHAPTER I ;
i I
t
AN INTRODUCTION TO THE PROBLEM OP THE CULT I
I 1
;
I
! One o f th e r a th e r b a f f l i n g problem s i n P r o t e s t a n t - I
I '
Roman C a th o lic r e l a t i o n s h i p s i s th e r e su r g e n c e i n our tim e !
I
o f th e p o p u la r it y o f th e C u lt o f the V ir g in Mary, P r o t e s
t a n t C h r i s t i a n i t y , b a s i c a l l y H ebraic i n i t s a t t i t u d e toward I
women has n ev er a p p r e c ia te d C a th o lic is m a t t h i s p o i n t ,
Adolph von Harnack p o in t s t o th e Roman d o c t r in e of Mary a s , '
■ . . . th e p l a i n e s t e v id e n c e o f th e d e c li n e o f an i n -
! w a rd ly grounded d o c tr in e o f s a l v a t i o n and o f th e growing^
j a tta ch m en t o f v a lu e to c r e a t u r e l y g o o d n e ss. . . , l
I In i t s i n s i s t e n c e th a t th e c u l t w h ich has Mary a s
i t s r e l i g i o u s o b j e c t c o n ta in s l i t t l e s p e c i f i c a l l y C h r is t ia n
and i s th e r e s u l t o f an e s s e n t i a l l y pagan i d e o l o g i c a l i n
f l u x , P r o t e s t a n tis m i s p a r t l y r i g h t . I t d oes n ot f o l l o w ,
how ever, t h a t th e phenomenon i s r e l i g i o u s l y w o r t h le s s . The
f i g u r e o f th e fe m in in e d e i t y i s e n t i r e l y to o p e r s i s t e n t in
the h i s t o r y o f r e l i g i o n s t o be so sim p ly d is m is s e d . Perhaps
th e r e i s a v a l i d a n a lo g y to th e fem in in e i n the comprehen
s i v e n e s s o f th e Godhead.
The moat s i g n i f i c a n t i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f th e r i s e o f
th e myth o f Mary w i l l be from th e p o in t o f view o f
^Adolph Harnack, H is to r y o f Domna, tr a n s , N e il
Buchanan (from 3rd German e d , ; B oston : L i t t l e , Brown, arid
C o ., 1 8 9 9 ). V I, 3 12.
2 |
^psychology, w ith th e h i s t o r y o f th e c u l t p r o v id in g th e !
jm a teria l but n o t n e c e s s a r i l y th e norms o f i t s own judgm ent, '
jThat i s t o s a y , th e t h e o l o g i c a l r e a so n s a re o f seco n d a ry
jc o n s id e r a tio n i n t h i s p a r t i c u l a r i n v e s t i g a t i o n . P r o t e s t a n t -
I i
jism i s d r iv e n to t h i s s o r t o f e x a m in a tio n r a th e r than th e j
I !
{ t r a d it io n a l h i s t o r i c a l - d o c t r i n a l approach by a t l e a s t two |
- i
c o n s i d e r a t io n s . F i r s t , th e r e i s th e n e c e s s i t y i n our w orld
to come to term s w ith d iv e r g e n t C h r is t ia n t r a d i t i o n s , i n - j
■eluding th e Roman, on th e b a s i s o f t h e i r h ig h e s t p o s s i b l e |
i I
^ co n trib u tio n s to r e l i g i o n . S e c o n d ly , th e r e a re danger I
I I
jsig n a ls in P r o te s ta n t is m t h a t th e n e g l e c t o f th e fe m in in e j
la sp ec ts o f r e a l i t y have p r o v id e d th e o c c a s io n f o r a lm o st !
I i
hom osexual r e l a t i o n s h i p s to m a sc u lin e r e l i g i o u s o b j e c t s . i
I l l u s t r a t i o n s i n p o in t a re th e p o p u la r g o s p e l son gs and
}
!charases l i k e I Come to the Garden A lone and J e s u s Holds M y 1
Hand, th e h e a r ty s in g in g o f w h ic h p u ts th e m ale church ;
member i n a l e s s th an h e a lth y s t a t e o f mind. A lth ou gh
Roman C h r i s t i a n i t y has had a s i m i la r problem , th e r e would
seem t o be i n th e p e r so n o f th e B le s s e d Mother o f J e su s a
r e l e a s e f o r em otion s h a v in g as t h e i r p ro p er o b j e c t the
fe m in in e . |
When one p r o p o se s to i n v e s t i g a t e a problem from a
p s y c h o lo g ic a l o r i e n t a t i o n , th e q u e s t io n o f w h ich p s y c h o lo g y
alw ays p r e s e n t s i t s e l f . S in c e th e a u th o r i s n o t a t r a in e d
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3 j
I
p s y c h o l o g i s t , he f e e l s t h a t he must approach th e s u b je c t
from one o f th e two s c h o o ls w ith w h ich he i s b e s t acquainted^
i :
;Thus th e problem i s a r b i t r a r i l y red u ced t o e i t h e r F reu d ian |
i ’
p s y c h o a n a ly s is or Ju n gian a n a l y t i c p s y c h o lo g y . T h is t h e s i s :
I i
p i l l make i t s app roach from a n a l y t i c p s y c h o lo g y b eca u se o f |
!the f o llo w in g c o n s id e r a t io n s . F reu d ian m eth od ology i s j
j I
l i m i t e d by i t s own dogm atic p r e s u p p o s it io n s i n th e é v a lu a - ;
t i o n o f any r e l i g i o u s phenomenon. In our s p e c i f i c c o n t e x t , i
th e u se o f Freud would be made most d i f f i c u l t by th e in a d e - !
i I
jq[uacy o f h i s fundam ental p o s t u l a t e c o n c e r n in g th e p r im it iv e |
jidea o f God. F a th er White p o in t s t h i s o u t in h i s book, God j
and th e U n c o n sc io u s: !
i
1 . , . H is ^ r e u d * ^ f i r s t im p ortan t u t te r a n c e on th e ^
' s u b j e c t o c c u r s i n Totem and Taboo in I 9 0 7 . He th e n «
j w r o te , *P s y c h o - a n a ly t ic i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f th e in d iv id u a l |
te a c h e s w it h e s p e c i a l em phasis th a t god i s i n e v e r y ea sel
I m o d elled a f t e r th e f a t h e r , and t h a t our p e r s o n a l r e l a - |
! t i o n to god i s dependent on our p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n to our!
p h y s ic a l f a t h e r . . . *
Most e t h n o l o g i s t s , a s w e ll a s many p s y c h o l o g i s t s ,
w i l l p r o b a b ly d is a g r e e th a t 'god i s i n e v e r y c a s e
m o d elled a f t e r th e f a t h e r '; th e y w i l l i n s i s t t h a t Mother
and D aughter g o d d e s s e s , and ev en d iv in e S o n s, appear to
be much o ld e r and more w id esp read i n human r e l i g i o n , andi
th a t F a th e r -g o d s appear c o m p a r a tiv e ly l a t e . . . .2
In c o n t r a s t to F reud, Jun gian p s y c h o lo g y seems to
s u g g e s t p r o b a b ly h y p o th e se s and f e r t i l e i n s i g h t s w ith o u t
2
V ic to r W hite, God and th e U n co n scio u s (London: The
Harv i l l e P r e s s , 1953)> p % 1Ü1, q u o tin g Sigmund F reud, Totem
and Taboo, t r a n s . James S tr a c h e y (Longon: R on tled ge and
Kegan J?aul, 1 9 5 0 ) , p . 1I1 .7 .
i ^ i
undue dogm atism . I t i s i n t e n s e l y sy m p a th etic to th e v a lu e s
jin m y th o lo g ic a l them es a s th e y e x p r e ss n o t e s o f th e une on - ;
s c i o u s . L a ter i n t h i s stu d y , J u n g 's own e x c u r s io n s in t o
'th is f i e l d w i l l be n o te d .
i CHAPTER I I I
1 '
; THE JUNGIAN BASIS OP EXPLORATION
I I
j Ju n gian p s y c h o lo g y i s h ig h ly s u i t e d f o r r e l i g i o u s '
I I
i n v e s t i g a t i o n b eca u se i t assum es the r e a l i t y o f th e S e e le '
i :
( s o u l: th e r e l a t i o n s h i p betw een th e c o n s c io u s and th e un eo n - :
I !
è c io u s ) and th e e q u iv a le n c e o f im portance o f th e p s y c h i c a l |
I !
and th e p h y s i c a l . A n a ly tic p s y c h o lo g y i s p r im a r ily e m p ir i- ,
i I
c a l; i t s s c ie n c e i s a b y -p ro d u c t o f i t s c l i n i c a l o r i e n t a t i o n .
I
I . . . Ju n gian p s y c h o th e r a p y i s no a n a l y t i c a l p roced u re I
j i n th e u su a l m eaning o f t h i s term , a lth o u g h i t h o ld s |
; s t r i c t l y to th e m e d ic a lly , s c i e n t i f i c a l l y , and e m p ir i- |
I c a l l y co n firm ed p r e m ise s o f r e s e a r c h i n a l l r e le v a n t |
j f i e l d s . I t i s a 'H éiT sw eg. ' a 'way o f h e a l in g ' i n b o th i
I m eanings o f th e German term , w h ich s i g n i f i e s a t th e same ;
I tim e 'h e a lin g * and ' s a l v a t i o n .
I I
I Fundamental to Ju n gian ism i s th e c o n c ep t o f th e I
I j
s t r u c t u r e o f th e P sy ch e, The P syche may be c o n c e iv e d as a j
la r g e c i r c l e , th e ego b e in g a t th e c e n t e r . Around th e ego \
and w e ll w it h in th e p s y c h ic c i r c l e i s th e sp h ere o f c o n -
I
s c i o u s n e s s , a sm a ll a r e a , in d eed J Beyond i s th e l a r g e r area!
o f th e p e r s o n a l u n c o n sc io u s w h ich fa d e s i n t o th e enormous !
I I
c o l l e c t i v e u n c o n sc io u s o f th e r a c e . C o n sc io u sn e ss i s
; _ ;
f . . , th e f u n c t io n or a c t i v i t y w h ich m a in ta in s th e r e l a t io n ;
o f th e p s y c h ic c o n te n t to th e ego . . ." 2 The c o n s c io u s and
■ »
J o la n J a c o b i, The P sy c h o lo g y o f Jung (r e v . ed . ; New'
Haven: Y ale U n iv e r s it y P r e s s , 1 9 5 d V pp. 6 - 7 .
2
• — . _- _ .. . . . id) â. # ' — ^ 3 # — — _ .— — — - — - - “ — * - - — - ^ - • — - - —
, ^ ,
I :
I I
ithe u n c o n sc io u s supplem ent and complem ent one a n o th e r . What;
Jung c a l l s th e ^ ‘p e r s o n a l u n co n sc io u s" i s e q u iv a le n t to th e *
ito ta l u n c o n sc io u s i n Freud. The c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f th e p e r - i
< 1
so n a l u n c o n sc io u s i n Freud i s t h a t i t s c o n t e n ts are s p e c i f i c
f o r ”... our in d iv id u a l ego and r e s u l t from p e r s o n a l a c - ,
i . I
q u i s i t i o n s . . |
! Beyond th e p e r s o n a l u n c o n s c io u s , Jung p o s t u l a t e s
som ething a n te c e d e n t and autonom ous. F r e u d 's o v e r - s i m p l i f i -
\
c a t i o n o f th e u n c o n s c io u s , Jung b e l i e v e s , was o n ly b e c a u se
Freud d id n o t o b s e r v e th e tr a c e s o f autonom y w it h in i t .
I . . . I t i s o b v io u s th a t su ch c a r e f u l o b s e r v e r s a s Janet;
j and Freud would n o t have form ed t h e o r i e s i n w h ich th e ;
I u n c o n sc io u s i s m a in ly d e r iv e d from c o n s c io u s so u r c e s hadj
I th e y d is c o v e r e d a tr a c e o f in d ep en d en t p e r s o n a l i t y or
; autonomous v o l i t i o n . A ccord in g to b oth t h e o r i e s th e un
c o n s c io u s i s l i t t l e e l s e th an p s y c h ic m a t e r ia l th a t
; happens to la c k th e q u a l i t y o f c o n s c io u s n e s s , thou gh i t ;
; need n o t do s o , and th a t d i f f e r s in no o th e r way from !
! c o n s c io u s c o n t e n t s . . . . 4 •
The c o l l e c t i v e u n c o n sc io u s i s th e i n h e r it e d s t r u c
tu r e upon w h ich th e in d iv id u a l c o n s c io u s n e s s and th e p e r so n a l
u n c o n sc io u s a r e r a i s e d . I t p r o v id e s a common ground f o r
mankind. J a c o b i sa y s o f t h i s :
. . . th e c o l l e c t i v e p a r t o f th e u n c o n sc io u s in c lu d e s
c o n t e n t s . . . su ch as r e s u l t 'from th e i n h e r it e d
^I b i d . , pp. 6 - 7 .
^C. G. Jung, The I n t e g r a t io n o f P e r s o n a l i t y , t r a n s .
S t a n le y D e ll (London: R o n tled g e and Kegan P a u l, L t d ., 1 9 ^ 0 ),
p . 6 .
I p o s s i b i l i t y o f p s y c h ic a l f u n c t io n in g in g e n e r a l; nam ely
I from th e i n h e r it e d b r a in s t r u c t u r e . * T h is in h e r it a n c e ;
I i s common t o a l l hu m anity, p erhaps even to a l l th e !
j anim al w orld ; and form s th e b a s i s o f e v e r y in d iv id u a l j
I p s y c h e .5 j
1
Of s i g n a l in p o r ta n ce to s tu d e n t s of r e l i g i o n i s t h is ;
realm o f th e c o l l e c t i v e u n c o n s c io u s , f o r i t i s th e so u rce o f|
j I
m y th o lo g ic a l th em es. Jung s a y s : i
I . . . The c o l l e c t i v e u n c o n s c io u s — so f a r a s we can
; v e n tu r e a Judgment upon i t - - s e e m s t o c o n s i s t o f som e- i
I th in g o f th e n a tu re o f m y t h o lo g ic a l themes or im ages. !
I For t h i s r e a s o n the myths o f p e o p le are th e r e a l e x
p o n en ts o f th e c o l l e c t i v e u n c o n s c io u s . The whole o f |
, m yth ology c o u ld be ta k e n a s a k in d o f p r o j e c t i o n o f the!
: c o l l e c t i v e u n c o n s c io u s . ^
I I
I
I To u n d ersta n d m y th o lo g y , one m ust u n d ersta n d th e |
a r c h e ty p e s o f th e c o l l e c t i v e u n c o n s c io u s . These them es r e - |
i i
cu r i n th e myths and le g e n d s o f p r i m it i v e p e o p le s and a r e j
v e r i f i e d as "dream -themes" in modern l i f e . Jung s e e s i n the!
dream f a n t a s y a s i m i l a r i t y t o th e p r i m it i v e c o n c e p tio n o f !
I i
r e a l i t y . The a r c h e t y p e s , h a l f - p e r s o n a l i t i e s w ith in th e c o l- :
l e c t i v e u n c o n s c io u s , are enum erated by Carl Jung a s , ( l ) th e
shadow, (2 ) th e Wise Old Man, (3 ) th e c h i l d or c h i ld - h e r o ,
(Ij-) th e Mother (P rim o rd ia l Mother and E a rth M oth er), (5 ) her!
c o u n te r p a r t, th e m aiden, and (6 ) th e "anima" i n man or the
I ^ J a c o b i, op. c i t . . p. 7 , !
! 6
C. G. Jung, C o n tr ib u tio n s to A n a ly t ic a l P s y c h o lo g y . ,
t r a n s . H. G. and Cary F . Baynes (Hew York: H areou rt. Brace i
and C o ., 1 9 2 8 ) , p . 1 1 1 . :
8
"animus" i n the woman.
I The e m p ir ic a l b a s i s o f the a r c h e ty p e s l i e s i n the !
I
common e x p e r ie n c e s o f th e r a c e . F r ie d a Fordham sa y s i n h er :
book. An I n t r o d u c tio n to J u n g 's P sy c h o lo g y :
! I
j . . . The a r c h e ty p e s a re th e r e s u l t s o f th e many r e c u r - ,
r in g e x p e r ie n c e s o f l i f e : l i k e th e r i s i n g and s e t t i n g
I o f th e su n , the coming o f s p r in g and autumn i n tem p erate
c lim a t e s and o f th e r a in s i n more t o r r i d z o n e s , b i r t h
; and d e a th , th e f i n d in g o f m ate, or fo o d , o r e s c a p e from
I danger; i t i s , h ow ever, f a n t a s i e s r a th e r th an a c t u a l
! im ages o f th e e x p e r ie n c e t h a t r e m a in .°
I J o la n J a c o b i sa y s o f th e s e a r c h e ty p e s :
. . . They are r e p r e s e n t a t io n s o f th e i n s t i n c t i v e - - ! . e . ,
p s y c h o l o g i c a l l y n e c e s s a r y — r e s p o n s e s to c e r t a i n s i t u a - j
j t i o n s , w h ich c ir c u m v e n tin g c o n s c io u s n e s s , le a d by v ir t u e ,
I o f t h e i r in a t e p o t e n t i a l i t i e s to b e h a v io r c o r r e sp o n d in g i
I to the p s y c h o l o g ic a l n e c e s s i t y , even though i t may n o t !
; alw ays appear a p p r o p r ia te when r a t i o n a l l y view ed from |
j w i t h o u t . 7
One o f J u n g 's k e e n e s t i n s i g h t s w ith regard t o th e
p s y c h o lo g ic a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f dogma i s e x p r e s s e d i n h i s
work. P sy c h o lo g y and Alchem y:
. . . The a r c h e ty p e s o f the u n c o n sc io u s can be shown
e m p i r i c a l l y t o be th e e q u iv a le n ts o f r e l i g i o u s dogmas.
In the h erm en eu tic lan gu ag e o f th e F a th e r s , th e Church
p o s s e s s e s a r i c h s t o r e o f a n a lo g ie s w ith the in d iv id u a l
and sp o n ta n eo u s p r o d u c ts to be found in p s y c h o lo g y .
What th e u n c o n sc io u s e x p r e s s e s i s f a r from b e in g m erely
^G. G. Jung and E. K e r e n y i, E ssa y s on a S c ie n c e o f
M ythology ( B o llin g e r S e r ie s XXII, New York: P antheon Books,
1 9 4 9 ), p . 2 1 9 .
■ 8
F r ie d a Fordham, An I n t r o d u c tio n to J u n g 's P s y c h o l
ogy (London: P en guin B ook s, 1 9 5 3 ). p . 2^.
9J a c o b i, op. c i t . , p . I 4 .0 .
: a r b i t r a r y o r o p in io n a te d ; i t i s som ething t h a t j u s t
I happens to be what i t i s , as i s th e c a s e w it h e v e r y i
' o th e r n a tu r a l b e i n g .10 ;
I The f i r s t o f t h e s e a r c h e ty p e s i s what Jung c a l l s the!
; I
Shadow. The Shadow i s th e o p p o s ite o n e , th e o th e r s id e o f |
bu r8e l v e s . I t w is h e s to do th e t h in g s w hich we w i l l n ot i
I n I
a llo w o u r s e lv e s to do.-^-^ As su ch i t c o n t r a s t s w ith th e i
! :
c o n s c io u s " p e r s o n a ,” th e mask w ith w h ich we m eet th e w o r ld . ;
!
The Wise Old Man, i n th e m a sc u lin e p e r s o n a l i t y , i s th e ;
I I
so u rc e o f wisdom , God, or the g r e a t d o c to r . I f th e m ale i s |
I I
dom inated by t h i s a r c h e ty p e , he becom es p a t e r n a l , th e g r e a t j
d i c t a t o r . P la y in g much th e same r o le fo r th e fem a le i s th e |
I j
f i g u r e o f the G reat M other. ]
! !
! Of the dominance o f th e G reat Mother a r c h e ty p e ,
; I
Fordham sa y s :
! i
I . . . Anyone p o s s e s s e d by t h i s f i g u r e comes t o b e l i e v e
h e r s e l f endowed w ith an i n f i n i t e c a p a c it y f o r l o v in g andi
: u n d e r s ta n d in g , h e lp in g and p r o t e c t i n g , and w i l l wear j
I h e r s e l f o u t in th e s e r v i c e o f o t h e r s . She c a n , h o w ev er,i
I a l s o be m ost d e s t r u c t i v e , i n s i s t i n g (th o u g h n o t n e c e s
s a r i l y o p e n ly ) t h a t a l l who come w it h in h e r c i r c l e o f
in f lu e n c e are 'h er c h i l d r e n , * and th e r e f o r e h e l p l e s s or I
dep en d en t on h e r i n some d e g r e e .^2
I f Ju n gian a n a l y s i s i s c o r r e c t in i t s o b s e r v a tio n a t
‘ TO
G. G. Jung, P sy c h o lo g y and Alchemy , t r a n s . R. F, C;
H u ll, ( B o l li n g e r S e r ie s XX, New Yoi4c: Pantheon B ook s, 1 9 5 3 ) .-
p . 1 7 . ‘
11
Fordham, o p . c i t . , p . 1|_9.
^^I b i d . . pp . 6 0 - 6 1 .
10!
I '
t h i s p o i n t , m ost women fo u n d ers o f r e l i g i o u s s e c t s are
dom inated by th e a r c h e ty p e o f th e G reat M other.
I
In h i s book. The P sy c h o lo g y o f th e U n c o n sc io u s, Jung
c o n s id e r s th e r o le o f the Mother and th e O edipus com plex.
I '
I t w i l l be remembered t h a t Sigmund Freud o b ser v ed th a t i n j
! I
jbhe male c h i l d th e r e was a h o s t i l i t y to th e f a t h e r and an
I j
A t t r a c t io n toward th e m other. Freud f e l t t h a t th e c h i l d j
a c t u a l l y d e s ir e d to commit i n c e s t . Jung p o i n t s o u t t h a t th e|
1 ■ ■
• I
m other i s th e so u rce o f l i b i d o , the so u rc e o f l i f e i t s e l f .
j :
Man l e a v e s th e m other b u t d e s ir e s to r e tu r n to th e womb,
th e r e to be born a g a in . In one o f h i s e a r l y b o o k s. Pay- :
I
c h o lo g y o f th e U n c o n sc io u s, Jung s a y s : |
I I
. . . Man l e a v e s the m other, th e so u r c e o f l i b i d o , and ;
i s d r iv e n by the e t e r n a l t h i r s t to f in d h e r a g a in , and
t o d r in k ren ew al from h e r ; thu s he c o m p le te s h is c y c l e ,
I and r e tu r n s a g a in i n t o th e m o th e r 's womb. E very o b s t a -
j c l e w h ich o b s t r u c t s h i s l i f e ’ s p a th and th r e a te n s h is i
a s c e n t , w ears th e shadowy f e a t u r e s o f the ' t e r r i b l e *
m other,* who p a r a ly z e s h i s e n e rg y w it h th e consum ing
p o is o n o f th e s t e a l t h y , r e t r o s p e c t i v e l o n g i n g . In e a ch
co n q u est he w in s a g a in th e s m ilin g lo v e and l i f e - g i v i n g
m other. . . .1 3
Jung, t h e r e f o r e , c o n ten d s t h a t th e i n c e s t theme i s se co n d a r y
to th e d e s i r e to become a new c h i ld ; t o e x p e r ie n c e r e b i r t h .
The m ost f a s c i n a t i n g a r c h e ty p e i n c o n n e c tio n w ith
our p rop osed stu d y o f the c u l t o f th e V ir g in i s th e m ale
" a n im a ,” w h ich h a s i t s c o u n te r p a r t i n t h e fem a le as th e
1 3 c . G, Jun g, P sy c h o lo g y o f th e U n c o n sc io u s, t r a n s .
B e a t r ic e M . H inkle (Hew York: M o ffa t, Yard and C o ., I 9 1 6 ) ,
p.. 1 ^ 2 7 .. - - -
11
"anim us." The "anima" i s th e fe m in in e minor v o i c e in th e
man; th e "animus" i s th e m a sc u lin e m inor v o ic e i n th e woman. ;
Jung a tte m p ts to p r o v id e an e m p ir ic a l b a s i s f o r t h i s p h e
nomenon in th e u n c o n s c io u s .
i i
I . . L I t i s th e a c c e p te d th eo ry th a t s e x i s d eterm in ed |
! by a p rep on d eran ce o f m a le --o r fe m a le — p r o d u cin g g e n e s |
I i n th e com bined chromosomes o f sperm and ovum a f t e r !
f e r t i l i z a t i o n has ta k en p l a c e . B i o l o g i c a l l y , t h e r e f o r e ,i
a man c o n ta in s fe m a le -p r o d u c in g e le m e n ts , a woman, m a l e - !
p ro d u cin g e le m e n ts , a f a c t , o f w h ich , e a c h , a s a r u l e is',
q u ite unaw are. . . . A ll men must have more o r l e s s j
j l a t e n t fem a le com ponents i f i t i s tr u e th a t th e fe m a le -
j form in g e le m e n ts c o n tin u e to l i v e and p e r p e tu a te them
s e l v e s th rou gh ou t th e body c e l l s o f th e e n t i r e m ale
organism * How t h e s e s e x -d e te r m in in g e le m e n ts f u n c t io n
I i n th e body i s n ot known, bu t th e r e ca n be no doubt t h a t j
th e y a re a t l e a s t i n d i r e c t l y r e s p o n s ib le fo r th e e x i s t - !
j en ce o f th e m ale and fem a le s e x hormones w h ich . . .
I g o v ern th e se co n d a r y s e x c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . . . I 4 ;
I ;
I Those who have e y e s to s e e , may o b se r v e the "anima" ,
■ I
and "animus" i n ev ery d a y s i t u a t i o n s , w orking from th e d ep th s:
I ■ ■ ■ ;
o f th e u n c o n sc io u s and tr a n sfo r m in g p e r s o n a l i t i e s . Jung I
s a y s :
. . . The o b s e r v e r who has sharpened h i s e y e s and acquired
a good d e a l o f p r a c t i c a l e x p e r ie n c e b e g in s to d is c o v e r
I symptoms ( o f t e n a s t o n is h in g o n es) o f th e man in the woman,
and o f th e woman i n th e man . . . a man who i s o r d in a r ily ,
I a l t r u i s t i c , g e n e r o u s, a m ia b le , and i n t e l l i g e n t becom es,
when a c e r t a i n mood s e i z e s upon him, a s l i g h t l y mean,
n a s t i l y e g o t i s t i c a l , and i l l o g i c a l l y p r e ju d ic e d c h a r a c te r .
A woman o f a u s u a l l y k in d and p e a c e a b le d i s p o s i t i o n b e
comes an a r g u m e n ta tiv e , o b s t i n a t e , narrow -m inded shrew
i f i t sh o u ld come i n t o her head to u se a h a lf- u n d e r s t o o d :
id e a heard in a c o n v e r s a t io n s i x weeks or months ag o.
Should you stu d y t h i s w o rld -w id e e x p e r ie n c e w it h due
a t t e n t i o n , and r eg a r d th e 'o th e r s i d e ' a s a t r a i t o f
^^Jung, I n t e g r a t io n o f th e P e r s o n a l i t y , pp. c i t . , p . I 8 .
i
j c h a r a c t e r , you w i l l produce a p i c t u r e t h a t shows what I :
j mean by 'a n im a ,' th e .woman in a man, and the 'a n im u s ,'
I the man in a woman. 13 I
: Of a l l th e a r c h e ty p e s , th e "anima-anim us" group a re |
I ;
th e m ost s i g n i f i c a n t f o r the m e ta p h y s ic a l. Jung sa y s o f th e
."anima" : j
!
I . . . With th e a r c h e ty p e o f th e anima we e n t e r th e realm j
I o f th e gods o r o f m e ta p h y s ic s , f o r e v e r y th in g i n w h ich i
th e anima ap p ears ta k e s on th e q u a l i t y o f th e num en--
t h a t i s , becomes u n c o n d it io n a l, d a n g ero u s, ta b o o ,
m a g ica l . . .
To Jung t h i s i s th e r e a so n why s c i e n t i f i c r a t i o n a l - ;
i !
ism has b een u n a b le t o d e s tr o y the g o d s . The g o d s , w h atever
; !
may be t h e i r s t a t u s in h ea v en , d w ell deep w it h in th e human j
I .
p e r s o n a l i t y . I
' . . . Animus and anima are n a tu r a l 'a r c h e t y p e s ,' p r i - .
I m ondial f i g u r e s o f th e u n c o n s c io u s , and have g iv e n r i s e ]
. to th e m y t h o lo g ic a l gods and g o d d e s s e s . I t i s , t h e r e - j
I f o r e , r a th e r a f u t i l e u n d e r ta k in g to d i s i n f e c t Olympus j
' w ith r a t i o n a l e n lig h te n m e n t. The gods are n o t th e r e ;
th e y a re en sc o n c ed in th e shadows o f th e u n c o n s c io u s , |
where we ca n n o t u p ro o t them. ^Vhenever a p r o j e c t i o n o f
th e s e a r c h e ty p e s i s d e s tr o y e d by r a t i o n a l c r i t i c i s m , th e
I d isem b od ied image r e tu r n s t o i t s o r i g i n , the a r c h e ty p e . ■
i There i t a w a its a new o p p o r tu n ity t o p r o j e c t i t s e l f .^7 ^
I The "anima" alw ays app ears a s a s i n g l e f i g u r e . I t :
o f t e n i s th e i n f e r i o r f u n c t i o n , th e e x c lu d e d f o u r t h p e r s o n ,
i . e . , t h a t w h ic h has f a i l e d i n i t s b id f o r membership in
^^ I b ld . . p . 1 9 .
^^I b l d . . p . 7 7 .
^ 7 l b l d . . p . 2 3 .
^ '^1
some p s y c h o lo g ic a l tr in ity * ^ ® Jung sa y s t h a t the "anima"
has a m oral range from th e v i r g i n to a degraded p r o s t i t u t e .
‘ i '
jU sually th e "anima" la c k s a l l m a tern a l q u a l i t i e s . I t has j
■the c a p a c it y o f th e d em onic, f r e q u e n t ly s ta n d in g f o r e v i l
{ i t s e l f . Both th e "anima" and th e "animus" " . . . c o n t a in |
I ' I
jthe g r e a t e r p a r t o f th e m a te r ia l w h ich a p p ea rs i n i n s a n i t y ,
I ;
more e s p e c i a l l y in s c h iz o p h r e n ia . . . , ”^9 ,
The "anima" and i t s c o u n te r p a r t in th e fe m a le ,
p a r a l l e l i n th e u n c o n sc io u s th e r o l e o f th e "persona" in th e
c o n s c io u s ; th e "anima" comes to term s w ith th e in n e r w o rld .
I t i s in t h i s r o le t h a t th e "anima" em erges a s th e " p sych o- i
I I
pom pos," th e one who shows the way. At t h i s p o in t th a t
w hich n o r m a lly la c k s i n m atern a l q u a l i t i e s p a r t i c i p a t e s in '
: !
à d e c id e d ly m other f u n c t i o n . But we m ust remember t h a t th e ;
i i
I anima" i s the "beckoning one" o f p a r a d o x ic a l n a t u r e s . i
The "animus" a lm o st alw ays ap p ears i n dreams a s a
grou p , l i k e th e F a th e r s o f th e Church, r e n d e r in g "e x
cath ed ra" d e c i s i o n s . J a c o b i sa y s :
. , . The animus ap p ears seldom as a s i n g l e f i g u r e . Con
s id e r in g th e com p en satory q u a l i t y o f th e c o n t e n t s o f th e
u n c o n sc io u s to c o n s c io u s b e h a v io r , one c o u ld say: s in c e
th e man in h i s o u te r l i f e i s more p o ly g a m o u sly i n c l i n e d ,
h i s anim a, h i s so u l im age, w i l l u s u a l l y appear in the
C o n tr ib u tio n s t o A n a ly t ic a l P sycholojgy. o p .
c i t . , p . 1 2 8 .
Ilf
s in g u la r and show th e m ost v a r ie d and c o n t r a d ic t o r y
fe m in in e ty p e s u n it e d i n one i m a g e , 20
20
J a c o b i, op. c l t . , p . 1 5 8 .
: CHAPTER I I I
I
I THE RISE OP THE CULT OP THE VIRGIN
I
!
I W e ste r n e r s, r e a r e d i n th e H eb re w -C h ristia n t r a d i t i o n ,
j h a b it u a lly th in k o f God a s m a s c u lin e , a f a t h e r - f i g u r e . Sucla
! !
ja f e e l i n g i s l a t e i n th e t r a d i t i o n s o f r e l i g i o n . In th e |
; ' \
Ia n cien t E g y p tia n m y th o lo g y . Nun o r Hu, god o f th e p rim a ev a l |
mass o f w a te r s , w h er ein were th e germs o f a l l e x i s t e n c e , i s
■ s e lf - c r e a t e d and b i - s e x u a l , a b le to f e r t i l i z e and b e g e t o f
h im s e lf.] - T h is f ig u r e c l e a r l y p a r ta k e s o f th e u n d i f f e r e n - |
1 *
it ia t e d u n c o n s c io u s . An "anima" p r o j e c t i o n , f u n c t i o n i n g a s |
ipsychopomp i s th e E g y p tia n s k y -g o d d e s s . Mut, who co n d u cted
jthe s o u ls o f k in g s to h e a v e n . 2 In M esopotam ian r e l i g i o n s , i
one i s a t t r a c t e d by th e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f I s h b a r , g o d d ess o f ■
Iwar and se x u a l l o v e . John Moss sa y s o f h e r : j
I
. . . O f a l l th e s e d e i t i e s , Ish b a r was t o come c l o s e s t |
to b e in g u n i v e r s a l l y w o rsh ip p ed . She was th e g r e a t
m o th e r -g o d d e ss, and y e t had som eth in g a lm o st v i r g i n a l
ab ou t h e r . By h er a tta ch m en t to Tammuz, t h e god o f the
sp r in g sun and i t s aw ak en in gs, she e s t a b l i s h e d h e r s e l f
as a g r e a t lo v e r i n h er own r i g h t . As th e g o d d ess o f
f e r t i l i t y , she gave c h ild r e n t o women and l i f e to v e g e - 1
t a t i o n . As the p l a n e t , V enus, she was ' th e queen o f
th e h eaven s and o f the s t a r s . * Her w orship was d e s t in e d
to sp rea d f a r to th e W est, to P a l e s t i n e and to E gyp t.
B e s s ie G. R e d f ie ld , e d . , Gods: A D ic t io n a r y o f th e .
D e i t i e s o f A ll Lands (Mew York: G. t . Putnam 's S o n s, 1 9 3 1 ),
p . 2 1 1 .
I ^John B. M oss, Man' s R e li r i o n s (Mew York: The
M acm illan Company, 19W ) f P* k -7 •
I' 16
i
t
Even th e Z o r o a s tr ia n s were u n ab le to r e s i s t h e r , and
a f t e r ch an gin g h e r name to A n a h ita , 'The S p o t le s s One* i
I (and th u s p u r i f y i n g h e r .'), th e y gave to her alm ost a s |
! g r e a t prom inence as to Ormazd h i m s e l f . 3 i
Of g r e a t i n t e r e s t i s th e s t i l l e x ta n t p r a y e r to ‘
I !
I s h t a r , w h ich p a r t i c u l a r l y p o in t s up th e r e l i g i o u s u se o f
I I
ithe m o th e r -fig u r e :
I ;
I I in v ok e t h e e . I , s o r r o w fu l, s i g h in g , s u f f e r i n g . j
; Look upon me, 0 my la d y , and a c c e p t my s u p p l ic a t io n . . L
How lo n g s h a l l my body la m en t, f u l l o f t r o u b le s and i
d is o r d e r s ? ■
How lo n g s h a l l my h e a r t be a f f l i c t e d , f u l l o f sorrow !
and s ig h in g ? . . . i
Put an end to th e e v i l bew itch m en ts o f my bod y, th a t *
I I may se e th y c l e a r l i g h t . 4 <
I I
I The l o s s o f the fem in in e a s p e c t o f d e i t y f o r th e j
iW estern w orld o c cu rr ed in th e s t r u g g le o f e t h i c a l Jahwism ;
I I
jwith th e f e r t i l i t y - r e l i g i o n , B a a lism , in th e n in t h and ’
i !
le ig h th c e n t u r ie s b e fo r e C h r is t . There i s some e v id e n c e to j
!b e l i e v e t h a t Jahweh p o s s e s s e d a fem a le c o n s o r t a t one tim e. I
! I
'Adolphe Lods s a y s : ;
. . . th e J e w ish s e t t l e r s a t E le p h a n tin e , who s t i l l
p r e s e r v e d i n th e f i f t h c e n tu r y many o f th e a n c ie n t
custom s o f p r 6 - e x i l i c t im e s , a s s ig n e d to Jahweh a
! fem a le c o n s o r t whom th e y c a l l e d i n d i f f e r e n t l y A nath-
Jahn or A n a th -B e th e l.3
The C an aanite r e l i g i o n was an a g r i c u l t u r a l c u l t
; ^ Ibld. . p. 54- I
^ I b l d . . . p , 60.
q
Adolphe L ods, I s r a e l , from I t s B e g in n in g s to th e
M iddle o f th e E ig h th C en tu ry , t r a n s . S. H. Hooke (New York: '
A l f r e d A .K n o p f , 1 9 3 2 ), p . 124.
17
I
I dom inated by th e f e r t i l i t y them e. As su ch i t en cou raged '
I I
what seemed to th e p r o p h e tic s t r a i n in Jahwism th e w o r st ;
k in d o f im m o r a litie s :
• , . By a l l i n d i c a t i o n s , a s i s o f t e n th e c a se w it h
a g r i c u l t u r a l r e l i g i o n s , C an aan ite r e l i g i o n was o f an ;
o r g i a s t i c n a tu re : th e r i t u a l ten d ed t o s t i r up i n th e |
w o r sh ip p e rs a w ild e x c ite m e n t; maddened by th e c r i e s ,
; th e d a n c e s, th e w in e , th e y gave th e m se lv e s up by tu r n s j
i to u n b r id le d m errim ent and to the b lo o d y p r a c t i c e s w hich
I we have j u s t a llu d e d t o , c u t t i n g th e m se lv e s a s o f f e r i n g
: to the god s w h atever th e y h e ld m ost d e a r . For th e same
I r e a so n e c s t a t i c phenomena and se x u a l e x c e s s e s seem to
: have p la y e d a la r g e p a r t i n th e r e l i g i o u s l i f e o f th e
I in h a b it a n t s o f P a l e s t i n e . 6
I B a a lism , w ith i t s se x u a l em p h a sis, f o s t e r e d sa c r e d
p r o s t i t u t i o n , b o th male and f e m a le . The w orsh ip o f Jahweh |
j
Itook o v er mapy o f t h e s e B a a l i s t i c p r a c t i c e s , in c lu d in g .
I '
p r o s t i t u t i o n . I f th e s t e r n e t h i c o f th e d e s e r t w a r r io r -g o d !
were to be r e s t o r e d , the Hebrews f e l t , th e fem a le d e i t y i
Iwould have to be e lim in a t e d . So God no lo n g e r c o n ta in e d
the fe m in in e n a tu r e . Jahweh was King and Lord o f H o sts.
The Lord Jahweh had a q u a r r e l w ith th e w o r ld , and t o th e '
n e c e s s i t a t e d s t e r n n e s s and m oral r i g o r , we owe th e g r e a t n e s s
!
o f th e Hebrew r e l i g i o n .
i
; One o f th e m ost s u g g e s t iv e p s y c h o lo g ic a l i n s i g h t s on
th e d evelop m en t o f th e H eb rew -C h ristia n co n c ep t o f God i s
p r o v id e d i n J u n g 's c o n s id e r a t io n o f the problem o f Job , th e
German work r ev ie w e d by th e R everend E r a st u s Evans f o r th e
^ I b l d . . p . 1 0 2 ,
18
G u ild o f P a s to r a l P s y c h o l o g y . V J o b 's q u e s t io n to God co n
c e r n in g th e j u s t i c e o f p u n is h in g an in n o c e n t man b r in g s from
God a t ir a d e o f b o a s ts about th e m a g n ific e n c e o f the d iv in e
power and th e i n s i g n i f i c a n c e o f Job. Only Job seems to
r e a l i z e t h a t the p ro p er n a tu re o f God i s e t h i c a l . A lth ou gh
Job f i n a l l y a c q u i e s c e s , i t i s God who l o s e s th e argum ent,
f o r He i s fo r c e d to r e c o n s id e r H im s e lf. S h o r t ly a fte r w a r d s ,
th e r e ap p ears in Judaism th e f i g u r e o f Wisdom, a fe m in in e
p r i n c i p l e . T h is s i g n i f i e d t h a t th e fem ale a r c h e ty p e haa
been u n it e d to th e Godhead. W e may e x p e c t a d i v i n e - c h i l d .
jHence th r e e c e n t u r i e s l a t e r , th e r e i s th e I n c a r n a tio n . God
i s s t r i v i n g to o p e r a te on m an's l e v e l .
B eg in n in g i n p r e - C h r is t ia n d a y s, th e c u l t o f th e
G reat Mother to o k r o o t in th e Near E a s t. Dr. H arold
W illou gh b y o f the U n iv e r s it y o f C hicago sa y s:
. . . The p r im it iv e 'lo c u s * o f t h i s n a tu re w orsh ip was
in th e u p lan d s o f A n a t o lia . In a g e n e r a l way le g e n d s
a g r e e i n l o c a t i n g th e r i s e o f th e C y b e le - A t t is c u l t in
th e a r ea c o v er ed by G a la t i a , P h r y g ia , and L y d ia .°
In i t s m ost p r im it iv e form s the c u l t began i n the
m id d le o f th e s i x t h c e n tu r y b e fo r e C h r is t , I t was a m y stery
7
E r a stu s E van s, Ah A ssessm en t o f J u n e 's 'Answer to
J o b , ' (London; G u ild o f P a s t o r a l P sy c h o lo g y , 1951^).
^H arold R. W illo u g h b y , Pagan R e g e n e r a tio n (C h icago:
The U n iv e r s i t y o f C hicago P r e s s , 1 9 2 9 ) , P* I I 8 .
;
!
c u l t w h ich c e le b r a t e d th e G reat Mother o f th e g o d s . In .
Imany w ays, the "Magna Mater" rese m b le d th e C h r is t ia n V ir g in ;
a lth o u g h w ith o u t th e n e c e s s a r y v i r g i n a l s a n c t i t y : ,
I
. . . The d iv in e p erso n a g e i n whom t h i s c u l t c e n te r e d I
was th e 'Magna Mater Deum* who was c o n c e iv e d a s th e |
so u rc e o f a l l l i f e a s w e ll a s t h e p e r s o n i f i c a t i o n o f I
a l l the pow ers o f n a tu r e . T h is a s p e c t o f u n iv e r s a l I
m otherhood was th e com p reh en sive f e a t u r e o f h e r c h a r a c - !
t e r m ost f r e q u e n t ly em phasized i n th e v a r io u s c u l t
t i t l e s a p p lie d t o h e r . She was th e 'G reat M other' n o t ;
o n ly ' o f a l l th e g o d s , ' b u t ' o f a l l men* a s w e l l . She
was th e 'm is t r e s s o f a l l , ' th e ' A l l- N o u r is h e r ' and ' A l l -
B e g e t t e r ,' th e 'M ighty M o th e r ,' and th e 'M other o f Zeus
H im se lf, '9
i In th e myth o f G ybele and A t t i s , th e G reat M other
'may b o r d e r on th e t h r e s h o ld o f th e "anima" b eca u se sh e b e -
j
jcomes a f i g u r e o f th e j e a lo u s lo v e r :
I . . . A ccord in g to th e m yth, th e g o d d ess-m o th er lo v e d
th e y o u th fu l v ir g in - b o r n sh ep h erd A t t i s w it h a pure
! l o v e . But A t t i s d ie d , e i t h e r s l a i n by a n o th e r or by
h i s own hand. In the l a t t e r i n s t a n c e , he was u n f a i t h f u l
to th e G reat Mother and in a f r e n z y o f r e g r e t he em as- I
' c u la t e d h i m s e l f and d ie d . The g o d d ess-m o th er mourned ;
h er dead lo v e r and f i n a l l y e f f e c t e d h i s r e s t o r a t i o n .
Thus, i n th e end, the m ortal A t t i s became d e i f i e d and
im m ortal,
I T h is m y s t e r y - r e l i g io n was one o f the more p o p u la r |
:in th e Roman em pire d u rin g New T estam ent tim es and e a r l y
C h r is t ia n tim e s . In v o lv e d i n th e w orsh ip o f the "Magna
Mater" wais a c e l i b a t e p r ie s t h o o d o f th e m ost d e v o ted :
. . . th e d e v o te e s o f th e G reat M other d id n o t sto p w it h
th e sh ed d in g o f b lo o d m e r e ly . Keyed up to th e h ig h e s t
^Ibld. . pp. 1 1 4 -1 1 5 .
I b i d . . B._ 1 1 7 . -
20;
I
I p i t c h o f r e l i g i o u s e x c it e m e n t , t h e y f o llo w e d th e example
I o f A t t i s and e m a scu la te d th e m s e lv e s . W ith t h i s f i n a l
: a c t o f s e l f - s a c r i f i c e and c o n s e c r a t io n , th e 'D ie s '
I S a n g u in is ' was crow ned, and th e d e v o te e became one o f
th e G a i n , a e u n u c h -p r ie s t o f th e A sia n g o d d e s s ,1 1 |
I The le g e n d o f th e V ir g in - B ir t h o f J e su s a r i s e s l a t e ;
I I
jin the New T estam ent p e r io d . The e a r l i e s t l e t t e r s o f th e j
C h r is t ia n S c r ip t u r e s , th o s e o f P a u l, know n o th in g o f su ch ah
jev e n t. The im p o rta n t p o in t i s t h a t C h r is t i s born o f a j
jwoman, i . e . , o f human p a r e n ta g e . Mark, th e e a r l i e s t o f our |
j
e x ta n t G o s p e ls , assum es t h a t Mary i s th e m other o f J e su s o f ;
I N a za reth , a man a n o in te d to be th e M essia h . She comes w i t h |
h i s b r o th e r s and f r i e n d s to "take" J e su s b e c a u s e , . . he j
i s b e s id e h im s e lf " ; ! ^ i . e . , th e y th ou gh t him mad. Apparent-|
f
|ly Mary i s n o t s u f f i c i e n t l y aware o f h i s su p e r n a tu r a l ;
! t
^m ission. The t r a d i t i o n o f th e V ir g in B ir t h ap p ears in
IMatthew, c a . 90 A .D ., and l a t e r , c a , 95 A .D ., i t a p p ea rs i n |
;a d i f f e r e n t form in Luke. Even in t h e s e l a t e r e c o r d s , th e |
in c id e n t i s n o t r e f e r r e d to a f t e r th e f i r s t few p a g e s . In
jM atthew's a c c o u n t, th e su p e r n a tu r a l b i r t h o f J e su s ta k e s
i - i
jp lace t o f u l f i l an Old T estam en t p r o p h ec y , ( I s a i a h ? îlif ) #
i i
w hich in th e S e p tu a g in t t r a n s l a t i o n u s e s th e term , " v ir g in ."
! '
The o r i g i n a l Hebrew l i t e r a l l y means a young woman o f mar- !
: I
r ia g e a b le age and may a c t u a l l y have th e f o r c e o f **temple
^^i b l d . . pv 1 2 5 .
l^Mark 3 : 2 1 - 3 5 .
21
I :
I
p r o s t i t u t e , " The p ro p h ecy does n o t seem to have any co n n ec
t i o n w ith th e M essia h , bu t th e m isu se o f su ch p a s s a g e s i s
I I
Icommon i n th e New T esta m en t. Luke d e v e lo p s the m yth, ta k in g
!
l i t from a s o u r c e s i m i l a r to M atthew 's and ad d in g th e
ÎA nnunciation and th e P li g h t to E g y p t. The Book o f the |
jR e v e la tio n o f John sp ea k s o f th e woman about t o be d e - |
jliv e r e d o f the d iv in e Son, who i s th r e a te n e d by th e dragon.]-)
j P s y e h o lo g ic a lly , the myth may be i n t e r p r e t e d a s th e good |
•mother and th e o f f s p r i n g th r e a te n e d by th e d ragon -m oth er. I
: ' I
I The fem in in e i s th e n r e i n t e g r a t e d i n t o the m a s c u lin e , o f :
.which heaven i s th e sym bol.
I In th e p o st-N ew T estam ent p e r io d , a t l e a s t th ro u g h !
I !
th e f i r s t th r e e c e n t u r i e s of th e Church, th e r e i s l i t t l e I
tre n d toward th e c u l t o f Mary. As f a r a s th e e a r l y church
I
Ifa th e r s a re co n cern ed : *
i ■
. . . R e fe r e n c e s t o h er /M ary7 &re s p a r s e ; and t h e s e , j
though d i s t i n c t as t o h er b e in g th e V ir g in Mother o f
th e Lord and t h e r e f o r e to be h o n o red , g iv e no s u g g e s
t i o n o f au gh t th a t c o u ld be c a l l e d a c u l t o f h e r . l 4-
There i s one ap ocryp h al document w h ich shows th e
I i n f l u en ce o f th e n a t u r e - c u l t s on C h r i s t i a n i t y , a s w e ll as
th e demand f o r e x p r e s s io n on th e p a r t o f the u n c o n sc io u s in
, ]-3Rev. 1 2 : 1 - 6 .
James C ooper, "M ary," E n c y c lo p e d ia o f R e lig io n
and E t h i c s , e d , James H a s tin g s , v o l . V I I I . (1 9 5 1 ) .
r - - 22 I
t h a t an in t e n s e i n t e r e s t i s g e n e r a te d i n a h i t h e r t o unim
p o r ta n t e le m e n t, th e l i f e o f Mary:
. . . The one t h in g in t h e s e c e n t u r i e s /A .D . 3 0 - 30 0 7 !
t h a t p o i n t s in th e d i r e c t i o n o f any c u l t o f h er /M a r j7 |
i n the Church i s the a p p ea r a n c e , somewhere i n th e 2nd ^
c e n t u r y , o f an ap o cryp h al *E vangelium J a c o b i,^ w hich j
was v ery p o p u la r and became th e b a s i s o f two l a t e r ;
w orks, *L ib e r de I n f a n t ia Mariae e t C h r i s t i S a lv a t o r i s * |
I and * E vangelium de H a t iv i t a t e M ariae♦ ^ I t i s from t h e s e
i th a t th e ' t r a d i t i o n a l * names o f h er p a r e n t s , Joachim j
I and Anna, have b een d e r iv e d , and th e s t o r y o f Mary * s ,
n u r tu r e in th e Temple from h er t h ir d to h er t w e l f t h !
y e a r . 15 |
! ;
The seco n d c e n tu r y Church a c c e p te d Mary as th e
I t
I V irg in -M o th er o f C h r is t . T h is sta te m en t may be m o d ifie d i f |
' I
we a s s ig n a l a t e d a t e , (90 Â.D, - 1I 4 .O A .D .) , t o th e G ospel |
o f John. **John, ” dom inated by an a lm o st G n o stic c o n c e p t o f j
th e S p i r i t , s e e s no r e a l n e c e s s i t y fo r som eth in g so p h y s ic a l
I a s Mary* s v i r g i n i t y . J u s t i n M artyr, ( c a . 100 - 163 A .D .) , |
ju ses Mary as an o p p o s it e f o r Eve:
k n o w ,* s a id S t. J u s t i n , * He became man by
means o f th e V ir g in , so t h a t th e d is o b e d ie n c e a r i s i n g
from th e s e r p e n t m ight come to an end i n th e v e r y same
way in w h ich i t had i t s b e g in n in g . For E ve, b e in g a
v i r g i n and u n d e f i le d , c o n c e iv e d th e word t h a t was from
th e s e r p e n t and b rou gh t f o r t h d is o b e d ie n c e and d e a th ;
but the V ir g in Mary, ta k in g f a i t h and j o y , when th e
A ngel t o l d h er the good t i d i n g s th a t th e S p i r i t o f th e
Lord sh o u ld come upon h er and the power o f th e h ig h e s t
overshadow h e r , and t h e r e f o r e th e H oly One t h a t was
born o f h e r was Son o f God, answ eped, *Let i t be unto
me a c c o r d in g to th y w o r d !'. . . ' l o
l& Jean G uiitton, The V ir g in Mary, t r a n s . A. Gordon
Sm ith (Hew York: P. J . Kenedy and S on s, 1 9 5 2 ), pp. 7& -77.
23
! In l i k e manner w rote I r e n a e u s , u s in g th e f i g u r e o f |
; j
ithe f i r s t m other over a g a in s t the l a s t : ;
I ^
. . . 'J u s t as E ve,* he / i r e n a e u s / w r o te , *by h er d i s
o b e d ie n c e was th e ca u se o f d e a th b o th to h e r s e l f and t o
j th e w hole human r a c e , so a l s o Mary, by h er o b e d ie n c e
I became b o th to h e r s e l f and t o th e whole human r a ce th e
; ca u se o f s a l v a t i o n . And a g a in . As the f i r s t v i r g i n '
was se d u ce d , so a s to f l e e from God, so the o th e r was '
: drawn t o obey him; so th a t th e V ir g in Mary became th e i
I a d v o c a te o f th e V ir g in E ve, . . .' ^ 7 '
i T e r t u l l i a n , b e f o r e he became a h e r e t i c , in tr o d u c e d |
I th e V ir g in in t o h i s L a tin th e o lo g y in much th e same to n e s ;
a s J u s t in M artyr and Ir en a eu s:
i ;
; . . . T e r t u l l i a n s a y s : *Por i n t o E ve, a s y e t a v i r g i n / ;
had c r e p t th e word w h ich was t h e fram er o f d e a th . !
E q u a lly i n t o a v i r g i n was to be in tr o d u c e d the Word of !
j God w h ich was th e b u ild e r -u p o f l i f e ; t h a t , what by t h a t
1 s e x had gone i n t o p e r d i t i o n m ight by th e same se x be
I brought back to s a l v a t i o n . Eve had b e l i e v e d th e S e r
p e n t , Mary b e l ie v e d G a b r ie l; what Eve sin n e d by f a i t h ,
Mary a to n e d by f a i t h . . . . »lo
I
The p la c e o f Mary was f u r t h e r g u a r a n te ed i n th e i
Church by th e e a r l y G n o stic c o n t r o v e r s i e s . In t h i s co n
s i d e r a t i o n , h e r v i r g i n i t y was secon d i n im portance t o th e
f a c t th a t she had g iv e n b i r t h to J e s u s , a s s u r in g h i s human
! i
[ e x is t e n c e . By th e l a t e f o u r t h c e n tu r y th e r e were i n d ic a
t i o n s th a t th e s a i n t s were prayed to f o r fa v o r s i n co n n ec
t i o n w ith t h e i r s p e c i a l i n t e r e s t s when a l i v e ; th u s Mary was
^ J o s e p h P o h le , M a r lo lo g y . t r a n s . A rthur P reu ss
( S t . L o u is: B. Herder Book Company, 194-5), p . 5 0 .
24
prayed to by J u s t in a t o a id a v i r g i n in d a n g er. T h is i s an
e a r l y i n d i c a t i o n th a t Mary was g o in g to have a c o n tin u in g
f u n c t io n a p a r t from th e d o c t r in e o f th e I n c a r n a tio n .
In th e e a r l y f i f t h c e n tu r y , th e f i r s t e x c e s s co n
c e r n in g th e honor due Mary i s m en tio n ed .
. . . E p ip h an iu s rec k o n s i t a h e r e s y (H aer. LXXIX) th a t
, ' c e r t a i n women i n T h ra ce, S c y t h ia , and Arabia* were in
th e h a b it o f a d o r in g th e V ir g in a s a g o d d e ss and o f f e r -
I in g to h e r a c e r t a i n kin d o f cake . . . whence he c a l l s
j them *G o lly r id ia n s . . .* 1 9
At t h i s p o in t i n h i s t o r y th e r e may be s e e n two q u it e
o p p o s it e f o r c e s w hich l a t e r came to d w ell s id e by s id e in
i
ith e c u l t o f Mary. One i s th e orth o d o x co n c er n f o r th e
s t a t u s o f Mary as th e human p a r e n t o f th e God-Man. T h is i s
e x p r e s s e d by C y r il o f A le x a n d r ia in h i s s ta te m e n t w h ich was
approved by th e C o u n cil o f Ephesus in li-31 :
. . . * I f anyone d o es n o t acknow ledge th a t Emmanuel i s
i n t r u t h God, and t h a t th e h o ly V ir g in i s , in c o n s e
q u en ce, 'T h e o to k o s,* f o r she brough t f o r t h a f t e r the
f l e s h th e Word o f God who has become f l e s h , l e t him be
a n a th e m a ,* . . .2 0
The o th e r str a n d in th e c u l t i s e x p r e s s e d by th e
G o lly r id ia n s . T h is i s th e demand o f th e m u ltitu d e f o r a
r e b i r t h o f th e c u l t o f th e G reat M other. W illia m Ramsay
s e e s a d e f i n i t e co rr esp o n d en ce o f Mary and A rtem is i n the
^^Cooper, op. c i t .
^ ^ C yril o f A le x a n d r ia Ep. XVII, q u oted by C ooper,
op. c i t .
! 25
1 '
I
d e v o t io n s o f p e a s a n ts d w e llin g i n th e same g e o g r a p h ic a l area,
'M acedonia, a few c e n t u r ie s a p a r t: j
i I
• , • An in d u b it a b le example o f the V ir g in A rtem is ;
! tran sform ed in t o th e C h r is t ia n Mother o f God i s found
I a t th e n o r th e r n end o f the g r e a t d ou b le l a k e , c a l l e d |
I Iiim nai i n a n c ie n t tim e s , and now known by two names
f o r th e two p a r t s , H oiran-G ol and E g e r d ir -G o l. Hear
the n o r t h - e a s t e r n c o rn er o f th e la k e s th e r e i s s t i l l
s a id to be a sa c r e d p la c e o f th e C h r is t ia n s to w hich
th e y come on p ilg r im a g e from a d i s t a n c e , though th e r e |
i s no C h r is t ia n s e t t l e d p o p u la tio n n e a r e r than O lu- |
B orlu ( th e a n c ie n t A p o llo n ia ) . A la r g e body o f in s c r ip -;
t i o n s has b een c o l l e c t e d from th e n eig h b o rh o o d , show ing [
t h a t th e r e was h e r e a p e c u l ia r w orsh ip o f th e g o d d e s s , i
A r te m is, w h ich p r e s e r v e d th e A n a to lia n c h a r a c te r unim - |
I p a ir e d th ro u g h th e Greek and Roman p e r io d s , and to I
w hich s t r a n g e r s came from g r e a t d i s t a n c e s , . . .2 1 j
I I
The s u b s t i t u t i o n o f Mary f o r A rtem is i s to Ramsay |
jq u lte a l o g i c a l o n e. The str a n g e m ix tu r e o f v i r g i n i t y and j
,m otherhood are fundam ental p r i n c i p l e s in b o th c u l t s . B oth '
g o d d e s se s h a b i t u a l l y f u n c t io n as psychopom ps.
I i
I The d o c t r in e o f M ary's p e r p e tu a l v i r g i n i t y a s w e ll
; ' I
las d iv in e m otherhood, a r o se from th e in f lu e n c e o f a s c e t i c :
m o n a s tic s who were tr a n sfo r m in g th e p r ie s t h o o d in t o a
c e l i b a t e s o c i e t y and th e m other o f C h r is t in t o th e Id e a l o f ,
[ V ir g in it y .
. . . à f u r t h e r im p u lse was g iv e n to th e d e v o t io n to
, Mary by th e e x a g g e r a te d r e v e r e n c e f o r the a s c e t i c l i f e
and f o r c e l i b a c y , as sp read by m o n a stic ism from th e |
j fo u r th c e n tu r y . She became th e typ e and i d e a l o f ;
! v i r g i n i t y . T e r t u l l i a n had a d m itted h e r m arriage ( 'De
I W . M. Ramsay, P a u lin e and O ther S tu d ie s in E a r ly .
iC h r is t ia n H is to r y (2 d . e d . ; New York: George H. Doran, Co., I
n . d . ), p. 1 3 8.
i 2 6 ',
j
! Monogamla* v i i i . ) and B a s i l had r e c o g n iz e d ( ' H om ilia i n ,
* C h r i s t i g é n é r â tio n e m * v , ) th a t the n a t u r a l s e n s e o f j
i M att. 1 : 25 fa v o r e d t h i s v ie w . But E p ip h an iu s ( 'H a e r .* j
I x x v i i . ) c o n tr o v e r te d as h e r e t i c s . . . th o se who s a id ;
I t h a t she had m a rried J o sep h and had c h ild r e n by h im .22 j
S ecu red t h e o l o g i c a l l y by th e n e c e s s i t i e s o f th e '
I I
C hurch's h ig h C h r is t o lo g y , Mary was p u sh ed h ig h e r and h igh er,
! i
by th e dynamic o f p o p u la r d e v o tio n : j
I ' I
. . . As e a r l y a s 54-0 we f in d a m osaic in w h ich she !
j ^Mary7 s i t s en th ro n ed as Queen o f Heaven i n th e c e n t e r '
I o f th e apex o f th e c a th e d r a l o f Parenzo i n A u s t r ia ,
' w h ich was c o n s t r u c t e d a t t h a t d a te by B ish op E upharas-
I i u s .2 3
I I
I The F e a s t o f th e P u r i f i c a t i o n o f th e V ir g in Mary |
a r o se about 54^ . O r i g i n a l l y , i t commemorated th e p r é s e n t a - |
jtion o f th e C h r is t - C h ild a t th e Tem ple, but in th e West i t ■
! I
has become a F e a s t o f th e V ir g in , a lth o u g h l o g i c a l l y th e r e |
I I
was no need o f M ary's p u r i f i c a t i o n i f Roman d o c t r in e co n - '
I . ■ ' ;
c e r n in g the c o n d it io n s o f J e s u s ' b i r t h h o ld s t r u e . 24- T h is
i I
t e a s t o c c u r s f o r t y days a f t e r C h ristm a s, F eb ru ary 2nd. I t |
i i
i s a l s o c a l l e d Candlemas. '
D uring th e e a r l y s i x t h c e n tu r y , th e N e s t o r ia n
I ^^0. Z o c k le r , * * Mary, Mother o f J e su s C h r i s t , " The
Hew S c h a ff-H e r z o g E n c y c lo p e d ia o f R e lig io u s K now ledge, ed .
Samuel M acauley J a c k so n , v o l . VII (195 3)*
! . H erbert T h u rsto n , " V ir g in Mary," The C a th o lic
E n c y c lo p e d ia , ed. C h a rles G. Herbermann. e t a l . , v o l . XV
(I912).
24-p red erick G. H olw eck, "Candlem^^, " The C a th o lic
E n c y c lo p e d ia , ed . C h a rles G. Herbermann> eb a l . . v o l . I l l
.{ 1 9 0 8 ) .
27
I I
•c o n tr o v e r sy b rou gh t th e d eb ate b etw een th e s c h o o ls o f |
I
jA lexan d ria and A n tio c h as to th e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f th e d iv in e |
land human n a tu r e s i n C h r is t and th e c o m m u n ic a b ility o f th e
i
I d iv in e a t t r i b u t e s to hum anity. T h is r a i s e d th e q u e s t io n o f '
jwhether Mary was t o be c a l l e d " T h eotok os," th e Mother o f God
lor m er ely th e Mother o f C h r is t . P op u lar o p in io n su p p o rted •
Ithe " T h eo tok os." By 787 th e Second C o u n cil o f H icea a p - |
[proved th e v e n e r a t io n o f M ary's image a s th e v e n e r a tio n o f |
* - I
;Mary h e r s e l f . j
I The M iddle Ages were i n a p a r t i c u l a r way th e era o f I
! ^ I
{Mary. For m ost o f th e p e o p le o f t h i s t im e , th e H oly T r i n i t y
I !
I c o n s i s t e d o f the F a th e r , th e Son, and Mary. The F a th e r was j
I , • I
f a r away and had to be approached by way o f th e Son. By |
t h i s tim e , th e o lo g y had d eta ch ed th e d iv in e C h r is t from th e i
I i
jcom p assion ate J e su s o f N azareth ; I
: ^ i
. . . J e su s was to be lo o k e d upon as th e Judge who was 1
come t o p u n is h th e w ick ed . H is sa v in g and i n t e r c e s s o r y .
work was t h r u s t i n t o the background. Men f o r g o t th a t
He was the S a v io r and I n t e r c e s s o r ; and as th e human
h e a r t c r a v e s f o r someone t o in t e r c e d e f o r i t , a n o th e r '
I i n t e r c e s s o r had to be fo u n d . T h is g r a c io u s p e r s o n a l i t y |
1 was d is c o v e r e d i n th e V ir g in M other, who was t o be e n -
I t r e a t e d t o in t e r c e d e w ith h er Son on b e h a lf o f poor
I s in n in g human c r e a tu r e s . . .2 5
j T h is v ie w p o in t was a c c e p te d by t h e o lo g ia n s l i k e ,
S t . Bernard o f C la ir v a u x , who w rote: ;
^^Thomas M . L in d sa y , A H is to r y o f th e R efo rm ation
.(New York; C h a rles S c r ib n e r 's S o n s, 1 9O 6 ) , I , 134--135.
28
I
. . . 'D ost thou f e a r the d iv in e m a je s ty in th e Son?
W ilt thou f i n d an a d v o ca te b e fo r e him? F le e t o Mary;
in h er hum anity i s p u re. The Son w i l l l i s t e n to th e
m o th er, and th e F a th er to th e S o n .' . . .2 6
I j
Henry Adams c o n c lu d e s t h a t m an's atta ch m en t to Mary *
: t
ir e s t s on the i n s t i n c t o f s e l f - p r e s e r v a t i o n ;
i
. . . They knew t h e i r own p e r i l . I f th e r e was to be a j
fu tu r e l i f e , Mary was t h e i r o n ly h o p e. She a lo n e rep re-'
s e n te d L ove. The T r in it y w ere, or w a s. One, and c o u ld 1
I by th e n a tu r e o f i t s e s s e n c e , a d m in is te r j u s t i c e a lo n e . '
Only c h i l d l i k e i l l u s i o n c o u ld e x p e c t a p e r s o n a l fa v o u r
from C h r is t . . . . C a ll th e th r e e Godheads by what
names one l i k e d , s t i l l th e y m ust rem ain One; must a d -
I m in is t e r one j u s t i c e ; must adm it one la w . In t h a t la w , j
I no human w eakness o r e r r o r c o u ld e x i s t ; by i t s e s s e n c e
! i t was i n f i n i t e , e t e r n a l , im m utable. There was no |
! cra ck and no cran n y i n th e sy stem th ro u g h w h ich human |
I f r a i l t y c o u ld hope f o r e s c a p e . One was fo r c e d from |
I co rn er to c o r n e r by a r e m o r s e le s s l o g i c u n t i l one f e l l j
I h e l p l e s s a t M ary's f e e t . 2? i
I !
I S i g n i f i c a n t f o r th e c u l t o f th e V ir g in Mother were
I :
■the t e n t h and e le v e n t h c e n t u r i e s . In the t e n t h c e n tu r y th e i
|"Ave Maria" was added to the L o r d 's P ra y er. The O f f ic e o f '
th e V ir g in came i n t o g e n e r a l f a v o r th ro u g h th e e f f o r t s o f
S t . P e te r Damian tow ard th e m id d le o f th e e le v e n t h c e n tu r y .
i
In 1 095 Pope Urban I I ord ered t h a t th e Hours o f th e V ir g in
,be s a id e v e r y day and the O f f ic e on S a tu r d a y .28
The c h i e f c o n te n d e r s f o r th e honor o f Mary were the
^ ^ Z o ck ler, op. c i t .
He nr y Adams, M on t-S ain t M ichel and C h artres
(B o sto n : Houghton M i f f l i n Company, I 904.} , p . 2 5 2 .
^^Zockler, op. cit.
; 2 ?
î '
[ r e l i g i o u s o r d e r s . C e lib a c y and m o n a stic ism u n it e d in th e
I , :
'prom otion o f h e r d e v o tio n ;
; j
I . • • The T e u to n ic k n ig h ts ch o se h er f o r t h e i r p a tr o n - !
j e s s ; th e D om inicans a id e d w ith the r o s a r y from 1270; |
j th e F r a n c isc a n s were ard en t a d v o c a te s o f th e d o c t r in e j
j o f th e Imm aculate C o n cep tio n ; th e C a r m e lite s b o a s te d j
I o f h e r s p e c i a l f a v o r , a s s e r t i n g t h a t t h e i r s i x t h general!,
I S t . Simon S to c k , had s e e n a v i s i o n ( 1 2k6 ) i n w h ich she 1
I gave him a s c a p u la r w ith th e prom ise t h a t he who d ie d |
j w earin g i t sh o u ld be d e l iv e r e d from th e e t e r n a l f i r e . 29 |
I In th e t h i r t e e n t h c e n tu r y , S t . Bonav e n tu r a (1221-74%
I I
iparaphrased c e r t a i n p salm s and c a n t i c l e s from th e Sacred
I S c r ip t u r e s , tu r n in g them from th e honor o f th e Lord to th e !
I ' 1
(honor o f th e V ir g in , Â l i t t l e o v e r a c e n tu r y a g o , a Church ;
j i
o f England clergym an named T y ler c o l l e c t e d th e s e t o g e t h e r j
i '
:in a book on M a rio la b ry . W e are dependent on h i s t r a n s l a - !
! i
t i o n . In p a r a l l e l p a s s a g e s , th e R everend Mr. T y le r l i s t s
i i
jthe " C a n tic le L ik e t h a t o f Habakkuk" w ith th e B i b l i c a l |
o r i g i n a l : !
A d d ressed i n H oly S c r ip tu r e A d d ressed by Bonav en tu ra i
to God the Lord Jehovah; t o Mary:
0 L ord, I have heard th y 0 Lady, I have heard th y i
r e p o r t , and was a f r a i d . r e p o r t , and was a s to n is h e d .j
i I
1 c o n f e s s to t h e e . F a th e r , I w i l l c o n f e s s t o t h e e , 0 ;
I Lord o f h eaven and e a r t h . Lady, b e c a u se thou h a s t
! b eca u se thou h a s t h id t h e s e h id th e s e t h in g s from the
th in g s from the w ise and w is e , and h a s t r e v e a le d |
p r u d e n t, and h a s t r e v e a le d them t o b a b es. ■
them t o b a b es. I
30|
I
Thy g l o r y h a th co v ered th e Thy g lo r y h a th co v ered th e
h e a v e n s. h e a v e n s, and th e e a r th i s I
The e a r t h i s f u l l o f th e f u l l o f th y m ercy. !
m ercy o f th e Lord. i
Thou w e n te s t f o r t h f o r th e Thou, 0 V ir g in , w e n te s t I
s a l v a t i o n o f th y p e o p le ; f o r t h f o r th e s a l v a t i o n o f ;
f o r s a l v a t i o n w it h th y th y p e o p le ;
C h r is t . f o r s a l v a t i o n w ith th y i
j C h r i s t . 3 0 :
i I
I T h is sim p ly p o i n t s up th e c a p a c it y o f the m other- !
! , !
f i g u r e to usurp th e p la c e o f God th e F a th er i n th e r e l i g i o u s
l i f e o f th e M iddle A ges, ;
I In th e c e n t u r i e s im m ed ia te ly p r e c e e d in g the Reforma-;
! '
It io n , many f e l t t h a t th e B le s s e d V ir g in h e r s e l f was to o pure!
j I
|to be approached w ith o u t m e d ia tio n . S t . Anna, th e m other ofj
(Mary, became th e o b j e c t o f a f a i r l y e x t e n s i v e c u l t . Of S t . j
Anna, Dr. L in d sa y sa y s : !
I i
. . . Hymns w ere w r i t t e n in h er p r a i s e . C o n f r a t e r n it ie s ;
j m o d e lle d on th e c o n f r a t e r n i t i e s d e d ic a t e d to th e B le s s e d
; V ir g in , were form ed in ord er to b r in g th e power o f th e |
j p r a y e r s o f numbers to b ea r upon h e r . These c o n f r a t e r n i-i
I t i e s sp rea d a l l o v e r Germany and beyond i t . . . . The |
s p e c i a l c u l t o f th e V ir g in seems t o have begun , a t l e a s t
i n i t s e x tr a v a g a n t p o p u la r form , i n N orth F ra n ce, and to
have sp read from P rance through Germany and S p a in , bu t
a s f a r a s i t ca n be t r a c e d , t h i s c u l t o f S t . Anna, ' th e ;
! Grandmother* had a German o r i g i n . . . L u th er h im s e lf
t e l l s u s t h a t *St. Anna was h is i d o l . * . . . 31
3 0 E n d e ll T y le r , The Worship of th e B le s s e d V ir g in
Mary i n th e Church o f Rome C on trary t o Holy S c r ip tu r e and to
th e F a it h and P r a c t ic e o f th e Church o f Chid s t Through the I
F i r s t F iv e C e n tu r ie s (London: Ê. P.O. K 7 , 1 5 k b ), p . 3 1 .
^^Lindsay, op. cit., p. I3 6.
i 31
: As th e a g e s w ere t h a t went b e f o r e , th e M iddle Ages
w ere a tim e o f m ir a c le s . The B le s s e d V ir g in was a w orker o f
m ir a c le s p ar e x c e l l e n c e . Any stu d y o f th e w o n d e r -a c ts a t -
jtr ib u te d t o t h e H oly V ir g in w i l l show two t h i n g s . F i r s t ,
|th a t th e r e i s a c u r io u s p a r a l l e l betw een th e m ir a c le s o f thej
I ■ . . '
M edieval Mary and th o s e a t t r i b u t e d to h er Son by th e G o sp els.
I ' I
T h is f a c t w i l l s u b s t a n t i a t e th e t h e s i s t h a t p o p u la r p i e t y
has ten d e d to a t t r i b u t e to Mary an e q u a l i t y o f s t a t u s th a t
I
i s f a r i n advance o f form al t h e o lo g y . S econ d , the m ir a c le s '
I :
ja t tr ib u te d t o Mary c o n t a in a " g r e y -a r e a ," by w h ich i s meant ;
jan a r ea un con cerned f o r e t h i c s . I t i s h e r e th a t th e "anima"
I i
jassuraes i t s dark a s p e c t s , f o r Mary can a c t " im m orally." At |
t im e s , th e r e i s l i t t l e c o n c e r n f o r th e m a te r n a l, a s w i l l be ^
I
am ply d em o n stra ted . The T r i n i t y ca n n o t c o n t a in h e r ; t h e r e
f o r e , sh e c o n t r a d i c t s th e T r i n i t y and a c t s in d e p e n d e n tly o f
! i
I
One o f our s c h o la r s i n th e f i e l d o f S p a n ish l i t e r a
t u r e , Dr. Frank C a l l c o t t , i n v e s t i g a t e d th e m ir a c le s a t -
jtr ib u te d to Mary i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e o f th e p e r io d o f A lfo n so
X, who r e ig n e d o v er th e C h r is t ia n s t a t e s o f S p ain from 1252
to 1284- Dr. C a l l c o t t su rm izes t h a t th e m ost p o p u la r o f th e
’m ir a c le s o f Mary was i n th e r e s t o r a t i o n of l i f e , a d e f i n i t e
p a r a l l e l to th e a b i l i t y o f J e su s to r a i s e the d e a d . 32 She
3^Frank C a l l c o t t , The S u p ern a tu ra l i n E a r ly S p a n ish
i
r e s t o r e s s i g h t to th e b l i n d and ta k e s a g r e a t i n t e r e s t i n !
^ i
ithe h e a l in g o f l e p e r s . Dr. C a l l c o t t s a y s :
I . . . Seven s e p a r a te tim es do l e p e r s a p p ea l t o h e r i
/^ a r y 7 a re h e a le d . The b l i n d have t h e i r s i g h t r e
s t o r e d , b u t one c l e r k , a p p a r e n tly th r u / s i c / Lack o f j
f a i t h ask ed o n ly t h a t h is s i g h t be g iv e n him w h ile Mass !
was b e in g s a i d . She took him a t h i s word and a llo w e d ,
him th e p r i v i l e g e o f s e e in g e v e r y day o n ly d u rin g th e j
tim e o f M ass. . . . S w e llin g s d is a p p e a r . . . A fte r j
l e p r o s y th e m ost common a ilm e n t to i n c i t e the p i t y o f j
th e B le s s e d Mother i s r a b ie s . . .3 3
I t was f e l t by some t h a t the V ir g in had so m e th in g j
to do w it h th e p r o t e c t i o n o f th o s e on th e s e a . She im ita tes;
J e su s in t h a t she can w alk on water. 34 T h is would s u g g e s t j
I
;a dim aw aren ess o f h e r f u n c t io n i n th e u n c o n s c io u s . The |
"anima" v e r y o f t e n f u n c t io n s a s th e psychopom p. To b u t t r e s s
I
t h i s s u p p o s i t i o n , we f i n d a la n d - m ir a c le i n w h ic h Mary le a d s
I I
Ithe l o s t w ith a s h in in g wand: I
I (
I . . . 4 band o f p ilg r im s jo u r n e y in g t o Santa Maria de j
i S o i s so n s l o s e t h e i r way i n th e m ountains and in answer |
to t h e i r p r a y e r s , she ^ a r y / ap p ears to them *w ith a |
s h in in g wand’ i n h e r hand and le a d s them s a f e l y to •
t h e i r d e s t i n a t i o n . 35
Taking a s t o r y from the G ospel o f S t. John, the j
I !
[Spanish make i t contem p orary and s u b s t i t u t e th e B le s s e d Mary
L i t e r a t u r e , S tu d ie d i n t h e Works o f the Court o f A lfo n s o X,
£1 S a b io (New York: I n s t i t u t e de Las Espanas en l o s E s t ados
iU nidos, 1 9 2 3 ) , p . 3 3 .
33ib ld . . p. 35.
3^Ibld. . p. 38.
35ib id . . p. kO.
33
f o r th e C h r is t . C a l l c o t t s a y s :
; . . . M ir a c le s s i m i l a r to the one perform ed by J e su s a t ;
! th e wedding f e a s t in Cana o f G a li l e e . . . a re N os. 23
I and 3 5 1 . The f i r s t i s th e sim p le s t o r y o f a woman who
was o u t o f w ine when th e King came to v i s i t h e r , so sh e
' a sk ed th e V ir g in to h e lp h er in h er p e r p l e x i t y , and
I im m e d ia te ly the w ine c a sk s in the c e l l a r were f i l l e d .
The s e c o n d , on a l a r g e r s c a l e and w ith an e le m en t of I
i humor, m a in ta in s t h a t a t the g r e a t an n u al f e a s t i n
I honor o f th e V irgen de A gosto one y e a r a g r e a t hogshead ’
j o f w ine was s u p p lie d fo r th e p u b l i c , b u t, sa d to r e la te ,*
I i t d id n o t l a s t lo n g . A f t e r i t became e x h a u ste d the 1
crowd was slo w to go away and someone s u g g e s te d t h a t
! th e y lo o k a g a in t o se e w h eth er i t was e n t i r e l y em pty. i
I To t h e i r s u r p r i s e , th e y fou n d i t was f u l l o f m ir a c u lo u s ;
■ w ine s u p p lie d by th e S a i n t , and i t had th e q u a l i t y not
; o n ly o f d e l i g h t i n g th o s e who p a r to o k o f i t b u t a l s o o f
; c u r in g i l l s .3 6
I The V ir g in c o u ld a l s o e x te n d h er h e lp to Mohammedans
I '
I i f t h e y had the f a i t h t o t r u s t h e r . T his i s a p a r a l l e l to !
t
J e s u s ' d e a lin g s w ith th e Sam aritans and G e n t i l e s . C a l l c o t t
[says:
I . . . The V i r g in ’ s m ercy was a l s o g r e a t enough to r e
s t o r e l i f e t o the c h i l d o f a M oorish woman, who, b e c a u se
she had heard o f th e m ira c u lo u s power o f Santa Maria de ’
S a l a s , to o k th e dead body o f h e r l i t t l e one to th e s h r in e
A f t e r th e m other had rem ained th e r e a l l n i^ h t i n p ra y er
th e c h i l d was b rou gh t back t o l i f e a l t h o / s i c / i t had
been dead th r e e d a y s .37
Now we e n t e r in t o th e realm o f the " g r e y -a r e a ,"
where m ir a c le s a t t r i b u t e d to a r e l i g i o u s f i g u r e ten d toward
-mere d i s p l a y s o f power w ith o u t e t h i c a l c o n s i d e r a t io n .
C a l l c o t t sa y s :
38Ib id . , pp. ii.8- 49.
37Ib id . , p. 42.
r 34^
. . . two men, one v e r y r i c h w h ile th e o th e r p o s s e s s e d
o n ly a church b u i ld in g , were r o l l i n g d i c e . The w e a lth y
man p la y e d h ig h s t a k e s , th e poor man, h a v in g o n ly th e
c h u r c h , p la y e d i t . The r i c h one r o l l e d and th r e e s i x e s
i f e l l . H is com panion, tr e m b lin g , in h i s tu r n r o l l e d . As
[ he d id so he o f f e r e d th e ch u rch t o th e V ir g in sh o u ld he
' w in . To h i s a s to n is h m e n t, and to th e wonder o f th e b y -
I 8t e n d e r s , one o f th e d ic e f e l l i n tw o, th r e e s i x e s and
one ace a p p e a r in g .3 o
In th e S p a n ish m i r a c le s , th e V ir g in can a l s o d i s p l a y
j e a lo u s y and v e n g e a n c e. C a l l c o t t s a y s ;
. . . A lth o / s i c / th e V ir g in d id a l l e v i a t e b o d i ly i l l s
f o r a good c a u s e , she was n o t alw ays a s a i n t o f m ercy.
Even m ore, h er d e v o te e s were som etim es g iv e n th e p r i v i
l e g e o f s e e in g . . . ven gean ce brough t down a t t h e i r
own r e q u e s t upon the en em ies o f th e f a i t h b e c a u se o f
some im pious a c t . One C h r is t ia n w h ile k n e e lin g a t
p r a y e r b e fo r e h er s h r in e was b i t t e n by a la r g e dog th a t
happened to p a s s t h a t way. As he a r o s e to p ic k up a
s to n e to d r iv e th e anim al away, he was g r e a t l y in c e n s e d
a t s e e in g two Jews la u g h in g a t him . Not b e in g a b le to
r e s t r a i n h i s a n g e r , he c a l l e d upon the V ir g in to avenge
h e r s e l f o f su ch an a f f r o n t w ith th e r e s u l t th a t th e
w a ll by w hich t h e y were s ta n d in g f e l l upon the unbe
l i e v e r s . 39
C a l l c o t t makes th e i n t e r e s t i n g o b s e r v a t io n t h a t in
th e p o p u la r mind o f S p a in in th e t h i r t e e n t h c e n tu r y , th e
power o f the V ir g in was a t v a r ia n c e w ith th e o f f i c i a l
Church d o c t r in e s c o n c e r n in g h er:
. . . a l t h o a c c o r d in g t o th e Church a u t h o r i t i e s , th e
V ir g in c o u ld perform m ir a c le s o n ly when e s p e c i a l l y em
pow ered to do so ; she i s r e p r e s e n te d h ere as p erfo rm in g
them o f h e r own a c c o r d . Only seld om d oes she go to h er
Son or to God th e F a th er f o r a id or p e r m is s io n
%
3 8 I b i d .
3 9 i b i d . . pp. 3 7 -3 8 .
^ ° I b id .
35
i
; In th e f a n a t ic is m o f th e p a s s in g o f th e M iddle A ges,
I
!
I th e r e w as, t o be s u r e , a f a n a t i c is m o f Mary, C h a r a c t e r is
t i c was S t , I g n a t iu s L o y o la , "Our L ad y’ s K n ig h t," who k e p t
i a v i g i l a t M on tserrat on th e eve o f th e A n n u n c ia tio n , 1 5 2 2 ,
! w a tc h in g h i s s p i r i t u a l armor b e fo r e th e a l t a r o f th e V ir g in ,
There i s a s t o r y i n w h ich S t . I g n a t iu s d is p u t e s w ith a
M oorish g en tlem a n o v e r th e p e r p e tu a l v i r g i n i t y o f Mary.
The Moor, u n p ersu a d ed , rod e o f f . The S a in t d eb a ted w h eth er
or n o t to p u rsu e th e Mohammedan and k i l l him. F o r t u n a t e ly
f o r th e Son o f Isla m , Ignatius* mule d e c id e d th e i s s u e by
r id in g o f f i n the o p p o s it e d i r e c t i o n . 4-1
About th e same tim e th e Legend o f th e V ir g in o f
Guadalupe a r o se in M exico:
. . . In th e y e a r 1531 th e B le s s e d V ir g in app eared t o
a f i f t y - f i v e - y e a r - o l d n e o p h y te , th e humble In d ia n ,
Juan D ie g o , who was h u r r y in g down Tepeyac h i l l to h ear
Mass in M exico C ity . She i n s t r u c t e d him t o co n v ey to
th e F r a n c is c a n B ish op Tumarraga h er w ish t h a t a ch u rch
be b u i l t on th e s p o t . When th e B ishop p r u d e n tly a sk ed
f o r a s i g n to prove h er i d e n t i t y , th e Lady t o l d Juan t o
g a th e r r o s e s o f Tepeyac h i l l . T h is he d id , though i t
was w in t e r . On h i s r e t u r n , th e V ir g in r ea r ra n g ed th e
f lo w e r s i n h i s m an tle and bade him keep them un distu rb ed
t i l l he rea ch ed th e B ish o p . As he u n fo ld e d h i s m an tle
and th e r o s e s f e l l o u t , th e B ish op and h i s a t t e n d a n t s
dropped on t h e i r k n e e s . A l i f e - s i z e f i g u r e o f th e
V ir g in , j u s t a s Juan had d e s c r ib e d h e r , had m ira c u lo u sly
b een p a in t e d on h i s m a n tle . 42
S. A l l i s o n P e e r s , S tu d ie s o f the S p a n ish M y stics
(2nd ed . r e v . ; London: S. P. G. K ., 1 9 5 l)4 1 , 5 .
^ " N o t a b le A p p a r itio n s o f Our L ady," The N a tio n a l
C a th o lic Almanac (1 9 5 2 ).
I
A lth o u g h s t a r t i n g as e a r l y a s S t . B ernard, th e c u l t >
o f th e Im m aculate H eart o f Mary was o f f i c i a l l y a c c e p te d o n ly
I i
in th e s e v e n t e e n t h c e n tu r y . F a th e r John P. Murphy s a y s : f
! I
j . . . w ith S t . John Eudes ( I 6 O I-I 6 8O) th e d e v o tio n / t o
j th e H eart o f Mary/* was made p u b lic and r e c e iv e d e c c l e s i -
1 a s t i c a l a p p r o b a tio n , bu t i t was f o r a tim e l i m i t e d to |
I s p e c i f i c l o c a l e s and was o n ly i n l a t e r d ecad es to be i
. a c c e p te d and p o p u la r iz e d th rou gh ou t the u n i v e r s a l |
I Church. . . .4-3 !
I The n i n e t e e n t h c e n tu r y saw th r e e a l l e g e d a p p ea r - ■
' o I
lances by th e V ir g in i n F ran ce. From t h e e a r l i e s t , I 8 3O, ,
Icome8 th e medal o f th e Im maculate C o n ce p tio n , known as th e
i I
M iracu lou s m ed al. In l 8k6 , Mary app eared a t La S a l e t t e i n I
j
s o u t h - e a s t e r n F rance t o two c h ild r e n . In t h a t sp o t a p - |
p ea red a f o u n t a in w h ich i s now a s h r i n e . The m ost famous ;
!
I o f t h e s e a p p a r it io n s i s Lourdes in 1 8 5 8 , where th e r e was I
[purported to be th e g u sh in g f o r t h o f a s p r in g . The N a tio n a l
C a th o lic Almanac sa y s :
. . , D uring 1 8 5 8 , on e ig h t e e n o c c a s i o n s , b e g in n in g i n
F eb ru ary, th e B le s s e d V ir g in ap p eared to a p o o r , f o u r
t e e n y e a r o ld g i r l , B e rn a d e tte S o u b ir o u s, in th e g r o t t o
o f M a s s a b ie lle , n ear L ou rd es, F ra n ce. B e r n a d e t t e 's !
d e c la r a t io n o f h avin g se e n a young and b e a u t i f u l Lady ^
l e d th e in c r e d u lo u s to demand p r o o f t h a t the v i s i o n was
th e B le s s e d V ir g in Mary. On F ebruary 25 th e Lady t o l d
B e r n a d e tte to d r in k o f th e w a ter and wash i n th e sp r in g
w h ich m ir a c u lo u s ly gushed f o r t h when th e p e r p le x e d g i r l
. . . s c r a tc h e d up th e dry e a r t h . On March 25 the L a d y ,
r e v e a le d h e r i d e n t i t y , ' I am th e Im m aculate C o n c e p t io n .'
Most o f th e c u r e s occu r when the s ic k , a r e b l e s s e d
i 1 I
! 4 3 John F. Murphy, M ary's Im m aculate H eart (Milwaukee:
iThe Bruce E u b lis h in g C o ., I 9 5 l ) , p p . 3 0 -3 1 .
37
w it h th e S acred H ost a f t e r the t r a d i t i o n a l p r o c e s s io n o f
th e B le s s e d Sacram ent, though b a th s in th e s p r in g w ater :
or v i s i t s to th e s h r in e have p ro ved e f f i c a c i o u s . The
w ater has b een found by a n a l y s i s to c o n t a in no c u r a t iv e
p r o p e r t i e s . The m ir a c le s can in no w ise be e x p la in e d
on any n a tu r a l b a s i s ,4 4 ^
The dogma o f th e Im maculate C o n cep tio n was p r o -
! I
;claim ed by Pope P iu s IX i n 1854 th e b u l l , In e ffa b a lis D e i. I
! I
'P redrik N ie ls e n q u o te s i t as f o l lo w s :
! ;
; . . . 'I n honour o f th e h o ly and u n d iv id e d T r i n i t y , to
I th e g l o r y o f th e V ir g in Mother of God, to th e e x a l t a t i o n
! o f th e C a th o lic f a i t h and the in c r e a s e o f th e C h r is t ia n
: r e l i g i o n , in a cco rd a n ce w ith a u t h o r it y from our Lord |
J e su s C h r is t , from th e b l e s s e d a p o s t l e s , P e te r and Paul
! and from o u r s e l v e s , we d e c la r e , p r o c la im , and d e c re e
I th a t th e d o c tr in e w h ich te a c h e s th a t the Most B le s s e d |
I V ir g in Mary, in th e f i r s t moment o f h e r c o n c e p tio n , b y |
a s p e c i a l g i f t o f g r a c e from A lm ig h ty God, in c o n s id e r - ,
I a t i o n o f th e m e r it s o f J e su s C h r is t . . . was p r e s e r v e d j
I pure from a l l t a i n t o f o r i g i n a l s i n , i s r e v e a le d by God,i
' w h er efo r e i t s h a l l a l s o be th e o b je c t , o f sure and c e r - .
j t a i n f a i t h on th e p a r t o f a l l . . . . *45 j
! The m ost famous o f th e t w e n t ie t h c e n tu r y a p p a r it io n s
I I
o f Mary was to th r e e P o rtu g u ese c h i ld r e n on May 1 3 , 1 9 1 7 . '
I
Our Lady o f Fatim a i s supp osed to have ask ed t h a t R u ssia be ’
d e d ic a te d t o h e r Im m aculate H eart. From December 2 9 , 1932
I to January 3 , 1 9 3 3 , th e V ir g in i s supposed to have ap p eared
to f i v e c h ild r e n a t B eaurang, B elgiu m , The l a s t appearance
o f Mary was in Banneaux, B elgium , i n 1 9 3 3 , where Mary
44" N otabl e A p p a r itio n s o f Our L ady." op . c i t .
45p j,0d rik N i e l s e n , The H is to r y o f th e Papacy i n th e
X lX th C en tu ry , t r a n s . A rthur James Mason (London: John
lîu r r a y 7 1 9 0 6 ) , I I , 194*
38
announced h e r s e l f as th e V ir g in o f th e poor*
So f a r , th e h e ig h t o f the c u l t o f Mary was i n 1 9 5 0 , |
|When P iu s X II d e f in e d th e dogma o f th e b o d ily A ssum ption o f j
: I
jthe B le s s e d Mary: :
j . . . W e p ron ou n ce, d e c la r e and d e f in e i t to be a j
I d i v i n e l y r e v e a le d dogma: t h a t th e Im m aculate Mother o f j
I God, th e e v e r V ir g in Mary, h a v in g com p leted th e c o u r s e j
[ o f h er e a r t h l y 1 i f e , was assum ed body and s o u l i n t o i
; h e a v e n ly g l o r y . 4-8 j
I I
! ^ " Ths N a tio n s l C a th o lic
Almanac ( 1 9 5 1 ) .
CHAPTER IV
MàHY AS THE THEOLOGIAN SEES HER
A ll o rth o d o x t h e o l o g i e s , w h eth er C a th o lic or ^
P r o t e s t a n t , a g r e e upon th e s i n l e s s n e s s o f J e s u s . Perhaps |
i t i s a moot q u e s t io n w hether or n o t He had th e power t o I
I
s i n , but a l l are a g r e e d upon th e s i n l e s s n e s s of H is n a tu r e . '
B u t, th e n a g a in , th e o rth o d o x a re a g r ee d th a t t h i s n a tu re i s
|an odd Divine-Hum an th in g w hich i s d i f f e r e n t i n k in d from ^
I I
jthe run o f th e m i l l . W ith Mary, th e r e a r o s e a p roblem .
I - !
W hatever s i m i l a r i t i e s th e r e may be betw een h e r f u n c t io n and !
I
jthe r o le o f a g o d d ess in th e v a r io u s a n c ie n t pagan c u l t s ,
j
i t rem ains tr u e t h a t in form al C h r is t ia n t h e o lo g y , Mary i s ■
[co m p letely " of our r a c e ." C a th o lic t h e o lo g y has no s u s -
j
Ip ic io n o f th e m oral v i r t u e o f the m other o f J e s u s . I f S t, !
i
IA ugustine had n o t in tr o d u c e d in t o form al th e o lo g y a c o n c e p t
o f o r i g i n a l s i n , t h i s a ssu r a n c e o f v i r t u e w ould have been
•q u ite enough. A u g u stin e * s s u c c e s s f o r c e d the Church to
c o n s id e r c a r e f u l l y th e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f Mary’s "human" n a tu r e
to th e c o n c ep t o f s i n . The o p in io n s o f th e e a r l i e s t t h e o
l o g ia n s who d w elt upon t h i s problem , S t . B ernard, A lexan d er ;
o f H a le s , S t . A lb e r t th e G reat and S t . Bonav e n tu r a were a l l
on th e s id e w h ich f e l t th a t w h ile the V ir g in com m itted no
s i n , she was born w it h th e s t a i n o f o r i g i n a l s i n common to
j a i l save C h r is t and was c o n s e q u e n tly redeem ed by Him as w ere
! a l l o th e r C h r is t ia n s .^ W ith th e p r o g r e s s io n o f th e power o f
I
jthe c u lt o f the V irg in , the answer which th ese th e o lo g ia n s ,
jhad given proved no longer s a t is f a c t o r y . As Alan Watts
Isays :
I :
I . . . For more th a n s i x hundred y e a r s t h e o lo g y has j
fo u g h t a s t e a d i l y l o s i n g b a t t l e w ith th e C a th o lic f o l k - I
m ind, w h ich , s te p by s t e p , i s p e r su a d in g th e o f f i c i a l
Church to r e c o g n iz e th e tr u e d i v i n i t y o f th e V i r g i n . 2 ;
Mary was t h e r e f o r e d e c la r e d exempt from o r i g i n a l ;
s i n . ‘
. . . t o b r in g th e V ir g in w it h in th e red em p tiv e a c t i o n i
o f C h r is t , i t was s u f f i c i e n t to a f f ir m t h a t i n the ;
i n s t a n t she came in t o p e r s o n a l e x i s t e n c e , Mary bore i n |
h er (h a v in g reg a rd t o th e t o t a l l y human c o n d i t i o n o f I
I h er g e n e r a t io n ) th a t e x ig e n c e in h e r e n t i n f a l l e n n a tu r e [
and ru n n in g c o u n te r to th e d i v i n e l i f e w h ich would have '
, s e p a r a te d her from God, i f a t th e same i n s t a n t a s u p e r - ,
' abundance o f g r a ce had n o t p r e v e n te d th a t e f f e c t . 3
i Thus, in Mary’ s c a s e , th e m e r it to be won by C h r is t
i s a n t i c i p a t e d by th e F a th e r and a p p lie d t o Mary a t th e
.in s t a n t she would have b een l i a b l e to th e c u r se o f Adam’ s
s i n . The p r a c t i c a l r e s u l t i s to b estow upon Mary th e same
s t a t u s t h a t C h r is t had in regard to s i n . As he was th e
^M aurice Z u n d el, "The Im m aculate C o n c e p tio n ," The
Mary B ook. P. J . S h eed , e d . (New York: Sheed and Ward,
• 1 9 5 1 ) , pp. 2 2 6 - 2 2 7 .
^A lan W . W a tts, Myth and R itu a l i n C h r i s t i a n i t y
,(New York: The Vanguard P r e s s , 1 9 5 3 ) , p . 1 1 0 .
: ^Zundel, op. cit.. p. 229*
I 41 i
'Id e a l Man; so i s H is Mother the I d e a l Woman. Jean G u itto n I
I :
’s t a t e s :
i :
. . . f o r our p oor e x i s t e n c e in tim e t o c o in c id e p e r -
I f e c t l y w ith th e d iv in e p la n , to m irro r the pure id e a
I t h a t God o r i g i n a l l y had o f u s , th e r e i s n eed o f th e !
: m e d ia tio n o f th e in c a r n a te and redeem ing C h r is t . As
I f a r a s Mary was c o n c e r n e d , th e e q u a tio n was e f f e c t e d j
w ith o u t th e p r e - e x i s t e n c e o f any gap to be b r id g e d . ,
I T h is i s e x p r e s s e d by th e id e a th a t th e B le s s e d V ir g in ;
i s th e o n ly c r e a tu r e who n e v e r s in n e d , who was t h e r e - |
f o r e in a c o n d i t i o n o f b le s s e d n e s s a lw a y s. In o th e r '
! w ord s, th e V ir g in a lo n e o f a l l c r e a te d b e in g s was j u s t '
I a s God had w i l l e d h er to b e. . , . 4
I
I The age i n w h ich th e Roman Church a t t a i n e d i t s
; i
' g r e a t e s t c o n t r o l o v e r th e mind o f Europe was p r e e m in e n tly i
Ian age con cern ed w it h fe u d a l p r i v i l e g e s . D ig n it y was one }
;
Iof i t s c o n s ta n t th em es. Mary i s th e human m other o f J e su s j
[who i s th e C h r is t , the Son o f God. As a son must p a r ta k e ;
I ;
jof th e n a tu re o f h i s f a t h e r ; so J e su s i s God. T h e r e fo r e , j
; i
'Mary i s th e " T h eotok os," th e m other o f God. Her d i g n i t y i s |
[then a s c h i e f o f a l l c r e a t e d c r e a t u r e s .
. . . S t . Thomas Aquinas s a y s : ’Prom th e f a c t th a t she
I i s th e Mother o f God, the B le s s e d V ir g in has a c e r t a i n
i n f i n i t e d i g n i t y , d e r iv e d from th e i n f i n i t e Good who i s '
God, and on t h i s a c co u n t th e r e can n ot be a n y th in g b e t t e r
j u s t a s th e r e can n ot be a n y th in g b e t t e r than God. . . ’5
To th e c a s u a l o b s e r v e r , th e r e i s l i t t l e d i f f e r e n c e
i n th e honor o f f e r e d by th e devout C a th o lic to Mary and '
t h a t o f f e r e d to God. P r a c t i c a l l y sp e a k in g , th e r e may be
^G uitton, op. c i t ., p. 1 2 3 .
^Pohle, op. c i t .. p. 2 0 .
I M
n o n e, b u t the Roman t h e o lo g ia n i n s i s t s t h a t th e r e i s a f i n e .
ip o in t o f d i s t i n c t i o n . F a th e r Murphy sa y s:
: , • . the v e n e r a t io n we show the a n g e ls and s a i n t s as i
s p e c i a l l y endowed c r e a tu r e s i s t e c h n i c a l l y c a l l e d su p e r
n a tu r a l ’d u l i a . ' T his ’d u l i a ’ i s d i s t i n g u i s h e d from
! 'l a t r l a . f th e w orsh ip we owe God. . . . What c o n c er n s
I us p r e s e n t l y i s w h eth er th e c u l t we o f f e r th e B le s s e d !
: M other, . . . ' h v p e r d u lia , ’ i s e s s e n t i a l l y ( i . e . , ^
s p e c i f i c a l l y ) d i f f e r e n t , or o n ly d i f f e r e n t in d eg ree i
* from t h a t w hich we o f f e r th e a n g e ls and s a i n t s . . . .
: Now th e p r i v i l e g e s o f th e B le s s e d Mother upon w h ic h '
! 'h y p e r d u lla ’ i s founded d i f f e r in d eg ree and n a tu r e from
i th o s e o f th e s a i n t s w h ich c a u se us to v e n e r a te them. . ..
A ll o th e r c r e a t u r e s , even S t . J o se p h , no m a tter how '
i c l o s e l y a s s o c i a t e d w ith C h r is t , p e r t a i n to th e Hypo-
1 s t a t i c Union o n ly e x t r i n s i c a l l y ; th e B le s s e d M other, ,
I how ever i n t r i n s i c a l l y . . . 8 j
jMary th u s i s pushed c l o s e r t o th e T r i n i t y th an any o t h e r . |
!
IMonsignor P oh le g i v e s Mary’ s p ro p er r e l a t i o n s h i p : |
I " ;
I . . . Mary’s D iv in e M otherhood e n t a i l s an a l t o g e t h e r ;
[ u n iq u e r e l a t i o n to th e F i r s t P erso n o f th e T r in it y , She
can c la im one and th e same Son w it h God the F a th e r , n o t ,
I o f c o u r s e , i n th e h e a th e n s e n s e , as god and g o d d e s s , b u t
I i n th e C h r is t ia n s e n s e , a s the D iv in e F a th er and a human
I m other. T h is m ira c u lo u s r e l a t i o n s h i p on the p a r t o f
Mary may be t e c h n i c a l l y d e s c r ib e d a s her d au gh terh ood . ;
I t form s th e t h e o l o g i c a l c o u n te r p a r t o f h e r m otherhood |
and i s a p r e r o g a t iv e p e c u l i a r t o Our Lady, r e s u l t i n g i n
a s p e c i a l k in d o f a d o p tio n . . God' th e F a th er ca n n ot b u t
lo o k w it h u n a llo y e d p le a s u r e upon th e m other o f His
D iv in e Son. She i s His a d o p ted d au gh ter ( ’f i l i a
! a d o p t i v e ’ ) . who e x c e l s a l l His o th e r ad op ted c h ild r e n
by r i g h t o f p r im o g e n itu r e .
Mary’ s r e l a t i o n s h i p e x te n d s a l s o to th e Holy G h o st,
b eca u se He i s th e p ro d u ct o f th e j o i n t a p i r a t io n o f th e ;
F a th e r and th e Son. In t h i s c a p a c it y she has b een ;
a p t l y compared to a sp o u s e — an a n a lo g y adum brated by the;
A p o s t l e s ’ Creed when i t sa y s th a t C h r is t ’was c o n c e iv e d
by the H oly Ghost* . . .
Thus we have se e n th a t Mary i s th e m other o f th e
^Murphy, op. cit., pp. 44-45.
■ " ■ ' ’ 43;
d iv in e L o g o s, th e d a u g h ter o f God th e F a th e r , and th e
sp ou se o f th e H oly G h ost. What m o r ta l mind ean form
an ad eq u ate c o n c e p tio n o f t h i s t h r e e f o l d d ig n it y ? ? I
The V ir g in i s s e e n to be th e D au ghter o f God p a r a l - |
l e l i h g th e C h r is t who i s th e Son o f God. She b a r e ly e s c a p e s
th e Holy T r in it y and t h i s i s due o n ly t o th o s e e x a c t in g j
t h e o lo g ia n s who have la b o r e d a g a in s t th e p r e s s u r e o f th e '
[m asses f o r so lo n g . !
! R etu rn in g t o the "Second E ve" theme o f th e e a r l y
* I
[F ath ers o f the Church, Mary i s th e "Mother" o f the human I
I
I :
r a c e . P oh le c o n t in u e s : |
. . . She i s n o t , o f c o u r s e , th e ’h e a d ’ o f th e human \
r a c e . That d i g n i t y b e lo n g s s o l e l y to J e su s C h r is t , t h e |
’ secon d Adam’ who r e s t o r e d our l o s t in n o c e n c e . Mary j
I gave b i r t h to h er own s p i r i t u a l and su p e r n a tu r a l head |
i i n th e p e r eo n o f C h r is t . -Her un iqu e p o s i t i o n in th e !
m y stic body o f th e Church has b een lik e n e d to t h a t o f I
I th e ’n e c k , ’ but sh e i s perh ap s more a p p r o p r ia t e ly com- ^
I p ared to th e h e a r t , w h ich o f a l l th e b o d i ly organ s m ost I
1 p e r f e c t l y r e f l e c t s the e n e rg y o f th e head and m ost j
I ' ' e f f e c t i v e l y s u s t a i n s i t s v i t a l f u n c t i o n s . Thus Mary’ s i
I D iv in e M otherhood ta k e s on th e c h a r a c te r and f u n c t io n s \
I , o f a s p i r i t u a l m otherhood i n r e l a t i o n to a l l men, Î
! e s p e c i a l l y th o s e who a re l i v i n g members o f th e body o f
C h r ist.C
: For C a t h o li c s , Mary i s a c o o p e r a to r i n th e Atonem ent
Iof C h r is t: '
. . . th e B le s s e d V ir g in may be s a id a f t e r a f a s h io n t o ;
have c o -o p e r a te d i n th e a to n em en t, b e c a u se she form ed
i th e D iv in e V ic tim i n h e r c h a s t e womb, p rep a red Him f o r '
th e s l a u g h t e r , and s ta n d in g b e n e a th the c r o s s , o f f e r e d
7 p o h le , op. c i t . , pp . 1 8 - 1 9 .
^ I b l d .. p. 2 1 .
!
Him up fo p th e s a l v a t i o n o f mankind. T h is f a c t j u s t i -
I f i e s th e a t t r i b u t i o n to h e r o f th e h on orary t i t l e o f ;
[ ’deacona s a c r i f i e i c ’ . . . /
T h is p r i e s t e s s i s a c o -r e d e m p tr e ss w ith C h r is t f o r
jHoman p i e t y : '
! i
I . . . i t was i n th e g l o r i o u s d e s ig n o f God th a t human
’ lo v e sh o u ld n o t be d e n ie d a l l p la c e i n th e e x p i a t io n o f |
! human s i n , w ith men condemned t o be no more th a n s p e c - j
I t a t o r s o f t h e i r own r ed em p tio n . . , , There i s th e n a
; c o -r e d e m p tiv e a c t i v i t y o f the w hole M y s tic a l Body, d e-
i r i v i n g th e w hole o f i t s e f f e c t i v e n e s s from th e redem p-
■ t i v e a c t i o n o f C h r is t; and i n t h i s c o -r e d e m p tiv e a c t i v
i t y e v e r y member p la y s some p a r t i n s o f a r a s he u n i t e s
I h i s s u f f e r i n g s w ith C h r i s t ' s ; human n a tu r e i s p r i v i l e g e d
1 to r e p e a t in th e p e r so n s o f men what i t h as co m p leted in
; th e P er so n o f C h r is t . But what a l l o f u s do a c c o r d in g
I to our im p e r f e c t io n . Our Lady d id p e r f e c t l y . Even S t .
Paul c o u ld n o t make a l l o f h i s s u f f e r i n g s a v a i l a b l e f o r
th e Church, s in c e some a t l e a s t must be s e t a g a in s t h i s
own s i n s . Our Lady had no s i n s , and w h a tev er she s u f
f e r e d c o u ld be w h o lly f o r th e s i n s o f mankind.
* Mary i s th e f i r s t stew ard o f th e t r e a s u r y o f th e
1
im erits o f C h r is t , a c c o r d in g to a p a p a l d e f i n i t i o n :
On F ebruary 2n d , 1 9 0 4 , P iu s X w rote in th e e n c y c l i -
[ c a l , Ad Diem: 'I n v i r t u e o f th e communion o f sorrow s
and o f w i l l w h ich a tt a c h e d h er to C h r is t , Mary wanted
to become the w orth y R e p a r tr ix o f th e f a l l e n w o r ld , and
i n con seq u en ce th e D isp e n se r o f a l l th e g r a c e s J e su s
, a c q u ir e d f o r us by His b lo o d y d e a th . . . B ecau se she
s u r p a s s e s a l l o th e r c r e a t u r e s by her s a n c t i t y and by
I h er u n io n w ith C h r is t , and b eca u se she was c a l l e d by
' C h r is t to p a r t i c i p a t e in th e work o f our s a l v a t i o n ,
she m e r its f o r us * de congruo , ' a s th e e x p r e s s io n i s .
‘ ^I b l d . . p. 1 2 5 .
J . S h eed , "The C om -P assion o f Our Lady," Mary
Book, op. c i t . . p . 239*
45;
what C h r is t has m e r ite d f o r us ' de condipr.no, * and sh e
i s th e f i r s t stew ard in th e d is p e n s in g o f g r a c e s . H
I C a th o lic t h e o lo g ia n s r e a d i l y adm it t h a t th e d o c t r in e
o f the A ssum ption can n ot be b ased upon h i s t o r i c a l m ethod. |
i I
! S o l e l y dogm atic c o n s id e r a t io n s must p r e v a i l . F a th e r Duhr I
I !
Isays: ;
: !
I . . . The Church, w h ich has n e v e r c la im ed th e power to i
I add to r e v e l a t i o n , has so le m n ly v in d ic a t e d her r i g h t t o '
I d e f in e i t i n f a l l i b l y . The r e a so n s a l l e g e d by th e i n - i
I stru m en ts o f th e m a g ister iu m so l i t t l e m easure th e j
! i n f a l l i b i l i t y t h a t t h e o lo g ia n s adm it th e p o s s i b i l i t y o f |
; e r r o r in th e grounds l a i d down f o r a d e f i n i t i o n o f ’
: f a i t h . 12 j
! '
W ith th e r e c e n t l y added dogma o f th e A ssu m p tio n , j
Mary becomes a c u r io u s p a r a l l e l to C h r is t . Exempted from I
I
[ s in , p la y in g a m ajor p a r t in th e red em p tion w ith h er s u f f e r -
I :
:ln gs and f i n a l l y assum ed in t o h ea v en to be s e a t e d a t th e !
jthrone o f God a s Queen o f H eaven, th e sim p le p e a sa n t woman \
[becomes a g o d d e ss m e d ia tin g b etw een heaven and e a r t h , i . e . ,
th e u n c o n sc io u s and c o n s c io u s n e s s . *
11 !
C h a rles J o u r n e t, "C o-R edem ptress," Mary Book, '
i b i d . , p . 2 4 2 .
i 1^J o sep h Duhr, The G lo r io u s A ssum ption o f th e Mother
I o f God, t r a n s . J . M . P rau nces (New York: P. J , Kenedy & Sons,
4 9 5 0 ) , pp. 4 - 5 .
; CHAPTER V
I
I '
THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE CULT OF THE VIRGIN ;
i
I The f u n c t io n o f th e c u l t o f th e V ir g in in Roman
jC a th o lic ism i s t o a ttem p t to d e a l w ith th e n eed s o f th e u n - ,
I
{c o n scio u s in term s a c c e p t a b le to C h r is t ia n dogma. The
I :
V ir g in Mary i s a r e l a t i v e l y m inor b i b l i c a l c h a r a c te r who
Ihas been endowed by th e C a th o lic fo lk -m in d w it h th e a r c h e -
! . :
; ty p e s o f th e G reat Mother and th e " a n im a ." The v a g u e n e ss o f
!
jthe h i s t o r i c a l o u t l i n e c o n c e r n in g Mary a llo w s h er a g r e a t
j s u s c e p t i b i l i t y t o p r o j e c t i o n o f th e fe m in in e n eed s o f the :
!
«u n con sciou s. F u n c t i o n a l l y , she becom es th e r e in c a r n a t io n j
I
jof th e G reat Mother o f the g o d s. Her r o le i s a s o ld as a l l
^ r e lig io n . A c tin g on t h i s a ssu m p tio n , we w i l l t r y to r e c o n -
i
1 8 t r u e t what has happened i n th e develop m en t o f th e V ir g in
as a r e l i g i o u s o b j e c t .
The e x p e r ie n c e o f th e m other i s the p r i m it i v e human
e x p e r ie n c e . I t h as th e q u a l i t y o f b e in g u n iv e r s a l in t h a t
th e r e a re no human e x c e p t io n s to t h i s e x p e r ie n c e . The e x
p e r ie n c e o f th e f a t h e r i s p o s t - n a t a l and under c e r t a i n c i r
cu m stan ces su ch as d e a th or d e s e r t i o n d oes n o t o c c u r .
I
iF ollow in g J u n g ia n l i n e s o f th o u g h t, we may p r o p e r ly e x p e c t
t h i s e x p e r ie n c e o f th e m other to emerge as a dom inant theme
dn b o th th e i n d iv id u a l and th e c o l l e c t i v e p a r t s o f th e
: k l !
I
u n c o n s c io u s . Hot e v e r y e x p e r ie n c e th e i n d iv i d u a l has o f s
1 I
;the m other i s a good e x p e r ie n c e , While i t i s tr u e t h a t one I
I I
I i s d ep en d en t upon th e m other fo r s u r v i v a l , th e r e a re a l s o |
j
th e t h r e a t e n in g a s p e c t s o f th e m other. W e have n o t y e t i n -
i
iv e s t ig a t e d e x t e n s i v e l y the e f f e c t s o f e m o tio n a l s t a t e s |
i '
I w it h in th e m other upon th e unborn c h i l d , b u t th e r e i s th e :
{ p o s s i b i l i t y , a t l e a s t , t h a t th e a d v e r se em o tio n s o f th e *
m oth er w i l l r e f l e c t th e m se lv e s i n th e make-up o f th e c h i l d , !
I ;
jA fter b i r t h th e c h i l d e x p e r ie n c e s r e j e c t i o n by th e m oth er, |
a t c e r t a i n tim e s . I t i s u n d o u b ted ly t h r e a t e n e d , i n a sense,^
by h er p h y s i c a l s i z e f o r a number o f y e a r s . There a re a t j
l e a s t two a s p e c t s , th e n , p r e s e n t . One we may c a l l th e
I
jE ternal Mother and th e o t h e r , th e t h r e a te n in g M other, the |
i !
jdragon, w hich t h r e a t e n s to d evou r. The in d iv id u a l as he |
I I
' s t r i v e s f o r s e c u r i t y may be s a i d t o be s t r i v i n g to r ew in ;
I h i s p r i m it i v e s t a t e , s a f e i n th e womb o f th e E te r n a l M other.
iEven th e n he knows th a t he c a n n o t s t a y th e r e ; so he s t r i v e s |
: i
to w in h er fa v o r in o rd er to im p regn ate h er w ith h im s e lf !
I
a g a in and be reb o rn , '
A l l o f th e e x p e r ie n c e s o f th e m ale w it h th e fem a le j
I do n o t have a m a tern a l q u a l i t y . I t i s im p o rta n t to remembeij
t h a t e a c h human b e in g p o s s e s s e s a fe m in in e a s p e c t , e i t h e r
in dominance or a s a s u b o r d in a te r o l e . T h is i s th e so u rce
o f th e "anima" a r c h e ty p e i n th e m a sc u lin e u n c o n s c io u s , '
14.8:
T hese a r c h e ty p e s of th e G reat Mother and th e
I"anima" a re the e x p r e s s io n s in th e u n c o n s c io u s o f man * s ^
1 :
c o n ta c t w ith th e fe m in in e . They p r o v id e the p s y c h o lo g ic a l
! b a s e s o f th e r i s e o f any r e l i g i o u s c u lt u s p o s s e s s in g a
I fem a le o b j e c t o f d e v o t io n . '
I I
j Our h i s t o r i c a l c o n s id e r a t io n s in c h a p te r th r e e p r o - |
I ■
:Vide the n e c e s s a r y o u t l i n e to r e a l i z e the e x p r e s s io n s o f ;
I th e fe m in in e in th e r e l i g i o n s o f th e Near E a ste r n w orld j
(Which f e r t i l i z e d th e s o i l w hich C h r i s t i a n i t y had to t i l l ,
I ^
,The e a r l i e s t C h r is t ia n com m u nities were s t i l l l o y a l to th e
I j
Iu n ity in h e r e n t in th e J e w ish c o n c e p t o f God, bu t a s Jung !
I
! p o in t s o u t: i
I !
. . , Opposed to th e endeavor to form a u n i t y th e r e
I sta n d s a s t i l l s t r o n g e r en d eavor to c r e a t e a g a in and
a g a in a m u l t i p l i c i t y , so t h a t even i n th e s o - c a l l e d
s e v e r e m o n o t h e is tic r e l i g i o n s , a s C h r i s t i a n i t y , f o r '
exam p le, th e p o l y t h e i s t i c te n d e n c y i s i r r e p r e s s i b l e .
The D e it y i s d iv id e d in t o th r e e p a r t s a t l e a s t , to
w hich i s added the fe m in in e D e it y o f Mary and th e
numerous company o f th e l e s s e r g o d s , th e a n g e ls and j
s a i n t s , r e s p e c t i v e l y . These two te n d e n c ie s are in
c o n s ta n t w a r fa r e . There i s o n ly one God w ith c o u n t le s s ,
a t t r i b u t e s , or e l s e th e r e a re many gods who are th e n I
sim p ly known d i f f e r e n t l y . . . .1
In th e C a th o lic Church, as i t expanded th rou gh th e
a n c ie n t Roman e n t i r e , th e r e d e v e lo p ed th e n e e d , u n r e a liz e d
'but n e v e r t h e l e s s d e a l t w it h , to come to term s w ith the
v a r io u s them es o f th e u n c o n sc io u s o f i t s p o l y g l o t
p . 1 0 7 .
^Jung, P sy c h o lo g y o f the U n c o n sc io u s, op. c i t . ,
j - 49
i
! c o n s t i t u e n c y . I t had, i n e v e r y s e n s e , a c o l l e c t i v e r a th e r
I
! than a r a c i a l u n c o n sc io u s to f a c e , b eca u se the Church no
^longer a p p e a le d to one e th n ic group w ith a c l o s e l y k n it
I t r a d i t i o n . Out o f t h i s v a s t m u l t i p l i c i t y o f th e m e s, the
jchurch had to b r in g some s o r t o f co h eren ce and u n i t y f o r
1 t h e o l o g i c a l p u r p o s e s . Fordham s a y s :
! !
; . . . what o r g a n iz e d r e l i g i o n has alw ays t r i e d to do
I w ith v a r y in g s u c c e s s , has b een to p r o v id e s a t i s f y i n g j
form s f o r th o s e deep human n eed s w h ich now f i n d su ch |
; dan gerous or b an al e x p r e s s io n , and to e x p r e ss * th e
l i v i n g p r o c e s s e s o f th e u n c o n sc io u s i n th e form o f th e |
I drama o f r e p e n ta n c e , s a c r i f i c e and red em p tio n .* Dogma, I
I c r e e d and r i t u a l a r e c r y s t a l l i z e d form s o f * o r i g i n a l I
I r e l i g i o u s e x p e r i e n c e , * worked o v e r and r e f i n e d , som e- |
I tim es fo r c e n t u r i e s , u n t i l th e y r e a c h th e form s in j
I w h ich we know them. In t h i s way c h a n n e ls a re made |
I w hich c o n t r o l th e u n r u ly and a r b it r a r y * su p e r n a tu r a l * !
I i n f l u e n c e s . A l i v i n g church p r o t e c t s men from th e f u l l
I f o r c e o f an e x p e r ie n c e w h ich can be d e v a s t a t in g ; in s t e a d
I o f b e in g g r ip p e d by th e c o l l e c t i v e u n c o n s c io u s , th e y can
' p a r t i c i p a t e i n a r i t u a l w h ich e x p r e s s e s i t s u f f i c i e n t l y
1 to *purge* by i t s r e f l e c t i o n . 2
! i
I In th e l i g h t o f what we have j u s t s a id i t seems |
j '
j u s t i f i e d to assume f o r e x p e r im e n ta l p u r p o se s t h a t th e c u l t '
' ■
o f Mary a r o s e to p r o v id e a p ro p er c h a n n el f o r th e e x p r e s s io n
,of th e fe m in in e a r c h e ty p e s . The C u lt o f th e V ir g in o f f e r s !
i i
'some p r o t e c t i o n a g a in s t the f u l l f o r c e of th e u n c o n s c io u s . |
I N e v e r t h e le s s , th e r e i s a danger h e r e . The u n d er- ;
d e v e lo p e d c h a r a c te r o f Mary p r o v id e s th e i d e a l f i g u r e f o r a ■
■ function w hich i s t o t a l l y c lo u d e d in the numinous and th e
2
Fordham, op. cit., p. 72.
I 5 0 1
j u t t e r l y m y s te r io u s . The f i g u r e o f th e G reat Mother may be
'approached h ere or the l a t e n t v o ic e o f th e "anima” p r o j e c t e d
I r e a d ily w ith o u t many h i s t o r i c a l l i m i t a t i o n s . I t i s a t t h i s
i ' I
'p o in t th a t we d is c o v e r th e b a s ic danger i n th e c u l t . The :
I :
iH eb rew -C h ristia n r e l i g i o u s sy stem in any o f i t s v a r ia t i o n s
; \
must have a b a s i c a l l y e t h i c a l c o n c e r n . The dark a r e a s o f '
I 1
'm iracu lou s a c t i v i t y a t t r i b u t e d t o the V ir g in w h ich appear so
!
,r e a d i l y i n th e l i t e r a t u r e o f Roman C a th o lic p e o p le s have
'a lr e a d y been p o in t e d o u t . With th e r e l i g i o u s f i g u r e o f :
jJ e su s, th e r e i s s u f f i c i e n t " h i s t o r i c a l ” c o n te n t to g u a r a n te e
I th e a v a i l a b i l i t y o f an e t h i c a l o u t l i n e t o th e Church. W ith '
I
Mary t h i s seem s n o t to be s o . In t h i s c o n n e c tio n we run j
I
!in to an i n t e r e s t i n g o b s e r v a t io n c o n c e r n in g th e r ep la cem en t
o f th e H oly S p i r i t by th e V ir g in . The im p o rta n t t h ir d p e r -
1
son o f th e T r i n i t y a l s o l a c k s p r e c i s e h i s t o r i c a l d e f i n i t i o n . ’
I ;
;This f a c t h as c a u se d a l l s o r t s o f e m o tio n a l e x c e s s e s i n th e
p r i m it i v e ch u rch and in i t s avowed r e s t o r a t i o n i n th e
P r o t e s t a n t movement. In C a th o lic is m w it h i t s em p hasis upon
e c c l e s i a s t i c a l d i s c i p l i n e , how ever, a n o th e r p a t t e r n has
em erged. The H oly V ir g in , th e Queen o f H eaven, has r e p la c e d
th a t vague D e it y i n th e C a th o lic fo lk -m in d . I f God was to o :
s a c r e d , J e su s to o a u s t e r e , th e S p i r i t to o v a g u e , th e Holy
M other was f e l t to be f u n c t io n in g i n th e w orld o f men.
The c h i e f c r i t i c i s m o f P r o t e s t a n t is m has been t h a t
- - - - - — - 1
I I t i s a lm o st t o t a l l y un eq uip ped t o d e a l w ith th e une o n - I
! !
j s c i o u s . T. S. G regory s a y s ; !
I
I I t i s th e s u b - r a t io n a l and su b c o n sc io u s p r e s s u r e
I o f t h i s s p a t i a l c ir c u m sta n c e t h a t a Germ anized or
I A n g lic iz e d C h r i s t i a n i t y c o u ld n o t h a n d le . I t c o u ld ,
I e d i f y s a i n t s ; i t c o u ld c o n v e r t s in n e r s ; i t c o u ld l i f t |
I up i d e a l s and q u ick en a s p i r a t i o n s and i n s t r u c t m in d s, j
i b u t i t c o u ld n o t s a n c t i f y t h i n g s . P r e c i s e l y b eca u se j
i t l i f t s i t s eyebrow s w ith r a t i o n a l s u p e r i o r i t y a t th e |
l o c a l i s m o f iMiat i t h as dubbed s u p e r s it iO n , th e P r o t e s - |
' t a n t t h e o lo g y has n o th in g to sa y to th e sub-human f a c t s 1
J i n human n a tu r e . I t i s alw ay s in th e s i t u a t i o n o f e x -
I pounding a red em p tion wrought by a God who d id n o t know
I what he had to redeem u n t i l th e s c i e n t i s t found i t o u t
! f o r h im .3 ^
i !
I In th e l i g h t o f the f o l lo w in g c o n s id e r a t io n s : ( l ) |
I th e a v a i l a b i l i t y o f th e Ju n gian k ey to th e u n c o n s c io u s ; (2 ) j
I '
jthe p e r s i s t e n c e o f th e M o th e r -c u lt th rou gh ou t the h i s t o r y o f
{ i
j r e l ig i o n ; ( 3 ) the demand f o r a s im ila r e x p r e s s io n in the |
l a r g e s t e x p r e s s io n o f C h r i s t i a n i t y and (k) th e hom osexual
I I
[te n d e n c ie s i n c e r t a i n form s o f p o p u la r P r o t e s t a n t is m , th e I
: I
t h e o lo g ia n o f th e R efo rm a tio n t r a d i t i o n m ust b e g in to take |
s e r i o u s l y th e problem o f th e fe m in in e a s p e c t s o f r e l i g i o n .
What i s n eed ed i s t h r e e f o ld : ( l ) an i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f th e |
problem from a l l p o s s i b l e p s y c h o lo g ic a l t h e o r i e s which have
^ !
‘ any b e a r in g , ( 2 ) an a n a l y s i s o f th e d an gers o f th e c u l t as
e v id e n t i n Roman C h r i s t i a n i t y and ( 3 ) a t h e o l o g i c a l sy n th e sis.
3
T. 8 . G regory, "Mary and P i e t y , ” Mary Book, op.
G i t . , p . 393.
I $2
w h ich i s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f th e R eform ation t r a d i t i o n . ^ The
.problem w i l l n o t be s o lv e d o v e r n ig h t , but P r o t e s t a n t is m
I w i l l m iss a g r e a t o p p o r tu n ity i f i t does n o t come to some
Îk in d o f term s w ith t h i s pure m a n if e s t a t io n o f the un con
s c io u s d im en sio n o f p e r s o n a l i t y .
^Some work has b een done by German t h e o lo g ia n s .
C f. D ie R e lig io n in G e s c h ic h te und G egen w ort. ed. Hermann
G unkel. a t a l . . V o l. I l l { 1 9 2 7 j .
B I B L I O G R A P H Y
j Books
I Adams, Henry. M o n t-S a in t M ichel and C h a r tr e s . B oston :
I Houghton M i f f l i n Co., 190k. j
I I
'C a lic o t t , Frank. The S u p ern a tu ra l in E a r ly S p a n ish L i t e r a -
i t u r e . S tu d ie d i n th e Works o f the Court o f A lfo n s o X,
I E l S a b io . New York: X n s t lt u to de l a s Espanos en l o s ;
! E sta d o s H n id os, 192 3.
Duhr, J o sep h . The G lo r io u s A ssum ption o f th e Mother o f God.
I T r a n s la te d by J . M . F ra u n c es. New York: P. J . Kenedy &
I S o n s, 1 9 5 0 . ;
E van s, E r a s t u s . An A ssessm en t o f J u n g *3 *Answer to Job. * |
j London: G u ild o f P a s t o r a l P s y c h o lo g y , 1954»
iFordham, F r ie d a . An I n tr o d u c t io n to Jung * s P s y c h o lo g y . I
' London: P en gu in B ook s, 1953. ;
t , I
jG u itto n , J e a n . The V ir g in Mary. T r a n s la te d by A. Gordon !
I Sm ith. New York: P. J . Kenedy & Son s, 1 9 5 2 .
! I
I I
iHarnack, A dolph. H is t o r y o f Dogma. T r a n s la te d b y N e il 1
i Buchanan. V ol. VI. From 3rd German ed . B oston : L i t t l e ,
! Brown, and Co., 1899.
! i
!J a c o b i, J o la n . The P sy c h o lo g y o f Jun g. R e v is e d . New ‘
; Haven: Y ale U n iv e r s it y P r e s s , 1 9 5 l . ;
' ;
Jung, C. G. C o n tr ib u tio n s to A n a ly t i c a l P s y c h o lo g y . T ran s
l a t e d by H. G. and Cary P’. B ayn es. New York: Ear c o u r t , 1
i B race and Co., I 9 2 6 . '
The I n t e g r a t io n o f the P e r s o n a l i t y . T r a n s la te d i
by S t a n le y D e l l . London: R o n tled g e and Kegan P a u l,
L td., I 9I 4 -O.
P sy c h o lo g y and A lchem y. T r a n s la te d by R. F . G.
H u ll. B o l li n g e r S e r ie s XX. New York: P antheon B ook s,
1 9 5 3 .
P sy c h o lo g y o f th e U n c o n sc io u s. T r a n s la te d by
B e a t r ic e M . H in k le . New York: M o ffa t, Yard and Co.,
1 9 1 6.
■■ " 55j
Jung, C, G. and K e r e n y i, E, E ssa y s on a S c ie n c e o f Myth- |
o lo g y . B o l li n g e r S e r ie s XXII. New York: P antheon i
B ooks, 194.9 . '
L in d sa y , Thomas M , A H is to r y o f th e R e fo rm a tio n . New York:
C h a rles S c r ib n e r * s Sons , 1 9 0 6 .
I
L od s, A dolphe. I s r a e l , From i t s B e g in n in g s to th e M iddle ,
j o f the E ig h th C e n tu ry . T r a n s la te d by S, H. Hooke. j
I New York: A lfr e d A. K nopf, 1 9 3 2 . I
i Murphy, John F. Mary * s Imm aculate H ea r t. M ilwaukee: The |
I Bruce P u b lis h in g Go., 1 9 5 l. !
i >
j N i e ls e n , F r e d e r ic k . The H is to r y o f th e Papacy i n th e XIXth I
I C en tu ry. T r a n s la te d b y A rthur James Mason. V ol. I I . I
I London: John Murray, I 9 0 6 .
I Nos8 , John B. Man's R e l i g i o n s . New York: The M acm illan
Go:. , 1 9 4 9 . --------------------- i
I I
P e e r s , E. A l l i s o n . S tu d ie s o f th e S p a n ish M y s t ic s . V ol. IJ
2nd Ed. r e v i s e d . London: S. P. C. K ., 1 951. |
P o h le , J o sep h . M a r io lo g y . T r a n s la te d by Arthur P r e u s s . !
I S t . L o u is: B. H erder Book Co., 194-5.
'Ramsay, W . M . P a u lin e and Other S tu d ie s i n E a r ly C h r is t ia n '
* H is to r y . 2nd. Ed. New York: G eorge H. Doran, Co., |
i n. d. I
I 1
R e d f i e l d , B e s s ie G. ( e d .) . Gods; A D ic tio n a r y o f the
D e i t i e s o f A ll Lands. New York: G. Pi Putnam’ s S o n s,
1 9 3 1 .
jSheed, P. J . (ed. ). The Mary Book. New York: Sheed and
I Ward, 1 9 5 1 .
T y le r , J . E n d e ll. The Worship o f th e B le s s e d V ir g in Mary
in the Church o f Rome C on trary to H oly S c r ip tu r e and to
' th e F a it h and P r a c t ic e o f the Church o f C h r is t Through
the F i r s t F iv e C e n tu r ie 3 . London: S. Pi G. K ., 18^6.
W a tts, A lan W . Myth and R it u a l i n C h r i s t i a n i t y . New York:
The Vanguard P r e s s , 1 9 5 3 .
jl/%iite, V ic to r . God and the U n c o n sc io u s. London: The
* H a r v ille P r e s s , 1953.
56
:W illo u g h b y , H arold R. Pagan R e g e n e r a tio n . C hicago: The
I U n iv e r s it y o f C hicago P r e s s , 1929*
A r t i c l e s
I C ooper, Jam es. "M ary,” E n c y c lo p e d ia o f R e l ig i o n and E t h i c s .
E d ite d by James H a s tin g s . V o l. V I I I , 1931*
jHolweck, F r e d e r ic k G. "C andlem as," The C a th o lic E n c y c lo - ;
p e d i a . E d ite d by C h a rles G. Herbermann, e t a l . V o l.
; I I I , 1 9 0 8 . !
I
i”M u n ific e n tissm u s D eu s," The N a tio n a l C a th o lic Alm anac.
I 1951.
:"N otab le A p p a r itio n s o f Our L ady," The N a tio n a l C a th o lic
I Alm anac. 195 2 .
I
'T hurston, H erb ert. " V ir g in Mary," The C a th o lic E n c y c lo - i
! p e d ia . E d ite d by C h a rles G. Herbermann, e t a l . !
I V o l. XV, 1 9 1 2 . :
iZ o ck le r, 0. "Mary, Mother o f J e su s C h r i s t , ” The New S c h a f f -
I H erzog E n c y c lo p e d ia o f R e l ig i o u s K now ledge. E d ite d by !
Samuel M acauiey J a ck so n . V ol. VII, 1 9 5 3 . i
Onli/srsity of Southern Cal^omia Ubraty^

Asset Metadata

Creator Thompson, James Calvin (author)

Core Title The implications of Jungian psychology for an interpretation of the rise of the cult of the Virgin

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Degree Master of Arts

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag OAI-PMH Harvest,philosophy, religion and theology,Psychology

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c39-364803

Unique identifier UC11313950

Identifier EP65250.pdf (filename),usctheses-c39-364803 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier EP65250.pdf

Dmrecord 364803

Document Type Thesis

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Thompson, James Calvin

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA