 |
| inclusive feminism |
With the Second
Vatican council the church gradually opened herself to the new insights in exegesis
and the method in theology. These lead eventually to the fall of traditional
Mariology. The foundations ones laid strong did not withstand the shift that occurred
in Vatican II. The traditional Mariology which was typed on the triumphant
Christology and Ecclesiology altered with the rise of the historic-critical
exegesis, the developing hermeneutics and the existential method in theology.
Cecilia Heyen,
in her article to show the spuriousness of the Scripture and Tradition on Mary
- the foundations traditional Marian theology – writes,
Mary
is mentioned in the scriptures but scantily. Paul doesn’t even mention her
name, Luke and Matthew mention her in their infancy narratives. Biblical
Scholars alert us to the fact that these narratives are by no means historical
accounts but more along the lines of myths. In the Acts of the Apostles (1.14)
Luke explicitly names Mary among the first believers assembled at Jerusalem,
awaiting the coming of the Holy Spirit. John gives prominence to her more as a
theological reflection rather than a narrative account of Jesus’ life. The Didache
(teachings of the twelve apostles in the early Christian community) makes no
mention of her name. Views of Mary’s virginity (unbroken hymen and perpetual
virginity) are first found in the Proto-evangelium of James (apocryphal infancy
story dated AD 150). Her historical life remains a mystery that will probably
never be solved; indeed a number of scholars have commented on the lack of
information on which Mariology was built. Karl Rahner stated, “The Church does
not know Mary’s life story.”
The
earliest known artistic representation of Mary comes from a fresco of the
virgin and child painted 150 AD […] first known prayer to Mary, Sub Tuum
Praesidium, is dated from the late third to fourth century. The second century
‘Apostolic Fathers’ made no reference to Mary; however those who did write to
Mary had Christological concerns. In 431 AD the Council of Ephesus gave Mary an
ancient eastern title, Theotokos, or ‘the bearer of God’, to counter influences
of Docetism (held that the human flesh is evil therefore Jesus passed through
Mary’s body but not like a normal human being) and Gnosticism (Jesus’ birth did
not pass the normal human process – emphasizing Jesus’ divinity). Maurice
Hamington points out that the Theotokos title was commonly understood by
Catholics to mean ‘The Mother of God’ and directly implied Mary’s divinity,
thus giving more impetus to the growth of the Cult of Mary. [1]
Further in her
article, she continues to show the allusion of virginity and then perpetual
virginity to Mary in the Council of Chalcedon (451) and Fourth Lateran Council
(649) following development of the doctrine of Original Sin by St. Augustine.
Thereafter Mary is called as the New-Eve in contrast to the Eve who caused the
fall of the human race. Heyen makes a note that the Augustine’s theory exerted
major influence for the rise of later Marian dogmas, Immaculate Conception and
Bodily Assumption. The church has now
began to see her as the first disciple and type of the church. Paul VI in his
encyclical on Mary proposed an alternative Marian theology that views her from
the perspective of the struggles of contemporary women. He called her ‘as the
model disciple’. The journey in this direction gained momentum with the
post-twentieth century theologies from the margins and the enthusiasm to extend
collaboration with the other Churches.
Apart from these
criticisms based on the factual/historical accuracy of the traditional
conception of Mary, a major blow came from the feminist and liberation theologians.
To name a few, Rosemary Radford Reuther, Elizabeth Johnson, Elizabeth Schussler
Fiorenza, Sallie McFague, Leonordo Boff, and Tissa Balasuriya. They critiqued traditional
Mariology as patriarchal, feudal, capitalist, naive and andro-centric
perpetuating slavery of the oppressed, domestication of women, injustice to the
poor and inequality in society. Balasuriya for example, writes,
Mary
has been made to fit into the tradition of the woman in feudalism and later on
in capitalism. Throughout these ages the reflection on Mary has taken place
mainly in the European countries and as far as the Catholics are concerned in
South Western Europe. It has also been elaborated mainly by celibate clerics,
monks and women religious. These have been largely cut off from the experiences
and trails of the masses of the people. […] Throughout the centuries Mary has
been presented as the ideal of Catholic womanhood that has had a position
subordinate to that of the dominant male. Mary is seen as a the mother who
stayed at home looking after the child and doing homely tasks. Even in her
maternity there is no mention of a relationship to sex. She is the immaculate
conception; born without any inclination of a carnal nature. She is said to have
been a virgin before the birth of Jesus, in the birth of Jesus and after the
birth of Jesus. Hence, Mary was presented as the ideal of womanhood that was
not in any way tarnished by sexual relations.[2]
Feminist and
liberation theologians pointed such portraits of Mary as a humble handmaiden,
subservient further impoverished with dualistic understanding of God and the
world, body-soul, matter-spirit, man-woman, rational-emotional etc., as wanting
deconstruction. Besides, there is an extensive criticism of Eve-Mary parallelism
that has demonized women as anything more than a seductive animal. Hence they
envisaged a reconstruction of Mary that would present an authentic picture of
Mary as the Jewish women of Nazareth, and relevant to the struggles of the
women and poor of our times. We find a
sample in in Balasuriya’s Mary, A Mature
Committed Woman. There are also extensive commentaries on the Magnificat
attributed to her, in Luke from the perspective of the liberation of the
suffering masses.This has been recognized as the new starting point of Marian
theology which seeks the support of scriptures as interpreted by modern
hermeneutics. Thus there evolved new
titles Mary, a Mature committed woman, Model for Women, a woman preoccupied
with the Kingdom of God (liberative mission of Jesus). They project her as the
critical symbol of compassionate love amid the struggles of history.
Feminist theology further, has contributed to redeem the sexist/reductionist presentation of the divine. It aims to free Mary from the burden of being divine mother and goddess that we may know her as an exemplary human being, a guide accompanying in our efforts to build the kingdom of God.
Feminist theology further, has contributed to redeem the sexist/reductionist presentation of the divine. It aims to free Mary from the burden of being divine mother and goddess that we may know her as an exemplary human being, a guide accompanying in our efforts to build the kingdom of God.
Final Note
A
summary based on the course on Marian Theology by Sr. Margret Shanthi.
[1]
Cecile Heyen, “The Place of Mary in Catholic Spirituality” http://ww.acu.edu.au/ren/HEYEN1.HTM
accessed on 19/12/2002.
[2]
Tissa Balasuriya, Mary, A Mature
Committed Woman (Mumbai: Seva Niketan) 1-2.
No comments:
Post a Comment