THE USE OF MARIAN IMAGERY IN CATHOLIC ECCLESIOLOGY SINCE VATICAN II A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Notre Dame in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Natalia M. Imperatori-Lee, B.A., A.M. Mary Catherine Hilkert, Director Graduate Program in Theology Notre Dame, Indiana July 2007 © Copyright by NATALIA M. IMPERATORI-LEE 2007 All rights reserved THE USE OF MARIAN IMAGERY IN CATHOLIC ECCLESIOLOGY SINCE VATICAN II Abstract by Natalia M. Imperatori-Lee The Second Vatican Council linked mariology and ecclesiology in its promulgation of Lumen gentium, The Dogmatic Constitution on the Church. While it was clear from the time of the council that mariology would be tied to ecclesiology, the reverse is less obvious and has not been examined systematically. This dissertation asserts that there is a mariological element to some contemporary Catholic ecclesiologies, an element that has been poorly understood. Through an analysis of the work of Hans Urs von Balthasar, Elizabeth Johnson, and U. S. Latino/a theologians, this study examines the mariological and ecclesiological contributions of these thinkers, whether these contributions dovetail with the goals of the Second Vatican Council, and what they say about the struggle for identification in the Catholic Church today. After examining the debate surrounding the mariological schema at Vatican II, this dissertation analyzes the aesthetic mariological ecclesiology of Hans Urs von Balthasar. By making Mary the cornerstone of his reflection on the Church, specifically the Church’s “marian character,” Balthasar ties his mariological ecclesiology to his Natalia Imperatori-Lee theological anthropology. This is among the first significant attempts to link mariology and ecclesiology in the wake of Vatican II. However, Balthasar’s problematic anthropological assumptions call for critique, and do not fully engage the ecclesiological vision of the Second Vatican Council. The next approach studied is the critical feminist approach of Elizabeth Johnson. Her desire to return Mary to her proper place within the communion of saints, a symbol Johnson uses to describe the Church, forges a new direction in the link between mariology and ecclesiology. Johnson’s vision of a historical communion of equal disciples living out holiness in ordinary ways both broadens the idea of holiness in the Church and returns Mary to a human status ignored in the excesses of marian maximalism. The last approach is that of U. S. Latino/a theologians, in particular their reflections on Mexican-American devotion to Guadalupe. While this study does not confront the questions of historicity surrounding this apparition, it contends that the reflections on Guadalupan devotion constitute an incipient ecclesiology, one that holds promise for the self-identification of the American Church. CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS........................................................................................ iv INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 1 CHAPTER 1: A CHRISTOLOGICAL AND ECCLESIOLOGICAL SHIFT: THE SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL AND PAUL VI .................................................. 10 1.1: The Inclusion Debate............................................................................ 17 1.2: The Evolution of the Marian Schema.................................................... 25 1.3: The Text of Chapter Eight..................................................................... 29 1.4: Mary’s Role in Salvation History.......................................................... 32 1.5: Mary’s Role in the Church.................................................................... 35 1.6: Marian Devotion................................................................................... 40 1.7: The Mariological “Crisis”..................................................................... 42 1.8: Pope Paul VI’s Contributions: “Mater ecclesiae” and Marialis cultus ... 48 1.9: The Text of Marialis cultus................................................................... 49 1.10: Devotion To The Blessed Virgin Mary In The Liturgy........................ 50 1.11: The Renewal of Devotion To Mary..................................................... 52 1.12: Conclusion.......................................................................................... 57 CHAPTER 2: A FEMININE ECCLESIOLOGY: MARY AS ARCHETYPE OF THE CHURCH....................................................................................................... 59 2.1: Balthasar and Vatican II........................................................................ 62 2.2: Balthasar’s Theology of the Sexes ........................................................ 69 2.3: Nuptiality in Balthasar’s Ecclesiology .................................................. 76 2.4: The Feminine Sphere: The Marian Church............................................ 79 2.5: The Masculine Sphere: Office in the Church......................................... 82 2.6: Conclusion............................................................................................ 89 CHAPTER 3: MARY IN THE COMMUNION OF SAINTS: A FEMINIST CRITICAL APPROPRIATION OF MARIOLOGY AND ECCLESIOLOGY......... 93 3.1: Johnson, Feminism and Mariology ....................................................... 95 3.2: A Communion of Saints, Prophets, Friends: Johnson’s Ecclesiological Reflections............................................................................................ 99 3.3: Mary of Nazareth, Companion in Hope: Johnson’s Mariology.............112 3.4: An Anthropological Critique: Nancy Dallavalle...................................124 3.5: An Alternative Vision: Mary Aquin O’Neill ........................................129 3.6: Conclusion...........................................................................................136 ii CHAPTER 4: AN INCULTURATED MARIOLOGY: MARY IN THE LATINO/A CONTEXT .........................................................................................138 4.1: The Demographics of the Hispanic Church..........................................142 4.2: Orlando Espín, A Proto-Ecclesiologist.................................................143 4.3: The Pneumatological Guadalupe: Espín’s Proposal..............................149 4.4: Elizondo, A Guadalupan Theologian ...................................................155 4.5: Roberto Goizueta, A Theology of Accompaniment and Relationality...161 4.6: Ada María Isasi-Díaz: A Mujerista Approach ......................................167 4.7: Conclusion...........................................................................................171 CONCLUSION......................................................................................................175 5.1: First Criterion: The Impact of Mariology on Ecclesiology....................176 5.2: Second Criterion: Continuity with Vatican II .......................................182 5.3: Third Criterion: Marialis cultus ...........................................................184 5.4: Final Criterion: The Way Forward .......................................................196 BIBLIOGRAPHY..................................................................................................199 iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This dissertation would not have been possible without the support, insight, and hard work of people besides the author. First I must thank my advisor, Mary Catherine Hilkert. Her thorough reading of my drafts, her ideas, and most importantly her encouragement enabled me to complete this dissertation. The other members of my committee, who read and commented on this dissertation, Mary Doak, J. Matthew Ashley, and Richard P. McBrien also enhanced my writing and my insight with their suggestions along the way. Because of the generosity of the Lousiville Institute Dissertation Grant, I was able to dedicate a year to writing this dissertation full-time, and I am grateful to them for that year and for their continued support. My colleagues at Manhattan College have provided me a community of scholars with which to share some insights reflected in this study, for which I am very thankful. A work like this could only come to fruition because of the dedication and support of my family. In particular, I would like to express my gratitude to my grandfather, José Angel Imperatori, who instilled in me a love of learning and of words. My father, Alberto C. Imperatori never tired in his support for my endeavors, and though he did not live to see this project, his wisdom and wit were with me throughout its composition. My mother, María Victoria Imperatori has been the tireless promoter of all my projects, no matter how small or insignificant. Her strength and resilience continue to be examples for my own life, and this is her accomplishment as well as mine. I would also like to thank iv my brother Albert, who helped make me a feminist, for his encouragement throughout my studies. My son, William Edward Lee, was born during the writing of this dissertation and I hope that he sees the joy he has brought my life in these pages, even if he is too young to understand the words on them. In a very special way, I want to thank my husband Michael Edward Lee, who has not only sustained me nutritionally in the last 3 years and especially through the final stages of this dissertation, but also has nourished my mind with humor, questions, and insights,