Marian Devotions: in and Beyond Marialis Cultus Stanley A

Marian Studies Volume 40 Proceedings of the Fortieth National Convention of the Mariological Society of America held Article 15 in Burlingame, Calif. 1989 Marian Devotions: In and Beyond Marialis Cultus Stanley A. Parmisano Follow this and additional works at: https://ecommons.udayton.edu/marian_studies Part of the Religion Commons Recommended Citation Parmisano, Stanley A. (1989) "Marian Devotions: In and Beyond Marialis Cultus," Marian Studies: Vol. 40, Article 15. Available at: https://ecommons.udayton.edu/marian_studies/vol40/iss1/15 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Marian Library Publications at eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Marian Studies by an authorized editor of eCommons. For more information, please contact frice1@udayton.edu, mschlangen1@udayton.edu. Parmisano: Marian Devotions: In and Beyond Marialis Cultus MARIAN DEVOTIONS: IN AND BEYOND MARIALIS CULTUS Vatican Council II is often blamed, or praised, for the loss of devotion to Mary within the Church. It is pointed out as fact that prior to the Council devotion to Mary flourished, while immediately afterwards it suffered an almost immedi ate demise. The elements within the Council held to be re sponsible for this change are as follows: 1. Tbe promulgation of the one document on the Church (Lumen gentium) with a chapter on Mary appearing at its end, treating her as first within the Church. Though such ac tion might have gratified a minority of Catholics and ap peased Protestants, most of the faithful would see it only as a diminishment of the person and role of Mary. Instinctively they would look for a separate document on Mary alone, extolling her as above as well as within the Church. 2. Tbe strong emphasis in the Council upon the humanity of Christ and upon Christ as our sole savior and intermedi ary with God. If, as prior to the Council, Christ's divinity were accentuated and his self-declared dual role as judge and savior of the world were retained, then the need for Mary as our intercessor with Christ-as Christ is with God would remain. But the Council stressed the human Christ who is abundantly merciful and compassionate and who is our constant and efficacious intercessor. Our need for a sec ond intermediary, then, would seem superfluous and even downright blasphemous. 3. Tbe priority given to Sacred Scripture as the embodi ment of the initial and fundamental tradition of the Church. The enthusiasm for Scripture sparked thereby has tended to distract from attention paid to later Tradition in which Mary XL (1989) MARIAN STUDIES 136-153 Published by eCommons, 1989 1 Marian Studies, Vol. 40 [1989], Art. 15 Marian Devotions: In and Beyond Marialis Cultus 137 mainly appears. The Mary of this later tradition, often god like in her qualities, does not seem to be the same as the simple Jewish woman of the gospels. Therefore, eliminate her. 4. Tbe reform of the liturgy, with its insistence on the cen trality of the Eucharist and other sacraments, and the substi tution of the vernacular for Latin as the liturgical language. Largely because the liturgy had been foreign in language and otherwise isolated from the people, popular devo tions-including the most popular marian devotions-arose to satisfy the need for intelligible worship. But now a re newed vernacular liturgy itself could and should satisfy this need, thereby rendering other devotions, Marian devotion included, unnecessary. 5. A more positive outlook on the world, life, and death. Not so much seeing Christ in the act of redeeming the world but viewing the world as already redeemed seemed to be the tenor of the Council. Thus, with sin and its conse quences no longer at the fore, Mary-the refuge of sinners, gate of heaven, help of Christians, and so on-seems not so desperately needed now. If, with the Protestants we are al ready saved by Christ, then, like them, we are in no need of Mary. 6. Ecumenism. The Council's thrust toward dialogue and unification with other Christian churches and other religions has led to a de-emphasis upon things that divide. But, since the Reformation, devotion to Mary has been central in the division of the Catholic Church from other Christian bodies. Therefore, we should let her and devotion to her quietly re cede into the background while, with our Protestant broth ers and sisters, we proclaim Jesus Christ as our only Lord and Savior. Yet, it must be acknowledged that Mary features more in Vatican II than in any other ecumenical council and, many argue, in ways that best befit her and her magnificent voca tion. She is prominently there in the very first words of Pope John XXIII as he opens the Council, also in the intro ductory words of the conciliar fathers in their address to "all https://ecommons.udayton.edu/marian_studies/vol40/iss1/15 2 Parmisano: Marian Devotions: In and Beyond Marialis Cultus 138 Marian Devotions: In and Beyond Marialis Cultus people and nations" as they begin their work. Though she does not have a document all to herself, she climaxes-or at least finalizes-in a long and detailed chapter, the first and perhaps most important-document of the Council, Lu men gentium. Her name is invoked or mentioned in other documents of the Council. And the papal brief closing the Council begins and ends with the acknowledgement of her presence and protection throughout. Further, Pope John ex pressly opens the Council on the feast of the Divine Mater nity (11 Oct.), and Pope Paul closes it on the feast of the Immaculate Conception (8 Dec.). It may be that such recognition of Mary's presence and authority arises from deep levels of the Catholic psyche, vi tally operative within the Council as elsewhere in the Church, but it is also plausibly argued that it is peripheral, a pious though anachronistic nod in the direction of Mary. Central to the Council are the non-marian teachings and declarations mentioned above, and these, it would seem, have tended to exclude rather than include Mary and dimin ish rather than encourage devotion to her. I think that, initially, this has been the case. But perhaps, in the long run, the Council will be seen to have done right by Mary, not so much because of what it said about her (though this also) but, rather, because of its emphasis upon other essentials of the faith. Having got them rightly and properly placed, according to the exigencies of our time, it has cleared the way for fresh and creative approaches to Mary in and for the contemporary world. NEW DIRECTIONS For all the fine things the Council said about Mary, it rec ognized that there is so much else that can and should be said. In the preface to its chapter on Mary (Lumen gentium, chap. 8), it emphatically declares that it "does not ... have it in mind to give a complete doctrine on Mary, nor does it wish to decide those questions which have not yet been fully Published by eCommons, 1989 3 Marian Studies, Vol. 40 [1989], Art. 15 Man·an Devotions: In and Beyond Marialis Cultus 139 illuminated by the work of theologians (no. 54)." Thus Car dinal Suenens, one of the more prominent and creative voices at the Council, has recently stressed the incomplete ness of its declaration on Mary: "I felt we needed to say more ... "' Pope John Paul II seems of like mind when he asks for "a new and more careful reading of what the Coun cil said about the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God, in the mystery of Christ and of the Church."2 And Pope Paul VI, in Maria/is cultus, speaks continually of the "develop ment" and "growth" of devotion to Mary. For him, too, the Council did not say the final word either about Mary or devotion to her, nor did he consider his own word as fi nal.3 In this paper, I would like to suggest the direction of fur ther development of marian devotion as rooted in marian theology (the two must go hand in hand), not only in and for the future but also as it is already occurring here and now. When we speak of devotion in a religious sense, we gen erally have in mind prayer, specifically, some set of prayers definite in kind and number. Thus, we speak of devotions (plural) of (or to) Our Lady of Perpetual Help, St. Jude, St. Ann, etc. It is a matter of saying some particular prayers in a specified context. But there is a stronger sense to the word. St. Thomas defines it in terms of service: it is the prompt or ready will to serve God and others as leading to God.4 We ourselves have this sense in mind when we use the word as a verb or adjective or adverb, as when we speak of devot ing one's life to a cause, when we refer to a devoted friend, or when we sign off a letter with the phrase "Devotedly yours" and mean it. This is the meaning of the word as it is used by St. Louis De Montfort when he speaks of "true de- 'John Catoir, "Cardinal Suenens Calls for A New Pentecost," America, 6 June 1987, 457-59. In the interview recorded here the Cardinal ex plained: "She is not merely an historical figure; from the beginning she has been given an ongoing mission to bring Christ to the world" (p. 457). 2 Redemptoris mate~; no. 48. 3M aria/is cultus, introduction and passim.

Load more