1. What is dogma?
2.1 The Immaculate Conception
In spite of continuing powerful opinion outside of the Catholic Church to the contrary, the dogma of the Immaculate Conception was promulgated by Pius IX in 1854 in Ineffable Deus.
‗We declare …that the most blessed Virgin Mary in the first moment of her conception was, by the unique grace and privilege of God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ the saviour of the human race, preserved intact from all stain of original sin.‘8
Although the doctrine is founded in tradition rather than scripture, there are, nonetheless, a number of biblical texts which are believed to support it. These, Gen 3:15, Lk1:42 and Lk1:28, were given by Pius IX as reasons for the dogma having been revealed.
Because of the relatively few scriptural texts in its favour, the dogma of the Immaculate Conception has had a troubled record, not only for Protestants, but for notable Catholics as well.
It was rejected by Thomas Aquinas largely on the grounds that it isolates Mary from the need for
7 Joseph Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1982), 48.
8 Heinrich Denziger, Enchiridion Symbolorum et Definitionum (New York: Herder and Herder, 1957), 1641.
51 salvation by Christ.9 It was only when the notion of preservative redemption was introduced that the dogma found more favour.
The Eastern Orthodox Church also rejected the dogma, in spite of their long veneration of the Virgin. For them it is important that Mary remain fully human and her purity an exception rather than a privilege. It is her purity, combined with her personal liberty, which makes her venerable in this tradition.
The important truths that are contained in this declaration are, firstly, that Mary was free from sin from the beginning of her existence in utero, though the specific point at which that occurs is not defined, though it is widely accepted as the first moment of her conception. Secondly, the phrase
‗by a singular grace and privilege‘ designates that she is the only human person (Jesus is a divine person) who has been immaculately conceived. Thirdly, and significantly, the phrase ‗in view of the merits of Jesus Christ‘ does not exempt her from redemption.10 These three truths are crucial.
Their implication is that Catholic believers attribute the birth of Christ to a combination of God‘s will and the free will of Mary, though her free acceptance of the role of Mother of God does not actually depend on her immaculate conception. Protestant believers see it as entirely the work of God. It must always be borne in mind that Ineffable Deus does not exist alone. It must be seen alongside other Catholic dogmas concerning incarnation, grace and redemption. This is true of all dogmas but particularly so where the dogma is meagrely supported by scripture. This doctrine is a logical necessity of other, more fundamental, doctrines, namely the Theotokos.
Theologically, the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception is essential if Mary is predestined to carry the title of Theotokos because of the dignity afforded to Jesus through the title.
Not only the substance, but also the language of the statement remain disturbing to many Protestants, and strike other chords which are related to other doctrines. For example, in
9 St Thomas Aquinas. Summa Theologiae: A Concise Ttranslation, ed., Timothy McDermott. (Westminster, Maryland: Christian Classics, 1989), 513.
10 Joseph A. Komonchak, Mary Collins and Dermot A. Lane, eds., The New Dictionary of Theology (Dublin: Gill and Macmillan, 1987), 508.
52 Macquarrie‘s opinion, the use in the declaration of the terms ‗stain‘ and ‗preserved‘ implies an inevitability regarding original sin that perhaps rests uneasily in Protestant belief. The prominence in the document of original sin is as disquieting to Protestants as the dogma itself.11 Macquarrie points out that the term ‗stain‘ implies an attitude to sin that perhaps is not intended in the definition. He indicates that if sin is an alienation from God, and if original sin is that communal alienation of humankind from God and the resultant distortion of society, then the term ‗stain‘ is not apposite. ‗Stain‘ has the implication of physical imperfection rather than spiritual estrangement. This term is thus burdened by implications which are unrelated to the doctrine as expressed in Ineffable Deus.
A life ‗preserved‘ from this alienation, implies a life that is not distorted or deformed by alienation in the way that all of humanity‘s is. This accords Mary a unique relationship with God that is a model for humanity. The difference is subtle but important. It is not only a more personal view of Mary, but a more positive understanding of the truth of the Immaculate Conception. Freedom from sin is closeness to God and to God‘s grace.
It would seem therefore, that a different approach to the personhood of Mary might be more acceptable to Protestants. This would be an approach that, while maintaining the centrality of the Marian dogma, uses terminology that is more affirming of Mary‘s uniqueness without refuting the centrality of God.
Relevant here might be the reflection that Macquarrie‘s observations limit themselves to the dogma as expressed in English. It might be a peculiarity of English semantics that render the meaning in the way that Macquarrie, and other Anglicans, perceive it. A fuller hermeneutic of the text in Latin and other languages into which it has been rendered might not support Macquarrie‘s reading.
11 John Macquarrie, Christian Unity and Christian Diversity (London: SCM Press, 1975), 93.
53 Although the doctrine of Original Sin has been the focus of theologians over the ages, it has not completely expunged the notion of the original righteousness of humanity which has been created in God‘s image. Total corruption has never been a part of Christian belief, but a firmer emphasis on the essential rectitude of humanity would enable a broader understanding of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, in Macquarrie‘s opinion. So the negative implication of the preservation from original sin might well be seen as a re-institution of that divine grace which signifies the end of the alienation of the fall and the preparation for the incarnation.
This brings us to another very real concern of Protestants in the issue of Mariology: the danger of the amplification of the attributes of Mary to the extent that she becomes so imbued with Christ- like qualities as to make Christ redundant, or, in view of her special graces, to set her in opposition to Christ. This notion began to emerge during the Counter-Reformation and was an objection to the dogma‘s largely traditional foundation at the expense of scripturally based theology. Here, the sensus fidelium, of which the Catholic Church was so considerate, became instead a cause for concern and was viewed as giving undue credibility to mere superstition.
A careful reading of the official formulation of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception makes it clear that this is not so. It declares that Mary‘s grace and privilege were hers ‗in view of the merits of Jesus Christ the Saviour of the human race‘. It is indisputable that the meaning of Mary is indivisible from, and informed by, the meaning of Christ.
However, and pivotally, Macquarrie reminds us that Mary‘s righteousness is also different in essence from that of Christ‘s. Mary‘s righteousness was essentially Jewish. She represented the old dispensation in her obedience to God. While Christ is also obedient to God, his righteousness is qualitatively different. It has a new intention: dynamic, creative and innovative, it points the way forward to an eschatological future that is no longer Jewish. This is why the truth of the Incarnation of Christ supersedes the Immaculate Conception of Mary.12
12 Macquarrie, Christian Unity and Christian Diversity, 95.
54 This point has been troubling to feminist thinkers over the years. Mary‘s righteousness is receptive and passive whereas Christ‘s is pro-active and creative. Mary represents Israel the bride, beloved of God, whereas Christ‘s righteousness goes beyond this and shares in the creativity of God. This view of Mary‘s righteousness has the unfortunate effect of setting the two as competitors in salvation history and such an understanding would be flawed in both Catholic and Protestant traditions.