logo

Mary’s yes to God

logo

Cross-posted from Shreds and Patches

While among Christians Jesus has escaped his detractors, his mother still carries the weight of human detraction, or perhaps worse still types of adoration that rob her of her humanity.

After a sermon on her Feast Day, the bishop was assailed by an angry parishioner who scolded him for preaching about Mary. The bishop replied, “Sir, it seems that when you speak of Mary you are remembering a deceased Roman Catholic lay woman. When I speak of her I speak of the Mother of God.”

There’s another adage that is perhaps more to the point. “If you are not a Marian, you are probably an Arian.” The Arians denied that Jesus was, in the womb, truly God and truly human. More of that in a moment.

While many Anglicans flinch at what they conceive to be the extravagance of devotion given to St. Mary, a more modern objection has its adherents. These people believe that Mary’s meek submission to the will of God demeans all women. Mary describes herself as the handmaiden of the Lord and submits to God’s will. To some this seems to re-enforce the stereotype of male domination and female submission. So poor Mary continues to be ignored, chided for the extravagance of devotion offered to her, or decried as being an anti-feminist.

The Prayer Book of 1662 described August 15 as the Feast of the Falling Asleep of the Blessed Virgin Mary. When the Episcopal Church compiled its own Prayer Book at the end of the 18th Century the Feast disappeared. It returns in our present Prayer Book as “The Feast of St. Mary the Virgin.” The collect refers to her being taken into heaven. This reflects the pious belief of Christians through the ages who acknowledge the crucial role Mary plays in God’s action in our redemption.

Mary’s reply to the Angel was probably the most important yes in the history of the human race. However her yes, the yes of a woman to bear God’s Son, isn’t merely a female assent. Every human, male or female, young or old, who agrees to do the will of God, submits. At the heart of vocation is our response to dedicate our life to God and to seek to do his will. We are all called to bear Jesus.

Mary is, therefore, as are all men and women we regard as saints, ordinary people who respond to God’s will in extraordinary ways, an example for us to follow. Mary bears Jesus in an extraordinary way as we are called, through baptism, to bear Jesus in our perhaps ordinary way. We are encouraged by her example. That which is unique, one of a kind, draws near to us and helps us to respond with our own yes.

The writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews reminds us that it is as we are surrounded by a cloud of witnesses that we are able to look to Jesus, in and through whom or faith is begun and finished. From the earliest times the Church has identified this cloud or company of witnesses (witness means lifegiver) as the saints. They encourage our walk with Jesus. Such encouragement has been described as prayer. Unfortunately a very narrow definition of prayer creates misunderstanding and reaction to the whole idea of the communion of saints, an article of the Creed. If prayer is always a request, and more narrowly a request for salvation, then obviously such requests are appropriately offered to God the Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit.

However, prayer is much wider than a plea for salvation. Prayer is conversation. Every time we worship together we share our prayers and praises, our confession and adoration with each other and with the whole church. Even our private, lonely prayers echo through the heavens and are taken up through the Spirit in the eternal offering of Jesus and those who surround him in glory.

Mary can’t save us — that has happened in our baptism. The saints can’t save us, for that has been given to us when we were adopted by God in Christ. But Mary and the saints can express the love that never fails in encouraging our devotion and echoing our prayers as they are taken up by angels and archangels and all the company of heaven.

Mary is also God-bearer, Theotokos, because the child within her womb, the child she bore, is God from God, Light from Light, True God of True God, and through Mary truly flesh of our flesh and blood of our blood. Her relationship to Jesus her son, her naming in the Creeds, presence in the Gospels, noted fellowship with the Apostles in the Upper Room as Jesus makes himself known, demands our collective admiration and devotion. When cousin Elizabeth met the pregnant Mary, the child leaped in her womb. “Blessed art thou among women,” and yes, Blessed art thou among all humans.

On this her Feast Day we hail Mary, bless Mary, enjoy her presence in the communion of saints and seek to follow her yes as God calls us to his work and witness.

5 Responses to “Mary’s yes to God”

  1. Doug Simmons says:

    Setting aside for not the discussion of “Theotokos” and the significant differences between the concept of “Mother of God” and “God-bearer,” I still wonder about the statement that our baptism saves us.

    I come from an evangelical (Baptist) background and have difficulty with the idea that an outward act, especially one that can be imposed on us apart from our willful choice (i.e., infant baptism) is the means through which salvation is granted. As an outward sign of an inward reality the sacramental nature of the act seems valid, but does the act itself, whether by immersion or effusion, actually convey and impart the Saving Grace bestowed by God on those whom He calls? If so, what is the role of Confirmation? Is it necessary? Why?

    Let me pose my question from another angle. Is (infant) Baptism, in the absence of a subsequent confirmation, efficacious?

  2. David McConkey says:

    I query the comment that “The Prayer Book of 1662 described August 15 as the Feast of the Falling Asleep of the Blessed Virgin Mary.” It’s not so in any 1662 Prayer Book I know! A number of other Marian feasts (Conception, Nativity, Annunciation, Visitation) are included but not the Dormition. I don’t find any reference to this in Lynda Howell’s Table of Differences between the 1662 Prayer Book and the Modern Edition, for example.

  3. Fr Ian says:

    The thing, I think, that trips people up who have reservations about baptism’s efficacy is that they see it simply as an outward act, simply as pouring water. But it’s not simply that. It’s at the center of a very big thing, and is nothing apart from that. The candidates and sponsors have been prepared, the Church is gathered round, not just as onlookers, but praying, crying out to God, asking his regenerating Spirit to do what he promises. Baptism is not a strictly personal moment. It’s a moment when the whole Church, including blessed Mary and the baby and every believer in between, are offering up to God this life to make his own in a most intimate way. It is therefore a very Catholic moment.

  4. “Baptism now saves you-not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience -through the resurrection of Jesus Christ…” (1 Peter 3:21)

    It is worth noting that while the words “Baptism now saves you” are written in Scripture, the words “personal decision for Jesus” never make an appearance. I say this not to be snarky… well, ok, a little bit to be snarky, but not much… really it’s just because I think that there is nothing more truly Evangelical, in the historical sense of the word, than belief in God’s use of Baptism for the purpose of saving us by binding us to Christ’s death and resurrection.

  5. Doug Simmons says:

    Looking at several commentaries, I see a lot of linkage betwen the “appeal to God for a good conscience” and the “personal decision” element. Using the Flood and Noah as a type, the water, while surrounding Noah, is not the instrument of his salvation. Rather, he is saved by the Ark, a type of the Church and the gracious act of God.

    Let me pose again my question: In the absence of a subsequent confirmation, is Baptism efficacious? If so, how?

Leave a Reply

logo
logo
Copyright 2012. The Living Church Foundation. Designed by 11th Hour