mother of god and mystical theology of childbirth

8/9/2019 Mother of God and Mystical Theology of Childbirth

1/9

Molly Caliger

The Mother of God and the Mystical Theology of Childbirth

Fr. Alexander Schmemann wrote, Properly understood, Mariology is . . .

the locus theologicuspar excellence of Christian anthropology.1 In a dierent

article, Schmemann made the following profound statement regarding the

place of Mary in understanding creation SheMaryis the ultimate doxaof

creation, its response to !od. She is the climax, the personi"cation, the

a#rmation of the ultimate destiny of all creation that !od may $e "nally all in

all, may "ll all things with himself. %he world is the receptacleof his glory, and

in this it is feminine.And in the present era,Mary is the sign, the guarantee

that this is so, that in its mystical depth the world is already achie&ing this

destiny.2

'ithout Mary, a theology of the human person remains a$stract and

theoretical.()arl *ahner+replied, when ased what he thought was the reason

for the decline in Marian de&otion %oo many Christians, whate&er their

religious o$edience may $e, tend to mae Christianity an ideology, ana$straction. And a$stractions do not need a mother.5 %he Theotokosmaes

1A. Schmemann, -Mary, the Archetype of Manind,- %he ni&ersity of /ayton *e&iew, 00, no. (

1Spring, 02345 6(.

2See 7n Mariology in 7rthodoxy,Marian 8i$rary Studies 19ew Series5 : 1023;5, (0.

3Fr. /onald Calloway, %heology of the of>the>$ody>and>marian>dogmas>part>ii=

4)arl *ahner, S.?. 1March 4, 02;+March (;, 026+5, was a !erman ?esuit priest and theologian

who, alongside @enri de 8u$ac, @ans rs &on


2/9

Molly Caliger

Christianity tangi$le in part $ecause Mary was a woman, an em$odied human

person, with whose humanity one may identify. 'omen can identify with Mary

as the prototypical mother men can identify with her as the model of what it

means to $ecome a theophoros, or $earer>of>!od. As the ultimate doxaof

creationshe informsall of life.

In this paper I explore the ways in which Mary facilitates theosis through her

&ery central role in a theology of the $ody. In particular I examine Mary as the

prototypical $irth>gi&er and child$irth as a mystical experience which can lead

one, through theosis, to the %heotoos and $ac to !od.

The Theotokos and a Theology of the Body

Christianity is a$out the $ody insofar as ?esus Christ is !od incarnate

without a proper understanding of the $ody, Christianity cannot $e fully

understood. %he whole ey to the meaning of redemption is contained in the

incarnation of the !od>man as ena$led $y a woman. As Meyendor pointed

out %he hypostatic union of di&inity and humanity in ?esus Christ is the &ery

foundation of sal&ation, and therefore of dei"cation in Christ, humanity has

already participated in the uncreated life of !od $ecause the eshhas truly

$ecome the esh of !od.6 Met. )allistos wrote Man is a unity of $ody and

soul, and since the Incarnate Christ has sa&ed and redeemed the whole man, it

follows that mans $ody is dei"ed at the same time as his soul.7In that di&ine

lieness which man is called to realie in himself, the $ody has its place. -Your

body is a temple of the Holy pirit,! wrote Saint Paul 10 Cor. G025. -Therefore,

my brothers, " beseech you by #ods mercy to o$er your bodies as a livin%

sacri&ce to #od! 1*omans 0:05.8

Marys $ody $ecame the actual temple of the @oly Spirit, after which all

humanity would model itself in the future. She concei&ed the eternal 8ogos,

6?. Meyendor, A Study of !regory Palamas, p.06:.

7from St. Maximus the Confessor, Maximus, #nostic Centuries, :, 66 1'(#(2;, 00G6A5.

2


3/9

Molly Caliger

nourished @im in her wom$, felt @is Huicening and was aware of @is

intrauterine growth and de&elopment. %he @oly Spirit was literally in Mary > not

Eust in her heart or her mind, $ut li&ing and growing in her body. As the foetus

?esus grew wee $y wee during her gestation, Mary felt her $ody growing and

transforming conEointly with her deepening awareness of her self as she

transformed into a ne)mother and wife, %he @oly Mother and the


4/9

Molly Caliger

teaching @e did not come as through a pipe, $ut has assumed of her 1from

her5, a human nature consu$stantial to ours 1On the Orthodo* +aith, (0:500.

Virginitas in Partu

Marys hard>won title of Theotokosimplies $y de"nition that she did, after

all, %ive birth to !od. %hat Mary, while yet a &irgin, concei&ed ?esus in her

wom$ $y the @oly Spirit, is not dou$ted $y east nor west. Bet her status as

ir%initas in partuis still de$ated, and continues to $e defended, especially in

Catholic circles. %his spurious dogma teaches that Mary not only concei&ed as a

&irgin, $ut that she remained a &irgin e&en during child$irth, that the $irth

process did not alterher physically. Some Catholic theologians suggest that in

order to a&oid emphasis on Marys di&ine maternity,the emphasis has instead

$een put on two other Marian aspects > her inuence on Christology and on

Dcclesiology

%heologians today are more inclined to include the Mary>Church analogy within themain Marian idea of fundamental principle of mariology. In so doing, they a&oid theextreme of identifying the Jdi&ine maternityJ as the central mariological principle insuch a way as to mae it an arti"cial a$straction of $iological motherhood isolatedfrom MaryJs conception in holiness, &irginity, and role in redemption. %hisinterpretation does not do Eustice to any experience of human maternity, let alone tothe motherhood of !od incarnate. For to concei&e and $ear a child is essentially ahuman action and not an expression merely of the &egetati&e>reproducti&e andanimal>sexual dimensions of a womanJs nature.0:

Certain 1nota$ly Catholic5 theologians are ready to ignore the Huestion of her

$irth experience, while wholeheartedly calling attention to her $ody as temple

and her entire holy $eing as sym$ol of the Church, as if one is possi$le without

the other.

Mary, childbirth and mystical Experience

11%ertullian 1d. ::;>:(;5 maintains that alentinus, a !nostic leader, taught that ?esus

hea&enly $ody only passed through Mary $ut ?esus too nothing from her ...@e came intoexistence through her, not of her>not experiencing a mother in her, $ut nothing more than a

way.In other words, ?esus passed through Mary lie water through a pipe. She contri$utednothing from herself. %ertullian appeals to the 8etter to the !alatians asserts that ?esus was not

$ornthrough a woman$ut of a woman.1%ertullian, 7n the Flesh of Christ,- xx, in %he Ante>9icene Fathers, &ol. III, ed. A. Cle&eland Coxe 1!rand *apids Derdmans, 026G5, 4(6.5

12?elly, op cit, pp (G>(3.

4


5/9

Molly Caliger

Paul D&doimo& characteries 'estern anthropology as essentially a

moralanthropology, in which the goal of Christian life is the $eati"c &ision of

!od, whereas 7rthodox anthropology is ontological, with a central concept of

dei"cation 1theosis5, or the spiritualiation of the human $eing.0( %his

distinction is particularly e&ident in their respecti&e relationships toward Mary.

Met. )allistos points out, regarding the western dogma of the Immaculate

Conception

For Christ to enter the world, it is reHuired > as we ha&e already seen > that his mothershould "rst freely consent to her election yet, according to the dogma of theImmaculate Conception, $efore she gi&es her free consent she already enEoys the fruitsof her sonJs redemption. Is this not an example theologically of the fallacy of petitioprincipiiK0+

A similar charge can $e made regarding the western interpretation of Marys

experience of child$irth. Child$irth is, a$o&e all, a transformati&e experience.

%he woman in her last wee of pregnancy cannot $e transformedunless she

has gone through labor.

Child$irth is a process, with successi&e stages, one owing into another,

each more challenging than the pre&ious. %he la$ouring woman anticipates the

process coming to fruition, in the fulness of time1!al. ++5. Child$earing

reects di&ine cosmic law human gestation last nine months or three times

three. D&en the uterus contracts in multiples of three a new contraction $egins

e&ery three minutes and at their pea of intensity last G;>2; seconds. 8a$or is

lie spiritual struggle the $irthing woman is gi&en opportunity with each

successi&e contraction to practice acceptance, meeness, humility, long>

suering. She longs for the culmination of her la$or yet forgetsin her

conscious mind what it is she is suering for, so taen out of herselfis she,

that her only possi$le stance in the face of a superior force is su$mission. She

is as if holding onto the roof of the ca$oose of a train, which is tra&elling at

13D&doimo&, Paul. 7rthodoxy. 0242.

14%he Sanctity and !lory of the Mother of !od 7rthodox Approaches,

The -ay, Supplement40, Papers of the 026+ International Congress of the Dcumenical Society of the 2G.

5


6/9

Molly Caliger

untold speed around sharp turns and through narrow tunnels, and all she can

do is hold on until the train comes to a stop. In $irth a woman tra&erses all

le&els of the creation of the world > its inception, de&elopment, demise, and

resurrection. She passes through the gamut of spiritual states from despair to

reconciliation.

St. Maximus the Confessor de"nes a mystic as one who $est of all

exhi$its the $irth of the 8ord, since contemplation mae the fertile soul at

once a &irgin and a mother, and St. Am$rose adds, D&ery $elie&ing soul

concei&es and gi&es $irth to the 'ord of !od 18ogos5 $y faith, and Christ is the

fetus of us all, thus we are in essence the motherof Christ. %hese words throw

considera$le light on the gospel episode 18ue 002>:05 and remo&e thatpeEorati&e sense inferred to it $y classical Protestant exegesis. The emphasis

is made not on the Virgin, but on man:My Mother is the essence of he

who hears the word of !od and eeps it> e&ery person is gi&en the grace to

gi&e $irth to Christ in his or her soul and to $ecome liened to the Theotokos.04

%he experience of gi&ing $irth has the potential to $e a mystical experience

which further liens one to the Theotokosand facilitates theosis. Child$irth is a

process reecting an archetypal foundation which proceeds from the di&ine>

uni&ersal to the feminine>particular. As Paul D&doimo& asserted, A woman is

not maternal $ecause her $ody is a$le to gi&e $irth $ut it is from her maternal

spirit, from the particular feminine charism, that her physiological and

anatomical capa$ilities are deri&ed. 'omans charism is to gi&e life and to care

for it and, a$o&e all, to $ring forth Christ in the souls of human $eings.16

Conclusion

Mary, as prototypical Mother and archetype of the feminine, "nds

resonance within em$odied human experience. !ods pro&idence allows

15D&doimo&, 7rthodoxy.

16D&doimo&, Paul, 'oman and the Sal&ation of the 'orld, p. ::+.

6


7/9

Molly Caliger

women to enter into the holy of holies&ia the gate of child$irth. ladimir

8ossy $est descri$ed mystical experience in relation to theology

%he eastern tradition has ne&er made a sharp distinction $etween mysticism andtheology $etween personal experience of the di&ine mysteries and the dogmaa#rmed $y the Church. %he following words spoen a century ago $y a great 7rthodoxtheologian, the Metropolitan Philaret of Moscow, express this attitude perfectly Jnoneof the mysteries of the most secret wisdom of !od ought to appear alien or altogethertranscendent to us, $ut in all humility we must apply our spirit to the contemplation ofdi&ine thingsJ. %o put it in another way, we must live the dogma expressing arevealed truth, which appears to us as an unfathomable mystery, in such afashion that instead of assimilating the mystery to our mode ofunderstanding, we should, on the contrary, look for a profound change, aninner transformation of spirit, enabling us to experience it mysticallyLemphasis mine.03

Mary li&ed the dogma expressing a re&ealed truth. Marys experience of

parturition, and her /i&ine Sons as well, was a $odily experience, undergone in

the earthly realm, and it was the prototype for all further theology regarding

Mary in particular, the ecclesia>typical aspect of Mariology. Mary could not

ha&e $ecome the @oly Mother of the Church which gi&es $irth to the )ingdom

of !od on earth had she not $een transformed into the mystical $ody of Christ

through gi&ing $irth to @im physically, through a womans $ody, in the way a

woman gi&es $irth. %he proEectedreality that $elie&ers experience a$out the

Church reects the prototype of the Theotokos. Furthermore, what a woman

experiences in child$irth can inform us a$out the prototype, since not only

Marys, $ut our esh was changed and made new after the Incarnation.

A theology of the $ody is a$out the nuptial union of !od and the created order

through the Incarnation, a marriage of hea&en and earth that $egins in the

conception of Christ in the wom$ of the &irgin Mary. Mary, therefore, is the

temple in which !od and humanind are reconciled. Mary $ecame the @olyMother of a ne), redeemedhumanity when esh was redeemed through her

gi&ing $irth to the 8ogos. 'e are daughters and sons of Mary, the Theotokos,

no less than we are children of !od the Father. Mary was the &rstto pa&e the

way $ac to !od > the Most @oly Primipara > and we ha&e inheritedher gifts

the Son, in whom we li&e and 'ho li&es in us and the mystical transforming

178ossy, ladimir, %he Mystical %heology of the Dastern Church 18ondon ?ames Clare N Co.,

8%/5, 0243.

7


8/9

Molly Caliger

experience of parturition which has the transformati&e potential to lead us

e&en closer $ac to !od.

Bibliography

D&doimo& Paul, 7rthodoxy, %ranslation of LOrthodo*ie ./0102, 9ew City, :;00.

D&doimo& Paul, 'oman and the Sal&ation of the 'orld, St ladimirs SeminaryPress, 022+.

?elly Frederic M., 1026:5%he Concrete Meaning of Marys Motherhood.

?elly, Frederic M. 1026(5 -%owards a %heology of the


9/9

Molly Caliger

9

mother of god and mystical theology of childbirth

Documents