The Expository Times
And finally … A Dangerous
Assumption?
We often spend two or three weeks every August in
Provence; and in the middle of August, on the 15th,
the Assumption of Mary is celebrated with special
masses, parades, the occasional foire brocante, and
not the least, with many libations of pastis. My com-
ment, though not for the sensitive ears of the pious, is
“C’est la fête de l’Assomption ou de la Consomption?”
The doctrine that Mary assumed into Heaven
without dying was unknown in the earliest years of
the Church. However, a number of Gnostic texts
speak of “The Passing of Mary” and “The Obsequies
of Mary”. However, beginning with Irenaeus, though
an early and notable Anti-Gnostic father, Mary was
metamorphosed, in process of time, from Eva, “the
mother of all living”, to Ave, the “Hail Mary” and
theotokos.
In the aftermath, and as a direct consequence of
the Arian Crisis of the early fourth century, the term
theotokos, along with homoousios, became one of the
watchwords and shibboleths of Nicene orthodoxy - a
bulwark against those who would dilute the doctrine
of the full deity of Mary’s son. It was a useful and
much-used term in the decades after Nicaea, as
Arianism refused to die out and still had noted sym-
pathisers. However, in the later decades of the fourth
century, and particularly in the early fifth century, the
term became contentious and it centred on the rivalry
between Nestorius, the patriarch of Constantinople,
and Cyril of Alexandria.
The two patriarchs, in addition to their mutual
animus, represented different “schools” of theology
and rival influential sees. Nestorius, an Antiochene,
typically laid emphasis on the authentic humanity of
Jesus; Cyril, by contrast, emphasised the full deity of
Jesus. Things came to a head when Nestorius took
strong exception in his preaching to the use of the-
otokos and demanded that the more appropriate word
christotokos ought to be employed: Mary bore the
121(11) 584­
© The Author(s) 2010
Reprints and permission: sagepub.
co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0014524610373307
http://ext.sagepub.com
man Jesus, the Christ, not the bearer (or mother) of
God. Cyril, a skilful and ruthless politician, won the
day. Pope Celestine condemned Nestorius’ preferred
term as “a denial of the birth of God”. Finally, with
the Definition of Chalcedon of 451, the curtain fell
on Nestorius and the contentious term was retained;
and, for me, it is the one blemish – a fly in the oint-
ment - in an otherwise satisfactory summation of
biblical doctrine. For the term theotokos, while
coined to defend the deity of Christ, in its exaltation
of Mary actually, throughout the centuries, consider-
ably diminished Christ.
Over time, rococo accretions in abundance clus-
tered around the simple and plain story of Mary in
the Gospels; and iconography, through the centuries,
paints a clear picture of a queenly Mary and a dimin-
utive Jesus. Checked for a time in the period of the
Reformation, extravagant devotion to Mary shows
no sign of diminishing in its popularity. Recent pon-
tiffs, like John XXIII and John Paul II, have been
fervent devotees of the cultus of Mary. To the present
time, devotion to Mary remains a major stumbling-
block between Catholics and those who adhere to the
sola scriptura principle.
We should, of course, in our teaching and
preaching, give due honour to Mary as a prime
example of faith and faithfulness; but that should
be the extent of it, bearing in mind Mary’s own
words in the Magnificat: “My soul praises the
Lord. How my spirit rejoices in God my saviour.
He took notice of a lowly servant girl” (New Living
Translation).
August 15th, especially in the Midi, will have its
special masses and other colourful celebrations; but
my libations on that occasion will be in the honour
and recognition of the much-maligned Patriarch of
Constantinople!
Dave Allen