»
Discussion
»
Philosophy 101
»
The Cult of the Virgin Mary
| Philosophy 101 |
|
The Cult of the Virgin Mary |
|
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan 
|
. I would very much like to read a discussion on this subject; it’s history and impact on Western culture and civilization as well as contrast to other cultures and civilizations influenced by other perspectives.. . I simply can’t afford books on the subject. John . |
||
| © Copyright 2007 John Pawlik - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
I understand your interest, John, but I am also perplexed a bit. I completely understand the ache of an intellectual itch for want of conversation, too. Until the internet, I didn't even have much access to a library that wasn't my own. But now with the internet--how "freeing", eh? So why don't you start?  Or have you? "The Cult of the Virgin Mary" hmmm...are you trying to open up a conversation regarding Catholicism here? Do we need to go through the motions of defining "cult", "virgin" and just WHICH Mary to whom you are referring? (Not trying to be an ass here--just asking for a little clarification.)  (Came back to add--just on a little WHIM--I googled your subject-- http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGIH_enUS210US211&q=free+e+books+virgin+mary Enjoy! ) |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
. It was something I think Joseph Campbell referred to in one of his interviews and considered the origin of ideals underlying the Western Age of Chivalry. . |
||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
Hmm...I happen to have an archive of that stuff. I'll check it out for you--I'm afraid I just have the Moyers interviews only though. If I find what I think you're looking for--I'll be back. |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Did you check the library? |
||
|
hush Senior Member
since 2001-05-27
Posts 1653Ohio, USA |
I am so not Catholic. But- I went to a Catholic college, and took a women's history in religion class- we talked quite a bit about Mary, the Madonna complex. It's very interesting to me- here we have a female who is for once both revered and necessary. In fact, I think it was Sojourner Truth who said something to the effect that Jesus Christ, Savior of mankind, had nothing to do with Man himself... that was all between God and a woman. But here's the catch... this revered woman was also an impossible woman and therefore no woman can ever live up to the ideal... we are all flawed. Immaculate conception...? Joseph was awfully trusting.  |
||
Stephanos
since 2000-07-31
Posts 3618Statesboro, GA, USA |
Hush: quote: I think that's the difference between the "Mary" of Roman Catholic tradition, and the more historically plausible Mary of the gospels. Mary, though a blessed and favored woman of God, was not without sin or fault. There were moments in the record where her humanity was perplexed (understandably so) with the divine will, and really, who her son was, and what he was destined for. quote: The immaculate conception (in Roman Catholicism) has nothing to do with the virgin birth of Jesus. It is actually the doctrine that Mary was born without sin. For, (as the argument goes) how could divinity be born from the womb of a sinful woman? The "solution" for this dilemma (wholly of tradition) is not in the least ascertained from a reading of the Gospels. So it is historically dubious on that account. Also it doesn't really solve the problem of how sinless divinity can come into such intimate contact with sinful humanity (a problem more to be marvelled at in a spirit of worship, than solved). The immaculate conception creates a regress which does little more than displace the question and send it one generation backward. For it could always be asked how a sinless Mary could be born from a sinful mother. Why wouldn't an "immaculate conception" have to be invented for her birth as well? Anyway ... that's more information than you probably wanted, but I did want to point out that the Immaculate Conception and the Virgin Birth of Christ are not the same thing. As far as Joseph being "too trusting", he wasn't. If you'll read the Gospel account, he was quite prepared to put Mary away (although discreetly out of kindness) because he thought her pregancy was quite natural and unrelated to himself. It was a mystical experience involving an angelic encounter that convinced him of the truth of Mary's own innocence and divine encounter. Call him gullible and subject to fantasy and altered states of consciousness if you will, but not "too trusting". That kind of sentimentality isn't in the nature of a man, especially in the face of what would appear all too obvious. And since both Catholics and Protestants treasure the piety of Mary (though they part ways about her near-divinity), your suggestion of her base infidelity might prove offensive to both. Stephen |
||
|
Kitherion Member
since 2006-08-01
Posts 181Johannesburg |
She was joking Steph.... chill "Our Father who art in Heaven... Hallowed be thy name..." |
||
|
Stephanos
since 2000-07-31
Posts 3618Statesboro, GA, USA |
Ever had anyone joke about your mother? Stephen |
||
|
hush Senior Member
since 2001-05-27
Posts 1653Ohio, USA |
Mary's your mother? Sorry, another joke... Thanks though for pointing out the difference between the immaculate conception/virgin birth. Don't get me wrong, I don't necessarily have a problem with the worship/story of Mary (though I did gather from the title of this thread we were talking specifically of Catholic worship of her). I think it's interesting how important Mary is in some circles, suggesting to me that people found it necessary to incorporate a female element into the worship of the Christian god. I also just find her character and what that may say about what mankind wants out of women- the perfect ideal, to propogate the species without dirtying oneself in sexual acts. But then again, what man wants to marry a perpetual virgin... begging the question of whether or not that is perfection. Just food for thought, I'm not trying to express any convictions one way or the other. |
||
|
Stephanos
since 2000-07-31
Posts 3618Statesboro, GA, USA |
quote: It is very interesting. And I guess this thread was intended to be about the uniquely Roman Catholic approach to Mary. But as a Protestant, and a lover of history, you'll have to bear with my pointing out the differences. Both the tendency of godess worship and the feeling that sex is "dirtying" (more in line with certain kinds of paganism and gnosticism respectively) are foreign to orthodox Christianity. Many will tell you that Genesis somehow casts a negative shadow on sexuality that extends throughout the Bible, but a more careful reading dispels this. I understand the psychological needs involved that you mentioned. There was always a need for the feminine expression within divinity, though I would argue that its not necessary to find this by idolizing Mary, since (believe it or not) there were already signs and tokens of something transcendent of gender within God. The desire is not wrong, as much as the results. Mary becomes skewed into legend and her historical realness is trivialized, and something or someone is worshiped apart from God. (though I'm aware that Roman Catholics insist on a difference between the veneration of Mary and the worship of God) As far as perpetual virginity goes, what about the half brothers of Jesus (who were never lauded with miraculous births)? Wouldn't the best answer be that Mary and Joseph (after the birth of Jesus) went on much the same as any married couple would? Amy, thanks for the "food for thought". (and this note is for Karen, lest she imagine that my pointing out of differences is meant to stop the discussion of these other traditions, and their virtues or influences on culture and individuals ... Not at all.) Stephen |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
. But again did this cult/adoration of Mary, who was not a goddess like Juno or Isis, influence a different view of all women as opposed to other cultures? . |
||
|
Stephanos
since 2000-07-31
Posts 3618Statesboro, GA, USA |
John, Are you asking whether Mary has anything to do with the prominence of the feminist ideal in the West? Stephen |
||
|
Kitherion Member
since 2006-08-01
Posts 181Johannesburg |
To true Steph, to true but you pose an interesting question, the feminist ideal within the west... coud it have stemmed from a predominately male ordained religion??? "Our Father who art in Heaven... Hallowed be thy name..." |
||
|
Stephanos
since 2000-07-31
Posts 3618Statesboro, GA, USA |
quote: I didn't really make a statement there, only asked a question. quote: Firstly (a disclaimer) I don't disagree with everything about feminism. But whether good or bad, I think it partly came about due to failure of men in their roles ... not merely because those particular roles were given to men. Stephen |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
Not feminist but feminine and again as it nurtured the ideals of chivalry etc which I think may still influence views today. And I wonder if it would be more accurate to say that the cult was an unexpected consequence rather than an intended outgrowth. John |
||
|
oceanvu2 Senior Member
since 2007-02-24
Posts 1066Santa Monica, California, USA |
Hi John -- The cult of the Goddess, fecundity, renewal, predates any examples so far. The difficulty with Marianism reflects a shift from matrilineage to patrilineage. And the guys don't want to give it up. How about good old Kali? She's still hanging around for millions and millions of folk, no? Outside of Christianity, the "Mother" remains the iconic image. Jim |
||
|
Stephanos
since 2000-07-31
Posts 3618Statesboro, GA, USA |
Jim, My understanding is that matriarchal worship (without corresponding male deities) was rare if ever. Even Kali (if I understand her) had originated as a part of the god Agni. I think the idea that matriarchalism was predominate until the advent of the allegedly male-chauvinistic Christianity (or Judaism) is a kind of popular myth. That of course doesn't mean that godess worship wasn't around, side by side with the worship of male deities. Your statement about all of this predating Mary, is of course correct. I tend to think goddesses and gods were always coexistent within Pagan religions, and therefore see the quasi worship of Mary as a patching of these older tendencies upon Christianity. The "Mother and Son" pattern can be seen many times over. At any rate, John seems to credit the veneration of Mary with the feminine ideas of chivalry and so forth, while you seem to associate it with a return to Matriarchalism (or what I would call the feminist ideal). Quite a difference in your views. Or am I misunderstanding you both? Stephen [This message has been edited by Stephanos (10-24-2007 12:00 AM).] |
||
|
hush Senior Member
since 2001-05-27
Posts 1653Ohio, USA |
But even if goddess worship was in conjunction with male deities, it still existed. I completely agree that the tendency to venerate (or worship) Mary carries over from the pagan traditions of ancient Rome before the empire converted to Christianity. But what's more, I think it speaks to an innate need to have a female icon or religious figure to look to. For all the controversy and double standards, Mary does represent something very positive for both women and mankind as a whole- God chose a human woman to carry his son... and Mary was considered good enough to birth and raise the son of God. |
||
|
Stephanos
since 2000-07-31
Posts 3618Statesboro, GA, USA |
Hush: quote: To that I say "Amen". Stephen. |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
It is only logical that we say "Amen" and not "Awomen" |
||
|
rwood Member Elite
since 2000-02-29
Posts 3793Tennessee |
Ha. Very funny, Ess. quote: There is a feminist ideal? Feminists are notoriously torn (and quite heatedly) over the portrayals of women in society. That’s why there are 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th? waves of ideals in the brew and I wish I could keep up, but I’m not able to any more. Last I heard: The ideal woman is one who rejects society’s ideals?? Sounds a lot like “Let’s all get in a circle and kick each other,” to me. My female perspective is that the Madonna icon was formulated by the church as a counter attack on contemporary feminine ideals during 12th century reformation. It’s No coincidence that the Cult of the Virgin Mary sprang up about the same time that the Cult of Courtly Love was gaining widespread “troubadourious” followers. The church promoted Mary to a model adult female icon for very specific purposes, believing courtly traditions to be heretical. The catholic worship of Mary is/was decided “ex cathedra” by the Pope, which means by his authority & “infallible decisioning,” she is divined—below God but above all humans (excluding the Pope). Her symbolism is very much under the control of a patriarchal system of beliefs, and by what could be a more powerful pop-culture icon? Yall decide. quote: For me, the Virgin Mary doesn’t win the daily double on chivalry. It’s Eleanor D’Aquitaine, my dear Gent, and E D’A deserves her own acknowledgment, imo. I believe her influence on the courts and chivalry is why the church needed to Madonna up. Different cults, courts, messages, loves, entirely. Agape vs. Courtly Love, or romantic love. Mary’s simplest role in Christianity is enough for me to be amazed. And I will remain amazed by the continued grace while we seek/hash/suffer & hack out what we feel are the best/worst examples of who or what we should be as women, as long as we’re free to make our own choices. It’s just very difficult to do so in an iconically dependent society, so I wonder if all wouldn’t be better off with the pedestals removed, if anyone really feels there are any. |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
"...what we should be as women..." We? |
||
|
Stephanos
since 2000-07-31
Posts 3618Statesboro, GA, USA |
Regina: quote: I'm curious. What exactly are the "courtly traditions" which the Roman Catholic Church considered heretical, and why? quote: Yet another reason to be sure that papal infallibility is a false and unbiblical doctrine. Also didn't we read where the Apostle Paul wrote to the Church in Galatia, that even if he (or an Angel for that matter) were to preach any other gospel that he should be accursed? Didn't an Angel in the Revelation of John, fearfully shy away from spontaneous adoration, asserting that even exalted beings are only "fellow servants" of God? Surely what goes for Angelic powers, and Apostles, should apply to Popes as well? Worship of human beings (other than the one who happens to be God incarnate) is idolatry, whether male or female. Stephen |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
"Worship of human beings (other than the one who happens to be God incarnate) is idolatry, whether male or female." If that is true, shouldn't you also say loving and marrying someone is "idolatry"? Aren't love and marriage a form of worship too? |
||
|
Stephanos
since 2000-07-31
Posts 3618Statesboro, GA, USA |
Ess: quote: If they are, it is a form ordained and approved by God as fitting for humans to give and receive. But if a spouse were to be called (seriously speaking) "God", and given reverence that is due only to divinity, then that would be idolatry. Just consider what you mentioned ... marital love, and you'll see that this principle applies even to strictly human relationships. For most would agree that friendship is a form of love as well as marriage; But if I irrationally and immorally start to give a lady friend the kind of love that is due only to my wife, then I have made one serious categorical mistake ... perhaps a fatal one. Stephen |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
No problem with that Stephanos. I was just trying show (although in a roundabout way) that I thought it a bit mistaken to suggest any and all worshipping of people is idolatry. For a man can worship his wife as a wife, his mother as a mother, his father as a father, brother as brother, sister as a sister, a hero as a hero et cetera, for her/his own good, without worshipping her/him as a "God" too. |
||
|
rwood Member Elite
since 2000-02-29
Posts 3793Tennessee |
Ess~ Yeah, “we” is correct, since “I” didn’t get here by meself. quote: Stephen~ The first word that came to mind in answer to your question: Camelot. I promise to have a solid (non-mythical) point. “Camelot as a place is associated with ideals like justice, bravery and truth, the virtues Arthur and his knights embody in the romances.” wiki Perfect time slot. 12th century trace. Kudos to Chrétien de Troyes. The concept/theme of romantic love found its way into tradition upon the high courts through the works of French troubadours, (the first rock stars) again--high middle ages, 12th century. Influential ladies, such as E D’A—in my earlier post, encouraged their messages of romance & eroticism. For the first time in European history, erotic literature/song/poetry was created purely for a female audience, hailing women as forces worthy of all the moral qualities of life AND passion. Openly displayed passion. PDA’s unlike any ever before. “Tennis, anyone?” “Paris said amour courtois was an idolization and ennobling discipline. The lover (idolizer) accepts the independence of his mistress and tries to make himself worthy of her by acting bravely and honorably (nobly) and by doing whatever deeds she might desire.” wiki Medieval love games/foreplay with rules of etiquette complete with a code, and since men love to pursue/compete/win, it was just extra fuel for their fire toward chivalry & knighthood. There were a couple of problems with that on both sides of the ruling fences. With such love in the air, and so many Lancelots running around, blue bloods began to seriously question their heirs. Forced/Arranged marriages were the norm and had nothing to do with love, but political & spiritual attainment controlled by the church. Men & women wanted control in choosing a mate. People wanted to marry for love, no matter what the nobles arranged or what the church said. So the church tightened every thumb-screw down on that notion, because Agape was losing ground to erotic notions, and they were losing control of who was doing who for what, when, how, or why. quote:wiki. Was the Pope on dope, or what? That’s why the Madonna rose as a pearl in the crown of the Pope. She was supposed to cool the moral climate of L O V E and restore piety back to its frigid temps. My cheeky side says it’s because the church wanted to keep all the hot-sexy men to themselves, which is not completely unfounded, so don’t slay my little dragon thought too quickly. On another love note, aren’t you a fan of C.S. Lewis’ works? quote:wiki love, reg |
||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
John--I suspect you found what you were "looking for".  |
||
|
Stephanos
since 2000-07-31
Posts 3618Statesboro, GA, USA |
Regina, Thanks for the references. I am a Lewis fan, but have read little of his works focused more on literary analysis. I lean more toward his Theological / Philosophical works. What you are describing seems to be the battle between a "courtly" tradition that wasn't always noble, and of organized religion that wasn't always sound or godly in its view of sex and love. What is so noble about adultery? And what is so stoical about sex that it should be for procreation alone? The church in her better (and more biblical interpretations) has noted well that God ordained sex, not only as a means to procreate, but as a highly pleasurable celbration of love. What has been constant in Church history is the insistence upon a covenantal relationship and faithfulness. The annoying and spurious addition (which turns out to be a subtraction) has been from good men who are ashamed when God has seemed almost Bacchanalian (without the insane autonomy) in his approbations ... good men, who could have been better by not being almost gnostically ashamed of the body. But considering the imbalance that was there (historically speaking) I can see how Mary was hi-jacked, and how the "virgin cult" was used by the Roman Catholic Church to promote celibacy as the ideal of spiritual perfection, and as a means to try and battle what was viewed as wanton and immoral in the traditions of courtly love. Stephen |
||
|
rwood Member Elite
since 2000-02-29
Posts 3793Tennessee |
Yep, seems the words celibate and celebrate are often the core embodiments of confusion. "Bacchanalian"...now there's a lost word. Hadn't found that in print in soooo long, though I hadn't looked either. I'm glad you brought that up. and yes, the Bible holds several wonderful passages that celebrate the becoming factors of "one flesh," all inside the beautiful realm of marriage. though the "M" word is probably a dead horse for me.  don't be sad for me though, be happy for the guys that get away....mmuuuwwwwaaahhaha. |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
