Pneuma 29 (2007) 214-225
Mary, the Unwelcome (?) Guest in Catholic/Pentecostal Dialogue
Ralph Del Colle
Associate Professor of T eology, Marquette University, T eology Department,
PO Box 1881, Milwaukee, WI 53201-1881
Abstract
Catholic Marian doctrines and practices have been a major stumbling block for Catholic/Pente- costal dialogue. In this article I utilize a pneumatological perspective to suggest that Mariology exemplifies the intersection between a Catholic theology of grace (including spirituality) and ecclesiology (embracing Vatican II’s articulation of Mariology). I build on the notion that the outpouring of the Holy Spirit alerts the Pentecostal/Charismatic believer to: 1) the church’s existence in the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, 2) the reception of the grace, gifts and charisms of the Holy Spirit, 3) the fraternal/sororal recognition of “anointed ones” in the midst of the Pentecostal assembly, and 4) the doxological response in which praise and veneration are appro- priate in an eschatologically oriented church. In doing so I correlate each of these points with aspects of Catholic Marian doctrine and praxis and seek to elicit a Pentecostal response.
Keywords
Mariology, grace, reception, iconic, spiration, veneration
An Integral Approach to Mariology
The Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) was as important for the Catholic understanding of Mary as it was for ecclesiology, ecumenism, liturgy, and the Church’s mission in the world. The debate by the conciliar fathers on whether to promulgate a separate document on Mary or incorporate Mariology within a broader schema is well known and its outcome quite significant. Prior to the Council the Catholic Church witnessed what has been described as a ‘new ‘Marian Century’ (1850-1950).’ Devotions, pilgrim- ages, Marian congresses, popular literature, and new religious congregations under the patronage of Mary flourished. It was also during this period
© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2007 DOI: 10.1163/157007407X237926
PNEU 29,2_f4_214-225.indd 214PNEU 29,2_f4_214-225.indd 214
111/7/07 10:59:47 AM1/7/07 10:59:47 AM
1
R. Del Colle / Pneuma 29 (2007) 214-225
215
that the new Marian dogmas were proclaimed. Hence, a good number of bishops at the Council desired a new document on Mary.
T eir preference was for a ‘ christotypic orientation’ in Mariology, meaning that Mary is situated in her relationship to Christ in light of her role in the plan of salvation. She is particularly venerated under various titles that bespeak both her honor and function in the divine economy. However, in a rather close vote — 1,114 to 1,074 — the bishops decided for the broader schema. T ey eventually incorporated Catholic teaching on Mary at the end of Lumen Gentium, the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, under the chapter title, ‘The Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God in the Mystery of Christ and the Church’ (nos. 52-69). T is more ‘ ecclesiotypic orientation,’ Mary in the midst of the Church, represented a major shift for many theologians. It also under- scored what was at stake in the Council’s decision.
Elizabeth Johnson among others narrates the debate as a ‘clash of the titans,’ the ‘wildest, most emotional fight of the whole council.’ It was a struggle between two parties in the Church, those advocating the ‘separate schema’ and those desiring an ‘inclusion in the church’ schema. Besides the Christotypic and ecclesiotypic theological characterizations she also represents two different emphases in the history of Mariology. Painting in rather broad strokes John- son assigns the ecclesiotypic orientation to the first Christian millennium and the Christotypic one to the second Christian millennium, respectively a more minimalist or more maximalist Mariology promoted by the party advocates at Vatican II. The latter would be consistent with the developments in the post- tridentine Church while the former reflects the ressourcement of the biblical, liturgical, and patristic movements in theology right before the Council. For Johnson this is a move from Mary as Mediatrix to Mary as Model, from her role between the believer and Christ to her role as sister and exemplary disciple in the Church.
I rehearse this history not to expose the various Catholic Mariological emphases with the hope that Pentecostals and other Protestants would gravi- tate at the very least toward the more minimalist position, the assumption being (no pun intended!) that the more maximalist position is beyond reason- able ecumenical expectations. In fact, a properly ecumenical posture in dia- logue may very well entail conversion wherein new insights are gained by dialogue with another communion. The Dombes Group in France — a gath- ering of Catholic and Reformed scholars — has proceeded along these lines, searching for Catholic and Protestant conversions on the various theological subjects under discussion. However, the conventional approach that if Catholics
PPNEU 29,2_f4_214-225.indd 215NEU 29,2_f4_214-225.indd 215
11/7/07 10:59:47 AM11/7/07 10:59:47 AM
2
216
R. Del Colle / Pneuma 29 (2007) 214-225
(and Orthodox) would only tone down their veneration of Mary, Protestants would be more accepting, is not in my judgment the way forward. T is is not to say that the Catholic Magisterium (as well as many theologians) has not been concerned about reining in Marian excesses. Lumen Gentium attempted as much as have other documents since the Council. The interest of this essay is to proffer a specific approach to dialogue on Mary from the distinctly pneumatological issues that emerge from the Catholic-Pentecostal conversation.
My argument will proceed on the basis of four intersections between pneu- matology and the dynamics of ecclesial life. By this I mean that the work of the Holy Spirit is best assessed in a Pentecostal modality when understood in light of its dynamic or existential reception in the life of the People of God. I believe this holds true for both Catholics and Pentecostals despite differences regarding the nature of that reception, one example being the relationship between what Catholics call hierarchical and charismatic gifts in the Church. I will relate each point to its Mariological significance and seek to elicit a Pen- tecostal response. In doing so it will be clear that I envision a convergence between the ecclesiotypical and Christotypical orientations related above. In this manner I hope to underscore the integral nature of Mariology, linking the ecclesiotypical exemplary mode of Mariology to the Christotypical doxologi- cal mode — a correlation true to the Catholic-Pentecostal conversation.
First Intersection: The Church Exists in the Outpouring of the Holy Spirit
The outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the disciples gathered in prayer with Mary on the day of Pentecost (Acts 1.14; 2.1-4) is traditionally cel- ebrated as the birth of the Church. More than just a memorial, however, Pentecost also signifies the pneumatological foundations of the Church. As many have argued this does not compete with its Christological founda- tions. The Church is a consequence of the ‘joint mission’ of the Son and the Holy Spirit, a phrase utilized by the Catechism of the Catholic Church (nos. 485, 689-90, 727, 743). One quote suffices. ‘From the beginning to the end of time, whenever God sends his Son, he always sends his Spirit: their mission is conjoined and inseparable.’ (No. 743)
The Orthodox theologian John Zizioulas in his book Being as Communion, argues in a similar fashion preferring to delineate pneumatology as constitu- tive of ecclesiology which he distinguishes from Christ’s institution of the
PPNEU 29,2_f4_214-225.indd 216NEU 29,2_f4_214-225.indd 216
11/7/07 10:59:47 AM11/7/07 10:59:47 AM
3
R. Del Colle / Pneuma 29 (2007) 214-225
217
Church. ‘Christ in-stitutes [the Church] and the Spirit con-stitutes [the Church].’ The same holds true for Pentecostals. Despite the exaggerations made by some outside observers, Pentecostalism is not simply a ‘Spirit movement.’ The strong Christocentric piety of Pentecostals is self-evident and the power of the Holy Spirit is given by Christ and inspires service of him in praise and mission.
The Christological and pneumatological dimensions of ecclesiology do not negate the human dimension. The Church is, after all, an assembly of redeemed creatures, called and ordered in mission to the glory of God. The gathering of the one hundred and twenty disciples in the upper room is instructive in this regard. Order and liturgy were the proto-ecclesial activities of the disciples in preparation for the fulfillment of the Father’s promise to send the Holy Spirit. The choice of Matthias to fill the apostolic office vacated by Judas and the devotion of the assembly to prayer represent an implicit epicletic posture by the disciples. Seeking divine guidance for the choice to office and prayerful waiting signify the dependence of the Church upon the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.
In the Lucan narrative the presence of Mary is not insignificant. The one who initially assented to the divine word to conceive Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit at the Annunciation (Lk. 1.26-38) and continually pondered the mystery of her Son (Lk. 2.18, 51) is now present on the eve of the Pente- costal outpouring (Acts 1.14). Of those present she is the one upon whom the Spirit had already descended — ‘The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you’ (Lk. 1.35). Luke does not iden- tify Mary as involved in the discussion over Judas’ successor. In fact, Acts 1.14 is the last mention of Mary in Luke-Acts. However, the theological symbolism of this inscripted icon is unmistakable.
Of course, my shift in terminology suggests, I will admit, a Catholic imagi- nation. However, my point is simple and consistent with the Lucan text. The Church exists in the outpouring of the Spirit, similar to Mary conceiving Christ by the Spirit coming to her. Her presence at Pentecost underscores the pneumatological continuity between the birth of Christ and that of the Church. The outpouring of the Holy Spirit is an event among persons of whom Mary can serve as an icon. She witnesses to the fruitfulness of the Spir- it’s work. Her fiat at the Annunciation is the prelude to the nativity of Christ. So too, her presence in the cenacle points the reader to the fruitfulness of apostolic and ecclesial mission that is inaugurated on Pentecost. If the Church is to exist in the outpouring of the Holy Spirit then its personal manifestation is essential to its realization. The Pentecostal/Catholic assembly in its continual
PPNEU 29,2_f4_214-225.indd 217NEU 29,2_f4_214-225.indd 217
11/7/07 10:59:48 AM11/7/07 10:59:48 AM
4
218
R. Del Colle / Pneuma 29 (2007) 214-225
epiclesis for the coming of the Spirit realizes the manifestation of the Spirit in the world. For Luke this continues the economy of salvation, and as to its efficacy in a human person Mary, is the symbol.
What Mary represents in prayer for the Spirit, the Pentecostal assembly signifies as it tarries for the baptism in the Holy Spirit, revivals, and new move- ments of the Spirit. The Pentecostal narrative is peopled with those who called on the Lord, watched and waited. Whether it was Bethel Bible College in Topeka, Kansas in 1900-01 or the Azuza Street Mission in Los Angeles in 1906 a community was at prayer imploring the Lord for the Holy Spirit. At this point I simply note that the Marian posture before God and the Spirit is not all that strange to the Pentecostal imagination. The privileges of Mary derive from her longing for God. The initiative remains with God, viz., the Annunciation, but the human response in faith is a necessary condition for the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, viz., Mary and the disciples in the upper room. An integral dialogue on Mariology begins with the Christian assembly await- ing the promise of Pentecost.
Second Intersection: Reception of Grace, Gifts and Charisms of the Holy Spirit
The wonders of divine grace surely lie at the heart of Christian piety and spirituality. The sheer gratuity of the divine offer, God’s favor to us even in our sinfulness (Rom. 5.9), elicits from the heart desires and affections to love and serve God. The magnificence of grace is recognized then not only in the divine offer with its source in unconditional love, but also in the transformation it effects in human life, called to communion with God and to participation in the divine nature (2 Pet. 1.4). In other words, grace is amazing not only in the offer but in its reception as well. That finite and sinful creatures receive grace and that it becomes effective in their lives redounds to the glory of God.
For Catholics Mary is that singular instance in human life in which grace is wholly and entirely effective. She is the exemplar of entire sanctification and Christian perfection. Her singular privileges as Immaculata and Assumpta are a testimony to the power and efficacy of grace from conception to death. It is not necessarily my intention to convince Pentecostals of the Catholic Marian dogmas of the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption (although I would welcome their assent!). T eir meaning, however, is important and relevant to all Christian traditions. It primarily concerns the reception of grace that is
PPNEU 29,2_f4_214-225.indd 218NEU 29,2_f4_214-225.indd 218
11/7/07 10:59:48 AM11/7/07 10:59:48 AM
5
R. Del Colle / Pneuma 29 (2007) 214-225
219
operative in sanctification. While a discussion of Catholic and Protestant (including Pentecostal) differences over the relationship between justification and sanctification is relevant, e.g., whether the grace that sanctifies contributes to justification or not, suffice it to say that the call to holiness registers in all Christian traditions as the heart of the Christian vocation to discipleship. Needless to say, Catholics and Pentecostals in particular mutually witness to this call and expect its actualization in the lives of believers.
Mary’s holiness occupies an important place in Catholic faith and practice because it represents the work of grace in a creature. Catholics certainly acknowledge how grace is present in Christ. The ‘grace of union’ funds the Incarnation in the creation and assumption by the eternal Son of his human nature in the hypostatic union. Singular to Christ it is the temporal enactment in history of what his eternal generation from the Father means when in the power of the Holy Spirit the divine Word became flesh — the union of human and divine natures in the person of the eternal Son. Catholic divinity has also traditionally affirmed that Christ received the fullness of sanctifying or habit- ual grace, the grace by which all his human operations and actions are holy. Tese are all instances of his natural sonship in the Incarnation; and this differs in kind from the filiation of Christians who through the grace of adoption in and through Christ become children of the Father. The latter is also the work of sanctifying grace. In this respect there is a difference in degree between Christ and Christians. Christ bears the fullness of grace and from him Chris- tians receive grace (Jn 1.16). In pneumatological terms Christ receives the Spirit without measure (Jn 3.34) while believers receive the Spirit from the risen and exalted Christ. In all of this it is important to distinguish sanctifying grace from the grace of union. No measure of sanctifying grace can equal the grace of union — hence, no adoptionism! — therefore the grace of union is applicable only to Christ. Fully human and also full of grace Christ is not only Spirit-filled but the Incarnate Son, the only begotten God-human.
Needless to say, Mary and all the saints from a Catholic perspective are instances and exemplars of adoptive filiation and the triumph of sanctifying grace in a creature. Such grace is dependent upon Christ and is mediated through him by virtue of the grace of union in the Incarnation and in view of his meritorious graces proceeding from his obedience even unto the work of redemption on the cross. The grace Christians receive proceeds from his ‘capital grace,’ the grace he distributes as head of the Church from his own sanctifying grace now flowing from his glorified humanity. Again, to put it in pneumato- logical terms, Christ the bearer of the Spirit becomes in his exaltation to the Father’s right hand the sender of the Spirit.
PPNEU 29,2_f4_214-225.indd 219NEU 29,2_f4_214-225.indd 219
111/7/07 10:59:48 AM1/7/07 10:59:48 AM
6
220
R. Del Colle / Pneuma 29 (2007) 214-225
In the case of Mary we have a singular instance of the fullest possibilities of the reception of sanctifying grace in a human being (rather than a God- human) such that all her human operations and actions are transformed in holiness by divine grace. Her sinlessness is a consequence of grace, the grace of Christ, and represents for the Church the eschatological glory of the creature; imaged ecclesially (of which she is the symbol) as the Church without spot or wrinkle (Eph. 5.27).
Two emphases emerge in pneumatological perspective through this focus on the reception of grace. First, the efficacy of grace embraces human receptiv- ity. As Paul testified: ‘But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace to me has not been ineffective. Indeed I have toiled harder than all of them; not I, however, but the grace of God [that is] with me’ (1 Cor. 15.10). Mary cooperates with grace — ‘May it be done to me according to your word’ (Lk. 1.38) — and thus brings forth the Savior. Mary and the disciples devote themselves to prayer and thus the Spirit comes. The efficacy of the Spirit’s work — for that is what grace is — manifests itself in the gifts that are exer- cised (1 Cor 12:4) and the fruit that is borne (Gal 5:22-23). God’s grace is not diminished but magnified when it is witnessed in the transformed lives of believers.
Second, the Holy Spirit acts in and upon persons. Christian anthropology owes to pneumatology the notion of the recovery and transformation of the person in the image and likeness of God. Vladimir Lossky has argued that since the Holy Spirit does not have his image in another divine hypostasis he ‘will manifest Himself in deified persons: for the multitude of the saints will be His image.’ The iconic manifestation of the Spirit is visible in the graces, gifts, and charisms operative in the lives of believers. However, all of these, the various and diverse works of the Spirit, are oriented to the transformation of the person into the image of Christ. Beginning with the metaphor of Chris- tians as the letter of Christ written on hearts of flesh by the Spirit of the living God, Paul concludes with their glorification by the Lord who is the Spirit (2 Cor. 3.1-4, 17-18).
The glory of Pentecostal effusion of the Spirit is not simply the manifesta- tion of gifts. Ecclesial persons, situated in the Pentecostal assembly constituted by the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, manifests the presence and power of the Holy Spirit. More importantly, believers’ likeness to Christ according to the Spirit of holiness redounds to the glory of God and thus manifest the person of the Spirit whose mission is to glorify the Father and the Son. T us the work of the Spirit cries out for its iconic manifestation in the person who is the
PPNEU 29,2_f4_214-225.indd 220NEU 29,2_f4_214-225.indd 220
11/7/07 10:59:48 AM11/7/07 10:59:48 AM
7
R. Del Colle / Pneuma 29 (2007) 214-225
221
image of God. Is the Catholic/Orthodox imagination too distant from the Pentecostal one in this regard? To answer this we turn to the communal embodiment of the Spirit’s operation.
T ird Intersection: Recognition of the Anointing in Fraternal/Sororal Communion and Presence
There are among Pentecostals different ways to discern and recognize the anointing of the Holy Spirit in gifts, ministries, and office in the Church. Nevertheless, the Pentecostal assembly is the primary locus for the emer- gence of ministry through the manifestation of gifts and the witness of the Spirit. Building upon the previous two sections I here argue that the work of the Spirit in the assembly is a matter of presence and communion or koinonia.
The prologue to the First Epistle of John parallels the prologue of the Fourth Gospel. In the case of the epistle what was from the beginning (1.1) and was made visible (1.2) is situated within an ecclesial context so that the prologue concludes with the following invitation: ‘What we have seen and heard we proclaim to you, so that you too may have fellowship with us; for our fellow- ship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ. We are writing this so that our joy may be complete.’ (1 Jn 1.3-4)
Fellowship with the Father and the Son is known by the presence of the Spirit (3.24) and fellowship with the brethren is enacted in love (4.21). The presence of brothers and sisters in Christ insures the authenticity of the praxis of love. It must be in deed and truth (3.18), which also verifies one’s love of the invisible God through love of the visible brethren (4.20). The presence of the Spirit cannot be considered apart from the visible praxis of the community in the confession of the faith (4.2), the keeping of the commandments (3.23- 24), and the mystery and proclamation of the kerygma (5.6-7).
The same holds true for Paul whose image of the Church as the body of Christ correlates both the diverse manifestations of the Spirit and the different parts of the Body (1 Cor. 12.4-31). His charismatic ecclesiology has a high expectation of the distribution of spiritual gifts so that all members of the Body are necessary even if a hierarchical order remains in the Church (1 Cor. 12.28). My point is not to belabor the obvious but simply to underscore that the various manifestations of the Spirit are indeed produced by the Spirit (1 Cor. 12.11), but exercised by persons in the assembly (1 Cor. 14.26). After
PPNEU 29,2_f4_214-225.indd 221NEU 29,2_f4_214-225.indd 221
111/7/07 10:59:48 AM1/7/07 10:59:48 AM
8
222
R. Del Colle / Pneuma 29 (2007) 214-225
all, the spirit of the prophet is subject to the prophet (1 Cor. 14.32). What is of interest is not church order or discipline in worship per se, but the theological/anthropological foundations of ecclesiology.
The anthropological mediation of pneumatic agency is essential to under- standing the pneumatological foundations of the Church. If the Spirit is breathed forth, spirated from the Son — certainly in the divine economy (Jn 20.22); we bracket the question of the filioque — then there is a measure of that same spiration in and through Christ’s body, the Church. I take this to be the pneumatological import of the Pauline (1 Cor. 12.12) and Augustinian notion of the ‘whole Christ’ (Christus totus). T rough the exercise of gifts, or the presence of a charism in a particular spirituality — Ignatian or Franciscan spirituality, or simply the evident fruits of the Spirit in the sanctity of a mem- ber of the Church — the Spirit is present, active, shining forth and even ema- nating from the believers as the very life of communion.
The inhabitation of the Spirit in the justified person does not bypass the human faculties of the person. As co-workers in the divine economy (1 Cor 3.9) communion in the holy things of God bears an intersubjective, relational, and social modality as well as a transcendent one. Nowhere is this more evident than in the Pentecostal/charismatic assembly. It is also the case in the ritual praxis of Catholic liturgy as well as in contemplative, mystical and charismatic forms of prayer.
The intersection of the Spirit’s work in fraternal/sororal communion in ecclesial life is necessary in order to fully appreciate the place of the commu- nion of Mary and saints in the worshipping assembly and the life of the Church. The discernment of the anointing in the Pentecostal assembly — sometimes moving from person to person; at other times proceeding (spi- rating!) from a particular ministry — is often the stuff of charismatic worship. In the exercise of gifts and in the presence of the holy, including holy ones (!), the Spirit edifies the Church through ‘the proper functioning of each part’ (Eph. 4.16). While each member grows ‘in every way into him who is the head, Christ’ (Eph. 4.15), what is often missed is that the body ‘builds itself up in love’ (Eph. 4.16).
The edification of the Church in and through its members constitutes the earthly enactment of the communion of saints. The communion ( koinonia) of the Holy Spirit creates and sustains the communion (koinonia) of saints and corresponds to our first axiom that the church exists in the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. The maturation of the Church (Eph. 3.13 — ‘until we all attain to the unity of faith and knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the extent of the full stature of Christ’) and its eschatological glorification
PPNEU 29,2_f4_214-225.indd 222NEU 29,2_f4_214-225.indd 222
111/7/07 10:59:49 AM1/7/07 10:59:49 AM
9
R. Del Colle / Pneuma 29 (2007) 214-225
223
(Eph. 5.27 — ‘that he might present to himself the church in splendor, with- out spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish’) are the consequence and fruit of the sanctification and perfection of its members. The agency of the Holy Spirit and the agency of the saints are so intertwined that the ecclesial perfection of the Church’s spousal relation to Christ is dependent on the efficacy of cooperative grace in the persevering assent of the faithful. This assent, Spirit-empowered and Spirit-communicat- ing (the spirative moment), is personally and iconically the Marian dimension of the Church. Mary signifies the assent in grace that brings forth Christ in his Incarnation through her assent at the Annunciation and in its ecclesial repre- sentation through its spousal glorification at the parousia. In this regard Cath- olic doctrine affirms that the Marian dimension of the church precedes the Petrine, that is, its sacramental and hierarchical order.
Since the Church exists in the risen Lord the relational and intersubjective agency of cooperative grace in the communion of saints cannot be limited to the earthly church. Put another way, ecclesial communion in the Holy Spirit and enacted as a fraternal/sororal communion cannot be limited simply to the holy ones on earth. The Church worships and exists before an open heaven in and as the body of the risen Christ upon which the angels of God ascend and descend (Jn 1.51). The open heavens of the Pentecostal assembly therefore implicate the communion of saints in heaven and on earth. To limit this com- munion to the visible saints of the earthly assembly would be to deny the eschatological dimension of Pentecostal worship, the final topic to which we now turn.
Fourth Intersection: Eschatology, Doxology and the Disposition to Praise and Veneration
The veneration of Mary and the saints in Catholic and Orthodox doxological praxis is essentially an eschatological affirmation on this side of the parousia of the triumph of grace in the Christus totus in heaven and on earth. Two foun- dational axioms emerge which are intended to explicate the nature of Marian veneration and its appeal to a Pentecostal imagination. In this concluding section I confine myself to a foundational examination of the move from an ecclesiotypical representation of Mary to a Christotypical one, respectively a justification for Marian intercession and the veneration of Mary.
The ecclesiotypical representation of Mary envisions her as an exemplary symbol of holiness within the communion of saints and her effective intercession
PNEU 29,2_f4_214-225.indd 223PNEU 29,2_f4_214-225.indd 223
111/7/07 10:59:49 AM1/7/07 10:59:49 AM
10
224
R. Del Colle / Pneuma 29 (2007) 214-225
on behalf of that communion. The latter follows from the former. Mary’s exemplary holiness in the midst of the Church is a matter not only of memory but also of iconic and personal presence. The praise of God declares the works of God including the triumph of divine grace in those who are with the Lord. In Christ they shine forth in the Church’s memory, which re-presents their irreversible gaze in the beatific vision now turned to the Church on earth in exemplary and iconic manifestation. Perfection in holiness is a perfection of their love of God and neighbor. Hence their turn to the Church on earth takes on ecclesial form and presence through prayer and veneration. This may be the subject of imitation in Christian discipleship as the Church meditates and mediates their following of Christ.
In the communion of the Holy Spirit, the source of the prayer of the Church and of its members, the saints may be encountered in their form — such as icons and narratives — and in their presence. Of course, their presence differs from that of the faithful on earth, brothers and sisters still in via. Nevertheless, the communion of the Holy Spirit does not dissolve the relational dimensions of interpersonal presence and encounter in the communion of saints relative to those who have gone on to be with Christ. It simply alerts the Church to their permanent disposition toward Christ that is gained through death (Phil. 1.21). In the risen Christ, the Christus totus, it is also a permanent disposition toward the Church, for the risen Lord faces both the Father and the Church in his heavenly session of headship and high priestly intercession. For the faithful on earth this indeed entails the possibilities of relational presence and encounter with all those joined to Christ.
Finally, the Church’s doxological praxis within this communion generates veneration as well as petition. The worship of God accentuates the awareness of divine glory and holiness eliciting from the Church both praise and peti- tion. So too in the communion of saints petition and the praise of veneration (not worship) extends to those united to Christ in glory. Beholding the saints with Christ (Christotypical representation) evokes veneration and is simply an extension of the relational acclamations of love — ‘Most blessed are you among women’ Lk. 1.42 — that proceed from recognition of their exemplary holiness present in the Church and its communion (ecclesiotypical representation).
All of this I contend is present in the doxological cast of the Church’s prayer including that of the Pentecostal assembly. Mary is the most venerated because she is the most holy. What is true for her is the same as that which may be predicated of all in the communion of saints. The Pentecostal sensibility increases awareness of and participation in the divine praises. Is it too much
PNEU 29,2_f4_214-225.indd 224PNEU 29,2_f4_214-225.indd 224
111/7/07 10:59:49 AM1/7/07 10:59:49 AM
11
R. Del Colle / Pneuma 29 (2007) 214-225
225
that in the acclamation of the divine works we also venerate those who shine forth in divine splendor by the marvels of his grace?
Bibliography
Blancy, Alain; Jourjon, Maurice, and the Dombes Group, Mary in the Plan of God and in the
Communion of Saints (New York: Paulist, 2002).
Catechism of the Catholic Church: with Modifications from the Editio Typica. New York: Double-
day, 1997.
Directory on Popular Piety and the Liturgy: Principles and Guidelines. (Boston: Pauline Books and
Media, 2002).
Groupe des Dombes. For the Conversion of the Churches. (Geneva: WCC Publications, 1993).
Johnson, Elizabeth A., Truly Our Sister: A T eology of Mary in the Communion of Saints (New
York: Continuum, 2003).
Laurentin, René. The Question of Mary (New York: Hot, Rinehart and Winston, 1965).
Lossky, Vladimir. The Mystical T eology of the Eastern Church (Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s
Seminary Press, 1976).
Lumen Gentium. In Second Vatican Council, De Ecclesia, Constitution on the Church, November
21, 1964, Lumen Gentium, publ. no. 000-1, no translator given (Washington, DC: United
States Catholic Conference, n.d.).
Zizioulas, John D. Being As Communion: Studies in Personhood and the Church (Crestwood, NY:
St Vladimir’s Seminary, 1985).
PPNEU 29,2_f4_214-225.indd 225NEU 29,2_f4_214-225.indd 225
11/7/07 10:59:49 AM11/7/07 10:59:49 AM
12
Leave a Reply