First Published April, 1949
Reprinted November

PRINTED

1949

BT THE FREDERICK PRESS, STH. FREDERICK

UNI,

DUBLIN.

The Mother of The
Saviour
and

Our Interior Life
BY

Father Reginald GARRIGOU-LAGRANGE, O.P.
Professor of Dogma and Mystical Theology in the
Angelico, Rome
TRANSLATED BY

Bernard

J. KELLY, C.S.Sp., D.D.
Deus, humilium celsitudo...
O God, Who art the great­
ness of the humble, reveal
to us Mary’s humility which
is proportioned to the eleva­
tion of her charity.

B HERDER BOOK COMPANY
15 & 17 SOUTH BROADWAY
ST. LOUIS 2, MO.

2 3Z, 43/
G? i*
t.l
»- / 3 ll-SS
Nihil Obstat:
MICHAEL L. DEMPSEY, S.T.D ,
Censos Ttuoi. Depivat.

Imprimi Potest:
JOANNES CAROLUS.

Archiep. Dlbunen., Hiberniae Primas.

Dublini, die 8 Decembris, 1918.
Imprimi Potest:
PATRICIUS O’CARROLL, C.S.SP..

Siterior Provincial».
Dvblini, die 2 Decembris, 1948.

Imprimi Potest:
FR. BERNARD MARIE, O.P.,
Vicaire Provincial oit Zone Libre.
le 8 Juillet. 1941.

TO THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY
MOTHER OF GOD
AND OUR MOTHER a

who placed all her greatness in God
and was filled by Him with good things,
in token of profound gratitude

and filial obedience.

1773

TRANSLATOR’S PREFACE

A theologian of the eminence of Father GarrigouLagrange does not himself need to be introduced to
the public. This present work of his would, however,
seem to invite a few words of explanation.

It is not a devotional book in the ordinary sense of
the term: it is too openly theological for that. On
the other hand, it is no mere theological treatise : the
author’s aim has been to inflame hearts no less than
to enlighten minds. The result is a work which de­
mands more intellectual application than many
others on Our Lady. But, by way of compensation, it
touches the will at a deeper and more spiritual level
than would a work of less rich content. The author’s
insistence—a fully justified one—on the doctrinal
side of his subject, has of course, left little room for
mere literary ornament. But this lack, if lack it be,
will not turn away any reader who is sincerely
desirous to know Our Lady better.
As for the translation itself, though care has been
taken not to attribute to Father Garrigou-Lagrange
anything he did not write, it has not been possible

always to translate the original with literal fidelity.
Theologians who wish to use the book for strictly
scientific purposes would be well advised to compare
passages they intend to quote with the original. The
translator will be glad to supply it, if necessary, as
far as possible.

Holy Ghost Missionary College,
KlMMAGE,

Corpus Christi, May 27th, 1948.

AUTHOR’S PREFACE

This book is intended to be an exposition of the
principal theses of Mariology in their bearing on our
interior life. While writing it I have noticed more
than once how often it has happened that a
theologian admitted some prerogative of Our Lady in
his earlier years under the influence of piety and
admiration of her dignity.
A second period then
followed when the doctrinal difficulties came home
to him more forcefully, and he was much more
reserved in his judgement. Finally there was the
third period, when, having had time to study the
question in its positive and speculative aspects,
he returned to his first position, not now
because of his sentiment of piety and admiration, but
because his more profound understanding of
Tradition and theology revealed to him that the
measure of the things of God—and in a special
way those things of God which affect Mary—
is more overflowing than is commonly understood. If
the masterpieces of human art contain unsuspected
treasures, the same must be said, with even more
reason, of God’s masterpieces in the orders of nature
and grace, especially when they bear an immediate
relation to the Hypostatic Order, which is constituted
by the mystery of the Incarnation of the Word. I have
endeavoured to show how these three periods may be
found exemplified in the process of St. Thomas’s
teaching on the Immaculate Conception.

These periods bear a striking analogy to three
others in the affective order. It has often been
noticed that a soul’s first affective stage may be one
of sense-perceptible devotion, for example to the
Sacred Heart or the Blessed Virgin. This is followed
by a stage of aridity. Then comes the final stage of
perfect spiritual devotion, overflowing on the sensi­
bility. May the Good God help the readers of this
book who wish to learn of the greatness of the Mother
of God and men to understand in what this spiritual
progress consists.
The doctrines proposed in this book are not per­
sonal ones: it has been my aim to give what is most
commonly held by theologians—especially those of
the Thomistic school—and to explain the various
points in the light of St. Thomas’s principles (1).
Lastly, every effort has been made to avoid merely
metaphorical expressions. There are sometimes too
many of them in books on Our Lady. A bibliography
is given with each question treated.
(1) For the positive part of the book. I have made extensive
use of Fr. Merkelbach’s Mariologia. Although I have differed
from him in some matters, his book seems to me worthy of the
highest praise in its speculative parts as well, both as regards
the order of the questions and the accuracy of his theological
arguments.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE

Translator’s Preface
Author’s Preface

...

...

...

...

...

7

...

...

...

...

9

PART I

The Divine Maternity and the Plenitude of Grace

Chapter I: The Divine Maternity: Its Eminent Dignity
Article I: The Predestination of Mary: Mary’s
predestination to the Divine Maternity pre­
ceded her predestination to the fulness of
glory and grace
...
...
...
Article II: Other reasons for asserting the pre­
eminence of the Divine Maternity ...
31

17

Chapter II: Mary’s First Plenitude of Grace ...
...
Article I: The different plenitudes of grace
...
Article II: The privilege of the Immaculate
Conception
...
...
...
...
Article III: Was Mary exempt fromevery fault,
even venial?
...
...
...
Article IV: The perfection of Mary’s first grace
Article V: The consequence of Mary’s plenitude
of grace
...
...
...
...

45
45

Chapter III: Mary’s Plenitude of Grace at and after the
Incarnation
...
...
...
...
...
Article I: Mary’s spiritual progress up to the
Annunciation
...
...
...
...
Article II: Mary’s wonderful increase in grace at
the Annunciation
... ...
...
Article III: The Visitation and the Magnificat
Article IV: Mary’s perpetual virginity
...

20

51
71
76
88

97
97

112
118
121

12

TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE

CHAPTER III (CONTD.)

Article V: The principal mysteries which contri­
buted to Mary’s increase in grace after the
Incarnation
...
...
...
···
Article VI: Mary’s intellectual endowments and
her principal virtues
... ...
... 140
Chapter IV: The Final Plenitude of Mary’s Grace
...
Article I: Mary’s fulness of grace at the moment
of death ...
...
...
...
Article II: The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin
Article III: The final plenitude of grace in heaven

125

155
155
159
171

PART II
Mary, Mother of all men: Her Universal Mediation
and our Interior Life

Chapter I: The Mother of the Redeemer and of All Men
Article I: The Mother of the Saviour associated
with his redemptive work ...
...
179
Article II: Mother of all men
...
...
Chapter II: Mary’s Universal Mediation during Her
Earthly Existence
...
...
...
···
Article I: Mary’s universal mediation in general
Article II: Mary’s merits for us
...
...
Article III: The sufferings of Mary as Co1
Redemptrix
...
...
...
...

Chapter III: Mary’s Universal Mediation in Heaven ...
Article I: Mary’s power of intercession
...
Article II: Mary and the distribution of grace ...
Article III: The universality of Mary’s mediation
and its definability
... ...
...

179

187
197
197
206
214
227
227
234

249

TABLE OF CONTENTS

13
PAGE

Chapter IV: Mother of Mercy
...
...
...
Article I: Greatness and power of this maternity
Article II: Principal manifestations of justice ...

258
258
260

Chapter V: Mary’s Universal Queenship
...
...
Article I: Her Queenship in general
...
...
Article II: Special aspects of Mary's Queenship

269
270
275

Chapter VI: True Devotion to Our Laiy
...
... 286
Article I: The cult of hyperdulia and the benefits
it confers
...
...
...
... 286
Article Π : The Rosary : a school of contemplation 292
Article III: Consecration to Mary
...
... 297
Article IV: Mystical union with Mary ...
... 308
Article V: The Consecration of the Human Race
to Mary for the Peace of the World
... 314
Chapter VII: The Predestination of St. Joseph and His
Eminent Sanctity
...
...
...
...

322

PART I

The Divine Maternity

and the Plenitude of Grace

CHAPTER I
The Divine Maternity:
its eminent dignity

The two truths which stand out like mountain
peaks in the chain of revelation concerning Our
Blessed Lady, and around which cluster all other
truths we hold about her, are her divine maternity
and her fulness of grace, both of which are affirmed
in the Gospels and in the Councils of the Church.
To grasp their importance it will be well to compare
them, asking which of the two comes first, and gives,
as it were, the true Pisgah view of all Mariology. In
that spirit have theologians enquired which was the
greater of Mary’s prerogatives, her divine maternity
(her motherhood of God) or her fulness of grace.

The Problem Stated
There have been theologians (1) who have de­
clared Mary’s fulness of grace hex- greatest preroga­
tive. The words spoken to Jesus by a certain woman
as He passed in the midst of the people, and His an­
swer, have led them to adopt this position : “ Blessed
(1) Gabriel Biel in Ilium Sent. dist. IV, a.3, dub III, p.2,
Brescia 1574, p.67 sq. and some others who have followed him
more or less closely. Thus, Vasquez, in Illam, disp. XXIII,
c.II and disp. C. c.II, attributes greater dignity to sanctifying
grace than to the divine maternity.
For this opinion cf.
Dictionnaire de la Théologie Catholique, art. marie by E.
Dublanchy S.M., col. 2356 sqq.
B

18

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

is the womb that bore Thee, and the paps that gave
thee suck. But He said: Yea rather, blessed are they
who hear the word of God and keep it ” (Luke xi, 2728). On their view the Saviour’s answer implies that
the fulness of grace and of charity which was the
principle of Mary’s supernatural and meritorious
acts was superior to her divine maternity, a privilege
in itself of the corporeal order only.
According to many other theologians (2) the rea­
son given just now is not conclusive. Their argu­
ments are many. They say that the woman in ques­
tion did not speak precisely of the Divine Maternity :
she thought of Jesus less as God than as a
prophet whose words were heard eagerly, who was
admired and acclaimed, and she was thinking there­
fore of a natural motherhood according to flesh and
blood: “Blessed is the womb that bore thee and the
paps that gave thee suck.” She did not speak of the
divine maternity as of something which included a
supernatural and meritorious consent to the mystery
of the redemptive Incarnation. That was why Our
Blessed Lord answered as He did: “Yea rather,
blessed are they who hear the word of God and keep
it.” For it was precisely by hearing the word of God
and believing in it that Mary became Mother of the
(2) Among the thomists special mention must be made of
Contenson, Gotti, Hugon and Merkelbach.
Father Merkelbach quotes the following in his Mariologia,
1939, p.68, as having all admitted more or less explicitly that
her divine maternity is the greatest of Mary’s titles: St.
Epiphanius, St. Ambrose, St. Sophronius, St. Germanus of
Constantinople, St. John Damascene, Andrew of Crete, St.
Peter Damien, Eadmer, Peter of Celles, St. Bernard. St. Albert
the Great, St. Bonaventure. St. Thomas, Denis the Carthusian,
St. Bernardine of Siena, St. Alphonsus, and all thomists in
general as, for example, Gonet, Contenson, Gotti, Hugon.
Besides, Leo XIII says in his encyclical Quamquam pluries of
August 15. 1889: “Certe Matris Dei tam in excelso est dignitas,
ut nihil fleri majus queat.” Cf. Marie in Dictionnaire de la Th
Cath., cols. 2349-2359.

THE DIVINE MATERNITY:

ITS EMINENT DIGNITY

19

Saviour. She said her fiat generously and with
perfect conformity of will to God’s good pleasure and
all it involved for her, and she kept the divine words
in her heart from the time of the Annunciation on­
wards. Elisabeth, for her part, expressed this when
she said: “Blessed art thou that hast believed, be­
cause those things be shall accomplished which were
spoken to thee by the Lord” (Luke 1, 45). What a
contrast with Zachary who was struck dumb for not
having believed the words of the Angel Gabriel:
“ And behold thou shalt be dumb . . . because thou
hast not believed my words” (Luke 1, 20).
Nothing said so far, therefore, is sufficient to solve
the problem: which was the greater, the divine
maternity as realised in Mary or her fulness of grace
and charity?
We must search deeper for a solution. To make
the terms of the problem still more precise, it should
be noted that the maternity proper to a creature en­
dowed with reason is not the maternity according to
flesh and blood which is found in the animal king­
dom, but something which demands by its very
nature a free consent given by the light of right
reason to an act which is under the control of the
will and is subject to the moral laws governing the
married state: failing this, the maternity of a
rational being is simply vicious. But the maternity
of Mary was more than rational.
It was divine.
Hence her consent needed to be not free only, but
supernatural and meritorious: and the intention of
Divine Providence was that in default of this con­
sent the mystery of the redemptive Incarnation
would not have taken place—she gave her consent,
St. Thomas says, in the name of mankind (Illa,
q.30, a.2).
.Hence the maternity we are discussing is not one

20

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

which is merely of flesh and blood, but one which by
its nature included a supernatural consent to the
mystery of the redemptive Incarnation which was
about to be realised, and to all the suffering it in­
volved according to the messianic prophecies—espe­
cially those of Isaias—all of which Mary knew so
well. There can, in consequence, be no question of
any divine maternity for Mary except a worthy one:
in the designs of God she was to be a worthy Mother
of the Redeemer, united perfectly in will to her Son.
Tradition supports this by saying that her conceiving
was twofold, in body and in soul: in body, for Jesus is
flesh of her flesh, the flame of His human life having
been lit in the womb of the Virgin by the most pure
operation of the Holy Ghost: in soul, for Mary’s
express consent was needed before the Word
assumed our nature in her.
To the problem so stated the great majority of
theologians answer that tradition teaches that the
divine maternity, defined in the Council of Ephesus,
is higher than the fulness of grace, and that Mary’s
most glorious title is that of Mother of God. The
reasons for their answer are as follows. We ask the
reader’s special attention for the first few pages.
Once they have been grasped the rest follows quite
naturally.

Article I
The Predestination

of

Mary

Let us examine first the primary object in the pre­
destination of Mary, and the sense in which it was
absolutely gratuitous.

THE PREDESTINATION OF MARY

21

Mary’s 'predestination to the divine maternity
preceded her predestination to the fulness of
glory and grace.
This proposition may appear a little too profound
for a beginning. In reality it is quite easy to under­
stand. Most people admit it, at least implicitly.
Besides it throws a flood of light on all that follows.
Pius IX affirmed it in effect in the Bull Ineffabilis
Deus, by which he defined the dogma of the Immacu­
late Conception, when he said that God the Father
predestined Jesus to natural divine sonship—so
superior to adoptive sonship—and Mary to be Mother
of God, in one and the same divine decree. The eternal
predestination of Jesus included not only the
Incarnation itself as object but also all the circum­
stances of time and place in which it would be
realised, and especially the one expressed by the
Nicene Creed in the words: “Et incarnatus est de
Spiritu Sancto ex Maria Virgine.”(3) By the same
eternal decree, therefore, Jesus was predestined to be
Son of the Most High and Mary to be Mother of
God. (4) It follows that as Christ was predestined to
(3) The words “ natus ex Maria Virgine ” are in the creed
used in the West from at least the 2nd century.
(4) The words of Ineffdbüis Deus are: “Ineffabilis Deus ab
Initio et ante saecula Unigenito Filio Suo, matrem ex qua
caro factus in beata temporum plenitudine nasceretur, eleoit,
atque ordinavit tantoque prae creaturis universis est prose­
cutus amore, ut in illa una sibi propensissima voluntate
complacuerit ... Ipsissima verba, quibus divinae scripturae de
increata Sapientia loquuntur, ejusque sempiternas origines
repraesentant, consuevit (Ecclesia), tum in ecclesiasticis
officiis, tum in sacrosancta llturgia adhibere, et ad illius
Virginis primordia transferre, quae uno eodemque decreto cum
divinae sapientiae Incarnatione fuerunt praestituta.”
The gratuitous predestination of Christ is the exemplary
cause of ours, for He merited for us all the effects of our pre­
destination, as St. Thomas explains Illa, q.24, a.4. But Mary’s
predestination to the divine maternity has this altogether
peculiar to it, that it is one with Christ’s predestination to

22

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

natural divine sonship before (in signo priori) being
predestined to the summit of glory and to the
fulness of grace (the germ of glory) so also the
Blessed Virgin Mary was predestined first to the
divine maternity, and in consequence to a very high
degree of heavenly glory and to the fulness of grace,
in order that she might be fully worthy of her
mission as Mother of the Saviour. This second pre­
destination was all the more necessary seeing that,
as His Mother, she was called to closest association
with Jesus, by perfect conformity of her will with
His, in His redemptive work. Such, in substance, is
the teaching of Pius IX in the Bull Ineffabilis Deus
(5).
Thus, just as in Jesus the dignity of Son of God, or
natural divine sonship, that is to say, with the decree of the
Incarnation. This follows clearly from the text of Pius IX.
(5) The same doctrine is found very beautifully expressed
in the collect of the Votive Mass of the Holy Rosary
(Dominican Missal): Omnipotens et misericors Deus, qui ab
aeterno Unigenitum tibi coaequalem atque consubstantialem
Filium secundum carnem praedestinasti in Spiritu sanctifica­
tionis D. N. J. C., et sanctissimam Virginem Mariam tibi
acceptissimam in matrem eidem a saeculo praeelegisti."
In predestining Christ to natural divine sonship, the Father
loved, therefore, and selected (dilexit, elegit et praedestinavit)
Mary from all eternity as His Mother, to whom, in conse­
quence, He willed to give fulness of glory and grace. As Pius
IX says in Ineffabilis Deus: “Et quidem decebat omnino ut
perfectissimae sanctitatis splendoribus semper ornata
fulgeret.”
St. Thomas says: “Post Christum habuit Maria maximam
plenitudinem gratiae, quae ad hoc est electa, ut esset mater
Dei” (in Ep. ad Rom., VIII, lect. 5; p.118 in Marietti edition).
Mary’s predestination to the divine maternity involves her
predestination to glory and grace as an immediate conse­
quence, for that maternity is so intimate a relationship with
God as to demand a participation in the divine nature. No
one thinks of the Mother of God as without grace, cf. Hugon,
De Virgine Maria Deipara, 1926, p.734. The divine maternity
implies also both confirmation in grace and impeccability for
there must be mutual and perpetual love between Motlier and
Son: God owes it to Himself to preserve His Mother from
every fault that would separate her from Him, cf. Hugon, ib.,
p.736.

THE PREDESTINATION OF MARY

23

Word made flesh, surpasses that of the plenitude of
created grace, charity, and glory, which He received
in His sacred soul as a result of the hypostatic union
of two natures in Him by the Incarnation, so also in
Mary the dignity of Mother of God surpasses that of
the plenitude of grace and charity, and even that of
the plenitude of glory which she received through
her unique predestination to the divine maternity.
It is the teaching of St. Thomas and many other
theologians when treating of the motive of the In­
carnation (for the redemption of mankind) that
Mary’s predestination to be Mother of the Redeemer
depended on the divine foreknowledge and permis­
sion of Adam’s sin.
As St. Thomas explains
(Illa, q.l, a.3, ad 3), that sin was permitted in view
of a greater good, namely that through the redemp­
tive Incarnation “ where sin abounded, grace
(might) more abound” (Rom. 5, 20) (6). Just as
God wills the human body for the sake of. the human
soul, and yet, since He wills that the soul give life to
the body, does not create a soul till there is a body
ready to receive it, so also God allowed in view of
the greater good of the redemptive Incarnation that
there should be a sin to be atoned for, and He willed
the redemptive Incarnation for the sake of the re­
generation of souls: thus in the actually existing
order of divine providence there would have been no
Incarnation had there been no sin.
And in this
order everything is subordinated to Christ and His
(6) Pius IX says the same In the Bull Ineffabilis Deus:
" Ineffabilis Deus ... cum ab omni aeternitate praeviderit
luctuosissimam humani generis ruinam ex Adami transgreslone derivandum, atque in mysterio a saeculis abscondito
primum suae bonitatis opus decrevit per Verbi incarnationem
• ncramento occultiore complere, ut quod in primo Adam
en suram erat, in secundo felicius erigeretur, ab Initio et ante
ii'cula Unigen’to Filio suo matrem ex qua ... nasceretur
elegit atque ordinavit ...”

24

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

Holy Mother, so that it is true to say with St. Paul
(1 Cor. iii, 23): “All things are yours . . . And you
are Christ’s; and Christ is God’s” (7). Thus the
greatness of Christ and of His Mother are in no way
lessened by their dependence on Adam’s sin.
Mary was therefore predestined first to the divine
maternity. This dignity appears all the greater if
we recall that Mary, who was able to merit glory, was
not able to merit the Incarnation nor the divine
maternity, for the Incarnation and the divine mater­
nity lie outside the sphere of merit of the just, which
has as outer limit the beatific vision (8).
There is also another conclusive reason: the prin­
ciple or beginning of merit cannot itself be merited.
Since original sin, the Incarnation is the principle of
all the graces and merits of the just; it cannot there­
fore be itself merited.
Neither, then, could Mary
merit her divine maternity de condigno nor de
congruo proprie, for that would have been to merit
the Incarnation (9).
(7) This point has been explained at length in Le Sauveur
et son amour pour nous, 1933, pp.129-136, and in Angelicum,
1930 and 1939 : “ Motivum incarnationis fuit motivum miseri­
cordiae ... Causae ad invicem sunt causae.” The sin to be
atoned for comes first in the order of material causes. The
redemptive Incarnation comes first in the order of final
causes, and precedes in the divine Intention the actual
application of the redemption to souls.
(8) cf. St. Thomas Illa, q.2, a.II: “ Neque opera cujuscumque hominis potuerant esse meritoria hujus unionis
(hypostaticae) ex condigno. Primo quidem quia opera meri­
toria hominis proprie ordinantur ad beatitudinem, quae est
virtutis praemium et consistit in plena Dei fruitione. Unio
autem incarnationis, cum sit in esse personali, transcendit
unionem beatae mentis ad Deum, quae est per actum fruentis,
et ideo non potest cadere sub merito.”
(9) Ibid.: “Secundo, quia gratia non potest cadere sub
merito, quae est merendi principium.
Unde multo minus
incarnatio cadit sub merito, quae est principium gratiae,
secundum illud Joannis, I, 17, ‘ gratia et veritas per Jesum
Christum facta est.’ ”
Mary could merit the Incarnation
neither de condigno nor de congruo proprie. Even the second
kind of merit must be excluded for it is based on charity,

THE PREDESTINATION OF MARY

2»

As St. Thomas very accurately indicates, what
Mary could merit by the first fulness of grace which
she received gratuitously in view of the foreseen
merits of her Son, was an increase of charity and
that higher degree of purity and holiness which was
becoming in the Mother of God (10). Or, as he says
elsewhere: “Mary did not merit the Incarnation
(nor the divine maternity) but, granted that the
Incarnation had been decreed, she merited {merito
congrui, not condigni) that it should come to pass
through her, since it was becoming that the Mother
of God should be most pure and perfect” (11). Thafis to say, she merited the degree of sanctity which it
was becoming for the Mother of God to have, a de­
gree which no other virgin had in fact merited, or
could merit, since none other had received nor was
entitled to receive the initial fulness of grace and
charity which was the principle of Mary’s merits
This first reason for the eminent dignity of the
Mother of God, based on her gratuitous predestina­
tion to that glorious title, is clear beyond question.
It contains three truths which are, as it were, stars
of first magnitude in the heavens of theology: 1st—
that by one and the same decree the Father predes­
tined Jesus for natural divine sonship and Mary for
the divine maternity; 2nd—that Mary was predes­
tined for the divine maternity before being predes­
tined to the glory and the grace which the Father
which the just have through the merits of the Redeemer. In
other words, the eminent cause of our merits cannot itself be
merited.
(10) Illa, q.2, all. ad 3: “Beata Virgo dicitur meruisse
portare Dominum omnium, non quia meruit ipsum incarnari;
H<’d quia meruit ex gratia sibi data illum puritatis et sancti­
tatis gradum, ut congrue posset esse mater Dei.”
(11) III Sent., d.IV, q.3, a.I, ad 6: “Beata Virgo non meruit
incarnationem sed praesupposita incarnatione, meruit quod
per eam fleret, non merito condigni, sed merito congrui, in
quantum decebat quod Mater Dei esset purissima et
perfectissima.”

26

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

prepared for her that she might be the worthy
Mother of His Son; 3rd—that though Mary merited
heaven de condigno she could not merit (12) the
Incarnation, nor the divine maternity, since these
lie outside the sphere and purpose of human super­
natural merit which does not extend beyond gaining
eternal beatitude.
Many theologians have considered the argument
just given as conclusive. It implies the arguments
we shall expose in the following article, which really
are but its developments, much as the history of a
predestined soul is the unfolding of what was implied
in its predestination (13).
The gratuitousness of the
predestination of Mary.
A few additional remarks about the uniqueness of
Mary’s predestination will make its gratuitousness
all the more apparent.
Among men Jesus is the first of the predestined,
(12) Not even merito de congruo proprie, for that would be
based on Mary’s charity which for its part depended on Jesus’
merits, the source of all human merits. But the Blessed Virgin
was able to obtain the advent of the promised Saviour by her
prayers, the value of which is termed meritum de congruo
improprie (which is based not on God’s justice but on His
infinite mercy).
(13) cf. Vie Intérieure de la Très Sainte Vierge, a collection
of writings of M. Olier, Rome, 1866, vol. I, ch. I: Mary’s pre­
destination to the august dignity of Mother of the Incarnate
Word: in decreeing the Incarnation of His Son, God the
Father took The Blessed Virgin as His spouse, pp. 53-60.
Consequences: wonderful abundance of light and love poured
into the soul of Mary at the moment of her conception, pp.
101 sqq. The glory she gives to God from the time of her
conception, pp. 106-115.
Ch. Ill: Mary’s presentation and
life in the Temple. She enhanced the value of the service
offered by the Synagogue by herself adoring Jesus in the
Temple under all the figures of the Old Testament; she
offered Him under the figure of the immolated victims, pp.
136-143. Mary called on the Messiah in the name of Jews

THE PREDESTINATION OF MARY

27

ince His predestination is the model and cause of
ours. As St. Thomas shows (Illa, q.24, a.3 and 4),
I le merited for us all the effects which follow on our
predestination. But the man Jesus was predestined,
;ts we have said, to natural divine sonship, even be­
fore being predestined to glory and grace. Hence,
His first or primary predestination is none other
I lian the decree of the Incarnation. This eternal
decree covers not only the Incarnation taken in the
abstract—its mere substance—but also all circum­
stances of time and place in which it was to be put
into execution, including the fact that Jesus was to
be conceived in the womb of the Virgin Mary
"espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the
house of David” (Luke I, 27). Mary’s predestina­
tion to the divine maternity being thus included in
Ji sus’s predestination to natural divine sonship, it
follows that it precedes her predestination to glory,
since Jesus is the first of those so predestined. A
striking confirmation of the thesis of the preceding
e ages! (14).
mill Gentiles, p.148. Ch. V: Accomplishment of the mystery
of the incarnation. The Holy Ghost fills Mary with a fulness
ni His gifts which made her actually worthy of the divine
... ternlty, pp. 203 sqq. The inexpressible love of Mary for
tlh- Word incarnate in her, and of the Word for Mary, pp.
«150 .sqq. At the moment of the Incarnation, the Word espouses
du· Church in the person of Mary, to whom, on that account,
11·· gives the fulness of His gifts, p.253. Explanation of the
Mui/niffcat. pp. 294-313. Ch. VIII: The birth of Christ: Mary
In spiritually the Mother of all Christians, pp. 327-345. Ch.
IX The presentation of Jesus in the Temple by Mary, pp.
,Ίΐ’ι i sqq.
Ch. X: The union between Jesus and Mary, pp.
4«U> 434.
114) Suarez is in agreement with the Thomists in this
hiiilter: cf. in Illam, De Mysteriis Christi, disp. I, sect. 3, n.3:
Flilcltur B. Virginem, nostro modo intelligendi, prius secunilinn rationem praedestinatam esse et electam ut esset Mater
liri, quam ad tantam gratiam et gloriam ... Ideo enim B. Virgo
|n .icdestinata est ad tantam gratiam et gloriam, quia electa
ki in Matrem Dei ... ut esset ita disposita sicut Matrem Dei
ib · liat.” cf. also tt>- disp. X, sect. VIII.

28

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

It is no less clear that Mary’s predestination, like
that of Jesus, was gratuitous. Jesus did not merit
His predestination to natural divine sonship for the
reason that His merits presuppose His Person, which
is that of the Son of God by nature. Being there­
fore the principle of all His merits, His Divine Sonship could not itself be merited: else it would be
cause and effect at the same time and under the
same respect (15).
In the same way Mary’s predestination to the
divine maternity is gratuitous or independent of her
merits, for we have seen that to merit it would in­
volve meriting the Incarnation itself, which is the
principle of all the merits of mankind since the Fall.
That is the reason for Mary’s words in the Magni­
ficat: My soul doth magnify the Lord . . . Because
He hath regarded the humility (the lowly condition)
of His handmaid.” Her predestination to glory and
grace is clearly gratuitous also, since it is a result or
morally necessary consequence of her predestination
to be Mother of God. This does not however involve
a denial that she merited heaven. On the contrary,
we affirm that she was predestined to gain heaven
by her merits (16). For the whole question of Mary’s
(15) cf. St. Thomas Illa, q.2, a.II: “In Christo omnis
operatio subsecuta est unionem (cum Verbo); ergo nulla ejus
operatio potuit esse meritoria unionis.” Item Illa, q.24, a.l
and 2.
(16) The divergence of Molinist teaching from that of the
disciples of St. Augustine and St. Thomas in this matter of
predestination is well known. The two great Doctors men­
tioned (cf. St. Thomas, la, q.23, a.5) teach that the predestina­
tion of the elect cannot depend on their foreseen merits, since
their merits are the effect of their predestination. That was
the point of St. Paul’s question, “ What hast thou that thou
hast not received?” (I Cor., iv, 7). The ultimate reason why
one person is better than another is that God loves him more.
No one perseveres in grace rather than to fall into sin except
for the reason that God gives him the grace to persevere. For

THE PREDESTINATION OF MARY

29

predestination cf. Diet. Théol, Cath., article Marie,
col. 2358 (17).
The sequence or order of the divine plan is there­
fore clear: 1st—God willed to manifest His goodness;
2nd—He willed Christ and His glory as Redeemer—in
which will the permission of original sin for the sake
of the greater good is included; 3rd—He willed Our
Blessed Lady as Mother of the Redeemer; 4th—In
consequence He willed her glory; 5th—He willed the
prace and merits by which she would attain to glory;
titli—He willed the glory and grace of all the other
elect.
The predestination of Mary appears now in all its
sublimity. We can understand why the Church ex­
tends to her the application of the words of the Book
of Proverbs, viii, 22-35: “The Lord possessed me in
the beginning of His ways, before He made anything
from the beginning. I was set up from eternity, and
of old before the earth was made. . . when He pre­
pared the heavens I was present . . . when He
bn lanced the foundations of the earth, I was with
HI in forming all things: and was delighted every day,
playing before Him at all times; playing in the world,
and my delights were to be with the children of men
flint, reason we ought daily to pray for the grace of final perMi'verance, the grace of graces, the grace of the elect.
Hut even if the Molinists differ from the Thomists in their
»moral theory of predestination, it would appear, as Father
brkclbach notes in his Mariologia, p.101, that they should
lu h lo· an exception of Mary. For she, having been predestined
urutuitously to the dignity of Mother of God, her predestlnallnn to glory—which was a consequence of her first
|ii< <l<'stination—must also have been gratuitous. God could
pot, have allowed His Mother to be lost and therefore must
have willed efficaciously to lead her to salvation and to stir up
In Ikt the merits which would earn heaven for her.
Γ il7) Vasquez was the first to affirm that Mary was
tin destined to the divine maternity because of her foreseen
merits. This opinion has been commonly rejected both in his
nwn and in subsequent times.

30

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

. . . He that shall find me shall find life, and shall
have salvation from the Lord.”
Mary had been promised as the woman who would
triumph over the serpent (Gen. iii, 15), as the Virgin
whd would bear Emmanuel (Is. vii, 14) ; she had been
prefigured by the ark of alliance, the house of gold,
the tower of ivory. All those testimonies show that
she was predestined first of all to be Mother of God.
And the precise reason why the fulness of glory and
grace was given her was to make her the worthy
Mother- of God—“ to make her fit to be the mother of
Christ” as St. Thomas expresses it (Illa, q.27, a.5,
ad 2). This doctrine appeared to him so certain
that we find him saying in the same article (corp.
art.) : “ The Blessed Virgin Mary came nearer than
any other person to the humanity of Christ, since it
was from her that He received His human nature.
And that is why Mary received from Christ a pleni­
tude of grace which surpassed that of all the saints.”
Pius IX speaks in the same sense at the beginning
of the Bull Ineffabilis Deus: “From the beginning
and before all ages God selected and prepared for
His only Son the Mother from whom, having taken
flesh, He would be born in the blessed fulness of time;
He loved her by herself more than all creatures, and
with such a love as to find His delight in a singular
way in her. That is why, drawing from the treasures
of His Divinity, He endowed her, more than all the
angels and saints, with such an abundance of
heavenly gifts that she was always completely free
from sin, and that, all beautiful and perfect, she
appeared in such a plenitude of innocence and holi­
ness that, except God’s, no greater than hers can be
conceived, and that no mind but the mind of God
■can measure it” (18).
(18) The original Latin text will be found on pp 21 and 76.

THE PRE-EMINENCE OF THE DIVINE MATERNITY

31

Article II
for Asserting the Pre-eminence
of the Divine Maternity

Other Reasons

We have seen that by the decree of the Incarnation
<·.ι· Maria Virgine the Blessed Virgin was predestined
first of all to the divine maternity and by way of
consequence to glory and grace. There are still other
reasons, which we shall now bring forward, which
•how that the divine maternity surpasses the pleni­
tude of grace.
The value of a dignity of the hypostatic order

Since the value or worth of a relation depends on
the term which it regards and which specifies it—as,
lor example, the dignity of the beatific knowledge
and love of the elect depends on their object, which
I:; the Divine Essence known intuitively—the dignity
"I the divine maternity is to be measured by con. Idering the term to which it is immediately referred.
Now this term is of the hypostatic order, and there­
fore surpasses the whole order of grace and glory.
By her divine maternity Mary is related really to
the Word made flesh. The relation so set up has the
uncreated Person of the Incarnate Word as its term,
lor Mary is the Mother of Jesus, Who is God. It is
not precisely the humanity of Jesus which is the term
of the relation, but rather Jesus Himself in Person:
It is He and not His humanity that is Son of Mary
(19). Hence Mary, reaching, as Cajetan says, even
( 19) cf. St. Thomas Illa, q.35, a 4: “Concipi et nasci personae
attribuitur secundum naturam illam in qua concipitur et
nascitur.
Cum igitur in ipso principio conceptionis fuerit
humana natura assumpta a divina persona, consequens est
quod vere possit dici Deum esse conceptum et natum de viriii'ic ... Consequens est quod B. Virgo vere dicatur Mater Dei.”
T<> deny that Mary is Mother of God it would be necessary

32

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

to the frontiers of the Divinity (20), belongs termi­
nally to the hypostatic order, to the order of the
personal union of the Humanity of Jesus to the Un­
created Word. This truth follows also from the very
definition of the divine maternity as formulated in
the Council of Ephesus (21).
But the order of the hypostatic union surpasses
wonderfully that of grace and glory, just as this lat­
ter surpasses that of nature—of human nature and
of angelic nature, created or possible.
The three
orders distinguished by Pascal in his Pensées, that of
bodies, that of spirits with their powers sometimes
amounting to genius, and that of supernatural
charity, are separated by an immeasurable distance
from each other. The same is true of the hypostatic
order and that of glory and grace, considering the
latter even as found in the greatest saints. “ The
earth and its kingdoms, the firmament and all its
stars, are not worth a single thought: all spirits taken
together (and all their natural powers) are not worth
the least movement of charity, for it belongs to
another and an entirely supernatural order.” Simi­
larly, all the acts of charity of the greatest saints,
men or angels, and their heavenly glory, are far be­
low the personal or hypostatic union of the Humanity
of Jesus to the Word. The divine maternity which
is terminated by the uncreated Person of the Word
made flesh surpasses therefore immeasurably, beflrst of all to assert that Jesus had been a mere man before
becoming Son of God, or, with Nestorius, to deny that He had
a divine personality.
(20) cf. Cajet. In Ila, Hae, q.103, a.4, ad 2: "Ad fines
Deitatis B. V. Maria propria actione attigit, dum Deum con­
cepit, peperit, genuit et lacte proprio pavit.” Of all creatures
Mary had the closest “ affinity ” to God.
(21) cf. Denzinger, Enchiridion, no.113: “Si quis non con­
fitetur Deum esse veraciter Emmanuel, et propterea Dei
genitricem sanctam virginem (peperit enim secundum carnem
factum Dei Verbum), A.S.” Item nos. 218, 290.

THE PRE-EMINENCE OF THE DIVINE MATERNITY

33

cause of its term, the grace and glory of all the elect,
and even the plenitude of grace and glory received
by Mary herself.
St. Thomas says (la, q.25, a.6, ad 4): “The
Humanity of Christ since it is united to God, the
beatitude of the elect since it is the possession of
God, the Blessed Virgin Mary since she is the Mother
of God—all these have a certain infinite dignity from
their relation to God Himself, and under that respect
there can be nothing more perfect than them since
there can be nothing more perfect than God.” St.
Bonaventure supports this when he says: “ God could
make a greater world, but He cannot make a more
perfect mother than the Mother of God ” (Speculum,
c. viii).
As Fr. E. Hugon, O.P., says: “The divine maternity
is by its nature higher than adoptive sonship. This
latter produces only a spiritual and mystic relation­
ship, whereas the maternity of the Blessed Virgin
establishes a relationship of nature, a relationship
of consanguinity with Jesus Christ and one of affinity
with the entire Trinity. Besides, adoptive sonship
does not impose, as it were, such obligations on God :
for the divine maternity imposed on Jesus those
obligations of justice which ordinary children con­
tract naturally in regard to their parents, and it con­
fers on Mary that dominion and power over Him
which are the natural right accompanying the dignity
of motherhood ” (22).
By way of corollary it may be mentioned that the
divine maternity surpasses all the gratiae gratis
datae or charismata, such as the gift of prophecy,
knowledge of the secrets of hearts, the gift of
miracles or of tongues, for all these graces are in
(22) Marie, Pleine de Grâce, 5th edition, 1926,, p.63. This
hook I consider one of the best written on the Blessed Virgin.
C

34

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

some way exterior and lower in dignity than sancti­
fying grace (cf. la Ilae, q.3, a.5). It should be noted
also that the divine maternity cannot be lost,
whereas grace can be lost on earth.

©
The eminent dignity of the divine maternity has
been set in striking relief by Bossuet in his sermon
on the Conception of the Blessed Virgin (towards the
end of the first point) : “ God so loved the world, said
Our Saviour, as to give His only begotten Son (John
iii, 16) . . . (But) the ineffable love which He had
for you, O Mary, made Him conceive many other
designs in your regard. He ordained that He should
belong to you in the same quality in which He be­
longed to Himself : and in order to establish an eter­
nal union with you He made you the Mother of His
only Son and Himself the Father of yours. O
prodigy! O abyss of charity! what mind does not
find itself lost to consider the incomprehensible re­
gard He had for you; you come so near to Him,
through this Son common to you both, this inviolable
bond of your sacred alliance, this pledge of your
mutual love which you have given so lovingly to each
other, the Father giving Him in His impassible
Divinity, and you giving Him in the mortal flesh in
which He was obedient.”
God the Father communicated to His Son the
Divine Nature. Mary gave Him a human nature,
subject to pain and death, in which to redeem us.
But Mary’s Son is the Only-begotten of the Father,
and in that consists the whole grandeur of her
maternity.

©

THE PRE-EMINENCE OF THE DIVINE MATERNITY

35

The reason why so many
graces were conferred on Mary
The eminent dignity of the divine maternity is
revealed in a new light if we consider that it is the
reason why the fulness of grace was given to Mary,
that it is the measure and end of that fulness, and
that it is superior to it.
The reason why Mary was given a fulness of grace
from the first instant was that she might be enabled
to conceive the Man God in holiness, by uttering her
fiat with the utmost generosity on the day of the
Annunciation in spite of the sufferings which she
knew had been foretold of the Messias; it was given
her, too, that she might bring forth her child while
remaining a virgin, that she might surround Him,
with the most motherly and most holy devotion; it
was given her, finally, that she might unite herself to
Him in closest conformity of will, as only a most holy
mother can, during His hidden life, His apostolic life,
and His suffering life—that she might utter her
second fiat most heroically at the foot of the Cross,
with Him, by Him, and in Him.
As Fr. Hugon has so well put it: “The divine
maternity postulates intimate friendship with God.
Since a mother is bound both by a law of nature and
an express precept to love her son, and he to love her,
Mary and Jesus love each other mutually; and since
the maternity in question here is supernatural the
love must be of the same order. But this means that
it is a sanctifying love, since by the fact that God
loves a soul He makes it lovable and sanctifies it ”
(23). There is thus the most complete conformity
between the will of Mary and her Son’s oblation
(23) Father E. Hugon. OP.. De B. Virgine Maria Deipara
< Tractatas Theologici), 1926, p.735.

36

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

which was, as it were, the soul of the sacrifice of the
Cross.
It is clear that it was for the reason, we have given
and for none other that Mary was given an initial
plenitude of grace followed by a consummated pleni­
tude in glory. The same reason or end was the
measure of her grace and glory: therefore it sur­
passed them. Admittedly it is not possible to deduce
from the divine maternity each and every one of the
privileges received by Mary (24) but all derive ulti­
mately from it. If, finally, she was predestined from
all eternity to the highest degree of glory after Jesus,
the reason is that she was predestined first of all to
be His most worthy mother, and to retain that title
during eternity after having enjoyed it in time. The
saints who contemplate in heaven the sublime degree
of glory, so far surpassing that of the angels, in which
Mary is enthroned, know that the reason why she
was predestined to it is that she might be and might
remain for eternity the most worthy Mother of God :
Mater Creatoris, Mater Salvatoris, Virgo Dei Genetrix
Such was the teaching of St. Albert the Great on
more than one occasion (25). The poets have sung
(24) For example, we cannot deduce from it the privilege
of the Assumption, except by taking into consideration the
further point that the Mother of God was associated intimately
with Jesus’s complete victory over Satan, sin and death. At
the same time, it is clear that the reason for this intimate
association is the divine maternity. This is much the same
as to say that the second property of the circle cannot be
deduced from the definition alone, but follows from it taken
in conjunction with its first property.
(25) Mariale qq. 140 and 141: "Magis est esse matrem Dei per
naturam, quam esse filium (Dei) per adoptionem ”—“ Quidquid
claudit alterum in se plus est eligendum quam illud quod non
claudit alterum in se.
Sed esse matrem Dei per naturam
claudit in se filium Dei adoptivum.” Suarez says similarly in
Illam P., disp. I. sect. 2, no. 4: "Comparatur haec dignitas
Matris Dei ad alias gratias creatas tamquam prima forma ad
suas proprietates: et e converso aliae gratiae comparantur ad
ipsam sicut dispositiones ad formam. Est ergo haec dignitas

THE PRE-EMINENCE OF THE DIVINE MATERNITY

37

it in their verses. We refer in a note to one of their
most recent tributes (26).

The Motive of the Cult of Hyperdulia
A last consideration, which will be found in the
works of many theologians, can be adduced in favour
of our thesis.
It is because she is Mother of God rather than be­
cause she is full of grace that Mary is entitled to the
matris, excellentior, sicut forma perfectior est proprietatibus
et dispositionibus. ” Item Bossuet, cf. infra p.29.
(26) Paul Claudel has written very beautifully on the subject
In his Corona benignitatis anni Dei, Hymn to the Sacred Heart
15th ed„ p.64.
Three months after the Angel’s message—at the end of June,
The Woman who is bright as the sun and fair as the moon
Feels the Heart of her Infant throb beneath hers.
In the womb of the Virgin Immaculate a new world begins,
The Child ioho is older than time enters time for our sins,
And with human breathing the First Mover stirs.
Mary, heavy with child, conceived by the Holy Ghost,
Is far from the sight of men with her heavenly Host,
Like the dove of the Canticle in the crannied wall.
She moves not, she speaks not a word, she adores—no more;
Her life is within, her God is within to adore,
Her work and her son, her child, her all.
The world is at peace, the temple of Janus is shut,
The sceptre of David is gone and the prophets are mute,
Lol darker than Hades, a dawn without light.
For Satan holds sway and the world gives him incense and
gold,
hut into his kingdom God comes like a thief, and behold
A daughter of Eve puts the serpent to flight.
The promised Messiah is come, for whom the world prays,
Men knoiv not the good tidings yet, but, far from their gaze,
The Mother is circled by Cherubim bright.

38

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

cult of hyperdulia, a cult superior to that due to the
saints highest in grace and glory. In other words,
hyperdulia is due to Mary not because she is the
greatest of the saints but because of her divine
maternity. It would not have been her due had she
been raised to her present degree of glory without
having been predestined to be Mother of God. This
is the express teaching of St. Thomas (27).
In the Litanies of the Blessed Virgin the first title
of glory mentioned is the Sancta Dei Genetrix. All
the others follow as something which pertains to
Mary as Mother of God: Sancta Virgo Virginum,
Mater divinae gratiae, Mater purissima, Mater cas­
tissima, Mater inviolata, Mater intemerata, Mater
amabilis, Mater admirabilis, Mater boni consilii, etc.

Consequences of the Principles thus far outlined
It follows from what has been said thus far that,
simpliciter loquendo, purely and simply, the divine
maternity, even considered in isolation, is superior to
the plenitude of grace, consummated no less than
initial. The ultimate reason for this assertion is that
(27) Illa, q.25, a.5: “Cum Beata Virgo sit pura creatura
rationalis, non debetur ei adoratio latriae, sed solum veneratio
duliae, eminentius tamen quam caeteris creaturis, in quantum
ipsa est Mater Dei. Et ideo dicitur quod debetur ei non qualiscumque dulia, sed hyperdulia.”
ad 1: Matri regis debetur quidam h.onor consimilis (honori
qui debetur regi), ratione cujusdam excellentiae.”
ad 2: “Honor matris refertur ad Alium.”
St. Bonaventure speaks in the same sense in III Sent·, d.9.
q.3, a.l. The Sacred Congregation of Rites said also, June 1st,
1884: “Reginae et domihae angelorum, in quantum est mater
Dei ... debetur ... non qualiscumque dulia, sed hyperdulia.”

THE PAE-EMINENCE OF THE DIVINE MATERNITY

39

by its term the divine maternity belongs to a higher
order, that of the hypostatic union (28).
Thus the rational soul which, considered even in
isolation, pertains to the order of substance, is su­
perior to its faculties of intellect and will: it is their
end, for they proceed from it as accidents and pro­
perties in order that it may have the power of know­
ing and willing. In a somewhat similar way, the
divine maternity, considered in isolation from Mary’s
other dignities, is the end and reason of her fulness
of grace, and is therefore higher than it.
It is now clear why Mary was predestined first to
be Mother of God before being predestined to the
highest degree of glory after Jesus. The dignity of
a relation is to be judged more by its term than by
anything else; but the divine maternity is something
relative to the Person of the Word made Flesh. In
much the same way the mother of a king is nearer to
him than the most able of his lawyers.
However, under a certain respect—secundum quid,
(28) In this assertion we differ, as do many theologians,
from Suarez (in Illam S. Thomae, t.II, disp. I, sect. 2, no. 6
sq.) and the Salmanticenses (Cursus Theologicus, tr. ΧΙΠ,
disp. II, 27; tr. XIX, disp. IV, 117 sq.).
The reasons for our position are those so well exposed by
E. Dublanchy in the Diet. Théol. Cath., art. Marie, cols. 2357:;365. As we read there, Suarez held that were the divine
maternity to exist without grace and adoptive childhood by
i:race, it would be much inferior to the latter . On the other
hand, if the divine maternity be understood as including
everything that is associated with it in the present order of
providence, it is certainly higher than adoptive childhood.
Suarez’ distinction has been approved and adopted by Novatus,
Vega and the Salamanticenses.
.
However, as Father Dublanchy says, ibid. col. 2357 : The
greater number of theologians, basing themselves on the
principle that the divine maternity pertains to the hypostatic
order and that whatever pertains to that order surpasses all
rifts of grace, continued to hold both in the 17th and the
Micceeding centuries that the divine maternity surpassed—in
dignity, at least—adoptive childhood by grace, even if it be
considered, per impossible, as separated from grace.

40

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

as theologians say—sanctifying grace and the beatific
vision are more perfect than the divine maternity.
As regards sanctifying grace, it makes its bearer holy
in the formal sense of the term, whereas the divine
maternity, being only a relation to the Word made
flesh, does not sanctify in that way (29). The
beatific vision, for its part, unites the intellects of
the elect to the divine essence without the inter­
mediary of the Sacred Humanity (30).
It is evident that the hypostatic union of the two
natures in Christ, considered absolutely, surpasses
the beatific vision, even though the latter includes a
perfection in the order of knowledge not found in the
former. In a similar way, and with all due reserva­
tions, the divine maternity, if considered absolutely
or simpliciter, surpasses the plenitude of grace and
glory, even though this latter is more perfect in a
secondary way, or secundum quid. For the divine
maternity, being but a real relation to the Incarnate
Word, is not enough of itself to sanctify Mary. But
it called out for, or demanded, the fulness of grace
which was granted her to raise her to the level of her
singular mission. She could not have been predes­
tined to be any other kind of mother to the Saviour
than a worthy one (31). Everything follows from
(29) That is a point of difference between the divine
maternity and the uncreated grace of union, which is nothing
other than the Person of the Word sanctifying the Sacred
Humanity. The grace of union confers an inner, substantial,
uncreated sanctity, which is higher than the accidental and
created sanctity conferred by the accident of sanctifying grace.
(30) These theological arguments for the superiority of the
divine maternity over the fulness of grace are ably exposed by
Father Merkelbach. O.P., In his Mariologia, 1939, pp. 64-70
(against Vasquez, Van Noort, and others). Father Hugon, O.P.,
Tractatus Theologici, de B. V. Maria Deipara, 1926, p.736, may
also be consulted.
(31) The maternity of a rational creature must be worthy
or else irrational; an unworthy mother falls In the duties im­
posed on her by the natural law. Rational maternity of its very

THE PRE-EMINENCE OF THE DIVINE MATERNITY

41

that certain truth. All Mariology is dominated by it
Just as all Christology is dominated by the truth that
Jesus is the Son of God (32).

Since Mary pertains by the term of her maternity
to the hypostatic order, it follows that she is higher
than the angels; higher also than the priesthood,
which participates in that of Christ (33). Of course,
not having the priestly character, Mary could not
consecrate as does the priest at the altar. But none
the less, her dignity is higher than that of the priest
and of the bishop, since it is of the hypostatic order.
The Victim offered on the Cross, and Whom the
priest offers on the altar, was given us by Mary. The
Principal Offerer of our Masses was given us by her.
She was more closely associated with Him at the
foot of the Cross than anyone else—more than even
the stigmatics and the martyrs.
Thus, had Mary

nature far surpasses the maternity of an Irrational creature,
< von though this latter is not without nobility, as for example
In the mother-hen who gathers her chicks under her wings
and sacrifices herself to protect them from the hawk.
(32) cf. Diet. Théol. Cath., art. Marie by E. Dublanchy, col.
'.1365: " The dignity of the divine maternity, since it appertains
lo the hypostatic order surpasses all other created dignities,
even when considered in its isolation, and not excluding the
dignity of divine adoption by grace and the Christian priest­
hood.”
Father E. Hugon. O.P., in his book Marie, pleine de grâce,
!>th edition, 1926, p.213, remarks very pertinently: ‘‘The divine
maternity calls for holiness and all its effects. It calls for
participation in the divine being and the divine friendship.
|i Implies a special inhabitation of the Blessed Trinity. It
i onfers a sovereign power of impétration. It guarantees
Impeccability. It confers an inalienable right to the eternal
heritage and even to dominion over all things. It belongs to
to the hypostatic order, which is higher than that of grace and
glory. Habitual grace can be lost, but not the divine maternity.
Mary’s other graces are only a consequence of her maternity,
llv it, Mary is the eldest daughter (l'ainée') in all creation.”
(33) Mary contributes by her maternity to the realisation of
tin* mystery of the Incarnation by giving the Word His human

42

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

received the priestly ordination (but it did not form
part of her mission) she would have received some­
thing less than what is implied in her title of Mother
of God. As St. Albert the Great so well expressed it:
“The Blessed Virgin was not called by God to be a
minister, but a consort and a helper, in accordance
with the words ‘Let us make him a help like unto
himself ’ ” (Mariale, 42 and 165). Mary was chosen
to be not the minister of the Saviour butj His asso­
ciate and helper in the work of redemption.
The divine maternity is therefore, as is commonly
taught, the foundation, source, and root of all Mary’s
graces and privileges, both those that preceded it as
preparation, and those that accompanied it or fol­
lowed from it as its consequence. It was by way of
preparation for the divine maternity that Mary was
the Immaculate Conception, preserved from the
stain of original sin by the future merits of her Son.
He redeemed her as perfectly as was possible; not by
healing her, but by preserving her from the original
stain before it touched her soul for even an instant.
It was because of her maternity that Mary received
the initial fulness of grace which ceased not to in­
crease till it reached its consummated plenitude.
And because of the same maternity she was exempt
from all personal fault, even venial—and from all
imperfection, for she never failed in promptitude to
obey the divine inspirations even when they came to
nature, which is more than to make Him really present in the
Blessed Eucharist. Besides, the priest may have the priestly
character without grace and without God’s friendship; the
plenitude of grace is, however, inseparable from Mary, because
of her special predestination. It is possible to think of an un­
worthy priest, but not of an unworthy Mother of God. From
Mary’s maternity, there follow the privileges of her preserva­
tion from original sin, and from every personal sin (even
venial) and from every imperfection.

THE PRE-EMINENCE OF THE DIVINE MATERNITY

43

her by way of simple counsels (34). The dignity of
Mary surpasses therefore that of all the saints com­
bined.
Recall too that Mary had a mother’s authority over
the Word of God made flesh. She contributed there­
fore to His knowledge: not, of course, to His beatific
or infused knowledge, but to the progressive forma­
tion of His acquired knowledge, which knowledge lit
up the acquired prudence in accordance with which
He performed acts proportioned to His age during
His infancy and hidden life. In this way the Word
made flesh was subject to Mary in most profound
sentiments of respect and love. How, then, could we
f.iil to have the same sentiments in regard to the
Mother of Our God?
In one of the most beautiful books written about
Mary, the Treatise on True Devotion to the Blessed
Virgin, St. Grignon de Montfort says (ch. 1, a.l):
" God made Man found liberty in being enclosed in
her womb; He showed His power by allowing Himself
to be Carried by her, young maiden though she was;
He found glory, and His Father found glory too, in
hiding His splendour from all creatures of earth, so
us to reveal them to Mary alone; He glorified His
majesty and His independence by depending on the
Virgin in His conception, His birth, His presentation
in the tempTe, His hidden life of thirty years—and
even up to the time of His death, for she was present
then, and He offered one only sacrifice in union with
her, and was immolated to the eternal Father with
her consent as once Isaac was immolated to the
illvine will by the consent of Abraham ... It is she
(34) Thus we see that an imperfection, which is a failing in
promptitude to follow a divine counsel, is something different
from a venial sin. The shade of difference is not easy to
detect in ordinary human lives, but it appears quite clear in
I lie light of the perfect holiness of Mary.

44

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

who nourished and supported Him, who brought Him
up and then sacrificed Him for us . . . Finally, Our
Lord remains as much the Son of Mary in heaven as
He was on earth.”
Such is the first reason for the cult of hyperdulia
which we owe her. It explains why the voice of tra­
dition, and especially the Councils of Ephesus and
Constantinople, insisted, before everything else con­
cerning Mary, on the fact that she was the Mother
of God, thereby affirming afresh against Nes­
torianism that Jesus was God.
To conclude this chapter we should note that
many Christians find it so evident that Mary’s
greatest title is that of Mother of God, and that all
her other titles follow from and are explained by it,
that they do not understand why time should be
devoted to proving the point. It is quite clear to
them that had we, for our part, been in a position to
do so, we should have given our mother every gift at
our disposal. That is why St. Thomas is content to
state quite simply (Illa, q.27, a.5, corp, et ad 2): “To
be the worthy Mother of God, Mary needed to
receive fulness of grace.” Bossuet repeats this in his
sermon on the Compassion of the Blessed Virgin (1st
point, end) : “ Since God disposes things with won­
derful aptness, it was necessary that He should im­
print on the heart of the Blessed Virgin a love going
far beyond nature even to the last reaches of grace,
so that she might have for her Son sentiments
worthy of a Mother of God and of a Man-God.”

CHAPTER II
Mary’s First Plenitude of Grace

Hail, full of Grace
Luke 1, 28.

Having seen the nobility of Mary’s title, Mother of
God, it is now appropriate to examine the meaning
and implications of the words spoken to her by the
Angel Gabriel on the day of the Annunciation:
"Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: Blessed
art thou among women” (Luke i, 28). As a help to
understanding these words spoken in God’s name we
shall consider: 1st—the different plenitudes of
i.race; 2nd—the privilege of the Immaculate Con­
ception; 3rd—the sublimity of Mary’s first grace.

Article I
The Different Plenitudes of Grace

According to the usage of Holy Scripture, which
becomes more and more explicit in the New Testa­
ment, it is grace in the strict sense of the term which
Ι.Ί implied in the term “ Fulness of grace ”—that is to
say, grace which is really distinct from nature, both
human and angelic, grace which is a free gift of God
surpassing the natural powers and exigencies of all

46

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

nature, created or creatable (1). Habitual or sancti­
fying grace makes us participate in the very nature,
in the inner life of God, according to the words of
St. Peter (II Peter i, 4): “By whom he hath given us
most great and precious promises: that by these you
may be made partakers of the divine nature.” By
grace we have become adopted children of God, heirs
and coheirs with Christ (Rom. viii, 17); by grace we
are “born of God” (John i, 13). It prepares us to
receive eternal life as a heritage and as a reward of
the merits of which it is itself the principle. It is
even the germ of eternal life, the semen gloriae as
Tradition terms it, since by it we are disposed in ad­
vance for the face to face vision and the' beatific love
of God.
Habitual grace is received into the very essence of
the soul as a supernatural graft which elevates and
deifies its vitality. From it there flows into the
faculties the infused virtues, theological and moral,
and the seven gifts of the Holy Ghost, all of which
supernatural organism constitutes a sort of second
nature of such a kind as to enable us to perform connaturally the supernatural and meritorious acts of
the infused virtues and the seven gifts. We have,
too, by habitual grace the Blessed Trinity dwelling
within us as in a temple where They are known and
loved, even as it were experimentally. And at times
we do know Them in this quasi-experimental fashion
when by a special grace They make Themselves
known to us as the life of our life, for “. . . you have
received the spirit of adoption of sons, whereby we
(1) “ Full of grace,” especially if the original Greek word
be considered, means “ made agreeable in God’s eyes ” or
“ well-beloved of God.” But a soul is made agreeable in God’s
eyes by habitual grace, or gratia gratum faciens, which is
itself an effect of the active and uncreated love of God which
selects the soul as His adopted child.

THE DIFFERENT PLENITUDES OF GRACE

47

cry Abba (Father) ” (Rom. viii, 15). Then does the
Holy Ghost inspire us with filial love, and in that
sense “. . . thei spirit himself giveth testimony to
our spirit, that we are the sons of God” (Rom. viii,
16).
While habitual grace makes us thus children of
God, actual or transitory grace first of all disposes
us for adoptive childhood, and subsequently makes
us act, through the infused virtues and gifts working
separately or both together, in a manner becoming
God’s children. This new life of grace, virtues and
I’lfts, is none other than eternal life begun on earth,
since habitual grace and charity will outlive the pas­
sage of time.
Grace—call it, if you will, a participation in the
divine nature—was no less gratuitous for the angels
I han for us. As St. Augustine says (De Civ. Dei, XII
c. 9) : “ God created them, at the same instant form­
ing their nature and endowing them with grace. ’
When creating the angels God conferred grace on
them, to which grace their nature, richly endowed
t hough it was, could lay no claim. The angels, and
man also, could have been created in a purely
natural condition, lacking the divine graft whence
issues a new life.
The grace intended in the words “Hail, full of
(■race ” addressed to Our Lady is therefore someI hing higher than nature or the exigencies of
nature, created or merely possible. It is a participal ion in the divine nature or in the inner life of God.
which makes the soul to enter into the kingdom of
God, a kingdom far surpassing all the kingdoms of
nature—mineral, vegetable, animal, human, and
fven angelic. So elevated is grace that St. Thomas
could say: “The good of the grace of one soul is
rroater than the good of the nature of the whole

48

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

universe” (2). The least degree of grace in the
soul of a newly baptised child is worth more than all
created natures, including those that are angelic.
Being a participation in the inner life of God, grace
is something greater than all miracles and exterior
signs of divine revelation or of the sanctity of God’s
favoured servants. And it is of this grace, germ and
promise of glory, that the angel spoke when he said
to Mary: “Hail, full of grace.”
Gazing at Mary’s
soul, he saw that, though he himself was in the pos­
session of the beatific vision, Mary’s grace and
charity far surpassed his for she possessed them in
the degree required to become at that instant the
Mother of God.
Mary, of course, had received from the Most High
natural gifts of body and soul in wonderful perfec­
tion. Judged even from the natural level, the soul
of Jesus united in itself all that there is of beauty
and nobility in the souls of the great poets and ar­
tists, of men of genius and of men of generosity. In
an analogous way the soul of Mary was a divine
masterpiece because of the natural perfection of her
intelligence and will and sensibility. There is no
shadow of doubt that she was more gifted than
anyone who has ever struck us as remarkable for
penetration and sureness of mind, for strength of
will, for equilibrium or harmony of higher and lower
faculties. Since she had been preserved from origi­
nal sin and its baneful effects, concupiscence and
darkness of understanding, her body did not weigh
down her mind but rather served it. When forming
the body of a saint, God has in mind the soul which
is to vivify it: when forming Mary’s body He had in
mind the Body and the infinitely holy Soul of the
Word made flesh. As St. Albert the Great loves to
(2) la Ilae, q.24, a.3, ad 2.

MARY'S FIRST PLENITUDE OF GRACE

49

recall, the Fathers of the Church say that Mary,
viewed even naturally, had the grace of Rebecca, the
beauty of Rachel, and the gentle majesty of Esther.
They add that her chaste beauty never held the gaze
tor its own sake alone, but always lifted souls up to
God.
The more perfect these gifts of nature in Mary, the
more elevated they make her grace appear, for it
surpasses them immeasurably.

When speaking of fulness of grace it is well to note
that it exists in three different degrees in Our Lord,
In Mary, and in the just. St. Thomas explains this
a number of times (3).
There is, first of all, the absolute fulness of grace
which is peculiar to Jesus, the Saviour of mankind.
Taking into consideration only the ordinary power of
God, there can be no greater grace than this. It is
the eminent and inexhaustible source of all the
i .race which all men have received since the Fall, or
will receive till the end of time. It is the source also
of the beatitude of the elect, for Jesus has merited
all the effects of our predestination (4).
There is, in the second place, the fulness of super­
abundance which is Mary’s special privilege, and
which is so named since it is like a spiritual river
which has poured of its abundance upon the souls of
men for almost two thousand years.
There is finally the fulness of sufficiency which is
common to all the just and which makes them
capable of performing those meritorious acts—they
(3) See particularly his Comm, in Joannem, c.l, lect. x.
<4) Illa, q.24, a.4.
D

50

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

normally become more perfect in the course of years
—which lead them to eternal life.
These three fulnesses have been well compared to
an inexhaustible spring, to the stream or river which
flows from it, and to the different canals fed by the
river, which irrigate and make fertile the whole
region they traverse—that is to say, the whole
Church, universal in time and space. The river of
grace proceeds from God through the Saviour, as we
read “ Drop down dew, ye heavens, from above, and
let the clouds rain the just: let the earth be opened,
and bud forth a saviour” (Is. xiv, 8). And then
finally it rises once more to God, the Ocean of peace,
in the form of merits, prayers, and sacrifices.
To continue the image: the fulness of the spring
has not increased ; that of the river, on the contrary,
which flows from it has increased. Or, to speak in
plain terms, the absolute fulness of Our Saviour
knew no increase, for it was sovereignly perfect from
the first instant of His conception by reason of the
personal union with the Word. For, from the first
instant the lumen gloriae and the beatific vision were
communicated to Jesus’s soul, so that the second
Council of Constantinople could say (Denz. 224) that
Christ did not grow more perfect by reason of His
meritorious acts: “Ex profectu operum non melior­
atus est.” Mary’s fulness of grace, however, did not
cease to increase up to the time of her death. For
that reason theologians usually speak of 1st—her
initial fulness or plenitude; 2nd—the fulness of her
second sanctification at the instant of the concep­
tion of the Saviour; 3rd—the final fulness (at the
instant of her entry into glory), its extent, and its
superabundance (5).
(5) Cf. Illa, q 27. a.5. ad 2.

THE PRIVILEGE OF THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION

51

Article II
The Privilege of the Immaculate Conception

The initial fulness of grace in Mary presents two
aspects. One is negative, at least in its formulation:
her preservation from original sin. The other is
positive: her conception, absolutely pure and holy
by reason of the perfection of her initial sanctifying
i-.race in which were rooted the infused virtues and
t he gifts of the Holy Ghost.

The Dogmatic Definition

The definition of the dogma of the Immaculate
Conception, made by Pius IX on December 8th, 1854,
reads as follows: “We declare, announce, and define
that the doctrine which states that the Blessed
Virgin Mary was preserved, in the first instant of her
conception, by a singular grace and privilege of God
Omnipotent and because of the merits of Jesus
Christ the Saviour of the human race, free from all
.-.tain of original sin, is revealed by God and must
therefore be believed firmly and with constancy by
all the faithful” (Denz. 1641).
This definition contains three especially impor­
tant points: 1st—It affirms that the Blessed Virgin
was preserved from all stain of original sin from the
first instant of her conception.
The conception
meant is that known as passive or consummated—
that in which her soul was created and united to
her body—for it is then only that one can speak of a
human person, whereas the definition bears on a
privilege granted to the person of Mary. The defini­
tion states also that the Immaculate Conception is a

52

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

special privilege and an altogether singular grace,
the work of Divine Omnipotence.
What are we to understand by original sin from
which Mary has been preserved? The Church has
not defined its intrinsic nature, but she has taught
us something about it by telling us its effects: the
divine hatred or malediction, a stain on the soul, a
state of non-justice or spiritual death, servitude
under the empire of Satan, subjection to the law of
concupiscence, subjection to suffering and to bodily
death in so far as they are the penalty of the com­
mon sin (6). These effects presuppose the loss of
the sanctifying grace which, along with integrity of
nature, Adam had received for us and for himself,
and which he lost by sin, also for us and for him­
self (7).
It follows therefore that Mary was not preserved
free from every stain of original sin otherwise than
by receiving sanctifying grace into her soul from the
first instant of her conception. Thus she was con­
ceived in that state of justice and holiness which is
the effect of the divine friendship as opposed to the
divine malediction, and in consequence she was
withdrawn from the slavery of the devil and subjec­
tion to the law of concupiscence.
She was with­
drawn too from subjection to the law of suffering
and death, considered as penalties of the sin of our
(6) Cf. Second Council of Orange, Denz. 174, 175. Council of
Trent, Denz. 788, 789.
(7) Council of Trent, Denz. 789: “Si quis Adae praevari­
cationem sibi soli et non eius propagini asserit nocuisse,
acceptam a Deo sanctitatem et. justitiam quam perdidit, sibi
soli et non nobis etiam 'perdidisse·, aut inquinatum illum per
inobedientlae peccatum mortem et poenas corporis tantum in
omne genus humanum transfudisse, non autem peccatum quod
est mors animae, A.S.” Sin is the death of the soul since it
deprives it of sanctifying grace which is the supernatural life
of the soul, and the germ of eternal life.

THE PRIVILEGE OF THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION

53

nature (8), even though both Jesus and Mary knew
suffering and death in so far as they are consequences
of our nature (in carne passibili) and endured them
for our salvation.
2nd—It is affirmed in the definition, as it was al­
ready affirmed in 1661 by Alexander VIII (Denz.
1100) that it was through the merits of Jesus Christ,
the Saviour of the human race, that Mary was pre­
served from original sin. Hence the opinion held by
some 13 th century theologians—that Mary was im­
maculate in the sense of not needing to be redeemed,
and that her first grace was independent of the
future merits of her Son—may no longer be admit­
ted. According to the Bull Ineffabilis Deus, Mary
was redeemed by the merits of her Son in a
most perfect way, by a redemption which did not
free her from a stain already contracted, but which
preserved her. from contracting one. Even in human
affairs we look on one as more a saviour if he wards
off a blow than if he merely heals the wound it in­
flicts.
The idea of a preservative redemption reminds us
that Mary, being a child of Adam and proceeding
from him by way of natural generation, should have
incurred the hereditary taint, and would have in­
curred it in fact had not God decided from all eter­
nity to grant her the unique privilege of an immacu­
late conception in dependence on the future merits
of her Son.
The liturgy had already made this point in the
prayer proper to the Feast of the Immaculate Con­
ception, which was approved by Sixtus IV (1476):
"Thou hast preserved her (Mary) from all stain
(8) This asnect of the dogmatic definition is very well exnlained bv Fr. X. M. le Bachelet, S.J., in the Dictionnaire
Anologétiaue. art. Marie, section Immaculée Conception, vol.
III. col. 220 sqq.

54

THE DIVINE MATERNITY: ITS EMINENT DIGNITY

through the foreseen death of this same Son.” The
Blessed Virgin was preserved from original sin by
the future death of her Son, that is to say, by the
merits of Christ dying for us on the Cross.
It is therefore clear that Mary’s preservation from
original sin differs essentially from that of the
Saviour. Jesus was not redeemed by the merits of
another, not even by His own. He was preserved
from original sin and from all sin for two reasons:
first because of the personal or hypostatic union of
His humanity to the Word in the very instant in which
His sacred soul was created, since it could not be that
sin should ever be attributed to the Word made
flesh; secondly, since His conception was virginal
and due to the operation of the Holy Ghost, so that
Jesus did not descend from Adam by way of natural
generation (9). These two reasons are peculiar to
Jesus alone.
3rd—The definition proposes the doctrine of the
Immaculate Conception as revealed, that is, as con­
tained at least implicitly in the deposit of Revela­
tion—in Scripture and Tradition, or in one at least
of those two sources.

The Testimony of the Scriptures

The Bull Ineffabilis Deus quotes two texts of
Scripture, Gen. iii, 15, and Luke i, 28, 42.
The privilege of the Immaculate Conception is re­
vealed as it were implicitly or confusedly in the book
of Genesis in the words spoken by God to the ser(9) As St. Augustine puts it. De Genesi ad litteram, bk. X,
chs. 19 and 20 : Jesus was in Adam “ non secundum seminalem
rationem” but only "secundum corpulentem substantiam.”

THE PRIVILEGE OF THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION

55

pent, and thereby to Satan (Gen. iii, 15): “I will put
enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed
and her seed: she shall crush thy head and thou
shalt lie in wait for her heel.” The pronoun we
translate as “ she ” in “ she shall crush thy head ” is
masculine in the Hebrew text, and stands for the
posterity or seed of the woman; this is true also of
the Septuagint and the Syraic versions. The Vulgate
however has the feminine pronoun “ ipsa,” referring
the prophecy directly to the woman herself. How­
ever there is no essential difference of meaning be­
tween the two readings since the woman is to be
associated with the victory of Him Who will be the
great representative of her posterity in their con­
flict with Satan throughout the ages.
Taken by themselves these words are certainly not
sufficient to prove that the Immaculate Conception
Is revealed. But the Fathers of the Church, in their
comparison of Eve and Mary, have seen in them an
allusion to it, and it is on that account that the text
is cited by Pius IX.
To the naturalist exegete the text means no more
than the instinctive revulsion man experiences
towards the serpent. But to the Jewish and Chris­
tian tradition it means much more. The Christian
tradition sees in that promise—it has been termed
the protoevangelium—the first sketch of the Messiah
and His victory over the spirit of evil. For Jesus is
pre-eminently the posterity of the woman in conflict
with the posterity of the serpent. But if Jesus is
termed the posterity of the woman, that is not be­
cause of His remote connection with Eve, who was
able to pass on to her descendants only a fallen and
wounded nature, deprived of the divine life. Rather
is it because of His connection with Mary, in whose
womb He took a stainless humanity. As Fr. F. X.

56

THE DIVINE MATERNITY:

ITS EMINENT DIGNITY

le Bachelet says, in col. 118 of the article referred to
already, “ We do not find in Eve the principle of that
enmity which God will put between the race of the
woman and the race of the serpent; for Eve, like
Adam, is herself fallen a victim to the serpent. It is
only between Mary, Mother of the Redeemer, that
enmity ultimately exists. Hence the person of Mary
is included, though in a veiled manner, in the protoevangelium, and the Vulgate reading ‘ ipsa ’ (she)
expresses something really implied in the sacred
text, since the victory of the Redeemer is morally,
but really, the victory of His Mother.”
For that reason early Christianity never ceased to
contrast Eve who shared in Adam’s sin by yielding
to the serpent’s suggestion with Mary who shared in
the redemptive work of Christ by believing the words
of the angel on the morning of the Annunciation
(10).
The promise of Genesis speaks of a victory that
will be complete: “She shall crush thy head.” And
since the victory over Satan will be complete, so also
the victory over sin which makes the soul slave and
the devil master. But as Pius IX teaches in the Bull
Ineffabilis Deus, the victory over Satan would not be
complete if Mary had not been preserved from origi­
nal sin by the merits of her Son: “ De ipso (serpente)
plenissime triumphans, illius caput immaculato pede
(Maria) contrivit.”
The Immaculate Conception is contained there­
fore in the promise of Genesis as the oak is contained
in the acorn. A person who had never seen an oak
(10) For the interpretation of the prophecy of Genesis cf.
Terrien, La Mère de Dieu et la Mère des Hommes, vol. III, bk.I,
ch. 2, pp. 26-49.
The Mary-Eve antithesis is brought out
by SS. Justin. Irenaeus, Cyril of Jerusalem. Ephrem,
Epiphanius. Ambrose, Jerome, Augustine, John Chrysostom,
etc. Cf. Diet. Apol. article already quoted, col. 119.

THE PRIVILEGE OF THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION

57

could never guess the value of the acorn, nor its final
stage of development. But we who have seen the
oak know for what the acorn is destined, and that
it does not yield an elm nor a poplar.
The same
law of evolution obtains in the order of progressive
divine revelation.

The Bull Ineffabilis quotes also the salutation
addressed by the angel to Mary (Luke i, 28): “Hail,
full of grace . . . blessed art thou among women,”
as well as the similar words uttered by St. Elisabeth
under divine inspiration (Luke i, 42). Pius IX does
not state that these words are sufficient by them­
selves to prove that the Immaculate Conception is
revealed; for that, the exegetic tradition of the
Fathers must be invoked.
This tradition becomes explicit with St. Ephrem
the Syrian (d. 373) (11). Among the Greeks it is
found on the morrow of the Council of Ephesus
(431), especially in the teaching of two bishop­
opponents of Nestorious, St. Proclus who was a suc­
cessor of St. John Chrysostom in the chair of Con­
stantinople (431-446) and Theodore, bishop of
Ancyra. Later we find it in the teaching of St.
Sophronius, Patriarch of Jerusalem (634-638), An­
drew of Crete (d. 740), St. John Damascene (d.
towards the middle of the 8th century). These
different testimonies will be found at length in the
article Marie of the Diet. Apol. cols. 223-231.
Understood in the light of this exegetic tradition,
the words of the angel to Mary “ Hail, full of grace ”
-that is “Hail, thou art fully pleasing to God and
loved by Him”—are not limited temporally in their
(11) Cf. Diet. Théol., art Ephrem, col. 192.

58

THE DIVINE MATERNITY: ITS EMINENT DIGNITY

application in such a way as to exclude even the
initial period of Mary’s life. On the contrary, the
Blessed Virgin would not have received complete
fulness of grace had her soul been even for an in­
stant in the condition of spiritual death which fol­
lows on original sin, had she been even an instant
deprived of grace, turned away from God, a
daughter of wrath, in slavery to the devil. St.
Proclus says that she was “ formed from stainless
clay” (12).
Theodore of Ancyra says that “the
Son of the Most High came forth from the Most
High” (13). St. John Damascene writes that Mary
is the holy daughter of Joachim and Anne “who
has escaped the burning darts of the evil one” (14),
that she is a new paradise “to which the serpent
has no stealthy access” (15), that she is exempt
from the debt of death which is one of the conse­
quences of original sin (16), and that she must
therefore be exempt from the common fall.
If Mary had contracted original sin her fulness of
grace would have been diminished in this sense that
it would not have extended to the whole of her life.
Thus, Our Holy Mother the Church, reading the
words of the angelic salutation in the light of Tradi­
tion and with the assistance of the Holy Ghost saw
revealed implicitly in it the privilege of the Immacu­
late Conception. The privilege is revealed in the
text not as an effect is in a cause which could exist
without it, but as a part is in a whole; the part is
actually contained in the whole at least by way of
implicit statement.
(12) Orat. VI; P. G., LXV, 733; cf. 751 sqq., 756.
(13) Hom. VI, in Sanctam Mariam Dei genetricem, 11-12;
P. G., LXXVII. 1426 sqq.
(14) Hom. I in Nat., 7; P. G., XCVI, 672.
(15) Hom. II in dormit.. 2, col. 725.
(16) Hom. II in dormit., 3. col. 728.

THE PRIVILEGE OF THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION

59

The Testimony of Tradition
Tradition itself affirms the truth of the Immacu­
late Conception more and more explicitly in the
course of time. St. Justin (17), St. Irenaeus (18),
Tertullian (19), contrast Eve, the cause of death,
and Mary, the cause of life and salvation.
This
anthithesis is constantly on the lips of the Fathers
(20) and is found also in the most solemn documents
of the Church’s magisterium, especially in the Bull,
Ineffabilis Deus. It is presented as perfect and
without restriction; thus, Mary must always have
been greater than Eve, and most particularly at the
first moment of her life.
The Fathers often say
that Mary is stainless, that she has always been
blessed by God in honour of her Son, that she is
intemerata, intacta, impolluta, intaminata, illibata,
altogether without spot.
Comparing Mary and Eve, St. Ephrem says: “Both
were at first simple and innocent, but thereafter Eve
became cause of death and Mary cause of life” (21).
Speaking to Our Blessed Lord, he continues: “You
Lord and Your Mother are the only two who are
perfectly beautiful under every respect. In You
there is no fault, and in Your Mother there is no
stain. All other children of God are far from such
beauty” (22).
(17) Dial, cum Tryphone, 100: P.G., VII, 858 sqq., 1175.
(18) Adv. Haereses, III, xxli, 3, 4: P. G., VII, 858 sqq., 1175.
(19) De carne Christi, XVII; P. L„ II, 782.
(20) For example, SS. Cyril of Jerusalem, Ephrem, Epiphanlus, Ambrose, Jerome, Augustine, John Chrysostom, etc.
(21) Op. Syriaca, Roman edit., t. II, p. 327,
(22) Cf. G. Bickell, Carmina Nisibena, Leipzig, 1866, pp. 2829. Bickell concludes from this and similar passages that St.
Ephrem is a witness to the dogma of the Immaculate
Conception.

60

THE DIVINE MATERNITY:

ITS EMINENT DIGNITY

In much the same way St. Ambrose says of Mary
that she is free from every stain of sin “ per gratiam
ab omni integra labe peccati” (23). St. Augustine’s
comment is well known: “The honour of the Lord
does not permit that the question of sin be raised in
connection with the Blessed Virgin Mary ” (24). If
however the question be put to the saints “ Are you
sinless?” he affirms that they will answer with the
Apostle St. John (I John, i, 8): “If we say that we
have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is
not in us.” There are two other texts which seem
to show that St. Augustine meant his words to be
understood in the sense of the Immaculate Concep­
tion (25). Many other texts of the Fathers will be
found in the works of Passaglia (26), Palmieri (27)
and Le Bachelet (28).
It should not be forgotten that the Feast of the
Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary has been
celebrated in the Church, especially in the Greek
Church, since the 7th and 8th centuries. The same
Feast is found in Sicily in the 9th, in Ireland in the
10th, and almost everywhere in Europe in the 12th
century.
The Lateran Council, held in the year 649 (Denz.,
256) calls Mary “ Immaculate.” In 1476 and 1483
Pope Sixtus IV speaks favourably of the privilege in
connection with the Feast of the Conception of
Mary (Denz., 734 sqq.).
The Council .of Trent
(Denz., 792) declares, when speaking of original
sin which infects all men, that it does not intend to
(23) In Ps. CXVIII, 22. 30: P. L„ II. 782.
(24) De natura et gratia, XXXVI, 42; P. L., XLIV. 267.
(25) Contra Julianum pelagianum, V, xv, 57; P.L., XLIV,
815; Opus imperf. contra Julianum, IV, cxxii; P. L„ XLV, 1418.
(26) De immaculatae Deiparae conceptu.
(27) Thesis 88.
(28) Diet. Apol., art. Marie, Immac. Concept., col. 210-275.

THE PRIVILEGE OF THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION

61

include the Blessed and Immaculate Virgin Mary.
In 1567 Baius is condemned for having taught the
contrary (Denz., 1073). In 1661 Alexander VII
affirmed the privilege, saying that almost all
Catholics held it, though it had not yet been de­
fined (Denz., 1100). Finally, on December 8th, 1854,
we have the promulgation of the solemn definition
(Denz., 1641).
It must be admitted that in the 12th and 13th
centuries certain great doctors, as, for example, St.
Bernard (29), St. Anselm (30), Peter Lombard (31),
Hugh of St. Victor (32), St. Albert the Great (33), St.
Bonaventure (34) and St. Thomas Aquinas appear to
have been disinclined to admit the privilege. But this
was because they did not consider the precise1 instant
of Mary’s animation, or of the creation of her soul,
and also because they did not distinguish, with the
help of the idea of preservative redemption, between
the debt to contract the hereditary stain and its ac­
tual contraction. In other words, they did not always
distinguish sufficiently between “ debebat contra­
here ” and “ contraxit peccatum.” We shall see
later that there were three stages in St. Thomas’s
doctrine and that though he appears to deny the
Immaculate Conception in the second, he admits it
in the first, and probably in the third also.

(29)
(30)
(31)
(32)
(33)
(34)

Epist. ad canonicos Lugdunenses.
De conceptione virginali.
In III Sent., dist. 3.
Super Missus est.
Item Super Missus est.
In III Sent., dist. 3, q.27.

62

THE DIVINE MATERNITY:

ITS EMINENT DIGNITY

Theological Reasons for Admitting the
Immaculate Conception

The principal argument ex convenientia, or from
becomingness, for the Immaculate Conception, is an
elaboration of the one which St. Thomas (Illa, q.27,
a.l) and others give for Mary’s sanctification in her
mother’s womb before birth. “It is reasonable to
believe that she who gave birth to the Only-begotten
of the Father, full of grace and truth, received
greater privileges of grace than all others ... We
find however that to some the privilege of sanctifica­
tion in their mother’s womb has been granted, as
for example to Jeremias . . . and John the Baptist
. . . Hence it is reasonable to believe that the
Blessed Virgin was sanctified before birth.”
In a.5 of the same question we read also:
“The nearer one approaches to the source of all
grace the more grace one receives; but Mary came
nearest of all to Christ, Who is the principle of
grace ” (35).
But this argument ex convenientia needs to be
expanded before it will prove the Immaculate Con­
ception.
It is Scotus’s glory (Thomists should consider it a
point of honour to admit that their adversary was
right in this matter) to have shown the supreme
becomingness of this privilege in answer to the fol­
lowing difficulty which St. Thomas and many other
theologians put forward: Christ is the universal
Redeemer of all men without exception (Rom. iii, 23;
v, 12, 19; Gal. iii, 22; Π Cor. v, 14; I Tim. ii, 16);
but if Mary did not contract original sin she would
not have been redeemed; hence, since she was re­
deemed, she must have contracted original sin.
(35) Illa, q.27, a.5.

THE PRIVILEGE OF THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION

63

Duns Scotus answers this objection (36) by refer­
ring to the idea of a redemption which is preserva­
tive, not liberative. He shows how reasonable this
idea is, and in some places at least does not link it
up with his peculiar doctrine concerning the motive
of the Incarnation, so that it can be admitted inde­
pendently of what one thinks about the second
matter.
This is his line of argument.
It is becoming that a perfect Redeemer should
make use of a sovereign mode of redemption, at
least in regard to the person of His Mother who was
to be associated more closely with Him than anyone
else in the work of salvation.
But the sovereign
mode of redemption is not that which liberates from
a stain already contracted, but that which preserves
from all stain, just as he who wards off a blow from
another saves him more than if he were simply to
heal a wound that has been inflicted. Hence it was
most becoming that the perfect Redeemer should,
by His merits, preserve His Mother from original sin
and all actual sin. This argument can be found in
embryo in Eadmer (37).
The Bull Ineffabilis gives this argument, in a
somewhat different form, along with others. For
example, it states that the honour and dishonour
alike of parents affect their children, and that is
was not becoming that the perfect Redeemer should
have a mother who was conceived in sin. Also, just
as the Word proceeds eternally from a most holy
Father, it was becoming that He should be born on
(36) In III Sent., dlst. Ill, q.l, (Edit. Quaracchi): edit. Vives,
<IV, 159; and Reportata, 1. Ill, dlst. Ill, q.l, edit. Vives, XXIII,
261.
(37) Tractatus de Conceptione sanctae Mariae·, P. L„ CLIX.
(01-318. Eadmer, a disciple of St. Anselm, began in the 12th
< i‘ntury to synthesise the elements of the Greek tradition.

64

THE DIVINE MATERNITY:

ITS EMINENT DIGNITY

earth of a mother to whom the splendour of sanc­
tity had never been lacking. Finally, in order that
Mary should be able to repair the effects of Eve’s
fall, overcome the wiles of the devil, and give super­
natural life to all, with, by, and in Christ, it was
becoming that she herself should never have been
in, a fallen condition, a slave to sin and the devil.
If it be objected that Christ alone is immaculate,
it is easy to answer: Christ alone is immaculate of
Himself, and by the double title of His Hypostatic
Union and His virginal conception; Mary is impiaculate through the merits of her Son.

The consequences of the Immaculate Conception
have been developed by the great spiritual writers.
Mary has been preserved from the two baneful fruits
of original sin, concupiscence and darkness of
understanding.
Since the definition of the Immaculate Concep­
tion we are obliged to hold that concupiscence has
been not only bound, or restrained, in Mary from the
time she was in her mother’s womb, but even that
she was never in any sense its subject. There could
be no disordered movement of her sensitive nature,
no escape of her sensibility from the previous con­
trol of reason and will. Her sensibility was always
fully subject to her rational powers, and thereby to
God’s Will, as obtained in the state of original inno­
cence. Thus Mary is virgin of virgins, most pure,
“inviolata, intemerata,” tower of ivory, most pure
mirror of God.
Similarly, Mary was never subject to error or
illusion. Her judgment was always enlightened and
correct. If she did not understand a thing fully

THE PRIVILEGE OF THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION

65

she suspended her judgment upon it, and thus
avoided the precipitation which might have been the
cause of error. She is, as the Litanies say, the Seat
of Wisdom, the Queen of Doctors, the Virgin most
prudent, the Mother of good counsel. All theo­
logians realise that nature spoke more eloquently to
her of the Creator than to the greatest poets. She
had, too, an eminent and wonderfully simple know­
ledge of what the Scriptures said of the Messiah, the
Incarnation, and the Redemption.
Thus she was
fully exempt from concupiscence and error.
®

But why did the Immaculate Conception not make
Mary immune from pain and death since they too
were consequences of original sin?
It should be noted that the pain and death which
Jesus and Mary knew were not consequences of
original sin as they are for us. For Jesus and Mary
they were consequences of but human nature, which,
of itself, and like the animal nature in general, is
.subject to pain and death of the body: it was only
because of a special privilege that Adam had been
exempt from them in the state of innocence. As
lor Jesus, He was conceived virginally in passible
tlesh in order to redeem us by dying, and when the
I ime came He accepted suffering and death, its con­
summation, freely for love of us.
Mary, for her
part, accepted suffering and death voluntarily in
Imitation of Him and to unite herself to Him; she
was one with Him in His expiation and in His work
of redemption.
There is one wonderful thing, one delight of con­
templatives, which we should not overlook. It is
I hat the privilege of the Immaculate Conception and
E

66

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

the fulness of grace did not withdraw Mary from
pain, but rather made her all the more sensitive to
suffer from contact with sin, the greatest of evils.
Precisely because she was so pure, precisely because
her heart was consumed by the love of God, Mary
suffered pains to which our imperfection makes us
insensible. We suffer if our self-love is wounded,
or our pride, or our susceptibilities. Mary, however,
suffered from sin, and that in the measure of her
love of God Whom sin offends, and her love of Her
Son Whom sin crucifies; she suffered in the measure
of her love of us, whom sin wounds and kills. Thus
the Immaculate Conception increased Mary’s suffer­
ings and disposed her to bear them heroically. Not
one of them did she squander. All passed through
her hands in union with those of Her Son, thus to
be offered up for our salvation.

St. Thomas and the Immaculate Conception

As certain commentators have suggested, three
periods may be distinguished in St. Thomas’s
teaching.
In the first—that of 1253-1254, the beginning of
his theological career—he supports the privilege,
probably because of the liturgical tradition which
favoured it, as well as because of his pious admira­
tion for the perfect holiness of the Mother of God.
It is in this period that he wrote (I Sent., d.44, q.l,
a.3, ad 3): “Purity is increased by withdrawing
from its opposite: hence there can be a creature
than whom no more pure is possible in creation, if it
be free from all contagion of sin: and such was
the purity of the Blessed Virgin who was immune

THE PRIVILEGE OF THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION

67

from original and actual sin.” This text states
therefore that Mary was so pure as to be exempt
from all original and actual sin.
During the second period St. Thomas, seeing bet­
ter the difficulties in the question—for the theo­
logians of his time held that Mary was immaculate
independently of Christ’s merits—hesitated, and re­
fused to commit himself. He, of course, held that
all men without exception are redeemed by one
Saviour (Rom., iii, 23; v, 12, 19; Gal. iii., 22; II Cor.,
v, 14; I Tim., ii, 6). Hence we find him proposing
the question thus in Illa, q.27, a.2: Was the Blessed
Virgin sanctified in the conception of her body be­
fore its animation? for, according to him and many
other theologians, the conception of the body was to
be distinguished from the animation, or creation of
the soul.
This latter (called to-day the consum­
mated passive conception) was thought to be about
a month later in time than the initial conception.
The holy doctor mentions certain arguments at the
beginning of the article which favour the Immacu­
late Conception—even taking conception to be that
which precedes animation. He then answers them
as follows: “There are two reasons why the sancti­
fication of the Blessed Virgin cannot have taken
place before her animation: 1st—the sanctification
In question is cleansing from original sin . . . but
the guilt of sin can be removed only by grace (which
has as object the soul itself) . . . 2nd—If the
Blessed Virgin had been sanctified before animation
she would never have incurred the stain of original
sin and would therefore never have stood in need
of redemption by Christ . . . But this may not be
admitted, since Christ is Head of all men (I Tim.
ii, 6).”
Even had he written after the definition of 1854

68

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

St. Thomas could have said that Mary was not
sanctified before animation. However he goes fur­
ther than that here, for he adds at the end of the
article : “ Hence it follows that the sanctification
of the Blessed Virgin took place after her anima­
tion.” Nor does he distinguish, as he does in many
other contexts, between posteriority in nature and
posteriority in time. In the answer to the second
objection he even states that the Blessed Virgin
“contracted original sin” (38). However, it must
be recognised that the whole point of his argument
is to show that Mary incurred the debt of original
sin since she descended from Adam by way of
natural generation. Unfortunately he did not dis­
tinguish sufficiently the debt from actually incur­
ring the stain.
Regarding the question of the exact moment at
which Mary was sanctified in the womb of her
mother, St. Thomas does not make any definite pro­
nouncement. He states that it followed close on
animation—cito post are his words in Quodl. VI, a.7.
But he believes that nothing more precise can be
said : “ the time of her sanctification is unknown”
(Illa, q.27, a.2, ad 3).
St. Thomas does not consider in the Summa if
Mary was sanctified in the very instant of anima­
tion. St. Bonaventure had put himself that ques­
tion and had answered it in the negative.
It is
possible that St. Thomas’s silence was inspired by
the reserved attitude of the Roman Church which,
unlike so many other Churches, did not celebrate
the Feast of the Conception (cf. ibid., ad 3). This
is the explanation proposed by Fr. N. del Prado, O.P.,
(38) On the basis of these texts many commentators hold
that St. Thomas denied the Immaculate Conception. This is
the opinion of Fr. Le Bachelet, Diet. Théol., art. Immaculée
Conception, cols. 1050-1054.

THE PRIVILEGE OF THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION

69

in Santo Tomas y la Immaculada, Vergara, 1909, by
Fr. Mandonnet, O.P., Diet. Théol. Cath., art. Frères
Prêcheurs, col. 899, and by Fr. Hugon, O.P., Tractatus
Dogmatici, t. II, ed. 5, 1927, p. 749. For these
authors the thought of the holy doctor in this second
period of his professional career was that expressed
long afterwards by Gregory XV in his letters of July
4th, 1622: “Spiritus Sanctus nondum tanti mysterii
arcanum Ecclesiae suae patefecit.”
The texts we have considered so far do not there­
fore imply any contradiction of the dogma of the
Immaculate Conception. They could even be retained
If the idea of preservative redemption were intro­
duced. There is however one text which cannot be
so easily explained away. In III Sent., dist. Ill, q.l,
a.l, ad 2am qm we read: “Nor (did it happen) even
in the instant of infusion of the soul, namely, by
grace being then given her so as to preserve her from
incurring the original fault. Christ alone among
men has the privilege of not needing redemption.”
Frs. del Prado and Hugon explain this text as fol­
lows: The meaning of St. Thomas’s words may be
that the Blessed Virgin was not preserved from
original sin in such a way as not to incur its debt,
as that would mean not to stand in need of redemp­
tion. However, one could have expected to find in
the text itself the explicit distinction beween the
debt and the fact of incurring the stain.
In the final period of his career, when writing the
Exposito super salutatione angelica—which is cer­
tainly authentic (39)—in 1272 or 1273, St. Thomas
expressed himself thus: “For she (the Blessed
Virgin) was most pure in the matter of fault
(quantum ad culpam) and incurred neither original
(39) Cf. Mandonnet: S. Th. Aq. opuscula omnia, Parisiis 1927.
t. I, Introduction, pp. xix-xxli.

70

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

nor mortal nor venial sin.”
Cf. J. F. Rossi, C.M.,
S. Thomae Aquinatis Expositio salutationis angelicae,
Introductio et textus. Divus Thomas (PL), 1931,
pp. 445-479 (40). In this critical edition of the
Commentary on the Ave Maria, it is stated, pp. 11-15,
that the passage quoted just now is found in sixteen
manuscripts out of nineteen consulted by the author,
who concludes that it is authentic. He gives photo­
graphs of the principal manuscripts in an appendix.
Let us hope that the same conscientious work will
be performed on the other opuscula of St. Thomas!
(41)
In spite of the objection raised by Fr. P. Synave
(42) the text appears to be authentic. If it is, then
St. Thomas returned towards the end of his life—
moved, we may believe by his love of the Mother of
God—to the position he had adopted when he
affirmed the Immaculate Conception in his Com­
mentary on the Sentences. Nor is the text we are
considering the only indication of such a return (43).
(40) Off-print, Piacenza, Collegio Alberonl, 1931. Monografie
del Collegio Alberonl.
(41) The objection was raised in the Bulletin Thomiste of
July-December 1932, p. (579) that we read in the same opus­
culum a little earlier: “Ipsa (Virgo) omne peccatum vitavit
magis quam alius sanctus, praeter Christum. Peccatum enim
aut est originale, et de isto fuit mundata in utero; aut mortale
aut veniale, et de istis libera fuit ..... Sed Christus excellit
Beatam Virginem in hoc quod sine originali conceptus et natus
fuit. Beata autem Virgo in originali concepta sed non nata.”
Does this text contradict the other one which occurs a few
lines later? It is highly improbable that St. Thomas would
contradict himself in the space of a few lines. The difficulty
vanishes if one recalls that on St. Thomas’s view the concep­
tion of the body and the beginning of the evolution of the
embryo preceded by a month at least the animation (or
consummated passive conception) before which the person did
not exist since there was as yet no rational soul.
(42) Bulletin Thomiste, Loc. cit.
(43) In the Compendium Theologiae, written at Naples in
1272-1273, and interrupted by his death. St. Thomas wrote
(ch. 224): “Nec solum a peccato actuali immunis fuit (B.

WAS MARY EXEMPT FROM EVERY FAULT, EVEN VENIAL?

71

Such an evolution of doctrine is not rare among
theologians. At first they propose a thesis which
they accept from tradition without seeing all its
difficulties. Later reflection leads them to adopt a
more reserved attitude. Finally they return to their
first position, realising that God is more bounteous
in His gifts than we can understand and that we
should not set limits to Him without good reason.
In the case of St. Thomas, we have seen that the
reasons he invoked against the privilege are not
conclusive, and that they even support it when con­
sidered in the light of the idea of preservative re­
demption (44).

Article III
Was Mary Exempt From Every Fault, Even Venial?

The Council of Trent (45) has defined that “after
his justification a man cannot avoid, during the
Maria Virgo) sed etiam db originali, speciali privilegio mundata
. Est ergo tenendum quod cum peccato originali concepta
fuit, sed ab eo, quodam speciali modo, purgata fuit.” But he
could not have spoken here of a special privilege if he meant
merely that Mary had been purified in the womb of her
mother after animation as were Jeremias and John the
Baptist.
In other places too St. Thomas declares Mary immune from
original sin: Epis, ad Galat.. ill, 16, lect. 6 “excipitur purissima
et omni laude dignissima”; similarly in Exposit. in Orat.
Domini, petitio Va. “ Plena gratia, in qua nullum peccatum
luit”; in Psalm xviii, 6 “Quae nullam habuit obscuritatem
peccati.”
(44) Recently, Fr. J. M. Voste. O.P., in his Commentarius in
Illam P. Summae theol. S. Tfiomae (in q.27, a.2). 2nd edit.,
Rome, 1940. has accepted Fr. Rossi’s thesis that St. Thomas
returned at the end of his career to the position he had
adopted at the beginning.
This view is at least seriously
probable.
(45) Sess. VI, Can. 23; Denz., 833.

72

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

whole course of his life, every venial sin, without a
special privilege such as the Church recognises was
conferred on the Blessed Virgin.” The soul in the
state of grace can therefore avoid any venial sin
considered separately, but cannot avoid all venial sins
taken together by keeping itself always free from
them. Mary however avoided all sin, even the least
grave. St. Augustine affirms that “for the honour
of her Son Who came to remit the sins of the world,
Mary is never included when there is question of
sin” (46). The Fathers and theologians consider,
to judge from their manner of speaking, that she is
free even from every voluntary impèrfection, for,
according to them, she never failed in promptness to
obey a divine inspiration given by way of counsel.
Though a minor lack of generosity is not a venial
sin, but simply a lesser good, or an imperfection, not
even so slight a shortcoming was found in Mary.
She never elicited an imperfect (remissus) act of
charity, that is to say, one that fell short in inten­
sity of the degree in which she possessed the virtue.
St. Thomas gives the reason for this special privi­
lege when he says: “God prepares and disposes
those whom He has chosen for a special purpose in
such a way as to make them capable of performing
that for which He selected them ” (47). In that God
differs from men, who sometimes choose incapable
or mediocre candidates for important posts. “ Thus,”
continues St. Thomas, “ St. Paul says of the Apostles
(II Cor., iii, 6), ‘It is God Who has made us fit minis­
ters of the new testament, not in the letter, but in
the spirit.’ But the Blessed Virgin was divinely
chosen to be the Mother of God (that is to say, she
was predestined from all eternity for the divine
maternity). Hence, it cannot be doubted that God
(46) De natura et gratia, ch. xxxvi.
(47) Illa, q.27, a.4.

WAS MARY EXEMPT FROM EVERY FAULT, EVEN VENIAL?

73

fitted, her by grace for her mission, according to the
words spoken her by the angel (Luke i, 30): ‘Thou
hast found grace with God. Thou shalt conceive in
thy womb, and shalt bring forth a son; and thou
shalt call his name Jesus.’ But Mary would not have
been a worthy Mother of God had she ever sinned,
for the honour and dishonour of parents is reflected
on the children according to the words of the Book
of Proverbs: ‘The glory of children are their
fathers.’
Besides, Mary had a special affinity to
Jesus, from Whom she took flesh, but ‘ What concord
hath Christ with Belial?’ (II Cor. vi, 15). Finally,
the Son of God, Who is Divine Wisdom, inhabited
Mary in a very special manner, not in her soul only
but in her womb also; and it is said (Wisdom i, 4):
‘ Wisdom will not enter into a malicious soul, nor
dwell in a body subject to sins.’ Hence it must be
said without any reservation that the Blessed Virgin
committed no sin, mortal or venial, so that the
words of the Canticle of Canticles are fully verified
in her regard (Cant, iv, 7): ‘Thou art all fair, my
love, and there is not a spot in thee ’.”
Mary had therefore impeccantia (the term is
parallel to inerrantia) or freedom from sin, and even
impeccability. Her title to these endowments is not
however the same as her Son’s. In her case it was
a matter of preservation from every sin through a
special privilege (48). This privilege includes first
of all a very high degree of habitual grace and
charity, which gives the soul a strong inclination to
the act of love of God and withdraws it from sin.
(48) Our Blessed Lord has absolute impeccability under three
titles: by reason of His Divine Personality: by reason of the
beatific vision which He had in a permanent way since His
conception; by reason of the absolute and inalienable fulness
of grace and charity, the fervour of which could not diminish.
Besides, He always received efficacious grace.

74

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

It includes also confirmation in grace, which when
granted to a saint is had normally through an in­
crease of charity, especially that proper to the state
of transforming union, and an increase of actual
efficacious graces which preserve the soul de facto
from sin and move it to ever more meritorious acts.
Thus Mary enjoyed a special assistance of Divine
Providence. This assistance—more effective than
even that which belonged to the state of innocence—
preserved all her faculties from faults, and kept her
soul in a state of the most complete generosity. Just
as confirmation in grace is an effect of the predestina­
tion of the saints, so this preservative assistance
granted to Mary was an effect of her peculiar
predestination. Far from diminishing her liberty or
free will, the effect of this preservation from sin was
to confer on her full liberty in the order of moral
goodness, with no inclination to evil (just as her mind
never tended to error). Hence her liberty, following
the example of that of Jesus, was a faithful and most
pure image of God’s liberty, which is at once sovereign
and incapable of sin.
If human masterpieces of art, in architecture,
painting and music, and if the precision instruments
produced by human skill all reach such perfection,
what must not be the perfection of God’s master­
pieces? And among these, if the works of the natural
order are so perfect—the majesty of the ocean and
the high mountains, the structure of the eye and ear,
the human mind and the mind of the angels—how
perfect must not the works of the supernatural order
be, among which so remarkable a place is held by the
soul of Mary which was adorned with every choice
gift from the first moment of her existence?

■WAS MARY EXEMPT FROM EVERY FAULT, EVEN VENIAL?

75

Note.

The distinction between imperfection and penial sin
The problem (49) has been taken from Its proper context by
the casuists. It is one which concerns interior souls, advanced
in the spiritual life, and careful to avoid every more or less
venial sin. Those who consider the problem in relation to
less advanced souls run the risk of taking for imperfection
what is really a venial sin.
At one time the problem was closely associated with another
one: is it possible to commit no more than a simple imperfec­
tion by resisting a religious vocation? The answer ordinarily
given to this question is that though the religious vocation
does not oblige under pain of sin, sin is always involved in
rejecting it for the reason that religion is a way of life that
embraces the whole of life, and the other ways of life, being
less safe than it, are never chosen in preference to it except
through some inordinate attachment to the things of this
world, as is seen in the example of the rich man in the Gospel.
Thus, the rejection of a vocation involves an inordinate
attachment (which is forbidden by divine precept) and not
only a lack of generosity.
To see the problem of an imperfection as distinct from a
venial sin in its proper perspective, it must be viewed in its
relation to very generous souls, and still more in relation to
the impeccability of Christ and the sinlessness qf Mary. Here
we may ask: Was there any voluntary imperfection in the
lives of Jesus and Mary? The question is obviously a most
delicate one.
The answer usually given to this problem is that there was
never any imperfection, however slightly voluntary, in the
lives of Jesus and Mary, for they never failed in their prompt
obedience to every divine inspiration given by way of counsel.
But if there had been any lack of promptitude, it would have
been a mere lack of generosity, not a moral disorder in the
strict sense of the term, as is an inordinate attachment to
the things of this world.
As regards interior souls, it may be said that as long as they
have not taken the vow of always doing the most perfect
thing, they are not bound under pain of venial sin to act
always with the maximum of generosity possible to them at
any given instant. (50) It is becoming, however, that those
more advanced should, without binding themselves by vow,
promise the Blessed Virgin always to do what will appear to
them evidently the most perfect in any given circumstance.

(49) I have treated it at length in L’Amour de Dieu et la
Croix de Jésus, t. I, ρρ. 360-390.
(50) Strictly speaking, a counsel obliges only when one
would offend against a precept by not obeying it. Cf. Ha Ilae,
q.124, a.3, ad 1.

76

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

Article IV
The Perfection of Mary’s First Grace

The habitual grace which the Blessed Virgin re­
ceived at the instant of the creation of her holy soul
was a fulness or plenitude to which the words of the
angel on the Annunciation day might have been
applied “ Hail, full of grace.” This is what Pius IX
affirms when he defines the dogma of the Immacu­
late Conception. He even says that, from the first
instant, Mary “ was loved by God more that all
creatures (prae creaturis universis), that He found
most extreme pleasure in her, and that He loaded her
in a wonderful way with His graces, more than all the
angels and saints ” (51). Many texts might be quoted
from tradition to the same effect (52).
St. Thomas explains the reason of this plenitude
of grace when he says (53): “The nearer one ap­
proaches to a principle (of truth and life) the more
one participates in its effects. That is why St. Denis
affirms (De caelestia hierarchia) that the angels, who
(51) Ineffabilis Deus ... ab initio et ante saecula unigenito
filio suo Matrem, ex quo caro factus in beata temporum pleni­
tudine nasceretur elegit atque ordinavit, tantoque prae
creaturis universis est prosecutus amore, ut in illa una sibi
propensissima voluntate complacuerit. Quapropter illam longe
ante omnes angelicos Spiritus, cunctosque Sanctos caelestium
omnium charismatum copia de thesauro Divinitatis deprompta
ita mirifice cumulavit ut ipsa ab omni prorsus peccati labe
semper libera ac tota pulchra et perfecta eam innocentiae et
sanctitatis plenitudinem prae se ferret, qua maior sub Deo
nullatenus intelligitur, et quam praeter Deum nemo assequi
cogitando potest.
(52) Cf. Terrien, La Mère de Dieu, t. Il, l.VII, pp. 191-234;
De la Broise, S.J., La Sainte Vierge, chs. II and XII; Diet.
Apol. art. Marie, cols. 207 sqq.
(53) Ilia, q.27, a.5.

THE PERFECTION OF MARY’S FIRST GRACE

77

are nearer to God than man is, participate more in
His favours. But Christ is the principle of the life of
grace; as God He is its principal cause and as Man
(having first merited it for us) He communicates it to
us, for His humanity is, as it were, an instrument
always united to the Divinity : ‘ Grace and truth
came by Jesus Christ ’ (John i, 17). The Blessed
Virgin Mary, being nearer to Christ than any other
human being, since it is from her that He received
His humanity, receives from Him therefore a fulness
of grace surpassing that of all other creatures.”
It is true that St. John the Baptist and Jeremias
were sanctified, according to the testimony of Sacred
Scripture, in their mother’s womb, without, however,
being preserved from original sin. But Mary received
grace from the very first instant in a degree far ex­
celling theirs, and received as well the privilege of
being preserved from every fault—even venial—a
privilege we find accorded to no other saint (54).
In his Expositio super salutatione angelica St.
Thomas describes Mary’s plenitude of grace (and his
words are applicable to the initial plenitude) in terms
of which the following is a summary :
Though the angels do not manifest special respect
for men, being their superiors by nature and living
in holy intimacy with God, yet the Archangel Gabriel
when saluting Mary, showed himself full of venera­
tion for her. He understood that she was far above
him through her fulness of grace, her intimacy with
God, and her perfect purity.
a) She had received fulness of grace under three
respects. First, so as to avoid every sin, however
slight, and to practise all the virtues in an eminent
degree. Secondly, so as to overflow from her soul
(54) Cf. Ibid., a.6, ad 1.

78

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

upon her body and prepare her to receive the In­
carnate Son of God. Thirdly, so as to overflow upon
all men (55) and to aid them in the practice of all
the virtues.
b) Further, she surpassed the angels in her holy
familiarity with the Most High. On that account,
Gabriel saluted her saying: “ The Lord is with thee.”
It was as if he said: “You are more intimate with
God than I. He is about to become your Son, whereas
I am but His servant.” In truth, Mary, as Mother of
God, is more intimate with the Father, Son and Holy
Ghost, than are the angels.
c) Finally, she surpassed the angels in purity, even
though they are pure spirits, for she was both pure
in herself and the source of purity to others. Not
only was she exempt from original sin (56) and from
all mortal and venial sin, but she escaped the curse
due to sin, namely, “ In sorrow shalt thou bring forth
children . . . into dust thou shalt return ” (Gen. iii,
16, 19). She will conceive the Son of God without
loss to her virginity, she will bear Him in holy recol­
lection, she will bring Him forth in joy, she will be
preserved from the corruption of the tomb and will
be associated by her Assumption with the Ascension
cf the Saviour.
Already she is blessed among women, for she alone,
with and through her Son, will lift the curse which
descended on the human race, and will bring us
blessings by opening the gates of heaven. That is
why she is called the Star of the Sea, guiding
Christians to the harbour of eternity.
Elisabeth will say to her : “ Blessed is the fruit of
(55) Theologians commonly hold that Mary merited for us
with a merit of becomingness (de congruo') all that Christ
merited in strict justice (de condigno).
(56) This is the text we have quoted on p. 69.

THE PERFECTION OF MARY’S FIRST GRACE

79

thy womb.” Whereas the sinner looks for that which
he cannot find in the object of his sinful desires, the
just finds everything in what he desires holily. From
this point of view, the fruit of the womb of Mary will
be thrice blessed.
a) Eve desired the forbidden fruit, so as to have
the knowledge of good and evil, and thereby to be­
come independent and free from the yoke of
obedience. She was deceived by the lying promise
“ You will be as God,” for far from becoming like
God, she was turned away from Him. Mary, on the
contrary, found all things in the blessed fruit of her
womb. In Him she found God, and she will lead us
to find God in Him.
b) By yielding to the temptation, Eve sought joy
and found sadness. Mary, on the contrary, found
joy and salvation for herself and us in her Divine Son.
c) Finally, the fruit sought by Eve had beauty only
for the senses, whereas the fruit of Mary’s womb is
the splendour, the eternal and spiritual glory of the
Father. Mary is blessed herself, and still more
blessed in her Son, Who has brought all men blessing
and salvation.
The preceding is a synopsis of what St. Thomas has
to say of Mary’s fulness of grace in his commentary
on the Hail Mary. He has in mind most of all the
fulness of the Annunciation day. But what he says is
applicable also to her initial fulness, just as what is
said of the stream is applicable also to its source.
©
Mary’s Initial Grace compared,
with that of the Saints
It has been asked if Mary’s initial grace was
greater than the final grace of the greatest of angels

80

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

and men, or even than the final grace of all angels
and men taken together. The question is usuallyunderstood not of the final and consummated grace
of heaven, but of the grace which is final in the sense
that it immediately preceded entry into glory (57).
As for the first part of the question, theologians
commonly hold that Mary’s initial grace was greater
than the final grace of the highest of angels and men.
This is the teaching, for example, of St. John
Damascene (58), Suarez (59), Justin of Miechow, O.P.
(60), Contenson (61), St. Alphonsus (62), Fathers
Terrien (63), Godts, Hugon, Merkelbach, etc. To-day,
all text-books of Mariology are unanimous in con­
sidering this teaching certain. It can even be found
expressed by Pius IX in the Bull Ineffabilis Deus in
the passage we have quoted already. The principal
argument in favour of this teaching is arrived at
from a consideration of the divine maternity, which
is the reason for all the privileges conferred on Mary.
There are two ways of outlining it: from the point of
view of the end to which Mary’s initial grace was
ordained, and from the point of view of the divine
love which was its cause.
Mary’s initial grace was given her as a worthy
(57) Theologians commonly teach that the consummated
grace of Mary in heaven is higher than that of angels and
saints combined; also that the final grace of Mary at the
moment of death, and even her grace at the moment of the
Incarnation, surpassed the final grace of all the saints at the
term of their earthly lives. The question under discussion
here is whether or not the same may be said of Mary’s initial
fulness of grace. We know, of course, that the degree of glory
of the saints in heaven corresponds to the degree of grace and
charity which they had before entry there.
(58) Orat. de Nativitate Virginis P. G., XCVI, 648 sqq.
(59) De mysteriis vitae Christi, disp. IV, sect. I.
(60) Collât, super litanias B. Mariae Virginis, col. 134.
(61) Theol. mentis et cordis, 1. X. diss. VI, c. I.
(62) Glorie di Maria, Ile P., disc. 2.
(63) La Mère de Dieu, t. I.

THE PERFECTION OF MARY’S FIRST GRACE

81

preparation for the divine motherhood—to prepare
her to be a worthy Mother of the Saviour, said St.
Thomas (Illa, q.27, a.5, ad 2). But even the con­
summated grace of the other saints is not a worthy
preparation for the divine maternity, for it pertains
to the hypostatic order. Hence the first grace of Mary
surpasses the consummated grace of the other saints.
Pious authors express this truth by taking in an
accommodated sense the words of Psalm Ixxxvi “ The
foundations thereof are in the holy mountains.” They
say that the summit of the perfection of the other
saints is not as yet the beginning of the perfection of
Mary.
The same conclusion is reached by considering the
uncreated love of God for the Blessed Virgin. Since
grace is the effect of the active love of God which
makes us pleasing in His eyes as adoptive children,
the more a person is loved by God the more grace he
receives. But Mary, since she was to be the Mother
of God, was more loved by Him in the first instant of
her being than any angel or saint. Hence she re­
ceived from the first instant a greater gift of grace
than any of them, however favoured.

®
Was Mary’s First Grace higher than the Final
Grace of all the Angels and
Saints taken together?

A number of theologians, both ancient and modern,
have answered this question in the negative (64).
However, the affirmative answer, which is given by
(64) Théophile Raynaud, Terrien, and Lépicier, admit it only
in regard to Mary’s final grace. Others, like Valentia, admit
It for the grace of her second sanctification at the time of the
Incarnation. However, most theologians join St. Alphonsus
F

82

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

Ch. Véga, Contenson, St. Alphonsus, Godts,
Monsabré, Billot, Sinibaldi, Hugon, L. Janssens,
Merkelbach and others, is at least probable.
For it there is, first of all, the argument from
authority. Pius IX favours it in his Bull Ineffabilis
Deus, when he says: “ Deus ab initio ... unigenito filio
suo Matrem ... elegit atque ordinavit, tantoque prae
creaturis universis est prosecutus amore, ut in illa
una sibi propensissima voluntate complacuerit.
Quapropter illam longe ante omnes angelicos Spiritus,
cunctosque Sanctos coelestium omnium charismatum
copia de thesauro Divinitatis deprompta ita mirifice
cumulavit, ut... eam innocentiae et sanctitatis pleni­
tudinem prae se ferret, et qua major sub Deo nulla­
tenus intelligitur, et quam praeter Deum nemo
assequi cogitando potest.” (This text is translated
on page 30). Taken in their obvious sense all these
expressions, especially the “ cunctos sanctos,” mean
that Mary’s grace surpassed that of all the saints
together from the first instant mentioned in the text.
If Pius IX wished to say that Mary’s grace surpassed
that of each angel and saint individually, he would
have said “ longe ante quemlibet sanctum et
angelicum ” rather than “ longe ante omnes angeli­
cos Spiritus cunctosque sanctos.” Nor would he have
said that God loved Mary above all creatures, “ prae
creaturis universis,” and that He took greater delight
in her alone, “ ut in illa una sibi propensissima
voluntate complacuerit.”
It cannot be contended
that in all this there is no question of the first instant
of Mary’s existence since Pius IX goes on to say, im­
mediately after the passage just quoted, “Decebat
In admitting it for her initial grace.
Among these three
opinions, the first two are certain; the third, as Fr. Merkelbach
shows in his Mariologia, 1939, pp. 178-181, is at least very
probable.

THE PERFECTION OF MARY’S FIRST GRACE

83

omnino ut beatissima Virgo Maria perfectissimae
sanctatatis splendoribus semper ornata fulgeret.”
A little further on in the same Bull, we are told that,
according to the Fathers, Mary is higher by grace
than the Cherubim, the Seraphim, and the whole
heavenly host {omni exercitu angelorum)—that is to
say, all united. Though it is universally admitted
that these words refer to Mary in heaven, it must yet
be recalled that one’s degree of heavenly glory is pro­
portionate to the preceding grace or charity at the
hour of death. And in the case of Mary, this latter
was proportionate to her dignity as Mother of God,
a dignity for which she had been prepared from the
very first instant of existence.
To the argument from the authority of the Bull
Ineffabilis, two theological reasons can be added.
They are based on the divine maternity, considered
as the end towards which Mary’s first grace was
ordained and on the uncreated love which was its
cause. As a help to grasping them, it is necessary to
remark that even though grace is a quality and not
a quantified thing, there are many to whom it is not
at once evident that if Mary’s first grace surpassed
that of the highest of the saints, it must also surpass
that of all angels and saints united. They say, for
example, that though the eagle’s vision is more acute
than that of the most keen-sighted man, it does not
follow that an eagle sees more than all men taken
together. Of course, in this example an element of
quantity—that is, of extension and distance—enters
in, which is not found in the case of Mary’s grace, so
that it is really irrelevant. But, at the same time, it
may be well to clarify the question still more.
1st—Since Mary’s first grace prepared her to be the
worthy Mother of God, it must have been propor­
tionate, at least remotely, to the divine maternity.

84

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

But the final consummated grace of all the saints
together is not proportionate to the divine maternity,
since it belongs to an inferior order. Hence the final
consummated grace of all the saints united is less
than the first grace received by Mary.
This argument—even though not admitted by all
theologians—seems to be quite conclusive. The objec­
tion has been raised that Mary’s first grace was not
a proximate preparation for the divine maternity and
hence was not necessarily of a different order from
the grace of all the saints. To this it may be answered
that, though not a proximate preparation, Mary’s
first grace was a worthy and proportionate prepara­
tion, according to the teaching of St. Thomas (Illa,
q.27, a.5, ad 2): “The first perfection of grace (was)
as it were dispositive, making the Blessed Virgin
worthy to become the Mother of Christ.” But the
consummated grace of all the saints united is not
proportionate to the divine maternity, which is of the
hypostatic order. The argument therefore retains
its force.
2nd—The person who is more loved by God than all
creatures united receives grace surpassing theirs, for
grace is the effect of uncreated love and is propor­
tionate to it. As St. Thomas says (la, q.20, a.4) : “ God
loves one more than another by the fact that He wills
him a higher good, for the divine will is the cause of
the good that is in creatures.” But God has loved
Mary from all eternity more than all creatures united,
as being she whom He was to prepare from the first
instant of her conception to be the worthy Mother of
the Saviour. In the words of Bossuet: “ He always
loved Mary as His Mother, and considered her as such
from the moment she was conceived ” (65).
(65) Cf. E. publanchy, Diet. Théol. Cath., art. Marie, col.
2367: “The teaching of Dius IX in the Bull Ineffabilis Deus

THE PERFECTION OF MARY’S FIRST GRACE

85

This does not, of course, exclude the possibility that
Mary advanced in holiness, or grew in grace. For
grace, being a participation in the divine nature, can
always increase though still remaining finite; Mary’s
final fulness of grace is limited, while yet being so full
as to overflow on all souls.
To these two arguments, taken from the divine
maternity, another may be added, which will become
increasingly evident as we speak of Mary’s universal
mediation. It is that Mary could obtain by her merits
and prayers—even on earth, and from the time when
she could first merit and pray—more than all the
saints together, for they obtain nothing except
through her universal mediation. Mary is, as it
were, the aqueduct which brings us grace; in the
mystical body she is, as it were, the neck which joins
the members with the Head. In short, from the time
she could merit and pray, Mary could obtain more
without the saints than they could without her. But
merit corresponds in degree to charity and sanctify­
ing grace. Hence Mary received from the beginning of
her life a degree of grace superior to that which the
saints and angels united had attained to before their
entry into heaven.
There are other indirect confirmations, or more or
less close analogies. For example, a precious stone—
a diamond—is worth more than a number of other
resumes the argument upon which theological tradition has
always relied: God’s love of special predilection for Mary more
than all other creatures, a love such that He made her alone
the object of His greatest satisfaction, and gave her that
which was dearest to Him, His own Son. And since it is the
teaching of St. Thomas (la, q.20, a.3) that the good which God
produces in creatures is proportioned to the love He has for
them, it may be concluded with certainty that Mary, loved by
God more than all creatures, has been the recipient of divine
favours greater than those given to all creatures, taken even
collectively.

86

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

stones united; a saint like the Curé of Ars could do
more by his prayers and merits than all his
parishioners together; a founder of an order like St.
Benedict surpasses all his first companions by the
grace he has received, for without him they could
not have made the foundation whereas, had they
failed him, he could have enlisted others to take
their place; the intellect of an archangel surpasses
that of all inferior angels united; the intellectual
worth of St. Thomas is greater than that of all his
contemporaries; the power of a king is greater, not
only than that of his prime minister, but also that of
his ministers combined.
Early theologians did not examine the question of
the degree of Mary’s first grace, but that is probably
because its solution appeared evident to them. They
taught, for example, at the end of the treatises on
grace and charity that whereas a ten franc piece is
worth no more than ten one franc pieces, the charity
signified by the ten talents of the parable is worth
more than ten charities of one talent (66). That is
why the devil tries to keep souls called to high sanc­
tity by their priestly and religious vocation at the
level of mediocrity. He wishes to prevent the growth
of their charity, knowing that one man of great
charity will do much more than many whose charity
is at a lower, luke-warm level (67). Thus Mary, in
virtue of the first grace which disposed her for the
(66) Cf. Salamantlcenses, De caritate, disp. V, dub. Ill, par.
7, nos. 76, 80, 85. 93, 117.
(67) Attention must be drawn to the nature of the order of
pure immaterial quality to which sanctifying grace belongs.
The reason why the vision of the eagle is not better than that
of all men united, even though it is better than that of the
most keen-sighted man, is that quantity or distance in space
intervenes; all men, situated at different places on the globe
can obviously see more than one eagle, even if perched on the
highest mountain. But quantity does not enter at all into
the order of pure quality.

THE PERFECTION OF MARY’S FIRST GRACE

87

divine maternity, was worth more in God’s eyes than
all the apostles, martyrs, confessors, and virgins
united, more than all men and all angels created from
the beginning.
The thought of the marvellous instruments which
human skill can produce is a reminder of what the
Divine Artist can do in this soul of His special choice,
in her of whom it is said “ Elegit earn Deus et praeelegit earn,” in her who the liturgy tells us was raised
above all the angelic choirs. The first grace she re­
ceived was already a worthy preparation for her
divine maternity and her exceptional glory which is
inferior only to that of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Nor
should we forget that she suffered proportionately as
He did, for she was called to be a victim with Him so
as to be victorious with and by Him.
These reasons permit us to get some glimpse of the
dignity and elevation of Mary’s first grace.
One more point before concluding. The classics in
the literature of every country mean much more to
us when we take them up in mature age, than they
did when we first read them at the age of fifteen or
twenty years; and the same is true of the works of
the great theologians, of St. Augustine and St.
Thomas. Must there not, then, be beauties hidden
as yet from our eyes in God’s masterpieces, in those
composed immediately by Himself, and especially in
that masterpiece of nature and grace, the soul of
Mary, God’s Mother? This thought alone is enough
to make one begin by affirming the richness of her
initial grace.
Perhaps the next thing will be, to
wonder if the affirmation has not been too hasty, if a
probability has not been made into a certainty. But
last of all, there will come a return to the first posi­
tion; not now because it is beautiful, but because
careful study has shown that it is true; not because

88

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

it has a merely theoretical becomingness but because
its becomingness acted as a motive in determining
the choice that God actually made of it.

Article V.
The Consequence

of

Mary’s Plenitude

of

Grace

From the instant of her conception, Mary’s initial
plenitude of grace included the infused virtues and
the seven gifts of the Holy Ghost, which are the
different parts or functions of the spiritual organism.
Even from before St. Thomas’s time, habitual grace
was called “ the grace of the virtues and the gifts ”
because of its connection with them; for the infused
virtues, theological and moral, flow from grace (in a
degree proportioned to its perfection) as its proper­
ties, just as the faculties flow from the substance of
the soul (68). The gifts flow from it also (in a similar
proportionate degree) as infused permanent disposi­
tions which make the soul docile to the inspirations
of the Holy Ghost, somewhat as the sails of a boat
make it docile to a favourable wind (69).
Furthermore, the infused virtues and the gifts are
linked up with charity which makes their acts
meritorious (70), and they keep pace with it in their
growth as do the five fingers of the hand with one
another (71). It may well happen that the gifts of
wisdom, understanding and knowledge, which are
both speculative and practical, will manifest them(68)
a.2.
(69)
(70)
(71)

Cf. la, Ilae, qq. 62, 63 (a.3), 110, aa. 3 and 4; Illa, q.7,

la Ilae, q.66, a.2.
Ibid., a.5 and q.65.
la Ilae, q.66, a.2.

THE CONSEQUENCE OF MARY’S PLENITUDE OF GRACE

89

selves in one saint more in their practical and in
another more in their speculative roles. But normally
all seven exist in every soul in the state of grace in a
degree proportionate to its charity—the charity it­
self being proportionate to the sanctifying grace of
the soul.
From these principles, which are commonly
accepted in treatises on the virtues in general and
the gifts, it is usually deduced that Mary had the
infused theological and moral virtues and the gifts
from the first instant of her conception, and that
they flowed from and were proportionate to her
initial fulness of grace. Mary—destined even then to
be Mother of God and men—could not have been
less perfect than Eve was at her creation. Even if
she did not receive in her body the privileges of im­
passibility and immortality, she must have had in
her soul all that pertained spiritually to the state of
original justice—all, and more, even, since her initial
fulness of grace surpassed the grace of all the saints
together. Her virtues in their initial state must,
therefore, have surpassed the heroic virtues of the
greatest saints (72). Her faith, lit up by the gifts of
wisdom, understanding and knowledge, was un­
shakably firm and most penetrating. Her hope was
unconquerable, proof against presumption and
despair alike. Her charity was most ardent. In fine,
her initial holiness, which surpassed that of God’s
greatest servants, was born with her, and did not
cease to grow all through life.
The only difficulty in this matter is that of the
exercise of the infused virtues, already so perfect, and
the gifts. Their exercise demands the use of reason
and of free will. We must, therefore, ask if Mary had
(72) Cf. H. B. Merkelbach, Mariologia, 1939, pp. 184-194.

90

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

the use of her rational faculties from the first
instant.
All theologians admit that the holy soul of Christ
had the use of intellect and will from the beginning
(73). They admit too that He had the beatific vision,
or the immediate vision of the divine Essence (74), a
doctrine which the Holy Office declared on June 6th,
1918, to be certain. Jesus is the Head in the order of
grace, and therefore He enjoyed from the first in­
stant, as a consequence of the personal union of His
humanity to the Word, the glory He was to give to
the elect. He had also infused knowledge similar to
that of the angels, but in a much more perfect degree
than it has been found in some of the saints—in
those, for example, who had the gift of under­
standing and speaking languages they had never
learned (75). Theologians teach that these two
knowledges — the beatific and the infused — were
perfect in Jesus from the beginning. It was only the
knowledge which He acquired by experience and
reflection which developed. Jesus, the sovereign
priest, judge, and king of the universe, offered
Himself for us, says St. Paul (76), from the moment of
His entry into the world and knew everything in the
past, present and future, that could be submitted to
His judgement (77).
(73) Cf. Illa, q.34, aa. 2 and 3.
(74) Ibid., a.4 and q.9, a.2.
(75) Illa, q.9, a.3.
(76) Hebr. x, 5-9: “Wherefore when he cometh into the
world he saith ... Behold I come ... Sacrifice and oblation (of
the Old Law) thou wouldst not ... Behold I come to do thy
will”
, ,
(77) In Jesus’ infused knowledge we distinguish the know­
ledge which is infused per se from that which is infused per
accidens. Knowledge is infused per se if it deals with an
object about which, from the very nature of the object, know­
ledge cannot be acquired; such infused knowledge can be
used without the help of imagery even in the womb. Knowledge

THE CONSEQUENCE OF MARY’S PLENITUDE OF GRACE

91

Though there is little serious difference of opinion
among theologians regarding Jesus’ knowledge, the
problem of Mary’s knowledge is much disputed. It
would appear that there is no reason to assert that
she had the beatific vision here on earth, especially
from the first instant of her conception (78). But
many thologians hold that she had per se infused
knowledge from the beginning, at least from time to
time—though some contend that she had it in a per­
manent way. On this view she would have had the
use of her intellect and of her free will in her
mother’s womb—on certain occasions at least—and
would, in consequence, have had the use of the in­
fused virtues and the gifts which she possessed in so
high a degree. One can hardly deny this view except
by asserting that Mary’s intellect, will and infused
virtues remained as it were asleep, as they do in other
children, and did not wake up till she attained the
ordinary age of the use of reason.

For our part, we may say, first of all, that it is at
least very probable, according to the teaching of the
majority of theologians, that Mary had the use of her
free will through her infused knowledge from the
first instant of her conception, at least in a passing
manner. Such is the teaching of St. Vincent Ferrer
Is infused per accidens when the object with which it deals
is of such a kind that it could be known by acquired
knowledge; this knowledge is used with the help of imagery.
An example of knowledge which is infused per accidens is
knowledge of a language; for such knowledge can be ac­
quired in the ordinary way by study.
(78) Ch. Véga is the only theologian who has held that
Mary had the beatific vision, excluding faith and merit of
eternal life, from the first instant. It cannot be established
with certainty that she had it in a passing way before death.
Cf. Merkelbach, Mariologia, pp. 197 sqq. This latter opinion
is at most very probable. It is suggested by the fact that St.
Paul enjoyed the privilege for some few instants.

92

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

(79), St. Bernardine of Sienna (80), St. Francis de
Sales (81), St. Alphonsus (82), Suarez (83), Véga (84),
Contenson (85), Justin de Miéchow (86), and most
modern theologians (87). Fr. Terrien goes so far as
to say that he found only two opponents of .the doc­
trine: Gerson and Muratori (88).
The following are the reasons that can be adduced
in favour of the privilege :
1st—It is not becoming to hold that Mary, Queen
of patriarchs, prophets, apostles, and all the saints,
lacked a privilege granted to St. John the Baptist
(89). We read of him in Luke i, 41 and 44, while he
was still in the womb: “When Elisabeth heard the
salutation of Mary, the infant leaped in her womb,”
and Elisabeth herself said: “ For as soon as the voice
of thy salutation sounded in my ears, the infant in
my womb leaped for joy.” St. Irenaeus, St. Ambrose,
St. Leo the Great, and St. Gregory the Great have
noted that the joy of St. John the Baptist before his
birth was not merely of the sense order, but was
elicited by the coming of the Saviour, Whose precur(79) Manuscript. Tolos., 346.
(80) Sermon IV de B. Μ. V., a.I, c.II, t.IV, p.86.
(81) Sermon 38 for the Feast of the Purification.
(82) Glorie de Maria, Ile P„ II discors., 2 punt.
(83) De mysteriis vitae Christi, disp. IV, sect. 7 and 8.
(84) Theologia Mariana, no. 956.
(85) Lib. X, diss. 6, cap. 1.
(86) Collât. 93 super litan. B. V.
(87) Cf. Tractatus dogmatici by Fr. Hugon, O.P., t. II, p. 756;
Mariologia by Fr. Merkelbach, O.P., pp. 197 sqq; La Mère de
Dieu by Fr. Terrien, S.J., t. II, p.27; cf. also the article Marie
in the Diet. Apol. where Fr. d’Ales quotes Fr. de la Broise to
the same effect.
(88) Cf. Terrien, ibid.
(89) St. Thomas (Illa, q.27, a.6) cites Jeremias and John
the Baptist as having been sanctified before birth. However,
the sacred text does not state that Jeremias had the use of
reason and of free will in the womb, whereas of St. John the
Baptist we read (Luke i, 44): “The infant in my womb leaped
for joy.”

THE CONSEQUENCE OF MARY’S PLENITUDE OF GRACE

93

sor he was (90). Thus Cajetan notes that this joy,
being of a spiritual order, presupposes the use of
reason and will, and at the time there could be no
question of acquired but only of infused knowledge
(Comment, in Illa P., q.27, a.6). The Church too
sings in her liturgy, in the hymn for Vespers of St.
John the Baptist “ Senseras Regem thalamo manen­
tem · . ■ Suae regenerationis cognovit auctorem: You
have recognised your king and the author of your
regeneration.” If, therefore, St. John the Baptist
had the use of reason and will before birth, because
of his vocation as precursor of Christ, the same
privilege can hardly be denied to Christ’s mother.
2nd—Since Mary received grace and the infused
virtues and the gifts in the first instant in a degree
higher than that of the final grace of the saints, she
must have been sanctified in the way proper to
adults, that is, by disposing her through actual grace
for habitual grace, and by using this latter as a prin­
ciple of merit from the moment she received it; in
other words, she offered herself to God as her Son did
on His entry into the world. “ Then I said: Behold I
come to do thy will, O God ” (Hebrews x, 9). Mary
did not, of course, know then that she would be one
day the Mother of God, but none the less she would
accept all that the Lord asked and would yet ask of
her.
3rd—Mary’s initial fulness of grace, virtues, and
(90) St. Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. Ill, 16; P. G., VIII, 923: “John
who was still in his mother’s womb, recognising the Saviour
Who was in Mary’s womb, saluted Him”; St. Ambrose, in
Luke I, II, c.xxxiv ; P. L„ LIV, 232 : “ He who thus leaped for
joy had the use of reason ”; St. Leo, Sermo XXXI in Nativ.
Domini, c.iv; P. L.. LIV, 232: “The precursor of Christ re­
ceived the prophetic spirit in the womb of his mother, and
before his birth manifested his joy in the presence of the
Mother of God”; St. Gregory, Moral., 1 III, c.4; P. L., LXXV,
603: “He was filled with the prophetic spirit in the womb of
his mother.”

94

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

gifts which surpassed already the final fulness of all
the saints, could not have remained inactive at the
beginning of her life. Such inactivity would appear
opposed to the sweet and generous dispositions of
Divine Providence in favour of the Mother of the
Saviour. But unless she had the use of her free will
through infused knowledge, the virtues and gifts
which she possessed in so high a degree would have
remained inactive for a considerable part of her life
(that is, the beginning).
Almost all present-day theologians admit that it is
at least very probable that, in her mother’s womb,
Mary had the use of her free will through infused
knowledge—transitorily, at any rate. They admit
too that she had the use of this infused knowledge
on certain occasions, such as the Incarnation, the
Passion, the Resurrection, the Ascension; also that
she had the use of it for the purpose of acquiring a
more perfect knowledge of the divine perfections and
of the mystery of the Blessed Trinity. There is all
the more reason for admitting that Mary had this
privilege when we recall that infused knowledge was
given to the apostles on the first Pentecost when they
received the gift of tongues, and that the great St.
Teresa, after arriving at the Seventh Mansion, had
frequent intellectual visions of the Trinity such as
can only be explained by infused ideas. Even those
theologians who are most conservative in their views
do not hesitate to admit this much of Mary (91); It
(91) Cf. H.-B. Merkelbach, O.P., Mariolooia, 1939, p. 200:
“ Cognitionem infusam transeuntem Mariae fuisse communi­
catam conveniens erat in quibusdam specialibus adjunctis,
v.g. in primo instanti conceptionis et sanctificationis, aut dum
huiusmodi cognitio hic et nunc opportuna aut decens vide­
batur ad pleniorem intelligentiam cuiusdam mysterii, aut ad
interpretationem cuiusdam loci Scripturae; et si prophetis
videatur aliquando concessa, aut etiam sanctis, quo altius in
contemplando assurgerent, sicut testantur auctores mystici,
non est tale privilegium B. Virgini denegandum.”

THE CONSEQUENCE OF MARY’S PLENITUDE OF GRACE

95

is in fact the least that may be attributed to the
Mother of God who enjoyed the visit of the Archangel
Gabriel, who was on terms of saintly familiarity with
the Incarnate Word, who was constantly enlightened
by Him during the hidden life, who must have re­
ceived special revelations during and after the
Passion, and who received on the day of Pentecost
the light of the Holy Ghost in more abundant
measure than the apostles themselves.
@>
Was Mary’s Use of Reason and Free Will in her
Mother’s Womb only Transitory and Interrupted?

According to St. Francis de Sales (92), St. Alphonsus (93), and theologians of the standing of Sauvé
(94), Terrien (95) and Hugon (96), Mary’s use of her
privilege was uninterrupted. Fr. Merkelbach and
other theologians assert that there is no convincing
argument in proof of that thesis (97).
It is our
opinion that though it cannot be demonstrated with
certainty that Mary enjoyed the uninterrupted use of
reason and free will in her mother’s womb, it is
seriously probable and difficult to disprove that she
had it. For if it be conceded that she had it in the
first instant, it follows that she would become less
perfect when deprived of it. But it does not appear
becoming that so holy a creature should fall in any
way without guilt on her part, all the more so since
(92) Loc. dt.
îûq)

(94)
(95)
(96)
Pleine
(97)

T.ns*

cît

Jésus Intime, t. Ill, p. 262.
La Mère de Dieu, t. II, ch. I.
Tractatus Dogmatici, 1927, t. II. p. 759; also Marie
de Grâce, 5th edit., 1926, pp. 24-32.
Mariologia, pp. 199, 201.

96

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

her dignity demanded that she should progress con­
tinuously and that her merit should be unbroken
(98).
It has been objected that St. Thomas regards the
privilege as peculiar to Christ (99). Certain it is that
Christ’s permanent exercise of reason and will be­
longs to Him alone as a strict right and consequence
of the beatific vision. Mary cannot lay any such claim
to the privilege. But it appears altogether becoming
that the future Mother of God should have been
granted it as a special and most appropriate favour.
Besides, St. Thomas’s words may be explained by the
fact that the Immaculate Conception had not been
defined in his time and, in consequence, prominence
had not been given to the motives we have adduced
for admitting the privilege in Mary’s case (100). To­
day, however, after the Bull Ineffabilis, we realise
that Mary was favoured from the first instant more
than all the saints united. Besides, as we have said,
almost all theologians admit that she had the privi­
lege at least transitorily from the first instant. If so,
it is hard to see why it should ever have been
withdrawn, interrupting her merit and progress, and
leaving the initial plenitude, as it were, unproductive
and sterile—all of which is opposed to the sweet and
strong way in which Providence cared for Mary.
Such was the initial fulness of grace which accom­
panied the Immaculate Conception, and such were
its first consequences. More and more can we see
the implications of the angelic salutation: “Hail,
full of grace.”
(98) This is the argument of Fr. Hugon, loc. cit.
(99) Illa, q.27, a.3: “ ... non habuit usum liberi arbitrii in
ventre matris existens: hoc enim est speciale privilegium
Christi ...”
(100) Cf. Hugon, locis citatis.

CHAPTER III.
Mary’s Plenitude of Grace at and after the
Incarnation

In this chapter we shall speak of Mary’s spiritual
progress up to the Annunciation, of the increase of
grace at that instant, of her perpetual virginity, of
her growth in charity on certain important occasions
which followed—notably on Calvary; finally we shall
speak of Mary’s wisdom, of her principal virtues and
charismatic gifts.
Article I
Mary’s Spiritual Progress

up to the

Annunciation

The method which we have adopted in this book
is first to treat principles, bringing out their
force and .their sublimity, and then to apply
them to the Mother of God. Hence we begin this
article by recalling that spiritual progress is, most
of all, progress in charity, the virtue which inspires,
animates, and renders meritorious the other virtues.
All the other infused virtues are connected with
charity, and grow to the rhythm of its growth, just
as the five fingers of a child’s hands grow propor­
tionately (1).
(1) la Ilae, q.65 and q.66, a.2.
G

98

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

In the sections that follow we shall see why and
how charity developed in Mary, and examine the
stages of its growth.
to

The Rapidity of the Growth of Charity in Mary

Why is it that charity grew in Mary up to the time
of her death? First of all, because such growth is in
accordance both with the nature of the charity which
is tending to eternity and with the divine precept:
“ Thou Shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole
heart, and with thy whole soul, and with all thy
strength ”—a precept which is so worded as to denote
progress. This divine precept, which takes pre­
cedence over all other precepts and counsels, obliges
all Christians to tend towards the perfection of
charity and the other virtues in the manner appro­
priate to their condition of life—some in the married
state, others in the priestly or the religious state. Not
all are obliged to the practice of the three evangelical
counsels. But all are obliged to strive to acquire their
spirit, which is one of detachment from self and the
things of this world in view of closer union with God.
Of Our Blessed Lord alone can it be said that He
never grew in grace or charity, for He alone received
the complete fulness of them both at His conception
in consequence of the hypostatic union. Thus, the
Second Council of Constantinople declares that
Jesus did not develop spiritually through progress in
good works (2), even though He followed the normal
sequence in performing the acts of virtue peculiar to
each period of life. Mary, however, was continually
(2) Cf. Denz., 224: “SI quis defendit ... Christum ... ex pro­
fectu operum melioratum ... A.S.”

MARY’S SPIRITUAL PROGRESS UP TO THE ANNUNCIATION

99

growing in grace all through her life. What was still
more, her growth was an accelerated one, in accor­
dance with the principle formulated by St. Thomas
à propos the text: “ ... comforting one another, and
so much the more as you see the day approaching ”
(Hebr. x, 25). In his commentary in loc. he writes:
“ It may be asked why we should thus always pro­
gress in faith and love. The reason is that a natural
(or connatural) movement always becomes more
rapid the nearer it approaches its term (the end
which attracts it). With violent or unnatural move­
ment, it is quite different.” [To-day we remark that
the downward movement of a falling body is uni­
formly accelerated while the upward movement of
one thrown into the air is uniformly slowed down.]
“ But,” continues St. Thomas, “ grace perfects the
soul and makes it tend to the good in a natural way
(like a second nature); it follows then, that those
who are in the state of grace should grow more in
charity according as they come nearer to their final
end (and are more strongly attracted by it). That is
why it is said in the Epistle to the Hebrews: ‘Not
forsaking our assembly ... but comforting one
another, and so much the more as you see the day
approaching ’—that is to say, the end of your journey
approaching. We read elsewhere : ‘ The night is
passed, and the day is at hand ’ (Rom. xiii, 12). * But
the path of the just, as a shining light, goeth for­
wards and increaseth even to perfect day ’ ” (Prov.
iv, 18) (3).
(3) Cf. also St. Thomas in 1.1 de Caelo, ch. viii, lect. 17, end:
' Terra (vel corpus grave) velocius movetur quanto magis
descendit.” Ia Hae, q.35, a.6: “Omnis motus, naturalis
Intensior est in fine, cum appropinquat ad terminum suae
naturae convenientem, quam in principio ... quasi natura magis
tendat in id quod est sibi conveniens, quam fugiat id quod est
sibi repugnans.”

100

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

St. Thomas wrote this at a time when the law of
universal gravitation was not yet known, and the rate
of acceleration of falling bodies had not been calcu­
lated accurately. Nevertheless, his genius enabled
him to find in the little that had been observed a
symbol of the accelerated progress of the saints who
gravitate towards the Sun of justice and the Source
of all good. His point is, therefore, that the intensity
of the life of the saints increases, that they move
more promptly and generously towards God, the
nearer they come to Him. That is the law of univer­
sal attraction in the spiritual life. Just as bodies
attract one another in proportion to their mass and
in inverse proportion to the square of their distances,
so souls are attracted to God in proportion to their
holiness and their nearness to Him. The trajectory
of the spiritual motion of the saints is towards a
zenith from which it does not descend. There is no
twilight for them. Age weakens only their bodily
powers. Their progress in love is even more rapid in
their last years. They advance, not with a regular,
but with an ever hastening step, in spite of the weight
of years, and their “ youth shall be renewed like the
eagle’s ” (Ps. cii, 5).
Mary’s progress was the most continuous of all. It
encountered no obstacle, was not halted nor delayed
by attachment to self or to the things of this world.
It was the most rapid of all, because the rate at which
it commenced was determined by Mary’s fulness of
grace and therefore surpassed that of all the saints.
Thus there was in Mary (especially if, as is probable,
her infused knowledge gave her the use of reason and
will during her hours of sleep) a wonderful increase
in the love of God of which the accelerated motion
of bodies under the force of gravitation is but a dis­
tant image.

MARY'S SPIRITUAL PROGRESS UP TO THE ANNUNCIATION

101

Modern physical science tells us that the velocity
of a falling body increases uniformly. This is an
image of the growth of charity in a soul which allows
nothing to hold it back, and which moves faster
towards God according as increasing nearness to Him
increases His attraction. Such a soul usually makes
each sacramental or spiritual communion more
fervently, and in consequence more fruitfully,
than the preceding one. The movement of a stone
thrown in the air, which grows uniformly slower and
finally falls back, is a symbol of the lukewarm soul,
especially if through a growing attachment to venial
sin its communions become less fervent.
The principles outlined in this article show what
must have been Mary’s spiritual progress from the
time of her Immaculate Conception, especially if she
had, as is probable, the uninterrupted use of reason
and will in her mother’s womb and afterwards (4).
Besides, since it appears that Mary’s initial fulness
of grace surpassed that of all the saints, her subse­
quent progress cannot but exceed our powers of
description (5). Nothing held her back, neither the
(4) We have quoted the authorities who support this view
on p. 92. The following are the words of St. Francis de Sales:
" How much more probable is it that the mother of the true
Solomon had the use of reason in her sleep ” : Treatise on the
iMve of God, L. Ill, c.8, à propos the words of the Canticle of
Canticles: “I sleep and my heart watcheth.”
(5) It is necessary to explain what is meant by the expres­
sion “ to exceed our powers of description.” It is not a denial of
the certain fact that Mary’s grace remained limited.
To
attribute to her what Is peculiar to her Divine Son would be
unpardonable exaggeration. We know that her progress in
grace could not go beyond certain limits. In other words, we
know on the negative side what she could not do; but we do
not know on the positive side all she could do, nor the degree
of holiness to which she could attain, nor what was her point
of departure.
This is like our knowledge of the forces of
nature: we do not know all they can do, but we do know

102

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

consequences of original sin, nor any venial sin,
neither negligence, nor distraction, nor imperfection,
She was like a soul which, having taken the vow
always to do the most perfect thing, proved com­
pletely faithful to it.
Saint Anne must have been struck by the unique
holiness of her child. But she could not have sus­
pected the Immaculate Conception nor the future
divine maternity. Her child was much more loved
by God than she thought. In a somewhat similar
way, each soul in the state of grace is more loved by
God than it thinks. To know fully how much it is
loved, it would need to understand grace, and the
glory of which grace is the germ, just as to know the
full value of the acorn it is necessary to have seen a
fully developed oak tree. The greatest things often
lie concealed in the most insignficant, as in a mustard
seed, or in the tiny trickle which is the beginning of
a mighty river.

Mary’s Progress by Merit and Prayer

If Mary’s charity grew uninterruptedly in accor­
dance with the great law of love, we may ask what
were the sources of its growth. They were merit,
prayer, and a certain spiritual communion with God
certain things they cannot do—such as to cause the restora­
tion to life of a dead man.
In a similar way, we do not know positively all that the
angels are capable of by their natural powers, especially the
highest angels; but we know for certain that the least degree
of grace is higher than the nature of the highest angel. To
know fully the value of the least degree of grace, germ of
glory, it would be necessary to have enjoyed the beatific vision
momentarily. Much less then can we understand the grace
of Mary.

MARY’S SPIRITUAL PROGRESS UP TO THE ANNUNCIATION

103

Who was present in Mary’s soul from the first
moment of her existence.
It must be recalled first of all that it is not precisely
in extension that charity grows, for even the least
degree of charity extends to God and to all men with­
out exception—though it is true that we can and do
extend the field of our active goodwill. Charity grows
most of all in intensity. It takes ever deeper root in
the will, or, to lay metaphor aside, it makes the will
determined to avoid both evil and that which is less
good and to tend generously to God. The growth of
charity is not quantitative—as is that of a heap
which grows by having more added to it—but quali­
tative, as is the growth of knowledge which, even if
no fresh conclusions are drawn, can become more
penetrating, more profound, more unified, more
certain. Charity grows by tending to love God above
all things, more perfectly, more purely, and more
firmly, and our neighbour as ourselves, so that all
may be united in glorifying God in time and in
eternity. This growth brings the formal object and
motive of charity into fuller relief than it usually is
at the beginning of a spiritual life. At first, we love
God more for what He has given and for what we
hope He will yet give, and less for His own sake. But
gradually we come to realise that the Giver is greater
and more lovable than the gift, and that He deserves
to be loved for the sake of His own Infinite Goodness.
In our case, a number of different influences con­
tribute to the growth of charity—merit, prayer, the
sacraments. We shall now consider the first of these
in relation to Mary.
A meritorious act, proceeding from charity or from
a virtue inspired by it, establishes a right to a super­
natural reward, and first of all to the reward of an
increase of habitual grace and charity itself. The

104

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

increase of grace and charity is not caused directly
by the meritorious act, for grace and charity are not
acquired but rather infused habits. God alone can
produce them, for they participate in the depths of
His life; He alone can increase them. That is why
St. Paul says: “I have planted (by preaching and
baptism), Apollo watered, but God gave the increase”
(I Cor. iii, 6); and again: “He will . . . increase the
growth of the fruits of your justice ” (II Cor. ix, 10).
But though our acts do not directly increase
charity, they contribute in two ways to its growth:
morally, by meriting it; physically, by disposing for
it. Meritorious acts confer on the soul the right to
receive from God an increase of charity so as to love
Him more purely and more firmly. Besides, they dis­
pose the soul for this increase by opening out in some
way, or by unfolding, its higher faculties, enabling
the divine life to enter them, to elevate them, and to
purify them.
It often happens that our meritorious acts remain
imperfect—remiss, as theologians put it—that is to
say, below the level or degree in which the virtue of
charity exists in us. Oftentimes, though we have a
charity of three talents, we act as if we had one of
but two. It is as when an intelligent man is careless
and does not apply himself seriously to what he is
doing. Remiss acts are meritorious. But St. Thomas
and the older generation of theologians teach that
they do not obtain for the soul at once the increase of
charity which they merit, precisely because they do
not dispose it to receive it (6). A person who, having
three .talents of charity, acts as if he had only two, is
obviously not preparing or disposing himself to have
his charity increased to four talents. He will receive
the increase he merits only when he disposes himself
(6) Cf. Ila Ilae, q.24, a.6, ad I.

MARY’S SPIRITUAL PROGRESS UP TO THE ANNUNCIATION

105

for it by a more generous or more intense act of
charity or of one of the virtues which it controls.
These few principles throw a flood of light on what
has been said about Mary’s progress by way of merit.
She never performed a remiss or imperfect meri­
torious act, for that would have been a moral
imperfection, a lack of generosity in God’s service
such as theologians declare she was never guilty of.
Hence her meritorious acts were rewarded at once
by the increase of charity which they merited.
But there is something more Theologians tell us
that God is more glorified by a single act of charity
of ten talents, than by ten acts of one talent. Simi­
larly, one devout soul gives more glory to God than
many who are lukewarm. In the spiritual order
especially, quality means more than quantity. Hence,
Mary’s merits grew continuously in perfection. Her
most pure heart dilated, and her capacity for the
divine increased, as is described in Ps. cxviii, 32: “I
have run the way of thy commandments, when thou
didst enlarge my heart.” Whereas we often forget
that we are journeying towards eternity and treat
this world as if it were to last for ever, Mary never
withdrew her eyes from the goal of her life, God Him­
self, and never wasted a moment of the time He gave,
her. Each instant of her life on earth entered into
the single instant of eternity through her accumula­
ting ever richer merits. She saw the present not along
the horizontal line of time which ends in a future on
earth, but along the vertical line which ends in an
eternity that never passes.
Another thing to be noted is that, according to the
t eaching of St. Thomas, no deliberate act really per­
formed in the course of a lifetime is ever indifferent.
For an act which is indifferent in itself, such as to take
a walk or to teach mathematics, becomes good or bad

106

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

in performance because of the end to which it is
directed, and a reasonable being is obliged always to
act for a reasonable or good end, and not simply for
self-gratification or for some other disordered
purpose (7). From this it follows that every deliberate
act of a person in the state of grace which is not a sin
is morally good; in consequence, it is virtually or­
dained to God, the final end of the just, and is
meritorious. “ Every act of those who have charity
is either meritorious or de-meritorious ” (De Malo,
a.5, ad 17). This is an additional reason for saying
that all Mary’s deliberate acts were good and meri­
torious. And we may add that none of the acts she
performed during her waking hours were indeliberate
or machine-like, but all were under the control of her
intellect and her grace-directed will.
When we mediate on the outstanding occasions in
Mary’s life, it is especially in the light of the pre­
ceding principles that we should do so. And since,
just now, we are concerned with those which
preceded the Incarnation, let us turn to her
Presentation in the Temple, when she was as yet a
child, or to her participation in the great feasts of
Israel, or to her reading of the Messianic prophecies
—those particularly of Isaias—which increased so
wonderfully her faith, her hope, her love of God, and
her longing for the advent of the Messiah. How much
she must have penetrated the depth of meaning in
Isaias’ words: “For a child is born to us, and a son
is given to us, and the government is upon his
shoulder; and his name shall be called, Wonderful,
Counsellor, God the Mighty, the Father of the world
to come, the Prince of peace ” (Is. ix, 6). Though
she was still so young, Mary’s vivid faith must, have
grasped better than even Isaias did the meaning of
(7) Cf. la Ilae, q.13, a.9.

MARY'S SPIRITUAL PROGRESS UP TO THE ANNUNCIATION

107

the words “ God the Mighty.” She understood
already that the plenitude of the divine power would
be in that Child, that the Messiah would be an
eternal and immortal King, always the Father of His
people (8).
®

The life of grace increases not by merit only but by
prayer as well, which has its own peculiar efficacy (of
impétration). For that reason, we pray every day to
grow in the grace of God, saying: “ Our Father, Who
art in Heaven, hallowed be Thy Name; Thy Kingdom
come (more and more in us); Thy Will be done (May
Your precepts be better observed by us).” Similarly,
the Church makes us pray on the 13th Sunday after
Pentecost : “ Grant us, O Lord, an increase of faith,
hope and charity.”
After justification, one can therefore grow in grace
both by the way of merit—which is based on the
divine justice, and gives a right to a reward—and by
the way of prayer—which relies on the divine mercy.
Prayer is efficacious in the degree in which it is
humble, confident, persevering, and desirous of an
increase of virtue rather than of temporal favours:
“ Seek ye first the kingdom of God and His justice,
and all these things shall be given to you.” And it
(8) No one can affirm as certain beyond question that Mary
did not understand the God the Mighty of the prophecy of
Isaias as attributing divinity to the Messiah.
The Church,
enlightened by the New Testament, understands the term in
that sense in the Masses of Christmas. Who then will assert
that Mary did not understand as much before the Incarnation?
Th e Messiah is the Anointed of the Lord. In the light of New
Testament teaching, we to-day realise that the anointing is
constituted first of all by the grace of union, which is the
Word Himself, Who communicates substantial and uncreated
holiness to the Sacred Humanity. Cf. Illa, q.6, a.6; q.22, a.2,
nd 3.

108

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

can happen that the soul in the state of grace will
receive at once, in answer to fervent prayer, more
than it merits. In other words, a person may, on
occasion, receive an increase of grace through the
impetratory power of a prayer which exceeds that
due to prayer’s meritorious value (9).
Mary’s prayer was most efficacious from her very
childhood, not only because of its meritorious value,
but also because of its wonderful impetratory value,
proportionate to her humility, her confidence, and
her perseverance in a continually growing generosity.
Through it she grew continuously in the pure and
strong love of God. She obtained also all the actual
efficacious graces which cannot be merited strictly,
such as those which incline to new meritorious acts,
or the special inspiration which is the principle of
infused contemplation.
This must certainly have
happened when she repeated in her prayer the words
of the Book of Wisdom, vii, 7 : “ Wherefore I wished,
and understanding was given me: and I called upon
God, and the spirit of wisdom came upon me: and I
preferred her before kingdoms and thrones, and
esteemed riches nothing in comparison with her . . .
for all gold in comparison of her, is as a little sand,
and silver in respect of her shall be counted as clay.”
In this way, the Lord came to her to nourish her with
Himself, and each day gave Himself more fully to her
by prompting her to give herself more fully to Him.
More appropriately than anyone else except Jesus,
she said with the psalmist : “ One thing I have asked
(9) This explains how the just can obtain by prayer graces
which cannot be merited, as, for example, the grace of final
perseverance, or actual efficacious grace which at the same
time preserves from mortal sin and conserves and. augments the
state of grace. The same can be said of the special inspiration
which is the principle, through the gifts of understanding and
wisdom, of infused contemplation.

MARY’S SPIRITUAL PROGRESS UP TO THE ANNUNCIATION

109

of the Lord, this will I seek after: that I may dwell
in the house of the Lord all the days of my life; that
I may see the delight of the Lord ...” (Ps. xxvi, 4).
Day after day brought her a fuller understanding
of the infinite goodness of God to those who seek Him
and to those who find Him. Even before the institu­
tion of the Blessed Eucharist, Mary enjoyed, there­
fore, that spiritual communion which consists in the
simple and intimate prayer of the soul in the unitive
stage when it enjoys God present within it as in a
spiritual temple : “ O taste and see that the Lord is
sweet ” (Ps. xxxiii, 9).
The psalmist expresses his thirst for God in burn­
ing words : “ As the hart panteth after the fountains
of waters; so my soul panteth after thee, O God. My
soul hath thirsted after .the strong living God ” (Ps.
xli, 2). What must have been Mary’s thirst for God
from the moment of the Immaculate Conception up
to the day of the Incarnation !
St. Thomas tells us that Mary’s progress in charity
was not such that she merited the Incarnation, for
the Incarnation is the principle of all merit since the
sin of Adam, and could not itself be merited by one
who was redeemed. Nevertheless, her progress
merited for her gradually (as a result of the first grace
which came from the future merits of her Son) that
(-minent degree of charity, humility, and purity which
made her, on the Annunciation day, the worthy
mother of the Saviour (10).
Neither did she merit the divine maternity; that
would have been equivalently to merit the Incarna­
tion. She did, however, merit .the degree of charity
which was the proximate disposition for being made
(10) Cf. Illa, q.2, a.II, ad 3: “Beata Virgo dicitur meruisse
portare Dominum omnium, non quia meruit ipsum incarnari,
. ' d quia meruit ex gratia sibi data illum puritatis et sancti­
tatis gradum, ut congrue posset esse Mater Dei.”

110

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

Mother of God.
This proximate disposition must
have been an unimaginable summit of holiness, since
even the remote disposition—Mary’s first fulness of
grace—surpassed the united holinesses of all the
saints.
Finally, we may add that Mary’s years in the
temple accelerated her growth in the grace of .the
virtues and the gifts in a way with which the growth
of the most generous of souls is quite unworthy to be
compared.
It is, of course, possible to exaggerate Mary’s
growth in grace and to attribute to her a perfection
which belongs only to her Son. But even if we are
careful to confine ourselves to what were really her
prerogatives, we are utterly incapable of forming a
worthy idea of the elevation of her beginning and
her progress in the spiritual life. The most we can
do is to attain to some small measure of under­
standing of so sublime a mystery.

Note.
When in our lives do the less fervent or remiss
acts of charity obtain the increase of charity
due to them?

According to St. Thomas (1), every act of charity of the
‘ wayfarer ’ is meritorious, meriting an increase of this virtue
and disposing the soul, at least in a remote manner, to receive
it; but only fervent acts dispose one proximately, i.e. acts at
least equal in intensity to the degree of the infused virtue
from which they proceed. Therefore only fervent acts obtain
immediately the increase of charity that they merit.
(1) Ila Ilae, q.24, a.6.

MARY’S SPIRITUAL PROGRESS UP TO THE ANNUNCIATION

111

When do the less fervent acts obtain it?
One might think that it is as soon as a fervent meritorious
act is made. However, there is a difficulty, for whereas this
act certainly obtains the increase due to it and to which it
disposes one proximately, it is not certain that it obtains at
the same time the increase due to the less fervent meritorious
acts which have preceded it and which has not yet been given.
One way by which these arrears can be obtained is by fer­
vent acts of charity which are themselves meritorious, and
which also dispose one to receive already in the present life not
only what they merit themselves but even more than they
merit.
This is the case with the fervent act of charity by which one
prepares oneself for a good communion, which confers 4 ex
opere operato’ an increase of charity corresponding to the
actual fervent disposition and to the 4 arrears.’ This must be
quite frequent with good priests and good Christians, especi­
ally at the more fervent communions which they make on
certain feast-days or on the First Friday of the month. More
so must this take place when, with good dispositions, one
receives Holy Communion as Viaticum, or with Extreme
Unction, which, effacing the remains of sin (reliquiae peccati),
produces an increase of charity in proportion to the fervour
with which it is received; it can therefore produce also the
4 arrears ’ merited but not yet obtained.
One’s 4 arrears ’ may be obtained also by a fervent prayer
for an increase of charity; for this prayer is at once meri­
torious, inasmuch as inspired by charity, and impetratory; and
on this latter score it obtains more than it merits and can
dispose one proximately to receive the 4 arrears ’ already
merited but not obtained.
Finally, it remains probable that the soul which may not
have obtained its ' arrears ’ during this life by any of the
means we have mentioned, can dispose Itself proximately to
receive them by its fervent acts in Purgatory, acts which,
however, are no longer meritorious. It is certain that these
souls in Purgatory, as their purification advances, make more
and more fervent acts (non-meritorious), which attain at
least to the degree of intensity of the infused virtue from
which they proceed. These acts do not merit an increase of
ibis virtue, but it is probable that they dispose one actually
to receive the 4 arrears ’ already merited 4 in via ’ and not yet
obtained. Thus a soul which entered Purgatory with a charity

112

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

of five talents, could leave It with a charity of seven, the degree
of glory corresponding always to the degree of merit.
And if this is true, it would appear to be true especially with
regard to the final act by which the soul disposes itself (in
genere causae materialis') to receive the light of glory, an act
which is produced (in genere causae efficientis et formalis)
under the influence of this light at the exact moment of its
infusion, just as the last act which immediately disposes one
for justification proceeds from charity at the exact moment
of its infusion. Thus the ‘ arrears ’ would be obtained at least
at the last moment, on one’s entry into glory (2).

Article II
Mary’s Wonderful Increase in Grace at the
Annunciation

As St. Thomas explains (11), it was becoming that
the mystery of the Incarnation should be announced
to the Blessed Virgin so as to instruct her in its
meaning and that she might give her consent to it.
Thereby she conceived the Word spiritually, as the
Fathers say, before conceiving Him physically. And
St. Thomas adds that her supernatural and meri­
torious consent was given in the name of the whole
human race which stood in need of the promised
Redeemer.
It was becoming also that the Annunciation should
have been made by an angel, coming as ambassador
of the Most High. A rebellious angel had caused the
Fall; a holy angel, the highest of the archangels,
(2) These different explanations, which are quite probable,
have been proposed by several commentators on St. Thomas
in Ila, Ilae, q.24, a.6. We have exposed them more at length
elsewhere: L’Amour de Dieu et la Croix de Jésus, t. 1, pp. 415422, and Les Trois Ages de la Vie Intérieure, 1.1, p. 180 sqq.
(11) Hla, q.30, aa. 1, 2, 3, 4.

MARY’S WONDERFUL INCREASE IN GRACE AT THE ANNUNCIATION

113

announces the Redemption (12). Becoming, as well,
that Mary should have been enlightened before St.
Joseph about the mystery, for by her predestination
she was greater than he. Becoming, in the last place,
that the Annunciation should have taken the form
of a corporeal vision accompanied by an intellectual
illumination, for the corporeal vision is, in itself, more
certain and reliable than the imaginative one, and
the grace of the intellectual illumination revealed
with certainty the meaning of the words spoken (13).
Joy and confidence succeeded reverential fear and
astonishment as the angel spoke: “Fear not, Mary,
for thou hast found grace with God. Behold thou
shalt conceive in thy womb, and shalt bring forth a
son; and thou shalt call his name Jesus. He shall be
great, and shall be called the Son of the Most High ...
The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power
of the Most High shall overshadow thee. And there­
fore also the Holy which shall be born of thee shall be
called the Son of God.” And the angel adds, both
as sign and as explanation of what is to come to pass :
“ And behold thy cousin Elisabeth, she also hath con­
ceived a son in her old age, and this is the sixth month
with her that is called barren. Because no word shall
be impossible with God.”
And Mary consented, saying, “Behold the handmaid
of the Lord; be it done to me according to thy word.”
Bossuet tells us in his Elevations on the Mysteries,
12th Week, 6th Elevation, that Mary manifested
principally three virtues in her consent: virginity, by
her noble resolution to renounce the joys of the
senses for ever; perfect humility in regard to God
who so favoured her; and faith, by conceiving the
Son of God in her soul before she conceived Him in
(12) Illa, q.3O, a.3.
(13) lb., a.4.
H

114

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

her body— which is why Elisabeth saluted her : “ And
blessed art thou that hast believed, because these
things shall be accomplished that were spoken to
thee by the Lord.” She manifested also confidence
in God and courage, for she was not ignorant of the
messianic prophecies—those especially of Isaias—
which foretold the great sufferings of the Messiah in
which she was called to share.
Many interior souls are struck most by Mary’s total
self-forgetfulness at the Annunciation, and see in it
the highest humility. She thought only of God’s will,
of all that the Incarnation would do for His glory and
for our salvation. And God, Who is the greatness of
little ones, regarded her humility, and made her
faith, her confidence, and her generosity all they were
called to be by her participation in our redemption.
There are men who think that their greatness con­
sists in their genius and their gifts of nature. Mary,
the greatest of creatures, turned her gaze from her­
self, and sought her greatness in God. Deus humilium
celsitudo, God, Who art the greatness of the humble,
reveal to us the greatness of Mary, the loftiness of
her charity (14).
St. Thomas tells us (15) that Mary’s fulness of
grace increased notably at the Incarnation, through
the presence of the Word of God made flesh. If she
(14) Deus humilium celsitudo Is the opening of the Collect
of the Mass of St. Francis of Paula, April 2nd, and of the
Blessed Martin Porres. November 5th, in the Dominican
Missal. St. Albert the Great has some magnificent pages in
his Mariale about the humility of Mary whom he regarded as
his mother and his inspiration.
(15) Illa, q.27, a.5, ad 2: “In Beata Virgine fuit triplex
perfectio gratiae. Prima quidem quasi dispositiva, per quam
reddebatur idonea ad hoc quod esset mater Christi, et haec
fuit prima perfectio sanctificationis.
Secunda autem per­
fectio gratiae fuit in Beata Virgine ex praesentia Filii Dei in
eius utero incarnati. Tertia autem est perfectio finis, quam
habet in gloria.”

MARY’S

wonderful increase in grace at the annunciation

115

had not been already confirmed in grace, she would
have been so from that moment.

The Reason for Mary’s Increase in Grace and
Charity at the Incarnation

Three reasons have been given for Mary’s increase
in the divine life at the Incarnation: the finality, or
purpose, of her grace; the cause of her grace; the
mutual love of Jesus and His Mother.
In the first place, an increase in grace and charity
was most becoming as a proximate and immediate
preparation for the dignity of the divine motherhood.
It is a general principle that the proximate prepara­
tion (ultimate disposition) for any perfection is
proportionate to it. But the divine maternity is
superior by its term—which is of the hypostatic order
—to every other dignity of nature or of grace. Hence,
Mary must have received as proximate preparation
for it a special increase of her fulness of grace. This
special increase made her proximately worthy to be
the Mother of God and to take her unique place in
regard to the Word made flesh.
In the second place, the Son of God owed it to
Himself to enrich Mary with a still greater grace
when He became present in her by the Incarnation.
For by His Divinity He is principal cause of grace, and
by His Humanity He is its meritorious and instru­
mental cause. But Mary was, of all creatures, the
one who entered into closest contact with Him in His
Humanity since He took flesh in her womb. Hence,
it was appropriate that she should have received a
notable increase of grace at the Incarnation. Re­
ceiving the Word into her womb, she must have

116

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

experienced all—and more than all—the benefits of
a fervent sacramental communion. Jesus gives
Himself to us in the Blessed Eucharist under the
appearances of bread; He gave Himself to Mary in
His true form, and by an immediate contact which
produced, ex opere operato, an increase in her parti­
cipation in the divine life more bounteous than even
that produced by the greatest of the sacraments.
There is one remarkable point of dissimilarity
between Jesus’ gift of Himself to Mary and His gift
of Himself to us in Holy Communion. He gives Himself
to us that we may live by Him.
But, though he
nourished Mary’s soul and gave Himself to her by the
Incarnation, in His human nature, He lived by her
and received from her the nourishment which His
sacred Body required.
In the third and last place, the mutual love of Jesus
and Mary demanded an increase of Mary’s fulness
of grace. As we have said, grace is an effect of God’s
active love for His creature. But if the Word made
Flesh loves all the men for whom He is prepared to
shed His blood, if He loves in a special way the elect
and among them in a still more special way the
apostles and the saints, His love for Mary, who was to
be the most closely associated with Him in His work
for souls, is the greatest of all. But Jesus is God.
Hence His love for her produces grace in her soul—
such an abundance of grace as to be capable of over­
flowing on souls. He is man too, and as man has
merited all the effects of our predestination (16).
Hence, in His love for her, He communicated to her
the effects of her special predestination, most parti­
cularly that increase of charity which brought her
nearer to the final fulness that was to be hers in
(16) Illa, q.24, a.4.

MARY’S WONDERFUL INCREASE IN GRACE AT THE ANNUNCIATION

117

glory. We must remember too that Mary was never
in the slightest degree unresponsive to Jesus’ love for
her; on the contrary, her maternal love for Jesus
answered most fully to Jesus’ love for her. On that
account it was possible for Him to give Himself to her
much more fully than to any of the great saints. To
form some idea of Mary’s maternal love for Jesus, we
have only to think of the heroic love and of the im­
mense sacrifices of which mothers are capable for
their children in their hour of trial and suffering.
Think too of how loving Mary’s pure virgin heart
was; and of how she loved her Son as her God; and
of how her love was supernatural as well as natural,
growing continuously in intensity. Such thoughts
will enable you to glimpse Mary’s love in a distant
way.
Speaking of the time when the Body of the Saviour
was formed in Mary’s virginal womb, Fr. Hugon says
( 17) : “ She must have made uninterrupted progress
in grace during those nine months—ex opere operato,
as it were—through her permanent contact with the
Author of holiness. If her plenitude of grace is in­
comprehensible at the time of the Incarnation, what
must it have been at the Nativity . . . Each time she
fed him at her virginal breast, she was nourished with
grace . . . When she held Him in her arms and gave
Him the kisses of a virgin-mother, she received from
Him the kiss of the divinity, which made her still
purer and holier.” These words are but an echo of
the liturgy (18). Even when physical contact with
Jesus in her womb had ceased, Mary’s charity and
(17) Marie, pleine de grâce, 5th edit., 1926, p.46.
(18) Cf. Vespers Hymn for the Feast of the Holy Family:
Maria dives gratia
O Lux beata caelitum
O sola quae casto potes
Et summa spes mortalium
Fovere Jesum pectore,
Jesu, o cui domestica
Cum lacte donans oscula.
Arrisit orto caritas:

118

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

motherly love continued to grow, and this up to the
hour of her death.
In her case, grace perfected
nature in a degree which will remain for ever beyond
the powers of the human tongue to express.

Article III
The Visitation and the “ Magnificat ”

1. The Visitation
After the Annunciation the Blessed Virgin went to
visit her cousin, St. Elisabeth. As soon as Elisabeth
heard Mary’s salutation, the child she bore leaped in
her womb for joy, and she was filled with the Holy
Ghost. And she cried out: “ Blessed art thou among
women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. For
behold, as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded
in my ears, the infant in my womb leaped for joy.
And blessed art thou that hast believed, because those
things shall be accomplished that were spoken to
thee by the Lord.” In the light of divine revelation
Elisabeth understands that the Fruit of Mary’s womb
is beginning to bless men through His mother. She
knows that it is the Lord Himself Who comes to her.
The Son of God comes, through His mother, to His
precursor; and the precursor, through his mother,
recognised the Son of God.
St. Luke gives the canticle of the Magnificat in the
verses which follow. The context, the authority of
the great majority of the best manuscripts, and the
unanimous voice of the oldest and most learned
Fathers (Irenaeus, Origen, Tertullian, St. Ambrose,
St. Jerome, St. Augustine, etc.) all point to Mary as its
author.

THE VISITATION AND THE “ MAGNIFICAT ’’

119

What strikes one most of all in the Magnificat is its
simplicity and its dignity. In substance it is a song
of thanksgiving, which recalls that God is the great­
ness of the humble, that He lifts them up even while
He casts down the pride of the mighty. Bossuet sums
up well what the Fathers say about the Magnificat in
his Elevations on the Mysteries, 14th week, 5th Eleva­
tion. We shall follow him in the next few pages (19).

God has done great things in Mary

“ My soul doth glorify the Lord.” Mary leaves self,
as it were, to glorify God alone and to find in Him all
her joy. She is in perfect peace, for no one can take
from her Him Whom she sings.
“ My spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.” What
Mary cannot find in herself she finds in God, Who is
the Supreme Treasure.
She rejoices “ because He
hath rewarded the humility of His handmaid.” She
does not think herself capable of attracting His gaze,
for she is nothing. But He, in His goodness, has
turned towards her, and now she has a sure ground
for confidence—the Divine mercy. No longer does
she fear to recognise all she has received freely from
Him: rather is that a debt of gratitude to be paid.
“ For behold from henceforth all generations shall
call me blessed ”—a prophecy which is still fulfilled
(19) St. Francis de Sales’ two sermons on the Visitation
should also be studied. In one place he asks if by “ the humi­
lity of his handmaid ” Mary referred to her lowly condition
as a creature or also to her humility.
With some of the
Fathers—though against many authorities—he answers that
it is more probable that she spoke of her humility; for she
knew from the angel’s words that she was full of grace, and
had, in consequence, the virtue of humility in a high degree.
But to God she gave the glory due to her virtue.

120

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

after two thousand years with each “ Hail Mary ” that
men say.
And now she sees that her joy will be the joy of all
men of good will: “ He that is mighty hath done great
things to me; and holy is His name. And His mercy
is from generation unto generation, to them that fear
Him.” He Who is mighty has performed in her the
greatest work of His might—the redemptive Incarna­
tion: He has given a Saviour to the world through
her, while yet leaving her virginity intact.
The Most High is holy, is Holiness. This is all the
more evident to us who believe that the Son of God,
Who is also the Son of Mary, has bestowed mercy,
grace and holiness on men of so many different times
and nations who feared God with that childlike fear
which is the beginning of wisdom, and accepted the
yoke of His commandments by grace.

3. God raises up the humble and through them
triumphs over the pride of the mighty
To explain these wonderful effects Mary appeals to
the Divine Power : “ He hath showed might in His
arm; He hath scattered the proud in the conceit of
their heart. He hath put down the mighty from their
seat, and hath exalted the humble.” God did all she
mentions when He sent His only Son to confound the
proud by the preaching of His gospel, and to make
use of the weakness of the apostles, confessors and
virgins, to bring the strength of a proud paganism to
naught. His sublime mysteries He has hidden from
the wise and revealed to little ones (Matt, xi, 25).
Mary is herself an example of what God does by the
little ones. He raised her above all because she looked
on herself as the least of all. The Son of God chose

MARY’S PERPETUAL VIRGINITY

121

for His dwelling not the rich palaces of kings but the
poverty of Bethlehem, and He manifested His power
by the very weakness in which He came to exalt the
little ones.
“ He hath filled the hungry with good things; and
the rich He hath sent empty away.” Jesus in His turn
will say : “ Blessed are ye that hunger now, for you
shall be filled . . . Woe to you that are filled, for you
shall hunger ” (Luke vi, 21 & 25). In Bossuet’s words,
it is when the soul sees the glory of the world in ruins
and God alone great that it finds peace.
The Magnificat concludes as it began, with thanks­
giving: “He hath received Israel His servant, being
mindful of His mercy : As He spoke to our fathers, to
Abraham and to his seed for ever.” We should make
our own the words of St. Ambrose : “ Let Mary’s soul
be in us to glorify the Lord; let her spirit be in us that
we may rejoice in God our Saviour ” (20). May His
Kingdom come in us through the accomplishment of
His will.

Article IV
Mary’s Perpetual Virginity

The Church teaches three truths concerning Mary’s
virginity: that she was a virgin in conceiving Our
Saviour, that she was a virgin in giving Him birth,
and that she remained a virgin her whole life
through. The first two truths were defended against
the Cerinthians and the Ebionites towards the end
of the 1st century; against Celsus, who was refuted
by Origen; in the 16th century against the Socinians,
(20) In Lucam, 1. II, n. 26.

122

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

whom Paul IV and Clement VIII condemned; and
recently against the rationalists—Strauss, Renan,
and the Pseudo-Herzog in particular (21). The second
truth was attacked by Jovinian, who was condemned
in 390. The third truth was denied by Helvidius and
defended by St. Jerome (22).

The Virginal Conception

Mary’s virginity in the conception of her Son was
foretold by Isaias (Is. vii, 14) : “ A virgin shall con­
ceive, and bear a son.” The virginal conception is
clearly the literal sense of this text; otherwise, as St.
Justin pointed out to Tryphon (23), there would be
no question of a sign, as Isaias had promised. Gabriel
also gave testimony to the virginal conception at the
Annunciation : “ The Holy Ghost shall come upon
thee, and the power of the Most High shall over­
shadow thee.” The message given by the angel to St.
Joseph is to the same effect: “Joseph, son of David,
fear not to take unto thee Mary, thy wife, for that
which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost” (Matt,
i, 20). And St. Luke says of Jesus: “ ... being (as it
was supposed) the son of Joseph ” (Luke iii, 23).
Tradition confirms that the conception of Christ
was virginal, as can be learned from the testimonies
of St. Ignatius the Martyr, Aristides, St. Justin, Tertullian, St. Irenaeus. All the creeds teach that the
Son of God made flesh “ was conceived by the Virgin
Mary, by the operation of the Holy Ghost (24). It was
(21) Cf. Denzinger, nos. 20, 91, 113, 143 sqq.. 201, 214, 255
sqq.. 282, 293, 344. 429, 462. 708, 735, 993, 1314, 1462.
(22) De perpetua virginitate B. Mariae adversus Helvidium,
P.L., XXIII, 183-205.
(23) DM. cum Tryphone, LXXXIV; P. G., VI, 673.
(24) Denz., 6 sqq.

MARY’S PERPETUAL VIRGINITY

123

defined by the Lateran Council under Pope Martin I
in 649 (25) and it was reaffirmed by Paul IV against
the Socinians (26).
The arguments which show the appropriateness of
the virginal conception are exposed by St. Thomas
(27): 1—It is appropriate that He Who is the natural
Son of God should have no father on earth, but only
in heaven; 2—The Word, conceived eternally in the
most complete purity, should be conceived virginally
when being made flesh; 3—That the human nature
of the Saviour be exempt from original sin it was ap­
propriate that it should not be formed by the ordinary
process of human generation, but virginally; 4—By
being born of a virgin Christ showed that His
members should be born by the Spirit of His virginal
and spiritual spouse, the Church.

The Virginal Birth
St. Ambrose bears witness to the virginal birth
when commenting on the text of Isaias : “ A virgin
shall conceive, and bear a son ”; she will be a virgin,
he says, in giving birth as well as in conceiving (28).
The same had been said earlier by St. Ignatius the
Martyr (29), Aristides (30), Clement of Alexandria
(31). It was defined by the Lateran Council (32).
St. Thomas gives the following arguments to show
the appropriateness of the virginal birth: 1—The
(25) Denz., 256.
(26) Denz., 993.
(27) Illa. q.28. a.l.
(28) Epist. XLII ad Siricium Papam. P. L., XVI. 1124: “Non
enim concepturam tantum modo virginem, sed et parituram
(Isaias) dixit.”
(29) Ad Ephes., xv, 1.
(30) Ex vita Barlaam et Josaphat, P. G., XCVI, 1121.
(31) Strom.. VII. xvi; P. G., IX. 529.
(32) Denz., 256; item 993.

124

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

Word, Who is conceived and Who proceeds eternally
from the Father without any corruption of His sub­
stance, should, if He becomes flesh, be born of a virgin
mother without detriment to her virginity; 2—He
Who came to remove all corruption should not by His
birth destroy the virginity of her who bore Him; 3—
He Who commands us to honour our parents should
not Himself diminish by His birth the glory of His
holy mother.
The Perpetual Virginity of Mary after the
Saviour’s Birth

The Lateran Council affirmed this point of doctrine
in 649, as did Paul IV later against the Socinians (33).
Among the Greek Fathers two deserve special
mention as having explicitly taught it: Origen (34)
and St. Gregory the Wonderworker (35). The ex­
pression semper virgo — “ always a virgin ” — is
common in the 4th century, especially in the works
of St. Athanasius and Didymus the Blind (36). It
was also used by the 2nd Council of Constantinople
(37). The Latin Fathers are represented by Saints
Ambrose (38), Augustine (39), and Jerome (40). St.
Ephrem voices the mind of the Syraic Church (41).
St. Thomas’s arguments to show the appropriate­
ness of the perpetual virginity are as follows (Illa,
(33) Denz., 256; 993.
(34) In Matt., t. X. xvll; P. G., XIII, 876 B; HomU. VII in
Luc.; P. G., XIII, 1818.
(35) Serm. in Nativit. Christi; P. G.. X, 391.
(36) St. Athanas., Orat. II contra Arianos, LXX; P. G., XXVI,
296; Didymus, De Trinitate, I. xxvii; P. G., XXXIX, 404.
(37) Denz., 214, 218.
(38) Epist. XLI1 ad Siricium Papam; P. L„ XVI. 1124.
(39) Serm. Ill in Natali Domini, n.l; P.L., XXXVIII, 995.
(40) De perpetua virginitate B. Mariae adversus Helvidium.
(41) S. Ephrem Syri opera, ed. Rom., 1743, t. II, P· 267.

MARY’S INCREASE IN GRACE AFTER THE INCARNATION

125

q.28, a.3) : 1—Helvidius’s error is opposed to the dig­
nity of Christ himself, for just as He is the only Son
in eternity of the Father so also He ought to be the
only Son in time of the Virgin; 2—It is opposed also
to the dignity of the Holy Ghost Who sanctified once
and for ever the virginal womb of Mary; 3—It is
opposed to the dignity and holiness of the Mother of
God as it would imply that she was dissatisfied with
having borne such a Son; 4—Finally, St. Joseph
would have been guilty of the greatest presumption
had he violated the virginity of her whom he knew,
by the angel, to have conceived of the Holy Ghost
(42).
St. Thomas explains also (Illa, q.28, a.4) the
commonly accepted teaching that the Blessed Virgin
had taken a vow of perpetual virginity. Her words
to the angel prove the point: “How shall this be
done, because I know not man?” Tradition is summed
up in the phrase of St. Augustine’s : “ Virgo es, sancta
es, votum vovisti ” (43).

Article V
The Principal Mysteries Which Contributed to
Mary’s Increase in Grace after the Incarnation

These mysteries are those especially which the
Rosary proposes for our consideration.
(42) Those mentioned in the New Testament as brothers of
the Lord were merely relatives, as tradition has always taught.
The Hebrew word corresponding to “brother” signified near
relative, and was used to cover cousins, nephews, etc. Cf. Gen,
xiii, 8; xiv, 6. Cf. A. Durand, Frères du Seigneur in Diet.
Apol.
(43) Sermo CCCX in Natali Joannis Bapt.; P. L., XXXVIII,
1319.

126

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

The Nativity

Mary grew in humility, poverty and love of God by
giving birth to her Son in a stable. His cradle was
but a manger. But, by contrast, there were the
angels there to sing “Glory to God in the highest;
and on earth peace to men of good will.” Those
words were sweet to the ears of the shepherds and of
St. Joseph, and still more sweet to the ears of Mary.
They were the beginning of a Gloria which the
Church does not cease to sing at Mass while this
world endures, and the liturgy of eternity has not
yet replaced that of time.
It is said of Mary that she kept all these words,
pondering them in her heart. Though her joy at the
birth of her Son was intense, she treasured it up in
silence. St. Elisabeth alone received her confidences.
God’s greatest actions defy human expression. What
could Mary say to equal what she had experienced?
The Presentation in the Temple
Mary said her Fiat in peace and holy joy on the
day of the Annunciation. There was sorrow too in
her heart at the thought of the sufferings which
Isaias had foretold would befall her Son. Still more
light is thrown for her on the mystery of the Redemp­
tion when the holy old man Simeon speaks of the
child Jesus as the “ Salvation, which thou hast pre­
pared before the face of all peoples: A light to the
revelation of the Gentiles.” Mary remains silent in
wonder and thanksgiving. Simeon continues : “ This
child is set for the fall, and for the resurrection of
many in Israel, and for a sign which shall be contra­
dicted.” Jesus, come for the salvation of all, will be

MARY’S INCREASE IN GRACE AFTER THE INCARNATION

127

the occasion of the fall of many, he will be a
stumbling block (Is. viii, 14) for many of the Jews,
who, refusing to recognise Him as the Messiah, will
fall into infidelity and thence to eternal ruin (Rom.
ix, 32; I Cor. i, 13). Jesus Himself will say later:
“ Blessed is he that shall not be scandalized in me ”
(Matt, xi, 6).
Turning then to Mary herself, Simeon addressed to
her the prophetic words : “ And thy own soul a sword
shall pierce, that out of many hearts thoughts may
be revealed.” Mary will have a share in the Saviour’s
trials. His sufferings will be hers. Her very heart
will be pierced by a sword of sorrow. Had the Son of
Man not come thus on earth we should never have
known the full malice of pride’s revolt against truth.
The hidden thoughts of hypocrisy and false zeal were
revealed when the Pharisees cried out for the cruci­
fixion of Him Who is Holiness.
Jesus’ fulness of grace had two apparently contra­
dictory effects: the most perfect peace of soul; the
will to offer Himself as a redemptive victim. Mary’s
grace produced two similarly contrasting effects: the
pure joys of the days of the Annunciation and the
Nativity; the desire to be united most generously to
the sufferings of her Son for our salvation. Thus,
presenting Him in the temple, she already offers Him
for us. Joy and sorrow are wedded in the heart of
the Mother of God who is already the Mother of all
who will believe in her Son.
The Flight into Egypt
St. Matthew tells us how. after the Magi had come
to adore, an angel appeared to Joseph in his sleep
saying : “ Arise, and take the Child and his mother,
and fly into Egypt: and be there until I shall tell

128

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

thee. For it will come to pass that Herod will seek
the Child to destroy him.” True to the angel’s pro­
phecy, Herod ordered the massacre of all the children
of two years and under, in and around Bethlehem.
It is Jesus Whom this king fears. He fears where
there is no reason to fear, and despises God’s anger
which he should hold in dread. Mary and Joseph are
called to share in Jesus’ sufferings. “ Before, they
had lived in peace and earned their bread without
anxiety by the labour of their hands. But as soon as
Jesus is given to them their tranquil calm is broken
. . . they must share in His Cross ” (44). The Holy
Innocents share also in the Cross. Their massacre
shows us that they were predestined from all eternity
for the glory of martyrdom.
When Herod has died, an angel appears again to
Joseph to tell him that the time has come to go to
Nazareth in Galilee.
The Hidden Life of Nazareth

Mary grew continuously in grace and charity as
she carried the infant in her arms, fed Him, embraced
Him and was caressed by Him, heard His first words,
guided His first steps.
“ Jesus advanced in wisdom and age and grace with
God and men.” Arrived at the age of twelve years,
He accompanied Mary and Joseph to Jerusalem for
the Pasch. When the day of departure came, He
remained in the city unknown to His parents. It was
only after three days that they found Him in the
midst of the doctors. And He said to them : “ How is
it that you sought me : did you not know that I must
(44) Bossuet, Elevations, 19th Week, 3rd Elevation.

MARY’S INCREASE IN GRACE AFTER THE INCARNATION

129

be about my Father’s business?” But Mary and
Joseph “ understood not the word that he spoke to
them.”
Mary accepted in faith what she could not as yet
understand. The depth and the extent of the Mystery
of the Redemption will be revealed to her only
gradually. She is glad to have found Jesus again. But
in her joy sounds many an overtone of sadnesses yet
to come.
Bossuet has some remarkable reflections on the
hidden life, which lasted up to the time of Jesus’
public ministry (45).
“ There are some who feel ashamed for Jesus’ sake
that He should have endured the wearisomeness of
so long a retirement.
They experience much the
same feelings in regard to Mary, and try to enliven
her period at Nazareth by attributing continual
miracles to her. Rather let us pay heed to the words
of the gospel: “Mary kept all these words in her
heart.” Was not that a task worthy of her? And if
the mysteries of His infancy were so rich a subject
for her meditation, what of the mysteries that suc­
ceeded them? Mary meditated on Jesus ... she re­
mained in perpetual contemplation, her heart
melting, as it were, in love and longing. What then
shall we say to those who invented so many pretty
fables about Our Lady? What, if not that humble
and perfect contemplation did not seem enough in
their eyes? But if it was enough for thirty years of
Mary’s—and of Jesus’—life, it was enough for the
other years too. The silence of the Scriptures about
Mary is more eloquent than all discourses. Learn,
O man, in the midst of your restless activity, to be
satisfied to think of Jesus, to listen to Him within, to
(45) Elevations, 20th Week, 9th and 10th Elevations.
■x

I

130

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

hear again His words ... Of what are you complaining,
human pride, when you say you count for little in
this world? Did Jesus count for much there? Or
Mary? They were the wonder of the world, the sight
that ravished God and angels. And what did they do?
What name did they bear? Men wish to bear an
honoured name, to take part in brilliant movements.
They do not know Jesus and Mary . . . You say you
have nothing to do. The salvation of souls is in your
hands—in part, at least ! Do you not know enemies
whom you could help to reconcile, quarrels you could
mend? Are there not souls in misery you could save
from blasphemy and despair? And even if you have
nothing of all that, have you not the work of your
own salvation, which is for every soul the true work
of God?”
Reflecting on the hidden life of Nazareth and on
Mary’s spiritual progress in its silence, and reflecting
by way of contrast on what the world terms progress,
we are forced to conclude : men never talked more of
progress than since they began to neglect its most
important form, spiritual progress. And what has
been the result? That the baser forms of progress,
sought for their own sake, have brought pleasure,
idleness and unemployment in their train, and pre­
pared the way for a moral decline towards
materialism, atheism—and even barbarism, as the
recent world wars prove. In Mary, on the contrary,
we find the ever more perfect realisation of the
gospel words : “ Thou shalt love the Lord thy God,
with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and
with all thy strength, and with all thy mind.” The
further she advances the more she loves God with all
her heart, for the more she sees the opposition to
Jesus growing in the course of His ministry up to the
consummation of the mystery of the Redemption.

MARY’S INCREASE IN GRACE AFTER THE INCARNATION

131

The Cause of Mary’s Dolours on Calvary and the
intensity of her Love of God and of her Son
and of Souls

What was the profound cause of Mary’s sorrows on
Calvary? Every Christian soul for whom practice has
made the Stations of the Cross familiar will answer:
the cause of Mary’s sorrows, as of those of Jesus, was
sin. Happy the souls for whom that answer is a vital
truth, who experience true sorrow at the thought of
their own sins—a sorrow that only grace can produce
in them.
We understand but little of the sorrows of Mary,
for little grieves us except what wounds our bodies,
our self-love, our vanity, or our pride. We suffer too
from men’s ingratitude, from the afflictions of our
family or our native land. But sin grieves us but
little. We have but little sorrow for our faults con­
sidered as offences against God. In theory, we admit
that sin is the greatest of evils since it affects the soul
Itself and its faculties, and since it is the cause of the
disorders which we deplore in society; it is only too
evidently the cause of the enmity between classes and
nations. But in spite of that we do not experience
any great sorrow for the faults whereby we contribute
more or less ourselves to the general disorder. Our
superficiality and our inconstancy prevent us from
seeing what an evil sin is; precisely because it strikes
so deep it cannot be known by those who look only
at the surface. In its manner of ravaging souls and
society, sin is like one of those diseases which affect
vital but hidden organs, and which the sufferer is
Ignorant of even while they near a crisis.
To experience salutary grief, grief for sin, it is
necessary truly to love God Whom sin offends and
sinners whom it destroys. The saints suffered from

132

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

sin in the degree in which they loved God and souls.
St. Catherine of Siena recognised souls in the state
of mortal sin by the insupportable odour which they
exhaled. But to know just how far grief for sin can
go, one must turn to the heart of Mary. Her grief
sprang from an unequalled love for God, for Jesus
crucified, and for souls—a love which surpassed that
of the greatest saints, and even of all the saints
united, a love which had never ceased to grow, a love
which had never been restrained by the slightest
fault or imperfection. If such was Mary’s love, what
must her grief have been!
Unlike us who are so
superficial, she saw with piercing clarity what it was
that caused the loss of so many souls: the concupi­
scence of the flesh, the concupiscence of the eyes, the
pride of life. All sins combined to add to her grief;
all revolts against God, all outbursts of sacrilegious
rage, such as that which reached its paroxysm in the
cry “ Crucify Him ” and in utter hatred of Him Who
is the Light Divine and the Author of Salvation.
Mary’s grief was deep as was her love, both natural
and supernatural, of her Son. She loved Him with a
virginal love, most pure and tender; loved Him as her
only Son, miraculously conceived, and as her God.
To understand Mary’s dolours, one would need to
have received, as did the stigmatics, the impression
of the wounds of the Saviour; one would need to have
relived with the mystics His physical and moral
sufferings, and to have shared with Him the hours
of His Passion and Death. We shall try once more to
speak of this matter when considering Mary as
Mediatrix and Coredemptrix, and the reparation
which she offered with, and by, and in her Son.
Mary’s love in her dolours was meritorious for us
and for her also. By her sufferings she grew in
charity as well as in faith, and hope, and religion;

MARY’S INCREASE IN GRACE AFTER THE INCARNATION

133

she grew in fact in all the virtues—those of humility,
and meekness, and supernatural courage suggesting
themselves especially to the mind.
Her virtue in
suffering was heroic in the highest degree. Thereby
she became Queen of Martyrs.
On the hill of Calvary, grace and charity overflowed
from the Heart of Jesus to the heart of His mother.
He it was Who sustained her, just as it was she who
sustained St. John. Jesus offered up her martyrdom
as well as His own, and she offered herself with her
Son, Who was more dear to her than her own life.
If the least of the acts of Nazareth increased Mary’s
charity, what must have been the effect of her par­
ticipation in the Cross of Jesus!
Pentecost
The glorious resurrection of Our Saviour and His
different apparitions all marked new stages in Mary’s
spiritual growth. She saw in them the realisation of
so many of Jesus’ prophecies. She saw in them too
His victory over death, a sign of Good Friday’s victory
over Satan.
The mystery of the Ascension raised Mary’s
thoughts still higher heavenwards. The evening of
that day, when she withdrew to the Supper-room
with the Apostles (Acts i, 14) she must have felt, as
they too did, how empty the world was without Jesus.
The difficulty of converting the pagan world loomed
up in all its magnitude. The presence of Our Lady
helped the Apostles to face it. In union with Jesus
she merited, de congruo, the graces they were about
to receive in this room where the Blessed Eucharist
had been instituted, where they had been ordained
priests, and where the Master had appeared to them
after His Resurrection.

134

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

The day of Pentecost comes. The Holy Ghost de­
scends on Mary and on the Apostles in the form of
tongues of fire, to give the final enlightenment
concerning the mysteries of man’s salvation, and to
impart the strength needed for the immense and ar­
duous task that awaited its accomplishment. On
that day, the Apostles were confirmed in grace. St.
Peter went forth to manifest by his preaching that
he had received fulness of knowledge of the mystery
of Jesus Christ, Saviour and Author of newness of
life. One and all, from being fearful the apostles
became courageous, rejoicing to suffer for the name
of Jesus. How marvellous must not Mary’s progress
have been—she who was to be on earth, as it were,
the heart of the infant Church !
Now that Jesus has ascended to heaven no one will
participate as she in His love for His Father and for
souls. By her prayer, her contemplation, her cease­
less generosity, she will, in some way, sustain the
souls of the Twelve, following them as a mother in
the labours and difficulties of their apostolate, right
up to the crown of martyrdom. They are her sons.
The Church will later call her Queen of Apostles.
Even now she cares for them and makes their work
fruitful by a continual oblation of herself in union
with the sacrifice of Jesus perpetuated on the altar.

Mary, Model of Devotion to the Eucharist
It is most becoming to insist here a little on what
Holy Mass and Holy Communion, received from the
hands of St. John, must have meant for Our Blessed
Lady.
Why had Mary been committed to St. John on
Calvary rather than to the holy women who were

MARY’S INCREASE IN GRACE AFTER THE INCARNATION

135

also at the foot of the Cross? The reason was that
St. John was a priest and had a treasure which they
could not give her, the treasure of the Eucharist.
Why among the Apostles was John chosen rather
than Peter? One reason is that John alone remained
at the Cross, drawn and held there by a strong sweet
grace. Another is that he is, as St. Augustine re­
marks, the model of the contemplative life, of the
interior and hidden life which had always been that
of Mary and which would be hers till death. Mary’s
life will be cast in a very different mould from that
of Peter, for she will have no share in ruling the
Church. Her vocation will be to contemplate and to
love Our Saviour in His sacramental presence, and to
obtain by her unceasing prayer the spread of the
faith and the salvation of souls. She will be thus in a
very real sense the heart of the infant Church, for
none other will enter as she into the depths and the
strength of the love of Jesus (46).
Let us consider her in this hidden life, especially at
the hour when John celebrated Holy Mass in her
presence. Mary has not the priestly character; she
cannot perform the priestly functions. But she has
received, in the words of M. Olier, “ the plenitude of
the priestly spirit,” which is the spirit of Christ the
Redeemer. Thus she is able to penetrate deeper than
(46) St. Thomas says, Illa, q.8, a.l, ad 3, speaking of the
Mystical Body of Christ: “The head has evident superiority
over the members, whereas the heart exercises a hidden in­
fluence. That is why the Holy Ghost Who vivifies and unifies
the Church invisibly is compared to the heart, and Christ, in
Ills visible nature, is compared to the head.” From another
point of view, we say that the Holy Ghost is like the soul of
the Church, since the invisible soul is whole in the whole body
and whole in each of its parts, though exercising its higher
functions in the head. Mary’s influence has been well com­
pared to that of the heart, since it remains hidden, and since
It. is principally of the affective order—the Influence of a
mother.

136

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

St. John himself into the meaning of the mysteries
he celebrates. Besides, her dignity of Mother of God
is greater than that of ordained priest; she has given
us both the Priest and the Victim of the sacrifice of
the Cross and she has offered herself with Him.
Holy Mass was for her, in a degree we can only sus­
pect, the memorial and the continuation of the
sacrifice of the Cross. A sword of sorrow had pierced
her heart on Calvary, the strength and tenderness of
her love for Jesus making her suffer a true
martyrdom. She suffered so much that the memory
of Calvary could never grow dim, and each Holy Mass
was a fresh renewal of all she lived through there.
Mary found the same Victim on the altar when John
said Mass. She found the same Jesus, really present;
not present in image only, but in the substance of His
Body with His Soul and Divinity. True, there was no
immolation in blood, but there was a sacramental
immolation, realised through the separate consecra­
tion of the bread and the wine: Jesus’ blood is shed
sacramentally on the altar. How expressive is that
figure of His death for her who cannot forget, for her
who bears always in the depths of her soul the image
of her Son, outraged and wounded, for her who hears
yet the insults and the blasphemies offered Him. St.
John’s Mass with Mary present at it, was the most
striking memorial of the Cross as it is perpetuated in
its substance on our altars.
Mary Found in the Sacrifice of the Mass the Point
of Contact of the Cults of Heaven and Earth

It is the same Victim Who is offered at Holy Mass
and Who, in Heaven, offers His glorious wounds to the
Heavenly Father. The Body of Christ never ceases

MARY’S INCREASE IN GRACE AFTER THE INCARNATION

137

to be in heaven, it is true. It does not come down from
heaven, in the strict sense of the terms, on to the
altar. But, without being multiplied, It is made really
present by the transubstantiation of the substance
of the bread and the wine into Itself.
There is the same principal priest, or offerer, in
heaven and on earth also, “ always living to make
intercession for us ” (Hebrews vii, 25). The celebrant
of the Mass is but a minister who speaks in Jesus’
name. When he says “ This is my body ” it is Jesus
Who speaks by him.
It is Jesus Who, as God, gives .to the words their
power of transubstantiation. It is Jesus as Man
Who, by an act of His holy soul, transmits the divine
power and Who continues to offer Himself thus for
us as principal priest. If the human minister ever
happens to be slightly distracted, the principal
Offerer is not distracted, and Jesus as Man, continu­
ing to offer Himself sacramentally for us, sees all that
we miss—sees all the spiritual influence exercised by
each Mass on the faithful present and absent, and on
the souls in Purgatory.
Jesus continues to offer Himself in each Mass, the
actual offering being made through the hands of His
minister. The soul of the sacrifice of our altars is the
interior oblation which is always a living reality in
His Sacred Heart; through that oblation He applies
to us continually the merits and satisfaction of
Calvary. The saints have sometimes seen Jesus in
the priest’s place at the moment of consecration.
Mary knew the full truth better than any of the
saints. Better than any of them she knew that the
soul of every Mass was the oblation that lived in her
Son’s Heart. She understood too that when, this
world having reached its term, the last Mass would
have been said, Jesus’ interior oblation would con­

138

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

tinue for ever, not now as supplication but as adora­
tion and thanksgiving—as the eternal cult
expressed even now at Mass by the Sanctus in honour
of the thrice-holy God.
How did Mary unite herself to the oblation of
Jesus, the principal priest? She united herself to it,
as we shall explain later, as universal mediatrix and
co-redemptrix. She continued to unite herself to it
as at the foot of the Cross—in a spirit of adoring
reparation, in petition and thanksgiving. Model of
victim-souls, she offered up the anguish she suffered
at those denials of the divinity of Jesus which
prompted St. John to write his fourth Gospel. She
offered thanks for the institution of the Blessed
Eucharist and for all the benefits of which It is the
source. She prayed for the conversion of sinners,
for the progress of the good, for the help the Apostles
needed in their work and their sufferings.
In all that Mary is our model, teaching us how to
become adorers in spirit and in truth.
What shall we say of Mary’s communions? The
principal condition for a fervent communion is to
hunger for the Eucharist. The saints hungered for It.
When Holy Communion was denied St. Catherine of
Siena, her desires obtained that a portion of the large
Host broke off unknown to the celebrant and was
carried miraculously to the saint. But Mary’s hunger
for the Eucharist was incomparably greater and
more intense than that of the saints. Let us con­
template reverently the strong loving desire which
drew Mary to Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament.
Every soul is drawn towards God, for He is the
Sovereign Good for Whom we have been made. But
the consequences of sin—original and actual—and of
innumerable imperfections make God appear un­
attractive in our eyes and weaken our inborn desire

MARY’S INCREASE IN GRACE AFTER THE INCARNATION

13&

for union with Him.
Mary’s soul, however, knew
nothing of the consequences of sins and imperfec­
tions; nothing ever checked the godwards tendency
of her wonderful charity. Forgetting herself, Mary
turned firmly towards God, with a firmness that grew
daily as did her merits. The Holy Ghost dwelling in
her moved her to give herself to God and to be united
to Him. Her love of God, like an intense thirst, was
accompanied by a sweet suffering which ceased only
when she died of love and entered on the union of
eternity. Such was her desire of the Eucharist.
Jesus for His part desired most ardently to con­
summate Mary’s holiness, to communicate to her the
overflowing riches of His Sacred Heart. If He could
suffer in glory, He would suffer from the resistance we
offer to the same desire He has in our regard. But He
found no resistance in Mary. And so He was able to
communicate Himself to her in the most intimate
way possible for two lives to be fused into one on
earth : Jesus’ union with Mary was a reflection of the
sanctifying union of the Word with the Sacred
Humanity, an image of the communion of the Three
Divine Persons in the one infinite Truth and the one
limitless Goodness.
Mary became again the pure living tabernacle of
the Lord when she communicated—a tabernacle
which knew and loved; one a thousand times more
precious than any golden ciborium; a true tower of
ivory, house of gold, and ark of the alliance.
What were the effects of Mary’s communion? They
surpassed anything St. Teresa recounts of trans­
forming union in the Seventh Mansion of the In­
terior Castle. Transforming union has been compared,
in its power to transform the soul in some way into
God by knowledge and love, to the union of fire with
a piece of iron, or that of light with the air it

140

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

illumines. Rays of supernatural warmth and light
came forth from the soul of Jesus and communicated
themselves to Mary’s intellect and will. Mary could
not take the credit to herself for the sublime effects
they produced in her. Rather did she give praise on
their account to Him Who was their principle and
end: “ He that eateth me, the same also shall live by
me ” : he who eats my flesh lives by me and for me,
just as I live by my Father and for my Father.
Each of Mary’s communions surpassed the pre­
ceding one in fervour and, producing in her a great
increase of charity, disposed her to receive her next
Communion with still greater fruit. Mary’s soul
moved ever more swiftly Godwards the nearer she
approached to God; that was her law of spiritual
gravitation. She was, as it were, a mirror which
reflected back on Jesus the light and warmth which
she received from Him; concentrated them also, so as
to direct them towards souls.
In everything she was the perfect model of
Eucharistic devotion. If we turn to her she will teach
us how to adore and to make reparation; she will
teach us what should be our desire of the Blessed
Eucharist. From here we can learn how to pray at
Holy Mass for the great intentions of the Church, and
how to thank God for the graces without number He
has bestowed on us and on mankind.

Article VI
Mary’s Intellectual Endowments
Principal Virtues

and her

To understand Mary’s fulness of grace, especially
towards the end of her life on earth, it is necessary

MARY’S INTELLECTUAL ENDOWMENTS AND HER PRINCIPAL VIRTUES 141

to examine the perfection of her intellect. We must
consider her faith, enlightened by the gifts of
Wisdom, Understanding and Knowledge. It will be
necessary then to pass on to a consideration of some
of her principal virtues, which, through their con­
nection with her charity, were in her soul in a
degree proportionate to her fulness of grace. To
conclude this section we shall glance briefly at the
gratuitous gifts of intellect which she received, par­
ticularly those of prophecy and the discernment of
spirits.
Mary’s Faith Enlightened by the Gifts

The natural perfection of Mary’s soul resulted in
very great powers of penetration in her intellect, as
well as moral rectitude in her will and her lower
faculties. These natural endowments continued to
develop throughout the course of her life.
As regards her faith, it perceived its object in an
exceptionally penetrating manner because of the
revelation made to her at the Annunciation con­
cerning the mysteries of the Incarnation and the
Redemption, and because also of her daily intercourse
with the Word made Flesh. Subjectively also her
faith was remarkable, being strong, certain and
prompt in its assent. In fact, Mary received the virtue
of faith in the highest degree in which it was infused
into any soul on earth, and the same must be said of
her hope also. Jesus, having the beatific vision from
the first instant of His conception, had neither faith
nor hope: to Him belonged the full light of vision
and full undelayed possession.
Hence, the sublimity of Mary’s faith surpasses our
understanding. She did not hesitate at the Annun-

142

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

elation but believed at once the very moment the
mystery of the redemptive Incarnation was
sufficiently proposed to her, so that St. Elisabeth can
say soon after : “ And blessed art thou that hast be­
lieved, because these things shall be accomplished
that were spoken to thee by the Lord.” In Bethlehem
she sees her Son born in a stable and believes that
He is the Creator of the world; she sees all the weak­
ness of His infant body and believes in His
omnipotence; when He commences to essay His first
words she believes His infinite wisdom; when the
Holy Family takes flight from Herod’s anger she
believes that Jesus is the King of Kings and Lord of
Lords, as St. John would later say. At the Circum­
cision and the Presentation in the Temple her faith
in the mystery of the Redemption expands.
Her
whole life on earth was passed in a dark brightness,
the darkness arising not from human error and
ignorance but from the very transcendence of the
light itself—a darkness which was, in consequence,
revealing of the heights of the mysteries contem­
plated by the blessed in heaven.
She is at the foot of the Cross on Calvary, though
all the Apostles, St. John only excepted, have fled;
she stands erect there, firm in her faith that her Son
is the Son of God, that He is the Lamb of God Who
is even then taking away the sins of the world, that
though apparently defeated, He is Victor over Satan
and sin, and that in three days He will conquer death
by His resurrection. Mary’s act of faith on Calvary
was the greatest ever elicited on earth, for the hour
was unspeakably dark and its object was the most
difficult of all—that Jesus had won the greatest of
victories by making the most complete of
immolations.
Her faith was aided then by the gifts of the Holy

MAffY’S INTELLECTUAL ENDOWMENTS AND HER PRINCIPAL VIRTUES

143

Ghost. By the gift of Understanding she read far
into the revealed mysteries, far into their inner
meaning, their harmony, their appropriateness,
their consequences. She was particularly favoured
in her understanding of the mysteries in which she
herself had a part to play, such as the virginal con­
ception of Christ, His Incarnation, and the whole
economy of the Redemption. Brought as she had
been into close contact with the Three Divine Persons,
the mystery of the Blessed Trinity revealed more of
its depths to her than to any other mere human
being.
By the gift of Wisdom the Holy Ghost enabled her
to judge the things of God through a certain
connaturality or sympathy which is based on charity
(47). She knew therefore in an experimental
manner how truly the great mysteries answer to our
highest aspirations, and how grace continually
awakens new desires in us so as to prepare the way
for clearer light and more burning love. She relished
the mysteries in the measure of her ever-growing
charity, her humility, and her purity. In her were
verified most strikingly the words “ God gives His
grace to the humble ... Blessed are the pure of heart
for they shall see God.” Even on earth the pure have
some vision of their Father in heaven.
By the gift of Knowledge the Holy Ghost taught
her to judge temporal things, at times as symbols of
eternal and divine things (as, for example, to see the
heavens telling the glory of God) or again in their
nothingness and frailty so as to appreciate eternal
life all the more by contrast.

(47) Cf. Ila Ilae, q.45, a.2.

144

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

Special Privileges of Her Intellect

Besides faith and the gifts of the Holy Ghost which
all the faithful have as part of their spiritual
organism, Mary, like many of the saints, had the
gratiae gratis datae, or charismata which are given
principally for the benefit of others rather than for
the benefit of the person who receives them. These
charismata are exterior signs having as purpose to
confirm revelation or holiness, rather than fresh
forms of sanctity. That is why they are distinct
from grace, the infused virtues, and the gifts, all of
which belong to a higher order (48).
Regarding the charismata, theologians usually
admit the principle: Mary received all privileges
which it was becoming for her to receive, and which
were not incompatible with her state, in a higher
degree than the saints did. In other words, we cannot
conceive of her as being inferior to the saints in the
matter of charismata, seeing how much she sur­
passed them in the matter of holiness.
The principle is not, however, to be taken in a
material sense. If, for example, certain saints have
lived long months without food, if they have walked
on the waters to come to another’s aid, it does not
follow that Mary did the same; it is enough if she
received grace of a higher order in which such lower
graces were contained and surpassed (49). At the
same time, in virtue of the principle just now
enunciated, we must assert that she had certain
charismata, either certainly or very probably.
First of all, she had by a special privilege a know­
ledge of the Scriptures greater than that of any of
(48) Cf. la Ilae, q.III, a.5.
(49) Cf. E. Dublanchy, Diet, de Théol. Cath., article Marie,
cols. 2367-2368; 2409-2413.

MARY’S INTELLECTUAL ENDOWMENTS AND HER PRINCIPAL VIRTUES

145

the saints, particularly in what concerned the
Messiah, the redemptive Incarnation, the Blessed
Trinity, the life of grace and of the virtues, and the
life of eternity. And even though Mary did not
receive the commission to share in the official
ministry of the Church, she must have enlightened
St. John and St. Luke concerning the infancy and
the hidden life of Jesus (50).
She must have known in a clear and penetrating
manner all that was useful about objects of the
natural order. Though she need not have known the
chemical formula of such things as salt or water, it
would still be possible for her to know their natural
properties, and still more their higher symbolism.
For Mary’s knowledge of natural objects was of the
kind which throws light upon the great religious and
moral truths, such as the existence of God, His
universal Providence extending to the minutest de­
tails, the spirituality and immortality of the soul, free
will and moral responsibility, the principles and
conclusions of the moral law, the relation between
nature and grace. She saw clearly the finality of
nature, the order of creation, and the subordination
of every created cause to the First Cause. She saw
that every good thing comes from God, even the free
determination of our salutary and meritorious acts;
she saw too that no one person would be better than
another were he not more loved by God—a principle
which is at the root of all humility and thanksgiving.
The knowledge which Mary had while still on earth
(50) Cajetan remarks in his commentary on the Illa, q.27,
a.5: “Posset tamen dici quod non publica doctrina, sed
familiari instructione, quam constat mulieribus non esse pro­
hibitam. B. Virgo aliqua particularia facta explicavit
Apostolis.’’ This she did better and more frequently than
Mary Magdalen, who obtained the title Apostolorum apostolo
through having announced the Resurrection to the Apostles.
K

146

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

had limits, especially at the beginning. She did not,
for example, understand the full import of what
Jesus said about His Father’s business when she found
Him in the Temple. But, as has been often said, the
limits were limits, not gaps. Hence she was in no sense
ignorant, for the limits did not deprive her of the
knowledge of anything she should have known at the
time. God’s Mother knew at every stage of her life
all that it was becoming for her to know.
Nor was she subject to error. She was never
precipitate in judging; if she had not sufficient light
she suspended her judgement; if she was not sure
about a thing she was satisfied to affirm that it was
likely or probable. For example, when she thought
It likely that Jesus was not in the company of her
friends and relatives on the occasion when she lost
Him, her belief was a very likely one indeed—though
in point of fact it was not true—and in looking on it
as likely Mary did not err.
We have seen earlier (Chapter II, art. 5) that it is
very probable that she had infused knowledge from
the time she was in her mother’s womb. We have
seen too that it is equally probable that she was never
deprived of it in the course of her life, and that many
theologians hold that she had the use of it even
during her sleeping hours.

Among Mary’s gratuitous gifts we must include
that of prophecy. An example of its exercise can be
found in the Magnificat·. “For behold from hence­
forth all generations shall call me blessed.”
The
realisation of this prophecy in the course of ages is
as evident as is the meaning of the words themselves.
It is more than likely that this was not the only occa­
sion on which Mary used her prophetic gift since
prophecy is so common among the saints, as for

MARY’S INTELLECTUAL ENDOWMENTS AND HER PRINCIPAL VIRTUES

147

example St. John Bosco and the Curé of Ars (51).
Finally, she had, like so many saints, the gift of
discernment of spirits, by which to recognise the
spirit of God and to distinguish it from diabolical
illusion and natural exaltation. It enabled her also
to read the secrets of hearts, especially when someone
came to ask counsel of her. Thus her advice was
always sound, opportune and practical.
Many theologians hold that Mary had the gift of
tongues when she travelled in foreign countries—in
Egypt, for example, and also in Ephesus (52). There
is still greater reason for believing that she had this
gift after the Assumption, for in her apparitions at
Lourdes and La Salette and elsewhere she spoke the
dialect of the district—the only one understood by
those to whom she appeared.
The question has been asked if Mary enjoyed on
earth—even for a few instants—the face to face
vision of the divine essence as the blessed in heaven
do. On one point theologians are unanimous
against Véga and Franciscus Verra: unlike her
Divine Son, she had not that vision in a permanent
way on earth, for if she had it permanently she would
not have had the virtue of faith. But it is more diffi­
cult to say whether or not she enjoyed the beatific
vision from time to time. It is true that she must
have had an intellectual vision of the Trinity higher
(51) For this same reason many theologians teach that
Mary had, particularly after the Ascension, the gift of miracu­
lous healing and that she used it to lighten the sorrows of the
uffllcted and to help the unfortunate who had recourse to her
or whom she met.
She was on earth the consoler of the
ifflicted in such a manner as to manifest her grea.t sanctity.
This was the opinion of St. Albert the Great. St. Antoninus,
j nd Suarez, and Is common in most of the present-day
manuals of Mariology.
(52) Such was the teaching of St. Albert the Great, St.
Antoninus. Gerson. Suarez, Cornelius a Lapide. Many modern
i ioologlans are of the same opinion.

148

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

than that described by St. Teresa in the Seventh
Mansion. But the vision of which St. Teresa speaks
does not transcend faith, and is therefore immeasur­
ably inferior to that of the blessed.
Some light is thrown on the problem by what we
know of St. Paul. St. Augustine and St. Thomas (53)
teach that it is probable that St. Paul enjoyed the
beatific vision momentarily when, in his own words,
he was “ caught up to the third heaven .. . and heard
secret words which it is not given to man to utter ”
(II Cor. xii, 2). The two great doctors both mention
that according to the Jews the third heaven was not
merely the higher air, but the spiritual heaven in­
habited by God, where He is seen face to face by the
angels—Paradise, as St. Paul says in the same
context. Hence they conclude that St. Paul, having
been called to be the Doctor of the Gentiles and of
grace, was probably favoured by a brief moment of
the beatific vision, since grace cannot be understood
fully without having seen the glory of which it is the
beginning. The authority of two such Doctors, them­
selves favoured with mystical graces and thus especi­
ally competent to speak of such matters, is sufficient
to constitute serious probability. It must, however, be
admitted that neither Estius nor Cornelius a Lapide
accept such an exegesis of St. Paul’s text. Modern
commentators tend to be non-committal.
To return to Our Lady, we agree entirely with Fr.
Hugon when he states that if it is probable that St.
Paul enjoyed the beatific vision momentarily, it is
difficult to see why the same should not be said of
Our Blessed Lady (54), for her divine maternity, her
fulness of grace, and her freedom from every stain
disposed her more perfectly than any saint for the
(53) Ila Ilae, q.175, a.3.
(54) Marie, pleine de grâce 5th edit., 1926. pp. 106 sqq.

MARY’S INTELLECTUAL ENDOWMENTS AND HER PRINCIPAL VIRTUES

149

beatitude of eternity. Hence, even if it is not certain
that she had moments of the beatific vision, it re­
mains very probable (55).
This brief survey will suffice to give some idea of the
rich intellectual gifts which Mary enjoyed on earth.

Mary’s Principal Virtues
We have spoken already of her faith. A few words
may now be said of her hope and her charity, as well
as of the cardinal virtues and the virtues of humility
and meekness.
Her hope, by which she tended to the possession of
God Whom she did not as yet fully possess, was a
perfect confidence and trust which relied not on self
but on the divine mercy and omnipotence. It was
therefore sure (56). And its sureness was increased
by the gift of Piety. For Piety awakens in us a filial
attitude to God, and by it the Holy Ghost “ giveth
testimony to our spirit that we are the sons of God ”
(Rom. viii, 16) and assures us that we can count on
His assistance. It was increased also by the fact that
Mary was confirmed in grace and preserved free from
every shortcoming—lack of confidence as well as
presumption.
Some of the occasions for the exercise of hope in
Mary’s life spring at once to the mind. She exercised
It when, yet a child, she awaited the coming of the
Messiah and the salvation of all peoples; again, when
(55) Cf. E. Dublanchy, Diet. Théol. Cath., article Marie, col
2410: “Probably conferred on Moses and St. Paul, the favour
.'.hould be attributed to Mary also on the principle which allows
us to attribute to her as Mother of God and Co-Redemptrix or
universal Mediatrix every grace conferred on the other saints
i nd in keeping with her dignity.”
<56) Cf. Ila, Hae, q.18, a.4.

150

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

she awaited the time that the secret of the virginal
conception would be revealed to St. Joseph; again,
when she fled into Egypt; again—and most of all—
when on Calvary all seemed lost, but she awaited the
victory which her Son had foretold He would win
over death. Finally, her confidence, her unshaken
hope, sustained the Apostles in their ceaseless labours
for the spread of the Gospel and the conversion of
the pagan world.
Her charity—her love of God in Himself and of souls
for His sake—surpassed even in its beginnings the
charity of all the saints combined, for it was of the
same degree as her fulness of grace. Mary was always
most intimately united to the Father as His best­
beloved daughter, to the Son as His Virgin Mother,
and to the Holy Ghost in a mystic marriage more
perfect than the world had ever known. She was, in
a way beyond all power of understanding, a living
temple of the Trinity, loved by God more than all
creatures, and corresponding perfectly with that love
by consecrating herself fully to Him in the instant of
her conception, and by living thenceforth in the most
complete conformity to His Will.
No disordered passion, no vain fear, no distraction,
checked the surge of her love for God. Her love for
souls was of the same intensity, she offered her Son
and herself unceasingly for souls.
The pages of the Gospel call many occasions to
mind when her charity must have burned with a
special flame—the Annunciation, the finding of Jesus
after the three days’ loss, Calvary ... Well may the
Church apply to Mary the words of Ecclesiasticus
(Eccl. xxiv, 24) “ I am the mother of fair love, and of
fear, and of knowledge, and of holy hope.”
The moral infused virtues are in all souls in the
state of grace in the degree of their charity: pru­

MARY’S INTELLECTUAL ENDOWMENTS AND HER PRINCIPAL VIRTUES 151

dence in the intellect, to make their judgement right
in accordance with God’s law; justice in their will to
prompt them to give every one his due; fortitude and
temperance in their sensitive nature to bring it into
conformity with reason and faith.
The acquired
virtues—which bear the same names—facilitate the
exercise of the corresponding infused virtues.

Mary’s prudence directed all her actions undeviatingly towards her supernatural destiny. All her
actions were deliberate and meritorious Thus the
Church calls her the Virgin most prudent. Aided by
the gift of Counsel she exercised prudence in a
notable manner at the Annunciation when, troubled
at the angel’s word, she wondered what his salutation
could mean, and again when she asked “ How shall
this be done, because I know not man?” Nor was her
prudence less when, the angel having explained his
mission, she accepted God’s will : “ Behold the hand­
maid of the Lord; be it done to me according to thy
word.”
She practised justice in its highest form—that is to
say, justice in regard to God, which is the virtue of
religion aided by the gift of Piety—when she con­
secrated herself to God in the first instant of her
being. She practised it also by her vow of virginity,
her presentation of Jesus to His Father in the Temple,
and her final offering of Him on the Cross. On Calvary
she offered the greatest act of the virtue of religion
in union with Jesus, the perfect sacrifice and the
holocaust of infinite value
Justice was always wedded to mercy in Mary. As
did her Son, she forgave all the wrongs done to her
and showed the greatest compassion for sinners.
Then as now, she was the Mother of Mercy, Our Lady
of Perpetual Succour. The words of the psalmist find

152

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

in her their realisation : “ The earth is full of the
mercy of God.”
Fortitude, that firmness of soul which can with­
stand the greatest dangers, the most difficult tasks,
and the cruellest afflictions, was found in Mary in a
no less eminent degree than the other virtues. At the
foot of the Cross she did not flinch nor weaken, but
stood courageously, as St. John tells us. Cajetan
wrote a special tract, De spasmo Virginis, refuting the
idea that Mary fainted on the road to Calvary. In this
he was at one with Medina, Toletus, Suarez and with
theologians generally, who all agree that Mary did
not collapse under her grief. By her courageous
bearing of trials Mary merited to be called Queen of
Martyrs. She shared more intimately in Jesus’
suffering by her inner union with Him than did all
the martyrs by their exterior afflictions. This thought
is called to mind by the Church on the Feast of the
Compassion of Our Lady and the Feast of the Seven
Dolours, particularly in the Siabat Mater·.

Fac ut portem Christi
mortem,
Passionis fac consortem
Et plagas recolere.

Fac me plagis vulnerari,
Fac me cruce inebriari,
Et cruore Filii.

Let me to my latest breath,
In my body bear the death
Of that dying Son of thine.

Wounded with His every
wound,
Steep my soul till it hath
swoon’d
In His very blood away.
—Fr. Caswall.

Temperance in its different forms, especially in that
of perfect virginity, appeared in her angelic purity.
In Mary the soul reigned over the body, the higher

MARY’S INTELLECTUAL ENDOWMENTS AND HER PRINCIPAL VIRTUES

153

faculties over the senses. The image of God was re­
flected in her as in a mirror.
Her humility never had to struggle against the
slightest movement of pride or vanity. She recog­
nised that of herself she was nothing and could do
nothing in the supernatural order. Therefore she
bowed down before the Divine Majesty and before all
that there was of God in creation. She placed all her
greatness in God alone, realising thus the words of
the Missal: Deus humilium celsitudo.
At the Annunciation she speaks of herself as the
handmaid of the Lord, and in the Magnificat she
thanks the Most High for having regarded her lowli­
ness. On the day of the Purification she submits to a
law which did not bind’ her. Her whole life long,
humility was manifested in her bearing, her modesty,
her voluntary poverty, in the lowly tasks she per­
formed—and all that, even though she had received
graces as no other mere human ever did.
The Liturgy reminds us too of her meekness : Virgo
singularis, inter omnes mitis. She uttered no word of
reproach against those who crucified Jesus, but in
union with Him she forgave them and prayed for
them. Here we have meekness at its highest united
to consummate fortitude.
Such are, then, the intellectual endowments and the
principal virtues with which Mary was adorned. They
made her a model of the contemplative life, one
characterised by devotion to the Incarnate Word, and,
through participation in His redemptive work, one in
whom we find the most universal of all hidden
apostolates (57).
(57) For a treatment of Mary’s virtues cf. Justin de Miéchow,
O.P.; R. Bernard, O.P., Le Mystère de Marie, Paris, 1933; Rambaud, O.P., Douce Vierge Marie, Lyons, 1939; Journet in Notre
Dame des Sept Douleurs; Lallement and Sertillanges in Mater
Misericordiae.

154

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

What we have said in this chapter about Mary’s
principal virtues and her intellectual endowments
shows in a concrete way the general plan of her
spiritual progress. It remains to speak in the next
chapter of her final fulness of grace at the moment
of her death and of her entry into heaven. We shall,
then, have followed the stages of her spiritual life
from her Immaculate Conception to her final glorifi­
cation, a life which in its progress resembles a river
rising at a great height and causing the fertility of
the regions through which it passes, before it plunges
at length into the mighty ocean.

Chapter IV
The Final Plenitude of Mary’s Grace

The plan of this chapter will be: to speak first of
Mary’s fulness of grace at the time of her death; then
to recall the teaching of the Church concerning her
Assumption; finally to treat of her fulness of grace as
it unfolded itself in heaven.

Article I
Mary’s Fulness

of

Grace at the Moment of Death

Bossuet remarks (1) that Mary was left in the
world after Jesus to console the Church. This she did
by her prayers and ever-increasing merits which
were the support of the Apostles in their labours and
trials as well as the hidden source of the fecundity
of all they did for souls.
We have seen already that in Mary’s case death
was not a consequence of original sin, but simply of
human nature as such. Man was not made immortal
at the beginning otherwise than by a special privi­
lege. The Incarnate Word willed to take passible
flesh (2). Mary’s flesh was passible too. Thus the
(1) 2nd Sermon for the Feast of the Assumption.
(2) This presupposes the sin of the first man; in fact, it is
one of the most convincing reasons for asserting that, in the
actual order of Providence, the Word would not have become
flesh had not man sinned, for the actual efficacious decree of

156

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

deaths of Jesus and Mary were consequences of the
inherent weakness of human nature left to itself and
unsustained by any preternatural gift. Jesus, how­
ever, mastered death by accepting it for our salvation.
Mary united herself to Him in His death, making for
us the sacrifice of His life in the most generous
martyrdom of heart the world has ever known after
that of Our Saviour. And when, later on, the hour
of her own death arrived, the sacrifice of her life had
been already made. It remained but to renew it in
that most perfect form which tradition speaks of as
the death of love, a death, that is to say, in which the
soul dies not simply in grace or in God’s love, but of
a calm and supremely strong love which draws the
soul, now ripe for heaven, away from the body to be
united to God in immediate and eternal vision.
Mary’s last moments are described by St. John
Damascene (3) in the words “ She died an extremely
peaceful death.” St. Francis de Sales’ chapters in
his treatise on the Love of God (ch. xiii and xiv) are
an eloquent commentary on the words of St. John
Damascene :
“ The Blessed Virgin, Mother of God, died of love
for her Son ... It is impossible to conceive of her
death as having been anything except a death of love,
which is the most noble of all deaths and the fitting
crown of the most noble of all lives ... If the early
Christians were said to have but one heart and one
soul because of their perfect mutual love, if St. Paul
lived no longer for himself but Christ lived in him
because of the intense union of his heart with the
heart of his Master . .. how much more true is it that
the Incarnation bears on the Incarnation as it was realised
hic et nunc, that is to say, in carne passibili, which even on
the admission of the Scotists presupposes Adam’s sin.
(3) Homiliae duae de dormitione Virginis Mariae. Cf. also
St. Brigid of Sweden, Revelations, Bk. VI, c. 62.

MARY’S FULNESS OF GRACE AT THE MOMENT OF DEATH

157

the Blessed Virgin and her Son had but one soul, one
heart, and one life ... so that her Son lived in her.
Mother most loving and most loved that could be . . .
of a love incomparably higher than that of angels
and men in the measure in which the titles of only
mother and only Son are higher than all names that
are united in love.
But if this mother lived by the life of her Son, she
died also by His death; for as the life is, so is the
death . . . Retaining in her memory all the most lov­
able mysteries of the life and death of her Son, and
receiving always the most ardent inspirations which
her Son, the Sun of Justice, poured out on men in the
noon-day ardour of His charity . . . she was at length
consumed by the sacred fire of this charity, as a holo­
caust of sweetness.
And thus she died, her soul
ravished and transported in the arms of the love of
Jesus . . .
She died of a most sweet and tranquil love . . . The
love of God increased every moment in the virginal
heart of our glorious Lady, but in a sweet, peaceful,
and continuous way, without agitation, nor shocks,
nor any violence . . . like a great river which, finding
no obstacles in the level plain, flows along effortlessly.
Just as iron, if not hindered, is drawn strongly but
sweetly by the magnet, and the attraction increases
according as it is drawn more close to it, so the
Blessed Virgin, being in no way hindered in the opera­
tion of the love of her Son, united herself to Him in
an incomparable union by sweet, peaceful and effort­
less ecstasies ... So that the death of the Virgin was
more peaceful than we can conceive, her Son drawing
her gently by the odour of His ointments ... Love had
caused Mary the pangs of death on Calvary; it was
only just, then, that death should cause her the
highest delights of love.”

158

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

Bossuet, in his turn, voices the same sentiments in
Iris first sermon for the Feast of the Assumption.
“ If to love Jesus and to be loved by Jesus are two
things which draw down the divine blessing on souls,
what a sea of graces must have inundated the soul of
Mary. Who can describe the impetuosity of that
mutual love in which all that is tender in nature
concurred with all that is efficacious in grace? Jesus
never tired of seeing Himself loved by His Mother:
Mary never thought she had had enough of the love
of her Son. She asked no grace from her Son except
that of loving Him, and that fact drew down more
graces on her.
Compare, if you can, with her love the holy im­
patience she experienced to be united to her Son . . .
St. Paul wished to burst at once the bond of the flesh
so as to be with his Master at the right hand of the
Father, and how much greater must have been the
longing of a maternal heart ! The absence of a year
was enough to pierce the heart of the mother of
Tobias with sorrow, and what must have been the
regret of Mary when she felt herself so long separated
from a Son she loved so well!
When she saw St.
Stephen and so many others depart from this world
she must well have asked her Son why He wished to
leave her the last of all. He had brought her to the
foot of the Cross to see Him suffer, and would He delay
to allow her to see Him enthroned? If only He would
allow her love its way, it would soon withdraw her
soul from her body to unite it to Him in Whom she
lived.
That love was so ardent, so strong, so inflamed,
that not a desire for heaven sprang from it which
was not capable of drawing with it Mary’s soul.
Thus, Mary yielded her holy and blessed soul peace­

THE ASSUMPTION OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN

159

fully and without violence into the hands of her Son.
Just as the least touch gathers the ripe fruit, so was
gathered her blessed soul, to be at once carried to
heaven; thus the divine Virgin died in a movement
of the love of God.”
That holy death reveals the final fulness of Mary’s
grace, a fulness which corresponded wonderfully to
that initial fulness which had not ceased to grow
from the moment of the Immaculate Conception. It
disposed her for the consummated fulness of heaven
which is always proportionate to the merits acquired
at the moment of death.

Article II
The Assumption

of the

Blessed Virgin

What is meant by the Assumption? The whole
Church understands by the term that the Blessed
Virgin, soon after her death and glorious resurrec­
tion, was taken up body and soul to heaven to be
forever throned above the angels and saints. The
term Assumption is used rather than Ascension since,
unlike Jesus Who ascended to heaven by His own
power, Mary was lifted up by God to the degree of
glory for which she had been predestined.
Was the Assumption capable of being perceived by
the senses, and if there were witnesses—the apostles
and St. John in particular—had they ocular evidence
of it? Certainly there was something of the
sense-perceptible order about the Assumption, since
it was the taking up of Mary’s body to heaven. But
the term of that taking up, that is, the entry to

160

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

heaven and the exaltation of Mary above all the
saints, was invisible and inaccessible to the senses.
It can be admitted that did certain witnesses find
the tomb of the Mother of God empty after her
burial, and did they later witness her resurrection
and her being raised up in the skies, they would have
been able to presume that she entered heaven and
that Our Blessed Lord had associated her with the
glory of His Ascension. But a presumption is not
certitude. Mary’s body could have been transported,
for all their evidence proved, into a place not visible
to human eyes—to the place, for example, in which
Jesus’ risen body was between His different appari­
tions.
But if a presumption is not certitude, how was Our
Lady’s entry into heaven ever known with certainty?
For that a divine revelation was required. St. Thomas
remarks that there was such a revelation in the case
of the Ascension (4) made through the intermediary
of the angels who said : “Ye men of Galilee, why stand
you looking up to heaven? This Jesus Who is taken
up from you to heaven, shall so come, as you have
seen him going into heaven ” (5).
Besides, without a divine revelation, the Assump­
tion would not be capable of being defined a dogma
of faith, since the motive of faith is the authority of
God in revelation. A private revelation would not
however be sufficient. Private revelations—those
made to St. Joan of Arc, to St. Bernadette, to the
little shepherds of La Salette, are examples of private
revelations—could become well known and public in
that sense. But they are not public in the sense of
being part of the common deposit of revelation and
proposed infallibly by the Church to all the faithful.
(4) Illa, q.55, a.2, ad 2.
(5) Acts 1, 11.

THE ASSUMPTION OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN

161

Neither would a revelation of the kind made to St.
Margaret Mary be sufficient. For her revelations
were private too, and did no more than to draw atten­
tion to certain practical consequences of what was
already known to be an object of faith—the already
accepted truth that the Sacred Heart of Jesus is
entitled to adoration or the cult of latria.
Hence, that the Assumption should have been
known as certain and capable of being proposed to
the whole Church for acceptance, a public revelation
must have must have been made to the apostles, or
at least to one of them—to St. John, for example.
Note that this revelation must have been made to an
apostle since the deposit of common and public
revelation was completed with the death of .the last
apostle. It may have been made explicitly or im­
plicitly. In this latter case its message would have
become more explicit in the course of time.
Let us now see what we have to learn from
Tradition, and also the theological arguments which
have been commonly invoked, at least since the 7th
century.
1st—The documents of Tradition show that the
privilege was at least implicitly revealed.
It is not possible to prove directly from Sacred
.scripture nor from primitive documents that the
privilege of the Assumption was revealed explicitly
to any of the Apostles, for no text of scripture affirms
II explicitly, and there is a similar absence of explicit
testimony in the primitive documents. But it can be
proved indirectly from later documents that there
was at least an implicit revelation since there are
certain facts, dating from the 7th century, which are
explicable in no other way.
From the 7th century, almost the whole Church,
e;r;t and west, celebrated the Feast of the AssumpL

162

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

tion.
Pope Sergius (687-707) ordered a solemn
procession on that day (6). Many theologians and
liturgists contend that it existed already before the
time of St. Gregory the Great (d. 604) and they quote
in support of their opinion the Collect of the Mass
of the Assumption contained in the Sacramentary
known as Gregorian (though it is probably later in
date) where we read the words: “ Nec tamen mortis
nexibus deprimi potuit ” (7). St. Gregory of Tours
seems to imply that the Feast was celebrated in Gaul
in the 6th century (8). At any rate, it was certainly
celebrated there in the 7th century as is proved by
the Missale Gothicum and the Missale Gallicanum
vetus, which date from the beginning of that century
and contain very beautiful prayers for the Feast.
(P. L„ t. LXXII, col. 245-246).
In the East the historian Nicephorus Callistus (9)
recounts that the Emperor Maurice (582-602), con­
temporary and friend of St. Gregory the Great,
ordered the solemn celebration of the Feast on
August 15th. The earliest testimony to the tradi­
tional faith of the East appears to be that of Saint
Modestus, Patriarch of Jerusalem (d. 634) in his
Encomium in dormitionem Deiparae (P.G., t.LXXXVI
col. 3288 sqq.). His account of the matter is that the
apostles were led to the Blessed Virgin by a divine
inspiration and were present at the Assumption.
After him, mention must be made of St. Andrew of
Crete (d 720), monk in Jerusalem and later Arch­
bishop of Crete, the author of the homilies In
(6) Liber Pontificalis, P. L., t. CXXVIII, c. 898; in Duchesne’s
edit., 1.1, p. 376.
(7) P. L., t.LXXVIII, col. 133.
(8) “ Dominus susceptum corpus (Virginis) sanctum in nube
deferre jussit in paradisum ubi, nunc, resumpta anima, cum
electis eius exultans, aeternitatis bonis nullo occasuris fine
perfruitur ” De aloria martyrum, c. iv; P. L„ t.LXXI, coi. 708.
(9) H. E., l.XVII, c.xxviii; P. G., t. CXLVII, coi. 292.

THE ASSUMPTION OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN

163

dormitionem Deiparae (10), of St. Germanus,
Patriarch of Constantinople (d. 733), author of In
sanctam Dei Genitricis dormitionem (11), and finally
of St. John Damascene (d. 760), author of In dormi­
tionem beatae Mariae Virginis (12).
There is no shortage of testimonies from the 8th
century on. Those comonly quoted are Notker of
St. Gall, Fulbert of Chartres, St. Peter Damien,
St. Anselm, Hildebert, Peter Abelard, St. Bernard,
Richard of St. Victor, St. Albert the Great, St. Bona­
venture and St. Thomas (13). The period between
the 7 th and the 9 th centuries witnessed the
development of the liturgy, theology, and preaching
of the Assumption. Pope Leo IV instituted the octave
of the Feast around the year 847. Authors then and
in the succeeding periods regarded the object of the
feast not as a pious belief peculiar to this or that
country, but as an integral part of the general tradi­
tion which went back in the Church to the earliest
times. And not only the authors, but the Church
herself voiced the same doctrine: the simple fact
that the Church celebrated the Feast universally in
East and West, usually on the 15th of August, shows
that she considered the privilege of the Assumption
to be a certain truth taught by her ordinary
magisterium, that is to say, by all the bishops in
union with the supreme pastor. For the faith of the
Church is manifested in her prayer: Lex orandi, lex
credendi. The doctrine of the Assumption has not
yet been solemnly defined, but it is commonly
asserted that it would be at least temerarious or
erroneous to deny it (14). When some few authors
(10)
(11)
(12)
(13)
(14)

P. G., t. XCVII, col. 1053 sqq., 1081 sqq.
P. G., t.XCVIII, col. 345 sqq.
P. G.. t.XCVI, col. 716.
Cf. Merkelbach, Marioloffia, pp. 277 sqq.
That is the teaching of St. Antoninus, Suarez, Lugo,

164

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

proposed to change the Feast of the 15th of August,
Benedict XIV answered: Ecclesiam hanc amplexam
esse sententiam (15).
The attitude of the Church in regard to the
doctrine is not therefore simply one of tolerance : she
proposes it positively in the liturgy and in preaching
both in the East and the West. This universal agree­
ment of the whole Church in celebrating the solemn
feast shows that her ordinary magisterium is at work.
But the ordinary magisterium presupposes at least
that the doctrine has been implicitly revealed :
otherwise, as we have seen, there could be no cer­
tainty that Mary had entered heaven. And we may
go further still and assert that it is probable that the
revelation made to the Apostles, or to one of them,
was even explicit, since otherwise it is hard to explain
the universal tradition in the East and the West
from the 7th century at the latest, which manifests
itself in the celebration of the Feas.t (16). For if the
Baronins, Frassen, Cano, Soto, Billuart, Tanner, Gotti,
Renaudin, Noyon, Hugon. Cf. Merkelbach, Marioloyia, 1939,
pp. 286 sqq.
If theologians do not agree on the note—whether of teme­
rity or error—with which the denial of the Assumption should
be qualified, the reason is that some concentrate on the
theological arguments for the privilege, which may be
considered in the abstract as mere arguments ex convenientia
or in the concrete as an expression of the traditional faith, in
which latter case they are much more cogent. Besides, even
if an occasional author has raised doubts, it may never be
forgotten that since the 7th century the areal majority of
ecclesiastical writers have regarded the Feast of the
Assuniptlon as the expression of the ordinary maaisterium of
the Church.
(15) De Canoniz. Sanct., 1.1, c. 42, no. 151
(16) This is the opinion of Dom P. Renaudin, La Doctrine de
la Assumption, sa définibüité, Paris, 1913, pp. 119 sqq.; of J.
Bellamy, Diet. Théol.. art. Assomption, col. 2139 sqq. and many
other authors including P. Terrien.
Other theologians are
satisfied to assert that there was an implicit revelation, though
not denying the probability of an explicit one, transmitted
orally and by the liturgy.

THE ASSUMPTION OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN

165

revelation had been only implicit at the beginning,
how could it happen that the different bishops and
theologians in the different parts of the Church, both
East and West, would agree that it was implicitly
revealed?
For such agreement much preliminary
work and many preliminary councils would be re­
quired, of which there is absolutely no record. Neither
is there any record of private revelations such as are
sometimes made in order to set the Church’s official
investigations of the deposit of revelation in motion.
Up to the 6th century this privilege of Mary’s was
hidden behind a veil of silence, lest it be misunder­
stood through an unfortunate confusion with the
fables concerning pagan goddesses.
The principal
contribution of the early centuries of the Church to
Mariology was to establish her great title, “ Mother
of God ” and eventually to define it in the Council
of Ephesus.
Thus, we may conclude that everything tends to
indicate that the privilege of the Assumption was
explicitly revealed to the Apostles, or at least to one
of them, and that it was transmitted subsequently by
the oral tradition of the Liturgy; otherwise there is
no explanation of the universal Feast of the Assump­
tion, found so clearly from the 7th century on, by
which time the Assumption itself was already the
object of the ordinary magisterium of the Church.
2nd—The theological reasons usually adduced show
that the Assumption is at least implicitly revealed.
These theological arguments, as well as the scrip­
tural texts on which they are built, may be
considered in two ways: abstractly—from which
point of view many of them are mere arguments ex
convenientia and are not demonstrative—and in the
concrete—that is to say, as expressing concrete facts,
the complexity and richness of which is learned from

166

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

tradition. It is well to note too that even the argu­
ments ex convenientia may be considered from two
points of view : either purely theoretically or as being
themselves at least implicitly revealed and as having
influenced the divine choice .
In this section we shall insist on two arguments
which, taken as expressing Tradition, show that the
privilege of the Assumption is implicitly revealed
(17). As for the eminent dignity of the Mother of
God, though this is the root reason of all Mary’s
privileges, it is not the proximate cause of her
Assumption. Thus it seems to yield only an argument
ex convenientia which is not demonstrative (18). The
first of these two arguments runs as follows :
Mary received fulness of grace and was blessed by
God among women in an exceptional way. But this
exceptional blessing negatives the divine malediction
to bring forth children in pain and to return to dust
(Gen. iii, 16-19). Mary was therefore preserved
through it from corruption in her body: her body
would not return to dust but would be resuscitated in
an anticipated resurrection. Since the two premisses
of this argument are revealed, the conclusion is, ac­
cording to the teaching of most theologians, capable
of being defined.
A thing to be noted in this argument is that the
reasoning process in it is not precisely illative, but
rather explicative since the divine malediction con­
tains the “ into dust thou shalt return ” of Genesis
not as a cause contains an effect but as a whole
contains its parts : “ Into dust thou shalt return ” is
a part of the divine malediction. Thus Mary, blessed
among women, and not falling under the malediction,
(17) Cf. Merkelbach, op. cit., pp. 279 sqq., and Friethoff, O.P.,
De Doctrina Assum-ptionis corporalis B. Mariae Virginis
rationibus theologicis illustrata, Angelicum, 1938, pp. 13 sqq.
(18) Cf. Friethoff, loc. cit.

THE ASSUMPTION OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN

167

would not suffer the corruption of the tomb. The hour
of the resurrection would be anticipated for her, and
her glorious resurrection would be followed by the
Assumption or elevation of her glorified body to
heaven. It is, then, clear that the privilege of the
Assumption is contained implicitly revealed in the
plenitude of grace and the exceptional blessing with
which Mary was favoured.
The second argument is no less cogent. It was put
forward by the many fathers of the Vatican Council
who asked for the definition of the dogma of the
Assumption and was indicated by Pius IX in the Bull
Ineffabilis Deus {19). The argument may be formu­
lated thus:
Christ’s perfect victory over Satan included victory
over sin and death. But Mary, the Mother of God,
was most intimately associated with Jesus on Calvary
in His victory over Satan. Hence she was associated
with Him in His victory over death by her
anticipated resurrection and her Assumption.
In this argument, as in the first one, the premisses
are both revealed, and the argument itself is explica­
tio) For the Vatican Fathers cf. Cone. Vatic, documentorum
collectio, Paderborn, 1872: “Quum juxta Apostolicam doctrinam,
Rom. v, 8; I Cor., xv, 24, 26, 54, 57; Hebr. ii, 14-15, aliisque locis
traditam, triplici victoria de peccato et de peccatorum fruc­
tibus. concupiscentia et morte, veluti ex partibus integrantibus,
constituatur ille triumphus, quem de Satana, antiquo serpente,
Christus retulit; quumque Gen. iii, 15, Deipara exhibeatur
■.Ingulariter associata Filio suo in suo triumpho; accedente
unanimi sanctorum patrum suffragio non dubitamus quin in
praefato oraculo eadem beata Virgo triplici illa victoria prae• gnificetur illustris, adeoque non secus ac de peccato per im­
maculatam Conceptionem et de concupiscentia per virginalem
Maternitatem, sic etiam de inimica morte, singularem
triumphum relatura, per acceleratam similitudinem Filii sui
resurrectionis, ibidem praenuntiata fuerit.”
In the Bull
Ineffabilis we read: “ ... sempiternas contra venenosum serpi ntum inimicitias exercens, ac de ipso plenissime triumphans
...” and again ”... Numquam fuit maledicto obnoxia, ergo
<imcepta immaculata” and victorious in consequence over
death too.

168

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

tive rather than illative : it turns on Christ’s perfect
victory which is a whole containing as its parts
victory over sin and victory over death.
The major premiss is known to be revealed, as the
Fathers of the Vatican Council stated, from many
texts in the Epistles of St. Paul. Among texts from
other books of the New Testament, we may mention
a few from St. John’s gospel. Jesus is “ the Lamb of
God .. who taketh away the sin of the world ” (John
i, 29); He said of Himself “I have overcome the world”
(John xvi, 33); shortly before His Passion He said
“Now is the judgement of the world: now shall the
prince of this world be cast out. And I, if I be lifted
up from the earth, will draw all things to myself ”
(John xii, 31-32). The sacrifice of the Cross offered
in love, the acceptance of humiliation and a most
painful death—these were the victory over Satan and
sin. But death is a consequence of sin. Hence, He
Who had conquered Satan and sin on the Cross would
conquer death by His glorious resurrection.
The minor premiss is revealed also—that is, that
Mary, Mother of God, was associated as closely as
possible on Calvary with Jesus’ perfect victory over
Satan. It is announced mysteriously in Genesis in
the words addressed to Satan : “ I will put enmities
between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her
seed: she shall crush thy head ...” And though that
text alone would not suffice to establish the point, we
have in addition Mary’s words at the Annunciation :
“ Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it done to me
according to Thy word ...” uttered when she con­
sented to be the Mother of the Redeemer. But she
would not have been a worthy mother unless her will
were perfectly conformed to the will of Him Who was
to offer Himself for us. Besides, Simeon told her of
the sufferings to be borne : “ And thy own soul a sword
shall pierce ...” Last of all we read in St. John’s

THE ASSUMPTION OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN

169

gospel: “There stood by the Cross of Jesus, his
mother, and his mother’s sister.” She shared in His
sufferings, therefore, in the measure of her love for
Him: so fully did she share that she is called
Co-redemptrix (20).
There is a very intimate connection between com­
passion and motherhood, for the deepest compassion
is that of a mother, and Mary would not have been a
worthy mother of the Redeemer had she been lacking
in conformity of will with His redemptive oblation.
Since, therefore, Mary was associated very inti­
mately with Jesus in His perfect victory over Satan,
it follows that she was associated also with Him in
the different parts of His triumph, that is to say, in
His victory over sin and over death, sin’s consequence.
It could, perhaps, be objected that it would be
enough were Mary associated in His victory over
death by her final resurrection on the Last Day. To
which the answer can be given that Mary was more
closely associated than anyone else with Jesus in His
perfect victory—or in the perfection of His victory—
over Satan, and that perfect victory included exemp­
tion from bodily corruption, and, in consequence,
anticipated resurrection and assumption into heaven.
(20) Cf. Denz. 3034. Pius X wrote in his Encyclical, Ad diem
Ulurn, Feb. 2nd, 1904, quoting Eadmer, the disciple of St.
Anselm: “Ex hac autem Mariam inter et Christum
communione dolorum et voluntatis ‘ promeruit ’ illa ‘ ut reparatrix perditi orbis dignissime fieret.’ Quoniam universis
sanctitate praestat conjunctioneque cum Christo atque a
Christo ascita in humanae salutis opus, de congruo, ut aiunt,
promeret, nobis, quae Christus de condigno promeruit.” Cf.
also Benedict XV in the Apostolic Letter, Inter Sodalicia,
March 22nd. 1918: “Ita (B.M.V.) Filium immolavit, ut dici
merito queat, ipsam cum Christo humanum genus redemisse ”
and Pius XI in the Apostolic Letter Explorata res, February
2nd. 1923: “Virgo perdolens redemptionis opus cum Christo
participavit.”
The Holy Office approved the invocation of Mary as Coredemptrix of the human race on June 26th, 1913 and January
22nd, 1914; cf. Denz. 3034, note.

170

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

As we read in the Collect of the Mass of the
Assumption : “ Mortem subiit temporalem, nec tamen
mortis nexibus deprimi potuit . . ” She died; but
she was not retained captive by the bonds of death—
a privilege accorded to no other saint, for even though
the bodies of some saints are miraculously preserved
from corruption, they are still in the bonds of death.
These two great theological arguments taken
respectively from Mary’s fulness of grace united to
her special blessing, and her association with Jesus
in His perfect victory, prove that the Assumption is
implicitly revealed and capable of definition as an
article of faith.
There are other theological arguments too which
confirm the same conclusion, at least by way of proof
ex convenientia. The love of Jesus for Mary can be
appealed to as a reason why she should have been
accorded the privilege.
The excellent virginity of
Mary seems to demand that her body, free from all
stain of sin, should be free from the bonds of death,
the consequence of sin. The Immaculate Conception
calls for it also since death is a consequence of
original sin from which Mary was preserved. It may
also be added that there are no relics of Our Lady,
which is a probable indication of her Assumption,
body and soul, into heaven.
Since the Assumption is contained at least
implicitly in Revelation, it can be defined as an article
of faith. The opportuneness of its definition is
manifest, as Dom Renaudin says (21). For, from the
doctrinal point of view, the Assumption of the
Blessed Virgin along with the Ascension of Our
Blessed Lord, crowns our faith in the objective com­
pletion of the work of the Redemption, and gives our
(21) La Doctrine de VAssomption, sa définibüité, Paris, 1913,
pp. 204-217.

THE FINAL PLENITUDE OF GRACE IN HEAVEN

171

hope a new guarantee For their part, the faithful
will derive from a solemn definition of the Assumption
the advantage of being able to go beyond their ad­
herence to the infallibility of the ordinary
magisterium of the Church who has instituted the
feast, and to adhere immediately to the dogma on
the authority of God Who revealed it, in which dogma
they will find an arm against all those errors of our
times—whether materialism, rationalism, or liberal
Protestantism—which agree in minimising the faith
in every possible way rather than to recognise that
the gifts of God surpass our ideas of them. From the
point of view of heretics and schismatics, the solemn
definition will be a help rather than a hindrance, for
it will make more manifest the power and goodness
of Mary who has been given to men to lead them
along the way of salvation. Finally, the just man
lives by his faith. Hence he finds in the solemn defi­
nition of a revealed truth a form of spiritual
nourishment which increases his faith, and
strengthens his hope, and makes his charity more
fervent.
Article III
The Final Plenitude of Grace in Heaven

In this article we shall consider Mary’s eternal
beatitude : the beatific vision ; the love of God and the
Joy which results from it; her elevation above the
choirs of angels; her participation in Christ’s Kingship and the consequences which follow from it.
Mary’s Essential Beatitude
Mary’s essential beatitude surpasses in intensity
and extension that conferred on all the other blessed.

172

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

This doctrine is theologically certain. Heavenly
glory, or essential beatitude, is proportioned .to the
degree of grace or charity which precedes entry to
heaven. But Mary’s initial fulness of grace surpassed
the final grace of the highest saints and angels; and
we have seen that it is probable, if not certain, that
it surpassed their final graces united. It follows that
Mary’s essential beatitude surpasses that of all the
saints taken together. In other words, Mary’s beatific
vision penetrates more deeply into the divine essence
seen face to face than that of all the other blessed—
exception being, of course, made for the beatified soul
of Jesus.
It is true that the natural intellectual powers of the
angels are greater than those of Mary, or even the
human powers of Jesus. Nevertheless Mary’s intuitive
gaze of the divine essence is more piercing than theirs
because of the much more intense lumen gloriae
(light of glory) with which she is enriched. The ob­
ject of the beatific vision being essentially
supernatural, greater natural powers confer no
greater advantage in knowing it. In much the same
way an unlettered Christian can have a greater
infused faith and charity than an highly endowed
and qualified theologian.
Not. only does Mary know more of the essence of
God in heaven, but she knows more too of His wisdom,
His love, His power, and she sees better the range of
their extent both in the order of possible and of
existing realities. Besides, since the blessed in heaven
see more things in God according as their mission is
a more universal one, Mary, as Mother of God,
Universal Mediatrix, Co-Redemptrix, Queen of
Angels, Saints, and the whole universe, sees much
more in God, in Verbo, than do the other blessed.
Higher than her in glory is only her Divine Son. His

THE FINAL PLENITUDE OF GRACE IN HEAVEN

173

human mind reads into the divine essence deeper
than hers. He knows certain secrets which are hidden
from her, for they pertain to Him only, the Saviour,
the High Priest and the Universal King.
Mary comes immediately after Jesus in heavenly
glory. That is why the liturgy affirms, on the Feast
of the 15th of August, that she has been lifted up
above the choirs of angels, and that she is at the right
hand of her Son (Ps. xliv, 10). According to St. Albert
the Great (22) she constituted among the blessed an
order apart, higher than the seraphim as they are
higher than the cherubim : for the queen is as much
higher than the first of her servants as they are
higher than the last of their fellows.
Being Mother of God she participates more than
anyone else in the glory of her Son. And since the
divinity of Jesus is absolutely evident in heaven, it is
clear to the blessed that Mary belongs to the hypo­
static order, that she has a special affinity to the
divine Persons, and that she shares in a unique way
in Jesus’ universal kingship over all creatures. This
is the doctrine of so many of the liturgical prayers:
Ave Regina Coelorum , . . Regina Coeli . . . Salve
Regina. It is found also in the Litanies: Queen of
Angels . . . Queen of all saints . . . And it is affirmed
also in the passage we quoted earlier from the Bull
Ineffabilis Deus. It is taught explicitly by St.
Germanus of Constantinople (23), St. Modestus (24),
St. John Damascene (25), St. Anselm (Orat. I), St.
Bernard (26), St. Albert the Great (27), St. Thomas
Aquinas (28), and all the doctors.
(22) Mariale, q.151.
(23) Hom. II in Dorm.
(24) Enc. in Dorm.
(25) Horn. I, II, III, in Dorm.; De Fide orth., IV, 14.
(26) He speaks very frequently of Mary as Regina and
Domina.
(27) Mariale, q.151.
(28) In III Sent., dist. 22, Q.3, a.3, q.3, ad 3.

174

THE DIVINE MATERNITY AND THE PLENITUDE OF GRACE

Mary’s Accidental Beatitude

To Mary’s accidental beatitude contribute her more
intimate knowledge of the glorious Humanity of
Jesus, the exercise of her universal mediation and of
her motherly mercy, and the cult of hyperdulia
which she receives as Mother of God. She enjoys
also in an eminent way the triple aureola of the
martyrs, the confessors, and the virgins, for she
suffered more than the martyrs during the Passion
of her Son, she instructed the apostles themselves in
a private and intimate way, and she preserved
virginity of soul and body in all its perfection. The
glory of her body—which is a reflection of that of her
soul—is of the same eminent degree.
Under all these respects Mary is raised above all
the saints and angels, and it becomes increasingly
evident that the reason and root cause of all her
privileges is her eminent dignity as Mother of God.

PART II

Mary, Mother of all men
Her universal mediation and
our interior life

Having considered the Blessed Virgin as Mother
of God, and the fulness of grace which was given her
that she might be God’s worthy mother, it remains
to speak of her relations with men. Tradition
attributes to Mary three titles, Mother of the Re­
deemer, Mother of all men, and Mediatrix, to express
her relations with men as yet on their way to eter­
nity. In regard to the blessed she has especially the
title, Universal Queen.
Theology teaches us that these titles correspond
to those of Christ the Redeemer (1). He performed
His redemptive work as Head of the humanity He
was to regenerate, as First Mediator Who has the
power by His priesthood to sacrifice and to sanctify,
and to exercise teaching authority, and finally as Uni­
versal King, Who legislates for all men, judges the
living and the dead, and governs all creatures not
excluding the angels.
Mary, in her quality of
Mother of the Redeemer, is associated with Jesus in
those three roles.
She is associated with Him as
Head of the Church by being spiritual Mother of all
men; she is associated with Him as First Mediator
by being a secondary and subordinate mediatrix;
and she is associated with Him as Universal King by
being Queen of the universe. That is Mary’s triple
(1) Cf. Merkelbach, Mariologia, p.295.

177

mission, to men which we are about to consider in
this part of the book.
We shall speak first of Mary as Mother of the
Redeemer and as Mother of all men; then of her
universal mediation on earth and in heaven; finally
of her universal queenship. All these titles, but
especially that of Mother of God, are the justifica­
tion of the cult of hyperdulia of which we1 shall
speak in the last place. At no time shall we en­
deavour to put forward original views, or those of
individual authors—nor have we done that in the
earlier part of the book—but rather will it be our
aim to expose the common teaching of the Church,
transmitted by the Fathers and explained by theo­
logians. It is only on such a foundation that one
can safely build.
Because of the method we have chosen, a super­
ficial reader may think our treatment of the different
questions banal or elementary.
But it is well to
recall that the most elementary philosophical
truths, such as the principles of causality and
finality, and the most elementary religious truths,
such as those contained in the Our Father, are found
to be the most profound and vital when they are
examined carefully and put into practice. In the
present matter as elsewhere it is necessary to ad­
vance from what is known and certain to what is
less well known, from what is easy to what is diffi­
cult; were one to embark on a premature considera­
tion of more difficult problems, especially if they
were presented in the form of dramatic and striking
paradoxes, the result might be—as has happened to
.many heretics—to end up by denying evident
truths and obvious conclusions. The history of
theology and philosophy shows that this is no ficti­
tious danger. Finally it should not be forgotten
M

178

that though in human matters, where truth and
falsity, good and evil, are jumbled together, simpli­
city is superficiality and exposes one to error, in the
things of God, where there is but the true and the
good, simplicity alone will reveal the greatest
heights and the most secret depths (2).
(2) For a treatment of the place of Our Lady in the interior
life cf. Μ. V. Bernadot, O.P., Notre Dame dans ma Vie;
Morineau, L’Année Mariale; Boulenger, O.P.. Le Diev, de Marie
dans le Saint Rosaire; Marie de Sainte-Thérèse, L’Union
Mystique à Marie; Neubert, La Doctrine Mariale du P.
Chaminade; all of which are published by La Vie Spirituelle.

CHAPTER I
The Mother of the Redeemer
and of alt men

These two titles are evidently connected. We shall
consider them in the order indicated.

Article I
The Mother of the Saviour Associated With
His Redemptive Work

The Church calls Mary Mother of the Saviour as
well as Mother of God. In the Litany of Loreto, for
example, after the invocations, Holy Mother of God,
and Mother of the Creator, we find the other, Mother
of the Saviour, pray for us. Though some have
thought the contrary (1) the fact of these two titles
Is no reason for believing that Mariology labours
under the defect of a duality of distinct principles:
" Mother of God ” and “ Mother of the Saviour, who
Is associated with His redemptive work.” Mariology
Is a unity, for Mary is “ Mother of God the Redeemer
or the Saviour.”
In much the same way the two
mysteries of the Incarnation and the Redemption do
(1) Rev. Professor Bittremieux in De supremo principio
Mariologiae, Eph. theol. Lovan., 1931, though he does not deny
that Jn a sense Mariology can be reduced to one principle.
Insists rather on duality.
As against this cf. Merkelbach,
ntariologia, pp. 91 sqq.

180

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

not take away from the unity of Christology, for its
central point is the redemptive Incarnation. The
motive of the Incarnation is sufficiently indicated
in the Creed which says that the Son of God came
down from heaven for our salvation.
Let us now see how Mary became Mother of the
Saviour by her consent, and how, as Mother of the
Saviour, she was to be associated with His redemp­
tive work.
Mary Became Mother of the Saviour by Her Consent

Mary gave her consent to the redemptive Incar­
nation when, on the day of the Annunciation, the
angel said to her: “ Thou shalt conceive in thy womb,
and shalt bring forth a son; and thou shalt call his
name Jesus ”—the name to be given to her Son
meaning “ Saviour.” Mary was not ignorant of the
Messianic prophecies—most particularly those of
Isaias—which foretold the redemptive sufferings of
the promised Saviour. Thus, when she uttered her
flat she accepted in advance for herself and for her
Son all the sufferings which the redemption would
involve.
She learned something still more explicit about
them a few days later when Simeon spoke to her:
“Behold this child is set for the fall, and for the
resurrection of many in Israel, and for a sign which
shall .be contradicted; And thy own soul a sword
shall pierce.” A little earlier he had spoken of Jesus
as “. . . thy salvation, which thou hast prepared
before the face of all peoples.” Mary, we are told,
kept all these words in her heart. The divine plan
became gradually clearer to her contemplative faith,
lit up as it was by the illumination of the gift of
understanding.

MARY ASSOCIATED WITH THE SAVIOUR IN HIS WORK

181

Mary therefore became freely Mother of the Re­
deemer in His role of Redeemer; she grew in her
appreciation of the fact that the Son of God became
man for our salvation. She united herself to Jesus
as only a mother, and a very holy mother, could in
perfect oneness of love for God and souls. That was
her way of fulfilling the great precept of the law—
and what more perfect way could there be? Tradi­
tion is clear on Mary’s union with the Redeemer; it
never tires of repeating that as Eve was united to
the first man in the work of perdition Mary was
united to the Redeemer in the work of redemption.
Mother of the Redeemer, she grew too in her
appreciation of the manner of our redemption. It
was sufficient for her to call to mind and meditate
on the prophecies which all knew so well. Isaias
(liii, 1-12) announced the sufferings and humilia­
tions of the Messiah, saying that they would be borne
to expiate our sins by Him Who is innocence itself,
and that by His Death He would justify many. She
knew too David’s psalm (Ps. xxi) “ O God, my God,
why has thou forsaken me?” describing the prayer of
the Just One, His cry of anguish in His abandon­
ment, and His confidence in Jahve, His apostolate
and its effects in Israel and among the gentiles.
There was finally Daniel’s prophecy of the Son of
Man (Dan. vii, 13-14) and of the power that would
be given Him: “And he gave Him power, and glory,
and a Kingdom: and all peoples, tribes, and tongues
shall serve him: his power is an everlasting power
that shall not be taken away: and his kingdom, that
shall not be destroyed.” All Tradition has seen the
Messiah promised as Redeemer in the Man of Sor­
rows of Isaias and the Son of Man of Daniel.
Mary, who was not ignorant of these prophecies,
became therefore Mother of the Redeemer in His

182

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

role of Redeemer at the Annunciation. From her
consent “ Be it done to me according to thy word ”
follows all the rest of her life, just as all Jesus’ life
followed from the consent He gave to His Father’s
will on entering the world: “Holocausts for sin did
not please thee. Then said I: Behold I come to do
thy will, O God ” (Hebr. x, 6, 9). The Fathers could
say that our salvation depended on Mary’s consent,
and that she conceived her Son spiritually before
she conceived Him corporeally (2).

It may be objected that a divine decree such as
that of the Incarnation could not depend on the con­
sent of a creature who was free not to give it. To
this theology answers that God has efficaciously
willed and infallibly foreseen everything that will
happen in the course of time. Therefore, He willed
efficaciously and foresaw infallibly Mary’s consent to
the realisation of the mystery of the Incarnation.
From all eternity God, Who works with strength and
gentleness, decided to give Mary the efficacious
grace which would move her to consent freely and
meritoriously. Just as He makes the trees to bear
their blossoms, so He makes our wills to produce
their free acts; and far from doing them any vio­
lence He is the author of their freedom, for that too
is a reality, a form of being. The “ how ” of all this
is the secret of God Omnipotent. Just as Mary
conceived the Saviour by the operation of the Holy
Ghost without losing her virginity, so she uttered
her flat infallibly under the motion of efficacious
grace without prejudice to her complete liberty—
rather did her will, under the divine motion, flower
(2) Cf. St. Augustine, De Virg., c. 3. 31; St. Gregory the
Great, Hom. 38 in Evang.·, St. Leo the Great, Sermo 20 in Nat.
nom.. c. 1; St. Bernard, Hom. IV super Missus est ; St. Laurence
Justinian, Serm. de Ann.

MARY ASSOCIATED WITH THE SAVIOUR IN HIS WORK

183

spontaneously into the free consent she gave in the
name of all mankind.
Mary’s fiat belonged entirely to God as First Cause
and entirely to Mary as secondary cause. In it we
find a perfect example of what St. Thomas speaks
of (Ia,q.l9,a.8) : “Since the will of God is supremely
efficacious it follows that not only do the things that
God wills (efficaciously) happen, but that they hap­
pen in the way in which He wills. But it is His will
that some things should happen of necessity and
others freely.” By her fiat, then, Mary became volun­
tarily the Mother of the Redeemer.
Tradition recognises that Mary consented to be
Mother of the Redeemer in His redemptive role by
calling her the New Eve. The first Eve, by consent­
ing to temptation, led the first man to commit the
sin which lost original justice for mankind. Mary
is the New Eve by her consent to be the Mother of
the Redeemer for the sake of the work of redemp­
tion.
Some non-Catholics have objected that Mary’s
parents could equally well have been entitled father
or mother of the Redeemer and regarded as asso­
ciated with Him in the work of redemption. It is
not hard to find an answer to this objection. Mary
alone received the light required for the consent of
which we speak. Her parents did not know that the
Messias would be born of their family. St. Anne
could not foresee that her child would be the mother
of the Messias.

How Was the Mother of the Redeemer to he
Associated with His Work?
According to what the Fathers of the Church tell us
about Mary as the New Eve whom many saw foretold

184

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

in the words of Genesis, it is common and certain
doctrine, and even fidei proxima, that the Blessed
Virgin, Mother of the Redeemer, is associated with
Him in the work of redemption as secondary and
subordinate cause, just as Eve was associated with
Adam in the work of man’s ruin (3).
The doctrine of Mary as the second Eve was uni­
versally accepted in the 2nd century. The Fathers
who taught it then did not regard it as the fruit of
personal speculation but as the traditional doctrine
of the Church supported by the words of St. Paul
which describe Jesus as the second Adam and oppose
Him to the first as the Author of salvation to the
author of the fall (I Cor. xv, 45 sqq.; Rom. v, 12 sqq.;
I Cor. xv, 20-23). They fitted St. Paul’s words into
the context of Genesis’ account of the fall, the pro­
mise of the redemption, and the victory over the
demon, as well as St. Luke’s account of Mary’s con­
sent at the Annunciation. It is necessary therefore
to regard the doctrine of Mary as the second Eve,
associated with the redemptive work of her Son, as
a divino-apostolic tradition (4).
The Fathers who speak most explicitly of this
matter are St. Justin (5), St. Irenaeus (6), Tertullian
(7), St. Cyprian (8), Origen (9), St. Cyril of Jerusa(3) Many Fathers, followed by many theologians, have noted
that if Eve alone had sinned there would have been no original
sin, and if Mary alone had given her consent without Jesus
there would have been no redemption.
(4) Cf. Merkelbach, Mariologia, pp. 74-89.
(5) Dial, cum Tryphone, c. 100—written about 160 a.d.
(6) Adv. Haer., Bk. Ill, c. 19, 21-23; Bk. IV, c. 33; Bk. V, c. 19
—written before the end of the 2nd century.
(7) Liber de Carne Christi c. 17—written about 210-212 a.d.
(8) Lib. II ad Quirinum.
(9) Hom. 8 in Luc.

MARY ASSOCIATED WITH THE SAVIOUR IN HIS WORK

185

lem (10), St. Ephrem (11), St. Epiphanius (12), St.
John Chrysostom (13), St. Proclus (14), St. Jerome
(15), St. Ambrose (16), St. Augustine (17), St. Basil
(18), St. Germanus of Constantinople (19), St. John
Damascene (20), St. Anselm (21), St. Bernard (22).
In later times the theologians of the middle ages and
of our own day have maintained the same doctrine
(23).
What, according to Tradition, is the sense in which
Mary, the New Eve, was associated with the work of
redemption?
It was not merely by having conceived the Re­
deemer physically, by having given Him birth and
nourished Him, but rather was her association moral,
through her free, salutary, and meritorious acts. Eve
contributed morally to the fall by yielding to the
temptation of the devil, by disobedience, and by
leading up to Adam’s sin ; Mary, on the contrary, co­
operated morally in our redemption by her faith in
Gabriel’s words, and by her free consent to the
mystery of the redemptive Incarnation and to all
the sufferings it entailed for her Son and for herself.
(10) Cat. XII, 5, 15.
(11) Edit. Assemani, 1.11, syr. lat., pp. 318-329; edit. Lamy,
1.1, p. 593; t. II, p. 524.
(12) Panarion, haer. Ixxxili, 18.
(13) Hom. in Pasch.. n. 2; in Ps. xliv.
(14) Or. I in laud. S.M.
(15) Ep. 22 ad Eustochium, n. 21.
(16) Ep. 63 ad Eccl. Vercel.. n. 33.
(17) De agone Christiano, 22.
(18) Or. 3, n. 4.
(19) Hom. II in Dorm.
(20) Hom. I in Dorm.
(21) Or. 51 and 52.
(22) Sermo in Dorn. infra Oct. Ass.; in Nat. B. V. de Aquae­
ductu; 12 Praer.
(23) Hugo a S. Charo, Postillae in Luc. I, 26-28; Richardus
h S. Laurentio, De Laud. B. Μ. V., 1.1, c. 1; S. Albertus Magnus,
Mariale, q.29, 3: St. Bonaventure. De donis Sp. Sti., coll. 6. n.16;
Sermo III de Ass. B. Μ. V.; St. Thomas, Opusc. VI Exp. Salut.
Ang.

186

MARY'S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

Clearly, Mary is not the principal and perfective
cause of the Redemption: she could not redeem us
in justice, de condigno, since for that a theandric
act of infinite value which could belong only to an
incarnate Divine Person was required. But she is
really a secondary cause of salvation, dispositive, and
subordinate to Jesus. She is said to be subordinated
to Jesus not merely in the sense that she is inferior
to Him, but also in the sense that she concurred in
saving us by a grace which proceeded from His
merits, and therefore acted in Him, with Him, and by
Him. We must never forget that Jesus is the Uni­
versal Mediator. He redeemed Mary by preserving
her from original sin. Similarly, it is through Him
that she contributed to saving us. She is not the
perfective cause of salvation, but a dispositive one,
disposing us to undergo the action of her Son, Who
it is achieves our salvation and is our Redeemer.
Mary’s association with Jesus in the redemption is
therefore not like that of the Apostles, but is some­
thing still more intimate. That is what St. Albert
the Great formulated so happily when he said: “ The
Blessed Virgin Mary was chosen by God not to be
His minister but to be His consort and His helper—
in consortium et adjutorium—according to the words
of Genesis: Let us make him a help like to himself ”
(Mariale, q.42).

We can now see that the unity of Mariology does
not suffer from the defect of having two distinct
principles. There is one principle which dominates
it: Mary is Mother of God the Redeemer and is by
that fact associated to His work. In the same way,
the two mysteries of the Incarnation and the

MOTHER OF ALL MEN

187

Redemption do not constitute a duality so as to take
from the unity of Christology, for they find them­
selves united in the idea of the redemptive Incarna­
tion; and their union in it is expressed in the Creed
in the words “. . . qui propter nos homines et prop­
ter nostram salutem descendit de caelis, et incar­
natus est.”
Jesus’ natural sonship of God or His grace of
hypostatic union is greater than His fulness of
created grace and our redemption. In the same way
Mary’s motherhood of God is greater than her ful­
ness of grace which overflows on us, as has been
shown in the first chapter of this book. The unity
of theological knowledge contributes to its certainty,
since, because of its unity, it uses subordinated and
not co-ordinated principles. All the different trea­
tises, too, which go to make it up are subordinated
in their totality to some supreme truth.

Article II
Mother

of

All Men

Tradition ascribes to Mary the titles Mother of
Divine Grace, Mother most amiable, Mother most
admirable, Mother of mercy. The Fathers have often
spoken of Mary as Mother of all Christians, and even
as Mother of all men. In what sense is this maternity
to be understood? When did Mary become our
Mother? How does her maternity affect all the
faithful, even those who are not in the state of grace,
and all men, even those who have not the true faith?
These are the questions we shall try to answer in this
section.

188

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

In what sense is Mary Our Mother?

Evidently Mary is not our mother in the ordinary
sense of the term since she did not give us natural
life. Considering our natural life, it is Eve who de­
serves to be called the mother of all men. Mary is
our mother rather in a spiritual sense and through
adoption, for, by her union with Jesus the Redeemer,
she has communicated to us the supernatural life of
grace. She is very much more than a sister in grace :
we say, on the analogy of natural life, that she has
given us birth to a divine form of life. St. Paul could
say, speaking to the Corinthians, “ In Christ Jesus,
by the gospel, I have begotten you ” (I Cor. iv, 15).
With still more truth can we speak of Mary’s spiritual
maternity—a maternity which is source of a life
destined to endure not sixty or eighty years, but all
eternity.
Mary’s maternity is adoptive, as is God’s father­
hood of the just. It is, however, much more intimate
and fruitful than in ordinary human adoption.
Human adoption constitutes a person legally the child
and heir of another. But all this is in the legal order;
and even though it is a sign of the affection bestowed
on the adopted child, it does not produce any in­
terior change in it. Divine adoption, on the contrary,
produces sanctifying grace in the soul of the just,
thereby making it to participate in the divine nature
and to have within itself the germ of eternal life.
The soul which is endowed thus with grace is agree­
able in God’s eyes and is His child, called to know
Him face to face and to love Him for all eternity. St.
John speaks of this in his prologue when he describes
those who believe in the Son of God made man as

MOTHER OF ALL MEN

189

“ Who are born, not of blood, nor of the will of the
flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God ” (John i,
13). Mary’s maternity participates in the fruitful­
ness or fecundity of the divine Paternity: in union
with the Redeemer, she has truly and really
communicated to us grace, the germ of eternal life.
She can therefore be called Mother of grace, Mother
of mercy. That is what the Fathers meant when
they called her the New Eve, and said that she had
co-operated voluntarily in our salvation as Eve had
co-operated in our fall.
The points of doctrine just outlined are found in
the Church’s preaching from the 2nd century on. The
references are the same as those given a short while
ago in connection with the doctrine of the New Eve.
St. Ephrem, in the 4th century, is a particularly
eloquent witness.
He calls Mary “ Mother of life
and of salvation, Mother of the living and of all men”
since she gave us the Saviour and united herself to
Him on Calvary (24). Similar expressions are found
in St. Germanus of Constantinople (25), St. Peter
Chrysologus (26), Eadmer (27), St. Bernard (28),
Richard of St. Laurence (29), St. Albert the Great
(30) who calls Mary “ Mater misericordiae, Mater
regenerationis, totius humani generis mater
spiritualis,” and in St. Bonaventure (31).
Every day the liturgy repeats : “ Hail holy Queen,
Mother of mercy . . . Show thyself a mother . . . Hail,
(24) Opera S. Ephraem Syr., edit. Assemani t. II, syr. lat.,
pp. 324, 327; III, 607.
(25) Sermo in Dorm. Deip., 2 and 5.
(26) Serm. 140 and 142.
(27) De Etc. V.M., c.xi, 5.
(28) Sermo de Aquaeductu, n. 4 sqq.
(29) De Laud. B. Μ. V., 1. VI, c. 1, n. 12; l.IV, c. 14, n. 1.
(30) Mariale, q.29, n.3; qq. 42, 43.
(31) Serm. VI in Ass. B. Μ. V., and in I Sen., d.48, a.2, q.2,
dub. 4.

190

MARY'S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

Mother of mercy, Mother of God and Mother of
pardon, Mother of hope and Mother of grace.”
&

When did Mary become our Mother?
The different texts we have quoted indicate that
Mary became our mother by consenting freely to be
the Mother of the Saviour, the Author of grace and
of our spiritual regeneration. By that act she con­
ceived us spiritually and would have been our
adoptive mother as its result even had she died before
her Son. But that was not to be. Instead she lived
on to unite herself to Jesus in the sacrifice of the
Cross and by that great act of faith, hope and love
of God and souls, she became our mother in a still
more perfect way and contributed more directly,
more intimately, and more profoundly to our salva­
tion. Besides, it was on Calvary that Jesus
proclaimed Mary our Mother, when He addressed to
Mary the words: ‘‘Woman, behold thy son,” and to
St. John, who personified all the redeemed, the
words : “ Behold thy mother.” Tradition has always
understood the words in that sense : they do not refer
to a grace peculiar to St. John alone, but go beyond
him to all who are to be regenerated by the Cross
(32).
(32) This explanation, suggested by Origen in the 3rd cent.,
Praef. in Joan., I. 6, is explicitly advanced by many authors,
especially from the 12th century on, from which time it be­
came common. It has been regarded in different papal
documents as the common belief of the Church. Cf. Benedict
XIV Bull Gloriosae Dominae, Sept. 27th, 1748; Gregory XVI,
Bull Praestantissimum; Leo XIII, enc. Octobri Mense, 22nd
Sept.. 1891; Adjutricem, 5th Sept., 1895; Augustissimae Virginis,
12th Sept., 1897: Plus X. Ad diem ilium, Feb. 2nd. 1904; Benedict
XV. Utt. ay. inter Sodalicia, Mar. 22nd, 1918; Pius XI, Utt. ap.
Exvlorata res, Feb. 2nd, 1923; enc. Rerum Ecclesiae, Feb. 21st,
1926.

MOTHER OF ALL MEN

191

The words of the dying Saviour, like sacramental
words, produce what they signify: in Mary’s soul
they produced a great increase of charity and of
maternal love for us; in John a profound filial affec­
tion, full of reverence for the Mother of God. There
is the origin of devotion to Mary.
Mary continues to exercise her motherly functions
in our regard by watching over us so that we grow
in charity and persevere in it, by interceding for us
and by distributing to us all the graces we receive.

What is the Extension of Mary’s Maternity?

She is first of all Mother of the faithful, of those
who believe in her Son and receive through Him the
life of grace. But she is also Mother of all men, since
she gave the world the Saviour of all men and since
she united herself to the oblation of her Son Who
offered His precious blood for all. This is what has
been affirmed by Popes Leo XIII, Benedict XV, and
Pius XI (33).
She is not the Mother of all men in a general way,
as may be affirmed of Eve in the natural order, but
of each man in particular, for she intercedes for each
and obtains for each all the graces he receives. Jesus
says of Himself that He is the Good Shepherd who
“ calleth his own sheep by name ” (John x, 3). Some­
thing the same may be said of Mary who is the
mother of each individual man.
(33) Leo XIII calls Mary mother not only of Christians, but
of the whole human race: enc. Octobri Mense, Sept. 22nd, 1891:
ep. Amantissimae voluntatis, April 14th, 1895: enc. Adjutricem
populi, Sept. 25th. 1895:Benedict XV calls her mother of all
men: litt. ap. Inter sodalicia, March 22nd, 1918; for Pius XI cf.
litt. ap. Exvlorata res, Feb. 2nd, 1923; enc. Rerum Ecclesiae
Feb. 21st. 1926.

192

MARY'S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

However, Mary is not Mother of the faithful and of
infidels, of the just and sinners, in exactly the same
way. The distinctions which are made in regard to
the members of Christ’s Mystical Body must be made
here also (34). Mary is Mother of infidels in that she
is destined to engender them to grace, and in that
she obtains for them the actual graces which dispose
them for the faith and for justification. She is
Mother of the faithful who are in the state of mortal
sin, in that she watches over them by obtaining for
them the graces necessary for acts of faith and hope,
and for disposing themselves for justification. Of
those who have died in the state of mortal sin, she is
no longer the mother: she was their mother. She is
fully the Mother of the just, since they have received
sanctifying grace and charity through her. She cares
for them with tender solicitude so that they may
continue in grace and grow in charity. She is in an
eminent way the Mother of the blessed who can no
longer lose the life of grace.
All this makes clear the meaning of what the
Church sings every day at Compline: Hail, Holy
Queen, Mother of mercy; Hail, our life, our sweetness,
and our hope. To thee do we cry, poor banished
children of Eve. To thee do we send up our sighs in
this vale of tears . . .

St. Grignon de Montfort has explained the conse­
quences of this doctrine very beautifully in his
Treatise on True Devotion to the Blessed Virgin, ch.
1, art. 1, no. 2: God wishes to make use of Mary for
the sanctification of souls. He sums it up thus in the
(34) Cf. Illa, q.8, a.3.

MOTHER OF ALL MEN

193

Secret of Mary (First Part: Why Mary is necessary
for us):
“ She it is who has given life to the Author of
grace, and on that account she is called Mother of
grace. In giving her His Son, God the Father, from
Whom all good things descend, gave her all graces:
as St. Bernard says, God’s will is given her in Him
and with Him.
“ God has chosen her to be treasurer and dispensa­
trix of all His graces. All His graces and all His gifts
pass by her hands . · · Since Mary has formed the
Head of the predestined, Jesus Christ, it pertains to
her to form also the members of the Head, who are
the true Christians . . . She has received from God a
special power to nourish souls and to make them grow
in Him. St. Augustine goes so far as to say that the
predestined in this world are enclosed in Mary’s
womb and that they come to the light only when
their good Mother brings them forth to eternal life.
It is to her that the Holy Ghost has said * Take root
in my elect ’ (Eccl. xxiv, 13)—roots of profound
humility, of ardent charity and of all the virtues.
“ Mary is called by St. Augustine, and is in fact, the
living mould of God—forma Dei. In her was the
Man-god formed . . .. and in her alone can man be­
come deiform. Whoever is in this mould and allows
himself to be shaped there, takes on the appearance
of Jesus Christ, true God, in a manner adapted to his
human weakness, without excess of pain and labour.
This is a sure way, without danger of illusion, for
Satan never had and never will have power over
Mary, holy and immaculate, stainless and sinless.
“What a difference there is between a soul formed in
Jesus by the method of those who, like sculptors, rely
on their art and their industry, and a soul which,
relying in nothing on itself, and freed from all
N

194

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

attachments and submissive in all things, throws
itself into Mary’s hands, there to be shaped by the
action of the Holy Ghost. What stains, what defects,
what darkness, what illusions, what an amount of the
merely natural there is in the first soul, and how the
second one is pure, divine, and like to Jesus ... !
“ A thousand times happy is the soul to whom the
Holy Ghost reveals the secret of Mary and to whom
He opens this enclosed garden. That soul will find
God alone in that most lovable creature—God
infinitely holy and infinitely condescending, yet pro­
portioned to its weakness .. . God lives in her and, far
from causing souls to rest in herself, she leads them
to God and unites them to Him.”
Thus Christian doctrine becomes the object of a
penetrating faith for St. Grignon de Montfort, of a
contemplation which issues in a true and strong
charity.
Mary, Exemplary Cause of the Elect
Jesus is our model. His predestination to natural
divine sonship is the exemplary cause of our pre­
destination to adoptive sonship for “ whom he
foreknew He also predestined to be made conformable
to the image of His Son; that he might be the first­
born among many brethren ” (Rom. viii, 29).
Similarly Mary our Mother, associated with her Son,
is the exemplary cause of the life of the elect. It is
in that sense that St. Augustine and St. Grignon de
Montfort after him say that she is the mould or the
model according to which God forms the elect. One
must be marked with Mary’s seal and reproduce her
characteristics to have a place among those loved by

MOTHER OF ALL MEN

195

Our Lord—which is the reason why theologians teach
commonly that a true devotion to Mary is one of the
signs of predestination. Blessed Hugh of Saint-Cher
even says that she is, as it were, the book of life (35),
or the mirror of that eternal book, since God has
written in her the names of all the elect, just as He
willed to form, in her and by her, Jesus Who is the
First of the elect.
St. Grignon de Montfort writes (36): “ God the Son
said to His Mother ‘ Let thy inheritance be in Israel ’
(Eccl. xxiv, 13). It is as if He had said: God, My
Father, has given me for heritage all the nations of
the earth, all men good and evil, predestined and
reprobate; I shall lead some by a rod of gold and
others by a rod of iron; I shall be the father and
advocate of some, the just chastiser of others, and
the judge of all; but you, My dear Mother, you shall
have for your heritage only the predestined who are
prefigured by Israel, and as their mother, you will
give them birth, nourish and rear them; as their
Queen you will lead, govern and protect them.”
It is in that same sense that we must understand
the words of St. Grignon de Montfort a little further
on in the same work, when showing that Mary, like
Jesus, makes her choice always in accordance with
the divine good pleasure : “ The Most High has made
her His treasurer and the dispenser of His favours,
to ennoble, raise up, and enrich whom she wills, to
allow whom she wills to enter on the narrow way of
heaven, to make whom she wills pass through the
narrow gate of life in spite of everything, and to give
the throne, the sceptre, and the kingly crown to whom
(35) Comm, in Eccles., XXIV.
(36) Treatise of True Devotion to the Blessed Vtrain, ch. 1,
i 1. no 2.

196

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

she will. To Mary alone has God given the keys of
the cellars of divine love, and the power to enter on
the highest and most secret ways of perfection and to
lead others thereto.”
Those words make clear the scope of Mary’s
spiritual maternity by which she forms the elect and
leads them to the term of their predestination.

CHAPTER II
Mary’s Universal Mediation during her Earthly
Existence
We shall see first of all in what this mediation
consists and what are its principal characteristics.
After that we shall examine the two ways in which
Mary exercised her mediation during her life on
earth, by her merits and her satisfaction.

Article I
Mary’s Universal Mediation

in

General

Our Holy Mother the Church approved during the
pontificate of Benedict XV the proper Mass and Office
of Mary, Mediatrix of all Graces (1). Many theologians
consider that the doctrine of Mary’s universal media­
tion is sufficiently contained in the deposit of
revelation to be one day proposed solemnly as an
object of faith by the infallible Church. It is taught
by the ordinary magisterium of the Church through
the liturgy, through encyclical letters, through
pastoral letters, in preaching, and in the works of
theologians approved by the Church. Let us see first
what is meant by this mediation and then enquire if
it is affirmed by tradition and proved by theology.
(1) Cf. the decree of January 21st, 1921, of the Sacred
Congregation of Rites: “De Festo Beatae Mariae Virginis
Mediatricis omnium gratiarum.”

198

MARY'S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

What is meant by Mary’s Universal Mediation?

St. Thomas says, speaking of the mediation of the
Saviour (Illa, q.26, a.l): “It pertains to the office of
a mediator between God and men to unite them.”
That is, as he explains in the following article, the
mediator offers to God the prayers of men, and most,
particularly sacrifice which is the principal act of the
virtue of religion, and distributes as well to men
God’s sanctifying gifts, light from on high and grace.
There is, thus, a double movement in mediation : one
upwards in the form of prayer and sacrifice, and the
other downwards in the form of God’s gifts to men.
The office of mediator belongs fully only to Jesus,
the Man-God, Who alone could reconcile us with God
by offering Him, on behalf of men, the infinite sacri­
fice of the Cross, which is perpetuated in Holy Mass.
He alone, as Head of mankind, could merit for us in
justice the grace of salvation and apply it to those
who do not reject His saving action. It is as man
that He is mediator, but as a Man in Whom humanity
is united hypostatically to the Word and endowed
with the fulness of grace, the grace of Headship,
which overflows on men. As St. Paul puts it: “For
there is one God, and one mediator of God and men,
the man Christ Jesus: Who gave Himself for a re­
demption for all, a testimony in due times ” (I Tim.
ii, 5-6).
But, St. Thomas adds (Zoc. cit.): “ there is no reason
why there should not be, after Christ, other secon­
dary mediators between God and men, who co-operate
in uniting them in a ministerial and dispositive
manner.” Such mediators dispose men for the action
of the principal Mediator, or transmit it, but always
in dependence on His merits.
The prophets and priests of the Old Testament

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION IN GENERAL

199

were mediators of this kind, for they announced the
Saviour to the chosen people by offering sacrifices
which were types of the great sacrifice of the Cross.
The priests of the New Testament may also be spoken
of as mediators between God and men, for they are
the ministers of the supreme Mediator, offering
sacrifice in His Name, and administering the sacra­
ments.
The question arises, is Mary, in subordination to
and in dependence on the merits of Christ, universal
mediatrix for all men from the time of the coming
of the Saviour, in regard to obtaining and distribu­
ting all graces, both in general and in particular?
Does it not appear that she is? Nor is her role pre­
cisely that of a minister, but that of an associate in
the redemptive work, in the words of St. Albert
already quoted.
Though non-catholics answer the question with a
denial, the Christian sense of the faithful, formed for
years by the liturgy, which is one of the voices of the
ordinary magisterium of the Church, has no hesita­
tion in maintaining that, by the very fact of her
being Mother of the Redeemer, all the indications are
that Mary is universal mediatrix, for she finds herself
placed between God and men, and more particularly
between her Son and men.
Since she is a creature she is, of course, altogether
below God Incarnate. But at the same time she is
raised far above men by the grace of the divine
maternity, which is of the hypostatic order,
and by the fulness of grace which she received
even from her Immaculate Conception.
Hence,
the mediation attributed by the liturgy and
the Christian sense of the faithful to Mary
is, strictly speaking, subordinated to .that of Jesus
and not co-ordinated; her mediation depends com­

200

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

pletely on the merits of the Universal Mediator. Nor
is her mediation necessary (for that of Jesus is super­
abundant and needs no complement) : it has however
been willed by God as a kind of radiation of the
Saviour’s mediation, and of all radiations the most
perfect. The Church regards it as most useful and
efficacious to obtain from God all that we need to
lead us directly or indirectly to salvation and perfec­
tion. Last of all, Mary’s mediation is perpetual and
extends to all men, and to all graces without any
exception whatever.
The above is the precise sense in which universal
mediation is attributed to Mary in the liturgy, in the
Feast of Mary Mediatrix, and by the theologians who
have recently treated the question at great length.
©
The Testimony of Tradition
Mary’s mediation was affirmed in a general and
implicit way from the earliest centuries by the use
of the titles, the New Eve, the Mother of the Living.
There is all the more reason for so understanding
tradition in that the titles were attributed to her not
solely because she gave birth physically to the Saviour
but because she co-operated morally in His redemp­
tive work, especially by uniting herself very intimately
to the sacrifice of the Cross (2). From the 4th
century onwards, and notably in the 5th century, the
Fathers affirm clearly that Mary intercedes for us,
that all the benefits and helps to salvation come to us
through her, by her intervention and her special
(2) Cf. St. Justin, Dial., 100; P. G., t. VI, col, 711; St. Irenaeus,
Contr. haer.. Ill, xxii, 4; V, xix, I; P. G., t. VII, col. 958 sqq.,
1175; Tertullian, De came C*~isti, 17; P. L., t.II, col. 782.

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION IN GENERAL

201

protection. From the same time too she is called
mediatrix between God and men or between Christ
and us. Recent studies have thrown much light on
this point (3).
The antithesis between Eve, cause of death, and
Mary, cause of salvation for all men is repeated by
St. Cyril of Jerusalem (4), St. Epiphanius (5), St.
Jerome (6), St. John Chrysostom (7). The following
invocation of St. Ephrem deserves to be quoted in
full: “Hail, most excellent mediatrix of God and
men, hail most efficacious reconciler of the whole
world ” (8).
St. Augustine speaks of Mary as mother of all the
members of our Head, Jesus Christ. He tells us that
by her charity she co-operated in the spiritual birth
of all the faithful who are Christ’s members (9), St.
Peter Chrysologus says that Mary is .the mother of
all the living by grace whereas Eve is the mother, by
nature, of all the dying (10). It is evident that he
considers Mary as associated with the divine plan for
our redemption.
From the 8th century we may quote the Venerable
(3) Cf. Blttremleux, De mediatione universali B. Mariae
Virginis, 1926; Marialia, 1936; Dublanchy in Diet, de Théol.
(lath, also Marie Médiatrice in La Vie Spirituelle, 1921-22.
Hover, S.J., La Mediaciôn universal de la Segunda Eva en la
Tradiciôn patristica, Madrid. 1923-1924. Frietoff, O.P., Maria
alma socia Christi mediatoris, 1936. Merkelbach, Mariologia,
1939, pp. 309-323. Génevois, O.P., La maternité spirituelle de
Marie en saint Irenée, Revue Thomiste, 1935. Galtier, S J.,
La Vierge qui nous régénère, Rech. de sc. rel. 1914.
(4) Cat., XII, 5, 15.
(5) Haer., LXXVIII, 18; P. G., t.XXII, col. 728.
(6) Epist., XXII, 21; P. L„ XXII, col. 408.
(7) Hom. in sanctum Pascha, 2; P. G., t. LV, col. 193 and in
Gen., Ill, hom. XVII,T; P. G., t. LUI, col. 143.
(8) Opera omnia, edit. Assemani, Rome, 1740, t. Ill, graecol.it. col. 528 sqq., 531 sqq., 551; in Lamy’s edit. II p.547 and 1.1,
proleg., p. xlix.
(9) De sancta virginitate, VI, 6: P. L., t. XL, col 399.
(10) Serm. 140 and 142, P. L„ t. LII, col. 576, 579.

202

MARY'S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

Bede (11). St. Andrew of Crete calls Mary Mediatrix
of grace, dispenser and cause of life (12).
St.
Germanus of Constantinople says that no one has
been saved without the co-operation of the Mother
of God (13). The title of mediatrix is given by St. John
Damascene also, who asserts that we owe to her all
the benefits conferred on us by Jesus (14).
In the 9th century we find St. Peter Damien teach­
ing that nothing is accomplished in the work of our
redemption without her (15). The teaching of St.
Anselm (16), Eadmer (17), and St. Bernard in the 12th
century is the same. St. Bernard speaks of Mary as :
gratiae inventrix, mediatrix salutis, restauratrix
saeculorum (18).
From the middle of the 12th century the explicit
affirmation of Mary’s co-operation in our redemption
becomes quite common. Her co-operation is looked
on as consummated by her consent to her sacrifice
at the Annunciation, and its accomplishment on
Calvary. Among names that may be cited are those
of Arnold of Chartres, Richard of St. Victor, St. Albert
the Great (19), and Richard of Saint-Laurent. St.
Thomas seems to be of the same opinion (20). It is
(11) Homil. I in fest. Annunc. and hom. I in fest Visit.; P. L.,
t. XCIV, col. 9. 16.
(12) In Nativit. B. M., hom. IV, and in Dormit. S. M., Ill;
P. G„ t.XCVII, col. 813 and 1108.
(13) In dormit. B. M.; P. G., t. XCVIII, c. 349.
(14) In dormit, B. M„ hom. I, 3, 8, 12; II, 16; P. G., t. XCVI,
cols. 705, 713, 717, 744.
(15) Serm. 45; P. L„ CXLIV, cols. 741, 743.
(16) Orat. 41. 52; P. L., t. CLVIII, cols. 945. 955, 964.
(17) De excellentia B. Μ., IX, XI; P. L.. t. CLIX, cols. 573, 578.
(18) Ep. 174; P. L., t. CLXXXII, col. 333; Super Missus est,
hom. IV. 8; P. L., t. CLXXXIII, c. 83.
(19) Mariale, q.42. He terms Mary the coadjutrix et socia
Christi.
(20) He says that on the day of the Annunciation Mary gave
her consent in the name of all humanity, loco totius humanae
naturae. Cf. also his Expos. Salut. Angelicae.

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION IN GENERAL

203

found quite explicitly in St. Bernadine of Siena, St.
Antonine (21), Suarez (22), Bossuet (23), and St.
Alphonsus. St. Grignon de Montfort is one of those
who, in the 18th century, did the most to spread the
doctrine by bringing out its practical conclusions
(24).
In the encyclical Ad diem illum, Pius X stated that
Mary is the all-powerful mediatrix of the world before
her Son : “ Totius terrarum orbis potentissima apud
Unigenitum Filium suum mediatrix et conciliatrix.”
The title of mediatrix has been consecrated by the
institution of the feast of Mary, Mediatrix of all
graces, on January 21st, 1921.

Theological Arguments
The theological arguments invoked by the Fathers
and still more explicitly by theologians are principally
the following:
Mary deserves the title of universal mediatrix,
subordinated to the Redeemer, if she is an inter­
mediary between Him and men, presenting to Him
their prayers and obtaining benefits from Him for
them. But that is precisely Mary’s role. For, though
a creature, she reaches by her divine maternity to the
frontiers of the divinity, and she has received a ful­
ness of grace which is intended to overflow on us. She
has, too, co-operated in saving us by consenting
(21) He terms Mary adjutrix nostrae redemptionis et mater
nostrae spiritualis regenerationis.
Surnjna Theol-, part IV,
tit. XV, c. xiv, 2.
(22) In Illam S. Thomae, t. II, disp. XXIII, sect. I, n. 4. He
shows from tradition that Mary merited de congruo what
Christ merited de condigno. This is also the teaching of John
of Cartagena. Novatus, Chr. de Véga, Théophile Raynaud, etc.
(23) 4th sermon for the Feast of the Annunciation. Cf. also
the index to his works under the word Marie.
.
(24) Treatise of True Devotion to the Blessed Virgin, chs. I
and II.

204

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

freely to be the Mother of the Saviour and by uniting
herself as intimately as possible to His sacrifice. We
shall see later that she has merited and made satis­
faction for us, and we know from the teaching of the
Church that she continues to interecede for us so as
to obtain for us all graces that contribute to our
salvation. These different offices pertain to the
exercise of her maternity, as we have already seen.

Thus Jesus is the principal and perfect Mediator,
in dependence on Whose merits—and they are super­
abundant and sufficient of themselves—Mary
exercises her subordinate mediation (25). But Mary’s
mediation has nevertheless been willed by God
because of our weakness and because God wished to
honour her by allowing her the exercise of causality
in the order of salvation and sanctification.
The work of redemption proceeds therefore entirely
from God as First Cause of grace, entirely from Jesus
as principal and perfect Mediator, and entirely from
Mary as subordinate mediatrix. These three causes
are not partial and co-ordinate—as are three men
who drag the same load—but total and subordinated:
the second acts under the influence of the first, and
the third under the influence of the second. An
example which may make the point clear is that of
the fruit which proceeds entirely from God the
Author of nature, entirely from the tree, and entirely
from the branch on which it grows. It does not
proceed in its different parts from different causes:
neither is our redemption the work in part of the
Divinity, in part of the Humanity, and in part of Mary
(25) Jesus’ merits needed no complement on the part of
Mary; that is why she is compared in the mystical body to the
neck which unites the head to the members. She is compared
also with an aqueduct through which grace passes to us.

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION IN GENERAL

205

(26). It is worth noting how becoming it is that
Mary who was redeemed by the Saviour in a most
excellent manner and preserved from all sin, original
and actual, should co-operate in this way in our justi­
fication and our final perseverance.
Mary’s mediation is of a much higher order than
that of the saints, for she alone has given us the
Saviour, she alone was so intimately united to the
sacrifice of the Cross, she alone is universal mediatrix
for all mankind and (as we shall see later) for all
graces in particular—even for that grace which is of
all the most particular, the grace of the present
moment which assures our fidelity from instant to
instant.
We shall grasp this universality better when we
shall have seen that Mary merited de congruo every­
thing that Jesus merited in strict justice, that she
made satisfaction (ex convenientia) for us in union
with Him, and that as regards the application of the
fruits of the redemption, she continues to intercede
for each one of us, and more particularly for those
who invoke her, so that of all the particular graces
granted to us, none are granted de facto without her
intervention.

(26) For the moment we are attributing to Mary only moral
causality which, as we shall see, is exercised by merit, satis­
faction and intercession. However, it is probable, as we shall
show later, that she exercises a physical instrumental
causality as well in the spiritual order for the transmission
and production of the graces which we receive through her.
This is no more than a simple probability, but we believe it
cannot be denied without running the risk of diminishing
Mary’s influence, which must be greater than is commonly
believed. Cf. infra pp. 234-248.

203

MARY'S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

Article II
Mary’s Merits For Us

Nature and Extent of Her Merits
The exercise of her functions as universal media­
trix was not confined for Our Lady to the period of
her glory in heaven: she exercised them on earth,
as far as the acquisition of grace was concerned, by
co-operating in our redemption by her merits and
her satisfaction. In that she followed the example
of Jesus Who was Mediator during His life on earth,
most of all by His death on Calvary: in fact, His
mediation on earth was the foundation of His
mediation in heaven, whence, by His intercession,
He transmits to us the fruits of His sacrifice.

The Three Kinds of Merits
Merit in general means a right to a reward: the
meritorious act confers a right to a reward even
though it does not itself produce it. Supernatural
merit — which presupposes habitual grace and
charity—is a right to a supernatural reward. It is
distinguished from satisfaction, which has as pur­
pose to expiate the insult offered the Divine majesty
by sin and to render God once more propitious. It is
distinguished also from prayer, for even a sinner in
the state of mortal sin can pray with the help of
actual grace. Besides, unlike merit, prayer appeals
not to the divine justice but to the divine mercy.
Even when a person is in the state of grace the meri­
torious value of his prayer should be distinguished
from its value considered precisely as prayer.

MARY’S MERITS FOR OS

207

Considered as prayer—that is, from the point of view
of impetratory value—it can obtain grace, such as
that of final perseverance, which cannot be merited
in the strict sense of the term.
There are three kinds of merit. The highest kind,
which was that of the Incarnate Word, is merit which
is perfectly and fully worthy of a reward, perfecte de
condigno: the act of charity of the God-Man, since
it is the act of a divine Person, is at least equal in value
to the reward, even when evaluated in strict justice.
Even when the reward was not for Himself, but for
us, Jesus could still merit it in strict justice since He
was Head of the human race through the fulness of
grace which had been given Him that we might all
receive of it.
The second kind of merit is that of the person in
the state of grace. It is a dogma of faith (27) that
every person in the state of grace and endowed with
the use of reason and free will, and who is as yet a
member of the Church militant, can merit an increase
of charity and of eternal life with a merit commonly
termed de condigno. The force of the term (which
may be translated literally “ of worthiness ”) is that
such a person is capable of performing acts which are
really worthy of a supernatural reward, not in the
sense that they are fully equal in value to it, but in
the sense that they are proportionate to it since they
proceed from habitual grace which is the germ or
beginning of that eternal life which God has
promised to those who keep His commandments.
Merit de condigno is a right in distributive justice,
though not in the full rigour of justice. The connec­
tion between merit de condigno and justice throws
light on certain texts of scripture such as those in
which eternal life is spoken of as a crown of justice
(27) Council of Trent. Session VI, cm. 32: Denz. 812.

208

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

(28) , a retribution made according to each one’s work
(29) , or the recompense of a labour which God could
not pass over (30).
A person in the state of grace cannot, however,
merit grace de condigno for another—for example,
the conversion of a sinner or another’s advance in
charity. The reason is that Christ alone has been
constituted Head of the human race to regenerate
men and to lead them to salvation (31). In other
words the merit de condigno of the just, and even of
Mary, is incommunicable. One person can, however,
merit grace for another by a lower kind of merit—
that known as de congruo proprie, or merit of be­
comingness. Merit de congruo is founded on charity
or friendship with God rather than on justice:
theologians say that it is founded on the rights of
friendship, in jure amicabili. St. Thomas explains
it thus : “ Since a man in the state of grace does God’s
will, it is in keeping with the proprieties (or rights)
of friendship that God should do his will in saving
another person (for his sake)—although it can hap­
pen that at times there will be an obstacle on the side
of the other person ” (32). In this way, a good
Christian mother, for example can, by her good works,
her love of God and of her neighbour, merit the
conversion of her son de congruo proprie. St. Monica
obtained the conversion of St. Augustine by that kind
of merit as well as by her prayers : “ The son of so
many tears ” said St. Ambrose, “ could not be lost.”
This third kind of merit is that of Mary in our
regard. It should be noted that it is merit in the
(28) II Tim. iv, 8.
(29) Rom. 11. 6-7.
(30) Hebr. vl, 19.
(31) Cf. Acts iv, 12: “There is no other name under heaven
given to men, whereby we must be saved.” Cf. also la Hae,
q.114, a.6.
(32) la Ilae, q.114, a.6.

MARY’S MERITS FOR US

209

proper sense of the term since it is founded on the
rights of friendship and presupposes the state of
grace in the person meriting. The reason why it is
truly and properly merit, and not something else or
something less, is that the idea of merit is analogical,
and admits therefore of differing senses which bear
some proportion to one another. Thus there are,
lower than the merits of Christ, and lower than the
merits whereby the just man merits for himself, the
merits de congruo proprie, founded not on the rights
of strict equality of justice, nor even on the rights
of distributive justice, but on the rights of friendship
(33).
There is a fourth member of the merit group which
is merit in an improper sense of the term. It is that
of the sinner in the state of mortal sin who prays to
God under the impulse of an actual grace. His prayer
has impetratory value; it addresses itself to God’s
mercy and not to His justice, and it is founded not on
the rights of friendship but on the actual grace which
moves the sinner to pray. It is merit de congruo im­
proprie—merit of becomingness in the wide or im­
proper sense.
Mary’s Merit de Congruo for Us.
Once the nature of merit de congruo has been
explained, it is at once evident that Mary could merit
for us de congruo just as any mother can merit for
her children. Hence, it is in no way astonishing that
from the 16th century on theologians have taught
that Mary merited for us de congruo proprie all that
(33) The term merit de condigno has sometimes been trans­
lated as merit properly so called. This is a mistake, since it
Implies that merit de congruo proprie is not properly merit
at all.
o

210

MARY'S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

Jesus merited for us de condigno. Suarez is very
explicit. He shows, by appealing to a wide tradition,
that though Mary merited nothing for us de condigno,
since she was not constituted head of the Church,
she co-operated in our salvation by her merits de
congruo (34). John of Cartagena (35), Novatus (36),
Chr. de Véga (37), Théophile Raynaud (38), George
of Rhodes (39), all teach the same as Suarez. Later
theologians follow this teaching also. Among the 19th
and 20th century theologians the following may be
mentioned: Ventura, Scheeben, Terrien, Billot,
Lépicier, Campana, Hugon, Bittremieux, Merkelbach,
Friethoff, and all those who have written in recent
years on the universal mediation of the Blessed
Virgin.
We may conclude this list of authorities with the
words of Pius X in his encyclical Ad Diem Ilium, Feb.
2nd, 1904 : “ Mary · ·. since she surpasses all creatures
in holiness and union with Christ, and since she has
been associated by Him with the work of salvation,
(34) In lam P. S. Thomae, t. Il, disp. XXIII, sect. I, no. 4:
“ Quamvis B. Virgo nec nos redemerit, nec aliquid de condigno
nobis meruerit, tamen, impetrando, merendo de congruo, et
ad incarnationem Christi suo modo cooperando, ad salutem
nostram aliquo modo cooperata est ...
Et eisdem modis
saepissime sancti Patres B. Virgini attribuunt, quod nostrae
fuerit salutis causa.” He then proceeds to quote St. Irenaeus,
St. Augustine, St. Fulgentius, St. Anselm, St. Bernard, St.
Germanus, St. Ephrem, St. Peter Damien, Richard of St.
Victor, Innocent III, in support of his thesis.
(35) Opera, t. II, p. 30 sqq.
(36) De eminentia Deiparae virginis Mariae, Rome, 1629, t.I,
pp. 379. sqq..
(37) Theologia Mariana, Naples, 1866, t. II, pp. 441 sqq.
(38) Opera, t.VI, pp. 224 sqq. Raynaud stresses the point
that the redemption as accomplished by Jesus is of an in­
finite and superabundant value and does not need any com­
plement from Mary’s side.
(39) Disp. theol. schol., tr. VIII, De Deipara virgine Maria,
t. II, p. 265, Lyon, 1661. George of Rhodes states that Mary
merited for us de congruo all that Jesus merited for us de
condigno.

MARY’S MERITS FOR ÜS

211

has merited for us de congruo, as it is termed, all that
Christ merited for us de condigno, and is the principal
minister in the distribution of graces ”(40).
As has been remarked (41) there is a double diffe­
rence between Mary’s merit de congruo, for others and
that of ordinary souls in the state of grace. The first
difference is that Mary merited all graces, and not
some only, in that way.
The second is that she
merited the acquisition of grace as well as its appli­
cation, since, by her union with Jesus on Calvary, she
had a share in the act of redemption itself even be­
fore interceding for us in heaven.
The doctrine expressed by Pius X in the words
quoted just now are merely an application to Mary
of the commonly received doctrine regarding the
nature and condition of merit de congruo proprie.
Some theologians look on it as morally certain; others
as a certain theological conclusion; others as a truth
formally and implicitly revealed and capable of being
defined as a dogma of faith. In our opinion, it is at
least a certain theological conclusion.
We shall
return to the point later (pp. 251-256).
What is the Extension of Mary’s Merit for Us?

To answer this question it is enough to recall what
Jesus has merited for us, since Mary has been
associated with Him in the whole work of redemption
and since the theologians—and their teaching has
the authority of Pius X to support it—teach in general
that Mary merited de congruo all that Jesus merited
for us de condigno (42). But Jesus merited in justice
(40) Denz. 3034.
Concerning this text cf. Merkelbach,
'luriologia, p 328.
(41) Merkelbach, ib., p.329.
(42) Under the Old Dispensatio» graces were given—as it
.■.re on credit—in view of the future merits of Jesus, with

212

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

all the graces required that all men should really be
enabled to observe the commandments, even though
in point of fact they do not observe them. He merited
also all efficacious graces and their effects—that is to
say, the effective accomplishment by men of the
divine will. He merited finally for the elect all the
effects of their predestination: their Christian voca­
tion, their justification, their final perseverance, and
their eternal glory (43).
It follows that Mary has merited all these same
graces de congruo and that she asks for their appli­
cation now in heaven and distributes them (44).

The foregoing points show in what an elevated, in­
timate and all-embracing manner Mary is our
spiritual mother, Mother of all men. We can suspect
too what her care must be for those who are not con­
tent to invoke her at distant intervals but who
consecrate themselves to her that she may lead them
to intimacy with Jesus, as St. Grignon de Montfort
which were associated those of Mary. Thus, Mary’s merits
de congruo extended by anticipation to the just of the Old
Dispensation.
(43) Cf. Illa, q.24, a.4, and the commentaries. Though we
cannot merit our final perseverance for ourselves (it can be
obtained by prayer, the value of which is distinct from merit,
as we have shown), Our Blessed Lord has merited it in justice
for those who will persevere and Our Lady has merited it also
de congruo.
(44) It follows from the principles enunciated in this
section that Jesus has merited for Mary all the effects of her
predestination, except the divine maternity. The reason for
this exception is that to merit it would be equivalent to
meriting the Incarnation, that is, to meriting Himself. Among
the graces He merited for Mary are included: her initial
fulness of grace, her preservation from original sin. all the
actual graces by which the Initial fulness was increased, final
perseverance, and glory.

MARY’S MERITS FOR US

213

explains so admirably in the following extract from
his Treatise on True Devotion.
Treatise, Ch. I, a.2 : “ Mary is necessary for men
that they may arrive at their final end. (Devotion to
Mary is not therefore a work of supererogation, as is
devotion to any particular saint: it is necessary, and
when it is true, faithful and persevering, it is a sign
of predestination). That devotion is still more
necessary for those who are called to special*perfection, and I do not think it possible that anyone can
arrive at intimate union with Our Blessed Lord and
perfect fidelity to the Holy Ghost without a great
spirit of union with Our Blessed Lady and of depen­
dence on her assistance ... I have said that this will
happen especially towards the end of the world . . .
because then the Most High and His Holy Mother will
need to form great saints . . . These great saints, full
of grace and zeal, will be chosen to oppose the
enemies of God who will rage on every side, and they
will be singularly devout to Our Lady, enlightened by
her, nourished by her, led by her spirit, sustained by
her and kept under her protection, in such wise that
they fight with one hand and build with the other . . .
That will arouse many enemies, but it will also yield
many victories and much glory to God.”
This noble spiritual doctrine, the fruits of which we
see daily more clearly, is the normal consequence, on
the level of contemplation and intimate union with
God, of the doctrine admitted by all theologians:
that Mary has merited de congruo all that Jesus has
merited for men de condigno, and especially has she
merited for the elect the effects of their predesti­
nation.

214

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

Article III
The Sufferings of Mary as Co-Redemptrix

How Did Mary Make Satisfaction For Us?
The purpose of satisfaction is to repair the offence
offered to God and to make Him once more favourable
to the sinner. The offence offered by mortal sin has
about it a certain infinity, since offence is measured
by the dignity of the person offended. Mortal sin, by
turning the sinner away from God, his final end, de­
nies in practice to God His infinite rights as the
Supreme Good and destroys His reign in souls.
It follows from this that only the Incarnate Word
could offer to the Father perfect and adequate satis­
faction for the offence of mortal sin (45).
For
satisfaction to be perfect, it must proceed from a love
and oblation which are as pleasing to God as, or more
pleasing than, all sins united are displeasing to Him
(46). But every act of charity elicited by Jesus had
these qualities for His Divine Person gave them infi­
nite satisfactory and meritorious value. A meritorious
work becomes satisfactory (or one of reparation and
expiation) when there is something painful about it.
Hence, in offering His life in the midst of the greatest
physical and moral sufferings, Jesus offered satisfac­
tion of an infinite and superabundant value to His
Father. He alone could make satisfaction in strict
(45) It is easier to knock down than to build up. The offence
of a creature’s mortal sin has a certain infinity from the side
of the Person offended, whereas the creature’s love is limited
because of the limitations of its principle. Besides, mortal sin
destroys the life of grace, and once that has been lost, we
cannot be restored to it by ourselves.
(46) Illa, q.l, a.2, ad 2; q48, a.2.

THE SUFFERINGS OF MARY AS CO-REDEMPTRIX

215

justice since the value of satisfaction like that of
merit comes from the person, and the Person of Jesus,
being divine, was of infinite dignity.
It was, however, possible to associate a satisfaction
of becomingness (de congruo) to Jesus’ satisfaction,
just as a merit of becomingness was associated to His
merit. In explaining this point, we shall show all the
more clearly the depth and extent of Mary’s
sufferings.

Mary offered for us a satisfaction of becomingness
(de convenientia) which was the greatest in value
after that of her Son.
When a meritorious work is in some way painful it
has value as satisfaction as well. Thus theologians
commonly teach, following upon what has been ex­
plained in the previous section, that Mary satisfied
for all sins de congruo in everything in which Jesus
satisfied de condigno. Mary offered God a satisfaction
which it was becoming that He should accept: Jesus
satisfied for us in strict justice.
As Mother of the Redeemer, Mary was closely united
to Jesus by perfect conformity of will, by humility,
by poverty, by suffering—and most particularly by
her compassion on Calvary. That is what is meant
when it is said that she offered satisfaction along
with Him. Her satisfaction derives its value from
her dignity as Mother of God, from her great charity,
from the fact that there was no fault in herself
which needed to be expiated, and from the intensity
of her sufferings.
The Fathers treat of this when they speak of Mary
“ standing ” at the foot of the Cross, as St. John says
(John xix, 25). They recall the words of Simeon, “Thy
own soul a sword shall pierce ” and they show that

216

MARY'S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

Mary suffered in proportion to her love for her cruci­
fied Son; in proportion also to the cruelty of His
executioners, and the atrocity of the torments in­
flicted on Him Who was Innocence itself (47). The
liturgy also has taught many generations of the
faithful that Mary merited the title of Queen of
Martyrs by her most painful martyrdom of heart.
That is the lesson of the Feasts of the Compassion of
the Blessed Virgin and of the Seven Dolours, as well
as of the Stabat Mater.
Leo XIII summed up this doctrine in the statement
that Mary was associated with Jesus in the painful
work of the redemption of mankind (48). Pius X
calls her “ the repairer of the fallen world ” (49) and
continues to show how she was united to the priest­
hood of her Son : “ Not only because she consented to
become the mother of the only Son of God so as to
make sacrifice for the salvation of men possible, but
also in the fact that she accepted the mission of pro­
tecting and nourishing the Lamb of sacrifice, and
when the time came led Him to the altar of
immolation—in this also must we find Mary’s glory.
Mary’s community of life and sufferings with her Son
was never broken off.
To her as to Him may be
applied the words of the prophet: My life is passed in
dolours and my days in groanings. To conclude this
list of Papal pronouncements we may refer to the
words of Benedict XV : “ In uniting herself to the
(47) Cf. St. Ephrem, Oratio ad Virginem; St. Ambrose, De
Instit. Virg., c. 7; Epist. 25 ad Eccles. Vercell.; St. Bernard,
Sermo de Passione, Sermo de duodecim stellis, Sermo Dom.
infra Oct. Ass.; St. Albert the Great, Mariale, q.42; St. Bona­
venture. Sermo I de B. V.; St. Laurence Justinian, Sermo de
nativ. Virginis.
(48) Encycl. Jucunda Semper, Sept. 8th, 1894: “Consors cum
Christo existlt laboriosae pro humano genere expiationis."
(49) Encycl. Ad diem ilium, Feb. 2nd, 1904: ‘‘ Reparatrix
perditi orbis.”

THE SUFFERINGS OF MARY AS CO-REDEMPTRIX

217

Passion and Death of her Son she suffered almost
unto death; as far as it depended on her, she im­
molated her Son, so that it can be said that with Him
she redeemed the human race ” (50).

The Depth and Fruitfulness of Mary’s
Sufferings as Co-Redemptrix

Mary’s sufferings have the character of satisfaction
from the fact that like Jesus and in union with Him,
she suffered because of sin or of the offence it offers
to God. This suffering of hers was measured by her
love of God Whom sin offended, by her love of Jesus
crucified for our sins, and by her love of us whom sin
had brought to spiritual ruin. In other words, it was
measured by her fulness of grace, which had never
ceased to increase from the time of the Immaculate
Conception. Already Mary had merited more by the
easiest acts than the martyrs in their torments be­
cause of her greater love. What must have been the
value of her sufferings at the foot of the Cross, granted
the understanding she then had of the mystery of the
Redemption !
In the spiritual light which then flooded her soul,
Mary saw that all souls are called to sing the glory
(50) Cf. Denz. 3034. no. 4. In this same place reference is
made to the words of Pius XI: “Virgo perdolens redemptionis
opus Jesu Christo participavit ’’ and to a decree of the Holy
Office praising the custom of adding after the name of Jesus
that of His Mother, our Co-Redcjnptrix, the Blessci Virg'.n
Mary. The same Congregation has indulgenced (Jan. 22nd,
1914) the prayer in which Mary is addressed as Co-Redemp­
trix of the human race. Cf. Diet, de Théol. Cath., art. Marie,
col. 2396: "Since the word ‘Co-Redemptrix ’ signifies of itself
simple co-operation in the work of redemption, and since it
has received in the theological usage of centuries the very
precise meaning of secondary and dependent co-operation ...
there can be no serious objection to its use. on condition that
it be accompanied by some expression indicating that, Mary’s
role in this co-operation is secondary and dependent.”

218

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

of God. Every soul is called .to be as it were a ray of
the divinity, a spiritual ray of knowledge and love,
for our minds are made to know God and our wills to
love Him. But though the heavens tell God’s glory
unfailingly, thousands of souls turn from their
Creator. Instead of that divine radiation, instead of
God’s exterior glory and His Kingdom, there are
found in countless souls the three wounds called by
St. John the concupiscence of the flesh, the concupis­
cence of the eyes, and the pride of life: living as if
there were no desirable love except carnal love, no
glory except that of fame and honour, and no Lord
and Master, no end, except man himself.
Mary saw all that evil, all those wounds in souls,
just as we see the evils and wounds of bodies. Her
fulness of grace had given her an immense capacity
to suffer from the greatest of evils, sin. She suffered
as much as she loved God and souls: God offended by
sin and souls whom it rendered worthy of eternal
damnation. Most of all did Mary see the crime of
deicide prepared in hearts and brought to execution :
she saw the terrible paroxysm of hatred of Him Who
is the Light and the Author of salvation.
To understand her sufferings, we must think too of
her love, both natural and supernatural, of her only
Son Whom she not only loved but, in the literal sense
of the term, adored since He was her God. She had
conceived Him miraculously. She loved Him with
the love of a virgin—the purest, richest and most
tender charity that has ever been a mother’s. Nor
was her grief diminished by ignorance of anything
that might make it more acute. She knew the reason
for the crucifixion. She knew the hatred of the Jews,
His chosen people—her people. She knew that it was
all for sinners.
From the moment when Simeon foretold the

THE SUFFERINGS OF MARY AS CO-REDEMPTRIX

219

Passion—already so clearly prophesied by Isaias—
and her compassion, she offered and did not cease
to offer Him Who would be Priest and Victim, and
herself in union with Him. This painful oblation
was renewed over years. Of old, an angel had de­
scended to prevent Abraham’s immolation of his son
Isaac. But no angel came to prevent the immolation
of Jesus.

In his sermon on the Compassion of Our Lady, we
read the following magnificent words of Bossuet: “ It
is the will of the Eternal Father that Mary should not
only be immolated with the Innocent Victim and
nailed to the Cross by the nails that pierce Him, but
should as well be associated with the mystery which
is accomplished by His death . . . Three things occur
in the sacrifice of Our Saviour and constitute its per­
fection. There are the sufferings by which His
humanity was crushed. There is His resignation to
the will of His Father by which He humbly offered
Himself. There is the fruitfulness by which He brings
us to the life of grace by dying Himself. He suffers
as a victim who must be bruised and destroyed. He
submits as a priest who sacrifices freely; voluntarie
sacrificabo tibi (Ps liii, 8). Finally He brings us to
life by His sufferings as the Father of a new people ...
“ Mary stands near the Cross. With what eyes she
contemplates her Son all covered with blood, all
covered with wounds, in form now hardly a man!
The sight is enough to cause her death. If she draws
near to that altar, it is to be immolated there: and
there, in fact, does she feel Simeon’s sword pierce
her heart...
“ But did her dolours overcome her, did her grief
cast her to the ground? Stabat juxta crucem; she

220

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

stood by the Cross. The sword pierced her heart
but did not take away her strength of soul : her con­
stancy equals her affliction, and her face is the face
of one no less resigned than afflicted.
“ What remains then but that Jesus Who sees her
feel His sufferings and imitate His resignation should
have given her a share in His fruitfulness. It is with
that thought that He gave her John to be her son:
Woman, behold thy son. Woman, who suffer with me,
be fruitful with me, be the mother of my children
whom I give you unreservedly in the person of this
disciple; I give them life by my sufferings, and
sharing in the bitterness that is mine your affliction
will make you fruitful.”
In the sermon, of which the paragraphs I have
quoted are the opening, Bossuet develops the three
main points outlined and shows that Mary’s love for
Jesus was enough to make her a martyr: “ One Cross
was enough for the well-beloved Son and the
mother.” She is nailed to the Cross by her love for
Him. Without a special grace she would have died
of her agony.
Mary gave birth to Jesus without pain: but she
brings the faithful forth in the most cruel suffering.
“ At what price she has bought them ! They have
cost her her only Son. She can be mother of Christians
only by giving her Son to death. O agonising fruit­
fulness! It was the will of the Eternal Father that
the adoptive sons should be born by the death of the
True Son . ·. What man would adopt at this price and
give his son for the sake of strangers? But that is
what the Eternal Father did. We have Jesus’ word
for it: God so loved the world as to give His only
begotten Son (John iii, 16).
“ (Mary) is the Eve of the New Testament and the
mother of all the faithful; but that is to be at the

THE SUFFERINGS OF MARY AS CO-REDEMPTRIX

221

price of her First-born. United to the Eternal Father
she must offer His Son and hers to death. It is for
that purpose that providence has brought her to the
foot of the Cross. She is there to immolate her Son
that men may have life . . ■ She becomes mother of
Christians at the cost of an immeasurable grief ...”
We should never forget what we have cost Mary. The
thought will lead to true contrition for our sins. The
regeneration of our souls has cost Jesus and Mary
more than we can ever think.

We may conclude this section by noting that Mary
the Co-Redemptrix has given us birth at the foot of
the Cross by the greatest act of faith, hope and love
that was possible to her on such an occasion. One
may even say that her act of faith was the greatest
ever elicited, since Jesus had not the virtue of faith
but the beatific vision. In that dark hour when the
faith of the apostles themselves seemed to waver,
when Jesus seemed vanquished and his work annihi­
lated, Mary did not cease for an instant to believe
that her Son was the Saviour of mankind and that
in three days, He would rise again as He had foretold.
When He uttered His last words “ It is consummated”
Mary understood in the fulness of her faith that the
work of salvation had been accomplished by His most
painful immolation. The evening before Jesus had
instituted the Eucharistic sacrifice and the Christian
priesthood; she sees now something of the influence
the sacrifice of the Cross will exercise. She knows
that Jesus is the true Lamb of God Who takes away
the sin of the world, that He is the conqueror of sin
and the demon, and that in three days He will con­
quer death, sin’s consequence. She sees the hand of
God where even the most believing see only darkness

222

MARY'S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

and desolation. Hers was the greatest act of faith
ever elicited by a creature, a faith higher than that
of the angels when they were as yet in their period of
trial.
Calvary saw too her supreme act of hope at a
moment when everything seemed lost. She grasped
the force of the words spoken to the good thief:
“This day thou shalt be with me in paradise”;
heaven, she realised, was about to be open for the
elect.
It was finally her supreme act of charity : so to love
God as to offer His only Son in the most painful
agony : to love God above everything at the moment
when He tried her in the highest and deepest of her
loves, even in the object of her adoration—and that
because of our sins.
It is true that the theological virtues grew in Mary
up to the time of her death, for these acts of faith,
hope and charity were not broken off but continued
in her as a kind of state. They even expanded in the
succeeding calm, like a river which becomes more
powerful and majestic as it nears the ocean. The
point which theology wishes to stress is not that of
Mary’s subsequent growth in the virtues but the
equality between her sacrifice and her merits at the
foot of the Cross itself: both her sacrifice and her
merits were of inestimable value and their fruitful­
ness, while not approaching that of Christ’s sacrifice
and merits, surpasses anything the human tongue
can utter. Theologians express this by saying that
Mary made satisfaction for us de congruo, in propor­
tion to her immense charity, while Jesus made
satisfaction de condigno.
Even the saints who have been most closely
associated with the sufferings of the Saviour did not
enter as Mary did into the most secret depths of the

THE SUFFERINGS OF MARY AS CO-REDEMPTRIX

223

Passion. St. Catherine de Ricci had every Friday
during twelve years an ecstasy of pain which lasted
twenty-eight hours and during which she lived over
again all the sufferings of the way of the Cross. But
even such sufferings fell far short of those of Mary.
Mary’s heart suffered in sympathy with all the agony
of the Sacred Heart to such a point that she would
have died of the experience had she not been
especially strengthened.
Thereby she became the consoler of the afflicted,
for she had suffered more than all, and patroness of
a happy death. We have no idea how fruitful these
sufferings of hers have been during twenty centuries.

Mary’s Participation as Co-Redemptrix in the
Priesthood of Christ.
Though Mary may be termed Co-Redemptrix in the
sense we have explained, there can be no question of
calling her a priest in the strict sense of the word
since she has not received the priestly character and
cannot offer Holy Mass nor give s.acramental absolu­
tism
But, as we have seen already, her divine
maternity is a greater dignity than the priesthood of
the ordained priest in the sense that it is more to
give Our Saviour His human nature than to make His
body present in the Blessed Eucharist.
Mary has
given us the Priest of the sacrifice of the Cross, the
Principal Priest of the sacrifice of the Mass and the
Victim offered on the altar.
It is more also, and more perfect, to offer her only
Son and her God on the Cross as Mary did, by offering
herself with Him in community of suffering, than to
make the body of Our Lord present and to offer It on
the altar as the priest does at Holy Mass.
We must affirm, too, as has recently a careful

224

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

theologian who has devoted years to the study of these
questions (51) that “ it is a certain theological con­
clusion that Mary co-operated in some way in the
principal act of Jesus’ priesthood, by giving, as the
divine plan required, her consent to the sacrifice of
the Cross as it was accomplished by the Saviour.” In
another context he writes: “If we consider only
certain immediate effects of the priest’s action such
as the eucharistie consecration or the remission of
sins in the sacrament of penance, it is true that the
priest can do certain things which Mary, not having
the priestly power, cannot. But to look at the matter
so is not to compare dignities but merely particular
effects which are produced by a power which Mary
lacks and which do not necessarily indicate a higher
dignity ” (52).
But even if Mary cannot, for the reasons given, be
spoken of as priest in the strict sense of the term, it
remains true, as M. Olier has said, that she has re­
ceived the fulness of the spirit of the priesthood,
which is the spirit of Christ the Redeemer. That is
the reason why she is called Co-Redemptrix, a title
which, like that of Mother of God, implies a higher
dignity than that of the Christian priesthood (53).

Mary’s participation in the immolation and obla­
tion of Jesus, Priest and Victim, cannot be better
summed up than in the words of the Stabat Mater of
the Franciscan Jacopone de Todi (1228-1306).
The Stabat Mater manifests in a singularly striking
manner that supernatural contemplation of the
(51) E. Dublanchy, Diet, de Théol. Cath., art. Marie, col.
2396 sqq.
(52) lb., col. 2366.
(53) lb., col. 2365.

THE SUFFERINGS OF MARY AS CO-REDEMPTRIX

225

mystery of Christ crucified is part of .the normal way
of holiness. In precise and ardent words it speaks
of the wounding of the Saviour’s Heart and shows
the intimate and persuasive manner in which Mary
leads us to Him. Not only does Mary lead us to the
divine intimacy, in a sense she produces it in us : that
is what the repetition of the imperative “ Fac ” in the
following strophes brings out:

Eia Mater, fons amoris,
Me sentire vim doloris
Fac, ut tecum lugeam.

O Thou Mother! Fount of
love!
Touch my spirit from above,
Make my heart with thine
accord !

Fac ut ardeat cor meum
In amando Christum
Deum,
Ut sibi complaceam.

Make me feel as thou hast
felt;
Make my soul to glow and
melt
With the love of Christ my
Lord.

Fac ut portem Christi
mortem,
Passionis fac corsortem
Et plagas recolere.

Let rhe, to my latest breath,
In my body bear the death
Of that dying Son of thine.

Fac me plagis vulnerari
Fac me cruce inebriari,
Et cruore Filii.

Wounded with His every
wound,
Steep my soul till it hath
swoon’d
In His very blood away.
—Fr. Caswall

This is the prayer of a soul which, under a special
inspiration, wishes to know in a spiritual way the
wound of love and to be associated in these painful
p

226

MARY'S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

mysteries of adoring reparation as were John and the
holy women on Calvary—and Peter, too, when he
shed his bitter tears. Those tears of adoration and
sorrow are what the Stabat asks for in the following
strophes :
Fac me tecum pie flere,
Crucifixo condolere,
Donec ego vixero.

Let me mingle tears with
thee,
Mourning
Him
who
mourn’d for me,
All the days that I may live.

Juxta crucem tecum
stare,
Et me tibi sociare
In planctu desidero.

By the cross with thee to
stay.
There with thee to weep
and pray,
Is all I ask of thee to give.
—Fr. Caswall

Mary exercised therefore a universal mediation on
earth by meriting de congruo all that Jesus merited
de condigno and also by making similar satisfaction
in union with Him. For both Jesus and Mary, the
mediation exercised on earth is the foundation of that
now exercised in heaven of which we shall speak in
the next chapter.

CHAPTER III

Mary’s Universal Mediation in Heaven

Mary’s mediation in heaven which she has exer­
cised since the Assumption has as purpose to obtain
for Us the application at the appropriate time of
Jesus’ merits and hers, acquired during their life on
earth and especially on Calvary. We shall speak in
this connection of Mary’s power of intercession, of
the way in which she distributes graces or the mode
of her influence on us, and finally of the universality
of her mediation and of its definability.

Article I
Mary’s Power of Intercession

Even during her life on earth, Mary appears in the
gospels as distributing graces. Jesus sanctifies the
precursor through her when she comes to visit her
cousin Elisabeth. Through her He confirms the faith
of His disciples at Cana by performing the miracle
for which she asked. Through her He confirms John’s
faith on Calvary, saying “ Son, behold thy mother.”
Through her finally the Holy Ghost gave Himself to
the Apostles, for we read in the Acts (Acts i, 14) that
she prayed with them in the Cenacle while they
prepared themselves for the apostolate and for tbE
light and strength and graces of Pentecost.

228

MARY'S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

With still greater reason is Mary powerful in her
intercession now that she has entered heaven and has
been lifted up above the choirs of the angels. The
Christian sense of the faithful assures us that a
mother in heaven knows the spiritual needs of the
children she has left behind her on earth, and that
she prays for their salvation. It is a universal practice
in the Church for the faithful to recommend them­
selves to the prayers of the saints in heaven. As St.
Thomas says (1), when the saints were on earth,
their charity led them to pray for their neighbour.
With still greater reason do we say that in heaven
they pray for their neighbour since when their
charity is inflamed by the beatific vision it is greater
than it was on earth: their charity in heaven is un­
interrupted in its acts and proceeds from a fuller
realisation of human needs and the value of life
eternal.
The Council of Trent defined that the saints in
heaven pray for us and that it is useful to invoke
them (Denz. 984). Their merits and their expiation
have ceased, but not their prayer—no longer a prayer
of tearful supplication but one now of intercession.
St. Paul tells us that Our Blessed Lord does not
cease to make intercession for us (2). He is the prin­
cipal and necessary intercessor. But Jesus Himself
wishes that we should have recourse to Mary so that
our prayers may have greater value through being
presented by her.
As Mother of all men Mary knows the spiritual
needs of all men, knows all that concerns their salva­
tion. Because of her immense charity she prays for
them. And since she is all-powerful with her Son
because of the love by which they are united, she
(1) Ila Ilae, q.85, a.II.
(2) Rom. viii, 34; Hebr. vii, 25.

MARY’S POWER OF INTERCESSION

229

obtains from Him all the graces for which she asks—
that is to say, all the graces we receive.
This power of Mary’s intercession is proclaimed by
the faithful each time they recite the Hail Mary.

»
Theology explains the belief of the faithful by
pointing to three fundamental reasons for Mary’s
power of intercession.
The first of these is that since Mary is Mother of
men she knows all their spiritual needs. It is a
principle admitted by all theologians that the happi­
ness of the blessed in heaven would not be complete
if they did not know what happens on earth to the
extent to which it concerns them by reason of their
office, their role, or their relations with men. Such
knowledge is the object of a legitimate desire which
must find its satisfaction in beatitude, and with all
the more reason when the knowledge they desire is
of men’s spiritual needs and is therefore desired in
charity: it is in charity that the saints desire men’s
salvation so that they may glorify God with them
for all eternity and share thus in their happiness.
Fathers and mothers, for example, know from heaven
the needs of their children, especially those which
bear on their salvation. The same may be said of the
founders of religious institutes. With all the more
reason may the same be said of Our Lady, who has
the highest degree of glory after her Son : as Mother
of all men she must know everything which bears
directly or indirectly on the supernatural life which
she has been commissioned to give us and to nourish
in us. This universal knowledge, certain and de­
tailed, of all that concerns our destiny—our thoughts,
desires, the dangers in which we are, the graces we
need, temporal affairs which have some connection

230

MARY'S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

with our salvation—is a prerogative which belongs
to Mary because of her motherhood of God and her
spiritual motherhood of men (3).
Knowing our spiritual needs and even the temporal
needs which are connected with our salvation Mary
is obviously impelled by her great charity to intercede
for us. If a mother but suspects that her child needs
her help she flies to its side. There is no question
here of Mary’s acquiring new merits in heaven but
simply of her obtaining that her merits—and her
Son’s—be applied to us at the appropriate moment.
Is Mary’s prayer omnipotent? Tradition has
honoured Mary with the title, Omnipotentia supplex,
omnipotence in the order of supplication (4).
In support of the title, we may refer to the principle
that the intercession of the saints is proportioned to
their degree of glory in heaven, or of union with God
(Cf. Ila Ilae, q.83, a.II). It follows then that Mary
whose glory surpasses that of all the saints, must
have all power in intercession. Even before the 8th
century, this is the explicit teaching of St. Ephrem.
In the 8th century, the most clear-cut statements are
those of Andrew of Crete, of St. Germanus of Con­
stantinople, and of St. John Damascene. Towards
the end of the 11th century, St. Anselm and his
disciple Eadmer affirm Mary’s intercessory omniootence. a doctrine explained by St. Bernard and
(3) Cf. E. Dublanchy, Diet. Theol· Cath., art. Marie, col.
2412: “ Can it be said that even on earth Mary knew in detail
all that concerned the salvation and sanctification of all men?
It would appear that no satisfactory proof can be given to
support an affirmative answer to the question, especially in
regard to universal knowledge extending to all the details
concerning every individual.
But Mary has this perfect
knowledge in heaven where she exercises her universal inter­
cession and mediation for all the graces which follow from
the redemption.”
(4) For a list of extracts and references we refer the reader
to Hugon, O.P., Marie pleine de grâce, 5th edit., 1926, pp.
160-166; also to Merkelbach, Mariologia, pp. 345-371.

MARY’S POWER OF INTERCESSION

231

transmitted to succeeding generations of theologians.
Bossuet brings out the underlying principles very
well in his sermon on the Compassion of Our Lady,
when he recalls the two texts : “ God so loved the
world, as to give his only begotten Son ” (John iii, 16)
and “ He that spared not even his own Son, but de­
livered him up for us all, how hath he not also, with
him, given us all good things ” (Rom. viii, 32). Mary
in her turn has loved God and souls to the extent of
delivering up her Son, Jesus, on Calvary. She is in
consequence all-powerful with God the Father and
with Jesus to obtain all that is necessary for the
salvation of those who turn to her mediation.
One paragraph of the sermon deserves to be
quoted : “ Intercede for us, O Blessed Virgin Mary :
you have in your hands, if I may so speak, the key
that opens the treasury of the divine blessings. That
key is your Son: He closes and no one can open: He
opens and no one can close : it is His innocent blood
which makes us to be inundated with heavenly
graces. And to whom will He give the right to that
blood, if not to her from whom He drew all His blood
. . . For the rest, you live in such perfect union of
love with Him that it is impossible that your prayer
should not be heard.” It is enough, as St. Bernard
says, if Mary speaks to the Heart of Jesus.
The teaching of Tradition, thus formulated by
Bossuet, has been proclaimed by Leo XIII in his first
encyclical on the Rosary, September 1st, 1883, in
which he calls Mary the dispenser of heavenly graces,
coelestium administra gratiarum. In the encyclical
Jucunda semper, September 8th, 1894, the same Pope
makes his own the two statements of St. Bernard:
that God in His great mercy has made Mary our
Mediatrix, and that He has willed that all graces
should come to us through her. The same teaching

232

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

will be found in the encyclical Ad diem ilium, Feb.
2nd, 1904, where Mary is spoken of as “ the dispenser
of all the graces which have been acquired for us by
the Blood of Jesus.” Jesus is the source of these
graces: Mary is, as it were, the aqueduct, or—to use
another image—as it were the neck which unites the
Head to the members and transmits the vital impulse
to them : “ Ipsa est collum capitis nostri, per quod
omnia spiritualia dona corpori ejus mystico com­
municantur.” Benedict XV has consecrated this
teaching by approving the Mass and the liturgical
Office of Mary, Mediatrix of all graces, for the
universal Church.
As Fr. Merkelbach indicates (5), three points are to
be noted.
First of all, it is of faith that Mary prays for us,
and even for each one of us, in her capacity as Mother
of the Redeemer and of all men, and that her inter­
cession is very useful for us. This follows from the
general dogma of the intercession of the saints
(Council of Trent: Session 25). In support of this
assertion we may refer to the practice of the Church
in praying, Sancta Maria, ora pro nobis; Holy Mary,
pray for us. Legem credendi lex statuat supplicandi;
dogma and prayer have one and the same law (Denz.
139).
In the second place, Tradition teaches us as certain
that Mary’s powerful intercession can obtain for all
those who invoke her with the proper dispositions
all the graces required for salvation (6) and no one is
(5) Mariologia, pp. 345-349.
(6) An obstacle to grace may arise through lack of proper
dispositions or, if the prayer be for another, through that
other’s lack of dispositions. It should be noted that for the
exercise of Mary’s mediation of intercession it is not necessary
that one pray explicitly to her. By the fact that one prays
to God or to the saints, one prays implicitly to Mary according
to the present plan of our redemption. Besides, many graces

MARY’S POWER OF INTERCESSION

233

saved without her intervention. Thus the Church
repeats: Sentiant omnes tuum juvamen: Let all be
cognizant of your assistance.
In the third place, it is common and safe doctrine,
taught by different Popes, by the liturgy, and by
preachers throughout the world, that no grace is
granted us without Mary’s intervention. This is
contained clearly in the Mass and Office of Mary,
Mediatrix of all graces, and it would be at least rash
to deny it.
Historically, this doctrine will be found implicit in
the doctrine of Mary’s universal mediation up to the
8th century. It becomes more explicit as we draw
nearer to the 15th century, in the form of the affirma­
tion that all God’s gifts come to us through Mary as
intermediary. From the 16th century onwards, the
question has been examined under all its aspects.
Even the graces of the sacraments are considered to
fall under Mary’s universal mediation in the sense
that the dispositions which we must bring to the
reception of the sacraments are obtained through
her intercession (7). Besides, if Mary has merited de
congruo all that Jesus has merited for us de
condigno, it follows that she has merited the sacra­
mental graces themselves.
It is clear therefore that Mary’s intercession is
much more powerful and efficacious than that of all
the other saints—even taken all together—for the
other saints obtain nothing without her. Their
mediation is included under her universal mediation,
while hers is, in its turn, subordinated to that of
Jesus. There is another point to be noted: it is that
are given us without our praying for them at all, for example,
the actual grace required to begin to pray. However, prayer
offered explicitly to Mary with the proper dispositions has a
greater guarantee of calling down God’s grace.
(7) Cf. Diet. Théol. Cath., art. Marie, col. 2403.

234

MARY'S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

Mary has merited all the graces which she asks for
us, whereas the saints often ask for graces for others
which they have not merited themselves. Their
prayer could not then have the same efficacy as
Mary’s.
Regarding the efficacy of Mary’s prayer, a principle
which applies to the prayer of Christ may well be re­
called. The prayer of Christ is always heard when
the thing prayed for is asked absolutely and in con­
formity with the divine intentions which He knows
so well (8); it is not so heard, however, when the
thing prayed for is asked conditionally, as happened
in the case of the prayer of the Garden of Olives. In
the case of Mary’s prayer, she obtains infallibly from
her Son all that she asks absolutely and in conformity
with the divine intentions : these intentions she
knows, and her will is in complete accord with them.
What has been said in this section is sufficient to
show that Mary’s omnipotence in intercession, resting
as it does on the merits of the Saviour and on His
love for His Mother, is far from derogating from His
own universal mediation. On the contrary it is one
of its brightest manifestations, and throws into
clearer relief the marvellous way in which Jesus re­
deemed and adorned her who was so intimately
associated with Him in the redemption of men.

Article II
Mary

and the

Distribution of Grace

Does Our Lady distribute grace only in the sense
that she intercedes for each one of us and so obtains
(8) Cf. Illa q.21. a.4.

MARY AND THE DISTRIBUTION OF GRACE

235

that the fruits of the merits of her Son be applied to
each one of us at the appropriate moment, or does
she transmit graces to us in the way in which the
Sacred Humanity does? According to the teaching
of St. Thomas and many other theologians, the Sacred
Humanity is a physical instrumental cause of grace,
an instrument always united to the divinity and
higher than the sacraments, which are instruments
separated from the divinity.
St. Thomas has treated of this question in many
places in so far as it refers to Christ, the Head of the
Church (9). It is but reasonable to ask if something
similar to what he says about the Head may be
affirmed of her who is, according to the teaching of
Tradition, as it were the neck of the Mystical Body
which unites the Head to the members and transmits
the vital impulse to them.
®

In this connection theologians commonly admit
that Mary exercises moral causality by her past
merits and satisfaction and by her present inter­
cession. But very many stop there and do not admit
that she exercises any physical instrumental
causality (10). Other theologians admit physical
instrumental causality in subordination to the Sacred
Humanity. They rely in support of their thesis on
the traditional doctrine of Mary as the neck of the
(9) Illa, q.8. a.2, ad 1; q.13, a.2; q.48, a.6; q.49, a.l; q.50, a.6;
q.62, a.l and De Potentia, q.6, a.4.
(10) This negative answer is found in Suarez, III, disp. 23,
sect. I, no. 2. Contemporary theologians who adopt the same
position are Scheeben. Terrien. Godts, Bainvel, Campana, de
la Taille, Blttremieux, Friethoff, Grabmann, Van der Meersch,
Merkelbach.

236

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

Mystical Body, uniting Head and members, and
transmitting the vital influence to them (11).

It is certain that St. Thomas taught explicitly that
the Sacred Humanity and the sacraments of the New
Law are physical instrumental causes of grace. God
alone is its principal cause, since it is a participation
in His inner life. But there is no similar statement
of his about Our Lady. There are even theologians—
with whom we do not agree—who hold that he ex­
plicitly denied her any such causality (12). In his
explanation of the Ave Maria, he attributes to Mary
a fulness of grace which overflows on souls and
sanctifies them, but he does not say explicitly that
this overflowing is anything more than moral
causality.
However, since physical instrumental causality was
not an impossibility for the Sacred Humanity nor for
the sacraments—for example, for the words of the
priest at the consecration or when giving absolution
—in the opinion of St. Thomas and his commentators,
neither is it an impossibility for Mary (13). St.
Thomas even admits that a miracle-worker is some(11) This Is the position adopted by Hugon, O.P., La
causalité physique instrumentale, 1907, pp. 194-205; de
Commer. De munere Matris Dei in Ecclesia gerendo; Lépicier,
Girerd, Fernandez, Lavaud, Bernard.
(12) In Illa, q.60, a.8. All that is stated here is that one
cannot baptise in the name of Mary, as we do in the name of
the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, since she is not operative in
Baptism even though her intercession is of value to the
baptised person to help him to preserve his baptismal grace.
(13) Besides the arguments from Scripture and Tradition
for the physical instrumental causality of the Sacred
Humanity there is a theological argument: to act physically
as well as morally is more perfect than to act only morally.
But we must attribute what is more perfect to the Humanity
of Christ, provided it is not incompatible with the redemptive

MARY AND THE DISTRIBUTION OF GRACE

237

times instrumental cause of a miracle, for example,
when it is worked through a blessing (14). Not onlycan he obtain the miracle by his prayer, he may even
perform it as God’s instrument.
It is not possible therefore to be certain that Mary
did not exercise a similar influence in regard to grace.
We must also allow for the fact that God’s master­
pieces—among which we must include Mary—are
richer, more beautiful, more brimful of life than we
can find words to describe.
But at the same time it must be admitted that it
does not seem possible to prove with certainty that
Mary did exercise physical causality. Theology will
hardly advance beyond serious probability in this
matter for the reason that it is very hard to see in
the traditional texts quoted where precisely the literal
sense ends and the metaphorical sense begins. Those
who are in the habit of using metaphors whenever
they can will not appreciate this difficulty. But any­
one who is accustomed to using words in their exact
and proper sense will be fully sensible of it. When
Tradition tells us that Mary’s position in the Mystical
Body is comparable to that of the neck which unites
the Head to the members and transmits the vital
impulse to them, at the very least the metaphor it
uses is an expressive one, but we cannot affirm with
certainty that it is more than a metaphor.
However, as Father Hugon points out, the compari­
son does not seem to be given credit for all its force
unless physical instrumental causality be admitted
Incarnation. Hence we must attribute to the Humanity of
Christ the physical instrumental causality of grace. This same
argument is valid, within all due limits, If applied to Mary,
and establishes our thesis as probable.
(14) Cf. Ha Ilae, q.178, de gratia miraculorum, a.l, ad 1:
'* Potest contingere quod mens miracula facientis moveatur
ad faciendum aliquid, ad quod sequitur effectus miraculi, quod
Deus sua virtute facit.”

238

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

(15). Fr. R. Bernard, O.P., is of the same opinion:
“ God and His Christ make use of her (Mary) in this
sense, that they make all the graces which they
destine for us pass through her ... By using her as
intermediary, They temper Their action all the more
with humanity, without in any way diminishing its
divine efficacy. They make Mary live by the life we
are to live by. She is first filled to overflowing with
it. Grace is pre-formed in her and receives in her the
imprint of a special beauty. All grace and all graces
come to us thus canalized and distributed by her,
impregnated with that special sweetness which she
imparts to all she touches and all she does.
“ By her action Mary enters therefore into our lives
as bearer of the divine. In the whole course of our
lives, from the cradle and before it to the grave and
beyond it, there is nothing of grace in which she had
no part. She shapes us to the likeness of Jesus . . .
She leaves her mark on everything and adds to the
perfection of what passes through her hands. I have
said that we are sustained by her prayer: we are
similarly sustained by her action and, if one may say
it, have our spiritual being in her hands.
Every
Christian is a child of Mary, but a child is not worthy
of the name unless it is formed by its mother ” (16).
By admitting that Mary not only obtains grace for
us by her prayers but transmits it to us by her action,
a fuller meaning is given to her titles of treasurer
and dispensatrix of all graces. This same fuller
meaning seems to be suggested by certain strong and
beautiful expressions found in the Liturgy, especially
in the Stabat, where the repetition of the imperative
(15)
(16)

La causalité instrumentale en théologie,
Le Mystère de Marie, 1933, p.462.

p.201.

MARY AND THE DISTRIBUTION OF GRACE

239

Fac implies that Mary in some way produces the
grace of intimacy with Christ in us (17).
Mary’s influence on our souls remains, it is true,
shrouded in mystery, but it appears probable that it
is more than moral : she seems to enter into the pro­
duction of grace as a free and knowing instrument,
somewhat as a miracle-worker can perform a miracle
by his contact and his blessing. Even in the natural
order a smile, a look, the tone of the voice, communi­
cate something of the life of the soul.

In addition to the argument drawn from the
traditional formulae there are theological ones which
have a certain weight.
As Fr. Hugon says ( 18) : “ Once it is granted that the
angels and the saints are frequently physical
secondary causes of miracles, it seems quite natural
to postulate the same power for the Mother of God
and in a higher degree.” And if she is the physical
instrumental cause of miracles which God alone
produces as Principal Cause, what reason can there
be for not admitting that she causes grace in the
same manner? Fr. Hugon continues “ Every pre­
rogative which is possible in itself and which
harmonises with the role and dignity of the Mother
of God should be found in Mary . . . She receives
under a secondary title everything that Jesus has
under a full and primary title—merits, satisfaction,
intercession. Why should this relation between
Mother and Son not extend to the order of physical
(17) Cf. the strophes quoted on p. 225.
(18) La causalité instrumentale en théologie, 1907, pp. 195
sqq.

240

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

causality? What necessitates an exception? (19).
Would it not appear that the supernatural parallelism
between Jesus and Mary should be continued to the
very end, and that the Mother should be secondary
instrument wherever the Son is first and conjoined
instrument? ... It seems but natural that Mary’s acts
of which God makes continual use in the order of
intercession should be elevated and transformed by
His infinite fecundity and commissioned to com­
municate the life of grace instrumentally to souls.”
Another argument may be drawn from the fact
that the priest who absolves is instrumental cause of
grace by reason of his union with the Redeemer. But
Mary is no less closely united to the Redeemer since
she is Mother of God and Co-Redemptrix.
The influence which Jesus, Head of the Mystical
Body, exercises is itself most mysterious since it is
supernatural. No wonder then if that which Mary
exercises over and above her intercession is also a
mystery. We may note before concluding that Mary’s
influence seems to be exercised especially on our
sensibility—which is sometimes so rebellious or so
distracted—to calm it, to subordinate it to our higher
faculties, and to make it easy for these latter to sub­
mit to the movement of the Head when He transmits
us the divine life (20).

Though the manner of Mary’s action upon us is
hidden, the fact of her influence is in no way doubt­
ful. It is beyond question that Mary is dispensatrix
(19) To justify the exception it would appear that there
should be some positive reason.
(20) In this we see the application of St. Thomas’s principle
that the instrument disposes in preparation for the action of
the principal agent.

MARY AND THE DISTRIBUTION OF GRACE

241

of all graces, at least by her intercession. It may be
added with Fr. Merkelbach (21) that Mary does not
intercede in the same way as the other saints: her
prayer is not such as may possibly not be heard, but
rather it is like the prayer of Christ, our Mediator and
Saviour, Whose intercession is effective in fact as well
as in right. The intercession of Christ, says St.
Thomas (22), is the expression of His desire for our
salvation which He acquired at the price of His
precious blood. Since Mary was associated with the
redemptive work of her Son she is associated with
His intercession; she too expresses a desire which is
always united to that of Jesus.
In this sense she
disposes of the graces which she asks for : her prayer
is the efficacious cause of their being obtained, and
she is united also to Christ’s influence in transmitting
them.
For that reason the Church sings in the hymn of
Matins of the Feast of Mary Mediatrix of all graces :
Cuncta, quae nobis meruit Redemptor,
Dona partitur genitrix Maria,
Cujus ad votum sua fundit ultro
Munera Natus (23).
She bestows on us all the graces which her Son has
merited for us and which she has merited with Him.

If, as it would appear, Mary transmits to us by
physical instrumental causality all the graces which
we receive, all the actual graces which are given us
(21) Mariologia, p. 370.
(22) Commentarium in Ep. ad Hebr., vii, 25 and ad Rom.,
viii, 34.
(23) All the gifts which the Saviour merited for us are
bestowed by His Mother Mary. The Son gladly loads us with
benefits In answer to her prayer.
Q

242

MARY'S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

to be the air which the soul breathes unceasingly, it
follows that we are at all times under her influence,
subordinated to the influence of Jesus the Head of
the Mystical Body; she transmits to us continuously
the vital influence which comes from Him.
But even if her action upon us is only the moral
causality of intercession she is present, by an affective
presence, in souls in the state of grace who pray to
her just as a beloved object, even if physically distant,
is present to the person who loves it. Mary being
physically present in body and soul in heaven is
physically distant from us on earth.
But she is
affectively present within the interior souls who love
her (24).
©

Mary’s influence becomes increasingly all-em­
bracing as souls advance in the interior life. This
has been often noted by St. Grignon de Montfort.
“ The Holy Ghost,” he says, “became fruitful on earth
through Mary, His spouse. It was with her and of
her that He produced His masterpiece, God-mademan, and that He produces daily till the end of the
world the predestined members of the body of our
adorable Head : that is why He is all the more active
to produce Jesus Christ in a soul the more He finds
there Mary, His dear and inseparable spouse.
“This does not mean that Mary gave the Holy Ghost
His fecundity ... It means that the Holy Ghost mani­
fests His fecundity by making use of Mary, even
though He does not need her, to produce Jesus Christ
(24) Cf. la Ilae, q28, a.l: “Duplex est unio amantis ad
amatum. Una quidem secundum rem: puta cum amatum
praesentialiter adest amanti. Alia vero secundum affectum
... Secundam autem unionem facit (amor) formaliter; quia
ipse amor est talis unio, vel nexus."

MARY AND THE DISTRIBUTION OF GRACE

243

and His members in her and through her: this is a
mystery of grace unknown even to the most learned
and spiritual of Christians ” (25).
As Fr. Hugon remarks à propos of these words of
St. Grignon de Montfort (26): “The exterior fecun­
dity of the Divine Paraclete is the production of
grace, not in the order of moral causality—for the
Holy Ghost is not a meritorious or impetratory cause
—but in the order of physical causality. To reduce
this fecundity to act is to produce physically grace
and the other works of holiness which are appro­
priated to the Third Divine Person. From this it
follows that the Holy Ghost produces grace physically
in souls by Mary: she is the secondary physical
instrument of the Holy Ghost. Such seems to us the
import of these strong expressions of the saint: such
the sublime doctrine which he says is a mystery of
grace unknown even to the most learned and
spiritual of Christians.” Mary’s virginal motherhood
reaches its completion in her transmission of the
graces which she obtains by her intercession, just as
the Incarnation is prolonged, in a certain sense, by
the vivifying influence of Christ the Head upon His
members.
St. Grignon de Montfort never expressed himself
otherwise than as we have seen (27). Reference must
also be made to the work “ The Mystic Union with
Mary ” composed by a Flemish recluse, Mary of St.
Teresa (1623-1677) who had herself experience of
what she taught.
Such writings show that Mary
exercises a very profound influence on faithful souls
to lead them to ever greater intimacy with Our
(25) Treatise of True Devotion, ch. I, a.l.
(26) Op. cit., p. 203.
(27) Cf. ch. 5, a.6; ch. 6, a.l; ch. 7, a.5, a.6. Cf. also L’union
mystique à la Sainte Vierge, by Father Neubert, in La Vie
Spirituelle, Jan. 1937.

244

mart's universal mediation and our interior life

Blessed Lord (28). Those who enter on this way find
themselves introduced far into the mystery of the
communion of saints, and come gradually to share
in the sentiments Mary had at the foot of the Cross,
after Jesus’ death, and later on at Pentecost when
she prayed for the Apostles and obtained for them
the graces of light and love and strength which they
needed to carry the name of Jesus to the limits of the
earth. And now that she has entered heaven the
influence of Mary, universal Mediatrix, is still greater,
more universal, and more effective.
NOTE

The Mode

of presence of the

Blessed Virgin in

SOULS UNITED TO HER.

To make clear the doctrine on this point, it is necessary
to explain briefly what theologians understand by virtual
contact on one hand, and by affective presence on the other.

Virtual or Dynamic Contact
With regard to the presence of God in all things or of that
of the angels In the bodies on which they act, a distinction
is generally made between virtual contact (contactus virtutis)
and quantitative contact. Two bodies are present to each
other by quantitative contact, l.e. by that of their own
quantity or extension. A pure spirit, having no body, and
consequently no quantity or extension, is present where it
operates by virtual contact, by its power, the principle of its
action. This is the dynamic contact of a spiritual force which
takes possession of what it acts on.
The Power of God is not distinct from His Essence, and
so God is really and substantially present, by virtual contact,
in everything He Himself produces immediately, or without
the intermediary of an instrument, i.e. in what He creates
(28) A French translation by L. van den Bossche of the
Flemish original will be found in Les Cahiers de la Vierge,
May, 1936.

MARY AND THE DISTRIBUTION OF GRACE

245

In the strict sense of the term ex nihilo and keeps im­
mediately in existence. He is thus present in Prime Matter,
in souls and in angels which can only be produced by creation
ex nihilo and cannot be brought about by the intermediary
of an instrument (cf. la, Q8, a. 1, 2, 3, 4; Q45, a. 5; Q104, a. 2).
For the same reason theologians admit generally that an
angel, which, strictly speaking, is not in a place inasmuch
as it is a pure spirit, is really present where it acts, for it
touches by virtual contact (.contactus virtutis) the body which
it moves locally (cf. Ia, Q52). An angel can also enlighten a
human intelligence and act on It through the imagination,
like a master who instructs
The presence of the Soul of Jesus and that of the soul of
the Blessed Virgin in persons united to them resembles that
of the angels, but differs from it, however, under a certain
respect. The difference comes from the fact that a human
soul united to its body, like the Soul of Jesus and that of His
Holy Mother, is really present (definitive) where its body is
and nowhere else. Now the Body of Jesus, since the Ascension,
is in heaven alone according to its natural place, and the
same must be said of Mary’s body since the Assumption. And
the soul, being of its nature united to its own body, acts on
others only through it. In this it differs from an angel, which
has no body.
But just as God can make use of angels to produce instru­
mentally a properly divine effect such as a miracle, He can
make use also of the Soul of Jesus, of His acts, and even of
His Body, or again of the soul of Mary, of her acts and of
her body. When God makes use of the humanity of the
Saviour as a physical instrumental cause to produce grace
in us, as St. Thomas admits (Hia, Q43, a. 2; Q48, a. 6; Q62,
a. 4), we are under the physical influence of the Humanity
of Jesus. However, It does not touch us, for It Is in heaven.
In the same way, if someone speaks to us from a distance
by means of a megaphone, this megaphone does not touch
us immediately : there is only virtual contact and not quanti­
tative contact of the Instrument and the subject on which
it acts—virtual contact similar to that of the sun which gives
us light and warmth from afar.

If the Blessed Virgin Is a physical instrumental cause of
grace, subordinate to Christ’s Humanity, we are also under

246

MARY'S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

her -physical influence, without her touching us, however,
otherwise than by virtual contact.
It must be noted, however, that the human soul, in so far
as it is spiritual and transcends the body, is not as such in a
place. From this point of view, all souls, in the measure in
which they grow in the spiritual life and become detached
from the senses, by bringing themselves spiritually nearer to
God, bring themselves spiritually nearer to one another as
well. Thus is explained the spiritual presence of Christ’s Holy
Soul and that of Mary in us, especially if we admit that they
are both physical instrumental causes of the graces we re­
ceive.
Thus one can say that we are constantly under their in­
fluence in the spiritual order, as in the corporal order our
body is constantly under the influence of the sun which gives
us light and warmth, and under the permanent Influence of
the air which we breathe at all times (1).
In this spiritual presence of which we have just spoken
there can be united the influence of Instrumental causality
called physical, which is here spiritual, and the presence cal­
led affective, which we shall now explain and which for its
part is not only probable but certain.

(1) The Instrumental power which produces grace is of a
spiritual and supernatural order. It can, however, be In a
passing manner—as a vibration is—in a corporal action, for
example of exterior adoration or blessing, or come through
the glorious wounds of Christ’s Body. It can be also in percep­
tible words, as in those of sacramental absolution transmitted
by the sound-medium which is between the priest and the
penitent. This instrumental power productive of grace can
also be transmitted by the medium (air or ether) between
us and the Body of Christ or that of His Holy Mother, present
in heaven.
But, as St. Thomas says (Ila Ilae, q.178, a.l, ad 1, and de
Potentia Q6, a.4) God can also use as instrument a purely
spiritual act, an interior prayer of the Saviour or of His
Mother: in this case the instrumental power productive of
grace is transmitted without a corporal medium. How ? God,
who is present everywhere, both in spirits and in bodies,
which He keeps in existence, can make present where its
work is needed this instrumental power of the spiritual order,
which of itself is not in any place, but which is, like the
spirits, in a supra-spatial zone of reality. The Thomlsts say
that God brings it where it has to operate. God Himself can­
not play the part of medium, for a medium, like air or ether,
is a material cause set in motion whereas God can be only
an efficient and a final cause.

MARY AND THE DISTRIBUTION OF GRACÈ

247

Affective Presence

Even if the Blessed Virgin were not the physical instru­
mental cause of the graces we receive, she would be present
in us by an ‘ affective presence ’ as an object known and loved
is present to the lover, and this in varying degrees of inti­
macy according to the depth and strength of our love.
Even a very Imperfect soul is under the so-called physical
influence of the Blessed Virgin if she is the physical instru­
mental cause of the graces received by this soul. But the
deeper our love of Mary becomes, the more intimate does her
affective presence in us become. It is necessary to Insist on
this, for the affective mode of presence is one which certainly
exists, and St. Thomas has admirably explained it (la Ilae,
Q28, a.l and 2) where he asks whether union is the effect of
love and whether a mutual inherence results from it.
He replies (a.l) : “Love, as the Areopagite has said, is a
unitive force. There are two unions possible to those who
love : 1—a real union, when they are really present to each
other (as are two persons who are in the same place and see
each other directly); 2—an affective union, (as that which
exists between two persons physically distant). This latter
proceeds from the knowledge (derived from actual remem­
brance of the person loved) and the love of this person . . .
Love suffices to constitute affective union and leads to the
desire for real union.” There is, then, an affective union re­
sulting from love, in spite of whatever distance may separate
the persons. If St. Monica and St. Augustine, far away from
each other, were nevertheless spiritually united and in that
way affectively present to each other in a more or less pro­
found manner according to the degree or intensity of their
affection, how much more is a soul that grows dally closer in
Intimacy with our heavenly Mother affectively united to her ?
St. Thomas goes further : ibid., a.2, corp, et ad 1, he shows
that a mutual spiritual inherence can be an effect of love in
spite of the remoteness of the persons. And he distinguishes
very well two aspects of this affective union: 1—amatum est
in amante, the person loved is in him who loves, as being
Imprinted on his affection through the delight he inspires
him with; 2—and on the other hand, amans est in amato, the
lover is in the person loved, inasmuch as he rejoices greatly
and intimately at what makes for his happiness.
The first mode is often the one more felt, and, with regard
to God, we run the risk here of simulating such a union be­
fore the time moreover, even when it is really the fruit of

248

MARY'S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

grace, it can have too strong an effect on the sensibility and
thus expose one to spiritual greediness.
The more disinterested and at the same time the stronger
and more intimate love is, the more does the second aspect
tend to prevail. Then the soul is more in God than God in
it; and there is something similar to this with regard to the
Humanity of Jesus and of the Blessed Virgin.
' Finally, this strong and disinterested love produces, says
St. Thomas (ibid., a.3), the ecstasy of love (with or without
suspension of the use of the senses), a spiritual ecstasy
through which the lover goes out of himself, so to speak, be­
cause he wishes the good of his friend as his own and forgets
himself (2).
We see by this what can be the intimacy of this union of
love and of this presence, not corporal, but affective. It is
true, however, that this affective union tends to the real
union which we shall enjoy in heaven in the immediate sight
of the Saviour’s Humanity and of the Blessed Virgin. Even
in this life there is a sort of prelude to it in the physical in­
fluence of the Humanity of Jesus and probably in that of
the Blessed Virgin, whence we derive a higher degree of grace
and a charity which takes deeper and deeper root in our will
—cf. infra the section dealing with Mystical Union with Mary,
pp. 308-314.

(2) Ia Hae, Q28, a.3 : “ Extasim secundum vim appetitivam
facit amor directe, simpliciter amor amicitiae; amor autem
concupiscentiae secundum quid ... In amore amicitiae
affectus alicujus simpliciter exit extra se, quia vult amlco
bonum, et operatur bonum, quasi gerens curam et pro­
videntiam ipsius propter amicum."

TUE UNIVERSALITY OF MARY’S MEDIATION

249

Article III
The Universality

of Mary’s Mediation and its
Definability

In this article we shall consider the universality of
Mary’s mediation, the degree of certainty we have
concerning it, and its precise meaning.
As a matter of fact the universality of Mary’s
mediation follows so evidently from the principles we
have established that the onus of proof lies altogether
on our opponents (29). Mary Mother of the Redeemer
and Co-Redemptrix has merited de cotigruo all that
Jesus has merited for us and has made satisfaction
in union with and in dependence on Him. Does it not
follow that she can obtain in heaven the application
of the fruits of these merits, and that she thereby
obtains for us not only all graces in general but all
graces in particular?
This assertion is more than a pious opinion, how­
ever probable. It is theologically certain in virtue of
the principles on which it rests, it has been
commonly accepted by theologians, it has been part
of the Church’s preaching and has been confirmed
by the encyclicals of different Popes. To quote but
one striking papal pronouncement, we find Pope Leo
XIII teaching in the encyclical Octobri Mense on the
Rosary, September 22nd, 1891 (Denz. 3033), “Nihil
nobis nisi per Mariam, Deo sic volente, impertiri ” :
No grace is given to us except through Mary, such
being the Divine Will.
The universality of Mary’s mediation is affirmed
also in the prayers of the Church, which are an ex(29) Among the opponents we may mention the Jansenists
who wished to modify the line Bona cuncta posce of the Ave
Maris Stella, since by it we ask Mary for all the graces which
lead us to God.

250

Mary's universal mediation and

our interior life

pression of her faith. Graces of every kind, temporal
and spiritual—and among these latter all those which
lead to God, from the grace of conversion to that of
final perseverance—are asked through Mary. She is
prayed also for the graces needed by apostolic
workers, by martyrs in time of persecution, by con­
fessors of the faith, by virgins that they may preserve
their virginity intact, etc. The Litany of Loretto gives
some idea of the many graces which the Church asks
through her intercession.
Thus through her are granted all the graces all
men need, in their different conditions and stages of
life. It has been so for twenty centuries: it will re­
main so till the end of time. Mary obtains for us all
we need for our journey towards eternity.
Among all the different graces that which is the
most peculiar to any particular wayfarer is the grace
of the moment in which he finds himself. That too
comes through Mary. We pray for it daily and many
times each day when we say “ Pray for us sinners,
now and at the hour of our death.” By the word
“ now ” we ask for the grace required to fulfil the
duty of the present moment, to practise this or that
virtue asked of us here and now. Even if we do not
ourselves realise what grace we need, Mary in heaven
does, and it is through her intercession that we
obtain it. The succession of graces of the moment,
varying from one moment to the next, is like a
spiritual atmosphere which we inhale and which re­
news our souls as air does the blood.
Mary’s mediation is therefore truly universal : such
is the teaching of Tradition. It extends to the whole
work of our salvation, without being limited to graces
of any particular kind. On this point, there is moral
unanimity of the Fathers and Doctors of the ChurcL,

THE UNIVERSALITY OF MARY’S MEDIATION

251

and of the faithful whose belief is expressed in the
liturgy.

Definability of the Doctrine
It would appear that the doctrine of Mary’s uni­
versal mediation is capable of being defined as a
dogma of faith, for it is implicitly revealed in the
different titles which Tradition gives Mary—that of
Mother of God, most powerful in intercession with
her Son, that of the new Eve intimately associated
with the Redeemer, that of Mother of all men. Be­
sides, it is a doctrine explicitly and formally affirmed
by the morally unanimous consent of Fathers and
Doctors of the Church, of preaching throughout the
Church, and of the Liturgy.
Leo XIII, after having stated that we receive
nothing except through Mary, goes on to say that
“ as no one can come to the Father except by the Son,
in much the same way (ita fere) no one can come to
the Son except by Mary ”(30). Pius X calls her “ the
dispensatrix of all the graces which Jesus acquired
for us by His blood” (31). Benedict XV gave his
approval to the same doctrine when he instituted the
universal feast of Mary, Mediatrix of all graces (32).
Mary’s universal mediation appears then to be
capable of definition as a dogma of faith: it is at least
implicitly revealed and it is already universally pro­
posed by the ordinary magisterium of the Church.
What is the Precise Meaning of this Universality^
A number of preliminary remarks will be necessary
in order to arrive at the precise meaning of Mary’s
universal mediation.
(30) Denz. 3033.
(31) Denz. 3033.
(32) Denz. 3034.

252

MARY'S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

In the first place, all the graces received by men
from the Fall up to the Incarnation were granted in
view of the foreseen merits of the Saviour—with
which we must associate those of His Mother—but
neither Jesus nor Mary distributed or transmitted
them. This limitation was removed with the coming
of the Saviour on earth in human flesh. As for Mary,
it is especially since her Assumption into heaven that
she knows the spiritual needs of all men and that she
intercedes for them and distributes the graces they
need.
Since Mary distributes all that she has merited, it
follows that she distributes the graces we receive in
the sacraments. She does this at least by giving us
the grace of being disposed for their reception, and
sometimes even by sending us a priest without whose
ministry we could not have received them (33).
Mary’s universal mediation should not be under­
stood as if it meant that no grace is given to us
without our having asked it explicitly of her; that
would be to confuse our prayer to her with her prayer
to God. Mary does in fact ask for graces without
being invoked explicitly. Many graces are given to
both children and adults even before they pray for
them—especially the grace of beginning to pray. The
Our Father can be said without any explicit invoca­
tion of Mary; but she is invoked implicitly in it when
it is said according to the order established by divine
providence.
(33) Cf. Diet. Théol. Cath., art. Marie (E. Dublanchy). coi.
2403 : The doctrine of the universal mediation of Our Lady “ is
true of all the supernatural graces which proceed from the
Redemption.
This conclusion, which is without restriction,
applies to the graces of the sacraments, in this sense that the
dispositions which one should bring to their reception, and on
which the infusion of grace depends, are obtained through
Mary’s Intercession.”

THE UNIVERSALITY OF MARY’S MEDIATION

253

It should not be thought either that Mary was
Mediatrix for herself. She obtained her fulness of
grace through the mediation of her Son.
It would, however, be an error by defect to say that
Mary merited nearly all graces, or morally all graces
—say, something like eight or nine tenths of them. All
graces without exception come by her mediation.
Such is the general law established by divine provi­
dence, and there is no known indication of any
exceptions (34).

A point which distinguishes Mary’s mediation from
that of the saints is that she is mediatrix de jure and
not simply de facto for all men, since she is the
mother of all. This makes her intercession allpowerful.
Her prayers are more efficacious than
those of all the saints united. The saints can do
nothing without her intercession for the reason that
it is universal (35).
Mary’s universal mediation extends to the souls in
Purgatory. “ It is certain that the Mother of Mercy
knows the needs of these souls . . . She can bring her
satisfaction to the support of her prayers . . . she did
not need it for herself but has given it all into the
hands of the Church who distributes it to souls in the
form of indulgences . . . Thus when the satisfaction
of Mary is applied to the poor debtors of Purgatory,
they have a kind of right to deliverance since they
pay their debt with what is their own . . . She obtains
also that her children on earth pray for her clients
in Purgatory, offer good works for their intention.
(34) Cf. Merkelbach, Mariologia, p. 375.
(35) This is what St. Anselm taught, Or. 46:
Te tacente,, nullus (sanctus) orabit, nullus invocabit,
Te orante, omnes orabunt, omnes invocabunt.

254

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

and have the sacrifice of redemption offered for them
. . . She can obtain also that prayers destined for
souls who do not need them or who are not capable
of benefitting by them should be made available for
the children of her special love ” (36).

In the same spirit a Doctor of the Church, St. Peter
Damien, assures us that on every Feast of the
Assumption many thousands of the souls captive in
Purgatory are delivered (37). St. Alphonsus de
Liguori adds, quoting Denis the Carthusian, that such
liberations take place most particularly on the Feasts
of Christmas and the Resurrection. Though these
testimonies do not impose themselves on our faith
for acceptance, they point to and, in their own way,
explain Mary’s mediation.

Some Difficulties
The objection has been raised: the mother of a
king has not the right to dispose of his treasures;
neither then has Mary the right to dispose of the
graces which Jesus has merited.

There is no parity between the two cases (38). The
mother of a king is simply the mother of a child who
subsequently became king and, more usually than not,
she has not co-operated closely with him in his
government. But Mary is Mother of God the
Redeemer, Universal King, by the simple fact of her
(36) Hugon, O.P., Marie, pleine de grâce, edit. 5, 1926, p. 201.
(37) Ep. 52 and Opusc. XXIV: Dlsp. de variis apparit. et
miraculis.
(38) Cf. Merkelbach, Mariologia, p. 377.

THE UNIVERSALITY OF MARY’S MEDIATION

255

divine maternity. She has given Him His human
nature and she has been intimately associated with
Him in His redemptive sufferings and in His merits.
She shares therefore in His spiritual royalty and has
the right, in subordination to Him, to dispose of the
graces He—and she—acquired.
Another objection is that Mary’s universal media­
tion is no more than becoming or appropriate, and
therefore cannot be affirmed with certainty.
We may answer that the becomingness or appro­
priateness in question is more than ordinary. It is
based on Mary’s divine maternity, on her spiritual
motherhood of men, on her union with the Redeemer,
and is so connected with them that its opposite would
be unbecoming.
It is connatural to the spiritual
mother of all men to watch over them and to distri­
bute to them the fruits of the Redemption. And—
what is still more conclusive—Tradition shows that
God has in fact disposed the scheme of our
Redemption in accordance with this becomingness.
This is the teaching of the Fathers of the Church,
of the Doctors of the Middle ages, and of later
theologians, who all in their own way have thrown
the universality of Mary’s mediation into clearer
relief.
Conclusion.

There is therefore no serious difficulty against de­
fining Mary’s universal mediation as a dogma of
faith, provided it is understood as we have indicated:
as a mediation subordinate to that of Jesus and
depending on His merits; as a mediation which is not
considered to add any necessary complement to
Jesus’ merits, the value of which is infinite and super­
abundant, but which shows forth the influence and

256

MARY'S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

fruitfulness of those same merits in a soul fully con­
formed to Him. As a matter of fact, the difficulties
which are raised against Mary’s universal mediation
are much less serious than those raised against the
Immaculate Conception in the 13th century. The
Assumption is usually looked on as capable of
definition; Mary’s universal mediation seems to be
even more certain, if we consider the principles which
underlie it: the divine maternity, the motherhood of
men, and the venerable tradition which contrasts
Mary and Eve. Since this is so, and since the ordinary
magisterium of the Church makes Mary’s universal
mediation to be theologically certain, we can only
hope and pray that it be one day defined so as to in­
crease devotion to her who is the watchful and loving
Mother of all men.
Mary’s mediation in no way obscures that of Jesus.
Her mediation is but a share in His : her merits have
been acquired under His influence, and it is He Who
confers on her the dignity of being a cause in the
order of salvation and sanctification. History shows,
too, that devotion to Mary has been lost by those
nations precisely which have lost their devotion to
Jesus, whereas those which have been the first to
honour Mary have also been the first in their faith
in the redemptive Incarnation. When Dr. Pusey ob­
jected to Fr. Faber’s statement: “Jesus is obscured
because Mary is kept in the background,” Newman
answered that its truth “ exemplified in history might
be abundantly illustrated . . . from the lives and
writings of holy men in modern times ” (39). As
examples he quoted St. Alphonsus de Liguori and St.
Paul of the Cross, in whom ardent love of Jesus was
inseparable from great devotion to Mary.
(39) Difficulties felt by Anglicans in Catholic Teaching, 4th
edit., p. 440.

THE UNIVERSALITY OF MARY’S MEDIATION

257

True cult of Mary, like her action upon us, leads
surely to intimacy with Jesus. Far from diminishing
our intimacy with Jesus it increases it, just as the
action of the Holy Soul of Jesus increases our union
with the Blessed Trinity.
The universality of Mary’s mediation will become
more evident when we consider in the next chapter
that she is Mother of Mercy.

B

CHAPTER IV
Mother of Mercy

We shall consider this title first in itself and then
in its principal manifestations which are, as it were,
that radiance of the revealed doctrine concerning
Mary which makes it accessible to all minds.

Article I
Greatness

and

Power of this Maternity

The title of Mother of Mercy is one of Mary’s
greatest. Mercy is not the same thing as mere
emotional pity. Mercy is in the will, pity is but a
good inclination of the sensibility.
Pity, which
does not exist in God Who is a pure spirit, leads us
to suffer in unison with our neighbour as if we felt
his suffering in ourselves. It is a good inclination
but usually a timid one, being accompanied by fear
of harm to ourselves and often helpless to render
effective aid.
Mercy, on the contrary, is a virtue of the will, and,
as St. Thomas so well notes (1), whereas pity is
found most of all in feeble and timid beings who
feel themselves threatened by the evil that has
befallen their neighbour, mercy is the virtue of the
(1) la, q.21, a.3; Ila Ilae, q.30, a.4.

GREATNESS AND POWER OF THIS MATERNITY

259

powerful and the good, who are capable of giving
real assistance. That is why it is found in God
especially: as one of the prayers of the Missal says
(2) , it is one of the greatest manifestations of His
power and goodness. St. Augustine remarked that it
was more glorious for God to obtain good out of evil
than to create out of nothing: it is greater to con­
vert a sinner by giving him grace than to make a
whole universe, heaven and earth, out of nothing
(3) .
As Mother of Mercy, Mary reminds us that if God
is Being, Truth and Wisdom, He is also Goodness and
Love, and that His infinite Mercy, which is the
radiation of His Goodness, flows from His love
and anticipates His vindicatory Justice which pro­
claims the inalienable right that the Supreme Good
has to be loved above every other object: “Mercy
exalteth itself above justice ” (James ii, 13). She
teaches us, though, that if mercy is not justice it is
not opposed to it as injustice is, but unites itself to
it and goes beyond it: most of all in pardoning, for
to pardon is to go beyond what is demanded by justice
in forgiving an offence (4).
Every work of divine justice presupposes a work
of mercy or of gratuitous goodness (5). If God can be
said to owe anything to a creature it is because of
some preceding gratuitous gift: if He owes a recom­
pense to our merits, it is because He has first of all
given the grace to merit, and if He punishes, it is
after having given us the assistance which made
(2) Deus qui maxime parcendo et miserando, potentiam
tuam manifestas.
(3) Cf. Ia Hae, q.113, a.9.
(4) Ia, q.21, a.3, ad 2.
(5) ib. a.4: 'Opus divinae justitiae semper praesupponit
opus misericordiae, et in eo fundatur.”

260

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

the accomplishment of His precepts really possible,
for He never commands the impossible.
Mary reminds us too that God often gives us His
mercy more than we need, more than He is obliged
in Justice to Himself to give; that He gives us more
than we merit—the grace of Holy Communion, for
example, which is not merited. She tells us that
mercy is wedded to Justice in the trials of this life.
Trials are a medicine to heal us, to make us right
again, to bring us to the good. She tells us finally
that mercy often makes good the inequality of
natural conditions among men by a correspondingly
more generous distribution of graces. This is the
lesson of the different beatitudes—of the poor, the
meek, those that weep, those that hunger and thirst
after justice, those that are merciful, those that are
pure of heart, those that are peacemakers, those
that suffer persecution for Justice.

Article II
Principal Manifestation

of

Justice

Mary manifests herself as Mother of Mercy by
being “ Health of the sick, Refuge of sinners, Com­
forter of the afflicted, Help of Christians.”
The
gradation of titles here is very beautiful. It shows
that Mary is merciful to those who are sick of body
in order to benefit their souls, and that afterwards
she consoles them in their afflictions and streng­
thens them in the midst of all the difficulties they
have to overcome. Among creatures no one is

PRINCIPAL MANIFESTATIONS OF JUSTICE

261

higher than Mary, and yet no one is more approach­
able, more helpful, and more gentle (6).

Health of the Sick
Mary is Health of the Sick by the many providen­
tial or miraculous cures which have been obtained
through her intercession in Christian sanctuaries up
to our own days. So many have these cures been
that it may be said that Mary is a fathomless ocean
of miraculous healing. But it is to help the infir­
mity of the soul that she cures the body. Her most
important cures are those of the four spiritual
wounds which we have suffered as a result of origi­
nal sin and our personal sins—the wounds of concu­
piscence, of weakness, of ignorance, and of malice.
She heals concupiscence—a wound of our sensi­
bility—by diminishing the ardour of our passions
and by breaking our sinful habits. She helps the
sinner to begin to will what is right with sufficient
firmness to enable him to reject evil desires as well
as the appeal of honours and riches. In this way
she cures the concupiscence of the flesh and that of
the eyes.
She heals the wound of weakness too, our feeble
pursuit of the good, our spiritual sloth. She makes
the will constant and firm in its practice of virtue
and helps it to despise the attractions of this world
by throwing itself into the arms of God. She
strengthens those who falter and lifts up those who
have fallen.
(6) These points are developed by the Polish Dominican,
Justin of Miéchow in his Collationes in Litanias B. Mariae
Virginis, translated Into French by A. Ricard under the title
Conférences sur les litanies de la Très Sainte Vierge, 3rd
edit., Paris, 1870. We shall draw much of our inspiration for
the following pages from this work.

262

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

She heals the wound of ignorance by lighting up
the darkness of our minds and providing us with
the means to escape from error. She calls to our
minds the simple and profound truths of the Our
Father, thereby lifting our minds up to God. St.
Albert the Great, to whom she gave the light to
persevere in his vocation and to see through the
wiles of Satan, said frequently that she preserves us
from losing rightness and firmness of judgement,
that she helps us not to grow weary in the pursuit
of truth, and that she leads us eventually to a relish
of the things of God. He himself speaks of her in
his Mariale with a spontaneity, an admiration, a
freshness, and a fluency which are rarely found in
the works of great students.
She heals us finally of the wound of malice, by
urging our wills Godwards, sometimes by gentle ad­
vice, sometimes by stern reproaches. Her sweetness
checks anger, her humility lowers pride and re­
strains the temptations of the evil one. In a word,
she heals us of the wounds which we bear as a result
of original sin and which our personal sins have
made all the more dangerous.
Sometimes this healing power of hers works in a
miraculous manner by producing its effects instan­
taneously. An example is the conversion of the
young Alphonse Ratisbonne, at the time a Jew and
far removed from the faith, who visited the Church
of Sant’ Andrea delle Frate in Rome through curi­
osity. Mary appeared to him there, as she is
represented on the miraculous medal, with rays of
light issuing from her hands. She indicated gently to
him to kneel. He obeyed, and while on his knees lost
the use of his senses. When he returned to himself he
expressed an intense desire for baptism. He was
baptised and later, with his brother who had been

PRINCIPAL MANIFESTATIONS OF JUSTICE

263

converted before him, founded the congregation of
the Fathers of Sion and that of the Religious of Sion,
to pray, suffer, and work for the conversion of the
Jews, saying daily at Holy Mass “ Father forgive
them, for they know not what they do.”

Refuge of Sinners

Mary is Refuge of Sinners precisely because she is
so holy. Detesting sin, which does so much harm to
souls, she welcomes sinners and wishes to bring them
to repentance. She frees them from the bonds of
sinful habits by the power of her intercession; she
obtains their reconciliation with God by the merits
of her Son, and reminds the sinner too of the same
merits.
Once converted to penance, she protects
them from Satan, against everything which could
lead to fresh falls. She helps them to learn of the
sweetness of penance.
To her, after Jesus, all sinners now in heaven owe
their salvation. She has converted them in count­
less numbers, especially in places of pilgrimage—at
Lourdes where she issued the invitation “ Pray and
do penance,” and more recently at Fatima where
the number of conversions since 1917 is known to
God alone. There are many condemned criminals
who owe to her their conversion at the last moment.
She has inspired the foundation of religious orders
consecrated to prayer, to penance, and to the apostolate of the conversion of sinners—those of St.
Dominic and of St. Francis, the Redemptorists, the
Passionists, and so many others.
What sinners are there whom she does not pro­
tect? Those only who despise God’s mercy and call
down His malediction on themselves. She is not the
refuge of those who are obstinate in evil—in bias-

264

MARY'S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

phemy, perjury, impurity, avarice, pride of the spirit.
But even to them she sends from time to time, as
Mother of Mercy, graces for the mind and the will,
and if they accept them they will be led from grace
to grace and finally to the grace of conversion. To
such she has suggested by the lips of a dying mother
that they should say at least one Hail Mary each day,
and often it has happened that though they made
no other effort than that to change their lives, the
feeble spark of good-will it contained was enough to
light them the way to a worthy and penitent recep­
tion of the Last Sacraments. They have been
labourers of the last hour, called and saved by Mary
(7). For almost two thousand years Mary has been
the Refuge of Sinners.
Consoler of the Afflicted

Mary was Consoler of the Afflicted even during her
lifetime on earth: she consoled Jesus by her pre­
sence on Calvary; she consoled the apostles in the
difficulties' they encountered in the conversion of
the pagan world and obtained for them a spirit of
strength and holy joy in their sufferings. She must
have helped St. Stephen by her prayers when he
was being stoned to death. She obtained for many
the grace to bear persecution patiently and without
giving way to cowardly fears. Though she saw the
dangers which threatened the infant Church, she
did not waver; her face was ever calm, for her soul
was tranquil and confident. Sadness never took
possession of her heart. What we know of the in­
tensity of her love of God assures us that she re­
mained joyous in affliction, that she did not com(7) This was the case in France of the Immoral writer
Armand Silvestre.

PRINCIPAL MANIFESTATIONS OF JUSTICE

265

plain of poverty or privations, that insults had no
power to alter her meekness. Her example alone
was enough to hearten many a despairing soul.
She has given to many saints the grace to be
themselves consolers of the afflicted.
Such were
St. Genevieve, St. Elizabeth, St. Catherine of Siena,
St. Germaine de Pibrac.
The Holy Ghost is called the Consoler most of all
because He makes us shed tears of contrition, there­
by to wash away our sins and to restore to us the
joy of God’s friendship. For the same reason the
Blessed Virgin is the consoler of the afflicted when
she prompts them to bewail their sins from a con­
trite heart.
Mary is particularly attentive to our inner or
secret poverty: she knows how little are the
resources of our hearts, and she comes to. their
assistance. She knows all the needs of soul and
body: she has consoled Christians in persecution,
she has delivered the possessed, she has assisted and
strengthened the dying by calling to their minds the
infinite merits of her Son. She lessens the rigours
of purgatory, and obtains for those who suffer there
that the faithful pray and have Masses offered on
their behalf.
In a sense, Mary’s power as Consoler of the afflic­
ted is felt even in the terrible regions of hell. For
St. Thomas tells us that the damned suffer less than
they deserve (8) since the divine mercy is found even
in the strictest exercise of divine justice.
What­
ever less there is of the pain of hell than there might
be is due to the merits of Jesus and Mary. St.
Odilon of Cluny says in his sermon on the Assump­
tion that the Feast of the Assumption brings some
slight alleviation of pain to hell’s torments.
(8) la, q.21. a.4, ad I.

266

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

Mary has been consoler of the afflicted throughout
the ages in the most varied ways, because of her
great knowledge of the many trials through which
men pass.

Help of Christians

Mary is Help of Christians. Help is an effect of
love, and Mary has now consummated fulness of
love. She loves the souls redeemed by Jesus’ blood.
She helps them in their difficulties and assists them
in the practice of the virtues.
The thought of Mary, Help of Christians, inspired
St. Bernard in the well-known passage from his
second homily on the Missus est: “If the tempest
of temptation rages, if the torrent of tribulation
carries you away, look at the star, look at Mary. If
the waves of pride and ambition, of slander and
jealousy, buffet you and almost engulf you, look at
the star, look at Mary. If anger or avarice or passion
tosses the frail bark of your soul and threatens to
wreck it, look once more at Mary. Let her memory be
ever in your heart and her name always on your lips
. . . But remember that to obtain the benefit of her
prayer you must walk in her footsteps.”
She has been the refuge of whole peoples as well
as of individuals. Baronius tells us that Narses,
general of the armies of the Emperor Justinian, de­
livered Italy by her help in 553 from bondage to
Totila the Goth. He tells us also that in 718 the
city of Constantinople was rescued from the Sara­
cens, who had been put to flight on many similar
occasions already with Mary’s aid. In the 13th
century, Simon, Count of Montfort, defeated a
powerful Albigensian army near Toulouse while St.
Dominic invoked the Mother of God. In 1513 the

PRINCIPAL MANIFESTATIONS OF JUSTICE

267

city of Dijon was delivered miraculously through
her. On the 7th of October, 1571, a Turkish fleet,
much more numerous and powerful than that of
the Christians, was defeated at Lepanto, at the en­
trance of the Gulf of Corinth, through the help of
Mary invoked in the Rosary. Finally, Mary’s title
of Our Lady of Victories reminds us how often her
intervention on the battlefield has been decisive in
favour of oppressed Christian peoples.

The four invocations of the Litany of Loreto,
Health of the Sick, Refuge of Sinners, Consoler of
the Afflicted, Help of Christians, recall unceasingly
to the faithful how truly Mary is Mother of divine
grace and Mother of mercy. The Church sings that
she is our hope: Hail, Holy Queen, Mother of mercy!
Hail, our life, our sweetness, and our hope! She is
our hope in that she has merited, with her Son, all
that we need of help from God, and in that she
transmits it to us now by her intercession. She is
therefore the living expression and the instrument
of God’s helping Mercy, which is the formal motive
of our hope. Confidence, or firm hope, is certain in
its tendency to salvation (9), and its certainty in­
creases with our growth in grace. This certainty de­
rives from our faith in the goodness of God Omni­
potent and in His fidelity to His promises. Thence
comes that almost constant sense of His watchful
Paternity which we find in the saints. Mary’s in­
fluence leads us gradually to this perfect confidence
and makes its motive ever more clear.
(9) Ha Ilae, q. 18, a.4: “Spes certitudinaliter tendit ad
suam finem, quasi participans certitudinem a fide.”

268

MARY'S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

Mary is even called Mother of holy joy and Cause
of our Joy, for she obtains for generous souls the
hidden treasure of spiritual joy in the midst of
suffering. She obtains for them from time to time
the grace to carry their cross with joy after the Lord
Jesus. She initiates them into love of the cross.
And even though they do not experience that joy
uninterruptedly themselves, she helps them to
communicate it to others.
In La Vie Spirituelle, April, 1941, p. 281, Fr. M. J. Nicolas,
O.P., has written of a holy religious, Fr. Vaysslère, who died
as Provincial of the Dominicans at Toulouse: “The grace of
intimacy with Mary that he received, he owed first of all to
the state of littleness to which he had been reduced and to
which he had consented. But he owed it as well to his
Rosary. During the long days of solitude at Sainte-Baume,
he had acquired the habit of saying several Rosaries in the
day, sometimes as many as six. He often said the whole of
it kneeling. And it was not a mechanical and superficial
recitation: his whole soul went into it, he delighted in it,
he devoured it, he was persuaded that he found in it all that
one could seek for in prayer. ‘Recite each decade,’ he used
to say. ‘ less reflecting on the mystery than communicating
through the heart in its grace, and in the spirit of Jesus and
Mary as the mystery presents it to us. The Rosary is the
evening Communion (elsewhere he calls it the Communion of
the whole day) and it translates into light and fruitful resolu­
tion the morning Communion. It is not merely a series of
Ave Marias piously recited; it is Jesus living again in the soul
through Mary’s maternal action.’ Thus he lived in the
perpetually moving cycle of his Rosary, as if ‘ surrounded ’ by
Christ and by Mary, communicating, as he said, in each of
their states, in each aspect of their grace, entering thus into
and remaining in the depth of God’s Heart: ‘The Rosary is
a chain of love from Mary to the Trinity.’ One can under­
stand what a contemplation it had become for him, what a
way to pure union with God, what a need, like to that of
Communion.”

CHAPTER V
Mary’s Universal Queenship

In the language of the Church, both in the Liturgy
and in her universal preaching, Mary is not only
Mother and Mediatrix but Queen of all men and even
of thei angels and the whole universe.
In what
sense is she a queen? In a true or in a merely meta­
phorical sense?
It should be recalled first that God alone has uni­
versal kingship over all things through His Essence:
He governs all things and leads them to their end.
Jesus and Mary share in this Divine Kingship. Even
as man, Jesus shares in it for three reasons: be­
cause of His Divine Personality (1), because of His
fulness of grace which overflows on men and angels,
and because of His victory over sin, Satan and death
(2). He is King of all men and of all creatures in­
di Cf. Pius XI, encyc. Quas primas, Dec. 11th, 1925, (Denz.
2194): Eius principatus illa nititur unione admirabili, quam
hypostaticam appellant. Unde consequitur, non modo ut
Christus ab angelis et hominibus Deus sit adorandus, sed etiam
ut eius imperio Hominis angeli et homines pareant et subjecti
sint: nempe ut vel solo hypostaticae unionis nomine Christus
potestem in universas creaturas obtineat.”
Because of its
personal union with the Word the Humanity of Christ is en­
titled to adoration and participation in God’s universal
kingship over all creatures. Christ as Man has been predes­
tined to be Son of God by nature, not by adoption, whereas
angels and men are only adoptive sons.
(2) Since He accepted the humiliations of His Passion in
love “ God also hath exalted Him, and given Him a name
which is above all names: That in the name of Jesus every
knee should bow. of those that are in heaven, on earth, and
under the earth ” (Phil, ii, 9-10).

270

MARY'S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

eluding the angels, who are “ His angels.” Thus He
says (Mk. xiii, 26): “ And then they shall see the Son
of man coming in the clouds, with great power and
glory. And then shall He send his angels . . .” For
Jesus is Son of God by nature, whereas the angels
are but God’s servants and adopted sons. Jesus has
said too of Himself: “All power is given to me in
heaven and on earth ” (Mt. xxviii, 18), and we read
in the Apocalypse that He is “ King of Kings and
Lord of Lords ” (Apoc. xix, 16).
Article I
Her Queenship in General

Can it be said of Mary, since her Assumption espe­
cially, and her crowning in heaven, that she shares
in God’s universal Kingship in the sense that she Is
Queen of all creatures in subordination to Christ (3).
She could certainly be called a queen in the wide
sense of the term by reason of her spiritual qualities
and her fulness of grace, of glory and of charity
which raise her above all other creatures. It is
quite customary to use the words king and queen to
designate persons of such eminence. Her mother­
hood of Christ the King would also entitle her to
be called a queen—still in a wide sense of the term
at least.
But would it not appear that she is a queen in the
literal sense of the term by the fact of having re­
ceived royal authority and power? Has she not, in
dependance on Jesus and through Him, not only a
(3) Cf. De Gruyter, De B. Maria Regina, Buscoduci, 1934:
Garénaux, La Royauté de Marie, Paris, 1935; M. J. Nicholas, La
Vierge Reine, in the Revue Thomiste, 1939 ; Merkelbach, Mariologia, 1939, p. 382.

HER QUEENSHIP IN GENERAL

271

primacy of honour in regard to the angels and
saints, but a real power to command both angels and
men? This is, in fact, what emerges from an ex­
amination of Tradition as expressed in the preach­
ing of the universal Church, the Fathers, the state­
ments of different Popes, the Liturgy. There are
theological arguments besides in favour of the affir­
mative answer.
The Fathers of both East and West referred fre­
quently to Mary under such titles as Domina,
Regina, Regina nostrae salutis. It is sufficient to
mention a few among many: in the East SS. Ephrem,
Germanus of Constantinople, Andrew of Crete, John
Damascene; in the West St. Peter Crysologus, the
Venerable Bede, St. Anselm, St. Peter Damien, St.
Bernard. The same titles occur also in the works
of the theologians: in St. Albert the Great (4), St.
Bonaventure, St. Thomas (5), Gerson, St. Bernadine
of Siena, Denis the Carthusian, St. Peter Canisius,
Suarez, St. Grignon de Montfort, St. Alphonsus.
Different Sovereign Pontiffs have often used the
same expressions (6).
(4) Mariale, q.43, 2: "Virgo assumpta est in salutis auxilium
et regni consortium . . . habet coronam regni triumphantis et
militantis Ecclesiae, unde ... est regina et domina angelorum
. . . imperatrix totius mundi ... : in ipsa est plenitudo potes­
tatis coelestis perpetuo ex auctoritate ordinaria ... ; legitima
dominandi potestas ad ligandum et solvendum per imperium;
totam habet B. Virgo potestatem in coelo, in purgatorio et in
inferno . . . B. Virgo vere et jure et proprie est domina omnium
quae sunt in misericordia Dei, ergo proprie est regina miseri­
cordiae . . ■ ipsa enim ejusdem regni regina est cujus ipse est
rex” Cf. Ibid. qq. 158. 162, 165.
(5) In expos. Salut. Angelicae.
(6) In his letter to St. Germanus of Constantinople read at
the 2nd Council of Nicaea (787), Pope Gregory II terms Mary
Domina Omnium, and the council itself approves of statues
erected in Mary’s honour. Leo XIII frequently spoke of Mary
as Regina and Domina universorum in his encyclicals. Simi­
larly Pius X in the encyclical Ad diem ilium: “Maria adstat
regina a dextris ejus.’’

272

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

The Roman and Oriental liturgies proclaim Mary
Queen of the heavens, Queen of angels, Queen of
the world, Queen of all the saints. Among the
mysteries of the Rosary commonly recited in the
Church since the 13th century the last of all is that
of the crowning of Our Lady in heaven—a scene
represented in one of Fra Angelico’s most beautiful
frescoes.
The arguments adduced by theologians to prove
that Mary has universal Queenship in the proper,
non-metaphorical sense of the term, are conclusive.
They may all be reduced to the following three.
Jesus Christ is King of the universe, even as man,
in virtue of His Divine Personality. But Mary as
Mother of God made man belongs to the hypostatic
order and shares in the dignity of her Son, for His
Person is the term of her divine motherhood. Hence
she shares connaturally, as Mother of God, in His
universal Kingship (7). Our Blessed Lord owes it to
Himself to recognise His Mother’s title in gratitude.
A second argument is that Jesus is King of the
universe by His fulness of grace and by the victory
which He won over Satan and sin by His humility
and His obedience unto death, “ For which cause
God hath exalted Him . . .” But Mary was asso­
ciated with His victory over Satan, sin, and death by
her union with Him in His humiliations and suffer­
ings. She is therefore really associated with Him in
His Kingship.
The same conclusion may be arrived at by con­
sidering the close relationship in which Mary stands
to God the Father, of Whom she is the first adoptive
daughter and the highest in grace, and God the Holy
(7) Cf. Merkelbach, op. cit., p. 385.

HER QUEENSHIP IN GENERAL

273

Ghost through Whose operation the Word took
flesh in her womb.
It has been objected that the mother of a king, the
queen-mother, is not by that simple fact queen in
the strict sense of the term: she has nothing of
royal power.
Neither then has Mary. We have
answered this objection already.
There is no
parity between the two cases. A queen-mother is
simply the mother of a child who later became king.
But Mary is the mother of Him Who from the in­
stant of His conception is King of the universe by
His hypostatic union and His fulness of grace. Be­
sides Mary was associated closely with the victory
by which He obtained universal kingship as a right
of conquest, even though He possessed it already as
Son of God. Mary is therefore associated with His
Kingship in a true, even if in a subordinate manner.

Many consequences follow from this truth. Asuniversal King Jesus has power to establish and
promulgate the New Law, to propose revealed doc­
trine, to judge the living and the dead, to give souls
sanctifying grace and all the virtues (8). Mary
shares in this universal kingship especially
by dispensing in an interior and hidden manner
the graces which she merited in dependence
on Jesus. She participates in it exteriorly also by
the fact that she gave on earth the example of all
the virtues, that she helped to enlighten the
Apostles, and that she continues to enlighten us
when, for example, she manifests herself exteriorly
(8) Cf. Encyc. Quas primas (Denz. 2194) and la Ilae, q.106.
a.l. Jesus is all the more King of minds, hearts and wills by
the fact that the New Law is not primarily a written law, but
one imprinted on the soul by grace.
s

274

MARY'S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

in sanctuaries such as those of Lourdes, La Salette,
and· Fatima. Theologians note that she does not
seem to share in any special way in the royal judi­
cial power of inflicting punishment for sin, for Tra­
dition calls her not the Mother of justice but the
Mother of mercy, a title which is hers in virtue of
her mediation of all graces (9). Jesus seems to have
kept to Himself the reign of justice (10) as is be­
coming Him Who is the “ judge of the living and
the dead ” (11).
Mary has a radical right to universal queenship
by the fact of her divine motherhood, but the divine
plan was that she should merit it also by her union
with her suffering Son, and that she should not
exercise it fully before being crowned queen of all
creation in heaven. Her royalty is spiritual and super­
natural rather than temporal and natural, though it
extends in a secondary way to temporal affairs
considered in their relation to salvation and
sanctification.
We have seen how Mary exercises her queenship
on earth. She exercises it in heaven also. The
essential glory of the blessed depends on Jesus’
merits and hers. She contributes to their accidental
glory—as well as to that of the angels—by the light
she communicates to them, and by the joy they have
in her presence and in the realisation of what she
does for souls. To both the angels and the saints
she manifests Christ’s plan for the extension of His
Kingdom.
Mary’s queenship extends to purgatory, for she
prompts the faithful on earth to pray for the souls
(9) Cf. Mariale, q.43, 2.
(10) John V, 22, 27 : “ . . . the Father
judgement to the Son.”
(11) Acts x, 42; cf. Illa, q.59, a.l.

. . hath given all

SPECIAL ASPECTS OF MARY’S QUEENSHIP

275

detained there and to have Masses offered for them.
She herself offers their prayers to God, thereby in­
creasing their value. She applies the fruits of the
merits of Jesus and of herself to the Holy Souls in
Jesus’ name.
Her queenship extends to the demons too who are
obliged to recognise her power, for she can make
their temptation cease, can save souls from their
snares, and can repulse their attacks. “ The demons
suffer more ” says St. Grignon de Montfort “ from
being conquered by the humility of Mary than by the
Omnipotence of God.” Her reign of mercy extends
to hell itself, as we have seen, in the sense that the
lost souls are punished less than they deserve (12),
and that on certain days—including possibly the
Assumption—their sufferings become less fearful.
Thus Mary’s queenship is truly universal. There
is no region to which it does not extend in some way.

Article II
Special Aspects

of

Mary’s Queenship

Mary’s universal queenship comes home to us in a
more concrete form if we consider its different as­
pects as presented in the Litany of Loreto: Queen of
angels, of patriarchs, of prophets, of martyrs, of con­
fessors, of virgins, of all the saints, of peace.
(12) la, q.21, a.4, ad 1: “In damnatione reproborum apparet
misericordia non quidem totaliter relaxans, sed aliqualiter
allevians. dum (Deus) punit citra condignum.” This interven­
tion of Divine Mercy is not independent of the merits of Jesus
and Mary.

276

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

Queen of Angels

Mary is Queen of the angels since her mission is
higher than theirs. They are but servants, whereas
she is the Mother of God.
She is as much above
them as the word “ mother ” surpasses the word
“ servant.” She alone with the Father can say to
Jesus: “ Thou art my Son, I have begotten thee.”
She is higher than the angels also by her fulness of
grace and glory, which surpasses that of all the
angels united. She is purer than they, for she has
received purity for others as well as for herself. She
was more perfect than they and more prompt in her
obedience to God’s commandments and in following
His counsels. By her co-operation in the redemp­
tion she merited de congruo for the angels them­
selves the accidental graces by which they help us
to save our souls and the joy which they experience
in doing so.
As Justin of Miéchow well remarks (13), if the
angels have served Our Lord how much more did not
Mary serve Him, she who conceived and bore Him,
who cared for Him, who carried Him into Egypt to
escape Herod’s anger?
She surpasses the angels in this also, that they
have each care of one soul or one community, but
she is the guardian of all men and of each in par­
ticular. She is, more than they, the messenger of
God who brought us not a created word but the Un­
created Word.
Archangels are appointed to protect this or that
city: Mary protects all cities and all churches· in
them. Principalities are the custodians of provinces:
Mary has the whole Church under her protection.
(13) Collationes', circa invocationem: Regina angelorum.

SPECIAL ASPECTS OF MARY’S QUEENSHIP

277

Powers repel demons: Mary has crushed the ser­
pent’s head; she is terrible to the demons by the
depth of her humility and the ardour of her charity.
Virtues perform miracles as God’s instruments: but
the greatest miracle was to conceive the Incarnate
Word for our salvation. Dominations command the
lower angels: Mary commands all the heavenly
choirs. The Thrones are those angels in whom God
dwells in a specially intimate way: Mary, who gave
birth to Jesus, is the Seat of Wisdom, and the Blessed
Trinity reside in her more familiarly than in the
highest angel—that is to say, in a way proportionate
to her consummated grace.
She surpasses even the Cherubim and Seraphim.
The Cherubim shine with the splendour of their
knowledge: but Mary has penetrated deeper than
they into the divine mysteries since she has the light
of glory in a degree far above theirs. She has car­
ried in her womb Him in Whom are hidden all the
treasures of wisdom and knowledge. She lived with
Him for thirty years on earth, and in heaven she is
nearest of all to Him.
The Seraphim burn with the flame of love: but
more ardent still is the living flame of Mary’s charity.
She loves God more than all creatures together, for
she loves Him not only as Creator and Father but as
her Infant and her treasured Son.
She is therefore the Queen of Angels. They serve
her faithfully, surround her with veneration, marvel
at her tender solicitude for each one of us and for
glory of God and the salvation of souls are the obthe whole Church. Her charity, her zeal for the
jects of their intense admiration.
Such is the substance of Justin of Miéchow’s
treatise on Mary, Queen of Angels.

278

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

Queen of Patriarchs
The superiority of Mary to Adam in the state of
innocence is clear from all that has been said thus,
far. She was higher in grace than he, and had as
well the principal effects of original justice: subordi­
nation of the sensibility to the higher faculties, and
subordination of these latter to God. Mary’s charity
was greater from the first instant of her conception
than that of Adam in the state of innocence, and she
had, in addition the special grace of freedom from all
sin however slight, even though she was conceived in
passible and mortal flesh.
Her intimacy with God was much closer than that
of Abel, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, or Joseph.
Abraham’s most heroic act was that of preparing
himself to immolate his son Isaac, the son of the
promise. It was far more for Mary to offer Jesus
Who was dearer to her than her own life: nor did
an angel come to arrest Jesus’ immolation as one did
in the case of Isaac.
Her title of Mother of God, her charity and the
heroicity of all her virtues make Mary shine as a
star without compare among the patriarchs.

Queen of Prophets
Prophecy in the strict sense of the term is the gift
of knowing with certainty and predicting the future
under divine inspiration. It was given to many in
Old Testament times. In the New Testament St.
John and St. Paul were both prophets and apostles.
Sacred Scripture tells us of certain holy women also
who received the gift of prophecy: Mary the sister
of Moses, Deborah, Anne, mother of Samuel, Elisa­
beth, mother of John the Baptist.

SPECIAL ASPECTS OF MARY’S QUEENSHIP

279

Mary is Queen of prophets. She foretold the
future in the Magnificat when she sang: “Behold
from henceforth all nations shall call me blessed.” Of
her the prophets spoke when they announced the
mystery of the Incarnation. She bore in her womb
Him of Whom the prophets spoke, and she heard
from His own lips the mysteries of the kingdom of
God.
She had the gift of prophecy in the highest degree
after Our Blessed Lord, and at the same time she had
perfect understanding of the fulness of the revela­
tion which He communicated to the world.

Queen of Apostles
In what sense is Mary Queen of the twelve
apostles?
Her dignity as Mother of God surpasses theirs. The
apostolate is a form of ministry (14). But accord­
ing to the phrase of St. Albert which we have quoted
already, Mary is not simply God’s minister since as
Mother of the Saviour she is still more closely asso­
ciated with Him. After the Ascension the Apostles
had need of direction, of counsel, and no one was
better equipped than Mary to give it to them. She
consoled them in their grief at the departure of Our
Lord when they felt lonely and helpless in face of the
task of the evangelisation of the pagan world. Jesus
had left them His mother to help them. She was
for them, it has been said, a second paraclete, a
visible paraclete, a mediatrix; she was their guiding
star in the midst of the tempest of persecution that
raged about them. She was truly a mother to them.
None of them ever left her side without having been
(14) “Let a man so account of us as the ministers of Christ”
(I Cor. iv, I).

280

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

enlightened and consoled, without having been
strengthened. By her example in suffering calum­
nies, by her experience of the things of God she sus­
tained them in times of trial and perseution.
There was no one who could talk as she did of the
virginal conception of Christ, of His birth, His in­
fancy, His hidden life, of what took place in His soul
on the Cross. This is what prompted St. Ambrose
to say: “ It is not strange that St. John should have
spoken better of the mystery of the Incarnation than
the others did; he lived at the source of heavenly
secrets ” (15). He lived in Mary’s company what he
speaks of in the fourth gospel (16).
Queen of Martyrs

The title of Queen of Martyrs has been applied to
Mary by SS. Ephrem, Jerome, Ildephonsus, Anselm
and Bernard. The implied allusion is to her martyr­
dom of heart of which Simeon spoke: “ Thy own soul
a sword shall pierce.”
Mary’s grief was proportionate to her love for her
Son. She suffered when He was called a seducer, a
violator of the Law, one possessed by a devil; she
suffered inexpressibly when Barabbas was preferred
to Him, when He was nailed to the Cross, when He
was tortured by the crown of thorns, when He was
parched with thirst; she shared in all the anguish of
His priestly and victim soul. She felt as it were all
the blows Jesus received in His scourging and cruci­
fixion, for her love made her one with Him.
As
Bossuet exclaims: “ One cross was enough to make
martyrs of Him and her.” They offered but one
( 15) De Institutione Virginis, c. lx.
(16) These remarks are a summary of the corresponding
section of Justin de Mléchow’s work.

SPECIAL ASPECTS OF MARY’S QUEENSHIP

281

sacrifice, and since, she, for her part, loved Jesus
more than herself, she suffered more than if she her­
self had been the victim. All this she endured so as
to confess her faith in the mystery of the redemptive
Incarnation, and in her the faith of the Church was
strong at that moment, stronger and more ardent
than in all the other martyrs.
We should remember that Mary’s sufferings had
the same cause as her Son’s—the accumulated sins
of men and their ingratitude which made the suffer­
ings to be partly of no avail. We must remember
too that she suffered from the time of the concep­
tion of the Saviour, still more after Simeon’s
prophecy, still more as she saw the opposition to
Jesus mounting, and most of all at the foot of the
Cross. But even then, even when her soul was inun­
dated with grief, her zeal for the glory of God and
for the salvation of souls caused her a holy joy at
the sight of her Son consummating His redemptive
work by the most perfect of holocausts.
Lastly, she has helped the martyrs in their tor­
ments. She is Our Lady of a happy death because
of her care for the dying who call on her. Much
more does she help those who die to profess their
faith in the Redeemer.

Queen of Confessors
Mary and Priests

She is Queen of all who confess their faith in Jesus
for she herself confessed the same faith more than
any other creature.
But we shall speak principally in this section of
what she is to the priests of Our Blessed Lord. To
represent Jesus truly, the priest who brings Him
down on the altar and offers Him sacramentally in

282

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

Holy Mass should unite himself more and more to
His sentiments, to the oblation which is always liv­
ing in the Heart of Jesus ‘‘always living to make
intercession for us.” In addition, he should, through
the different sacraments, distribute the grace which
is the fruit of the merits of Jesus and Mary.
Because of the work to which they are called, Mary
is specially zealous for the sanctification of priests.
She sees that they share in the priesthood of her Son
and she watches over their souls that the grace of
their ordination may bear fruit in them, that they
become living images of the Saviour. She protects
them against the dangers which surround them and
lifts them up if they happen to stumble. She loves
them as sons of predilection, just as she loved St.
John who was committed to her on Calvary. She
attracts their heart to herself to raise it up and to
lead them to greater intimacy with Jesus, so that one
day they may be able to say in all truth : “ I live, now
not I, but Christ liveth in me.”
Mary helps priests in a special way at the altar so
that they may become more fully conscious of their
union with the Principal Offerer. She is spiritually
present at that sacramental oblation which perpe­
tuates the substance of the sacrifice of the Cross,
and she distributes to the priest the actual graces he
needs to minister with recollection and in a spirit of
self-donation. In that way she helps the priest to
share in Jesus’ victimhood as well as in His priest­
hood. All this means to form priests to the image
of the Heart of Jesus.
With Jesus she arouses priestly vocations and cul­
tivates them. She knows that where there are no
priests there is no Baptism, no Confession, no Mass,
no Christian Marriage, no Extreme Unction, no

SPECIAL ASPECTS OF MARY’S QUEENSHIP

283

Christian life: without the priest the world returns
to paganism.
Our Lord Who has willed to have need of Mary in
the work of salvation has willed also to have need of
priests, and Mary forms them in holiness. We can
see her action clearly in some of the saints who were
priests—St. John the Evangelist, St. Bernard, St.
Dominic, the Apostle of the Rosary, St. Bernardine of
Siena, St. Grignon de Montfort, St. Alphonsus.

Queen of Virgins
Mary and Consecrated Souls

Mary is Queen of Virgins since she had the virtue
of virginity in the most eminent degree and pre­
served it in the conception, birth, and after the
birth of the Saviour. She teaches souls the value of
virginity. It is a true virtue, a spiritual force, some­
thing more than a mere good inclination of the sensi­
bility. She teaches them that virginity consecrated
to God is higher than simple chastity since it
promises integrity of the body and purity of the
heart for the whole of life—a consideration which led
St. Thomas to say that virginity stands in much the
same relation to chastity as munificence does to
simple liberality, since it is a perfect gift of self, and
sign of a perfect generosity.
Mary safeguards virgins from danger, she supports
them in their difficulties and leads them, if they are
faithful, to great intimacy with her Son.
What is her role in regard to consecrated souls?
The Church calls such souls “ Spouses of Christ.” It
follows that Our Lady is their perfect model. Fol­
lowing her example they should live a life of prayer
and of reparation in union with Our Blessed Lord.
They should become also consolers of the afflicted,

284

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

remembering that the consolation which they afford
in a supernatural spirit to the suffering members of
Christ is afforded to Himself and makes amends for
the ingratitude, coldness, and even hatred of so
many. Thus, these souls are called to reproduce the
virtues of Mary and to continue in some measure her
work for Our Blessed Lord and for souls.
If consecrated souls but know and follow Mary’s
guidance they find through her a wonderful com­
pensation for the privations their lives impose on
them, and which, though all accepted in advance, are
felt most keenly only as they come one by one, day
after day. Through Mary they can aspire to a cer­
tain spiritual motherhood, which is an image of her
own, in regard to all—the poor, the afflicted, sinners
—who are in need of spiritual care. Our Blessed
Lord alluded to that spiritual motherhood when He
said: “ I was hungry, and you gave me to eat; I was
thirsty, and you gave me to drink; I was a stranger,
and you took me in: Naked, and you covered me:
sick, and you visited me: I was in prison and you
came to me ” (Mt. xxv, 35-36).
Spiritual motherhood in the life of contemplation
and reparation may be practised also by the apostolate of prayer and suffering which makes fruitful the
exterior apostolate for the conversion of sinners and
the extension of the reign of Christ. A hidden, in­
terior apostolate can be one of great sufferings; but
Our Lady will show how to bear them and she will
afford some glimpse of their effects in souls.
Another work of Mary’s is to help Christian
mothers to bring up their children to a life
of faith, confidence in God, and love.
She helps
them also to win back their erring children, as St.
Monica did St. Augustine.
Thus, we see the universality of Mary’s Queenship.

SPECIAL ASPECTS OF MARY'S QUEENSHIP

285

She is Queen of all the saints by virtue of her unique
mission in God’s providential plan, and her fulness
of grace and glory. She is Queen of all the saints,
the unknown as well as the known, the uncanonised
as well as the canonised, the Queen of all those who
strive after holiness on earth, whose trials and joys
are so well known to her, and the crown of whose
merits she foresees even now.

CHAPTER VI
True Devotion to Our Lady

In this chapter we shall speak of : 1st—the cult of
hyperdulia which is due to the Mother of God; 2nd—
the usual forms of Marian devotion, especially the
Rosary as a school of contemplation; 3rd—Conse­
cration to Our Lady as explained by St. Grignon de
Montfort; 4th—Intimate and mystical union with
Mary.

Article I
The Cult of Hyperdulia and the Benefits
It Confers (1)

Cult in general means honour paid in a spirit of
submission and dependence to a superior because of
his excellence (2). Whether it be merely interior, or
exterior as well, cult differs according to the position
or excellence of the person to whom it is paid. Since
the excellence of God is infinite, He being First
Principle and Supreme Master of all things, the cult
to which He has a right is supreme. It is known as
latria and to pay it is an exercise of the virtue of
(1) Merkelbach, Mariologia, pp. 392-413.
E. Dublanchy,
Diet. Théol. Cath. art. Marie, col. 2439-2474.
(2) Ila Hae, q.81. a.l, ad 4 and a.4; q.92, a.2. Cult Is some­
thing more than honour: it Is honour paid by an Inferior to a
sunerior. God honours the saints but He does not offer them
cult.

THE CULT OF HYPERDULIA

287

religion. This same cult is due to the Sacred
Humanity of Our Blessed Lord considered as belong­
ing to the uncreated Person of the Word, and in a
relative manner it is due to crucifixes and to pictures
and statues which represent Him.
Created persons who have a certain excellence are
entitled to the cult called dulia: a cult of respect.
Thus, in the natural order respect is due to parents,
kings, teachers; in the supernatural order it is due to
the saints, the heroicity of whose virtues has been
recognised. The latter cult paid to God’s servants
honours God Himself Who is revealed to the world
in the saints and draws us by them to Himself (3).
It is commonly taught in the Church that the
Blessed Virgin is entitled to a cult of hyperdulia, or
supreme dulia, because of her eminent dignity as
Mother of God (4).

Nature and Foundation of the Cult of Mary
There have been two opposed false tendencies in
regard to the cult of Mary. According to the testi­
mony of St. Epiphanius (Haer., 78-79) the Collyridians
wished to pay her divine cult and to offer sacrifice to
her. This error might be termed Mariolatry. It was
(3) Ila Ilae, q.103, a.4.
(4) According to J. B. de Rossi, Roma sotteranea Christiana,
Rome, 1911, t. HI, pp. 65 sqq, and 252, and Marucchi, Eléments
d’archéologie chrétienne. 2nd edit.. 1911, p. 211 sqq. the first
representations of the Blessed Virgin holding the child Jesus
in her arms which are found in the Roman catacombs date
back to the 2nd. 3rd. and 4th centuries. The institution of
special feasts in Mary's honour appears to be traceable to the
4th century, from which time St. Epiphanius (.Haer., 79) speaks
of her cult while condemning the error of the Collyridians
who transformed it into adoration. St. Gregory of Nazianzen
mentions her cult also (Orat. XXIV, xi) as well as St. Ambrose
(De instit. virginis. XXX, 83). There are II prayers to her
attributed to St. Ephrem (d.378) in Assemani’s edition of his
works. The cult of Mary became general in both East and
West in subsequent times.

288

MARY'S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

of brief duration. Opposed to it is the Protestant
contention that the cult offered to Mary by Catholics
is a form of superstition.

To answer this charge, we must insist that the cult
of latria or adoration can be and is offered to God
alone. If we adore the Sacred Humanity, it is because
of Its personal union with the Word; if we offer rela­
tive cult of adoration to the crucifix, it is because it
represents Our Saviour (5), for it is quite clear that
the crucifix and other representations of Our Saviour
have no other excellence than that of representing
Him. Were relative adoration to be offered to Our
Lady because of her connection with the Word made
flesh, it might easily be mistaken for adoration
offered to her because of her own intrinsic excellence,
and would therefore be an occasion of grave error
and of idolatry, as St. Thomas remarks (6).
The cult due to Our Lady is therefore one of dulia.
This statement is of faith, because of the teaching
of the universal magisterium of the Church; hence
the condemnation of the opposed propositions of
Molinos (7).

It is common and certain doctrine that Mary is
entitled to a special kind of dulia known as hyperdulia, which is due to her considered as Mother of
God. This doctrine is traditional. It is found quite
explicitly in the works of St. Modestus in the 7th
century, of St. John Damascene in the 8th, and later
in the works of St. Thomas (8), St. Bonaventure (9),
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)

Illa, q.25, a.3 and a.5.
lb. a.3, ad 3.
Denz. 1255 sqq.. 1316.
Ila Ilae, q.103, a.4. ad 2; Illa, q.25, a.5.
In III Sent., d.9, a.l, q.3.

THE CULT OF HYPERDULIA

289

Scotus (10), Suarez (11) and almost all catholic
theologians (12).
The cult of hyperdulia is due to Mary formally be­
cause she is Mother of God since the dignity of her
divine motherhood belongs by its term to the
hypostatic order and is therefore very much higher
than that which follows upon her degree of grace and
glory. If Mary had received only the fulness of grace
and glory without having been made the Mother of
God, if, in other words she were higher than the
other saints only through her degree of consummated
glory, a special cult of hyperdulia would not be due
to her (13).
It is the more common and more probable opinion
that hyperdulia differs from dulia not in degree only
but in kind, just as the divine maternity belongs by
its term to the hypostatic order, which is specifically
distinct from that of grace and glory (14).
The cult of hyperdulia is offered to Mary since she
is Mother of God, Mother of the Saviour. But we
should remember that for the same reason she is
Mother of men, universal Mediatrix and CoRedemptrix.

What are the Fruits of this Cult?

By rendering Mary the cult of hyperdulia we move
her to look down on us with still greater love, and
for our part are drawn to imitate her virtues. The
(10) In III Sent., d.9. q. un.
(11) In Illam, disp. XXII, sect. II, n. 4.
(12) Cf. Diet. Théol. Cath., art. Marie, cols. 2449-2453.
(13) In this matter, Vasquez differs from the great majority
of theologians by holding that the cult of hyperdulia is due to
Mary principally because of her eminent holiness. This view
of his is a conseauence of his holding that sanctifying grace
has a dignity higher than that of the divine maternity.
(14) This is the opinion of Fr. Merkelbach, op. cit., pp. 402,
405.
T

290

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

cult of hyperdulia leads effectively to salvation, for
Mary can obtain the grace of final perseverance for
all those who pray faithfully to her for it. For this
reason true devotion to Our Lady is commonly looked
on as one of the signs of predestination: though it
does not give absolute and infallible certainty of sal­
vation—a possibility ruled out by the authority of
the Council of Trent (Denz. 805)—it gives rise to a
firm hope.
This firm hope rests on Mary’s great
power of intercession and her special love for those
who invoke her (15). In this sense St. Alphonsus
asserts (The Glories of Mary, Part I, ch. viii) that it is
morally impossible that they should be lost who have
the desire to amend their lives and who honour the
Mother of God faithfully and commit themselves to
her protection. Those who have no serious desire to
amend their lives cannot, of course, look on the fact
that they keep up a certain appearance of devotion
to Our Lady as a probable sign of predestination. But
a sinner who tries to give up sin and turns to Mary
for assistance will find that she will not fail him. This
is the opinion of St. Alphonsus (Zb., ch. I, 4) and of
most modern theologians (16).
The cult offered to Mary in the Church confirms in
a general way the foundations of our faith since it
derives from the Redemptive Incarnation. Thereby
it destroys heresies : “ Cunctas haereses interemisti
in universo mundo.” The same cult leads to holiness
by suggesting the imitation of Mary’s virtues, and it
glorifies the Son by honouring the Mother.

Objections
The objection raised by some Protestants, that cult
offered to Mary is derogatory to the divine cult, can
(15) Diet, théol. oath., art. Marie, col. 2458.
(16) Cf. Terrien, op. cit., t. IV, pp. 291 sqq.

THE CULT OF HYPERDULIA

291

be answered without much difficulty. The Catholic
Church teaches that the cult of latria or adoration
is offered to God alone and that the cult of Mary, far
from taking from the cult of the Godhead, promotes
it by recognising God as the Author of all the gifts
with which Mary is endowed. The honour paid to
the Mother redounds to the glory of the Son, and
Mary the Mediatrix of all graces helps us to know
better God, the Author of all graces. Experience has
shown that faith in the divinity of Christ has best
been preserved in those countries which are marked
by devotion to Mary. All the saints were devout to
both Jesus and Mary.
Since the cult of Mary is more sense-perceptible,
there are some who perform its acts with more in­
tensity than those pertaining to the cult of the God­
head.
But even for such persons the cult of the
Godhead is higher in kind, for they love God above
all things with a love of preference {amour d’estime),
and this love in its turn becomes more intense accor­
ding as they advance in holiness and live a life more
detached from the senses.
Confidence in Mary increases our confidence in
God. The confidence that pilgrims had in the Curé
of Ars, for example, increased their confidence that
God would help them through his instrumentality.

It would be a real lack of humility, as St. Grignon
de Montfort says, to pass over the mediators whom
God has given us because of our weakness. Far from
lessening our intimacy with God, they prepare us for
its increase. Just as Jesus does nothing in souls ex­
cept in order to lead them to His Father, so also Mary
works on minds and hearts solely in order to lead
them nearer to her Son. God has willed to make
continual use of Mary for the sanctification of souls.

292

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

Article II
The Rosary:

A School

of

Contemplation

From among the many customary devotions to Our
Lady, such as the Angelus, the Office of the Blessed
Virgin, the Rosary, we shall speak especially of the
last in so far as it prepares us for and leads us up to
contemplation of the great mysteries of salvation.
After Holy Mass it is one of the most beautiful and
efficacious forms of prayer, on condition of under­
standing it and living it.
It sometimes happens that its recitation—reduced
to that of five mysteries—becomes a matter of
routine. The mind, not being really gripped by the
things of God, finds itself a prey to distractions.
Sometimes the prayer is said hurriedly and soullessly. Sometimes it is said for the purpose of
obtaining temporal favours, desired out of all relation
to spiritual gain. When a person says the Rosary in
such a way, he may well ask himself in what way his
prayer is like that of which Pope Leo XIII spoke in his
encyclicals on the Rosary, and about which Pius XI
wrote one of his last apostolic letters.

It is true that to pray well it is sufficient to think
in a general way of God and of the graces for which
one asks. But to make the most out of our five
mysteries, we should remember that they constitute
but a third of the whole Rosary, and that they should
be accompanied by meditation—which can be very
simple—on the Joyful, Sorrowful and Glorious
Mysteries, which recall the whole life of Jesus and
Mary and their glory in heaven.

the rosary: a school of contemplation

293

The Three Great Mysteries of Salvation
The fifteen mysteries of the Rosary thus divided
into three groups are but different aspects of the three
great mysteries of our salvation : the Incarnation, the
Redemption, Eternal Life.
The mystery of the Incarnation is recalled by the
joys of the Annunciation, the Visitation, the Birth of
the Saviour, His Presentation in the Temple and His
finding among the doctors. The mystery of the
Redemption is recalled by the different stages of the
Passion : the Agony in the garden, the Scourging, the
Crowning with thorns, the Carrying of the Cross, the
Crucifixion. The mystery of eternal life is recalled
by the Resurrection, the Ascension, Pentecost, the
Assumption of Our Lady and her crowning as Queen
of heaven.
Thus, the Rosary is a Credo: not an abstract one,
but one concretised in the life of Jesus Who came
down to us from the Father and Who ascended to
bring us back with Himself to the Father. It is the
whole of Christian dogma in all its splendour and
elevation, brought to us that we may fill our minds
with it, that we may relish it and nourish our souls
with it.
This makes the Rosary a true school of contempla­
tion. It raises us gradually above vocal prayer and
even above reasoned out or discursive meditation.
Early theologians have compared the movement of
the soul in contemplation to the spiral in which cer­
tain birds — the swallow, for example — move when
they wish to attain to a great height (17). The joyful
mysteries lead to the Passion, and the Passion to the
(17) Cf. Ila Ilae, q.180, a.6. The spiral movement lifts itself
up to God progressively by the consideration of the different
mysteries of salvation, all of which lead to Him.

294

MARY'S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

door of heaven. The Rosary well understood is,
therefore, a very elevated form of prayer which
makes the whole of dogma accessible to all.

The Rosary is also a very practical form of prayer
for it recalls all Christian morality and spirituality by
presenting them from the sublime point of view of
their realisation in Jesus and Mary. The mysteries
of the Rosary should be reproduced in our lives. Each
of them is a lesson in some virtue—particularly in the
virtues of humility, trust, patience and charity.
There are three stages in our progress towards God.
The first is to have knowledge of the final end,
whence comes the desire of salvation and the joy to
which that desire gives rise. This stage is symbolised
in the joyful mysteries which contain the good news
of the Incarnation of the Son of God Who opens to
us the way of salvation. The next stage is to adopt
the means—often painful to nature—to be delivered
from sin and to merit heaven. This is the stage of
the sorrowful mysteries. The final stage is that of
rest in the possession of eternal life. It is the stage
of heaven, of which the glorious mysteries allow us
some anticipated glimpse.
The Rosary is therefore most practical. It takes
us from the midst of our too human interests and
joys and makes us think of those which centre on the
coming of the Saviour. It takes us from our meaning­
less fears, from the sufferings we bear so badly, and
reminds us of how much Jesus has suffered for love
of us and teaches us to follow Him by bearing the
cross which divine providence has sent us to purify
us. It takes us finally from our earthly hopes and
ambitions and makes us think of the true object of

the rosary: a school of contemplation

295

Christian hope—eternal life and the graces necessary
to arrive there.
The Rosary is more than a prayer of petition. It is
a prayer of adoration inspired by the thought of the
Incarnate God, a prayer of reparation in memory of
the Passion of Our Saviour, a prayer of thanksgiving
that the glorious mysteries continue to reproduce
themselves in the uninterrupted entry of the elect
into glory.

The Rosary and Contemplative Prayer
A more simple and still more elevated way of re­
citing the Rosary is, while saying it, to keep the eyes
of faith fixed on the living Jesus Who is always mak­
ing intercession for us and Who is acting upon us in
accordance with the mysteries of His childhood, or
His Passion, or His glory. He comes to us to make us
like Himself. Let us fix our gaze on Jesus Who is
looking at us. His look is more than kind and under­
standing: it is the look of God, a look which purifies,
which sanctifies, which gives peace. It is the look of
our Judge and still more the look of our Saviour, our
Friend, the Spouse of our souls. A Rosary said in this
way, in solitude and silence, is a most fruitful inter­
course with Jesus. It is a conversation with Mary too
which leads to intimacy with her Son.
We sometimes read in the lives of the saints that
Our Blessed Lord reproduced in them first His
childhood, then His hidden life, then His apostolic
life, and finally His Passion, before allowing them to
share in His glory. He comes to us in a similar way
in the Rosary and, well said, it is a prayer which
gradually takes the form of an intimate conversation
with Jesus and Mary. It is easy to see how saintly
souls have found in it a school of contemplation.

296

MARY'S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

It has sometimes been objected that one cannot re­
flect on the words and the mysteries at the same time.
An answer that is often given is that it is not neces­
sary to reflect on the words if one is meditating on or
looking spiritually at one of the mysteries. The words
are a kind of melody which soothes the ear and
isolates us from the noise of the world around us, the
fingers being occupied meanwhile in allowing one
bead after another to slip through.
Thus, the
imagination is kept tranquil and the mind and the
will are set free to be united to God.
It has also been objected that the monotony of the
many repetitions in the Rosary leads necessarily to
routine. This objection is valid only if the Rosary is
said badly. If well said, it familiarises us with the
different mysteries of salvation and recalls what these
mysteries should produce in our joys, our sorrows,
and our hopes. Any prayer can become a matter of
routine—even the Ordinary of the Mass. The reason
is not that the prayers are imperfect, but that we do
not say them as we should—with faith, confidence
and love.

®
The Spirit of the Rosary as St. Dominic Conceived It
To understand the Rosary better it is well to recall
how St. Dominic conceived it under the inspiration
of Our Lady at a time when southern France was
ravaged by the Albigensian heresy—a heresy which
denied the infinite goodness and omnipotence of God
by admitting a principle of evil which was often vic­
torious. Not only did Albigensianism attack Christian
morality, but it was opposed to dogma as well—to the
great mysteries of creation, the redemptive incarna-

CONSECRATION TO MARY

297

tion, the descent of the Holy Ghost, the eternal life
to which we are called.
It was at that moment that Our Blessed Lady made
known to St. Dominic a kind of preaching till then
unknown, which she said would be one of the most
powerful weapons against future errors and in future
difficulties. Under her inspiration, St. Dominic went
into the villages of the heretics, gathered the people,
and preached to them the mysteries of salvation—
the Incarnation, the Redemption, Eternal Life. As
Mary had taught him to do, he distinguished the
different kinds of mysteries, and after each short
instruction he had ten Hail Marys recited—somewhat
as might happen even to-day at a Holy Hour. And
what the word of the preacher was unable to do, the
sweet prayer of the Hail Mary did for hearts. As
Mary had promised, it proved to be a most fruitful
form of preaching (18).
If we live by the prayer of which St. Dominic’s
preaching is the example our joys, our sorrows, and
our hopes will be purified, elevated and spiritualised.
We shall see that Jesus, Our Saviour and Our Model,
wishes to make us like Himself, first communicating
to us something of His infant and hidden life, then
something of His sorrows, and finally making us
partakers of His glorious life for all eternity.
Article III
Consecration

to

Mary

In his Treatise of True Devotion to the Blessed
Virgin, St. Grignon de Montfort has distinguished a
(18) The first fruit of the Rosary was the victory of Simon
of Montfort over the Albigensians, obtained while St. Dominic
implored Mary’s help in prayer.

298

MARY S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

number of different degrees of true devotion to the
Mother of God. He speaks only briefly of the forms
of false devotion—that which is altogether exterior,
or presumptuous, or inconstant, or hypocritical, or
self-interested—since his main concern is true
devotion.
Like the other Christian virtues, true devotion
grows in us with charity, advancing from the stage
of the beginner to that of the more proficient, and
continuing up to the stage of the perfect. The first
. degree or stage is to pray devoutly to Mary from time
to time, for example, by saying the Angelus when the
bell rings.
The second degree is one of more
perfect sentiments of veneration, confidence and
love; it may manifest itself by the daily recitation of
the Rosary—five decades or all fifteen. In the third
degree, the soul gives itself fully to Our Lady by an
act of consecration so as to belong altogether to Jesus
through her (19).

What does this Consecration mean?

This act of consecration consists in promising Mary
to have constant filial recourse to her and to live in
habitual dependence on her, so as to attain to more
intimate union with Our Blessed Lord and through
Him with the Blessed Trinity present in our souls.
The reason for making it lies, St. Grignon de Mont­
fort says, in the fact that God has willed to make use
of Mary for the sanctification of souls, having already
made use of her to bring about the Incarnation
(Treatise of True Devotion, ch. I, a.l, no. 44).
(19) That is why St. Grignon de Montfort speaks in his
formula of “ Consecration of oneself to Jesus by the hands of
Mary.’” Tn the course of his treatise he usually says more
briefly, “ Consecration to Mary,” meaning thereby consecra­
tion to Jesus through her.

CONSECRATION TO MARY

299

The saint continues : “ I do not think that anyone
can attain to great union with Our Blessed Lord or
perfect fidelity to the Holy Ghost without being
closely united to Our Lady and depending very much
on her help . . . She was full of grace when she was
saluted by the Archangel Gabriel, she was super­
abundantly filled with grace by the Holy Ghost when
He overshadowed her, she so advanced in grace from
day to day and from moment to moment as to arrive
at an inconceivable summit of grace; on which
account the Most High has made her His unique
treasurer and the unique dispenser of His graces, so
that she may ennoble, enrich and elevate whom she
wills, and make whom she wills enter the narrow gate
of heaven ... Jesus is everywhere and always the Son
and the fruit of Mary; Mary is everywhere the true
tree which bears the fruit of life and the true mother
who produces it.”
In the same chapter, a little earlier, we read: “ We
may apply to Mary with even more truth than St.
Paul applies them to himself the words : ‘ My little
children, of whom I am in labour again, until Christ
be formed in you. I am in labour daily with God’s
children till Jesus be formed in them in the fulness
of His age.’ St. Augustine says that the predestined
are in this world hidden in the womb of Mary in order
to become conformed to the image of the Son of God;
and there she guards, nourishes, and supports them
and brings them forth to glory after death, which is
the true day of their birth—the term by which the
Church always speaks of the death of the just. O
mystery of grace unknown to the reprobate and little
understood by the predestined!” Mary is truly the
mother of the just, conceiving them spiritually and
bringing them forth after death by their entry into
glory, which is their definitive spiritual birth. It is

300

MARYS UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

clear then that it would be a falling short in humility
to neglect to have frequent recourse to the Universal
Mediatrix whom Divine Providence has given us as
our true spiritual mother to form Christ in us. It is
clear also that theology cannot but recognise that it
is lawful and more than lawful to consecrate oneself
to Mary, Mother and Queen of all men (20).
Consecration to Our Lady is a practical form of
recognition of her universal mediation and a
guarantee of her special protection. It helps us to
have continual childlike recourse to her and to con­
template and imitate her virtues and her perfect
union with Christ. In the practice of this complete
dependence on Mary, there may be included—and St.
Grignon de Montfort invites us to it—the resignation
into Mary’s hands of everything in our good works
that is communicable to other souls, so that she may
make use of it in accordance with the will of her
Divine Son and for His glory. “ I choose thee this day,
O Mary, in the presence of the whole court of heaven,
as my Mother and Queen. I give and consecrate to
you as your slave my body and my soul, my interior
and exterior possessions, and even the value of my
past, present and future good actions, allowing you
the full right to dispose of me and of all that belongs
to me, without any exception whatever, according to
your good pleasure, for the greater glory of God, in
time and in eternity.” This offering is really the
practice of the so-called heroic act, there being ques-

(20) Cf. Diet, de Tiiéol. Cath.. art. Marie, cols. 2470 sqq. Pius
X has made his own the teaching of St. Grignon de Montfort,
and sometimes of his very expressions, in the Encyclical Ad
diem ilium on Mary, universal Mediatrix.

CONSECRATION TO MARY

301

tion here not of a vow but of a promise made to the
Blessed Virgin (21).
We are recommended to offer our exterior posses­
sions to Mary, that she may preserve us from
inordinate attachment to the things of this world
and inspire us to make better use of them. It is good
also to consecrate to her our bodies and our senses
that she may keep them pure.
The act of consecration gives over to Mary also our
soul and its faculties, our spiritual possessions, virtues
and merits, all our good works past, present and
future. It is necessary, however, to explain how this
can be done. Theology gives us the answer by
distinguishing what is communicable to others in our
good works from what is incommunicable.
What in our good works is communicable to others?

To begin at the other end of the problem, our merits
de condigno which constitute a right in justice to
an increase of grace and to eternal glory are incom­
municable. Our merits de condigno differ in that
from those of Our Blessed Lord. He was Head of the
human race and could in justice communicate His
merits to us. If, therefore, we offer our merits de
condigno to Mary, it is not in order that she may give
them to others but that she may keep them for us,
that she may help us to make them bear fruit, and. if
we have the misfortune to lose them by mortal sin,
that she may obtain for us the grace of really fervent
contrition.
There is, however, something in our good works
which we can communicate to others whether on
(21) Even religious who have taken solemn vows of poverty,
chastity and obedience can make this offering which will
Introduce them further into the mystery of the Communion
of saints.

302

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

earth or in purgatory (22). There is in the first place
the merit de congruo proprie, founded on the rights
of friendship with God by grace. God gives grace to
some because of the good intentions and good works
of others who are His friends. There are, in the
second place, our prayers; we can and should pray
for our neighbour, for his conversion and his spiritual
progress; we should pray also for the dying, for the
souls in purgatory. There are finally our acts of
satisfaction. We can make satisfaction de congruo
for others, for example, by accepting our daily crosses
to help to expiate for their sins. We may even, if God
moves us to do so by His grace, accept the penalty due
to their sins as Mary did at the foot of the Cross, and
thereby draw down the divine mercy on them (23).
This the saints did frequently. An example is found
in the life of St. Catherine of Siena. To a young
Sienese whose heart was full of hate of his political
enemies she said : “ Peter, I take on myself all your
sins, I shall do penance in your place : but do me one
favour; confess your sins.” “I have been frequently
to Confession,” answered Peter. “ That is not true, ’
replied the saint. “ It is seven years since you were
at Confession,” and she proceeded to enumerate all
the sins of his life. Confounded, he repented and
pardoned his enemies. Even without having all St.
Catherine’s generosity, we can accept our daily
crosses to help other souls to pay the debt they owe
to the divine justice.
We can also gain indulgences for the souls in pur­
gatory, opening to them the treasury of the merits
and satisfactions of Christ and the saints and
hastening the day of their liberation.
(22) Cf. Treatise of True Devotion, ch. Iv, a.l.
(23) Cf. Illa. q.14. a.l; q.48, a.2; Suppl., q.13, a.2: “ Unus pro
allo satisfacere potest, in quantum duo homines sunt unum in
caritate.”

CONSECRATION TO MARY

303

There are, therefore, three things which we can
share with others : our merits de congruo, our prayers,
our satisfaction. And if we put these in Mary’s hands
for others, we ought not to be surprised if she sends
us crosses—proportionate, of course, to our strength
—to make us really work for the salvation of souls.
Who are those who may be advised to make this
act of consecration? It certainly should not be re­
commended to people who would make it for merely
sentimental reasons or through spiritual pride, and
would not understand its true meaning. But those
who are truly spiritual may be recommended to make
it for a few days at first and then for some longer
time; when finally they are prepared they may make
it for their whole lives.
Someone may say that to give everything to Our
Lady is to strip oneself, to leave one’s own debts un­
paid, and so to add to one’s term in Purgatory. This
is in fact the difficulty the devil suggested to St. Brigid
of Sweden when she thought of making the act of
donation to Mary. Our Blessed Lord explained, how­
ever, to the saint that the objection sprang from
self-love and made no allowance for Mary’s goodness.
Mary will not be outdone in generosity: her help to
us will far exceed what we give her. The very act of
love which prompts our donation will itself obtain
remission of part of our Purgatory.
Others wonder if making the act of donation to
Mary leaves them free to pray for relatives and
friends afterwards. They forget that Mary knows
the obligations of charity better than we do: she
would be the first to remind us of them. There may
even be some among our relatives and friends on
earth and in purgatory who have urgent need of
prayers and satisfactions, without our knowing who
they are. Mary, however, knows who they are, and

304

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

she can help them out of our good works if we have
put them at her disposal.
Thus understood, consecration and donation make
us enter more fully, under Mary’s guidance, into the
mystery of the Communion of Saints. It is a perfect
renewal of the baptismal promises (24).

Fruits of this Consecration
“ This devotion,” St. Grignon de Montfort tells us
(25), “ gives us up altogether to the service of God,
and makes us imitate the example of Our Blessed
Lord, Who willed to be ‘ subject ’ in regard to His
Blessed Mother (Luke ii, 51). It obtains for us the
special protection of Mary, who purifies our good
works and adorns them when she offers them to her
Divine Son. It leads us to union with Our Blessed
Lord; it is an easy, short, perfect and safe way. It
confers great interior freedom, procures great bene­
fits for our neighbour, and is an excellent means of
assuring our perseverance.” The saint develops each
of these points in a most practical way.
He speaks of the easiness of the way in ch. 5, a.5:
“ It is an easy way, one followed and prepared for us
by Our Blessed Lord in His own coming, one where
there are no obstacles in reaching Him. It is true
that one can arrive at union with God by following
other roads; but there will be many more crosses and
trials, and many more difficulties which it will not be
easy to surmount—there will be combats and
strange agonies, steep mountains, sharp thorns,
fearful deserts. But the way of Mary is sweeter and
more peaceful.
“Even along the way of Mary there are stern battles
(24) Cf. Treatise
(25) lb., ch. v.

of True Devotion,

ch. iv, a.2.

CONSECRATION TO MARY

305

and great difficulties; but our good Mother makes
herself so near and present to her faithful servants
to enlighten them in their doubts, to strengthen them
in their fears, and to sustain them in their battles,
that in truth the Virgin’s way to Jesus is a way of
roses and honey compared with all others.”
The
saint adds that the truth of this can be seen from the
lives of the saints who have followed this way most
particularly: St. Ephrem, St. John Damascene, St.
Bernard, St. Bonaventure, St. Bernardine of Siena, St.
Francis de Sales.
A little further on in the same chapter, the saint
states that Mary’s servants “ receive from her
heaven’s greatest graces and favours which are
crosses; but it is the servants of Mary who bear the
crosses with most ease, merit and glory; and what
would hold back another makes them advance,” for
they are more aided by the Mother of God, who
obtains for them the unction of love in their trials.
It is wonderful how Mary makes the cross at the same
time easier to bear and more meritorious: easier to
bear because she helps us, and more meritorious be­
cause she obtains for us greater charity, which is the
principle of greater merit.
“ It is a short way . . . one advances more in a little
while of submission to and dependence on Mary than
in many years of self-will and self-reliance . . . We
can advance with giant strides along the path by
which Jesus came to us ... In a few years we shall
arrive at the fulness of the perfect age ” (26).
“ It is a perfect way, chosen by God Himself . . .
(26) St. Francis of Assisi learned one day in a vision that his
sons were endeavouring vainly to reach Our Blessed Lord by
a steep ladder which led directly to Him.
St. Francis was
shown instead a ladder much less steep, at the top of which
was Mary, and he heard the words: “Tell your sons to make
use of the ladder of my Mother.”
u

306

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

The Most High descended to us by way of the humble
Mary without losing anything of His divinity ; it is by
Mary that little ones can rise perfectly and divinely
to the Most High without fear.”
It is finally a safe way, for the Blessed Virgin pre­
serves us from the illusions of the devil and our
imagination.
She preserves us from sentiment as
well, calming and ruling our sensibility, giving it a
pure and holy object, and subordinating it to the rule
of the will vivified by charity.
In consecration to Mary, we find great interior
liberty: this is the reward of putting ourselves in such
complete dependence on Mary. Scruples are banished;
the heart dilates with confidence and love. The saint
confirms this point by referring to what he read in
the life of the Dominican, Mother Agnes de Langeac
“ who, suffering great anguish of soul heard a voice
which said to her that if she wished to be delivered
and to be protected from her enemies, she should
make herself at once the slave of Jesus and His Holy
Mother ... When she had done so all her anguish and
scruples ceased, and she found herself in a state of
great peace, as a result of which she determined to
teach the devotion to others ... among whom was M.
Olier, the founder of the seminary of Saint-Sulpice,
and many other priests of the same seminary.” It
was in the same seminary that St. Grignon de Mont­
fort received his priestly formation.
“ Finally, this devotion is one which procures the
good of our neighbour and it is for those who live by
it an admirable means of persevering in grace . . . for
by it one gives to Mary, who is faithful, all that one
has ... It is on her fidelity that reliance is placed . .
that she may preserve and increase our merits in
spite of all that could make us lose them ... Do not
commit the gold of your charity, the silver of your

CONSECRATION TO MARY

307

purity, the waters of heavenly graces, or the wine of
your merits and virtues ... to broken vessels such as
you yourselves are; else you will be despoiled by
robbers, that is by the demons, who watch day and
night for a favourable opportunity . . . Put all your
treasures, all your graces and virtues, in the womb
and in the heart of Mary: she is a spiritual vessel, a
vessel of honour, a singular vessel of devotion.
“ Souls who are not born of blood nor of the will of
the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God and of
Mary, understand and relish what I say; and it is for
them that I write ... If a soul gives itself to Mary
without reserve, she gives herself to it without re­
serve ” and helps it to find the road which leads to
the eternal goal.
Such are the fruits of this consecration : Mary loves
those who commit themselves to her fully; she
guides, directs, defends, protects, supports and inter­
cedes for them. It is good to offer ourselves to her so
that she may offer us to her Son according to the
fulness of her prudence and her zeal.
There are also fruits of a higher order which this
devotion produces, fruits which are strictly mystical,
as we shall explain in the next section (27).
(27) According to St. Grignon de Montfort (ch. I, a. 2, no. 3),
devotion to Our Blessed Lady will be more specially necessary
In the last ages of the world, when Satan will make an effort
such “ as to deceive (if possible) even the elect” (Mt. xxiv, 24).
“ If the predestined,” he says, “ enter with the grace and light
of the Holy Ghost into the interior and perfect practice of
this devotion, they will see clearly as far as faith permits this
beautiful star of the sea, and they will arrive safely in har­
bour, in spite of pirates and tempests. They will learn the
greatness of their Queen, and they will consecrate themselves
entirely to her service, as her subjects and slaves of love ” to
combat what St. Paul calls the slavery of sin (cf. Rom. vi, 20).
They will have experience of her motherly tenderness, and
they will love her as her well-beloved children.
The expression ‘‘holy slavery” used by the saint has been
sometimes criticised. This is to forget that it is a slavery of
love which accentuates rather than diminishes the filial

308

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

Article IV
Mystical Union

with

Mary

A soul faithful to the devotion of which we have
been speaking perforins all its actions through Mary,
in Mary and for Mary, and attains thereby to great
intimacy with Our Lord (28). To consider only humi­
lity, the theological virtues, and the gifts of the Holy
Ghost, the following are the more precious fruits of
consecration to Mary when it is lived fully : a gradu­
ally increasing participation in Mary’s humility and
faith, great confidence in God through her, the grace
of pure love, and the transformation of the soul to
the image of Jesus (29).
Participation in Mary’s Humility and Faith

By the light of the Holy Ghost the soul consecrated
to Mary will come to learn of all the evil that is in
itself; it will see by experience that it is naturally
incapable of every salutary and supernatural good
and that through self-love it opposes many obstacles
to the work of grace within it. Thus, it will attain
to that contempt of self of which St. Augustine speaks
in the City of God (Bk. XIV, ch. 28) : “ Two loves have
built two cities. The love of self even to the degree
character of our love of Mary.
Besides, as Mgr. Garnier,
Bishop of Luçon, remarked in a pastoral letter of March Uth,
1922. if there are in the world slaves of human respect, of
ambition, of money, and of shameful passions, there are also,
thank God, slaves of conscience and of duty. The holy slavery
belongs to this group. The expression “ holy slavery ” is a
striking metaphor, opposed to the slavery of sin.
(28) Treatise of True Devotion, ch. viii, a.2.
(29) lb., ch.vli.

MYSTICAL UNION WITH MARY

309

of despising God has built the city of Babylon, and
the love of God even to the degree of despising self
has built the city of God.” “ The humble Mary,” says
St. Grignon de Montfort (30), “ will make you a sharer
in her deep humility, so that you will despise your­
self and no one else, and you will love to be despised.
“ She will give you a share in her faith also, which
was greater than the faith of the patriarchs., the
prophets, the apostles, and all the saints. She herself
has that faith no longer, for she sees all things clearly
in God in the light of glory; but she keeps it . . . in
the Church militant for her most faithful servants.
“ The more you win her love . . . the more you will
have a pure faith, which will make you set little store
by the sense-perceptible and the extraordinary; a
faith living and animated by charity which
will make you act from a motive of pure love;
a faith firm and immovable as a rock which
will make you constant in the midst of storms
and afflictions; a faith active and piercing
which, like a mysterious master-key, will give you
entry to all the mysteries of Jesus, the final destiny
of man, and the heart of God Himself; a courageous
faith which will make you undertake and bring to
achievement great things for God and the salvation
of souls; a faith that will be your flaming torch, your
divine life, your hidden treasure of divine wisdom,
your all-powerful weapon, yours to use for the en­
lightenment of those who are in darkness, and the
shadow of death, for the inflaming of those who are
lukewarm and who need the purified gold of charity,
for the restoration to life of those who are dead by
sin, for touching and uprooting by your sweet and
and powerful words the hearts of marble and the
(30) 7b., ch.vil, a.l.

310

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

cedars of Lebanon, and finally for resisting the devil
and all the enemies of salvation” (31). These won­
derful pages are the fruit of the full development of
the virtue of faith, lit up by the gifts of understand­
ing and wisdom—fides donis illustrata, as theologians
say.
Great Confidence in God through Mary

By confidence we mean that firm hope which tends
towards eternal glory with sureness of direction.
According to St. Grignon de Montfort (32), the
Blessed Virgin inspires great confidence in God and in
herself : 1st—since through consecration we approach
Jesus no longer alone but in the company of His
Mother; 2nd—having given Mary all our merits,
graces and satisfactions to dispose of as she wills, she
in return will communicate to us her virtues and
clothe us with her merits; 3rd—since we have given
ourselves to Mary she will give herself to us. We can
say to Mary : “ I belong to you, O Holy Virgin. Save
me.” And to God we can say with the psalmist (Ps.
cxxx, 1): “Lord, my heart is not exalted: nor are my
eyes lofty. Neither have I walked in great matters,
nor in wonderful things above me. No, but I keep my
soul in calm and silence; as a child that is weaned
(from the pleasures of the world, and resting) on its
mother’s breast (and trusting in her).”
Through
Mary we receive more and more the inspirations of
the gift of knowledge which shows us the emptiness
of the things of this world and our frailty, and con­
trasts them with the reward of eternal life and the
divine assistance.
(31) Zb., ch.vii, a.2.
(32) Zb., a.4.

MYSTICAL UNION WITH MARY

3U

The Grace of Pure Love and of
Transformation of Soul

Those who walk by the way of Mary grow in charity
under the influence of her who is called the “ Mother
of fair love ” (Eccl. xxiv, 24). “ She will take out of
your heart every scruple and servile fear; she will
expand it so that you will run in the commandments
of her Son (Ps. cxviii, 32) with the holy freedom of
the children of God. She will introduce into your
heart that pure love of which she has all the
treasures so that you will no longer serve the God of
love in fear as you have done, but in pure love. You
will look on Him as your good Father Whom you will
try to please at all times, with Whom you will con­
verse in all confidence. If you have the misfortune
to offend Him . . . you will at once ask forgiveness
humbly, you will stretch out your hands to Him . . .
and you will continue your journey towards Him with
unshaken confidence ” (33).
Mary’s soul will be communicated to yours to
glorify the Lord and to rejoice in Him, to live the
Magnificat. The faithful Christian “ inhales Mary in
a spiritual manner just as his body inhales the air ”
(34) . So well is her spirit of wisdom communicated
that her fully faithful servant and child becomes a
living image of his mother.
Through this communication the soul is trans­
formed to the image of Jesus Christ. “ St. Augustine
calls the Blessed Virgin the mould of God, forma Dei
(35) ... Whoever is cast in this mould is soon formed
(33) lb., ch.vii, a.3.
(34) lb., a.5.
(35) Sermon 208, which has been attributed to St. Augustine.
‘‘Si formam Dei te appellem, digna existis.”

312

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

in Christ . . . Some directors are like sculptors who,
placing their trust in their art, deal blow after blow
with hammer and chisel to a hard stone or a piece of
wood in order to shape it into a representation of
Jesus, and sometimes do not succeed . . . one badlyaimed blow can botch the whole work.
But
those who accept the secret of grace of which I write
are like artists who work from a mould. Having found
the beautiful mould of Mary, where Jesus was formed
naturally and divinely, they do not trust their own
industry but only the fidelity of the mould, and cast
and lose themselves in Mary, becoming thus images
of Christ . . . But remember that you can cast in a
mould only what has been melted to a liquid: that is
to say, you must destroy and melt down the old Adam,
to become the new Adam in Mary ” (36).
The way of Mary increases purity of intention. By
it a person renounces his own peculiar intentions,
even if good, to be lost in those of the Blessed Virgin.
“ One enters thus into the sublimity of her intentions
which were so pure that she gave more glory to God
by the least of her actions—for example, by winding
her distaff, or by some needlework—than St. Laurence
did on the gridiron by his martyrdom, or even all the
saints by their most heroic acts ... or all the angels
... By deigning to receive into her virginal hands the
gift of our actions she gives them a beauty and splen­
dour which glorify Our Blessed Lord much more than
if we offered them to Him ourselves . . . Finally, you
never think of Mary but she thinks of God for you . .
She is all she is relative to God . . . she is the echo of
God, who says and repeats but ‘ God ’ . . . When she
is praised God is loved and praised. We give to God
through and in Mary ” (37).
(36)
(37)

Treatise of True Devotion,
lb., ch. vii, a.7.

ch. vii, a.6.

MYSTICAL UNION WITH MARY

313

Grace of Intimacy with Mary
Some souls are favoured with a special grace of
union with Mary. Fr. E. Neubert, the Marianist, has
gathered a number of significant testimonies in this
connection (38). Reference must also be made to the
work “Mystic Union with Mary,” written by a Flemish
recluse, Marie de Sainte-Therese (1623-1677) who
had personal experience of the subject on which she
wrote.
Fr. Chaminade, who exercised the priestly ministry
at Bordeaux with great zeal during the French Revo­
lution and who founded the Marianists had the same
experience. He wrote : “ There is a gift of the habitual
presence of the Blessed Virgin even as there is a gift
of the habitual presence of God—very rare, it is true,
but obtainable through great fidelity.” As Fr. Neubert
explains, this text refers to normal and habitual
mystical union with Mary. The Ven. L. Ed. Cestac
had the same gift. “ I do not see her,” he said, “ but
I feel her presence as the horse feels the hand on the
rein.” Thus these souls are conscious of the influence
which Mary exercises on us continually by transmit­
ting actual graces to our souls.
Marie de Sainte-Therese has words to the same
effect: “That sweet mother has taken me under her
maternal direction just as a teacher takes in her own
the hand of the child she is teaching to write . . . She
remains almost uninterruptedly before my soul,
drawing me to herself in so loving and motherly a
manner, stimulating me, guiding me, instructing me
in the way of the spirit and in the perfect practice
(38) La Vie Spirituelle, January 1937: “L’Union mystique
à la Sainte Vierge, pp. 15-29.

314

mary’s universal mediation and our interior life

of the virtues. And I do not lose for a single instant
the charm of her presence along with that of the
Godhead . . . She produces the divine life in me by an
imperceptible inflow of different graces ... It is of the
nature of love to unite itself to the object loved . . .
Thus tender, burning and unifying love draws the
soul which loves Mary to live in her, to be united to
her, and to other effects and transformations ... Then
God shows Himself in Mary and by her as in a
mirror.” Such was a great part of the life of this
servant of God.
Some souls who have had great intimacy with Mary
say that they never experienced her presence in them,
but rather her presence very near them—as near as
possible, in fact—and that they felt a great joy at
knowing of her happiness. We have known a saintly
Carthusian who said : “ I suffer, but she is happy.”
Finally, many holy souls have had, in the midst of
their sufferings, a gift of deep intimacy with Mary
which was the source of their strength even though
they have left no account of it. Many of them have ex­
perienced, were it only for an instant, her presence
like that of a mother who peeps into the room where
her children are. In· such experiences she communi­
cates an indescribable holiness, and prompts to more
generous sacrifices, such as lead the soul into the
depths contained in the Magnificat and the Stabat
Mater.

Article V
The Consecration of the Human Race to Mary
for the Peace of the World

The gravity of the events of these latter years, since
the Russian Revolution, the Spanish Civil War and

THE CONSECRATION OF THE HUMAN RACE TO MARY

315

the World War, shows that the faithful should have
recourse to God more and more through the great
mediators He has given us on account of our weak­
ness. The horror of these events shows in a singu­
larly striking manner to what men can come if they
wish to do absolutely without God, and organise their
life without Him, far from Him and against Him.
When, instead of believing in God, hoping in Him
and loving Him above all and our neighbour in Him,
we wish to believe in humanity, hope in it, and love it
in a purely earthly manner, it does not take long to
show itself to us with all its blemishes and gaping
wounds: the pride of life, the concupiscence of the
flesh, the concupiscence of the eyes, and all the
brutality that ensues from them. When, instead of
making our last end God, Who can be simultaneously
possessed by all, we seek our final end in earthly
goods, we are not long in finding out that they divide
us profoundly; for the same house, the same field, the
same territory, cannot belong simultaneously and
integrally to several owners. The more life is
materialised, the more the lower appetites are ex­
cited, without any subordination to a superior love,
the more the conflicts between individuals, classes
and peoples become acute, till finally earth becomes
a veritable hell.
The Lord shows thus to men what they can be
without Him. It is a striking commentary on these
words of the Saviour: “Without me you can do
nothing” (John xv, 5); “He that is not with me is
against me: and he that gathereth not with me,
scattereth ” (Mt. xii, 30); “ Seek ye first the kingdom
of God and his justice, and all these things shall be
added unto you ” (Mt. vi, 33). The psalmist in the
same way says: “Unless the Lord build the house,
they labour in vain that build it. Unless the Lord

316

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

keep the city, he watcheth in vain that keepeth it ”
(Ps. cxxvi, 1).

The two great evils of the age, as Pope Pius XI said,
are on the one hand materialistic and atheistic
communism according to the programme of the
‘ God-less,’ and on the other hand, an unbounded
nationalism which aims at establishing the
supremacy of the stronger nations over the weaker,
without respect for divine and natural law. Hence
the bitter conflict in which the entire world is
plunged.
As a remedy for these evils, the best and most
zealous among catholics in nations actually on oppo­
site sides feel the need for common prayer which will
re-unite before God the souls of true Christians in all
countries, to obtain that the reign of God and of His
Christ be established more and more in the place of
the reign of pride and covetousness. To this end,
masses are daily offered along with adoration of the
Blessed Sacrament; which latter has been established
in different countries in so speedy and widespread a
manner that one must consider it the fruit of a great
grace from God.
Exterior peace will not be obtained for the world
except by the interior peace of souls, bringing them
back to God and working to establish the reign of
Christ in the depths of their intellects, of their hearts
and of their wills. For this return of straying souls
to Him Who alone can save them, it is necessary to
have recourse to the intercession of Mary, Universal
Mediatrix and Mother of all men. It is said of sinners
who seem for ever lost that they must be confided to
Mary: it is the same for Christian peoples who stray.

THE CONSECRATION OF THE HUMAN RACE TO MARY

317

All the influence of the Blessed Virgin has as its end
to lead souls to her Son, just as that of Christ, the
Universal Mediator, has as its end to lead them to His
Father.
Mary’s prayer, especially since she was assumed
into heaven, is universal in the widest sense of the
term. She prays not only for individual souls on
earth and in Purgatory, but also for families and for
all nations, which ought to live beneath the rays of
the Gospel’s light and the influence of the Church.
Moreover, her prayer is all the more powerful in that
it is more enlightened and proceeds from a love of
God and of souls which nothing can weaken or inter­
rupt. The merciful love of Mary for men surpasses
that of all the angels and saints united, and so does
the power of her intercession with the Heart of her
Son.

That is why on all sides many interior souls, before
the unprecedented disorders and tragic sufferings of
the hour, feel the need for recourse to the redeeming
Love of Christ through the intercession of Mary
Mediatrix.
In many countries, especially in convents of fervent
contemplative life, it is remembered that many
French bishops united at Lourdes, at the second
national Marial Congress, on the 27th of July, 1929,
expressed to the Sovereign Pontiff their desire for a
consecration of the human race to the Immaculate
Heart of Mary. It is remembered also that Father
Deschamps, S.J., in 1900, Cardinal Richard, Arch­
bishop of Paris, in 1906, Fr. Le Doré, Superior General
of the Eudists, in 1908 and 1912, and Fr. Lintelo, S.J.,
in 1914, took the initiative in the matter of petitions

318

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

to the Sovereign Pontiff to obtain the consecration of
the human race to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.
By a collective act, the bishops of France, at the
beginning of the war of 1914, in December of the
same year, consecrated France to Mary. Cardinal
Mercier in 1915, in his Pastoral Letter on Mary
Mediatrix, saluted the Blessed Virgin, Mother of the
human race, as Queen of the World. Fr. Lucas, new
Superior General of the Eudists, obtained finally in a
few months more than three hundred thousand sig­
natures to hasten by this consecration the peace of
Christ in the reign of Christ.

®
The strength that we need in the present upheaval
is the prayer of Mary, Mother of all men, who will
obtain it for us from the Saviour. Her intercession
is very powerful against the spirit of evil which
ranges individuals, classes and peoples one against
the other. If a formal pact, fully consented to, with
the demon, can have dire consequences in the life of
a soul and send it to eternal damnation, what spiri­
tual effect will a consecration to Mary not have, made
in a deep spirit of faith and often renewed with still
greater fidelity?
One may remember how in December, 1836, the
venerable curé of Our Lady of Victories in Paris, while
celebrating Mass at the altar of the Blessed Virgin,
heartbroken at the thought of the apparent failure
of his ministry, heard these words : “ Consecrate your
parish to the Holy and Immaculate Heart of Mary,”
and how once the consecration was made the parish
was transformed.
Mary’s prayer for us is that of a Mother very en­
lightened, very loving and very strong, who watches

THE CONSECRATION OF THE HUMAN RACE TO MARY

319

ceaselessly over her children, over all men, called to
receive the fruits of the Redemption. This is the
experience of anyone who daily consecrates to Mary
all his works, material and spiritual, and all his
undertakings. He recovers faith and confidence
when all seems lost.
Now, if the individual consecration of a soul to
Mary obtains for it daily great graces of light, love
and strength, what will not be the fruits of a conse­
cration of the human race made to the Saviour by
Mary herself, at the request of the common Father
of the faithful, the supreme Pastor? What will not
be the effect of a consecration thus made, especially
if the faithful among the different peoples unite, so
as to conform their lives to it, in fervent prayer often
renewed at Holy Mass?
To obtain that the Sovereign Pontiff perform this
act, it is necessary that a sufficient number of the
faithful understand the recent lessons given us by
Divine Providence. In other words, a sufficient
number must have seized the meaning and the im­
port of the consecration asked for. Otherwise it will
not be able to produce the required effects. In the
divine plan, trials end when they have produced the
effect they were intended to produce, when souls have
profited by them—just as Purgatory ends when the
soul is purified.
As a saintly religious used to say (39): “ We do not
live for ourselves; we must see everything as it is in
God’s plan; our present sufferings—even were they
to rise to their peak and were we ourselves to be sacri­
ficed in the disaster—gain and prepare the future
(39) Mère Marie de Jésus, foundress of the Society of the
Daughters of the Heart of Jesus: “Pensées de la Servante de
Dieu, Mère Marie de Jésus (1841-1884), Rome, 1918, pp. 43 sqq.,
50.

320

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

assured triumphs of the Church . . . The Church goes
thus from struggle to struggle and from victory to
victory, each succeeding the other until Eternity,
which will be the final victory.” “ Ought not Christ
to have suffered these things and so to enter into His
glory ” (Luke xxiv, 26). The Church and souls must
go along the same road. The Church does not live
only for a day; when the martyrs fell like snowflakes
in winter, might one not have believed that all was
lost? No, their blood was preparing the triumphs of
the future.”
In the difficult period we are going through the
Church has need of very generous souls, of real
saints. It is Mary, Mother of Divine Grace, Mother
most pure, Virgin most prudent and strong, who must
shape them.
From various sides the Lord suggests to interior
souls a prayer of which the form may differ but of
which the substance is always the same: “In this
time when a spirit of pride pushed to the point of
atheism seeks to spread itself among the peoples, O
Lord, be Thou as the soul of my soul, the life of my
life; grant me a deeper understanding of the mystery
of the Redemption and of Thy holy self-abasement,
the remedy of all pride. Grant me a sincere desire
to participate, in the measure intended for me by
Providence, in these salutary humiliations and make
me find in this desire the strength, peace and—when
Thou desirest it—the joy, to stir up my courage and
the confidence of those around me.”
To enter thus practically into the depths of the
mystery of the Redemption, it is necessary that Mary,
who at the foot of the Cross entered into them deeper
than did any other creature, should teach us in­
teriorly and reveal to us in the words of the Gospel
the spirit in which she herself lived so fully.

THS CONSECRATION OF THE HUMAN RACE TO MARY

321

May the Mother of the Saviour deign by her prayer
to place all the faithful of the different nations be­
neath the rays of these words of Christ: “ The glory
which thou hast given me I have given to them; that
they may be one, as we also are one ” (John xvii, 22)
It is to be hoped that one day, when the hour
appointed by Divine Providence will have come, and
when souls are prepared, the Supreme Pastor, in
answer to the prayers of the bishops and the faithful,
will consecrate the human race to the merciful and
Immaculate Heart of Mary,* that she may offer us all
the more appealingly to her Son and so obtain peace
for the world. This would be a new affirmation of
the universal mediation of the Blessed Virgin.
Let us go to her with the greatest confidence: she
has been called “ the hope of the hopeless,” and by
going to her as to the best and the most enlightened
of mothers we shall go to Jesus as to our sole and
merciful Saviour.

* This has been done since the publication of this book.

v

CHAPTER VII
The Predestination of St. Joseph
and His Eminent Sanctity

“ He that is lesser among you all, he is the greater ”
—Luke ix, 48

One cannot write a book on Our Lady without re­
ferring to the predestination of St. Joseph, his
eminent perfection, the character of his special
mission, his virtues, and his role in the sanctification
of souls.

His Pre-eminence over the other Saints

The opinion that St. Joseph is the greatest of the
saints after Our Lady is one which is becoming daily
more commonly held in the Church. We do not
hesitate to look on the humble carpenter as higher
in grace and eternal glory than the patriarchs and
the greatest of the prophets—than St. John the
Baptist, the apostles, the martyrs and the great
doctors of the Church. He who is least in the depth
of his humility is, because of the interconnection of
the virtues, the greatest in the height of his charity :
“He that is the lesser among you all, he is the
greater.”
St. Joseph’s pre-eminence was taught by Gerson
(1) and St. Bernadine of Siena (2). It became more
(1) Sermo in Nativitatem Virginis Mariae, IV a consideratio.

PREDESTINATION OF ST. JOSEPH AND HIS EMINENT SANCTITY

323

and more common in the course of the 16th century.
It was admitted by St. Teresa, by the Dominican
Isidore de Isolanis, who appears to have written the
first treatise of St. Joseph (3), by St. Francis de Sales,
by Suarez (4), and later by St. Alphonsus Liguori (5),
Ch. Sauvé (6), Cardinal Lépicier (7) and Mgr.
Sinibaldi (8); it is very ably treated of in the article
“ Joseph ” in the Diet, de Thêol. Cath. by M. A.
Michel.
The doctrine of St. Joseph’s pre-eminence received
the approval of Leo XIII in his encyclical Quamquam
pluries, August 15th, 1899, written to proclaim St.
Joseph patron of the universal Church. “ The dignity
of the Mother of God is so elevated than there can be
no higher created one. But since St. Joseph was
united to the Blessed Virgin by the conjugal bond,
there is no doubt that he approached nearer than any
other to that super-eminent dignity of hers by which
the Mother of God surpasses all created natures.
Conjugal union is the greatest of all; by its very
nature it is accompanied by a reciprocal communica­
tion of the goods of the spouses. If then God gave
St. Joseph to Mary to be her spouse He certainly did
not give him merely as a companion in life, a witness
of her virginity, a guardian of her honour, but He
made him also participate by the conjugal bond in
the eminent dignity which was hers.”
When Leo XIII said that Joseph came nearest of all
to the super-eminent dignity of Mary, did his words
imply that Joseph is higher in glory than all the
(2) Sermo I de S. Joseph, c. ill, Opera, Lyon. 1650, t. IV. p 254.
(3) Summa de donis S. Joseph, ann. 1522. There is a new
edition by Fr. Berthier, Rome. 1897.
(4) In Summam S. Thomae, Illa, q.29, disp. 8. sect. I.
(5) Sermone di S. Giuseppe, Discorsi Morali. Naples, 1841.
(6) Saint Joseph Intime, Paris, 1920.
(7) Tractatus de Sancto Joseph, Paris, 1908.
(8) La Grandezza di San Giuseppe, Rome, 1927, pp. 36 sqq.

324

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

angels? We cannot give any certain answer to the
question. We must be content to restate the doctrine
which is becoming more and more commonly taught:
of all the saints Joseph is the highest after Jesus and
Mary; he is among the angels and the archangels.
The Church mentions him immediately after Mary
and before the Apostles in the prayer A cunctis.
Though he is not mentioned in the Canon of the Mass,
he has a proper preface, and the month of March is
consecrated to him as protector and defender of the
universal Church.
The multitude of Christians in all succeeding
generations are committed to him in a real though
hidden manner. This idea is expressed in the
litanies approved by the Church: “ St. Joseph, illus­
trious descendant of David, light of the Patriarchs,
Spouse of the Mother of God, guardian of her vir­
ginity, foster-father of the Son of God, vigilant
defender of Christ, head of the Holy Family; Joseph
most just, most chaste, most prudent, most strong,
most obedient, most faithful, mirror of patience,
lover of poverty, model of workers, glory of domestic
life, guardian of virgins, support of families, consola­
tion of the afflicted, hope of the sick, patron of the
dying, terror of demons, protector of the Holy
Church.” He is the greatest after Mary.

The Reason for St. Joseph’s Pre-eminence
What is the justification of this doctrine which has
been more and more accepted in the course of five
centuries. The principle invoked more or less ex­
plicitly by St. Bernard, St. Bernardine of Siena,
Isidore de Isolanis, Suarez, and more recent authors

PREDESTINATION OF ST. JOSEPH AND HIS EMINENT SANCTITY

325

is the one, simple and sublime, formulated by St.
Thomas when treating of the fulness of grace in Jesus
and of holiness in Mary : “ An exceptional divine
mission calls for a corresponding degree of grace.”
This principle explains why the holy soul of Jesus,
being united personally to the Word, the Source of all
grace, received the absolute fulness of grace. It ex­
plains also why Mary, called to be Mother of God,
received from the instant of her conception an initial
fulness of grace which -was greater than the initial
fulness of all the saints together: since she was
nearer than any other to the Source of grace she
drew grace more abundantly. It explains also why
the apostles who were nearer to Our Blessed Lord
than the saints who followed them had more perfect
knowledge of the mysteries of faith. To preach the
gospel infallibly to the world they received at
Pentecost the gift of a most eminent, most en­
lightened, and most firm faith as the principle of
their apostolate.
The same truth explains St. Joseph’s pre-eminence.
To understand it we must add one remark : all works
which are to be referred immediately to God Himself
are perfect. The work of creation, for example, which
proceeded entirely and directly from the hand of God
was perfect. The same must be said of His great
servants, whom He has chosen exceptionally and im­
mediately—not through a human instrument—to
restore the order disturbed by sin. God does not
choose as men do. Men often choose incompetent
officials for the highest posts. But those whom God
Himself chooses directly and immediately to be His
exceptional ministers in the work of redemption re­
ceive from Him grace proportionate to their vocation.
This was the case with St. Joseph. He must have
received a relative fulness of grace proportionate to

326

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

his mission since he was chosen not by men nor by
any creature but by God Himself and by God alone
to fulfil a mission unique in the world. We cannot
say at what precise moment St. Joseph’s sanctifica­
tion took place. But we can say that, from the time
of his marriage to Our Lady, he was confirmed in
grace, because of his special mission (9).

To What Order Does St. Joseph’s Exceptional
Mission Belong?
St. Joseph’s mission is evidently higher than the
order of nature—even of angelic nature. But is it
simply of the order of grace, as were that of St. John
the Baptist who prepared the way of salvation, and
that the apostles had in the Church for the sanctifi­
cation of souls, and that more particular mission of
the founders of religious orders? If we examine the
question carefully we shall see that St. Joseph’s
mission surpassed the order of grace. It borders, by
its term, on the hypostatic order, which is constituted
by the mystery of the Incarnation. But it is neces­
sary to avoid both exaggeration and understatement
in this matter.
Mary’s unique mission, her divine motherhood,
has its term in the hypostatic order. So also, in a
sense, St. Joseph’s hidden mission. This is the
teaching of many saints and other writers. St.
Bernard says of St. Joseph: “He is the faithful and
prudent servant whom the Lord made the support of
His Mother, the foster-father of His flesh, and the
(9) Cf. Diet. Théol. Cath., art. Joseph, col. 1518.

PREDESTINATION OF ST. JOSEPH AND HIS EMINENT SANCTITY

327

sole most faithful co-operator on earth in His great
design” (10).
St. Bernardine of Siena writes : “When God chooses
a person by grace for a very elevated mission, He
gives all the graces required for it. This is verified
in a specially outstanding manner in the case of St.
Joseph, Foster-father of Our Lord Jesus Christ and
Spouse of Mary ...” (11). Isidore de Isolanis places
St. Joseph’s vocation above that of the Apostles. He
remarks that the vocation of the apostles is to preach
the gospel, to enlighten souls, to reconcile them with
God, but that the vocation of St. Joseph is more im­
mediately in relation with Christ Himself since he is
the Spouse of the Mother of God, the Foster-father
and Protector of the Saviour ( 12). Suarez teaches to
the same effect: “Certain offices pertain to the
order of sanctifying grace, and among them that of
the apostles holds the highest place; thus they have
need of more gratuitous gifts than other souls,
especially gratuitous gifts of wisdom. But there are
other offices which touch upon or border on the order
of the Hypostatic Union ... as can be seen clearly in
the case of the divine maternity of the Blessed Virgin,
and it is to that order that the ministry of St. Joseph
pertains” (13).
Some years ago Mgr. Sinibaldi, titular Bishop of
Tiberias and secretary of the Sacred Congregation of
Studies, treated the question very ably. He pointed
out that the ministry of St. Joseph belonged, in a
sense, because of its term, to the hypostatic order:
not that St. Joseph co-operated intrinsically as
physical instrument of the Holy Ghost in the realisa(10) Homil. II super Missus est.
(11) Sermo I de S. Joseph.
(12) Summa de donis sancti Joseph. Pars Illa. c. xviii. This
work was very highly praised by Benedict XIV.
(13) In Summam S. Thomae, Illa, q.29, disp. 8, sect. I.

328

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

tion of the mystery cf the Incarnation—for under
that respect his role is very much inferior to that of
Mary—but that he was predestined to be, in the
order of moral causes, the protector of .the virginity
and the honour of Mary at the same time as fosterfather and protector of the Word made flesh. “ His
mission pertains by its term to the hypostatic order,
not through intrinsic physical and immediate co­
operation, but through extrinsic moral and mediate
(through Mary) co-operation, which is, however,
really and truly co-operation ” (14).

St. Joseph’s Predestination is One with the Decree
of the Incarnation

St. Joseph’s pre-eminence becomes all the clearer
if we consider that the eternal decree of the Incarna­
tion covered not merely the Incarnation in
abstraction from circumstances of time and place but
the Incarnation here and now—that is to say, the
Incarnation of the Son of God Who by the operation
of the Holy Ghost was to be conceived at a certain
moment of time by the Virgin Mary, espoused to a
man of the family of David whose name was Joseph:
“ The angel Gabriel was sent from God into a city of
Galilee, called Nazareth, to a virgin espoused to a
man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David ”
(Luke i, 26-27).
All the indications are therefore that St. Joseph
was predestined to be Foster-father of the Incarnate
Word before being predestined to glory; the ultimate
reason being that Christ’s predestination as man to
the natural divine sonship precedes the predestina(14) La Grandezza di San Giuseppe, Rome, 1927, pp. 36 sqq.

PREDESTINATION OF ST. JOSEPH AND HIS EMINENT SANCTITY

329

tion of all the elect, since Christ is the first of the
predestined (15).
The predestination of Christ to
the natural divine sonship is simply the decree of
the Incarnation, which, as we have seen, includes
Mary’s predestination to the divine motherhood and
Joseph’s to be foster-father and protector of the
Incarnate Son of God.
As the predestination of Christ to the natural
divine sonship is superior to His predestination to
glory and precedes it, and as the predestination of
Mary to the divine motherhood precedes {in signo
priori) her predestination to glory, so also the pre­
destination of St. Joseph to be Foster-father of the
Incarnate Word precedes his predestination to glory
and to grace. In other words, the reason why he was
predestined to the highest degree of glory after Mary,
and in consequence to the highest degree of grace
and of charity, is that he was called to be the worthy
Foster-father and protector of the Man-God.
The fact that St. Joseph’s first predestination was
one with the decree of the Incarnation shows how
elevated his unique mission was. This is what people
mean when they say that St. Joseph was made and
put into the world to be the Foster-father of the In­
carnate Word and that God willed for him a high
degree of glory and grace to fit him for his task.

The Special Character of St. Joseph’s Mission
This point is explained admirably by Bossuet in his
first panegyric of the saint: “Among the different
vocations, I notice two in the Scriptures which seem
directly opposed to each other : the first is that of the
(15) Cf. Illa. q.24. a l, 2, 3. 4.

330

mary’s universal mediation and our interior life

apostles, the second that of St. Joseph. Jesus was
revealed to the apostles that they might announce
Him throughout the world; He was revealed to St.
Joseph who was to remain silent and keep Him
hidden. The apostles are lights to make the world
see Jesus. Joseph is a veil to cover Him; and under
that mysterious veil are hidden from us the virginity
of Mary and the greatness of the Saviour of souls . . .
He Who makes the apostles glorious with the glory
of preaching, glorifies Joseph by the humility of
silence.”
The hour for the manifestation of the
mystery of the Incarnation had not yet struck : it was
to be preceded by the thirty years of the hidden life.
Perfection consists in doing God’s will, each one
according to his vocation; St. Joseph’s vocation of
silence and obscurity surpassed that of the apostles
because it bordered more nearly on the redemptive
Incarnation. After Mary, Joseph was nearest to the
Author of grace, and in the silence of Bethlehem,
during the exile in Egypt, and in the little home of
Nazareth he received more graces than any other
saint.
His mission was a dual one.
As regards Mary, he preserved her virginity by con­
tracting with her a true but altogether holy
marriage. The angel of the Lord said to him:
“ Joseph, son of David, fear not to take unto thee
Mary thy wife, for that which is conceived of her is
of the Holy Ghost” (Mt. i, 20; Luke ii, 5). Mary is
truly his wife. The marriage was a true one, as St.
Thomas explains (Illa, q.29, a.2) when showing its
appropriateness. There should be no room for doubt,
however light, regarding the honour of the Son and
the Mother: if ever doubt did arise Joseph, the most
informed and the least suspect witness, would be
there to defend it. Besides, Mary would find help and

PREDESTINATION OF ST. JOSEPH AND HIS EMINENT SANCTITY

331

protection in St. Joseph. He loved her with a pure
and devoted love, in God and for God. Their union
was stainless, and most respectful on the side of St.
Joseph. Thus he was nearer than any other saint to
the Mother of God and the spiritual Mother of men—
and he too was a man. The beauty of the whole
universe was nothing compared with that of the
union of Mary and Joseph, a union created by the
Most High, which ravished the angels and gave joy
to the Lord.
As regards the Incarnate Word, Joseph watched
over Him, protected Him, and contributed to His
human education. He is called His foster-father, but
the term does not express fully the mysterious super­
natural relation betwen the two. A man becomes
foster-father of a child normally as a result of an
accident. But it was no accident in the case of St.
Joseph: he had been created and put into the world
for that purpose: it was the primary reason of his
predestination and the reason for all the graces he
received. Bossuet expressed this well ( 16) : “If nature
does not give a father’s heart, where will it be
found? In other words, since Joseph was not Jesus’
father, how could he have a father’s heart in His
regard?

Here we must recognise the action of God. It is
by the power of God that Joseph has a father’s heart,
and if nature fails God gives one with His own hand;
for it is of God that it is written that He directs our
inclinations where he wills ... He gives some a heart
of flesh when He softens their nature by charity . . .
Does He not give all the faithful the hearts of
children when He sends to them the Spirit of His
(16) First Panegyric of St. Joseph, edit. Lebarcq, t. II. pp.
135 sqq.

332

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

Son? The apostles feared the least danger, but God
gave them a new heart and their courage became
undaunted ... The same hand gave Joseph the heart
of a father and Jesus the heart of a son. That is
why Jesus obeys and Joseph does not fear to com­
mand. How has he the courage to command his
Creator? Because the true Father of Jesus Christ,
the God Who gives Him birth from all eternity,
having chosen Joseph to be the father of His only
Son in time, sent down into his bosom some ray or
some spark of His own infinite love for His Son; that
is what changed his heart, that is what gave him a
father’s love, and Joseph the just man who feels that
father’s heart within him feels also that God wishes
him to use his paternal authority, so that he dares
to command Him Who he knows is his Master.” That
is equivalent to saying that Joseph was predestined
first to take the place of a father in regard to the
Saviour Who could have no earthly father (17), and
in consequence to have all the gifts which were given
him that he might be a worthy Protector of the
Incarnate Word.
Is it necessary to say with what fidelity St. Joseph
guarded the triple deposit confided to him: the vir­
ginity of Mary, the Person of Jesus Christ, and the
secret of the Eternal Father, that of the Incarnation
of His Son, a secret to be guarded faithfully till the
hour appointed for its revelation?
In a discourse delivered in the Consistorial Hall on
the 19th of March, 1928, Pope Pius XI said, after
having spoken on the missions of St. John the
Baptist and St. Peter : “ Between these two missions
there appears that of St. Joseph, one of recollection
and silence, one almost unnoticed and destined to be
(17) We read that Jesus was subject to Mary ana Joseph.
Josenh in his humility must have been confounded that he,
the least of the three, should be the head of the Holy Family.

PREDESTINATION OF ST. JOSEPH AND HIS EMINENT SANCTITY

333

lit up only many centuries afterwards, a silence which
would become a resounding hymn of glory, but only
after many years. But where the mystery is deepest
it is there precisely that the mission is highest and
that a more brilliant cortege of virtues is required
with their corresponding echo of merits. It was a
unique and sublime mission, that of guarding the Son
of God, the King of the world, that of protecting the
virginity of Mary, that of entering into participation
in the mystery hidden from the eyes of ages and so
to co-operate in the Incarnation and the Redemp­
tion.” ‘That is equivalently to state that Divine
Providence conferred on St. Joseph all the graces he
received in view of his special mission: in other
words, St. Joseph was predestined first of all to be as
a father to the Saviour, and was then predestined to
the glory and the grace which were becoming in one
favoured with so exceptional a vocation.
The Virtues and Gifts of St. Joseph
St. Joseph’s virtues are those especially of the
hidden life, in a degree proportioned to that of his
sanctifying grace: virginity, humility, poverty,
patience, prudence, fidelity, simplicity, faith en­
lightened by the gifts of the Holy Ghost, confidence
in God and perfect charity. He preserved what had
been confided to him with a fidelity proportioned to
its inestimable value.
Bossuet makes this general observation about the
virtues of the hidden life (18): “ It is a common fail­
ing of men to give themselves entirely to what is out­
side and to neglect what is within; to work for mere
appearances and to neglect what is solid and lasting;
(18)

Second Panegyric on St. Joseph.

334

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

to think often of the impression they make and little
of what they ought to be. That is why the most
highly esteemed virtues are those which concern the
conduct and direction of affairs. The hidden virtues,
on the contrary, which are practised away from the
public view and under the eye of God alone, are not
only neglected but hardly even heard of. And yet
this is the secret of true virtue ... a man must be
built up interiorly in himself before he deserves to
be given rank among others; and if this foundation
is lacking, all the other virtues, however brilliant,
will be mere display . . . they will not make the man
according to God’s heart.
Joseph sought God in
simplicity; Joseph found God in detachment; Joseph
enjoyed God’s company in obscurity.”

St. Joseph’s humility must have been increased by
the thought of the gratuity of his exceptional voca­
tion. He must have said to himself: why has the
Most High given me, rather than any other man, His
Son to watch over? Only because that was His good
pleasure.
Joseph was freely preferred from all
eternity to all other men to whom the Lord could
have given the same gifts and the same fidelity to
prepare them for so exceptional a vocation. We see
in St. Joseph’s predestination a reflection of the
gratuitous predestination of Jesus and Mary. The
knowledge of the value of the grace he received and
of its absolute gratuitousness, far from injuring his
humility, would strengthen it. He would think in his
heart: “ What have you that you have not received?”

Joseph appears the most humble of the saints after
Mary—more humble than any of the angels. If he is
the most humble he is by that fact the greatest, for
the virtues are all connected and a person’s charity
is as elevated as his humility is profound. “ He that

PREDESTINATION OF ST. JOSEPH AND HIS EMINENT SANCTITY

335

is lesser among you all, he is the greater ” (Lk. ix, 48).

Bossuet says well : “ Though by an extraordinary
grace of the Eternal Father he possessed the greatest
treasure, it was far from Joseph’s thought to pride
himself on his gifts or to make them known, but he
hid himself as far as possible from mortal eyes, en­
joying with God alone the mystery revealed to him
and the infinite riches of which he was the custodian
(19). Joseph has in his house what could attract the
eyes of the whole world, and the world does not know
him; he guards a God-man, and breathes not a word
of it; he is the witness of so great a mystery, and he
tastes it in secret without divulging it abroad ” (20).
His faith cannot be shaken in spite of the darkness
of the unexpected mystery. The word of God com­
municated to him by the angel throws light on the
virginal conception of the Saviour: Joseph might
have hesitated to believe a thing so wonderful, but he
believes it firmly in the simplicity of his heart. By
his simplicity and his humility, he reaches up to
divine heights.
Obscurity follows once more. Joseph was poor
before receiving the secret of the Most High. He be­
comes still poorer when Jesus is born, for Jesus comes
to separate men from everything so as to unite them
to God. There is no room for the Saviour in the last
of the inns of Bethlehem. Joseph must have suffered
from having nothing to offer to Mary and her Son.

His confidence in God was made manifest in trials.
Persecution came soon after Jesus’ birth. Herod tried
to put Him to death, and the head of the Holy Family
was forced to conceal the child, to take refuge in a
(19) First Panegyric on St. Joseph.
(20) Second Panegyric on St. Joseph.

336

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

distant country where he was unknown and where
he did not know how he could earn a living. But he
set out on the journey relying on Divine Providence.
His love of God and of souls did not cease to in­
crease during the hidden life of Nazareth; the
Incarnate Word is an unfailing source of graces, ever
newer and more choice, for docile souls who oppose
no obstacle to His action.
We have said already,
when speaking of Mary, that the progress of such
docile souls is one of uniform acceleration, that is to
say, they are carried all the more powerfully to God
the nearer they approach Him. This law of spiritual
gravitation was realised in Joseph; his charity grew
up to the time of his death, and the progress of his
latter years was more rapid than that of his earlier
years, for finding himself nearer to God he was more
powerfully drawn by Him.
Along with the theological virtues the gifts of the
Holy Ghost, which are connected with charity, grew
continuously. Those of understanding and of wisdom
made his living faith more penetrating and more
attuned to the divine. In a simple but most elevated
way his contemplation rose to the infinite goodness of
God. In its simplicity his contemplation was the
most perfect after Mary’s.
His loving contemplation was sweet, but it de­
manded of him the most perfect spirit of abnegation
and sacrifice when he recalled the words of Simeon
“ This child will be ... a sign that will be contra­
dicted ” and “ Thy own soul a sword shall pierce.” He
needed all his generosity to offer to God the Infant
Jesus and His Mother Mary whom he loved
incomparably more than himself.
St. Joseph’s death was a privileged one; St. Francis
de Sales writes that it was a death of love (21). The
(21) Treatise of the Love of God, Bk. VII, ch. xlii.

PREDESTINATION OF ST. JOSEPH AND HIS EMINENT SANCII1V

117

same holy doctor teaches with Suarez that St. Joseph
was one of the saints who rose after the Resurrection
of the Lord (Mt. xxvii, 52 sqq.) and appeared in the
city of Jerusalem; he holds also that these resurrec­
tions were definitive and that Joseph entered heaven
then, body and soul.
St. Thomas is much more
reserved regarding this point. Though his first
opinion was that the resurrections were definitive
(22) he taught later, after an examination of St.
Augustine’s arguments in the opposed sense, that this
was not the case (23).

St. Joseph’s Role in the Sanctification of Souls
The humble carpenter is glorified in heaven to the
extent to which he was hidden on earth. He to whom
the Incarnate Word was subject has now an incom­
parable power of intercession. Leo XIII, in his
encyclical Qua?nquam pluries finds in St. Joseph’s
mission in regard to the Holy Family “ the reasons
why he is Patron and Protector of the universal
Church . . . Just as Mary, Mother of the Saviour, is
spiritual mother of all Christians . . . Joseph looks on
all Christians as having been confided to himself . . .
He is the defender of the Holy Church which is truly
the house of God and the kingdom of God on earth.”
What strikes us most in St. Joseph’s role till the
end of time is that there are united in it in an admir­
able way apparently opposed prerogatives. Hki
influence is universal over the whole Church, and yet,
like Divine Providence, it descends to the least details;
“ model of workmen ” he takes an interest in every­
one who turns to him. He is the most universal of the
(22) Cf. in Matth. xxvii and IV Sent., dist. 42, q.l, a.3.
(23) Cf. Illa, q.53, a.3, ad 2.

338

MARY’S UNIVERSAL MEDIATION AND OUR INTERIOR LIFE

saints, and yet lie helps a poor man in his ordinary
daily needs. His action is primarily of the spiritual
order, and yet it extends to temporal affairs; he is the
support of families and of communities, the hope of
the sick. He watches over Christians of all conditions,
of all countries, over fathers of families, husbands
and wives, consecrated virgins; over the rich to in­
spire them to distribute their possessions charitably,
and over the poor so as to help them. He is attentive
to the needs of great sinners and of souls advanced
in virtue. He is the patron of a happy death, of lost
causes; he is terrible to the demon, and St. Teresa
tells us that he is the guide of interior souls in the
ways of prayer. His influence is a wonderful reflec­
tion of that of Divine Wisdom which “ reacheth from
end to end mightily, and ordereth all things sweetly ”
(Wisdom viii, 1).
He has been clothed and will remain clothed in
Divine splendour. Grace has become fruitful in him
and he will share its fruit with all who strive to attain
to the life which is “ hid with Christ in God ” (Col.
iii, 3).