ST. THERESE AND JOAN OF ARC

St. Therese wrote this poem about Joan of Arc when she was tempted with atheism

During her final months on earth, St. Therese was plunged into the darkness of unbelief.

In May 1897, St. Thérèse of Lisieux was only a few short months away from dying. Her tuberculosis gave her significant bodily pain, but above all, God allowed her to be plunged into a spiritual darkness.

She wrote about it in her autobiography, Story of a Soul.

[God] allowed my soul to be overwhelmed with darkness, and the thought of Heaven, which had consoled me from my earliest childhood, now became a subject of conflict and torture. This trial did not last merely for days or weeks; I have been suffering for months, and I still await deliverance. I wish I could express what I feel, but it is beyond me. One must have passed through this dark tunnel to understand its blackness … When I sing of the happiness of Heaven and the eternal possession of God, I do not feel any joy therein, for I sing only of what I wish to believe. Sometimes, I confess, a little ray of sunshine illumines my dark night, and I enjoy peace for an instant, but later, the remembrance of this ray of light, instead of consoling me, makes the blackness thicker still.

It was a very difficult time for St. Thérèse and she expressed this darkness in a poem she wrote, titled “To Joan of Arc.”

Thérèse had had a deep devotion to St. Joan of Arc since her childhood and wrote many poems and plays about her beloved patron. During her trial of faith, Thérèse felt united to Joan of Arc, especially as Joan waited in the dungeon before being led out to her cruel martyrdom.

At the bottom of a black dungeon, laden with heavy chains,
The cruel foreigner filled you with grief.
Not one of your friends took part in your pain.
Not one came forward to wipe your tears.

Joan, in your dark prison you seem to me
More radiant, more beautiful than at your King’s coronation.
This heavenly reflection of eternal glory,
Who then brought it upon you? It was betrayal.

Ah! If the God of love in this valley of tears
Had not come to seek betrayal and death,
Suffering would hold no attraction for us.
Now we love it; it is our treasure.

In this way St. Thérèse experienced a spiritual darkness that many atheists feel, not knowing if there is a God or an afterlife. Yet, even in the midst of such doubts, Thérèse continued to make acts of faith with her mouth, willing that her heart would follow after.

This “dark night of the soul” eventually cleared by the time of her death, and she left this world with the words, “My God, I love You!”

PEACE INHERITANCE

An Inheritance of Peace

A man facing death sets his affairs in order. He makes arrangements so that his heirs will be well provided for upon his death. This is what our Lord does at the Last Supper. Making the final preparations before His Crucifixion, He leaves an inheritance to the Apostles and through them to the entire Church. Thus He gives us the Eucharist, the new commandment of love (the mandatum), the priesthood, etc.

            We hear of one such gift in today’s Gospel: Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you. Not as the world gives do I give it to you. This is part of His last will and testament, of our inheritance. Of course, “peace” is one of those words that we often use and rarely understand. What He intends here is not geopolitical peace but spiritual. Still, the classic definition used in political thought also applies: peace is the tranquility of order.

            Sin has disturbed our souls, set them out of order. Our interior disquiet, in turn, causes disturbances outside of us – in the family, society, and the world as a whole. Christ’s grace within us frees our souls from the disorder of sin. He gives us an interior tranquility of order by configuring us to Himself. Once at peace interiorly, we can then (and only then) be a cause of peace for others.

            Interestingly, our Our Lord says little about peace – not even a full verse. Still, the context of His words indicates its importance, and His precise phrasing reveals its distinctive nature.

            Peace I leave with you. . . .His peace is left to us. It is something received, not seized or manufactured. Like Christ Himself, His peace is “begotten not made.” It is the fruit of His grace within us, and not something we attain by our own cleverness or dint of effort. We can neither think our way to this peace nor will it for ourselves. Ours is to respond to and cooperate with His grace of peace, not to create or grasp for it.

            In fact, the attempt to manufacture this interior peace typically results in its exact opposite. (Serenity now!) We all know those who think they can bring about peace by their own efforts. For them, peace depends on controlling the situation. Such people not only fail to attain peace for themselves; they also disturb it for others. That is one takeaway from today’s first reading: those who insisted on their own way of salvation disturbed the “peace of mind” (Acts 15:24) of Christ’s followers. It is not in controlling Christ that we have peace but in receiving Him.

            My peace I give to you. . . .Ultimately, only Jesus Christ can say this, because only He has peace to give. As both God and man, He is our reconciliation with the Father. As the risen One He has vanquished everything and everyone that threatens that peace. Thus even the peace we extend to others (cf. Mt 9:13) is not our own but what He has entrusted to us. Further, He does not give something apart from or external to Himself. His peace comes from within. Indeed, He is our peace, as Saint Paul bluntly states. (Eph 2:14)

            Not as the world gives do I give it to you. The world gives conditionally, according to its own familiar standards of wealth, power, and pleasure. If we want peace on the world’s terms, then we must have those things. If we set our hearts on what the world gives, then our peace will be as fragile and unstable as the world is. Our Lord gives a peace that doesn’t depend on the things of this world and so can withstand any setbacks, sufferings, and even the worst persecutions.

            The world gives by way of compromise with the truth. In effect, it gives not peace but only a truce. Or, perhaps more accurately, the world threatens conflict if we do not compromise. So we often settle for a false peace (as we do false loves and mercies) at the price of truth. Christ’s peace, however, comes from knowledge of and adherence to the truth. It is the peace that comes from knowing Him and being found in Him. (cf. Phil 3:9-10)

            Finally, since the Great Novena to the Holy Spirit begins this Friday in anticipation of Pentecost, we should note the relation of Christ’s peace and the Holy Spirit. Like any other inheritance, this one becomes effective upon the death of the Giver. Unlike any other, however, this inheritance comes not as the Giver departs from us, but as He comes to us in a more powerful way, through His Spirit.

May that same Spirit increase our intimacy with Christ and bring to fruition His peace within us.

CHRISTIANS' RELATIONSHIP WITH MARY

6 Reasons why all Christians (non-Catholics too!) should have a relationship with Mary

Even Karol Wojtyla wondered if it was possible to overdo our devotion, but there's no reason to fear growing closer to Our Lady.

Protestants generally avoid any devotion to Mary, assuming it is a type of idol worship. But even Catholics – including Karol Wojtyla before becoming Pope John Paul II – can sometimes wonder if we might honor Jesus’ mother a little too much.

I’m convinced there’s no need to have fear about deepening our relationship with Mary.

Here are six reasons I feel so certain (I explore these and others in my book The Marian Option: God’s Solution to a Civilization in Crisis):

See John Paul II’s reflections on this in Gift and Mystery.

1) Catholics don’t worship Mary

To put Protestants at ease right way: Catholics do not worship Mary. Period. We venerate her because as the Mother of Jesus, Christ came to us through her. God could have done it any way he wanted, and yet this was how he chose to come to us. It is only fitting then, that the Mother should help us return to her Son. Protestants are comfortable with venerating St. Paul, for example, speaking of him highly, recommending that others get to know his work. Similarly Catholics revere Mary. She is clearly not God, but a creature given incredible graces and gifts by the Creator.

2) Love isn’t binary

There seems to be a sense that if we love Mary, then we must not love Jesus as much as we could or should – that somehow loving the Mother takes away from the Son. But family relationships aren’t binary. What son resents that his friends love his mother? What good mother feels slighted because her children love their father, too? In a family, love is abundant and overflowing.

3) Jesus isn’t jealous of His mother

In a poetic moment, Pope Paul VI wrote, “The sun will never be dimmed by the light of the moon.” Jesus, as the Son of God, doesn’t feel threatened by love and devotion to his Mother. He trusts her and loves her and knows their wills are united. Mary, because she is a creature and not the Creator, will never outshine the Trinity, but always be a reflection of it.

4) She is our Mom

Whether we know it or not, Mary is our spiritual Mother. That moment on the Cross, when Christ gives Mary to St. John, and St. John to his Mother, is when Mary’s role as mother expands to all of humanity. She is closest to those who will stand with her at the foot of the Cross, but her love is not limited just to Christians. She knows well what it cost her Son to purchase our salvation. She doesn’t want to see it squandered.

5) Like a good mom, she makes everything better

Recently, a Protestant challenged my appeal to Mary for assistance in our troubled times by suggesting that devotion to her was solely interior, with little regard for the active life. What is largely misunderstood about Mary is how she transforms our active life. When praying with Mary, not only do we draw closer to her and her Son, but our unique personal mission can be revealed, energized, and transformed by her intercession.

6) You can know a tree by its fruit

Scripture speaks of knowing a tree by its fruit (cf. Matthew 7:16). There is abundant fruit when we look at what Mary has done for the Church historically, geopolitically, and culturally. Not only has she stopped famines, wars, heresies, and persecutions, but she has inspired artists and thinkers at the pinnacle of culture – Mozart, Botticelli, Michelangelo, St. Albert the Great, and the master builders who erected Notre Dame Cathedral, just to name a few.

The testimonies of the saints are overwhelming when it comes to just how powerful her intercession is. There are abundant numbers of canonized saints who spoke highly of her, but you will never find one that spoke poorly of her. Cardinal John Henry Newman noticed that when Mary is abandoned, it isn’t long before a true practice of the faith is abandoned as well.

MARY AND EUCHARISTIC ADORATION

How devotion to Mary should lead us to a deeper love of Eucharistic adoration

St. Peter Julian Eymard firmly believed that the closer someone was to Mary, the closer they were drawn to Jesus in the Eucharist.

On May 13, 1856, French priest St. Peter Julian Eymard founded the Congregation of the Blessed Sacrament, a religious order dedicated to spreading a deep and profound love of Jesus in the Holy Eucharist.

Eymard firmly believed that there existed an intimate connection between devotion to the Virgin Mary and the Blessed Sacrament, and frequently invoked Our Lady under the title of “Our Lady of the Blessed Sacrament.” After Eymard’s death May 13 became a feast dedicated to Our Lady of the Blessed Sacrament and is still celebrated today by his congregation.

During his life, Eymard wrote a series of reflections that were compiled in a book titled, Month of Our Lady of the Blessed Sacrament, consisting of daily meditations for the month of May.

In it, he explains how Mary was the first “adorer” of Jesus and is the “Model of Adorers.”

Jesus has left us His Divine Mother to be the Mother and Model of Adorers … It was Mary who first adored the Incarnate Word. He was in her womb, and no one on earth knew it. O how well was Our Lord served in Mary’s womb! Never has He found a ciborium, a vase of gold more precious, or more pure than Mary’s womb. Mary’s adoration rejoiced Him more than that of all the angels. “The Lord hath placed His tabernacle in the sun,” says the Psalmist. That sun is Mary’s heart … At Bethlehem, Mary was the first to adore her Divine Son lying in the crib. She adored Him with the perfect love of a Virgin Mother.

This example of Mary should inspire us to behold and adore our Eucharistic Lord, truly present in the consecrated host. The more we ponder the life of Mary, the more we can see how much time she must have spent looking at and adoring her Son, the saviour of the world.

The next time you visit a Catholic Church and see the tabernacle that holds the Blessed Sacrament, think about the Virgin Mary and how she would have beheld her Son in a most pure and loving gaze. It is through this adoration that we can inflame within our hearts and deeper love of God.

Here is a short prayer composed by Eymard that asks Our Lady to intercede for us to become worthy “adorers” of her Son.

O Mary, teach us the life of adoration!
Teach us to find, as thou didst, all mysteries and all graces in the Eucharist,
to live the Gospel over again, and to read it in the Eucharistic Life of Jesus!
Remember, Lady of the Most Blessed Sacrament, that thou art the Mother of all
adorers of the Holy Eucharist.

MARY'S PERPETUAL VIRGINITY

Virgin Undefiled

Mary’s Perpetual Virginity and Her Miraculous DeliveryT

As light passes through glass without harming it, so too did Jesus pass through the womb of Mary without the opening of Mary’s womb and without any harm to the physical virginal seal of the Virgin, who was pure and the perfect tabernacle of the unborn Christ.

– Mark Miravalle.¹

Holy Mother Church teaches that Mary was not only perpetually virgin but that she also delivered Christ in a miraculous manner. I would like to, in this article, present these views of Holy Mother Church as well as those of the Angelic Doctor in proving that not only was Mary perpetually a virgin, but also that her delivery of Christ was both painless and did not alter her physical virginity in any way. It was commonly held among the early Christian Fathers that the Blessed Virgin Mother did not experience any pain in giving birth to Christ. Oftentimes, they would turn to the prophet Isaiah as Scriptural evidence of this, which states, “before she travailed, she brought forth; before her pain came, she was delivered of a man child” (Is 66:7). This article will consider the painless and miraculous birth of Christ in the light of the dogma of the perpetual virginity of the Blessed Virgin Mother. The dogma itself professes Mary’s state of virginity as perpetual, i.e. that she was and is always a virgin, before, during and after her delivery of Christ, her son. Pope St. Martin I was the first who defined this ternary character of the dogma and he did so during the Lateran Synod in 649 A.D., where he pronounced as an article of faith that, “the blessed ever-virginal and immaculate Mary conceived, without seed, by the Holy Spirit, and without loss of integrity brought Him forth, and after His birth preserved her virginity inviolate.”²

The Definition of Virginity

When the early Christian fathers used the term virgin, they were not merely referring to a physical or experiential reality, i.e., that Mary hadn’t physically been with a man or that she had no experience with sexual intercourse. Instead, when they referred to Mary with the title of virgin, it was taken to mean a sign of her essential character. Hence, the fathers presupposed the understanding that Mary was virginal in all regards of her person, body, soul, and spirit (1 Cor 7:34). On account of the grace of God, then, Mary’s virginal character grew, matured, and increased until she became the woman of God who was assumed into heaven. In this regard, her essential virginity came to maturity in a purity unlike any other creature. Hence, her physical virginity which was assumed to have continued until the day she died, is a physical sign of her spiritual character.³

Mary’s Virginity before Christ’s Birth

Sacred Scripture attests to the virginity of Mary across both Old and New Testament. In reading the Gospel of Luke, readers see the Annunciation narrative wherein the archangel Gabriel appears to Mary and announces unto her that she is to become the mother of the Second Person of the Trinity. Luke narrates how Gabriel was sent “to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin’s name was Mary” (Lk 1:26–27). The exchange that ensued between Mary and Gabriel bore coherent confirmation of Mary’s virginity as, when Gabriel informed her, “you will conceive in your womb and bear a Son” (Lk 1:31), her immediate response was, “how will this be since I know not man?” (Lk 1:34). Scripture scholars often point out this distinction that to “know” someone in scripture, within proper context, often means to partake in sexual intercourse with the person.

Looking ahead to an historical document, the Protoevangelium of James, written sometime around 120 A.D., albeit not canonical, also bears testimony to the perpetual virginity of Mary. The document narrates the prophecy that preceded the birth of Mary, also depicting how Mary was devoted to Temple services by St. Anne before she was born. The assumption that follows this is, if Mary had been so consecrated, such a life would include the undertaking of the vow of perpetual virginity.

Retrospectively, then, it is clear that the Old Testament presents the prophecies that prepared the way for this reality. The Prophet Isaiah states, “Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign. Behold a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and his name shall be called Emmanuel” (Is 7:14). Scholars vary in their interpretations of the word “virgin” as, within this verse, the Hebrew word used could also be taken to mean “maiden.” Nonetheless, the Old Testament usage of said word bears the implication that the maiden would, herself be a virgin.⁴ Dispute over the verse is put to final rest in the conception of Christ by Mary for, indeed, a virgin did, in fact, conceive and bear the Son of God, the one who is “Emmanuel” or “God with us,” Saviour and Redeemer of the world.

St. Thomas Aquinas sums up this reality perfectly in stating how, “on account of the very end of Incarnation of Christ, which was that men might be born again as sons of God, ‘not of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God’ (Jn 1:13), i.e. of the power of God, of which fact the very conception of Christ was to appear as an exemplar.”⁵ From there, Aquinas quotes St. Augustine who, in writing about the Blessed Virgin, describes how it was proper that Christ be conceived in a virgin so that the future members of the Church would, in their turn, be born, by the birth of water and the Spirit, of a virgin Church.

Mary’s Virginity during the Birth of Christ

The second of the three facets of the dogma of Mary’s perpetual virginity refers to Mary’s physical virginity being preserved during her delivery of Christ.

The papal definition of Mary’s continued virginity during the birth of Christ refers to the event that at the appointed time of birth, Jesus left the womb of Mary without the loss of Mary’s physical virginity. The Church understands Mary’s virginity during the birth of Christ as an absence of any physical injury or violation to Mary’s virginal seal (in Latin, virginitas in partu) through a special divine action of the all-powerful God. This divine act would safeguard Mary’s physical virginity which is both symbol and part of her perfect, overall virginity; a virginity both internal and external, of soul and of body.⁶

This fact was decisively and broadly propagated by the early Christian fathers and the Doctors of the Church. The fathers of the Church overwhelmingly taught the “miraculous birth” of Jesus that resulted in no injury to the Blessed Virgin Mary’s physical integrity. In quoting a sermon from the Council of Ephesus, Thomas Aquinas writes, “After giving birth, nature knows not a virgin: but grace enhances her fruitfulness, and affects her motherhood, while in no way does it injure her virginity.”⁷ Hence, Aquinas is arguing with conciliar support that Mary’s physical virginity remained intact upon her delivery of Christ. The Old Testament prophecy of Isaiah clearly states, “Behold a virgin shall conceive,” but, to that effect, the prophecy further adds, “and shall bear a son” (Is 7:14). Accordingly, Aquinas posits certain logical conclusions from this. Two of these are as follows: Firstly, regarding Christ as the Word (logos). Because the word is conceived in the mind without corruption, it has to necessarily proceed from the mind without causing corruption. This principle is also true for the Word incarnate being conceived and brought forth in Mary. Hence the same sermon of the Council of Ephesus states, “Whosoever brings forth mere flesh, ceases to be a virgin. But since she gave birth to the Word made flesh, God safeguarded her virginity so as to manifest His Word, by which Word He thus manifested Himself.”⁸ Secondly, Aquinas quotes Augustine who demonstrates how Christ, who came to heal corruption, would not, at the advent of his coming, violate the physical and virginal integrity of Mary.

To wit, Pope St. Leo the Great also defends the preserved virginity of Mary in the process of Christ’s supernatural birth. He states, “Mary brought Him forth, with her virginity untouched, as with her virginity untouched she conceived Him.”⁹ The understanding that birth pangs were, essentially, the result of a curse that followed the fall of man need be considered, for it followed the act of the sin of Eve. Scripture recounts how the Lord God said to Eve, “in pain you shall bring forth children I will greatly increase your pangs in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children, yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you” (Gen 3:16). Being the New Eve who, herself, had chosen a life of absolute obedience to the will of God and who was so confirmed in grace by her Immaculate Conception, Mary stood apart from the rest of womankind regarding this curse. She brought forth Christ, the Son of the Living God whilst preserving her virginal integrity as inviolate, all without experiencing any sense of pain.¹⁰ In the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, the Second Vatican Council reaffirmed the Church’s teaching on Mary’s inviolate virginity upon Christ’s miraculous birth. It states, “This union of the mother with the Son in the work of salvation is made manifest from the time of Christ’s virginal conception…then also at the birth of our Lord, who did not diminish his mother’s virginal integrity but sanctified it.”¹¹

The Painless and Miraculous Birth of Christ

Because of this, Mary necessarily felt no pain during the birth of Christ. Aquinas describes the pains of childbirth as being caused by the infant opening the passage from the womb, i.e. passing through the birth canal. However, “Christ came forth from the closed womb of His Mother, and, consequently, without opening the passage,” and, ergo, had to have caused her no pain in doing so.¹² Elsewhere, Aquinas construes that the pangs of childbirth are the result of the mingling of the sexes, i.e. sexual intercourse.¹³ However, in quoting Augustine, Aquinas demonstrates how this cannot pertain to the Blessed Virgin Mother, “because she conceived Christ without the defilement of sin, and without the stain of sexual mingling, therefore did she bring Him forth without pain, without violation of her virginal integrity, without detriment to the purity of her maidenhood.”¹⁴ Aquinas assumes St. Jerome’s position as assumed valid, i.e. that “no midwife was there, no officious women interfered. She was both mother and midwife.”¹⁵ He further argues by way of deduction from this that because Scripture supports this in illustrating how the Blessed Virgin Mother, by herself, after having given birth to Christ, “wrapped [him] up in swaddling clothes and laid Him in a manger” (Lk 2:7), she must have necessarily experienced a painless and miraculous delivery of Christ.

Mary’s Virginity after the Birth of Christ

The final aspect of the dogma involves Mary’s preserved virginity after her delivery of Christ and unto the end of her days on earth. The Prophet Ezekiel writes, “This gate shall be shut, it shall not be opened, and no man shall pass through it; because the Lord the God of Israel hath entered in by it” (Ezekiel 44:2). St. Augustine, in explicating this verse, postulates the following:

What means this closed gate in the House of the Lord, except that Mary is to be ever inviolate? What does it mean that “no man shall pass through it,” save that Joseph shall not know her? And what is this — “The Lord alone enters in and goeth out by it” — except that the Holy Ghost shall impregnate her, and that the Lord of angels shall be born of her? And what means this — “it shall be shut for evermore” — but that Mary is a virgin before His Birth, a virgin in His Birth, and a virgin after His Birth?¹⁶

Popes across history defend this teaching as well. Pope Paul IV who rebuked anyone who would deny that the Blessed Virgin Mary “did not retain her virginity intact before the birth, in the birth, and perpetually after the birth.”¹⁷ The Second Vatican Council also lent its voice to the profession of this dogma by declaring the Blessed Mother as the “glorious ever Virgin Mary.”¹⁸

Looking back at the New Testament, and, in particular, the Annunciation event, it is inducible, from Mary’s response to the Angel Gabriel, that she was attesting to a vow of perpetual virginity. By contemplating her response, “how will this be since I know not man?” (Lk 1:34), Church Fathers have come to understand Mary’s reply as an allusion to the vow of perpetual virginity that she had already undertaken, offering herself as a complete and irrevocable gift to God. Her statement, “I know not man,” may be taken as an advertence to a pre-existing, permanent vow that connotes an invariable disposition of her virginity. Scholars go so far as to conclude, from this, that God would not only honour such a vow but continue it, thus preserving her virginity even during and, in his grace, after Christ’s birth unto the end of her earthly life.¹⁹ It is amazing that the Protestant reformer, Martin Luther corroborated this dogma in his own statement, “Mary realized she was the mother of the Son of God, and she did not desire to become the mother of the son of man, but to remain in this divine gift,” a statement that his contemporaries and even other reformers such as Ulrich Zwingli, John Calvin and John Wesley, also affirmed.²⁰

St. Thomas Aquinas treats this aspect of the dogma by appealing to other theological truths. Firstly, because Christ was God’s only-begotten Son, it would follow that he likewise deserved to be an “only-begotten” Son of Mary, through whom he received his human nature. Secondly, Aquinas draws from the reality that because the Incarnation, through whom God himself would come to be “born of a woman” (Gal 4:4), took place miraculously through the overshadowing of the Holy Spirit, Mary’s womb was necessarily the shrine of the Spirit. Carnal conception in that same shrine would be to desecrate its sacredness and the uniqueness of its seed of precedence. By extension, he also illustrates how preposterous it would be to assume that Mary herself would desire to forfeit God’s miraculous preservation of her immaculate virginity through carnal relations as well. With a tone that comes across as almost indignant, Aquinas also adds that it would be a grave disrespect to St. Joseph to assume that he would want to violate a vessel so pure with carnal relations.²¹

A further, and final, consideration of Scriptural proof of Mary’s perpetual virginity and its logical correlation that she had no other biological children save Christ, is found in the Gospel of John. At the foot of the Cross at Calvary, Christ entrusts Mary into the care of his beloved disciple (cf. Jn 19:26–27). It would have been of grievous offense to Christ’s alleged other siblings if he had not entrusted Mary into their care, per Jewish custom. The fact that Christ intentionally entrusted Mary to the Apostle John is a sound indicator of Mary’s not having other biological children. (Tangentially, this was also the point where Christ declared her Mother of the Human Race, but that is for another article.)

It was always God’s intention that Salvation History come to a climactic point in the person of Christ. Likewise, it was in his divine Will that Mary was to be, for all mankind across the ages, the perfect model of Christian discipleship. Her life, offered as an absolute and irrevocable gift of self to God renders her as the exemplary type of the Church which, herself, is both virgin and mother as well. In mirroring the virginity of her Son, God’s preservation of Mary’s virginity presents her as an excellent instance of consecration of self to all disciples of Christ in his beloved spouse, the Church — Mary is an ideal expression “that holy virginity is the highest objective vocational gift of self to God.”²²

1.    Mark I. Miravalle, Introduction to Mary: The Heart of Marian Doctrine and Devotion(Goleta, CA: Queenship, 2006), 58; excerpted online as “The Miraculous and Painless Birth of Jesus Christ,” Mother of All Peoples, Marian Library, motherofallpeoples.com/blog/the-miraculous-and-painless-birth-of-jesus-christ. Hereafter “Miraculous and Painless Birth.” 

2.    Miravalle, “Miraculous and Painless Birth.” 

3.    Dwight Longenecker and David Gustafson, Mary: A Catholic-Evangelical Debate(Leominster: Gracewing Publishing, 2003), 63–64. 

4.    Miravalle, “Miraculous and Painless Birth.” 

5.    ST III, Q. 28, A. 1, Res. 

6.    Miravalle, “Miraculous and Painless Birth.” 

7.    ST III, Q. 28, A. 2, Sed. 

8.    ST III, Q. 28, A. 2, Sed. 

9.    Pope St. Leo, Enchiridion Patristicum, 2182. 

10.  Eds. Robert I. Bradley, SJ, and Eugene Kevane, Roman Catechism, (Boston: St. Paul Editions, 1985), 49–50. 

11.  Pope Paul VI, “Dogmatic constitution on the Church,” Lumen Gentium (1964), no. 57. 

12.  ST III, Q. 35, A. 6, Res. 

13.  ST III, Q. 35, A. 6, Ad 1. 

14.  ST III, Q. 35, A. 6, Ad 1. 

15.  ST III, Q. 35, A. 6, Ad 3. 

16.  Judith Costello, To Mary, our morning star: Mariology in ten lessons (State College, PA: Goldhead Group, 2013), 254. 

17.  DS 1880; Dupuis, The Christian Faith in the Doctrinal Documents of the Catholic Church, no. 707. 

18.  Pope Paul VI, “Dogmatic constitution on the Church,” Lumen Gentium (1964), no. 52. 

19.  Cf. Collins, SJ, “Our Lady’s Vow of Virginity,” Catholic Biblical Quarterly (1943), 5. 

20.  Martin Luther, Wiemar edition of Martin Luther’s Works, trans. William J. Cole, 11, p. 320; John Calvin, cf. Bernard Leeming, “Protestants and Our Lady,” Marian Library Studies, January 1967, 9; John Wesley, Letter to a Roman Catholic; Ulrich Zwingli, Zwingli Opera, Corpus Reformatorum, Vol. 1, 424. 

21.  ST III, Q. 28, a. 3, Res. 

22.  Miravalle, “Miraculous and Painless Birth.”