There’s a tension in the Catholic world between Marian maximalism and Marian minimalism.
(hat tip to Jimmy Akin who linked to this article on how Ratzinger has developed from an active participant in Vatican II through his life, and now as Pope Benedict XVI).
Marian Maximalism is a great Marian devotion, which contends that since Mary is the most perfect of all of creation, and as the ‘masterpiece of God’, any praise and adoration given to her reflects off, and is actually praise of her Creator. For people who adhere to this theory, no devotion can be too great.
Marian Minimalism also grants all the historical titles that Mary as been acclaimed by through the centuries. However, it is uncomfortable with the extremes of devotion that some in the Marian Maximalism camp partake in.
This debate has been raging in my heart for years. By nature, I am inclined more towards the minimalist side of the debate, but I can understand the argument that Marian Maximalism puts forward.
What brought this debate up recently is a discussion I was having with someone from Latin America. She was telling me that in the culture that she had experienced, “The Virgin was everything.” That they barely even think of Jesus and the Father, and the Spirit at all.
This bothers me greatly.
Jesus, and His sacrifice was the focal point of history. (the Maximalist responds that ‘No Mary = No Jesus’, and follows up with Mary sharing in Cavalry, and pointing to the ‘sword that will pierce your heart’.)
The thought that I came up with at lunch today was a little twist on the first argument that the maximalists reach for… What mother wants praise, when her Son is more worthy of it?
More to come, but these were just some thoughts tumbling through my head.
I always liked Scott Hahn intro to Mary … rough paraphrase, I could be kinda wrong:
Jesus is absolutely obedient to the Law, and we are to aspire to be as Jesus is and do as Jesus does. Jesus, according to the Mosaic Law, honors His Mother and Father – which means that He not only brings them glory but gives them glory. That’s the “two planks” on which all appropriate Marian devotion stands.
I understand this. No worries. My issues more run around the LIMITS of these statements, rather than their basis.
Right … I understand. I, like you, am more comfortable with the minimalist attitude … yet, when I get down to asking myself, “How far would Christ go?” I have a tendency to feel guilty about not being more comfortable (if not totally comfortable) with the maximalist view.
That, and I love JP2 … and I think he would fall under maximalist. It certainly did him no harm.
I think JP2 leaned towards the Maximalist camp. B16 is pretty solid in the Minimalist camp.
St. Bonaventure once said that every great saint has a great Marian devotion (though i think it’s safe to say it’s not a two way street).
Here are the things I keep coming back to:
1) Jesus is effectivly a non-entity in a fair portion of Latin and South America Catholic circles. This is one reason protestants (Adam Suter anyone?) goes down there. If Mary is viewed as a needed requirement for Jesus, then that’s fine, but the point is still the sacrafice of Jesus.
2) Great Marian devotion can’t forget the second half of the ‘theotokos’ title: Mother of God… Mother is insufficient.
3) The passage late in Jerimiah where he condems those who worship ‘the queen of heaven’ keep reverberating in my mind as well… I realize that it’s far more accurate to call Mary ‘geberah’ (sp?) which is ‘Queen Mother of Heaven’, in the model of the kings of Judah, but how many people realize THAT?