In approaching this document we need to remember that at times in Protestant circles there has been an over-reaction to the Roman position, producing the temptation to speak disparagingly of Mary herself. This does nothing to help the cause of truth. Rather, it harms it. Mary is not to blame for the position she has been given by Rome, and Protestants can only forward their convictions honourably by recognising what Scripture says about her. God bestowed a great privilege and responsibility upon her in choosing her to be the mother of the Saviour and our attitude should be shaped by the Scriptural record.

There had been some debate in Rome about whether or not Mary should have a separate document devoted entirely to her, but in the end it was decided that this should form part of the treatment of the Church.

The ten pages of translated text can be found in Vatican Council II. The Conciliar and Post Conciliar Documents, edited by Austin Flannery O.P (Fowler Wright Books Ltd. 1981) pp 413 - 423. There are five sections: an introduction; the function of the blessed virgin in the plan of salvation; the blessed virgin and the church; the cult of the blessed virgin in the church; Mary, sign of true hope and comfort for the pilgrim people of God.

"Ever Virgin"
The introduction calls on the faithful to reverence the memory of Mary and, in the language of the Mass, describes her as "ever virgin". We are immediately in a controversial area. While some Protestants have also maintained Mary's perpetual virginity it seems only possible to do this by explaining away plain statements of Scripture such as Matthew 1:25 and the passages referring to the Lord's brothers and sisters.

For Rome this idea of a perpetual virginity seems necessary because of Mary's position as "the Mother of God and of the Redeemer ..... the Mother of the Son of God.... the beloved daughter of the Father and the temple of the Holy Spirit". This status is possible for her because she has been "Redeemed, in a more exalted fashion, by reason of the merits of her Son and united to him by a close and indissoluble tie". We seem to be here in the realm of thinking that felt the necessity for the dogma of the Immaculate Conception.

Because of "this gift of sublime grace she surpasses all creatures both in heaven and earth." Yet, because of belonging to Adam's race, "she is at the same time also united to all those who are to be saved." Augustine is quoted in describing Mary as "clearly the mother of the members of Christ ...since she has by her charity joined in bringing about the birth of believers in the Church."

The introduction also speaks of "the duties of the redeemed towards the Mother of God, who is the Mother of Christ and mother of men, and most of all of those that believe." This latter phrase, echoes 1 Timothy 4:10 referring to God as "the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe".

All through this opening section it sounds as though Mary is being given a position that far exceeds what is said about her in Scripture. Yes, she was the mother of our Lord. It was prophesied that He would be born of a virgin, and the chapter correctly speaks later on of the Old Testament prophecies and their fulfilment in the birth of the Lord and Mary's part in this. Yet Scripture does not lead to the impression of Mary given by this document.

Her Place in Salvation
A clue to understanding Roman thinking may be found in the section on the plan of salvation, to which we now turn our attention. This speaks of the Son of God taking "human nature from her", and may explain why Rome believes a miracle of grace was necessary at Mary's own conception "to preserve her free from all stain of original sin." Only so, they may reckon, could our Lord be conceived without receiving sinful human nature. Yet Scripture says nothing about Mary's conception. The miracle spoken of in Scripture is the work of the Holy Spirit in our Lord's conception so that He was and is truly God and truly man, yet without sin. This is all the explanation we need, and anything more can only be superstition leading, in Rome's case, to serious error in the deductions it makes.

We are told of Mary that she "gave the world the Life that renews all things ..... enriched by God with gifts appropriate to such a role." This, it is said, explains why the Fathers spoke of "the Mother of God as all holy and free from every stain of sin." She has "an entirely unique holiness." She was not impeded by any sin in her commitment to God's saving will. Under and with her Son she served the mystery of redemption by the grace of Almighty God. She freely co-operated in the work of man's salvation through faith and obedience. Irenaeus is cited as saying that she "being obedient became the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race." It was said, "death through Eve, life through Mary."

Once again, the Protestant feels thoroughly uncomfortable with such thinking and the statements it produces, because it is not reflected in the teaching of Scripture. It is true that the Roman Church will always claim to go back to God and His grace revealed in the work of Christ as the ultimate source of salvation, but the emphasis on Mary and what is said about her does not, in practice, bring more honour and glory to God. Rather, it confuses the situation by the way in which she is unnecessarily exalted.

The document does not overlook the incident in Mark 3: 31 - 35 where Mary and the Lord's brethren want to see Him, and when our Lord says that those who do the will of God are His mother and brethren. It argues that this shows that Mary did faithfully keep the Word of God. It does not seem to recognise that in this context her natural motherhood was discounted over against a spiritual bond with the Lord enjoyed equally by all who obey God's will.

In speaking of the~crucifixion the chapter claims that Mary "stood in ''keeping with the divine plan, enduring with her only begotten Son the intensity of his suffering", and in this "associated herself with his sacrifice in her mother's heart, so lovingly consenting to the immolation of this victim which was born of her." We would not want to minimise the suffering felt by Mary, and we can believe that this suffering was intense at the human level, but she could no more know the spiritual intensity of the suffering of separation from His Father caused by bearing our sin than anyone else. Did she understand any better than others what was happening then? Scripture gives no indication that she did. Nor is there any evidence that she anticipated the Lord's resurrection.

"Queen Over All Things"
Once again Rome seems to give Mary a place far beyond any that she would have claimed for herself, and this continues as the section draws to a close. "Finally the Immaculate Virgin, preserved free from all stain of original sin, was taken up body and soul into heavenly glory, when her earthly life was over, and exalted by the Lord as Queen over all things, that she might be the more fully conformed to her Son, the Lord of lords, and conqueror of sin and death."

The Protestant would say that there is no scriptural warrant for such statements concerning Mary alone. We believe that she, like all other believers who have died trusting in the Lord Jesus, is now "with Christ", and like them is waiting for His return to earth and the resurrection of the body. We look forward to being conformed to Christ's likeness with all other believers, in accordance with God's predestinating purpose for us. We have no reason to think that Mary has been exalted Queen over all things and will or can be more fully conformed to the Saviour than any other of His redeemed people.