New Mary Document (ARCIC)

A reader writes:

Jimmy,

Do you kwow if, when the new document, "Mary: Grace and Hope in Christ,",will be available and if we can download it anywere?

http://www.ewtn.com/vnews/getstory.asp?number=56648

http://news.google.com/?ncl=http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory%3Fid%3D762213&hl=en

The document is available now, but it is not available for download.

For those who may not be up on what the reader is asking about, there is a new, just-out document from ARCIC (the Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission, or the main Anglican-Catholic ecumenical dialogue) called "Mary: Grace and Hope in Christ." It’s also called "the Seattle Statement" since key work done in drafting it was done in Seattle, where it was released Monday by the Catholic head of ARCIC (Seattle Archbishop Alex Brunett) and the Anglican head (Peter Carnley, Archbishop of Perth).

I’d been hearing rumblings about the new document for a bit, but when it came out today, I immediately tried to get a copy.

Unfortunately, it isn’t online–and the plans don’t seem to be for it to be put online. The source I spoke to stressed the copywrited nature of the work (as have written resources I now have) and indicated that it was being produced by Continuum publishing

ORDERS ARE ALREADY BEING TAKEN FOR IT ONLINE, HERE.

ARCIC thus seems to be going the route of protecting their copyright and trying to make money via standard publishing. I don’t know how ARCIC is funded–this may be something they need to do or are contractually bound to do, though for my money–in the Internet age–if you have a new ecumenical or ecclesiastical document that you want to make a really big splash with, the thing to do is slap it up on the Internet.

The source I spoke with was very helpful, though, and I now have a copy of the document, along with some supporting materials. Unfortunately, I can’t simply post the whole thing. That would violate good faith with the source (as well as copyright law), but I can write about it (the source expects me to do that) and quote highlights under the Fair Use provisions of U.S. copyright law (also expected).

So here goes . . .

This is a first take, not based on a full, exhaustive reading of the text.

First, the document makes its status clear right up front. It is not an official document of either Church:

It is a joint statement of the Commission. The authorities who appointed the Commission [that includes the Vatican’s Pontifical Commission for Promoting Christian Unity] have allowed the statement to be published so that it may be widely discussed. It is not an authoritative declaration by the Roman Catholic Church or by the Anglican Communion, who will study and evaluate the document in due course. 

The document is meant to specifically focus on the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption, which were dogmas that previous ARCIC work had called for further discussion.

The document has a lengthy section on Mary in Scripture, followed by one on Mary in Christian Tradition, which amounts to a history of Marian belief and devotion in the Christian age (including in the Reformation). This section is quite well-written, accurate, balanced, and up-to-date, including things John Paul II did as recently as 2002. This section notes:

Jesus Christ was “conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary.” This Anglicans and Roman Catholics together affirm [MGHC 33].

In receiving the Council of Ephesus and the definition of Chalcedon, Anglicans and Roman Catholics together confess Mary as Theotókos [MGHC 34].

There is then a theological section broaching remaining difficulties. It sets an eschatological framework for considering these difficulties, focusing on Mary’s role in God’s plan of the ages. It recognizes that God gave Mary graces to prepare her for her role as the Mother of the Messian and acknowledges her acceptance of God’s will in this role. It thus states:

With the early Church, we see in Mary’s acceptance of the divine will the fruit of her prior preparation, signified in Gabriel’s affirmation of her as ‘graced’. We can thus see that God was at work in Mary from her earliest beginnings, preparing her for the unique vocation of bearing in her own flesh the new Adam, “in whom all things in heaven and earth hold together” (Colossians 1:17). Of Mary, both personally and as a representative figure, we can say she is “God’s workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works which God prepared beforehand” (Ephesians 2:10) [MGHC 55].

It goes on to say regarding the Immaculate Conception:

In view of her vocation to be the mother of the Holy One (Luke 1:35), we can affirm together that Christ’s redeeming work reached ‘back’ in Mary to the depths of her being, and to her earliest beginnings. This is not contrary to the teaching of Scripture, and can only be understood in the light of Scripture. Roman Catholics can recognize in this what is affirmed by the dogma – namely “preserved from all stain of original sin” and “from the first moment of her conception" [MGHC 59].

Regarding the Assumption, it states:

[G]iven the understanding we have reached concerning the place of Mary in the economy of hope and grace, we can affirm together the teaching that God has taken the Blessed Virgin Mary in the fullness of her person into his glory as consonant with Scripture and that it can, indeed, only be understood in the light of Scripture. Roman Catholics can recognize that this teaching about Mary is contained in the dogma. While the calling and destiny of all the redeemed is their glorification in Christ, Mary, as Theotókos, holds the pre-eminent place within the communion of saints and embodies the destiny of the Church [MGHC 58].

It also says concerning these two doctrines:

We have agreed together that the teaching about Mary in the two definitions of 1854 and 1950, understood within the biblical pattern of the economy of grace and hope outlined here, can be said to be consonant with the teaching of the Scriptures and the ancient common traditions [MGHC 60].

But it immediately goes on to note that Anglicans have a problem regarding these as obligatory for belief.

There is a final section on Mary in the life of the Church. It acknowledges Mary’s unique role in the communion of the saints and takes up the subject of praying to the saints. After reviewing many of the passages commonly cited in Catholic apologetic writings on the subject, it states:

It is in this sense that we affirm that asking the saints to pray for us is not to be excluded as unscriptural, though it is not directly taught by the scriptures to be a required element of life in Christ. Further, we agree that the way such assistance is sought must not obscure believers’ direct access to God our heavenly Father, who delights to give good gifts to his children (Matthew 7:11) [MGHC 70].

Citing the "Behold your mother" passage in John, the document notes that Christian believers

may come to see Mary as mother of the new humanity, active in her ministry of pointing all people to Christ, seeking the welfare of all the living. We are agreed that, while caution is needed in the use of such imagery, it is fitting to apply it to Mary, as a way of honouring her distinctive relationship to her son, and the efficacy in her of his redeeming work [MGHC 72].

Regarding Marian devotion, the document says;

Many Christians find that giving devotional expression to their appreciation for this ministry of Mary enriches their worship of God. Authentic popular devotion to Mary, which by its nature displays a wide individual, regional and cultural diversity, is to be respected [MGHC 73].

It adds a discussion of apparitions and the devotion showed regarding them and states:

We are agreed that, within the constraints set down in this teaching to ensure that the honour paid to Christ remains pre-eminent, such private devotion is acceptable, though never required of believers [ibid.]

Summing up the topic of Marian devotion and praying to the saints, it states:

Affirming together unambiguously Christ’s unique mediation, which bears fruit in the life of the Church, we do not consider the practice of asking Mary and the saints to pray for us as communion dividing. Since obstacles of the past have been removed by clarification of doctrine, by liturgical reform and practical norms in keeping with it, we believe that there is no continuing theological reason for ecclesial division on these matters [MGHC 75].

The document concludes by noting that "Our statement has sought not to clear away all possible problems" (MGHC 80), which is a key statement that needed to be there since the document does not report full agreement on all points. It does open the door for Anglicans to believe in the Immaculate Conception and Assumption, for example, but acknowledges that Anglicans find it difficult to say that such beliefs should be required.

Early work by ARCIC was found problematic by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (prompting clarifications to be made), but based on the brief look at the document that I’ve been able to have, I’m not sensing such problems with this one. This document does not seem to be papering over divisions with ambiguous formulae (one of the problems with the early work) and seems to clearly acknowledge when the two groups are not in full agreement.

In terms of what is new in the document that might advance the cause of authentic ecumenism, it strikes me that the Catholic group does not do that much that is new toward answering Anglican concerns. Instead, the document cites a long string of things Catholics have already done that ameliorate the kinds of concerns Anglicans had after the time of the Reformation. In other words, it acknowledges that the kind of hyper-Marian things many Protestants were afraid of regarding Catholic Marian belief and practice have been carefully nuanced already by the Catholic Church.

Most of the reassurances that Anglicans would have sought thus have already been made in different Catholic documents. It helps, though, to have a joint document acknowledging that these reassurances havfe been made.

Most of the "new" things in the document therefore fall on the Anglican side of things. They display a remarkable degree of openness toward Catholic Marian belief and practice. While this stops short of a full endorsement or mandate of the Catholic perspective, it is still a remarkable step forward.

Since this is not an official document of either Church, it speaks only for the actual participants in the dialogue and is presented to the two communions for reflection. Unless there’s something that I missed, I don’t think that the Holy See will have a problem with what it says (maybe a phrase here or there). What I will be most interested to see is the reaction that it gets in the Anglican communion. If it receives a positive reception there, it could have a significant impact on future relations and lead to a broadening and deepening of Marian belief and practice in Anglicanism.