The Age of the Enlightenment

In the following epoch the image of the Church was affected by the impact of Deism and Enlightenment with Rationalism, which brought about a new interpretation of Christian teaching aimed at effacing all creedal differences. The Church was to be reduced to a moral institution through demythologising and desecrating efforts. On the one hand this resulted in the endeavours of a more people-oriented liturgical emphasis and on the other hand a stronger clericalism emerged. The strong apologetic orientation remained and was to be seen against the background of the above-mentioned influences and political changes.

The effects of the Enlightenment on the Church were particularly felt in the area of Marian devotion and teaching. In contrast to the more demonstrative and effusive Catholic representation of Marian truth and devotion of the Baroque the time of Enlightenment presented a reduction of Marian doctrine to a purely moral level of values and virtues associated with a milieu of bourgeoisie. There is a marked descent from the praise of Mary's glories as Queen of Heaven to her being a model character of a mother's love and concern for home duties. This Marian content, rationalized and reduced to mere morality and ethics by many Church authorities, was kept alive to a significant degree in popular piety.

From the Period of Romanticism to the Nineteenth Century

The influence of the Romantic affected the concept of the Church in a way which brought again to the fore the inner reality of the Church and its organic unity. Through the impact of “modernism” and the counter orientation on neo-scholasticism, the Church increasingly closed itself off to the spirit of the time and became defensive. Within this atmosphere of Catholicism the ninetieth century inaugurated again a re-awakening of Marian piety marked by Marian pilgrimages and apparitions, and inspired by the definition of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, which commenced the so-called Marian century. In spite of this renewal of Marian devotion, essentially influenced through the dogmatic definition in 1854, there was considerably less development in Marian theology; however, two eminent theologians and contemporaries need to be mentioned: J. H. Newman, who brought again to the fore the Eve-Mary parallel in support of Mary's original state of grace [Immaculate Conception], her part in redemption, her eschatological fulfilment and her intercession, and J. M. Scheeben.

The latter gives a fairly detailed mariological-ecclesiological exposition. Mary, as the grace-filled person [per se] in her relationship with the Trinity and in her divine motherhood, is typologically significant for the Church. From this perspective, Scheeben speaks of a fundamental principle which is constitutive and serves as vantage point for all mariological statements and the understanding of Mary's person and task in the order of salvation and the history of salvation: Mary's divine-spousal motherhood [Gottesbräutliche Mutterschaft as her personal character–a term unique to Scheeben's mariology. He speaks of the fundamental principle within the framework of the supernatural personal character of Mary. This character distinguishes Mary from all other people: “At the same time, of its very nature and according to the idea of the Church, it is used also in the sense that, compared with all other qualities of Mary, the distinguishing mark of ‘mother of Jesus' forms the capital, fundamental, and central quality to which, as subordinate attributes, all others are joined.” Further, Scheeben underlines:

”All the privileges belonging to the Mother of God are of a super-natural character and thus find their principle in a supernatural gift of grace, so this applies particularly to the motherhood itself. This motherhood must therefore be defined as a supernatural distinguishing mark of Mary's person, to which, in addition to her nature, she is raised through divine grace and which thus has its root in a divine gift of grace through which it is constituted.”

The formative element of Mary's personal character is the “supernatural, spiritual union of the person of Mary with that of her Son”; it is the highest, most intimate and perfect union between God and a human creature. “Mary, as united with the Logos, is taken into complete possession by him; the Logos, as infused and implanted in her, gives himself to her and takes her to himself as partner and helper, in the closest, strictest, and most lasting community of life.” Scheeben considers Mary in the role of her divine-bridal motherhood as the mother and heart of the Mystical Body of Christ. Within the inner organic unity of the Church he highlights this heart function:

“Mary is . . . the prototype of the Church, as the idea of the Church is originally realized in her person and in the most perfect manner. Since she herself belongs to the Church and at the same time forms the head-member as root and heart, the idea of the Church as a supernatural principle assisting Christ also obtains its full, concrete and living figure.”

Scheeben's perception of a fundamental principle, and the uniqueness of his concept of Mary's personal character has found a resonance in the years preceding Vatican II [from ca. 1940 on], for example in the works of H. M. Köster, K. Rahner and Semmelroth. The aspects and the orientations that Scheeben gives in this concept have generated negative and positive critiques. According to G. Philips, it is not possible to combine the two terms “mother” and “bride” in the concept of “bridal motherhood” without creating a misconception in the understanding of the concept. C. Feckes takes the divine-bridal motherhood as the fundamental principal of Mariology: Mary is mother, because she is bride and co-worker of the Redeemer. Her first service as co-worker in the redemptive work of her Son is her maternal action. She is bride, because she is mother, since her motherly action includes in her Fiat a bridal dimension.

A pertinent modification and application of Scheeben's idea of the mariological fundamental principle is given by Fr. Kentenich in his Marian paradigm. In accordance with a long tradition acknowledging the essential unity between Christ and Mary, and in affiliation with Scheeben's concept, he defines, as a fundamental Marian principle, the personal character of Mary: as “the unique bridal, permanent helpmate and associate of Christ, who is the Head of the whole Church and world, in the entire work of redemption,” or expressed in the shorter version from 1950: Mary is “the official companion and helpmate of Christ in the entire work of redemption.” Although all of Mary's unique gifts–like her immaculate conception, perpetual virginity, the intemerata and her divine motherhood–are included and are to be interpreted from the above paradigm, yet Fr. Kentenich's choice of this definition as he stated in 1941 points beyond traditional mariological interpretations toward Mary's active involvement in salvation history. She is, through her educative task toward humanity, the free cooperative permanent helpmate and associate of Christ in the entire work of redemption. The christologically founded and oriented unity between Christ and Mary is constitutive for Mary's place in God's divine plan, in the order of salvation and at the center of salvation history, and gives her an official character. For Fr. Kentenich, Mary's position in God's plan of salvation is the starting point for everything that can be said about her person and her mission.