Love is the astrolabe of God’s mysteries
- Jalāl ad-Dīn Muhammad Rūmī
In my 9th grade
year, my boarding school required we take a course in world religions in place
of a history course, and in that class, I first ran across this quote of Rumi
which has stuck with me since
then. In reflecting on our class discussion of Mary of Agreda’s Mystical
City of God, this quote came to mind, and I found that the same role that
love plays for Rumi is played by the Virgin Mary for Mary of Agreda. We touched
on this idea many times in class, though in slightly different terms.
Generally, we have observed this phenomenon in depictions of Mary as a spotless
mirror or light-refracting crystal. In this way, it would seem that Rumi and
the venerable Mary of Agreda would agree, perhaps among other things, on the idea that humans – being unable
to grasp the divine itself – must use other means to discuss or to understand
effectively the divine.
As I noted, this idea is
not new at all to Mary of Agreda; it has been a prominent part of the tradition
at least since the homilies of St. Andrew of Crete if not before. However, I
see in the Mystical City of God a
full flowering – in rather rococo form that I find not inappropriate to the
subject matter – of the Marian tradition into this role. If I may be permitted
to make a rather arcane metaphor, Agreda’s Mystical City of God could be
bright Silmaril born of the tradition, the two interwoven trees. While I feel
this metaphor could be extended further, I will refrain for now to return to
the main matter at hand.
While, in many ways, Mary
of Agreda’s work is a distillation of the previous tradition in how it views
Mary; there is innovation too in both the extent of the claim as well as the
theological basis for this claim. In the Mystical City of God, Mary is
depicted as wholly a true intermediary between normal humans and the Godhead whereas in earlier traditions there was an uncomfortable tension between the
fact that she was both an “unspotted mirror”, the perfect reflection of the
divine, but herself still absolutely human. This tension came to the fore in
the high Medieval debates regarding not only the validity of the immaculate
conception itself – taken up as we’ve seen between the Dominicans and the Franciscans
– but also the question of when exactly Mary was rid of original sin or whether
she was stained by it at any point. Mary of Agreda through her work resolves
this issue with a bold theological claim that Mary was a particular human who
existed as wholly an intermediate being between people and God. The argument is
made in many ways, but it can most clearly be seen in Mary of Agreda’s description
of the order or “instants” by which we understand how God came to manifest his
divine knowledge or plan or being – as Mary of Agreda describes these things
are not easily divisible (Mystical City of God, 12).
Beginning with the first
instant, Mary of Agreda describes how God recognizes and comprehends fully his
own divine nature that, like “the sun should diffuse its light”, is inherently
creative and communicative without any loss or detriment to itself. The second
instant describes the duty of that creation to magnify the same God as the
“manifestation of his greatness”. Next, the third instant involves the manner
in which this communication will take place, and to that end, the necessary
existence of Christ as hypostatically God and man was preordained.
Finally, in the fourth
instant, Mary of Agreda comes to discuss the Virgin Mary. In this instant, the
existence of Mary was effectively born or decreed to be. I find it particularly
interesting that this followed directly from the instant in which Christ himself
was preordained – who In turn proceeded from the necessary creative outpouring
of a perfect divinity. This distinctly reminded me of the origins of the Marian
cult in the Christological arguments against Nestorianism in the fourth and fifth
centuries A.D. The fifth instant involving the origin of the angels
both good and evil in the mind of God followed afterwards. The origin of the
angels as following that of Mary is of note particularly because it prefigures
why Mary is the “empress of heaven” and ergo holds authority over the angles.
This comes up later in the Mystical City of God with Mary’s guard of
1,000 angels, but also in St. Louis de Montfort’s The Secret of the Rosary
in the account regarding the man wracked by demons that were forced out by the
invocation of the Virgin – who preceded them and therefore is accorded the greater
authority (The Secret of the Rosary, 88-91). Finally, in the sixth instant, humankind and their fall from grace
is prefigured – though their nature as being free, and as having both the faculties to know God and the ability to distinguish good and evil came in the third instant.
This particular
description of the “order of instants” in the mind of God effectively constitutes
– among other things – a theological argument for the immaculate conception
since the Virgin Mary’s existence predates humankind itself and their
corresponding original sin – though not human nature which is how she can
partake of the good in human nature without being tainted by the evil. In this
way, these instants set up Mary of Agreda’s goal of depicting Mary as the
perfect human, a divine human, someone we can understand because while we can’t
grasp divinity – being mere humans – it is much easier to grasp a human who
displays perfectly divine characteristics through whom or by whom we can begin to
penetrate, as far as we are able, the mysteries of God. The Virgin Mary is the immaculate
astrolabe – for what is the use of an astrolabe if it is not perfectly accorded
with the stars – so likewise Mary of Agreda’s theological treatise on the
divine naturally traces the terrestrial life of the Virgin.
-LDD
-LDD
The astrolabe metaphor is a beautiful one, I can see why you've found it so striking, and I think you're right to see Mary as operating in a similar manner for Sister Mary. I liked also your contention at the end that Mary proves to be more "graspable" than Christ because she mirrors the divine attributes within the human frame, it seems an elegant answer to the question of why Marian devotion was so prominent and why these theologians devoted so much space to her. Do these divine attributes that we see mirrored in Mary also pull her further away from us, however, making her ultimately just as ungraspable as her son? What does Sister Mary offer us to help mitigate this? Or perhaps, we can see what Louis encourages with Marian prayer in our other reason as in part an attempt to both bridge this gap and make visible the mirror that is the Virgin.
ReplyDeleteI, too, like the astrolabe metaphor very much! (And, of course, the Silmarils!) I also found your discussion of the various instants of creation in the mind of God especially helpful for thinking through what Sor Maria seems to be claiming about Mary as the Immaculate Conception: how it is not only fitting, but necessary that, as the one pointing us to God (as star of the sea or astrolabe), Mary must have existed in the mind of God before the prefiguration of the fall or even the angels. (This makes me think of that other creation story, in which the Ainur sing the song of creation based on the themes that Iluvatar has proposed...) Perhaps this is another way of thinking, too, about why Mary is so helpful to us in giving us a way to think about God: without Mary, we cannot see the order of creation as clearly; Mary mirrors the thoughts as well as the words and actions of God. RLFB
ReplyDeleteThere are quite a few aspects of Marian devotion that remind me of certain beliefs and images in Islam. It would be interesting to study the correspondences there. Mirrors are frequent images in mystical strands of Islam and holy people in Islam are called "Friends of God," like Mary. I'm curious about the extent of influence on Marian devotion by Islam, particularly in Spain. The angels in the Mystical City of God seem to rely on a well-developed mythos or "angelology" that could probably be traced to a lot of different sources, including Judaism and Islam. (In the Qur'an, God creates angels before humans and makes them bow before Adam. One of them refuses to bow and "falls" like Lucifer.) Most of all, I see correspondences between Mary and Muhammad, because they are both defined simultaneously by their humanity and their exceptional status. Neither is an object of worship on the level of God, but they are perhaps more special because of their proximity to other humans despite their incredible importance. Some similarities are coincidences, I'm sure, but I also suspect there was a lot of borrowing and theological posturing between the two religions as Marian devotion developed. - JF
ReplyDelete