by Rev. Michael O’Carroll, C.S.Sp.
Coredemptrix Mediatrix Advocate
Towards a Papal Definition?
Back to Table of Contents
A Marian Dogma and Ecumenism
Fr. O’Carroll has written widely on theological and ecumenical
topics and is an internationally known Mariologist. He is a member
of the Pontifical Marian Academy, the French Society for Marian Studies,
and an Associate of the Bollandistes.
If one extends the scope of
this title to take in the world religions we get a theological panorama
truly worthy of the one whose destiny concerns us. Let us begin
with a brief survey of personalities. Because Catholic doctrine
and devotion centred on Our Lady are known to cause problems for
our separated brethren in the West, one would expect Catholics committed
to ecumenism to show a faint or muted interest in Marian theology,
and to avoid altogether such ideas as Mary’s mediation. With some
highly committed and gifted individuals it has been the exact opposite.
The first important ecumenical initiative
since the Reformation was the Malines conversations between Lord
Halifax and Cardinal Mercier. They ended in an official vacuum,
but they remain exemplary. Mercier was the one who launched a campaign
to obtain a dogmatic definition of Mary’s universal mediation: he
did secure a Mass and Office with this title and the establishment
of three commissions to study the matter. His successor in the see
of Malines-Brussels, Leon Joseph Cardinal Suenens, was in his mould.
In two works, The Theology of the Apostolate and Mary,
Mother of God, he defended the doctrine of mediation; he was
a principal support to the Ecumenical Society of the Blessed Virgin
Mary, as of the Charismatic Renewal Movement. His great moment was
at Pentecost, 1975; he was patron to the International Charismatic
Congress and Papal Legate to the International Marian Congress running
Frank Duff, founder of the Legion
of Mary, whose prayer is directed to Mary, Mediatrix of All Graces,
was one of those who initiated the first inter-faith society in
Ireland since the Reformation, named The Mercier Society.
Despite a prestigious membership, enthusiasm and erudition abounding,
it was suppressed. When the Archbishop of Dublin sought instruction
from the Holy Office he was told that one condition would have to
be that the Protestants should not be allowed to defend their opinions.
Society members were without bitterness then and triumphalism later
when Vatican II fully endorsed the project. Friendships remained,
for me among many, that with Bishop Richard Hanson, one of the greatest
of recent patrologists, whose opus magnum, The Search for the
Christian God, published after his death, was dedicated to a
French Jesuit, Fr. Crouzel. To the names of the Catholic Marian
and ecumenical specialists, should be added that of a great Bishop
of Lausanne, Geneva and Fribourg, Marius Besson. His beautiful book
on Our Lady had been preceded by two ecumenical works which have
been shamefully neglected, La Route Aplanie and Après
Quatre Cents Ans. He was the first bishop in Europe who ordered
use of the words "nos frères séparés" in regard
to Protestants. Looking beyond the Catholic communion, one should
consider Sergius Bulgakov, ornament of the St. Serge Institute in
Paris; of him we shall discuss later.
To address the main subject of this
paper let us draw attention first to the materials available. Fr.
Karl Balic, O.F.M., trained in scholarly research, as his edition
of the works of Duns Scotus shows, first President of the Pontifical
Marian Academy, edited before the Second Vatican Council, a massive
work on Mariology and Ecumenism. It is invaluable. With it one should
consult the reports of the round table conferences which marked
the meetings of the International Mariological Congresses from Zagreb
to Huelva (1971-1992). The excellent Claretian review, Ephemerides
Mariologicae, brought out in 1992 a special issue on Mariology
in Ecumenical Dialogue.
Let us begin with the Orthodox. There
are two interesting references to Mary’s mediation. The Ecumenical
Patriarch, Bartholomew I, on whose life and writings I am preparing
a book, with his authorization, paid an official visit to the French
hierarchy assembled in Lourdes. In the sermon on Our Lady which
he preached he spoke of her mediation, as between us and the perfect
mediation of Christ. The second reference pertains to an account
of the apparitions of Our Lady at Zeitoun in Egypt, which were evaluated
by the Coptic Patriarch. In the booklet relating the happenings,
issued with his approval, is found a reference to our Lady’s mediation.
No inhibition here, as it was taken for granted.
This is true to a great tradition.
There are those in the West who think that the exponents of Our
Lady’s mediation have been St. Louis Marie Grignion de Montfort
and St. Alphonsus de Ligouri, with little thought of the Oriental
Churches. From these the evidence is clear, overwhelming. Thanks
to the work of the late, regretted John Meyendorff, we have been
enlightened on the teaching of St. Gregory Palamas (d. 1359) and
the others of his time who are generally characterized as the Palamite
theologians. Some quotation from Gregory is apposite. He saw Mary
as central, with her divine Son, in the whole of creation:
Mary is the cause of what had gone
before her, the pioneer of what has come after her; she distributes
eternal goods; she is the thought of the prophets, the head of the
Apostles, the support of martyrs, the certainty of doctors. She
is the glory of earth, the joy of heaven, the ornament of all creation.
She is the principle, the source and the root of ineffable good
things. She is the summit and the fulfillment of all that is holy.
Gregory’s idea of Mary’s mediation
is not open to doubt or question. It is implicit in his theory of
her destiny, her place in creation. It is made explicit:
No divine gifts can reach either angels
or men, save through her mediation. As one cannot enjoy the light
of a lamp....save through the medium of this lamp, so every movement
towards God, every impulse towards good coming from him, is unrealizable
save through the mediation of the Virgin. She does not cease to
spread benefits on all creatures, not only on us men, but on the
celestial, incorporeal ranks.
Let us look at the other members of
the Palamite quartet. Isidore Glabas (d.c. 1397) carried Byzantine
praise of Mary to its loftiest peak—beyond the permissible limit,
his critics would say. For him Mary was at the centre of the universe.
He thought that all that was and is and will be came into being
because of her. With his daring exaltation of her went naturally
an affirmation of her important role in our salvation: "And truly
the Virgin, without doubt was for all a cause of restoration to
a better state." Because of her, God freed the human race from the
sentence of condemnation, and man reached the likeness of God. Through
her our regeneration is accomplished. No one approaches the Father
save by the new Offspring; no one approaches him save through his
The Mariology of Nicholas Cabasilas
(b.c. 1320, d.c. 1396) is known to us since the great Orientalist,
Martin Jugie, A.A., published his relevant homilies in 1926; he
has been esteemed as a theologian of the Eucharist. He assumed the
central tents of the Palamites: all creation is centred on the Incarnation.
Mary he thought of as the "saint of saints" and said that "she opened
the door of holiness to others, being excellently prepared to receive
the Saviour." His comment of the Annunciation is very forceful:
The incarnation of the Word was not
only the work of the Father, of his power and of his Spirit, but
was also the work of the will and faith of the Virgin; without the
consent of the Immaculate One, without the contribution of her faith,
this was as unrealizable as without the intervention of three divine
Eve, Cabasilas thought, helped Adam,
but Mary helped God. She was his most suitable cooperator. "Being
assumed as a helper, not simply to contribute something as one of
those moved by another, but that she should give herself and become
the fellow-worker (sunergos) of God in providing for the
human race, so that with him she should be an associate and sharer
in the glory which would come from it." He makes it clear that the
partnership should be "in all the sufferings and affliction. He,
bound on the Cross, received the lance in his side; the sword, as
divinely inspired Simeon foretold, pierced her heart."
Cabasilas says that Mary was our Advocate
with God before the Paraclete came. He ends the third homily with
an epilogue which glorifies her as salvation of men, light of the
world, way to the Redeemer, co-cause with Christ, the cause of our
We now come to the greatest of the
Palamites in regard to Our Lady’s mediation, Theophanes of Nicaea
(d. 1381). Fr. Martin Jugie, who introduced him to the scholarly
world by publishing his Sermo in Sanctissimam Deiparam, thought
him the greatest exponent of Mary’s mediation. He distinguishes
two moments in creation, being in itself and well-being. The second,
to which the first is designed, is achieved through divinization
and of this the source is the Incarnation. Through the divine motherhood
Mary is intrinsically bound with the entire reality. The first receptacle
of the divine fullness is the assumed nature of the Saviour, all
the fullness of the divinity. "But the living tabernacle which brought
him forth is acknowledged as the second receptacle, that is receiving
immediately from the first receptacle, the assumed nature of the
Saviour, all the fullness of divinity."
Mary’s mediation thus rooted in the
order of things is universal. "It cannot happen that anyone, of
angels or of men, may come otherwise, in any way whatsover, to participation
in the divine gifts flowing from what has been divinely assumed,
from the Son of God, save through his Mother." Theophanes emphasizes
the Trinitarian perspective, studying Mary in relation to each of
the divine Persons: with the Father, whose mirror image and all-fair
Spouse she is, she is linked by their common Son. While repeating
that Mary and her divine Son each retain their identity, Theophanes
elaborates powerfully the astonishing union between them, closer
than any association described by western authors.
Born of sterile parents she was "from
the orgin of her existence united to the Spirit, the author of life.....participation
in the Spirit was for her participation in being and her conception
was the image and type of the conception of her Son."
Theophanes surprisingly uses an image
found in the West—Mary as the neck of the Mystical Body of Christ.
"Since then," he writes, "the Head of every principality and power
and of our Church is the only way that leads to the Father, so that
sacred neck is the only way leading to the Head of all." As the
fountain, the beginning of life "she receives wholly the hidden
grace of the Spirit and amply distributes it and shares it with
others, thus manifesting it." All things were created for her and
are governed through her. No one attains the fullness and goal of
life in Christ "without her cooperation or without the Spirit’s
Theophanes links the doctrine with
that of the spiritual motherhood:
The Mother of him who through his
unspeakable goodness willed to be called our brother is the dispenser
and distributor of all the wondrous gifts of the divine Spirit,
which make us Christ’s brother and co-heirs, not only because she
is granting the gifts of her natural Son to his brothers in grace,
but also because she is bestowing them on these as her own true
sons, though not by ties of nature but of grace.
Germanus in the East before him, Bernard,
Bernardine or Grignion de Montfort in the West, have not been anymore
explicit than this on Mary’s universal mediation. Political vicissitudes
would affect continuity of doctrine in the Orthodox East. In the
fifteenth century, however, one name stood out, that of George Scholarios
(d. after 1472), a student of western theologians, involved in the
conciliar search for unity. On the question of Mary’s mediation
we may quote such words as these:
How should you not be blessed, you
who not only completely escaped the iniquities of the first curse,
but will deliver others from these iniquities....And as the same
of the curse taking its origin from a woman brought ruin to human
nature, in the same way now through you the treasure of blessing
will be shared with others and you will become the seed of a new
life and the beginning of men truly worthy of the name.
Scholarios says that "she cooperated
with God in giving us eternal life, filling the role of an appropriate
What of modern Orthodox teaching?
Officially things hardened in regard to the dogmas, especially of
the Immaculate Conception; about the Assumption, mostly supported
by eastern testimonies from the early centuries, there was dissatisfaction
with the refusal to affirm the death of Our Lady, as well as a certain
irritation at Catholic dogmatic pronouncements.
To find Orthodox theologians committed
to Marian theology one should look at the teachers of the St. Serge
Institute in Paris. Let us briefly look to a giant among them, Sergius
Bulgakov (d. 1944) and take note of an Orthodox theologian in Romania.
It is important to note that liturgical and personal prayer to the
Theotokos have never waned, do not depend on systematic theology,
nor does one have to recall the immense role of the Icons.
Bulgakov linked his theology of Mary
with his sophiological outlook and sees with it her special relationship
with the Holy Spirit:
The Annunciation was a complete and
therefore hypostatic descent of the Holy Spirit and his entry to
the Virgin Mary...By his coming into the Virgin Mary the Holy Spirit
identifies himself in a way with her through her God-motherhood...He
does not at all leave her after the birth of Christ, but remains
forever with her in the full force of the Annunciation.
In one work he is almost carried away
and thinks that the limits of the creature are passed in the deification
of Mary; her life of grace is the hypostatic life of the Holy Spirit.
In The Wisdom of God however, he rejects the idea of an incarnation
of the Holy Spirit and says: "He abides, however, in the ever-Virgin
Mary as in a holy temple, while her human personality seems to become
transparent to him and to provide him with a human countenance."
The Russian expatriate sees Mary as
our Mediatrix: "Living in heaven in a state of glory the Virgin
remains the Mother of the human race for which she prays and intercedes.
She covers the world with her veil, praying, weeping for the sins
of the world; at the Last Judgment she will intercede before her
Son and ask pardon from him." All this derives its value "from her
Fiat, repeated on Calvary and from her unique relationship with
A committed ecumenist, member of Faith
and Order, Bulgakov insisted on the importance of thinking on Our
Protestantism differs in almost equal
measure from both Orthodoxy and Catholicism. Love and veneration
for the Virgin is the soul of Orthodox piety, its heart, that which
warms and animates its entire body. A faith in Christ which does
not include his virgin birth and the veneration of his Mother is
another faith from that of the Orthodox Church.
He saw the Old Testament as a preparation
for "a holy humanity worthy to receive the Holy Spirit, that is
worthy of the Annunciation in the person of the Virgin."
A little more recently than Bulgakov
a nonagenarian Romanian theologian, Professor D. Staniloae expounded
the mediation of Our Lady, giving her also the title Praying One.
We are faced in the Orthodox world with a dislike of dogmatic statements,
a large question which we can scarcely deal with here.
With the massive Orthodox testimony
which I have briefly reviewed, it is deeply regrettable that the
drafting commission of Chapter VIII, Lumen Gentium ignored
it. When the great Orientalist, Antoine Wenger, A.A., submitted
a memo on the importance of the mediation in the eastern Church,
he was "called to moderation" by the secretary, Ch. Moeller. All
this is doubly regrettable since the rapprochement with Rome was
initiated by Athenagoras and continued by his successors, Dimitrios
and Bartholomaios, in the ecumenical patriarchate. We are sister
Churches since the lifting of the excommunication and anathemas
in 1965; John Paul II is making gigantic effort to achieve unity,
hoping that in the third millennium the Church (he uses the singular)
will breathe with its two lungs.
Ecumenism must also take account of
the Christians in the West separated from us since the sixteenth
century. What is the hope of a sympathetic reception from their
official and theological representatives for a dogma on Mary Coredemptrix,
Mediatrix and Advocate? I speak from long experience of dialogue
with Protestants, as well from Protestant family relations. There
are extremes to avoid. One is doctrinal compromise. This was responsible
for the regrettable silence of Vatican II on St. Joseph. Though
strictly relevant to many problems on the conciliar agenda—the theology
of work, the dignity of marriage, the call to holiness, the Church
and the Jews and especially the vocation of the Blessed Virgin Mary.
Under the influence of some periti the great Saint was ignored.
In the 100,000 words of conciliar documents his name occurs once,
in a quotation from the Roman Canon, Eucharistic Prayer I.
Were Protestants impressed? Let us
look to two not insignificant sources. Karl Barth was asked did
he have the same reservations about St. Joseph as about Our Lady.
"Not at all" he replied; "I love St. Joseph. I rejoiced when John
XIII inserted his name in the Roman Canon. I intend to ask Paul
VI to give him prominence," and then a memorable word, "He protected
the Child; he will protect the Church." More radically direct was
the very sharp criticism of the Marian text by J.J. von Almen of
Neuchatel University, Pastor of the Swiss Reformed Church, who held
that the Council had no right to eliminate St. Joseph. He was the
guarantor before Israel of the messianic tradition and he is the
model of male sanctity as is Our Lady of female holiness.
No, compromise does not win support.
Yet this other extreme has to be avoided as well: a kind of ruthless
disregard for the religious traditions and sensitivity of Protestants.
This calls for patience, honesty and humility. Five Catholic theologians,
including this author, were invited to investigate and report on
doctrinal and devotional attitudes towards Our Lady in the different
Christian communions in Ireland; we were to work with five ministers
from the separated Churches. It was found that total honesty was
possible with increasing trust and friendship. Invocation of Mary,
based on the assumption of her intercession was the difficulty,
as was the Unus Mediator text. This difficulty also occurred
in the round-table meetings at the International Mariological Congresses.
What can be done? Emphasis must be
given to the teaching of Vatican II which in dealing with Mary’s
mediation insists on its inner harmony with that of Christ: "the
unique mediation of the Redeemer does not exclude but rather gives
rise among creatures to a manifold cooperation which is but a sharing
in this unique source."
Much of the polemics in regard to
biblical Marian texts is conditioned by a) a lack of a sense of
mystery which leads to ultra-literal interpretation, and b) a legalistic
tendency towards limitation, rigid categories. The phrase Per
Mariam ad Jesum is feared by some as if Mary were an intruder,
an obstacle on the way to Jesus.
The Orientals have been free from
these restrictions. They do not interpret the work of salvation
in a legalistic sense, but insist on divinization as its core. One
would hope that in the years ahead the influence of the Orthodox
would be felt in the separated communions of the West. It would
benefit all of us for two reasons. The Orthodox have remained steadfast
in their traditions and they are profoundly attentive to the Holy
Spirit. One notices that in Orthodox sanctuaries there has not been
the ejection of the icons, as we have witnessed in regard to images
and statues of Our Lady in Catholic churches.
Secondly, we should hope that the
Orthodox would stimulate still more profound awareness of the Holy
Spirit and greater fidelity to his inspiration and impulse. Notice
how as by instinct Theophanes linked Mary’s mediation with the Holy
Spirit, how Sergius Bulgakov sought to probe the mystery of the
Spirit and Mary. As the fourth session of Vatican II was approaching,
a Greek theologian, Nikos Nissiotis, issued a challenge to the assembly.
In a resounding article he said in summary: if you do not teach
more about the Holy Spirit, your documents will have little or no
impact in the Orthodox world. Attempts were made in the fourth session
to remedy things. But after the Council Paul VI appealed to preachers
and theologians to add a theology of the Holy Spirit to the theology
of the Church and theology of Our Lady elaborated by Vatican II.
At the International Mariological
Congress in Huelva in 1992 Fr. Ignace de la Potterie, S.J. said
that the Catholic Church had gone through a "decade without Mary,"
a touch of hyperbole, he most likely would admit. It is reasonable
to assume he was thinking of the lean years from the end of the
Council to Marialis Cultus from Paul VI, 1974. But in that
decade the search for enlightened devotion to the Holy Spirit was
afoot. What could have been expected happened. Entry into the mystery
of the Holy Spirit confronts us with mystery of Mary. Were this
author asked to suggest a theme from which this congress would move
forward, it would be the theme of the Holy Spirit.
Let us delay on this proposal. We
are on the threshold of a mighty manifestation of the Spirit of
God. Theology is being renewed and the devotional life of the faithful
deepened under his inspiration and influence. It is not necessary
here to enter into details about the Charismatic Renewal Movement,
nor to survey the numerous apparitions of the Blessed Virgin Mary
currently reported, some of them already evaluated favourably. They
are not evidence that Our Lady is taking over the Church; they are
essentially evidence of charisms bestowed by the Spirit. Note that
the one who, in the wake of Vatican II, emphatically teaches the
doctrine of charisms, insisting that they are especially found among
the laity in our time, is John Paul II; this he has done in Christifideles
Laici and in several public discourses, on one occasion urging
acceptance of these "special graces" among members of the other
Christian churches. It is a fact that John Paul is, in teaching
and practice, a Pope of the Holy Spirit. He has published more on
the Third Divine Person than all his predecessors taken together.
A revealing fact pertinent to the dogma in relation to ecumenism
is this: Pius XI’s Encyclical, Mortalium Animos, 1928, on
this subject has not one single reference to the Holy Spirit; John
Paul II’s Ut Unum Sint, speaks of the Holy Spirit twenty
The present Pope has also fully espoused
the interpretation of the life and mission of Jesus Christ as a
masterpiece of the Spirit: what Cardinal Congar once said. "There
is no Christology without pneumatology; no pneumatology without
Christology." The "Forgotten Paraclete" spoken of by Mgr. Landrieux
in 1921, was forgotten even in the theology of Jesus Christ. We
fortunately are enlightened.
We should also be enlightened in regard
to Mary Coredemptrix, Mediatrix and Advocate by penetrating the
meaning of each in the light of the Holy Spirit. I would hope that
this would help to break down barriers between us and the Churches
of the Reformation. It would help to dissolve a mind-set; it would
lift the whole problem out of a polemical hardened enclosure, focusing
attention on God, and possibly satisfying the Protestant demand,
Deus solus, Christus solus, Fides sola. Nor
must it be forgotten that change does occur. Hans Asmussen was one
of the few Protestant theologians to write on Our Lady (with Max
Thurian and Neville Ward among a few others). He expressed his readiness
to accept Mary’s mediation "in Christ." The great patrologist, Richard
Hanson, gave a rather conservative Protestant lecture at the International
Congress of the ecumenical Society of the Blessed Virgin Mary in
Dublin, 1984. He was received with the utmost courtesy and sensitivity,
and leaving the Hall he said to me, "You’ve given me food for thought."
This he put in writing later.
In dealing with the separated Churches
of the Reformation we should not neglect history. Not many people
know that Luther wrote a book on the Magnificat, that the Caroline
divines kept Marian ideas alive during the seventeenth century.
Finally it is important to conduct dialogue on the interpretation
of Sacred Scripture, along the lines for example of the joint work,
Mary in the New Testament, the work of American biblical
The idea of co-redemption does not
occur explicitly in Orthodox writing, still less so in Anglican
or Lutheran theology. It is widely known that the big task is to
convince Anglicans, Lutherans, Calvinists, and some Orthodox, that
we do not mean equality by the prefix, "co.". It has been this author’s
experience in pastoral work with Anglicans, that it is difficult
to convince them that honour to Mary does not take something from
Jesus. Most Protestants also do not accept the idea of consecration
to Our Lady.
It would be well to enlarge the perspective
of this paper to include the world religions. Vatican II gave us
an example in this matter. It is fair to say that before the meetings
in Rome no one would have foreseen the Declaration on the Church
and the World Religions, nor on the sequel, the Pontifical Council
headed by Cardinal Arinze. Allow me to offer some suggestions as
the subject is vast and yet of prime importance. Our efforts to
secure official recognition for Mary’s titles of Coredemptrix, Mediatrix
and Advocate should not isolate us, in a kind of narrow theological
ghetto apart from the genuine religious intuitions and trends throughout
Let us begin with the most obvious
call, that of the Jewish people. We are living through an unusual
experience in the world of Catholic scholarship. We have discovered
after two thousand years the most obvious thing about Jesus Christ:
he was a Jew. At the inaugural address some years ago the American
Catholic Biblical Association spoke of the Jewishness of Jesus as
a challenge. There is a growing literature on the subject. But if
we can now write, as I have done, "God became a Jew," how shall
we interpret the life story and destiny of his Mother in strictly
Jewish terms? It must have a relevance, even to this subject matter.
Then there is Islam. It may or may
not be known that there are many exciting things in the sacred book,
the Koran, on Mary. Vatican II stated that the Muslims "honour,
the Virgin Mother of Jesus and at times they call on her with devotion."
It may be known that a sentence in the Koran taken with a famous
Hadith seems to imply the Immaculate Conception: "Every newly-born
son of Adam is touched by Satan, save the Son of Mary and his Mother."
This continues to be open to further research.
Those who wish to pursue the theme
of Mary in comparative religion have an excellent guide in Jean
(later Cardinal) Danielou’s study which appeared in the first volume
of Hubert du Manoir’s encyclopedic work, Maria. He deals
with a delicate subject: to what extent the cult of mother-goddesses
prepared the way for Mary’s sublime role. It is certain that the
most meaningful title of Mary, Theotokos, originated in Egypt.
And here Christian thinking and verbal composition was influenced
by the existence of the title Mother of God for Isis in regard to
Orus; the adaptation was possibly first made in Coptic. The differences
between Mary and Isis were well clarified: she was the "the handmaid
of the Lord," the chaste Virgin whose Son was true God and true
man, whereas Isis was seen as a goddess, one who conceived her Son
in passion, entirely removed from the mysterious destiny of the
This certainly represents a light
sketching of subjects which demand a vast canvas. I do want to suggest
strongly that we must open out the perspective in which we contemplate
the Marian dogma; we must give it cosmic dimensions to show the
validity of the words "all graces" and the relevance of the Council’s
statement: "She was exalted by the Lord as Queen of all, in order
that she might be more thoroughly conformed to her Son, the Lord
of lords (cf. Apoc 19:16), and the conqueror of sin and death."
In facing honestly the ecumenical
situation I would like to say that I retain strong hope for this
very reason. It was St. Augustine who first used the title "Mother
of Unity" (Mater Unitatis) in regard to Our Lady. There are
signs of change in the separated churches of the West; in a church
in a Scandinavian country, probably for the first time, a statue
of Our Lady was set in place. Walsingham, the English shrine of
Our Lady is ecumenical in character. Feminism of the authentic type
will orient thought towards the model of female greatness and virtue.
It was a nineteenth-century rationalist, W.E. Lecky, who saw Our
Lady as the one who significantly molded medieval culture in its
greatest moment. One of the two most beautiful pieces of sculpture
in London is "The Mother and Child," in Cavendish Square, work of
the Jewish sculptor, Jacob Eppstein. Fr. Rene Laurentin has published,
years after the war, the magnificent tribute to the Mother of God
composed in a prison camp for Catholic priests by Jean Paul Sartre,
known as an atheist, Sartre allowed the publication. I have utter
confidence that the "Woman adorned with the Sun" will manifest her
dignity and especially her power to our friends in the other communions.