In a recent volume, one Latter-day Saint author wrote the following:
Mary, the Divine
. . . In order for Jesus to be wholly free from any taint of original sin, Jesus, of necessity, needed to be born free of this inheritance. The doctrine of Mariology is unique to Roman Catholicism and includes these qualities to the nature of the mother of Jesus:
· Mary’s immaculate conception means that she was born without original sin and remained sinless throughout her life.
· During her tutelage in the temple as a child, Mary received almost nightly visits by angels.
· Mary’s perpetual virginity asserts that she had no children before or after Him.
· Mary received a physical ascension into heaven. Because of her sinlessness, Mary never experienced a physical death—the result of sin. Instead, she was raised bodily into the presence of Christ.
· Mary is crowned as Co-Redeemer and Co-Mediator of all graces. The obedience and sufferings of Mary were essential to secure the full redemption bought by Christ.
· Mary earned a right of veneration and worship . . . There are three specific terms of worship in Catholicism: latria adoration that is due God alone, dulia-veneration afforded to the saints and hyperdulia-special veneration given to Mary. In practice, these become practically indistinguishable in relation to Catholic devotion to Mary. As a matter of point, Catholics pray to Mary and expects that she hears and answers all such prayers. This elevates her to a position of deity. (Ronald R. Zollinger, The Pathway of Mormonism: An Investigation into the Latter-day Saint Culture of Consecration [CreateSpace, 2017], 116-17, italics in original, bold added for emphasis)
There are many problems with the presentation of Catholic Mariology.
Firstly, Mariology is not unique to Catholicism. All groups within the broad Christian spectrum have a Mariology, Latter-day Saints included. In the case of Latter-day Saints and many others, it is a “low” Mariology in comparison to the “high” Mariology of Roman Catholicism. Furthermore, other groups have a “high” Mariology, too, such as the Eastern Orthodox who believe Mary was a perpetual virgin, hold that she was either sinless or free from any major sins, believe in her Dormition (“falling asleep”) and whose liturgy teaches the Assumption, as well as seeing her heavenly intercession.
Secondly, while apocryphal sources (e.g., the Protoevangelium of James) have fanciful stories about Mary’s youth (e.g., visitation of angels; her being a consecrated temple virgin), such is not part of Catholic doctrine, let alone dogma, about Mary. Granted, Catholics appeal to such sources to support beliefs such as the perpetual virginity, but not everything in this and other apocryphal source discussing Mary is privileged by Catholics (e.g., Aquinas referred of the Protoevangelium of James as being “apocryphal ravings”).
Third, Mary, in Catholic dogma, was assumed into heaven; she did not ascend into heaven. There is a difference: Mary was passive, ergo, she was assumed, unlike Jesus who went to heaven by his own divine power in Acts 1:11.
Fourthly, against on the Assumption, the dogma does not state Mary did not die. The papal bull dogmatising the Assumption, Munificentissimus Deus, states that:
[It is] a divinely revealed dogma: that the Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory.
The question of whether Mary died or not is not discussed, and one can be a good, faithful Catholic while holding to either perspective. Indeed, before dogmatizing the Bodily Assumption, Pius XII established a theological commission to see if “tradition” evidenced one perspective over another (the “mortalist” vs. “immortalist” camps), with the commission concluding there was no hard or fast answer to such a question, one reason why the scientific definition of the dogma does not address the question of Mary’s death.
Fifthly, claiming that Catholics “worship” Mary and that they basically view her as “divine” and the like are arguments that generate more heat than light. Yes, functionally, the (hyper) dulia and latria distinctions often break down, especially in popular Catholic piety (although the Eucharistic sacrifice of the Mass is only offered to God, not Mary, one key difference in veneration of deity and Mary in Catholicism). However, Mary is not elevated to deity and is seen as merely a creature (albeit, the most glorified creature in Catholic theology). Furthermore, in Catholic theology, God enables the saints in heaven (not just Mary) to hear prayers, so it is a form of divine enablement. If Zollinger debated an informed Catholic apologist on any of these issues (e.g, Trent Horn; Tim Staples; Robert Sungenis), he would be lucky to come out with a draw, and Mariology is the weak link on the Catholic’s armour.
Such misinformed criticisms of Catholic theology is one reason why I wrote a book on Mariology. For those who wish to know (1) what Catholics actually believe about Mariology and (2) how to actually interact with their best arguments (e.g., Sungenis; McHugh; Staples; Madrid), see:
