Maternal Love for the Divine: Journal of Vaishnava Studies

Abstract

Given my topic, “Mary’s Maternal Love for Her Divine Son in the Context of Vaishnava Bhakti," an important condition for drawing
conclusions should be an answer to the question, “Is there a Mary?” Several years ago, I was nonplused during a muddled faculty discussion of the merits of the apparitions of Medjugorje. It occurred to me to ask my colleagues to clarify a necessary condition for an authentic apparition, namely, the present existence of Mary of Nazareth. If Mary does not presently exist, then the question of the authenticity or non-authenticity of an apparition takes on an entirely different character. In this case, an authentic apparition would be one that says the right thing, not whether there is really someone speaking or appearing. Actually, given the negative beliefs
of my colleagues, if Mary does presently exist, then the authenticity or nonauthenticity of an apparition takes on an entirely different character. An authentic apparition would then be one that would need to be correctly heard or seen, because someone really spoke or appeared. I have no doubt that there was a Mary of Nazareth, mother of Jesus of Nazareth, but will assume, on Christian creedal grounds, that there is a Mary of Nazareth. This will involve me in somewhat of a bind since many of the approaches of
my treatment of the material will be shared with scholars like Marina Warner, Rosemary Reuther, Daphne Hampson, Julia Kristeva, and
Sarah Coakley. These approaches, based on the history of religions, comparative mythology, feminist theology, and psychoanalysis, produce both negative and positive evaluations and conclusions. I will ignore the negative evaluations and conclusions since I judge that the “negativity” of many of these conclusions derives, whether consciously or not, from a negative judgment about whether Mary of Nazareth presently exists. If Mary does not exist, then negative conclusions would have to be considered. This article will treat first, “Love for God in relation to Gender”; second, “Love for God in Vaishnava Bhakti”; third, “Maternal Love for Krishna”; fourth, “Preliminary Conclusions: Love, Narrative, and Imagination”; and fifth, “A Christian’s Conclusions: Mary’s Maternal Affection for Jesus and Ours.”