The great central fact of The Blessed Virgin Mary is the evangelical rediscovery of the Fathers, the joyful excitement of returning ad fontes, building on the foundation of that great evangelical Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture. Writing first of all for an evangelical audience, they defend their chief focus on the patristic testimony on Mary: ”˜The Fathers are the heritage of the undivided Church. They teach all Christians, in both method and content, how to wrestle with the primary data of the Church’s teaching, Holy Scripture.” Kendall and Perry cogently reveal how the biblical writings about Mary form a coherent basis for the doctrinal emphases about her that emerge subsequently and rightly insist that the Fathers brought Western Mariology to its mature form. Whatever medieval and modern developments take place, the fundamental shape of Marian theology remains unaltered.
I wish I could tell from this what elements of ‘Mariology’ are being affirmed and why? 1) Virgin Birth, 2) Perpetual Virginity, 3) Theotokos language, 4) Immaculate Conception of Mary ‘from her mother Ann’, 5) bodily assumption, 6) Mary is intercessor. Obviously ‘creedal Christians’ can affirm 1 and 3 (and Calvin, eg., assumed 2 on the basis of scripture) and so join up with the Early Church. Luther can struggle to know what to do with his own personal legacy in the realm of 4, given the late Middle Ages piety that is his own and that he is sorting through. I guess the question I would have liked to have seen discussed is how a higher estimate of Mary translates into worship and piety, as against doctrinal concerns (Barth could press 1 and 3 hard at this point). I guess one needs to read the books reviewed for answers.