When Fundamentalists study the writings of the “Reformers” (or the founders of their particular sects) on Mary, the Mother of Jesus, they will discover that these Reformers accepted almost every major Marian doctrine and regarded those doctrines as both scriptural and fundamental to the historic Christian faith. A careful examination of the writings of figures such as Martin Luther, John Calvin, and other early leaders of the Reformation reveals that their approach to Mary was far more nuanced than is often assumed today. Although they challenged certain medieval expressions of Marian devotion and rejected the idea of invoking Mary as a mediator of grace, they did not generally reject Mary herself or the central doctrines concerning her place in salvation history.
The Reformers continued to affirm Mary’s unique role as the Mother of God (Theotokos), a title that had been defended by the early Church as a safeguard of the truth about Christ’s divine and human natures. They also maintained beliefs such as Mary’s perpetual virginity and honoured her as the chosen vessel through whom the Son of God entered the world. For many of the Reformers, reverence toward Mary was not viewed as a distraction from Christ but as a consequence of recognising the extraordinary grace God bestowed upon her.
The Marian teachings of the early Reformers were deeply connected to their Christological convictions. Their honouring of Mary was ultimately an affirmation of who Christ is: truly God and truly man. Since Mary gave birth to the incarnate Word, the honour attributed to her was understood in relation to the dignity of her Son. As many early Christian writers had taught, Mary’s greatness was not independent of Christ but derived entirely from the grace of God and her unique participation in the mystery of the Incarnation.
The contrast between the Marian beliefs of many original Reformers and the attitudes found among some later Protestant groups raises important questions about the development of Christian teaching after the Reformation. The widespread rejection or neglect of Marian doctrine among certain Fundamentalist communities represents not simply a continuation of all Reformation principles, but also the influence of later historical, theological, and cultural developments.
A renewed study of the Reformers’ own writings therefore provides an important historical perspective. It reveals that devotion to Mary was not originally regarded by many Reformers as incompatible with biblical Christianity. Rather, their Marian beliefs formed part of a broader Christian tradition in which Mary’s role was understood in relation to God’s plan of salvation and, above all, to the person and mission of Jesus Christ.
Martin Luther
Mary the Mother of God
Throughout his life Luther maintained without change the historic Christian affirmation that Mary was the Mother of God:
“She is rightly called not only the mother of the man, but also the Mother of God…It is certain that Mary is the Mother of the real and true God.”
Perpetual Virginity
Again, throughout his life, Luther maintained that Mary’s perpetual virginity was an article of faith for all Christians, and he interpreted Galatians 4:4 to mean that Christ was “born of a woman” alone.
“It is an article of faith that Mary is the Mother of the Lord and still a Virgin.”
The Immaculate Conception
Yet again, the Immaculate Conception was a doctrine that Luther defended until his death (as confirmed by Lutheran scholars such as Arthur Carl Piepkorn). Like St. Augustine, Luther saw an unbreakable link between Mary’s divine maternity, perpetual virginity, and Immaculate Conception. Although his formulation of the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception was not entirely clear-cut, he held that her soul was free from sin from the very beginning:
“But the other conception, namely, the infusion of the soul, is piously and suitably believed to have been without any sin, so that, at the very moment the soul was being infused, she would at the same time be cleansed from original sin and adorned with the gifts of God to receive the holy soul thus infused. And thus, in the very moment in which she began to live, she was without all sin.”
Assumption
Although he did not make it an article of faith, Luther said of the doctrine of the Assumption:
“There can be no doubt that the Virgin Mary is in heaven. How it happened we do not know.”
Honour to Mary
Despite his unremitting criticism of the traditional doctrines of Marian mediation and intercession, Luther continued to proclaim until the end of his life that Mary should be honoured. He made it a point to preach on her feast days.
“The veneration of Mary is inscribed in the very depths of the human heart.”
“Is Christ only to be adored? Or is the holy Mother of God rather not to be honoured? This is the woman who crushed the Serpent’s head. Hear us. For your Son denies you nothing.”
Luther made this statement in his last sermon at Wittenberg in January 1546.
John Calvin
It has been said that John Calvin belonged to the second generation of the Reformers, and certainly his theology of double predestination governed his views on Marian and all other Christian doctrines. Although Calvin was not as profuse in his praise of Mary as Martin Luther, he did not deny her perpetual virginity. The term he most commonly used in referring to Mary was “Holy Virgin.”
“Elizabeth called Mary the Mother of the Lord because the unity of the person in the two natures of Christ was such that she could have said that the mortal man engendered in Mary’s womb was, at the same time, the eternal God.”
“Helvidius has shown himself to be too ignorant in saying that Mary had several sons because mention is made in some passages of the brothers of Christ.”
Calvin translated “brothers” in this context to mean cousins or relatives:
“It cannot be denied that God in choosing and destining Mary to be the Mother of his Son, granted her the highest honour.”
“To this day we cannot enjoy the blessing brought to us in Christ without thinking at the same time of that which God gave as adornment and honour to Mary, in willing her to be the mother of his only-begotten Son.”
Ulrich Zwingli
“It was given to her what belongs to no creature, that in the flesh she should bring forth the Son of God.”
“I firmly believe that Mary, according to the words of the gospel as a pure Virgin brought forth for us the Son of God and in childbirth and after childbirth forever remained a pure, intact Virgin.”
Zwingli used Exodus 4:22 to defend the doctrine of Mary’s perpetual virginity:
“I esteem immensely the Mother of God, the ever chaste, immaculate Virgin Mary.”
“Christ…was born of a most undefiled Virgin.”
“It was fitting that such a holy Son should have a holy Mother.”
“The more the honour and love of Christ increases among men, much the esteem and honour given to Mary should grow.”
We might wonder why the Marian affirmations of the Reformers did not survive in the teaching of their heirs, particularly among Fundamentalists. This break with the past did not come through any new discovery or revelation, nor was it the result of a direct rejection of everything that had preceded it. Rather, it developed gradually through a combination of theological, cultural, and historical influences that shaped later generations of Protestant Christianity. The Reformers themselves (see above) took a benign, and in many cases even positive, view of Marian doctrine, although they did reject the concept of Marian mediation because of their broader rejection of all human mediation in the work of salvation.
It is important to recognize that the Reformers’ criticisms were not directed primarily against Mary herself but against certain practices and theological interpretations that they believed obscured the unique mediation of Christ. Their concern was fundamentally Christological: they wished to safeguard the truth that Christ alone is the Redeemer and the sole Mediator between God and humanity. Nevertheless, this concern did not prevent many of them from maintaining a profound respect for Mary and from affirming several traditional Marian doctrines inherited from the ancient Church.
Moreover, while there were certainly some excesses in popular Marian piety during the late medieval period, Marian doctrine as taught in the pre-Reformation era drew its inspiration from the witness of Scripture, the testimony of the Fathers, and the Church’s reflection upon the mystery of Christ. The central Marian teachings concerning her divine motherhood, perpetual virginity, and unique role in salvation history were not isolated developments but were rooted in Christology. They arose from contemplation of the mystery of the Incarnation and the identity of Jesus Christ as true God and true man.
The real reason for the break with this earlier tradition must therefore be attributed not simply to a careful re-examination of Scripture but also to the iconoclastic tendencies of some followers of the Reformation and to the consequences of certain Reformation principles when applied more broadly by later generations. The rejection of images, saints, traditional devotions, and aspects of historic Christian worship sometimes developed into a wider suspicion of anything associated with medieval Catholic practice, including authentic expressions of Marian devotion.
Even more influential in the movement away from Marian devotion was the rise of the Enlightenment era, which introduced intellectual currents that questioned or denied many of the mysteries of Christian faith. As rationalism became increasingly influential, doctrines dependent upon revelation, tradition, and the supernatural character of Christianity were often subjected to criticism. Within this changing intellectual environment, devotion to Mary was frequently interpreted not as a reflection of Christian belief but as a later addition that needed to be removed.
Unfortunately, the Marian teachings and preaching of the Reformers have, in many cases, been “covered up” by their most zealous followers, with damaging theological and practical consequences. This “cover-up” can be detected even in Chosen by God: Mary in Evangelical Perspective, an Evangelical critique of Mariology. One of the contributors acknowledges that “most remarkable to modern Protestants is the Reformers’ almost universal acceptance of Mary’s continuing virginity and their widespread reluctance to declare Mary a sinner.” He then asks whether it is “a favourable providence” that kept these Marian teachings of the Reformers from being “transmitted to the Protestant churches.”
This observation raises an important question about how historical developments are interpreted. What is understood as “Providence” by a Marian critic may legitimately be interpreted as a force of a very different kind by a Christian who recognizes the role of Mary in God’s plan of salvation. From this perspective, the disappearance of certain Marian beliefs from parts of Protestant Christianity is not necessarily seen as a providential correction, but rather as the result of historical circumstances, theological shifts, and cultural influences that separated later generations from aspects of the broader Christian tradition.
For Christians who continue to affirm Mary’s place within God’s plan, authentic Marian devotion is not a rival to devotion to Christ but a consequence of it. Mary’s significance is entirely dependent upon her Son; she is honoured because of what God accomplished through her. As the Mother of the Lord, she points believers toward the mystery of Christ and invites them, as she did at Cana, to “do whatever He tells you” (John 2:5).
Thus, a recovery of a balanced understanding of Mary requires neither exaggeration nor neglect. It requires returning to the Christ-centred vision that shaped much of early Christian reflection on Mary: that she is honoured not apart from Christ, but because of Christ; not as an alternative to the Gospel, but as one of its most profound witnesses.
Discover more from Chavez Cyrillus Mariae Poon
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
