THE BLESSED VIRGIN IN

ORIGEN AND ST AMBROSE

By D O M AMBROSE AGIUS

T HERE is no need to emphasize the difficulty of

separating the strands of thought and literary
tradition that make up the pattern of the Blessed
Virgin in the popular concept of to-day. Like the
diverse elements of the English language they are tinged,
each one, with the history of an epoch. Two lines of
investigation however suggest themselves, which may
prove interesting to those who are attracted by literary
survivals and still more by devotion to the Blessed Virgin.
One is the tracing of certain outstanding ideas right down
the centuries. The other is the establishing of the
antiquity of the literary portrait of the Blessed Virgin
in the mind and devotion of the Church.
St Augustine, by the influence of his writings, not
unnaturally has been credited with the honour of being
Our Lady's chief champion, anyhow in the West. He
was not, however, the pioneer in this field. His inspira-
tion in thought, and often in word, is derived from St
Ambrose. It is not to be supposed that Augustine
concerned himself deeply with the Blessed Virgin before
his conversion, unless it can be shown that his mother
had some influence in this direction. But after his
association with St Ambrose, we find the devotional
thought, even in details, of the elder man reproduced
and built upon by his disciple.
St Ambrose, however, in the pell-mell of his career,
also drew inspiration from his predecessors. Enormous
as his influence was in standardising and systematising
devotion to the Blessed Virgin, it is a matter of some
interest to ascertain how far he is indebted to previous
writers in the same field. In brief, must Mariology
 I2
The Blessed Virgin in St Ambrose 7
(clumsy word!) be pushed back beyond Ambrose, and
how far back ?
Admittedly the Gospels contain the germ 1 of all
devotion to the Blessed Virgin. Familiar also from the
beginning was the notion of Mary as the Second Eve,
and the linking up of Our Lady with Redemption, at
least implicitly. But is it true that by the end of the
second century the Blessed Virgin figured largely in the
mind of the faithful and was a subject of frequent dis-
cussion ? The works of Origen would seem to give an
affirmative answer.
That Origen, besides being theologically unsound,
should have been inconsistent is hardly a matter of sur-
prise. He was the hustler of the ancient world. Even
an Edgar Wallace might have been embarrassed by the
" seven skilled amanuenses," working in relays, " as many
copyists and some female calligraphers." 2 But the
unfortunate result has been that Origen fell into two
notable errors concerning the Blessed Virgin, which,
though not unnatural at the time, have cast such a shadow
over his name that he seldom, if ever, receives credit for
the remarkable and devotional ideas concerning Our
Lady which he actually developed and promulgated.
It is beyond the scope of the present article to examine
these ideas in detail. Here an attempt will be made,
first to estimate the two false steps of Origen and to
show how St Ambrose dealt with them, and secondly to
summarize St Ambrose's own complete and shining ideal
of the Blessed Virgin and to indicate the cumulative
effect of assembling in order his fervent expressions. It
will be left to a future occasion to appreciate the relations
between Ambrose and Origen, and, subsequently, to

1
" Wir datiren sie aber in das Evangelium selbst zuriick." (Niessen
Mariologie Hieronymus, p. 29, note 10.)
2
Bardenhewer, Patrology, 1908, p. 136.
I
 The Downside Review
enquire if Origen is reflecting previous or contemporary
thought or is himself its brilliant inspiration.
Origen then went astray in denying the virginity " in
partu " ; and in imagining Our Lady to have sinned by
doubt on Calvary. These two errors will be considered
in order.
Even in fault Origen is not consistent. Neubert 1 says
he " denied the ' virginitas in partu ' materialiter, but
held it formaliter." In the Homily XIV on Luke
(P.G. xiii, 1834), Origen says: " ' W h e n the days of their
purification were accomplished.' ' Their ? ' Whose ?
If it had been said, ' because of her purification.' i.e.
Mary's, who had borne a child, the question would not
arise, and I would boldly assert that Mary, as being
human, had need of purification after delivery." Against
this may be set the Homily VIII in Levit. (P.G. xii,
493) where Mary is expressly declared immune from this
uncleanness of the Mosaic Law as being, not simply
" woman," but " virgin." We cannot explain the former
citation by the latter and say (with Huet) that " a purely
legal purification was intended by Origen in the homily
on Luke," because in the same context he says " matris
Domini eo tempore vulva reserata est, quo et partus
editus, quia sanctum uterum . . . ante nativitatem
Christi masculus omnino non tetigit." 2 (P.G. xiii,
1836-7).
The simplest explanation is, that having put forward
his first opinion (in the homily on Luke), where Christ
himself3 is declared stained by original sin, against the
common opinion4 of the time, Origen in the intervening
ten or fifteen years changed his opinion before writing
1 Marie dans I'Eglise Antiniceenne, p. 182.
2
Origen here departs from his master, Clement of Alexandria, and seems
not to have been followed by his pupil, Gregory Thaumaturgus.
3St Ambrose uses the Virgin Birth to disprove this. (P.L. xvi, 490).
* Ci. " temerarie forsitan videor dicere " and " audacter dicere," (P.G.
xiii, 1834).
 I2
The Blessed Virgin in St Ambrose 9
the homily on Leviticus. In any case he admits the
principle that the body chosen to serve the Word ought
to rest pure and virginal to the end (Horn, in Mat. x,
N.I7), (P.G. xiii, 878), but he was confused in the appli-
cation of this principle. Nor did the Protevangelium
Jacobi, which maintains the Virgin Birth, help him,
because of the undue stress laid upon its apocryphal ele-
ments by contemporary Christians.
St Ambrose comes down heavily on such vacillation.
" Sed de via perversitatis produntur dicere. ' Virgo
concepit, sed non virgo generavit.' Potuit ergo virgo
concipere, non potuit virgo generare, cum semper con-
ceptus praecedit, partus sequatur ? " (P.L. xvi, 1173,
B.) Or again, " quanta dementia funestorum latrantium
ut idem dicerent Christum ex Virgine non potuisse
generari, qui asserunt ex muliere editis humanorum
partubus pignorum virgines permanere." {ibidem).
However, St Ambrose was also a busy man. And in
the Commentary on Luke (P.L. xv, 1655) he says un-
guardedly that Christ " opened His mother's womb."
It is clear from the context (and from many other pass-
ages)1 that St Ambrose had in mind no loss of virginity
in partu. " Denique, non est aperta " he says decisively,
elsewhere (P.L. xvi, 335, B). But that the words should
appear at all was due to the unrecognised and uncorrected
influence of the original.
Origen's other blunder refers to Mary on Calvary.
" Even Peter the prince of the apostles made the three-
fold denial. What ! Are we to suppose that when the
apostles were scandalised, the Lord's mother was exempt
from scandal ? If she suffered not scandal in the Lord's
1
e.g., " Virginali fusus est partu, et genitalia virginitatis claustra non
solvit. Mansit intemeratum septum pudoris et inviolata integritatis
duravere signacula, cum exiret de virgine cujus altitudinem mundus
sustinere non posset." (P.L. xvi, 334 c.)
" Virgo portavit, quem mundus iste capere ac sustinere non potest."
(P.L. xvi, 1249c.) Cf. P.L. xvi, 424B, 867A.
•3° T h e Downside Review
passion, Jesus did not die for her sins. . . . And this it is
that Simeon now prophesies . . . even thee shall the
sword of unbelief pierce, and thou shalt be struck with
the spear of doubt, and thy thoughts shall tear thee
asunder." 1
Origen's great name led St Basil2 to speak of the
" scandal . . . both to the disciples and also to Mary
herself " (Ep. 260), and Cyril of Alexandria 3 to describe
Simeon's prophecy as " perhaps signifying the sorrow she
had on account of Christ" (Horn. In Occurs. Dni.).
In contrast, St Ambrose, in every type of his writings
(sermons, letters, exegesis) extols Mary's unfaltering
courage. " But Mary, as became the Mother of Christ,
when the apostles fled, still stood before the Cross,
gazing with tender eyes upon the wounds of her Son,
waiting, not for the death of her Son, but for the salvation
of the w o r l d " (P.L. xv, 1930 c). And again, " T h e r e
stood beside the Cross His mother. The men fled, she
stood fearless. . . . See whether the Mother of God
could lose her chastity who never lost her courage. . . .
She stood before a spectacle not unbecoming a mother,
for she feared not an execution. Her Son hung upon
the Cross, she offered herself to the persecutors."
(P.L. xvi, 333. See the whole passage.)4 From letters
extant between 5 Augustine and Paulinus of Nola,
Ambrose's disciples, it would seem that the prophecy
of Simeon was a subject frequently debated in St
Ambrose's circle.
And now for St Ambrose's ideal picture of the Blessed
Virgin, gathered from his writings and reproduced either
in his actual words or in a legitimate paraphrase.
1
In Luke, xvii. Translated by Livius. (B. V. in Fathers of First
Six Centuries, p. 149.) (P.G. xiii, 1845.)
2 P.G. xxxii, 967. Livius, op. cit., p. 162.
3
Livius, p. 153. P.G. lxxvii, 1049B.
* See also below for Mary as the first-fruits of redemption.
s P.L. xxxiii, 468—70, and 644.
 The Blessed Virgin in St Ambrose '3 1
The first enticement to study is the noble character
of the teacher. But what could be nobler than the
Mother of God ?' For she was adorned with grace by
all three Persons of the Blessed Trinity. This was the
source of her grace, which was not only unique, 2 but
beyond the power of human ingenuity to conceive,
unless illuminated by revelation. 3 . . . The Father* of
His own initiative ; the Son,5 seeking a pure resting place
on earth, yet choosing something heavenly rather than
earthly ; the Holy Spirit, 6 shaping the Incarnation ; all
co-operated to build up Mary's perfection ; so that,
apart from other considerations, the flesh of Christ
demands our esteem7 because it was taken from Mary.
No wonder that, possessing the Author of Grace, she
alone should merit to be hailed " Full of Grace," a title
unknown before or since.8
Mary's Son was stainless and immaculate. So must
she be, incorrupt, through grace free from every stain
of sin.9
So much for her grace in general. But such un-
measured grace must be expressed in every form of virtue.
In all her life, in every word and gesture, her self-control
was apparent. A charming companion, respectful to-
wards age, pitiful to the poor and needy, a stranger to
envy and contempt and sarcasm, unruffled in composure,

1
P.L. xvi, 220B.
2 P . L . xv, 1636B.
3
" t a n t a m contulisti gratiam, quantam ante oracula divina credere
nemo potuisset." (P.L. xvi, 346B. Cf. also xvi. 786. c. D.)
4 P.L. xvi, 346B.
5 P.L. xvi, 346A ; and 328A.
6 P.L. xvi, 782B ; 783A.
1 P.L. xvi, 746B.
8 P.L. xv, 1636B.
9 " Virgo per gratiam ab omni integra labe peccati " (P.L. xv, 1599D).
Cf. " Dominus redempturus mundum, operationem suam inchoavit a
Maria, ut per quam sains omnibus parabatur, eadem prima fructum salutis
hauriret." (P.L. xvi. 1640 B.)
1 2
3 The Downside Review
studious, mortified, intent upon the presence of God
within, she was loved and respected by all.1
But the grace and virtue which thus shone in her whole
life were not given to Mary for her own sake alone.
Her great prerogatives, Virginity, Motherhood, Sinless-
ness, all rested upon the Incarnation. She was elected
to play so intimate a part in the Redemption of the
world that it could be said of her that she operated the
salvation of the world 2 and she defeated the devil. 3
Therefore when the Son of God set about His work of
redemption, He began with Mary. She was first re-
deemed that we might be all redeemed through her.4
Her part consisted in bestowing on the Son of God
something which she alone could give—an immaculate
resting place from which Christ might return unspotted
to the Father 5 . She gave Him a human nature that
He might redeem us by our own ; our own being, in this
case, Mary's human nature representing the human race.6
She gave Him a nature capable of suffering, as her own
was, in which the Son of God might enter into the
sorrows of humanity. 7
Mary's virginity then, and her part in our Redemption,
are most intimately connected. T o express both, Mary
is likened to the rod of the Root of Jesse,8 the Light
Cloud, 9 from which the Most High began to operate our
salvation, and the Closed Gate l 0 through which the
Redeemer entered into the world.
But especially as Virgin and Co-Redeemer, is Mary the
Second Eve. Sin began in the first virgin, good must
• P.L. xvi, 220 ff.
2 " Sola erat et operata est mundi salutem " (P.L. xvi, 1203c.)
3 P.L. xvi, 1463B.
4
P.L. xv, 1640B ; xvi, 410A.
5P.L. xiv, 1136A. Note the force of " ideo."
« P.L. xvi, 866c ; 867B.
7 P.L. xiv, 1225A.
8 P.L. xiv, 7t3A ; 947B.
9 P.L. xv, xvi, 36IB ; 339—40.
•OP.L. xvi, 1174B.
 The Blessed Virgin in St Ambrose 133
rise from the second.' The fall of the one is wiped out
by the compliance of the other. 2 Folly and care came
from one, wisdom and salvation from the other. 3 Eve
herself is transformed into Mary 4 ; and womanhood,
bound in the one, is delivered and restored in the other. 5
Nay more, the fault of Eve did us more good than harm,
for in it through Mary our redemption revealed a divine
prerogative. 6 This is virginity, which Mary vowed
to retain. 7
Mary, therefore, is the exemplar and standard-bearer
of virginity, 8 and she it was who initiated the world
into a new prerogative. 9 The evidence for virginity in
the Old Testament is negligible.10 But when God, Light,
Lustre, 11 chose virginity for His tabernacle (and Mary
provided that virginity), then Christ became the Author
of the virginal life.12 Stirred by that singular prero-
gative, zeal for virginity began to increase.13 Christ
came by one, but He called many ; and Mary raised
the standard of virginity and lifted up the holy banner
of unstained chastity.14 She, therefore, is the pattern
of virginity and her unique life is a training model for
all.15 Nor is Mary leader of virgins in this life only.
i P.L. xv, 1643B. St Ambrose improves on Origen here.
2 P.L. xvi, 359A, and 1249D.
3 P.L. xv, 1698A ; xvi, 1173A.
4 " Veni ergo Eva, jam Maria." (P.L. xvi, 328A.)
5 P.L. xv, 1276c.
6
" Amplius nobis profuit culpa quam nocuit, in quo redemptio quidem,
nostra divinum munus invenit." P.L. xvi, 346. Cf. " Felix ruina, quae
reparatur in melius," xiv, 1116c.
7
" propositi virginalis," " propositum pudoris," " professio castitatis.',
P.L. xiv, 1138A; xv, 1636A ; 1641B. Cf. St Augustine, " i l i a admiratio
propositi est testificatio." P.L. xxxviii, 1097A.
8 P.L. xvi, 328B. v. inf. note 15.
9 P. L. xvi, 203A.
10 P.L. xvi, 202—3.
11 P.L. xvi, 220B ; 1249c.
12 P.L. xvi, 205c.
13
P.L. xvi, 346c.
l
* " Signum sacrae virginitatis extulit, et intemeratae integritatis
pium Christo vexillum erexit." (P.L. xvi, 328B.)
15 " Talis enim erat Maria, ut ejus unius vita omnium sit disciplina."
P.L. xvi, 222B.
 *34 T h e Downside Review
In Heaven she waits to lead them, like Miriam at Jordan,
to her Son, rejoicing because they have passed through
life unsullied.1
Mary's virginity and her part in our Redemption meet
in the unique fact of the Virgin Birth. This was the
significance of the sign given by Isaias to Achaz.2 In
this Christ is greater than all born of women, even John
the Baptist. 3 This is a greater miracle than the raising
from the dead,4 a proof of the Eucharist, 5 of the work
of the Holy Spirit in Baptism,6 of Christ's Divine Birth,
and of His freedom from original sin7 ; and an antidote
to concupiscence.8 Finally, arguments against the Virgin
Birth are easily refuted, not least by the courage and
fidelity of Mary herself.8
Not only in her virginity, but also, necessarily, in her
maternity is Mary intimately connected with our Re-
demption. It was her own, not foreign, matter that she
wrought into offspring and bestowed upon the Son of
God, so that He might become in all things like to His
brethren ; assuredly not like them in His Divinity, but
in His Humanity. 9 She was His sole parent on
earth 1 0 ; from her, therefore, was derived His human
sympathy for our infirmity.11
Moreover, Mary's part in generating the Humanity
of Christ establishes the truth of the Incarnation in the
face of those who impugn either the Divinity or the
' " Tunc etiam Maria tympanum sumens, choros virginales excitabit . .
quod per mare saeculi sine saecularibus fluctibus erexit." ( P X . xvi
222C.D.)
2 P.L. xiv, 338c ; xv, 1663B.
3 P.L. xiv, 1141A. xv, 175m.
* P.L. xvi, 330B.
5 P.L. xvi, 424B.
• P.L. xvi, 426c.
7
P.L. xvi, 490—IA.
8 e.g., P.L. xvi, 331B, ff.
9 P.L. xvi, 879D.
10 P.L. xv, 1817D.
11 " Affectum sumpsit ex matre, ut infirmitates nostras ipse susciperet."
P.L. xiv, 1225A.
 The Blessed Virgin in St Ambrose *35
Humanity of Christ. 1 And this double generation of
Christ, (like Melchisedech in origin as in priesthood), 2
encourages our devotion to Bethlehem and the con-
trasting attributes of the Christ Child. 3
Mary's maternity brings her honour, because her Son
was Divine as well as human 4 ; but He himself also paid
her honour and was subject to her, not of constraint or
necessity, but through affection, expressing in human
terms to her the filial love He bears to His Father in
Heaven. 5
A sequel of Mary's maternity, and an indication of the
intimacy of the love she bore her Son is to be found in
her sufferings on Calvary. Yet there, too, affection
must be subject to the part she has to play in our
Redemption. She overcame her natural sorrow and
the grief which sword-like pierced her heart, looking,
not for the death of her Son, but for the Salvation of
the world ; standing, though men fled, intrepid ; offering
herself to the executioners, if her death were needed to
consummate the sacrifice ; a worthy mother, desirous
to be associated with the redemption wrought by her Son.6
But her grief is to be measured by the fact that no
woman's son could be so dear to his mother as hers, nor
would she ever bear another. 7
Apart from every other claim to our veneration, Mary
sets for all an example of virtue. For in her as in a
mirror, shine forth the beauty of chastity and the norm
of virtue. The nobility of her character is an induce-
ment to all to study virtue. From her life, in every
phase of it, all may take an example of living ; for traced
i P.L. xvi, 552B ; 575A.
2
P.L. xvi, 421c; 458A.
3 P.L. xv, 1649—50; xvi, 205c, 222A, 558A.
4 P.L. xiv, 939D ; 1153A ; xvi, 709c; 786c.
5 P.L. xv, 1657c ; xvi, 603A.
Ge.g., P.L. xv, 1929D—1931 ; xvi, 333A.
t " Neque enim vos dulciores liberos habetis, nequeillud virgo quaerebat
solatium, quod alium posset generare filium." P.L. xvi, 1271A.
*3 6 T h e Downside Review
there as in a master copy is the very pattern of righteous-
ness.1 She teaches not only the theory of virtue but also
virtue applied, readiness to learn from inferiors, haste
to succour a relative in need, 2 pity and tenderness and
strength in suffering.3
Mary's virtues are transparent in the great events of
her life. The Angel found her alone (though not
lonely),4 thus his message had not to wait. 5 In her
reply are seen modesty, prudence, faith and knowledge
of the Scriptures. 6 Next, eager to be of service, Mary
hastens to her cousin, a handmaid though Mother of
the Lord, and speedily there follow the benefits of her
coming.7
Here St Ambrose expresses an important principle in
Mariology. Through Mary grace is administered to
St John and St Elisabeth ; and that not only at her
coming and in the moment of her salutation, but con-
tinuously, all the three months, John receives grace from
her presence to fit him for his office.8 Similarly, John
the Apostle9 after Our Lord's death surpassed all others
in speaking of Him, since the Palace of Heavenly Mysteries
was at his side.
T o sum up. Mary, as visualized by St Ambrose, played
a fourfold part in the Dispensation of the Incarnation.
First she was herself immaculate and full of grace ; and
all the actions of her life revealed the fulness of grace
1
P.L. xvi, 220.
2 P.L. xv, 1640 ; xvi, 220A, ff.
3 Cf. note sup.
* P.L. xv, 1636A ; xvi, 153D, 221c, 1203c.
5 P.L. xv, 1640c.
8 P.L. xv, 1638—9; xvi, 221, 373A.
7
P.L. xv, 1640.
8 " Nam si primo ingressu tantus processus exstitit ut ad salutationem
Mariae exsultavit infans . . . quantum putamus usu tanti temporis sanctae
Mariae addidisse praesentiam ? . . . Ungebatur quasi bonus athleta."
(P.L. xv, i643B,c.)
9 " Non miror (Joannem) prae caeteris locutum mysteria divina, cui
praesto erat aula coelestium sacramentorum." (P.L. xvi, 333c.)
 J
The Blessed Virgin in St Ambrose 37
within. Secondly, she is, therefore, our model in every
public and private virtue, but particularly in chastity,
her especial prerogative. Thirdly, she co-operated per-
sonally, actually, intimately and variously in our
Redemption. Lastly, her very presence brings super-
natural grace.