A Defence of Mariology

From a longtime mama's boy

Last Updated 2026-10-16

Like all good evangelical children, growing up, I viewed the Catholic Church, particularly Marian devotion, as idolatrous and plain weird. Now, as a Catholic, I see its beauty: a well trodden way to fall more deeply in love with Christ, the Word incarnate.

In this article, I wish to briefly go through some of the Old Testament prefigurements of Our Lady, in the hope that it might help those who are open to the idea, but haven't really seen it in their own studies of Scripture.

Why her?

So, why do we give Mary reverence? Why do we honour her? Why do we give her titles?

The answer is simple: because it brings us closer to Christ.

Beliefs about Our Lady flow from Christology: what we know about Jesus. Fundamentally, it is Jesus who determines who Mary must be. She uniquely shares in Christ's grace and mission, and this article will explore why titles like 'Queen of Heaven' and 'Mother of God' aren't idolatrous, rather, that they safeguard fundamental truths about Christ himself.

Mary's Prefigurements in the OT

When you start looking for connections between the Old Testament and the New Testament, you can't help but see that Mary is prefigured in several 'types' (foreshadowings). Let's start with an easy one: Mary as the new Ark of the Covenant.

The new Ark

In the Old Testament, the Ark of the Covenant is where the presence of God would dwell, the physical manifestation of God's presence. Importantly, the Ark contained three things:

  1. The Word of God
  2. Manna from Heaven
  3. Aaron's priestly rod

It's clear how Jesus fulfils these three items. It is He who is the Word made flesh. It is He who is the true Bread from Heaven, and it is He who is the Eternal High Priest.

It is Jesus who dwells in the new Ark.

So, where could this Ark be? We don't have to look very hard in the New Testament. In fact, we can start at the beginning of the Gospel of Luke, to find out. Here, after the Annunciation, where Mary's yes set the ball in motion, Luke clearly parallels Mary's story with the story of David and the Ark from 2 Samuel 6. Here are a few parallels:

Parallels

Arose and went to Judah
How/why come to me?
Moved with joy before God
Loud with joy
Time and location

Other scriptural allusions

Outside of 2 Samuel, there's more Scripture backing up this idea that Mary is the new Ark. Here are a few:

What now?

So, what are the implications of Mary being the new Ark of the Covenant? Like the old Ark, Mary, the new Ark:

Let's tease out the implications and how they relate to Catholic beliefs about Our Lady. The Immaculate Conception, the belief that Mary was conceived without original sin, through the lens of the Ark, makes perfect sense, due to the purity and consecration of Our Lady. Moreover, the belief that Mary was a perpetual virgin is strengthened by this type, due to the holiness and untouchability of the Ark. Finally, the connection between the Ark and Dagon strengthens the belief that Mary is the woman of Genesis 3:15.

The new Eve

It's not just the Ark. Mary is also prefigured by Eve, but unlike Eve, Mary's decision to say yes to God, rather than yes to herself and her own desires, is where the stories differ, and why Mary is the actual fulfilment of Eve's story.

Here are some of the parallels:

This is why the earliest Christians, like St. Irenaeus in the 2nd Century, saw that "the knot of Eve's disobedience was loosed by the obedience of Mary."

Mary as the new Hannah

Mary as the new Ark, and Mary as the new Eve are the most well known types of Our Lady, but I think Mary as the new Hannah is the most beautiful. Let's see the parallels:

Song of Praise

Hannah sings "My heart exults in the Lord" (1 Samuel 2:1), closely mirroring Mary's canticle: "My soul magnifies the Lord" (Luke 1:46 - 55).

Growth of Children

Hannah's son Samuel grew "in stature and favour with the Lord and with men" (1 Samuel 2:26). Similarly, Mary's son Jesus "increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man" (Luke 2:52).

Finding Favour

Both Hannah and Mary found favour with God, and were granted sons miraculously (Hannah, barren, and Mary, a virgin).

Both Are Grace

The name Hannah means grace, or favour. When Mary is addressed in Luke as "kecharitōmenē", she is being addressed as "full of grace"; the ultimate fulfilment of the meaning of Hannah. Let's dive into this one more fully, by seeing how this title, prefigured by Hannah, contributes to the Catholic belief about Our Lady's sinlessness.

Sinlessness of Mary

Why do Catholics believe that Mary was sinless? It's not just because we never saw her sin, rather, it protects and affirms the holiness of Christ's humanity, and is the redemptive answer to the sin we inherited from Adam and Eve.

Full Of Grace

In Scripture, the idea that God or God's messengers would change your name or give you a new title would only ever occur when God reveals a person's true identity or mission through the name. When Abram was renamed Abraham, God tells us that Abraham would be the father of nations. When Simon was renamed Peter, Jesus was telling us that Peter would be the rock on which the Church was built. Let's see how this plays out for Our Lady...

In Greek, "kecharitōmenē" is a perfect passive participle. This means that calling someone "kecharitōmenē" means that they are full of grace not only in that moment, but in a completed and enduring way. Rather than Gabriel giving a momentary blessing, he informs Mary, and us as witnesses that she has always been, is currently, and will always be, "full of grace". This certainly puts in context Mary being "troubled" by this greeting.

As Mary was from conception full of grace as a gift from God, there would be no space for sin.

Let's look at a few common objections to this idea that Mary was sinless.

Objections to the Sinlessness of Our Lady

Need of a Saviour

Objection: Mary calls God her "Saviour" in Luke 1. If she was sinless, then she wouldn't need a saviour.

Answer: Catholics believe that Mary was indeed saved by Jesus, just by a different means than you and I are. While we are redeemed in the ordinary sense through the washing at our baptisms, we hold that Mary was saved preventively from sin, before it touched her. Rather than Jesus lifting Mary out of the pit of sin with us, Jesus saved Mary by not letting her fall in in the first place.

This is uniquely fitting to make way for the redeemer, particularly with regard to Ark typology. In the book of Joshua, the Ark was carried first across the river Jordan into the Promised Land. Similarly, we hold that Mary, the new Ark, was the first to be saved by Jesus, the first of us creatures to enter the fulfilment of the Promised Land: Heaven.

No explicit biblical evidence

Objection: There isn't explicit biblical evidence for the belief that Mary was sinless.

Answer: As discussed, "full of grace" ultimately means that from her conception, there was no space for sin. Moreover, if we needed explicit biblical evidence for other Nicene Christian beliefs, we would struggle similarly with belief in the Trinity and the canon of Scripture itself.

Only Jesus was sinless

Objection: Romans 3:23 states that we have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.

Answer: If we held to a literal interpretation of this passage, Christ himself would not be exempt from this rule. Moreover, if we took this literal interpretation to other parts of the Bible speaking of the sinfulness of others, we might not be able to reconcile Elizabeth, Job, and Zechariah being described as "blameless" before God. Scripture often speaks about human righteousness and sinfulness broadly, and cannot be shoved into absolutes.

Sinlessness implies divinity

Objection: If Mary was sinless, then she would have to be divine. As God alone is divine, Mary cannot be sinless.

Answer: We know that for a time Adam and Eve were both sinless, and were not divine. Therefore it is possible to be sinless and not divine.

Timing of Dogma

Objection: The dogmatic definition of the Immaculate Conception occurred in the 19th Century, therefore, the belief has no historical basis.

Answer: Definitions of dogmas do not imply anything about the belief beforehand. We would say dogmas are normatively defined only when some begin to err on a truth that is necessary for belief.

Perpetual Virginity

You'd think the perpetual virginity would be a slam dunk, as it was believed not only by Catholics and other apostolic Churches, but some of the early reformers like Zwingli, and even Luther himself. However, over the past few centuries, it has become more popular to hold that Mary didn't remain a virgin after giving birth to Christ.

This belief is important not only to highlight Our Lady's total consecration of herself to God and as the Ark of the Covenant reserved for God alone, but also protects the uniqueness of Jesus' arrival, defending against claims that his birth was ordinary.

Let's return to the Gospel of Luke to get a better understanding of Mary's virginity.

Scriptural Evidence

In Luke 1:34 Mary asks Gabriel about her son: "How can this be, for I know not man?". Why did Mary ask this? Surely, being betrothed to Joseph, who is literally from the line of David, Mary's first thought would be that the coming King she would bear would be Joseph's son.

She doesn't say "I haven't known a man", rather "I know not man". Like the question itself, this wording is a little strange, unless Mary planned to remain a virgin during her marriage. In fact, we can see precedent for this in the Old Testament, in Numbers 30, where vows made by married women were allowed to be kept with the consent of their husbands. Suddenly, the question makes perfect sense, that Mary was indeed promised to Joseph in marriage, but had vowed to remain a virgin.

The gate of Ezekiel 44 is fulfilled thus in Mary and her womb, the door through which God enters the world: "This gate shall remain shut; it shall not be opened, and no man shall enter by it; for the Lord, the God of Israel, has entered by it; therefore it shall remain shut".

A common objection is that Jesus had "brothers" in Mark, but it falls quite flat, as brother extends broadly to kinsmen in Semitic languages. Moreover, it seems shocking that in the era of second temple Judaism Jesus would give His mother over to John, when other siblings were still alive.

Matthew 1 is another common citation for objections, that Joseph did not know Mary "until" she bore a son. However, the word until doesn't imply anything about what happened afterwards. In 2 Samuel 6 Michal "had no child until the day of her death". However, this does not imply Michal had children after her death.

Theotokos and Mater Dei

"God bearer", and "Mother of God". These terms sounded scary at first, but they really say less about Mary than they do about Jesus. In fact, the terms safeguard the belief in the Incarnation; that Jesus is one divine person with two natures. This may seem like a minor point for us in the 21st Century, but is actually super important, particularly with regard to heresies of old (and reappearing). Jesus wasn't just a human who became God. Rather He was God from even before His conception, from before the time He took on flesh. To say that Jesus is fully God, and that Jesus' mother is Mary, is to say that Mary is the literal mother of God.

As a Protestant, I found "Mother of God" as a title almost scandalous, as in my mind, it had a different connotation, that Jesus was subordinate to Mary, that God was subordinate to Mary. However, when you look at what we actually believe, it's clear that it is a simple misunderstanding of the meaning of the term.

The Assumption, and the Coronation of Mary as Queen of Heaven

Finally, I'd like to briefly address the Assumption and the Coronation of Our Lady as Queen of Heaven, starting with a probing question.

Who is the woman in Revelation? It states: "a great sign appeared in Heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars".

Is it the Church? Is it Israel? Is it Mary?

Well... yes. It is all of these things. Biblical imagery can have multiple fulfilments, like how John states a few chapters later that the seven heads of the beast are seven mountains as well as seven kings.

For the woman of Revelation 12, Mary's fulfilment is clear. She is the one who gives birth to the one who will "rule all the nations" just a few verses later, and as we have already established her as the Ark, she is the Ark from just a few verses earlier in Revelation 11.

Two facts we can infer from this passage: Mary is in Heaven before the resurrection of the dead, and she is crowned. So, what does this mean for our beliefs about Mary?

She is in Heaven

Fact 1: Mary is in Heaven before the resurrection of the dead.

In fact, she is there right now. Let's tie this neatly into the assumption; the belief that Mary was assumed bodily into Heaven.

The Assumption is the natural consequence of the Immaculate Conception we established earlier. Since bodily corruption is the consequence of sin, and Mary was preserved from sin, she fittingly was preserved from bodily corruption. As the new Ark, she is taken into the heavenly temple (Revelation 11-12).

Just as Enoch was taken in Genesis, and Elijah taken in a whirlwind, so Mary, the holiest of all creatures (due to her sinlessness and Fiat: "let it be done") is taken up into Heaven by the power of her Son.

She is crowned

Fact 2: She is crowned in Heaven.

So how do Catholics get from Mary being crowned to Mary being Queen of Heaven? Do we believe that Mary was married to Jesus? Let's return to the Old Testament one more time to show who the Queen actually was.

In 1 Kings (chapters 1-2), King Solomon had his queen sit at the right of his throne. Sounds normal, but there's a catch. It wasn't his wife. Who was it? His mother, Bathsheba. In the Davidic Kingdom, the Queen wasn't the spouse of the King, but the Gebirah, the "Great Lady", the mother.

In fact, we can see how Marian intercession is prefigured in the Old Testament from this passage too! Adonijah asks Queen Bathsheba to intercede on his behalf to the King, her son. Similarly, the Queen of the New Covenant, Mary, intercedes on behalf of the wedding party at Cana (John 2).

When Catholics say "Ask His mother, as he will not refuse her", we are almost quoting verbatim what King Solomon says to his mother upon her request "Make it, my mother, I will not refuse you" (1 Kings 2:20). Solomon does refuse his mother, for Adonijah's request was unjust. However, Mary, the true fulfilment of the Queen, will not be refused, as she who is "full of grace" will never ask something contrary to the will of her Son, Jesus.

Today's understanding of what a Queen should be has muddled our understanding of the role of Our Lady as true Queen.

Conclusion

On Calvary, Jesus goes further still. From the cross, He gives the Queen of Heaven and Earth to John. John, who stands in for all of us at Golgotha:

"Behold your mother." (John 19:27)

Mary is not only the Queen beside the King; she is our Mother, the intercessor who draws us ever closer to her Son, our Saviour, Jesus Christ.