To mark the 750^th anniversary of the scapular, the OCD and O.Carm. General Curias called a ‘mariological seminar’ for experts in the field. It was a scientific and interdisciplinary seminar directed towards the study of the Marian patrimony of Carmel and its relevance to life and to a faithful living of the charism.

The seminar took place at ‘Il Carmelo’, Sassone, Rome, from 14^th to 21^st June 2001 with the participation of around 25 experts who came from various parts of the world, but predominately from Western Europe. The papers that were given will be published in book form eventually, and this will be ample testimony to their highly scientific nature and to the richness of Marian themes in Carmel’s life and history.

This present document therefore, does not intend to summarise the topics that were treated and discussed. Instead it offers in a synthetic form the common convictions and working suggestions which emerged from the discussions and which seemed to enjoy a consensus among the participants.

Our superiors general have written: ‘The Virgin Mary, our Mother, Patron and Sister is certainly one of the greatest gifts that we have received from God and which we share with the Church. She is an essential part of our patrimony.’ (With Mary, the Mother of Jesus. The Virgin in the Life of Carmel, Aylesford, 2001, n. 2) This then is our starting point and we offer ten points each divided into two parts: the facts which are evident to us, and suggestions which are connected with and come from a consideration of the facts.

1. The Presence of Mary in Carmel

1.1.The Facts. Carmel’s history cannot be fully understood without taking account of a living presence of Mary. This presence has been expressed in many ways, including a multiplicity of titles by which she is venerated, admired, imitated and felt to be present in a familiar way. For example, the many Marian shrines with famous icons or simpler statues, the number of churches dedicated to her and all the various liturgical feasts and remembrances provide strong evidence for her presence in Carmel. So too do the theological and devotional writings of our authors, the rich spiritual and mystical experiences of our saints and blesseds, and the religious congregations, lay groups and popular forms of confraternity. Finally, devotion to the scapular itself is very widespread among people in general.

1.2.Suggestions. We need to do everything possible to recognise, interpret and live this tradition in a way which is faithful to authentic Biblical, Christlogical, ecclesial and spiritual insights. We must also take into account the new concerns of symbolism and cultural anthropology, including new feminist perspectives. We must also take seriously this scientific part of our faithfulness to the charism and to our specific patrimony.

2. Anthropological and Feminine Aspects

2.1. The Facts. Today there are many stimulating ideas which come from the anthropological sciences and especially from the new feminist reflections on the condition of woman in society and in the Church. This influences the sort of language we use when speaking of Mary and of her function as a female figure in Christian tradition and in a universal, symbolic sense. We are asked to be more cautious in the use of categories such as ‘mother’ and ‘maternity’, ‘virgin’, ‘spouse’ and ‘sister’. This is also true for our interpretation of these terms as they are used in scripture and historical texts, especially when they come from a cultural and religious background which is not ours.

2.2. Suggestions. We need to be attentive and receptive to the criticisms that come from feminist theologies and from anthropological research on symbols and languages. We need therefore to re-read our own Marian tradition applying correctly these new interpretative instruments. We have to bear in mind also the various levels of sensitivity, which are connected to cultural contexts and to the evolution of religious and social traditions in various countries, nations, continents and social classes.

3. The Biblical Foundation

3.1. The Facts. Exegetical reflection on Mary’s presence in the Sacred Scriptures and on the interpretation of texts, symbols and figures is particularly lively today. Thanks to these various studies, today Mary is much more rooted in the people’s spirituality than she was in the past. Greater knowledge of inter-testamentary literature and an exegesis which is respectful of the specific nature of the Old Testament both help to understand better those texts in the New Testament, which speak of Mary. Above all there has been a rediscovery of Mary as a model of Jewish womanhood, of discipleship and of a person with a ‘new heart’. There have also been notable insights from non-Catholic exegetes and from ecumenical and inter-religious dialogues. Carmelites too have a place in this field and have produced much appreciated studies and reflections on Marian themes. There have been new interpretations arising from lived experiences of reality, particularly the revival of the practice of lectio divina, which have enriched our understanding of Mary’s place in the history of salvation and suggest new horizons for her presence in the Church.

3.2. Suggestions. We need to take on board these new perspectives also with an eye to challenges that come from various cultural contexts. We should take advantage of the opportunities offered by new interpretative keys with a view to revising our way of speaking about Mary which has a more authentically biblical basis. In particular, the programmes of initial and on-going formation should give due attention to the genuinely biblical dimension of Mary’s figure.

4. Theological Language

4.1. The Facts. The Second Vatican Council gave certain indications about the figure of Mary which have a strong Christological, liturgical and ecclesiological emphasis and which have changed the theological treatment of Mary. Later documents from the Magisterium, such as Marialis cultus (1974), Redemptoris mater (1987) and Mulieris dignitatem (1988) opened the way to anthropology, aesthetics, feminism, ecumenical and inter-religious dialogue, popular religion, solidarity with the oppressed, and so on. Today the idea of ‘mariological models’ is used to explain the figure of Mary from various points of view that maintain a ‘dynamic’ unity. Such models are Mother of God, Mother of the Lord, Icon of the Church, Mary and the Holy Spirit, the All-Holy, Servant and disciple of the Lord, Spiritual mother and also, Sister in the faith, new Woman, new Eve, Mother of the living and so on.

4.2. Suggestions. We should get to know and absorb better the riches of this new theological language, examining also the implications for our own way of speaking about Mary in order to purify and enrich it. We need to reformulate our patrimony using new models which perhaps have not figured much up to now: Servant and disciple, Sister in the faith, Daughter of Zion, Prophet, New Eve, and so on. It is to be hoped that a new ‘mariological association’ will be formed with the participation of experts from the whole Carmelite family.

5. Christian Spirituality

5.1. The Facts. The Marian dimension of Christian spirituality today is characterised by the importance given to various dimensions: Biblical, Christocentric, pneumatological, liturgical, theological and ecclesial. There is also special attention paid to the language of salvation history, of presence and communion, of beauty, of feminine discourse and of solidarity with the plight of the people. The results of research into the characteristics of the ‘spirituality lived by Mary herself’ with a special emphasis on her journey of faith make up a new chapter in this subject.

5.2. Suggestions. A serious and courageous review of our language and of our intentions in this area is necessary so that these new insights can be received and integrated coherently. This implies a purification of the frameworks and models of spirituality, which no longer are capable of meeting these new challenges. Our very lives must emphasise these characteristics so that there is a correspondence between theory and practice. Speaking of Mary helps us to live out our baptismal commitment and paying attention to theological developments means that our commitment makes us children of God.

6. In the History of Carmel

6.1. The Facts. Current studies on Mary in Carmel are at a highly developed stage, whether they treat of the early centuries and controversial subjects such as visions and ‘privileges’, or whether they deal with the teachings and writings of our doctors and masters. Individual and collective works have illustrated the origins, doctrinal developments, popular forms, pastoral needs, liturgical texts, iconography, pious practices, the models and titles from various ages, and so on. Members of the Carmelite family do not however, always read these publications.

6.2. Suggestions. We need to insist that the many texts already published by experts are read. We also need to ask our authors to use new criteria of interpretation, which match current developments in historiography so that aspects, which have not been properly examined, can be brought to light. We should not be afraid of serious historical research, even when it seems to threaten conventional wisdom and to force us to change our minds on certain issues. We must also give due weight to the narrative and symbolic value of Mary’s presence and therefore ask ourselves how we can give adequate space to new popular stories. After ‘historical criticism’, we need to go back to ‘telling the popular stories’ which are full of symbolic energy and which would help us to encourage ‘mystagogical pathways’ suitable for popular religiosity.

7. The Ecclesial Context of Our History

7.1. The Facts. It is becoming clearer and clearer that the Marian dimension of our history – whether we are speaking of the early centuries or more recent times – is intimately connected with the model of Church that predominates at that time and with the religious ambience of the people. In Carmelite history certain teachings about Mary, certain devotional practices and corresponding pastoral activities, have echoed the language of the age and the institutions and preoccupations thereof. Today we can appreciate the fruits of this relationship and give an account of its advantages and disadvantages in the way it has influenced Carmelite witness and models of Mariology.

7.2. Suggestions. We must study deeply this relationship between the expression of the Carmelite Marian dimension and the ecclesial models and popular environment that have influenced these expressions. In this way we can appreciate better the creativity and inculturated nature of our Marian dimension. This will also help us to evaluate the effects of those periods where the preoccupation has been to preserve, or where there has been a lack of creativity and of a living pastoral sense. In a post-modern context, this exercise will enable us to discern a correct use of the symbolic language that we have inherited and to live out a new creative fidelity.

8. The Witness of Our Great Teachers

8.1. The Facts. The number of specific studies on the Marian teaching and experience of our great spiritual teachers is increasing. This type of study is important when it is done with scientific criteria and with the help of theological and sapiential categories of interpretation. What emerges from these studies is a tradition of lived experience, which sometimes can become an organic doctrine, a thematic proposal for living and a recognised spiritual teaching. Carmel has a patrimony that has not yet been completely explored nor examined, sometimes because of language or cultural difficulties.

8.2. Suggestions. We should direct our young researchers towards this type of study, in connection with their doctoral studies, so that we rediscover memories which were unknown and precious experiences which have not been examined up to now. It would also be opportune to compile a list of authors and topics not yet studied in order to advance research in this field. We should also encourage the publication, in various languages, of scientific or popular texts which deal with the Marian dimension of Carmel. With our Carmelite saints as guides and teachers, we must rediscover the art of living, both in individual and community contexts, a life of beauty so that we might be in the Church what we contemplate in Mary.

9. The Liturgical Tradition

9.1. The Facts. There are not many Carmelite studies in this area. The medieval liturgical sources, the reformed Carmelite rite and the solemn commemoration of Our Lady of Mount Carmel are three examples of such studies. On the other hand, there is almost nothing on pastoral liturgy or popular piety and many other areas have not been studied at all.

9.2. Suggestions. Our liturgical tradition should become an area of greater interest both in terms of a general recovery of our heritage and of a particular study of the euchological elements which are valid and vital even today but often forgotten. At the same time, we should stimulate and accompany a correct and creative inculturation and adaptation of the Marian dimension to various situations

a) To this end it is recommended that a liturgical commission (O.Carm. and OCD) be established to gather liturgical and euchological material, which already exists, and to work on new texts and celebrations.
b) Individual groups and communities that are able should be encouraged to use the masses in the Marian Sacramentary. They should also prepare alternative texts for major Marian celebrations so that the new values and preoccupations might be expressed.
c) A particular effort should be made to prepare a votive office of the Blessed Virgin Mary of Mount Carmel, and a corresponding Mass, with the option of local adaptation and inculturation according to circumstances.
d) Greater and more original reflection is needed on the ‘special days’ associated with Mary (Wednesdays, Saturdays, novenas, tridua, processions, and so on). Pamphlets and booklets should be prepared not simply at a generic, devotional level, but to express new elements of liturgical and spiritual originality, in conformity with the Carmelite charism and traditions.
e) There should be a meeting of Marian shrine directors who have direct pastoral responsibility. From their practical and concrete experiences, we can find and develop common forms of celebration, animation and Marian spirituality, in conformity with our charism. From the results of this meeting we can offer models to inspire other churches and shrines over which we do not have direct control.

10.1. The Facts. Devotion to Our Lady of the Scapular is the form in which our Marian nature as an order is known among the people. It is also one of the most important ways we possess of evangelising with Marian devotion. The most reliable historians have shown that there is insufficient historical documentary evidence to sustain the historicity of the vision. On the other hand, there is a widespread, longstanding and often lively popular Marian piety. This manifestation of popular religiosity often goes its own way, following local traditions, some of which are very old, and this forms an ecclesial heritage which is well rooted and strong. We note that there are various perceptions of the meaning of the scapular: a more generic one when the bonds of communion with the Carmelite family are not evident, and a more specific one when the bond is real, concrete and evident. Not all forms of devotion to the scapular could be said to be free from sometimes magical or superstitious influences, or reinforced by fear and anxiety.

10.2. Suggestions. It is important to propose some requirements here:

a) We should insist that in preaching and pastoral activities connected with the scapular, which is a sacramental of the Church, there is great value – when it is a conscious choice – of belonging to the Marian tradition of Carmel and to its ecclesial witness all through the centuries.
b) We must try to make a more explicit contact with this great heritage, which is called ‘a treasure for the whole Church’, found everywhere, ‘a devotion which is deeply and widely received by the people of God.’ (Letter of John Paul II, Il provvidenziale evento, n. 4) It is to be considered a ‘sacramental of the Church’. (With Mary, nn. 23-24) As far as possible this tradition should not be abandoned, bur contact maintained with Carmel and its Marian spirituality.
c) We need to study better the symbolic and spiritual nature of the narratives that are connected with the Scapular (vision, privilege, miracle, etc.) and their function of strengthening and interpreting the symbol to enable its acceptance. We need to see how we can recover the symbolic and narrative force of elements such as ‘final perseverance’ and ‘purification after death’ which people are drawn to spontaneously. In particular, we should emphasise in our presentation of the Scapular, the ‘continual protection of the Most Holy Virgin, not only in this life, but at the moment of transition towards the fullness of eternal glory.’ (Il provvidenziale evento, n. 5)
d) We need to promote a new phase of creativity in the inculturation of the various elements of the scapular devotion: the physical form of the scapular, the use of the renewed rite of enrolment, the sense of belonging both to the Order and to a family of the faithful, the intention to lead a virtuous life (or habitus) and cultivate a prayerful disposition, the sense of solidarity against the anxieties and dangers aroused by the ancient serpent, hope which is open to a positive future, the sense of the ‘sweet and maternal presence’ of Mary.
e) The enrolment ceremony needs to be accompanied by an adequate period of preparation, as the new rite indicates. It needs to be carried out with the meaningful involvement of members of the Order and lay people who are already enrolled. Membership must be made visible in the celebration of the great mystery of salvation, that is, the Mass. The liturgy is not simply a chance context, but must become an interpretative criterion for the popular devotion itself.

Conclusion

The rich Marian spirituality of Carmel is a precious tradition which must promote not only faithful continuity, but also a new season of creativity. We have pointed out some urgent needs in this respect. As in the past, an attitude of prayerful contemplation and trust in the ‘sweet and maternal presence’ of Mary are fundamental in order to live with a pure and faithful heart ‘in obsequio Jesu Christi’ (Rule n. 2).

Our communities must engage in a new period of prayerful, contemplative and yet creative reflection on Mary’s presence in our life and on the path to Jesus, in communion with the Church and with humanity. Only in this way, with a poor and pondering heart (cf. Luke 2: 19, 51), with a questioning faith, ‘with a penetrating vision and open heart’ (Novo millennio ineunte, n. 58), will we be able to respond to the maternal presence of the Mother of the Lord, taking on our historical responsibilities and a new sense of prophetic mission.

Sustained by the sweet and maternal presence of Mary, we will be able to take part in the Church’s mission to be of service to the kingdom, as authentic disciples of the Lord, committed witnesses in holiness and justice, in hope and in love.

We make the conclusion of the superior generals’ letter ours too: ‘That Mary, our Patron, Mother and Sister, would cover us with the mantle of her special protection so that clothed in her habit, we may be brought to the holy mountain, Christ our Lord, in whose footsteps we live.’ (With Mary, n. 36).