What do you think?
Rate this book
The virgin
. 1976, bright clean copy, no markings, withnick to dustjacket, Professional booksellers since 1981
1000 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1976
59 people are currently reading
192 people want to read
About the author
Geoffrey Ashe
99 books42 followersGeoffrey Thomas Leslie Ashe is a British cultural historian, a writer of non-fiction books and novels.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
August 22, 2018
I really, really enjoyed reading this book. It is an investigation into the origins of the cult of the Virgin Mary in Catholicism. It pays special attention to the scriptural justification (or lack thereof), the emergence of the cult in the first centuries of the Church, and what psychological and spiritual motivations are at play in both the emergence of the cult of the Virgin Mary and it’s later adopted and incorporation into the orthodoxy of the Catholic Church. Ultimately, Ashe seems to argue that the cult is both #valid and necessary to the health and survival of Christianity, but that the attempts to incorporate it into and justify it using a fundamentally patriarchal epistemology and structure limits it unnecessarily. So, pretty much, reform Catholicism to validate and recognize alternative sources of tradition and belief and allow for the full presence of women in the Church (both the “Eternal-Womanly”/“feminine numinoisity” we seem to be fundamentally oriented towards and the ordination of priestesses) or Perish.
Definitely the coolest thing I learned from this book is that the cult of the Virgin Mary can be traced back to a group of female worshipers in the early churh (disparaging lacked “Collyridians” which is basically an ancient pun for Holy (bread) Rollers) who saw in the Virgin Mary an equal to the Trinity, who kept an empty throne for the Virgin Mary at services (like for Elijah! At Passover!) that was draped in cloth and bread and wine, and was exclusively women led.
Definitely the coolest thing I learned from this book is that the cult of the Virgin Mary can be traced back to a group of female worshipers in the early churh (disparaging lacked “Collyridians” which is basically an ancient pun for Holy (bread) Rollers) who saw in the Virgin Mary an equal to the Trinity, who kept an empty throne for the Virgin Mary at services (like for Elijah! At Passover!) that was draped in cloth and bread and wine, and was exclusively women led.
April 10, 2021
This book gives a fascinating account of what Ashe thinks is the origin of the Marian cult in the Roman Catholic church. He starts with the goddesses that were adored in pre-biblical times as well as in Biblical times. He then gives an account of the part Mary plays in the New Testament. He shows that there were no significant adoration of Mary in the first three centuries of Christianity. Real adoration slowly started in the fifth century and constantly grows until the situation in the Roman Catholic Church today. What is surprising is that he shows that the New Testament gives no reason for the adoration of Mary. Yet he believes that the adoration of Mary is a reasonable development in the church. So, he rejects the Bible as the only basis of out faith and gives tradition a place. If the Bible is not the sole basis of our faith it opens the door to all kinds of subjective beliefs and practices. Who can then know what is true and what is not?
Ashe doesn’t give any reasons for the development of Mariology, although he sometimes gives a glimmering of the real reasons. I suggest that al least three things played a role in the development of Mariolology,
The first is the celibacy required of priests. This goes against nature as God intended it. If you don’t have a real wife you need a substitute. And Ashe gives a hint of this in one of his sentences. Ashe also shows, but doesn’t intend this, when he tells about one of the priests who gives a very graphic description of Mary, not only in her spiritual, but also in her physical perfections.
The second is shown in the book “The Virgin Mary” by Giovanni Miegge. Miegge shows that when Christianity became the state religion of the empire, various practices and beliefs of unbelievers were absorbed in the church. And so the beliefs about the goddess Cybele and Isis were absorbed in the beliefs of the church. Everything that people believe about Mary today reflect what people believed about these and other goddesses in the past.
The third is the role of Mary as a mother. One wonders if Mary doesn’t fullfill some longing for a perfect mother. It is a pity that one cannot do an empirical study of this in ancient times. But perhaps someone will be brave enough to do a study about this today.
The reading of Ashe’s book is a fascinating experience but he disappoints by his conclusions which goes against all reason.
Ashe doesn’t give any reasons for the development of Mariology, although he sometimes gives a glimmering of the real reasons. I suggest that al least three things played a role in the development of Mariolology,
The first is the celibacy required of priests. This goes against nature as God intended it. If you don’t have a real wife you need a substitute. And Ashe gives a hint of this in one of his sentences. Ashe also shows, but doesn’t intend this, when he tells about one of the priests who gives a very graphic description of Mary, not only in her spiritual, but also in her physical perfections.
The second is shown in the book “The Virgin Mary” by Giovanni Miegge. Miegge shows that when Christianity became the state religion of the empire, various practices and beliefs of unbelievers were absorbed in the church. And so the beliefs about the goddess Cybele and Isis were absorbed in the beliefs of the church. Everything that people believe about Mary today reflect what people believed about these and other goddesses in the past.
The third is the role of Mary as a mother. One wonders if Mary doesn’t fullfill some longing for a perfect mother. It is a pity that one cannot do an empirical study of this in ancient times. But perhaps someone will be brave enough to do a study about this today.
The reading of Ashe’s book is a fascinating experience but he disappoints by his conclusions which goes against all reason.
May 16, 2014
Ashe starts the book with a great discussion of the large influence that the idea of motherhood and fertility have had over almost all mythologies. Unfortunately he follows that discussion with the most ardent defense of the idea of “the bible as history” that I’ve ever encounter. Reading his book was to be confused for almost the entirety of it as to what he actually believed. He recognizes the idea of The Goddess yet refuses to use it in the plainest terms to explicate the ascendance of the Virgin to her current place in the Catholic worldview. In what has been the most unexpected turn in what would appear to be a sociologically oriented discussion of religion, Ashe not only starts defending the “true” dogma of Christianity but also spends an entire chapter defending the Virgin birth story not as an incorporation of pagan influences in Christianity but as almost true fact, though always with an escapist quote for the, as he calls them, “unbelievers”. In his obsession to sketch a biography of the Virgin as a person he comes to rely on the lightest literary analysis of the bible to arrive not only at a family tree of Jesus but to sketch a complete parallel development of a Marianist religion that he, at least, recognizes is more speculation than history. In all honesty the best use that could be given to the book is as a source of early mythological analysis with respects to the Sacred Feminine and as a hint of the way that it managed to burrow into the Catholic Church.
April 24, 2023
This book contains an interesting account of the history of “Mariology” within Christianity, but the lack of an up-front thesis makes the book less convincing. As other reviewers mention, the reader is left guessing what the author’s viewpoint is until the final pages of the book.
Geoffrey Ashe provides a wealth of historical and rhetorical evidence that would lead the reader to believe Ashe will finally reject Marian dogmas and devotion, but in a rather startling twist he ends the book claiming that however illegitimate the origins of mariology seem, they should be embraced by the Church. He also argues that to be consistent the church should embrace a sort of Marian egalitarianism. This odd conclusion is only in the book’s epilogue, so one could comfortably read the body of the book for its historical data and disagree with the author’s final view.
My personal favourite moment in the book:
“One of the Virgin’s attributes, according to the liturgy, is that she ‘overcomes all heresies’; and it is true, simply as historical fact, that her worship does tend to conserve Catholic loyalty. Protestant seceders have always felt compelled to oppose it. Yet it hardly seems reliably orthodox itself. Again and again enthusiasts make claims on Mary’s behalf which defy scripture, distort tradition, and would, on any impartial reading, be branded as heresy. Catholics palliate these as ‘devotional excesses’. But in a system as powerful and well-defined as Catholicism, one would expect aberrations to be swiftly corrected. The norm should return, the interrupted stream should flow as before. It does not. The history of Marian doctrine is largely a history of extreme positions gradually becoming official ones.”
Geoffrey Ashe provides a wealth of historical and rhetorical evidence that would lead the reader to believe Ashe will finally reject Marian dogmas and devotion, but in a rather startling twist he ends the book claiming that however illegitimate the origins of mariology seem, they should be embraced by the Church. He also argues that to be consistent the church should embrace a sort of Marian egalitarianism. This odd conclusion is only in the book’s epilogue, so one could comfortably read the body of the book for its historical data and disagree with the author’s final view.
My personal favourite moment in the book:
“One of the Virgin’s attributes, according to the liturgy, is that she ‘overcomes all heresies’; and it is true, simply as historical fact, that her worship does tend to conserve Catholic loyalty. Protestant seceders have always felt compelled to oppose it. Yet it hardly seems reliably orthodox itself. Again and again enthusiasts make claims on Mary’s behalf which defy scripture, distort tradition, and would, on any impartial reading, be branded as heresy. Catholics palliate these as ‘devotional excesses’. But in a system as powerful and well-defined as Catholicism, one would expect aberrations to be swiftly corrected. The norm should return, the interrupted stream should flow as before. It does not. The history of Marian doctrine is largely a history of extreme positions gradually becoming official ones.”
October 17, 2023
Education and faithful.
I liked that it paid homage to the culture and worship of our sacred virgin Mary. I read some books on religion and this appealed to me personally. It was easy enough not read if you are associated with religion.
I liked that it paid homage to the culture and worship of our sacred virgin Mary. I read some books on religion and this appealed to me personally. It was easy enough not read if you are associated with religion.
February 27, 2024
Nothing new here, nothing far beyond the traditional, some almost regressive. No new insights or perspectives.
July 27, 2008
Ashe does a lot of historical works into ancient myths, theology, etc. This one is very extensive study into the history of the Blessed Virgin and looks at origins in pre Christian groups.
September 23, 2013
3 1/2 stars
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews