EWTN News portal reports on the dedication of the month of May to the Blessed Virgin Mary, presenting it as a time of special devotion. The article quotes extensively from the conciliar “popes,” particularly Leo XIV’s predecessor Francis, who called Mary “the first disciple” and emphasized her humility and service. While the practice of honoring Mary in May is ancient and praiseworthy, the article’s framing through modernist lenses reveals the theological impoverishment of post-conciliar Mariology, reducing the Mother of God to a mere moral exemplar while obscuring her unique privileges and mediatorial role.
The Modernist Reduction of Mary to a Moral Model
The article’s central thesis is that Mary is “a model for every Christian,” particularly for women, as expressed by Francis: “There is only one model for you, Mary: the woman of fidelity, the one who did not understand what was happening to her but obeyed.” This characterization, while not entirely false, is dangerously incomplete. By focusing exclusively on Mary’s humility, obedience, and service, the article reduces her to a moral exemplar — a role she shares with many saints — while ignoring her unique and unrepeatable privileges as the Mother of God.
The pre-conciliar Church taught with clarity that Mary is not merely a model but the Mediatrix of All Graces, the Co-Redemptrix, and the Queen of Heaven and Earth. Pope Pius IX, in Ineffabilis Deus (1854), defined the Immaculate Conception as a dogma, affirming that Mary was “preserved free from all stain of original sin” by a singular grace and privilege of Almighty God. This is not a minor detail but the foundation of her unique role in salvation history. Yet the article mentions this only in passing, as if it were a footnote rather than the cornerstone of Catholic Mariology.
The Heresy of “First Disciple”
Perhaps the most egregious error in the article is Francis’s description of Mary as “the first disciple of Jesus.” This phrase, repeated approvingly by the article, is not merely imprecise but heretical. Mary is not a “disciple” of her own Son; she is His Mother, the Theotokos, the God-bearer, as defined by the Council of Ephesus (431 AD). To call her a “disciple” is to place her on the same level as the Apostles and the faithful, thereby denying her unique dignity and role.
The Council of Ephesus condemned Nestorius precisely for refusing to acknowledge Mary as Theototkos, insisting instead that she was merely the mother of Christ’s human nature. The Council affirmed that Mary is truly the Mother of God, for the One she bore in her womb is true God and true man. To call her “the first disciple” is to echo Nestorian tendencies, reducing her to a follower rather than the Mother of the Redeemer.
The Omission of Mary’s Queenship and Mediation
The article’s silence on Mary’s queenship and mediatorial role is deafening. Pope Pius XII, in Ad Caeli Reginam (1954), formally established the feast of the Queenship of Mary, affirming that she is “Queen of heaven and earth” by virtue of her divine maternity, her singular graces, and her union with Christ in the work of redemption. This is not pious exaggeration but Catholic doctrine.
Moreover, the Church has always taught that Mary is the Mediatrix of All Graces, through whom all graces from Christ flow to the faithful. Pope Leo XIII, in Octobri Mense (1891), wrote: “Nothing is granted to us except through Mary, and since no one can approach the Father except through the Son, so no one can approach Christ except through His Mother.” This truth is entirely absent from the article, which presents Mary as a passive model rather than an active intercessor.
The Naturalistic Language of “Heaven Within Reach”
The article quotes Francis’s Angelus address: “She shows us that heaven is within reach, if we too do not give in to sin, we praise God with humility, and we serve others with generosity.” This statement, while superficially pious, is theologically bankrupt. It implies that heaven is attainable through human effort — by not sinning, praising God, and serving others — without any mention of the necessity of sanctifying grace, the sacraments, or the Church.
The Catholic faith teaches that heaven is not “within reach” by natural means but is a supernatural gift, attainable only through the merits of Christ, applied to the soul through the sacraments and the intercession of the Blessed Virgin. The Council of Trent (Session VI, Chapter 7) anathematized those who claim that man can be justified by his own works without divine grace. Francis’s statement, by omitting the necessity of grace and the sacraments, echoes the Pelagian heresy condemned by the Church.
The Conciliar Context: A Church in Apostasy
The article’s reliance on conciliar “popes” for its Mariological content is itself symptomatic of the post-conciliar crisis. The pre-conciliar Church produced definitive dogmatic pronouncements on Mary — the Immaculate Conception, the Perpetual Virginity, the Divine Maternity, the Assumption — grounded in Scripture, Tradition, and the Magisterium. The conciar “popes,” by contrast, have reduced Mary to a symbol of humility and service, stripping her of her unique privileges and mediatorial role.
This is not accidental but the logical fruit of the modernist revolution inaugurated by John XXIII and consummated by the Second Vatican Council. The Council’s Lumen Gentium (Chapter VIII) attempted to subsume Mariology into ecclesiology, presenting Mary as a “model of the Church” rather than as the Mother of God in her own right. This was a deliberate downgrade, designed to facilitate ecumenical dialogue with Protestants and Orthodox who reject Catholic Mariology.
Conclusion: Return to True Marian Devotion
The month of May should indeed be dedicated to the Blessed Virgin Mary, but not in the impoverished, modernist manner presented by this article. True Marian devotion acknowledges Mary as the Immaculate Conception, the Mother of God, the Mediatrix of All Graces, the Co-Redemptrix, and the Queen of Heaven and Earth. It recognizes that she is not merely a model but a powerful intercessor, through whom all graces flow from Christ to the faithful.
The faithful must reject the modernist reduction of Mary to a moral exemplar and return to the fullness of Catholic Mariology as taught by the pre-conciliar Magisterium. As Pope Pius X warned in Pascendi Dominici Gregis (1907), the modernists seek to strip the faith of its supernatural content, reducing it to a naturalistic ethic. The article’s treatment of Mary is a perfect illustration of this tendency.
Let us honor Mary not with the tepid, naturalistic rhetoric of the conciliar sect but with the fullness of Catholic truth: “Hail, Holy Queen, Mother of mercy, our life, our sweetness, and our hope. To thee do we cry, poor banished children of Eve; to thee do we send up our sighs, mourning and weeping in this valley of tears. Turn, then, most gracious advocate, thine eyes of mercy toward us, and after this our exile, show unto us the blessed fruit of thy womb, Jesus. O clement, O loving, O sweet Virgin Mary.”
Source:
Here’s why the month of May is dedicated to the Virgin Mary (ewtnnews.com)
Date: 01.05.2026