The Vase in Paintings of the Annunciation, a Polyvalent Symbol of the Virgin Mary

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I confess that when I received the entry article it seemed to me a banal matter, but as I read what was collected in the article it seemed more and more relevant to me.

The author's examination of sources from different fields is a wise decision: theology (especially patristics), liturgy, or art (poetry and painting). The picture that he manages to reconstruct is rich, deep and convincing.

The author solidly demonstrates the relevance in the first XV centuries of Christianity of the metaphor of ‘vas’ applied to Mary and its indisputable meaning: the exaltation of the divine motherhood of Mary; better of a maternity that is interpreted not only in its spiritual dimension, but essentially in its carnality. The article makes it possible to shed new light on the almost unanimous insistence on her virginal, immaculate motherhood: this total participation of the flesh in her divine motherhood (which suggests her ('exclusive') virginal giving) seems to be a way of expressing a personal giving , indisputable, that he leaves nothing outside of that dedication to that task, to that mission. As the author points out very well when equating ‘caro’ to human nature, that is, his humanity. If this is so, in Mary -in her motherhood- the flesh appears by itself as the natural sign of the unconditional gift of self. I think that in this sense the contribution of the article seems original and very relevant.

Areas where I suggest expanding the topic in the future:

1º-The author explains well the symbolic meaning of ‘vas’, but he does not explain why that expression ‘vas’ has been chosen to express her maternal body. Surely alludes to an earlier tradition. Although I am not an expert on the subject, I suggest that you look in the Old Testament for the meaning and meaning of the sacred vessels in the sacrifices of the Old Law and in the temple.

2º-I think that the notion of ‘vas’ refers to the body of the Virgin, the maternal and dedicated body of the Virgin. From reading the article -especially the hymns- it seems (it is a suggestion) that a growing 'spiritualization' of Mary's body appears, leaving her carnal condition in the background. I don't know if this is so. I suggest -especially in hymns- the systematic and quantitative study of the adjectives that accompany the expression 'vas'. I believe that more and more they insist on spiritual aspects -of grace, virtue, piety...- and supernatural, disappearing the expression ‘caro’ or similar adjectives. Does this mean a change in the meaning of 'vas’?; of body? Lost the meaning of the biblical notion of flesh as an unconditional gift of self? Sign of a naturalization of the 'physical' body that loses its personal meaning?

3º-It is interesting that the study goes back to the XV-XVI century, after that there are no references. The question is: don't they exist? I don't know if this is so. If it were, it is interesting to note that this is the time when the cult of Saint Joseph spreads, whose 'first' attribute is being the husband of Mary.  Are the two phenomena related? Is there a certain doctrinal twist in this change? The metaphor of ‘vas’ suggests an absolute dedication-possession of Mary to-of the divinity (both God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit) incompatible with any relationship of the Virgin linked to her feminine carnal condition (especially mother and wife). In this context, it would seem that the figure of José in a certain sense appears incompatible with this vision of his body as ‘vas’. What has changed so that it no longer is? It has to do with the doctrinal shift in the doctrine of marriage: the shift from the centrality of ‘una caro’ to the centrality of 'consent' in the doctrine of marriage in canon law and in theology of the 11th-13th centuries?

Author Response

See the enclosed file

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Article is very good and thorough.

Thesis is well argued.  No changes needed.

Typos on lines 263, 1144, 1290, 1567.

Lines 245-1110 has 51 hymns.  The same point could be made about these hymns with about half that number of hymns but author could keep all 51 if wants to.

Author Response

1. Typos on lines 263, 114t, 1290, 1567.

Reply: I have corrected and completed all cases.

2. Lines 245-1110 has 51 hymns.  The same point could be made about these hymns with about half that number of hymns but author could keep all 51 if wants to.

Reply: These 51 hymns are a selection of the many I have found. So, I prefer to keep all these 51 hymns, to highlight the richness of this unexplored, meaningful field