Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-9nbrm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-03-27T09:01:40.158Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mulder’s hail Mary

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 November 2024

Blake Hereth Open the ORCID record for Blake Hereth [Opens in a new window]
Blake Hereth*
Affiliation:
Department of Medical Ethics, Humanities, and Law, Western Michigan University Homer Stryker M.D. School of Medicine, Kalamazoo, MI, USA
*
Email: blake.hereth@wmed.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In a recent article Jack Mulder, Jr gives a Plantinga-style defence of the Virgin Mary’s free consent to bear Jesus at the Annunciation. Against Mulder, I argue that a theodicy (rather than a defence) is necessary to undermine my arguments, that Mulder’s Catholic appeal to Mary’s Immaculate Conception amounts to a kind of freedom-undermining metaphysical grooming, and therefore Marian consent remains invalid.

Keywords

immaculate conceptionMarian consentpower differentialsinformed consentmetaphysical grooming

Information

Type
Original Article
Information
Religious Studies , Volume 61 , Special Issue 2: Featuring articles on Engaging Philosophically with Afro-Brazilian Religions , June 2025 , pp. 410 - 426
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Archard, D (1994) Exploited consent. Journal of Social Philosophy 25, 92–101.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Austin, E (2024) Matthew 1:18. In Gay Girl Prayers. Kingston, ON: Brick Books, .Google Scholar
Bailey, SP and Boorstein, M (2016) Pope Francis suggests contraception could be permissible in Zika fight. The Washington Post (18 February 2016), https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2016/02/17/mexico-confirms-zika-virus-cases-in-pregnant-women-as-pope-francis-exits-the-country/.Google Scholar
Bazargan, S (2014) Moral coercion. Philosophers’ Imprint 14, 1–18.Google Scholar
Beauchamp, TL and Faden, RR (2014) Informed consent In Vaughn, L (ed), Bioethics: Principles, Issues, and Cases 4th Edn. NY: Oxford University Press, 1682–1687.Google Scholar
Bertrand, MB and Mulder, J (2017) Why Christians should not be Kaneans about freedom. Philosophical Christi 19, 315–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boonin, D (2022) Exploitation and sexual consent. In Boonin, D (ed), The Palgrave Handbook of Sexual Ethics. Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan, 377–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buchanan, AE and Brock, DW (1989) Deciding for Others: The Ethics of Surrogate Decision Making. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Chambers, KL (2019) Wronging future children. Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy 6, 119–141.Google Scholar
Cohick, LH (2009) Women in the World of the Earliest Christians: Illuminating Ancient Ways of Life. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic.Google Scholar
Correia, JC (2016) Flourishing and freedom: Exploring their tensions and their relevance to chronic disease. Health Care Anal 24(2), 148–160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10728-016-0314-6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Curley, E (2013) The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. In Murray, MJ (ed), Divine Evil? the Moral Character of the God of Abraham. New York: Oxford University Press, 58–78.Google Scholar
Dougherty, T (2021) The Scope of Consent. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dougherty, T (2022b) Social constraints on sexual consent. Politics, Philosophy, and Economics 21, 393–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gould, JB (2008) The grace we are owed: Human rights and divine duties. Faith and Philosophy 25, 261–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayes, C (1999) Intermarriage and impurity in ancient Jewish sources. Harvard Theological Review 92, 3–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hereth, B (2022) Mary, did you consent? Religious Studies 58(4), 677–700. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0034412521000226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liberto, H (2017) Intention and sexual consent. Philosophical Explorations 20(sup2), 127–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/13869795.2017.1356359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Magnusson, E (2019) Children’s rights and the non-identity problem. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 49, 580–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McConnell, TC (1981) Moral blackmail. Ethics 91(4), 544–567. https://doi.org/10.1086/292270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mulder, J Jr (2012) Why more Christians should believe in Mary’s immaculate conception. Christian Scholar’s Review 41, 117–134.Google Scholar
Mulder, J Jr (2014) A response to Chiang and White on the immaculate conception. Christian Scholar’s Review 43, 261–265.Google Scholar
Mulder, J Jr (2018) A response to Van Kuiken on the immaculate conception. Christian Scholar’s Review 47, 281–286.Google Scholar
Mulder, J, Jr (2023) In defence of Mary’s consent: A response to Hereth. Religious Studies, First View 59(4), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1017/S003441252200052X.Google Scholar
Osborne, TM (2012) William of Ockham on the freedom of the will and happiness. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 86, 435–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pettit, P (1999) Republicanism: A Theory of Freedom and Government. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pettit, P (2012) On the People’s Terms: A Republican Theory and Model of Democracy. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pettit, P (2014) Just Freedom: A Moral Compass for A Complex World. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
Rees, M and Ichikawa, J (2024) Sexual agency and sexual wrongs: A dilemma for consent theory. Philosophers’ Imprint 24, 1–23.Google Scholar
Schlossberger, E (2003) Entitlements, liberties, permissions, and the presumption of permissibility. Journal of Social Philosophy 34, 537–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stuckenbruck, LT (2017) The Myth of Rebellious Angels. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.Google Scholar
Walls, JL (1991) Why Plantinga must move from defence to theodicy. Philosophy & Phenomenological Research 51, 375–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walls, JL (2011) Why no classical theist, let alone orthodox christian, should ever be a compatibilist. Philosophia Christi 13(1), 75–104. https://doi.org/10.5840/pc20111316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, T (2017) John Duns Scotus. In Griffith, M and Levy, N (eds), The Routledge Companion to Free Will. New York: Routledge, 275–283.Google Scholar