Critics and the reception of Bulgakov’s Mariology
This chapter continues the critical analysis of Bulgakov’s Mariology. Specifically, this chapter examines criticisms of Sergius Bulgakov’s Mariology from neo-patristic and feminist perspectives. The main interlocutors analyzed in this chapter are Georges Florovsky, Vladimir Lossky, Elizabeth Behr-Sigel, and Elizabeth Johnson. The author argues that the main difference between the neo-patristic approach to Mary and Bulgakov’s approach is their methodology. However, regarding the claims Bulgakov and Lossky made about Mary, there is perhaps more in common than different. The chapter also applies the feminist theory to Bulgakov’s Mariology and argues that although there are aspects of his thought that are misogynist, overall the pneumatological orientation of his Mariology offer a liberating approach to Mary that is representative of Orthodoxy’s devotion and affection to the Mother of God.