ABSTRACT
The personifying effect is maintained by Mary's continued utilization of familiar pronominal forms to address the cross as her anger rises. Mary is mightily upset with this wooden object. How has it come into possession of the "fruit of womb?" That "fruit" would be her son, of course, and it is clear that he already hangs upon the cross. One of the theological advantages of a dispute between Mary and the cross is that the son does not have to speak at all. In Philip's poem, neither Mary nor the cross speaks with Christ. It is clear that the poet has added a eucharistic element to the dispute between Mary and the cross, and this element will become even starker by the end of the poem than it was in Lignum vitae quaerimus. The poem's coda, is an attempt to bring closure to the dispute between Mary and the cross. But still, it grates.
