Exploring the biblical theology of Christian egalitarianism

Close this search box.

Virgin Mary and Eve
Crayon and pencil drawing by Sr Grace Remington, OCSO
© 2005, Sisters of the Mississippi Abbey.
Used with permission from the artist.

I just love this picture. The imagery is powerful. Just look at their feet (Gen. 3:15)!

Several early church theologians saw Mary as the antithesis of Eve and the antidote to Eve’s sin. Even though Adam and Eve both ate the forbidden fruit and both sinned, these theologians overemphasised Eve’s doubt, disobedience, and pride as being instrumental in bringing sin into the world.[1] Conversely, they highlighted Mary’s faith, obedience, and humility as being instrumental in bringing salvation into the world.[2]

But Mary is more than a “new Eve.”

Without Mary, the saving significance of her Son’s humanity is lost … In the person of the Virgin, humanity has opened the way for God to fulfil His work. Mary is properly called therefore the bearer of salvation. A new Eve, and more than Eve, she held in her hands the life by which we receive life.[3]

While the comparison of Eve and Mary is interesting, it should not be pushed too far. Because of his incarnation, death, and resurrection, it is Mary’s son Jesus who redeems humanity, men and women, girls and boys, potentially freeing us from the power of sin and death and the debilitating consequences of the Fall (cf. Gen. 3:15; 1 Cor. 15:56-57).

Look also at the hands in the picture above. Mary is depicted as a messenger, and the message is all about the hope and promise of who is in her belly. Jesus is our Saviour—the giver of new life. He is the one who takes away sin and shame.

You can purchase prints of this drawing online at the Monastery Candy Store,  here.
You can also buy Christmas cards with this picture and the poem below from the Monastery Candy Store.

O Eve!

My mother, my daughter, life-giving Eve,
Do not be ashamed, do not grieve.
The former things have passed away,
Our God has brought us to a New Day.
See, I am with Child,
Through whom all will be reconciled.
O Eve! My sister, my friend,
We will rejoice together
Life without end.

Sr Columba Guare
© 2005, Sisters of the Mississippi Abbey


[1] In On the Apparel of Women 1.1, Tertullian blames Eve alone and ascribes even to Christian women the “odium of human perdition.” He was wrong.

[2] See, for example, Tertullian, On the Flesh of Christ, 17.

[3] J.A. Ross Mackenzie, “The Patristic Witness to the Virgin Mary as the New Eve,” Marian Studies, Vol. 29 (1978): 67-78, 69 & 73. A pdf of this article is here.

A note on Mary’s whiteness. I’ve seen many people expressing concern about the whiteness of Mary’s and Eve’s skin tones in this drawing. I understand their concern. There is no doubt the real Mary didn’t have white skin. Throughout the centuries, many artists have depicted Bible characters in ways that reflect the artist’s own ethnicity and culture rather than realistically.

An interview with the artist Sister Grace Remington is here.

Explore more

I have more about Mary here.
Is it he, she, they or we who crush the serpent’s head? (Gen. 3:15)
Jael, Mary, and Jesus’ Crucifixion
Mary and the Women in Matthew’s Genealogy of Jesus
Women, Eve, and Deception
Is Adam solely responsible for the first sin?
All my articles on gender in Genesis 1-3 are here.
All my Christmas-related articles are here.

You can support my work for as little as $3 USD a month at Patreon.
Become a Patron!

26 thoughts on “The Virgin Mary Consoles Eve

  1. Powerful and beautiful

  2. That’s so cool! Another interesting comparison has been made for Easter, with Mary Magdalene in the garden being the opposite of Eve in the Garden.

    1. It’s an interesting comparison. It would be more compelling perhaps if the same Greek word was used in both Genesis 2:8-17 (paradeisos) and John 19:41 (kēpos).

  3. Interesting – but unfortunately not theologically correct. The referenced verse is speaking of Jesus not Mary .. Would be more apropos if Jesus was consoling Eve.

    1. Hi David,

      The focus of the picture is on Mary’s belly. It is her child who is the Saviour who bruises the serpent’s head. It is the hoped-for seed of the woman who removes Eve’s shame and guilt, and ours.

      The image is not biblically correct, in that there is no Bible story about Mary consoling Eve, but I think there’s enough good theology symbolised in the artwork for me to appreciate the theology. Art is often symbolic rather than factual in what it portrays, and the artist has symbolised the prophecy of the seed of the woman bruising the serpent’s head well.

      My accompanying blurb makes it clear who the Saviour is. Nevertheless, Mary played a vital role in bringing Salvation into the world, and I think it is fine that she is the spokesperson and prophet for Salvation in this image. I think the picture is profound.

      1. First you say the image is not biblically correct, and then you say the picture is “profound”. Sorry….. I don’t think it can be both.

        1. Hi Jo,

          There is no biblical story of the person of Mary, or the person of the incarnate Jesus, meeting and consoling Eve, but there certainly is both the biblical and theological concept of the seed of the woman bruising the serpent’s head.

          This image clearly points to the seed of the woman. Both women in the image have their hands on Mary’s pregnant belly. Mary’s symbolic stance is prophetic and profound. It does not take away from the fact that it is Jesus who is the one who mortally wounds the serpent. Rather, this artwork highlights this fact. Mary’s stance also highlights that she, Eve, and each of us, have victory through Jesus (1 Cor. 15:56-57). The work is symbolic.

          The blue scarf is also symbolic. The colour blue has long been associated with Mary, beginning with Byzantine and early Medieval art. Natural aquamarine (ground and purified lapis lazuli) was costly and, during the medieval period and European renaissance, its use in painting was typically reserved for Mary. It’s unlikely the real Mary would have worn a white long-sleeved dress and a blue headscarf.

          1. Marg – I totally “get” this picture and understand exactly what it means. The gospel changes hearts and this picture reminds me of Genesis 3 – thank you for posting it and for giving credit to the artist for such imagery!

  4. My first reaction was, “Cool imagery but not theologically correct. THEN I saw that Mary was pregnant and I DO INDEED think it is very descriptive. Some people just don’t focus on the pregnant part and get themselves in a tizzy. Also, some people don’t understand poetry – poetry in verse or image.

  5. For those who go first to the “whether it’s theologically correct” question, please excuse yourselves for having too narrow an imagination.

    Mary is offering hope and encouragement, not “absolution,” and so, by pointing out that her infant son, as yet unborn, would be the means of God’s salvific grace, it’s TOTALLY theologically correct, as a retrojection from the artist to Mary to Eve. The child within her womb will, in fact, crush the serpent’s head she treads upon.

    Retrojection is a common feature, both in the text of Scripture, and in a biblically-redeemed imagination.

    We WILL, in fact, someday see Jesus face-to-face, as the Sciptures projectively promise… and I’ve no doubt Mary and Eve will (if not already done) have a very poignant meeting in the afterlife.

    Thanks for sharing, Marg!

    1. “Mary is offering hope and encouragement, not ‘absolution’ . . .”
      Exactly. Thanks, Guy.

  6. I think this is a beautiful image and very profound on different levels. I do get the idea that Eve was the means through which sin was brought into the world (at least according to the Bible story) and Mary is the means through which Jesus is brought into the world and is the antidote to sin (again if you follow that particular theology of the atonement).
    There are many truths and profound ideas. Not all are ‘biblically correct’ though they may still be true. And many biblical stories may be ‘true’ but not be historically fact.

    Thank you for posting it and for stimulating thought.

  7. To bad it a false dipection of what the Bible really teaches. It’s Christ who crushed the head of the serpent not mary. The glorification of Mary is biblical unsupported. Solo da Gloria …to Christ alone.

    1. Hi David.

      ~ The interpretation that it is Jesus Christ who crushes the serpent’s head may be correct, though it was unknown before the late second century AD. The earliest, clearest evidence of this interpretation occurs in Irenaeus’ second-century work Against Heresies 5.21.1 (circa 180 AD). Irenaeus quoted Genesis 3:15 and plainly identified the woman as Mary and the seed as Jesus. I write about this here.

      ~ No one is giving God’s glory to another (Isaiah 42:8). In line with her prophecy recorded in the Bible, however, we call Mary blessed (Luke 1:48). She played an amazing and unforgettable role in the incarnation. She conceived God’s child and delivered the Messiah, the Saviour of the world, and she gave her son his humanity. But, with Mary, we praise the greatness of the Lord God for this (Luke 1:46-47 CSB).

      Here is a small section of Mary’s words recorded in the Bible:
      “Surely, from now on all generations will call me blessed (makarízō), because the Mighty One has done great things for me …” (Luke 1:48-49 CSB)

      And here are some of Elizabeth’s words (about Mary) recorded in the Bible:
      “Blessed (eulogeō) are you among women, and your child will be blessed (eulogeō)! … Blessed (makaria) is she who has believed that the Lord would fulfil what he has spoken to her!” (Luke 1:42 & 45).

      Mary’s words and her actions glorified God. Our words and actions can also glorify God.

      “… Bring my sons from far away, and my daughters from the ends of the earth—everyone who bears my name and is created for my glory. I have formed them; indeed, I have made them” (Isaiah 43:6-7 CSB)

      This is what the Bible teaches.

  8. Hi, I am just encountering this would be beautiful drawing, when was it drawn? so point it so powerful so touching deep into my heart.

  9. I don’t know if my comment got posted but I did not mean to say “would be” beautiful picture it is a “profoundly” beautiful picture and I’m ordering one now. Just curious on when this picture was drawn and painted with crayons?

    1. 2005 , see included credits. Mississippi

    2. Here’s some info that was on the Monastery Candy website: “In 2003 one of our sisters made a picture of Mary and Eve, and the following year another sister wrote a poem to go with it for our Christmas card. Word has gotten out on the internet and we’re delighted that this image has conveyed something of God’s life to many people!” I’m not sure why the copyright date is 2005.

      A podcast where the artist is interviewed is here.

  10. Pictures express the hidden joyous feelings
    Within our hearts
    That no words can picture
    And with one judicial “biblically correct” word
    It is destroyed.

  11. and again God uses women to bring His promise to fruition
    Men must have been so jealous–it is no wonder why they gave into the devil’s attempts and plans to marginalize
    the ezer kenegdo (equal power) throughout history

    After all without women there would be no other men
    nor the promised one. God knows it took two to make the ONE.

    ok enough deep thinking for today. now to get a copy of that painting.

  12. […] [1] Many early church theologians saw Mary as being the antithesis of Eve, and the antidote to Eve’s sin. Even though Adam and Eve both ate the forbidden fruit and both were culpable of sin, early church theologians emphasised Eve’s doubt, disobedience and pride as being instrumental in bringing sin into the world. Conversely, they highlighted Mary’s faith, obedience and humility as being instrumental in bringing salvation into the world. While the comparison of Eve and Mary is interesting, it should not be pushed too far. What we do know is that Mary’s son Jesus Christ would die sacrificially on our behalf and that he redeemed both men and women from sin and death. (I have more on the comparison of Eve with Mary, here.) […]

    1. Profound post Marg! Thank you.
      Indeed Mary’s seed crushed our enemy’s head.
      The picture well shows her quiet strength, her submission and God’s power!
      Like, “I’m sweet and gentle and pure and now I’m going to simply stomp his brains out.” -squishy crackly sound-
      Love Mary!! (She could have said no to Gabriel.)

      1. Thanks, Lori. I love the real Mary too. She’s been misrepresented in many Christian traditions.

  13. […] Notice the three privileges given to Mary Magdalene.
    First, she had the privilege of being a prophet because she was worthy enough to see the angels, for a prophet is an intermediary between angels and the people.
    Secondly, she had the dignity or rank of an angel insofar as she looked upon Christ, on whom the angels desire to look.
    Thirdly, she had the office of an apostle; indeed, she was an apostle to the apostles insofar as it was her task to announce our Lord’s resurrection to the disciples.
    Thus, just as it was a woman who was the first to announce the words of death, so it was a woman who would be the first to announce the words of life.
    Aquinas, In Ioannem Evangelistam Expositio 20.3 §2519. […]

  14. […] But the male Christ was born of a woman. And as the first Eve was brought forth from the first Adam, so the second or last Adam was brought forth from the second Eve (as the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches regard Mary) (cf. 1 Cor. 11:12). […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Subscribe to Marg's Blog

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.


Join Marg's Patreon

Would you like to support my ministry of encouraging mutuality and equality between men and women in the church and in marriage?