Did Mary Crush the Serpent’s Head?

If you go to any Catholic Church or bookstore, you’re likely to see a statue of the Virgin Mary standing on a snake. A statue of the Virgin makes sense, but why does she always have a serpent underfoot? Well, it’s a long story.

The story begins with Gen 3:15, some of the words that God speaks to the serpent after deceiving Adam and Eve, inducing their Fall, “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel” (RSV). So, you’re probably thinking, “I don’t see the connection. It says ‘he shall bruise’ not ‘she’.” And you’re right, for the RSV. But if you look at the Douay-Rheims version, it says, “she shall crush thy head.” What’s going on?

Well, what we have here really is a text-critical problem.

Hebrew Masoretic Text: הוּא יְשׁוּפְךָ֣ רֹ֔אשׁ  (hu’ yeshuphka rosh, “he will crush your head”)

Greek Septuagint: αὐτός σου τηρήσει κεφαλήν (“he will watch your head”)

Latin Vulgate: ipsa conteret caput tuum (“she will crush your head”)

Nova Vulgata (1979): ipsum conteret caput tuum (“it will crush your head”)

In the Hebrew, the masculine pronoun hu’ is referring back to the noun zera‘, which is a masculine noun. The other thing to mention is that the verb form, yeshuphka, is third person masculine singular with a second person singular pronominal suffix.  And the vowel pointing could not change it to feminine—the feminine form would include one different letter, not just vowel points. It would be תָּשׁוּפְךָ* (tashuphka). The masculine is not just in the pronoun, but is embedded in the verb.

In Greek, the masculine pronoun autos is used even though the antecedent (spermatos, seed) is neuter. It seems that the masculine is preferred here by the translator because the seed/offspring of Eve would presumably be a person, not a thing.

The Nova Vulgata uses ipsum, a neuter pronoun referring to a neuter noun (seed, semen). But St. Jerome’s Vulgate is the outlier here, reading ipsa, which here is the feminine nominative singular (not the nom/acc neuter plural) and the Douay-Rheims version is based on the Vulgate. I should also add that the Nova Vulgata is the current official version of the Bible promulgated by the Vatican.

The old Catholic Encyclopedia defends the Vulgate text of this passage thusly:

The reading “she” (ipsa) is neither an intentional corruption of the original text, nor is it an accidental error; it is rather an explanatory version expressing explicitly the fact of Our Lady’s part in the victory over the serpent, which is contained implicitly in the Hebrew original. The strength of the Christian tradition as to Mary’s share in this victory may be inferred from the retention of “she” in St. Jerome’s version in spite of his acquaintance with the original text and with the reading “he” (ipse) in the old Latin version. (emphasis added)

This explanation is rather generous, but it’s more helpful than saying that we just don’t know why Jerome translated this way.

Interestingly, Jerome’s translation made it into a very important papal statement, the declaration of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception in Pope Pius IX’s Apostolic Constitution, Ineffabilis Deus:

Hence, just as Christ, the Mediator between God and man, assumed human nature, blotted the handwriting of the decree that stood against us, and fastened it triumphantly to the cross, so the most holy Virgin, united with him by a most intimate and indissoluble bond, was, with him and through him, eternally at enmity with the evil serpent, and most completely triumphed over him, and thus crushed his head with her immaculate foot.

I like the idea of the Virgin Mary having an “immaculate foot,” but I still think this statement is based on a flaw in Jerome’s translation. Interestingly, when John Paul II took up the Protoevangelium in his audience on Dec 17, 1986 he regards Christ as the agent of “crushing” not Mary.

Now, of course, from a theological perspective, every Christian shares in Christ’s victory over sin and the devil. The New Testament substantiates this: But rejoice in so far as you share Christ’s sufferings, that you may also rejoice and be glad when his glory is revealed. (1 Peter 4:13 RSV) “For whatever is born of God overcomes the world; and this is the victory that overcomes the world, our faith.” (1 John 5:4 RSV) Mary, as the most Christian Christian, is as JPII teaches in the above-cited text, “the one who first shares in that victory over sin won by Christ.” So all Christians get to “crush the serpent’s head” through Christ’s victory on the cross and the Virgin Mary is the first to share in that victory. Are the statues based on a faulty translation? Yes. But are they still theologically correct? Yes.

9 thoughts on “Did Mary Crush the Serpent’s Head?

  1. LouAnn Babka

    I have my grandmothers Virgin Mary and Jesus figures. They date back to the early 1900’s. She was Catholic but I am not. My 6 year old granddaughter who has autism is the first one in my family to notice that snake under Mary’s foot. I am glad I found the explanation and answer her when she asks why it is there.

  2. Eduardo

    I think its kind of interesting the story of Mexico city being built and established where an eagle on a cactus was consuming a serpent. The original Basilica was built over looking what had became the worlds largest city, and many cathedrals then were built over the tops of pyramids, in essence crushing them of a paganistic religion.

  3. Patricia Ester

    The statues are based on a faulty translation; therefore, they are Not theologically correct. When the battle is the Lord’s then the victory is ours, just as at a football game when my team wins. I did not make the touchdown, even though I share in the victory; but it was not I who made the touchdown so no one puts my picture on the billboards.

  4. James Travers Vote

    Mary being the Mother of Jesus our Saviour, is privileged in being the woman that God chose to bear His Son as a human like us, to enable Jesus to overturn the sin of Eve and Adam , to open the doors of Eternity to all mankind that believed in Him

  5. Pamela Mitchell

    I like very much the tradition of Mary crushing the serpent’s head. It is the one I was raised with in Catholic school. So many years later I find it fascinating and now choose to believe it is an omen of the need for the Patriarchy to be crushed by women ( the glue of the world.) For it is the Ways of Women ( collaborative, care-giving, patient, humble, and nurturing) that are needed if we are to survive and come into the Peace that surpasses all understanding.

  6. JD Matney

    I don’t have a question so much about the feminine versus the masculine as much as the word bruised and crushed. In the second paragraph you not state Gen 3:15 states,

    “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel”

    Shouldn’t it be CRUSH the serpents head, not just bruise it?

    Thank you, Janet

Leave a Reply

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