Marianismo
Evelyn Stevens' essay was very significant to this area of study. However, since its publication, her argument has been debated by other researchers and critics. Although her argument addresses marianismo in Latin America at large, many of the sources she uses mainly focus on Mexican culture, thus severely limiting her frame of reference. Also, she is criticized for implying that, despite other differences among various socioeconomic classes, the ideal woman's characteristics are ultimately the same across social classes. Her critics claim Stevens ignores socioeconomic factors, saying "her description of women as altruistic, selfless, passive, [and] morally pure" is inadequate. There have been some responses in the literature to the concept of marianismo that assert that its model of/for women's behavior is very class-based. In other words, the idea that men do all the hard work, while women remain idle, on a pedestal, is a life that rarely exists, particularly for the peasant, poor and working class women that make up the majority of Latin America women. As Gil and Vazquez remind us, "most of her [Stevens's] data came from middle class Mexican women".
Leo Scheffczyk
Scheffczyk was a Mariologist of vast scope, and shown in his role as co-editor and major contributor to the "Marienlexikon", a work which totals some 4000 pages. In his article on Mariology at the Second Vatican Council, he asserts that in pursuing the goal of unity among Christians, though this was legitimate, nevertheless Marian beliefs and devotions had been understated by some representatives of the Catholic Church. In his view this was the case with the final chapter of the Vatican II Dogmatic Constitution "Lumen gentium", dealing with the Virgin Mary. For Scheffczyk, in this Marian chapter: "The coldness and reserve of this document can be explained, as it is openly admitted, by its showing consideration for ecumenical dialogues especially with Protestants. Though justifiable, this method's success should not be overrated and does not prevent theology from saying more." He disagreed with those who considered the document as failing to satisfy conservatives, liberals, Orthodox and Protestants, stating that the document contains tangible elements for a mariological bridging of positions, though he concludes that such as result had to date not been achieved. He regretted, however, that: 
The decisive fundamental affirmations (on Mary) are compromises, which narrow the richness of the existing faith and open the way to divergent interpretations, such as the accusation that the Council eliminated the Mediatrix teachings.