The snare of devotion to Mary.

[Rhamiel]

That's a fair point Rhamiel..I was writing straight from my heart and out of deep concern, and not trying to attack Catholicism or Catholics per se, but specifically addressing what SCIM had written.



Thanks...I appreciate it.

Can you see why I reacted the way I did?

yeah, I believe your thread is in good faith, that is why I am taking the effort to try and respond to what you have to say

 

[Zeek]

SOme people get way carried away with Marian devotions.

This is the crux of what I am getting at bro. Are there any things in place that can prevent this from occuring, and what do you think indicates someone getting carried away?

Just as long as you accept the infallible dogmas about her, as defined in the Ecumenical Councils and infallible Papal declarations, you're good.

Off the top of my head:
1. Immaculate Conception, that Mary was born without Original Sin.
2. That she never committed personal sin.
2. Perpetual Virginity
3. Theotokos, that she gave birth to Jesus, who is both fully God and fully man.
4. That she was bodily assumed into heaven after, or shortly before, her death.
5. That she intercedes with God for us on our behalf.

Well I agree with one of them..., but then I am not Catholic and don't have to surrender my understanding to come in line with things that I do not wholly trust.

As far as devotions, none are required for salvation. Don't like the rosary? Don't pray it. Don't like the brown scapular? Don't enroll in it. Don't like St. Louis de Montfort's writings? Don't read them.

Suddenly you make Catholicism a bit more interesting....

Edited to add: But you can't deny these devotions to others. They are a part of Catholic tradition. It's just that no particular Catholic can be required to have these devotions. It's why they are called "private" devotions.

Interesting point....sometimes these things are presented in such a way by some Catholics that you think they must be 'required'....it means that getting a proper over view of the Catholic faith is rather a fraught affair; and that despite the numerous guide-lines in the Catechism, is still open to some quite wide interpretations.

 

[Mary's Bhoy]

"...I have never found such an overt form of internal evangelism that insists Mary be given the status you have ascribed to her."

"The Child is not found without Mary, His Mother. If, then it is impossible to separate what God has united, it is also certain that you cannot find Jesus except with Mary and through Mary." - Pope Saint Pius X.

I disagree...you have gone way over anything intimated by the L-rd, by the disciples and by any NT writer concerning the person and function of Mary.

Was Jesus true God and true Man?

I have had many discussions over the years with Catholics and have read a number of books recommended to me on this subject, the last one I read was 'Hail Holy Queen' by Scott Hahn....thanks for the recommendation but at this point I believe I have covered the basics and gained an insight into the emphasis on Mary.

Dr Hahn's a nice enough fellow, by the book I recommended to you is a collection of writings from some of the foremost theologians in the Church today. I am rather well read in the field of Mariology and I'm familiar with most of the major works. Perhaps I misspoke. This primer isn't so much concerned with the basics, but rather the foundations of Mariology as a theological science. It goes beyond mere pop-theology like Dr Hahn's works.

It troubles me for very obvious reasons.

Which I cannot begin to fathom.

I see...so it was a regular NT greeting then?

No, it was not.

He said that specifically to John who was just a lad, and I believe Jesus had a very real father/son relationship with John...hence the words, 'the one that He loved'. I also believe it is possible that Jesus had siblings who were of a similar age to John, and that Jogn was looked upon as an extended family member...but these are my own sanctified speculations.

Personally I think it is extremely tenuous to build a tradition on those few words stripped of a proper context.

Saint John was not a child. He was a grown man. Yes, tradition tells us he was the youngest of the disciples, but he would have been in the age of his majority. And you are free to believe that Christ was simply refering Our Lady to Saint John alone. However you must surely be aware that every Doctor and Saint of the Church views these words of Our Lord from the Cross in a much greater sense? The great minds and spiritual authors all seem to agree that Saint John at this moment represented us all and the Church.

You're simply standing in contradiction of 2000 years of Christian history.

That would appear to me to be a rather uncomfortable place to be.

Yours in Jesus and Mary,
SCIM.

 

[Rhamiel]

SCIM

would you mind going over some of your statements that the OP quoted that gave him the most problem?

 

[Tallguy88]

I agree with your list. I would note what is NOT there. There is no requirement to believe in Marian apparitions. There is no requirement to believe that Mary answers our prayers. There is no requirement that Mary is a Mediator in the same sense as Jesus.

And just BTW, I find your construction interesting. You suggest that if one accepted all the infallible dogmas as defined by all the Councils and papal declarations, when we are good (and acceptable to the Catholic Church).

I find this idea a bit strange. If that were the standard, we should probably kick out considerably more than half the members of the Church. Most do not understand some dogma of the Church. And many disagree with some. For me, the Catholic Church is a family, not those who graduated by accepting and understanding every piece of dogma ever written.

But even under your strict understanding go "good", we ware good even if we do believe that praying to Mary does any good at all. After all, Mary intercedes for us all the time. She is our Mother. It does not follow that we should pray to her for our needs.

You're overthinking my post. I just mean as long as one knows what these mean, they shouldn't deny them. Poor catechesis is a mitigating factor for too many.

 

[Tallguy88]

.

 

[Zeek]

"The Child is not found without Mary, His Mother. If, then it is impossible to separate what God has united, it is also certain that you cannot find Jesus except with Mary and through Mary." - Pope Saint Pius X.

From what I have read and seen there are good Popes and bad Popes and some of them as fallible human beings have said some outlandish things at times and behaved in an unseemly fashion.

This statement by Pius X is fairly vague IMO, I think any Believer; myself included, has no problem with the connection between Mary and Jesus and that Mary played a pivotal role through her care and nurture of the L-rd, especially in those most vulnerable years of His childhood.

However trying to force a connection that has salvic overtones between knowing the L-rd and knowing His mother strays from any biblical text or known legitimate early tradition.

When as a young man G-d revealed Himself to me through Jesus, there was never any added input concerning Mary, or the necessity to acknowledge her part in my salvation, and as I read John chapters 14 through to 16 I see nothing that even hints at this possibility as the function of the Holy Spirit is to reveal G-d to us through Jesus...not to reveal Mary to us in any shape or form.

Was Jesus true God and true Man?

Of course...I am totally orthodox in my beliefs.

Dr Hahn's a nice enough fellow, by the book I recommended to you is a collection of writings from some of the foremost theologians in the Church today. I am rather well read in the field of Mariology and I'm familiar with most of the major works. Perhaps I misspoke. This primer isn't so much concerned with the basics, but rather the foundations of Mariology as a theological science. It goes beyond mere pop-theology like Dr Hahn's works.

Ok...so he's a bit lightweight. (I agree)

I will have a look at the book you mentioned some time, but with respect there have been extremly clever intellectuals from hundreds of years ago that have written all sorts of theological treatises, but much of it has been empty words devoid of the Spirit because they have not stayed anchored in Scripture...and before you think 'sola scriptura', it is a legitimate criticism across the Catholic and Protestant divide...

It troubles me for very obvious reasons.

Which I cannot begin to fathom.

Well if that is truly the case let me spell it out for you.

I know many Catholics that love Mary, believe she intercedes for them etc, but never really express the degree of emphasis you place upon Mary, and would never sign off, 'Yours in Jesus and Mary'. Which seems to signify what I see in your content as a deliberate attempt to raise Mary's profile and to get people focusing on her far more than they are inclined to do, should do or are required to do. (and I'm talking about your fellow Catholics).

Saint John was not a child. He was a grown man. Yes, tradition tells us he was the youngest of the disciples, but he would have been in the age of his majority.

In Jewish tradition a boy is considered a man between the ages of 12-13,
and finished formal education around 15-16, so it is possible that when Jesus died and rose again, John was around 15-16 years old or 18-19...my point was that as Jesus was dying He formally enjoined John and His mother...which is fairly momentous in itself...the Son of G-d commending John to receive as his mother the very woman who had carried the divine Son within her womb.

And you are free to believe that Christ was simply refering Our Lady to Saint John alone. However you must surely be aware that every Doctor and Saint of the Church views these words of Our Lord from the Cross in a much greater sense? The great minds and spiritual authors all seem to agree that Saint John at this moment represented us all and the Church.

Actually I am not free to believe whatever I want to believe, I am compelled to always seek that which is true, and be obedient from the heart to the truth....Scripture always means exectly what it says, but we don't always get the gist in translation or when filtered through corrupt minds...sometimes we have to be like Mary and put things on the back burner till we understand more fully and get 'insight'.

I personally find the expression 'Our Lady' in reference to Mary a little quaint...but I don't really have a problem with the idea of Mary being a symbolic mother to people...I don't agree, but it is not something I would lose any sleep over....However it only takes a little leaven, and what might start off as a particular tradition can gain traction and become something that was never intended...I expect to elaborate more if necessary as this thread develops.

You're simply standing in contradiction of 2000 years of Christian history.

That would appear to me to be a rather uncomfortable place to be.

I dare say there have been many objections to this idea raised over these 2,000 years, but most of them have been conveniently forgotten or destroyed.

I think you have a slight point when you consider it an uncomfortable place to be for someone like myself....one of the strengths of the Catholic community is the weight of history behind them, and this is often used as part of a compelling argument on theological issues, that combined with the idea of being the only legitimate inheritors of Apostolic succession...you guys have the monopoly and claim the authority.

By comparison, part of the weakness of the Protestant tradition is it's relatively new emergence and its fragmentation...something that is not lost on those numerous threads that advocate for Catholicism on these Boards.

 

[Zeek]

Just so you know, my thread is not solely directed against some things SCIM has written, athough the bulk is within it, but also Galilee wrote this:

I would firstly pray from your heart to Jesus and our Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God Jesus' Divine Mercy Chaplet asking Jesus for He and The Blessed Virgin Mary to guide you in Jesus' Holy steps into His Catholic Church while focussing on Jesus' Stations of His Cross, His Bitter Passion, Agonies and Sorrows after repentance from your heart.

Love and kindest wishes your Sister in Jesus Christ our Saviour

Here again I cannot entertain the idea that Jesus is coupled up with Mary and that there is no ambiguity as Mary is directly prayed to, and also given divine attributions through her assumed ability to guide and answer prayer just like the L-rd....this despite the many times Catholics have denied praying to Mary.

I note that Galilee has a very sweet spirit and I do not intend to be unkind or derogatory in any way, but what has been expressed is what I see as a form of idolatry...Isaiah notes well that nothing and no one compares to the L-rd or comes within a million light years of His glory ( Is chaps 40-48), and yet the way Mary is approached tramples the word of G-d underfoot and actively elevates another Mary (because this is not the beloved Mary of the Bible) to participate in the role of G-d.

Even though I am what you would call a Protestant and on the outside looking in, surely there must be some understanding of what I am talking about that does not feel the need to revert back to the defence of Catholicism?

 

[ChesterKhan]

This is 100% idolatry, this is 'adding to the Gospel, this is teaching something that is not of G-d, I'd even go so far as to say this works in opposition to the truth and will bring a snare, a burden and condemnation to the person that embraces this sort of teaching.

IMO, this is an attempt to make Catholicism completely distinct from Protestantism through the elevation of Mary as Co-Redeemer, and the unabashed glorification of Mary and to rejoice in the difference because the stamp of true Catholicism is to be wholly devoted to Mary.

IMO this goes beyond any traditions of the Church and is an overt attempt to take Catholicism into another dimension...it is the promotion of a Marian agenda and is being fed to Catholics in much the same way that fundamental Islam is fed to the so-called moderate Moslems....it is extremly worrying.

I'd particularly be interested in hearing some Catholic friends response to this, and I am hoping that there are some Catholics that will make a distinction and not be afraid of voicing what they feel is right, rather than closing ranks and thinking this is just the Protestant reaction that was anticipated by SCIM.

I don't generally litter my posts with Scriptures and references as I hope most readers will know chapter and verse, but when it is necessary then I will certainly include relevant texts.

I think SCIM might be being a bit overzealous in Marian devotion, and I agree somewhat with the OP. The Marian dogmas, however, do exist for the glorification of Jesus. And not to perceive their truth is to not fully appreciate the splendour of Our Saviour.


But this is hardly anything new concerning Protestantism. Protestants also do not have 6 of the 7 sacraments, most do not have icons or statues (considering them "idolatrous"), they lack the full Bible, and more than a few turn a blind eye to Tradition. Yet I would not accuse an honest Protestant of not loving Jesus.

But a faith that lacks the sacraments, lacks the full Bible, lacks the saints and Mary, lacks Tradition, is shallower - much shallower - than it ought to be.

Our Lord said His House has many rooms, or mansions. It seems to me the really "low church" Protestants have a tendency to stay within the mansion of Jesus, to the exclusion of the mansions of Jesus's brethren and sistern - the Body of Christ. The Tradition upon which the Catholic faith is built is nothing less than Christ working through other men, things, and places. It is not "me and Jesus". The true faith says, "me and Jesus and His World".


Zeek, I do not doubt you love Our Saviour, and are obedient to Him. Have you considered, perhaps, that He is calling you to more? Yes, even than Himself. For He made a whole world, too. And He made it "good". And every piece of it shines with His goodness.

 

[WisdomTree]

Off the top of my head:
1. Immaculate Conception, that Mary was born without Original Sin.
2. That she never committed personal sin.
2. Perpetual Virginity
3. Theotokos, that she gave birth to Jesus, who is both fully God and fully man.
4. That she was bodily assumed into heaven after, or shortly before, her death.
5. That she intercedes with God for us on our behalf.

There are actually only four dogmas (five if you include the scriptural Annunciation), the fifth one (co-mediatrix) on this list is a doctrine. To continue the list:
6. That she is associated with our redemption (co-redemptrix).
7. That as a mother of Christ who is our King, she is the Queen of the Universe.
8. That since we (the Church) are the Bride of Christ, she is the Mother of all Christians.

To re-iterate, 1-4 are dogmas while 5-8 are doctrines. For Catholics, all eight are things we have to accept, but while the doctrines can be changed or even challenged, the dogmas cannot as it holds equal authority to that of the Apostolic Deposits.

Of these sets of Marian dogmas and doctrines, 2-3 are also accepted by the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Church as well as being in agreement with the Fathers of the Protestant Reformation. The Church of the East (Nestorian) also accepts 2 while accepting 3 in orthodoxy, but not in orthopraxy. Within these Eastern/Oriental Churches (including Catholics of these Rites), 4 is kinda accepted, but under a different name and interpretation (Dormition).

Now, you can assume that all these titles that come with these dogmas and doctrines seem to be elevating Mary to a higher position of some sort especially at an initial glance, I can definitely say, that is not the intent. Take for note the number three on this entry: Theotokos. That is Greek for "bearer of God", translated into English as the "Mother of God". That in itself looks like it is making Mary a goddess of some, but one has to look at the context and how it came to be. During the Council of Ephesus, when Nestorius attempted to supplant Theotokos with Christokos (which is why the Council was called in the first place), the main rationale for rejecting Nestorius' position was that denying Mary that title undermined the unity of the divinity and the humanity of Christ, thus would re-introduce Adoptionist heresy back into the fold. In other words, the title Theotokos defended against the denigration of both the divine nature and the human nature of our Saviour. No where in the canon does it argue for the honour of Mary.

So one has to keep in mind when it comes to Catholic Mariology, what are the intents here?

 

[Galilee63]

Given Jesus and our Blessed Virgin Mary Mother of God speak to my heart daily during Jesus' Divine Mercy Chaplet prayed and our Blessed Virgin Mary's Holy Rosary prayed for world causes and in between, it would be totally inappropriate for me to enter into a debate of what other posters Wisdom Tree, Zeek (the Author) and others of whom "may not" have formed a relationship through Jesus/God The Most High with our Blessed Virgin Mary, "Mother of God" of Whom is our Heavenly Mother, loves us all deeply, prays for us all, prays for the conversion of sinners, visits and brings Holy Refreshments to our Loved ones in Purgatory, (this can be our Grandparents, Aunts, Uncles, Cousins, Brothers, Sisters) prior to The Holy Souls in Purgatory being Cleansed, averts disasters through the prayers of Her Holy Rosaries prayed by The Holy Trinity, works through the hearts of those whom our Blessed Virgin Mary has chosen urging to pray Her Holy Rosaries and through hearts/souls/people converting them to Jesus Christ our Saviour...for Centuries.

A good book for people of whom do not Love or do not have feelings for our Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God - our Heavenly Mother Mary, of whom have a problem believing that our Heavenly Mother is in fact The Queen of Heaven and Queen of Mercy among other Holy Titles that God The Most High has given His Favoured One, I suggest Saint Louis De Montfort's "The Secret of The Rosary" and other books that Saint Louis and Blessed Alan de La Roche have written about Jesus Christ our Saviour with The Blessed Virgin Mary appearing to Priests, Sisters, Saints, Children and others around the Years 1,214 +.

Of course, those of whom are interested and have researched Jesus and our Blessed Virgin Mary Mother of God appearing to Popes, Bishops, Priests, Sisters/Nuns, Children and others around the world during each Century (including this era) already know that Jesus Christ our Saviour does in fact appear with our Blessed Virgin Mary Mother of God at different times.

If we cross over to Jesus Christ our Saviour in Judgement and have not been Loving, reverant, respectful and hold a belief in our Blessed Virgin Mary Mother of God, how does one "think" our Heavenly Father who art in Heaven will "feel" in His Sacred Heart about comments dismissing any focus, thought or feeling in our Hearts of God The Most High's Blessed Virgin Mary "God's Favoured One" - (Our Lady of Sorrows of Whom suffered greatly during Jesus Christ our Saviour's bitter Passion and Stations of His Cross) and Jesus Christ our Saviour's Heavenly Mother?

I say this to those of whom make comments of dismissal in relation to our Heavenly Mother Mary - for your own soul good eternally.

Three of Jesus' Stations of His Cross - of which every Catholic should be focussing daily - are The Thirteenth and Fourteenth Stations of Jesus' Cross of which are part of Jesus' Sorrows, Sufferings, Torments, Agonies, Tortures and Bitter Passion in which Jesus Christ our Saviour's Holy Mother Mary is Present, with our Hearts that should be open in Love and Sorrow for Her during the times we fully open up our Hearts to Jesus Christ our Saviour focussing on Jesus Himself and His Bitter Passion and Stations of His Cross.

The Fourth Station of Jesus Christ our Saviour's Stations of His Cross:

Jesus meets His Mother Mary of whom is afflicted:
"Recall the meeting between Jesus and His Mother Mary on the way to Calvary. How oppressive that experience must have been for both of them. What a sword of anguish must have pierced Mary's maternal heart!".

My Jesus, by the compassion You felt for Your Mother Mary, have compassion on me, and permit me to share in Her Holy intercession with You. O Mary, afflicted Mother, intercede for me with Your Son Jesus, that by His sufferings I may be saved from the wrath of which is to come".

The Thirteenth Station of Jesus Christ our Saviour's Stations of His Cross:

"Recall how two of His Disciples, Joseph and Nicodemus, took Jesus' Body down from His Cross, and how they laid Him in the arms of His stricken Mother Mary. She received Him with tenderness, pressing Him close to Her afflicted Heart".

"Mother of Sorrows, for the Love of Your Son, take me for Your servant, and pray to Him on my behalf. And You, Dear Jesus, who died for me, let me Love You and desire You".

The Fourteenth Station:

"The Body of Her dearly Beloved Son is taken from His Mother Mary and laid in the tomb. The Tomb is closed and Jesus' Lifeless Body remains until the hour of His Glorious Resurrection". Love and kindest wishes your Sister in Jesus Christ our Saviour".

 

[mark46]

With respect, if you consider Scott Hahn a lightweight, then this board is not the place to have your discussions. You should be having discussions with professors at Catholic seminaries.

Personally, I think it a bit silly to think that folks here can give you better understanding than Scott Hahn, and those from Coming Home for that matter.

I am not sure what you are looking for. The catechism is available to one and all.
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p123a9p6.htm

The interpretations of the dogma and doctrine are quite varied. The Church is a big tent.

And yes, the Orthodox explain best (better than Protestants in my view) alternative understandings of the Marian dogma and doctrines.
================

Protestants see some Catholics going overboard in their Marian devotions and beliefs and think that Catholics have faulty theology and reject Scripture. Catholics see those same folks and simply sigh.

You keep implying that because a certain understanding is not in Scripture, then it must be untie. We can discuss this at length, but this is not s sustainable view.

Scripture was not collected into one set until hundreds of years after Jesus. What we hold as the faith was developed as interpretations of Scripture over the centuries. We need Scripture plus Tradition plus Reason plus Experience. Individuals should NOT look at a doctrine and determine that it is not in Scripture and reject that doctrine. They need to understand what the Church teaches.
==============

In the end, you should realize what a big tent the Church really is. There is room for all Christians, the fact that there are those within the Church with very strange views and practices not withstanding.

To be clear, there is one Church. Since Vatican II, much of the Church has changed in ways that many on this board reject. Many here reject the popes of the 60's. So, I would be very careful before considering their views as what Catholicism means or must mean.
==========

BOTTOM LINE
If you want better arguments, go to a Jesuit seminary or find their courses/discussions on the web. But joining the Church has little to do with accepting every dogma and doctrine in the same ways as those message boards like this one.

To put it another way, there will be no church entity agrees with you on all dogma and doctrines. And you simply choose the closest one to your understandings, you will then need to change again as you grow spiritually. As my Baptist mentor taught me long ago (when I was leaving to join the Catholic Church), find a Church doing God's work and join in and get to work. Theology is a fine hobby, and a fine profession, but I suspect that it should not be the deciding factor in joint a local church.

Ok...so he's a bit lightweight. (I agree)

[/I]



Well if that is truly the case let me spell it out for you.

I know many Catholics that love Mary, believe she intercedes for them etc, but never really express the degree of emphasis you place upon Mary, and would never sign off, 'Yours in Jesus and Mary'. Which seems to signify what I see in your content as a deliberate attempt to raise Mary's profile and to get people focusing on her far more than they are inclined to do, should do or are required to do. (and I'm talking about your fellow Catholics).



In Jewish tradition a boy is considered a man between the ages of 12-13,
and finished formal education around 15-16, so it is possible that when Jesus died and rose again, John was around 15-16 years old or 18-19...my point was that as Jesus was dying He formally enjoined John and His mother...which is fairly momentous in itself...the Son of G-d commending John to receive as his mother the very woman who had carried the divine Son within her womb.



Actually I am not free to believe whatever I want to believe, I am compelled to always seek that which is true, and be obedient from the heart to the truth....Scripture always means exectly what it says, but we don't always get the gist in translation or when filtered through corrupt minds...sometimes we have to be like Mary and put things on the back burner till we understand more fully and get 'insight'.

I personally find the expression 'Our Lady' in reference to Mary a little quaint...but I don't really have a problem with the idea of Mary being a symbolic mother to people...I don't agree, but it is not something I would lose any sleep over....However it only takes a little leaven, and what might start off as a particular tradition can gain traction and become something that was never intended...I expect to elaborate more if necessary as this thread develops.



I dare say there have been many objections to this idea raised over these 2,000 years, but most of them have been conveniently forgotten or destroyed.

I think you have a slight point when you consider it an uncomfortable place to be for someone like myself....one of the strengths of the Catholic community is the weight of history behind them, and this is often used as part of a compelling argument on theological issues, that combined with the idea of being the only legitimate inheritors of Apostolic succession...you guys have the monopoly and claim the authority.

By comparison, part of the weakness of the Protestant tradition is it's relatively new emergence and its fragmentation...something that is not lost on those numerous threads that advocate for Catholicism on these Boards.

 

[mark46]

Thank you for sharing your personal experiences.

However, private devotions and private revaluations are not a required part of being a Catholics.

Given Jesus and our Blessed Virgin Mary Mother of God speak to my heart daily during Jesus' Divine Mercy Chaplet prayed and our Blessed Virgin Mary's Holy Rosary prayed for world causes and in between, it would be totally inappropriate for me to enter into a debate of what other posters Wisdom Tree, Zeek (the Author) and others of whom "may not" have formed a relationship through Jesus/God The Most High with our Blessed Virgin Mary, "Mother of God" of Whom is our Heavenly Mother, loves us all deeply, prays for us all, prays for the conversion of sinners, visits and brings Holy Refreshments to our Loved ones in Purgatory, (this can be our Grandparents, Aunts, Uncles, Cousins, Brothers, Sisters) prior to The Holy Souls in Purgatory being Cleansed, averts disasters through the prayers of Her Holy Rosaries prayed by The Holy Trinity, works through the hearts of those whom our Blessed Virgin Mary has chosen urging to pray Her Holy Rosaries and through hearts/souls/people converting them to Jesus Christ our Saviour...for Centuries.

A good book for people of whom do not Love or do not have feelings for our Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God - our Heavenly Mother Mary, of whom have a problem believing that our Heavenly Mother is in fact The Queen of Heaven and Queen of Mercy among other Holy Titles that God The Most High has given His Favoured One, I suggest Saint Louis De Montfort's "The Secret of The Rosary" and other books that Saint Louis and Blessed Alan de La Roche have written about Jesus Christ our Saviour with The Blessed Virgin Mary appearing to Priests, Sisters, Saints, Children and others around the Years 1,214 +.

Of course, those of whom are interested and have researched Jesus and our Blessed Virgin Mary Mother of God appearing to Popes, Bishops, Priests, Sisters/Nuns, Children and others around the world during each Century (including this era) already know that Jesus Christ our Saviour does in fact appear with our Blessed Virgin Mary Mother of God at different times.

If we cross over to Jesus Christ our Saviour in Judgement and have not been Loving, reverant, respectful and hold a belief in our Blessed Virgin Mary Mother of God, how does one "think" our Heavenly Father who art in Heaven will "feel" in His Sacred Heart about comments dismissing any focus, thought or feeling in our Hearts of God The Most High's Blessed Virgin Mary "God's Favoured One" - (Our Lady of Sorrows of Whom suffered greatly during Jesus Christ our Saviour's bitter Passion and Stations of His Cross) and Jesus Christ our Saviour's Heavenly Mother?

I say this to those of whom make comments of dismissal in relation to our Heavenly Mother Mary - for your own soul good eternally.

Two of Jesus' Stations of His Cross - of which every Catholic should be focussing daily - are The Thirteenth and Fourteenth Stations of Jesus' Cross of which are part of Jesus' Sorrows, Sufferings, Torments, Agonies, Tortures and Bitter Passion in which Jesus Christ our Saviour's Holy Mother Mary is Present, with our Hearts that should be open in Love and Sorrow for Her during the times we fully open up our Hearts to Jesus Christ our Saviour focussing on Jesus Himself and His Bitter Passion and Stations of His Cross.

The Thirteenth Station of Jesus Christ our Saviour's Stations of His Cross:

"Recall how two of His Disciples, Joseph and Nicodemus, took Jesus' Body down from His Cross, and how they laid Him in the arms of His stricken Mother Mary. She received Him with tenderness, pressing Him close to Her afflicted Heart".

"Mother of Sorrows, for the Love of Your Son, take me for Your servant, and pray to Him on my behalf. And You, Dear Jesus, who died for me, let me Love You and desire You".

The Fourteenth Station:

"The Body of Her dearly Beloved Son is taken from His Mother Mary and laid in the tomb. The Tomb is closed and Jesus' Lifeless Body remains until the hour of His Glorious Resurrection". Love and kindest wishes your Sister in Jesus Christ our Saviour".

 

[Mary's Bhoy]

I think SCIM might be being a bit overzealous in Marian devotion, and I agree somewhat with the OP.

Name a single pope, saint or doctor of the Church that would oppose a single statement I have made regarding Mary's place in human salvation, and then you might be able to say I'm being overzealous. I, on the other, can provide you lists of popes, saints and doctors of the Church that would completely support me. Forgive the expression, but I'm not pulling this out of my backside. This is the teaching of the Church as expressed in the magisterium, and the writings of the greatest saints and spiritual directors of history.

Yours in Jesus and Mary,
SCIM.

 

[Mary's Bhoy]

I will have a look at the book you mentioned some time, but with respect there have been extremly clever intellectuals from hundreds of years ago that have written all sorts of theological treatises, but much of it has been empty words devoid of the Spirit because they have not stayed anchored in Scripture...and before you think 'sola scriptura', it is a legitimate criticism across the Catholic and Protestant divide...

The book I have referred you to is entirely anchored in Sacred Scripture. It will give a greater defence of everything I have said than I can myself. I can either give you a hatchet job explanation of the Church's mariology, or I can direct you to a sterling exposition of the same. If you're genuinely interested in this subject then read the book.

Otherwise I can't help you.

Yours in Jesus and Mary,
SCIM.

 

[mark46]

This article should shed some light. If you read through, you will see that Pope Benedict clearly indicates it is allowed for Catholics to reject private revelations, even those found credible by the Church.

https://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/apparitions.htm

Private revelations and devotions have a place within the Church. Many are accepted and promoted by the Church. HOWEVER, none of these are elements of faith. None are required.

There are indeed Marian doctrines. They are stated in the catechism. However, even the catechism is subject to varied understandings. Having said all this, I suspect that paragraph 969 (as amplified by 970) would be the most troubling to you. If you are interested in the theological issues, you might read articles on what it means to be Advocate or Mediatrix. There are definitely different views.
=========

BTW, as an aside, it has been said that we must accept the devotions and understandings of other Catholics. That, also is not strictly true. There are indeed certain Marian apparitions that have been accepted as credible by the Church. There are certain devotions that are accepted and indeed promoted by the Church. These must indeed be respected.

HOWEVER, there are also hundreds of other private revelations and devotions which have not been accepted by the Church. To these, we may freely disagree. Out of charity, we should allow folks to their own spiritual walk. However, it is certain OK to think and say that their views are misguided. Many folks think that Mary speaks to them every day. We can reject such understandings of events.

Interesting point....sometimes these things are presented in such a way by some Catholics that you think they must be 'required'....it means that getting a proper over view of the Catholic faith is rather a fraught affair; and that despite the numerous guide-lines in the Catechism, is still open to some quite wide interpretations.

 

[Tallguy88]

Co-Redemptorix and Mediatrix of all Graces are opinions, but not required beliefs. My priest said the Vatican put a stop to people wanting them to be declared dogma because it was raising Mary too high up. And he is a very orthodox, holy man who survived the soviet persecutions, not some kumbyah-singing hippy-priest.

 

[mark46]

I agree with you. This is a good example of different interpretations of the catechism.

969
This motherhood of Mary in the order of grace continues uninterruptedly from the consent which she loyally gave at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation . . . . Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix."512


I include the full section on Mary for context.
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p123a9p6.htm

Co-Redemptorix and Mediatrix of all Graces are opinions, but not required beliefs. My priest said the Vatican put a stop to people wanting them to be declared dogma because it was raising Mary too high up. And he is a very orthodox, holy man who survived the soviet persecutions, not some kumbyah-singing hippy-priest.

 

[WisdomTree]

Co-Redemptorix and Mediatrix of all Graces are opinions, but not required beliefs. My priest said the Vatican put a stop to people wanting them to be declared dogma because it was raising Mary too high up. And he is a very orthodox, holy man who survived the soviet persecutions, not some kumbyah-singing hippy-priest.

Wait. I'm pretty sure they're doctrines, though I may be wrong on this. I know that a lot of bishops petitioned Saint John Paul II to dogmatise it ex cathedra, but then he was like, "nah", for good reasons as well, I was under the impression that the essence of the message of these titles were something Catholics had to agree with though it could be challenged during an Ecumenical Councils, unlike dogmas.

 

[Mary's Bhoy]

Co-Redemptorix and Mediatrix of all Graces are opinions, but not required beliefs. My priest said the Vatican put a stop to people wanting them to be declared dogma because it was raising Mary too high up. And he is a very orthodox, holy man who survived the soviet persecutions, not some kumbyah-singing hippy-priest.

Your priest is wrong.

The Vatican put a stop to nothing. Pope Leo XIII said that "we may affirm that nothing, by the will of God, is given to us without Mary's mediation, in such way that just as no one can approach the Almighty Father but through His Son, likewise no one, so to speak, can approach Christ but through His Mother." But furthermore the exists the liturgical feast of Our Lady, Mediatrix of All Graces. The Church has expressed herself solemnly through her liturgy.

These aren't mere opinions. The particulars of these doctrines have not been definitively defined, of course. God pray that the Church speedily does so. But that Our Lady is co-redemptrix and mediatrix is Catholic doctrine. We are only at liberty to discuss the particulars.

It is an on-going discussion. The Vatican is not opposing these discussions nor is it saying that people are placing too much emphasis on Mary. Otherwise she would be condemning countless popes and her own liturgy. The Second Vatican Council adequately expresses the absolute minimums of the Church's teaching on Mariology.

But I wonder, if your priest says that the Vatican hasn't defined these matters because it's placing too much emphasis on Mary, then what are his views on the fact that it took over 1800 years to dogmatically define the Immaculate Conception?

Yours in Jesus and Mary,
SCIM.