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.
Pope Saint Pius X is one of the most widely revered popes of modern times. But even then my position is not rested solely upon this saintly pope. Every pope for the past three centuries has taught these positions as a part of their ordinary magisterium. The Second Vatican Council also taught these doctrines. There is no real wiggle room. This is the teaching of the Church. You don't have to accept it. But Catholics do.
Now you say that this is all unkown in early tradition. Yet it goes back to the very earliest days of the Church as Saint Justin (165) was the first to introduce the doctrine of Mary as the New Eve and her cooperative work with the New Adam. Saint Ignatius (110) spoke of Mary's participation in God's plan in revealing Jesus to us. Saint Irenaeus of Lyons (202) was already speaking of Mary's mediatory role as the New Eve. Origen (254) and pseudo-Origen were speaking of Our Lady as mediatrix. Saint Ephraem (373) said of Mary that "the human race ... depends upon your patronage and has you alone as its refuge and defense ... your prayer, in fact, is powerful with your Son." And as I've already mentioned in this thread, the Patristic sources for this doctrine reached their height in Saints Germanus of Constantinople (733), Andrew of Crete (740) and John Damascene (749). It is entirely grounded and anchored in early tradition.
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.
Of course...I am totally orthodox in my beliefs.
And this is where you are fundamentally wrong.
First of all on the matter of Scripture I ask you, do you believe in the Most Holy Trinity? Yet the Trinity is never expressed in Scripture in those words. The doctrine of the Trinity is implicitly contained in Scripture. If you do not find explicit words in Scripture as to Mary's role, then I tell you that you cannot have the Trinity eiither because nowhere is it ever said "God is a triune God, one God in three divine persons." That Christ is "consubstantial with the Father" is never found in Scripture, yet it is in the Nicene Creed which is the universal mark of Christian orthodoxy. That the Holy Ghost is God is never explicitly mentioned in Scripture. We are told the Word is God. Where does it say the Holy Ghost is God? You are already relying upon implicit truths contained in Scripture as handed down to you by the early Church. Our Lady's role in our salvation is also implicitly contained in Scripture and in the doctrine of the Early Church (see above).
And the foundations for role of Mary in our salvation is that she is the Mother of God, as revealed in Scripture and proclaimed joyfully by the early Church. It is that she is Mother that she is co-redemptrix and mediatrix. It is because she is Mother that she is integral to our salvation, both in a general and particular sense.
You say that when you first encountered Jesus that there was never any added input concerning Mary. Don't you see how ridiculous that is? The very existence of Jesus presupposes Mary. You would never have known Jesus without Mary because there would have been no Incarnation. No Mary, no Jesus. Because this is God's will. He chose to enter the world and engage men through the womb of the Blessed Virgin Mary.
The very existence of Jesus presupposes Mary.
It is by Mary that God has revealed Himself to man, it is by Mary that He has become Man, taking the the form of a servant and slave, chaining Himself in loving bondage in the womb of the Ever-Virgin Theotokos.
Everything in the New Testament, the very Gospel itsef, would be nothing without Mary. It wouldn't exist. This is the general participation of Mary in your salvation. But there is also a particular participation in the life of each unique soul. Because she is co-redemptrix, she has participated in the redemptive act of Christ. And it is again through Mary that Christ dispenses the merits and graces of His sacrifice. Mary didn't win those merits, of course. That would be impossible. She is a creature, which is to say, she is nothing before God. Nothing by nature. But she is everything by grace, because it is the grace of God that is made her what she is. God doesn't change His mind. He has revealed Himself to us through Mary, and it is through Mary that He continues to engage us.
Everything that God is by nature, Mary is by grace.
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).
My sign off is an act of my own personal expression of devotion. It is not unique and it has a long tradition in Catholicism. But the truth contained in those words are truths that every Catholic must accept. The Immaculate Heart of Mary and the Sacred Heart of Jesus are inseperable. They beat as one. Not in nature, but in grace. Mary lives for Jesus, and Jesus lives for Mary. There is no conflict between them. They are not equal, Our Lady is subordinate to her Son, that goes without saying. But Christ has united Himself firmly to her, and we cannot participate in the life of Christ outwith the life of His Mother.
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.
As long as you maintain a sola scriptura position, then your house wil be built on sand.
Yours in Jesus and Mary,
SCIM.
