The snare of devotion to Mary.

[justinangel]

I saw my mother-in-law die before my eyes putting her faith in Mary. Days before she died I asked her if Mary can save her and she actually said yes.

Then in her dying moments, my father-in-law pushed me in front of her to pray for her as she was dying before our eyes. I simply prayed out loud in front of everyone that she would put her faith in Jesus, and ONLY JESUS.

What your mother-in-law probably did was put her faith in the efficacy of Mary's patronage and intercessory prayers in virtue of her merits and favour with God. And there's nothing wrong with that. Paul believed that he would be delivered by both the prayers of the Philippians and the Holy Spirit. 'Yes, and I shall rejoice. For I know that through your prayers and the help of the Spirit of Jesus Christ this will turn out for my deliverance' (Phil 1:19). It was because the apostle believed that we participate in Christ's mediation by offering up our prayers to the Lord for others that he exhorted the Ephesians to pray for each other. 'Pray at all times in the Spirit, with all prayer and supplication. To that end keep alert with all perseverance, making supplication for all the saints' (Eph. 6:18). Your mother-in-law must have felt that Mary's prayers to her Son would be more acceptable to him than her own, and so she would have a better chance of being received by the Lord in his kingdom. With our Blessed Mother's prayerful support behind her own prayers she had every reason to be more confident that Jesus would receive her soul by virtue of Mary's higher merits in the order of grace. 'Therefore confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous man has great power in its effects' (Jas 5:16).

It appears that Paul didn't believe that we should only directly supplicate the Lord. He did in fact ask the members of Christ's mystical body to pray for him. 'I appeal to you, brethren, by our Lord Jesus Christ and by the love of the Spirit, to strive together with me in your prayers to God on my behalf' (Rom 15:30). And he was sure that the prayers of the saints are acceptable to God. 'First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all men ... This is good, and it is acceptable in the sight of God our Savior' (1 Tim 2:1-3). All the saints and the righteous are called to participate in Christ's mediation on behalf of others for they are "fellow workers with God" (1 Cor 3:9). Our Lord does not desire to channel his grace and save souls on his own. 'Are they not all ministering spirits sent forth to serve, for the sake of those who are to obtain salvation?' (Heb.1:14). 'If any one sees his brother committing what is not a mortal sin, he will ask, and God will give him life for those whose sin is not mortal' (1 Jn. 5:16). 'Elijah was a human being as frail as ourselves -- he prayed earnestly for it not to rain, and no rain fell for three and a half years; then he prayed again and the sky gave rain and the earth gave crops. My brothers, if one of you strays away from the truth, and another brings him back to it, he may be sure that anyone who can bring back a sinner from his erring ways will be saving his soul from death and covering over many a sin' (Jas. 5:17-20).

The truth is that our Lord has made us a "kingdom of priests" to serve God. It is the function of the priest in the new dispensation to mediate on behalf of others in and through Christ by their prayers and personal sacrifices. 'To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood and made us a kingdom, priests to his God and Father, to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen' (Rev 1:6). 'And like living stones be yourselves built into a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ' (1 Pet 2:5). The prayers of the saints both in heaven and on earth are presented to God in and through his Lamb. Our prayers on earth are united with the prayers of the saints in heaven. 'And when he had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and with golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints' (Rev 5:8). By putting her faith in Mary, or more precisely, her united prayer of faith, your mother-in-law was in fact putting her faith in what God has ordained in His plan of salvation.

Is any among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord; and the prayer of faith will save the sick man, and the Lord will raise him up; and if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven.
James 5: 14-15

"Under your mercy we take refuge, O Mother of God. Do not reject our supplications in necessity, but deliver us from danger,O you alone pure and alone blessed."
Sub Tuum Praesidium, From Rylands Papyrus, Egypt (c.250 A.D.)

"The Virgin received Salvation so that she may give it back to the centuries."
Peter Chrysologus, Sermon 140 (ante A.D. 450)

PAX

 

[bbbbbbb]

What your mother-in-law probably did was put her faith in the efficacy of Mary's patronage and intercessory prayers in virtue of her merits and favour with God. And there's nothing wrong with that. Paul believed that he would be delivered by both the prayers of the Philippians and the Holy Spirit. 'Yes, and I shall rejoice. For I know that through your prayers and the help of the Spirit of Jesus Christ this will turn out for my deliverance' (Phil 1:19). It was because the apostle believed that we participate in Christ's mediation by offering up our prayers to the Lord for others that he exhorted the Ephesians to pray for each other. 'Pray at all times in the Spirit, with all prayer and supplication. To that end keep alert with all perseverance, making supplication for all the saints' (Eph. 6:18). Your mother-in-law must have felt that Mary's prayers to her Son would be more acceptable to him than her own, and so she would have a better chance of being received by the Lord in his kingdom. With our Blessed Mother's prayerful support behind her own prayers she had every reason to be more confident that Jesus would receive her soul by virtue of Mary's higher merits in the order of grace. 'Therefore confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous man has great power in its effects' (Jas 5:16).

It appears that Paul didn't believe that we should only directly supplicate the Lord. He did in fact ask the members of Christ's mystical body to pray for him. 'I appeal to you, brethren, by our Lord Jesus Christ and by the love of the Spirit, to strive together with me in your prayers to God on my behalf' (Rom 15:30). And he was sure that the prayers of the saints are acceptable to God. 'First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all men ... This is good, and it is acceptable in the sight of God our Savior' (1 Tim 2:1-3). All the saints and the righteous are called to participate in Christ's mediation on behalf of others for they are "fellow workers with God" (1 Cor 3:9). Our Lord does not desire to channel his grace and save souls on his own. 'Are they not all ministering spirits sent forth to serve, for the sake of those who are to obtain salvation?' (Heb.1:14). 'If any one sees his brother committing what is not a mortal sin, he will ask, and God will give him life for those whose sin is not mortal' (1 Jn. 5:16). 'Elijah was a human being as frail as ourselves -- he prayed earnestly for it not to rain, and no rain fell for three and a half years; then he prayed again and the sky gave rain and the earth gave crops. My brothers, if one of you strays away from the truth, and another brings him back to it, he may be sure that anyone who can bring back a sinner from his erring ways will be saving his soul from death and covering over many a sin' (Jas. 5:17-20).

The truth is that our Lord has made us a "kingdom of priests" to serve God. It is the function of the priest in the new dispensation to mediate on behalf of others in and through Christ by their prayers and personal sacrifices. 'To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood and made us a kingdom, priests to his God and Father, to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen' (Rev 1:6). 'And like living stones be yourselves built into a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ' (1 Pet 2:5). The prayers of the saints both in heaven and on earth are presented to God in and through his Lamb. Our prayers on earth are united with the prayers of the saints in heaven. 'And when he had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and with golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints' (Rev 5:8). By putting her faith in Mary, or more precisely, her united prayer of faith, your mother-in-law was in fact putting her faith in what God has ordained in His plan of salvation.

Is any among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord; and the prayer of faith will save the sick man, and the Lord will raise him up; and if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven.
James 5: 14-15

"Under your mercy we take refuge, O Mother of God. Do not reject our supplications in necessity, but deliver us from danger,O you alone pure and alone blessed."
Sub Tuum Praesidium, From Rylands Papyrus, Egypt (c.250 A.D.)

"The Virgin received Salvation so that she may give it back to the centuries."
Peter Chrysologus, Sermon 140 (ante A.D. 450)

PAX

I think it is quite absurd to assert that anyone other than God actually knew who or what his mother-in-law was trusting for her salvation. I certainly never met the woman and do not presume to speak for her, nor do I think you ever met her, did you? Why, then, do you attempt to put words into her mouth? If anyone could make a valid conclusion regarding her faith it would probably be members of her own household, would you not agree?

 

[justinangel]

I think it is quite absurd to assert that anyone other than God actually knew who or what his mother-in-law was trusting for her salvation. I certainly never met the woman and do not presume to speak for her, nor do I think you ever met her, did you? Why, then, do you attempt to put words into her mouth? If anyone could make a valid conclusion regarding her faith it would probably be members of her own household, would you not agree?

I'm assuming that his mother-in-law was a faithful and well informed Catholic. It appears by what Yogosans14 wrote that he misconstrues what it means for a devout and faithful Catholic to "put her faith" in Mary. Perhaps it would help if he told us all his mother-in-law actually said that alarmed him. Finally, if anyone can draw a valid conclusion regarding her understanding of the faith, apart from any verbal clarification, it would be God, who alone can read the human heart and fully knows our thoughts.

PAX

 

[mark46]

There is nothing wrong with believing in the intercessory prayers of Mary, AS LONG as this belief is in ADDITION to faith in Jesus as our Lord and Savior.

IMHO, it is misguided to rely on Mary's intercession for our salvation instead of relying on our faith in and our relationship with Jesus.

What your mother-in-law probably did was put her faith in the efficacy of Mary's patronage and intercessory prayers in virtue of her merits and favour with God. And there's nothing wrong with that.
PAX

 

[Rhamiel]

There is nothing wrong with believing in the intercessory prayers of Mary, AS LONG as this belief is in ADDITION to faith in Jesus as our Lord and Savior.

IMHO, it is misguided to rely on Mary's intercession for our salvation instead of relying on our faith in and our relationship with Jesus.

strawman
no one is arguing for Mary apart from Christ

that is just a silly idea, without Christ she would have just been another inhabitant of Roman occupied Palestine from 2,000 years ago

 

[justinangel]

There is nothing wrong with believing in the intercessory prayers of Mary, AS LONG as this belief is in ADDITION to faith in Jesus as our Lord and Savior.

IMHO, it is misguided to rely on Mary's intercession for our salvation instead of relying on our faith in and our relationship with Jesus.

Grace originates from God, and the dispensation of His grace has been merited for us by Christ. So the prayers of the righteous have powerful effects only in and through Christ. Unless we first have faith in Jesus, it is meaningless and futile to place our confidence in the intercessory prayers of the saints. Whatever graces we receive through their intercession in Jesus' name do not originate from them, but from the Lord. It certainly would be wrong and misguided of us to believe that Mary is the one who answers our prayers, as if grace originates from her and is made available strictly by her merits. But it is because of her merits that she receives from the Lord whatever she asks for on our behalf in accordance with the will of God.

What Jesus has merited for the whole world addresses the divine justice. Without the satisfaction Jesus has made for the sins of world, neither Mary nor any saint could merit anything from the Lord by addressing the divine mercy. And by merit Catholics mean an entitlement to a reward by right of friendship with God. Thus when Mary intercedes for us in our spiritual needs, the graces we may receive through her prayers are more for the sake of our Lord's love for her than for us. It is not because she has paid the ransom for our sins with her blood that actual grace is instrumentally applied for our sanctification and justification through her mediation, but rather because her divine Son has paid that ransom for us and her. Our Lord mercifully answers his mother's prayers as a favour to her and as part of her eternal reward because of the faith she had in her association with him in his redemptive work as she abided in God's love by observing His will. It is by right of Mary's friendship with God through the grace which her Son has initially merited for her that she can participate in his mediation of grace as a physical instrument.

Look at it this way. Grace originates in the divine nature of Christ, enters the world through his sacred humanity, which serves as a physical channel, and is passed on by him through other physical instruments of his, which also include the sacraments of the Church beginning with Baptism.

Like good stewards of the manifold grace of God, serve one another with whatever gift each of you has received.
1 Peter 4, 10

And this is the boldness we have in him, that if we ask anything according to his will, he hears us. And if we know that he hears us in whatever we ask, we know that we have obtained the requests made of him.
1 John 5, 14-15

PAX

 

[yogosans14]

Grace originates from God, and the dispensation of His grace has been merited for us by Christ. So the prayers of the righteous have powerful effects only in and through Christ. Unless we first have faith in Jesus, it is meaningless and futile to place our confidence in the intercessory prayers of the saints. Whatever graces we receive through their intercession in Jesus' name do not originate from them, but from the Lord. It certainly would be wrong and misguided of us to believe that Mary is the one who answers our prayers, as if grace originates from her and is made available strictly by her merits. But it is because of her merits that she receives from the Lord whatever she asks for on our behalf in accordance with the will of God.

What Jesus has merited for the whole world addresses the divine justice. Without the satisfaction Jesus has made for the sins of world, neither Mary nor any saint could merit anything from the Lord by addressing the divine mercy. And by merit Catholics mean an entitlement to a reward by right of friendship with God. Thus when Mary intercedes for us in our spiritual needs, the graces we may receive through her prayers are more for the sake of our Lord's love for her than for us. It is not because she has paid the ransom for our sins with her blood that actual grace is instrumentally applied for our sanctification and justification through her mediation, but rather because her divine Son has paid that ransom for us and her. Our Lord mercifully answers his mother's prayers as a favour to her and as part of her eternal reward because of the faith she had in her association with him in his redemptive work as she abided in God's love by observing His will. It is by right of Mary's friendship with God through the grace which her Son has initially merited for her that she can participate in his mediation of grace as a physical instrument.

Look at it this way. Grace originates in the divine nature of Christ, enters the world through his sacred humanity, which serves as a physical channel, and is passed on by him through other physical instruments of his, which also include the sacraments of the Church beginning with Baptism.

Like good stewards of the manifold grace of God, serve one another with whatever gift each of you has received.
1 Peter 4, 10

And this is the boldness we have in him, that if we ask anything according to his will, he hears us. And if we know that he hears us in whatever we ask, we know that we have obtained the requests made of him.
1 John 5, 14-15

PAX

And you know this...how?did you get to go to heaven and see how it all works up there

1 John 2:1King James Version (KJV)

2 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:

 

[mark46]

I don't think that the sacraments as instruments of Grace are at issue in this thread.

IMHO, the issues of this thread is whether Mary is part of our current salvation and about whether devotions to her are required by the Church for salvation.

Many Catholics strongly believe that because of Mary's "yes" and her historical role in the Church, that she somehow currently mediates or co-mediates our salvation. JPII was specifically asks to make this the dogma of the Church. He refused for good reason.

There are many good explanations of what the Church means when it calls Mary a co-mediator. What the Church does NOT mean is that Mary in any ways currently dispenses Grace or is part of our receiving the gift of salvation.

Look at it this way. Grace originates in the divine nature of Christ, enters the world through his sacred humanity, which serves as a physical channel, and is passed on by him through other physical instruments of his, which also include the sacraments of the Church beginning with Baptism.

Like good stewards of the manifold grace of God, serve one another with whatever gift each of you has received.
1 Peter 4, 10

And this is the boldness we have in him, that if we ask anything according to his will, he hears us. And if we know that he hears us in whatever we ask, we know that we have obtained the requests made of him.
1 John 5, 14-15

PAX

 

[mark46]

I agree that this should be a straw man. If it were, it would be very easy for all Catholics to state that salvation is from Jesus and the Father, and not from Mary.
Many cannot make this statement or anything close. The firmly believe that, in this age, salvation come through Jesus AND Mary.

===
But some are arguing for salvation without stating that salvation is only through Jesus, somehow requiring Mary's current participation beyond her "yes" and her roles within the Church.

Let me state the Protestant confession to see what fault we find in it.

We are saved by Grace alone,

through our Faith alone,

in Christ Jesus alone.

Of course, most of us believe that God uses the sacraments as instruments of Grace, although some of us argue how many sacraments there are beyond the two clearly initiated by Jesus and which we have been directly ordered by Jesus to participate in.
======

To be clear, Mary means much to us. She is greatest of the saints, and more. But she is NOT Jesus; she is NOT the Father; she is NOT the Source of Grace. Nor is she a sacrament; she is NOT an instrument of Grace.
======
And yes, I understand that many disagree with me. I do NOT believe that any of holy fathers since Vatican II have disagreed with what I have stated.

strawman
no one is arguing for Mary apart from Christ

that is just a silly idea, without Christ she would have just been another inhabitant of Roman occupied Palestine from 2,000 years ago

 

[Rhamiel]

mark

I do NOT believe that any of holy fathers since Vatican II have disagreed with what I have stated.

why limit it only to the past 50 years? that seems silly
we are not part of a 50 year old church like some of the Protestant sects
we are part of the ancient Church, no need to ignore that rich history

 

[bbbbbbb]

mark
why limit it only to the past 50 years? that seems silly
we are not part of a 50 year old church like some of the Protestant sects
we are part of the ancient Church, no need to ignore that rich history

Quite true. That rich history includes an ever-evolving set of doctrines, some of which concern Mary.

 

[mark46]

For me, it is not a matter of ignoring our rich history. It is a matter of the Church's understanding evolving (bbbbbbb's word) over time. It is not for us to pick and choose the Church's statement that we agree with deep in the past. To believe in an apostolic Church is to trust the understandings of dogma and doctrines as they have developed into the current understandings.

An example in another thread is the Church's teaching with regard to "no salvation outside of the Church". Of course, the dogma has not changed. But Pope Benedict was quite clear that the Church's understanding had indeed changed.

The Church has changed with regard to its understanding of forgiveness, especially of sin after baptism. There are many, many examples.

Surely, this is the case with regard to doctrines, dogma and practices regarding Mary. Popes have dealt with this issue "ex cathedra" (in clear distinction from the those outside of Rome). Pope JPII refused to "add" an additional clarification or additional dogma, depending on your view.

mark
why limit it only to the past 50 years? that seems silly
we are not part of a 50 year old church like some of the Protestant sects
we are part of the ancient Church, no need to ignore that rich history

 

[bbbbbbb]

For me, it is not a matter of ignoring our rich history. It is a matter of the Church's understanding evolving (bbbbbbb's word) over time. It is not for us to pick and choose the Church's statement that we agree with deep in the past. To believe in an apostolic Church is to trust the understandings of dogma and doctrines as they have developed into the current understandings.

An example in another thread is the Church's teaching with regard to "no salvation outside of the Church". Of course, the dogma has not changed. But Pope Benedict was quite clear that the Church's understanding had indeed changed.

The Church has changed with regard to its understanding of forgiveness, especially of sin after baptism. There are many, many examples.

Surely, this is the case with regard to doctrines, dogma and practices regarding Mary. Popes have dealt with this issue "ex cathedra" (in clear distinction from the those outside of Rome). Pope JPII refused to "add" an additional clarification or additional dogma, depending on your view.

Very true. The real issue seems to me not to be a narrowly viewed doctrine such as being discussed in this thread, but the nature of the church itself. If the church is viewed as the guardian of the truth once delivered to the saints, as seems to be the EO understanding, then the chasm between the two bodies is much larger than many actually understand it to be.

 

[mark46]

Yes, I agree that a very real issue that separates many Christians is the nature of the Church.

Many of us do believe as a great Anglican priest (John Wesley) once taught,
"the living core of the Christian faith was revealed in Scripture, illumined by Tradition, vivified in personal Experience, and confirmed by Reason. Scripture [however] is primary, revealing the Word of God 'so far as it is necessary for our salvation.' "


The open question is the role of the visible Church. Did Jesus indeed establish His Church which has protected and interpreted the deposit of faith given to the apostles? Surely, we are not left to our own interpretations of Scripture! Scripture contains all that is necessary for salvation, but it is NOT self-interpreting (at least IMHO). For me, the idea of self-interpeting Scripture leads to chaos. After all, many, many times, opposite conclusions are taken based on private interpretations of Scripture. Scripture can be used to support opposite conclusions and actions.

Of course, many cannot accept Wesley's understand of Church. Curiously, Luther and Calvin would have few problems with the statement.

Very true. The real issue seems to me not to be a narrowly viewed doctrine such as being discussed in this thread, but the nature of the church itself. If the church is viewed as the guardian of the truth once delivered to the saints, as seems to be the EO understanding, then the chasm between the two bodies is much larger than many actually understand it to be.

 

[justinangel]

And you know this...how?did you get to go to heaven and see how it all works up there

1 John 2:1King James Version (KJV)

2 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:

Scripture and Tradition.

Although I am less than the least of all the Lord’s people, this grace was given me: to preach to the Gentiles the boundless riches of Christ, and to make plain to everyone the administration of this mystery, which for ages past was kept hidden in God, who created all things. His intent was that now, through the church, the manifold wisdom of God should be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly realms, according to his eternal purpose that he accomplished in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Ephesians 3, 8-11

In Catholic theology, endorsed by the Ordinary Magisterium, what Christ merited on the cross for the human race was in strict justice [meritum de condigno ]. His suffering and death drew from his divine person an infinite and eternal value which only by itself was capable of making reparation for the sins that have been and would be committed by every human being. Christ alone is able to restore the equality of justice between God and humankind by paying the ransom for our sins. Thus he is our advocate.

Truly, no ransom avails for one’s life,
There is no price one can give to God for it.

For the ransom of life is costly,
and can never suffice,
that one should live on forever
and never see the grave.

But God will ransom my soul from the power of death,
for he will receive me.
Psalm 49, 7-10, 15

Mary, on the other hand, in union with her divine Son on Calvary, made temporal satisfaction for the sins of the world based not on strict justice, since she was not a divine personality, but on charity and the love she had for her Son in her anguish that united her to God [ meritum de congruo ].

Then Simeon blessed them and said to his mother Mary, “This child is destined for the falling and the rising of many in Israel, and to be a sign that will be opposed so that the inner thoughts of many will be revealed—and a sword will pierce your own soul too.”
Luke 2, 34-35

Simeon's prophecy was fulfilled on Calvary. A sword did pierce Mary's soul too, so that the purpose of her child's destiny should be fulfilled. Certainly Jesus' death alone was more than sufficient to reconcile the world with God. But in His infinite wisdom and mercy, God willed to redeem the world by having a mother's suffering be united with the suffering of her Son. He ordained that the death of his Son be united to his mother's dying to self on account of her love for God. Paul tells us: 'For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we will certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his. We know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be destroyed, and we might no longer be enslaved to sin. For whoever has died is freed from sin. But if we have died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him' (Rom 6:5-8). The truth is that our Lord does not desire to save us entirely on his own. The salvation only he alone could gain for us in strict justice requires that it be applied by our crucifying the flesh and renouncing sin in our love for God.

All human beings do in fact have an integral part to play in the application of their individual salvation. Of Mary, Pope Benedict XV says: "She renounced her rights as a mother over her Son for the salvation of all men" (Inter sodalicia). The integral part she had had in the economy of salvation was of a universal scope. In faith informed by charity, the Mother of our Lord accepted the immolation of her divine Son and offered it for us by renouncing her rights as a mother and accepting her suffering and loss for the salvation of the world achieved by her Son's laying down his life freely. In her love for her Son, Mary offered up all the torments of his body and soul which she had felt as a loving mother. And it was because of sin that she had suffered a mother's terrible anguish. Spiritually she was crucified in union with her Son for our salvation. The late Catholic theologian, Fr. Garrigou- Lagrange has pointed out that Mary suffered for sin in the degree of her love for God, whom sin offends; she suffered for her Son, whom sin crucified; she suffered for humankind whom sin ravishes and destroys. Jesus suffered and made eternal reparation because of his infinite love for the Father, whom sin offends, and his infinite love for us, whom sin ravishes and destroys. Mary's suffering and dying to self made temporal satisfaction to God for the sins of the world by appealing to the divine mercy in union with her Son's suffering and death which appealed to the divine justice.

What Jesus merited for us de condigno, Mary merited for us de congruo. We know by the extant writings of the ECFs, that the Church has called Mary the new Eve from earliest time. She has long been perceived as the mother of all the living with regard to the life of the soul, as Eve has been with regard to the life of the body. Mary is our spiritual mother, just as Eve is our biological mother (cf. Gen 3:20; Jn 19:26-27). The evangelist does have Jesus address his mother as "Woman" in his gospel at the start and end of his public ministry: at Cana and on Calvary. Our spiritual mother does give spiritual life to us, but not as the principle physical cause of divine grace which is Christ in his divine person by his merits in strict justice. Rather she gives spiritual life to us as a moral cause by her meriting grace for us in charity and by right of friendship with God. I'm sure James perceived this truth when he wrote: 'Whoever turns a sinner from the error of their way will save them from death and cover over a multitude of sins' (5:20). Obviously he believed that the faithful could obtain the actual grace of conversion and forgiveness for sinners by their mediation through prayer, self-denial, and self-sacrifice out of love for God and neighbour and their aversion for sin.

Now I rejoice in what I am suffering for you, and I fill up in my flesh what is still lacking in regard to Christ’s afflictions, for the sake of his body, which is the church.
Colossians 1, 24

"For whereas the Word of God was without flesh, He took upon Himself the holy flesh by the holy Virgin, and prepared a robe which He wove for Himself, like a bridegroom, in the sufferings of the cross, in order that by uniting His own power with our moral body, and by mixing the incorruptible with the corruptible, and the strong with the weak, He might save perishing man."
Hippolytus, Treatise on Christ and antiChrist, 4 (A.D. 200)

PAX

 

[Rhamiel]

For me, it is not a matter of ignoring our rich history. It is a matter of the Church's understanding evolving (bbbbbbb's word) over time. It is not for us to pick and choose the Church's statement that we agree with deep in the past. To believe in an apostolic Church is to trust the understandings of dogma and doctrines as they have developed into the current understandings.

An example in another thread is the Church's teaching with regard to "no salvation outside of the Church". Of course, the dogma has not changed. But Pope Benedict was quite clear that the Church's understanding had indeed changed.

The Church has changed with regard to its understanding of forgiveness, especially of sin after baptism. There are many, many examples.

Surely, this is the case with regard to doctrines, dogma and practices regarding Mary. Popes have dealt with this issue "ex cathedra" (in clear distinction from the those outside of Rome). Pope JPII refused to "add" an additional clarification or additional dogma, depending on your view.

there are many good reasons for this to NEVER be made a dogma, a dogma is closely defined. This is, in part, a mystery.
you can find several references to Mary as Mediatrix of All Graces by Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI
this is from February 2013

In his Latin-language letter naming Archbishop Zygmunt Zimowski, president of the Pontifical Council for Health Pastoral Care, as his special envoy to the solemn celebration of the World Day of the Sick at the Shrine of Our Lady of Altötting (Germany), Pope Benedict entrusted the prelate’s mission “to the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary Immaculate, Mediatrix of all graces” [intercessioni Beatae Virginis Mariae Immaculatae, Mediatricis omnium gratiarum].

 

[justinangel]

I don't think that the sacraments as instruments of Grace are at issue in this thread.

One can draw an analogy between Mary and the sacraments as physical instruments of divine grace. When we are baptized, for instance, we place our faith in Christ who instituted this sacrament and thereby its efficaciousness as a channel of grace. Thus by placing our faith in Mary's powerful intercession, we Catholics place our faith in Jesus who has granted his mother the capability of serving him as a physical channel of his grace so that we might become and remain intimately united with him in our life with God in His grace.

Mary is a sacrament no less than the Church is or even as her divine Son is in his sacred humanity. Not unlike a sacrament, Mary is much more than being a sign of grace having been received. She serves and acts as a continuation of Christ's redemptive work by efficaciously being a physical channel of divine grace. The redemptive merits of her divine Son are conveyed through her to a sinful world. God dispenses His grace through her just as He does through the sacraments of the Church - by the operation of the Holy Spirit whom Mary collaborates with. Still the sacraments are the richest source of grace in the Divine dispensation. Each sacrament has its own treasury of actual graces besides the gifts of sanctifying and habitual grace: a permanent and qualitative divine inhering in the soul. Sanctification is the state of being freed from mortal sin and enduring supernatural life with God through the infused virtues that accompany the gift of sanctifying grace.

The gifts of actual graces which we receive through the sacraments are temporary influences from God that enlighten our minds and prompt our wills to perform supernatural deeds that may result in our attaining salvation. God provides us with holy thoughts and desires contrary to our fallen natural inclinations with the help of these graces so that the grace of sanctity and justice be poured into our souls. Actual graces help enable the soul to qualitatively inhere in the divine life through the infused virtues we receive. It is these actual or helping graces that we seek when we take recourse to Mary. And by her prayers we do receive them, whether we have asked for them or not, in accordance with the will of God. Not unlike a sacrament, she acts as a physical channel of divine grace and as a sign that these graces have been received through the efficacy of her prayers for our particular spiritual needs.

IMHO, the issues of this thread is whether Mary is part of our current salvation and about whether devotions to her are required by the Church for salvation.

The ordinary magisterium of the Church does encourage the faithful to take recourse to Mary's maternal patronage and intercession to help ensure that they shall finally attain their salvation made possible for them by the merits of Christ.

Many Catholics strongly believe that because of Mary's "yes" and her historical role in the Church, that she somehow currently mediates or co-mediates our salvation. JPII was specifically asks to make this the dogma of the Church. He refused for good reason.

Former Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger advised him not to mainly for ecumenical reasons. Pope Sixtus lV established the Feast of the Immaculate Conception in 1476, but he refrained from defining this Marian doctrine as dogma not because he questioned its veracity. It wasn't until 1854 that Pope Pius lX promulgated the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, since he had reason to believe that the time was ripe. Meanwhile the ordinary magisterium has non-infallibly and consistently taught that Mary is Mediatrix of all grace. This in itself makes it spiritually certain and true just as the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception has always been.

There are many good explanations of what the Church means when it calls Mary a co-mediator. What the Church does NOT mean is that Mary in any ways currently dispenses Grace or is part of our receiving the gift of salvation.

Which church would that be?

Blessed Pope Pius IX, Ubi primum, 2 February 1849:

'God has committed to her the treasury of all good things, in order that everyone may know that through her are obtained every hope, every grace, and all salvation. For this is His will, that we obtain everything through Mary. '

Pope Saint Pius X, Ad Diem Illum Laetissimum (On the Immaculate Conception), 2 February 1904:

'By the communion of sorrows and of will between Christ and Mary, she has deserved to become the dispenser of all the blessings which Jesus acquired for us by His blood.'

Pope Pius XI, Address of 15 August 1933:

'God alone gives grace according to the measure which in His infinite wisdom He foresees. But although that grace comes from God, it is given through Mary, our Advocate and Mediatrix, since motherly affection on the one hand find response in childlike devotion on the other.'

Pope Pius XII, Auspicia quaedam, 1 May 1948:

'May she who has given us Jesus, obtain for us that all those who have wandered from the path of truth may immediately return to Him motivated by salutary contrition. May she obtain for us -- for she is our kindest Mother, who has always shown herself, in the face of every danger, our powerful helper and channel of grace -- may she obtain for us, We say, a just solution, even in the midst of our gravest needs.'

Pope Paul Vl, Signum Magnum, 13 May 1967:

But in what way does Mary cooperate in the growth of the members of the Mystical Body in the life of grace? First of all, by her unceasing prayers inspired by a most ardent charity. The Holy Virgin, in fact, though rejoicing in the vision of the august Trinity, does not forget her Son's advancing, as she herself did in the "pilgrimage of the faith". Indeed, contemplating them in God and clearly seeing their necessities, in communion with Jesus Christ, "who continues forever and is therefore able at all times to intercede for them," she makes herself their Advocate, Auxiliatrix, Adjutrix and Mediatrix.'

Pope John Paul ll, Redemptoris Mater, 25 March 1987:

'With the redeeming death of her Son, the maternal mediation of the handmaid of the Lord took on a universal dimension, for the work of redemption embraces the whole of humanity. Thus there is manifested in a singular way the efficacy of the one and universal mediation of Christ "between God and men" Mary's cooperation shares, in its subordinate character, in the universality of the mediation of the Redeemer, the one Mediator..."For," the text goes on, "taken up to heaven, she did not lay aside this saving role, but by her manifold acts of intercession continues to win for us gifts of eternal salvation.'

“With the Mediator you are the Mediatrix of the entire world.”
Ephraem of Syria, Syri opera graeca et latine, v. 3 (A.D. 373)

PAX

 

[mark46]

Hmm

There are indeed reasons why the Marian doctrines should not have been made dogma through ex cathedra statements. The EO approach of treating such understandings as mystery make sense to me.

But this is NOT the path chose by Rome. Rome chose to make decisions with regard to making certain understanding dogma, and rejecting others. The Immaculate Conception and the Assumption became dogma by Rome. the idea of Mary as Mediatrix of All Graces was rejected as dogma.

The Church has been willing to antagonize the East (and Protestants) in order to make clear the dogmas regarding Mary.

Much has been written about what the Catechism means in its paragraphs regarding Mary, including her role as mediatrix. Popes have made a DECISIONS regarding what is dogma and what is not. Perhaps we should accept those decisions.

there are many good reasons for this to NEVER be made a dogma, a dogma is closely defined. This is, in part, a mystery.
you can find several references to Mary as Mediatrix of All Graces by Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI
this is from February 2013

 

[Rhamiel]

Hmm

There are indeed reasons why the Marian doctrines should not have been made dogma through ex cathedra statements. The EO approach of treating such understandings as mystery make sense to me.

But this is NOT the path chose by Rome. Rome chose to make decisions with regard to making certain understanding dogma, and rejecting others. The Immaculate Conception and the Assumption became dogma by Rome. the idea of Mary as Mediatrix of All Graces was rejected as dogma.

The Church has been willing to antagonize the East (and Protestants) in order to make clear the dogmas regarding Mary.

Much has been written about what the Catechism means in its paragraphs regarding Mary, including her role as mediatrix. Popes have made a DECISIONS regarding what is dogma and what is not. Perhaps we should accept those decisions.

I respect that decision, I never SAID it was a dogma
but it is a term that is normally used

it does not have to be made a dogma to be a normal expression of our faith

 

[mark46]

I did not mean to suggest that you thought that these Marian understandings were dogma.

I certainly agree that Marian devotions are normal expressions of our faith, as is asking Mary to pray for us.

I have been a bit nitpicky, trying to stay on the original thread point with regard to whether the idea that Mary is Mediatrix of All Graces is required for salvation, and even whether this understanding is the teaching of the Church.

I doubt that if we were discussing this issue face to face that we would have serious disagreements, certainly not ones that are central to our faith. Certainly having the various Marian understanding being a mystery works for me.

I respect that decision, I never SAID it was a dogma
but it is a term that is normally used

it does not have to be made a dogma to be a normal expression of our faith