5th Marian Dogma

[lil_flower_luv]

Frankly, no.

In Orthodox Christian teaching Saint Mary Theotokos is the spouse of Saint Joseph.

If you want to introduce this poetic license into the discussion we are going to have a whole bunch of complications, including but not limited to:

• God does not “marry”, for one thing. The Holy Trinity of God is really not “gender specific” either.
• No one may marry two people simultaneously.
• It cannot be assumed that a spouse has the same or similar prerogatives or has influence in the work of the other. ie the President’s wife is not the President, the garbage collector’s wife is not the garbage collector, the webmaster’s wife is not the webmaster etc.

The old Catholic encyclopedia states:
Marriage is that individual union through which man and woman by their reciprocal rights form one principle of generation. It is effected by their mutual consent to give and accept each other for the purpose of propagating the human race, of educating their offspring, of sharing life in common, of supporting each other in undivided conjugal affection by a lasting union.

To imply this between a creature of God and the Holy Divine sounds quite a bit like a heresy to me.

That is one possible interpretation.

However scriptural exegesis allows for numerous meanings to a passage, some not completely obvious, and of course there are some that seem to be wisps of fancy.

Every time we make exegesis beyond the literal meaning of the text we are stretching. We can only go so far with a technique like that before we come up with some dangerous novelties. In this case even the literal meaning requires us to make some assumptions.

For example, for Jesus to say “behold your mother” can be interpreted figuratively, but we must not lose sight of the literal meaning, which is (supposedly) that Jesus knew he was dying, and he needed to make provision for the care of his mother (whom we assume had no other children to look after her).

The text never mentions grace at all. It is not at all clear that Jesus was thinking of appointing his mother to any responsibility at all, except possibly cooking for saint John. The whole “Mediatrix” concept comes from somewhere else entirely, out of left field.

Then we have to deal with the very real fact that she did not die for years afterward. Was she doing this job while she was living in Ephesus?

Why have the Apostles never mentioned it, they all knew her personally!?

The subject doesn’t seem to have come up anywhere in the first centuries. Saint Paul never mentioned it, nor Saint Peter nor Saint James. It’s not in the Didache, or have I missed it?
I am not convinced that she was “granted a singular privilege of sinlessness just for that purpose”.

Are you suggesting Saint Mary of Nazareth was predestined to be the Mediatrix of ALL graces?
I think that you are getting your point across. It’s just not very convincing.

Sorry, but that’s just how it looks from here. I appreciate that you have taken the time to respond.

Answered very well below :clapping:

Indeed, Joseph was the foster-parent of Jesus. To the Jews that’s the same as having been his biological father.

The Holy Spirit DID espouse Mary:
St. Louis de Montfort explains:
God the Holy Spirit . . . became fruitful through Mary whom he espoused. It was with her, in her, and of her that he produced his masterpiece, the God-made-man, and that he produces every day until the end of the world in the members of the adorable Head. For this reason the more he finds Mary—his dear and inseparable spouse—in a soul, the more powerful and effective he becomes in producing Jesus Christ in that soul. (True Devotion, 20)

And here:
Mary is depicted as the spouse of the Holy Spirit in Scripture. In Luke 1:34, when Mary asks the angel how she will conceive a child, the angel responds: “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God.”

As for “heresy”. How would that be heresy? Jesus is depicted marrying His Church, and that would be us. Marriage here is only a small shadow of what true marriage in heaven will be.

Final thing:

The purpose for the great privilege she has may very well be for many reasons but the biggest reason is that it was fitting for Jesus to be born of such a woman. Not necessary, but fitting. Not only did He make Himself the best mother, He was such a gentleman as to ask His own mother she would accept giving birth to Him.

Anyway, Hesychios, please give this a good read: catholic.com/thisrock/2006/0609fea1.asp

God bless.

Thank you.

God Bless
Therese

 

[Hiskid1973]

Indeed, Joseph was the foster-parent of Jesus. To the Jews that’s the same as having been his biological father.

The Holy Spirit DID espouse Mary:
St. Louis de Montfort explains:
God the Holy Spirit . . . became fruitful through Mary whom he espoused. It was with her, in her, and of her that he produced his masterpiece, the God-made-man, and that he produces every day until the end of the world in the members of the adorable Head. For this reason the more he finds Mary—his dear and inseparable spouse—in a soul, the more powerful and effective he becomes in producing Jesus Christ in that soul. (True Devotion, 20)

And here:
*Mary is depicted as the spouse of the Holy Spirit in Scripture. In Luke 1:34, when Mary asks the angel how she will conceive a child, the angel responds: “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God.”*God bless.

Louis de Montfort explains: This is an opinion of a man…

There is no marriage in heaven…She was espoused to Joseph…I don’t base my faith on assumptions…But on the scripture given to the original apostles breathed by the Holy Spirit…Some of your doctrines/dogma scare me…

 

[lil_flower_luv]

Louis de Montfort explains: This is an opinion of a man…

There is no marriage in heaven…She was espoused to Joseph…I don’t base my faith on assumptions…But on the scripture given to the original apostles breathed by the Holy Spirit…Some of your doctrines/dogma scare me…

Don’t let anything scare you. How much of our life we waste in fear when there is nothing to fear! How much more powerful is God?

To say that the Spirit was not espoused to Mary is to deny scripture. Didn’t you read: "And the angel said to her in reply, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you…”? Luke 1: 35

God Bless you

 

[Hiskid1973]

Don’t let anything scare you. How much of our life we waste in fear when there is nothing to fear! How much more powerful is God?

To say that the Spirit was not espoused to Mary is to deny scripture. Didn’t you read: "And the angel said to her in reply, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you…”? Luke 1: 35

God Bless you

Thanks…I’m not fearful for my sake but for others making gospel out of something that isn’t sacred scripture…Like these Mary dogmas have people going nuts over rust and oil stains…I looked at at least 10 bible versions none of them hove espoused in there…

I see this: Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost

 

[lil_flower_luv]

Thanks…I’m not fearful for my sake but for others making gospel out of something that isn’t sacred scripture…Like these Mary dogmas have people going nuts over rust and oil stains…

A wise saint once said, “Leave sadness to those of the world. We who work for Christ should be lighthearted.” Do not fear for any soul but your own. I was told this when I thought the same for you, my protestant brothers and sisters.

I see this: Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost

That’s correct!

Let’s look at the Catechism…You are, after all, on a Catholic Forum, and I am supposed to give you the Catholic answer…
*
I. CONCEIVED BY THE POWER OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. . .

484 The Annunciation to Mary inaugurates “the fullness of time”,119 the time of the fulfillment of God’s promises and preparations. Mary was invited to conceive him in whom the “whole fullness of deity” would dwell “bodily”.120 The divine response to her question, “How can this be, since I know not man?”, was given by the power of the Spirit: "The Holy Spirit will come upon you."121

485 The mission of the Holy Spirit is always conjoined and ordered to that of the Son.122 The Holy Spirit, “the Lord, the giver of Life”, is sent to sanctify the womb of the Virgin Mary and divinely fecundate it, causing her to conceive the eternal Son of the Father in a humanity drawn from her own.

486 The Father’s only Son, conceived as man in the womb of the Virgin Mary, is “Christ”, that is to say, anointed by the Holy Spirit, from the beginning of his human existence, though the manifestation of this fact takes place only progressively: to the shepherds, to the magi, to John the Baptist, to the disciples.123 Thus the whole life of Jesus Christ will make manifest "how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power."124 *

scborromeo.org/ccc/p122a3p2.htm

 

[Hesychios]

Indeed, Joseph was the foster-parent of Jesus. To the Jews that’s the same as having been his biological father.

The discussion here is about Mary, and whether she can be considered espoused to the Holy Spirit.

Does any one deny that Saint Joseph was her spouse?

Did he not contemplate divorcing her, to be dissuaded by an angel?

Was he not present in the caravan ‘worried and searching for Jesus’ when Jesus was twelve and stayed behind in the temple?

St. Louis de Montfort explains:
God the Holy Spirit . . . became fruitful through Mary whom he espoused. It was with her, in her, and of her that he produced his masterpiece,

This smacks of anthropomorphism.

]Mary is depicted as the spouse of the Holy Spirit in Scripture. In Luke 1:34, when Mary asks the angel how she will conceive a child, the angel responds: “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God.”

This does not actually depict the Holy Spirit as a spouse.

It describes God making a virgin conceive a child.

As for “heresy”. How would that be heresy? Jesus is depicted marrying His Church, and that would be us. Marriage here is only a small shadow of what true marriage in heaven will be.

One does not make a dogma out of an allegory.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Heard on Catholic Radio last night that this “5 Marian Dogma” that **Mary is the Mediatrix of All Graces **is NOT a new dogma and that it has been believed since the beginning of the Church.

Apparently there is a petition which either has or will be sent to Pope Benedict with millions of signatures requesting him to make an Infallible Statement on this dogma.

Two questions for Catholics I have are:

1. If it’s been believed and taught since the beginning of the Church, then why would it need to be officially declared as dogma in an Infallible Statement by the Pope?
2. If it’s been believed and taught since the beginning of the Church, then why don’t we see it referenced anywhere in Church History & Tradition?

The Bible was silent about it, the Councils were silent about it and the Fathers were silent about it.

Gabriel of 12;
I believe you have a misunderstanding of the Oral Apostolic Tradition? I learned about the Catholic belief’s of the blessed Virgin Mary, not from the bible, not from literature, but from what my grandparents, parents, and local parishoners already practiced and believed in the blessed Mother of Jesus Christ. This is how Maryion belief’s came down by Practice not all written literature. Now when her (Mary’s or Jesus) dignity from Apostolic practice and belief of Marian belief’s came under attack from heretics or heresies, is when the Popes or Church counciled to define an already Marian belief as dogma or doctrine. Every thing Jesus said and did, did not get recorded or written down, but became living faith and practice.

Every Early Church Father that I have read about had a special devotion to Mary, or protected her from ever being disgraced by heretics or heresies.

The signatures to promote an already co-redemptrix practiced belief by the Catholic laity and religious does not need to be made dogma at this time, because this already co-redemptrix belief is already included in many of our rosaries and prayers.

Now when this practice is threatened one day, it is then when Jesus will send his Holy Spirit and his Angels to confirm this as doctrine or worthy of belief, and seperate his sheep from the goats. But at this time the blessed Mother of God is not being threatened or her children for their faith in Her Son Jesus and her intercession or co-redemptrix. Only the misunderstanding non catholics have of this already Catholic belief need to be clarified for what it is not, and what they pretend or misunderstand the practice belief of co-redemptrix.

Mary is not the first woman in the bible to make an act of faith to save God’s children from certain death, and she is not the first woman to assist in God’s plan to save his people. When taken in this perspective, it is not hard at all to understand “co-redemptrix” from a biblical view. Just as God took Enoch into heaven without seeing death, and assumed Elijah the prophet into heaven, it is not hard to have faith that Mary the Mother of God was assumed into heaven both body and soul.

Peace be with you

 

[StrawberryJam]

All graces though. ALL graces. That means each and every single one of them.

Mary was not on the cross. There’s one. I know there are some funky sects in some latin american countries that have drifted into strange faiths combining catholic traditions with other religions, and you can see Mary on a cross in these groups that clearly don’t understand what it is they are doing.

I don’t understand the All Graces part of this. It can not be ALL of them.

 

[Guyonthestreet]

it is not hard to have faith that Mary the Mother of God was assumed into heaven both body and soul.

Peace be with you

I have absolutely no problem accepting that this may well be the case. But I find it extrodinary there isnt any mention of this in the early writings.

I know not everything was written down, nor could it be.

But surely the Assumption of Mary into heaven is right up there with the recordable incidents of the early church.

Why no written record of this?

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

All graces though. ALL graces. That means each and every single one of them.

Mary was not on the cross. There’s one. I know there are some funky sects in some latin american countries that have drifted into strange faiths combining catholic traditions with other religions, and you can see Mary on a cross in these groups that clearly don’t understand what it is they are doing.

I don’t understand the All Graces part of this. It can not be ALL of them.

Mary gave birth (her flesh) to the Word of God which is the source of all Graces, Mary according to the “Strength of God” Gabriel the salutation angel called her by her new God given name “Hail Mary FULL OF GRACE”. To be full of God’s Grace is where All Graces begin her life.

 

[StrawberryJam]

I have absolutely no problem accepting that this may well be the case. But I find it extrodinary there isnt any mention of this in the early writings.

I know not everything was written down, nor could it be.

But surely the Assumption of Mary into heaven is right up there with the recordable incidents of the early church.

Why no written record of this?

They may have been unable to see how it fit into the plan of salvation to mention it. Or, they were waiting for Jesus to tell them what to do, they were expecting him back very quickly. Much more quickly than you all today. Not to sound rude, but then they died. So, I don’t know if the fact they did not write anything about it matters. Or if it indicates one should be worried they did not. To me, they were not really that smart even when Jesus was amoung them in the flesh, why would they suddenly get smart about things after he rose?

 

[StrawberryJam]

Mary gave birth (her flesh) to the Word of God which is the source of all Graces, Mary according to the “Strength of God” Gabriel the salutation angel called her by her new God given name “Hail Mary FULL OF GRACE”. To be full of God’s Grace is where All Graces begin her life.

She did not do it herself. She did not bring about his birth on her own, did she? Is this some newer innovative theology I haven’t read about yet?

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

I have absolutely no problem accepting that this may well be the case. But I find it extrodinary there isnt any mention of this in the early writings.

I know not everything was written down, nor could it be.

But surely the Assumption of Mary into heaven is right up there with the recordable incidents of the early church.

Why no written record of this?

The Early Church Fathers revealed an already practice and belief that Mary was Mother of God. This comes to the surface 400 years after the resurrection of Jesus, because it was challenged from a famed heretic and heresy introduced from the Eastern Catholic Patriarch by the name of “Nestorious”. The council of Ephesus in 431 a.d named her dogmatically as “Mother of God” Theotokos, now any one who does no accept this dogma that was already practiced and believed in, now made doctrine becomes excommunicated like “Nestorious” and his followers were.

From here all of Christendom remain Catholic. Mary does not come under attack for the next 1100 years. We find many desert fathers, Popes, Saints, Martyrs who have recorded a practicing faith in the blessed Virgin Mary. Sure the doma of her “assumption” is not recorded from apologetical writings because she does not come under attack, but a devotional prayer life is displayed from antiquity for her (Mary’s ) intercession, not from writings or Early Church Fathers apostolic teachings but most surprisingly from Art. Such as paintings, prayers, rosaries beads, statues, pilgrimage, etc.

The Assumption of Mary is recorded from scripture, when we come across the early church Fathers who interpret the Apostolic Tradition from sacred scripture. But we need the ancient Church to interpret these scriptures. One famous scripture among many is taken from Revelations 12:1. I find many Old Testament scriptures that reference her assumption.

Peace be with you

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

She did not do it herself. She did not bring about his birth on her own, did she? Is this some newer innovative theology I haven’t read about yet?

Lol… I find your comment interesting, everytime I try to correct a misunderstanding of my Catholic faith, it sounds like my 2000 year old Catholic faith is something new.

Mary according to the Early Church Fathers is called the New Eve because scripture records Jesus as the second( New) Adam. The first Eve brought about death from her choice to reject God in her disobedience, as well as the first Adam who also partook of the forbidden fruit.

Mary the New Eva whom we call “AVE” reversed this death from our first parents in her “yes” to God and obedience, which brought about life eternal and communion with God. The first Adam and Eve disobeyed God, the second Adam and Eve (Mary) obeyed God and brought about redemption for humanity.

Mary was NOT created as a robot, Mary’s freewill in her “yes” and obedience to God participated in bringing life to the dead children from the first Adam and Eve, our first parents.

God made this promise since the fall of man in Genesis 3:15 when he spoke his first protoevangelium to the serpent.

Since the fall the serpent has always sought out the woman and her child, but placed enmity between the serpent and the woman (Mary) and her seed. Thus we have many brave and heroic Woman in the bible who did God’s will.

According to the prophets Mary gave birth to Jesus without pain, birth pains were a curse from the fall of humanity for woman, that is why Gen. 3:15, and the prophets confirm from scripture that Mary was born without sin. Mary’s birth pains do not come upon her until the crucifixion, when the sacrifice of redemption comes from her son, what I have just stated here is a great mystery for this act exceeds the face value of the crucifixion, because it enters into eternity. So yes Mary suffered greatly at the foot of the cross.

Mary said yes to the divine plan of God for the salvation of humanity, that she will give birth to “emmanuel” God is with us. Jesus is full of Grace and Truth, Mary is “full of Grace”, we the believers are parted “Grace”.

What Mary did all by herself was submit her “will” to God’s perfect will. Mary co-operated with God to bring salvation and redemption into the world through her own flesh and will, thus co-redemptrix.

 

[StrawberryJam]

Lol… I find your comment interesting, everytime I try to correct a misunderstanding of my Catholic faith, it sounds like my 2000 year old Catholic faith is something new.

Mary according to the Early Church Fathers is called the New Eve because scripture records Jesus as the second( New) Adam. The first Eve brought about death from her choice to reject God in her disobedience, as well as the first Adam who also partook of the forbidden fruit.

Mary the New Eva whom we call “AVE” reversed this death from our first parents in her “yes” to God and obedience, which brought about life eternal and communion with God. The first Adam and Eve disobeyed God, the second Adam and Eve (Mary) obeyed God and brought about redemption for humanity.

Mary was NOT created as a robot, Mary’s freewill in her “yes” and obedience to God participated in bringing life to the dead children from the first Adam and Eve, our first parents.

God made this promise since the fall of man in Genesis 3:15 when he spoke his first protoevangelium to the serpent.

Since the fall the serpent has always sought out the woman and her child, but placed enmity between the serpent and the woman (Mary) and her seed. Thus we have many brave and heroic Woman in the bible who did God’s will.

According to the prophets Mary gave birth to Jesus without pain, birth pains were a curse from the fall of humanity for woman, that is why Gen. 3:15, and the prophets confirm from scripture that Mary was born without sin. Mary’s birth pains do not come upon her until the crucifixion, when the sacrifice of redemption comes from her son.

Mary said yes to the divine plan of God for the salvation of humanity, that she will give birth to “emmanuel” God is with us. Jesus is full of Grace and Truth, Mary is “full of Grace”, we the believers are parted “Grace”.

What Mary did all by herself was submit her “will” to God’s perfect will. Mary co-operated with God to bring salvation and redemption into the world

through her own flesh and will

Through her own flesh, I agree. Through her own flesh And will, I do not agree. It was not her will to bear the messiah. She agreed to it, and co operated with it. She did not dream it up herself, nor did she get on the cross.

You are talking to someone who would have no problem with the other dogmas by the way.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Through her own flesh, I agree. Through her own flesh And will, I do not agree. It was not her will to bear the messiah. She agreed to it, and co operated with it. She did not dream it up herself, nor did she get on the cross.

You are talking to someone who would have no problem with the other dogmas by the way.

Then we can dig further back from Marian tradition. Mary took the Nazarene vow to remain a virgin. Miracles were recorded when Mary as an infant with St. Ana and St. Joachim her parents took her to the temple of God. I introduce this to reveal that Mary lived a holy life to God, in fact she was to be given to the temple priest to perform duties in the temple, but she needed a husband for financial support thus St.Joseph was betrothed to Mary.

It was not revealed to Mary yet by God that she will give birth to Jesus. It was not the first Eve’s choice to bring about death to all who followed her and the first Adam. It was God’s covenant law that the first Eve broke with the first Adam, that brought about death to humanity.

Now reverse the above scenario in Mary and Jesus. Mary’s obedience to God’s will through her brought about our salvation. Mary gave her son for us so that we may have life, Jesus gives his mother Mary to us at his departure into death.

 

[StrawberryJam]

Then we can dig further back from Marian tradition. Mary took the Nazarene vow to remain a virgin. Miracles were recorded when Mary as an infant with St. Ana and St. Joachim her parents took her to the temple of God. I introduce this to reveal that Mary lived a holy life to God, in fact she was to be given to the temple priest to perform duties in the temple, but she needed a husband for financial support thus St.Joseph was betrothed to Mary.

It was not revealed to Mary yet by God that she will give birth to Jesus. It was not the first Eve’s choice to bring about death to all who followed her and the first Adam. It was God’s covenant law that the first Eve broke with the first Adam, that brought about death to humanity.

Now reverse the above scenario in Mary and Jesus. Mary’s obedience to God’s will through her brought about our salvation. Mary gave her son for us so that we may have life, Jesus gives his mother Mary to us at his departure into death.

All you are telling me is fine and great for what I already think is fine and not totally objectionable. But not a single thing in what you are posting here explains her being the source of All Graces. I’m starting to get worried that is being missed here.

Again, was she on the cross? If the answer is NO, and it better be a no I think…

Then you can’t say this. It would be a total deception to say it.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

She did not do it herself. She did not bring about his birth on her own, did she? Is this some newer innovative theology I haven’t read about yet?

I agree with you Mary did not bring about Jesus birth all on her own, she was overshadowed by the Holy Spirit. Here are the prophecies.

Isaiah 54: 5 For he who has become your husband is your Maker; his name is the LORD of hosts; Your redeemer is the Holy One of Israel, called God of all the earth.

 Isaiah 62: 5 As a young man marries a virgin, your Builder shall marry you; And as a bridegroom rejoices in his bride so shall your God rejoice in you.

Hosea 2: 21 I will espouse you to me forever: I will espouse you in right and in justice, in love and in mercy; 22 I will espouse you in fidelity, and you shall know the LORD.

Song of Songs 2: 1 I am a flower of Sharon, a lily of the valley. 2 As a lily among thorns, so is my beloved among women. 3 As an apple tree among the trees of the woods, so is my lover among men. I delight to rest in his shadow, and his fruit is sweet to my mouth. 4 He brings me into the banquet hall and his emblem over me is love.
Isaiah 66: 7 Before she comes to labor, she gives birth; Before the pains come upon her, she safely delivers a male child. 8 Who ever heard of such a thing, or saw the like? 9 Shall I bring a mother to the point of birth, and yet not let her child be born? says the LORD; Or shall I who allow her to conceive, yet close her womb? says your God. 10 Rejoice with Jerusalem and be glad because of her, all you who love her; Exult, exult with her,

 

[StrawberryJam]

I agree with you Mary did not bring about Jesus birth all on her own, she was overshadowed by the Holy Spirit. Here are the prophecies.

Isaiah 54: 5 For he who has become your husband is your Maker; his name is the LORD of hosts; Your redeemer is the Holy One of Israel, called God of all the earth.

 Isaiah 62: 5 As a young man marries a virgin, your Builder shall marry you; And as a bridegroom rejoices in his bride so shall your God rejoice in you.

Hosea 2: 21 I will espouse you to me forever: I will espouse you in right and in justice, in love and in mercy; 22 I will espouse you in fidelity, and you shall know the LORD.

Song of Songs 2: 1 I am a flower of Sharon, a lily of the valley. 2 As a lily among thorns, so is my beloved among women. 3 As an apple tree among the trees of the woods, so is my lover among men. I delight to rest in his shadow, and his fruit is sweet to my mouth. 4 He brings me into the banquet hall and his emblem over me is love.

 Isaiah 66: 7 Before she comes to labor, she gives birth; Before the pains come upon her, she safely delivers a male child. 8 Who ever heard of such a thing, or saw the like? 9 Shall I bring a mother to the point of birth, and yet not let her child be born? says the LORD; Or shall I who allow her to conceive, yet close her womb? says your God. 10 Rejoice with Jerusalem and be glad because of her, all you who love her; Exult, exult with her,

What does this have to do with all graces? All graces??

How many times do I have to ask you if she was on the cross? I don’t have a problem with the current dogmas, I do not understand what is meant by your understanding of ALL graces though. ALL.

 

[StrawberryJam]

Then we can dig further back from Marian tradition. Mary took the Nazarene vow to remain a virgin. Miracles were recorded when Mary as an infant with St. Ana and St. Joachim her parents took her to the temple of God. I introduce this to reveal that Mary lived a holy life to God, in fact she was to be given to the temple priest to perform duties in the temple, but she needed a husband for financial support thus St.Joseph was betrothed to Mary.

It was not revealed to Mary yet by God that she will give birth to Jesus. It was not the first Eve’s choice to bring about death to all who followed her and the first Adam. It was God’s covenant law that the first Eve broke with the first Adam, that brought about death to humanity.

Now reverse the above scenario in Mary and Jesus. Mary’s obedience to God’s will through her brought about our salvation. Mary gave her son for us so that we may have life, Jesus gives his mother Mary to us at his departure into death.

All these things you say here are fine and explain current dogma. Not all graces. Not by a long shot.