5th Marian Dogma

[Gabriel_of_12]

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.

Mary was present during Jesus passion and death at the foot of the cross. Did a sword pierce her heart of Mary at the foot of the cross? Yes, this fulfilled the prophecy from the Holy Spirit who spoke through the devout man Simeon in the temple when he spoke this message to Mary herself, after he saw the salvation Mary was presenting in the temple.

But I dont think the “Source of All Graces” when referenced to the Mother of God references your understanding coming from the Crucifixion of Jesus.

Explain to me what you think the “Source of All Graces” is supposed to come from the cross? Then maybe I can help define “Source of All Graces” from a Catholic perspective?

 

[StrawberryJam]

Mary was present during Jesus passion and death at the foot of the cross. Did a sword pierce her heart of Mary at the foot of the cross? Yes, this fulfilled the prophecy from the Holy Spirit who spoke through the devout man Simeon in the temple when he spoke this message to Mary herself, after he saw the salvation Mary was presenting in the temple.

But I dont think the “Source of All Graces” when referenced to the Mother of God references your understanding coming from the Crucifixion of Jesus.

Explain to me what you think the “Source of All Graces” is supposed to come from the cross? Then maybe I can help define “Source of All Graces” from a Catholic perspective?

I can’t believe I have to explain this, but unless she was the literal source of sacrifice, on the cross, then she can’t be the source of ALL graces unless the death of Jesus Christ (and later resurrection) on the Cross is not a grace.

Why have stations of the cross anymore with theology like this?

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

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.

Do you believe the Catholic Church has a dogma defining Mary as the “source of All Graces?” I have seen it prayed in a litany, but it does not give the meaning that She is God. This is not a doctrine defined of Mary.

 

[StrawberryJam]

Do you believe the Catholic Church has a dogma defining Mary as the “source of All Graces?” I have seen it prayed in a litany, but it does not give the meaning that She is God. This is not a doctrine defined of Mary.

This thread talks about Mary as Mediatrix of all graces. It is not a dogma yet.

I want to pull all my hair out at this point.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

I can’t believe I have to explain this, but unless she was the literal source of sacrifice, on the cross, then she can’t be the source of ALL graces unless the death of Jesus Christ (and later resurrection) on the Cross is not a grace.

Why have stations of the cross anymore with theology like this?

Ok, I thought I explained this in my very first post.

Jesus is the source of all Graces, Mary gave birth to the source of all Graces. God names her “Full of Grace”.

I believe as a Roman Catholic That God himself names and makes Mary full of Grace. The term source of all graces, gives credence to her giving birth to Jesus Christ who is full of Grace and Truth. Mary is the source from which “all graces” come and have come. Let me repeat this mystery this way… Mary is the source from which God took on flesh and became incarnate from which all Graces come and have come.

How do you define the mysterious biblical term “full of Grace?”

 

[StrawberryJam]

Ok, I thought I explained this in my very first post.

Jesus is the source of all Graces, Mary gave birth to the source of all Graces. God names her “Full of Grace”.

I believe as a Roman Catholic That God himself names and makes Mary full of Grace. The term source of all graces, gives credence to her giving birth to Jesus Christ who is full of Grace and Truth. Mary is the source from which “all graces” come and have come. Let me repeat this mystery this way… Mary is the source from which God took on flesh and became incarnate from which all Graces come and have come.

How do you define the mysterious biblical term “full of Grace?”

I think I finally understand the problem. Catholics seem to think that Mary’s giving birth to Jesus is in question.

I ask, where?

No where is her giving birth to Jesus a question or a dispute in christian circles, nor in Muslim ones!!!

So why this new dogma? If all it is defining is that she gave birth to him? All the other marian dogmas say that very same thing!

 

[StrawberryJam]

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=390186

Here is just one of many threads that I posted on regarding Mary.

Now, I am very open to Mary. I found out, that Mary is very very controversial in christian circles.

What I can’t believe is that the closest in mind seem to be the Orthodox and an Orthodox started this thread.

Who else venerates and sings and talks about Mary as much as catholics and orthodox?

It does seem like a huge detriment to unity with them though. Even though, they love her like wild, and so do catholics. This makes no sense to me.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

This thread talks about Mary as Mediatrix of all graces. It is not a dogma yet.

I want to pull all my hair out at this point.

Lol, I got a headache myself just now. I believe what you seek is the Catholic interpretation of “Source of all Graces” as being misunderstood by a different understanding from a non catholic perspective, while on the subject of Mediatrix.

Source of all Graces has different overtones than Mediatrix of all graces.

Mary is the source from which All graces come from God, thus Mediatrix of all graces. The biblical example of this is found in the Mysteries of the Joyful mysteries of the Holy Rosary.

1. The Annunciation
   2.The visitation
   3.The birth of Jesus Christ
   4.The presentation of Jesus at the temple
   5.The finding of the boy Jesus at the temple

If you pray these mysteries in the Joyful mysteries of Rosary with the Gospel reading reflection, I am sure God will reveal how Mary is the source of all Graces. It is difficult to explain and understand a mystery of God without faith.

Peace be with you

 

[StrawberryJam]

Thank you Gabriel of 12,

I think I need to stop thinking about it for now, and I thank you for giving me so much of your patient time explaining your faith to me, even if it seemed futile. It is not, because I am one of those types that will not be at rest until I can settle it in my mind.

Liz

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=390186

Here is just one of many threads that I posted on regarding Mary.

Now, I am very open to Mary. I found out, that Mary is very very controversial in christian circles.

What I can’t believe is that the closest in mind seem to be the Orthodox and an Orthodox started this thread.

Who else venerates and sings and talks about Mary as much as catholics and orthodox?

It does seem like a huge detriment to unity with them though. Even though, they love her like wild, and so do catholics. This makes no sense to me.

What you view from the outside on this subject is not a case of belief in Mary generally speaking. What may appear to be a detriment to unity has nothing to do with Mary herself, but pride of men and authority, of who can and who was first to define or make doctrine Marian belief’s when they came under attack. The hidden factor of this disunity you may see comes from an ancient pride, that the Western Church are not supposed to exceed or define doctrine without the the Eastern Church revealing these mysteries first. As great as the ancient Eastern Church was in mysticism or mysteries of God. Their pride got hurt when the Western Church came to the defense of the Marian belief’s and made them doctrine. So you see it is not the laity faithful who have a problem in Marian belief’s, it comes from those in opposition to authority arguing from pride not truly belief’s in the blessed Virgin Mary.

Just some food for thought.

 

[Hesychios]

Do you believe the Catholic Church has a dogma defining Mary as the “source of All Graces?”

The topic of this thread is a ‘proposed’ dogma… Mediatrix of ALL graces.

Do you believe in the proposed dogma?

Michael

 

[Good_Fella]

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.

Mary’s consent to be the mother of our Lord was an exercise of free will - a meritorious act of faith and obedience which resulted in the Incarnation and our redemption through the merits of Christ. God preordained from all eternity that the Word should become flesh by Mary’s fiat.
“And in your descendants all the nations of the earth shall find blessing – all this because you obeyed my command.”
Genesis 22, 18

“Blessed are you who believed that what was spoken to you by the Lord would be fulfilled.”
Luke 1, 45

PAX :heaven:

 

[Hesychios]

Mary gave birth to the source of all Graces. God names her “Full of Grace”.

God is the source of ALL Grace.

To say that Jesus is the source of ALL Grace is problematic. Not that it is wrong (Christ is the Word of God, after all), but can be interpreted poorly.

To be clear about this, there is the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. The Holy Trinity of God, which is the source of everything.

All grace comes from God.

… God himself names and makes Mary full of Grace.

No problem.

Mary is the source from which “all graces” come and have come.

Incorrect as written.

Mary is the source from which God took on flesh and became incarnate full stop]

It would be wise to say no more than this.

 

[StrawberryJam]

Mary’s consent to be the mother of our Lord was an exercise of free will - a meritorious act of faith and obedience which resulted in the Incarnation and our redemption through the merits of Christ. God preordained from all eternity that the Word should become flesh by Mary’s fiat.
“And in your descendants all the nations of the earth shall find blessing – all this because you obeyed my command.”
Genesis 22, 18

“Blessed are you who believed that what was spoken to you by the Lord would be fulfilled.”
Luke 1, 45

PAX :heaven:

How does this address my question? I don’t have a problem with what you state here.

You guys are making me crazy.

 

[Hiskid1973]

“And in your descendants all the nations of the earth shall find blessing – all this because you obeyed my command.”
Genesis 22, 18

And this was spoken to ?

Here’s a few verses…I agree with her…bolded
42 And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb…She is blessed form among women
43 And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?
44 For, lo, as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in mine ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy.
45 And blessed is she that believed: for there shall be a performance of those things which were told her from the Lord.
46 And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord,
47 And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.

 

[StrawberryJam]

“And in your descendants all the nations of the earth shall find blessing – all this because you obeyed my command.”
Genesis 22, 18

And this was spoken to ?

Moses or Abraham, What is the point?

 

[Hesychios]

What you view from the outside on this subject is not a case of belief in Mary generally speaking. What may appear to be a detriment to unity has nothing to do with Mary herself, but pride of men and authority, of who can and who was first to define or make doctrine Marian belief’s when they came under attack. The hidden factor of this disunity you may see comes from an ancient pride, that the Western Church are not supposed to exceed or define doctrine without the the Eastern Church revealing these mysteries first. As great as the ancient Eastern Church was in mysticism or mysteries of God. Their pride got hurt when the Western Church came to the defense of the Marian belief’s and made them doctrine. So you see it is not the laity faithful who have a problem in Marian belief’s, it comes from those in opposition to authority arguing from pride not truly belief’s in the blessed Virgin Mary.

Just some food for thought.

Thank you, Gabriel, for this editorial comment.

I will respond with my own commentary.

You are accusing the east of pride, when in fact the Latin Catholic church itself is split over this new proposed dogma. It is not even a dogma yet, and may never be. It sometimes seems to me that Latin Catholics are the ones here exhibiting pride, they seem to think they know better than the rest of us… it is hubris of course.

The fact that Eastern Christians do not recognize the Pope’s authority to declare a dogma is really a separate issue entirely. We all know that your church could advance it at any time (and already could have by now) through a Council even if the Pope did not claim the unilateral authority to declare it. Because this is not part of the Received Faith it would still be wrong to do so, we would still object! Your commentary has the look and smell of a red herring.

The subject is not the Pope’s authority, but the proposed dogma.

This is a new teaching. It is unknown to most people (even most Catholics) because it is new. If it is unknown in the east (which is, after all, the cradle of Christianity) it cannot be part of the oral tradition of the church. It is simply not from the received tradition.

It is derived from speculation, wisps of fancy and poetic license; and has it’s roots in western Europe. The Age of Revelation is closed. This is not authentic Christianity.

 

[Hiskid1973]

Moses or Abraham, What is the point?

Context…It’s all about who was spoken to and what it pertained to…Nothing to do with Marian dogma…

 

[Good_Fella]

How does this address my question? I don’t have a problem with what you state here.

You guys are making me crazy.

You wrote: “It was not her will to bear the Messiah.” Sounds like Mary had no choice, or even desire; that it was strictly God’s will without any conformity of her will with His. One can “agree” to do something for someone and “cooperate” with him while being coerced. But Mary fully and freely consented out of perfect love for God and humankind. The Incarnation was as much Mary’s will as it was God’s will now that he had made his intentions known to her. Perhaps you should be a little more consistent in what you mean to say, then we won’t have to drive you crazy.

 

[Vico]

Perhaps we are just talking passed one another here.

My question was about proclaiming new dogmas, not about the received Faith.

"Unfortunately, I cannot see any reason given for the expression of new dogmas."

For instance, it is certifiably not a dogma now, everyone seems to agree on this point… so why make a dogma we have never had before?

I missed your comment when you posted it, but I will reply now.

Are you familiar with the various grades of statements made by the Catholic Church? Only some are formally dogmas that must be belived as part of the faith, and others are less certain, but may be believed. When there is a teaching that threatens the faith, then the Church may declare a dogma to defend the faith. Many teachings that are traditional are not declared as dogma. Common to the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic, the first seven ecumenical councils contain many dogmas. Based upon the history of the ecumenical councils, one can understand that it took time to declare the mysteries. The Catholic Church summarized the dogmatic and non-dogmatic faith at the Vatican II in Lumen Gentium.

From the Eastern Church, Mary is the mediatrix for our salvation because He suffered the Passion of the Cross in the flesh that He assumed from her as expressed in the Tone 3 Resurrectional Theotokion.

Tone 3 Resurrectional Dismissal Theotokion

We praise you as the mediatrix of our salvation,
Virgin Theotokos.
For your Son, our God, Who took flesh from you,
accepted the Passion on the Cross,//
delivering us from corruption as the Lover of Man.

And we also have this from the Divine Liturgy of Saint John Chrysotsom:

“Through the prayers of the Theotokos, save us who sing to You, Alleluia.”

From Vespers:
“Christ our God, the existing one, is blessed always now and ever and unto the ages of ages.”
“Most Holy Theotokos save us.”
“More honorable than the Cherubim…”
“Glory to you, O Christ, our God and our hope….”

In the Catholic, Lumen Gentium VIII, item 62 is stated:

Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked by the Church under the titles of Advocate, Auxiliatrix, Adjutrix, and Mediatrix.(16*) This, however, is to be so understood that it neither takes away from nor adds anything to the dignity and efficaciousness of Christ the one Mediator.(17*)

(16) Cfr. Leo XIII, Litt. Encycl. Adiutricem populi, 5 sept. 1895: *** 15 (1895-96), p. 303. - S. Pius X, Litt. Encycl. Ad diem illum, 2 febr. 1904: Acta, I, p. 154- Denz. 1978 a (3370) . Pius XI, Litt. Encycl. Miserentissimus, 8 maii 1928: AAS 20 (1928) p. 178. Pius XII, Nuntius Radioph., 13 maii 1946: AAS 38 (1946) p. 266.

(17) S. Ambrosius, Epist. 63: PL 16, 1218.