ALL graces come through Mary?

[Kimley]

There are many Catholic Christians as well as non-Catholic Christians who do not pray through Mary. When I pray, I sometimes ask for Mary or another saint’s intercession, as well as praying the Rosary. But I do not understand “ALL graces through Mary.” Am I not understanding something here; I am a new convert.

 

[Brooklyn]

I think the problem with this phrase is that people tend to misread it. We are told that “all graces come THROUGH Mary.” Yet, too many read it as “all graces come FROM Mary.” This is a huge difference.

Here is a small excerpt from St. Louis Marie de Montfort’s “Secret of Mary”:

It all comes to this, then. We must discover a simple means to obtain from God
the grace needed to become holy. It is precisely this I wish to teach you. My
contention is that you must first discover Mary if you would obtain this grace from
God.

Let me explain:

(1) Mary alone found grace with God for herself and for every individual person. No
patriarch or prophet or any other holy person of the Old Law could manage to find
this grace.

(2) It was Mary who gave existence and life to the author of all grace, and because
of this she is called the “Mother of Grace”.

(3) God the Father, from whom, as from its essential source, every perfect gift and
every grace come down to us , gave her every grace when he gave her his Son. Thus,
as St Bernard says, the will of God is manifested to her in Jesus and with Jesus.

(4) God chose her to be the treasurer, the administrator and the dispenser of all his graces, so that all his graces and gifts pass through her hands. Such is the power that she has received from him that, according to St Bernardine, she gives the graces of the eternal Father, the virtues of Jesus Christ, and the gifts of the Holy Spirit to whom she wills, as and when she wills, and as much as she wills.

(5) As in the natural life a child must have a father and a mother, so in the
supernatural life of grace a true child of the Church must have God for his Father
and Mary for his mother. If he prides himself on having God for his Father but does
not give to Mary the tender affection of a true child, he is an impostor and his father
is the devil.

(6) Since Mary produced the head of the elect, Jesus Christ, she must also
produce the members of that head, that is, all true Christians. A mother does not
conceive a head without members, nor members without a head. If anyone, then,
wishes to become a member of Jesus Christ, and consequently be filled with grace
and truth , he must be formed in Mary through the grace of Jesus Christ, which she
possesses with a fullness enabling her to communicate it abundantly to true members
of Jesus Christ, her true children.

(7) The Holy Spirit espoused Mary and produced his greatest work, the incarnate
Word, in her, by her and through her. He has never disowned her and so he continues
to produce every day, in a mysterious but very real manner, the souls of the elect in
her and through her.

As God tells us in the Bible, His ways are not our ways, and our ways are not His Ways. He did not need to die a horrible bloody death in order to save us. One drop of His Precious Blood would have been more than enough to save all mankind. He does not “need” the Church to spread the message of salvation in the world. He could no doubt do it in a much more efficient manner than by using sinful human beings to accomplish His Work. But this is not what He chose.

He did not have to use Mary to come to the world. He could have found another method to take on human nature. But this is not what He chose. He chose a human being to be the vehicle by which He comes to all mankind. And just as He came to us through Mary, we go to Him through Mary. That little word “through” makes all the difference. All graces and blessings come FROM God, but He gives them to us THROUGH Mary.

I hope that helps.

 

[Joe_5859]

Brooklyn makes a good distinction between “through” and “from”. That’s important to keep in mind.

What is grace? Grace is God’s own divine life that He shares with us so that we may participate in God’s own Trinitarian life. How did this Grace become incarnate in Jesus? Through Mary.

If it was through Mary – who held God in her womb – that the infinite God became man, it doesn’t seem that different to say that it is through her that all grace comes to us. Jesus himself comes to us through Mary. To say that all grace comes through her is pretty much just another way of saying that same thing.

And, again, it does not come from her. She is not the origin. She’s the channel by which it comes.

As with all teaching about Mary, this tells us far more about Jesus than it does about Mary. The reason all grace comes through Mary is because Jesus came through her and He is God who died and rose for us to obtain salvation for us and participation in the divine life.

 

[anon98328916]

“Hail Mary full of grace” we can get graces from Mary. Mary is the key to Jesus

 

[Loving_disciple]

There are many Catholic Christians as well as non-Catholic Christians who do not pray through Mary. When I pray, I sometimes ask for Mary or another saint’s intercession, as well as praying the Rosary. But I do not understand “ALL graces through Mary.” Am I not understanding something here; I am a new convert.

Christ who all graces come from came through Mary into the world.

 

[godisgood77]

Some people believe that Mary’s mediation is universal, others do not. It is a private matter. There is no evidence of Mary’s universal mediation in the deposit of faith nor has Church has the Church ever declared it so.

I highly recommend the book “The Question of Mary” by Fr. Rene Laurentin. He is one of the world’s most renown Marian scholars. The book carries nihil obstat and imprimatur and provides an, in my opinion, unmatched breakdown of the topic.

Pax,
Dan

 

[Beryllos]

St. Maximilian Kolbe was, as this article tells, a “zealous promoter of the veneration of the Immaculate Mother of God,” and who am I to criticize the man, but I think he went too far when he argued that Mary is the “Mediatrix of all graces.” My understanding of Mary is closer to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraphs 963-975. Here is an excerpt:
…she is our Mother in the order of grace

967 By her complete adherence to the Father’s will, to his Son’s redemptive work, and to every prompting of the Holy Spirit, the Virgin Mary is the Church’s model of faith and charity. Thus she is a “preeminent and… wholly unique member of the Church”; indeed, she is the “exemplary realization” (typus) of the Church.

968 Her role in relation to the Church and to all humanity goes still further. “In a wholly singular way she cooperated by her obedience, faith, hope, and burning charity in the Savior’s work of restoring supernatural life to souls. For this reason she is a mother to us in the order of grace.”

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

970 “Mary’s function as mother of men in no way obscures or diminishes this unique mediation of Christ, but rather shows its power. But the Blessed Virgin’s salutary influence on men… flows forth from the superabundance of the merits of Christ, rests on his mediation, depends entirely on it, and draws all its power from it.” “No creature could ever be counted along with the Incarnate Word and Redeemer; but just as the priesthood of Christ is shared in various ways both by his ministers and the faithful, and as the one goodness of God is radiated in different ways among his creatures, so also the unique mediation of the Redeemer does not exclude but rather gives rise to a manifold cooperation which is but a sharing in this one source.”
I do not see where the Catechism says that all graces come through Mary.

 

[marywarfield]

There are many Catholic Christians as well as non-Catholic Christians who do not pray through Mary. When I pray, I sometimes ask for Mary or another saint’s intercession, as well as praying the Rosary. But I do not understand “ALL graces through Mary.” Am I not understanding something here; I am a new convert.

The distinction as one poster put it is confusing through
with from. But then again confusing from with source.
The Trinity is the SOURCE of all grace. That grace reached
us through Mary’s cooperation.

Kind of like having kids. The two married humans
are not the source of life- they do not create life.
God is and does. The humans simply co-operate
with God and through their cooperation with the act of
creation from the source new life is born through them.

 

[Topaz1128]

I think the problem with this phrase is that people tend to misread it. We are told that “all graces come THROUGH Mary.” Yet, too many read it as “all graces come FROM Mary.” This is a huge difference.

 

[Ad_Orientem]

Another important distinction is between invoking Mary’s intercession, versus her freely interceding for us of her own initiative, or rather because God has given her an exalted role.

In other words, we receive graces through our Lady whether or not we ask to receive them through her, indeed whether or not we know they come through her.

 

[marywarfield]

The concept of Mary as the Mother of All Grace
and through Mary comes all graces is so ancient and
familiar to the early Christians.
We first see it spoken in literal terms in
in the fourth century c 350AD by a Syrian Doctor of
the Church- St Ephraem
who called her the Dispensatrix of All Goods.

 

[Beryllos]

The concept of Mary as the Mother of All Grace
and through Mary comes all graces is so ancient and
familiar to the early Christians.
We first see it spoken in literal terms in
in the fourth century c 350AD by a Syrian Doctor of
the Church- St Ephraem
who called her the Dispensatrix of All Goods.

Thanks for that clarification. I figured it didn’t originate with Maximilian Kolbe, but I didn’t know it was that old!

 

[marywarfield]

Thanks for that clarification. I figured it didn’t originate with Maximilian Kolbe, but I didn’t know it was that old!

Oh yeah. Old. That’s how Tradition functions in the
Church. Everybody just continues to believe something
we all believed down through time until somebody
makes a big stink about it and then we write in stone
so to speak. Same thing with the Immaculate Conception.
Shoot that one began with St. James the Apostle supposedly
and the Assumption was written out by the 250s I believe?
Lol.

St. Ephraem also said in 373Ad “with the Mediator,
you Blessed Virgin are the Mediatrix of the Universe”

Gasp!

Antipator of Bostra 431AD Council of Ephesus- Hail you
who acceptably intercede as Mediatrix for all mankind."

Well imagine that. But if we say that today? Watch out! Lol

 

[godisgood77]

Oh yeah. Old. That’s how Tradition functions in the
Church. Everybody just continues to believe something
we all believed down through time until somebody
makes a big stink about it and then we write in stone
so to speak. Same thing with the Immaculate Conception.
Shoot that one began with St. James the Apostle supposedly
and the Assumption was written out by the 250s I believe?
Lol.

St. Ephraem also said in 373Ad “with the Mediator,
you Blessed Virgin are the Mediatrix of the Universe”

Gasp!

Antipator of Bostra 431AD Council of Ephesus- Hail you
who acceptably intercede as Mediatrix for all mankind."

Well imagine that. But if we say that today? Watch out! Lol

That’s just not true…the idea that these teaching were there in their fullness in early antiquity is false and a gross misstatement to say that all Christians believed them in early antiquity.

What is true is, for things outside of the deposit like this idea of Mary’s universal mediation, someone or a small group of people believe something, they put it forward as an absolute truth, it is debated (sometimes) for centuries until finally the Church makes a decision about the topic… The topic of Mary’s universal mediation is not a teaching of the universal Catholic Church. Read what Pius XII thought of it. Read what the Church decided at the Marian Congress in the 1980’s, read what the 2nd Vatican Council said about the topic during the sessions and in the documents or read the book by Fr Rene Laurentin I referenced earlier.

The Immaculate Conception and the Assumption are no different. Certainly, you are mistaken on the Assumption. There is zero evidence in the Assumption until at least the 5th century… And there is a pretty elaborate history of development that goes with it. I’d recommend the book ‘The Assumption’ by Fr Killian Healy for a great account of the development of the teaching.

 

[SAVINGRACE]

That’s just not true…the idea that these teaching were there in their fullness in early antiquity is false and a gross misstatement to say that all Christians believed them in early antiquity.

What is true is, for things outside of the deposit like this idea of Mary’s universal mediation, someone or a small group of people believe something, they put it forward as an absolute truth, it is debated (sometimes) for centuries until finally the Church makes a decision about the topic… The topic of Mary’s universal mediation is not a teaching of the universal Catholic Church. Read what Pius XII thought of it. Read what the Church decided at the Marian Congress in the 1980’s, read what the 2nd Vatican Council said about the topic during the sessions and in the documents or read the book by Fr Rene Laurentin I referenced earlier.

The Immaculate Conception and the Assumption are no different. Certainly, you are mistaken on the Assumption. There is zero evidence in the Assumption until at least the 5th century… And there is a pretty elaborate history of development that goes with it. I’d recommend the book ‘The Assumption’ by Fr Killian Healy for a great account of the development of the teaching.

 

[marywarfield]

That’s just not true…the idea that these teaching were there in their fullness in early antiquity is false and a gross misstatement to say that all Christians believed them in early antiquity.

What is true is, for things outside of the deposit like this idea of Mary’s universal mediation, someone or a small group of people believe something, they put it forward as an absolute truth, it is debated (sometimes) for centuries until finally the Church makes a decision about the topic… The topic of Mary’s universal mediation is not a teaching of the universal Catholic Church. Read what Pius XII thought of it. Read what the Church decided at the Marian Congress in the 1980’s, read what the 2nd Vatican Council said about the topic during the sessions and in the documents or read the book by Fr Rene Laurentin I referenced earlier.

The Immaculate Conception and the Assumption are no different. Certainly, you are mistaken on the Assumption. There is zero evidence in the Assumption until at least the 5th century… And there is a pretty elaborate history of development that goes with it. I’d recommend the book ‘The Assumption’ by Fr Killian Healy for a great account of the development of the teaching.

Really?
Where did I say they were there in their fullness?
Where did I say all Christians believed it?

I believe I gave the earliest dates known as referenced
and you and your friend owe me an apology for
your blasting me. I don’t appreciate it.

Do you have a better explanation as to why the ECF’s
at the Council of Ephesus 431 AD were calling her
the Dispensatrix of All Goods or the Mediatrix of
All the Universe? It is your contention that they
were stating what they did not really believe
or perhaps had too much new wine or heatstroke
from the desert surroundings?
Because that IS what they called her.

Fast forward to Vatican II bemoaning the fact of
and not having yet a complete dogma on Mary.

catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=360

I also suggest you get your facts straight on the Assumption.
ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/AOFMARY.HTM

 

[pnewton]

This is an issue that if the Church every declares as dogma I will just have to accept it based on faith in the Church, not any belief in this in and of itself.

 

[marywarfield]

That’s just not true…the idea that these teaching were there in their fullness in early antiquity is false and a gross misstatement to say that all Christians believed them in early antiquity.

What is true is, for things outside of the deposit like this idea of Mary’s universal mediation, someone or a small group of people believe something, they put it forward as an absolute truth, it is debated (sometimes) for centuries until finally the Church makes a decision about the topic… The topic of Mary’s universal mediation is not a teaching of the universal Catholic Church. Read what Pius XII thought of it. Read what the Church decided at the Marian Congress in the 1980’s, read what the 2nd Vatican Council said about the topic during the sessions and in the documents or read the book by Fr Rene Laurentin I referenced earlier.

The Immaculate Conception and the Assumption are no different. Certainly, you are mistaken on the Assumption. There is zero evidence in the Assumption until at least the 5th century… And there is a pretty elaborate history of development that goes with it. I’d recommend the book ‘The Assumption’ by Fr Killian Healy for a great account of the development of the teaching.

And again before blasting me I suggest instead
of commentaries by others you read the actual document
the Assumption/Dormition are based on. You were almost
right. The first record of a Feast celebrating the Assumption
is in fifth century.
But it did not just spring out of nowhere in the fifth
century.
The belief had been around way before that as
evidenced by the actual account given in the
voice of John the Theologian in the three hundreds.

catholicism.about.com/gi/o.htm?zi=1/XJ&zTi=1&sdn=catholicism&cdn=religion&tm=35&f=21&tt=65&bt=2&bts=3&zu=http%3A//www.newadvent.org/fathers/0832.htm

 

[marywarfield]

That’s just not true…the idea that these teaching were there in their fullness in early antiquity is false and a gross misstatement to say that all Christians believed them in early antiquity.

What is true is, for things outside of the deposit like this idea of Mary’s universal mediation, someone or a small group of people believe something, they put it forward as an absolute truth, it is debated (sometimes) for centuries until finally the Church makes a decision about the topic… The topic of Mary’s universal mediation is not a teaching of the universal Catholic Church. Read what Pius XII thought of it. Read what the Church decided at the Marian Congress in the 1980’s, read what the 2nd Vatican Council said about the topic during the sessions and in the documents or read the book by Fr Rene Laurentin I referenced earlier.

The Immaculate Conception and the Assumption are no different. Certainly, you are mistaken on the Assumption. There is zero evidence in the Assumption until at least the 5th century… And there is a pretty elaborate history of development that goes with it. I’d recommend the book ‘The Assumption’ by Fr Killian Healy for a great account of the development of the teaching.

And again no reason to blast me on the Immaculate
Conception. For stating that it comes from early traditions
dating back forever until it becomes a huge issue
that needs resolution declaration?
As that is EXACTLY how IC became doctrine isn’t it?
That is actually how almost ALL mariology develops.

From Fr. Francis Gillian

“Theologians are wont to distinguish three stages in the normal development of a dogma which was not contained explicitly in the sources of Revelation. First, there is the period of implicit but uncontroverted acceptance, when the doctrine in question is believed by the faithful only in the sense that they hold a more general doctrine in which it is logically contained, or in the sense that they are accustomed to perform some liturgical or devotional act which presupposes this particular doctrine. The second is the period of discussion and controversy, in which scholars inquire into the validity of the arguments for and against the admission of the doctrine as a truth of Revelation, and study its precise sense and its relation to other doctrines of Christian faith. Naturally, in this stage there are divergences of opinion among theologians. In the third stage the doctrine is accepted by the universal Church and taught unanimously by the authoritative magisterium, or even made the subject of a solemn definition.1 There is perhaps no truth of Catholic faith that exemplifies this threefold stage more definitely than the dogma of Mary’s Immaculate Conception.”

 

[Beryllos]

Try not to take it personally.