C
Contarini
Guest
Definitely. This is a central pillar of Christological orthodoxy.
As an Anglican I do not see myself as required to believe this as a matter of faith. I do have some questions about it, but I also hesitate to reject it given the antiquity and universality of the belief. I think it quite likely that there is something I’m not getting here, as a 21st-century Westerner. If nothing else, I’m fascinated by the way this doctrine led to the development of a concept of marriage based on consent (thus given women rights they would perhaps not otherwise have had).
** Assumption
**
Same as above but with less at stake on either side. I can’t think of any serious theological objections to it (I suppose one could argue that it compromises the idea that the bodily resurrection hasn’t happened yet–but besides the obvious fact that we believe Jesus has His body at present, there’s Enoch and Elijah. . . . ). But it also doesn’t have quite as much antiquity and universality of tradition behind it. I certainly acknowledge the Dormition as a major feast day of the Church, however.
**
**
Much more dubious about this one. Not a deal-breaker–in other words, not a serious reason for rejecting Catholicism on its own–but not something I would be inclined to embrace without the authority of the Church compelling me (which it presently does not, as I understand and experience the Church). I’m somewhat inclined to say that this is either correct or erroneous depending on how we understand original sin. I certainly believe that Mary was “entirely sanctified” in her mother’s womb, though I might put even this under the category of pious tradition rather than dogma.
** Mediatrix/QUOTE]
**Depends on what you mean by it, but it’s not a title I see any particular reason to use. I accept that Mary intercedes for us, as we intercede for each other–and obviously I accept that her faith and obedience were (in divine providence) instrumental causes of all the grace we receive. If the title means these two things, I have no problem with it.
**** Co-Redemptrix
Same as above, essentially.****
Her Place within the Communion of Saints
I like the “neck” metaphor.
Definitely legitimate. Not something I would insist on as a matter of dogma, but I think Christians who rule out the possibility are missing out on some of the rich nuances of the communion of saints.
Same as above. I believe in theosis. That means that when we venerate saints–not as objects of worship in themselves but as people who have been divinized by grace–we are not committing idolatry, because we are honoring the transforming grace of God. This applies to venerating physical representations of them as well (in other words, I accept II Nicea).
The only real problem I have with Marian piety (well, not counting forms of folk piety that the Catholic hierarchy would itself clearly disapprove of) is the tendency for some pious Catholics to speak as if Mary could somehow understand our weaknesses better than Jesus can, because she’s “just human” and He is divine and our judge. I think that’s a serious distortion of the doctrine of the Incarnation. But so is the idea that because Jesus is our mediator therefore Mary was “just a vessel” and doesn’t matter. That misses something very important about the orthodox Christian doctrine of salvation–it’s about transformation and divinization.
Edwin
