Church Mariology making me nuts!

[Tantum_ergo]

Yes, only a female could fulfill that role … I’ll grant u that.
But, isn’t that enuf ?

Where do we see the need/call … to make her the Co-Redeemer or Mediatrix. To promote her to a Goddess role ? That is clearly a pagan fallacy of Greeks/Romans … that God abhorred !!!

Who is 'making her" this by your assertion? Either she is actually taught as such by the Church, or else the words are only proposals, and not necessarily correctly understood.

I do not see the words ‘co-redeemer’ in the Catechism on a quick read, and the term Mediatrix is referenced to a citation in Lumen Gentium, so one should see in CONTEXT what Lumen Gentium MEANT by the term and not assume it means some ‘pagan goddess thing’. . .don’t you agree?

Lumen Gentium:

This motherhood of Mary in the economy of grace lasts without interruption, from the consent which she gave in faith at the annunciation, and which she unhesitatingly bore with under the cross, even to the perpetual consummation of all the elect. For after being assumed into heaven, she has not put aside this saving function, but by her manifold intercession, she continues to win the gifts of eternal salvation for us. By her motherly love, she takes care of the brothers of her Son who are still in pilgrimage and in dangers and difficulties, until they be led through to the happy fatherland. For this reason, the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Auxiliatrix, Adiutrix, and Mediatrix. This however it to be so understood that it takes nothing away, or adds nothing to the dignity and efficacy of Christ the one Mediator. For no creature can ever be put on the same level with the Incarnate Word and Redeemer…"

 

[Cranch]

Yes, only a female could fulfill that role … I’ll grant u that.
But, isn’t that enuf ?

Where do we see the need/call … to make her the Co-Redeemer or Mediatrix. To promote her to a Goddess role ? That is clearly a pagan fallacy of Greeks/Romans … that God abhorred !!!

Please get more familiar with Catholic theology regarding the Blessed Virgin. You have wrong ideas. Here is a place to start, an article from Catholic Answers containing this sentence:
"Not a few Protestants are surprised to discover the Catholic Church actually agrees that Mary was “saved.”

 

[hansard]

I find it totally unacceptable that many lesser writers are venerated by having their words enshrined in scripture, yet when the Queen of Heaven appears at Fatima, Lourdes or wherever, speaking with dire warnings for humanity and commanding the attention of thousands of pilgrims, the Church goes all coy and says that such apparitions are “worthy of belief”.
On every matter of Mariology, a Catholic is required to accept it as dogma, yet when the Mother of Christ appears and speaks to the faithful, you can accept it or not. There is no compulsion to take it seriously, or indeed, to even believe it is true.
In other words, we’ll venerate her and ascribe to her a special status among saints, but we’ll do virtually nothing when she speaks.

I can never be a real Catholic: I refuse to believe in (among other things) immaculate conceptions and body-and-soul assumptions. It’s not that I struggle with those areas of faith; I just plainly and simply don’t believe them.

And I can’t fathom the flippant approach of the Church toward Mary’s appearances.

 

[JM3]

APOSTOLIC EXHORTATION
OF HIS HOLINESS PAUL VI

MARIALIS CULTUS

FOR THE RIGHT ORDERING AND DEVELOPMENT
OF DEVOTION TO THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY

vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_p-vi_exh_19740202_marialis-cultus_en.html

 

[brb3]

Please get more familiar with Catholic theology regarding the Blessed Virgin. You have wrong ideas. Here is a place to start, an article from Catholic Answers containing this sentence:
"Not a few Protestants are surprised to discover the Catholic Church actually agrees that Mary was “saved.”

I’m familiar with Tim Staples ideas on Mary. Once got his 5-6 hr CD on Mary/Marian Dogma.

However, doesn’t the Angel say “the Holy Spirit will come upon you, and you will bear a son” ? This presumes that Mary was not conceived by the H.S. herself, or had received the H.S. earlier in her life … and needed to filled with, as a young adult.

On the otherhand, scriptures teaches that John the Baptist was “FILLED WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT FROM THE WOMB”. Now, you tell me which of the two was created early in life, in the more SINLESS fashiion ?

IMO, scripture supports the origin of John as the more miraculous. That his conception/birth was protected from original sin … rather than Mary’s.

 

[brb3]

On every matter of Mariology, a Catholic is required to accept it as dogma, yet when the Mother of Christ appears and speaks to the faithful, you can accept it or not. There is no compulsion to take it seriously, or indeed, to even believe it is true.

That’s because the Church had already declared that all Revelation ended with the death of John in approx 100 AD.

How can it now teach different dogma, w/o causing a schizm among the faithful ?

 

[Flame4]

Even calling her “Mother of God,” is really a semantical device. While we all understand that Mary is the Mother of Jesus and that Jesus is God (God the Son), calling her “Mother of God” is really a stretch. She is referred to as the “Mother of Jesus” in the BIble, never Mother of God, and the former is the more apt title.

Hi,
I’ll do my best to explain this one.

A. You accept that Mary is the mother of Jesus, the second person in the Trinity, yes?

B. You accept that the three persons of the Trinity cannot be seperated , yes? The Son is not be apart from the Father or the HS or vice versa?

You believe that saying the “Mother of God” would imply Mary is the mother of all three person, yes? That is your concern?

C. Ok so Mary is the mother of Jesus, but Jesus cannot be seperated from the Father and the HS. Therefore, by virtue of being the mother of one person in the Trinity, she is the mother of the entire Trinity. Therefore she is called the Mother of God. No she didn’t create God, but she is the mother of God by being the mother of one person in the Trinity.

Mary= mother of Jesus
Jesus= Father and HS
Jesus+ Father+ HS= God
Mary= Mother of God

I hope I didn’t come across as rude in my explanation; it wasn’t my intention. I broke it up like that to show you how we logically come to the conclusion that Mary is the mother of God. If she isn’t then A or B are wrong. Those are fundamental beliefs about Jesus, and they are directly supported by scripture.

Hope that helps a bit. God Bless

 

[Flame4]

I also want to clarify what the term “co-mediatrix” actually means. I does not mean that God had to rely on Mary. It does not mean she saved us. It means God used her as part of his plan of salvation. Now God uses all of us in his plans for salvation. Not because he has to, but beause, out of his love, he wants to. He works through us. We cooperate with God to fulfill the larger picture. We cooperate when we say yes to God. Mary is given that special title because out of all of humanity, her “yes” was the most complete, perfect yes.

brb3
Recall where Paul in scripture reminds the first century Church converts to “hold firm to what they had been taught, by word & tradition”.

Now, was our current Church teaching on Mary believed/taught by Paul to them ?

I think you mean Tradition, which includes the writings of the Church Fathers. St. Paul is saying to hold firm to what is and will be taught by them. And they hold Mary to a lofty position. As well, St Paul said the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth. So I think you have your answer there.

The apostles and saints are all important because they all said “yes” to God’s plan and his invitation to love. Yet God asked the most out of Mary and got the perfect response from her as well. That is why she is honoured above all.

God Bless

 

[iloveangels]

I also want to clarify what the term “co-mediatrix” actually means. I does not mean that God had to rely on Mary. It does not mean she saved us. It means God used her as part of his plan of salvation. Now God uses all of us in his plans for salvation. Not because he has to, but beause, out of his love, he wants to. He works through us. We cooperate with God to fulfill the larger picture. We cooperate when we say yes to God. Mary is given that special title because out of all of humanity, her “yes” was the most complete, perfect yes.

Mary is not your co-redeemer. Mary was a human being, conceived immaculately according to the teaching of the Church, and the greatest of the saints, but she was still only a human being. She is not the 4th person of the Trinity.

The term co-mediatrix is controversial exactly because there are many Catholics who want to make her into God because they do not understand the basics of Christianity. Most of them are relatively poorly catechised cradle Catholics.

A catholic in good standing can have another saint as their favorite. It’s perfectly possible for a Catholic in good standing to be uncomfortable with Marian visions and so on. Belief in Marian apparitions is not required for Catholics. It is optional.

Some people find that the rosary isn’t a prayer form that they like and that’s okay too. There are plenty of prayer forms to choose from, and the important thing is that they pray.

 

[1_with_God]

This thread has certainly brought out the heretics. No quotes needed as you speak so loud and clear it is obvious to anyone who wastes their time reading your posts who you are.

May God Bless those who defended Our Lady.

:heaven:

 

[iloveangels]

This thread has certainly brought out the heretics. No quotes needed as you speak so loud and clear it is obvious to anyone who wastes their time reading your posts who you are.

May God Bless those who defended Our Lady.

:heaven:

Well that’s a generalized slam directed at no one in particular. Bless you too.

 

[hansard]

Oh, it’s clearly directed at me (in part), as the most recent “heretic” to post on the thread.
I don’t mind. I’ve been called worse. (I’ve been a police officer and a teacher in disadvantaged schools in western NSW, Australia–heretic is a mild epithet to me).

I merely meant to point out the incongruity between the veneration of Mary and the importance attached to her appearances and statements.
If that is not defending Mary, then I don’t know what is. I want Mary’s collected statements to humanity elevated to the status of Holy Scripture. If this means revisiting the notion of revelation and when it ceased, then so be it. That would, of course, require courage and humility–qualities Mary apparently possessed in abundance.

There are other great saints–Aquinas, for example–whose writings or words could easily stand alongside anything written in scripture (apart from the Gospels, I’d suggest), but who just came later and missed out on the “revelation cut-off”.

If all that other stuff in Mariology is to stand, let it be so with her apparitions and statements (as long as they are documented and genuine).

How hard can it be? Oh, sorry… I know the answer. Very, very hard indeed.

 

[InJesusItrust]

It seems obvious to me that the next dogma that is coming is Mary as mediatrix of all graces and this going to cause a schism.

 

[JM3]

I can never be a real Catholic: I refuse to believe in (among other things) immaculate conceptions and body-and-soul assumptions. It’s not that I struggle with those areas of faith; I just plainly and simply don’t believe them.

splendoroftruth.com/curtjester/wikicatechism/

 

[iloveangels]

It seems obvious to me that the next dogma that is coming is Mary as mediatrix of all graces and this going to cause a schism.

Delusional.

We don’t have schisms anymore. We have sudden collapses. (Or not so sudden, if a person pays attention and is willing to be honest about what they see.)

 

[hansard]

Thanks for the link JM3.
(Not sure what I’m supposed to do with it, but it looked interesting.)

 

[InJesusItrust]

Delusional.

We don’t have schisms anymore. We have sudden collapses. (Or not so sudden, if a person pays attention and is willing to be honest about what they see.)

When the Pope declares is, I really do not think many will be accepting.

 

[1_with_God]

Mary is not your co-redeemer. Mary was a human being, conceived immaculately according to the teaching of the Church, and the greatest of the saints, but she was still only a human being. She is not the 4th person of the Trinity.

The term co-mediatrix is controversial exactly because there are many Catholics who want to make her into God because they do not understand the basics of Christianity. Most of them are relatively poorly catechised cradle Catholics.

A catholic in good standing can have another saint as their favorite. It’s perfectly possible for a Catholic in good standing to be uncomfortable with Marian visions and so on. Belief in Marian apparitions is not required for Catholics. It is optional.

Some people find that the rosary isn’t a prayer form that they like and that’s okay too. There are plenty of prayer forms to choose from, and the important thing is that they pray.

Truth in your statement that Mary is not the 4th person of the Trinity and that belief in Marian apparitions in not mandatory. Thank God.

None of your statements are heretical. I should not have posted and used that term without being more specific. Just felt very sad at the almost hatred of the Blessed Virgin Mary that comes through in some posts.

Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen

 

[1_with_God]

It seems obvious to me that the next dogma that is coming is Mary as mediatrix of all graces and this going to cause a schism.

Is this is the so called vision that I’m hearing about on the Catholic radio station where they ask all to contact the Pope to “okay” this as dogma?? If so, any kind of research on this “visionary?” makes it quite clear that there is no truth here.

 

[brb3]

Jesus’ own comments, on multiple occasions, seem to refute the elevation of Mary that has occurred. His statement that “rather, blessed are those who do the will of my Father in Heaven,” in reply to the woman who said, “blessed is the womb that bore you,” in particular appears to preclude the Mariology that has become so widespread.

No one has addressed this conundrum in scripture. If we are not to take Christ’s words literally, then what was he saying to the Church about Mary ?