Not the way Benedictgal explains it. Actually, according to her explanation, we are proclaiming these words with meaning and intention, and actually we are calling for Christ to be re-crucified, yet again, just as if we had never been redeemed - as if we can never stop sinning.
When we read our part in the Passion, nobody, but nobody, takes it that way. Neither you nor I nor anyone attending a Mass where an account of the Passion is proclaimed thinks that the participating assembly is calling for a new crucifixion. If Benedictgal chooses to state it as being analogous to the Mass, then you have to take the entire analogy. If you take her to mean that we would be “re-crucifying” Christ by reading those lines, then you would have to believe that we “re-crucify” Christ when we mystically enter into that moment by the Sacrifice of the Mass! Of course not!
But if we re-enter the eternal moment of the Crucifixion and someone says “which is your part?”, we ought not be too quick to make ourselves out to be Our Lady or St. John. We ought to admit where we are truly standing in this scene, and who we ought to rightfully be counted with: right there with the accusers and the disowners.
My point is that it is wrong to count ourselves as being clothed in the same fabric as Our Lady, knowing full well that she is not afraid to be taken as being associated with the fabric that is in the state ours has been in. Our Lady was never soiled whatsoever, but stayed pure precisely because her love of the filthy ones so greatly exceeds her hatred of the filth. It is by the grace of God alone that we are clean. If we take on airs that our names don’t belong in the same sentence with sin, then we risk by that vanity going back into the filth again.
If we have done better than the crowd did on that day, then great: let us throw our crowns at Christ’s feet at the Easter Vigil, for it is the Resurrection that made that possible. On Good Friday, though, let us admit what part we really did play in that day’s events.
Yes - she would preface it with “they said …” She wouldn’t portray herself as them.
I think Our Lady would not refrain from answering the question without that preface, which is added purely lest someone get the wrong idea.
That seems to be the entire implication here…that is, either “oh, I would
never say that!” or “it sounds like this is what I want to have happen!” She would not have to say, “
they said.” Distancing herself from those she loves would be the last thing on her mind. She would know what she meant. It just would not occur to her to worry that she’d be taken for a sinner or that her meaning was sinful.
We, in contrast, have no standing to be taken as anything but sinners…not because we can never stop sinning, but because our redemption was not our work, while our sin was.
