L
Lazerlike42
Guest
In all likelihood yes. There’s never a need to settle for less than full understanding though.
- Status
N
Neithan
Guest
That is precisely the kind of meritorious, submissive and obedient faith which Christ commanded us and His Mother most perfectly exemplified throughout her life on earth.
I wholeheartedly agree!There’s never a need to settle for less than full understanding though.
Though it may seem a paradox with the above statement–they are both true: *full *understanding insofar as we are able, but eventually a submissive faith is required for assent, and this is only possible with Divine Grace. The Church always plants her doctrines in that carefully balanced state of orthodoxy between the two extremes of strict rationalism and blind fideism.
Another recommended website: marymediatrix.com/
This one really helped me to understand, when I had the exact same questions that you do. Especially the homilies given by Fr. Thomas Nelson, O.P., in particular regarding Mary as ‘Revealer of the Holy Spirit’; His visible manifestation, or ‘sacramental.’ That is what ‘Mediatrix’ refers to, that she mediates between us and the Holy Spirit with her intercessory prayers for the distribution of Grace in the Communion of Saints.
God Bless
J
JKirkLVNV
Guest
I haven’t given up on this thread. I’m doing some reading and thinking. It is gradually making more sense (as long as it isn’t going to confuse Mary with the Lord or the Holy Trinity or the fact that it is Jesus who is the Savior).
L
Lazerlike42
Guest
Me too… if you ever have an ephiony of some sort, please post it!
Pope Leo XIII:
Hi Dave,
Looks like you’re the best one to turn to here.
I posted earlier for help on reconciling the quote you gave above and some others like it, with the sacramental notions of ex opere operato, and in persona Christi. I’m having difficulty because according to these terms, in the Sacraments, it is Christ administering them through human representatives. This is especially obvious in the Eucharist and Confession. In the Eucharist, sanctifying grace is increased by the consumption of the sacred Species (Christ himself), and in Confession, sanctifying grace is restored by the absolution, but we understand that it is not the priest who forgives, but Christ. In both these cases alone, it is Christ directly conferring grace through the Sacraments.
How is this reconciled with the Leonine quote you mentioned?
I’d really appreciate some enlightenment. Thanks.
N
Neithan
Guest
If I may attempt an answer (and Dave or anyone please correct me if I’m wrong):
It is true that all Grace comes to us through Christ, from the Father, by the Holy Spirit, with the prayers of Mary. We do not assign certain Graces to any Divine Person or Mary, all come to us in the same way. Even though it is Christ in the priest conferring Grace on you in the Sacraments, the Holy Spirit always is the direct ‘efficient cause’ of Grace in the soul, and wherever the Paraclete works, there is Mary–as the Mediatrix her prayers of intercession are present and efficacious in each and every Sacrament in a special way. Mary does not confer Grace as the Blessed Trinity does, in a direct way; but indirectly, as she is always involved with her special intercession.
I know this is certain insofar as Actual Grace is concerned, and with Habitual Grace I presume as well.
Hi Neithan,
In which case, the transmission of grace can look like this:
Father
|
| Grace
V Intercession
SON <--------------- Mary
|
|Grace
V
MAN
I have no problem here.
But the Leonine quote above implies:
Father
|
| Grace
V
Son
|
| Grace
V
Mary
|
| Grace
V
Man
Which appears to conflict with (e.g. Confession)
Son (via a priest)
|
| Grace (absolution)
V
Man
Or the Eucharist:
Father-(sends)-> Holy Spirit -(transforms)-> Eucharist (i.e. Christ)-(grace, thru Communion)->Man
I can’t see how the Leonine order of grace above fits into Sacramental impartation of grace, which basically calls for Christ directly applying grace through the Sacraments.
Someone please help. I’m confused.
S
starrs0
Guest
Just my :twocents: I have no problem whatsoever with this Dogma being proclaimed I fully support it and pray every day that it will one day be proclaimed I think if worded right when proclaimed there would be no misunderstanding or confusion as for what it would do to Non-Catholics (namely the Prots) view of The Church WHO CARES, They already think we worship her (we don’t of course) but really it doesn’t matter what they think because they aren’t in the Church and thus they don’t have to believe it let them have their misconceptions they don’t matter God will lead those in who search and desire The Truth in spite of the lies of those who are against us. I recommed this site for those who don’t yet fully understand the impact and truth of this potential Dogma voxpopuli.org/
J
JKirkLVNV
Guest
Please don’t tell anyone you’re a Catholic.
L
Lazerlike42
Guest
I have a relatively close relationship with a man who has just finished his seminary and is on his first apostolate. I have been corresponding with him for a while as I have tried to see if the Catholic Church was the true Church. He’s answered many questions of mine, and I asked him a few weeks back about mediatrix. He is working on the answer, which should be very thorough, because of who he is and because of how long it is taking. When he responds, I’ll post it.
He just got out of seminary, as I said, so he has a much better grasp on things than most priests do lol.
(btw, from all I can tell it’s a good seminary. Very orthodox, very correct in teachings)
Hi Lazer,
Please do. I posted my problem to the AAA forum last year, and Fr. Serpa gave a good answer, and he in effect didn’t recommend the “traffic cop” routine our Lady thought be some to be doing; he rather asked me to understand her as the Mother of God, who is all grace. That’s why I have no problem with THAT understanding.
But then comes the Pope Leo XIII quote, and it bothers me because it’s from an encyclical and possesses Papal authority; which is why I can’t reject it. I only want it reconciled with other Catholic teachings.
Please tell your friend about the quote from Pope Leo XIII. Also see my diagrams above. That’s my confusion.
I
itsjustdave1988
Guest
Porthos11,
I don’t believe the grace of any sacrament comes to me without Mary’s intercession. In other words, Mary and Jesus are not in disagreement with regard to their shared prayers for the faithful. As I understand it, this is the sense that Christ’s grace comes “through Mary.” We err when we attempt to see this as some sort of grace “physics.” I don’t believe Leo XII was referring to an “order” in time or space, but to an “order of grace.”
Mary merits for us de congruo that which Jesus merited de condigo. I believe that is the sense in which Mary is our “Mother in the order of grace.” I think we try to project “order of time and space” onto soteriological matters, when “order of grace” is intentionally separate.
Mary’s grace came from Christ’s work on Calvary, even before Christ was born of Mary in the order of time. Yet, in the order of grace, Mary was saved by Christ’s atonement. You see how complex this can get for creatures who are only familiar with the “order of time and space?”
Mary as Mediatrix began at the Annunciation, existed throughout her earthly cooperation with Christ’s ministery and death, and continues after her Assumption. For some, it is certainly simpler to just “understand her as the Mother of God, who is all grace.” Yet that is a summary of the Church’s teaching. When we summarize and translate, without loss of accuracy, we may certainly lose precision.
Mary as the Mother of Grace is expounded upon in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, quoting from Lumen Gentium, but even here, it is an accurate summary of what the Church has taught regarding Mary as Mediatrix of All Grace. Lumen Gentium refers to footnotes which expound further upon what is meant.
From Lumen Gentium, Ch. VIII, par. 62:
I don’t believe the grace of any sacrament comes to me without Mary’s intercession. In other words, Mary and Jesus are not in disagreement with regard to their shared prayers for the faithful. As I understand it, this is the sense that Christ’s grace comes “through Mary.” We err when we attempt to see this as some sort of grace “physics.” I don’t believe Leo XII was referring to an “order” in time or space, but to an “order of grace.”
Mary merits for us de congruo that which Jesus merited de condigo. I believe that is the sense in which Mary is our “Mother in the order of grace.” I think we try to project “order of time and space” onto soteriological matters, when “order of grace” is intentionally separate.
Mary’s grace came from Christ’s work on Calvary, even before Christ was born of Mary in the order of time. Yet, in the order of grace, Mary was saved by Christ’s atonement. You see how complex this can get for creatures who are only familiar with the “order of time and space?”
Mary as Mediatrix began at the Annunciation, existed throughout her earthly cooperation with Christ’s ministery and death, and continues after her Assumption. For some, it is certainly simpler to just “understand her as the Mother of God, who is all grace.” Yet that is a summary of the Church’s teaching. When we summarize and translate, without loss of accuracy, we may certainly lose precision.
Mary as the Mother of Grace is expounded upon in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, quoting from Lumen Gentium, but even here, it is an accurate summary of what the Church has taught regarding Mary as Mediatrix of All Grace. Lumen Gentium refers to footnotes which expound further upon what is meant.
From Lumen Gentium, Ch. VIII, par. 62:
While these footnotes give a greater understanding, they are not in themselves a comprehensive treatment of the Church on the subject. Nonetheless, to begin to understand Catholic teaching on the matter, these footnotes help to expound what Mary “mother in the order of grace” means.
L
Lazerlike42
Guest
I’m sorry but this just isn’t cutting it. Watch this.
1+1=3. This, however, is to be so understood that it neither takes away from nor adds anything to the fact that 1+1=2.
The point is that simply adding "This is to be understood…"onto something doesn’t change what it says. If X is X, and but someone says X is Y, just saying that it isn’t meant to say X isn’t really X doesn’t change the fact that that’s what it really does say.
Here’s that quote again:
I’m not trying to be rude, it’s just that the answers we’re getting are nowhere near sufficient. Dave, you said, “I don’t believe the grace of any sacrament comes to me without Mary’s intercession.” That’s fine and it illustrates your belief.
What we are asking for is this:
Here’s some quotes from the Catechism:
There really seems to be a contradiction here.
1+1=3. This, however, is to be so understood that it neither takes away from nor adds anything to the fact that 1+1=2.
The point is that simply adding "This is to be understood…"onto something doesn’t change what it says. If X is X, and but someone says X is Y, just saying that it isn’t meant to say X isn’t really X doesn’t change the fact that that’s what it really does say.
Here’s that quote again:
Whether anybody likes it or not this statement does put another step in between man and God.
I’m not trying to be rude, it’s just that the answers we’re getting are nowhere near sufficient. Dave, you said, “I don’t believe the grace of any sacrament comes to me without Mary’s intercession.” That’s fine and it illustrates your belief.
What we are asking for is this:
Here’s some quotes from the Catechism:
This last one is especially important. The Catechism defines Grace as follows:
[emphasis in original]
There really seems to be a contradiction here.
N
Neithan
Guest
You are confusing the order of Grace between the sacraments–*all *Grace (including the sacraments) comes to us in the same way: *from *the Father, *through *the Son, by the Holy Spirit, *with *the intercession of Mary. ALL Grace is conferred this way… it looks like this:
Father
|
|
V
Son
|…
| …
V…
Holy Spirit <===>Mary [intercessory prayers]
| …/
|… /
V …/
Man
The above is the only order of Grace in which all Grace is conferred from God to Man. Including ALL the Sacraments. In the Eucharist, for example, the Holy Spirit transforms the bread and wine into Christ’s body and blood, but the Grace which we receive by consuming it still comes from the Father, through Christ (physically) by the power of the Holy Spirit, with the intercession of Mother Mary.
I think the main problem you might have is that you are leaving out the action of the Holy Spirit in conferring Grace, and that is the key to the understanding of ‘Mediatrix of all Graces,’ because Mary’s prayers *in a special and unique way *in the Communion of Saints intercedes on our behalf for the Grace of the Paraclete… but this does not take away from the merits of Christ! Note Mary’s prominent role, but it is indirect, she does not have any power of her own, but only with her help in praying for the Grace of the Holy Spirit does she take part in the Order of Grace.
Remember that Mary is the type of the Church, and her role in the Order of Grace represents that of the Church. By the Will of God she is Mother of the Church and all Grace which comes us to does so with her helping hand.
As regarding the Leonine quote, your interpretation of it is much too rigid. Pope Leo XIII is certainly not obscuring the Trinity with his inclusion of Mary Mediatrix, since that would be contradicting not only the magisterium, but some of his own encyclicals, such as
Divinum Illud Munus on the work and role of the Holy Spirit. Also remember, that Encyclicals are not infallible, and even infallible documents do not carry the same sort of inspiration in their wording as Scripture does. In no way is the Leonine quote contradictory to the Order of Grace which I attempt to illustrate above. This is *the *order of Grace in which God communicates His Divine Life to Man.
Please go here: marymediatrix.com
And listen to these homilies: marymediatrix-resourceonline.com/cgi-bin/dbman/db.cgi?db=default&uid=&Title=mary&Author=nelson&Category=—&keyword=&mh=10&sb=—&so=ascend&view_records=Search
L
Lazerlike42
Guest
Neithan, I really like what you wrote. However,
If possible, could you exegete this or something?
I understand what you are saying about rigidity, but this still seems to say that it goes to the Virgin and only then to us.
If possible, could you exegete this or something?
N
Neithan
Guest
The problem here is that you aren’t understanding, and so you are assuming that by including Mary’s role in the order of Grace the Magisterium is contradicting itself. That simply isn’t the case.
If I am a messenger for my King, and no message which my King sends to the people reaches them without my involvement, does my role somehow take away from the power of the King? Read that Lumen Gentium quote a few times, which is excellent, and pray for understanding! That’s what I did, it is a Divine Gift, after all.
Doesn’t the priesthood do the same? In any case, there is no insertion of a direct step between man and God, as my post above illustrates–Mary’s involvement is indirect, with her intercession.
LoL This isn’t Dave’s belief, it is the doctrine of the Church. If you continue to hold preconceptions and assumptions about it then no answer will be anywhere sufficient.
Catholicism is full of ‘apparent’ contradictions, as *any *skeptic will tell you; but upon close examination one finds that they are only paradoxes and ever piece fits carefully together to forge a cohesive whole; this is one of the beauties of Catholic Dogma.
Again, God is the direct conferrer of Grace on the human soul, but there is Mary Mediatrix, whose special intercession is always present with the action of the Holy Spirit, and also the role of the Church which is also present as conduit of Grace.
As I said to porthos11 above, your interpretation of Pope Leo’s words are much too rigid, and Mary’s role is infinitely inferior to that of the Blessed Trinity–but her status as Mother of the Church, Queen of Heaven, Co-Redemptrix and Spouse of the Holy Spirit places her first in the Communion of Saints, hence the name ‘Mediatrix of all Graces.’
Go
here
I’ll keep you in mind during the Rosary today
L
Lazerlike42
Guest
Thanks
Like I said, Neithan your explanation makes sense and works. I think some of the other explanations are placing Mary higher power than yours is, and those are the ones I was questioning…
Like I said, Neithan your explanation makes sense and works. I think some of the other explanations are placing Mary higher power than yours is, and those are the ones I was questioning…
N
Neithan
Guest
I wish Pope Benedict XVI would write an encyclical clarifying all of this–it does seem to be a source of confusion for many. As Cardinal Ratzinger he was always careful in his wording, not to make it seem that Mary was in any direct way intruding on the Trinity.
Neithan, your explanations are clear and make sense, but they already jive with what I believe and understand. I’ve always understood our Lady’s role as intercesorry, but even your corrected diagram (clearly showing intercession, which I agree with), doesn’t reconcile with Pope Leo XIII which says (emphasis added):
It’s from the “Virgin it descends to us” part that’s the contention Lazer and I are confused about, because it apparently contradicts Sacramental theology. Dave is correct in advising us not to use temporal mechanics to try to understand it, but the quote clearly places a linear relationship between God, Christ, and our Lady.
When I receive absolution, everything the Church taught me tells me that even though the priest pronounces the Words, I am to hear Christ himself forgiving me. I can even see our Lady interceding for me while I’m confessing. But I cannot see our Lord telling her, “Okay mother, he’s done his part of the deal. Here’s the grace of his forvigeness, dispense it if you wish.” I seriously doubt this is Catholic teaching.
In any case, I’m very comfortable with Mary’s intercessorry mediation and her mediation because of her fiat.
- Status