Mary Mediatrix of All Graces

  • Thread starter Thread starter Agathon
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
AugustTherese said:
And, it does not say anything about some graces, or a few graces. How can anyone who wittingly accepts the title Mother of God have a beef with Mediatrix of all Graces?! It boggles my mind!
Click to expand...
A council declared Mary to be Mother of God…
 
A simple syllogism:
If Christ, the Second Person of the Trinity, is the source of all graces, and
Mary is Mediatrix between humanity and Christ, then
Mary is Mediatrix of all graces.
 
There’s no room to disagree. So I imagine a Catholic attending Mass when the Mass of Mary Mediatrix of All Graces is used just gets up and leaves because they don’t support what the liturgy says?
 
AugustTherese said:
And that title existed as Dogma hundreds of years before that Council, just as Mediatrix of all Graces does.
Click to expand...
I appreciate your passion for the topic… but good Catholics disagree on this and as I’ve laid out, the Church has set the issue aside due the great difficulties it causes.
 
Church has not “set the issue aside.” There is a feast in its honor in the liturgy.
 
KMG said:
Church has not “set the issue aside.” There is a feast in its honor in the liturgy.
Click to expand...
There is a mass for this in some places which only further reinforces that there is disagreement.

what do you say about this…the last formal action by the Church on the subject? - Marian Congress

During the International Mariological Congress at Czestochowa, Poland, August 18-23, 1996, a meeting composed of representatives from the Marian theological faculties and the Mariological societies was held to consider the advisability of petitioning the Holy See for the dogmatic definition of the Virgin Mary as coredemptrix, mediatrix, and advocate. This meeting at the International Mariological Congress was held at the request of the Holy See. There was unanimous agreement at the meeting not to petition the Holy See to make such a declaration at this time. There were two reasons for this decision: the first dealt with the theological clarifications which must first be made, and the second dealt with the ecumenical dialogue.

In accord with the precedent set at Vatican II, the participants agreed that a doctrinal declaration should not “settle questions which have not yet been fully clarified by the work of theologians” (LG 54); they noted that Vatican II had already stated that the “Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix” (LG 62). Although these titles are in common use, they are subject to ambiguous and different interpretations. The word “coredemptrix” did not appear in the magisterium until the pontificate of Pius XII. Earlier in the twentieth century, Pius XI had formed national commissions to study the possibility of a dogmatic definition of Mary as mediatrix. The pneumatological consequences of calling Mary “advocate” must also be carefully studied.

The second reason the theologians gave for recommending that the Holy See not define these Marian prerogatives dealt with the ecumenical dialogue. In the encyclical Ut unum sint, Pope John Paul II outlined a path for ecumenical dialogue among all the followers of Christ. The various churches should explore the common ground that unites them together as followers of Christ. He suggests that all Christians consider the Virgin Mary as “Mother of God, icon of the Church, spiritual mother who intercedes for all the disciples of Christ and for the whole of humanity” (n. 79). The theologians wished to follow the line of dialogue as outlined in the encyclical as the way to promote unity among all the churches. Catholics, Orthodox, Anglicans and the Reformed were united at Jasna Gora to consider the role of the Virgin Mary in the mystery of Christ. This dialogue at Jasna Gora presents an example of an exchange of views which searches for common ground and which brings together and unites.
 
Last edited:
There is a liturgy in honor of this feast, which can be used universally with no special permission. This isn’t an issue. Again, I imagine if a priest uses this Mass on 31 May you’ll walk out in protest.
 
Why would the Church permit a whole liturgy dedicated to a title Mary may not have?
 
Ah, yes–“ecumenical dialogue.” And there we have it.
 
Fauken said:
Why would the Church permit a whole liturgy dedicated to a title Mary may not have?
Click to expand...
Good question…

Why would the Pope form a commission in the 90’s to see if this could be pursued? And then agree unanimously not to pursue?
 
Last edited:
Yeah, some people have this “ecumenism uber alles” fetish going.
 
I’m not the Pope so I can’t say. But if I had to take a guess, perhaps he used the same reasoning that Pope Francis did for creating a board to study deaconess.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top