Mediatrix of All Graces

[godisgood77]

I think it’s important to remind everyone of the weight of the various Vatican documents… in descending order of formal authority: apostolic/dogmatic constitution, encyclical letter, encyclical epistle, apostolic exhortation, apostolic letter, letter and message. Therefore, Lumen Gentium would hold a higher place than the Apostolic Letters and Encyclicals mentioned previously in this thread…

I’ll go back to my original thoughts that were echoed and reinforced by Sirach… Lumen Gentium very purposefully stopped short of declaring Mary the Mediatrix of **All **Graces when it said “Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked by the Church under the titles of Advocate, Auxiliatrix, Adjutrix, and Mediatrix. These, however, are to be so understood that they neither take away from nor add to the dignity and efficacy of Christ the one Mediator.”

This is clear when you understand how the teaching was formed at the Council. Archbiship Corrado Mingo of Monreale, Italy argued at the Council that the title “Mediatrix” should be amplified to “Mediatrix of All Graces”, yet it was omitted from Lumen Gentium. Several other Council fathers made that argument as well, still it was not included. It’s a well documented fact that it was considered a compromise between disparate groups at the Council to include the title ‘Mediatrix’, let alone ‘of All Graces’.

Also at the Council, Bishop Ancel, of Lyons, France said that title “Mediatrix” was given in the Constitution, but at the same time it was given no endorsement, thus leaving the door open for further study as the topic is still heavily debated among theologians. "Perhaps the title ‘Mediatrix might be listed with the other titles, in order to avoid the impression that it is a privileged one’ he said.

To reinforce the point that the doctrine was not fully formed in the Constitution…during the Council, Cardinal Alfrink of the Netherlands said “the title ‘Mediatrix’ should not be insisted upon, since it generates such great difficulties.” There was a clear divisions between the Council Fathers on whether or not to even include the title 'Mediatrix", let alone define it… And there is no mention of ‘Mediatrix of All Graces.’

Last point, which I brought up earlier… the last formal action on this subject was in the mid-90’s, as the request of the Holy See a commission was formed to determine whether or not a 5th Marian Dogma should be defined addressing the titles Coredemptrix, Mediatrix and Advocate. The commission unanimously decided not to define a fifth Marian dogma on those titles.

A Dogmatic Constitution holds the Church’s highest teaching authority. Lumen Gentium did not declare Mary ‘Mediatrix of All Graces.’ and purposefully omitted it from the Constitution. The Church has yet to define a teaching on Mary a ‘Mediatrix’ and the last formal action on the subject ended with a decision not to pursue a definition.

This piece of Marian devotion seems to fall in to the category of personal devotion. The Church may one day declare Mary to be "Mediatrix of All Graces’, but it does not teach that today.

 

[De_Montfort]

This piece of Marian devotion seems to fall in to the category of personal devotion. The Church may one day declare Mary to be "Mediatrix of All Graces’, but it does not teach that today.

Do you acknowledge Abu posts on assent of faith?

LUMEN GENTIUM

25 Bishops, teaching in communion with the Roman Pontiff, are to be respected by all as witnesses to divine and Catholic truth. In matters of faith and morals, the bishops speak in the name of Christ and the faithful are to accept their teaching and adhere to it with a religious assent. This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra; that is, it must be shown in such a way that his supreme magisterium is acknowledged with reverence, the judgments made by him are sincerely adhered to, according to his manifest mind and will. His mind and will in the matter may be known either from the character of the documents, from his frequent repetition of the same doctrine, or from his manner of speaking

We can provide past Popes using the terminology. Can you provide any documents from the 90’s that claim to refrain from giving Mary such a title?

 

[godisgood77]

Do you acknowledge Abu posts on assent of faith?

We can provide past Popes using the terminology. Can you provide any documents from the 90’s that claim to refrain from giving Mary such a title?

Sure I acknowledge the posts on assent of faith although me acknowledging that statement doesn’t impact this conversation meaningfully. Do you acknowledge the hierarchy of authority in the Church from my post?

Yes, I’m aware that terminology has been used in the past. And you are aware of a more authoritative proclamation made by the Church in Lumen Gentium on the subject.

Visit this site for a snapshot of the conference in the 1990’s: miraclehunter.com/marian_apparitions/societies/PAMI/12/index.html

 

[Sirach2]

Last point, which I brought up earlier… the last formal action on this subject was in the mid-90’s, as the request of the Holy See a commission was formed to determine whether or not a 5th Marian Dogma should be defined addressing the titles Coredemptrix, Mediatrix and Advocate. The commission unanimously decided not to define a fifth Marian dogma on those titles.

This piece of Marian devotion seems to fall in to the category of personal devotion. The Church may one day declare Mary to be "Mediatrix of All Graces’, but it does not teach that today.

Here is the actual comment of that commission, published in
L’Osservatore Romano25 June 1997, page 10:

**A NEW MARIAN DOGMA? **Comment on Marian Academy’s Declaration
　
At the most recent Mariological Congress held at Czestochowa, 18-24 August 1996, a commission was established in response to a request, by the Holy See, which had asked to know the opinion of the scholars present at the Congress on the possibility and the opportuneness of defining a new dogma of faith regarding Mary as Coredemptrix, Mediatrix and Advocate. In recent years, the Holy Father and various dicasteries of the Holy See have received petitions requesting such a definition.
The response of the commission, deliberately brief, was unanimous and precise: it is not opportune to abandon the path marked out by the Second Vatican Council and proceed to the definition of a new dogma,

In the path of the teaching of the Second Vatican Council
From whatever perspective it is considered, the movement that is petitioning for a dogmatic definition of the Marian titles of Coredemptrix, Mediatrix and Advocate is not in line with the direction of the great Mariological text of the Second Vatican Council, chapter eight of Lumen gentium, which, in the judgement of Paul VI, constitutes the most extensive synthesis “of the Catholic doctrine on the place that the Blessed Virgin Mary occupies in the mystery of Christ and the Church” ever traced by an Ecumenical Council (Closing Allocution of the Third Session of the Council, 21 November 1964, n. 7).

One should not undervalue the importance of the Mariological teaching of Vatican II, set forth in the exceptional context of a dogmatic constitution, the fruit of the action of the Spirit and of the considered reflection of the Bishops - those to whom the Lord has entrusted the task of preserving and elucidating the deposit of faith. The current movement for a definition is not manifestly in line with the direction of Vatican 11, both with respect to the request for a new Mariological dogma, and the content that is proposed for such a hypothetical dogmatic definition.

More can be read from the link, Godisgood, but I agree with you that this presently falls in the category of pious devotion and is not obligatory for belief by Catholics at this time. I trust the readers will note the date was 1997.

 

[Abu]

godisgood77
Lumen Gentium very purposefully stopped short of declaring Mary the Mediatrix of All Graces

For those who are unaware of why, Fr William Most enlightens:
23 Note in Context:
The reason the Council did not itself add the words “of all graces” was concern for Protestant observers. Father Balic, a chief drafter of the Marian chapter 8, tells us: “The protestants [observers at the Council] were waiting to see if there would be mention of Mary as Mediatrix or not. In case of an affirmative answer, the dialogue would be closed.”-C. Balic, “El Capitulo VIII de la Constitucion ‘Lumen gentium’ comparado con el Primer Esquema de La B. Virgen Madre de la Iglesia” in Estudios Marianos 27 (1966), p. 174.
catholicculture.org/culture/library/most/getchap.cfm?WorkNum=232&ChapNum=12

So the fact that there is no dogmatic definition has not been in contention ever, and the fact that there is a doctrinal definition is supported, which Vatican II did not challenge.

“……that the redeeming graces due to that are mediated to us through Mary so reflects the belief of Catholics everywhere, the considered verdict of Catholic theologians and the declarations of Popes and Bishops on the subject that, even though not yet technically defined as a dogma, it must be regarded as the accepted Catholic doctrine and the safe and common teaching of the Church. This does not mean that we have to ask for every grace expressly through Mary’s intervention or intercession. Whether we do so or not, every grace will in fact come to us from Christ through her as a secondary and subordinate channel of His redemptive influence in our lives. What we are really acknowledging is the place God gave her in His plan of salvation. As both sexes co-operated in our downfall, Adam and Eve, both sexes co-operate in our restoration by grace, Jesus and Mary; and we go to God as He came to us, through Mary. The doctrine of itself in no way gives rise to excesses in the practice of a multitude of devotions to Mary, but rather to a general awareness of our own indebtedness to her subordinately to, but in, with and through our one Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ.”
[See #384 Radio Replies | Catholic Apologetics Online | Rumble & Carthy]

 

[De_Montfort]

Sure I acknowledge the posts on assent of faith although me acknowledging that statement doesn’t impact this conversation meaningfully. Do you acknowledge the hierarchy of authority in the Church from my post?

Yes, I’m aware that terminology has been used in the past. And you are aware of a more authoritative proclamation made by the Church in Lumen Gentium on the subject.

Visit this site for a snapshot of the conference in the 1990’s: miraclehunter.com/marian_apparitions/societies/PAMI/12/index.html

I was not aware of the council in the 90’s and I was not aware because they did not use the word all LG that it made such a title totally out of the question. From what I understood is that it was still up for debate, I had no idea a conclusion was made. Learn something new everyday…

 

[godisgood77]

For those who are unaware of why, Fr William Most enlightens:
23 Note in Context:
The reason the Council did not itself add the words “of all graces” was concern for Protestant observers.

So the fact that there is no dogmatic definition has not been in contention ever, and the fact that there is a doctrinal definition is supported, which Vatican II did not challenge]

I’m afraid you are mistaken on both points above…

Ecumenical concerns were a reason, but certainly not the first reason. As I mentioned in previous posts, there was much debate on the topic at the Council from quite disparate view points. The primary driver, as pointed out in the link I provided and the link Sirach provided, was and I quote “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.”

There is ample evidence that there was and has always been question and uncertainty on this topic. I suggest reading “the Rhine Flows in to the Tiber”, ‘Vatican II in Plain English’ or ‘Desolate City’ for detailed accounts of the debate and reasoning behind the very purposeful wording.

 

[Abu]

ZENIT, October 31 , 2002
In the 1950s, Protestant theologians Miegge and Maury identified Marian co-redemption as the fundamental issue of 20th-century Mariology. More recently, the Dombes ecumenical treatment on Mary noted that the omission of the titles of Co-redemptrix and Mediatrix of all graces at Vatican II for reasons of not offending Protestant Christians was not effective, since the doctrine of co-redemption and mediation remained a fundamental teaching of the council.

Thus, the doctrine is clear.

Pope Benedict invokes Mary as ‘Mediatrix of all graces’
CWN - February 13, 2013
In his Latin-language letter naming Archbishop Zygmunt Zimowski, president of the Pontifical Council for Health Pastoral Care, as his special envoy to the solemn celebration of the World Day of the Sick at the Shrine of Our Lady of Altötting (Germany), Pope Benedict entrusted the prelate’s mission “to the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary Immaculate, Mediatrix of all graces” [intercessioni Beatae Virginis Mariae Immaculatae, Mediatricis omnium gratiarum].

Although the Second Vatican Council and numerous popes have invoked the Blessed Virgin as “Mediatrix,” the papal use of the title “Mediatrix of all graces” is far rarer. The phrase occurs most authoritatively in Caritate Christi Compulsi, Pope Pius XI’s 1932 encyclical on the Sacred Heart, and has appeared on a handful of other occasions in documents issued by **Pope Benedict XV, Pope Pius XI, Venerable Pius XII, and Blessed John XXIII. **

In documents issued in 1979, 1980, and 1987, **Blessed John Paul II **raised churches dedicated under this title to cathedral or basilica status and referred to the Blessed Virgin in one of the documents (the 1987 apostolic constitution Frequentissimae) as **the “most chaste Mediatrix of all graces.” **

The late Father William Most has shown that Pope Leo XIII and subsequent popes have also used similar terminology to describe the Blessed Virgin’s maternal mediation.
catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=17049

 

[Sirach2]

Pope Benedict invokes Mary as ‘Mediatrix of all graces’
CWN - February 13, 2013
In his Latin-language letter naming Archbishop Zygmunt Zimowski, president of the Pontifical Council for Health Pastoral Care, as his special envoy to the solemn celebration of the World Day of the Sick at the Shrine of Our Lady of Altötting (Germany), Pope Benedict entrusted the prelate’s mission **“to the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary Immaculate, Mediatrix of all graces." **

An aside comment by a pope is not a solemnly-defined dogma, though you strive ever so hard to have us believe that their words are doctrinal, rather than an expression of common belief that is held by many.

Although the Second Vatican Council and numerous popes have invoked the Blessed Virgin as “Mediatrix,” the papal use of the title “Mediatrix of all graces” is far rarer. The phrase occurs most authoritatively in Caritate Christi Compulsi, Pope Pius XI’s 1932 encyclical on the Sacred Heart, and has appeared on a handful of other occasions in documents issued by **Pope Benedict XV, Pope Pius XI, Venerable Pius XII, and Blessed John XXIII. **

Again, numerous quotations are not indicative of a solemn definition. There are none, and these expressions must be understood in context with Church teaching. We went round robin awhile ago with EENS’s long list of popes speaking individually over the centuries, but the definition in V-II’s Dogmatic Constitution (LG) is a development of truth that must be understood and accepted over previous encyclicals.

You may continue to quote a long line of predessor popes, but their issuance of an encyclical wherein they give side references to this POV, does not carry the full weight of a Dogmatic Constitution. The statement in L.G., developed by over 5,000 Councillors and ratified by Pope Paul VI, is to be preferred to any previous writings by an individual pope.

It seems like double-speak when you strongly uphold the decision of Trent on baptism of desire here, yet easily dismiss another Council’s decision (LG 62), preferring instead to uphold previous papal encyclicals as pre-eminent. You defended Vatican II in your post here.

“It must be stated that Vatican II is upheld by the same authority as Vatican I and the Council of Trent, namely, the Pope and the College of Bishops in communion with him, and that also with regard to its contents, Vatican II is in strictest continuity with both previous councils and incorporates their texts word for word in decisive points…” (The Ratzinger Report, p 28).

Unless there is a proclamation by Motu Proprio giving Mary this express express title with the full definition of its meaning, you are doing no more that expressing the common belief that many hold as devotion, but not as dogma. Would you have us go to confession for the ‘sin’ of not believing that Mary bestows all graces?

Similarly, Paul VI wrote this in his Marian encyclical while noting concurrance from predessor Popes: “and finally to put forward a number of reflections intended to encourage the restoration, in a dynamic and more informed manner, of the recitation of the Rosary, the practice of which was so strongly recommended by our predecessors and is so widely diffused among the Christian people.”

Indeed, many popes and faithful hold the devotion to the rosary as par excellance, yet Church calls this a private devotion. We would not confess that *I did not say my rosary today, *any more than we would confess lack of belief in this aspect of Mary. Why then, are you so insistent that Catholics must believe it, when a commission of the Church has unanimously decided not to dogmatize it?

 

[Sirach2]

Abu:

So now we see that, as already clarified, no mistaken idea of dogma is involved, but as Fr Most shows ‘we turn to the second of the texts to which the Council refers us, the Ad diem illum of Pope St. Pius X. He wrote this Encyclical to solemnly commemorate the 50th anniversary of the definition of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception.

One more thought, Abu. If this is true doctrine that must be believed the faithful, wouldn’t we expect to find it in one of our many catechisms … in particular, the Catechism of St. Pius X who is quoted above? Yet it is not taught there. Nor is it in the Catechism of Trent, the Baltimore Catechisms, nor the CCC.

We are only obligated to believe that which the Church teaches in her official Catechisms.

 

[De_Montfort]

"Although Vatican II did not add the words “of all graces,” it added a note on the above passage, in which it refers us to the texts of Leo XIII, Adiutricem populi, St. Pius X, Ad diem illum, Pius XI, Miserentissimus Redemptor, and Pius XII, Radiomessage to Fatima. Leo XIII in that text spoke of her, as we saw above, as having “practically limitless power.” St. Pius X said she was the “dispensatrix of all the gifts, and is the “neck” connecting the Head of the Mystical Body to the Members. But all power flows through the neck. Pius XII said "Her kingdom is as vast as that of her Son and God, since nothing is excluded from her dominion.”

ewtn.com/faith/teachings/marya4a.htm

We also find in the teachings of the Saints, De Montfort and Maximilian Kolbe to name a few, that grace normally comes from God through Mary to us. We have to take that into consideration.

 

[Sirach2]

"Although Vatican II did not add the words “of all graces,” it added a note on the above passage, in which it refers us to the texts of Leo XIII, Adiutricem populi, St. Pius X, Ad diem illum, Pius XI, Miserentissimus Redemptor, and Pius XII, Radiomessage to Fatima. Leo XIII in that text spoke of her, as we saw above, as having “practically limitless power.” St. Pius X said she was the “dispensatrix of all the gifts, and is the “neck” connecting the Head of the Mystical Body to the Members. But all power flows through the neck. Pius XII said "Her kingdom is as vast as that of her Son and God, since nothing is excluded from her dominion.”

It seems that you did not read the thread, or you would have seen that these are not de fide proclamations in light of Vatican II and the Commission who recently as 1997 opted unanimously not to consider making it a dogma. Since it is NOT dogma, there is NO obligation for the faithful to believe anything other than what Vatican II taught in its Dogmatic Constitution and the Catechism. It is a pious devotion, and there is nothing wrong with private belief, provided we refrain from trying to impose it on the faithful as dogma, when the Church herself has not done so. I’m not sure why you are persisting in this vein.

Until the Church defines a doctrine concerning Mary as Mediatrix and what all that entails, it is speculation on what “dispensatrix of all the gifts” really means. Gifts of what … intercession? Maternal aid? Conversions? We already know that. The term has not been defined, so we are left at the mercy of private interpretation that can take many forms. Unless the Church clarifies her terminology, there is no point in the laity trying to help her do so.

 

[Abu]

The continual emphasis by Sirach2 against a dogma that the Blessed Virgin is Mediatrix of All Graces is continuously misdirected here, as no one has proposed this and thus it is tilting at windmills.

What is presented here is clear evidence that it is a doctrine which has been taught by Vatican II through the footnote to art 62, Lumen Gentium, which refers us to the teaching of Pope Leo XIII, St Pius X and Pius XII, who all taught that Mary is the Mediatrix of All Graces. Further, in art 25, we are taught to loyally submit will and intellect to papal teaching to the whole Church on faith and morals, even if not definitive.

LG (62) teaches that the maternity of Mary in the order of Grace lasts until the eternal fulfilment of ALL the elect; (69) until ALL families of people, whether Christian or whether they still do not know the Saviour, become one People of God.

In the Marian Encyclical *Redemptoris Mater *(Mother of the Redeemer), 1987, Bl John Paul II illustrates in an in-depth manner the theology of Mary’s maternal mediation: “Jesus prepared His Mother to become for ALL people their ‘Mother in the order of Grace’ (39; LG 61); this is because “Mary is united by a close and indissoluble bond” to Christ. (41)

Simply, what we all need to know is what the Church has taught, what the doctrine is on the BVM, not someone’s speculation. Real Catholics assent to what the Church teaches through Her Councils and the Popes, not to misrepresentations.

 

[Sirach2]

The continual emphasis by Sirach2 against a dogma that the Blessed Virgin is Mediatrix of All Graces is continuously misdirected here, as no one has proposed this and thus it is tilting at windmills.

What is presented here is clear evidence that it is a doctrine which has been taught by Vatican II through the footnote to art 62, Lumen Gentium, which refers us to the teaching of Pope Leo XIII, St Pius X and Pius XII, who all taught that Mary is the Mediatrix of All Graces. Further, in art 25, we are taught to loyally submit will and intellect to papal teaching to the whole Church on faith and morals, even if not definitive.

As was stated, Abu, the footnote is NOT “clear evidence” and does not lend further weight to what the Council specifically avoided in wording its definition. In fact, as was pointed out, the footnote does not clarify this whatsoever, since Leo XIII did not use the word “all”, but rather simply the word Mediatrix of grace. That is the contention that you continually overlook in your zeal to promote something the Church has not included in any of her teachings or Catechisms.

Simply, what we all need to know is what the Church has taught, what the doctrine is on the BVM, not someone’s speculation. Real Catholics assent to what the Church teaches through Her Councils and the Popes, not to misrepresentations.

Indeed, you previously asserted - rightly - that the Councils are pre-eminent over encyclicals. Why then do you dismiss Vatican II’s LG62 and insist that encyclicals from predecessor popes carry more weight?
Where are the defining arguments in ANY papal documents?
Where are the teachings spelled out in ANY of the Catechisms?
Why do you set aside the Commission who unanimously chose not to define the dogma at this time iin 1997?

Prove that it is of faith and required for all Catholics to believe.
I assert again that this is NOT essential for belief by Catholics, but it is of pious devotion. It has never been officially defined, other than devotionally.
Maybe you should tell us how God dispenses ALL graces to us through Mary whenever we pray to Him, since the Church has not pronounced it specifically.

Why then are we to listen to you, rather than the Church? I am very disappointed that you are presenting a false idea of Her teaching, whereas you were formerly a person whom I respected for fidelity and truthfulness in presenting doctrine accurately.

Since you did not answer our previous posts but prefer to cling adamantly to your views, I foresee that this will be bypassed as well. I’m not going to debate with you, since I believe enough information has been put forth in this thread that those who have eyes to see will understand. If they have any doubts, they can contact their bishops who will see to it that the truth is made clear to them.

 

[Sirach2]

For the record, lest anyone misconstrue what some have been saying in this thread, it is not the fact that the Church has titled Mary as Mediatrix that is the problem. It is that one or more members take their belief beyond what the Church has chosen to define in this regard and insert the additional title “ALL” graces.

Yes, Mary is our Mother, Mediatrix indeed, our most powerful intercessor. Let’s align our understanding with the Church until such time as this becomes more solemnly defined, if it ever does.

 

[fred_conty]

Hello, not sure if this question should be brought to this forum or not…

This past weekend my Pastor focused his homily on Mary as “Mediatrix of All Graces”. Further, he stated that the Second Vatican Council in Lumen Gentium declared this formally and gave her the title. Now, I’ve read several books about the Council and Lumen Gentium and know that the Council fathers very purposefully stopped short of giving Mary this title and that a commission was formed in 1996 at the request of the Holy See to explore this topic and that it was unanimously decided that it should not be declared that Mary is the Mediatrix of All Graces.

My understanding is that some Catholics give her this title, but that Church does not. I know that there has been a handful of Popes that have used this title in talks, but never declared this formally. Further, I believe there is a petition to dogmatically declare this, but that only about 8 million signatures have been gathered.

My question is two fold… 1) Does the Church teach that Mary is the Mediatrix of All Graces and 2) If not, should I answer my conscience and talk to my Priest about the this as I believe he misstated the Church’s teaching on this… somewhat of a fraternal correction.

Thank-you for your (name removed by moderator)ut.
Dan

Ott’s “Fundamentals of Catholic dogma” has this to say:

"Mary is the Mediatrix of all graces by her co-operation in the Incarnation. (Mediatio in universali.)
Mary is the Mediatrix of all graces by her intercession in Heaven. (Mediatio in speciali.) "

The first one is a definite yes to her being mediatrix. Christ being the source of all grace, and
Mary bringing the source of all grace into this world, then she is the mediatrix of all graces.

The second one is is not defined as dogma but it is a thought that is widely held.

So the answer is yes “Mediatrix of all graces” as long as one understands how that is to be taken, the mother of all grace, Christ.

I personally am more interested in Mary obtaining graces for those who ask for them. This is what she said when she gave us the miraculous medal. If you ask and trust, you will receive graces.​

“Though his friends flee in fear, she remained forever near.” (hymn)

 

[De_Montfort]

It seems that you did not read the thread, or you would have seen that these are not de fide proclamations in light of Vatican II and the Commission who recently as 1997 opted unanimously not to consider making it a dogma. Since it is NOT dogma, there is NO obligation for the faithful to believe anything other than what Vatican II taught in its Dogmatic Constitution and the Catechism. It is a pious devotion, and there is nothing wrong with private belief, provided we refrain from trying to impose it on the faithful as dogma, when the Church herself has not done so. I’m not sure why you are persisting in this vein.

Until the Church defines a doctrine concerning Mary as Mediatrix and what all that entails, it is speculation on what “dispensatrix of all the gifts” really means. Gifts of what … intercession? Maternal aid? Conversions? We already know that. The term has not been defined, so we are left at the mercy of private interpretation that can take many forms. Unless the Church clarifies her terminology, there is no point in the laity trying to help her do so.

Dear friend,
I am not saying that the title Mediatrix of all Graces is a dogma. All I did was search a little bit and found what I posted. To only show the history of the term and from what I can tell by what you posted, is still up for debate for the Church to declare more clearly.

Nowhere in LUMEN GENTIUM does it say we should refrain from using Mediatrix of all graces. To me it has to be read as a whole, foot notes included, to get what they were trying to express. I am a bit confused though on what your goal is? Are you trying to say we can’t ever use this term until the Church defines it? If so why? Can you provide any information that backs this claim up?

As far as the bolded part in your quote, can you provide any information that the Church in fact tells us to not use the term? The problem I have understanding this is that if you in fact look to the Church in the past you find the term used numerous times, yet if we go looking about it your way, as far as my search goes, we find nothing?

 

[Abu]

A look at the reality of the teaching of the Church on the Blessed Virgin as the Mediatrix of all graces including as referenced by Vatican II.

Leo XIII, Encyclical, Octobri mense adventante, Sept 22, 1891, *** 24, 1891, 196.
… it is right to say, that **nothing at all of that very great treasury of all grace **which the Lord brought us–for ‘grace and truth came through Jesus Christ’ [Jn 1.17]–nothing is imparted to us except through Mary, since God so wills, so that just as no one can come to the Father except through the Son, so in general, no one can come to Christ except through His Mother.

Leo XIII, Encyclical, Diuturni temporis spatium, Sept 5, 1898, *** 31, 1898, 146.
For from her, as in a must abundant conduit, the drafts of heavenly graces are given: ‘… in her hands are the treasures of the mercies of the Lord’; for ‘God wills that she be the principle of all good things.’

St. Pius X, Encyclical, Ad diem illum, Feb. 2, 1904, AAS 36, 1904. 453-54.
“Now from this common sharing of will and suffering between Christ and Mary, she **‘merited to become **most worthily the Reparatrix of the lost world’ [Eadmer, De Excellentia Virginis Mariae, 9] and therefore **Dispensatrix of all the gifts which Jesus gained for us **by His Death and by His Blood…”

St. Pius X, Litterae Apostolicae, August 27, 1910, AAS 2, 1910, 901.
“the Virgin of Lourdes, the treasurer [sequestra] of all graces,…”

Benedict XV, Encyclical, Fausto appetente die, June 29, 1921, AAS 13, 1921, 334.
“Mary … has such influence with her divine Son, that He confers whatever of graces He confers on humans, does so always with her as minister and decision-maker [administra et arbitra].”

Pius XI, Encyclical, Ingravescentibus malis, Sept 29, 1937, AAS 29, 1927, 380.
“… we know also that **all things **are imparted to us from God the Greatest and Best, **through the hands of the Mother of God/**U].”

 

[Sirach2]

Ott’s “Fundamentals of Catholic dogma” has this to say:

So the answer is yes “Mediatrix of -]all/-] graces” as long as one understands how that is to be taken … :yup:

Fred, who made Ott the papal legate to Catholics? Let’s see what Pope John Paul II had to say. Next post.

 

[Sirach2]

Dear friend,
I am not saying that the title Mediatrix of all Graces is a dogma. All I did was search a little bit and found what I posted. To only show the history of the term and from what I can tell by what you posted, is still up for debate for the Church to declare more clearly.
:yup:

Are you trying to say we can’t ever use this term until the Church defines it?:nope:

The descriptive titles Co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix, and Co-advocate have been used many times for Mary through out the history of the Church. Using the descriptive titles, even in official Church documents, **does not itself declare the Dogma which may only be done by the Pope himself. **

Many people in the Church currently when referring to this teaching say she is the Mediatrix of All Grace. But this role fits into her being the Advocate of the Sinner, Queen of the Universe, Second Eve, Mother of God, Mother of Humanity, Mother of the Church, Ark of the New Covenant, Full of Grace, and Co-Redemptrix.

1. Christ, Son of God, as our Mediator with the Father, is the MEANS (the way, the direct cause) of salvific grace.
2. Mary, as Mediator of grace, is the INTERCESSOR (the indirect cause).

The Trinity is the direct cause and source of all grace. Mary is not the direct cause or source of grace (as some believe). The implication that she is the direct source/cause of all grace through using the words “all grace” with the title, is the error that conveys a false theology in her regard. It becomes a stumbling block when presented to non-C’s.

More from Pope John Paul II …