I'm sure that many of you have heard the news that 5 cardinals have petitioned the Pope to make an ex cathedra pronouncement declaring a fifth Marian dogma, that Mary is Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix of All Graces.
annabellissima and I spent yestserday evening doing a bunch of web-reading on the subject. We're both ok with the title of Co-Redemptrix when
(
Read more... )
I think, speaking as a mariologist, that this proposed dogma is a terrible idea for all the reasons you cite in the last paragraph. The petition is largely EWTN-driven, adding more to my intense dislike of that organization.
Reply
I took a class on Mariology last semester and it was my first real encounter with this doctrine. The professor was a very big supporter of it and was downright shocked when his simple questions on the reading led to a heated discussion on the subject, as if it wasn't something universally accepted. I was a little frustrated, to say the least.
The ecumenical problems inherent in this are my biggest pet peeve (aside from the idea that we should mostly only pray to Mary because only she can make our prayers perfect--oh, St. Louis de Montfort)--as if proclaiming the Assumption wasn't enough to set back the Orthodox/Roman ecumenical process by decades. *shakes her head*
Anyway, I hadn't heard the news, but I'm with tepintzin on this one that Pope Benedict will continue with his "respectful silence" on the issue.
Reply
The Immaculate Conception, though, we do have a problem with, since it presupposes a view of Original Sin which we do not teach.
Reply
May I ask what view of Original Sin you're referring to?
Reply
1. A misunderstanding of what it says
2. That it's dogma (which seems weird to us)
3. That the pope declared it unilaterally (we don't think anyone can do that)
Our disagreement with the Immaculate Conception dogma comes from three things also; 2 and 3 from above, and also that we don't believe her conception was different from anyone else's. Our view of original sin is more along the lines that we're all born with the tendency to sin, but not with any guilt yet. The Theotokos didn't make much use of this tendency, but it was there.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
As for as the priest who was in charge of the center, he would not answer questions at all or give any helpful information.
Jose Maria Escriva was the founder of Opus Dei and the set of books with the heresy is published by Scepter in London, NY, New Delhi. The first edition came out in 1987. The series is called Hablar con Dios with the author Francez Fernandez. There is no Concordat Cum Originali, Nihl Obstat or IMPRIMATUR. There's 3 meditations per day year around but the biggest focus is on Mary. Probably 95% of the meditations end with something like, Let us asked Mary to .....
God bless.
Reply
I can't believe this was posted!
Reply
Reply
Escriva was a borderline Mariolater, he encourages penances which are more depraved than pious, and his obsession with aristocracy led him to capitulate with Franco while many of our priests died fighting for Church and personal liberty in Spain. The man wouldn't have lasted five minutes in a Sainthood process which still included the Advocatus Diaboli, which is why John Paul II got rid of it. Two of the judges of his cause objected strenuously to it even being opened.
Now, if you'd like to defend Escriva or Opus Dei you can, but the practices it encourages are not mainstream and aren't accepted even by the most devout Catholics in any other order or institution.
Reply
There is an Opus Dei club or whatever you call it, in Montreal. I worked briefly for Catholic Times there, and one afternoon looked in the collection of clippings about it.
To my surprise, I found that a deacon who worked in the office and who was absolutely delightful, had once been their spokesman. I asked him about it and he blanched and said, "That wasn't me. That was someone else," and made a hasty retreat.
I would love, love, love to know the story there....
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
The problem is that I am not sure that this "all Graces" aspect is true, and even if it is, I'm not sure that it is central enough to the faith to be elevated to the level of dogma. (But then, I am not entirely convinced that the Immaculate Conception or the Assumption are central enough to merit the elevation to dogma. I accept it, but I am not entirely convinced.)
Reply
Leave a comment