All Graces

[badsede]

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

Comments

[kishiriadgr]

This is being recycled from 2000 or so. John Paul II turned to a panel of theologians, who all urged him not to do it. I think that Ratzinger, who is a theologian himself, will probably follow suit.

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.

[jade_sabre_301]

Indeed.

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.

[martiancyclist]

We believe in the Assumption, but our objection to the dogma, when we do, is usually due to a misunderstanding that Catholics say she didn't die, which we insist she did do. Provided that clarification is made, we have no inherent problem with the teaching, though we don't dogmatize it.

The Immaculate Conception, though, we do have a problem with, since it presupposes a view of Original Sin which we do not teach.

[jade_sabre_301]

My understanding was that the main problem with it was that it was dogmatized--that the Orthodox churches only dogmatize Trinitarian and Christological teachings, not Mariological ones. The actual document Munificentissimus Deus leaves the question of Mary's demise unanswered, and generally speaking it makes more theological sense for her to have died--at least, the arguments I've seen asserting her death are much stronger than those saying she did not die.

May I ask what view of Original Sin you're referring to?

[martiancyclist]

Our disagreement with the Assumption dogma comes from three things:
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.

[napoleonofnerds]

Catholics tend to think Mary didn't die. The Church is silent on the subject.

[brotherskeeper1]

I've heard this promoted by Opus Dei. Have you also heard this from aside from EWTN -- which is not one of my favorite spiritual sources?

[kishiriadgr]

I've only heard it promoted on EWTN. I'm not familiar with anything Opus Dei promotes.

[brotherskeeper1]

Thanks for the comment. Last year in St. Louis, Opus Dei was under investigation as some of their activities were cult-like, and truly, from what was shown on TV, it had many of the earmarking of a cult: you give what you earn to them, you study their teaching however long each day, and they had a piece of barbed wire they had a member demonstrate as to how he tightly wraps it around his leg as a type of penance.

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.

[kaffeine1]

Is it OK in this forum to slag off practising Catholics with these sort of claims?
I can't believe this was posted!

[brotherskeeper1]

All of the comments here are from practicing Catholics, including myself. If you are objecting to my post, please read the info page about this community as to what is and what is not permitted. Others are posting their thoughts and objections. What I wrote is a matter of record.

[napoleonofnerds]

It's totally okay to express negative views of certain aspects of Church practice, especially ones as widely criticised as Opus Dei or the Legionaries of Christ.

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.

[kishiriadgr]

My little Opus story....

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....

[napoleonofnerds]

I'm aware, and I'm the first one to say Dominic was wrong too. The difference is that Dominic did it in 1195, and Escriva did it in 1955.

[badsede]

One point I forgot to make though: if it is true, then these sorts of practical concerns should not stop a dogmatic pronouncement. Difficulty should not stand in the way of Truth. And I do think that our current pope is the type to approach things that way.

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.)