Posted on 12/12/2008 10:02:26 AM PST by Joiseydude
Playboy has got into the Christmas spirit — by putting the Virgin Mary nude on its Mexican cover.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
not to be disrespectful, but Mary is NOT the mother of God. God in the Person of Jesus Christ existed long before He created Mary. She was just a vessel.
These issues have been argued since the Reformation. As long as one believes in Jesus Christ and His atoning act alone for salvation, then we will argue the finer points in Heaven.
Yes, I do know about Mediatrix.
The word Co-redemtrix is by far not correct and is used by anti-Catholic posters here to state that we are idiots.
From Catholic Pages.com:
http://www.catholic-pages.com/bvm/mediatrix.asp
There are five traditional Catholic beliefs about Mary:
1. that she is the Mother of God;
2. that she was Ever-Virgin;
3. that she was immaculately conceived;
4. that she was assumed into Heaven and crowned Queen of Heaven and Earth; and
5. that she is Mediatrix of all Graces, Co-Redemptrix and Advocate for the People of God.
The first four of these have been defined as dogmas of the faith (ie, they have been infallibly defined by the Pope or by an Ecumenical Council). There is considerable impetus at the moment for the Holy Father to make an ex cathedra declaration of the infallible truth of the fifth and final Marian dogma.
There is a lay movement called Vox Populi Mariae Mediatrici promoting this doctrine and setting in train the processes to bring about this proclamation. With the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption, the procedure was that following theological foundations of the doctrines and episcopal support, there had to be a manifestation of the sensum fidelium, ie, that the faithful believed it to be true. Eight million of the faithful petitioned the Holy Father over 95 years for the definition of the Assumption. So far, in just four years, four million signatures have been gathered for the definition of Our Lady as Mediatrix of All Graces.
The doctrine, essentially, is that as a special privilege and reward for her perfection, all Graces that Jesus, as the one Mediator between the Father and Man, obtains for us, are dispensed by and through the Virgin Mary, Queen of Heaven.
St Maximilian Kolbe reflected and wrote extensively on Mary as Mediatrix of Graces.
****
Please refer to this link for VOXPOPULI.ORG, explanations, objections and rebuttals:
http://www.voxpopuli.org/response_to_7_common_objections_part1.php
***
Here is another source on the subject:
http://www.motherofallpeoples.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1443&Itemid=80
The following article was given at a 2000 conference Ratcliffe College in England and published in Mary at the Foot of the Cross: Acts of the International Symposium on Marian Coredemption (New Bedford, MA: Academy of the Immaculate, 2001), pp. 155-171.
—Asst. Ed.
Introduction
For a number of theologians the term Coredemptrix is a stumbling block; for Pope John Paul II it is a key for entering deeper into the mystery of Jesus Christ crucified and resurrected, particularly through the practice of Marian consecration. Providentially, Our Lady at Fatima asked for the consecration of Russia and the world to her Immaculate Heart. Pope John Paul II has not only fulfilled this request, but skillfully articulates the dynamic role of Our Lady Coredemptrix working intimately in the lives of individuals, cities and nations, especially for the conversion of Russia. Thus, in this paper I will: 1.) present the Holy Father’s teaching on Genesis 3:15, demonstrating how it is the prophetic Scriptural basis for Mary’s role as Coredemptrix; 2.) assess and evaluate five different occasions that Pope John Paul II has used the term Coredemptrix, focusing primarily on Mary’s role at the foot of the Cross (Jn 19:25-27); 3.) show how His Holiness relates Marian Coredemption to the Fatima message, particularly through consecration of Russia and the world to Mary’s Immaculate Heart; and 4.) demonstrate the importance of Our Lady’s role as Coredemptrix in the conversion of Russia today.
The Woman, the Son and the Serpent (Gen. 3:15)
It is not uncommon today for some theologians to express difficulty in assessing the meaning of the “woman” in Genesis 3:15 (1): “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel.” Yet, as I shall show, both Pope John Paul II and the Second Vatican Council give a Marian interpretation to this text.
When His Holiness introduced the above text in his Marian Encyclical, Redemptoris Mater, he did so only in relation to the primacy of Christ, placing it in the context of Ephesians 1:3: “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places” (Eph 1:3) (2). He went on to say that the divine plan of salvation is
… eternally linked with Christ. It includes everyone, but it reserves a special place for the “woman” who is the Mother of Him to whom the Father has entrusted the work of salvation. As the Second Vatican Council says, “she is prophetically foreshadowed in that promise made to our first parents after their fall into sin” (3) – according to the Book of Genesis (cf. 3:15) (4).
By citing the Council, the Holy Father emphasized that this interpretation of Genesis 3:15 comes from the heart of the universal Magisterium; it is also consistent with the teaching of prior Pontiffs, particularly Pope Pius IX and Pope Pius XII, who solemnly defined the dogmas of the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption, respectively (5).
In a December 8, 1979, homily given at the basilica of St. Mary Major, the Supreme Pontiff characterized the struggle described in Genesis 3:15: “…the future of humanity and of the Church…is seen in the prospect of a struggle between the Spirit of Darkness, the one who ‘is a liar and the father of lies’ (Jn 8:44), and the Woman’s Son, who is to come amidst men as ‘the way, the truth, and the life’ (Jn 14:6)” (6). Christ, therefore, leads the battle and it is He who “will crush the head of the serpent” (7). Nonetheless, the “Woman” also participates in this struggle against the Evil One (8), as the Holy Father indicated in his April 13, 1980, Regina Caeli message, when he addressed the Virgin Mary directly concerning her active role, even to the extent of acknowledging her share in bruising the serpent’s head:
Our Mother and Our Lady! At the beginning of salvation, the Eternal Father resolved and chose you, Mary Immaculate, as the Mother of the Word Incarnate. At the beginning of this struggle between good and evil He established you, as the Woman who bruises the serpent’s head (cf. Gen 3:15). In this way he marked your humble maternity as the sign of hope for all those who, in this battle, in this struggle, wish to persevere with your Son and overcome evil with good (9).
John Paul II calls Mary Coredemptrix
We will now examine five specific times John Paul refers to Mary as “Coredemptrix,” so as to discover certain emphases which mark his thought and thus determine how he relates the term to a dynamic spirituality centered on Christ Crucified, especially through the reception of the Eucharist.
On September 8, 1982, in remarks made to pilgrims after his General Audience, Pope John Paul II clearly affirmed that Mary’s participation in Christ’s sufferings makes her our Coredemptrix: “Mary, though conceived and born without taint of sin, participated in a marvelous way in the sufferings of her divine Son, in order to be Coredemptrix of humanity” (10). Just as the salvific mission of her Son is universal, so is Mary s participation in this one saving act. As always, she is completely subordinate to Christ, yet nonetheless uniquely conjoined to Him, not by earned merit on her part but simply by God’s divine favor.
Similarly, in his November 4, 1984, Angelus message, the Holy Father stressed the importance and intensity of Mary’s future suffering at the foot of the Cross (Jn 19:25-27) while citing the words of St. Charles Borromeo:
To Our Lady – the Coredemptrix – St. Charles turned with singularly revealing accents: “…life will be for you a thousand times more bitter than death. You will see your innocent Son handed over into the hands of sinners … You will see Him brutally crucified between thieves … you will see the blood that you gave Him spilling. And nevertheless you will not be able to die!” (From the homily delivered in the Cathedral of Milan the Sunday after the Epiphany, 1584) (11).
In the above quote, Pope John Paul II has directly affirmed that Our Lady deserves and is honored by the title Coredemptrix. Sometimes the prefix “co” means equal, as in co-author; but in Coredemptrix, “co” comes from the Latin word “cum” meaning “with” (12). Thus, Mary redeems us, not as an equal of Christ, but with Christ and under Christ, always subordinate to Him. By quoting St. Charles, a towering light in the Catholic Counter-Reformation, the Pope may well be signaling the importance of this doctrine for our time.
On January 31, 1985, at a Marian celebration in Guayaquil, Ecuador, the Supreme Pontiff extended Mary’s role as Coredemptrix beyond the Resurrection, linking it to Pentecost and the Church of every age:
The Gospels do not tell us of an appearance of the risen Christ to Mary. Nevertheless, as she was in a special way close to the Cross of her Son, she also had to have a privileged experience of His Resurrection. In fact, Mary’s role as Co-Redemptrix did not cease with the glorification of her Son. Pentecost speaks to us of Mary’s presence in the infant Church: a prayerful presence in the apostolic Church and in the Church of all ages. Being the first – the dawn – among the faithful because she is the Mother, she sustains our common prayer (13).
The Holy Father has illustrated the powerful maternal link which Mary has with both Christ and the Church. Her intimate role in Christ’s redemptive sacrifice on the Cross propels her as maternal Coredemptrix into the life of the infant Church and the Church of every age: she sustains our common prayer precisely as Mother and Coredemptrix. Her role as Mother and cooperator in Jesus’ life and mission extends throughout history to the life of His Mystical Body, the Church.
On Palm Sunday 1985, after recalling Jesus’ entrustment of John to Mary on Calvary in the depth of her maternal sacrifice, the Pope urged the young people present to look to Mary as their Mother and Coredemptrix who will strengthen their desire for Jesus in the Eucharist:
There is Mary, your Mother! … The exemplary model to inspire you. The support to sustain you in the difficulties of life! The Church dedicates a special pastoral concern to it, calling the faithful to the Eucharistic Table, as the loving interpreter of the Lord’s aspiration: “I have greatly desired to eat this Passover with you” (Lk 22:15). May Mary our Protectoress, the Coredemptrix, to whom we offer our prayer with great outpouring, make our desire generously correspond to the desire of the Redeemer (14)
His Holiness has, so to speak, placed Mary as a “Coredemptrix in action” who instills in us an ever greater desire to participate in the celebration of the Eucharist. By invoking Our Lady as Coredemptrix, the Pope integrates theology and devotion: he brings alive the doctrine of Marian coredemption through authentic Eucharistic and Marian spirituality. This integration is a necessity for dynamic Christian living as affirmed by Hans Urs von Balthasar on June 23, 1984, during his acceptance of the Paul VI International Prize: “I insist on the inseparability between theology and spirituality, their separation being the worst disaster that ever occurred in the history of the Church” (15).
The importance of Mary’s role as Coredemptrix is further illustrated in the prayer life of St. Bridget of Sweden, the great 14th-century mystic and foundress, whom the Holy Father applauded in his October 6, 1991, Angelus Message and whom he recently made co-patron of Europe:
St. Bridget looked to Mary as her model and support in the various moments of her life … She contemplated her astonishing mission as Mother of the Savior. She invoked her as the Immaculate Conception, Our Lady of Sorrows, and Coredemptrix, exalting Mary’s singular role in the history of salvation and the life of the Christian people (16).
The three titles – Immaculate Conception, Our Lady of Sorrows, and Coredemptrix – all have a deep interrelated meaning in the Pope’s thought. Mary’s Immaculate Conception “gave the maximum value to her cooperation in the sacrifice” (17); and her suffering as Our Lady of Sorrows united with that of Jesus “was supernaturally fruitful for the redemption of the world” (18); and “in fact Mary’s role as Coredemptrix did not cease with the glorification of her Son” (19), but rather continues in the life of the Christian people. Thus, her Immaculate Conception enabled her to become the perfect Coredemptrix who humbly and subordinately united her sufferings with those of Christ for the redemption of the world and who continues to intercede for us that we may follow her example.
In this way, the Holy Father has shown that Mary’s title of Coredemptrix is more than a mere honor; rather it reflects her active, though subordinate, role in carrying out the plan of God for the salvation of the world and for our acceptance of that salvation (20). Like her, we must enter into the sufferings of her Son by joining our sufferings to His. For as St. Paul says: “I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church” (Col 1:24). In this way we become “coredeemers” (21) who participate in the redemption as it is applied to mankind (22). In his November 23, 1988, General Audience, Pope John Paul succinctly expresses how Mary is our perfect model in this regard:
Mary’s presence beside the Cross indicates her commitment of total sharing in her Sons redemptive sacrifice … she would forever remain the perfect model of all those who would agree to associate themselves unreservedly with the redemptive offering (23).
In August 1996, the Holy See asked the 12th International Mariological Congress to study the possibility and opportuneness of defining the dogma of Mary, Coredemptrix, Mediatrix, and Advocate. On June 4, 1997, L’Osservatore Romano published the conclusions reached by the 15 theologians selected to study this question. The following is an excerpt from their findings:
The titles, as proposed, are ambiguous, as they can be understood in very different ways … The Second Vatican Council did not use the title “Coredemptrix.” … In fact, from the time of Pope Pius XII, the term “Coredemptrix” has not been used by the papal Magisterium in its significant documents (24).
Granted, Pope John Paul II has not used the term Coredemptrix in any of his encyclicals, yet, as has been shown, he has employed it in significant ways on at least five occasions: in his remarks to pilgrims after a General Audience, in three Angelus messages and in a papal address at a Marian sanctuary (25). This repeated use takes on added importance, since the only other modern Pope to use the term Coredemptrix is Pius XI, who used it at least twice (26). Thus, John Paul II must have reflected at length before deciding to use it. He would have been aware that Leo XIII, Pius X, Benedict XV, and Pius XII, while choosing not to use the term Coredemptrix, all taught this doctrine (27). The fact that theologians and bishops have been using the term since the fourteenth or fifteenth century (28) and that prior to 1960 the vast majority of theologians subscribed to this doctrine (29), undoubtedly were factors favorably influencing his decision.
Why, then, is it significant that the Holy Father has resurrected this term? By using it he reaffirms the great tradition that has gone before him and reinforces the idea that the term in itself does not diminish Christ’s role as the One Mediator and Redeemer. He also renders incorrect Rene Laurentin’s 1991 assessment: “The title of ‘Coredemptrix.’… not retained by the papal magisterium or Vatican II…” (30). And this is precisely the point: Although Vatican II avoided using the term, John Paul II has re-opened and deepened the theological discussion of its meaning and use on a worldwide level by selectively employing it (31).
Furthermore, it is important to remember that key terms have great influence in theological debates. The non-biblical term Theotókos enabled the Fathers at the Council of Ephesus to give proper definition to Mary’s divine motherhood: she truly is the Mother of God inasmuch as she is the Mother of the divine Person Jesus Christ according to His human nature (32). This dogma crushed the Nestorian controversy which had asserted Jesus was two persons with two natures. In a similar vein, the term Coredemptrix, when properly understood, actually safeguards the doctrine that Jesus is our one true Redeemer, while at the same time illuminating God s will that the Virgin Mary subordinately serve as the representative of mankind who immediately and directly cooperates in objective Redemption from the moment of the Incarnation through Christ’s redemptive sacrifice on Calvary (33). ...
Follow link to view pages two and three.
Here is the view of Traditionalists on the subject (See 4th paragraph):
http://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enwiki/3333435
Coetus Internationalis Patrum
The “Coetus Internationalis Patrum” (Latin: “International Group of Fathers”) was a study group of the conservative-minded bishops at the Second Vatican Council. The members included prelates such as Cardinals Francis Spellman,fact|date=August 2007 Alfredo Ottaviani,fact|date=August 2007 Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, and Bishops Casimiro Morcillo of Madrid, Antônio de Castro Mayer of Campos and de Proenca-Sigaud of Diamantina. [”With Bishops Morcillo (Madrid), Castro Mayer (Campos), de Proenca-Sigaud (Diamantina) and 250 more prelates, Archbishop Lefebvre created a “traditionalist commando” within the Council, the “Coetus Internationalis Patrum”, composed by traditional Fathers who tried to stop the over-powerful influence of the rich and popular Modernist wing directed by Cardinal Bea.” [http://www.sspx.com/?ArchbishopLef A Biography of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre] , by Father Ramón Anglés]
It was originally formed after complaints by some of the more traditionalist bishops of the presence of Protestants and liberal Catholic theologians such as Hans Küng, Joseph Ratzinger (the future Pope Benedict XVI) and Karl Rahner. [”During a meeting of the Central Commission the Archbishop publicly complained about the presence in the sub-commissions of non-Catholics and of doubtful individuals as [Hans Küng, Ratzinger (in black suit and tie), Karl Rahner, Yves Congar, Schillebeeckx, and company. Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani told him that the Pope himself required their presence!” [http://www.sspx.com/?ArchbishopLef A Biography of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre] , by Father Ramón Anglés]
As a member of the Preparatory Commission for the Second Vatican Council, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre took part in the discussions about the draft documents submitted to the bishops for consideration at the Council. During the first session of the Council (October to December 1962), he became concerned about the direction the Council’s deliberations were taking. Together with several other like-minded bishops, including Bishop Antônio de Castro Mayer, Lefebvre established a study group of bishops at the Council which organized lectures by important theologians. Eventually this group became known as the “Coetus Internationalis Patrum”. [”With Bishops Morcillo (Madrid), Castro Mayer (Campos), de Proenca-Sigaud (Diamantina) and 250 more prelates, Archbishop Lefebvre created a “traditionalist commando” within the Council, the “Coetus Internationalis Patrum”, composed by traditional Fathers who tried to stop the over-powerful influence of the rich and popular Modernist wing directed by Cardinal Bea.” [[http://www.sspx.com/?ArchbishopLef A Biography of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre] , by Father Ramón Anglés]
This study group was concerned about a number of issues at the Council. They feared that episcopal collegiality could undermine papal primacy. [http://www.sspx.org/miscellaneous/collegiality2.htm Part II] , On Collegiality, by Father Basil Wrighton, SSPX USA Website] They thought there should be a specific condemnation of communism. [[http://www.sspxasia.com/Newsletters/2000/March-April/Editorial.htm Newsletter of the District of Asia - March-April 2000] , SSPX Asia] They opposed the reversal of the traditional formulation of the ends of marriage (i.e. listing the good of the couple before the procreation and education of children).Fact|date=February 2007 They thought there should be a specific Council document about the Blessed Virgin Mary, not merely a chapter in “Lumen gentium”.Fact|date=February 2007 Some also favoured a solemn definition of a fifth Mariological dogma, which would proclaim Mary as Co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix and advocate for the Church with the Most Blessed Trinity.Fact|date=February 2007
Continuing complaints from the group about the presence of Protestant observers led Pope Paul VI, who was “concerned not to alienate the traditionalists”, to ask Cardinal Augustin Bea “if perhaps the presence of the ‘separated brethren’ and their ‘mentality’ were ‘excessively dominating the council, thus diminishing its psychological freedom.’ (He) emphasized that protecting ‘the coherence of the teaching of the Catholic Church’ was more important than pleasing the observers.’” After thus consulting Cardinal Bea, the Pope decided not to disinvite the observers. [ [http://nationalcatholicreporter.org/word/word0131.htm Priest who was present at the start reviews bold ecumenical vision of Vatican II] , John L Allen Jr, January 31 2003, Word from Rome, National Catholic Reporter]
Read this letter, regarding the Doctrin of Mary, and how ecuminism directly attacked it during Vatican II:
http://www.sspxasia.com/Newsletters/2007/Jan-Apr/Mary_and_Ecumenism.htm
Sorry, I’m not an SSPXer.
I do believe that the worship of Mary was discouraged during the sixties, however, I feel that it had less to do with the council at the time and more to do with the liberal priests and laity that ruled from that.
Mother Angelica combed through the VII documents. Yet, the devotion to Mary is evident on EWTN. Much of what is said about the Second Vatican Council doesn’t hold up in the actual documents. One of the FReepers has a quote from Bishop Sheen as a tagline. To paraphase, What is said about Catholics is far worst than what we actually are.
Same with Vatican II. My parish is a Novus Ordo parish. Yet, many of us are concecrated in the Louis De Montfort way, we have a Traditional Latin Mass (one out of our eight on the weekend), start our Holy Masses with a Rosary and end with the Prayer to St. Michael.
The liberals tried to take her out of the mix, not the Vatican. And it’s coming around as well.
There's been a change:
Vatican plea to uncover Virgin Mary and show her breast-feeding baby Jesus
The La Leche League nazis have gotten to the Pope!
.
The” bastrads” are getting bolder. Maybe we should borrow more from the Muslims.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.