Sunday, 10 February 2008

Jesus saith to him: I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man cometh to the Father, but by me. John 14:6



Terry Nelson has some news that whilst inevitable, fills me with dread. There is so much room for division and outrage over the 5th Marian Dogma, the Church needs our prayers. I will always be obedient, but for me personally if the 5th dogma is pronounced and Mary is proclaimed coredemptrix it would turn my world upsidedown. I will most definitely be in need of your prayers.

Better minds than mine will be meditating over this, we must pray that the Holy Spirit prevails and God's will is done.

What I am about to say is my personal opinion, but I feel affronted for Christ, like many of you do when you witness liturgical abuses. I feel I have a right to bleat. I bleat over the image used by those who wish to pronounce Mary, "Mother of all Nations" and hence coredemptrix. I can not believe it is an icon, a true image. Dear reader, put me straight if you feel I err.




Nobody has a right to obscure the cross of Christ. The woman in the image has placed herself in front of the cross, the empty cross is no-longer a scandal but the means of her personal glory. In nativity scenes Mary is bathed with light from the Infant. In crucifixion scenes, Mary unites her suffering to Our Lord and she is redeemed through her united suffering. Where is Christ in this image? Why can the woman in the image radiate light; Christ is the light of the world? The woman in the image looks like a siren calling the sheep to the rocks. Look at the sheep around her, they have no shepherd, they look like the sheep in pens waiting for slaughter at the abattoir. Would Our Lady do this?

Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, ora pro nobis peccatoribus, nunc et in hora mortis nostrae. Amen

6 comments:

Joe said...

An interesting post. I am at present doing some study on the titles "mediatrix" and "coredemptrix". This is as a series of allocutions (little homilies) for the praesidium of the Legion of Mary in our parish. "Mediatrix" has a much longer history of use in the life of the Church than "coredemptrix"; it has also been employed in formal teaching by the magisterium, where "coredemptrix" seems to have been avoided, and only used in what one might call informal/pious contexts. What I still want to look at more closely in this context is the title "Mother of the Church", to see if this expresses in an integrated way what the titles "mediatrix" and "coredemptrix" might intend. If I don't post on this in a couple of weeks time, remind me!

Tom in Vegas said...

Rita-

This is what happens when well intentioned people lose sight of what is at the core of Catholicism. They put Mary ahead of her Son. BIG mistake.

We worship Jesus, not Mary. Although she is indeed the greatest of saints, the difference between her and God is still God.

This dogma was introduced before but unsuccessfully. The people trying to push for it are trying their luck with a new "administration" since under JP II it wasn't addressed to their liking.

Tom

Rita said...

I look forward to your post, Joe. I too have no difficulty with the title Mediatrix and I question why it has to be coupled to the concept of coredemptrix.

Thanks, Tom. People do forget "through Mary to Jesus", as if Mary is herself a means to an end.

Looking at that picture again, it has struck me that the lady has no "attributes", she has no rosary, no crown, no scapular, and no tears. Even La Salette offers tears!

Joe said...

A passing thought. Having seen a bit more of exactly what the petition is about, it seems to focus on the apparitions of the "Mother of all Nations". In the study that I am in the middle of, it simply hasn't occurred to me to refer to or make use of the content of these apparitions. Perhaps the issue of the title "coredemptrix" should not be tied to this specific, private revelation.

Andrew said...

I have to say that personally, I would find any new Marian definition of co-redemptrix inopportune. Mother of the Church? Scripturally sound and Paul VI already did that. No issue here. Mediatrix of All Graces? Have a long and venerable history of usage.

But Co-Redemptrix? That's a bit tougher. And inopportune. Not for any of the common reasons such as complicating ecumenism, etc, but I think such a definition would cause great confusion to the Catholic faithful. This needs a great deal of catechises to pull off and given the state of catechetics today, it would only foster confusion amongst the faithful.

I don't think that such a definition would be made in this pontificate or in the near future.

BUT, in the event that some future Pontiff should exercise his infallible magisterium or an Ecumenical Council should solemnly define it as dogma, I would obey with submission and believe.

WhiteStoneNameSeeker said...

I too have doubts about this. I'm so bothered about a new dogma-although I agree the word co-redemptrix will need so much explanation in the West, it hardly seems worth it. But I am concerned about the 'Image'.
It confuses me a great deal; she stands in front of the cross. I don't get a bad feeling about the sheep, but I wince at all that hair showing. It just seems wrong for an Orthodox Jewish mother. Does she do so anywhere else?
But then there's the events at Akita...
There's a lot more I struggle with.
So Rita, no, it's not just you.