At the time Vatican II was announced, what did most average Catholics expect?

[Jmartyr]

Nice article from Fr. Hardon. I am disappointed though that he did not mention the Fifth Marian Dogma (which some other Bishops had asked for) as part of the Council's focus. Imo, one of the main reasons the Church was chastised in the Post-Vatican II era was failing to define the Fifth Marian Dogma (Mary as Mediatrix of All Graces and Co-Redemptrix with Christ) which other theologians like Fr. Garrigou Lagrange had already prepared the way for in their writings; but I love Fr. Hardon too and he was clearly a very good Priest.

Let's see how things unfold.

Edit: This particular prediction by Fr. Hardon was clearly on target:

"Church and State Relations. There is good reason for believing that high in priority among the possible agenda will be the relations of the Catholic Church to the civil government. World communism has created ecclesiastical problems that have no counterpart in Christian history. Without compromising on her principles, the Church must give directions to the millions of Catholics who are suffering under Communist domination.

Unfortunately, many people outside of Russia and the satellite countries are still fascinated by the Marxist Utopia. The council may undertake (as the Popes have done since 1864) to expose and publicize the utter incompatibility of Christianity and communism, unlike the Evanston Assembly in 1954 that obscured the issue by its practical silence on the Red persecution of the Catholic Church and its fear that anti-Communist hysteria might be a greater evil than communism.

Closer to home, a much agitated question which the council may undertake to solve is the problem of tolerance by Catholics of their non-Catholic fellow citizens. Is this tolerance only a matter of expedience or does it rest on absolute principles? Should Catholics legally tolerate heresy in their midst only to avoid greater evils, but once in power, restrict the exercise, if not the profession, of what from the Catholic viewpoint is a heretical religion? Or, as Maritain would have it, "Even if one single citizen dissented from the religious faith of all the people, his right to dissent could by no means be infringed upon by the State in a Christianly inspired modern democratic society. Catholics who are ready to give their lives for freedom do not cling to these assertions as a matter of expediency, but as a matter of moral obligation or of justice" (Man and the State, p. 181). Catholic theologians may be found on both sides, with perhaps the majority in America favoring Maritain's theory, that tolerance is not merely a hypothesis (until Catholics can change the status quo), but a thesis, where tolerance yields to political fellowship, while recognizing theologically that only Catholicism has the full possession of revealed truth."

God forbid the council fathers bring up Our Lady as that would have offended our "separated brethren". 

[Xavier]

Dr. Taylor Marshall's article on that: https://taylormarshall.com/2011/05/is-mary-mediatrix-of-all-graces.html

"Is Mary the Mediatrix of ALL GRACES?
by Dr Taylor Marshall

Is Mary the Mediatrix of All Graces? This a two-part question. First, is Mary a "mediatrix"? (the Latin suffix -tor denotes masculine agency and the Latin -trix denotes feminine agency – like waiter and waitress – Mediator and Mediatrix)? Second, if she is a mediatrix, is she the mediatrix of all graces?

Mary Mediatrix of All Graces
Jesus and Mary – the New Adam and New Eve
applying graces to humanity

Is Mary a Mediatrix?
Before addressing this title, let it be confirmed at the outset that Mary's mediation does not violate the words of Saint Paul regarding the mediating priesthood of Jesus Christ, when he writes:

"For there is one God: and one mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus" (1 Tim 2:5, D-R)

Christ is the one mediator between God and men because He is both full God and fully human. Since He offered Himself as a perfect sacrifice to God, He alone can redeem mankind from sin.

However, Saint Luke records that the Holy Simeon prophesied to Mary that she too would suffer with Her divine Son:

"And thy own soul a sword shall pierce, that, out of many hearts thoughts may be revealed" (Luke 2:35).

The Fathers of the Church identify the "piercing sword" in Mary's soul as the moment when Mary beheld her dying Son on the cross, even more, when she held his cold, lifeless body in her arms.

Her quiet and maternal presence with Christ's high priestly sacrifice envelops her into the sacrifice of Christ in a unique way. Consider this, the Son of God acquired His flesh and blood from her flesh and blood. Jesus could die for us, because she gave to Him a body.

Jesus and Mary at the cross are the redemptive Adam and Eve. Eve once looked up to a tree in order to seize its fruit unlawfully. Now, Mary as the New Eve, beholds the tree on which hangs the "Fruit of her womb." She does not claim rights over this Fruit, but willingly offers It to the Father. The New Adam hangs suspended on the wood for every sinner. The New Eve stands by in sorrow.

Mary's mediation is based on her intimate union and consent to the Passion and Death of Christ. Moreover, we find in Scripture that Jesus comes to the world through Mary, literally. St Elizabeth and her baby St John the Baptist are filled with the Holy Spirit when St Elizabeth hears the voice of Mary. Jesus works His first miracle at Cana at Mary's request. Furthermore, Mary is present at Pentecost when the Holy Spirit is poured out upon the Apostles. Just as Mary's voice was the instrument that carried grace to Saint Elizabeth, so Mary is the personal instrument by which grace flows to us from Christ. St Bernard of Clairvaux called her the "aqueduct of grace."

The Liturgical Feast: Mediatrix of All Graces
In 1921, Pope Benedict XV, responding to petitions from the bishops of Belgium, established the annual feast day of "Mary Mediatrix of All Graces." This feast was included in the Missale Romanum under the title "Omnium Gratiarum Mediatricis" for the date May 31. If you have a pre-conciliar Latin Missal, you can usually find it there (look under Missae pro aliquibus locis). Two of my missals include the feast.

The first reading for this feast is Isaiah 55:1-3, 5 and the Gradual is the famous passage from Ecclesiasticus: "I am the mother of fair love, and of fear, and of knowledge, and of holy hope. In me is all grace of the way and of the truth, in me is all hope of life and of virtue. " (Sirach 24:24–25) The Gospel reading for the feast is the Marian passion account from John 19:25-27.

Pope Benedict XV's inclusion of a feast for "Mary Mediatrix of All of Graces" popularized doctrine. By the beginning of the Second Vatican Council (1962), there was a push among the bishops to formally declare the Blessed Virgin Mary as the "Mediatrix of All Graces." This attempt was eventually recast and she was instead declared "Mother of the Church," a softer title, but beautiful all the same. "Mother of the Church" was was preferred since it defined the truth in a more ecclesiastical way.

You can find this definition of "Mother of the Church" in Chapter 8 of Lumen Gentium. Nevertheless, Lumen Gentium 8 does refer to the Immaculate Mary as "Advocate, Auxiliatrix, Adjutrix and Mediatrix." Notably, the qualifier "of All Graces" was not included in the final text of Lumen Gentium even though it was proposed.

Did Pope Benedict XV go to far?
So then, it is a matter of faith that our Blessed Mother is a "Mediatrix"...but is she the "Mediatrix of All Graces"? Most Catholics have no problem with the title "Mediatrix" though I do notice that some Catholics flinch when they hear "Mediatrix of All Graces." Did Pope Benedict XV go too far in adding "of All Graces"?

The full title including "all graces" is controversial. Some protest that Mary could not possibly be the mediatrix of all the graces in the Old Testament since she did not yet exist. Moreover, could she have been the mediatrix of all graces while she was still on earth? Did she only become the mediatrix of all graces after Pentecost or perhaps only after her glorious Assumption? Even still, is she currently the mediatrix both of actual graces and sacramental grace? That is, does the grace of baptism and the Holy Eucharist also flow through her hands?

Two Difficult Questions regarding "of all graces"
These questions, essentially, raise two difficult questions:

1) When did Mary become the mediatrix of all graces. From all time? At the Immaculate Conception? Crucifixion? Pentecost? Assumption?

2) When we say "all graces" do we mean "each and every grace" or "all kinds of grace" or "all actual graces"?

I will reveal my hand at the beginning. I take the extreme position. I insist that she is the mediatrix of every single grace ever given to humanity, from Adam to the last moment of time. It is true that she didn't yet exist, but she is nevertheless the mediatrix of all these graces.

The New Adam as Mediator. The New Eve as Mediatrix.
How can one say such a thing? The argument depends on Our Lady's ancient status as the New Eve and upon Christ's status as the New Adam. All grace is absolutely mediated through Christ since he is fully God and fully man. He is the mediator of humanity necessarily and absolutely. Yet, He mediates this grace to humanity by virtue of His Incarnation, His Death, and through the Holy Spirit.

Now then, Mary as the New Eve was the instrument of the Incarnation, and she held the primary role at the Crucifixion and at the descent of the Holy Spirit on Pentecost. So we discover that Scripture links her with these three moment of Christ's absolute mediation.

We also know that all the graces of the Old Testament were mediated in anticipation of Christ's Incarnation and Death. Since Mary's flesh and cooperation are necessary for the Incarnation and Death of Christ, these graces are also mediated with her role in mind. This is why Pope Pius IX says that the decree of Christ's predestination is one and the same with that of Mary.

So the graces of the Old Testament were mediated in light of her, though not actually dispensed by her. Here we distinguish the term "mediating" from the term "dispensing." The Immaculate Mary has always been the Mediatrix of All Graces, but she became the Dispensatrix of All Graces at her glorious Assumption.

One could take an even more extreme and say that Mary became the Dispensatrix of every grace from the moment of her Immaculate Conception. This would necessitate that from her first moment, she had an enormous infusion of knowledge even while still in the womb of Saint Anne. I'm not so sure this happened, though I wouldn't fault anyone for holding it. It seems that Saint Alphonsus Liguori may have held this position, though I can't quite make it out (I'd be grateful if any Alphonsists could help me out on this point.)

What about Scripture?
We do know that the sanctification and confirmation in grace of Saint John the Baptist while still in his mother's womb occurred through the mediation of Mary's audible voice. "For behold as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in my ears, the infant in my womb leaped for joy. " (Luke 1:44, D-R)

Both the Latin and Greek liturgies apply Ecclesiasticus 24 as a prophecy of the Blessed Virgin Mary. It reads: "I am the mother of fair love, and of fear, and of knowledge, and of holy hope. In me is all grace of the way and of the truth, in me is all hope of life and of virtue. " (Sirach 24:24–25) Mary is the "Mother of Fair Love" and "in [her] is all grace." Here then is an Old Testament prophecy of Mary's title as Mediatrix of All Graces." ...

[james03]

Funnily enough I'm not sure this is a Vatican II thing but rather an American thing.

All the great heresiarchs of modernism were European.  Heck, with a name like Schillebeeckx, you know the dude was possessed.

[Michael Wilson]

Xavier,
why don't you post the article on the Mediatrix on a new thread?

[Xavier]

Xavier,
why don't you post the article on the Mediatrix on a new thread?

Michael,

Ok, Sure.

[Instaurare omnia]

Here is an eye-opening blast from the past: several articles from a March 1970 issue of Life magazine about the changes in the Church post-Vatican II. In this set of paragraphs, there was no hiding the crisis even back then:

...the Pope looks more and more like defeated man, and it is generally believed in Rome that Paul, with a sigh of relief, will step down when he reaches his 75th birthday in September 1972.A sympathetic priest in Rome who has known Paul for 40 years said recently: "The Pope knows better than anyone else that he is a failure. He has a strong sense of history. After the turmoil following upon the Vatican Council, it will take two or three generations to reconstruct Catholicism. It is Paul's fate to sit on the papal throne at the worst possible time, beset both by those who want to change nothing. The Vatican Council released demons. Paul, poor fellow, has no friends -- at least he has no solid constituency. Right now he may be the loneliest man in the world."

In Rome these days one hears again and again Winston Churchill's famous remark that he did not become the king's first minister in order to preside over the liquidation of the British Empire. That also seems to sum up the Pope's position. But one critical Vatican monsignor thinks that Paul has missed the message here. "The Empire was going to be liquidated, no matter what Churchill said," the monsignore says. "The curial empire will be liquidated too. If the Pope were wiser he would preside over its liquidation."