Author Topic: Woman, behold they son, and the Co-Redemptrix  (Read 1109 times)

Offline Philip G.

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 1110
  • Thanked: 421 times
  • Ordinary Cult
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Woman, behold they son, and the Co-Redemptrix
« Reply #30 on: April 05, 2021, 02:04:58 PM »
I am still waiting for Jayne to respond to my criticism of her argument that the 3rd century marian prayer definitively implies mediatrix of all graces.  Again, if Our Lady cannot despise a petition to her, us praying "do not despise our petition" is "like a resounding gong" and us "thinking we will be heard for our many words".  If all graces flow through our Lady's hands, how can she despise a prayer?  I already cited scripture showing that Christ says anything you ask in his name will be granted.  Where are you Jayne?  Where is your scribe on this one?  The fact is that authority in the church a living authority.  Your dead popes and your dead theologians cannot cast me out of the company of believers.   And, lastly, neither can you!

Speaking of despising petitions.  I was asked by an new female friend of mine the other day if I was interested in babysitting a family member of hers.  I know I am a nice approachable trustworthy guy, and good company, but I despised that petition.  I sharply but humorously responded, do I look like a babysitter?  Yes, Our Lady can despise a petition.  And, there are many many petitions that she either does despise in my opinion, or should. 
« Last Edit: April 05, 2021, 02:08:53 PM by Philip G. »
For the stone shall cry out of the wall; and the timber that is between the joints of the building, shall answer.  Woe to him that buildeth a town with blood, and prepareth a city by iniquity. - Habacuc 2,11-12
 

Offline Jayne

  • Mary Garden
  • Major
  • ****
  • Posts: 13878
  • Thanked: 6275 times
  • Comic Sans Frontières
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Woman, behold they son, and the Co-Redemptrix
« Reply #31 on: April 05, 2021, 02:10:13 PM »
If you are concerned with how authoritative this interpretation is, it is more useful to talk about Magisterial teaching.  (I really don't know what you mean by dismissing the teaching of the Fathers of the Church.)

My point is that the Magisterium cannot make up new stuff. If this doctrine does in fact go back to the Apostles then I have no objection; it is then without doubt Magisterial. But the question I'm raising is whether or not it does. I don't see it in the writings of the Apostles or even in the earliest Patristic commentaries. Then again, I haven't done any extensive research. But a plain reading of John 19:26-27 does not seem to say that Jesus gave each individual Catholic to Mary or that Jesus gave Mary to each individual Catholic; it says only that He gave John to John to Mary and Mary to John. Not only does the plain reading not say this, but I am not aware of any first- or even second-century attestation of this interpretation. Which leads me to believe that it's a later innovation.

The first Father whom I can think of who is associated with it is St. Ambrose.  Let's say, for the sake of argument, that this actually is the first occurrence.  Would you reject a doctrine that has been accepted from Ambrose onward and is confirmed in Magisterial documents?  Where did you get this idea that, in order for us to accept a teaching as Catholic, people need to prove that something was taught by the Apostles or within the first two centuries?
Jesus, meek and humble of heart, make my heart like unto Thine.
 
The following users thanked this post: orate, Michael Wilson

Offline Jayne

  • Mary Garden
  • Major
  • ****
  • Posts: 13878
  • Thanked: 6275 times
  • Comic Sans Frontières
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Woman, behold they son, and the Co-Redemptrix
« Reply #32 on: April 05, 2021, 02:24:28 PM »
I am still waiting for Jayne to respond to my criticism of her argument that the 3rd century marian prayer definitively implies mediatrix of all graces. 

I am waiting for you to retract your earlier statements that I conclusively proved were against Catholic teaching.  Instead, you continued to repeat your errors.  Then you started making personal attacks on those who have pointed them out and denying yet more Church teachings. 

At this point I question whether you are posting sincerely.  I reported you for trolling and will not be responding.  If you insist on posting about your ideas, may I suggest putting them in the "non-Catholic" subforum rather than here in "Sacred Sciences".

Jesus, meek and humble of heart, make my heart like unto Thine.
 
The following users thanked this post: orate, Michael Wilson, Melkor

Offline Philip G.

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 1110
  • Thanked: 421 times
  • Ordinary Cult
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Woman, behold they son, and the Co-Redemptrix
« Reply #33 on: April 05, 2021, 02:28:43 PM »
I am still waiting for Jayne to respond to my criticism of her argument that the 3rd century marian prayer definitively implies mediatrix of all graces. 

I am waiting for you to retract your earlier statements that I conclusively proved were against Catholic teaching.  Instead, you continued to repeat your errors.  Then you started making personal attacks on those who have pointed them out and denying yet more Church teachings. 

At this point I question whether you are posting sincerely.  I reported you for trolling and will not be responding.  If you insist on posting about your ideas, may I suggest putting them in the "non-Catholic" subforum rather than here in "Sacred Sciences".

True to form, you accuse others of what you yourself are guilty of.  You have been crying wolf for so long, and your cry is no longer heard. 
« Last Edit: April 05, 2021, 02:42:36 PM by Philip G. »
For the stone shall cry out of the wall; and the timber that is between the joints of the building, shall answer.  Woe to him that buildeth a town with blood, and prepareth a city by iniquity. - Habacuc 2,11-12
 

Offline Miriam_M

  • Mary Garden
  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 7420
  • Thanked: 5635 times
  • Never have been "MiriamB"
  • Religion: Traditional Roman Catholic
Re: Woman, behold they son, and the Co-Redemptrix
« Reply #34 on: April 05, 2021, 02:36:45 PM »
Daniel,

I think you make a valid point about her role being "less clear" (for you) than perhaps some other  dogmas are, for you.  But being less obvious to a lay person does not invalidate a teaching, nor should it cause suspicion on our parts. 

I do not consider myself technically well-versed in all aspects of Marian dogma; other areas of theology I have studied more carefully and thoroughly, and probably that's because I simply experience her as Mediatrix, and the experience, for me, validates the theology.

You and Phillip have spoken in the past of your distress at being "forced" to venerate Mary, or to venerate her "too much," etc.  I understand your concern, as she is a Saint (the ultimate and most powerful Saint, and that you should believe), but she is not divine. Nevertheless, it's not about "forcing," because as I've mentioned on other threads --probably so have others-- all of the Saints, but especially Our Mother, should be regarded as resources and treasures for our salvation, not as mandates: their intercession, the accounts of their lives by others, and their own writings.  Most Catholics I meet experience what I have:  that praying for her intercession kind of moves your needs to the head of the line in Heaven, in a speed-through kind of way.

Neither she nor the other Saints equal or compete with any Person of the Blessed Trinity, and titles the Church ascribes to her do not modify that statement in any way.  She merely is our spiritual mother and has our best spiritual interests at heart.  It was and is the choice of her Son to provide us with such a perfect mother as a constant assistance to us. 
 
The following users thanked this post: Jayne, Melkor

Offline Philip G.

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 1110
  • Thanked: 421 times
  • Ordinary Cult
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Woman, behold they son, and the Co-Redemptrix
« Reply #35 on: April 05, 2021, 02:53:00 PM »
I am still waiting for Jayne to respond to my criticism of her argument that the 3rd century marian prayer definitively implies mediatrix of all graces. 

 Then you started making personal attacks on those who have pointed them out and denying yet more Church teachings. 

At this point I question whether you are posting sincerely.  I reported you for trolling and will not be responding. 

"Personal attacks on those" is plural.  Because I insist on dialoguing with a like mind, I am now personally attacking Michael Wilson?  Take your dragon ball and go on home. 
For the stone shall cry out of the wall; and the timber that is between the joints of the building, shall answer.  Woe to him that buildeth a town with blood, and prepareth a city by iniquity. - Habacuc 2,11-12
 

Offline Melkor

  • Vizekorporal
  • **
  • Posts: 247
  • Thanked: 166 times
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Woman, behold they son, and the Co-Redemptrix
« Reply #36 on: April 05, 2021, 02:53:46 PM »
If you are concerned with how authoritative this interpretation is, it is more useful to talk about Magisterial teaching.  (I really don't know what you mean by dismissing the teaching of the Fathers of the Church.)

My point is that the Magisterium cannot make up new stuff. If this doctrine does in fact go back to the Apostles then I have no objection; it is then without doubt Magisterial. But the question I'm raising is whether or not it does. I don't see it in the writings of the Apostles or even in the earliest Patristic commentaries. Then again, I haven't done any extensive research. But a plain reading of John 19:26-27 does not seem to say that Jesus gave each individual Catholic to Mary or that Jesus gave Mary to each individual Catholic; it says only that He gave John to Mary and Mary to John. Not only does the plain reading not say that Mary from that point onwards became the Mother of each individual Christian, but I am not aware of any first- or even second-century attestation of this interpretation. Which leads me to believe that it's a later innovation, though I admit the typology of Genesis 3:20 does seem to fit. But the question of "Mediatrix of all graces" is far less clear.

And how many dogmas go all the way back to the Apostles? Less than you would think. For instance the Immaculate Conception does not, it is fairly recent. Yet still a dogma. Remember, Jesus gave Peter the keys: what you shall bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven.
« Last Edit: April 05, 2021, 03:30:58 PM by Melkor »
All that is gold does not glitter, not all those who wander are lost.

"Let a man walk ten miles steadily on a hot summer's day along a dusty English road, and he will soon discover why beer was invented."

G.K. Chesterton
 

Offline Melkor

  • Vizekorporal
  • **
  • Posts: 247
  • Thanked: 166 times
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Woman, behold they son, and the Co-Redemptrix
« Reply #37 on: April 05, 2021, 02:54:49 PM »
I am still waiting for Jayne to respond to my criticism of her argument that the 3rd century marian prayer definitively implies mediatrix of all graces. 

 Then you started making personal attacks on those who have pointed them out and denying yet more Church teachings. 

At this point I question whether you are posting sincerely.  I reported you for trolling and will not be responding. 

"Personal attacks on those" is plural.  Because I insist on dialoguing with a like mind, I am now personally attacking Michael Wilson?  Take your dragon ball and go on home.

Wow someone has a morbid hatred of dragons.
All that is gold does not glitter, not all those who wander are lost.

"Let a man walk ten miles steadily on a hot summer's day along a dusty English road, and he will soon discover why beer was invented."

G.K. Chesterton
 

Offline Melkor

  • Vizekorporal
  • **
  • Posts: 247
  • Thanked: 166 times
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Woman, behold they son, and the Co-Redemptrix
« Reply #38 on: April 05, 2021, 02:58:24 PM »
I am still waiting for Jayne to respond to my criticism of her argument that the 3rd century marian prayer definitively implies mediatrix of all graces.  Again, if Our Lady cannot despise a petition to her, us praying "do not despise our petition" is "like a resounding gong" and us "thinking we will be heard for our many words".  If all graces flow through our Lady's hands, how can she despise a prayer?  I already cited scripture showing that Christ says anything you ask in his name will be granted.  Where are you Jayne?  Where is your scribe on this one?  The fact is that authority in the church a living authority.  Your dead popes and your dead theologians cannot cast me out of the company of believers.   And, lastly, neither can you!

Speaking of despising petitions.  I was asked by an new female friend of mine the other day if I was interested in babysitting a family member of hers.  I know I am a nice approachable trustworthy guy, and good company, but I despised that petition.  I sharply but humorously responded, do I look like a babysitter?  Yes, Our Lady can despise a petition.  And, there are many many petitions that she either does despise in my opinion, or should.

Obviously if you ask for something stupid and unholy in a prayer it is to be despised. But asking for graces and such. She would never despise anything like that. It is a little too obvious for me, yet here we are with vague generalizations and erroneous interpretations. 
All that is gold does not glitter, not all those who wander are lost.

"Let a man walk ten miles steadily on a hot summer's day along a dusty English road, and he will soon discover why beer was invented."

G.K. Chesterton
 

Offline Philip G.

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 1110
  • Thanked: 421 times
  • Ordinary Cult
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Woman, behold they son, and the Co-Redemptrix
« Reply #39 on: April 05, 2021, 03:00:14 PM »
If you are concerned with how authoritative this interpretation is, it is more useful to talk about Magisterial teaching.  (I really don't know what you mean by dismissing the teaching of the Fathers of the Church.)

My point is that the Magisterium cannot make up new stuff. If this doctrine does in fact go back to the Apostles then I have no objection; it is then without doubt Magisterial. But the question I'm raising is whether or not it does. I don't see it in the writings of the Apostles or even in the earliest Patristic commentaries. Then again, I haven't done any extensive research. But a plain reading of John 19:26-27 does not seem to say that Jesus gave each individual Catholic to Mary or that Jesus gave Mary to each individual Catholic; it says only that He gave John to Mary and Mary to John. Not only does the plain reading not say that Mary from that point onwards became the Mother of each individual Christian, but I am not aware of any first- or even second-century attestation of this interpretation. Which leads me to believe that it's a later innovation, though I admit the typology of Genesis 3:20 does seem to fit. But the question of "Mediatrix of all graces" is far less clear.

And how many doctrines go all the way back to the Apostles? Less than you would think. For instance the Immaculate Conception does not, it is fairly recent. Yet still a doctrine. Remember, Jesus gave Peter the keys: what you shall bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven.

What an outrageously ignorant post.  All of our doctrines go back to the Apostles.  If they do not, they are not dogmatic.  We believe that all of the apostles believed in the immaculate conception.   We believe that all of the apostles believed in the assumption of our Lady.  It is called the deposit of the faith. 
« Last Edit: April 05, 2021, 03:02:42 PM by Philip G. »
For the stone shall cry out of the wall; and the timber that is between the joints of the building, shall answer.  Woe to him that buildeth a town with blood, and prepareth a city by iniquity. - Habacuc 2,11-12
 

Offline Melkor

  • Vizekorporal
  • **
  • Posts: 247
  • Thanked: 166 times
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Woman, behold they son, and the Co-Redemptrix
« Reply #40 on: April 05, 2021, 03:02:00 PM »
Yeah but it wasn't a dogma.....the Church hadn't decreed believing it as mandatory for salvation. Doesn't make it less true but still not a dogma at that point.
All that is gold does not glitter, not all those who wander are lost.

"Let a man walk ten miles steadily on a hot summer's day along a dusty English road, and he will soon discover why beer was invented."

G.K. Chesterton
 

Offline Philip G.

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 1110
  • Thanked: 421 times
  • Ordinary Cult
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Woman, behold they son, and the Co-Redemptrix
« Reply #41 on: April 05, 2021, 03:08:00 PM »
Yeah but it wasn't a dogma.....the Church hadn't decreed believing it as mandatory for salvation. Doesn't make it less true but still not a dogma at that point.

I can only know what you mean, by the words that you use to communicate.  You cannot change the goal posts after the fact and then claim a moral victory. 
For the stone shall cry out of the wall; and the timber that is between the joints of the building, shall answer.  Woe to him that buildeth a town with blood, and prepareth a city by iniquity. - Habacuc 2,11-12
 

Offline Melkor

  • Vizekorporal
  • **
  • Posts: 247
  • Thanked: 166 times
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Woman, behold they son, and the Co-Redemptrix
« Reply #42 on: April 05, 2021, 03:31:37 PM »
Yeah but it wasn't a dogma.....the Church hadn't decreed believing it as mandatory for salvation. Doesn't make it less true but still not a dogma at that point.

I can only know what you mean, by the words that you use to communicate.  You cannot change the goal posts after the fact and then claim a moral victory.

Post edited. My bad.
All that is gold does not glitter, not all those who wander are lost.

"Let a man walk ten miles steadily on a hot summer's day along a dusty English road, and he will soon discover why beer was invented."

G.K. Chesterton
 

Offline Jayne

  • Mary Garden
  • Major
  • ****
  • Posts: 13878
  • Thanked: 6275 times
  • Comic Sans Frontières
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Woman, behold they son, and the Co-Redemptrix
« Reply #43 on: April 05, 2021, 05:23:24 PM »
What the heck does that have to do with anything? It’s an online forum, who uses a real life picture of themselves as an avatar?

It occurs to me that you, as a Canadian, would be interested in my avatar, Melkor.  It is Our Lady of Canada, by Marius Dubois, in the Basilique Notre Dame, Montréal.  I use it because I am Canadian and also as a reminder that Canada, in spite of its current secularism, was once a Catholic country.

I have, in the past, used a real life picture of myself as an avatar, but lately I find this picture more meaningful.
Jesus, meek and humble of heart, make my heart like unto Thine.
 
The following users thanked this post: orate, Michael Wilson, Melkor

Offline Philip G.

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 1110
  • Thanked: 421 times
  • Ordinary Cult
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Woman, behold they son, and the Co-Redemptrix
« Reply #44 on: April 09, 2021, 12:06:18 AM »
Combine my original post theory with other parts of scripture, such as how it was believed that St. John would never die.  John 21:20-23 - "Peter turning about saw that disciple whom Jesus loved following, who also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord who is he that shall betray thee?  Him therefore when Peter had seen, he saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do?  Jesus saith to him, So I will have him to remain till I come, what is it to thee?  Follow thou me.  This saying therefore went abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die." 

Why might this be?  I will take this chance to affirm that it is not a dogma that the Virgin Mary died.  And, if you know me well enough, you would know that I do not believe that the Virgin Mary died, and was laid in some tomb.  That makes this scripture passage significant, and relevant to my original post/theory. 

There are two books in the bible that are unique, and stand out from the rest, in that they are founded not on any semblance of tradition.  They are founded on a vision.  They are Genesis, and the book of the Apocalypse.  Moses wrote Genesis, and St. John wrote the Apocalypse.  God appeared to Moses in the burning bush, which is a symbol of the Virgin Mary, in that she gives birth to Jesus but does not lose her virginity, just as the bush is not burnt.  And, Mary was with St. John, who wrote the book of the apocalypse.  No one else saw the burning bush but Moses.  The same regarding the Virgin Mary is to be said about St. John.  There was a unique singular relationship between St. John and the Virgin Mary that Peter had no might we say lack of a better word jurisdiction over.  This might be a useful concept to grasp in our time where sedevacantism and abuse of the papacy are widespread.

It is however a doctrine that St. John died.  So, what could Jesus possibly mean by "till I come", within the context of a belief of escaping death?  It seems reasonable to me that it might mean that Jesus returned to assume the Virgin Mary into heaven.  For, that would also make sense of the second judgement in a way, in that heaven is open also to those faithful at the end of the world who have not yet suffered death/entombment.  If heaven is open to the Virgin Mary, who stood at the foot of the cross, and who did not die, heaven at the end of the world can be open to faithful souls who like her have not died, and stand before the Judge.  The difference however is that if Christ on the cross gave his Mother to St. John specifically, who is not to be confused with the visibility of Peter, and not to the many, which do belong to Peter, how confident should they be who place all their hope in the Virgin Mary at the end of the world?  "Blessed are they who believe and do not see."  But, "blessed art thou Simon Bar Jonah".  If Christ gave his Mother in the singular, it says a lot about fallen humanities need for the visible.

It is a dogma that Christ alone is the Judge at the end of the world.  But, something else has become quite trendy in the church.  "Only Our Lady can save us now", I have heard too many times.  There is the bracelet W.W.J.D., that means "what would Jesus do"?  I have an acronym for us.  W.W.S.J.S.  What would St. John say?  Is St. John not allowed to despise a petition?  When I recall the bible, he is the only apostle who mentions that there are instances where we should not pray for such and such a person.  In sum, as it regards mankind, Our Lady is not alone.  Contrast that with Christ, who was alone, on the cross.  To think that Christ would allow his mother to be laid in a tomb and left alone is an utter absurdity to me.  The enemies of God even had the decency to guard Christ's grave, for both wrong and right reasons.  For, they know rightly that people rob graves.  But, they wrongly thought it would be Christ's followers in order to deify him. 

P.S. I wonder if there is a connection with how Jesus cannot be left alone exposed in the blessed sacrament? 
« Last Edit: April 09, 2021, 02:30:05 AM by Philip G. »
For the stone shall cry out of the wall; and the timber that is between the joints of the building, shall answer.  Woe to him that buildeth a town with blood, and prepareth a city by iniquity. - Habacuc 2,11-12