What inspired Mercier and St. Maximilian to initiate a global call of support to the Holy Father to make an infallible statement regarding Mary’s relationship with you and me?

Grace and Precedence.

Of the four existing Marian dogmas, Mary’s Motherhood of God, her Perpetual Virginity, her Immaculate Conception, and her Assumption, the last two dogmas have been solemnly proclaimed only after a lengthy petition drive from the People of God to the Roman Pontiff.

Before the papal definition of the Immaculate Conception by Bl. Pius IX in 1854, millions of petitions from the Catholic world came into the Vatican, with particular perseverance coming from Spain and its Catholic government. In the case of the Assumption, infallibly declared by Pius XII in 1950, over 8 million petitions spanning 95 years were documented by the Holy Office in support of this Marian dogmatic crown.

Petition drives for Marian dogmas are simply Catholic precedence. It’s not a democratic power play seeking to force the Pope’s hand. It is rather a manifestation of the sensus fidelium (the “common consensus of the faithful”) in encouraging the Holy Father to a particular course of action which the faithful discern to be for the good of the Church. An authentic Catholic petition drive must always be founded and sustained on two pillars: 1) the request is something that conforms to the faith and morals teachings of the Church; 2) that the object of petition be submitted with an unconditional obedience to the ultimate discernment and decision of the Vicar of Christ.

On December 1, 1950, an international association of mariologists gathered in Rome to petition Pius XII for the solemn definition of Mary’s universal mediation, and this just one month after he declared the dogma of the Assumption. Why did they ask for so much more so soon?

Their reasoning was simple: now that the four earthly perogatives of Mary have been solemnly defined as dogmas, the last remaining Marian doctrine, her relationship as our spiritual mother from heaven, should also be defined as a dogma. In a certain sense, the existing four dogmas which articulate her relationship with Jesus and her special personal gifts lose some of their immediate relevance for us if she is not also our spiritual mother.

How precisely is Mary our Spiritual Mother? In three ways.

First, Mary uniquely shared in the work of Jesus to redeem the human family, both by giving Jesus his body, the very instrument of Redemption (cf. Lk. 1:38; Heb. 10:10), and by suffering with Him at Calvary in a way unparalleled by another other creature (cf. Jn. 19:25-27). For this extraordinary role with Jesus in saving souls, Mary has been called the “Co-redemptrix” in the Church since the 14^th century. Fear not—“co” means “with” not “equal.” Mary’s not a goddess on a level or equality with Jesus. She is the unique immaculate human co-redeemer with Jesus, just as every Christian is called to be a “co-redeemer in Christ,” to use the expression of Bl. John Paul II.

Secondly, Mary nurtures us in the order of grace by distributing the graces obtained at Calvary to the human family through her role as the Mediatrix of all graces. The papal Magisterium of the last two centuries has consistently taught this Marian role, and Pope Benedict XVI Emeritus published this same title on the day he announced his resignation (Feb. 11, 2013). The Wedding of Cana (Jn. 2:5) reveals to us what the Second Vatican Council teaches us: that the Mother of Jesus “intercedes for the gifts of eternal life” (LG 62).

Thirdly, Mary, as Spiritual Mother, pleads for us before the throne of Christ the King as our Advocate. Her most ancient title (from the second century), Our Lady’s role as Advocate simply confirms that this Mother intercedes for our wants and needs with a maternal perseverance and power beyond that of any of the other saints.

By why a dogma? If Mary’s role as our Spiritual Mother is already a doctrine of the Catholic Church, what’s the benefit of a papal definition of the same truth?

Because history verifies that with every Marian dogma declared, historic graces have been poured forth upon the Church.

Take, for example, the dogma of the Immaculate Conception. The historic situation of the papacy and the Church during the time immediately preceding this Marian definition was bleak. Pope Pius IX had been chased out of the Vatican by Masonic forces from the South. While in exile in Gaeta, two cardinals approached the beleaguered Holy Father with the remedy to this dire situation: proclaim the dogma of the Immaculate Conception. Bring Our Lady’s powerful intercession into this situation, and the papacy and the Church will be fully restored. Acquiescing to their request, Pius IX from exile, wrote to the world’s bishops, stating his intention to proclaim this new Marian Dogma.

The result? The dogma was proclaimed. The papacy was restored. The Vatican and Church secured. Ultimately, this Marian dogma led to the later declaration of Papal infallibility, which then cemented the unity and vitality of the Church under the authority of Jesus’ Vicar on earth.

When Marian dogmas happen, graces happen.

Could we—our contemporary Church and world situation—not benefit from a historic outpouring of grace right now?

Since Mary’s motherly titles are also her motherly functions of grace for the Church, the more solemnly we acknowledge these motherly roles, the more powerfully she can exercise these motherly roles. When these roles are infallibly proclaimed by the Petrine keeper of the keys as the highest authority on the planet, this proclamation will lead to the fullest possible release of heavenly graces by the Mediatrix of all graces.

Pope Francis has been on a blessed tirade of Marian teaching and witness. Starting with his very first papal act of going to St. Mary Major’s Basilica to thank and honor Our Lady; to his request to have his papacy consecrated to Our Lady of Fatima on May 13; to his return visit to St. Mary Major’s Basilica on May 4, where Pope Francis prayed the Rosary and presented a lengthy and inspiring homily on our very subject: Mary’s Spiritual Motherhood.

During this month of May 2013, an international letter writing campaign to Pope Francis for the solemn definition of Mary’s Spiritual Motherhood is happening on all the continents of the world. Cardinals, bishops, priests, religious, and laity are writing to this extremely Marian pope in support of Pope Francis to proclaim this fifth Marian Dogma.

If you feel called to join in with Catholic faithful the world over in writing a brief, respectful few lines to our beloved Holy Father in support of Pope Francis to proclaim this fifth Marian Dogma, you can easily do so by mailing your note to: Pope Francis, Vatican City, 00120 (3 postage stamps gets your letter from the US to the Vatican).

The precedence is clear: with Marian dogmas come historic graces.

Our ecclesial and global situation is clear: we need historic graces from above to remedy the unprecedented challenges facing both the Church and in the world today—graces which call for the most powerful intercession possible by the Mother of Jesus and the Mother of all peoples.

Prayerfully consider participating by your prayers and your own personal letter to Pope Francis to contribute in bringing about this fifth Marian definition of Our Lady’s Spiritual Motherhood, and thus to bring to full completion Mary’s own scriptural self-prophecy:“ All generations shall call me blessed” (Lk.1:48).

Dr. Mark Miravalle

Professor Theology and Mariology

Franciscan University of Steubenville

The post The Case for Defining Mary’s Spiritual Motherhood appeared first on Mother of All Peoples.

Subsequently at the Lateran Council of 649 convoked by Pope St. Martin I the Church reached the certitude that Mary is ever Virgin: that she was a virgin before, during and after giving birth to Jesus.² After centuries of debate the Catholic Church arrived at the assurance that Mary was immaculate from the first moment of her conception. ³ Finally in 1950, after ascertaining the Church’s long held belief, the Venerable Pius XII formally defined that the Virgin Mary was taken up body and soul into the glory of heaven.⁴ Each of these truths are mysteries of faith which means that they are so deep our human minds can never fully exhaust their richness.

All four of these dogmas refer to the person of Mary in relation to her Son, the God-man, Jesus Christ. But, in fact, Catholics believe even more about Mary than these profound mysteries regarding her person. They also believe that she played and continues to play an entirely unique role in the work of our salvation. In the course of the second millennium saints and theologians have been meditating, preaching and writing about Mary’s collaboration in the work of redemption and in the distribution of grace while for over one hundred fifty years the Popes have teaching about her maternal role.

I. The Mystery of Marian Coredemption

It is precisely this role or function that I would like to present today and I believe that there is no better place to begin than with the teaching of the Second Vatican Council, which devoted more space to the Mother of God than any other Ecumenical Council of the Church. Thus the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church Lumen Gentium speaks of Mary as “under and with him [Christ], serving the mystery of redemption, by the grace of Almighty God” [sub Ipso et cum Ipso, omnipotentis Dei gratia, mysterio remdeptionis inserviens], as “freely cooperating in the work of man’s salvation” [humanæ saluti cooperantem] (#56), of the “union of the mother with the Son in the work of salvation” [ cum Filio in opere salutari coniunctio] (#57) and of how she faithfully persevered in her union with her Son unto the cross, where she stood, in keeping with the divine plan [non sine divino consilio], enduring with her only begotten Son the intensity of his suffering, associated herself with his sacrifice in her mother’s heart, and lovingly consenting to the immolation of this victim which was born of her [ vehementer cum Unigenito suo condoluit et sacrificio Eius se materno animo sociavit, victimæ de se genitæ immolationi amanter consentiens] (#58).

Likewise the Council Fathers state that Mary shared her Son’s sufferings as he died on the cross. Thus, in a wholly singular way she cooperated by her obedience, faith, hope and burning charity in the work of the Savior in restoring supernatural life to souls [Filioque suo in cruce morienti compatiens, operi Salvatoris singulari prorsus modo cooperata est, oboedientia, fide, spe et flagrante caritate, ad vitam animarum supernaturalem restaurandam] (#61).

The twentieth century Popes had already clearly taught the doctrine upon which the Council Fathers could base themselves. In his great Marian Encyclical Ad Diem Illum of 2 February 1904, Saint Pius X stated:

It was not only the glory of the Mother of God to have presented to God the Only-Begotten who was to be born of human members the material by which he was prepared as a Victim for the salvation of mankind, but hers also the office of tending and nourishing that Victim, and at the appointed time of offering Him at the altar.

Hence the ever united life and labors of the Son and the Mother which permit the application to both of the words of the Psalmist: “My life is wasted with grief and my years in sighs”. When the supreme hour of the Son came, beside the cross of Jesus there stood Mary, His Mother, not merely occupied in contemplating the cruel spectacle, but rejoicing that her only Son was offered for the salvation of mankind; and so entirely participating in His Passion that, if it had been possible “she would have gladly borne all the torments that her Son underwent” [St. Bonaventure, I Sent, d. 48, ad Litt. dub. 4].⁵

In his Letter Inter Sodalicia of 22 May 1918 Pope Benedict XV wrote: According to the common teaching of the Doctors it was God’s design [non sine divino consilio], that the Blessed Virgin Mary, apparently absent from the public life of Jesus, should assist Him when He was dying nailed to the Cross. Mary suffered and, as it were, nearly died with her suffering Son; for the salvation of mankind she renounced her mother’s rights and, as far as it depended on her, offered her Son to placate divine justice; so we may well say that she with Christ redeemed mankind [ut dici merito queat, Ipsam cum Christo humanum genus redemisse.]. ⁶

Several years ago I discovered that the same Latin phrase – non sine divino consilio – which occurs in Benedict XV’s document is also used in Lumen Gentium #58, which I have cited above, but without acknowledging the authorship of Benedict XV. The point being made in both places is that Our Lady’s active collaboration in the work of redemption was explicitly willed by God and we can affirm, along with Blessed Pope Pius IX in his Bull Ineffabiliis Deus declaring the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, that this is clearly supported by the Catholic understanding of the role of
the “Woman” of Genesis 3:15 and her “Seed” who together are in an eternal state of enmity with the serpent. ⁷

The Venerable Pope Pius XII in his Encyclical Letter Ad Cæli Reginam of 11 October 1954 insists just as firmly that it is God’s will that Mary is joined with Jesus in the work of our redemption.

Mary in the work of redemption was by God’s will joined with Jesus Christ, the cause of salvation, in much the same way as Eve was joined with Adam, the cause of death. Hence it can be said that the work of our salvation was brought about by a “restoration” (St. Irenaeus) in which the human race, just as it was doomed to death by a virgin, was saved by a virgin.

Moreover, she was chosen to be the Mother of Christ “in order to have part with Him in the redemption of the human race” [Pius XI, Auspicatus profecto].

“She it was, who, free from all stain of personal or original sin, always most closely united with her Son, offered Him up to the Eternal Father on Calvary, along with the sacrifice of her own claims as His mother and of her own mother love, thus acting as a new Eve on behalf of Adam’s children, ruined by his unhappy fall” [Mystici Corporis].⁸

Pius XII would go on to continue to underscore Mary’s unique role in his great Sacred Heart Encyclical Haurietis Aquas of 15 May 1956:

By the will of God, the most Blessed Virgin Mary was inseparably joined with Christ in accomplishing the work of man’s redemption, so that our salvation flows from the love of Jesus Christ and His sufferings intimately united with the love and sorrows of His Mother [Cum enim ex Dei voluntate in humanæ Redemptionis peragendo opere Beatissima Virgo Maria cum Christo fuerit indivulse coniuncta, adeo ut ex Iesu Christi caritate eiusque cruciatibus cum amore doloribusque ipsius Matris intime consociatis sit nostra salus profecta].⁹

No pope has taught more clearly and more consistently about Our Lady’s role in the work of redemption than Blessed John Paul II. Here is an important text from his general audience address of 4 May 1983:

Dearest brothers and sisters, in the month of May we raise our eyes to Mary, the woman who was associated in a unique way in the work of mankind’s reconciliation with God. According to the Father’s plan, Christ was to accomplish this work through his sacrifice. However, a woman would be associated with him, the Immaculate Virgin who is thus placed before our eyes as the highest model of cooperation in the work of salvation. …

The “Yes” of the Annunciation constituted not only the acceptance of the offered motherhood, but signified above all Mary’s commitment to service of the mystery of the Redemption. Redemption was the work of her Son; Mary was associated with it on a subordinate level. Nevertheless, her participation was real and demanding. Giving her consent to the angel’s message, Mary agreed to collaborate in the whole work of mankind’s reconciliation with God, just as her
Son would accomplish it. …

The orientation toward the redemptive sacrifice dominated Mary’s entire life as a mother. Unlike other mothers who cannot know in advance the sorrows that will come to them from their children, Mary already knew from those first days that her motherhood was on the way to a supreme trial.

For her, participation in the redemptive drama was the end of a long road. After seeing how the prediction about the opposition Jesus would undergo was fulfilled in the events of his public life, she understood more keenly, at the foot of the cross, the meaning of those words, “And you yourself shall be pierced with a sword”. Her presence on Calvary, which allowed her to unite herself with the sufferings of her Son with all her heart, was part of the divine plan: the Father wanted her, called to the most total cooperation in the mystery of redemption, to be integrally associated with the sacrifice and share all the pains of the Crucified, uniting her will to his in the desire to save the world. ¹⁰

Let us note two very important points here. The first is that, like his predecessors, John Paul stressed the fact that Mary’s collaboration is “according to the Father’s plan”, that is willed by God from all eternity. The second is that Mary’s cooperation is always “on a subordinate level”, but nonetheless “real and demanding”. It is the highest participation in the redemption possible for a creature, but always secondary, subordinate to and entirely dependent on the redemption wrought by Christ, her Son. This is the way the Council Fathers put it in Lumen Gentium #60:

For all the salvific influence of the Blessed Virgin on men originates, not from some inner necessity, but from the divine pleasure. It flows forth from the superabundance of the merits of Christ, rests on His mediation, depends entirely on it and draws all its power from it. In no way does it impede, but rather does it foster the immediate union of the faithful with Christ.

Two statements in the Catechism of the Catholic Church beautifully echo this conciliar teaching. The first occurs in #616:

No man, not even the holiest, was ever able to take on himself the sins of all men and offer himself as a sacrifice for all. The existence in Christ of the divine person of the Son, who at once surpasses and embraces all human persons, and constitutes himself as the Head of all mankind, makes possible hi redemptive sacrifice for all.

The second in #618:

Because in his incarnate divine person he has in some way united himself to every man, “the possibility of being made partners, in a way known to God, in the paschal mystery” is offered to all men. … In fact Jesus desires to associate with his redeeming sacrifice those who were to be its first beneficiaries. This is achieved supremely in the case of his mother, who was associated more intimately than any other person in the mystery of his redemptive suffering.

Here is a carefully balanced outline of the Church’s teaching on this matter that Blessed Pope John Paul II gave in his general audience address of 9 April 1997.

Down the centuries the Church has reflected on Mary’s cooperation in the work of salvation, deepening the analysis of her association with Christ’s redemptive sacrifice. St. Augustine already gave the Blessed Virgin the title “cooperator” in the Redemption (cf. De Sancta Virginitate, 6; PL 40, 399), a title which emphasizes Mary’s joint but subordinate action with Christ the Redeemer.

Reflection has developed along these lines, particularly since the 15^th century. Some feared there might be a desire to put Mary on the same level as Christ. Actually the Church’s teaching makes a clear distinction between the Mother and the Son in the work of salvation, explaining the Blessed Virgin’s subordination, as cooperator, to the one Redeemer.

Moreover, when the Apostle Paul says: “For we are God’s fellow workers” (1 Cor. 3:9), he maintains the real possibility for man to cooperate with God. The collaboration of believers, which obviously excludes any equality with him, is expressed in the proclamation of the Gospel and in their personal contribution to its taking root in human hearts.

However, applied to Mary, the term “cooperator” acquires a specific meaning. The collaboration of Christians in salvation takes place after the Calvary event, whose fruits they endeavor to spread by prayer and sacrifice. Mary, instead, cooperated during the event itself and in the role of mother; thus her cooperation embraces the whole of Christ’s saving work. She alone was associated in this way with the redemptive sacrifice that merited the salvation of all mankind. In union with Christ and in submission to him, she collaborated in obtaining the grace of salvation for all humanity. ¹¹

Here, once again the Pope highlights the uniqueness of Mary’s cooperation in the work of redemption. She “cooperated during the event itself and in the role of mother”, the mother specially prepared in advance for this unique role.

Blessed John Paul II again maintains a marvelous balance in presenting Mary’s unique function in the work of redemption in his Apostolic Letter Salvifici Doloris of 11 February 1984. He speaks first of the “unique and incomparable depth and intensity of suffering which only the man who is the only-begotten Son could experience” (Salvifici Doloris #18), a mental, emotional and physical suffering beyond our ability to comprehend.
Commenting on Colossians 1:24, in which St. Paul states “in my flesh I complete what is lacking in the sufferings of Christ for the sake of his body, the Church”, the Pope goes on to say:

The sufferings of Christ created the good of the world’s Redemption. This good in itself is inexhaustible and infinite. No man can add anything to it

. But at the same time, in the mystery of the Church as His Body, Christ has in a sense opened His own redemptive suffering to all human suffering. Insofar as man becomes a sharer in Christ’s sufferings – in any part of the world and at any time in history – to that extent he in his own way completes
the suffering through which Christ accomplished the Redemption of the world.

Does this mean that the Redemption achieved by Christ is not complete? No. It only means that the Redemption, accomplished through satisfactory love, remains always open to all love expressed in human suffering. In this dimension – the dimension of love – the Redemption which has already been completely accomplished is, in a certain sense, constantly being accomplished. Christ achieved the Redemption completely and to the very limit; but at the same time He did not bring it to a close. In this redemptive suffering, through which the Redemption of the world was accomplished, Christ opened Himself from the beginning to every human suffering and constantly does so. Yes, it seems to be part of the very essence of Christ’s redemptive suffering that this suffering requires to be unceasingly completed (Salvifici Doloris #24).

While Jesus’ suffering was more than sufficient to redeem the world, the Pope insists that it remains “open to all love expressed in human suffering”. This is, indeed, a mystery, something that is at the same time beyond our comprehension, but also a truth of faith. All of our sufferings can be united with those of Jesus for the sake of his body, the Church. While we can share in applying the work of the redemption to ourselves and to others by the patient
endurance of our sufferings, Mary had the unique role of joining her sufferings with those of Jesus at the very same moment when he was suffering for our redemption. The Pope continues:

It is especially consoling to note – and also accurate in accordance with the Gospel and history – that at the side of Christ, in the first and most exalted place, there is always His Mother through the exemplary testimony that she bears by her whole life to this particular Gospel of suffering.
In her, the many and intense sufferings were amassed in such an interconnected way that they were not only a proof of her unshakable faith but also a contribution to the Redemption of all. … It was on Calvary that Mary’s suffering, beside the suffering of Jesus, reached an intensity which can hardly be imagined from a human point of view but which was mysteriously and supernaturally fruitful for the Redemption of the world. Her ascent of Calvary and her standing at the foot of the cross together with the beloved disciple were a special sort of sharing in the redeeming death of her Son. …

As a witness to her Son’s passion by her presence, and as a sharer in it by her compassion, Mary offered a unique contribution to the Gospel of suffering, by embodying in anticipation the expression of St. Paul which was quoted at the beginning. She truly has a special title to be able to claim that she “completes in her flesh” – as already in her heart – “what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions” (Salvifici Doloris #25).

These two citations from Salvifici Doloris already help us to hold in tension the dynamic truths that underlie Mary’s compassion or cooperation in the redemption. On the one hand “The sufferings of Christ created the good of the world’s redemption. This good in itself is inexhaustible and infinite. No man can add anything to it.” On the other hand “Mary’s suffering [on Calvary], beside the suffering of Jesus, reached an intensity which can hardly be imagined from a human point of view but which was mysteriously and supernaturally fruitful for the Redemption of the world.” Thus the Pope strikes once again that careful balance which is always a hallmark of Catholic truth: he upholds the principle that the sufferings of Christ were all-sufficient for the salvation of the world, while maintaining that Mary’s co-suffering “was mysteriously and supernaturally fruitful for the Redemption of the world.” This is an axiom that may be discovered in the lives of the saints of every era of the Church’s history from the days of the apostles to our own.

Now we must deal with a matter of terminology: How do we best describe this secondary and subordinate, but nonetheless active and unique role willed by God for Mary in the work of our redemption? Blessed Pope John Paul II used a good number of descriptive titles such as collaborator and cooperator, associate and ally. He has called her “the perfect co-worker in Christ’s sacrifice” (perfetta cooperatrice del sacrificio di Cristo) ¹² and “the perfect model for those who seek to be united with her Son in his saving work for all humanity”.¹³

This is a matter on which neither our present Holy Father nor any of his predecessors have pronounced and we are quite free to debate it. My argument would simply be that none of the one-word titles such as collaborator, cooperator, co-worker, associate, partner and ally sufficiently accentuates the uniqueness of Mary’s role whereas others seem to me to be either lengthy phrases or cumbersome circumlocutions. ¹⁴

The fact is that there is a word that was coined and has become hallowed by usage to describe Mary’s unique role: Coredemptrix. The first use of the word Coredemptrix of which we are presently aware dates from the fourteenth or fifteenth century.¹⁵ It passed into theological circulation ¹⁶ and then into the vocabulary of the magisterium. It was first used in official documents issued by Roman Congregations at the beginning of the twentieth century¹⁷ and
subsequently by Pope Pius XI in allocutions to pilgrims¹⁸ and in a radio message on 28 April 1935 for the closing of the Holy Year at Lourdes.¹⁹ The word was not used by Pius XII (1939-1958) because of controversies about the doctrine which were only clarified at the end of his pontificate ²⁰, and was described in the Prænotanda of the first draft of the schema which would eventually become chapter 8 of Lumen Gentium as among those words which are “absolutely true in themselves” [in se verissima], but were being avoided out of ecumenical sensitivity.²¹ We are also free to debate
about the wisdom and effectiveness of such a strategy.²²

Although the doctrine of Mary’s unique collaboration in our redemption was clearly taught by the Second Vatican Council as we have seen, the word Coredemptrix was not used out of what I call “political” and “misdirected ecumenical sensitivity”. ²³ What is even more significant, however, is that after a period of artificial suppression Blessed John Paul II used the word “Coredemptrix” or “coredemptive” at least seven times to describe Mary’s intimate cooperation in the work of our Redemption.²⁴

The term Coredemptrix usually requires some initial explanation in the English language because often the prefix “co” immediately conjures up visions of complete equality. For instance a co-signer of a check or a co-owner of a house is considered a co-equal with the other signer or owner. Thus the first fear of many is that describing Our Lady as Coredemptrix puts her on the same level as her Divine Son and implies that she is “Redeemer” in the same way
that he is, thus reducing Jesus “to being half of a team of redeemers”.²⁵ In the Latin language from which the term Coredemptrix comes, however, the meaning is always that Mary’s cooperation or collaboration in the redemption is secondary, subordinate, dependent on that of Christ – and yet for all that – something that God “freely wished to accept … as constituting an unneeded, but yet wonderfully pleasing part of that one great price”²⁶ paid by His Son for world’s
redemption. As Dr. Mark Miravalle points out:

The prefix “co” does not mean equal, but comes from the Latin word, “cum” which means “with”. The title of Coredemptrix applied to the Mother of Jesus never places Mary on a level of equality with Jesus Christ, the divine Lord of all, in the saving process of humanity’s redemption. Rather, it denotes Mary’s singular and unique sharing with her Son in the saving work of redemption for the human family. The Mother of Jesusparticipates in the redemptive work of herSavior Son, who alone could reconcile humanity with the Father in his glorious divinity and humanity. ²⁷

II. The Mystery of Mary’s Mediation of Grace

In its treatment of Mary’s Motherhood with regard to the Church the Catechism of the Catholic Church cites the text of Lumen Gentium 62 that “the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix” ²⁸ and then follows immediately with these further texts from Lumen Gentium by way of commentary:

Mary’s function as mother of men in no way obscures or diminishes this unique mediation of Christ, but rather shows its power. But the Blessed Virgin’s salutary influence on men … flows forth from the superabundance of the merits of Christ, rests on his mediation, depends entirely on it and draws all its power from it [Lumen Gentium 60]. No creature could ever be counted along with the Incarnate Word and Redeemer; but just as the priesthood of Christ is shared in various ways both by his ministers and the faithful, and as the one goodness of God is radiated in different ways among his creatures, so also the unique mediation of the Redeemer does not exclude but rather gives rise to a manifold co-operation which is but a sharing in this one source [ Lumen Gentium 62].²⁹

Although the conciliar text does not make any allusion to it, there is a striking corroboration of the analogy between the priesthood of Christ and his unique mediation and the various ways of sharing in this priestly mediation developed in Pope Leo XIII’s Rosary Encyclical of 20 September 1896, Fidentem Piumque. Let us look at the argument that he develops with the help of St. Thomas Aquinas:

Undoubtedly the name and attributes of the absolute Mediator belong to no other than Christ; for being one Person and yet both Man and God He restored the human race to the favor of the Heavenly Father. “One Mediator of God and men, the man Jesus Christ, who gave himself a redemption for all” (I Tim. 2:5-6).

And yet, as the Angelic Doctor teaches: “There is no reason why certain others should not be called in a certain way mediators between God and man, that is to say in so far as they cooperate by predisposing and ministering in the union of man with God” (ST III, q. 26, a. 1). Such are the angels and saints, the prophets and priests of both Testaments, but especially has the Blessed Virgin a claim to the glory of this title. For no single individual can even be imagined who has ever contributed or ever will contribute so much toward reconciling man with God. To mankind heading for eternal ruin, she offered a Savior when she received the announcement of the mystery brought to this earth by the Angel, and in giving her consent gave it “in the name of the whole human race” (ST III, q. 30, a. 1). She is the one from whom Jesus is born; she is therefore truly His Mother and for this reason a worthy and acceptable “Mediatrix to the Mediator”.³⁰

We should note that the first passage that Leo XIII quotes from St. Thomas speaks explicitly of those who “cooperate by predisposing and ministering in the union of man with God” [cooperantur ad unionem hominis cum Deo dispositive et ministerialiter]. ³¹ Among such secondary and subordinate mediators – the pope points out – Mary is
preeminent. It is precisely this role of Mary’s ministering in the union of man with God as a Mediatrix of grace that we now treat. Perhaps no Pope explained the intimate correlation between Mary’s coredemptive role and her role in the distribution of grace than did St. Pius X in his great Marian Encyclical Ad Diem Illum:

From this community of will and suffering between Christ and Mary “she merited to become most worthily the reparatrix of the lost world” (Eadmer, De Excellentia Virg. Mariæ, c. 9) and dispensatrix of all the gifts that our Savior purchased for us by his death and by his blood.

It cannot of course be denied that the dispensing of these treasures is the particular and supreme right of Jesus Christ, for they are the exclusive fruit of His death, who by His Nature is the Mediator between God and man. Nevertheless, by this union in sorrow and suffering, We have said, which existed between the Mother and the Son, it has been allowed to the August Virgin “to be the most powerful Mediatrix and advocate of the whole world, with her Divine Son” (cf. Ineffabilis Deus [OL #64]).

The source, then, is Jesus Christ, “and of his fullness we have all received” (Jn. 1:16); “from him the whole body (being closely joined and knit together through every joint of the system according to the functioning in due measure of each single part) derives its increase to the building up of itself in love”. But Mary, as St Bernard justly remarks, is the “aqueduct,” or if you will, the neck by which the body is joined to the head and the head transmits to the body its power and virtue: “For she is the neck of our Head, by which he communicated to his mystical Body all spiritual gifts” (St. Bern. Sen., Quadrag. de Evangelio æterno, Serm. X, a. 3, c. 3). We are thus, it will be seen, very far from declaring the Mother of God to be the authoress of supernatural grace. Grace comes from God alone. But since she surpassed all in holiness and union with Christ, and has been associated with Christ in the work of Redemption, she, as the expression is, merits de congruo what Christ merits de condigno, and is the principal minister in the distribution of grace.³²

Pius X’s predecessors, especially Leo XIII, had referred with some frequency to Mary’s function in the distribution of grace, but none of them had insisted so clearly on the fact that this flows from her coredemptive role.

On several occasions Pius’ successor, Benedict XV, referred to Mary as the Mediatrix of all graces, but perhaps the most striking of his statements deals with one of the miracles approved by him for the canonization of Joan of Arc.

First of all, grateful to God and to the powerful Virgin, We must recognize that we are debtors to God alone for the two miracles attributed to Joan of Arc, the authenticity of which has today been proclaimed. And if in every miracle We must recognize the mediation of Mary by means of whom according to the divine will all graces and favors come to us, no one can deny that in one of the miracles approved by Us this mediation of the Blessed Virgin has been manifested in a very special manner.

We think God has so disposed matters to remind the faithful that we must never forget Mary even when the miracle seems to be attributed to the intercession or the mediation of one who has been beatified or canonized. We believe that such is the lesson to be learned from the fact that Thérèse Belin was completely and instantaneously cured at the Sanctuary of Lourdes. On one hand Our Lord shows us that even on this earth, which is confided to the care of His Blessed Mother, He can work miracles through the intercession of one of His servants; on the other hand, He reminds us that even in such cases it is necessary to postulate the intercession of her whom the Holy Fathers greeted as “Mediatrix Mediatorum omnium”.

In other words, even while attributing a miracle to the intercession of a given saint, we can never discount the intercession and mediation of Mary.

In the reign of Pope Pius XI we find the terminology of Our Lady’s “ministry of grace” in the conclusion of his great encyclical on reparation through and to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, Miserentissimus Redemptor of 8 May 1928:

Trusting in her intercession with

Christ our Lord, who though sole Mediator between God and man (I Tim. 2:5), wished however to make His Mother the advocate for sinners and the dispenser and mediatrix of His grace

, from the bottom of Our heart as a token of heavenly favor and of Our fatherly solicitude We heartily impart to you and to all the faithful entrusted to your care Our Apostolic Benediction.³³

In this case we find Mary’s function with regard to the grace of Redemption delineated with two words in apposition, “dispenser and mediatrix” [ ministram ac mediatricem].

The Venerable Pope Pius XII used the occasion of a radio broadcast to the Shrine of Fatima for the coronation of the statue of Our Lady on 13 May 1946 to set forth the doctrinal foundations of Our Lady’s Queenship, a matter he would take up with even greater solemnity eight years later in his Encyclical Ad Cæli Reginam. In the Portuguese transmission, widely publicized and commented upon, he said:

He, the Son of God, gave His heavenly Mother a share in His glory, His majesty, His kingship; because,

associated as Mother and Minister to the King of martyrs in the ineffable work of man’s Redemption, she is likewise associated with Him forever, with power so to speak infinite, in the distribution of the graces which flow from Redemption.³⁴

As in many other papal texts we note here a description of Our Lady in her capacity as both Coredemptrix and Mediatrix. In the first role she is described as “Minister to the King of martyrs in the ineffable work of man’s Redemption” and in the second as “associated with Him forever … in the distribution of the graces which flow from Redemption”. Here the term “minister” refers explicitly to the coredemptive phase of Mary’s activity, while the mediatory phase
is characterized as “the distribution of graces”.

While Blessed John Paul II’s teaching on Marian coredemption is striking in its clarity and originality, his teaching on Mary as minister and mediatrix of all graces is more subtle and does not so readily fit as neatly into the scholastic mold of his predecessors, but nonetheless harmonizes with their teaching and is profound. I have treated this topic at length in a published essay.³⁵ For our purposes it will suffice to make a number of points. First among these is that in the wake of the post-conciliar crisis in Mariology John Paul singlehandedly re-launched the discussion on Mary’s maternal mediation in #38-47 of his Marian Encyclical Redemptoris Mater of 25 March 1987. He had already prepared the ground in his first Encyclical Redemptor Hominis of 4 March 1979 in stating that

For if we feel a special need, in this difficult and responsible phase of the history of the Church and of mankind, to turn to Christ, who is Lord of the Church and Lord of man’s history on account of the mystery of the Redemption,

we believe that nobody else can bring us as Mary can into the divine and human dimension of this mystery. Nobody has been brought into it by God himself as Mary has.³⁶

Now from Blessed John Paul’s many statements, I will choose just a few. On 25 August 2001 the Holy Father introduced the Mass he was celebrating for Polish pilgrims in this way:

“When the fullness of time had come, God sent his Son, born of a woman …” (Gal. 4:4). This saving mystery, in which God has assigned to the woman Mary of Nazareth, a role that cannot be replaced, is continually made present in the Eucharist. When we celebrate the Holy Mass, the Mother of the Son of God is in our midst and introduces us to the mystery of His redemptive sacrifice. Thus,she is the mediatrix of all the grace flowing from this sacrifice to the Church and to all the faithful. ³⁷

In his Apostolic Letter Spiritus Domini of 1 August 1987 commemorating the Bicentenary of the Death of St. Alphonsus de’ Liguori he wrote:

Devotion to Mary occupies a totally unique place for him [St. Alphonsus] in the economy of salvation: Mary is the Mediatrix of grace and Companion in redemption; for this reason she is Mother, Advocate and Queen. In fact, Alphonsus did everything under her protection from the beginning of his life until his death.³⁸

In his Message of 8 September 1995 to the Ordinary General Chapter of the Cistercian Order he offered this profound exhortation, obviously fully endorsing the teaching of St. Bernard of Clairvaux, its original formulator:

From this theological and spiritual approach there stems a deep and strong devotion to Our Lady, of which Bernard is the distinguished master and witness. “Do not forget”, he teaches, “to make all that you decide to offer pass through Mary, so that grace, by returning to its Author, may take the same path that it took in its descent” (Sermo in Nativ., V).³⁹

In his general audience address of 9 December 1998 John Paul made this striking statement about Mary’s intimate involvement in the outpouring of the living water of the Holy Spirit:

From the Cross the Savior wished to pour out upon humanity rivers of living water (cf. Jn. 7:38), that is, the abundance of the Holy Spirit. But

he wanted this outpouring of grace to be linked to a mother’s face, his Mother’s. Mary now appears as the new Eve, mother of the living, or the
Daughter of Zion, mother of all peoples

. The gift of a universal mother was included in the Messiah’s redeeming mission: “After this, Jesus, knowing that all was now finished … ”, the Evangelist writes after the two statements: “Woman, behold, your son!” and “Behold, your mother!” (Jn. 19:26-28). ⁴⁰

These few examples serve as an indication of how Blessed John Paul II presented the perennial doctrine of the Church according to his own unique insights and approach.

Concluding the presentation of papal texts on Marian mediation, I would like to offer three texts on Mary’s mediation of grace from our present Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI. The first comes from his homily on 11 May 2007 at the canonization of the Franciscan friar Frei Antônio de Sant’Ana Galvão at Campo de Marte, São Paulo, Brazil:

Mary, Mother of God and our Mother, stands particularly close to us at this moment. Frei Galvão prophetically affirmed the truth of the Immaculate Conception. She, the Tota Pulchra, the Virgin Most Pure, who conceived in her womb the Redeemer of mankind and was preserved from all stain of original sin, wishes to be the definitive seal of our encounter with God our Savior. There is no fruit of grace in the history of salvation that does not have as its necessary instrument the mediation of Our Lady. …

Let us give thanks to God the Father, to God the Son, to God the Holy Spirit from whom, through the intercession of the Virgin Mary, we receive all the blessings of heaven.⁴¹

His statement that “There is no fruit of grace in the history of salvation that does not have as its necessary instrument the mediation of Our Lady” is, indeed, a declaration of extraordinary clarity.

Secondly, I would like to present a text that comes from Pope Benedict’s general audience address of 30 March 2011 on St. Alphonsus de’ Liguori:

Precisely because it is Christological, Alphonsus’ piety is also exquisitely Marian. Deeply devoted to Mary, he illustrates her role in the history of salvation: an Associate in the Redemption and Mediatrix of grace, Mother, Advocate and Queen. ⁴²

I believe that this citation not only serves as Pope Benedict XVI’s synthesis of St. Alphonsus’ Mariology, but it also also illustrates the papal teaching which I have briefly sketched here provided that we understand that “Associate in the work of Redemption” is one of the ways in which a number of popes – especially the Venerable Pius XII – have chosen to speak of Mary’s coredemptive role. She is Mediatrix of all graces because she actively cooperated in the work of our Redemption, thus becoming our spiritual Mother, our Advocate with her Son and the Queen who now sits at his right hand. ⁴³

Finally, I conclude with this graceful reference that Pope Benedict made in his German homeland at the Marian Shrine of Etzelsbach on 23 September 2011, using a classical image of Our Lady’s mediation of grace:

Looking down from the Cross, from the throne of grace and salvation, Jesus gave us his mother Mary to be our mother. At the moment of his self-offering for mankind, he makes Mary as it were the channel of the rivers of grace that flow from the Cross. ⁴⁴

The post Marian Coredemption and Mediation: An Introduction appeared first on Mother of All Peoples.

Pope Francis prays the fifteen decades of the Rosary daily.  He previously played an instrumental role in bringing the powerful “Mary, Undoer of Knots” Devotion from Germany to Argentina and beyond. Our new Holy Father has also requested that Cardinal Policarpo, Patriarch of Lisbon, Portugal consecrate his papacy to Our Lady of Fatima, which he will do on this upcoming May 13!

These generous witnesses of Marian love by Pope Francis give every reason for hope as to his openness for the solemn of Our Lady’s Spiritual Motherhood under its three aspects of Co-redemptrix, Mediatrix of all graces and Advocate.

Dear friend in Jesus and Mary, during the beautiful month of May dedicated to our Spiritual Mother, would you prayerfully consider participating in an international letter campaign to Pope Francis by sending a brief personal letter of support to our Holy Father for the proclamation of the Dogma of Mary, Co-redemptrix, Mediatrix and Advocate? You would be joined by Marian cardinals, bishops, priests, religious and faithful worldwide who, during this special May letter campaign to the Holy Father, will likewise be sending a short note of encouragement for the solemn definition of Our Lady’s Spiritual Motherhood.

Perhaps you have done so in the past (for which, surely, Our Lady is most grateful). But Pope Francis presents a new and exciting possibility that the fifth Marian dogma could indeed be accomplished during his papacy. Please consider sending him a brief personal letter of encouragement to proclaim this dogma, which remains a necessary condition for the Triumph of her most Immaculate Heart and for world peace.

Send your personal note to: Pope Francis, Vatican City 00120. He is a “Pope of the people.”  Let him hear your support for the dogma of Mary’s Spiritual Motherhood. Consider writing a quick note to the Holy Father during this Marian month of May as an expression of your love and gratitude for all Our Lady has done for you.

The time for the fifth Marian dogma and its heavenly remedy of world peace is now!

Gratefully in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary,

Dr. Mark Miravalle

The post May 2013 Letter Campaign to Pope Francis For the Dogma of Mary’s Spiritual Motherhood appeared first on Mother of All Peoples.

The Immaculate Conception of Mary is a key event in Salvation and the Redemptive process. This event, as is well documented by Catholic scholars, was foretold in key texts in Scripture; Genesis 3:15, the enmity between the serpent and the woman and her offspring, Luke 1:28, wherein Gabriel proclaims Mary as “full of Grace”. These powerful passages indicate the nature of Mary and her Holy Son. Furthermore, the chaste and upright nature of Mary was foretold from the beginning of humanity.

These two passages act as monolithic pillars upon which the Church can rest her teachings on the Immaculate Conception. Yet, in addition to these teachings are other Biblical traditions which form a “Theology of Preparation”.¹ God prepared for Mary, as she was vital in the plan of Salvation which was completed by the Cross and through the Resurrection. The concept of “preparation” forms a theology which finds its culmination in Mary and the Immaculate Conception.

PREPARATION FOR MARY

Mary was to give the human form to the Incarnation, the Word of God becoming flesh. The Introduction, or Prologue, to John’s Gospel is clear in that in Jesus is the converging of the pre-existent Word of God, Logos, and the fleshly realm. The Mother of the Son of God was to be of a special nature and would hold a special place in Salvation History. Therefore, God set about preparing for Mary and foreshadowing her role in the centuries before her lifetime.

Preparing the Body

Article 488 of the Catechism states that God would “prepare a body” for His Son;

“He wanted the free cooperation of a creature. For this, from all eternity God chose for the mother of his Son a daughter of Israel, a young Jewish woman of Nazareth in Galilee, ‘a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the House of David; and the virgin’s name was Mary”.

Mary, as Gabriel said, was already filled with grace. However, chastity was part of the disposition for which God had prepared. The ideal of an immaculate and pristine body is rooted in the traditions of the Old Testament.

Judges 13

In the birth account of the Judge of Israel, Samson, we see strict dietary restrictions placed on the mother, who is not named in the text. She is to take no wine or strong drink, probably beer, and eat nothing unclean. Historically, this seems to be an early version of the Nazirite Vow that is recorded in Numbers 6.

However, in a theological, or prophetic, context we see a foreshadowing of Mary. YHWH is preparing for his “Holy One”, Samson. ² While not austere, the restrictions placed on Samson’s mother seem to be designed to prepare her body to give birth to the miraculously powerful son who will begin the deliverance of Israel from Philistine oppression. God is preparing a clean host for the child which He has promised. Interestingly, the text gives no indication that the restrictions are to carry through to the boy who is to be born.³ The focus is on the mother. The text emphasizes the physical disposition of Samson’s mother in preparation for the birth. While not immaculate, chastity is not at issue with Manoah and his wife, she is to provide the proper physical environment in which the baby can grow and be readied for his unique mission.

Isaiah 7:14

The famous “Immanuel” prophecy speaks to the issue of chastity and virginity. Matthew cited this text in his birth account (1:23). The Hebrew uses the termalmah to describe the virgin. This term denotes a young girl of marriageable age who is chaste. ⁴ This was to be a sign to the House of David. The sign is for Judah that YHWH is with them
in the midst of turmoil. The sign also speaks to the fulfillment of the promise made to the House of David (2 Samuel 7). Herein we see the promise of the eternal kingship.

This was to a sign of tremendous magnitude. It would follow, therefore, that the virgin would not be a common maid, but a girl of surpassing chastity. She was to be part of the Salvation History established by God. This was to be a sign that would transcend the centuries of oppression and subjection. Her chastity was the validation and affirmation that the sign was truly from God.

The prophecy is rather stark, in comparison with other prophecies in Isaiah and other books. It relies on the power of the words rather than eloquence. The transitions are abrupt and force the focus on the virgin. It is stated at the outset that this sign will be from God. However, the descriptions now focus on the virgin. It is the virgin who be with child, bear a son, and name him. The emphasis is on the disposition and actions of the virgin in preparation for this child, the sign to the House of David.

Overall, from these two major texts in the Old Testament we see the beginnings of the importance of the proper physical disposition of Mary. The immaculate nature of Mary, her chastity, fulfills these traditions. These traditions of Samson and Isaiah are both integral in establishing the eternal Kingship. In both of these traditions the physical disposition of the mother is emphasized. Mary was to give birth to the Davidic King, the Messiah, who was to complete the work of Samson and fulfill the words of Isaiah. Therefore, by extension, Mary’s physical nature must be understood to have surpassed, or completed, the nature of the women who went before her and led the way to her. To speak of her physically immaculate nature is to speak of her fulfilling the traditions which foreshadowed her.

Preparing the Mission of Mary

Article 489 of the “Catechism” argues that “throughout the Old Covenant the missions of many holy women prepared for that of Mary.” In recent decades, Biblical scholars have shed new light on the role of women in the Old Testament. B. Witherspoon argues that “within the OT . . . the women who
emerge as actors testify to the essential and active role of women in the formation and transmission of Israel’s faith.” He goes on, similarly to article
498, to say that “Israelite faith was . . . cherished, defended, and exemplified by women”.⁵

The Israel of the OT was a patriarchal society. Yet, despite this perspective the powerful role of women is still evident. The woman in the Old Testament displayed a quiet strength that was foundational and essential to the household. R. de Vaux states;

“All the hard work at home certainly fell to her; she looked after the flocks, worked in the fields, cooked the food, did the spinning, and so on. All this apparent drudgery, however, far from lowering her status, earned her consideration. Sometimes, in exceptional circumstances, a woman could even take part in public affairs, Israel honored Deborah and Jael as heroines (Judges 4-5), Athaliah reigned over Judah for several years (2 Kings 11); Huldah the Prophetess was consulted by the king’s ministers (2 Kings 22:14); and the books of Judith and Esther tell how the nation was saved by a woman.” ⁶

The Israelite, or Jewish, woman- wife or mother- was given a social status and dignity that was superior to other countries in the Ancient Near East. The women of the Bible rise to prominence because of their intelligence or devotion.

J.L. McKenzie points out that the passage of “The Fall” and the curse placed upon the woman indicates that the inferior position women had in relation to men does not represent the original order of creation. He states, “the inferiority of woman is thus presented as a deterioration from the primitive and unspoiled condition of man[kind].”⁷

Mary culminates these aspects of women in the Bible. She exemplified her faith in the quiet strength that was expected and that characterized her entire life. By virtue of her unassuming life and devotion she was worthy of dignity and social status. However, as indicated in Gabriel’s announcement, her grace was that of the original and, in McKenzie’s words, and unspoiled condition of humanity. The Greek word for “grace” derives from charis. The term contains the connotations of “to be highly favored”. All of the strong and devout women, known or unknown to history, pointed to Mary. Only Mary embodied the purity, only approximated by the women of old, that would make her worthy to be the mother of the Son of God. Mary’s mission, her calling to this role of motherhood grew from the pure, immaculate, nature that she possessed and manifested in her life.

Therefore, this shows that the Divine preparation of the body and the theological preparation of the mission converge in Mary. One form of preparation complements the other and each disposes Mary to the other. This “Theology of preparation” contains both physical and spiritual aspects, because the Incarnation was the merging of the Spiritual with the human spheres. The need for an immaculate nature resonates throughout this theological concept. It is only with an immaculate, surpassingly pure, nature could this merge, the Incarnation, occur.

THE SACRIFICE ON THE CROSS

Mary’s Immaculate Conception was needed if the Cross of Jesus was to be seen as a true sacrifice for our Salvation. John’s Gospel builds a powerful foundation for this connection between the Cross and the Immaculate Conception of Mary. John has the Baptist proclaim that Jesus is the “Lamb of God” (1:29). One must note the construction of the term; it is a possessive. This means that Jesus is the Lamb- the sacrifice. ⁸ The image of the lamb is a powerful symbol in Salvation History.

The Passover

According to McKenzie, “the lamb is most frequently mentioned in the OT as a sacrificial victim in ritual passages of Ex-Nm-Lv” The “singular title [Lamb of God] probably arises from a combination of the application to Jesus of Servant of YHWH (Isaiah 53:7). . . and of the Passover lamb.” ⁹ The lamb was, and is, to be unblemished, as is the case with most sacrifices. Passover was the great saving act of the Old Testament. It was the first step in the formation of the people of Israel. J. Miles argues that the Johannine Gospel synthesizes scriptural references. The title “lamb of God” is a passage “written deliberately” to link Jesus to the Passover lamb and the lamblike “Suffering Servant”. Miles also contends that Jesus’ crucifixion “at Passover, is described in a way that repeatedly draws attention to the season and underlines his identity as a new Passover victim.”¹⁰

John’s Gospel brings this point into bold relief by indicating that Jesus was not crucified on Passover itself, but on “preparation day” for the Passover celebration (19:14). B. Boksar argues that “John, in thus portraying Jesus crucified at the time the paschal lambs were being sacrificed at the Temple, depicts Jesus as a Passover offering. This synchronization explains how Jesus died for humanity and, it is claimed, gives his death a more enduring
redemptive quality than the regular Passover sacrifice.”¹¹ Therefore the Cross is the new Passover, the great saving act of Christianity, which will herald a new Israel.

Jesus, like the original Passover lamb, had to be unblemished. If the victim was flawed, the sacrifice was corrupted and the saving act would be emptied of meaning. Mary was to give birth to the perfect Passover victim, one that was wholly innocent and pure. Therefore, to preserve the integrity of the sacrifice of the Cross, Mary needed to be pure or immaculate as well. It was Mary’s immaculate nature that was integral to the Salvation and Redemption that was brought forth by the Cross.

REIGN OF SIN

In Romans 5:12-21, we read that sin and death has entered into the world through one man; Adam. This text is foundational to the concept of “Original sin”. However, as argued by M. Brauch, there is a relational aspect to Paul’s words. It reflects the relationship between Creator and creature. A relationship, though inherited, “can only be established or destroyed or affirmed or denied”.¹²

According to Biblical theology, sin breaks man’s relationship with God and separates man from God. Death is the result of Sin; therefore it takes on the separating power of Sin. Herein is the power of Death; that which needed to be broken by the Cross.

By virtue of Adam’s sin, all are in bondage and separated from God. Yet, we are all responsible for our participation in that bondage and separation, “because all sinned” according to Paul. The idea of all being subject to one man’s sin is the Biblical teaching of “corporate personality” or “solidarity”.  This concept “recognized the intimate interdependence of individuals and the effect that such solidarity could have. . . “ ¹³ Brauch explains the condition;

“Adam, the typical, representative first human being yields to temptation to determine his own existence and his own destiny (that is, he sins). The result of that self-determination is death. Death is the condition of separateness, since the creature apart from the Creator does not have life. . . Separation from the source of life results in decay and disintegration.”¹⁴

At the same time, Romans 5:12-21 depicts a human commonality. While we share the burden of sin, or separation, we are responsible and are to be held accountable “for the way we relate to that common humanity. . . Each individual participates in the Adamic humanity and becomes accountable for that participation. Death marches across the pages of human history because humans in their own individuality have sinned” ¹⁵

This “march” halts with the advent of Jesus Christ. Paul uses an “antithetical parallelism between the death wrought by Adam and the life brought by Christ”. Christ is the new Adam, whose grace and beneficence supplants the disobedience of Adam. ¹⁶ Christ had to overcome the universal separateness of humanity if he was to break the
power of Sin and death. Mary was his link to the human world; if she shared in the common humanity, so too would Jesus. She had to be of an immaculate nature to avoid passing on the universal separateness, or sinful nature, of humanity. Regarding the concept of individual responsibility, both Mary and Jesus re-established and affirmed the relationship with God, which was broken by Sin.

If Mary were not immaculate, Jesus would have shared in the separate nature of humanity by virtue of being born to Mary. If this were the case, the Cross would have been emptied of its Salvific and Redemptive power. Jesus would have died, technically, an innocent death as the legal charge against him was false. But, the Cross would have been in repayment for his own share in the universal, or collective, sin of humanity. In other words, without Mary’s
immaculate nature, Jesus would still have been an exemplary man. However, he would have been just an exemplary man who died for his personal beliefs and shortfalls. Therefore, the immaculate nature of Mary was the key to Jesus restoring the order which Adam destroyed.

CONCLUSION

The Immaculate Conception of Mary was the culmination of physical and traditional preparation, a key to the sacrifice of the Cross, and a vital part of the redemptive process wherein Jesus overcomes the Fall of Adam. Through one man sin and death entered the world. Therefore, only through a man can the effects of sin and death be broken. Mary was the lynchpin in Jesus, through the Incarnation, re-establishing and affirming man’s relationship with God through the
New Covenant. Mary had to surpass the separate nature of creation to give birth to the Savior and Redeemer. This was accomplished in the Immaculate
Conception.

The Immaculate Conception was the key, albeit human, element in the power of the Cross. The Cross was a singular act of grace, wherein Jesus was allowed by The Father to take our sins and punishment onto Himself. Jesus was innocent and sinless; otherwise this redeeming act could not have taken place. Mary, and the Immaculate Conception, was the indispensable factor in the sacrifice of the new paschal lamb on the Cross. The Immaculate Conception was foundational
to the great saving act of Christianity.

GENERAL BIBLIOGRAPHY

Brauch, M. Hard Sayings of Paul. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1989.

Brown, Fitzmyer, Murphy, eds. The Jerome Biblical Commentary. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice- Hall, 1968.

Catechism of the Catholic Church.
NY: Doubleday, 1994.

Freedman, D. N. Anchor Bible Dictionary 6 vols . NY: Doubleday, 1992.

McKenzie, J.L. Dictionary of the Bible. Chicago: Bruce, 1966.

Vaux, R. de, Ancient Israel: Social Institutions. NY: McGraw-Hill, 1965.

The post The Immaculate Conception: A Biblical Theology appeared first on Mother of All Peoples.

Let us therefore briefly examine the reported messages and relevant actions of “Maria Divine Mercy” in light of the Church’s foundational criteria for authenticity.

As the renowned French Mariologist, Fr. Rene Laurentin has aptly summarized, the norms for Church evaluation of a reported private revelation can be synthesized into the following three fundamental criteria: 1) Is the alleged message in conformity with the official faith and morals teaching of the Catholic Church? 2) Is the reported phenomena (state of ecstasy, manner of transmission of the message, etc.) consistent with the mystical tradition of the Church? 3) Does the reported message bring the Christian spiritual fruits that always accompany an authentically supernatural message, as indicated in the words of Jesus: “the tree is known by its fruits” (Mt. 12:33): greater conversion; spiritual peace; spiritual joy; new or renewed faith, trust, and charity; and greater fidelity to and union with the Church?

Unfortunately, the messages of Maria Divine Mercy, as well as the actions of the alleged seer, contain numerous and grave theological, historical and factual errors throughout the over 650 alleged messages—errors which contradict the doctrinal teachings of the Catholic Church, the mystical tradition of authentic Catholic private revelation, its own self-contained predictions, and the typical spiritual fruits of peace, charity, and joy that comes with a true heavenly message.

Just a few samples of these widespread and serious errors are as follows:

1. The assertion that Pope Benedict XVI was the “last true Pope on earth” and “the next Pope” will be the “False Prophet”: “My beloved Pope Benedict XVI is the last true Pope on earth…. The next Pope may be elected by members within the Catholic Church, but he will be the False Prophet” (April 12, 2012).

The message directly contradicts Catholic teaching as to the legitimacy of a validly elected Pope.  The message implies that an “anti-pope” can come from a valid conclave, which constitutes a false or “heretical” position.  The alleged message goes on to claim, by deduction, that Pope Francis is in fact the “False Prophet.” All of this is a reprehensible rejection of Catholic councils, catechisms, and canon law on the legitimacy of a validly elected Pope and the proper response of a “religious assent of mind and heart to the manifest mind of the pope, even when he is not speaking infallibly” (Second Vatican Council, Lumen Gentium, 25), which every member of the Catholic faithful is obliged to offer to the present Holy Father.

This erroneous message is extremely dangerous for any member of the Catholic Church, as it runs the risk of leading to formal “schism” or separation with the Catholic Church, which is the “refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him” (Code of Canon Law [CIC] n. 751).  A choice of schism for any Catholic tragically results in excommunication and the inability to receive the sacraments (see CIC 1364.1).

Not only does this erroneous message reject the true pontificate of Pope Francis, but it also rejects a proper respect of the pontificate of Pope Benedict XVI as well, as Pope Benedict vowed his submission to the next pontiff on the day of his voluntary resignation (not forced “ousting” as purported by the alleged message) on February 28, 2013, and also again vowed his unreserved obedience to Pope Francis before his very presence during their historic joint meeting on March 23, 2013.

2. A form of the heresy known as Millenarianism is present in several instances of the alleged messages, which asserts that there will be a literal “1000 year” reign of Jesus on the earth (April 9, 2012 Message), during which time there would be no pope on earth, but rather a type spiritual papacy by which St. Peter will rule the Church from heaven over a type of “paradise on earth” (see Messages, 89, 124, 141; 88, 109, 111, 251, 258).

The Catholic Church has rightly condemned Millenarianism and the concept of a literal 1000 year period during which Jesus would reign over an earthly paradise (see Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 676).  The concept of a 1000 years of earthly existence without a visible pope on earth is in practical violation of the Petrine promise of Jesus (cf. Mt. 16:15-20), as well as being absolutely unsustainable from the sources of Divine Revelation. This alleged prophecy appears to be an extremist interpretation of various papal prophecies, rather than anything acceptable by a faithful Catholic.

3. Denial of importance of Church evaluation of  alleged message

The alleged messages reject the importance of the Church’s investigation and subsequent judgment of the authenticity of the alleged message, stating that the Church’s approval of the message is “not important”:  “It is not important whether the Church authenticates these messages because time is not on their side” (July 9. 2011 message).
This perspective cannot be considered consistent with authentic Catholic private revelation, which always directs the true seer to submit their messages to the proper Church authority, even when Heaven knew that the messages would not be immediately accepted by the relevant Church authority on the first occasion of submission (as seen, for example, at Guadalupe with St. Juan Diego, and at Lourdes with St. Bernadette).

4. Alleged seer’s refusal to identify and present herself to local Church authority for appropriate Church theological, psychological and scientific evaluation, while at the same time internationally distributing alleged messages via the internet and printed texts.

Similar though distinct from the above category, the seer, while publicly distributing these alleged messages as true supernatural messages from heaven, refuses to submit herself and respond in obedience to her local Church authority for proper discernment of authenticity.  The seer operates from the region of Dublin, Ireland, and therefore should have submitted her messages, as well as her person, for proper ecclesiastical examination by the Archdiocese of Dublin.

The refusal to the seer to submit herself obediently to legitimate Church authority for proper discernment eliminates the possibility to incorporate the second criteria for evaluating authenticity, i.e., the concurring phenomena that typically accompanies a true supernatural communication. Jesus is the Light of the world and calls those in his service into the light.  His Adversary, conversely, operates from the darkness.

5. Theological errors, for example, in stating that the Heavenly Father “comes in the name of Jesus” rather than Jesus, who comes in the name of the Father, or the Father coming in his own name.  These assertions lead to confusion and are contrary to classic Trinitarian formulation. Moreover, statements which defend the “confusion” present in the messages by claiming, for example, that “love is confusing” (Message 45) are also antithetical to the character of authentic prophecy.  Jesus speaks with a profound simplicity and clarity; Satan fosters confusion.

6. Unfulfilled dated prediction of the “Warning” to have happened within “a few months” after May 31, 2011.

The message of May 31, 2011 calls people to prepare for the “Warning” ( a  God-granted “illumination of conscience,”  the prediction of which is found in other Marian messages) which would take place “within a few months” from the May 31, 2011 date: “Prepare now for this event [the Warning] for you have only a few months left to prepare your souls” (May 31,2011). The predicted event did not take place within a few months, or even a year, after the May 31, 2011 prediction.

7. Absence of the authentic Christian fruits of spiritual peace, joy, and trust, and charity; and, in their place, manifestations of greater fear, anxiety, and dominant negativity.

Fear producing tones of divine retribution, anger, justice, and, disaster are the principal themes placed into the alleged words of God the Father and Jesus. The alleged messages are replete with negative exhortatory rants of condemnation and judgment in words and expressions which gravely misrepresent the infinite mercy and love of the Father and of the Son.   For example, alleged messages from Jesus stating “Those of you who say that you follow My Teachings, but who want laws changed to condone acts, which are sinful in My Eyes, get out of My Church now”; or the Heavenly Father alleging speaking about sending souls to Hell where they “will rip their eyes out” are not in a continuity with other authentic messages of Jesus and of God the Father.

Even when Jesus, God the Father, and Mary have had to convey messages which include strong statements of conditional upcoming chastisement and purification (which are present, for example,  in the authentic messages of Divine Mercy and Fatima) these messages are always conveyed in the overall tone and  context of peace, love, encouragement, and even joy. These appropriate spiritual characteristics and their corresponding fruits spiritual are substantially absent from the alleged messages, and also seemingly absent from a significant number of the proponents of the alleged message.

With such blatant theological and factual errors present in the alleged messages of “Maria Divine Mercy,” how and why can these alleged messages continue to have such an extended readership among many Catholics of good will, the majority of whom maintain a commitment of obedience to the Church’s Magisterium, as well as  possessing a particular and true Marian devotion?

It is precisely because the alleged messages contain some elements which many readers can recognize to be true in evaluating the contemporary “signs of the times” (an evaluation called for by the Second Vatican Council, Gaudium et Spes, n.4): widespread crises of faith and morals within the Catholic Church and throughout global society; unprecedented global economic and social crises; ubiquitous geo-political conflicts in the Middle East and beyond; unprecedented natural disasters; proximate possibilities of nuclear weapon use in North Korea, Iran, Pakistan, etc.

To recognize and acknowledge the historic and challenging times in which we live is absolutely acceptable, and in my opinion, an honest and accurate assessment of the contemporary “signs of the times.”  To accept an alleged message immersed in theological error and Church disobedience is a grave and dangerous error.
There is a substantial moral difference between acknowledging the serious global indicators which call the world to urgent conversion, and thereby to accept God’s infinite mercy by faithfully responding to the legitimate supernatural messages of Jesus and Mary to contemporary humanity, which understandably include divine “warnings,” both universal and  individual; and, on the other hand, to accept and cooperate with a false message which usurps  the authentic contemporary messages of Jesus and Mary, and consequently contaminates them with false directives towards disobedience to Pope Francis and legitimate Church authority, rejection of classic Catholic dogma and the precedence of the Church’s true mystical tradition, and encourages a fear and anxiety based response to the world’s present global situation.

The single greatest danger present in this false message, in my opinion, is the alleged justification for Catholics to place an individual false revelation over the God-given authority of the present Pope as the Vicar of Christ on earth.

Ironically, the alleged message predicts an upcoming schism in the Church. This could well become a self-fulfilling prophecy, a Satanic goal and strategy,  which could result, in some part, from the following of  extremely dangerous and materially schismatic messages such as those promulgated by “Maria Divine Mercy.”

It is realistic, in my opinion, during our contemporary experience of challenge and change presently being experienced in the Church and in the world, to expect even more false messages in the times to come—false messages intermixed with true content–which serve the diabolical goal to distract us from authentic Church authority and doctrine, and from Heaven’s authentic message for our age.  This can only be countered and remedied by a renewed commitment of obedience to our Holy Father, Pope Francis, and to all legitimate Church authority.

Let us jointly and fervently pray for our beloved Holy Father, Pope Francis; for our holy Catholic Church; for the Triumph of Divine Mercy and the Immaculate Heart of Mary as found in authentic contemporary messages of Jesus and Mary; and for the peaceful conversion and reconciliation of the alleged seer and all her present supporters into the heart, obedience, and unity of the Church.

Dr. Mark Miravalle
Professor of Theology and Mariology

The post “Maria Divine Mercy”: A Theological Evaluation appeared first on Mother of All Peoples.

Dear brothers and sisters,

At the end of this celebration, we invoke the intercession of the Virgin Mary that she might accompany us during Holy Week. May she who followed her Son to Calvary help us to follow him, carrying his cross with serenity and love, to reach the joy of Easter. May the Virgin of Sorrows especially comfort those who are facing the most difficult situations. A thought goes out to those who suffer from tuberculosis since today is the World Tuberculosis Day. To Mary I entrust you in particular, dear young people, and your journey toward Rio de Janeiro.

See you in Rio in July! Prepare your heart spiritually.

Buon cammino a tutti!
Bonne route à tous !
I wish you all much joy on your journey.
Alles Gute für euren Weg auf Ostern hin und nach Rio!
¡Buen camino para todos!
Um bom caminho a todos!
Dóbrey drógui!

The post Pope Francis: “The Virgin of Sorrows” appeared first on Mother of All Peoples.

Walking: the House of Jacob. “O house of Jacob, Come, let us walk in the light of the Lord.” This is the first thing God said to Abraham: “Walk in my presence and be blameless.” Walking: our life is a journey and when we stop, there is something wrong. Walking always, in the presence of the Lord, in the light of the Lord, seeking to live with that blamelessness, which God asks of Abraham, in his promise.

Building: to build the Church. There is talk of stones: stones have consistency, but [the stones spoken of are] living stones, stones anointed by the Holy Spirit. Build up the Church, the Bride of Christ, the cornerstone of which is the same Lord. With [every] movement in our lives, let us build!

Third, professing: we can walk as much we want, we can build many things, but if we do not confess Jesus Christ, nothing will avail. We will become a compassionate NGO, but not the Church, the Bride of Christ. When one does not walk, one stalls. When one does not built on solid rocks, what happens? What happens is what happens to children on the beach when they make sandcastles: everything collapses, it is without consistency. When one does not profess Jesus Christ – I recall the phrase of Leon Bloy – “Whoever does not pray to God, prays to the devil.” When one does not profess Jesus Christ, one professes the worldliness of the devil.

Walking, building-constructing, professing: the thing, however, is not so easy, because in walking, in building, in professing, there are sometimes shake-ups – there are movements that are not part of the path: there are movements that pull us back.

This Gospel continues with a special situation. The same Peter who confessed Jesus Christ, says, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God. I will follow you, but let us not speak of the Cross. This has nothing to do with it.” He says, “I’ll follow you on other ways, that do not include the Cross.” When we walk without the Cross, when we build without the Cross, and when we profess Christ without the Cross, we are not disciples of the Lord. We are worldly, we are bishops, priests, cardinals, Popes, but not disciples of the Lord.

I would like that all of us, after these days of grace, might have the courage – the courage – to walk in the presence of the Lord, with the Cross of the Lord: to build the Church on the Blood of the Lord, which is shed on the Cross, and to profess the one glory, Christ Crucified. In this way, the Church will go forward.

My hope for all of us is that the Holy Spirit, that the prayer of Our Lady, our Mother, might grant us this grace: to walk, to build, to profess Jesus Christ Crucified. So be it.

The post Pope Francis’ First Homily appeared first on Mother of All Peoples.

Thank God for Pope Francis! A man of such humility, such, faith, such courage! What a blessing from the Almighty Father to be given such a Pope for our day.

Pope Francis is a champion of doctrinal orthodoxy; of the poor, of personal humble witness, and–of Our Lady! How beautiful and encouraging it is that his first act as Vicar of Christ on earth was to go to St. Mary Major’s Basilica to invoke Our Lady’s intercession for his papacy and for his flock. This is, indeed, a great Marian sign!

My friends,

it is now time to pray for our new beloved Holy Father and for the proclamation of the Dogma of Mary as Spiritual Mother of all humanity in her three maternal roles as Co-redemptrix, Mediatrix of all Graces and Advocate.

So soon? Can’t we give Pope Francis a little adjustment time before praying for him to perform such a historic act?

Let’s look at that question from Our Lady’s perspective.

Until the Fifth Marian Dogma is proclaimed, Our Lady will not be “freed” to bring peace to our troubled world. She awaits our “yes”—our free consent to fully exercise her intercessory powers for the Church and the world right now. The Heavenly Father will not permit any forcing of grace upon us, even the grace for world peace. We must consent.

That’s what the Fifth Marian Dogma is, and what it will do. When the Holy Father proclaims that Mary is Co-redemptrix, Mediatrix of all graces, and Advocate, then her titles will fully become her spiritual functions for humanity. By this proclamation, the Pope will be saying “yes” to God—“yes” we want the full power of Mary’s motherly intercession for our world. Then, and only then, will peace enter our human situation on a global basis.

And so, my friends, we must begin today, to pray for our new beloved Holy Father, Pope Francis, to make the Marian proclamation that will bring world peace to a troubled world—a global peace which can only truly come from the spiritual peace of Jesus Christ in human hearts. That takes conversion. That takes grace. That takes the full action of the Mediatrix of all graces!

Please begin praying today that our beloved Pope Francis will proclaim the Foifth Marian Dogma. Please pray daily the Prayer of the Lady of All Nations, the Prayer Our Lady specifically revealed to us and asked each of us to pray daily, for this solemn Marian declaration. Please let each of us do our part in bringing about the spiritual peace of Jesus into our hearts, our homes, our nations, and throughout the world—the peace we are desire and the world desperately needs.

Starting today, pray for Pope Francis, with hearts fervent with faith and hope– in your Mass intentions, Rosaries, and daily sacrifices and offerings– for the papal definition of Mary as the Spiritual Mother of All Peoples, the Co-redemptrix, Mediatrix of all graces and Advocate and thus to definitively initiate the Triumph of her most Immaculate Heart.

The post Thank God For Pope Francis! appeared first on Mother of All Peoples.

We must be on guard against all complacency which concludes, “The Holy Spirit elects the pope.  I don’t need to pray for the conclave.”
When Pope Benedict was asked, “Does the Holy Spirit elect the next pope?”  He responded:

“I would not say so, in the sense that the Holy Spirit picks out the pope. … I would say that the Spirit does not exactly take control of the affair, but rather like a good educator, as it were, leaves us much space, much freedom, without entirely abandoning us. Thus the Spirit’s role should be understood in a much more elastic sense, not that he dictates the candidate for whom one must vote.”

The Pope’s response underscores the imperative for the Catholic faithful to pray fervently with committed hearts to the Holy Spirit, that the conclave of cardinals elect the candidate most pleasing to God to become the next Vicar of Christ on earth.  We, the faithful, must enter this historical papal election process by praying to the Holy Spirit that He will descend upon the conclave for the choice most pleasing to Jesus and most beneficial for the Church and for the world today.

Beginning March 1, 2013, the first day when the Chair of Peter will be vacant, I encourage you to join in this Worldwide Novena for the Election of the Next Holy Father. Please join Catholic brothers and sisters the world over in the daily praying the Novena Prayer below (or any other prayer to the Holy Spirit that you may prefer) that the Holy Spirit may truly inspire the hearts of the cardinals of the conclave to choose the man that Jesus wants to guide the Church at this precise moment of human history.  This Conclave Novena will end on the day the Church and the world hears the words, “Habemus Papam!” (“We have a Pope!”).

Conclave Novena Prayer:

Lord Jesus Christ, Son of the Father, send down your Spirit over the conclave.  Let the Holy Spirit inspire the hearts of the cardinals, that they may choose the man most pleasing to You, as Successor of Peter and Your Vicar on Earth.  May Mary, Your Mother and Mother of the Church, be our Advocate.  Amen.

Dr. Mark Miravalle
Professor of Theology and Mariology
Franciscan University of Steubenville

The post Worldwide Novena for the Election of the Next Holy Father appeared first on Mother of All Peoples.

In a Latin letter dated January 10, 2013, in which the Pope designates Archbishop Zygmunt Zimowski (President of the Pontifical Council for Health Pastoral Care) as his representative for the February 11 2013 World Day of the Sick Celebration, Benedict XVI invokes Mary as the “Mediatrix of all graces” (Mediatricis omnium gratiarum). In doing so, the Holy Father continues a consistent line of explicit papal teaching of this Marian doctrine which goes back for over two centuries.

It is significant that Pope Benedict’s reference to Mary as the Mediatrix of all graces would be released on the very day that he would shock the world with his historic resignation announcement. Although it was the Holy Father’s first use of the Mediatrix of all graces term, it was not his first time to teach the Mediatrix of all graces doctrine.

On May 11, 2007 at the canonization of the Brazilian Franciscan, Fr. Antonio de Sant’ana Galvao, O.F.M., Pope Benedict used a formulation regarding the “necessary” role of Mary’s mediating of all graces that reminds one great Marian authors such as St. Louis Marie Grignion de Montfort, or St. Maximilian Kolbe: “There is no fruit of grace in the history of salvation that does not have as its necessary instrument the mediation of Our Lady.” The Pontiff reiterates this Marian doctrine when he continues: “Let us give thanks to God the Father, to God the Son, to God the Holy Spirit from whom, through the intercession of the Virgin Mary, we receive all the blessings from heaven.” (Benedict XVI, Homily of Canonization, May 11, 2007, n. 5).

Some news commentary on Pope Benedict’s momentous Marian reference may have given the impression that the doctrine and title of Mediatrix of all graces had not been taught by any pope since the time before the Second Vatican Council. While it is true that the Marian doctrine had been officially and consistently taught by the popes from the late 18^th century up to the time of Vatican II, it is also true that Blessed John Paul II repeatedly referred to the Mother of Jesus as the “Mediatrix of all graces” and has prolifically taught the doctrine of Our Lady’s “Maternal Mediation” throughout his extraordinary Marian pontificate.

Here are a few examples (among numerous others) of the popes before Vatican II who officially taught the doctrine of the Blessed Virgin Mary as the Mediatrix of all graces:

Benedict XIV: Mary is like “a celestial stream through which the flow of all graces and gifts reach [us]” (1750)

Pius VII: “Dispensatrix of all graces” (1806)

Pius IX: “For God has committed to Mary the treasury of all good things, in order that everyone may know that through her are obtained every hope, every grace, and all salvation.” (Ineffabilis Deus, 1854).

Leo XIII: “It is right to say that nothing of all of the immense treasury of every grace which the Lord accumulate –nothing is imparted to us except through Mary…(Encyclical, Octobri mense, 1891).

Saint Pius X: “Fromthis union of will and suffering between Christ and Mary‘she merited to become most worthily the reparatrix of the lost world’ and dispensatrix of all the gifts that our Savior purchased for us by his death and by his blood (Ad Diem Illum, February 2, 1904).

Pius XII: He, the Son of God, gave His heavenly Mother a share in His glory, His majesty, His kingship; because, associated as Mother and Minister to the King of martyrs in the ineffable work of man’s Redemption, she is likewise associated with Him forever, with power so to speak infinite, in the distribution of the graces which flow from the Redemption (Radio Message of 13 May 1946 on the occasion of the crowning of the statue of Our Lady of Fatima).

This consistent papal teaching and precedent before the Council provides us with the proper context in which to interpret and understand the Second Vatican Council’s teaching on Mary’s role as Mediatrix:

Thus in a wholly singular way, she cooperated by her obedience, faith, hope and buring charity in the work of the savior in restoring supernatural life to souls. For this reason she is a mother to us in the order of grace…

This motherhood of Mary in the order of grace continues uninterruptedly from the consent which she loyally gave at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation. By her maternal charity, she cares for the brethren of her Son who still journey on earth surrounded by dangers and difficulties, until they are led into their blessed home. Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix. This, however, is so understood that it neither takes away anything from nor adds anything to the dignity and efficacy of Christ the one Mediator (Lumen Gentium,61, 62).

Now let us briefly look at Blessed John Paul II’s seven usages of the Mediatrix of all graces title¹:

1. Papal Address to the General Council, Superiors, and Directors of the Italian Institutes of St. Joseph, December 1, 1978:

We cannot conclude without addressing the Blessed Virgin, so loved and venerated by Murialdo, who had recourse to her as the Universal Mediatrix of all grace (Inseg I (1978) 250.

2. Papal exhortation to seminarians at the Basilica of Our Lady of Graces in Brescia, September 27, 1982:

Entrust yourselves always with great confidence to Mary Immaculate, dispenser of every grace, to whom this fine seminary of yours is dedicated (ORE 755:8).

3. Angelus Address of 17 January 1988:

Another center of Marian devotion worthy of mention is the Church dedicated to Our Lady in Meadi, on the outskirts of Cairo, on the banks of the Nile…It is entrusted to the Coptic-Orthodox Christians, and many pilgrims continuously come to this sanctuary to entrust their intentions to the Mediatrix of all graces (Inseg XI/1 (1988) 119 (ORE 1023:5).

4. Papal homily for the Octave of Easter, 10 April 1988, in the Roman parish of Mary, Mother of the Redeemer:

In this Marian Year, your parish, which is placed under the patronage of Mary, Mother of the Redeemer, Redemptoris Mater, has an extra reason for renewing and strengthening its own devotion towards her, the Mediatrix of all graces, our Advocatewith her Son Jesus and the Help of Christians (ORE 1036:11).

5. Papal Address at the Shrine of Our Lady of Graces in Benevento on 2 July 1990:

With loving intuition from ancient times you have been able to grasp the mystery of Mary, as Mediatrix of all graces, because she is the Mother of the very Author of Grace, Jesus Christ (ORE 1148:2)..

6. Papal address to the General Chapter of the Mercedarian Sisters of Charity, June 28, 1996,

May she, true Ark of the New Covenant and Mediatrix of all graces, teach you to love him as she loved him (ORE 1451:5).

7. Papal Mass celebrated for Polish pilgrims, 25 August 2001:

When we celebrate the Holy Mass, the Mother of the Son of God is in our midst and introduces us to the mystery of His redemptive sacrifice. Thus, she is the mediatrix of all the grace flowing from this sacrifice to the Church and to all the faithful(ORE 1707:1

The Totus Tuus Pontiff repeatedly used the Mediatrix of all graces title and taught the doctrine, in echo of the popes of the preconcilar Papal Magisterium, and in proper interpretation and development of the teachings of Vatican II.

Why was Pope Benedict’s letter invoking the Mediatrix of all graces released on the same day of the announcement of his resignation? Perhaps only the Pope himself could answer this question. Nonetheless, Pope Benedict’s invocation does set the stage for his successor to continue this inspired Papal Tradition, and perhaps to bring it to its proper crowning development in a solemn definition. The Church movement for the fifth Marian Dogma of Mary’s universal mediation was initiated almost 100 years ago in 1915 by the great Belgian prelate, Cardinal Desire Mercier. The time seems ripe.

Every Marian Dogma has brought with it extraordinary graces for the Church and, thereby, for the entire world. May the dogmatic crowning of Mary, Mediatrix of all graces come soon, with its accompanying Marian roles of Co-redemptrix and Advocate), for the proper honor of the Mother, and for the historic graces of redemption and peace that the Church and the world will receive and—presently–so desperately need.

The post Pope Benedict Invokes “Mediatrix of All Graces” at End of his Pontificate appeared first on Mother of All Peoples.