Skojec and Dogma - Part 2 The Issue

  +

JMJ

The Issue

Recently, he got triggering into an argument on Dogma and this I think is the first time I’ve seen him discuss and grapple with the real reasons he left the Faith.

So … on X somebody espoused an opinion supporting the declaration of the “Fifth Marian Dogma”. Which is the theological theory that the Blessed Virgin Mary acts as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix of All Graces (link – EWTN). I had always believed these to be two separate doctrines, so I did a quick check in Ott’s “Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma”.

Under Chapter 2 The Privileges of the Mother of God, we find the dogmas (ie De Fide teachings):

1. Mary is truly the Mother of God

2. Mary was conceived without stain of original sin (Pius IX 1854)

3. Mary conceived by the Holy Ghost without the co-operation of man.

4. Mary bore her Son without any violation of her virginal integrity.

5. Also after the Birth of Jesus, Mary remained a Virgin

6. Mary was assumed body and soul into Heaven (Pius XII 1950)

So … there are already 6 dogmas regarding Our Lady … so this with be the seventh not fifth.

Ott goes on to explain that “Mary is designated mediatrix of all graces in a double sense”:

• Mary gave the Redeemer, the Source of all graces, to the world, and in this way she is the channel of all graces. (Sent Certa)

• Since Mary’s Assumption into Heaven no grace is conferred on man without her actual intercessory co-operation (Sent. Pio et probabilis)

Recently a document from the Dicastery of the Doctrine of the Faith casts some criticism on these two latter theological points.

22. Given the necessity of explaining Mary’s subordinate role to Christ in the work of Redemption, it would not be appropriate to use the title “Co-redemptrix” to define Mary’s cooperation. This title risks obscuring Christ’s unique salvific mediation and can therefore create confusion and an imbalance in the harmony of the truths of the Christian faith, for “there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12). When an expression requires many, repeated explanations to prevent it from straying from a correct meaning, it does not serve the faith of the People of God and becomes unhelpful. In this case, the expression “Co-redemptrix” does not help extol Mary as the first and foremost collaborator in the work of Redemption and grace, for it carries the risk of eclipsing the exclusive role of Jesus Christ — the Son of God made man for our salvation, who was the only one capable of offering the Father a sacrifice of infinite value — which would not be a true honor to his Mother. Indeed, as the “handmaid of the Lord” (Lk 1:38), Mary directs us to Christ and asks us to “do whatever he tells you” (Jn 2:5). (Link: Mater Populi Fidelis)

Interestingly, Rorate added the following note to this post:

The papal approval is at the end of the document, right before the endnotes. Interesting that Leo XIV approved the note, but not “in forma specifica” — which would make it an actual papal teaching demanding high assent of the faithful.

So, if this is correct, the question is not settled and remains open for discussion and pius belief. Even if it was set aside for ecumenical reasons:

The Second Vatican Council refrained from using the title for dogmatic, pastoral, and ecumenical reasons.

P^3