 |
| Author | Post |
|---|
Kayla
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jul 30th, 2007 |
| Location: | Emmitsburg, Maryland USA |
| Posts: | 369 |
| First Name: | Kayla | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Atheist, kind-of Mormon, Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jan 31st, 2008 11:43 pm |
|
((I couldn't decide which subject this should go into, considering that it deals with our Blessed Mother, eschatology, and the late JPII. Feel free to move it, mods, if you see a better placing.))
I would like to quote an exerpt from the document Redemptoris Mater: On the Blessed Virgin Mary in the life of the Pilgrim Church.
The circumstances which now moves me to take up this subject once more is the prospect of the year 2000, now drawing near, in which the Bimillennial Jubilee of the birth of Jesus Christ at the same time directs our gaze towards hi Mother. In recent years, various opinions have been voiced suggesting that it would be fitting to precede that anniversary by a similar Jubilee in celebration of the birth of Mary.
In fact, even though it is not possible to establish an exact chronological point for identifying the date of Mary's birth, the Church has constantly been aware that Mary appeared on the horizon of salvation history before Christ. It is a fact when "the fullness of time" was definitively drawing near- the saving advent of Emmanuel- she who was from eternity destined to be his Mother already existed on earth. The fact that she "preceded" the coming of Christ is reflected every year in the liturgy of Advent. Therefore, if to that ancient historical expectation of the Savior we compare these years which are bringing us closer to the end of the second Millennium after Christ and to the beginning of the third, it becomes fully comprehensible that in this present period we wish to turn in a special way to her, the one who in the "night" of the Advent expectation began to shine like a true "Morning Star". For just as this star, together with the "dawn," precedes the rising of the sun, so Mary from the time of her Immaculate Conception preceded the coming of the Savior, the rising of the "Sun of Justice" in the history of the human race.
We were discussing these two paragraphs in Militia Immaculata last night. I know that the end times is unknown to us all, but it seemed to us, at least, that the Holy Father was alluding to a necessity of a "return" to the Blessed Mother, who precedes Christ.
What do you all make of this?
____________________
I believe, Lord, help my unbelief.
Jesus, I trust in You!
There's not a lot of job security for us after death. I suppose that's one advantage of being a philosopher. - Peter Kreeft
http://kayla23mount.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
CajunRick
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Houma, Louisiana USA |
| Posts: | 5310 |
| First Name: | Rick (& Kermie) | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Lifetime Catholic, Latin Rite |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 1st, 2008 03:34 am |
|
Kayla wrote: What do you all make of this?
I see a much simpler meaning than I think you do.
1. The "salvation event" is the life of Jesus.
2. Mary is a vital part of the "salvation event".
3. Mary was present (that is, physically existed on earth in human form) before Jesus.
4. Advent recognizes the contribution of Mary in the "salvation event".
At the time of the release of this encyclical, there was a movement in the Church to grant Mary official titles as "Co-Redemptrix" and "Co-Mediatrix". The Holy Father rejected these attempts by inaction. He did not make an ex cathedra pronouncement of Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Co=Mediatrix. Instead, he reminded the world that the Church recognizes the vital contribution of Mary to salvation history as inseparable from that of Christ. He did not elevate her (as some desired or would have interpreted) to a place equal to that of Jesus; instead, he reminded us that the Church already acknowledges Mary's unique and vital role. She is the Mother of God and the Queen of Heaven. Additional actions and titles are unnecessary. A separate year to honor the second millennium of her birth is unnecessary since her role in salvation history is inseparable from that of her Son, and the celebration of the second millennium of his birth honors her as well.
I see no reference at all to end times, or a second coming of Mary in any way, shape, or form. Jesus has been called the "Morning Star" by the Church since its earliest days.
At the Easter Vigil, the priest enters the church carrying the Easter (Paschal) candle and sings three times, "Christ our Light". We respond, "Thanks be to God". Then the priest incenses the candle and sings the Easter Proclamation, the Exsultet. Here is a brief excerpt, from memory:
"May the Morning Star which never sets find this flame still burning: Christ that Morning Star who came back from the dead to shed his peaceful light on all mankind."
If Jesus is the Morning Star, then Mary is the preceding evening star. Her light brought forth his light. Salvation came to us in the physical body of Jesus through her womb. Her birth preceded his birth; her life preceded his life. It does not appear to me to be reference to the end of time, but the beginning of the New Covenant that will reach its final glory with his second coming.
I don’t think you've been to an Easter Vigil service yet, Kayla. Make sure you go this Holy Saturday and it will make more sense. It is the most beautiful, most solemn, most wonderful celebration of the year.
____________________
Understanding is the reward of faith. Therefore seek not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand. - Augustine
Rick Luquette
Luquette Lane
|
|
|
Kayla
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jul 30th, 2007 |
| Location: | Emmitsburg, Maryland USA |
| Posts: | 369 |
| First Name: | Kayla | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Atheist, kind-of Mormon, Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 1st, 2008 12:48 pm |
|
I didn't mean a second coming of Mary. I don't know, we were just discussing JPII and one of seminarians was talking about how JPII seemed to have a keen sense of history and what needed to be done and what not (think Communism). We really didn't go too far into it, because it's just an abstract thought that perhaps the Holy Father was indicating that before Christ comes again, there must be "revival" (of sorts, I guess) towards the Blessed Mother.
But you're probably right, it was probably too much of a read-in.
As for Easter Vigil-- that was the best Mass of my life.  I've definitely been to one of them.
____________________
I believe, Lord, help my unbelief.
Jesus, I trust in You!
There's not a lot of job security for us after death. I suppose that's one advantage of being a philosopher. - Peter Kreeft
http://kayla23mount.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
setapart
Member
| Joined: | Sat Jan 13th, 2007 |
| Location: | Austin, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 180 |
| First Name: | Bill | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Born Catholic, Non-Denominational Charismatic, Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 1st, 2008 02:34 pm |
|
Kayla,
It is very encouraging to see young people like you seeking God and wanting Him to be the main part of their lives. You are at a great location to take advantage of this opportunity in your life to continue to grow in the Faith.
Psa 128:2 You shall eat the fruit of the labor of your hands; you shall be blessed, and it shall be well with you.
Bill
____________________
But for you who fear my name, the Sun of Righteousness will rise with healing in his wings. And you will go free, leaping with joy like calves let out to pasture. Mal 4:2
|
|
|
Dave Armstrong
Network Apologist
| Joined: | Fri Nov 2nd, 2007 |
| Location: | Melvindale, Michigan USA |
| Posts: | 1657 |
| First Name: | Dave | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Evangelical (1977): Diverse Protestant Influences / Catholic in 1990 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 4th, 2008 08:23 pm |
|
Just a clarification on some of these Marian issues. Pope John Paul did not reject any additional titles for Mary as unnecessary, in the sense that they are ruled out for good. He is not necessarily "against" these things at all. He merely thought that the time had not yet come.
That's no different than the Church waiting all the way till 1950 to define the Assiumption of Mary as de fide, ex cathedra dogma, or till 1870 to define papal infallibility. Same thing. In both cases, the tradition was firmly entrenched. Mediatrix was a title used in Vatican II. The present Holy Father used the term Mediatrix in a homily of 1 January 2007. Pope John Paul II used the term Co-Redemptrix (or the conceptual equivalent) in his own writings. Here are some examples:
26 September 1986:
These devotions seek to direct our attention to Christ and to the role of his Mother in the mystery of Redemption . . .
We see symbolised in the heart of Mary her maternal love, her singular sanctity and her central role in the redemptive mission of her Son.
Our act of consecration refers ultimately to the heart of her Son, for as the Mother of Christ she is wholly united to his redemptive mission.
15 August 2001:
Paul's words that we have just heard in the Second Reading help us to understand the significance of the solemnity we are celebrating today. Christ's definitive victory over death, which came into the world because of Adam's sin, shines out in Mary, assumed into Heaven at the end of her earthly life. It was Christ, the "new" Adam, who conquered death, offering himself as a sacrifice on Calvary in loving obedience to the Father. In this way he redeemed us from the slavery of sin and evil. In the Virgin's triumph, the Church contemplates her whom the Father chose as the true Mother of his Only-begotten Son, closely associating her with the salvific plan of the Redemption.
Pope Benedict XVI stated similarly on 2 February 2006:
Bringing her Son to Jerusalem, the Virgin Mother offered him to God as a true Lamb who takes away the sins of the world. She held him out to Simeon and Anna as the proclamation of redemption; she presented him to all as a light for a safe journey on the path of truth and love.
But there is the matter of the right time to define something. JPII thought now wasn't the time for this. I agree with him. My position is precisely the same: the doctrine itself is firmly rooted in Catholic tradition, and there is nothing unCatholic in believing these things, but it is not yet time to define them as infallible at the very highest level.
For more on this issues see my Blessed Virgin Mary web page, second-to-last section: "Mediatrix." I defend the doctrine at great length and provide much relevant biblical data (for those of you reading this whose jaws are dropping in shock at such language and notions!).
____________________
I'm happy to offer whatever theological & personal assistance I can. My blog, Biblical Evidence for Catholicism, contains 2000+ papers & web pages (absolutely free) & 16 apologetic books (for sale):
http://www.biblicalcatholic.com/
|
|
|
Current time is 03:30 pm | |
|
|
|
|
|
