1. Felicific Forest
    Joined
    15 Dec '02
    Moves
    23682
    14 Mar '05 20:11
    The Fifth and last Marian Dogma:

    ‘The Lady Of All Nations’

    ‘Co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix and Advocate.’



    http://www.post1.com/home/mary/

    http://www.voxpopuli.org/contemporary_insights.php



    The Holy See, Pope John Paul II

    Piazza del S Uffizio, 1100193, Vatican City,

    Rome, Italy.

    Dear Holy Father: Pope John Paul II.

    May Our Blessed Lady continue to envelope you, whom we love, with Her Holy Mantle.

    From the Spring of 1945, until May, 1959, Our Blessed Lady appeared to Ida Peerdeman, of Amsterdam. During the course of fifty six apparitions, Our Lady asked to be called ‘The Lady Of All Nations. Co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix and Advocate’. This She said would become ‘the last Dogma in Marian History’.

    As to the authenticity of the apparitions, Our Blessed Lady refrained from public tangible miracles or signs. Instead, Our Lady said that the authenticity would become clearer, in the messages themselves. Today, we see that many prophecies contained in the messages, given to Ida, have come true.

    On April 22, 1984, following an eleven year investigation; Rome embraced with Her approval, the miracles and apparitions that took place in Akita, Japan. The approved miracles took place on a 3ft carved statue of ‘The Lady Of All Nations’.

    On May 31, 1996; His Excellency Hendrik Bomers, Bishop of Haarlem, gave his nihil obstat, approving devotion to ‘The Lady Of All Nations.’

    In the messages given to Ida Peerdeman, Our Blessed Lady says "Ask the Holy Father for this Dogma." With full loyalty to Rome and in obedience to Our Blessed Mother, I ask that Our Lady, Mary, be crowned as:

    ‘The Lady Of All Nations’

    ‘Co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix and Advocate.’

    Yours Faithfully.

    http://www.post1.com/home/mary/petition1.htm



    "Lord Jesus Christ, Son of the Father, send now Your Spirit over the earth. Let the Holy Spirit live in the hearts of all nations, that they may be preserved from degeneration, disaster and war. May the Lady of All Nations, who once was Mary, be our Advocate. Amen.”
  2. Standard memberRBHILL
    Acts 13:48
    California
    Joined
    21 May '03
    Moves
    223256
    14 Mar '05 20:20
    Originally posted by ivanhoe
    The Fifth and last Marian Dogma:

    ‘The Lady Of All Nations’

    ‘Co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix and Advocate.’



    http://www.post1.com/home/mary/

    http://www.voxpopuli.org/contemporary_insights.php



    The Holy See, Pope John Paul II

    Piazza del S Uffizio, 1100193, Vatican City,

    Rome, Italy.

    Dear Holy Father: Pope John Paul II.

    May Our Blesse ...[text shortened]... ation, disaster and war. May the Lady of All Nations, who once was Mary, be our Advocate. Amen.”
    You can have Mary as your Advocate, but I will follow what the Bible says not what a person says. Jesus is the only one between God and man to talk to.
  3. Standard memberDarfius
    The Apologist
    Joined
    22 Dec '04
    Moves
    41172
    14 Mar '05 20:25
    Originally posted by ivanhoe
    The Fifth and last Marian Dogma:

    ‘The Lady Of All Nations’

    ‘Co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix and Advocate.’



    http://www.post1.com/home/mary/

    http://www.voxpopuli.org/contemporary_insights.php



    The Holy See, Pope John Paul II

    Piazza del S Uffizio, 1100193, Vatican City,

    Rome, Italy.

    Dear Holy Father: Pope John Paul II.

    May Our Blesse ...[text shortened]... ation, disaster and war. May the Lady of All Nations, who once was Mary, be our Advocate. Amen.”
    Do you honestly agree with this blasphemy??
  4. Joined
    05 Jan '04
    Moves
    45179
    14 Mar '05 20:30
    Originally posted by ivanhoe
    The Fifth and last Marian Dogma:

    ‘The Lady Of All Nations’

    ‘Co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix and Advocate.’



    http://www.post1.com/home/mary/

    http://www.voxpopuli.org/contemporary_insights.php



    The Holy See, Pope John Paul II

    Piazza del S Uffizio, 1100193, Vatican City,

    Rome, Italy.

    Dear Holy Father: Pope John Paul II.

    May Our Blesse ...[text shortened]... ation, disaster and war. May the Lady of All Nations, who once was Mary, be our Advocate. Amen.”
    Disgusting Catholic Blasphemer!!!!
  5. Felicific Forest
    Joined
    15 Dec '02
    Moves
    23682
    14 Mar '05 20:31
    Originally posted by Darfius
    Do you honestly agree with this blasphemy??

    Why is the fifth and last Marian dogma blasphemy ?
  6. Felicific Forest
    Joined
    15 Dec '02
    Moves
    23682
    14 Mar '05 20:32
    Originally posted by darvlay
    Disgusting Catholic Blasphemer!!!!

    😳 🙄
  7. Joined
    05 Jan '04
    Moves
    45179
    14 Mar '05 20:42
    Originally posted by ivanhoe

    😳 🙄
    😵😛😵
  8. Standard memberDarfius
    The Apologist
    Joined
    22 Dec '04
    Moves
    41172
    14 Mar '05 22:10
    Bump for my friend Nemesio.
  9. Standard memberNemesio
    Ursulakantor
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Joined
    05 Mar '02
    Moves
    32455
    15 Mar '05 03:33
    Originally posted by Darfius
    Bump for my friend Nemesio.
    I can't find a Scriptural defense for 'Co-Redemptrix,' Ivanhoe. I see no theological
    problem with Mediatrix or Advocate; there is no heresy there. Others may find no
    theological merit in the position, but they cannot argue that it contradicts Scripture
    (although they try to, anyway). But, theologically, since early Christianity, there
    has always been One Redeemer.

    Would you care to elaborate?

    Nemesio
  10. Felicific Forest
    Joined
    15 Dec '02
    Moves
    23682
    15 Mar '05 04:234 edits
    Originally posted by Nemesio
    I can't find a Scriptural defense for 'Co-Redemptrix,' Ivanhoe. I see no theological
    problem with Mediatrix or Advocate; there is no heresy there. Others may find no
    theological merit in the position, but they cannot argue that it co ...[text shortened]... ys been One Redeemer.

    Would you care to elaborate?

    Nemesio
    If you want theological reasons for calling Mary co-redemtrix you'll find many sites dealing with this issue. Mary is co-redemtrix in the way that we Christians are all co-redeemers, or at least should be.

    The fifth and last Marian dogma will grant Mary the titles "Lady of all Nations", Co-Redemtrix, Mediatrix and Advocate.

    You can find the theological basis on this site I hope (I haven't studied it )

    http://www.voxpopuli.org/contemporary_insights.php

    The apparitions recieved by Ida Peerdeman of Amsterdam also play an important role in the developments regarding the fifth Marian dogma as well as events in Japan and much much more .....

    http://www.ladyofallnations.org/ida.htm

    http://www.ladyofallnations.org/akitahx.htm

    homepage: http://www.ladyofallnations.org/index.htm



  11. Standard memberNemesio
    Ursulakantor
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Joined
    05 Mar '02
    Moves
    32455
    15 Mar '05 04:491 edit
    Originally posted by ivanhoe
    If you want theological reasons for calling Mary co-redemtrix you'll find many sites dealing with this issue. Mary is co-redemtrix in the way that we Christians are all co-redeemers, or at least should be.

    The fifth and last Marian dog ...[text shortened]... htm

    homepage: http://www.ladyofallnations.org/index.htm



    Interesting stuff. There is a lot of incoherent double-talk on that site (what I call
    touchy-feely theology with no pith), but there are a few good articles. I think that
    this article was the most successful at explaining the stance:

    http://www.voxpopuli.org/cifiles/Calkins_first_article.doc

    In short, for the RC-antagonists out there, the stance is this: the word
    'Co-Redemptrix' derives from the Latin, meaning 'cum redemptor,' that
    is 'with the Redeemer.' This does not imply nor suggest equality, as there
    is only One Redeemer in the RC Church. It uses the analogy of Adam and
    Eve; Adam is the head of Eve and the head of the family, but that does not
    mean that Eve is inconsequental. Similarly, while Christ is head of the
    faithful, and Mary, as a member of the faithful, is subordinate to Him.
    However, as 'the most blessed among women,' and demonstrably having
    a special place in heaven as a result, her earthly role as Theotokos
    leads naturally to an important medating role in heaven; as Christ's first
    and last advocate in His pre-Resurrection ministry, so too is she active
    in Heaven as Mediatrix.

    In truth, Ivanhoe, if I had a vested interest in this, I would be worried about
    the 'slippery slope.' Co-Redemptrix may derive from 'with the Redeemer,'
    but I think that it isn't unreasonable to believe that it would come to mean
    'equal to the Redeemer' in short order, which is a dangerous and heretical
    theological point of view.

    Interesting stuff. I've never really known much about this. I will discuss it
    with the Sister with whom I work, as she holds Mary in high esteem.

    Thanks Ivanhoe,
    Nemesio
  12. Hmmm . . .
    Joined
    19 Jan '04
    Moves
    22131
    15 Mar '05 04:55
    Originally posted by Nemesio
    I can't find a Scriptural defense for 'Co-Redemptrix,' Ivanhoe. I see no theological
    problem with Mediatrix or Advocate; there is no heresy there. Others may find no
    theological merit in the position, but they cannot argue that it contradicts Scripture
    (although they try to, anyway). But, theologically, since early Christianity, there
    has always been One Redeemer.

    Would you care to elaborate?

    Nemesio
    But is there a “Scriptural defense” for Mediatrix either? I’m not sure any kind of “sola scriptura” argument could be brought to bear vis a vis Roman Catholicism (except from outside, i.e. Protestants). I know a bit more about Orthodox tradition than RC tradition (which is not saying much), but it seems to me that some justification could be found in (or at least made from) Mary’s designation as theotokos, “God Bearer.”

    But, theologically, since early Christianity, there has always been One Redeemer.

    This is true, but again from an Orthodox point of view, this is not strictly a “theological” issue, but one of salvific “economy” (oikonomia). In Orthodoxy, these are clearly distinguished. Theology goes to the mystery of the Trinity and the essence of God (and the orthodox have a strong tradition of apophatic theology). If Mary were accorded status as fourth “hypostasis” of God, that would be considered heretical. But would that be a necessary outcome of “Co-Redemptrix?” (I think not.)

    I am arguing from Orthodoxy, but, prior to the Great Schism of 1054, both churches have the same apostolic heritage. Co-redemptrix might be a leap, but so was Mary’s designation as theotokos (which was hotly debated) and the filioque (the addition of “and the son” to the third article of the Nicene Creed in the West, which was the primary theological issue behind the Great Schism, but has become the creedal formulation for both Rome and the Protestants). The Orthodox still do not include the filioque, and though they never stated it was heretical, they argue that it has no scriptural or apostolic basis, and is bad theology.

    In any event, I am generally in favor of any enhanced “feminization” in either theology or oikonomia. (BTW, there are feminine images of God, and God-language in Scripture, particularly in the Hebrew.)

    NOTE: I wrote this before reading Nemesio's last post.
  13. Standard memberNemesio
    Ursulakantor
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Joined
    05 Mar '02
    Moves
    32455
    15 Mar '05 06:48
    Originally posted by vistesd
    But is there a “Scriptural defense” for Mediatrix either? I’m not sure any kind of “sola scriptura” argument could be brought to bear vis a vis Roman Catholicism (except from outside, i.e. Protestants). I know a bit more about Orthodox tradition than RC tradition (which is not saying much), but it seems to me that some justification could be found in (or at least made from) Mary’s designation as theotokos, “God Bearer.”

    Greetings, Uncle Stephen. I predict that, within 3 posts, this thread will become
    corrupted by anti-Roman commentary, so I will enjoy the discussion while it lasts.

    The Roman Catholic tradition has, over time, elevated Mary's status. In some cases,
    it was Scripturally warranted (i.e., as the most blessed among women). The notion
    of Mary's being sinless, for example, comes from loosely from Scripture:
    http://home.nyc.rr.com/mysticalrose/marian4.html

    The affirmation of this Doctrine in 1854 was made in coordination with the earlier
    developments with the Orthodox and Occidental Church. They built upon some of
    the earliest Doctrines (e.g., the theotokos). It is just a process of successive
    building. I don't see how the proper understanding of Mediatrix is heretical (although
    it not a necessary conclusion to be drawn from Scripture). Similarly, the proper
    understanding of 'Cum Redemptrix' as defined in the article I cited in my previous
    post (i.e., Chief Mediator with the Redeemer) would similarly be unnecessary, but I
    don't see as heretical.

    Your observation of the distinction between theology and salvific economy is a good
    one; it elucidates the different branches of 'God Talk;' naturally, the use of Mary as
    the fourth hypostasis would be absurd, and the article makes clear that this is not
    what 'Co-Redemptrix' means.

    However, as I said, as we have seen Mary ascending the signficance ladder, from
    Full of Grace, to Theotokos, to the Immaculate Conception, to the Assumption,
    to (potentially) the Co-Redemptrix, I worry about how much farther she will climb
    up. The oikonomical justifications for each of those get shakier and shakier, and,
    as such, I would be concerned that the next logical step would be 'Co-Equal with
    Jesus,' which is not all that far off.

    In any event, I am generally in favor of any enhanced “feminization” in either theology or oikonomia. (BTW, there are feminine images of God, and God-language in Scripture, particularly in the Hebrew.)

    I'm indifferent to 'feminization,' as I think that gender is utterly inapplicable to God.
    It would be interesting to start a thread on the 'Feminine Side of God,' though; RBHILL
    yelled at me once for referring to the Holy Spirit as a 'she,' as I recall.....

    Nemesio
Back to Top