Proffa tuossa alhaalla esitteli kivoja arvailuja "pyhästä nelinäisyydestä". Tässä kirjoituksessa, joka on noin 1940-luvulta, käsitellään Mariaa kanssalunastajattarena. Kirjoittaja en ole minä, enkä myöskään allekirjoita juttua sellaisenaan, mutta se antaa yhden näkökulman siitä, milläisena Mariaa voi tarkastella. Nauttikaa :)
* * *
THE CO-REDEMPTRIX
1. "If any man come to me, and hate not his father and mother and wife and children and brethen and sisters, yea and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple" (Luke 14:26). What Jesus is calling upon us to conquer is primarily, of course, whatever may be inordinate in the love of relations; and this may go further than is commonly thought. In any case the inordinate is the imperfect. The saints have eyes especially sharp for the discovery of imperfection, and they have followed these words of Our Lord with a docility that is frightening.
The prescriptions of the Gospel, repeated by the Saints, must be taken without any attempt at watering-down. They do not, of course, bear upon the ontological reality of love: we are not meant to destroy in ourselves all feelings of filial affection and become hard and cold of heart. They bear upon the element of self that may be mingled with filial affection. We must keep no corner of our heart for ourselves. We must give our heart to God without reserve.
Then God Himself, master of our dearest feelings, will make us love our kinsfolk as we ought. The first uprooting of affection would be merely inhuman; the uprooting God wants of us is superhuman.
The blessed Virgin had from the first moment given every movement of her heart to God. In the very instant of the Incarnation she had renounced without reserve every possible element of self in her love for her Child. The ever more agonizing sacrifices demanded of her were not with the object of purifying her from the imperfections of her love, for there was in her no shadow of imperfection. Their sole end was to associate her with the redemptive suffering of her Son.
The suffering of Jesus was not directed to His purification but to the redemption of the world. The sufferings of the Immaculate Virgin likewise were not for her purification: she could unite them with the sufferings that Jesus bore for the salvation of men. In this sense they were co-redemptive.
2. We must see both the likeness and the difference between the sufferings of Jesus and Mary.
First, note that Jesus' sufferings could not increase grace in His soul, whereas Mary's sufferings merited for her a progressive elevation in charity. But above all, note that His sufferings and hers were not redemptive in the same sense.
The sufferings of Jesus were the sufferings of One whom God had constituted the unique head of all humanity. Because of this, they were primarily and themselves redemptive. Further, by reason of the infinite dignity of the person of Jesus, they had an infinite value; they constituted a superabundant atonement for the sins of all men and all ages.
The sufferings of Our Lady, needless to say, had only a finite value. Further, all their redemptive efficacy comes to them from the sufferings of Jesus. They are redemptive only secondarily and by participation. Jesus so loved the Virgin, made her so like to Himself, that He willed to communicate to her material sufferings something of the worth of His own; He willed that hers should be mingled with His and reckoned with His in compensation for the iniquity of men. God acts in a similar fashion, though to a lesser degree, in regard to very great saints whom He calls to suffer for the sins of others. St. Paul says that he rejoiced in his sufferings for the Colossians, adding the mysterious words, "And fill up those things that are wanting of the sufferings of Christ, in my flesh, for his body, which is the church" (Col. 1:24).
The Com-passion of Our Lady is thus united to the Passion of Our Lord in reparation for the sins of the whole world.
3. Nor is that all. The Compassion of Our Lady is united to the Passion of Our Lord to merit the salvation of the whole world. Remember what merit is.
When man, acting freely under the divine motion, achieves that towards which God, in pure goodness, had destined him, we say there is merit. Then if one considers the divine motion which proportions man to his goal, the merit is due in justice - it is called strict merit, condign merit; if one considers the consent of the free will moved by grace, it will be seen as suitable that God should grant his favours to the man who accepts the divine motion; this is the merit of congruity, not due strict justice but founded upon the divine generosity and friendship.
In consequence, when a man under the motion of grace suffers for justice he becomes, if we consider the motion of grace, worthy to receive eternal salvation; and if we consider the consent of his free will it is fitting that God, by a condescension of friendship, should grant him his just desires, for example the conversion of those he loves, provided these do not offer resistance to divine grace.
Thus when Our Lady, under the impulse of love, suffered with Christ, she became, if we consider the impulse that came from heaven, worthy to receive the salvation that came from heaven; and if we consider the consent of her free will, it was further fitting that God, by His liberality, should grant her profoundest desire which was the desire of her Son, namely the salvation of the world. Thus the Virgin merited de condigno her own salvation, de congruo the world's salvation. It is accurate to say in this sense that she laboured to merit for us the grace of redemption.
Yet Christ merited for us in a manner altogether higher. He was constituted head of the great body formed by the human race. All that He did under the permanent impulsion of love rendered Him worthy in justice to obtain salvation for all those who are called to become members of His body - that is for all men. Thus He merited eternal life for us, not simply by a merit of congruity but by condign merit: that this merit may be applied to us, it only needs that we should not resist the grace that God sends us for our incorporation with Christ. Christ, and only Christ, has thus merited redemptive grace for us de condigno.
Thus we see how Our Lady can be called Co-Redemptress, but only Christ can be called Redeemer.
This glorious title of Co-Redemptress, and that of Mediatrix of all graces, which it implies, have been given her by the latest popes. On February 2nd, 1904, Pius X wrote in the encyclical Ad diem: "In virtue of the communion of sorrows and of will which attached her to Christ, Mary wanted to become the worthy Reparatrix of the fallen world, and in consequence the Dispenser of all the graces Jesus acquired for us by His bloody death... Because she surpasses all other creatures by her sanctity and by her union with Christ, and because she was called by Christ to participate in the work of our salvation, she merits for us de congruo, as the expression is, what Christ has merited for us de condigno, and she is the first steward in the dispensing of graces."
Benedict XV writes similarly, March 22nd, 1918: "When her Son suffered and died, she so to say suffered and died with Him, renouncing for the salvation of men and the appeasement of the justice of God her maternal rights over her Son - and immolating her Son, as much as in her lay, so that we are entitled to say that she, with Christ, has redeemed the human race."
And Pius XI writes, February 2nd, 1923: "The Virgin of Sorrows participated with Christ in the work of the Redemption." The actual word Co-Redemptrix appears in two decrees of the Holy Office, dated June 26th, 1913, and January 22nd, 1914.
The consent Our Lady gave to the mystery of the Cross was already contained in the "Fiat" she had uttered to the angel.
Speaking of this totally free acceptance Leo XIII quotes the great sentence of St. Thomas Aquinas according to which at the instant of the Annunciation, God waited for the Virgin to utter the consent of the human race in its entirety; and he adds that in consequence none of that immense treasure of grace and truth which the Lord has brought us is communicated to us apart from Mary. He calls her our Mediatrix with the Mediator.
As we may see, the mystery of the Redemption stands in the Church like a great tree of doctrine which never ceases to flower.
* * *
THE CO-REDEMPTRIX
1. "If any man come to me, and hate not his father and mother and wife and children and brethen and sisters, yea and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple" (Luke 14:26). What Jesus is calling upon us to conquer is primarily, of course, whatever may be inordinate in the love of relations; and this may go further than is commonly thought. In any case the inordinate is the imperfect. The saints have eyes especially sharp for the discovery of imperfection, and they have followed these words of Our Lord with a docility that is frightening.
The prescriptions of the Gospel, repeated by the Saints, must be taken without any attempt at watering-down. They do not, of course, bear upon the ontological reality of love: we are not meant to destroy in ourselves all feelings of filial affection and become hard and cold of heart. They bear upon the element of self that may be mingled with filial affection. We must keep no corner of our heart for ourselves. We must give our heart to God without reserve.
Then God Himself, master of our dearest feelings, will make us love our kinsfolk as we ought. The first uprooting of affection would be merely inhuman; the uprooting God wants of us is superhuman.
The blessed Virgin had from the first moment given every movement of her heart to God. In the very instant of the Incarnation she had renounced without reserve every possible element of self in her love for her Child. The ever more agonizing sacrifices demanded of her were not with the object of purifying her from the imperfections of her love, for there was in her no shadow of imperfection. Their sole end was to associate her with the redemptive suffering of her Son.
The suffering of Jesus was not directed to His purification but to the redemption of the world. The sufferings of the Immaculate Virgin likewise were not for her purification: she could unite them with the sufferings that Jesus bore for the salvation of men. In this sense they were co-redemptive.
2. We must see both the likeness and the difference between the sufferings of Jesus and Mary.
First, note that Jesus' sufferings could not increase grace in His soul, whereas Mary's sufferings merited for her a progressive elevation in charity. But above all, note that His sufferings and hers were not redemptive in the same sense.
The sufferings of Jesus were the sufferings of One whom God had constituted the unique head of all humanity. Because of this, they were primarily and themselves redemptive. Further, by reason of the infinite dignity of the person of Jesus, they had an infinite value; they constituted a superabundant atonement for the sins of all men and all ages.
The sufferings of Our Lady, needless to say, had only a finite value. Further, all their redemptive efficacy comes to them from the sufferings of Jesus. They are redemptive only secondarily and by participation. Jesus so loved the Virgin, made her so like to Himself, that He willed to communicate to her material sufferings something of the worth of His own; He willed that hers should be mingled with His and reckoned with His in compensation for the iniquity of men. God acts in a similar fashion, though to a lesser degree, in regard to very great saints whom He calls to suffer for the sins of others. St. Paul says that he rejoiced in his sufferings for the Colossians, adding the mysterious words, "And fill up those things that are wanting of the sufferings of Christ, in my flesh, for his body, which is the church" (Col. 1:24).
The Com-passion of Our Lady is thus united to the Passion of Our Lord in reparation for the sins of the whole world.
3. Nor is that all. The Compassion of Our Lady is united to the Passion of Our Lord to merit the salvation of the whole world. Remember what merit is.
When man, acting freely under the divine motion, achieves that towards which God, in pure goodness, had destined him, we say there is merit. Then if one considers the divine motion which proportions man to his goal, the merit is due in justice - it is called strict merit, condign merit; if one considers the consent of the free will moved by grace, it will be seen as suitable that God should grant his favours to the man who accepts the divine motion; this is the merit of congruity, not due strict justice but founded upon the divine generosity and friendship.
In consequence, when a man under the motion of grace suffers for justice he becomes, if we consider the motion of grace, worthy to receive eternal salvation; and if we consider the consent of his free will it is fitting that God, by a condescension of friendship, should grant him his just desires, for example the conversion of those he loves, provided these do not offer resistance to divine grace.
Thus when Our Lady, under the impulse of love, suffered with Christ, she became, if we consider the impulse that came from heaven, worthy to receive the salvation that came from heaven; and if we consider the consent of her free will, it was further fitting that God, by His liberality, should grant her profoundest desire which was the desire of her Son, namely the salvation of the world. Thus the Virgin merited de condigno her own salvation, de congruo the world's salvation. It is accurate to say in this sense that she laboured to merit for us the grace of redemption.
Yet Christ merited for us in a manner altogether higher. He was constituted head of the great body formed by the human race. All that He did under the permanent impulsion of love rendered Him worthy in justice to obtain salvation for all those who are called to become members of His body - that is for all men. Thus He merited eternal life for us, not simply by a merit of congruity but by condign merit: that this merit may be applied to us, it only needs that we should not resist the grace that God sends us for our incorporation with Christ. Christ, and only Christ, has thus merited redemptive grace for us de condigno.
Thus we see how Our Lady can be called Co-Redemptress, but only Christ can be called Redeemer.
This glorious title of Co-Redemptress, and that of Mediatrix of all graces, which it implies, have been given her by the latest popes. On February 2nd, 1904, Pius X wrote in the encyclical Ad diem: "In virtue of the communion of sorrows and of will which attached her to Christ, Mary wanted to become the worthy Reparatrix of the fallen world, and in consequence the Dispenser of all the graces Jesus acquired for us by His bloody death... Because she surpasses all other creatures by her sanctity and by her union with Christ, and because she was called by Christ to participate in the work of our salvation, she merits for us de congruo, as the expression is, what Christ has merited for us de condigno, and she is the first steward in the dispensing of graces."
Benedict XV writes similarly, March 22nd, 1918: "When her Son suffered and died, she so to say suffered and died with Him, renouncing for the salvation of men and the appeasement of the justice of God her maternal rights over her Son - and immolating her Son, as much as in her lay, so that we are entitled to say that she, with Christ, has redeemed the human race."
And Pius XI writes, February 2nd, 1923: "The Virgin of Sorrows participated with Christ in the work of the Redemption." The actual word Co-Redemptrix appears in two decrees of the Holy Office, dated June 26th, 1913, and January 22nd, 1914.
The consent Our Lady gave to the mystery of the Cross was already contained in the "Fiat" she had uttered to the angel.
Speaking of this totally free acceptance Leo XIII quotes the great sentence of St. Thomas Aquinas according to which at the instant of the Annunciation, God waited for the Virgin to utter the consent of the human race in its entirety; and he adds that in consequence none of that immense treasure of grace and truth which the Lord has brought us is communicated to us apart from Mary. He calls her our Mediatrix with the Mediator.
As we may see, the mystery of the Redemption stands in the Church like a great tree of doctrine which never ceases to flower.
Vastaukset 1
Vanhimmat
Voi KISSA sun kanssas, kun pakotat meidät kahlaamaan tuollaista jättipostia.
Tässä sama siistittynä:
The suffering of Jesus was not directed to His purification but to the redemption of the world. The sufferings of the Immaculate Virgin ......she could unite them with the sufferings that Jesus bore for the salvation of men. In this sense they were co-redemptive.
Jesus so loved the Virgin, made her so like to Himself (!!!!!!!) , that .......He willed that hers should be mingled with His and reckoned with His in compensation for the iniquity of men.
The Com-passion of Our Lady is thus united to the Passion of Our Lord in reparation for the sins of the whole world.
The Compassion of Our Lady is united to the Passion of Our Lord to merit the salvation of the whole world.
God, by His liberality, should grant her profoundest desire which was the desire of her Son, namely the salvation of the world. .......... It is accurate to say in this sense that she laboured to merit for us the grace of redemption.
Thus we see how Our Lady can be called Co-Redemptress, but only Christ can be called Redeemer.
This glorious title of Co-Redemptress, and that of Mediatrix of all graces,............have been given her by the latest popes.
On February 2nd, 1904, Pius X wrote in the encyclical Ad diem:
"......Mary wanted to become the worthy Reparatrix of the fallen world, and in consequence the Dispenser of all the graces Jesus acquired for us by His bloody death...... Because she surpasses all other creatures by her sanctity and by her union with Christ (!!!!) , and because she was called by Christ to participate in the work of our salvation (!!!!) .......
Benedict XV writes similarly, March 22nd, 1918: "When her Son suffered and died, she..... suffered and died with Him, renouncing for the salvation of men ......her maternal rights over her Son - and immolating her Son,......so that we are entitled to say that she, with Christ, has redeemed the human race."
Leo XIII quotes ...... St. Thomas Aquinas :... at the instant of the Annunciation, God waited for the Virgin to utter the consent of the human race in its entirety; and he adds that ... none of that immense treasure of grace and truth which the Lord has brought us, is communicated to us apart from Mary. He calls her our Mediatrix with the Mediator.
As we may see, the mystery of the Redemption stands in the Church like a great tree of doctrine which never ceases to flower.
Juuri niin. Ja nyt vuosituhannen vaihdetta ennen on jokin viimeisin kukkanen puhjennut, mutta mikä se oli? Olin viimeksi itse Roomassa Juhlavuonna 2000, mutta en muistanut ottaa selvää.
Post Scriptum:
" The consent Our Lady gave to the mystery of the Cross was already contained in the "Fiat" she had uttered to the angel. "
On se jännää että hänelle tuli silloin mieleen
Fabriccio Italiana Automobili di Torino...