The hits just keep rolling in. Get this. An “expert” (I know people who know him) has clarified for us what the DDF doctrinal note about titles of the Blessed Virgin Mary mean. CNA has it. My emphases and comments.
Vatican expert: Co-Redemptrix title of Mary not absolutely prohibited
Monsignor Maurizio Gronchi, an expert consultant for the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith at the Vatican, clarified that the measure established last month regarding the use of the titles “Co-Redemptrix” and “Mediatrix” for the Virgin Mary is “not an absolute prohibition” and that these titles can still be used in popular piety, provided their meaning is understood.
“It’s not an absolute prohibition, but it will no longer be used in official documents or in the liturgy. [The 1962 Missale Romanum has in the appendix a formulary for a Mass on 8 May for Mary, Mediatrix of All Graces… just sayin’.] But if used in popular devotion, understanding its meaning, no one will be reprimanded for it,” [Whew! I was worried.] the expert said in an interview with “EWTN Noticias,” the Spanish-language broadcast edition of EWTN News.
The interview took place after the Nov. 4 publication of the doctrinal note “ Mother of the Faithful People” in which the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, led by Cardinal Víctor Fernández, [author of … well….] stated that the use of the title “Co-Redemptrix” is “always inappropriate” and encourages “special prudence” regarding the title “Mediatrix of All Graces.” The text has sparked controversy among the faithful, especially among those who use these terms within the Catholic Church.
Gronchi explained that “the issue is an old one. This problem has been discussed for 99 years, since 1926. We have studied it on several occasions, and the dicastery has received numerous requests for clarification regarding these terms. These titles present a problem. There is a risk of obscuring, of not clearly explaining that the centrality of the paschal mystery of salvation lies in Jesus Christ.” [? Really?]
“For this reason,” the expert indicated, “now is the time to clarify these titles, so that when it is said that they have been used in the past, it will mean that it was done inappropriately. [pace … John Paul II!] It doesn’t mean that it was wrong, but rather that a definition of these titles was not yet mature and clear.” [What’s the difference between “wrong” and “inappropriately”. Is it sort of like what “time is greater than space” means?]
The consultant emphasized that the pontifical document is a doctrinal note that “deepens, clarifies, and states that these terms are not appropriate, they are not opportune, simply because Mary participates in the redemption, she collaborates in the redemption, but not in the same way as Jesus.” [ZOWIE! We were worried about that. It took the Tucho-led DDF with his acolyte Gronchi to clear up the CONFUSION that we all felt over the Blessed Mother, Our Lady of Sorrows’s, role in our redemption. It WASN’T the same as Christ’s! Protestants and you woke Catholics, you can relax now. We’re sorry for the past use of these titles. We goofed. Now we know officially that Jesus saves. Just as you Protestants have been telling us Catholics for centuries!]
After noting that the Virgin Mary is like the moon reflecting the light of the sun, a symbol of Jesus, Gronchi said that “Mary gives birth to Jesus, but on the cross, Jesus dies, not Mary. [Who knew?] Mary participates with her heart, with her affection, with all that she is, but it is a participation that the document calls dispositive, meaning that Mary disposes us to receive the grace of Christ, but she is not the source of grace, nor the mediatrix of all graces.” [8 May]
What does he say to those who are confused?
When asked what he would say to those who are confused by the new Vatican document, the expert stated that “they shouldn’t feel any confusion. They should pray to Mary and they should pray to her with the holy rosary. The rosary contains the mysteries of the life of Jesus; therefore, one prays to Mary by meditating on the mysteries of the life of Jesus.”
“This is the simplest, most popular devotion, the one that leads to heaven. The saints have already said it, and we pray to Mary with serenity. If we wish, we can also use the Litany of Loreto, which has very beautiful titles; there is no need to add anything else,” Gronchi emphasized. [Okay, that’s it. JUST the Rosary and the Litany of Loreto. Forget about Our Lady of Sorrows devotion or any of those other things, like Votive Masses. Don’t say the Angelus. Forget about the Miraculous Medal (I’m taking mine off after posting this…. NOT). The Five 1st Saturdays. Novenas. No more traveling to Marian Shrines (sorry Card. Burke!) And, get rid of that Scapular of Our Lady of Mount Carmel. It’s time to stop being “inappropriate”!]
“What we must say about Mary,” he concluded, “is that she is the mother of the Lord, the mother of God, the mother of the Church, the mother of the faithful people [there’s the downgrade] who accompany us and guide us with tenderness and great love.”
Hey GRONCHI!
St. Bernardine of Siena:
Omnis gratia, quae huic saeculo communicatur, triplicem habet processum; nam a Deo in Christum, a Christo in Virginem, a Virgine in nos ordinatissime dispensatur. … A tempore enim a quo Virgo mater concepit in utero Verbum Dei, quandam ut sic dicam, iusrisdictionem seu auctoritatem obtinuit in omni Spiritus sancti processione temporali; ita quod nulla creatura aliquam a Deo obtinuit gratiam vel virtutem, nisi secundum ipsius piae matris dispensationem.
Every grace that is communicated to this world has a threefold process; for it is dispensed in the most orderly manner from God to Christ, from Christ to the Virgin, and from the Virgin to us. … For from the time when the Virgin Mother conceived the Word of God in her womb, He obtained a certain jurisdiction or authority, so to speak, in the entire temporal procession of the Holy Spirit; so that no creature obtained any grace or power from God, except according to the dispensation of the pious mother herself.
(De Nativitate Beatae Virginis, Sermo 5.8).
Loading ...
We should be more charitable and show some sympathy to those members of the clergy who don’t understand these titles because of their deep lack of education. They’re trying their best, but are always terribly confused.
They need to be accompanied, not constantly castigated for being victims of malformation.
Fr. Z sez …It took the Tucho-led DDF with his acolyte Gronchi to clear up the CONFUSION that we all felt over the Blessed Mother, Our Lady of Sorrows’s, role in our redemption…..
Tucho? Didn’t he say something like “When you have to shoot, shoot – don’t talk.”
Or am I thinking of Tuco Benedicto Pacífico Juan María Ramírez (aka “The Ugly”)?
They really want to confuse us with so much clarification that we just give up and be protestant.
Two quick thoughts-
A lack of Marian devotion seems to be a common thread with too many appointees of the PF pontificate. TC being issued out on OLMC for example.
And, because of this, our Lord can’t be too happy with treatment his Mother is getting.
TheCavalierHatherly – it is very difficult when some of them, despite attending (reputedly) some of the best theological courses, programs and formation in seminaries, end up coming out with absolute drivel.
A Vatican Expert having to clarify that Our Lady did not die on the cross is a little bit… basic?
I mean, who looks at someone like +Fernandez and goes… yep, need clarification off that guy, because my Catechism, the Bible and 2000 years of Church history doesn’t provide it.
I should honestly be more charitable towards them. But it’s difficult sometimes.
I am not confused by the DDF Doctrinal Note.
The dear monsignor should have tried to address his words, not to those who are “confused” by it, but to those who clearly understand it “with special prudence.”
Like all beliefs about Mary (as well as the Trinity), the belief in her role as Mediatrix and Co-redemptrix should be correctly understood. Of course. Nothing in the document disturbs the correct understanding of either term. It only warns that they may be misunderstood, and that the terms still need to “mature” (perhaps by greater catechesis?).
The Legion of Mary still includes an invocation to “Mary, Mediatrix of all graces,” in its daily prayers. The document doesn’t forbid this. It is not inappropriate.
St Louis deMontfort wrote clearly about Mary as Mediatrix in his book, True Devotion. Anyone who is confused about the word should start right there. It removes all uncertainty.
If the Doctrinal Note intended to forbid the use of the Mass in the 1962 Missale Romanum, it does not state it clearly.
Was the Supplica of St. Bartolo Longo on May 8th connected to this votive Mass?
Pope Leo was elected May 8th.
I found this interesting Dominican liturgical blog, dated May 8, 2025.
https://breviariumsop.blogspot.com/2025/05/may-8-blessed-virgin-mary-mediatrix-of.html?m=1
It quotes a prayer by St Ephrem the Syrian:
“My Lady, most holy Mother of God, full of grace, inexhaustible ocean of divine favors and graces which surpass description, treasury of all good things, net to the Trinity you are queen of the world; next to the Counselor you are a second comforter; next to our Mediator you are the mediatrix of all mankind.
“Behold my trust in you and my God-given devotion towards you! Do not despise one so unworthy, nor let the rankness of my deeds stay your immense mercy, Mother of God – the title that I love most of all.
“There is, indeed, no more certain guarantee of victory than your aid. You have wiped away all tears from the face of the earth, you have lavished on man benefits of all kinds; you have brought joy to heaven and salvation to the earth.
“Through you we hold the surest pledge of our resurrection;
through you we hope to reach the heavenly kingdom;
through you, who alone are immaculate, is drawn down all glory, all honor and all holiness on the apostles, the prophets, the just and the humble of heart, since the first Adam to the end of the world.
And so all men find joy in you who are full of grace.”
Protestants think Purgatory is the “Catholic 2nd Chance”. We should probably stop mentioning it.
Instead of expounding on the beautiful theology of these Marian Titles, the DDF punts.
Another missed opportunity for the Teaching Office to actually teach.
There is nothing wrong with the Marian hymn ‘As I kneel before you’, but in the NO it is inappropriate, I think, to use it to accompany the communion procession. And yet I have heard it used several times, and our [not very good] organist uses it during communion as background, despite playing it with an obtrusive waltz rhythm.
Would enjoy hearing him on other issues of piety which are unintelligible to…let’s say, the uncatechized [or heretics]. What does the cleric make of “…and a sword shall pierce your heart.”
I don’t care what the Argentinian Cardinal or any other collared know-it-all says. Both Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix of All Graces will remain in my piety and upon my lips as long as I live.
Catholic World Report found this sentiment objectionable this morning and refuse to publish the comment. I wish I could say that their refusal makes me wonder, but I wonder at the cold chill no longer.
Monsignor Maurizio Gronchi is just outright WRONG with regard to the title Mediatrix of all Graces in relation to the doctrinal note ; the note discusses some conditions whereby this title could be misinterpreted and requests care in its use, but it does NOT condemn the title, and instead affirms its pertinence, albeit that it does so in an overly ungenerous back-handed way.
Indeed the note does a fairly decent job, withstanding the negative tone, of explaining the title and how and why it can be believed.
I’d say, SPOILER ALERT —
Saint Mary’s Fiat led historically to the Incarnation of He Who Is All Grace, and in this alone, Saint Mary Mother of God Mediated the Coming of All Graces among us and for us and for the Salvation of Souls.
(mediate OED 2nd Edition : To occupy an intermediate or middle place or position; to be between; usually, to form a connecting link or a transitional stage between one thing and another — here, between the Will of the Father and the Incarnation in her womb of His Son.)
Having been involved in many popular devotions without really understanding their meaning, I’d be curious to know some examples of people/groups who were reprimanded for their popular piety. Protocol numbers or it didn’t happen. Perhaps “not being reprimanded” is a good truism, if nobody at all is reprimanded until they seek formal approval or recognition. Then, it’s not Popular Piety anymore!
Popular piety seems to include things like distributing fake-indulgence and too-good-to-be-true Lists of Promises of favorite saints, attached to long, elaborate prayers. Things like donors who receive many “free gifts” and “complimentary token of our gratitude” in the mails, so the Pious Donors drop them on a shelf or any flat surface in the narthex, although many will festoon the candle-lit shrines with cheap medals, “Holy Cards” and play “ring toss” with a rosary or scapular to get it around the wooden neck of a permanent image (these would normally be defended by pillars of flame, but fire regulations have turned our votives into L.E.D.s)
I have learned that the place least likely to accept an unwanted religious article is a parish church or religious community. These Pious Donors know it, too, so they plant these objects in secrecy.
Popular piety has included naming angels, and the Most Pious Pilgrims have their favorite unapproved private revelations. Indulgences are as misunderstood today as they were 508 years ago. I have frequently pointed back to the Directory when people try to tell me things, but who am I to judge?
I should also nominate for reprimand, some Pious Vendors who sell merchandise that is unfit for holding in my hand, much less praying with it or having it blessed. I suppose I should be clicking through to the Combat Rosaries store at this point. I often wonder how institutional churches manage to purchase and maintain supplies and durable goods. Probably by having strong, established relationships.
Regarding the promulgation of Traditionis custodes on July 16, Memorial of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, it seems especially fitting to me, considering the ferocious persecution endured by St. Teresa of Avila, and even more so by her contemporary St. John of the Cross.
These two saints individually merited the exalted title, “Doctor of the Church”, and jointly, they recognized the indolent decadence that had overwhelmed the Carmelite convents and monasteries of their day. St. John was imprisoned for his efforts and languished under investigation, though it seems they provided some pen and paper for his poetic output.
Now “fast-forward” to a third Doctor of the Church, St. Thérèse of Lisieux, whose youth and determination put her in a convent, although she passed away at the age of 24, she nevertheless astonished the pious population by standing firm against Jansenism (which is a sort of collective scrupulosity that we can never be good enough or holy enough for God’s grace to work?) and also presenting an autobiography of a “Little Way” to Heaven, again sweeping away the babbling of many words, and going to the heart of our salvation and justification in Christ.
“Actions Speak Louder Than Words” is a cliché I’ve kept in mind, especially when it comes to liturgy, assignments of personnel, and whatever befalls us in everyday life.
“For this reason,” the expert indicated, “now is the time to clarify these titles, so that when it is said that they have been used in the past, it will mean that it was done inappropriately. [pace … John Paul II!] It doesn’t mean that it was wrong, but rather that a definition of these titles was not yet mature and clear.”
I suggest that the apparent slight incoherence here is due to the translation of Msgr Gronchi’s words into English: I imagine that in the original Italian its TOTAL incoherence was obvious and blatant.
The Church engages in development of doctrine. This is the Holy Spirit-led process of generating ever clearer expositions of the truth from the original Deposit of Faith, wherein what was true but stated without complete clarity in early generations can, through development, be stated with greater clarity. The Marian dogmas of the Immaculate Conception and Assumption are examples. Because of this, the incomplete but TRUE teachings of early generations were both wholesome, and necessary in order to get to the later, more complete and clearer expressions of those truths.
So, when later generations (after us) have rightly sifted all these matters, and rightly set forth all of the distinctions needed and the senses under which we can call Mary “Co-Redemptrix” and “Mediatrix of all Graces”, at that time, their more complete teaching will make the prior teaching that urged these titles RIGHTLY done, though less perfect than the later teaching. Saying it makes the early teaching “inappropriate” is nonsense on stilts.
About his comments on the Rosary: If you look just at the most frequent element of that extended prayer, the Hail Mary, it is obvious that it’s all about Christ: The first part of the Hail Mary leads up to the central mystery of our Faith: Jesus Christ, the fruit of her womb. The second part stems from that central mystery and hangs on it: Mary prays for us as her participation in salvation assigned to her as the Mother of God. But as great as this devotion is, God and the Church demonstrate a love for multiplicity of devotions: Every approved prayer of the Church is the product of some holy person putting their private devotion into wider expression for others to be attracted toward the love of God. All the litanies, all the novenas, all the different feast days, all the shrines, are the fruit of God saying “there grace more abounds.”
Next are they going to tell us to stop praying to the saints because it obscures the unique role of Christ as Savior?
Was Cardinal Fernandez’ goal to make his office look like bungling idiots? The argument that “it can be misunderstood, so it shouldn’t be used” is silly on the face of it. The claim that it wasn’t used wrong then, but it is inappropriate now doesn’t make sense either.
Maybe Cardinal Fernandez is trying to explain that the death penalty wasn’t wrong then, but is inappropriate now?
In any event, I imagine Pope Leo playing 4-dimensional chess: he needs to get Cardinal Fernandez to quietly retire and stop harming the church so he publishes this obviously wrong-headed nonsense and has (thereby) cause to promote his retirement.
Rather than a “don’t do this” take on these matters, maybe they (DDF and the rest) should try educating the faithful on them. I believe this is known as catechesis.
I know that these titles for Our Lady were never properly explained to me causing me some personal confusion; your posts have helped me considerably in the proper understanding of these titles. Thank you, Fr. Z.
You know, “clarifications” like this do truly raise concerns about …why. I am quite annoyed by bishops who won’t preach vigorously to Protestants. I do fear that much… eagerness… to encourage the Novus Ordo may be “evangelism” of our day. If so, …it hasn’t worked. My Protestant cousins aren’t interested.
Please stop with “ecumenism”.
Likewise, please stop with these “clarifications”.
I agree with others, ..there has long been “confusion” about many things of Catholicism. Please, ….simply preach the catechism.
The Baltimore is quite clear and concise.
“There is a risk of obscuring, of not clearly explaining that the centrality of the paschal mystery of salvation lies in Jesus Christ.” [? Really?]”
Here again, saying too much lets the mask slip and we get a glimpse of what’s going on in the collective mind of these people. I cannot imagine any way whatsoever that someone tries to teach another about God, about the Trinity, about our need for salvation, about that salvation being won for us by Christ, being sacrificed on a cross … and running a risk even remotely close to what this guy is blabbing about.
But, he can. This means that he must teach along a truly unique outline, not starting from fundamentals but from … somewhere else. His concept of salvation, of Christ, and the Church, and Mary and everything in the Faith, progresses in a way which exposes him to a risk of confusion, maybe at every turn.
Pingback: TVESDAY LATE-AFTERNOON EDITION - BIG PVLPIT
Fernandez had it right, and I regret two things: the private piety exception, and the garment reading over the matter. I am bigly disappointed in Fr. Z’s take on this because he kept it under wraps early-0n and only came out strongly some time later. The claims by some commenters are just ridiculous.
[*yawn*]
Pingback: VVEDNESDAY LATE-AFTERNOON EDITION - BIG PVLPIT
Pingback: FRIDAY LATE-AFTERNOON EDITION - BIG PVLPIT