Thursday, June 17, 2021

William D. Most (1957) and Mary Having Shared Immediately in the Objective Redemption

  

A very small minority of theologians, in spite of numerous and clear papal texts (they say that the papal texts are not clear), still try to say that Mary did not really share immediately in the objective redemption, that is, she did not share on Calvary itself in paying the price of our redemption by which mankind was reconquered from the captivity of Satan. The minority can avoid the obvious sense of the papal texts only by asking that we suppose that the Popes constantly have in mind some distinction, which they never express, never hint at, and which is so far from being obviously needed that most theologians never believe they should add it! The distinction they most frequently ask us to read in would say that Christ alone paid the price by which mankind was reconquered, but Mary merely merited that the fruits of the conquest be applied. Such a distinction is obviously out of place in the Bendito seja (as elsewhere). For it is one thing to conquer, quite another thing to merit merely that the fruits of the conquest be applied! Nor is there any reason to add any distinction at all in the Bendito seja: the Holy Father has been so careful as to make explicit even the ever obvious qualification that Mary is subordinate to Christ; hence we should not presume to read in something that is not obvious. (William G. Most, “The Queenship of Mary,” in Stanley G. Mathews, ed., Queen of the Universe: An Anthology on the Assumption and Queenship of Mary [Saint Meinrad, Ind.: Grail Publications, 1957], 176-86, here, 185 n. 23)