Mary is not a co-redemptrix and above all she is not homophobic

Reflections by Massimo Battaglio

What is happening online is strange. the same People who tore their clothes for the final document of the synod (obviously Focusing Their complaints on the "openness" On the lGBT+ Issue) quickly dressed up to start tearing them up again now, after the clarification from The dicastery for The doctrine Of the faith which clarifies that the title of "Mary co-redemptrix" is very far from an unlikely dogmatic recognition.

No more than three weeks ago, we read idiotic headlines like “The Church supports gay pride” (and what would be wrong with that? Would it be so absurd to support the struggle of an oppressed people as all the prophets have always done?). Then the more detached phase of “bowls still” criticism began. And the Don Quixotes of doctrine have been produced in videos entitled for example "Synod or Sanhedrin". This weekend the music has changed. The Dicastery's Marian declaration is spoken of as "inappropriate" and it is said that "The Vatican is confusing".

Practically, there is a part of the Church that is scandalized by any pastoral change but on the other hand claims to dictate dogmatic changes. And coincidentally, the changes he hopes for always go in the direction of reviving traditionalist concepts, perhaps rigging "popular piety" but which, in the opinion of ordinary Christians, have nothing to do with it.

I wonder if I am the one who is outside of Christianity or if there are at least two Catholic Churches: that of everyday Christians and the one that celebrates alternative rites passing them off as "ancient" and believes in different and bizarre dogmas. The first struggles to navigate a stormy world; the second has a more comfortable life since it limits itself to obeying the orders of Trump and all sovereigns. Because that's always where we end up. It is enough to see how, in the same sacristies mentioned above, the election of Zohran Mamdami, a social democrat and Muslim, as mayor of New York was welcomed.

But let's go back to Maria. It does not seem to me that he has ever claimed titles superior to those of all Christians. Of course: she has been a virgin to sin since her conception and had the privilege of carrying God in her womb. She has not known the corruption of her own body and exercises her motherhood over all men and women. But he never boasted about all this.

On the other hand, his few words reported in the Gospels, concrete words, never declarations of high ecclesiology, seem to me very sweetly close to the intentions stated by the recent Synod of the Italian Church regarding LGBT+ people. I want to compare some passages.

“The local Churches and the Regional Episcopal Conferences promote accompaniment paths (...) in the ordinary pastoral care of those who wish to undertake journeys of greater ecclesial integration, but are on the margins of ecclesial life".

It is the first indication contained in point 30 of synodal document. And it is impossible not to hear Mary's words in the Magnificat echoing:

“he has ousted the powerful from their thrones and exalted the humble, he has filled the hungry with good things and sent the rich away empty-handed, he has helped his servant Israel, remembering his mercy”. (Lk 1, 51-54)

The echo of the Lucanian canticle becomes even clearer in the third indication:

"the Local churches, overcoming the discriminatory attitude sometimes widespread in ecclesial environments and in society, undertake to promote the recognition and accompaniment of homo-affective and transgender people, as well as their parents, who already belong to the christian community".

Then there is the fourth point, the one in which some were quick to see support for pride:

"The CEI supports with prayer and reflection the "days" promoted by civil society to combat all forms of violence and demonstrate closeness towards those who are hurt and discriminated against (Days against gender violence and discrimination, pedophilia, bullying, femicide, homophobia and transphobia, etc.)"

How can we not remember the story of the wedding at Cana? At that moment, Maria realizes that a beautiful party is about to fall apart. And it is activated immediately, with an essential form of prayer, that is, presenting the situation naked and raw to the Son, without comments: “they have no more wine”. He doesn't even add pleas and requests for grace because he knows that Jesus will intervene because he hates sadness. Just remind him of things as they are.

Don't we, in our vigils, do the same? We do not make strictly political judgments on homophobia. For this reason there are other locations, in which we are engaged, together with all civil society, at other times. Our prayer, in this case, is simple testimony illuminated by the Word; pure recommendation to God.

“Do whatever He tells you” (Jn 2.5)

Here we return to the beginning: to the absurdity of a dogma on "Mary co-redemptrix", an entirely identity and political statement but not at all evangelical; a real show of strength by small but powerful groups. Who knows if they realize that, no matter how much someone likes a title, it cannot become dogma if it goes against the Gospel. And in the Gospel, in fact, it doesn't say "do what I say" but "what He tells you".

But point 30 Of the Summary document Reserves another surprise. at The beginning he says:

"Being a sign of the Kingdom of God implies authentic and communion relationships, which show differences as richness. The ecclesial community wants to be a space in which everyone can feel understood, welcomed, accompanied and encouraged, with particular attention to those who remain on the margins".

Here, in addition to the Magnificat's call to the humble, the profile of a Church capable of motherhood is outlined, which takes care of its children without making preferences, on the contrary, valuing their diversity. And it comes naturally to remember the words that the crucified Jesus addressed to his mother and to the apostle John:

“Jesus then, seeing the mother and the disciple whom he loved there beside her, said to the mother: «Woman, here is your son!». Then he said to the disciple: «Behold your mother!». And from that moment the disciple took her into his home". (Jn 19, 25-27)

There is another paradox in these words: it is Not mary who Takes john into her home, under her protection, but the opposite. The maternal care of the mother of jesus For humanity is not expressed when we venerate her as the hostess by exaggerating in Compliments. rather, it begins when we welcome her into our home.

In this, as we said during the days of the Synod, the "Synthesis document" was a bit jarring when it repeated several times that LGBT+ people must become recipients of "welcome" and above all "accompaniment". Because, if we want to follow Mary's path, the Church would need to be capable not only of welcoming and directing. Above all, he should be welcomed and walk alongside - not ahead of - his people. In fact, at the beginning of the Acts of the Apostles we read:

"When they entered the city they went up to the upper floor where they lived. There were Peter and John, James and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zeloth and Judas the son of James (...), together with some women and with Mary, the mother of Jesus" (Acts 1, 13-14)

It does not take on a command role but, paradoxically, is together with all the others, sharing with them the role of apostles.

The Synod, however, seems to have accepted the paradox. In fact, it is significant that, for the first time in history, the LGBT+ issue is not addressed among the "problems" but in the chapter relating to "relationships" and, in particular, couple relationships, relationships that all men and women are led to experience by their common nature. It is an incredible leap, if we think that, until yesterday, the opinion that many churchmen had of us was that we were not capable of real relationships; that we were intrinsically incapable of loving.

Until yesterday, for example, the theory of Amedeo Cencini, the priest and psychology scholar who taught the homosexual question to seminarians, defining us as "sex-hungry" and adding that for us "couples don't exist" because we would need "multiple experiences". Perhaps, with the recent synod, these things bordering on defamation are truly outdated.

Instead of arm wrestling over trivial theological issues, prophets of doom should learn to congratulate themselves on how far the Spirit is pushing us forward. If they want to be faithful to Mary, they should remember how the story of the Nativity ends. She,

“for his part, he kept all these things, pondering them in his heart” (Lk 2,19)