Some Graces?

[badsede]

I was a little surprized at the responses to my last post here and in catholicism. Absolutely no one favored the dogmatization of the titles. I wonder what that says about the demographic that supports such a theological development and conversely about the demographic that posts in online Catholic communities. I guess there isn't a lot of overlap

Comments

[yechezkiel]

IIRC, there's some patristic support for the idea of grace entering time at the Incarnation, and as grace is a single thing... I'm not sure.

[dnfield]

I read through your post but didn't have time to reply. I'm not sure I really have time now either, but what the heck

[badsede]

I think it only makes sense to think of the Incarnation (and with it, the Passion and Resurrection) as being the defining moment of all graces because without it anything that could count as "grace" before it would be ineffective in some important sense.

Only if we are thinking of grace in a purely salvific sense. Sure, without the Incarnation and Passion, then there would be no redemption nor eternal life for us, but that is not all that Grace accomplishes in our life. Actual Grace leads to all the good things in our lives, and these regardless of our salvation. So, salvific Grace certainly entered with that historic event, but all Grace?

Anyone who participates in the Incarnation (including the Passion and the Resurrection) would have to be seen as a co-mediator/trix.

Certainly, I thought I covered that in the post. I can see her role as being singular enough to merit the actual title though. But the question really is the "all" part.

Yeah it'd cause problems for some of our separated brethren, but if the Spirit is

[dnfield]

Hmm. I think I see what you're saying a bit better now, although I think there's still something to the all part. But maybe some distinctions should be made