Discuss.
Thought for the Day
- Donald R. McClarey
Donald R. McClarey
Cradle Catholic. Active in the pro-life movement since 1973. Father of three, one in Heaven, and happily married for 43 years. Small town lawyer and amateur historian. Former president of the board of directors of the local crisis pregnancy center for a decade.
The Blessed Virgin Mary is a human being, a creature, a created being. Only God can redeem the human race, as only God can and must for Redemption.
Co-redemptrix no.
Mary will not accept worship nor any honor. Mary only wishes to do the will of God.
Mary’s apparitions are at the will of God.
Taught to me by the good Felician sisters back in the 1940s.
I’ll differ on this, and I may be in the minority. Mary was Her Sons Co-redemptrix, and calling Mary this does not take away the fact that Christ suffering, death and resurrection redeemed mankind. It simply honours Our Lady’s crucial role. Catholicism is the only Christian denomination which honours Mary’s in such an important way through various prayers and devotions.
Giving Our Lady the title Co-redemptrix needs to be defined. And understood. Yet we cannot, NOT give Her the honour because it may be construed towards Marian worship, or worse feminist narrative. It needs to be given and explained. We cannot simplify our Faith into easy to digest sound bites.
Mary cooperated in a unique way in Christ’s redemption of man. She took nothing away from his role, but acted “with” the Redeemer. There is ample evidence of this as a Catholic belief. Her heart was “pierced by a sword” as prophesied by Simeon.
Popes have used the term “coredemptrix ” in numerous documents and speeches, expressing this truth.
Mother Teresa asked for a solemn definition of this term as a Catholic dogma. So did Cardinal O’Connor of New York, along with 41 other cardinals and over 400 bishops. So did 4 million other people who signed a petition three decades ago.
In reaction, Cardinal Ratzinger expressed his opinion, one of caution, but did not declare it as pope.
‘co-redemptrix’ or “CO-REDEMPTRIX”, therein lies the trouble and the fault.
Mary is ….
THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION.
QUEEN OF HEAVEN AND EARTH.
why the need for another title?
I dare say there is something sinister in the ask, something apt to cause contusion and division, something the devil wishes for, and also in his pride he wishes she were not a mere human being, therefore no..
Mary Our Mother is a human being… and she will CRUSH YOUR HEAD.
My question would be this: Is there anything intended by the title “Co-Redemptrix” that is not already implicit as a theological corollary of the title “Theotokos”?
Fr. Hardon’s Modern Catholic Dictionary says: It may be considered an aspect of Mary’s mediation in not only consenting to become the Mother of God but in freely consenting in his labors, sufferings, and death for the salvation of the human race.
I don’t know if that is a good summation of what is intended by Co-Redemptrix, and I have found other sources that circumscribe it more or extend it even further (which is an separate issue), but if Fr. Hardon’s definition is more or less accurate, that seems to me to be more of a corollary of Theotokos, and IMO it would be better to stick with a title with such a long pedigree and then draw out the theological implications from that. It likely gets to the same place, but keeps it more grounded in terminology that already exists.
I’m torn between the to sides of this argument. I agree that She herself would not wish to be exalted by any means. Humility is a foundational virtue and one that must be dominant in all mortal men who wish to serve the Creator in all things. Mary is humility personified.
Mary is also Full of Grace.
No other creature attained this recognition for she is the Immaculate Conception.
Her Fiat was a cooperation with God par excellence. She not only is a daughter of God but the Mother of God and the Spouse of God.
This cooperation in God’s plan, God’s gift to mankind, our redemption, is beyond words, imo. God’s mother is our mother. Mary is the chief cooperator with God. Without her yes redemption would be most questionable. So yes. We have only one Redeemer yet He himself stated; “Who is my mother my brothers and my sisters? They are the ones that do the will of my Father.”
Mary perfectly carried out that will of God.
Is the title Co-redemptrix blasphemous?
Ask God?
I believe that God raised Mary up, the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and that the title is not blasphemy but a recognition of her hyperdulia.
The Church uses the term “co-founder” to refer to anyone who joins a religious order during the life of the founder. “Co” doesn’t necessarily imply equality.
We only need to refer to “Litany of the Rosary” or “Litany of Loreto” to see how many titles Our Lady actually has earned through Her continual role in interceding for mankind. It begins and ends with worshipping Our Lord and calling for His Mercy and Grace. It does not take anything away from Our Lords Salvation for us, but rather it enhances it. We unite with Mary in Love for Her Son.
Lord, have mercy on us.
Christ have mercy on us.
Lord, have mercy on us. Christ hear us.
Christ, graciously hear us.
God the Father of Heaven,
Have mercy on us.
God the Son, Redeemer of the world,
Have mercy on us.
God the Holy Spirit
Have mercy on us.
Holy Trinity, One God,
Have mercy on us.
Holy Mary, pray for us.
Holy Mother of God, pray for us.
Holy Virgin of virgins, pray for us.
Mother of Christ, pray for us.
Mother of divine grace, pray for us.
Mother most pure, pray for us.
Mother most chaste, pray for us.
Mother inviolate, pray for us.
Mother undefiled, pray for us.
Mother most amiable, pray for us.
Mother most admirable, pray for us.
Mother of good counsel, pray for us.
Mother of our Creator, pray for us.
Mother of our Savior, pray for us.
Mother of the Church, pray for us.
Virgin most prudent, pray for us.
Virgin most venerable, pray for us.
Virgin most renowned, pray for us.
Virgin most powerful, pray for us.
Virgin most merciful, pray for us.
Virgin most faithful, pray for us.
Mirror of justice, pray for us.
Seat of wisdom, pray for us.
Cause of our joy, pray for us.
Spiritual vessel, pray for us.
Vessel of honor, pray for us.
Singular vessel of devotion, pray for us.
Mystical rose, pray for us.
Tower of David, pray for us.
Tower of ivory, pray for us.
House of gold, pray for us.
Ark of the covenant, pray for us.
Gate of Heaven, pray for us.
Morning star, pray for us.
Health of the sick, pray for us.
Refuge of sinners, pray for us.
Comforter of the afflicted, pray for us.
Help of Christians, pray for us.
Queen of angels, pray for us.
Queen of patriarchs, pray for us.
Queen of prophets, pray for us.
Queen of apostles, pray for us.
Queen of martyrs, pray for us.
Queen of confessors, pray for us.
Queen of virgins, pray for us.
Queen of all saints, pray for us.
Queen conceived without Original Sin, pray for us.
Queen assumed into Heaven, pray for us.
Queen of the most holy Rosary, pray for us.
Queen of peace, pray for us.
Lamb of God, Who takest away the sins of the world,
Spare us, O Lord.
Lamb of God, Who takest away the sins of the world,
Graciously hear us, O Lord.
Lamb of God, Who takest away the sins of the world,
Have mercy on us. Let us Pray.
Dogmas of the faith must be accepted or at least not actively resisted to be one of the faithful.
I can think of no greater impediment to Protestant conversions than introducing the term “coredemptrix” to the dogmas of the faith.
The title was not considered necessary in the first two milennia of the Church. We cannot even here agree on what it would mean. Further, the Vatican at present is not in any state to be discerning new theology. It is barely capable of understanding the Baltimore Catechism. 💔
Is this part of a push for the ordination of women?
Based on contemplative formation the normal progression of the mystic is to start with purgation with the endpoint being the prayer of union. In the lives of both Jesus and Mary there is a mirror image of this progression. The Incarnation is a Prayer of Union between the Holy Spirit and Mary where Jesus as Son of God enters into the perfect Union of His Hypostatic Union. Mary need to be sin free to give herself in a pure fiat at the Annunciation in order for the Incarnation to be a supreme act of pure love and union between Jesus, Mary, and the Holy Spirit. Sin would have made the Incarnation an act of domination and conquest and not a loving act. Both Jesus and Mary are in the state of Original Righteousness that they never lost. To me before the Fall Adam and Eve were soulmates, two hearts beating as one. A relationship that was broken by Original Sin and the loss of Original Righteousness. The special relationship between the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary is based on their intact relationship with God.
*
From the Annunciation/Incarnation Jesus and Mary’s lives follow a path that ends in the Purgation of Christ’s perfect offering on the Cross. Starting in union and ending in purgation, Christ on the Cross and Mary at the foot of the Cross. They both live lives that are the mirror image of normal contemplative formation. It is the Cross that defines both of their lives in mortal flesh. This agrees fully with the way that Mary received the Immaculate Conception in the same mirror image process. A mystical life lived backwards with the Cross as the point of origin. Mary filled up in her own flesh what was lacking in the offering of Christ on the Cross. What was lacking was her response to Christ’s sacrificial offering on the Cross. Christ did His part, Mary did her part, we have to do ours by how we respond to His offering of Himself on the Cross.
I’ve already posted this in a prior article. I’m reposting it to have it and my posting about the lives of Jesus and Mary to have them both in one location:
*
In the Fall it wasn’t until Adam and Eve had both eaten of the forbidden fruit that their eyes were opened. Suggesting that Original Sin was a one flesh sin. Would not the redemption be a one flesh redemption? Adam was the priest of Eden. Jesus is the Eternal High Priest. We call Original Sin the sin of Adam, even though Adam and Eve had both sinned. The same could be said for our redemption. Jesus takes primacy in the redemption like Adam takes primacy in Original Sin. Adam failed in his priestly duties, whereas Christ fulfilled His priestly duties with His self sacrifice on the Cross. Remember Mary is known as Our Lady of Sorrows with her Seven Sorrows depicted as swords piercing her Immaculate Heart. Through her fiat and her Seven Sorrows Mary shared in Christ’s Passion and Death. We call Mary the Undoer of Knots, reversing Eve’s sin. Co-redemption could mean together or with and not necessarily equal.
As is usual, Bruised Optimist quite nicely summed up my own view.
As I recall, one of the major rationale for confecting the Novus Ordo Mass was to come up with a rite that would have fewer ‘stumbling blocks’ for Protestants. Seems to me that in the same “Spirit of Vatican II”, we should put consideration of any declaration re: “Co-Redemptrix” on the back burner, and give it a few centuries of careful consideration. After all, it took us over 1900 years to formally declare the dogma of the Assumption, and we quite literally have until the end of time itself to reflect on this matter.
Ott discusses the question in his Fundamentals of Catholic Doctrine. He makes a distinction between the ideas of Mary as the source of all graces through her “fiat” in history and Mary as the channel of all graces through her intercessory prayer in Heaven. If I’m reading him right, he considers the first concept true and Biblical, and the second concept probable but without Biblical evidence. The question of the title “co-Redemptrix” seems to have come up in the old debates between the Franciscans and Dominicans.
Amen.
Given that the few of us here cannot come to a firm agreement on the meaning and implications of the title, my advice is to drop the idea. Further word of advice, sometimes it is best to thoroughly think out the worst case interpretation that can be inferred, and proceed, or not, from there. “First, do not harm.”
Back burner?
Agreed. TBO, Clinton, good .
I wondered how many years the dogma of the Assumption of the Blessed Mary took before it was finally accepted as dogma;
https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/the-assumption-of-mary-in-history
Cardinal Fernandez?
***** Caution Ribbon Alert *****
Cdn Ratzinger is correct. Truly so.
I am saddened by so many Catholics who have been more or less “protestantized” into accepting the bogus protestant understanding of the term co-redemptrix instead of looking just a bit more deeply into the history of the term, and what it actually stands for. The more that people honestly and thoughtfully looking into the meaning of “co-redemptrix” as expressed by Catholic theologians over the years, and reflect on perennial Church teaching involving how Our Lord and Mary are the new Adam and the new Eve, the more they will come to appreciate that, whether or not the title is made official, Mary’s role as co-redemptrix is set in stone, and this is God’s will.
Among many examples, reflect more deeply on Mary’s specific role at the marriage feast in Cana that set into motion the more specific redemptive phase of our Lord’s mission.
For all those who gullibly accept the protestant mischaracterization of Mary’s role as co-redemptrix (similar to how they ignorantly attack saintly intervention in general), I urge you to sincerely look into what the Catholic teaching actually is, and at least note how it is not even close to what protestants and ignorant Catholics wrongly proclaim to be the case of granting Mary equal footing with our Lord.
Ezabelle:
”
Giving Our Lady the title Co-redemptrix needs to be defined. “
Only a divine Person could redeem humanity. Exactly why Jesus came unto the earth. As a divine Person only Jesus could redeem us.
Mary gave us Jesus. Jesus redeemed us.
I heard a teacher say “Mary stood beneath the cross in despair.”
Mary was a Perpetual Virgin. Despair is a sin.
When Jesus spoke saying “My God, my God why have you abandoned me?”
I believe that Christ was addressing his own divine nature of Whom Christ had emptied Himself.
Mary did the will of God perfectly.
Christ’s death was the end and the accomplishment of redemption.
(Mary lived until the age of 69)
lepanto:
Christ’s death accomplished our redemption. Mary lived at the will of God for twenty more years.
Jason:
“.Father Hardon’s Modern Catholic Dictionary says: It may be considered an aspect of Mary’s mediation in not only consenting to become the Mother of God but in freely consenting in his labors, sufferings, and death for the salvation of the human race.”
Mary wanted to die with Jesus but this was not the will of God for her.
Philip:
Jesus died as the Son of Man. Mary died as Mother of the Church twenty years later. Jesus took Mary to heaven and crowned her Queen of the Universe.
GregB
God forces no one into heaven. Nor does God contradict Himself.
Mary chose Perpetual Virginity with free will and informed consent, full knowledge through original innocence, not damaged by original sin.
Mary De Voe: I’m not sure if you are misunderstanding my position. Some people like to dismiss the Immaculate Conception and its relationship to the Incarnation. Reducing the Incarnation to being a means to an end, birthing Jesus. That the Annunciation and the Incarnation are treated like they are a dime a dozen. I agree that through the Immaculate Conception Mary’s will was freed from slavery to sin. Making Mary’s fiat a completely free will giving of herself over to God.