Co-Mediatrix?

[Dark_Warrior]

I know this probably has been asked a thousand times, but could someone please explain Mary as mediatrix and especially CO-mediatrix?

I can’t find anything at catholic answers library.

From what I understand is that the term “co-mediatrix” is actually not official yet.

 

[Randy_Carson]

I know this probably has been asked a thousand times, but could someone please explain Mary as mediatrix and especially CO-mediatrix?

I can’t find anything at catholic answers library.

From what I understand is that the term “co-mediatrix” is actually not official yet.

Mary as Mediatrix Proved From Scripture

The Catholic Church recognizes Mary’s role in salvation history and invokes her under the title of Mediatrix. However, many people struggle to understand how Mary can have this role which they reserve for Christ alone, and they cite the following verse in support of their position:

1 Timothy 2:5-6
5For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, 6who gave himself as a ransom for all men—the testimony given in its proper time.

Is this the complete picture of what the Bible has to say about the role of mediator? Let’s take a closer look at some verses which provide a bigger perspective on this important topic.

Hebrews 7:24-25
because Jesus lives forever, he has a permanent priesthood. 25Therefore he is able to save completely those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them.

Here we see that Jesus “always lives to intercede” for “those who come to God through him.” The role of the mediator and the intercessor are synonymous; a mediator lives to intercede for others.

All Christians are called to be mediators or intercessors for one another because we are all members of Christ’s body as we see from Paul’s letter to the Ephesians:

Ephesians 1:22-23
“And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church, 23which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way.”

Paul referred to himself as a co-laborer with Christ when he wrote:

1 Corinthians 3:9
For we are God’s fellow workers.

Paul went further in his understanding of our responsibility as co-laborers with Christ when when he wrote:

Colossians 1:24
Now I rejoice in what was suffered for you, and I fill up in my flesh what is still lacking in regard to Christ’s afflictions, for the sake of his body, which is the church.

Is anything lacking from the perfect sacrifice that Christ offered upon the Cross? Paul clearly indicates that more is to be done and that he makes up what is “still lacking” in his own flesh.

2 Corinthians 1:6
If we are afflicted, it is for your comfort and salvation

Additionally, we know that we are called to share in the priesthood of all believers (cf. 1 Peter 2:5-9), and a priest, by definition, is called to be a mediator between God and men. Each of us is called to this role and to be a mediator or mediatrix for others before God.

Therefore, if we are all called to this role of mediator and intercessor for one another, how much more can this be said of Mary who said, “Yes” to God and brought Christ into the world?

Speaking of this, the Catechism of the Catholic Church states:

[967](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/967.htm’) By her complete adherence to the Father’s will, to his Son’s redemptive work, and to every prompting of the Holy Spirit, the Virgin Mary is the Church’s model of faith and charity. Thus she is a “preeminent and . . . wholly unique member of the Church”; indeed, she is the “exemplary realization” (typus) of the Church.

[968](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/968.htm’) Her role in relation to the Church and to all humanity goes still further. “In a wholly singular way she cooperated by her obedience, faith, hope, and burning charity in the Savior’s work of restoring supernatural life to souls. For this reason she is a mother to us in the order of grace.”

---

[969](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/969.htm’) “This motherhood of Mary in the order of grace continues uninterruptedly from the consent which she loyally gave at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation . . . . Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix.”

---

[970](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/970.htm’) “Mary’s function as mother of men in no way obscures or diminishes this unique mediation of Christ, but rather shows its power. But the Blessed Virgin’s salutary influence on men . . . flows forth from the superabundance of the merits of Christ, rests on his mediation, depends entirely on it, and draws all its power from it.” “No creature could ever be counted along with the Incarnate Word and Redeemer; but just as the priesthood of Christ is shared in various ways both by his ministers and the faithful, and as the one goodness of God is radiated in different ways among his creatures, so also the unique mediation of the Redeemer does not exclude but rather gives rise to a manifold cooperation which is but a sharing in this one source.”

 

[Eucharisted]

I know this probably has been asked a thousand times, but could someone please explain Mary as mediatrix and especially CO-mediatrix?

I can’t find anything at catholic answers library.

From what I understand is that the term “co-mediatrix” is actually not official yet.

There is no such thing as Co-Mediatrix. -trix means woman. Mary is the only Woman, New Eve, Mother of all the living.

I think you mean Co-Redemptrix, which means that Mary cooperated in the Redemption of man as the Woman, New Eve, Mother of all the living, and that, assumed into Heaven, she continues her cooperation in the work of Jesus as the Mediatrix and Advocate of peace.

Mediatrix means Mary cooperates with Jesus, through Jesus, in the subjective redemption. Jesus is the only One Who did the objective redemption; we who are the creatures of God do the subjective redemption, that is, through intercession and prayer we obtain for others the graces of manking. But Mary alone is the Mediatrix - the one through whom Jesus dispenses His graces - because she is His Mother and because she had more faith than any other creature. Mary’s role dose not destroy Jeuss’ meditation but shows it; she is the Sign of the Way, that is, she points us to Jesus, who is the Way of Life and Truth.

Advocate means Mary cooperates with Jesus, through Jesus, in praying to the Father and offering Him the Precious Blood in atonement for the sins of the whole world. She acts not as a clergyman nor as a god but as a member of the Church. It is too much for me to explain fully, and I apologize for this.

 

[Joe_5859]

I know this probably has been asked a thousand times, but could someone please explain Mary as mediatrix and especially CO-mediatrix?

I can’t find anything at catholic answers library.

From what I understand is that the term “co-mediatrix” is actually not official yet.

Anything you ever wanted to know about this (and more) is on this website:

fifthmariandogma.com/

This proposed fifth Marian dogma regards Mary’s maternal mediation, which is spelled out in three titles: Co-redemptix, Mediatrix of all Graces, and Advocate.

There are Catholics on boths sides of this who disagree on this proposed dogma. As it hasn’t been formally defined in this way (with these three titles), Catholics are free to disagree on their appropriateness. The point of contention seems to be most often the title “Co-redemptrix”, which some think will harm ecumenism. Others also fear that it borders on “mariolatry”.

Basically, this proposed dogma is all about exactly what Mary’s role is in our lives and in salvation history. In this sense, it is really nothing new. The Church has always taught that Mary is the mother of us all and advocates on our behalf. This is part of Catholic teaching.

Edit: In particular, you might want to look at the FAQ and the Response to 7 Common Objections. This will give you a good sense of the pro arguments for this proposed dogma. Someone else will probably come along this thread who can better give you the con arguments.

 

[Good_Fella]

I know this probably has been asked a thousand times, but could someone please explain Mary as mediatrix and especially CO-mediatrix?

I can’t find anything at catholic answers library.

From what I understand is that the term “co-mediatrix” is actually not official yet.

The intercessory role Mary has in God’s plan of salvation is clearly illustrated in the Gospel of John 2: 3-5. By Mary’s prayerful intercession, our Lord’s grace is channeled to us. Our Blessed Mother (cf. Jn 19:26-27) serves as the human advocate to the Church by addressing our spiritual needs and presenting our ‘sincere’ petitions to her Son. Paul exhorts the faithful to pray and intercede for one another, for this pleases God who desires that everyone be saved (cf. 1 Tim 2:1-4).James assures us that God listens to the prayers of a righteous person (cf. 5:16). Nor does human mediation impugn the sovereignty of God and thus the all-sufficiency of Christ’s Sacrifice (cf. 5:17-18).

No human creature is more righteous and faithful than the Mother of our Lord, who both gloriously exist together body and soul in heaven. Mary is our Mediatrix and ‘Advocatrix’ by virtue of her privileged position with God as his faithful handmaid (Lk 1:38) and as Queen Mother of the Church. Our Divine King grants us many favors through the merciful solicitation of his Mother. (1 Kgs 2: 19-20; Lk 1: 31-33).

Our salvation does not preclude human participation and involvement.The Protestant concept of Sola Christu is unbiblical (cf. Col 1: 24). Indeed, Paul tells the Corinthians that we are “co-workers with God” (cf. 1 Cor 3:9). The prayers and sacrifices of a righteous person can make a big difference for the salvation of souls by the merits of Christ’s Passion and Death. The factual mediation of Abraham and the covenantal mediation of Moses reveal to us that God does not will to save us apart from human participation in association with him (cf. Gen 19: 25-26; Ex 32: 11-14).

In light of Genesis 3, 15; Luke 1: 28

“Raised to heaven, she remains for the human race an unconquerable rampart, interceding for us before her Son and God.”
Theoteknos of Livias, Assumption 291 (ante A.D. 560)

In light of Luke 1, 38; 46-49:

“For as Eve was seduced by the word of an angel to flee from God, having rebelled against His Word, so Mary by the word of an angel received the glad tidings that she would bear God by obeying His Word. The former was seduced to disobey God, but the latter was persuaded to obey God, so that the Virgin Mary might become the advocate of the virgin Eve. As the human race was subjected to death through the act of a virgin, so it was saved by a virgin.”
Irenaeus, Against Heresies, V: 19,1 (A.D. 180)

“The Virgin received salvation so that she may give it back to the centuries.”
Peter Chrysologus, Sermon 140 (ante A.D. 450)

In her purity and humility Mary freely and faithfully consented to bring the Source of all grace into the world so that the human race could be restored to the original state of holiness and justice before God that was forfeited by the fall of Adam and Eve. Our Blessed Mother’s position as “the advocate of Eve” is a divine mandate. She now helps bring us the grace we need from its Divine source through her intercessory prayers in heaven, having brought us the Saviour.

The doctrine of Mary invoked as Mediatrix and ‘Advocatrix’ has not yet been defined as dogma, but nonetheless it is still regarded as an infallible truth belonging to the Deposit of Faith: Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition. The infallible doctrine of the Holy Trinity was defined as dogma by the Council of Nicea in the late fourth century.

PAX :harp:

 

[Genesis315]

The term Co-Redemptrix is probably a confusing term. The CCC explains the meaning of this term without using it here:

**

Our participation in Christ’s sacrifice

**618 **The cross is the unique sacrifice of Christ, the “one mediator between God and men”.452 But because in his incarnate divine person he has in some way united himself to every man, “the possibility of being made partners, in a way known to God, in the paschal mystery” is offered to all men.453 He calls his disciples to “take up [their] cross and follow [him]”,454 for "Christ also suffered for [us], leaving [us] an example so that [we] should follow in his steps."455 In fact Jesus desires to associate with his redeeming sacrifice those who were to be its first beneficiaries.456 This is achieved supremely in the case of his mother, who was associated more intimately than any other person in the mystery of his redemptive suffering.457
Apart from the cross there is no other ladder by which we may get to heaven.458452 1 Tim 2:5.
453 Vatican II, Gaudium et Spes 22 # 5; cf. # 2.
454 Mt 16:24.
455 I Pt 2:21.
456 Cf Mk 10:39; Jn 21:18-19; Col 1:24.
457 Cf. Lk 2:35.
458 St. Rose of Lima: cf. P. Hansen, Vita mirabilis (Louvain, 1668).

**

 

[sambos671]

During a Marian argument or debate I mixed up Co-redemtrix and mediatrix calling it Co-mediatrix. The fact is I’m still having problems with Co-redemtrix. I don’t see in scripture how Mary as been assigned a special set apart role as mediatrix and differently than I or you when we intercede for each other. Co-redemtrix seems to indicate Mary has taken the role of Christ or that Christ was impotent unless Mary took an active part. I have issues with that.

 

[Genesis315]

As for Mediatrix, here is the explanation of this doctrine in the CCC:

**

**969 **

"This motherhood of Mary in the order of grace continues uninterruptedly from the consent which she loyally gave at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation … Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix."510

510 Vatican II, Lumen Gentium 62.

**

 

[sambos671]

As for Mediatrix, here is the explanation of this doctrine in the CCC:

---

That discription does not indicate a distinction between Mary and anyone else who participates in intercesion for the church.

 

[Genesis315]

I don’t see in scripture how Mary as been assigned a special set apart role as mediatrix and differently than I or you when we intercede for each other.

First, her will and Christ’s are always united and therefore she always seeks for us things consonant with His will (we do not always do so). Second, as the Mother of the Church, she constantly intercedes for the entire Church. Third, the prayer of the just man availeth much and she is the most just creature and attained a greater degree of perfection than any other saint (therefore, she is “closer” to Christ in Heaven).

Co-redemtrix seems to indicate Mary has taken the role of Christ or that Christ was impotent unless Mary took an active part. I have issues with that.

I agree that this term can be confusing. But it was wholly fitting that just as Eve’s obedience led to Adam’s sin, through which death came to man, so does Mary’s obedience lead to Christ’s redeeming work. And again, as I mentioned before, Mary’s heart was always perfectly united to Christ’s and her suffering always perfectly united to His sacrifice (this was symbolized chiefly in the piercing of her heart prophesied by Simeon). Just as we all participate in our sufferings in that of Christ, she does so most perfectly and meritoriously because she does so without sin.

 

[Genesis315]

Jesus is the head of the Body and we are the members–His life flows from the Head through the rest of the members. For example, bishops share the grace of ordination, priests share the grace of reconciliation, parents teach their children the saving Gospel, all of us hand on the love of God, etc., etc.

Mary, however, received it all first when she “found grace” and God made her “full of grace” at her conception. So she hands on to us all that she received. She received Christ first at the annunciation. When she visited Elizabeth, Elizabeth and John the Baptist received the Spirit. She then offered Jesus to Simeon, a symbol of sharing Him with the Jews. She was present throughout Jesus’ ministry whenever the gifts of grace and salvation were given. She was present at the Cross when His mercy poured forth from His heart and offered Him to the whole world. She shared in His sufferings as a spiritual sword pierced her heart as the lance pierced the heart of Jesus. She was present and prayed with the Apostles when, just as she and John the Baptist had already been, they too were filled with the Holy Spirit at Pentecost.

Finally, she was glorified and assumed into Heaven so that she could be present with all Christians and share with us all the graces and blessings Our Lord desires His Body to have.

For this reason, Mary has been called the neck of the Body of Christ since she is first to receive all the gifts of Christ before they are shared with the rest of the Body. This is uniqueness of Mary as Mediatrix of grace (of course, Jesus is the sole Mediator of justice–only He can justify us).

 

[sambos671]

First, her will and Christ’s are always united and therefore she always seeks for us things consonant with His will (we do not always do so). Second, as the Mother of the Church, she constantly intercedes for the entire Church. Third, the prayer of the just man availeth much and she is the most just creature and attained a greater degree of perfection than any other saint (therefore, she is “closer” to Christ in Heaven).

This may be true but it is arrived at by speculative reasoning. rather than espoused by scripture. We would have to first agree with the premise established of her imperfection. I actually don’t have a problem with that because in which case she may be better able to pray since she’s the most obiedient person is one thing but hypothetically if there was another similiarily obedient person out there who was in line with God’s will then the same would apply to that person.

I agree that this term can be confusing. But it was wholly fitting that just as Eve’s obedience led to Adam’s sin, through which death came to man, so does Mary’s obedience lead to Christ’s redeeming work. And again, as I mentioned before, Mary’s heart was always perfectly united to Christ’s and her suffering always perfectly united to His sacrifice (this was symbolized chiefly in the piercing of her heart prophesied by Simeon). Just as we all participate in our sufferings in that of Christ, she does so most perfectly and meritoriously because she does so without sin.

The one major falacy I see with the catholic thought on this matter is if I take the premise that Mary is perfect and immaculatly concieved the later part may be true. However, in order for Mary to be immaculate was the work of God not her own volition. No one knows whether or not how Mary suffered or to what extent that suffering achieved. In the end Christ saves Mary from Sin (whether before she was concieved or after) he is her redeemer. In which case, she only participated because of God’s good graces not her ability to obey. In which case, Mary is not Co-redemtrix but is herself saved by the same Jesus we all are.

 

[Dark_Warrior]

That discription does not indicate a distinction between Mary and anyone else who participates in intercesion for the church.

I found this on Dave Armstrong’s site where he responds to a critict regarding Mary as co-redemptrix paralleling 1 Kings 2: 17-25:

**"If the kings of Judah had wives for queens, like other nations, then we would have no analogy, but the fact that it might be so unusual, makes it all the more stunning. That the kings in the ancestral line of Jesus had mothers for queens is all the more appropriate that Jesus continue this “unusual practice” and make his mother the queen according to the same pattern of his predecessors.

One CANNOT deny that Solomon, the Son of David who sat on the throne of his father David – Solomon DID have his mother for a queen. And he DID set up the throne for her at his right hand. If it is unusual, it only makes my case all the stronger.

One CANNOT deny that Jesus sits on the throne of his father Solomon. Jesus is the ultimate Son of David who sits on the throne of David (and Solomon) and it would not be unbiblical or irrational or astounding to think that Jesus would do for his mother what Solomon did for his. . . .

. . . He says “she did not obtain from her son what she wished” as if that proved there could not be a Queen Mother. I remember my dad telling me that Mary could not be the queen of heaven – using the same argument – because Bathsheba did not get the request she asked for. I guess my question to that is “So what, what does that prove?”

Solomon was a type of Christ even though he was a sinner. Bathsheba was also a sinner. She asked for something unwise and Solomon refused. Just because Bathsheba asked for something unwise and it was not granted to her by her son Solomon, it does not mean she didn’t have the office of Queen Mother. It simply means she was unwise and didn’t receive her request.

Mary is not unwise and would not ask for something inappropriate. But even if she did (for the sake of argument), it would not invalidate the position of Queen Mother, or prove that she was not in heaven as the queen.

But didn’t Solomon reject his mother’s request? Yes, he did. But that in no way detracts from the fact that this office existed anymore than the presence of false prophets proves that prophets did not exist. It should be noted that all three parties, Adonijah (v. 17), Bathsheba (v. 18), and Solomon (v. 20), believed that because Bathsheba was the Queen Mother that she could intercede on others’ behalf with the reasonable expectation of a favorable answer. No one’s sensibilities are shocked by Bathsheba’s actions. The negative answer does not invalidate the fact that Bathsheba could ask and that there was an expectation that whatever was asked would receive a favorable hearing."**

 

[Dark_Warrior]

And to finish:

**"For example, one may say that the Queen Mothers were terrible sinners and therefore how could Mary be seen as a Queen Mother? This is a terrible argument.

First, whether or not office holders are sinners is irrelevant to whether an office exists. Indeed, an evil office holder may lower the prestige of an office, but it doesn’t invalid[ate] it any more than a bad president proves that the office of president doesn’t exist. We’ve seen that in our lifetime, unfortunately.

Second, the objector assumes that this argument is typological, which it is not. It is analogical. But even if it were a typological argument (which it is not), Mary would be the antitype to Bathsheba by opposition, which is one of the most common anti-typical fulfillments in the Bible. But since this is a[n] argument from the analogy of the institution, it doesn’t matter who the particular office-holder was as long as it was the king’s mother.

God, in his providential care, guided the Old Covenant people to develop certain institutions so that when Christ came, we would, by analogy, have something to help understand Him and his Mission, his office and his Church. For example, the Old Covenant has the institution of the priesthood so that we may understand, by analogy, Christ’s priesthood and how it relates to us and our redemption. Despite the fact that there were false prophets, sinful priests and evil kings in the Old Testament the institutions themselves aid us in understanding Christ, His relationship to God, and his relationship to everyone else since he is the true prophet, priest and king."**
Pretty awesome stuff I thought.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

I know this probably has been asked a thousand times, but could someone please explain Mary as mediatrix and especially CO-mediatrix?

I can’t find anything at catholic answers library.

From what I understand is that the term “co-mediatrix” is actually not official yet.

The word “co-mediatrix” is an absurdity: because it means “mediatrix with the mediatrix” - to make sense, it should be either:​

• mediatrix
  or
• co-mediator
  Even “co-mediator” is misleading, because then the word both affirms & denies parity with the Mediator. And Christ is the Mediator - not a mediator.

“Co-mediatrix” means “second female mediator, along with the first female mediator” - (the FFM being Mary, Mediatrix 1). But that is not what is meant.

Grammatically & semantically, the least problematic word is mediatrix - though even that implies that the BVM mediates independently of Christ. So all three words are problematic.

I think the Church should be content with 1 Timothy 2.5 - what is wrong with having Christ as Mediator ? He does not need help. Thrust Mary into what she cannot do - it is not her blood, or her merits, or her sacrificial death, or her atoning sacrifice, that give sinners peace with God, but Christ’s Alone - & that sort of semantic & grammatical & theological confusion is the result. Even the CC does not - yet - think that we receive the Body & Blood of Mary in the Eucharist; & Calvary is inextricably connected to the Eucharist . That being so, she can no more mediate for us than an ant or a beetle could, or than we could.

 

[Joe_5859]

During a Marian argument or debate I mixed up Co-redemtrix and mediatrix calling it Co-mediatrix. The fact is I’m still having problems with Co-redemtrix. I don’t see in scripture how Mary as been assigned a special set apart role as mediatrix and differently than I or you when we intercede for each other. Co-redemtrix seems to indicate Mary has taken the role of Christ or that Christ was impotent unless Mary took an active part. I have issues with that.

If you’re looking for explanations defending the term and the doctrine behind the term using Scripture and magisterial teaching, I recommend looking at the FAQ and the Response to 7 Common Objections on the Fifth Marian Dogma website.

If you don’t find these arguments compelling, then I’m not sure that I could offer anything better for you.

 

[Genesis315]

The one major falacy I see with the catholic thought on this matter is if I take the premise that Mary is perfect and immaculatly concieved the later part may be true. However, in order for Mary to be immaculate was the work of God not her own volition. No one knows whether or not how Mary suffered or to what extent that suffering achieved. In the end Christ saves Mary from Sin (whether before she was concieved or after) he is her redeemer. In which case, she only participated because of God’s good graces not her ability to obey. In which case, Mary is not Co-redemtrix but is herself saved by the same Jesus we all are.

That is exactly the Catholic position. I think you ascribing a redeeming action de condigno where Catholics only see one de congruo.

 

[Good_Fella]

I think the Church should be content with 1 Timothy 2.5 - what is wrong with having Christ as Mediator ? He does not need help. Thrust Mary into what she cannot do - it is not her blood, or her merits, or her sacrificial death, or her atoning sacrifice, that give sinners peace with God, but Christ’s Alone - & that sort of semantic & grammatical & theological confusion is the result. Even the CC does not - yet - think that we receive the Body & Blood of Mary in the Eucharist; & Calvary is inextricably connected to the Eucharist . That being so, she can no more mediate for us than an ant or a beetle could, or than we could.

But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people of his own, so that you may announce the praises of him who called you to his wonderful light.
1 Peter 2, 9

The Catholic Church does not teach that Mary has a role of redemption, mediation, and advocacy of her own. Her acts in the interest of our salvation occur “in” Christ, not “with” nor “subordinate” to Christ. Obviously our Lord and Saviour does not need anyone to help him mediate on our behalf and redeeem the world. His Passion and Death is all-sufficient. But God does will that we offer prayers, supplications, and petitions for others in the name of Christ and through his merits alone, for God desires that each and everyone of us be saved (cf. 1 Tim 2: 1-4). I trust you don’t subscribe to the false concept of Double-Predestination.

It isn’t a question of whether Jesus needs our help. If it were, then we Christians may as well refrain from praying and making personal sacrifices for the conversion of sinners and bearing witness to others by word and deed in an evangelical capacity. Paul may just as well have abandoned his ministry confident that our Lord would reach out to everyone on his own without the need of apostles. Meanwhile God could have willed to save us without sending his Only-begotten Son by the virtue of Mary’s ‘Fiat’ (cf. Lk 1: 38). Our heavenly Father does not will that we be passive spectators in his plan of salvation brought to fulfillment strictly by the merits of Christ’s Precious Blood.

Concerning 1 Timothy 2:5, which should be taken as part of the entire passage (1-7), exegete Manuel Miguens has pointed out that this verse should be translated from the Greek to mean “There is one and the same God [for all]; there is also one and the same mediator [for all].” In other words, Christ served as a ransom for all of us. Paul does not mean to tell us that there is numerically one God and mediator, but rather the love and benevolence of God and our reconciliation with him by the redemptive merits of Christ’s Passion and death is for the entire human race: Jews and Gentiles. The Greek word for “one” used in this verse is ‘heis’ instead of ‘monos’. The latter signifies “only” in the sense of exclusiveness, whereas the former term means “one” in the sameness of function.

In his epistles Paul teaches us that there are three kinds of mediators: priestly mediators (Christ-Aaron), covenantal mediators (Moses-Jesus), and factual mediators (Abraham-Paul). A factual mediator is one through whom, by divine decree, the grace of God is dispensed to a community. Christ is the one Mediator who alone reconciles us to the Father, and all other mediators are those who are called to participate in our Lord’s mediation by cooperating with him in leading souls to salvation in a prayerful and evangelical way. Many souls were converted to Christ on account of the great sacrifices Paul had made in His name and for the Church (cf. Col 1: 24). The gospels of Luke and John reveal that Mary served as a type of factual mediator in her active involvement for the spiritual benefit of the human race. In true faith she freely cooperated with the will of God in his plan of salvation which in his infinite wisdom calls for human participation. Jesus wished to perform his first miracle and begin his mission through Mary’s solicitation - a meaningful gesture on our Lord’s part.

“Mary’s function as mother of men in no way obscures or diminishes this unique mediation of Christ, but rather shows its power. But the Blessed Virgin’s salutary influence on men…flows forth from the superabundance of the merits of Christ, rests on his mediation, depends entirely on it, and draws all its power from it [LG 60]. No creature could ever be counted along with the Incarnate Word and Redeemer, but just as the priesthood of Christ is shared in various ways both by his ministers and the faithful, and as the one goodness of God is radiated in different ways among his creatures, so also the unique mediation of the Redeemer does not exclude but rather gives rise to a manifold cooperation which is but sharing in this one source [LG 62].”
Catechism of the Catholic Church #970]

PAX

 

[ChristIsLord]

The theology is sound but the word choices are terrible IMO. I love Mary as much as the next guy and pretending she was just a simple woman who did her one role and that’s it back to cleaning the pantry is absurd to me. She was giving to us by Jesus as our Mother, and we can ask her to pray for us. So in effect she is interceding on our behalf. However the prefixe co seems to mean that Mary and Jesus redeemed mankind together and that Jesus would’ve been powerless without Mary, which to me takes away Jesus Divinity, God is omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient. The wors choice should be thought out better IMO.

But I’m not certain a fifth dogma is a good idea, however I’m not the Pope to decide these matters anyway.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people of his own, so that you may announce the praises of him who called you to his wonderful light.
1 Peter 2, 9

The Catholic Church does not teach that Mary has a role of redemption, mediation, and advocacy of her own. Her acts in the interest of our salvation occur “in” Christ, not “with” nor “subordinate” to Christ.

Not “with” ? So why the “co-” ? **In practice, Marian mediation is presented as something she does to save us from Jesus - the emphasis on Christ’s Mediation is invisible in de Montfort’s “True Devotion”. It still sells well - we’re not talking about a book that (unhappily) was a tad OTT but (happily) is no longer read; this is a book that still influences how Catholics think of the BVM & the Mediator. Ask anyone in the Legion of Mary. **​

Obviously our Lord and Saviour does not need anyone to help him mediate on our behalf and redeeem the world.

**You know that. I know that. So do a lot of Christians. Sad to say, some Catholic theological writers seem not to. **​

His Passion and Death is all-sufficient. But God does will that we offer prayers, supplications, and petitions for others in the name of Christ and through his merits alone, for God desires that each and everyone of us be saved (cf. 1 Tim 2: 1-4). I trust you don’t subscribe to the false concept of Double-Predestination.

Double Positive Predestination, FWIW - & no, I don’t; though I see no ethical problem with it.​

It isn’t a question of whether Jesus needs our help.

**Oh, but it most certainly is. Positions that deny or obscure the all-sufficiency of Christ are certainly questions about Christ. For Christian thinkers to make His mother the cause of this obscurity is a horrible development. **​

If it were, then we Christians may as well refrain from praying and making personal sacrifices for the conversion of sinners and bearing witness to others by word and deed in an evangelical capacity. Paul may just as well have abandoned his ministry confident that our Lord would reach out to everyone on his own without the need of apostles.

**That is a serious misunderstanding - as the NT shows. Calvin is a fine corrective to this misconception about human & Divine activity. **​

more…