M
MaggieOH
Guest
What is the meaning of co-redemptrix? The emphasis is on the prefix “co” which means that Mary co-operated with God’s plan of Salvation. A Scriptural understanding of this “doctrine” is also based upon the infancy narratives, and in particular Luke’s Gospel. The basis of Mary’s co-operation is her fiat:
"Then Mary said to the angel, “How can this be, since I am a virgin?” And the angel said to her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the holy child to be born shall be called Son of God… Then Mary said: “I am the handmaid of the Lord, let it be done to me as you have said.” And the angel left her. " (Lk 1: 34-38)
The fiat, “let it be done to me as you have said” is the statement that shows that Mary used her free will to accept what was being offered to her by God. As a good Jewish girl she was well aware of the prophecies for the Messiah, and no doubt she also read the signs of the times, and she desired to be able to serve the Messiah in some way. She had no idea that she would be chosen for this role, but she obeyed God by agreeing to do His Will. By her fiat, therefore, Mary overturned the disobedience of Eve, when she gave into temptation and ate of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
The Calvinist theology known as T.U.L.I.P. denies that man has free will, because according to this theology man is totally depraved and depends solely upon God for grace. This is why the fundamentalist finds it so hard to accept the Truth of Scripture, that Mary truly co-operated with God, and by her consent she was used by God as an instrument to bring us into the era of Grace.
The co-operation does not end with Mary’s fiat. Also from Luke’s Gospel is the following:
"Simeon blessed them and said to Mary, his mother, “See him; he will be for the rise or fall of the multitudes of Israel. He shall stand as a sign of contradiction, while a sword will pierce your own soul.” (Luke 2: 33-35)
These are very weighty words because this is a prophecy for Mary that she will share in some way in the sufferings of her Son, both during the period of His Public Life, and through His Trial, Condemnation and Crucifixion. As His Mother, she would feel the pain of all mothers, whose children have caused them grief in some way, including seeing their sons tried for murder (that they might not have committed). Perhaps I could use a modern example of the pain and suffering of those mothers whose children disappeared in Iraq during the reign of terror of Saddam Hussein, for their children were surely innocent of any crime. Or perhaps I could use the scenes that I have witnessed most recently on the news broadcasts of the sorrow of those mothers whose children were taken from them as a result of the Tsanumi. In other words the suffering of Mary as the Mother of Christ were immense and in this way she shared in the sufferings of Christ.
So how then are we to see Mary as Co-Mediatrix of all Graces? It is not always possible to explain to those who wilfully shut their eyes when the Mother of God is mentioned. It seems as though one cannot accept any doctrine relating to Mary out of fear of being “Romanish” or at least that is the charge that is thrown about with a bit of abandon by the fundamentalists who claim that the Catholics are guilty of idolatry. So how do they answer when they are reminded that without Mary’s co-operation with the Will of God, the Messiah could not come into the world? According to the most common answer I have seen: he would have chosen someone else.
Can the fundamentalist position, that God would have chosen another be sustained? I have yet to see Scriptural evidence to support this particular response
Maggie
"Then Mary said to the angel, “How can this be, since I am a virgin?” And the angel said to her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the holy child to be born shall be called Son of God… Then Mary said: “I am the handmaid of the Lord, let it be done to me as you have said.” And the angel left her. " (Lk 1: 34-38)
The fiat, “let it be done to me as you have said” is the statement that shows that Mary used her free will to accept what was being offered to her by God. As a good Jewish girl she was well aware of the prophecies for the Messiah, and no doubt she also read the signs of the times, and she desired to be able to serve the Messiah in some way. She had no idea that she would be chosen for this role, but she obeyed God by agreeing to do His Will. By her fiat, therefore, Mary overturned the disobedience of Eve, when she gave into temptation and ate of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
The Calvinist theology known as T.U.L.I.P. denies that man has free will, because according to this theology man is totally depraved and depends solely upon God for grace. This is why the fundamentalist finds it so hard to accept the Truth of Scripture, that Mary truly co-operated with God, and by her consent she was used by God as an instrument to bring us into the era of Grace.
The co-operation does not end with Mary’s fiat. Also from Luke’s Gospel is the following:
"Simeon blessed them and said to Mary, his mother, “See him; he will be for the rise or fall of the multitudes of Israel. He shall stand as a sign of contradiction, while a sword will pierce your own soul.” (Luke 2: 33-35)
These are very weighty words because this is a prophecy for Mary that she will share in some way in the sufferings of her Son, both during the period of His Public Life, and through His Trial, Condemnation and Crucifixion. As His Mother, she would feel the pain of all mothers, whose children have caused them grief in some way, including seeing their sons tried for murder (that they might not have committed). Perhaps I could use a modern example of the pain and suffering of those mothers whose children disappeared in Iraq during the reign of terror of Saddam Hussein, for their children were surely innocent of any crime. Or perhaps I could use the scenes that I have witnessed most recently on the news broadcasts of the sorrow of those mothers whose children were taken from them as a result of the Tsanumi. In other words the suffering of Mary as the Mother of Christ were immense and in this way she shared in the sufferings of Christ.
So how then are we to see Mary as Co-Mediatrix of all Graces? It is not always possible to explain to those who wilfully shut their eyes when the Mother of God is mentioned. It seems as though one cannot accept any doctrine relating to Mary out of fear of being “Romanish” or at least that is the charge that is thrown about with a bit of abandon by the fundamentalists who claim that the Catholics are guilty of idolatry. So how do they answer when they are reminded that without Mary’s co-operation with the Will of God, the Messiah could not come into the world? According to the most common answer I have seen: he would have chosen someone else.
Can the fundamentalist position, that God would have chosen another be sustained? I have yet to see Scriptural evidence to support this particular response
Maggie