Co redemptrix dogmatically defined?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Iotaunum
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
From FCEGM, post #194
The Holy Father in his General Audience on Wednesday, March 30th, 2011: “Redemption is offered to all human beings ‘in abundance’. And precisely because it is Christological, Alphonsian piety is also exquisitely Marian. Deeply devoted to Mary he illustrates her role in the history of salvation: an associate in the Redemption and Mediatrix of grace, Mother, Advocate and Queen.”
Click to expand...
See: vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2011/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20110330_en.html

Thank you very much Frances – this is yet another of the numerous examples of the confirmation of the fidelity of the doctrines considered. In this we see true devotion with faith and reason.
 
:angel1:
Ignatius said:
It seems that there are those that will not accept the fact that the title ‘Co-Redemptrix’ is not only not a doctrine of The Church, but has actually been determined to be ambiguous and problematic. No matter how much evidence is presented, they will simply not accept it and choose to post again and again the false notion that it is actually a doctrine of The Church. I this the best course of action is to simply state that truth that it is not a doctrine, but has actually been determined to be ambiguous and problematic.

Please continue to post the truth here in the hope that it will keep some from being lead astray by the false claims of it’s proponents.
Click to expand...
I agree with you Iggy.I can’t understand why many people insist on this. Mary is not our redeemer,Jesus Christ is.He is the Son of God, the Messiah,spoken of by the holy prohets of the bible. He is the Lamb of God, His blood was spilt so that we would be saved.He sacrificed His life for us. No man comes to the Father except through him.
Mary gave birth to Jesus, but He had a mission to fufill which was His own. Only Jesus can save us. My late parents would not be pleased to hear all the brouhaha over something which is not theologically sound,and certainly not biblical either.
This is one of the reasons that the reunion between Catholics and some of the protestant churchs won’t happen, because of this sort of thing.While other doctrinal hurddles might be overcome, this is one that will not.While there has always been devotion to Mary throughout the centuries, this one is something that seems to get pushed more and more.Never heard of it before, util JP2,certainly when I was growing up in the 1960s and 70s rarely heard anyone speak about this. Of course people like myself and Iggy or others of a like mind are going to be branded heretics, because we don’t believe in this.
Oh well then so be it, but this is not biblical in any way shape or form.
 
HollyDolly said:
:angel1:

I agree with you Iggy.I can’t understand why many people insist on this. Mary is not our redeemer,Jesus Christ is.He is the Son of God, the Messiah,spoken of by the holy prohets of the bible. He is the Lamb of God, His blood was spilt so that we would be saved.He sacrificed His life for us. No man comes to the Father except through him.
Mary gave birth to Jesus, but He had a mission to fufill which was His own. Only Jesus can save us. My late parents would not be pleased to hear all the brouhaha over something which is not theologically sound,and certainly not biblical either.
This is one of the reasons that the reunion between Catholics and some of the protestant churchs won’t happen, because of this sort of thing.While other doctrinal hurddles might be overcome, this is one that will not.While there has always been devotion to Mary throughout the centuries, this one is something that seems to get pushed more and more.Never heard of it before, util JP2,certainly when I was growing up in the 1960s and 70s rarely heard anyone speak about this. Of course people like myself and Iggy or others of a like mind are going to be branded heretics, because we don’t believe in this.
Oh well then so be it, but this is not biblical in any way shape or form.
Click to expand...
Suppose Mary had said “no”?
 
HollyDolly said:
:angel1:

I agree with you Iggy.I can’t understand why many people insist on this. Mary is not our redeemer,Jesus Christ is.He is the Son of God, the Messiah,spoken of by the holy prohets of the bible. He is the Lamb of God, His blood was spilt so that we would be saved.He sacrificed His life for us. No man comes to the Father except through him.
Mary gave birth to Jesus, but He had a mission to fufill which was His own. Only Jesus can save us. My late parents would not be pleased to hear all the brouhaha over something which is not theologically sound,and certainly not biblical either.
This is one of the reasons that the reunion between Catholics and some of the protestant churchs won’t happen, because of this sort of thing.While other doctrinal hurddles might be overcome, this is one that will not.While there has always been devotion to Mary throughout the centuries, this one is something that seems to get pushed more and more.Never heard of it before, util JP2,certainly when I was growing up in the 1960s and 70s rarely heard anyone speak about this. Of course people like myself and Iggy or others of a like mind are going to be branded heretics, because we don’t believe in this.
Oh well then so be it, but this is not biblical in any way shape or form.
Click to expand...
Actually it is quite biblical, if only you would take the time to learn.
 
paperwight66 said:
Very well, then - teach us.
Click to expand...
Very well then. But first you must become willing to agree on a whole range of theological terms. Are you willing to do so?

The very first term you must understand is theotokos or Mother of God.
 
paperwight66 said:
Very well, then - teach us.
Click to expand...
In order to appreciate exactly the import of Mary’s obviously free consent at the Annunciation we need to know first to what she is being asked to consent. Gabriel says "Thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and shalt bear a son, and shalt call him Jesus. He shall be great, and men will know him for the Son of the Most High, the Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, and he shall reign over the house of Jacob eternally (Luke 1:31-41).

To this Mary, by her own free will, responded “Yes.” She consented to be the Theotokos, the Mother of God.

Now, you may ask, what does Mary being the Mother of God have to do with the topic. How do we get from Mary being God’s Mother to her being the Co-Redemptrix? Simply put, can you see how by the fact of Mary agreeing to the Incarnation of the Savior of the world she was co-operating with God’s plan of salvation for all of mankind?

It forms part of the Church’s treasure of faith, explicitly handed down from the earliest times, that Mary is the cause of our salvation, not only because the Savior was born of her, but because, as the New Eve, she contributed to it by her own actions. All Catholics are therefore agreed on this point that Mary was Jesus’ collaborator.

Two phases are to be distinguished in the work of redemption: that of Jesus’ life on earth which is called the phase the winning of grace, of objective salvation, or better still, of general causality of salvation. The other phase can then be called that of the distribution of grace, the subjective redemption, but it might be better to call it the phase of application of the general causality of salvation.

Everyone accepts Mary’s co-operation with respect to this latter phase, inasmuch as by her powerful intercession, she is called distributor of grace under Jesus. As regards the earthly period, all are agreed that she co-operated with Jesus, by:

(a) meriting the putting forward (in time) of the Incarnation
(b) meriting to be the instrument of the Incarnation
(c) freely accepting to be the Mother of God
(d) bearing, bringing up and preparing Jesus for His sacrifice
(e) enduring with Him the suffering by which He saved us

Are you with me so far?

(cont.)
 
paperwight66 said:
Very well, then - teach us.
Click to expand...
Mary’ compassion with Christ was entirely in the order of applied redemption. So, in this same order, the Patriarchs contributed to our salvation by their longing for the coming of the Saviour, and Abraham merited the grace of faith for us (Galatians 3:7-9). While Christ was dying on the Cross John stood beneath it with His mother. I am assuming that John surmised something of the meaning of this death, and if so, his compassion for Christ also contributed to our salvation. But on account of Mary’s exceptional union with Christ in the order of applied salvation, her compassion with Him as she stood by the Cross is very specially constituted. Her activity alone includes, like that of Christ, the whole of salvation. By her fiat and her compassion, she is the mother of life for all men. Christ came to atone for us; but first God asked for Mary’s fiat, her “Yes!” if you will. She gave it freely and it was completed by her dolorous compassion on Calvary. Here the activity of the New Eve surpasses that of all who collaborate in order to bring about the redemption. Therefore in the order of applied salvation, which embraces both meriting and distributing grace, she is in an order by herself.

(cont.)
 
Tomster said:
Mary’ compassion with Christ was entirely in the order of applied redemption. So, in this same order, the Patriarchs contributed to our salvation by their longing for the coming of the Saviour, and Abraham merited the grace of faith for us (Galatians 3:7-9). While Christ was dying on the Cross John stood beneath it with His mother. I am assuming that John surmised something of the meaning of this death, and if so, his compassion for Christ also contributed to our salvation. But on account of Mary’s exceptional union with Christ in the order of applied salvation, her compassion with Him as she stood by the Cross is very specially constituted. Her activity alone includes, like that of Christ, the whole of salvation. By her fiat and her compassion, she is the mother of life for all men. Christ came to atone for us; but first God asked for Mary’s fiat, her “Yes!” if you will. She gave it freely and it was completed by her dolorous compassion on Calvary. Here the activity of the New Eve surpasses that of all who collaborate in order to bring about the redemption. Therefore in the order of applied salvation, which embraces both meriting and distributing grace, she is in an order by herself.

(cont.)
Click to expand...
paperwight66,

The purport of the above passage is clear:

(a) Mary is in the same order as all those who collaborate in the application of salvation, as Abraham did, who merited the grace of faith for us, or as St. John did

(b) Nevertheless Mary is not to be put on the level as these without further comment, for she had something that those others did not: she merited not only, as they did, a definite grace, but all salvation for all

(c) The order of applied salvation includes not only distribution of graces, but also meriting them.
 
Tomster said:
Iggy,

You have failed to do your homework again

Please refute the seven responses.
Click to expand...
Tom, I’ll rely on official teachings of The Magisterium of The Catholic Church, thanks anyway.

You go ahead and feel free to put your trust in The New York times if you like.

Your servant in Christ.
 
HollyDolly said:
:angel1:
40.png
Ignatius:
It seems that there are those that will not accept the fact that the title ‘Co-Redemptrix’ is not only not
Click to expand...
a doctrine of The Church, but has actually been determined to be ambiguous and problematic. No matter how much evidence is presented, they will simply not accept it and choose to post again and again the false notion that it is actually a doctrine of The Church. I this the best course of action is to simply state that truth that it is not a doctrine, but has actually been determined to be ambiguous and problematic.

Please continue to post the truth here in the hope that it will keep some from being lead astray by the false claims of it’s proponents.

I agree with you Iggy.I can’t understand why many people insist on this. Mary is not our redeemer,Jesus Christ is.He is the Son of God, the Messiah,spoken of by the holy prohets of the bible. He is the Lamb of God, His blood was spilt so that we would be saved.He sacrificed His life for us. No man comes to the Father except through him.
Mary gave birth to Jesus, but He had a mission to fufill which was His own. Only Jesus can save us. My late parents would not be pleased to hear all the brouhaha over something which is not theologically sound,and certainly not biblical either.
This is one of the reasons that the reunion between Catholics and some of the protestant churchs won’t happen, because of this sort of thing.While other doctrinal hurddles might be overcome, this is one that will not.While there has always been devotion to Mary throughout the centuries, this one is something that seems to get pushed more and more.Never heard of it before, util JP2,certainly when I was growing up in the 1960s and 70s rarely heard anyone speak about this. Of course people like myself and Iggy or others of a like mind are going to be branded heretics, because we don’t believe in this.
Oh well then so be it, but this is not biblical in any way shape or form.
Click to expand...
Exactly, I love Our Holy Mother Mary and happily sing her praises, I am very devoted to her and believe that she would want us to leave these issue up the The Authentic Teaching authority of The Magisterium, which has stated that the problematic title of ‘Co-Redemptrix’ cannot be recommended because it is totally ambiguous.

Hail Holy Queen
Hail Holy Queen enthron’d above, O Maria
Hail Mother of Mercy and of love O Maria

Triumph all ye Cherubim
Sing with us ye Seraphim
Heav’n and earth resound the hymn
Salve Salve Salve Regina

Our life our sweetness here below O Maria
Our hope in sorrow and in woe O Maria

Triumph all ye Cherubim
Sing with us ye Seraphim
Heav’n and earth resound the hymn
Salve Salve Salve Regina

We honour you for Christ, your Son, O Maria!
Who has for us redemption won, O Maria!

Triumph all ye Cherubim
Sing with us ye Seraphim
Heav’n and earth resound the hymn
Salve Salve Salve Regina
 
Ignatius
The Authentic Teaching authority of The Magisterium, which has stated that the problematic title of ‘Co-Redemptrix’ cannot be recommended because it is totally ambiguous.
Click to expand...
  1. False, and no “Authentic Teaching authority of The Magisterium” can be produced to substantiate such a flight of fantasy.
  2. The study of the theological commission including non-Catholic theologians refers to the Request for definition of “the dogma of Mary as Mediatrix, Coredemptrix and Advocate” and the three titles go together.
  3. In *Redemptoris Mater *(Mother of the Redeemer), on the Blessed Virgin Mary in the Life of the Pilgrim Church, Pope John Paul II points out that this mediation of Mary Immaculate “is intimately linked with her motherhood,” and he notes with the Second Vatican Council that “the Church does not hesitate to profess this subordinate role of Mary," in her being invoked by the Church as "a sharing in the one unique source that is the mediation of Christ himself” (RM 38).
  4. The Holy Father in his General Audience on Wednesday, March 30th, 2011: “Redemption is offered to all human beings ‘in abundance’. And precisely because it is Christological, Alphonsian piety is also exquisitely Marian. Deeply devoted to Mary he illustrates her role in the history of salvation: an associate in the Redemption and Mediatrix of grace, Mother, Advocate and Queen.”
    See: vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2011/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20110330_en.html
  5. On the doctrine of Co-redemptrix, an unassailable papal declaration is: “Therefore, one can say, she [that is, the Blessed Virgin] redeemed with Christ the human race.” Pope Benedict XV, Apostolic Letter Inter soldalica, AAS 1918, 18.
There can only be confusion when some are unable to distinguish fact from fiction. It unfortunately results in deception on the three doctrines. There is no “ambiguity” in the use of the titles by these three Popes – Benedict XV, John Paul II and Benedict XVI.
 
Gosh is this tennis match still going on?

How many Rosaries could have been said while this debate has been going on ?

In the end the Vatican will have its say and it will be interesting what will be the response from many posters in this thread. I’m starting to think Christ himself could appear and pronounce the truth and there are people in here would tell him he is wrong.

I keep saying it ; a bit of humility and patience is needed here to wait on the Pope and Vatican on this. I’m sure ( but I have no proof ) the Pope would appreciate if the Faithfull would stop bickering and let his chosen people sort it out. 😃
 
Thankfully, by now many more know what the Church teaches on the difference between dogma and doctrine; that the titles given to Our Blessed Mother are doctrinally sound, encompass the reality of her status and life in God’s Plan, based on beliefs of saints and doctors of the Church from early times and declared by several Popes to today.

The Church will decide if and when a dogma will be declared requiring the assent of divine and Catholic faith. A doctrine requires at the very least the intellectual assent of intellect and will, without which the individual is in dissent – unacceptable to faith.

As long as there are aspersions cast on what the Church is actually teaching through Her Magisterium then the truth needs to see the light of day.
 
I would suggest that many more know the meaning of the saying " like a scratched Record " . But i’m guessing you don’t. Abu tell me what does like a scratched record mean.😃
 
thirddec said:
Gosh is this tennis match still going on?

How many Rosaries could have been said while this debate has been going on ?

In the end the Vatican will have its say and it will be interesting what will be the response from many posters in this thread. I’m starting to think Christ himself could appear and pronounce the truth and there are people in here would tell him he is wrong.

I keep saying it ; a bit of humility and patience is needed here to wait on the Pope and Vatican on this. I’m sure ( but I have no proof ) the Pope would appreciate if the Faithfull would stop bickering and let his chosen people sort it out.
Click to expand...
My point exactly. Apparently some of the folks here get their doctrine from the New York Times.

The Commission has said that the term ‘Co-Redemptrix’ is unsuitable for doctrinal use as it is ambiguous. I agree with you that we need to stand on that until we hear differently from The Magisterium.

I cannot let the false claim that the term ‘Co-Redemptrix’ is an official Doctrine of The Catholic Church go unchallenged. I intent to keep saying the Truth and praying about this; The truth is that this is not a Catholic doctrine and is problematic and ambiguous.

Please Join me in asking Our Lady to intercede that people will lay down this demand for ‘Co-Redemptrix’ as dogma and leave the decision up to The Magisterial Authorities.

Hail Mary full of Grace The Lord is with thee.
Blessed art thou among women and blessed is the Fruit of thy womb, Jesus.

Holy Mary, pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death. Amen.
 
Ignatius said:
Tom, I’ll rely on official teachings of The Magisterium of The Catholic Church, thanks anyway.

You go ahead and feel free to put your trust in The New York times if you like.

Your servant in Christ.
Click to expand...
Once again, I refer you the official teachings of twentieth century Popes; “Jucunda semper” - Pope Leo XII, “Ad diem illum” - Pope St. Pius X; and “Inter sodalicia” - Pope Benedict XV.

You really should read these teachings prayerfully.
 
Tomster said:
This one is especially for you Iggy.

voxpopuli.org/response_to_7_common_objections_part1.php

Please read all seven objections and responses.

Your job will be to refute the seven response.

Take your best shot! :knight2:
Click to expand...
Iggy,

Have you read the seven objections and responses? (I think not)

Have you even attempted to refute the responses to the objections? (I think not)

We have given you sufficient time to do so.

Why haven’t you done so?
 
Does anyone here find it sad that people are arguing over this issue. Any Catholic knows we do not worship Mary. She is our Mother who’s only goal is to lead us to Christ. Yet there is an argument over wether or not we love her too much. Do you really think that Jesus is worried about revering his mother too much. I think he is more concerned with us loving enough in general. As far as how other faiths veiw this I am not willing to cower away from the Blessed Virgin to seem less controversial. She is so much more than any saint she was the only human born without sin. Loving and revering her can never be harmful because it it’s pure form inevitably leads to her son. Our mediator in prayer and vessel of the holy spirit should be imitated not fought over on order to gain a sense of intellectual superiority.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top