Is Mary A Co-Redeemer

[Ceil-1]

**She’s God’s copilot. ** Use that instead of co-redemptrix. It’s a gift in the order of grace, from God through her, to us.

God allows her to help Him, not unlike the way we help God through our prayers,evangelization, and submitting ourselves to God’s Will and inspiration of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit was so completely manifest in her, it brought about the Incarnation. God allowed her to donate her DNA to Him. Her flesh literally housed God Himself. Just another girl on the street? I don’t think people understand what the Incarantion was or meant; those who say that.

Who hasn’t shown up just in the nick of time for roadside assistance, or a kind word to a friend? What Christian is not aware of how their work, be it a doctor or a ditch-digger, accomplishes God’s plan? They are participating in God’s plan without even realizing it. Surely, given some thought, one could understand the extraordinary holiness of this woman.

Those who do not understand the Communion of Saints will not understand the meaning of this term.

 

[Eucharisted]

Co-Redeemer is a lie that some folks believe in. Co-Redemptrix, however, is a truth that all Catholics must believe in.

Mary is Co-Redemptrix in that she co-operated with Christ in His redemptive work (Co-Redemp) as the woman, the New Eve (-trix). In other words, by giving birth to Christ and uniting herself to Him through prayer, and, through suffering at the foot of the Cross, she co-operated with Jesus in saving mankind. Just as every Christian co-operates with Christ by living his vocation, by prayer, and by suffering with Him. In Jesus’ own words: “If you wish to be My disciples, than deny yourselves, take up your cross, and follow Me.”

 

[1ke]

Hi, I have been doing searches on the Catholic Church and the Virgin Mary. I came across some articles about how Catholics are petitioning Pope Benedict XVI to make Mary the Co-redeemer. What does that mean and what do Catholics think about Mary and redeeming us along with Jesus?

Thanks for your answers.

Of course Mary is the Co-Redemptrix in that she co-operated with God in the plan of Salvation and the Incarnation. Note: There is no now, nor has there ever been a teaching regarding Mary as “co-redeemer” nor is there such a “petition” in front of the Pope.

We act in this same way when we co-operate in God’s plan of Salvation. St. Paul expresses as much in Colossians (1:24).

It is unfortunate that the English language fails to adequately express the concept of Co-Redemptrix and people view it in an inaccurate way because of this. However, this failure of the English language in no way negates the truth of the doctrine.

It is not a new doctrine, the Church does teach this through the ordinary Magesterium. What is being petitioned is that the doctrine be defined as Dogma-- an elevation to a solemn definition.

 

[chaunceygardner]

The “push” to make this belief Church Dogma is sort of an “urban legend”. It has been around for more than a decade, and there have been articles saying that the Pope (whichever one it was at the time) was about to make the pronouncement.

But is it really necessary? And would it be in the best interests of the Church?

I noted one advocate site that said the early Apostles, evangelists, missionaries and even Catholics today are all “co-redeemers” in that they all have (or should be) working along with God to spread the Gospel to the world. Not as equals to Jesus, but as His partners and disciples. That is correct. But they then go on to promote this doctrine of Mary, ignoring all those others they called “co-redeemers” as well. To me, those early, brave Christians, many of whom were martyred, who deserve that title as well.

The problem with declaring Mary as Co-Redemptrix is that it will be misunderstood, as others have said. No matter what the theology is, most people will look upon it as placing Mary closer in equality to Jesus, and to many it will appear that the primacy of Jesus will be more obscured by a seemingly obsessive devotion to Mary. That may not be the intent, but it could easily be the result.

In so many threads, Catholics ask Protestants why they don’t see Catholicism as the true Church. But if these Catholics would look at how the aura of Mary appears to be permeating the Church more and more, and seems to be detracting from the Gospel of Jesus, they would see one big answer to their own question.

 

[Ceil-1]

I beg to differ. The Friars of the Immaculata (FI) are very interested in pushing this dogma because they feel it will usher in a new age of the Church. They are very gung-ho on this. A conference was held in our parish on this very subject.

The dogma will have something to do with the Alliance of the Two Hearts.

christendom-awake.org/pages/united-hearts/2hearts&consec.htm

 

[chaunceygardner]

I beg to differ. The Friars of the Immaculata (FI) are very interested in pushing this dogma because they feel it will usher in a new age of the Church. They are very gung-ho on this. A conference was held in our parish on this very subject.

The dogma will have something to do with the Alliance of the Two Hearts.

christendom-awake.org/pages/united-hearts/2hearts&consec.htm

The “urban legend” statement had to do with the Magisterium of the Church being ready to make this doctrine official; I apologize for not making that clear. The impetus for this is coming from the “trenches”, mostly at the parish and organizational level, as you indicate. But with the Church’s track record for ignoring the Catholic faithful in their decision making process, you will need some “heavy hitters” to get this done.

I believe it is in the best interests of the Church to not proclaim another Marian Dogma, as it would be misunderstood by most people (including a lot of Catholics) and have negative repercussions on the Church.

It would be wonderful if we all spent as much time in learning the Word of God and doing His will in our daily lives as is spent on promoting Mary.

 

[ThuriferAcolyte]

It’s always interesting (at least for me) to compare the Eastern Orthodox view of Mary. It’s interesting that although they also venerate Mary, many (Russian Orthodox seem more vocal) denounce these sorts of developments (Co-Redemptrix, Co-Mediatrix).

 

[Guyonthestreet]

It’s always interesting (at least for me) to compare the Eastern Orthodox view of Mary. It’s interesting that although they also venerate Mary, many (Russian Orthodox seem more vocal) denounce these sorts of developments (Co-Redemptrix, Co-Mediatrix).

I find it very interesting as well.

And is something I find wuite appealing in the Orthodox tradition.

They accept mystery as it is - mystery.

I think the whole Mary as Co anything is just a step too far.

I cannot understand the catholic obsession with elevating Mary to a status such as this. It never seems to end. I’ll bring it up in RCIA, but based on my experiences so far, I seriously doubt I’ll get any form of cohesive answer.

 

[dzheremi]

It’s always interesting (at least for me) to compare the Eastern Orthodox view of Mary. It’s interesting that although they also venerate Mary, many (Russian Orthodox seem more vocal) denounce these sorts of developments (Co-Redemptrix, Co-Mediatrix).

Exaaaaaaactly! There is no need for these sorts of things in order to give Mary her proper place within the Church. No title that we in the CC don’t give her will take away from her place in proper Christian devotion, while on the other hand using these sorts of titles invites all kinds of problems from people who can fit all sorts of heterodoxy or heresy within Marian devotion by the inroad made by such a dogmatic proclamation.

I remember that the times that this topic has come up in the presence of our Eastern Catholic brothers and sisters, the general consensus from them has been “why is this necessary? Let some people believe it privately if they want, but it doesn’t need to be dogma”. I agree completely.

EDIT: Not to mention that this sort of “dogma ad populum” decision making, if it were to be assented to in this case, is in direct contradiction to the means by which I was told in RCIA that the Church proclaims dogmatic truth. Coming from Protestantism as I do, this is a very important and disturbing point for me. If this were to be declared as doctrine, I’m afraid I would have to face the fact that the Church is not what I was told it was, that it does not operate as I was told it does, and that I can’t in good conscience be a part of it anymore.

 

[VARC]

She is our co-redemptrix in the sense that through her redemption was made possible by Jesus. She is our co-mediatrix in the sense that she is a friend to whom we may always turn to intercede on our behalf to Jesus.

There is definately more to it than that. If the title simply meant that because Jesus was born from her, then King David and Adam would have to be considered equally co-redeemers. And if she is our co-mediatrix because we can always ask for her intercession, every saint would have to be considered our co-mediators because we can always ask their prayers as well.

Some RCs want to claim that salvation comes from God in Christ through Mary and Mary alone. This is more than intercession. This is very easily viewed as idolatry. Pope Benedict isn’t going to touch it with a ten foot crosier.

 

[Guyonthestreet]

There is definately more to it than that. If the title simply meant that because Jesus was born from her, then King David and Adam would have to be considered equally co-redeemers. And if she is our co-mediatrix because we can always ask for her intercession, every saint would have to be considered our co-mediators because we can always ask their prayers as well.

Some RCs want to claim that salvation comes from God in Christ through Mary and Mary alone. This is more than intercession. This is very easily viewed as idolatry. Pope Benedict isn’t going to touch it with a ten foot crosier.

I found this article very troubling. It suggests that Mary receives graces from God for her own exclusive distribution, and goes further to suggest that Mary is the mediatrix of all graces. Can someone explain this to me - I thought and belive that all grace comes from the Father and his Son, Jesus. What is the scriptural basis for this belief, that ALL graces from God are given to us through Mary, and not directly by Him or His Son.

tldm.org/news5/mediatrix1.htm

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Ah. Before we go further, that particular article links to a totally UNAPPROVED apparitions site.

Now, the doctrines regarding Mary are true whether or not they are spoken of by Catholics or nonCatholics.

For example, if I say I believe in the Immaculate Conception (and I’m Catholic), I’m speaking truth.

If I said I did not believe, then I would be speaking the truth (that I did not believe), but I could not make the truth (the reality of the Immaculate Conception) a lie simply because I did not believe.

If the Westboro Baptists came out and said they believed in the Immaculate Conception (and they really truly did), we would not jettison the Immaculate Conception merely because the truth was seen by those who otherwise, on 99.9% other points of Christian truth, are 180 degrees away. IOW, whether the truth is spoken by the ‘good’ or the ‘bad’ has no impact on the innate truthfulness.

That being said, the particular slant of THIS particular group is not necessarily in line with the correct understanding of the Virgin and her role. That they seek to acknowledge her is praiseworthy. That they use some terms which in the strictest Catholic application are correct is all right so far as it goes. . .but it appears that they are also using some terms in a possibly incorrect way.

So, I would not judge the "Catholic position’ based on this article ALONE. They may (indeed they most likely DO) have it wrong. . .wrong enough to cause trouble for the ones who have it ‘right’ and now have to argue not only amongst those who oppose the Church from the outside (nonCatholics) but to their fellow Catholics within).

Having seen now that the article in question is from a group supporting a BANNED TOPIC, I move that we discuss Mary’s role only insofar as it is strictly and correctly referenced, that is to say, by the Vatican site and the catechism, and NOT from groups which in adhering to an apparition which is not approved by the Church are already problematic.

 

[Guyonthestreet]

Ah. Before we go further, that particular article links to a totally UNAPPROVED apparitions site

I move that we discuss Mary’s role only insofar as it is strictly and correctly referenced, that is to say, by the Vatican site and the catechism, and NOT from groups which in adhering to an apparition which is not approved by the Church are already problematic.

Im not familiar with whats an approved and unapproved apparition so apologies as I didnt know.

This link from ewtn is still just as confusing though and still makes the claim for Mary being the mediatrix of ALL graces.

ewtn.com/faith/teachings/marya4.htm

 

[VARC]

Im not familiar with whats an approved and unapproved apparition so apologies as I didnt know.

This link from ewtn is still just as confusing though and still makes the claim for Mary being the mediatrix of ALL graces.

ewtn.com/faith/teachings/marya4.htm

Google St Louis de Montfort and you well learn all that you need concerning this doctrine. He is a master of Marian excess and his *True Devotion to the BVM * is the blueprint for the dogma. In short, the doctrine is that Jesus Christ created a super abunndance of divine grace through his sacrifice on the cross. But Mary, and Mary alone, distributes those graces, both actual and santifying, to whom “she wills and when she wills” and no one can be saved by Christ except they who receive the grace of God in Christ through Mary.

From True Devotion to Mary:

“God the Holy Spirit entrusted his wondrous gifts to Mary, his faithful spouse, and chose her as the dispenser of all he possesses, so that she distributes all his gifts and graces to whom she wills, as much as she wills, how she wills and when she wills. No heavenly gift is given to men which does not pass through her virginal hands.”
ewtn.com/library/Montfort/TRUEDEVO.HTM#Part I: Ch. 1

This is an ecumenical nightmare

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Thing is, Mary is the Mother of all Graces and distributor of all graces because (I knew you were waiting for it) she is the Mother of Jesus.

Jesus is all grace. Jesus was born of Mary. She gave Him to us, and in doing so, she gave us all Graces and all graces come through her.

And. . .here is the real kicker. . .a lot of people think that Jesus’s birth was a one-time thing, and it’s over. But it isn’t! God’s ‘time’ is not ours. God is unchanging. God is eternal.

Just as Christ’s sacrifice is continually occurring (not 'reoccuring) every time we receive the Eucharist, His birth from Mary is likewise continually occurring. It is an eternal NOW.

God chose Mary. The ultimate SOURCE of all graces is God. The ultimate CONDUIT of all graces, from which they all flow, is Mary. She dispenses them perfectly conformed to the will of God from which all the graces flow.

As for Mary’s will? It is perfectly conformed to God’s will. Mary never wills anything in opposition to God. (After all, are we not taught in Scripture that we will be united to Jesus in Heaven? Isn’t Mary there? Isn’t she united? Doesn’t united to Jesus mean that we will be One in Him?)

You see, St. Louis is quite right (though we have fallen so far away from graceful and elegant prose and have become so infected by Jansenist and narrow and ugly speech that it’s hard for us to appreciate his work).

 

[Guyonthestreet]

Google St Louis de Montfort and you well learn all that you need concerning this doctrine. He is a master of Marian excess and his *True Devotion to the BVM * is the blueprint for the dogma. In short, the doctrine is that Jesus Christ created a super abunndance of divine grace through his sacrifice on the cross. But Mary, and Mary alone, distributes those graces, both actual and santifying, to whom “she wills and when she wills” and no one can be saved by Christ except they who receive the grace of God in Christ through Mary.

From True Devotion to Mary:

“God the Holy Spirit entrusted his wondrous gifts to Mary, his faithful spouse, and chose her as the dispenser of all he possesses, so that she distributes all his gifts and graces to whom she wills, as much as she wills, how she wills and when she wills. No heavenly gift is given to men which does not pass through her virginal hands.”
ewtn.com/library/Montfort/TRUEDEVO.HTM#Part I: Ch. 1

This is an ecumenical nightmare

I have every respect for Mary as the mother of God, I pray the Hail Mary with reverence and respect. But I simply cannot go as far as this. Its difficult to express disagreement without sounding disrespectful, but to say that Mary has a superabundance of grace that she can dispose of as she wills, nd that all graces come from the Father to us through Mary is just way off base to me. I dont understand it at all. What is the basis for this belief. Scripture? Apostolic tradition?

 

[VARC]

I have every respect for Mary as the mother of God, I pray the Hail Mary with reverence and respect. But I simply cannot go as far as this. Its difficult to express disagreement without sounding disrespectful, but to say that Mary has a superabundance of grace that she can dispose of as she wills, nd that all graces come from the Father to us through Mary is just way off base to me. I dont understand it at all. What is the basis for this belief. Scripture? Apostolic tradition?

There is no basis for it in scripture and very little basis in tradition. It elevates Mary from the most venerable Christian saint to a goodess whose will is “perfectly conformed” to the divine will so much so that she chooses who is and who is saved.

 

[Guyonthestreet]

Just as Christ’s sacrifice is continually occurring (not 'reoccuring) every time we receive the Eucharist,

I can understand this. I can find reference in scripture old and new.

His birth from Mary is likewise continually occurring. It is an eternal NOW.

I cant understand this.

The ultimate CONDUIT of all graces, from which they all flow, is Mary. She dispenses them perfectly conformed to the will of God from which all the graces flow.

Is there a scriptural reference for this? Or is it a catholic teaching passed on through tradition? Nothing in the NT Ive read points to Mary as the conduit from whom all graces given by God flows.

Thanks for any help you can give me - Im trying to understand, not promote an anticatholic stance.

 

[VARC]

I can understand this. I can find reference in scripture old and new.

I cant understand this.

Is there a scriptural reference for this? Or is it a catholic teaching passed on through tradition? Nothing in the NT Ive read points to Mary as the conduit from whom all graces given by God flows.

Thanks for any help you can give me - Im trying to understand, not promote an anticatholic stance.

Something more problematic is what “true devotion” to Mary entails…

This devotion consists in giving oneself entirely to Mary in order to belong entirely to Jesus through her. It requires us to give:

(1) Our body with its senses and members;

(2) Our soul with its faculties;

(3) Our present material possessions and all we shall acquire in the future;

(4) Our interior and spiritual possessions, that is, our merits, virtues and good actions of the past, the present and the future.

In other words, we give her all that we possess both in our natural life and in our spiritual life as well as everything we shall acquire in the future in the order of nature, of grace, and of glory in heaven. This we do without any reservation, not even of a penny, a hair, or the smallest good deed. And we give for all eternity without claiming or expecting, in return for our offering and our service, any other reward than the honour of belonging to our Lord through Mary and in Mary, even though our Mother were not - as in fact she always is - the most generous and appreciative of all God’s creatures.

ewtn.com/library/Montfort/TRUEDEVO.HTM#Part II: Ch. 3

Someone who is truly devoted to Mary is supposed to surrender his soul to a creature. It is textbook idolatry.

 

[Guyonthestreet]

How can we give our souls over to Mary.

Surely She would not want this.

If she points always to her Son, as I believe she does, surely She would never endorse our very souls being given to Her, and not her Son, who died for the sins on our souls?

I really just cannot get my heard around this.

And I understand even less phrases like giving our souls over to her Son, through Her?

Why not just deal directly with her Son?