Is Mary the Co-redeemer?

[jkatpc]

I don’t think it’s really that misleading, to be honest. It’s just a matter of whether the listener chooses to interpret it charitably or uncharitably. Often that decision is made long before the Church says anything at all.

Think of the term “co-redemptrix” just like you think of the term “co-pilot” when I say to you, “My wife drove here, I was her co-pilot.” Does that mean I did any driving at all? No. It means that I helped her drive, that’s all.

The charitable Protestant, the one who hasn’t decided from the outset that everything that the Church teaches must be as false as possible, will understand that if Catholics call Mary “co-redemptrix” that we only mean it in the way that we call the passenger on a long road trip the “co-pilot.” The uncharitable Protestant will instantly assume that we intend to blaspheme Jesus who would save us if only we’d have faith in Him, which we don’t, because we’re Catholic.

Like I said, sound theology but bad marketing. There are just too many people who are searching for ways to interpret the words of the Church uncharitably for us to give them such easy ammunition.

Jeremy

I agree with bad marketing, but it is also misleading. I think your analogy is not quite accurate. A true co-pilot can assume the duties of the pilot when required. Mary cannot do that. If we use the term co-pilot in the loose sense (“with” the pilot, but not equal to), then we could extend the term of co-pilot to flight attendants, flight navigators, maybe even passengers. But that’s not what we really mean when we use the term.

 

[SORROWS]

I also HIGHLY recommend, “Glories of Mary” by St. Alphonsus Liguori, a great Doctro of the Church. He’s great because his teaching is never his own, it is always a synthesis of previous teaching from Scripture, the Fathers, and other saints. Read that book and it will become apparent these teachings have been handed down since the beginning.

I’ve read “Glories of Mary” and it is wonderful. Anything by St. Alphonsus Liguori is brilliant and I love the book.

 

[jemfinch]

I agree with bad marketing, but it is also misleading. I think your analogy is not quite accurate. A true co-pilot can assume the duties of the pilot when required.

Yes, that’s one possible interpretation. But it’s not the only interpretation. But you’ve also got the wrong modality: if a Catholic refers to Mary as a co-redemptrix, he’s not referring to what Mary could have done, but what Mary in fact did.

Jeremy

 

[Friar_Roderic_M]

Pope Pius IV, Council of Trent, Sess. 25, On Invocation, Veneration and Relics of Saints, and on Sacred Images, ex cathedra: “…the saints, who reign with Christ, offer up their prayers to God for me; and that it is good and useful to invoke them suppliantly and, in order to obtain favors from God through His Son JESUS CHRIST OUR LORD, WHO ALONE IS OUR REDEEMER and Savior….But if anyone should teach or maintain anything contrary to these decrees, let him be anathema.” (Denz. 984-987)

Vigis

By coredemption we are saying that Mary (and so also all Christians) participate in the Redemption. However the particiaption is subordinate and does not diminish Christ’s one Redemption. I agree that this does seem to be a contradictory statement. To make sense of it we need to make a distinction between two quite different types of participation or sharing.

One is materialistic, and can easily be illustrated in sharing a single cake. This kind of sharing when complete annihilates the cake as a whole by dividing it up into pieces. This is the only way a quantified entity can be shared, e.g. any big fortune. This is known philosophically as predicamental participation.

The other is spiritual and is known as transcendental participation. God in creating us does not divide himself. Rather he makes another being partially like him, that is participating in his perfection, but such sharing does not diminish his grandeur.

We can appeal here also to experience, not material, but intellectual and artistic: when I make any artifact, I in no way divide up myself or become less as a being. Same with the practice of virtue.

So also with sharing the redemptive role of Christ. We can partipate in the redemption without taking away from Christ’s work or His Glory. Thus at the same time Christ is the one Redeemer and at the same time we are Co-redeemers. see also this excellent point by levi86:

Just one more thing.

Think about this passage…

Colossians 1:24-25
Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am filling up what is lacking in the afflictions of Christ on behalf of his body, which is the church, of which I am a minister in accordance with God’s stewardship given to me to bring to completion for you the word of God,

We see here that as part of the body of Christ every Christian (especially and primarily Mary) is a co-redeemer, in that we aid Christ in advancing the Kingdom of God through our sufferings and evangelisation.

Ave Maria!

 

[Friar_Roderic_M]

I agree with bad marketing, but it is also misleading. I think your analogy is not quite accurate. A true co-pilot can assume the duties of the pilot when required. Mary cannot do that. If we use the term co-pilot in the loose sense (“with” the pilot, but not equal to), then we could extend the term of co-pilot to flight attendants, flight navigators, maybe even passengers. But that’s not what we really mean when we use the term.

Ave Maria!

jkatpc,

We can certainly say that the term co-redemption can be used to mean a variety of things. But this can be said of virtually any dogma defined previously including such primary dogmas as the Trinity. This was defined as three persons in one divine nature and this distinction between person and nature formed a very precise, unconfused basis of all subsequent theology. Interestingly, prior to the definition the word person was most often used to mean … you guessed it, NATURE! Talking about confusion!!! And yet the definition of the dogma cleared away all the monumental confusion in the terminology. So it will with the far lesser degree of confusion in Co-redemption.

Ave Maria!

 

[mayra_hart]

and i quoted " The church is very clear that Mary’s role depends on the basis of christ and his position: " This title is so understood that is neither takes away anything from nor adds anything to the dignity and efficacy of Christ the ONE MEDIATOR. Mary’s role of mediatrix thus depends on CHRIST’s mediatorship." from david currie book Born fundamentalist born again catholic. V. Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee; blessed are thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus.
R. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen.

 

[jkatpc]

Ave Maria!

jkatpc,

We can certainly say that the term co-redemption can be used to mean a variety of things. But this can be said of virtually any dogma defined previously including such primary dogmas as the Trinity. This was defined as three persons in one divine nature and this distinction between person and nature formed a very precise, unconfused basis of all subsequent theology. Interestingly, prior to the definition the word person was most often used to mean … you guessed it, NATURE! Talking about confusion!!! And yet the definition of the dogma cleared away all the monumental confusion in the terminology. So it will with the far lesser degree of confusion in Co-redemption.

Ave Maria!

I completely agree, and also with your previous very well expressed post. The philosophy behind co-redemption works for me. The issue I have is, essentially, the naming. The widely accepted understanding of “co” is not “a participant in” but “equal to.” Doesn’t really matter that there are deeper, more subtle meanings–it is a full time job defending and explaining our Marian devotions and doctrines to Protestants. Why use a term that we know will most likely be misunderstood unless accompanied by an explanation?

 

[marybee]

I don’t think “Co” means equal. Much like a Copilot. But Yes she definitely cooperated with God to help Jesus complete his mission.

 

[fin]

i think we all are co-redeemers, of course in very tiny, tiny ways.
Mary is given more power to help in our conversion. And if this title is blasphemy, Mary is also the first one to be offended because of her utmost humility.

 

[Friar_Roderic_M]

I completely agree, and also with your previous very well expressed post. The philosophy behind co-redemption works for me. The issue I have is, essentially, the naming. The widely accepted understanding of “co” is not “a participant in” but “equal to.” Doesn’t really matter that there are deeper, more subtle meanings–it is a full time job defending and explaining our Marian devotions and doctrines to Protestants. Why use a term that we know will most likely be misunderstood unless accompanied by an explanation?

Really only English has this problem of the most common meaning being equal and English is spoken by only a small minority of Catholics. The Catholic Church of course is Catholic meaning Universal and so must base its decisions on terminology on the wider language base which is predominantly Latin based languages like Spanish, Italian and French, And the official language of the Church is still Latin. All these languages do not have the equal connotation as it does in English.

It would be nice if there were no confusion in English, but even in English the non equal use of the term is common enough that people with a desire to understand should ask which meaning do you mean. And when we use it in context with the other partner then the inequality is clearly expressed even in English, That is, Mary Co-Redeemer and Christ Redeemer clearly expresses inequality but to say Mary and Christ are Co-redeemers clearly expresses equality.

I agree it would be better to not have the confusion, but so far no other term has been poposed given all the other languages to consider.

Ave Maria!

 

[pprimeau1976]

The reason I said “yes” is because as a mother she had to encourage her son along the way. The Passion of the Christ totally changed my perspective on Mary. Whenever he would look at her, he would find the strength to continue through the struggle.

People seem to forget that as God the Father sacrificed his son, Mary the mother sacrificed her son as well. Mary is a type of Eve, but in a way, she is also a type of Abraham. When she said “let it be done to me according to your will”, she sacrificed her will for God’s will in sacrificing her Son.

She in no way redeemed the world, but she definitely co-redeemed it by raising the Lamb of God and keeping it from blemish.

I could be totally wrong on this, but this is what I have come to believe.

 

[onenow1]

Since the time of Solomon, I believe the mother of the king has always been crowned Queen of the Kingdom,and as I recall from scripture, sat at the right hand of the King. Jesus I’m sure would do the same.

Peace, OneNow1

 

[myfavoritmartin]

Since the time of Solomon, I believe the mother of the king has always been crowned Queen of the Kingdom,and as I recall from scripture, sat at the right hand of the King. Jesus I’m sure would do the same.

Peace, OneNow1

Are ya gonna bake the queen some bread light incense for her and pour out libations.

 

[Friar_Roderic_M]

Agreed. Even though the underlying theology is okay, to declare these titles as dogma would be imprudent and unwise, and they certainly serve no useful purpose. The Marian Dogmas are all Christological in nature, i.e. they tell a truth about Christ. But there is little if any Christological value in these titles; they are mostly Marian.

Ave Maria!

Dear Parthos,

I am a newbie here and I have to say the people here are asking good straightforward questions and seem to be making progress in understanding the terms and concepts. I have been duking it out on the front lines at Free Republic for the last two weeks on this subject and progress is not so swift, nor pleasant. Of course, Free Republic is not a Catholic site so it is an uphill battle with both Protestants and Greek Orthodox a like.

The thread started when I posted an article from our vlog at AirMaria.com It is worth looking at because it is a pictorial snapshot of many of the most prominent current supporters of the Dogma, Cardinals, theologians, Apologists as well as some of the Saints and Blesseds in the last 100 years. Those shown are only a sampling. There is major support for this and some serious theological groundwork done. I then posted the article on Free Republic and now there are over 4500 views 500 replies, one of the largest threads in May. Its been brutal!! but there is progress there too.

Of note in this article is the next International Coredemption Symposium in Fatima this July which will be dedicated to the subject of how the dogma effects our understanding of the Redemption and how the Coredemption dogma helps correct many of the modern errors on this regard. You can also read the opening address which is already on-line by going to the above link which goes into some particulars.

In other words, there is a strong Christological connection. In general the more you know Our Lady the more you know Christ.

You can see my comment #35 on the Free Republic thread. Basically the Dogma makes sense of redemption and human participation in the Redemption wrought by Christ. As such, it underscores the importance of suffering and offering this suffering up to the Lord, uniting it to His. This addresses the hedonism and materialism of our modern age and I think you will have a hard time finding a more important or relevant issue than this. It is rather easy to trace every single one of our modern doctrinal problems back to this hedonism.

Hope this helps.

Ave Maria!

 

[Vaclav]

Historically, Mary and the Church have had many similarities and often are symbolically interchangable with one another.

Saint Ephrem said:

The Virgin Mary is, again, the figure of the Church, which received the first-fruits of the Gospel. Let us call the Church by the name of Mary; for she is worthy of the double name.

Saint Augustine:

The Woman signifies Mary, who, being spotless, brought forth our spotless Head. Who herself also showed forth in herself a figure of holy Church, so that as she in bringing forth a Son remained a Virgin, so the Church also should during the whole of time be bringing forth His members, and yet not lose her virgin estate.

Finally Saint Ambrose, in his commentary on the Gospel of Luke:

Mary is the type of the Church.

So, to me the question should not be whether or not we as individuals play some role as co-redeemers, as I’m not really sure that should have a bearing on any title of Mary.

I think the question is, does the Church share with Mary the title of Co-redeemer? How?

If that is answered positively, then I think Our Lady should be so honored along with the Church and Christ Himself.

 

[dacoobob]

I voted “no”, for a few reasons:

1. Even the title “Mother of God” was created NOT to honor Mary but to affirm that Jesus was in fact God (at a time when many were denying His divinity).
2. This whole discussion brings to mind Romans 14: even if it is technically accurate to use such a title, would doing so really be edifying, or would it just be an unnecessary stumbling block and cause for misunderstanding among your weaker brothers and sisters? (read: protestants)
3. The purpose of titles and terms (“Son of God”, “atonement”, etc) is to convey deep, complex ideas by distilling them into nuggets of truth that can be understood at a glance. A title that requires a long explanation in order to avoid gross misinterpretation has defeated its purpose.

So to summarize my feelings on the matter, there is nothing wrong with honoring Mary per se (just as it was technically permissible for St. Paul to eat pork), but I think that the inevitable controversy resulting from dogmatically defining this particular title would cause more harm than good at the moment.

 

[onenow1]

Are ya gonna bake the queen some bread light incense for her and pour out libations.

Hi, Martin

Mark. 9: 4, Jesus has conversation with Moses and Elijah, and Peter preposes to build three booths in their honor, Jesus does not rebuke him for this !

Heb. 13:7, Remember your leaders who preached the word of God to you, and as you reflect on the outcome of their lives, take their faith as your model.

Luke. 1: 48-49, because he has looked down on the humuliation of his servant, yes from now onwards all generations will call me blessed,for the almighty has done great things for me. Holy is His Name

Martin I don’t bake or do incense; but I do pray to Jesus through Mary and ocassionally light a candle.

Peace, OneNow1

 

[kaycee]

Is Mary omnicient and omnipresent?

Can she hear billions of prayers at the same time?

I thought God was a jealous God, why would he share his attributes with a human.

 

[onenow1]

Is Mary omnicient and omnipresent?

Can she hear billions of prayers at the same time?

I thought God was a jealous God, why would he share his attributes with a human.

Isn’t he going to share his attributes with us at the end of our time on earth?

We pray to Jesus through Mary, he hears our prayer first and if we are sincere and Love his mother as he did, I’m sure he accepts the prayers.

Rev. 5: 8, and when he took it, the four living creatures prostrated themselves before him and with the twenty-four elders; each one of them holding a harp and had a golden bowl full of incense which are the prayers of the saints.

Comment: If your prayer is intended for Jesus=God it will be accepted by the Lamb= Jesus.

Peace, Onenow1

 

[kaycee]

Isn’t he going to share his attributes with us at the end of our time on earth?

We get a glorified body, but heaven has not been fully explained to us. “Eye has not seen, ear has not heard”

Attributes that make God, God, will not be shared with his creatures.

We pray to Jesus through Mary, he hears our prayer first and if we are sincere and Love his mother as he did, I’m sure he accepts the prayers.

If we are sincere ad love his mother is a pre requisite? It appears that oral tradition causes very bad theology.

Rev. 5: 8, and when he took it, the four living creatures prostrated themselves before him and with the twenty-four elders; each one of them holding a harp and had a golden bowl full of incense which are the prayers of the saints.

These are prayers to God from the saints. Not sure why this is quoted. There is no prayer to saints or Mary here.