Mary as Co-Redemptrix

[natsclem]

Yes, this belief has long been held by Catholics and is taught by the Church. It just hasn’t been declared dogma. God chose to be born of Mary. He could have come any other way but He chose to be born of Mary. Thus, all Redeeming Grace came into the world through Mary, by the Will of God. Mary is not the Source of the Redeeming Grace, but she is the willing conduit. I read it described this way - We are the Body of Christ and He is the Head. Mary is the Neck, part of the Body and closest to Christ. Nothing from the Head reaches the Body without going through the Neck.

what is critical in here is how will it be defined. we dont know yet. but, to be sure, the Holy Spirit, as promised by the Lord, will guide the Pope on how to define it perfectly.

 

[natsclem]

This is also my question.
There is nothing really new in any of this. The pieces have long been known and acknowledged. The love and veneration has long been accorded her. She is the beautiful, loving mother of our Lord and our first intercessional advocate. To dogmatically bestow her with this new title would be too much for some people both inside and outside the Church.
We have one redeemer that is Jesus Christ. To call any other “co-redeemer” or “co-redemptrix” would be a huge misstep, no matter how you try to dogmatically define it. It would result in anther huge area for the apologists to try to understand and explain to our non-catholic and anti-catholic bretheren.

the definition of Infallibility was also viewed by many, including Newman, as unnecessary. Many separated from the RCC and now they call themselves Old Catholics. Vatican I defined it anyway. perhaps, for future use…like Vatican II declarations, which ironically not considered by many as authoritative and its Novus Ordo not as valid as TLM. If N.O. is approved and promulgated by the Pope then it must be valid; to say that it is invalid, then that person is putting himself above the Pope, who have been authorized by Christ to bind or loose anything on earth.So if he defines co-redemptrix as a matter of faith necessary for salvation, then so be it. Even so, for sure, co-redemptrix will be defined in the sense of Mary’s willful and perfect cooperation in Christ’s redemptive work.

 

[natsclem]

Your just plain wrong—it is taught by the fathers====see the quotes above by me and others–ALSO—CATHOLIC DOCTRINE DEVELOPS—we can definitley see this —the Popes I quoted above explicitly state Mary as Mediatrix—I quote Leo XIII again------
So Pope Leo XIII, Iucunda semper, said:

“… when He [the Father] has been invoked with excellent prayers, our humble voice turns to Mary; in accordance with no other law than that law of conciliation and petition which was expressed as follows by St. Bernardine of Siena : ‘Every grace that is communicated to this world has a threefold course. For by excellent order, it is dispensed from God to Christ, from Christ to the Virgin, from the Virgin to us.’”

I wonder, why Mediatrix and not Co-Mediatrix just as Co-Redemptrix?

 

[natsclem]

St. Bernardine of Siena : ‘Every grace that is communicated to this world has a threefold course. For by excellent order, it is dispensed from God to Christ, from Christ to the Virgin, from the Virgin to us.’"

St. Bernardine’s teaching is most harmonious with the biblical text of Christ’s mediation.

 

[natsclem]

Having read some of the articles at the links, I cannot agree with most of them. Dr. Miravale asserts that the Holy Spirit can only work through Mary, somehow deriving this from John 19:26. But this contradicts John 14:16-17, which says the Spirit will live with us and in us, and does not mention any intermediary.

For those that favor this as a new dogma, do you believe that the Spirit cannot or does not choose to directly distribute grace? Do you believe Mary’s will plays any role in distributing grace?

Have you ever heard or read about “Mary as Spouse of the Holy Spirit”? perhaps, Monfort has in heart the perfect spousal relationship of Mary to the Holy Spirit.

Mary, having been full of grace, was enabled by the Holy Spirit to accept her role in redemption and in her acceptance, she gave us our Saviour. Remember the matrimonial celebration in Cana? In John 2:3-4, Jesus said that it was not His time and yet without arguing with him, Mary just said to the servant “Whatever he tells you, do it.” And, Jesus, although, not yet his time, performed the first miracle. Mary did not command; she just presented, “There is no wine.” Jesus objected first but conceded and obeyed His mother anyway. So, is it blasphemous to say that Mary may be more solicitous than her Son for our daily needs (graces–spiritual or material) so that we can do our responsibilities? By the testimony of the Holy Scriptures, Mary is the most powerful ally we have-the Mediatrix par excellence! She is that because Christ the only Mediator between God and Man willed it to be so, not because of some merit of her own. So, to be sure that Christ will hearken immediately to our prayers there is no other way but Mary.

 

[natsclem]

Having read some of the articles at the links, I cannot agree with most of them. Dr. Miravale asserts that the Holy Spirit can only work through Mary, somehow deriving this from John 19:26. But this contradicts John 14:16-17, which says the Spirit will live with us and in us, and does not mention any intermediary.

For those that favor this as a new dogma, do you believe that the Spirit cannot or does not choose to directly distribute grace? Do you believe Mary’s will plays any role in distributing grace?

It is not that Holy Spirit cannot do, thus powerless, but that the Holy Spirit wills it to be, i.e. He chose to work through Mary. It cannot be said that the Hoy Spirit can only work through Mary in absolute terms. To be exact in figuring out what really happens in heaven regarding the distribution of every grace to every person from the richness of the Triune God we are bound to fail. We can only understand this mystery in its fullness when we come into His Glory.

 

[JRKH]

These conversations are certainly interesting and point up one thing very clearly to me. That this is a matter left squarely in the hands of the deep theologens. They are not for a common man such as myself.

If one is extremely learned in the art and intricacies of philosophy and theological study then pehaps all these things make sense. But is faith about these intricacies? Or is it about a simple loving of God and neighbor, and clinging to Christ who is our mediator?

There is a parallel thread with a poll attached. Certainly not scientific, but at last roughly 80% thought that such a title would be inappropriate
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=213012
Now others have said that truth does not depend on popularity and that is correct, but it does point to a very strong realization that this would be a troublesome thing if it were dogmatically declared.

This idea is best left where it is. In the realm of the “deep thinkers” where it can be discussed and appreciated in it’s proper context.

Peace
James

 

[JMMK]

I wonder, why Mediatrix and not Co-Mediatrix just as Co-Redemptrix?

Its a reference to the her being the neck of the Church while Christ is the head. Christ is our one mediator between man and the Father. Its a minor distinction but an important one if you go down this theological path.

By her maternal charity, she cares for the brethren of her Son, who still journey on earth surrounded by dangers and difficulties, until they are led into the happiness of their true home. Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked by the Church under the titles of Advocate, Auxiliatrix, Adjutrix, and Mediatrix.(16*) This, however, is to be so understood that it neither takes away from nor adds anything to the dignity and efficaciousness of Christ the one Mediator.(17*)

Lumen Gentium

 

[natsclem]

These conversations are certainly interesting and point up one thing very clearly to me. That this is a matter left squarely in the hands of the deep theologens. They are not for a common man such as myself.

If one is extremely learned in the art and intricacies of philosophy and theological study then pehaps all these things make sense. But is faith about these intricacies? Or is it about a simple loving of God and neighbor, and clinging to Christ who is our mediator?

This idea is best left where it is. In the realm of the “deep thinkers” where it can be discussed and appreciated in it’s proper context.

No matter how common we are, exchanges of thoughts here contribute to our appreciation, understanding and knowledge of the mysteries of our Faith. and when the glory of the Most Holy Trinity is finally revealed to us, our joy shall be exceedingly great, as our longing for Truth is finally satisfied perfectly.

 

[JRKH]

No matter how common we are, exchanges of thoughts here contribute to our appreciation, understanding and knowledge of the mysteries of our Faith. and when the glory of the Most Holy Trinity is finally revealed to us, our joy shall be exceedingly great, as our longing for Truth is finally satisfied perfectly.

Agreed:thumbsup:

James

 

[JMJ_coder]

Hello,

But Montfort is going way beyond that by saying the elect are saved because Mary applies the all graces of the crucifixion to the elect to whom she wills, when she wills, and in whatever manner she wills. That idea is never even suggested until the scholastic period at the earliest.

For what it is worth, Saint Gregory Palamas a “Pillar of Orthodoxy” (1296-1359) spoke in much the same manner. As he was Orthodox, he would not be influenced by anyone in the Catholic Church after the Great Schism (1054 a.d.). He writes in his Homily on the Dormition:

Hence, as it was through the Theotokos alone that the Lord came to us, appeared upon earth and lived among men, being invisible to all before this time, so likewise in the endless age to come, without her mediation, every emanation of illuminating divine light, every revelation of the mysteries of the Godhead, every form of spiritual gift, will exceed the capacity of every created being. She alone has received the all-pervading fulness of Him that filleth all things, and through her all may now contain it, for she dispenses it according to the power of each, in proportion and to the degree of the purity of each. Hence she is the treasury and overseer of the riches of the Godhead. For it is an everlasting ordinance in the heavens that the inferior partake of what lies beyond being, by the mediation of the superior, and the Virgin Mother is incomparably superior to all. It is through her that as many as partake of God do partake, and as many as know God understand her to be the enclosure of the Uncontainable One, and as many as hymn God praise her together with Him. She is the cause of what came before her, the champion of what came after her and the agent of things eternal. She is the substance of the prophets, the principle of the apostles, the firm foundation of the martyrs and the premise of the teachers of the Church . She is the glory of those upon earth, the joy of celestial beings, the adornment of all creation. She is the beginning and the source and root of unutterable good things; she is the summit and consummation of everything holy.

If you are really interested in this, I suggest this book:

Mary and the Fathers of the Church: The Blessed Virgin Mary in Patristic Thought

 

[knightbvm]

I don’t see this as proof that John Damascene believe that Mary was a co-redemptrix in the way that Montfort is describing. I do understand that Mary is described by the Fathers as a mediatrix in the sense that she participated in the general redemption by her fiat in the annunciation and in the sense that she is an interccessor for all mankind.

But Montfort is going way beyond that by saying the elect are saved because Mary applies the all graces of the crucifixion to the elect to whom she wills, when she wills, and in whatever manner she wills. That idea is never even suggested until the scholastic period at the earliest.

The bottom line is that Leo XIII in Lucanda Semper said that (quoting Saint Bernard) that EVERY GRACE IS DISPENSED FROM THE FATHER TO CHRIST THROUGH MARY----You can get into spliting hairs about “who decides” (obviously God decides-Mary cannot decide indepently of GOD–I doubt Demonfort is saying that) The Magisterium in an ordinary way has taught that Mary is Co- Redemptrix and Mediatrix of all Graces–Are they teaching it in the same way DeMonfort did? WHO CARES??? I DONT KNOW AND I DONT CARE!!! DEMONFORT ISNT THE MAGISTERIUM!!! What I do know is that the Church, through the ordinary magisterium (just like She did for the Immaculate Conception and Assumption before 1854 and 1950 respectively) has taught and does teach the doctrine that Mary is the Co- Redemptrix and Mediatrix of all Graces—

 

[VARC]

The bottom line is that Leo XIII in Lucanda Semper said that (quoting Saint Bernard) that EVERY GRACE IS DISPENSED FROM THE FATHER TO CHRIST THROUGH MARY----You can get into spliting hairs about “who decides” (obviously God decides-Mary cannot decide indepently of GOD–I doubt Demonfort is saying that) The Magisterium in an ordinary way has taught that Mary is Co- Redemptrix and Mediatrix of all Graces–Are they teaching it in the same way DeMonfort did? WHO CARES??? I DONT KNOW AND I DONT CARE!!! DEMONFORT ISNT THE MAGISTERIUM!!! What I do know is that the Church, through the ordinary magisterium (just like She did for the Immaculate Conception and Assumption before 1854 and 1950 respectively) has taught and does teach the doctrine that Mary is the Co- Redemptrix and Mediatrix of all Graces—

Let me ask you something. Why do you feel the need to CAPITALIZE words as if you’re yelling at someone? That doesn’t impress anyone and it makes you look like a jerk.

 

[VARC]

Hello,

For what it is worth, Saint Gregory Palamas a “Pillar of Orthodoxy” (1296-1359) spoke in much the same manner. As he was Orthodox, he would not be influenced by anyone in the Catholic Church after the Great Schism (1054 a.d.). He writes in his Homily on the Dormition:

Hence, as it was through the Theotokos alone that the Lord came to us, appeared upon earth and lived among men, being invisible to all before this time, so likewise in the endless age to come, without her mediation, every emanation of illuminating divine light, every revelation of the mysteries of the Godhead, every form of spiritual gift, will exceed the capacity of every created being. She alone has received the all-pervading fulness of Him that filleth all things, and through her all may now contain it, for she dispenses it according to the power of each, in proportion and to the degree of the purity of each. Hence she is the treasury and overseer of the riches of the Godhead. For it is an everlasting ordinance in the heavens that the inferior partake of what lies beyond being, by the mediation of the superior, and the Virgin Mother is incomparably superior to all. It is through her that as many as partake of God do partake, and as many as know God understand her to be the enclosure of the Uncontainable One, and as many as hymn God praise her together with Him. She is the cause of what came before her, the champion of what came after her and the agent of things eternal. She is the substance of the prophets, the principle of the apostles, the firm foundation of the martyrs and the premise of the teachers of the Church . She is the glory of those upon earth, the joy of celestial beings, the adornment of all creation. She is the beginning and the source and root of unutterable good things; she is the summit and consummation of everything holy.

If you are really interested in this, I suggest this book:

Mary and the Fathers of the Church: The Blessed Virgin Mary in Patristic Thought

thanks for the quote. It was most interesting.

 

[Ken_S]

This title is very misleading. Mary can not redeem anyone, only Christ can redeem. There would have been no redemption unless Christ came to earth. There would still have been redemption by Christ if his earthly mother wasn’t Mary.

Change this title.

 

[knightbvm]

This title is very misleading. Mary can not redeem anyone, only Christ can redeem. There would have been no redemption unless Christ came to earth. There would still have been redemption by Christ if his earthly mother wasn’t Mary.

Change this title.

Unfortunatley for you kennyboy Popes John Paul II, Benedict XV, Leo XIII, tons of Saints and tons of faithful Catholics—DISAGREE WITH YOU—Take a look at earlier posts --I have documented many instances of the Church teaching that Mary is the Mediatrix of all Graces and the Co- Redemptrix—“whoever hears you hears Me.”

 

[BonnieBj]

So does this mean that when we pray to a saint for a favor and it is granted, that it is actually Mary who acts? If so then why bother to pray to the saints?

And BTW what is the name of the “Marian Encyclical?” I would like to read it.

We’ve got a real can of worms here (and not the Diet of Worms either, he he). What happens to those of us Catholics who have a new dogma thrust upon them that they don’t believe? What happens to their Catholicism? The only way I can think of dealing with it is"Lord I believe, help Thou my unbelief."

The co-redemptirx concept givews me problems when put up against things that Jesus said like He is the only way to the Father, He is the way the truth and the life; come to Me, etc. Nowhere in the Bible does it mention or even hint that Mary has any role in the redemption of people.

If this concept turns out to be pronounced as dogma I want to be able to believe, but right now I can’t. What to do?Pray of course. But wwhere can I find good simple explanations? Because I am very confused.:banghead:

 

[Goth_Catholic]

But wwhere can I find good simple explanations? Because I am very confused.:banghead:

In earier posts in this thread:thumbsup:

 

[VARC]

So does this mean that when we pray to a saint for a favor and it is granted, that it is actually Mary who acts? If so then why bother to pray to the saints?

And BTW what is the name of the “Marian Encyclical?” I would like to read it.

We’ve got a real can of worms here (and not the Diet of Worms either, he he). What happens to those of us Catholics who have a new dogma thrust upon them that they don’t believe? What happens to their Catholicism? The only way I can think of dealing with it is"Lord I believe, help Thou my unbelief."

The co-redemptirx concept givews me problems when put up against things that Jesus said like He is the only way to the Father, He is the way the truth and the life; come to Me, etc. Nowhere in the Bible does it mention or even hint that Mary has any role in the redemption of people.

If this concept turns out to be pronounced as dogma I want to be able to believe, but right now I can’t. What to do?Pray of course. But wwhere can I find good simple explanations? Because I am very confused.:banghead:

Unfortunately if you can’t accept this than you must leave the church(when it is forced on catholics). You will be much in the same category as the Orthodox when the “filioque” was pushed on them and the Old Roman catholics when papal infallibility when forced on them. Rome has a pattern of dividing the church over ideas that christians were previously at liberty to disagree with.

 

[Ken_S]

knightbvm

So why isn’t Noah, Abraham, King David etc considered as CoRedeemers? They all did God’s bidding and said Yes to him and are of his lineage.
Honoring her for what she did is one thing. What a wonderful example of accepting what the Lord asks. To me if one says she is a co-redemptrix, then I guess that makes Christ not THE redeemer but rather also a co-redeemer.

We’re gonna have to have Scripture changed then to be worded something like “He was half the team that came into the world for us” etc

Have a good day knightbvm and may God bless us both