Mary Co-Redemptrix Poll

[Memaw]

Is Mary’s mother Saint Anne the cooperater of the Co-redemptrix, or co-coredemptrix?

Doesn’t Mary have enough titles? Why need to Dogmatize what is really nothing but wild speculation at this point?

I guess it’s pointless to keep repeating myself, I pray that this never turns into a dogma because it would flip my world upside down.

Why in the world would it flip your world upside-down. Don’t you trust the Holy Spirit???
PS, The church has always taught that Mary co-operated with her SON in our redemption, nothing new about that. That is what it means!!! Ever think about what would have happened if she would have said No to the Angel ??? We certainly wouldn’t be having this conversation.

 

[lukewarm]

Why in the world would it flip your world upside-down. Don’t you trust the Holy Spirit???

Because at that point I would have to admit it’s all a big sham, that the Church has gone off the deep end and is just making up dogma just for the sake of making suspect theories dogma. Mary can’t redeem anything, Jesus death redeemed us, not Mary’s sadness or suffering, Mary was a human her suffering can’t redeem anything no matter how severe it was. It’s an absurd title IMO.

I guess I would become a deist or something…

 

[Memaw]

Because at that point I would have to admit it’s all a big sham, that the Church has gone off the deep end and is just making up dogma just for the sake of making suspect theories dogma. Mary can’t redeem anything, Jesus death redeemed us, not Mary’s sadness or suffering, Mary was a human her suffering can’t redeem anything no matter how severe it was. It’s an absurd title IMO.

I guess I would become a deist or something…

You are totally misunderstanding what Co-redemptrix really means

 

[Memaw]

Because at that point I would have to admit it’s all a big sham, that the Church has gone off the deep end and is just making up dogma just for the sake of making suspect theories dogma. Mary can’t redeem anything, Jesus death redeemed us, not Mary’s sadness or suffering, Mary was a human her suffering can’t redeem anything no matter how severe it was. It’s an absurd title IMO.

I guess I would become a deist or something…

I have big news for you, the Church can never go “off the deep end” on anything, not ever. She is protected by the Holy Spirit and cannot, nor will EVER teach error. How in the world do you think the Catholic Church has survived 2,000 years of persecutions and watched every ruler, every Kingdom and every dictator, come and go. Nothing nor no-one will ever destroy the Church. It will be here till the end of time. Jesus even said the Gates of HELL shall NOT prevail against HIS Church. Have a little faith man,

 

[Pons]

Older thread: For Catholics: Do you think the Pope should dogmatically declare Mary to be Co-Remptrix?

Sorry if this has already been linked: Summary of Correct Doctrine by Ronald L. Conte, Jr.

Some points from the other thread (my post) - again, apologies if I repeat anything:

"…Mary’s role is different from, and subordinate to, Christ’s role because, in God’s plan for Creation, the role given to women is different from, and subordinate to, the role given to men. *

The “co-” prefix in co-Redemptrix refers to Mary’s cooperation with us … Mary is not a co-Redeemer and is not able to save anyone, not even with and under Christ. Christ alone redeems; Mary merely immerses herself in all that Christ does toward our redemption. Her role is not co-redemptive. … Mary is Mediatrix of Grace, but not of all graces. … She is not the Mediatrix of the graces that she herself receives from Christ; in that case, she is the recipient, not the Mediatrix.

…Mary completely immerses herself in all that Christ does for our salvation. She has no role of redemption, mediation, or advocacy of her own; all her acts toward our salvation occur in Christ, not “with and under” Christ."

Properly understood, I think all this belief is saying is that we all share in the work of Christ, which of course takes nothing away from his unique role… the term is bad, though - too touchy, too easy to misinterpret/misunderstand. It’s bad enough that some (many?) people think “Immaculate Conception” refers to Jesus’ conception.*

 

[lukewarm]

The “co-” prefix in co-Redemptrix refers to Mary’s cooperation with us … **Mary is not a co-Redeemer **

Two points:

1. The co prefix means:

Together; joint; jointly; mutually

Partner or associate in an activity: coauthor; cofounder.
Subordinate or assistant: copilot.

It does not mean “cooperation with”.

1. If you agree that Mary is NOT a “co-redeemer” then why would anyone want her to be given the title “coredemptrix”? I mean isn’t it common sense, the phrase is scandalous and sounds heretical.

Mary is Christ’s Mother, and Our Lady, she is the new Eve, Queen of Heaven and Sinless from conception on. She is the Madonna, Theotokis, Mother of God, Our Lady, Blessed Mother. Why would we ever need to label her “coredemptrix”. It is not possible for Mary to coredeem us with her suffering (as is described in the catechism). No matter how severe Mary’s suffering was, because she was a woman there is nothng she can do to redeem us based on her very nature.

This whole “cooperation with” stuff doesn’t fly when you look at the CCC. It plainly states that Mary took part in our redemption in her suffering with Christ. That is not possible because Mary was a woman.

 

[JARVET]

Tell Me Please, Where Does It Say In The Lords Word, (THE HOLY BIBLE) That Anyone Should Pray To Mary Or That Mary Was Born Without Sin Or That She Remained A Virgin Forever or that she is in any way our co-redemptress?
PLEASE PRESENT SCRIPTURE THAT WILL TRUTHFULLY JUSTIFY ANY ANSWER GIVEN

 

[Goth_Catholic]

Tell Me Please, Where Does It Say In The Lords Word, (THE HOLY BIBLE) That Anyone Should Pray To Mary Or That Mary Was Born Without Sin Or That She Remained A Virgin Forever or that she is in any way our co-redemptress?
PLEASE PRESENT SCRIPTURE THAT WILL TRUTHFULLY JUSTIFY ANY ANSWER GIVEN

chaire kecharitomene luke 1:28

hail (my queen) who was has been and continues to be bestowed with grace

 

[Paul_the_seaker]

Tell Me Please, Where Does It Say In The Lords Word, (THE HOLY BIBLE) That Anyone Should Pray To Mary Or That Mary Was Born Without Sin Or That She Remained A Virgin Forever or that she is in any way our co-redemptress?
PLEASE PRESENT SCRIPTURE THAT WILL TRUTHFULLY JUSTIFY ANY ANSWER GIVEN

Surely you are aware that Holy Bible is the Tradition of the Roman Catholic Church. It took four hundred years to write it down and complete the new Testament. At the time of the writing the Fathers of the Church included allusions to Mary and her role in the history of salvation, but they did not write the names of the different dogmas. They even didn’t use the term the virgin birth of Christ. Yet the Church defined this and many other things that were not formally included in the scriptures.

This is why the Church insists that scripture and tradition must be used together to get the whole truth of Christ work. Read the last verse of John’s Gospel and you will see that he agrees that Jesus did many other things that are not written down, indeed that all He did would fill the whole world with books.

Try to understand Catholicism. We are not simple minded. Such a challenge as you wrote, doesn’t do our Christian faith justice. We Christians beliee many things that are not written in the bible. This should be obvious unless you are from the “Sola scriptura crowd.”

 

[aaronlgates]

Please show me where to find these “quotes” from the popes and Church Fathers. When the Church Fathers were walking the face of this earth and writing things down for us to read centuries later there was at that time only ONE, HOLY, CATHOLIC and APOSTOLIC CHURCH, there were no others. It wasn’t till 1527 that protestant denominations even appeared on the horizon. Now there are over 35,000 different ones that disagree with one another on many major things.

Christ promised that HIS Church would never teach error, that the Gates of Hell shall never prevail against it. The Holy Spirit will guide it and has guided it down thru the centuries, till the end of time. If you would just read and really study the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles. Christ gave HIS Church the Authority to teach in HIS name. Infallibility comes from the authority Christ gave HIS Church keeping it free from error. It would help you so much if you would research what the Church means by Infallibility. Anytime the Pope teaches the whole church on Faith and Morals, he is Infallible. Faith is what we believe and Morals is how we live that Faith. We can be SURE that what the Catholic Church teaches us will be free from error, which is more than most can claim. I find great comfort in knowing that I don’t have to depend on my own idea of what to believe or on what many different people have claimed I should believe

If only every adult Catholic would take a good trustworthy class of instructions on the Catholic Faith, we would be much better equipped to defend our Faith properly. God Bless, Memaw

I would take the time to pull out all of the statements and quotes from the fathers and popes… but you have shown yourself to be one that is inflammatory to others, and I don’t wish to entertain you.

Read up on the Church fathers here on CA. You will find many such statements.

 

[epostle]

“Co” in co-redeemer, co-Mediatrix, etc. is Collaborator Mary “assisted” in our redemption and she assists in our mediation with Christ.

This context does not give Mary equal status with Christ, or usurp Christ in anyway. She, rather, merely cooperated and collaborated with Christ.

In a sense we, too, are co-mediators every time we pray for someone. We are offering intercession/mediation for our friend when we pray for them. This does not make us God or equal with God, it only means that we are cooperating with the economy of God when he asked us to be a family and pray for each other.
In terms of Mary as co-redeemer, she did in fact, cooperate in the redemption. When she made her fiat to accept God’s will for her to bear the Christ Child she was cooperating in the redemption of mankind for it was through her that the Redeemer came into the world.
The solution to problems like this is not suppression but education. “co” just simply does NOT mean “equal to”.
As for Judas, no he was NOT co-redeemer. Jesus could have been crucified without Judas’ help. Jesus could have been arrested at any time whenever he was in public. In fact, Jesus mentions this in the Garden when he was arrested. Judas happened to be the instrument of Jesus’ arrest, but was not necessary for Jesus’ arrest. This is different than with Mary…
Mary’s role was not incidental but REQUIRED. Jesus, to be incarnated, HAD to be born of a woman, otherwise he would not be human and thus could not be the redeemer.
Mary’s collaboration was required; Judas’ participation was not, but was incidental.
At this time the theory of co-redeemer is not Church dogma, and is not binding for belief by the faithful. But the concept should not wrinkle our shirts if we understand the nature of her role in the incarnation and the true meaning of “co”.

The problem is the redefining of terms. “Religion” is another term that has been redefined by tv evangelists as something negative. “Co” dos not mean “equal to” and if the language has changed, then the Church will probably take that into consideration.

 

[Memaw]

I would take the time to pull out all of the statements and quotes from the fathers and popes… but you have shown yourself to be one that is inflammatory to others, and I don’t wish to entertain you.

Read up on the Church fathers here on CA. You will find many such statements.

Would you call the TRUTH inflammatory?? Jesus said, I AM the WAY, the TRUTH, and the LIFE. I didn’t think we were here to be entertained but informed.

 

[epostle]

Tell Me Please, Where Does It Say In The Lords Word, (THE HOLY BIBLE) That Anyone Should Pray To Mary Or That Mary Was Born Without Sin Or That She Remained A Virgin Forever or that she is in any way our co-redemptress?
PLEASE PRESENT SCRIPTURE THAT WILL TRUTHFULLY JUSTIFY ANY ANSWER GIVEN

Please show me from the Lord’s Word (HOLY BIBLE) where those in heaven are made deaf, dumb, and blind to the affairs of the earth, and cannot interceed for us. This is a Protestant invention that is contrary to normal Christianity as practiced by the Church from the very beginning. Show me from the Lord’s Word (HOLY BIBLE) where God’s love for his family is divided and separate between heaven and earth. God wants us to participate and be fellow workers with Him because He loves us. It is contrary to the Bible to diminish God’s love for us by denying such participation, and Mary is the holiest of all saints. Does your church refer to Mary as “Blessed” as the bible commands?

God and sin cannot co-exist. Jesus got his sinless humanity from a sinless mother. Eve was sinless before the fall so it shouldn’t strike anyone as an odd thing for God to do, since Mary is the New Eve. If Christ is the New Adam, having no New Eve is senseless. This “Mary being a sinner” business was not even taught by the reformers, it is a fad, and a blasphemy against the Incarnation. Mary is the Spouse of the Holy Spirit who did not have an ordinary reltionship with Joseph because they did not have an ordinary Son. If Mary was not a perpetual virgin, then the mother of Jesus is a bigamist, which is contrary to the Bible, and further denigrates God.

It is impossible to attack Catholic Mariology without attacking Jesus and Catholics do not abuse God’s Holy Word (THE BIBLE) with pharisaical, near sighted, one verse theology. Everything we believe about Mary can be directly or inderictly infered from the Bible, you just have to set aside your prejudices caused by man-made inventions of the 16th century. And why do anti-Mary Protestants NEVER quote Luke 1:46-56???

Here is a list of scripture verses about Our Blessed Mom that Protestants wish weren’t there:
scripturecatholic.com/blessed_virgin_mary.html

 

[JRKH]

“Co” in co-redeemer, co-Mediatrix, etc. is Collaborator Mary “assisted” in our redemption and she assists in our mediation with Christ.

This context does not give Mary equal status with Christ, or usurp Christ in anyway. She, rather, merely cooperated and collaborated with Christ.

In a sense we, too, are co-mediators every time we pray for someone. We are offering intercession/mediation for our friend when we pray for them. This does not make us God or equal with God, it only means that we are cooperating with the economy of God when he asked us to be a family and pray for each other.
In terms of Mary as co-redeemer, she did in fact, cooperate in the redemption. When she made her fiat to accept God’s will for her to bear the Christ Child she was cooperating in the redemption of mankind for it was through her that the Redeemer came into the world.
The solution to problems like this is not suppression but education. “co” just simply does NOT mean “equal to”.
As for Judas, no he was NOT co-redeemer. Jesus could have been crucified without Judas’ help. Jesus could have been arrested at any time whenever he was in public. In fact, Jesus mentions this in the Garden when he was arrested. Judas happened to be the instrument of Jesus’ arrest, but was not necessary for Jesus’ arrest. This is different than with Mary…
Mary’s role was not incidental but REQUIRED. Jesus, to be incarnated, HAD to be born of a woman, otherwise he would not be human and thus could not be the redeemer.
Mary’s collaboration was required; Judas’ participation was not, but was incidental.
At this time the theory of co-redeemer is not Church dogma, and is not binding for belief by the faithful. But the concept should not wrinkle our shirts if we understand the nature of her role in the incarnation and the true meaning of “co”.

The problem is the redefining of terms. “Religion” is another term that has been redefined by tv evangelists as something negative. “Co” dos not mean “equal to” and if the language has changed, then the Church will probably take that into consideration.

I must disagree with you on your definition of “Co”. It has been posted a couple of times that “co” can also be read as equal.
For instance:
A Co-defendant is also a defendant in his/her own right.
A Co-pilot is also a pilot in his/her own right.
A Co-council is also a councilor (lawyer) in his/her own right.
To Co-operate is to operate together with another.
While it is true that in some of these examples the Co-operator has less authority than the “operator”, that is generally based on the experience level, or level of inviolvement of the individuals and not on their capabilities. Thus we can co-operate with Christ for redemption, but we can never co-redeem because we cannot ever redeem on our own.

Mary has no capability to redeem anyone herself. Regardless of the Love we have for her and she for us, she can only intercede for us, not redeem us. She does not have that capacity and never will. Therefore the term Co-redemptix as a Title is inappropriate.

This thread has certainly covered the ground thoroughly, but in so doing it becomes obvious that dogmatically declaring Mary Co-Redemptrix would be devisive and counterproductive.

Peace
James

 

[aaronlgates]

Would you call the TRUTH inflammatory?? Jesus said, I AM the WAY, the TRUTH, and the LIFE. I didn’t think we were here to be entertained but informed.

Is stating the truth telling a fellow Christian to ‘get a life’? What of your behavior elsewhere on this forum? Straighten up or I will report you.

 

[Memaw]

Is stating the truth telling a fellow Christian to ‘get a life’? What of your behavior elsewhere on this forum? Straighten up or I will report you.

Report away, who made you the judge and jury. I am just trying to be funny,lighten up a little and get over it. Everbody says it these days.

 

[Memaw]

No. Mary’s sorrow at losing her son did not in any way redeem us. What redeemed us was Jesus’ blood being spilt. Mary had nothing to do with this. Yes, she choose to be mother to Jesus, which was a holy act, but she did not know that she would need to suffer to fulfill this role, nor did she totally understand what would happen.

If we say she is co-redemptrix, why not say Pilate is to? Didn’t he order Jesus to die?

Oh yaaa, you were there??? as Fr. Benedict Groschael says. Mary was a very pure and holy person and well versed in her Jewish faith as were all young jews in those days and she knew more than you or I will ever know or understand. She knew full well what was going ot happen toher Son. Just read the Old Testament for yourself and see what it says about the suffering and death of the Messiah. The trouble is we all want things to be just like we think they should be. NOT SO.

 

[Memaw]

Look. I don’t like to be shouted at. So please chill.
You can quote things all day and it doesn’t make them infallible as of yet. Therefore the issue is still up for discussion.
No One is denying any of the things that the BV did or has done fror her God, son, or for us. My concern is, as I have repeatedly stated, the TERM. It will be divisive. It will cause problems both inside and outside the Church.
I wonder why Jesus and His mother would wish to drive another wedge between Catholics and their protestant bretheren.
If you cannot see that giving the TITLE of Coredemptrix to the BV is problematic I don’t know what to say.
Just look at how divisive it is right here.
Look at the poll results so far 3 times as many people think that it is a bad idea. Maybe it is the Holy Spirit trying to tell us that this isn’t a Good Idea…

Peace
James

If the HOLY SPIRIT inspires the Church to proclaim this as a Dogma, then do you want to argue with HIM. His Will be DONE.

What our protestant bro. and sisters want or do not want never controls the Catholic Church. What they need to do is to try to understand WHY the Church teaches what She does. If all you want to do is fuss about what the Church does or teaches, whats the point.

 

[JRKH]

If the HOLY SPIRIT inspires the Church to proclaim this as a Dogma, then do you want to argue with HIM. His Will be DONE.

What our protestant bro. and sisters want or do not want never controls the Catholic Church. What they need to do is to try to understand WHY the Church teaches what She does. If all you want to do is fuss about what the Church does or teaches, whats the point.

IF this were ever proclaimed as dogma, I guess I would have to read it carefully and decide.
I would probably accept that the Church acted within it’s authority, and then ignore it.

However, don’t kid yourself that those involved in determining these things don’t have these same kinds of debates among themselves.

Peace
James

 

[Memaw]

Fourth Lateran Council (1215): “There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside which no one at all is saved.”

Pope Boniface VIII, Bull Unam Sanctam (1302): “We are compelled in virtue of our faith to believe and maintain that there is only one holy Catholic Church, and that one is apostolic. This we firmly believe and profess without qualification. Outside this Church there is no salvation and no remission of sins, the Spouse in the Canticle proclaiming: ‘One is my dove, my perfect one. One is she of her mother, the chosen of her that bore her’ (Canticle of Canticles 6:8); which represents the one mystical body whose head is Christ, of Christ indeed, as God. And in this, ‘one Lord, one faith, one baptism’ (Ephesians 4:5). Certainly Noe had one ark at the time of the flood, prefiguring one Church which perfect to one cubit having one ruler and guide, namely Noe, outside of which we read all living things were destroyed. … We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.”

**Pope Innocent III (1198-1216), Profession of Faith prescribed for the Waldensians: **“With our hearts we believe and with our lips we confess but one Church, not that of the heretics, but the Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church, outside which we believe that no one is saved” (Denzinger 792).

Pope Pius IX (1846-1878), Allocution Singulari Quadem: "For, it must be held by faith that outside the Apostolic Roman Church, no one can be saved; that this is the only ark of salvation; that he who shall not have entered therein will perish in the flood; but, on the other hand, it is necessary to hold for certain that they who labor in ignorance of the true religion, if this ignorance is invincible, will not be held guilty of this in the eyes of God.

Pope Pius IX The Syllabus of Errors: [The following are prescribed errors:] "16. Men can, in the cult of any religion, find the way of eternal salvation and attain eternal salvation. - Encyclical Qui pluribus, November 9, 1846.
“17. One ought to at least have good hope for the eternal salvation of all those who in no way dwell in the true Church of Christ. - Encyclical Quanto conficiamur moerore, August 10, 1863, etc.”

Pope Pius XII (1939-1958), Encyclical Humani Generis: “Some reduce to a meaningless formula the necessity of belonging to the true Church in order to gain eternal salvation.”

There are many and many more. I listed only few examples.

All just personal opinions? And the Council was not “Church” - in fact it erred?

I do not deny that but so far I’m not persuaded by your argument. Maybe you can shine a bit more light on the topic.

Most of what you quoted above was done before the protestant reformation in 1527. At that time there was only ONE Christian Church and that was the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. Pray tell me, where would you go to seek salvation if not within the Church Christ founded Himself. Since the protestant reformation, even tho they have broken away from the TRUE Faith, they still have Baptism, which keeps them connected to the True Church. And still believe Jesus died for our sins. So after that the Popes have said it is a little different situation. The Church has NOT & cannot error in any way, just a matter of misunderstanding what she is teaching. I am afraid misunderstanding is the name of the game today. As Bishop Sheen said, “The truth is the truth even if no one believes it and a lie is still a lie even if everyone believes it.”
Councils within the Church are NEVER just someones personal opinion, you truly are misunderstanding the purpose of a Council.