Mary Co-Redemptrix ... Pope says No and I am confused

[godisgood77]

Just because the Pope does not think right now is appropriate to solemnly put a definition to what we ALREADY HAVE as doctrine, would not change their view on the title.

I don’t think this is true… we have successive Popes in Benedict and Francis that have clearly indicated that co-redemptrix is not okay. Sure as a poetic devotional title, people will likely continue to use it, but in terms of it being doctrine, it does not qualify. First, it has no doctrinal meaning as it has not been defined… Pope Benedict said that it veers too far from authentic Church teaching and Pope Francis let us know that it is nonsense.

This idea should be classified as devotion (particular to a time and place per St John Henry Newman), not doctrine (same for all places and times)

 

[commenter]

Could someone clarify for me?

What precipitated this statement by the Pope? Is he responding to some questions, if so by whom?

Why is this statement issued now rather than years in the past, or future?

I very often disagree with him, but don’t understand the criticism of Pope Francis on this. I mean, this issue was certainly around since St JP2, and likely long before.

No other pope declared it dogma either.

 

[Mishakel]

When development of doctrine gets authoritatively defined in a clearer manner, we are expected to assent to that.

I certainly do not want to hijack this thread. We will not agree on many things but you are acknowledging my bigger point. According to Catholicism it sets the rules for salvation. I’m aware the church itself will never pass judgement on a soul by saying they have gone to hell but, it certainly has fixed guidelines which can cause anathema from the Church or what it defines as the body of Christ. Here is the issue which you clearly see but accept because you submit to the authority of the Church.

If we place you in time 300 years ago, you were told salvation could be reached by doing a, b, and c. There’s no need to go into every detail of a, b, and c etc… The problem is you live today and the same authority tells you salvation is reached by a, b, c, and d. If you now don’t believe d, which you didn’t have to 300 years ago, your authority considers you anathema.

That isn’t development of doctrine. That is adding to the fundamental way of reaching salvation. With all due respect, and I certainly mean this with all good intentions, I can’t understand why anyone, belonging to any religion, wouldn’t have a problem with this described situation.

 

[annad347]

That isn’t development of doctrine. That is adding to the fundamental way of reaching salvation. With all due respect, and I certainly mean this with all good intentions, I can’t understand why anyone, belonging to any religion, wouldn’t have a problem with this described situation.

Add to that, my question… why? Why is it so important for Mary to have such a title, if everything she does &/or says is to bring you to her Son?

Take it a step further… if you take Mary out of your prayers, never say another Hail Mary, would you’re life still be complete and salvation reached with you’re prayers to Jesus alone? If you answer is yes, then why is this so important?

It feels like you guys are really arguing over a title for someone who isn’t even you’re Savior… and don’t say its out of respect for Jesus, cause there’s more to it then that, and I really want to understand what it is.

 

[Mishakel]

Add to that, my question… why? Why is it so important for Mary to have such a title, if everything she does &/or says is to bring you to her Son?

Take it a step further… if you take Mary out of your prayers, never say another Hail Mary, would you’re life still be complete and salvation reached with you’re prayers to Jesus alone? If you answer is yes, then why is this so important?

It feels like you guys are really arguing over a title for someone who isn’t even you’re Savior… and don’t say its out of respect for Jesus, cause there’s more to it then that, and I really want to understand what it is.

I think you are confused at least on my position. I’m not a Catholic and do not espouse to Mary any of the titles granted to her by Catholicism apart from what we find in scripture.

 

[EndTimes]

I think you are confused at least on my position. I’m not a Catholic and do not espouse to Mary any of the titles granted to her by Catholicism apart from what we find in scripture.

So… You accept Mary as both Blessed and mother of Jesus - Messiah of all?

_

 

[annad347]

I think you are confused at least on my position. I’m not a Catholic and do not espouse to Mary any of the titles granted to her by Catholicism apart from what we find in scripture.

I know, I also liked what your thoughts on reaching salvation with a, b, c for 300 years.

 

[Cathoholic]

godisgood77 . . .

I don’t think this is true… we have successive Popes in Benedict and Francis that have clearly indicated that co-redemptrix is not okay.

Would you mind quoting what statements from them (with links so I can see the context) that you are alluding to?

Again. Just because such a promulgation does not fit with the 2019 environment, does not mean it cannot fit with a 2020, or a 2021, etc.

The door has not been shut on this. At least that I have seen.

But I will await your quotes and proceed as indicated.

 

[Cathoholic]

Mishakel . . .

According to Catholicism it sets the rules for salvation . . .

That’s a false statement Mishakel.

When I get by a computer I will post (because you are not taking my word for these things which is fine. No need to do that.) what the Catholic Church teaches about how the Church is a steward not an innovater.

 

[Cathoholic]

Mishakel . . .

That is adding to the fundamental way of reaching salvation.

Why do you think that?

Don’t you think mankind after the moment of salvation, has a participation in our ongoing salvation through grace?

 

[otjm]

You were correct that it came up; I have no information as to how widely the Servites circulated their comments.

 

[otjm]

I think I would be a bit cautious in making a statement about seeking truth. It may not be so much that some do not seek truth as it may be that they seek it, but with vision clouded by those who went before.

 

[HarryStotle]

I think you are confused at least on my position. I’m not a Catholic and do not espouse to Mary any of the titles granted to her by Catholicism apart from what we find in scripture.

So you reject “titles,” i.e., names or terms, such as Trinity and Second Person of the Trinity because they are not explicitly found in Scripture?

What about Mary as “Ark of the Covenant?” Would that be despite all the evidence that the reference was widely used by the early Church Fathers and that Luke goes to great pains to point out the parallel in his Gospel?

 

[Cathoholic]

@Mishakel . . .

According to Catholicism it sets the rules for salvation . . .

.

Cathoholic . . .

That’s a false statement Mishakel.

When I get by a computer I will post (because you are not taking my word for these things which is fine. No need to do that.) what the Catholic Church teaches about how the Church is a steward not an innovater.

.

Here it is . . .

Cathoholic . . .

VATICAN II 10. Sacred tradition and sacred Scripture form one sacred deposit of the Word of God, committed to the Church. Holding fast to this deposit the entire holy people united with their shepherds remain always steadfast in the teaching of the Apostles, in the common life, in the breaking of the bread and in prayers (see Acts 8:42, Greek text), so that holding to, practicing and professing the heritage of the faith, it becomes on the part of the bishops and faithful a single common effort [7].

But the task of authentically interpreting the Word of God, whether written or handed on [8], has been entrusted exclusively to the living teaching office of the Church [9], whose authority is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ. This teaching office is not above the Word of God, but serves it, teaching only what has been handed on, listening to it devoutly, guarding it scrupulously and explaining it faithfully in accord with a divine commission and with the help of the Holy Spirit; it draws from this one deposit of faith everything which it presents for belief as divinely revealed.

It is clear, therefore, that sacred tradition, sacred Scripture and the teaching authority of the Church, in accord with God’s most wise design, are so linked and joined together that one cannot stand without the others, and that all together and each in its own way under the action of the one Holy Spirit contribute effectively to the salvation of souls. – DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION ON DIVINE REVELATION - (DEI VERBUM) Section 10

Bold mine.

 

[Cathoholic]

62 This motherhood of Mary in the order of grace continues uninterruptedly from the consent which she loyally gave at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, until the eternal fulfilment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation.[15] 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 their blessed home. Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix.[16]
This, however, is so understood that it neither takes away anything from nor adds anything to the dignity and efficacy of Christ the one Mediator.[17]

No creature could ever be counted along with the Incarnate Word and Redeemer; but just as the priesthood of Christ is shared in various ways both by his ministers and the faithful, and as the one goodness of God is radiated in different ways among his creatures, so also the unique mediation of the Redeemer does not exclude but rather gives rise to a manifold cooperation which is but a sharing in this one source.

The Church does not hesitate to profess this subordinate role of Mary, which it constantly experiences and recommends to the heartfelt attention of the faithful, so that encouraged by this maternal help they may the more closely adhere to the Mediator and Redeemer. - DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION ON THE CHURCH - LUMEN GENTIUM

Bold mine. We see here in Vatican II the titles of Mediatrix and Advocate explicitly stated.

And we already saw elsewhere in the CCC, that the discussion of Co-Redemptrix was already discussed as well.

CCC 618b In fact Jesus desires to associate with his redeeming sacrifice those who were to be its first beneficiaries. 456
This is achieved supremely in the case of his mother, who was associated more intimately than any other person in the mystery of his redemptive suffering .457

.

JOHN 19:32-34 32 So the soldiers came and broke the legs of the first, and of the other who had been crucified with him; 33 but when they came to Jesus and saw that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. 34 But one of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear, and at once there came out blood and water.

.

LUKE 2:34-35 34 and Simeon blessed them and said to Mary his mother, “Behold, this child is set for the fall and rising of many in Israel, and for a sign that is spoken against 35 (and a sword will pierce through your own soul also ), that thoughts out of many hearts may be revealed.”

.

The Blessed Virgin Mary. Behold your Mother.

• Mediatrix
• Advocate
• Co-Redemptrix

.

Here is part of what it all boils down to . . . .

" . . . so that encouraged by this maternal help they (the faithful) may the more closely adhere to the Mediator and Redeemer . . ."

“Do whatever He tells you.” – John 2:5

 

[po18guy]

Mary, the model of humility, would not desire this title.

 

[Cathoholic]

@po18guy.

Which of the Blessed Virgin Mary’s current titles do you think came about because of (initiated by) Her desire?

 

[graciew]

From the book “ God and World” Cardinal Ratzinger with Peter Seewald 2002
Page 144 in the Spanish version:

Google translate:

“ The response of the Congregation of the Faith says that what that intends to express is already best summarized in other titles of Mary, while the" co-redemptive "formula is too far from the language of Scripture and patristics and, so, it causes misunderstandings.
What is true about that? Well, it is true that Christ is not outside of us or at our side, but that he forms with us a deep, new community. Everything that is his becomes ours, and everything that is ours he has accepted by making it his own: this great exchange is the authentic
2.86 ’
z87 content of redemption, remove the barriers of our self and enter into communion with God.
Since Mary anticipates the Church as such and, so to speak, is the Church in person, that “with” is consummated in her in an exemplary manner. But that “with” must not make us forget that the “first” is Christ: everything proceeds from Him,
as the epistles to the Ephesians and the Colossians say above all; Mary is what she is thanks to Him.
The word “co-redeemer” would overshadow that origin. A correct intention is expressed with a wrong word. In matters of faith it is essential to link with the language of the Scriptures and of the Fathers; language is not manipulable to
Will.”

 

[po18guy]

All are fitting - the problem with co-xxx is that, at least in English, it implies equality. I know that in the nuanced sense, it does not, but we cannot even get many souls past the Peter as prime and Eucharist as the True Presence. Aren’t we defending the Church enough without yet another arrow in the opposition’s quiver?

 

[godisgood77]

But I will await your quotes and proceed as indicated.

Someone else just posted the Official CDF comments under Ratzinger about the idea of co-redemtrix and Pope Francis used the word nonsense to describe this in the article posted to start the thread.

I would say that the topic should be closed based on those clear statements.