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

[Cathoholic]

pnewton . . .

The Second Vatican Council did not make this term dogma, so to be clear, I am not speaking of what VII said, but what has been believed, and taught, beyond that, as doctrine, but doctrine that might need further refinement. Second, I still have no idea, other than to study and try and understand, how to submit one’s mind, unless you are speaking of blind obedience, without any understanding.

Well said pnewton.

 

[Cathoholic]

patricius79 . . .

The Sacrifice of the Mass is our participation in the Sacrifice of the Cross, in which Mary played a central role, by Christ’s grace.

Simple yet profound. Also well-stated.

 

[patricius79]

As only one is now pope, I always go with him, and consider that maybe my own understanding of what doctrine is might not be absolute.

My understanding of doctrine isn’t absolute. That’s sort of the point of the questions I was asking.

I don’t understand what the Pope reportedly said. For example, he said that no other titles besides “woman” and “mother” are essential to Mary.

So does this mean that he thinks that “Virgin” is not essential?

I’ll leave aside my questions about previous Popes for now.

One of my other questions is whether the Pope’s homily is now Catholic doctrine. What does make something Catholic doctrine?

Strictly speaking he didn’t say that Mary is not, in any sense, Co-Redemptrix. In fact, though he addresses “Co-Redemptrix” question, he doesn’t seem to explicitly address the Blessed Virgin’s singular and ongoing role in our salvation, as taught by his predecessors and by Vatican II.

But he evidently thinks it would be foolish to formally declare Our Lady to be “Co-Redemptrix”. So what does that mean, doctrinally?

 

[TULIPed]

You’re being way, way to reasonable. I find it very annoying. Please cease this reasonableness and begin to be much more close minded and (dare I say it) dogmatic in your posts.

 

[patricius79]

In reference to the conflict between minimalism and maximalism, there are many parts of Catholic spirituality that allow for a range of belief and devotion. Why not simply let each to their own path?

Who is obstructing anyone’s path?

 

[patricius79]

Thank you, Cathoholic.

Pope St. John Paul II literally affirmed the “centrality” of Mary in Christ’s Redemptive work.

In his Encyclical Redemptoris Mater, he wrote about the meaning of Christ Crucified saying: “Behold your Mother”.

Undoubtedly, we find here an expression of the Son’s particular solicitude for his Mother, whom he is leaving in such great sorrow. And yet the “testament of Christ’s Cross” says more. Jesus highlights a new relationship between Mother and Son, the whole truth and reality of which he solemnly confirms. One can say that if Mary’s motherhood of the human race had already been outlined, now it is clearly stated and established. It emerges from the definitive accomplishment of the Redeemer’s Paschal Mystery. The Mother of Christ, who stands at the very center of this mystery-a mystery which embraces each individual and all humanity-is given as mother to every single individual and all mankind. The man at the foot of the Cross is John, “the disciple whom he loved.”[47] But it is not he alone. Following tradition, the Council does not hesitate to call Mary “the Mother of Christ and mother of mankind”: since she “belongs to the offspring of Adam she is one with all human beings… Indeed she is ‘clearly the mother of the members of Christ…since she cooperated out of love so that there might be born in the Church the faithful.’”[48]
http://www.vatican.va/content/john-.../hf_jp-ii_enc_25031987_redemptoris-mater.html

 

[pnewton]

My understanding is that when Pope Leo XIII wrote his encyclical (“Iucunda Semper”) which called Mary “Co-Redemptrix”, that would mean that it is Catholic doctrine that Mary is Co-Redemptrix.

Having looked at that encyclical, I note that the topic is the rosary. It was not an encyclical aimed at explaining a new title for Mary. Therefore, it might mean that such a title is being defined, or it may mean only that a role is mentioned in passing, as this point occupies half of one sentence. So, since it is in Latin, it might have even been better translated with the English word “with”, as opposed to “co-.”

Note also that after he used this term, he wrote, “as it were.” Now I understand that what Pope Francis wrote was only in a homily, but it is possible he does not give the significance to this phrase being used in an encyclical about the Rosary that others give it. Of more interest to me was this:

… being by worthiness and by merit most acceptable to Him, and, therefore, surpassing in power all the angels and saints in Heaven.

 

[patricius79]

Thanks pnewton. The way I read it, he is saying that Mary’s central, subordinate role in our redemption in Jesus Christ is manifested by the prayer of the Rosary. By the way, Vatican II–which affirms that Mary is “the cause of salvation”–takes much the same approach in explaining Mary’s union with Christ n the work of our salvation, beginning with the Annunciation.

So here is the passage from Pope Leo XIII’s encyclical “Iucunda Semper”:

1. The recourse we have to Mary in prayer follows upon the office she continuously fills by the side of the throne of God as Mediatrix of Divine grace; being by worthiness and by merit most acceptable to Him, and, therefore, surpassing in power all the angels and saints in Heaven. Now, this merciful office of hers, perhaps, appears in no other form of prayer so manifestly as it does in the Rosary. For in the Rosary all the part that Mary took as our co-Redemptress comes to us, as it were, set forth, and in such wise as though the facts were even then taking place; and this with much profit to our piety, whether in the contemplation of the succeeding sacred mysteries, or in the prayers which we speak and repeat with the lips. First come the Joyful Mysteries…
   http://www.vatican.va/content/leo-x...enc_08091894_iucunda-semper-expectatione.html

 

[patricius79]

Now I understand that what Pope Francis wrote was only in a homily, but it is possible he does not give the significance to this phrase being used in an encyclical about the Rosary that others give it. Of more interest to me was this:

… being by worthiness and by merit most acceptable to Him, and, therefore, surpassing in power all the angels and saints in Heaven.

He may not give it the same significance. But among other things I’ve mentioned, I don’t understand why he thinks that that this title of “Co-Redemptrix” steals something from Christ–especially given that it was used by three of his predecessors in the Papacy.

 

[pnewton]

that that this title of “Co-Redemptrix” steals something from Christ–especially given that it was used by three of his predecessors in the Papacy.

I think the question is open if this is a title, or a description. The meaning of it is open, as it has not been defined, making me lean more toward it being a description. Since he use the word “foolishness,” he is not saying that the use of this phrase is untrue necessarily. I would say that the response in this one thread, on a very traditional leaning website at that, would indicate that to some, it is seen as taking something away from Christ. As a shepherd of all the sheep, that may be why he sees any further embellishment on the word by his office as foolish. As said above, both the Marian maximumists and minimalists are equally part of the Body of Christ. But I am speculating.

 

[patricius79]

Since he use the word “foolishness,” he is not saying that the use of this phrase is untrue necessarily. I would say that the response in this one thread, on a very traditional leaning website at that, would indicate that to some, it is seen as taking something away from Christ. As a shepherd of all the sheep, that may be why he sees any further embellishment on the word by his office as foolish. As said above, both the Marian maximumists and minimalists are equally part of the Body of Christ. But I am speculating

I am left speculating as well. If he wanted to say that many misinterpret the term “Co-Redemptrix”, I don’t know why he didn’t say that.

I would agree very much if he said that we need much more preaching about how Mary’s singular and continuing role in our salvation is all from Jesus Christ, and manifests His power. In other words, I think we need to hear what Vatican II and the Popes have taught about Mary.

As I also mentioned, the Holy Father also stated: “Mary woman, Mary mother, without any other essential title”.

I don’t understand that, because it sounds like he’s saying that “Virgin” is not essential to Mary. Yet this is dogma and reveals, as the Catechism says, her perfect faith in God.

I appreciate that he does affirm that Mary is the Mother of the Church, and that no praise is enough to talk about Mary.

 

[patricius79]

People by themselves in popular belief, which does not equal Church tradition, exaggerate the attributes of Mary.

I’ve read most of the Papal Encyclicals on Mary, as well as Vatican II’s teaching regarding her. They are very intense regarding the greatness of Mary and her cooperative role in our redemption in Jesus Christ.

Could you give an example of how people exaggerate the attributes of Mary? I ask because it seems to me that most Catholics have little idea of the dignity of the Mother of God, or of the magnitude of her love for each of us.

 

[commenter]

. I would say that the response in this one thread, on a very traditional leaning website at that, would indicate that to some,

“Mildly conservative leaning” website.

 

[pnewton]

pnewton:

. I would say that the response in this one thread, on a very traditional leaning website at that, would indicate that to some,

“Mildly conservative leaning” website.

LOL! Fair enough. I stand corrected. I should have left out the word “very.” Would you settle for moderately?

 

[commenter]

commenter:

pnewton:

. I would say that the response in this one thread, on a very traditional leaning website at that, would indicate that to some,

“Mildly conservative leaning” website.

LOL! Fair enough. I stand corrected. I should have left out the word “very.” Would you settle for moderately?

Fair enough.

 

[patricius79]

As said above, both the Marian maximumists and minimalists are equally part of the Body of Christ.

They are. But does it not hurt our Lord if we are intentionally minimizing the importance of His Mother and ours, the New Eve?

Or when you refer to Marian “minimalists”, do you just mean people who struggle with understanding what the Church teaches about Our Lady?

Vatican II doesn’t seem compatible with the ideas of Marian minimalism. The Council stated that Mary is united with our Redeemer and with His singular functions:

1. By reason of the gift and role of divine maternity, by which she is united with her Son, the Redeemer, and with His singular graces and functions, the Blessed Virgin is also intimately united with the Church. As St. Ambrose taught, the Mother of God is a type of the Church in the order of faith, charity and perfect union with Christ.(18*) For in the mystery of the Church, which is itself rightly called mother and virgin, the Blessed Virgin stands out in eminent and singular fashion as exemplar both of virgin and mother. (19*) By her belief and obedience, not knowing man but overshadowed by the Holy Spirit, as the new Eve she brought forth on earth the very Son of the Father, showing an undefiled faith, not in the word of the ancient serpent, but in that of God’s messenger. The Son whom she brought forth is He whom God placed as the first-born among many brethren,(299) namely the faithful, in whose birth and education she cooperates with a maternal love.
   Lumen gentium

 

[Sociallycal]

Be baptised by all, at one shot. Lake Taal is a ring of Churches, so baptise in it, you get baptised in all. However it got dried up after the recent volcano thingy. The teachings should unite Christians and not split us up into theology clusters.

 

[patricius79]

By grace, she can have a unique role in helping Jesus to redeem us. Mary, as His Mother, had a singular participation in the Redemptive Passion of Jesus Christ.

 

[Kei]

Pope Francis Vs. The Marian Title “Co-Redemptrix”? | Dave Armstrong

Think that covers a lot.

 

[DoubtingKT]

Mother Mary: a perfect advocate of Christ
Mother Mary: a perfect participator in Christ’s Redemption
Mother Mary: a perfect mediator in Christ’s Salvation (Jesus Christ is the Mediator between God and His people)

Mother Mary is a perfect reflection of God’s grace, a perfect disciple of Christ, a perfect human for Christ, and a perfect nurturer of lives.

Mother Mary always lead all to Jesus Christ, points all to Jesus Christ, and nothing about her. If at any point in time, anyone misinterpret and glorifies Mother Mary more than Jesus Christ, that will be a great injustice to her.

That’s what I believe as of now!