Mary Co-Redemptrix?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mperea75
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Mperea75

Guest
+JMJ

Ok here is a tough one Mary Co-Redmtrix. I know this is not dogma but it is something I have been reading about and studing a bit and would like. I have talked with a few of my pordestant friends about it and I have tried to explain it through mary’s “co-operation” with God’s grace in her “FIAT”. Any Opinons on this is much appriciated!
 
Perhaps it might help if one considers that the “co” part is not to be seen as “equal”–not like, for example, a “co-star”, but more in the sense of a “co-pilot”. A co-pilot is NOT the one who pilots the plane. The co-pilot does not share the piloting in the normal course of events, but is there to back-up and handle problems FOR the pilot, if necessary.

Jesus is piloting the plane. Mary is there to handle things that come up–to reassure the passengers if there is turbulence, for example.

Mary is a creature, not a goddess. Mary could not be even IN the plane without Jesus, while Jesus could definitely be in the plane without Mary. . .but, together, not that this makes Jesus MORE, but Mary REFLECTS Him (just as we someday will either be perfect reflections of God’s love, or damned by our own free choice), and this PLEASES Jesus.
 
"Mary as co-redemptrix is a doctrine not a dogma. When explaining this term to your friend, make sure he understands that the Church does not teach (never has and never will) that Mary as Co-redemptrix is equal to Christ. “Co” is from the Latin “cum” meaning “with”. “Trix” is a feminine suffix, so the word means “the woman with the redeemer”—the woman with the one doing the act of redemption.

Just as Eve participated in the fall by her consent and pride, Mary cooperates with the redemption of man by her consent and humility as handmaid of the Lord. She gave Jesus his body, and his body is what saved us."

Source :
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=2725&highlight=co-redemptrix
 
Because Mary AGREED with the angel that she would let the will of God be done, it was granted that the means of salvation would come into the world through her being. By giving birth to our Savior Jesus Christ. So she CO-OPERATED or freely submitted to the will of God. In this sense she became a co redemptrix for all of mankind by bearing and giving birth to our Savior who would die for the sins of the world. Mary, became what Eve wasn’t. The obedient virgin. So she became the New Eve and our Lord the Second Adam. And all Christians the the children of God. Truly, a beautiful truth.
Ron from Ohio
 
40.png
rarndt01:
Because Mary AGREED with the angel that she would let the will of God be done, it was granted that the means of salvation would come into the world through her being. By giving birth to our Savior Jesus Christ. So she CO-OPERATED or freely submitted to the will of God. In this sense she became a co redemptrix for all of mankind by bearing and giving birth to our Savior who would die for the sins of the world. Mary, became what Eve wasn’t. The obedient virgin. So she became the New Eve and our Lord the Second Adam. And all Christians the the children of God. Truly, a beautiful truth.

Ron from Ohio
Click to expand...
I think your post sums up the argument pretty well, which is why I reference it.

There are two senses by which one can understand your explanation:

First, we know this is true as an historical one-time event. The birth-giving and nurturing of Our Lord. Through this act she wilfully cooperated in the Salvation of humankind.

Second, many people will state their belief that this affords her an ongoing, all-encompassing role of dispensing Grace for all time everywhere. I have problems with this concept, and although it seems like a popular idea it is not Dogma.

The second contention depends entirely upon the first, but for a Catholic to agree on the first point in no way compels one to believe the second contention, which appears to be a recent novelty.
 
It’s an authentic magisterial doctrine of Catholicism. And that’s all the theological certainty that I need. 😉
 
This is a subject, which will further separate our Christian brothers and possibly drive (uninformed) Catholics away from the teaching of the Church. When I first read of this I was shocked, until I researched it. My question is how many Catholics and other Christians will not bother to research it, but take it on face value? What is the purpose of this? Does Mary not receive enough praise as it is? Are we neglecting her work through our Lord, Jesus the Christ? Redemption is only through our Lord, Jesus. Every priest, bishop, and pope could be considered a “co-redeemer” because they assist us in finding our Lord, why not call us all co-redeemers? I love my mother Mary, I don’t need another title for her. It will only cause division among Christians.
 
40.png
Tom:
… why not call us all co-redeemers?
Click to expand...
I think we are considered co-redeemers… As for myself, I love Our Lady and any title that would hold her in esteem would not bother me one bit…after all she does hold the title ‘Queen of The Angels’ and she is the Mother of us all in Christ soooo… Co-Redemptrix is good…
God Bless, Annunciata:)
 
I notice that most of the post agree on the role of Mary, so there is not really a doctrinal dispute as much as a linguistic one. I know that “co” in the language of theology does not mandate equality, but it has evolved in the English to the point where equality pops to the mind of many. Even a co-pilot is close enough to a pilot that he can fly the plane on his own.

I do not understand the necessity to boil a complex doctrine down to a single word, especially if it is predictable that this word is to be misunderstood.

I would be far more understanding to the phrase “cum-redemptrix”. At least this would the “with” part better.
 
40.png
Annunciata:
I think we are considered co-redeemers… As for myself, I love Our Lady and any title that would hold her in esteem would not bother me one bit…after all she does hold the title ‘Queen of The Angels’ and she is the Mother of us all in Christ soooo… Co-Redemptrix is good…
God Bless, Annunciata:)
Click to expand...
The title won’t make anyone love her any more than they do right now, it will only confuse many and drive a wedge between her children. I doubt very much she wants that. The implication is plain and incorrect, many will see this as the Church granting Mary the power of redemption, which is not correct, and is not what is meant by Co-Redemptrix. It’s a contradictory, inflammatory, unnecessary title. Why add fuel to a fire?
 
While I agree with the doctrine as described above - i.e. Mary with with Jesus the redeemer - I think the title is too confusing for non-Catholics and will just lead to more false assumptions about the faith. I prefer “Mary Mother of God” over “Mary CoRedemptrix” But that’s just my two cents. :twocents:
 
40.png
Tom:
The title won’t make anyone love her any more than they do right now, it will only confuse many and drive a wedge between her children. I doubt very much she wants that. The implication is plain and incorrect, many will see this as the Church granting Mary the power of redemption, which is not correct, and is not what is meant by Co-Redemptrix. It’s a contradictory, inflammatory, unnecessary title. Why add fuel to a fire?
Click to expand...
I agree. She’s already “Mother of God” and “Queen of Heaven”. How many more titles do we need to give her, especially ones that will further alienate non-Catholics?

Heck, I have trouble understanding why we need to call Mary a “co-redemptrix” without having to engage in mental and verbal gymnastics to try and explain it to my non-Catholic husband and in-laws. And I’ve been a Catholic my whole life.

(And yes, I read the arguments that “co-” doesn’t really mean equal. In common modern English, if often does. My “co-worker” is my fellow equal worker. “Co-redemptrix” would be taken by a modern-day non-Catholic as indicating that we view Mary as equal to Jesus Christ in providing salvation, and/or that Jesus alone is not enough for salvation. Nothing could be further from the truth, but why would we want to purposely add one more BIG hurdle for a non-Catholic to jump over before they can freely accept Catholicism?)
 
40.png
Tom:
The title won’t make anyone love her any more than they do right now, it will only confuse many and drive a wedge between her children. I doubt very much she wants that. The implication is plain and incorrect, many will see this as the Church granting Mary the power of redemption, which is not correct, and is not what is meant by Co-Redemptrix. It’s a contradictory, inflammatory, unnecessary title. Why add fuel to a fire?
Click to expand...
Originally Posted by Annunciata
I think we are considered co-redeemers… As for myself, I love Our Lady and any title that would hold her in esteem would not bother me one bit…after all she does hold the title ‘Queen of The Angels’ and she is the Mother of us all in Christ soooo… Co-Redemptrix is good…
Click to expand...
Tom,

Coming from a Protestant background myself, I have firsthand experience with accepting this doctrine.

If one is truly open to God’s Grace, (BTW that brings to mind another title of Mary,’ Mediatrix of All Grace’) then the ability to understand this will come about in time …I know it took me a while… but it didn’t keep from becoming a Catholic. They only make it a ‘wedge’ when it serves them… Annunciata:)
 
Not to be intolerant, but whether this becomes dogma isn’t dependent on whether “WE” think it is divisive, or not.

If it becomes dogma, that means that it was true, is true, and will always be true. . .whether we “agree”, or not.

There is no such thing as “new dogma”, but only deeper understanding of dogma which has been already revealed to us. (Revelation is closed–there will be no further “word” than THE “Word”).

And I, for one, am slightly tired of being told or warned of the “dire consequences” that come from our being “intolerant”, or “misunderstanding”, or “making it for others”.

The words “tolerance” and “intolerance”–not to mention the word “Christian”–have become so co-opted by “media” and exponents/ opponents that they mean NOTHING. Christian has become, not "follower of Christ, but now simply either “good” or “bad” depending on the point of view of the speaker.

“Tolerance” means “acceptance.” “Intolerance” means disagreement.

Orwell must be rolling in his grave.
 
I believe that had Mary NOT “ACCEPTED” God’s will to Spiritually concieve Jesus into her womb, salvation through Jesus would still have come to be. I believe that had Jesus NOT ACCEPTED God’s will to die on the cross for our sins, salvation would not have come to be.

I agree with Tom. Why push a HUGE barrier between us and the Protestants and risk great confusion to common Catholics? Especially for a belief that, believing it, is not going to carry weight on judgement day.

Jesus Loves God

NAB LUK 22:42
“Father, if it is your will, take this cup from me; yet not my will but yours be done.”

NAB ROM 5:18

To sum up, then: just as a single offense brought condemnation to all men, **a single righteous act brought all men acquittal and life. **Just as through one man’s disobedience all became sinners, so through one man’s obedience all shall become just.

NAB HEB 4:14
Since, then, we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God, let us hold fast to our profession of faith. For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weakness, but one who was tempted in every way that we are, yet never sinned. So let us confidently approach the throne of grace to receive mercy and favor and to find help in time of need.****NAB JOH 10:17

“The Father loves me for this: that I lay down my life to take it up again. No one takes it from me; I lay it down freely.” NAB JOH 15:12

This is my commandment: love one another as** I have loved you. There is no greater love than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends.** You are my friends if you do what I command you.NAB JOH 14:30

“I shall not go on speaking to you longer; the Prince of this world is at hand. He has no hold on me, but the world must know that I love the Father and do as the Father has commanded me.” NAB JOH 4:34

“Doing the will of him who sent me and bringing his work to completion is my food.” NAB REV 1:4

John wishes you grace and peace–from him who is and who was and who is to come, and from the seven spirits before his throne, and from Jesus Christ the faithful witness, the first-born from the dead and ruler of the kings of earth. To him who loves us and freed us from our sins by his own blood, who has made us a royal nation of priests in the service of his God and Father–to him be glory and power forever and ever! Amen. Peace in Christ,
Steven Merten
www.ILOVEYOUGOD.com
 
I think that part of the problem is that the C0-Redemptrix is not alone, it goes hand in hand with Mediatrix of all Graces. This is the one that I sort of have issues with.
 
Code:
Mperea75 said:
+JMJ

Ok here is a tough one Mary Co-Redmtrix. I know this is not dogma but it is something I have been reading about and studing a bit and would like. I have talked with a few of my pordestant friends about it and I have tried to explain it through mary’s “co-operation” with God’s grace in her “FIAT”. Any Opinons on this is much appriciated!
Click to expand...

If by Co-Redemptrix one means that Our Lady suffered horrendously at the foot of the Cross, then I don’t believe we should declare a dogma something which we already know is true.

If by Co-Redemptrix we mean that Mary saved us from sin just like Christ did, then I don’t believe we ever believed that and the Church will never declared a new dogma which would upset millions of Protestants and Orthodox.

Antonio :confused:
 
I don’t see any reason to make this or anything else dogma at this time. I don’t think that dogma should be made except when it is absolutely necessary to put down herecy. In the interest of ecumenism, when something is defined so stringently, in words that cannot be changed for clearity we end up in trouble sometimes trying to explain to others.

For instance, the dogma of immaculate conception. As I understand, the Orthodox believe that Mary was sinless, but since we have a difference in how we define original sin it has become a disputed issue. The belief is the same, it is the language that is causing a problem.

The teaching of Co-Redemtrix is fine just the way it is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top