Mary Co-Redemptrix?

[mercygate]

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

Yes. We are all co-redeemers insofar as we cooperate with Christ in his work. Yet I take the stand Newman took on papal infallibility before Vatican I. Even though he believed it to be true, he believed that promulgating it as dogma would be inadvisable. Promulgating the title of co-redemptrix would further confuse and alienate people who are already confused and alienated about what the Church teaches. It would not be or less true for being proclaimed as dogma.

I have heard that Our Lady herself, via a Dutch (?) visionary, is promoting the cause of promulgating this as dogma. I am skeptical. I ask myself: Is it LIKE her to self-promote?

 

[carol_marie]

I agree with those who think that Co-Redemptrix opens the door to MUCH misunderstanding. You will constantly have to repeat that “co” means “with” and I agree that lots of Catholics and Protestants will think that you mean to say that Mary is your redeemer JUST LIKE JESUS. I read an article in the Chicago Tribune where a woman was saying that because she was abused by men in her life she couldn’t bring herself to worship a Father God or Jesus but she was happy that she was Catholic because she can talk to her “Mother” instead. Men… who need em? How sad is that? I can promise you that every Protestant reading that article shook their head & thought… “Catholics have warped Mary into some sort of optional God.” Not that you should alter all your lingo to please Protestants but as it’s been said over & over again on these forums, words are powerful and since you don’t MEAN to say that Mary is equal to Jesus, why make it sound like she is? It would be similar to me saying, “When my kids are bad, I beat them.” And somebody says… yikes… how could you beat your kids? That is so wrong?! And then I say, “Well, when I say beat… I mean spank.” If they knew nothing about me and never bothered to ask me to expain, when they heard me say I beat my kids they they’d go around thinking just that… I beat my kids.
Besides… does Jesus really need somebody else to help him fly the plane?

 

[Tom]

BTW being a professional pilot, i assure you the co-pilot, as a fully qualified pilot, does indeed fly the plane.

 

[jimmy]

Fr Ambrose:

The Orthodox bishop of Oxford, UK, Bishop Kallistos Ware, has written an small article on this topic. He has called it “No New Dogmas Please.”

It was written for “The Tablet” in London and can be accessed on their website at
thetablet.co.uk/cgi-bin/archive_index.cgi/tablet-category-Ecclesiology

If you find it difficult to access that site, there is an alternative
cs.ust.hk/faculty/dimitris/metro/aug01/AUG01.html

Just scroll down until you come upon the article

I agree with Bishop Ware. I hope they do not make it a dogma, because, although it is true, it will allienate many Christians. We must keep obligatory definitions to a minimum.

I really don’t see any reason to declare it a dogma. Its not to combat any heresy.

 

[Joanna]

Sarah Jane:

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."

%between%

So simple, so sound!.

 

[Ahimsa]

Is Mary the co-pilot, or is she the mother of the pilot?



Ahimsa

 

[Writer]

"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

“Co” actually can also imply equality as in the word “coextensive”. This in and of itself is probably a good enough reason to nix the “Co-Redemtrix” term. While honoring Mary can certainly be a wonderful and important part of our spirtual lives, this title is in desperate need of a re-write. Let’s face it, we don’t speak Latin anymore, and this term needs to be said in a clearer and more accurate way to those of us who rely upon English in our daily lives.

A relative of mine discussed this issue with a priest or bishop in a leadership capacity who summed up my view when he said that, while the theology can be argued, the term itself needs to be re-evaluated. It may make perfect sense in Latin, but one has to admit as soon as a Protestant hears this term, one could hear a possible open mind slamming shut like an iron gate. If for no other purpose as a stumbiling block to witnessing, I would suggest we find another way to put it. As we are reminded in Romans 14:21, we don’t want to errect unnecessary barriers to Protestants who are trying to come home. Good concept perhaps, but let’s change the term “Co-Redemptrix” to its English enquivalent.

Besides the issue of language, however, there is also a legitimate theological concern here. It seems that some people are greatly preoccupied with this cause, which, I would argue, lessens their focus upon the one true redeemer, Jesus. If we ask ourselves, what would Mary herself think about this debate? Given her deep humility and love of the Lord, I would suggest she would admonish those people to focus instead on Christ.

 

[carol_marie]

 

[mayra_hart]

actually, mary’s whole role in life is to further the exaltation of her son and her savior. catholics point to mary at the wedding feast,where jesus changed the water into wine. she said,“do whatever he tells you”(jn2:5).she is always pointing to christians to jesus;she is always telling us to obey him. the church’s teaching on mary is not a dogma of catholicism in the same way that her teaching on jesus and his atonement is. santa maria madre de dios ruega por nosotros

 

[itsjustdave1988]

It doesn’t matter what “co-” CAN mean, but only what it DOES mean according to the Church regarding Marian doctrines, which takes this term from the Latin. I don’t advocate changing traditional Catholic doctrine because some people misuderstand it. Instead, better catechesis is needed.

There are Unitarians out there that don’t agree with our Trinitarian beliefs, sometimes merely due to misuderstanding. Should we “nix” the part of the Nicene Creed that insists upon Christ being the “eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light” just cuz it’s might be confusing?

 

[Mperea75]

+JMJ

Is not our Suffereing bring graces upon the earth and we suffer because of orginal sin. So if Mary suffered wouldn’t the grace that she brought upon the earth with her suffering be amply more because she was born without sin.

 

[Hesychios]

+JMJ

Is not our Suffereing bring graces upon the earth and we suffer because of orginal sin. So if Mary suffered wouldn’t the grace that she brought upon the earth with her suffering be amply more because she was born without sin.

I am not sure I understand the question, but it sounds rather interesting.

Does someone sinless have a lower tolerance for pain?

 

[mayra_hart]

mary is involve in our redemption because she allowed god to use her womb to enter the physical arena. she has cooperated in bringing salvationto all of us. santa maria madre de dios ruega por nosotros

 

[Antonio_B]

mayra hart:

mary is involve in our redemption because she allowed god to use her womb to enter the physical arena. she has cooperated in bringing salvationto all of us. santa maria madre de dios ruega por nosotros

Pecadores, ahora, y en la hora de nuestra muerte, Amén!

Antonio

 

[itsjustdave1988]

+JMJ

Is not our Suffereing bring graces upon the earth and we suffer because of orginal sin. So if Mary suffered wouldn’t the grace that she brought upon the earth with her suffering be amply more because she was born without sin.

Christ’s life, suffering, death, and resurrection is the source of all grace.

However, our suffering does bring Christ’s grace upon the earth. Grace for us, grace for others. Our suffering, our sacrifices, our good works, our acts of faith, hope, and charity, are not the source of grace, but are the work of Christ in us. They merit grace congruously, not condignly. This is true whether we were born with original sin or whether God kept us from original sin at conception.

We are all co-redeemers insofar as we allow the work of Christ to become our work. However, Mary’s cooperation with Christ’s Incarnation, ministry, and Redemption was unique, more obedient, more perfected than any other of God’s creatures. Consequently, her merit was also unique and more pefected than any other’s.

 

[Writer]

itsjustdave1988:

It doesn’t matter what “co-” CAN mean, but only what it DOES mean according to the Church regarding Marian doctrines, which takes this term from the Latin. I don’t advocate changing traditional Catholic doctrine because some people misuderstand it. Instead, better catechesis is needed.

There are Unitarians out there that don’t agree with our Trinitarian beliefs, sometimes merely due to misuderstanding. Should we “nix” the part of the Nicene Creed that insists upon Christ being the “eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light” just cuz it’s might be confusing?

From what I know of Unitarians, I can’t think of one central beleif we share, but that’s getting off track… I would point out that there is nothing being “given-up” from refraining from the use of terms such as “Co-Redemptrix”. Last time I checked the Catechism of the Catholic Church or the Nicene Creed, I found nothing even remotely identifying Mary as the “Co-Redemptrix”. On the other hand, the concept of the Trinity is integral to our understanding of God and the Church. In other words, you are comparing apples and oranges. You are selecting a non-central aspect of the faith and giving it equal footing to the Trinity, one of the deepest and most fundamental aspects of the Christian faith. I think this comparison in and of itself clarifies why “Co-Redemptrix” should give us pause and concern. It seems more a product of emotion than reason. Devotion to Mary is wonderful, but to even begin to place her on equal footing with Christ our Savior seems a dangerous road to follow.

Lastly, not to sound like Clinton arguing the definition of “is”, but words do mean things. Many non-Catholics would immediately identify “Co-Redemptrix” as meaning something which is incorrect. This, combined with the fact that breaking the parts of the word down can even lead to an erroneus meaning, sends a pretty clear signal that it’s a confusing term which proabably does more harm than good.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Last time I checked the Catechism of the Catholic Church or the Nicene Creed, I found nothing even remotely identifying Mary as the “Co-Redemptrix”.

My point is, if it is true, proclaim it. Don’t be afraid to proclaim the truth. Christ wasn’t. Why should we?

Furthermore, it is a teaching of the ordinary magisterium. The Pope uses the term in his catechesis on Mary. He’s the supreme teaching authority of Christianity. I’m not one that can so easily disregard his catechesis.

“Mary goes before us and accompanies us. The silent journey that begins with her Immaculate Conception and passes through the ‘yes’ of Nazareth, which makes her the Mother of God, finds on Calvary a particularly important moment. There also, accepting and assisting at the sacrifice of her son, Mary is the dawn of Redemption; …Crucified spiritually with her crucified son (cf. Gal. 2:20), she contemplated with heroic love the death of her God, she “lovingly consented to the immolation of this Victim which she herself had brought forth” (Lumen Gentium, 58)…In fact, at Calvary she united herself with the sacrifice of her Son that led to the foundation of the Church; her maternal heart shared to the very depths the will of Christ ‘to gather into one all the dispersed children of God’ (Jn. 11:52). Having suffered for the Church, Mary deserved to become the Mother of all the disciples of her Son, the Mother of their unity…In fact, Mary’s role as Coredemptrix did not cease with the glorification of her Son” (Pope John Paul II, 1985, Papal Address in Guayaquil, Ecuador)

See also…

TEACHING OF POPE JOHN PAUL II ON THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY
ewtn.com/library/MARY/JP2BVM70.HTM

 

[mayra_hart]

mary still mediates the grace of christ to his church. this is at least partially rooted in the concept of mary’s being the new eve. just as christ’s obedience is in contrast to adam 's disobedience,so mary’s mediating of god’s grace(christ) to us is in contrast to eve’s mediating of satan’s temptation to adam. eve made sin possible through her mediation. mary made redemption possible through her mediation.madre querida acogeme en tu regazo,cubreme con tu manto protector y con ese dulce carino que nos tienes a tus hijos aleja de mi trampas del enemigo,e intercede intensamente para impedir que sus astucias me hagan caer. amen

 

[Tom]

Dave,
Please understand my thought on this. I’m not arguing whether Mary acts to assist in the redemption of souls. I’m talking about the introduction of confusing language.

itsjustdave1988:

My point is, if it is true, proclaim it. Don’t be afraid to proclaim the truth. Christ wasn’t. Why should we?

For arguments sake: We can find language in Scripture which implies that in heaven we are “one in God” (Jn 10.38; 14,11; 14,20; all of chap 17 but especially 17, 11 & 17, 20-21) which would imply that those in heaven in actuality “become” a part of God. Using these Scriptural reference we “could” say Mary is God. Since she is “one with God”. The question is should we say such a thing? She of course is not God, but she is a part of God isn’t she? So in a way she is God, so we could make that statement, but, if we proclaim that Mary has “become” God using this reasoning, although Scripturally true, would be inflammatory and confusing to others.
If we have to explain what we mean by the expression (as is the case with coredemptrix) it is obviously not clear and should not be used.

itsjustdave1988:

Furthermore, it is a teaching of the ordinary magisterium.

It is not dogma is it? It is not an “infallible teaching”, and should not become one. It is not necessary for our faith and salvation.
As I stated earlier when I first heard the term used I was aghast. I had to research what the Church meant because it sounds blasphemous. After the research I understood the Church was not placing Mary on an equal level with Jesus, but that was my initial fear. The question is how many will hear this and not research it from the Church? The term is misleading (not the theology) and should not be used. Mary has indeed led more people to her Son than probably everyone else combined. I agree with the theology, just not the term “Coredemptrix”

 

[Mperea75]

itsjustdave1988:

Christ’s life, suffering, death, and resurrection is the source of all grace.

We are all co-redeemers insofar as we allow the work of Christ to become our work…

Since we are all “Co-Redeemers” cause we allow grace to work in us. Wouldn’t Mary’s role in this Redemtion be even greater cause she co-operated with God’s grace even more cause she was without sin?

And did not St. Louis demonfort say to Christ Through Mary. Iis not Mary Mediatrix of all Graces? Just like in the Miraculous Medal she pours out “Graces to the world” (message to St. Catherine Laboure)
Without her intercession nothing would have got started that is why the Wedding at Cana is a big thing. Cause in it is in that time where Mary who is full of Grace begged her son to start His journey to the Cross by performing a miracle.