Pope calls idea of declaring Mary co-redemptrix ‘foolishness’

  • Thread starter Thread starter Trying2overcome
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Trying2overcome

Guest

What do you all think of this? I’m surprised I haven’t seen much about this in the Catholic Web. I am not sure what to think of this, since I’ve never really given much thought to the “Co-Redemptrix” title. If it simply means the Mary brings Jesus to us, and vice versa, then I don’t see what’s so bad about it. Except, perhaps, the title itself, which may lead to misunderstanding and confusion, as Cardinal Ratzinger said. I wonder what Pope Francis thinks the title means. Perhaps he thinks it may take away from Jesus’ unique role as mediator…

I also wonder what this means for the "Lady of All Nations’ apparitions from the Netherlands. This apparition asked for the dogma of co-redemptrix to be proclaimed:
In the history of Marian apparitions it is truly unique that Our Lady asks for a dogma in her messages! According to her words, this Marian dogma will be the “final and greatest.” (Aug. 15, 1951) Addressing the Holy Father, she desired: “See to the final dogma, the crowning of Mary, the proclamation of the dogma of Coredemptrix, Mediatrix and Advocate.” (Oct. 11, 1953)
Click to expand...
https://www.de-vrouwe.info/en/the-dogma

I’m not too fond of this apparition anyway because of its sketchy approval history and certain “messages,” so Pope Francis seemingly contradicting it doesn’t bug me.
 
I have always had a problem with co-redemptrix and I have a strong devotion to Mary.
 
I can see why it may not be prudent to define it as a dogma… but I don’t think the title itself is necessarily foolish if properly understood. In fact, in one sense we are all called to be co-redeemers, participating in the Lord’s work of salvation through our own prayers and penance.
 
I don’t think “properly understanding” even the existing Marian dogmas is a strong suit of many Catholics and Christians, judging by the kinds of questions we get asked on here.
 
Jesus is “our only Redeemer and Saviour” as Lumen Gentium 50 mentions.

Yet humanity can have a participation in that redemptive work of Christ. This is especially true concerning the Blessed Virgin Mary.
Mary, consenting to the word of God, became the Mother of Jesus. Committing herself wholeheartedly and impeded by no sin to God’s saving will, she devoted herself totally, as a handmaid of the Lord, to the person and work of her Son, under and with him, serving the mystery of redemption, by the grace of Almighty God. – Lumen Gentium 56
Click to expand...
.
VATICAN II – By reason of the gift and role of her divine motherhood, by which she is united with her Son, the Redeemer . . . . – Lumen Gentium 63
Click to expand...
The cultivation of the appropriate honor of the Blessed Virgin Mary is “right” (“rightly”).
VATICAN II Mary has by grace been exalted above all angels and men to a place second only to her Son, as the most holy mother of God who was involved in the mysteries of Christ: she is rightly honoured by a special cult in the Church. – Lumen Gentium 66
Click to expand...
.
CCC 618 The cross is the unique sacrifice of Christ, the “one mediator between God and men”.452 But because in his incarnate divine person he has in some way united himself to every man, “the possibility of being made partners, in a way known to God, in the paschal mystery” is offered to all men.453 He calls his disciples to “take up [their] cross and follow [him]”,454 for "Christ also suffered for [us], leaving [us] an example so that [we] should follow in his steps."455 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
Apart from the cross there is no other ladder by which we may get to heaven.458
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
.

Now let’s go to the Cross. . . .
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.
Click to expand...
.

From CCC 618 above: “This (redemption) 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”

Parenthetical addition mine for context.

Footnote 457 in CCC 618 is Luke 2:35.

Here is the context of Luke 2:35 . . .
.

The Blessed Virgin Mary was united to Jesus in a special way at Calvary.
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.”
Click to expand...
.

Bold above Vatican II, CCC and Scripture mine.
 
Last edited:
Sometimes I think the Protestants have a bit of a point that we overdo it with the Blessed Virgin. Not that I question the doctrine, but as a fellow oblate recently told me on a week with a solemnity and a feast to the BVM in the same week: “One God in three persons, I can understand, but one Virgin in dozens of Our Ladies sounds a bit to me like the many avatars of Vishnu…”.

If you look at the calendar, add up all the Feasts of Our Lord, and the tally up all the feasts, solemnities and memorials of Our Lady (including the optional Saturday memorial), you might get the feeling we worship Mary instead of God if you were unfamiliar with Catholicism. I don’t think the sky would fall if we took a few out of the calendar. Because if we have too much feasting, the notion of “feast” loses its impact. It just becomes another liturgical burden… extra antiphons and hymns to deal with in the Liturgy of the Hours (especially for those of us who chant the Office in Gregorian chant), longer Mass on weekdays when people are in more of a hurry, etc. Many of us long for the feast of Saint Feria on such days. Monks love it when it’s the “Octave of St. Feria” (a full week of ordinary days without solemnities, feasts or memorials).

Have fewer feasts and feast them properly; convert most into optional memorials, so those with a particular devotion to Our Lady of (fill in the blank) can rightly honour it without making it binding on the rest of us. I can see for instance Our Lady of Guadeloupe having particular significance to Mexicans, but honestly… in Québec I see little relevance other than calling this vision of Our Lady a patroness of the Americas.

And it would help support the Holy Father’s (correct) notion that Mary is not a co-redemptrix. She was the willing vessel that nurtured the one and only redeemer.
 
I get the concept of “co-redemptrix”…but…I don’t see a need for the Pope to declare it the 5th Marian dogma. It would only make conversion of non-Catholics harder.
 
OraLabora said:
I don’t think the sky would fall if we took a few out of the calendar.
Click to expand...
It’s really sad to me that someone who is very religious and involved in religious life would say this, especially when several such feasts were already taken out of the calendar, still others are optional memorials, and still others such as the Annunciation are understood to be joint feasts of Mary and Jesus.

Since when did “how does it look to Protestants?” become the way that Catholics decide to do things? That is just sad. I’m not living my faith in order to look a certain way to Protestants, or to please Protestants, or to do anything with Protestants except pray for them and try to find common ground but NOT at the price of sacrificing or soft-pedaling my Catholic beliefs.

I will say an extra prayer of reparation to Our Lady to make up for the disrespect and minimization of her by my fellow Catholics who should know better and should RUN to her for her help in becoming more like her and thus closer to Jesus. Or at the very least, should not discourage others from doing so by making these types of “Yeah, too much Mary around here” kind of remarks.

The comparison to Vishnu avatars is also disrespectful, though I chose not to flag it in favor of just writing this response instead.
 
Last edited:
I think it is safe to say that I’m not that big on Marian spirituality. I don’t think it’s sad, nor is it non-Catholic. It’s just not my way. I don’t deny anything the Church says about her. Nor do I deny the right of Catholics to approach Jesus through her. Which is why I would make more of them optional memorials.
 
Many of them are already optional memorials. If you exclude memorials, including the obligatory ones, there really aren’t that many full Marian feasts and solemnities on the calendar. It’s not even once a month. When doing the math (feasts of Our Lady vs feasts of the Lord), keep in mind that every Sunday is rightfully celebrated as a feast of the Lord. Even on a Marian solemnity, Christ is still more central to the liturgy of the day than is Our Lady. Even in the Hail Mary, we bless “the fruit” of her womb.

This year, Sunday, as a “feast of the Lord”, took precedence over the feast of Her Nativity, which is one of the 12 great feasts in the East.

Regarding Guadalupe, I’ve become attached to it (as an Anglo Canadian raised an evangelical protestant). There’s always a solemn Spanish Mass at our cathedral in Vancouver to celebrate it with Mexican music (and food after). Considering how many millions were baptized after that particular apparition, I’ve always seen it as Mary “giving birth” to Christ in the New World. Of course, devotional mileage may vary…
 
Last edited:
Given your views on Mary, It is best if we don’t continue this conversation then. I will put you on mute. God bless and I hope one day you see things differently because you are missing out on a LOT.
 
I also thought, back in my early reversion days, that the marian devotion was a little excessive. But then it hit me that by honoring Mary, we honor God, because she is his most perfect creation and He himself gave her to us and told us to 'honor our mother." So the more honor we give to Mary, the more we honor and please God. And vice versa. This thought helped me. This quote my St Maximillian Kolbe also helped me:

“We should never be afraid of loving Mary too much because no one loved her more than Christ”
 
Dupe thread:
40.png
Mary Co-Redemptrix ... Pope says No and I am confused Sacred Scripture
This actually seems like a theologically sound response to me.
Click to expand...
 
From what I understand, although that schismatic group apparently believes in the Lady of All Nations apparitions, the apparitions are not officially associated with that group. They happened before the Army of Mary group. As of now the Lady of All Nations is approved by the local bishop. The bishop from back when the apparitions happened, however, declared them non supernatural and the Vatican confirmed this decision twice. Then in 2002 the new bishop apparently overturned these decisions and declared the apparitions approved. This is why I’m a little iffy about these apparitions. Can a local bishop overturn the Vatican’s decisions on apparitions? I
 
I’ve found reference to this CDF document online, searching for the original document.
40.png
The Prophecies of Our Lady of All Nations - Approved? Spirituality
Vatican rejects prayer to “Lady of All Nations” The Vatican City’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith does not permit any Catholic community of Christ’s faithful in the country and throughout the world “to pray to the Mother of God” under the title of ‘Lady of All Nations’ with the added phrase ‘who was once Mary’. This was the response received by the Catholic Bishop’s Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) for the entire People of God, in the country concerning the “form of devotion b…
Click to expand...
 
The approval history is given here:

http://www.miraclehunter.com/marian_apparitions/approved_apparitions/amsterdam/index.html
Approval

Negative judgement was given by the bishop of Haarlem on May 7, 1956, confirmed in 1957 and 1972.

Worship was authorized by Mgr H. Bomers, bishop of Haarlem, on May 31, 1996.

Recognition of the supernatural origin of the appearances by Mgr Joseph Marianus Punt, local ordinary, on May 31, 2002.

After the local bishop, Mgr Joseph Marianus Punt, consulted with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in 2006 in regard to the prayer recounted by Ida Peederman, the Congregation approved the text of the prayer but with the directive to change the original phrase “who was once Mary” to “the Blessed Virgin Mary” due to possible misunderstanding.

Click here to read the offical Church statements regarding the apparitions at Amsterdam.
Click to expand...
I note that on the Miracle Hunter’s list of “Official Church Statements” the link to the May 31, 2002 Declaration of Bishop Punt is dead, so here’s a live link to that.

http://www.communaute-dame.qc.ca/dame/DTP_Declaration_Mgr_Punt_AN.htm

In answer to “can the Bishop do that?” the answer appears to be “yes, he can and he did”.

It’s still a private revelation and people don’t have to believe in it.
 
Last edited:
No they don’t. The only one that does is ‘mother of God’.
 
Cathoholic . . . .
All Marian doctrines have Christologic implications.
Click to expand...
Babaganoush . . .
No they don’t. The only one that does is ‘mother of God’.
Click to expand...
.

What do you think “Christology” is Babaganoush?

And what do you think “Christologic implications” are?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top