Mary is Co-Redemptrix (co-redeemer)
And that is where I think Marian devotion begins to go too far.
Yes, Jesus addressing Mary his mother as ‘Woman’ here is very significant. St Paul says that Jesus is the new or second Adam, the first Adam being a figure of him. Now, in the creation of Eve, God "caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh;
and the rib which the LORD God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man.
Then the man said, “This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man”" (Gen. 2: 21-23). Mary is the new Eve, the Mother of all the living ( Gen. 3:20), i.e, all those reborn to the divine and spiritual life of grace. And so from the cross, the new Adam, Jesus Christ, addresses his mother as ‘Woman’, the new Eve.
Yet this is what the Church teaches. Mary as coredemptress. How do you reconcile this?
Do you believe Christ used the Apostles to save souls? Do you believe Christ was able to use the blood of the martyrs to redeem man?
Do you believe Christ has called you to share in His Kingship, His priesthood, His sanctification of the world we live in?
There are many paths to God…but the Virgin Mary is a shortcut .
Yes, explained I get it and don’t disagree with the theology. I disagree with giving the title to Mary. As you have shown she’s not the only one (but certainly the one with the largest role) and the title is confusing until the theology is explained.
Please provide a source supporting that the Church officially teaches “Mary as Co-Redemptrix”.
It is my understanding that only some Catholics believe this, that it is controversial and is not an official teaching of the Church. If I am wrong, like I said, please provide a source.
The Church teaches Mary as Mediatrix of All Graces, but not as Co-Redemptrix, because there is a concern about putting her equal to Jesus.
I’m so glad you queried this, Tis-Bearself. I was muttering to myself that I must find my copy of the Catechism so that I could quote something definite to refute the claim that the title Co–Redemptrix’ is taught by the Church.
As you have correctly implied. the onus is on the poster to prove it.
You’re right. It is not official dogma.
Also I don’t see the title co-redemptress as saying she is equal to Jesus, which was really the point of my post. Our Lord is so generous, so self giving, & so humble that he freely shares His kingship, priesthood, even His role as redeemer.
All she does is by the grace of God. The more she is honored the more Her Son is glorified. That’s the way I see it.
So, just to clarify ; are you now admitting that you erred in claiming that the Church teaches it, or are you making some distinction between ‘what the Church teaches’ and ‘official dogma’?
(The correct term is ‘Co-Redemptrix’ by the way.)
@LivingForJesus you have not been active in this discussion so far. Perhaps you have been considering all the responses and comparing with your own thoughts.
May I ask how, do you honour the mother of Jesus. What ways of honouring her, are you comfortable with right now?
The Church’s doctrine of Mary as Mediatrix of All Graces is a consequence of her role as Co-redemptrix and which naturally follows Mary’s singular and unique role in union with Jesus, under and subordinate to Him but with him, in the redemption of the human race. In other words, the reason why Mary is called the Mediatrix or Dispensatrix of All Graces is because she merited under and with Jesus as the New Eve the treasury of all graces which was obtained principally by Christ’s sacrifice and immolation on the cross which Mary lovingly and actively consented too standing at the foot of the cross as being the Father’s will for the redemption of the human race. Mary provided the body of Jesus through which “we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all” (Hebrews 10:10).
If we follow the Vatican II document Lumen Gentium, Chapter VIII on Our Lady and corresponding footnotes closely, this is essentially what is being taught following the Church’s Mariological Tradition and teaching. For example:
56. The Father of mercies willed that the incarnation should be preceded by the acceptance of her who was predestined to be the mother of His Son, so that just as a woman contributed to death, so also a woman should contribute to life… Embracing God’s salvific will with a full heart and impeded by no sin, she devoted herself totally as a handmaid of the Lord to the person and work of her Son, under Him and with Him, by the grace of almighty God, serving the mystery of redemption. Rightly therefore the holy Fathers see her as used by God not merely in a passive way, but as freely cooperating in the work of human salvation through faith and obedience. For, as St. Irenaeus says, she “being obedient, became the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race.”(6*) Hence not a few of the early Fathers gladly assert in their preaching, “The knot of Eve’s disobedience was untied by Mary’s obedience; what the virgin Eve bound through her unbelief, the Virgin Mary loosened by her faith.”(7*) Comparing Mary with Eve, they call her “the Mother of the living,”(8*) and still more often they say: “death through Eve, life through Mary.”(9*)
58…After this manner the Blessed Virgin advanced in her pilgrimage of faith, and faithfully persevered in her union with her Son unto the cross, where she stood, in keeping with the divine plan,(294) grieving exceedingly with her only begotten Son, uniting herself with a maternal heart with His sacrifice, and lovingly consenting to the immolation of this Victim which she herself had brought forth. Finally, she was given by the same Christ Jesus dying on the cross as a mother to His disciple with these words: “Woman, behold thy son”.(295) (11*)
- Predestined from eternity by that decree of divine providence which determined the incarnation of the Word to be the Mother of God, the Blessed Virgin was on this earth the virgin Mother of the Redeemer, and above all others and in a singular way the generous associate and humble handmaid of the Lord. She conceived, brought forth and nourished Christ. She presented Him to the Father in the temple, and was united with Him by compassion as He died on the Cross. In this singular way she cooperated by her obedience, faith, hope and burning charity in the work of the Saviour in giving back supernatural life to souls. Wherefore she is our mother in the order of grace.
From Mary’s role as the mother of Christ and in union with Christ and his sacrifice in the ‘objective’ work of the redemption of mankind, the council document proceeds to Mary’s role in the distribution of graces, again with and under Christ and the Holy Spirit but not as a robot but a union of wills through love.
62.This maternity of Mary in the order of grace began with the consent which she gave in faith at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, and lasts until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this salvific duty, but by her constant intercession continued 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 cultics, until they are led into the happiness of their true home. Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked by the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix.(16*) This, however, is to be so understood that it neither takes away from nor adds anything to the dignity and efficaciousness of Christ the one Mediator.(17*).
St John Paul II referred to Mary as Co-redemptrix at least 6 times. The word ‘Co-redemptrix’ apparently first appears in magisterial and papal teaching in the early 20th century. The idea, however, is rooted in Scripture and Tradition going back to the earliest Fathers of the Church such as the quote above (#56) from St. Irenaeus with various terms employed such as Reparatrix, the New Eve, Conciliatrix, Mediatrix, (see also Ineffabilis Deus, dogma of the Immaculate Conception).
Link to more information concerning the Marian title Co-redemptrix and various magisterial and papal documents, addresses, etc. using this title or similar ones with essentially the same meaning as well as Mary as Mediatrix of All Graces:
Go to ‘The Mystery of Mary Coredemptrix in the Papal Magisterium - Part 1 and Part 2’ on the webpage (Msgr. Arthur Calkins) to see the various recent magisterial and papal documents.
Also see on same website:
I said Co-redemsomething & meant Mediatrix.
I erred in claiming what the Church teaches.
You do not see her yes - her “Fiat” - to God as an integral part of, and absolutely necessary to God’s plan of redemption for all mankind?
It is in that regard - limited to her humanity as it is - that she is a collaborator with her Son. Properly understood, there is no theological problem with this, although the Church hesitates to grant her that official title. She has a veritable plethora of other titles, each of which can be realized with a little study and pondering in your heart.
I clarified in another post and co redeemer definitely goes too far.
Fair enough, and thank you for your post.
The question of titles for Our Lady can be a desperately sensitive subject for those of us actively involved in ecumenism.
Define your terms, otherwise we are not in the same conversation. And, what if you are wrong? Have you considered that?
I’ve studied and tried to do the Marian Consecration about 3 times now. Every time I stop short of doing it because I’m afraid it might be too much. Yes, I know what St. Louis de Montfort says, but perhaps he was wrong. That is what continually goes through my head. It just seems like the words said during the consecration crosses that fine line. I may be wrong, but I haven’t convinced myself yet.
I’m not sure what you need defined. I agree that Mary chose to cooperate in Gods plan of salvation by bearing Jesus and deserves honor for that.
However I disagree that she is a co redeemer. Her role in our salvation is by no means equal to Christ’s and the title without explanation implies that it is. I also see no need to highlight it. It does not seem to point to Christ in my opinion.