-
- To: Tim Staples <tstaples@catholic.com>
Subject: Q about the termination of Co-Remptrix and Co-Mediatrix
Doctrine.
The movement away from using the terms "Cordemptrix"
and "Mediatrix of all graces," does not mean we can't
"pray to Mary." Of course, we can. Praying to saints
is an essential component of the infallible teaching of "the
communion of saints." That can never change or be changed.
Lumen Gentium, Vatican II's Dogmatic Constitution on the Church,
gives us the most in-depth and developed Mariology of any ecumenical
council in the history of the Church, especially when it comes
to Mary's role in God's plan of salvation. And its most prevalent
image-absolutely essential to understanding Mary's salvific role-is
the image of Mary as mother-Mother of God and Mother of the Church,
the people of God.
St. John's Gospel especially, taken in tandem with the Book of
Revelation-both most likely authored by the same apostle-reveals
Mary to be not only the mother of Jesus but also mother of "all
those who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony
of Jesus Christ" (see John 19:27 and Rev. 12:17). In these
verses of Scripture we find summed up the essence of Mary's role.
As only a mother can, Mary gives birth to and nurtures both Christ
and his body, the Church. That was an essential component to
Pope Francis' concern about "Co-Redemptrix." The term
tends to get away from Mary's maternal role that is the source
of all that she is in Christ and place her too much on a par
with Jesus and his unique role in redemption. The term does not
and was not ever intended to do that, but the problem is very
real. It leads to confusion to the point where we always have
to explain that it doesn't mean that, in spire of appearances.
Lumen Gentium 61 expounds on this idea, long before Pope Benedict
XVI and Pope Francis, explaining that it is only in light of
her calling to be "a mother to us in the order of grace"
that we can say, "In a wholly singular way [Mary] cooperated
by her obedience, faith, hope, and burning charity in the Savior's
work of restoring supernatural life to souls."
Notice, the Church is not saying Mary is another redeemer, or
that Mary can do anything of eternal value apart from Christ;
rather, she was called to "cooperate… in the savior's
work." Most importantly, everything Mary is proceeds from
her cooperation in what Christ alone did and that Christ alone
could do. The recent brilliant document from the Church, "Mater
Populi Fidelis" makes clear that Mary's unique role in God's
plan of salvation in relation to not only the body of Christ,
but to the entire world, must be seen as a participation in part
in what Christ alone did infinitely by meriting infinitely throughout
his life and death on the cross. Thus, the DDF, with the approval
of Pope Leo XIV is emphasizing the perennial truth that in a
strict sense, salvation is Christ's work alone. There is no other
person qualified to reconcile men to God, objectively speaking,
than Jesus Christ. Man is only involved secondarily and instrumentally
in God's plan of salvation, and only because God willed it to
be so.
It is not as though God had to do it this way. He could have
done it more efficiently all by himself! But it was Christ himself
who said of his Church, "[H]e who hears you hears me"
(Luke 10:16). In fact, he went so far as to say that his Church
would "do the works that [he did]; and greater works than
these" by his power at work in it (John 14:12). The truth
is, as an integral part of his eternal plan of salvation God
both willed and empowered his Church to save souls.[1] Mary is
simply the pre-eminent example of this truth. Like all Christians,
she was and is called to cooperate in Christ's salvific work
freely and actively in accordance with her particular gifts,
thus becoming a secondary cause of the salvation of souls. Unlike
any other Christian, Mary is called to bring the whole Christ,
head and body, to the whole world. Thus, again, she participates
in a singular way in God's plan of salvation in that she alone,
outside of the godhead, participates in the salvation of all.
Lumen Gentium 62 sums it up nicely:
This motherhood of Mary in the order of grace continues uninterruptedly
from the consent which she loyally gave at the Annunciation and
which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, until
the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven
she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold
intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation…
Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the
titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix.
In his great encyclical Salvifici Dolores, Pope St. John Paul
II adds a crucial detail to our portrait of Mary's role in salvation,
explaining the intricate role suffering had to play in Mary's
salvific calling.
It is especially consoling to note-and also accurate in accordance
with the Gospel and history-that at the side of Christ, in the
first and most exalted place, there is always his Mother through
the exemplary testimony that she bears by her whole life to this
particular Gospel of suffering. In her, the many and intense
sufferings were amassed in such an interconnected way that they
were not only a proof of her unshakeable faith but also a contribution
to the redemption of all (25).
Revelation 12:2 alludes to this suffering of Mary via the image
of her "pangs of labor" in giving birth to Christ.
Simeon had prophesied it in Luke 2:34-35 when he foretold "the
sword" that would "pierce [Mary's] soul that the thoughts
of many hearts may be revealed."
Pope Benedict XVI, cited in Mater Populi Fidelis, really brings
home the ultimate problem with the title "Co-redemptrix:"
-
19. In the Feria IV meeting on 21 February 1996, Cardinal Joseph
Ratzinger, who was the Prefect of the then Congregation for the
Doctrine of the Faith, was asked whether the request from the
movement Vox Populi Mariae Mediatrici to define a dogma declaring
Mary as the "Co-redemptrix" or "Mediatrix of All
Graces" was acceptable. In his personal votum, he replied:
"Negative. The precise meaning of these titles is not clear,
and the doctrine contained in them is not mature. A defined doctrine
of divine faith belongs to the Depositum Fidei - that is, to
the divine revelation conveyed in Scripture and the apostolic
tradition. However, it is not clear how the doctrine expressed
in these titles is present in Scripture and the apostolic tradition."[37]
Later, in 2002, he publicly voiced his opinion against the use
of the title: "the formula 'Co-redemptrix' departs to too
great an extent from the language of Scripture and of the Fathers
and therefore gives rise to misunderstandings… Everything
comes from Him [Christ], as the Letter to the Ephesians and the
Letter to the Colossians, in particular, tell us; Mary, too,
is everything that she is through Him. The word 'Co-redemptrix'
would obscure this origin." While Cardinal Ratzinger did
not deny that there may have been good intentions and valuable
aspects in the proposal to use this title, he maintained that
they were "being expressed in the wrong way."[38]
20. The then Cardinal Ratzinger referred to the Letters to the
Ephesians and to the Colossians, where the vocabulary and the
theological dynamism of the hymns present the unique redemptive
centrality of the incarnate Son in such a way as to leave no
room to add any other form of mediation - for, "every spiritual
blessing" is bestowed upon us "in Christ" (Eph
1:3); we are adopted as sons and daughters through him (cf. Eph
1:5); in him we have been graced (cf. Eph 1:6); "we have
redemption through his blood" (Eph 1:7); and his grace has
been "lavished on us" (Eph 1:8). "In him, we have
obtained an inheritance, having been predestined" (Eph 1:11).
In him "all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell"
(Col 1:19) and for him and through him, God willed "to reconcile
all things" (Col 1:20). Such praise for the unique place
of Christ calls us to situate every creature in a clearly receptive
position in relation to him and to exercise careful, reverent
caution whenever proposing any form of possible cooperation with
him in the realm of Redemption.
21. On at least three occasions, Pope Francis expressed his clear
opposition to using the title "Co-redemptrix," arguing
that Mary "never wished to appropriate anything of her Son
for herself. She never presented herself as a co-Savior. No,
a disciple."[39]Christ's redemptive work was perfect and
needs no addition; therefore, "Our Lady did not want to
take away any title from Jesus… She did not ask for herself
to be a quasi-redeemer or a co-redeemer: no. There is only one
Redeemer, and this title cannot be duplicated."[40] Christ
"is the only Redeemer; there are no co-redeemers with Christ."[41]
For "the sacrifice of the Cross, offered in a spirit of
love and obedience, presents the most abundant and infinite satisfaction."[42]
While we are able to extend its effects in the world (cf. Col
1:24), neither the Church nor Mary can replace or perfect the
redemptive work of the incarnate Son of God, which was perfect
and needs no additions.
22. Given the necessity of explaining Mary's subordinate role
to Christ in the work of Redemption, it is always inappropriate
to use the title "Co-redemptrix" to define Mary's cooperation.
This title risks obscuring Christ's unique salvific mediation
and can therefore create confusion and an imbalance in the harmony
of the truths of the Christian faith, for "there is salvation
in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given
among men by which we must be saved" (Acts 4:12). When an
expression requires many, repeated explanations to prevent it
from straying from a correct meaning, it does not serve the faith
of the People of God and becomes unhelpful. In this case, the
expression "Co-redemptrix" does not help extol Mary
as the first and foremost collaborator in the work of Redemption
and grace, for it carries the risk of eclipsing the exclusive
role of Jesus Christ - the Son of God made man for our salvation,
who was the only one capable of offering the Father a sacrifice
of infinite value - which would not be a true honor to his Mother.
Indeed, as the "handmaid of the Lord" (Lk 1:38), Mary
directs us to Christ and asks us to "do whatever he tells
you" (Jn 2:5).
So the key is to understand that we are not talking about theological
error with regard to this title of Coredemptrix; rather, it is
a title that tends to obscure the very truth it is intending
to present to the world. The key is to understand that Mary's
role in redemption is one of participation in Christ's unique
and infinite redemption. She is not just slightly beneath Christ;
she is infinitely beneath Christ and his unique redemption, even
though her role is, at the same time, unique is relation to the
rest of the body of Christ.
When it comes to "mediatrix," the problems are similar,
but specific not to the term mediatrix-the document shows how
that title can be used authentically and is so used in the Church-but
the problem lies with "mediatrix of all grace." Even
though Mary, again, has a unique role in bringing the grace of
God to the entire world in Christ, mediatrix of all grace presents
Mary as, somehow, bringing grace to herself? That presents an
absurd theory of time that is contrary to the mind of the Church
and presents all sorts of problems (Co-redemptrix also presents
a similar problem).
So again, without going too long here, there are three keys to
sum things up:
1. The document does not say we cannot pray to the saints and,
of course, to Mary. That is the perennial teaching of the Church
that cannot be denied by any Catholic (CCC 2618; 2679; 2682).
- 2. The document does teach,
exercising the Ordinary Magisterial teaching of the Vicar of
Christ, that we cannot use the title "Co-redemptrix"
any longer as Catholics in our catechetics and evangelization.
- 3. The same can be said not
for the title "Mediatrix," but it can be said for the
title "Mediatrix of all graces."
Thus, anyone who would be so presumptuous as to knowingly present
these teachings the Church has deemed inappropriate as true and
therefore, as a Catholic stubbornly teach the Magisterium to
be wrong in this matter, would be committing mortal sin. For
those who are struggling with this teaching, the proper procedure
is to continue to attempt to form their consciences in accordance
with these teachings. Then, if questions arise, they must continue
to ask questions respectfully, knowing that the error is most
likely in their own minds and not in the mind of the Church.
- 2.3.2026
Thank you, James Sundquist <rock.salt@verizon.net>
- Disclaimer: The views expressed
in this article are the sole responsibility of the author. If
you have a problem with the correctness of the information, please
contact the author.
- (In accordance with Title
17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit
to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational purposes.)
- Tell your friends about
us and thank you for visiting Cephas Ministries http://www.go-cephas.com
|