Posted on 02/23/2008 2:46:18 AM PST by Manfred the Wonder Dawg
Should Mary be declared co-redemptrix?
One of the items posted by the Roman Catholic Zenit News Agency for Monday 11 February 2008 read as follows –
Cardinals Hoping for a 5th Marian Dogma To Declare Mary as Mother of Humanity
ROME, FEBRUARY. 11, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Five cardinals have sent a letter inviting prelates worldwide to join them in petitioning Benedict XVI to declare a fifth Marian dogma they said would "proclaim the full Christian truth about Mary."The text, released last week, includes the petition that asks the Pope to proclaim Mary as "the Spiritual Mother of All Humanity, the co-redemptrix with Jesus the redeemer, mediatrix of all graces with Jesus the one mediator, and advocate with Jesus Christ on behalf of the human race"… The petition states: "We believe the time opportune for a solemn definition of clarification regarding the constant teaching of the Church concerning the Mother of the Redeemer and her unique cooperation in the work of Redemption, as well as her subsequent roles in the distribution of grace and intercession for the human family"… The text adds that the move would be "the ultimate expression of doctrinal clarity at the service of our Christian and non-Christian brothers and sisters who are not in communion with Rome"… The statement added, "This initiative also intends to start an in-depth worldwide dialogue on Mary's role in salvation for our time”… Cardinal Aponte Martínez, one of the cardinal co-patrons said: "I believe the time is now for the papal definition of the relationship of the Mother of Jesus to the each one of us, her earthly children, in her roles as co-redemptrix, mediatrix of all graces and advocate.
Back in 1998 there were similar Roman Catholic groundswells of opinion to have the then Pope John Paul II issue the very same dogmatic declaration. I was invited to participate in a Channel 5 “Crossfire” televised debate on the subject with a Jesuit Priest, Richard Foley who was very much in favour of the idea and you can listen to an audio version [28 minutes] of the debate by going to this link http://www.takeheed.co.uk/ You will find the debate listed as London 1998: Debate: Should Mary be declared co-redemptrix? under the REAL AUDIO section.
Cecil Andrews – ‘Take Heed’ Ministries – 12 February 2008
If ye have the stomach for it, the original Zenit article, in English, is here:
http://zenit.org/article-21749?l=english
“If ye have the stomach for it, the original Zenit article, in English, is here:”
The hatred and bigotry of anti-Catholics never ceases to amaze me.
Why not just call her goddess and get it over with?
Excellent question! Would that vlad would answer it. He think a love for the Truth is hatred for the RCC. It’s actually hatred for false doctrine.
Put her face (who knows what she looked like?) on a tortilla and we all see that she is “venerated” as a goddess.
I was researching this topic anyhow and found this, from Andrew Miller’s “Church History”, chapter 23:
Mary-Worship
The worship of the Virgin Mary originally sprang from the ascetic spirit which became so prevalent in the fourth century. Before this period, there is no trace of the worship of Mary. About the same time — the close of the fourth century — it was discovered and circulated that there were in the temple at Jerusalem virgins consecrated to God, among whom Mary grew up in vows of perpetual virginity. This new doctrine led to the veneration of Mary as the very ideal of the celibate state, and sanctioned the profession of religious chastity. Soon after this it became customary to apply to the virgin the appellation, “Mother of God;” which gave rise to the Nestorian controversy. But, in spite of all opposition, Mary-worship prevailed; and, in the fifth century, images and beautiful paintings of the virgin, holding the infant Jesus in her arms were placed in all the churches. Thus introduced she rapidly rose into an object of direct worship; and Mariolatry became the ruling passion of the Romish church. The daily office for Mary, and the days and festivals which had been dedicated to her honour, were confirmed by Urban II. in the Council of Clermont, A.D. 1095.
Reverence for the blessed virgin was now an established doctrine and practice in the church of Rome, and has so continued down to the present day. Romanists may affect to deny that they honour Mary with the worship due to God only, but in their books of devotion prayers to the virgin occupy a prominent place. No prayer, we believe, is in more constant use than the “Aye Maria,” or “Hail Mary,” which, after quoting a passage from the salutation of the angel Gabriel to the virgin, adds these words, “Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners now, and in the hour of death, Amen.” Again, in another prayer, the virgin is thus addressed, “We fly to thy patronage, O holy Mother of God, despise not our petitions in our necessities, but deliver us from all dangers, O ever glorious and blessed Virgin.” Another runs thus, “Hail, holy Queen, Mother of mercy, our life, our sweetness, and our hope! to thee we cry, poor banished sons of Eve, to thee we send up our sighs, mourning, and weeping in this valley of tears, turn, then, most gracious advocate, thine eyes of mercy towards us,” etc. She is also called, “Ark of the Covenant,” “Gate of heaven,” “Morning Star,” “Refuge of sinners,” and many other such terms, which plainly show the idolatrous place which Mary occupies in the devotions of the Romish church.*
{*For details see “Mariolatry,” Gardner’s Faiths of the World, vol. 2, p. 372. Butler’s Lives of the Saints, October 1-the great Roman Catholic book on this subject.}
The Rosary, that is, a series of prayers, and a string of beads by which they are counted — consists of fifteen decades. Each decade contains ten Ave Marias, marked by small beads, preceded by a Pater Noster, marked by a larger bead, and concluded by a Gloria Patri. The Romish Breviary also, the great universal book of devotion, of which every priest must read a portion each day in private under pain of mortal sin, uses the following strong language as to the virgin: “If the winds of temptation arise, if thou run upon the rocks of tribulation, look to the star, call upon Mary. If thou art tossed on the waves of pride, of ambition, of distraction, of envy, look to the star, call upon Mary. If anger or avarice, or the temptation of the flesh toss the bark of thy mind, look to Mary. If disturbed with the greatness of thy sins, troubled at the defilement of thy conscience, affrighted at the horrors of the judgment, thou beginnest to be swallowed up in the gulf of sadness, the abyss of despair, think upon Mary — in dangers, in difficulties, in doubts, think upon Mary, invoke Mary.” So completely did the worship of Mary become the worship of Christendom, that every cathedral, almost every spacious church, had its “Chapel of our Lady.”
It is surely more than evident from these quotations, that Mary is addressed as not only an intercessor with her Son but the first and highest object of worship. And these are calm and sober specimens compared with the wild language of a chivalrous adoration, which is to be found in hymns, psalters, and breviaries. The attributes of Godhead are assigned to her, and she is represented as the Queen of Heaven, and sitting between cherubim and seraphim. The dogma of the Immaculate Conception was the natural result of this growing adoration of Mary. It has been re-asserted as an article of faith in the Romish church by the present pope and generally accepted.
There was nothing hateful in the article...What was posted are the positions your religion floods it's members with...
Why don't you discuss the issue instead of calling names??? What's your feeling about elevating Mary to an even higher position than she now holds in your religion???
Romanists may affect to deny that they honour Mary with the worship due to God only...
It's undeniable that the Catholic Church worships Mary, despite their vehement contention that they only "ask" her to pray for them. Pray? The voluminous prayers referenced ask her to DO what only God can do, with many of the the attributes of God.
Thanks for your note.
Yes, the denial of what happens around the world is grievous. The name calling by RCC watchdogs is an honor:
Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad:
You wrote:
“There was nothing hateful in the article...What was posted are the positions your religion floods it’s members with...”
Incorrect. There is no “flood” on Catholics about this issue from anyone in the Church. Also, the line I cited clearly has an anti-Catholic bias behind it.
“Why don’t you discuss the issue instead of calling names???”
I didn’t resort to name calling. Anti-Catholics can be labeled fairly as anti-Catholics. Also, there is no issue per se simply because the article only highlights actions and not doctrines. If you disagree with the actions, I really don’t care. If you disagree with the doctrines, I really don’t care. Using phrases like what I cited, however, seems excessive to say the least.
“What’s your feeling about elevating Mary to an even higher position than she now holds in your religion???”
1) No on can elevate Mary. There is no such process or possibility. Mary simply is who she is. Onlu God made her what she is with His grace. No man has anything to do with it. Your premise is based on a fantasy of your own creation.
2) My religion is orthodox Christianity - commonly known as the Catholic faith. Mary is important to all orthodox Christians.
3) I have no feelings whatsoever about doctrines. Only fools have feelings about doctrines, dogmas, doctrinal definitions, etc. Doctrines are teachings. They are not emotions or moods or colors or favorite foods. Those things routinely can be chosen or influenced by emotions. Doctrines cannot be. Do you rely on feelings to sort out doctrines? We call such a tendency ‘Protestantism’.
Anybody who can magically make her image appear on tortillas is at LEAST a goddess.
The obsession with Mary is yet another reason not to jump the Tiber.
If Catholics would just read their Bibles, they would know their dogma contradicts Christ Himself who explained who His true mother and brothers were...
And he answered and said unto them, My mother and my brethren are these which hear the word of God, and do it." -- Luke 8:20-21"And it was told him by certain which said, Thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to see thee.
Amen.
Love that word....conjures up images of reaching for the paper towel dispenser and getting bitten by a snake concealed by a towel and placed by some practical joker.
It's a Di-spens-a-Trix.
LOL.
And not for kids. 8~)
you both are on a roll!
lol
keeper
You may now return to posting your nonsense.
DispensatrixLove that word....conjures up images of reaching for the paper towel dispenser and getting bitten by a snake concealed by a towel and placed by some practical joker.
Or something to do with the end times. Accent on the penult a.
Marian devotion predates the legalization of Christianity by at least 150 years.
Comments like these are absolutely hateful and bigoted.
But what is more hateful and bigoted is a bunch of you guys standing around accusing other people of idolatry.
On the last day, you will be judged. You will not be judged on whether or not you accused enough people of idolatry on an Internet message board. You will be judged on what you did to root the idols out of your own life.
Given the almost pornographic obsession some of you have with condemning Catholics and Catholicism, I get the idea that your real God is not God, but the warm and fuzzy feeling you get from knowing how much more "right" you are than those poor, benighted, stupid Papists.
Prove me wrong. Show me that "hatred for the Pope" and "love for Jesus" aren't two sides of the same coin in your mind. Because from where I sit, you seem to make no distinction between the two.
How is she the mother of all Christians?
What was her unique role in my salvation?
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you're really asking to get an answer.
Through Christ, all Christians are adopted into the divine family, becoming sons and daughters of God, not by nature (as Christ himself is), but by adoption through grace.
Scripture teaches this in several places, most notably Romans 8:14-17, Romans 8:29, and 1 John 3:1, and 1 John 5:1.
Since Christ is our eldest brother in the order of grace, that means that his mother is our mother.
What was her unique role in my salvation?
Through an act of obedience to God (Luke 1:38), she gave Christ his human nature, which was (and is) the instrument of our redemption. Mary's act of obedience in so doing was of course unique (Jesus was only born once), and is in antithesis to Eve's act of disobedience in the Garden. For this reason Irenaeus of Lyons (ca AD 150) describes Mary as the "new Eve", complementing St. Paul's description of Christ as the "new Adam".
bigotry? Just because he says that praying to mary is unscriptural?
In fact I love Catholics and respect them greatly. I still think they’re wrong on some things, some very important things.
Hey, don’t you guys have an LDS thread that you’re supposed to be dominating right now? I’m sure Restornu & company appreciate the break, but I’d sure hate to see you all split up your energies...
But, anyway, carry on...
You wrote:
“bigotry? Just because he says that praying to mary is unscriptural?”
No. And the only way anyone could come to your conclusion was if he or she deliberately ignored what I actually wrote.
You wrote:
“In fact I love Catholics and respect them greatly. I still think they’re wrong on some things, some very important things.”
Fine. Now prove it by not deliberately distorting what a Catholic said or responded too. Thanks.
Um... Still at a loss.
Amen.
How does belief in Jesus Christ make Mary my mother? She was the mother of Jesus. She did not give birth to me.
You are seeking to give a title to her that she does not warrant. She did not give birth to my spiritual salvation, Jesus Christ did that when he was crucified.
Since Christ is our eldest brother in the order of grace, that means that his mother is our mother.
Not even in a symbolic way. She is the mother of Jesus, God incarnate, she did not save a soul.
Mary's act of obedience in so doing was of course unique (Jesus was only born once),...
Absolutely.
However, her act does not save anyone nor give her any role in our salvation. She did not pay the price for our sins. To elevate her with various titles and infer she has a role greater than she does deflects our focus from the truth.
You wrote:
“Um... Still at a loss.”
I’m not surprised you are.
Campion is correct
The OT calls Eve the Mother of the Living (Gen 3:20). However, we also know that threw Adam and her sin, death came to all her descendants. In the second century, Church Fathers began to see that the Eve-Mary parallel which suggests that Mary and a role in salvation history in relation to Christ, just has Eve had a role in the fall of the human race in relation to Adam. St. Justin Martyr in his dialogue with Trypho is the first to actually propose the Doctrine of Mary as the New Eve. Fr. Luigi Lamberto in his work Mary and the Fathers of the Church, published by Ignatius Press notes that Justin wanted to show how the Lord had decided to accomplish the salvation of man by following the same procedure by which sin had been committed and caused the downfall of man (p. 47). He points out that the Eve-Mary parallel had its foundation in the Pauline doctrine of Christ as the second Adam (1 Cor 15: 21-22). St. Justin Martyr writes
“The Son of God became man through a Virgin, so that the disobedience caused by the serpent might be destroyed in the same way it begun. For Eve, who was virgin and undefiled, gave birth to disobedience and death after listening to the serpent’s words. But the Virgin Mary conceived faith and joy; for what the Angel Gabriel brought her the glad tidings that the Holy Spirit would come upon her and the power of the Most High would overshadow her, so that the Holy One born of her would be the Son of God, she answered, ‘Let it be done to me according to your word’ (Lk 1:38). Thus was born of her the Child about whom so many Scriptures speak, as we have shown. Through him, God crushed the serpent along with those angels and men who had become like the serpent.” (Dialogue with Trypho 100)
St. Irenaeus of Lyons, the great defender of orthodoxy against the Gnostic Heretics of the 2nd century, further develops the idea of Mary as the New Eve, which St. Justin Martyr began to develop in 155. Fr. Matero notes that St. Irenaeus first recapitulated salvation history in Christ by appealing back to St. Paul’s Letter to the Romans 5: 12, where it states the whole human race fell into sin because of the man Adam, and then it was necessary that God’s son should become man and thus become the foundation of a new humanity. He then provides the following two quotes from Irenaeus, 1) that recapitulates Christ as the new Adam and 2) that recapitulates Mary as the new Eve.
(1) Irenaeus writes “When the Son of God took flesh and became man; he recapitulated in himself the long history of men, procuring for us the reward of salvation, so that in Christ Jesus we might recover what we had lost in Adam, namely, the image and likeness of God. For since it was not possible for man, once wounded and broken by disobedience, to be refashioned and to obtain the victor’s palm, and since it was equally impossible for him to receive salvation, as he had fallen under the power of sin, the Son of God accomplished both of those tasks. He God’s Word, came down from the Father and became flesh; he abased himself even unto death and brought the economy of our salvation to its completion.” (Against Heresies 3, 18)
(2) After recapitulating Christ as the new Adam, Irenaeus writes “Even though Eve had Adam for a husband, she was still a virgin….By disobeying, she became the cause of death for herself and for the whole human race. In the same way, Mary, though she also had a husband, was still a virgin, and by obeying, she became the cause of salvation for herself and the whole human race…The knot of Eve’s disobedience was untied by Mary’s obedience. What Eve bound through her unbelief, Mary loosened by faith.” (Against Heresies 3: 22)
St. Irenaeus further writes and points out that only the Gnostic Heretics ignore God’s economy of salvation, in which Mary had a unique role in playing since she gave birth to Christ, the word made flesh. Irenaeus writes:
“Eve was seduced by the word of the [fallen] angel and transgressed God’ s word, so that she fled from him. In the same way, [Mary] was evangelized by the word of an angel and obeyed God’s word, so that she carried him [within her]. And while the former was seduced into disobeying God, the latter was persuaded to obey God, so that the Virgin Mary became the advocate of the virgin Eve. And just has the human race was bound to death because of a virgin, so it was set free from death by a Virgin, since the disobedience of one virgin was counterbalanced by the Virgin’s obedience.
If then, the first-made man’s sin was mended by the right conduct of the firstborn Son [of God], and if the serpent’s cunning was bested by the simplicity of the dove [Mary], and if the chains that held us bound to death have been broken, then the heretics are fools; they are ignorant of God’s economy, and they are unaware of his economy for [the salvation of’ man.’ (Against Heresies 5: 19)
Finally, St. Irenaeus develops the recapitulation theme to its fulfillment when he writes:
“Adam had to be recapitulated in Christ, so that death might be swallowed up in immortality, and Eve [had to be recapitulated] in Mary, so that the Virgin, having become another virgin’s advocate, might destroy and abolish one virgin’s disobedience by the obedience of another virgin.” (Proof of Apostolic Preaching 33)
In summary, there was a well developed doctrine of Mary’s unique role in salvation history way before Constantine’s Edict, which legalized Christianity in the Roman empire.The second century testimony of two of the greatest orthodox Church Fathers, Justin and Irenaeus support this position, whether you want to agree or not.
The Orthodox recognize Mary as the Theotokos but this co-redemptrix stuff is just modernist nonsense.
ICor. 15:21-21 For since by man came death, by Man also came resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive.
or they mention that through her God Incarnate would come to save us.
Luke 1:38 Then Mary said, "Behold the maidservant of the Lord! Let it be to me according to your word." And the angel departed from her.
Neither passage declares or affirms Mary being the "Mother of Christianity".
Your church believes in free will, or cooperation, between us and God in our salvation. If you believe this to be true, Mary could have said no. If she had done that do you believe that would have stopped God's plan for our salvation?
I think the answer is no.
Mary was a wonderful, faithful woman nothing more.
This is also nonsense. Ask a Roman Catholic who is deserving of worship and he/she will answer that only God is the object of worship.
You really should know better than that.
I don't understand why people continue to posit these falsehoods about the Roman Catholics. You want to debate their theology, that's one thing, but starting off with these falsehoods just isn't the Christian way to do so.
The theologians that I quoted were the defenders of Apostolic Tradition against the Gnostic Heretics. In addition, both Justin and Irenaeus in their apologies quoted scripture frequently but provided the interpretations of the scriptures to refute the heresies of the day. I will take their interpretation over yours, and my own for that matter, on the subject thank you. Furthermore, Mary had free will, but her will was ordered to the will of God by God’s Grace, which in Catholic Theology is viewed as the abiding, interior, efficacious communication of the Divine Spirit. It belongs to the whole soul, mind, wil and affectons. It makes holy those who possess the gift by giving them a participation in the divine life. Grace, which is sanctifying, produces a conversion, a transformation of one’s predispositions. So when Mary is greated by the Angel Gabriel with “Hail Mary Full of Grace” (Lk 1: 28) following St. Jeromes’ Latin Vulgate Translation, it is God’s Grace already given to Mary that allows her to freely choose and act in accordance with God’s Holy Will. Thus, Mary, by God’s Grace, was Truly Free from the Christian perspective in that she was freely able to act in accordance with God’s Holy Will and Commandments.
Pax Domine Christi
.but the first and highest object of worship.This is also nonsense. Ask a Roman Catholic who is deserving of worship and he/she will answer that only God is the object of worship.
You really should know better than that.
Was just today reading something apropos to the argument:
"Laying aside subtleties, let us examine the thing. When Paul reminds the Galatians of what they were before they came to the knowledge of Gods he says that they “did service unto them which by nature are no gods,” ( Gal. 4:8 ). Because he does not say λατρια, was their superstition excusable? This superstition, to which he gives the name of δυλια, he condemns as much as if he had given it the name of λατρια. When Christ repels Satan’s insulting proposal with the words, “It is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve,” ( Mt. 4:10 ), there was no question of λατρια. For all that Satan asked was προσκὺνεσις (obeisance). In like manners when John is rebuked by the angel for falling on his knees before him ( Rev. 19:10 ; 22:8, 9), we ought not to suppose that John had so far forgotten himself as to have intended to transfer the honour due to God alone to an angel. But because it was impossible that a worship connected with religion should not savour somewhat of divine worship, he could not προσκὺνει̑ν (do obeisance to) the angel without derogating from the glory of God. True, we often read that men were worshipped; but that was, if I may so speak, civil honour. The case is different with religious honour, which, the moment it is conjoined with worship, carries profanation of the divine honour along with it. The same thing may be seen in the case of Cornelius ( Acts 10:25 ). He had not made so little progress in piety as not to confine supreme worship to God alone. Therefore, when he prostrates himself before Peter, he certainly does it not with the intention of adoring him instead of God. Yet Peter sternly forbids him. And why, but just because men never distinguish so accurately between the worship of God and the creatures as not to transfer promiscuously to the creature that which belongs only to God. Therefore, if we would have one God, let us remember that we can never appropriate the minutest portion of his glory without retaining what is his due. Accordingly, when Zechariah discourses concerning the repairing of the Church, he distinctly says not only that there would be one God, but also that he would have only one name—the reason being, that he might have nothing in common with idols. The nature of the worship which God requires will be seen in its own place. He has been pleased to prescribe in his Law what is lawful and right, and thus restrict men to a certain rule, lest any should allow themselves to devise a worship of their own. But as it is inexpedient to burden the reader by mixing up a variety of topics, I do not now dwell on this one. Let it suffice to remember, that whatever offices of piety are bestowed anywhere else than on God alone, are of the nature of sacrilege. First, superstition attached divine honours to the sun and stars, or to idols: afterwards ambition followed—ambition which, decking man in the spoils of God, dared to profane all that was sacred. And though the principle of worshipping a supreme Deity continued to be held, still the practice was to sacrifice promiscuously to genii and minor gods, or departed heroes: so prone is the descent to this vice of communicating to a crowd that which God strictly claims as his own peculiar right!"
Thank you for proving my point, Mary is neither worshipped nor are sacrifices made to her. Only God is worshipped.
Now I hope that people will move beyond this false slander of a Christian Church!
No one elevates Her beyond the role God Himself chose for Her. Do you really despise Christ’s mother so much you can’t give her the honor due?
Mother Mary is not a “goddess”, she is the “Queen of Heaven” by Our Lord’s choice. Who are we to disagree?
Queen of Heaven? Says who?
Proddies posting something, anything about RCs = hate speech
A RC posting this and would have been elevated to FR Saint.
But it doesn't predate Christianity, now does it? Christianity was correct long before it was legal.
You wrote:
“Proddies posting something, anything about RCs = hate speech”
Who said anything about hate speech? Not me.
“A RC posting this and would have been elevated to FR Saint.”
Are you a product of public schools? You write like one.
I must have hit close to home to inspire such a witty post from you.
When all else fails, toss out ad homs.
You wrote:
“I must have hit close to home to inspire such a witty post from you.”
You didn’t even hit close to English.
“When all else fails, toss out ad homs.”
Gee, are you crying? Here, let me help you. You wrote:
“A RC posting this and would have been elevated to FR Saint.”
Now, that should have been something like (if I even understand what you were trying to say): “If a Catholic posted this, he would have been elevated to FR sainthood.”
Is that what you were trying to say? There’s no ‘if’. There should be an ‘an’ if you’re going to say ‘RC’. And ‘sainthood’ is what you needed not ‘saint’.
Admit it. That’s what you were trying to say right? So there was no ad hominem attack really just a clear indication you goofed up a sentence. Is it so horrible that I pointed that out by (apparently correctly) asking if you went to public schools?
This is just so typical. If you disagree with something, claim the poster said something that they never did.
Have you stopped beating your wife?
Problem is, we know what 'Co' represents in English...
If what you say is accurate, you should be calling Mary 'With-Redemptor', NOT Co-Redemptrix...We know what Co-Redemptrix means...
Just more double-speak from you guys...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.