The Heõs Hou polemic is over: Radio Debate Matatics VS White & Svendsen on Perpetual Virginity Mary

Catholic Int'l. ^ | November 19, 2003 | Robert Sungenis

[xzins]

Now you're talking. 1997 would have been while I was still in Europe. I remember something about the Eucharist and the co-Redemptrix doctrine....do you remember that or is it just my fuzzy brain?

[xzins]

It's also possible that Joseph remained celibate if his other children were born before his marriage to Mary. (I never really liked the "cousin" theory.)

It's a possible doctrine but not a necessary one in the sense that it is provable.

[Codie]

No.Wish I could help fuzzy brain. ;)

[xzins]

Thanks Lol

(Pssst....your role is to deny I have a fuzzy brain...:>)

[Codie]

Hey.I know this is off topic,but don't you think some are crucifying Jackson before the facts are known? This mob mentality is scary.

[Codie]

Hey.I know this is off topic,but don't you think some are crucifying Jackson before the facts are known? This mob mentality is scary.

[xzins]

I must have a fuzzy brain....I'm seeing double.

Innocent until proven guilty.


(However, paedophiliacs tend to repeat over and over again.)

[A.A. Cunningham]

Do you know that the word Coredemptrix is a Latin word which literally means with the Redeemer, not equal to the Redeemer? The prefix co is derived from the Latin cum which means with, not equal. The term signifies the Blessed Virgin Mary's unique role, as the Mother of God, Jesus Christ, in the redemption of mankind.

[Iowegian]

Now what really happened:

The Arizona Cardinals stink. Let's face it. They got clocked 44-6 this past weekend, and they are headed for another one of their regular 4-12 type seasons. I have often said I'd be happy to volunteer to pack them up and ship them off to any city willing to take them. They are just bad from top to bottom. So why would I say Sungenis roots for the Cardinals? Well, late last night, a few hours after the Dividing Line featuring Gerry Matatics, Sungenis posted a review on his website. Well, no, not a review. I don't know what to call it. If you have listened to that edition of the Dividing Line and want some of the clearest evidence ever offered that some folks suffer from massively selective hearing, check it out. It is almost humorous, if it didn't involve obvious spiritual blindness. (BTW, Sungenis should really leave the cheesey titles to Scott Hahn. Though Hahn's define the term "cheese," at least, considered singularly, they normally carry a small amount of humor. Sungenis' article is titled, "Ding, Dong, The Witch is Dead." Excuse me?) Outside of the expected egregious misrepresentations, the whole thing is focused on a single issue. To summarize, "Hey, hey, don't listen to all those questions that didn't get an answer, just think of one thing: we have a single exception to Dr. Svendsen's thesis in a non-biblical source outside of the time parameters he examined! Wahoo! We have an exception to a rule of grammar! We win! We win! WE ARE #1!" And that's why I say Bob Sungenis roots for the Cardinals. See, it's one thing to say, "Hey, I'm a Cardinals fan, whether they win, or lose...and lose...and lose." I admire that kind of die-hard fan. But that is very different from standing there in the 4th quarter as the Cards are down by 30+ points screaming, "Yeah man, we are the BEST! We ROCK!" That's simple self-deception. And that's Bob Sungenis. He can listen to Matatics self-destruct on the level of not even being able to read a lexical entry properly and that doesn't even create a blip on his radar screen. Why? "Cuz Rome rules! WE ARE #1!" Just as the Cardinals will only get to the Super Bowl by purchasing tickets to it in 2008 (here in Phoenix), Rome will only get you the consolation prize of deception now, and destruction at the final judgment.

James White



To listen to the debate go here:

straitgate.com/jw111803.ram

[NYer]

Here is a very clear explanation on the topic of Mary as CoRedemptrixk from EWTN.

Mary's Cooperation in the Redemption

[Canticle_of_Deborah]

Very funny!

[Aquinasfan]

Heõs Hou and the Protestant Polemic by John Pacheco

Bump for a later read.

[xzins]

see #20

[redgolum]

The title of co redemptrix is one that causes much confusion among both RC's and non RC's. I have heard it expressed in a variety of ways, some that are fairly consistent with what Pyro has said, and some that tend to elevate the role of Mary to participating in the crucifixion by a spiritual link to the actual suffering of Jesus (not an official view of the RCC by the way). I also personaly had contact with a group that wanted Mary to be declared a part of the God head (which really upset my RC friend in the class!), and once had a priest tell me that unless you have pray to Mary, Jesus will not let you into heaven. Needless to say, that didn't really impress me much. If I remember right, this issue has been dropped for now.

I did read the book “Who is My Mother?” by the authors listed in the original article. In general, I was not all that impressed. It kind of struck me as shoddy work that tended to quote itself. I have read much better discussions of Mary that take a much more scholarly approach. To be honest, it reminded me of some of the King James Only stuff

[dsc]

Hey, Joseph and Mary were married. So what if they had relations or didn't have relations? If they did, it wasn't a sin.

What is that to thee and me?

Speaking for myself, credo in Deum Patrem omnipotentem, Creatorem caeli et terrae; et in Jesum Christum, Filium eius unicum, Dominum nostrum; qui conceptus est de Spiritu Sancto, natus ex Maria Virgine; passus sub Pontio Pilato, crucifixus, mortuus, et sepultus; descendit ad inferos; tertia die resurrexit a mortuis; ascendit ad caelos, sedet ad dexteram Dei Patris omnipotentis; inde venturus est judicare vivos et mortuos. Credo in Spiritum Sanctum; sanctam Ecclesiam catholicam, sanctorum communionem; remissionem peccatorum; carnis resurrectionem; et vitam aeternam.

If you want to believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary, that doesn't bother me. If you want to vigorously disbelieve in the perpetual virginity of Mary, that doesn't bother me either.

I don't think it's a central issue, or even a terribly important issue. Whichever, she intercedes for us in a big way.

[Dajjal]

Bumpus ad summum

[Dajjal]

Mary Ever-Virgin

[Hermann the Cherusker]

1. Mary’s triune role as co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix, Advocatrix is a reflection of the Three Persons of the Holy Trinity.

This smacks of numerology, and always assigning anything in threes as "Trinitarian". Rather, it seems these roles are a refelction of the Christ-like quality of Mary to which we are all supposed to strive. We should all work with Christ to redeem the world, mediate goodness to others, and advocate with God for their salvation. Mary is then simply an exemplar par excellence of this.

4. The “co-” prefix in co-Redemptrix refers to Mary’s cooperation with us; it does not mean that Mary is co-Redeemer, not even with and under Christ. (The “co-” prefix should not be capitalized, since it refers to our mere human efforts towards our salvation; the “R” in co-Redemptrix should be capitalized since it refers to Divine efforts towards our salvation.)

This is a good explanation, because "co" most certainly means "jointly" or "mutually", and implies equality. Thus "co-workers", "co-belligerents", etc. Mary (or anyone else) is not "co" anything with Christ in the Redemption. As Max noted above, the Magisterium has very much avoided the use of the word "Co-Redemptrix", which I also think is a non-starter.

7. Mary is also Mediatrix of Divine Providence and of mercy and of all that God does within Creation, except with respect to Christ and herself. Therefore, she should be called: “Mediatrix.”

Without venturing into heresy, it is impossible to say something like that without the qualifier of "after the Incarnation", or even better and more acurately, "after her Assumption". Frankly, I've never even heard of this claim before by the Marianists (Mary as mediator of Divine Providence and Mercy), and it certainly smacks of heretical notions of the eternal existence of Mary. Worse in my view, Divine Providence is the ordering of events towards their proper end by the mind of God. It is really a stretch to say Mary can "mediate" this to us.

10. Mary does not stand before God as co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix, Advocatrix. In truth, only Christ stands before God to redeem, mediate, and advocate. The Virgin Mary humbly kneels before Christ, in worship of Him, and assists Christ fully in His work of redemption, mediation, advocacy.

This is VERY strange sounding. First, Christ is God. Speaking about Christ standing before God smacks of Arianism or at least Nestorianism. The Creed confesses that Christ now "sits at the right hand of Father". Second, certainly all the Angels and Saints also stand before the heavenly throne (unless we are going to toss out the Apocalypse of St. John, and also verses like Jeremiah 15.1 and 2 Maccabees 15.12-15 which explicitly speak of saints mediating for us with prayers before God). Third, Mary does not "assist" Christ (is He not all-powerful and all-knowing?), but intercedes with Him for us and bestows the favors granted in return. That is certainly my understanding of Mediatrix. Christ does not need her assistance, but has instead deigned to give us His mother as our spiritual mother, and to accept her pleas for pity and mercy through bestowal of divine grace on our behalf. I don't see any reason to go beyond this.

[Hermann the Cherusker]

once had a priest tell me that unless you have pray to Mary, Jesus will not let you into heaven

Many saints have said this. It is undoubtedly true, that to disdain the intercession of Mary is to close off the hope of salvation, since it is the same as disdaining the bestowal of the grace of God. The fifteenth anathema of the Second Council of Nicea (Ecumenical 7) reads:

(15) If anyone shall not confess the holy ever-virgin Mary, truly and properly the Mother of God, to be higher than every creature whether visible or invisible, and does not with sincere faith seek her intercessions as of one having confidence in her access to our God, since she bare him, let him be anathema!

Also:

(17) If anyone denies the profit of the invocation of Saints, let him be anathema!

The priest you mention was quite right.

[Hermann the Cherusker]

If you want to believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary, that doesn't bother me. If you want to vigorously disbelieve in the perpetual virginity of Mary, that doesn't bother me either.

I don't think it's a central issue, or even a terribly important issue. Whichever, she intercedes for us in a big way.

How can you say that after you just confessed it as an integral part of the Creed?

natus ex Maria Virgine

That is "born of the Virgin Mary" [perpetual virginity], not "born virginally of Mary" [virgin birth only].