An Explanation of the Coredemptrix of Mary Title

Catholicsource ^ | Martin Beckman

[narses]

An Explanation of the Coredemptrix of Mary Title

Compiled by Martin Beckman

The following is a compilation of several articles by other authors, and discussions I have had with Protestants and Catholics on this issue. Much of the information in this compilation is copied from other authors and therefore I make no claims of authorship of this information in it's entirety.This article is intended to give a brief explanation.

 

Newsweek ran an article in it's August 25^th, 1997 issue about a movement within the Catholic Church. Millions of Catholics signed and submitted a petition to Pope John Paul II in an effort to name Mary, the Mother of our Lord, as Coredemptrix, Mediatrix, and Advocate for all Christians. This would be the fifth and final Marian dogma. Members of Vox Populi Mariae Mediatrici ("The Voice of the People for Mary Mediatrix") spearheaded the effort.

Supporters include Cardinal John O'Connor of New York, the late Mother Teresa of Calcutta; the late Cardinal Luigi Ciappi, OP, papal theologian emeritus; Cardinal Jaime Sin of Manila, the Philippines; Cardinal Edouard Gagnon, president of the Pontifical Committee for International Eucharistic Congresses; over 480 bishops including 40 cardinals; prominent lay leaders and ordinary faithful from all parts of the world. Hardly a fringe group!

Here's a short description from the petition submitted to the Pope:

When the Church invokes Mary under the title, "Coredemptrix", she means that Mary uniquely participated in the redemption of the human family by Jesus Christ, Our Lord and Saviour. At the Annunciation (cf.Lk.1:38) Mary freely cooperated in giving the Second Person of the Trinity his human body which is the very instrument of redemption, as Scripture tells us: "We have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all" (Heb.10:10).

And at the foot of the cross of our Saviour (Jn.19:26), Mary's intense sufferings, united with those of her Son, as Pope John Paul II tells us, were, "also a contribution to the Redemption of us all" (Salvifici Doloris, n.25). Because of this intimate sharing in the redemption accomplished by the Lord, the Mother of the Redeemer is uniquely and rightly referred to by Pope John Paul II and the Church as the "Coredemptrix."

It is important to note that the prefix "co" in the title Coredemptrix does not mean "equal to" but rather "with", coming from the Latin word cum. The Marian title Coredemptrix never places Mary on a level of equality with her Divine Son, Jesus Christ. Rather it refers to Mary's unique human participation which is completely secondary and subordinate to the redeeming role of Jesus, who alone is true God and true Man.

Mary's role was unique. If she had said 'no' to Gabriel ... to God, would we have a Savior, would we have our true Redeemer ... our Lord .... the Messiah? Mary played a definite role in our salvation. But back to the original statement ... that role is entirely dependent and subordinate on Jesus. 

Mary is called to give her free and full consent to conceive this child. She is not merely a passive recipient of the message, but she was given an active role, and heaven awaited her free choice. It is precisely by her free consent to collaborate in God's saving plan that she becomes the Coredemptrix. The prophecy of Simeon to Mary, "and a sword will pierce through your own soul also" (Luke 2:25), affirms Mary's unique participation in the work of redemption, as it warns her that she will undergo an unspeakable pain that will pierce her soul, for the salvation of mankind. John 19:25 tells us of Jesus' Mother at the very foot of the cross, persevering with her Son in his worst hour of agony, and therein suffering the death of her Son.

Thus in her own suffering too, the Mother of the Redeemer participates in the redemptive mission of Jesus Christ.

St. Paul tells us we are to make up what is lacking in the sacrifice of Jesus (Col 1:24): "Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church,"

Paul is making a very similar statement here also. By his sufferings he is completing what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for the church and us. This is a role we all can partake .... but this role is dependent on Christ and subordinate to Christ.

That is all that statement about Mary is saying. Mary had a role, a contribution in filling what was lacking in us, the Church. It's a very biblical statement.

Jesus Christ as true God and true man redeems the human family, while Mary as Coredemptrix participates with the Redeemer in his one perfect Sacrifice in a completely subordinate and dependent way. The key word here is "participation" in that which is exclusively true of Jesus Christ. The title "Coredemptrix" never puts Mary on a level of equality with our Lord; rather, it refers to Mary's unique and intimate participation with her divine Son in the work of redemption. "Coredemptrix" is a Latin word; the prefix "co" in the title, "Coredemptrix," derives from the Latin word "cum," which means "with," not "equal to." Mary's sufferings are efficacious towards the redemption of man because they are wholly rooted in the redemptive graces of Christ and are perfectly united to His redeeming will. Similarly, as Mediatrix, the Mother of Jesus does not "rival" Christ's mediation but rather participates in the one mediation of Jesus Christ. Imagine water from a reservoir reaching the people through a system of aqueducts or channels. By analogy, Jesus is the infinite "reservoir" of all grace, which is distributed to us through Mary .... as she gave birth to Jesus. Jesus, the one mediator, does not exclude secondary, subordinate mediators.

Catholics do agree wholeheartedly that Jesus is the one and only mediator between man & God. No question ... the bible teaches this ... the Catholic Church teaches this. No subordinate co-deities, no additional redeemers, no additional mediators! Clear enough?

But what about our role in bringing people to Christ, preaching the Gospel, as teachers, pointing people to Christ .... and so on? We can be mediators in that fashion. Surely you do not disagree that faith comes from (by grace) from receiving the gospel message.

This is not saying we are mediators between Jesus and God for mankind ... but we can have a subordinate & dependent role.

This isn't adding to Jesus' mediatorship, not a seperate channel, not an end-run, or anything that takes away from His role.

 

Return to Catholicsource Main Page

[Aquinasfan]

"St. Christopher, holy patron of travelers, protect me, and lead me safely to my destiny."

This would be praying TO a saint, not THROUGH a saint. hmmmm

That St. Christopher will present our prayers to God is assumed.

Traditionally, Catholics learn "St. Christopher, pray for us!" "St. Theresa, pray for us!," etc.

St. Paul says, "I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some." (I Corinthians 9:22 KJV) Is Paul saying that he is the ultimate cause of salvation? No. Paul is saying that he is acting as the proximate means of salvation for some men. He assumes that we understand that Christ is the ultimate means of salvation.

[bonfire]

Paul is speaking of preaching the gospel. Spreading the "Word". He is not saying that HE can save. The prayer to St. Christopher is a direct petition TO St. C. for protection. Quite a difference.

[Aquinasfan]

Paul is speaking of preaching the gospel. Spreading the "Word". He is not saying that HE can save. The prayer to St. Christopher is a direct petition TO St. C. for protection. Quite a difference.

Like I said, that Christ is the ultimate source of salvation is assumed in Paul's statement, just as Catholics' appeals to St. Christopher assume that he acts as an intercessor in praying for us.

[Dominick]

The prayer to St. Christopher is a direct petition TO St. C. for protection. Quite a difference

What could he do but pray to the Father? It is like St. Anthony's prayer to find something, I would drop dead from fright if St. Anthony handed me my car keys...

[irishtenor]

Again, you have no scripture to back up your actions. It doesn't make any sense to pray to someone other than God when you can go directly to God. When the disciples asked Jesus to teach them to pray, he didn't say "Pray to my Mom, she can help". No, he said "Our Father, who art in heaven...". That's good enough for me.

[irishtenor]

So your salvation is a salvation of works. Keep working.

I noticed that you didn't quote scripture, only some other writtings. I will follow scripture over and above all other writtings. If it ain't in scripture, I'd be very careful about putting my trust in it.

[irishtenor]

It still doesn't tell us to pray to anybody but God.

[Dominick]

It doesn't make any sense to pray to someone other than God when you can go directly to God.

You are simply repeating yourself, like I said asking others to pray for you is not only allowed, Paul suggests that we must. You simply repeat the same thing, and it is a straw man. I already said the position of the Church is one thing, and yet you continue to misrepresent the Church's position.

[irishtenor]

I haven't misrepresented anything. You are the one who insists that praying to other people is ok. All I am asking for is scripture to back it up.

By the way... asking someone to pray for you/with you is a lot different than praying to that person. Would you, at any time, say to your neighbor, friend, pastor, priest "I pray to you, so that you will send up prayers to heaven on my behalf"? No, you would just ask them to pray WITH you or FOR you. You don't pray to them. If you can't see the difference, then you are blind.

[Dominick]

You are the one who insists that praying to other people is ok.

I said those in Heaven are able to pray for us. There is a large distinction and you purposefully distort that distinction.

It is a cheap straw man tactic.

[irishtenor]

Whether they are in heaven or on earth, it is still unnecessary to pray to them. Period. No straw man, nothing. It is wrong to pray to another human being, whether dead or alive.

[Dominick]

You are either bear baiting or are just not reading what I wrote. In either case you are simply ignorant of the Catholic position, and find it easier to make up facts, and say those are wrong.

That is fine, you don't need me to have a conversation with yourself, but what you are saying is not the Catholic position. Let me know when you understand the doctrinal issue correctly. If all you are going to do is quote Jack Chick, then this is pointless.

[irishtenor]

You don't pray to saints? You don't pray to Mary?

[irishtenor]

And for what it's worth, you don't understand scripture.

[Dominick]

Scroll up...

[irishtenor]

Can't answer, huh?

[Aquinasfan]

I will follow scripture over and above all other writtings.

So what would you say if the theory of "The Bible alone" isn't in the Bible?

If you decide to go by this non-biblical doctrine, then at least use the entire Bible, and not Luther's abridged version.

The Church wrote, preserved and canonized Sacred Scripture. The Bible didn't drop from the sky at Pentecost. Martin "Bible Alone" Luther had no justification for rejecting the existing canon of Scripture.

Additionally, the Bible tells us to take our disputes "to the church," because the church is "the pillar and foundation of truth."

Matthew 18:17

If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector.

1 Timothy 3:15

if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God's household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.

Finally, you will find plenty of Scriptural support for Catholic doctrine at Scripture Catholic.

[Aquinasfan]

So your salvation is a salvation of works. Keep working.

James 2:19

You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that–and shudder.

But I did find Luther's doctrine of "faith alone" in the Bible.

James 2:24

You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone.

This is what Jesus said about works:

Matthew 25

37 "Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink?
38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you?
39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?'
40 "The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'
41 "Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.
42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink,
43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.'
44 "They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?'
45 "He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'
46 "Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."

[Aquinasfan]

If all you are going to do is quote Jack Chick, then this is pointless.

At least the lurkers will benefit from your posts.

[Dominick]

At least the lurkers will benefit from your posts.

Well, still, when people misrepresent what the Church teaches, and you show that isn't the case, make good points, then the person act like you never explained the real practice. Basically, they make the accusations fit the conclusion.

A few posts are OK, but I think this person is too slippery for this, I showed a misconception, and he ignored it. It is too convenient to say Catholics worship Saints as is the Worship due Christ. The reality doesn't make a good argument, and you can't use it to smear the Church.

Any stick is a good stick to beat the Church, and if it wasn't veneration of Saints, he would pick something else.