Co-Redemptrix
#21
(05-06-2012, 03:15 AM)Resurrexi Wrote: This has nothing to do with ecumenism.
Being ashamed of Our Lady has to do with false ecumenism.
Reply
#22
(05-06-2012, 03:17 AM)Geremia Wrote: Here's an excellent passage from Ludwig Ott's Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma:
Quote:Mary’s co-operation in the Redemption

The title Corredemptrix = Coredemptress, which has been current since the fifteenth century, and which also appears in some official Church documents under Pius X (cf. D 1978 a), must not be conceived in the sense of an equation of the efficacy of Mary with the redemptive activity of Christ, the sole Redeemer of humanity (1 Tim. 2:5). As she herself required redemption and in fact was redeemed by Christ, she could not of herself merit the grace of the redemption of humanity in accordance with the principle: Principium meriti non cadit sub eodem merito. (The author of an act of merit cannot be a recipient of the same act of merit.) Her co-operation in the objective redemption is an indirect, remote co-operation, and derives from this that she voluntarily devoted her whole life to the service of the Redeemer, and, under the Cross, suffered and sacrificed with Him. As Pope Pius XII says in the Encyclical “Mystici Corporis” (1943), she “offered Him on Golgotha to the Eternal Father together with the holocaust of her maternal rights and her motherly love like a new Eve for all children of Adam” (D 2291). As “The New Eve” she is, as the same Pope declares, in the Apostolic Constitution “Munificentissimus Deus” (1950) “the sublime associate of our Redeemer” (alma Redemptoris nostri socia [cf. Gn. 3:12]). Cf. D. 3031: generoso Divini Redemptoris socia.

Christ alone truly offered the sacrifice of atonement on the Cross; Mary merely gave Him moral support in this action. Thus Mary is not entitled to the title “Priest” (sacerdos). Indeed this is expressly laid down by the Holy Office (1916, 1927). Christ, as the Church teaches, “conquered the enemy of the human race alone (solus)” (D 711); in the same way, He alone acquired the grace of Redemption for the whole human race, including Mary. The words of Luke 1:38: “Behold the handmaid of the Lord,” imply Mary’s mediate, remote co-operation in the Redemption. St. Ambrose expressly teaches: “Christ’s Passion did not require any support” (De inst. virg. 7). In the power of the grace of Redemption merited by Christ, Mary, by her spiritual entering into the sacrifice of her Divine Son for men, made atonement for the sins of men, and (de congruo) merited the application of the redemptive grace of Christ. In this manner she co-operates in the subjective redemption of mankind.

The statement of Pope Pius X in the Encyclical “Ad diem illum” (1904): (Beata Virgo) de congruo, ut aiunt, promeret nobis, quae Christus de condigno promeruit (D 1978 a) (The Blessed Virgin merits for us de congruo what Christ merited de condigno) is, as the present tense “promeret” shows, not indeed to be taken as referring to the historical objective Redemption, which occurred once and for all, but to her ever-present, intercessory co-operation in the subjective redemption.

I agree with the majority of what Ott says here.

However, the title "co-redemptrix," seems to imply far more than "an indirect, remote co-operation." Such a title also de-emphasizes the fact that Christ (according to the definition of Florence) “conquered the enemy of the human race alone (solus)” and that (according to St. Ambrose) “Christ’s Passion did not require any support.” We should focus upon what the Church has already defined rather than supporting a title for Mary of dubious theological merit when she already has so many of unquestionable accuracy.  
Reply
#23
(05-06-2012, 03:34 AM)Geremia Wrote:
(05-06-2012, 03:15 AM)Resurrexi Wrote: This has nothing to do with ecumenism.
Being ashamed of Our Lady has to do with false ecumenism.

Opposition to the title "co-redemptrix" does not equate being ashamed of the immaculately conceived, ever-virgin mother of God, who was assumed into heaven by Him.
Reply
#24
(05-06-2012, 03:16 AM)jovan66102 Wrote: The doctrine of Co-Redemptrix in absolutely no way detracts from the centrality of Christ. Without Christ, there is no redemption. Without Mary, there is no Christ.
Well, there would be no incarnate Christ. The 2nd Person of the Trinity existed even before the Holy Spirit created Our Lady ex nihilo in St. Ann's womb.
Reply
#25
(05-06-2012, 03:16 AM)jovan66102 Wrote: The doctrine of Co-Redemptrix in absolutely no way detracts from the centrality of Christ. Without Christ, there is no redemption. Without Mary, there is no Christ.

That is incredibly well put.
Reply
#26
(05-06-2012, 03:42 AM)Resurrexi Wrote:
(05-06-2012, 03:34 AM)Geremia Wrote:
(05-06-2012, 03:15 AM)Resurrexi Wrote: This has nothing to do with ecumenism.
Being ashamed of Our Lady has to do with false ecumenism.
Opposition to the title "co-redemptrix" does not equate being ashamed of the immaculately conceived, ever-virgin mother of God, who was assumed into heaven by Him.
Rather than trying to seek the theological truth about the question, the reason defining it as dogma has been opposed seems to be in order to please the Protestants. From that ZENIT article I cited:
Quote:Father de Fiores is a member of the International Pontifical Marian Academy, which advises the Pope on all theological questions relating to the person of Mary. He said that to define Mary as "Co-redemptrix" does not mean to place her at the same saving level as Jesus, but to emphasize her cooperative role in salvation.

Q: There is a proposal to invoke Mary as Co-redemptrix. Would it be necessary to proclaim a new dogma?

Father de Fiores: From the conciliar and ecumenical point of view, it is certainly not opportune to proclaim this dogma at this time. The separated brethren, Protestants and Orthodox, reproach us for not consulting them in regard to the last dogmas on Mary. This is why I think that a dogma of this type would have to include their participation.

Let us first move toward union or toward a certain convergence among Christians; we will then examine if it is pertinent to proclaim Mary Co-redemptrix.
Reply
#27
(05-06-2012, 03:51 AM)Geremia Wrote:
(05-06-2012, 03:16 AM)jovan66102 Wrote: The doctrine of Co-Redemptrix in absolutely no way detracts from the centrality of Christ. Without Christ, there is no redemption. Without Mary, there is no Christ.
Well, there would be no incarnate Christ. The 2nd Person of the Trinity existed even before the Holy Spirit created Our Lady ex nihilo in St. Ann's womb.

And since it is the Sacrifice of the Incarnate Christ on the Cross that redeems us, my point still stands.
Reply
#28
(05-06-2012, 05:34 AM)jovan66102 Wrote:
(05-06-2012, 03:51 AM)Geremia Wrote:
(05-06-2012, 03:16 AM)jovan66102 Wrote: The doctrine of Co-Redemptrix in absolutely no way detracts from the centrality of Christ. Without Christ, there is no redemption. Without Mary, there is no Christ.
Well, there would be no incarnate Christ. The 2nd Person of the Trinity existed even before the Holy Spirit created Our Lady ex nihilo in St. Ann's womb.

And since it is the Sacrifice of the Incarnate Christ on the Cross that redeems us, my point still stands.

Indeed.  :tiphat:
Reply
#29
Is St. Joseph co-redeemer as well?

After all, if it weren't for Him both Christ and the Blessed Virgin would have perished in the hands of Herod, among other episodes.
Reply
#30
(05-05-2012, 06:10 PM)Resurrexi Wrote: The title makes me incredibly uncomfortable; it places an inordinate emphasis on the Virgin Mary's role in salvation history to the detriment of a proper focus on Christ, who is His mother's Savior ("et exsultavit spiritus meus in Deo salutari meo") as well as ours.

With the Fathers, I place the greatest honor of the Saints in Mary, who with special providence was created spotless. However, I do not hold the position that she is co-redemptrix or co-mediatrix in any sense as it is dangerously close to worshiping her equal to the Son. I consider her a mediator with all the saints, taking up our supplication to God, but will never hold her to be co-redemptrix. Such terms in my opinion are novelties unnecessary to the Faith and salvation, as well as a hindrance to worship of Christ and to the praise due to him. I feel that such terms are a product of Marian movement of some laity and clergy in our days which for me detract further and further from the true spirit of Christianity; that is "Christ centered". In fact, even thinking about it causes me no little grief and frustration. We need to give ourselves ENTIRELY to Christ. He is our redeemer and mediator in every sense of the word. The Fathers held Mary as a vessel of honor, chief among the saints, but no more. The more we divinize her the less we understand the nature and person of Jesus Christ. In school I remember hearing about a perverse idea of the Trinity where God and Mary are first persons and Jesus is third.

IMO. IMO. IMO.

This is all very troubling and confusing to me. As seen http://catholicforum.fisheaters.com/inde...94.10.html
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)