I’ve been at the Youth 2000 retreat in Balham for the last three days. Each afternoon I lead an ‘open forum’ workshop where participants bring random questions about faith and Christian life. It’s not that I necessarily provide expert answers, but as a group we thrash the questions around, and if I can shed any light I try to do that.
In yesterday’s session, we went beyond the usual questions about doctrine and morality, and someone asked about the Marian title ‘Co-Redemptrix’. We had a great discussion, just thinking through what we knew about Mary’s role in salvation from the scriptures and the tradition.
I came home this afternoon and found a book by Josef Weiger called Mary, Mother of Faith (Chicago, Henry Regnery Company: 1959), which is more a meditation on the Marian scripture passages than a doctrinal exposition. He has sections on ‘Co-Redemptrix’ and ‘Universal Mediation’.
First of all, he makes it quite clear what the title Co-Redemptrix does not mean.
What it does not mean is that our salvation depends on Mary; that Jesus’ mother is the source of our sanctity; that her own personal sanctity comes from herself; that she possesses a supernatural nature independent of the grace of her divine Son. Nor does it mean that Mary stood in no need of redemption.
Our redeemer is Christ; our Mediator is Christ; he has redeemed us by his death; and all are redeemed by him; all without exception; including Jesus’ holy mother.
Having said all that, which certainly needs saying, because the title can so easily be misunderstood, Weiger goes on to reflect on what it truly means.
At the Annunciation, when the Angel Gabriel came to Mary to invite her to give her consent to God’s plans:
God bound his will to the will of one of his creatures – the choicest of them, no doubt, and the most endowed with grace; still, the will of a human being was to help decide God’s plan for salvation; in fact, God made the salvation of the world dependent upon the freely-given consent of a human heart [...].
Divine Wisdom made our redemption part-dependent on the Yes or No of the Virgin. Our Redeemer had no desire to force himself on people or to assert himself by deploying rights and opportunities easily available to his almightiness. The salvation of the world was to become a reality in an act of faith, and through the faith of a virgin heart. Mary was to be a partner in our redemption. That is the meaning of her title, Co-Redemptrix. Without the Virgin’s faith, there would be no redemption by Christ. Through her faith Mary gave the Word of God a human home. Our Lord’s incarnation and the Virgin’s faith are an indivisible whole.
If we wonder what it is that distinguishes Mary’s faith from that of other saints – hers was necessary to bring about the salvation of the world in Christ; and that can be said of no other human being. Other people’s faith is necessary for their own salvation. The Virgin’s faith and her Son’s achievements are prerequisites, for without Mary’s faith and Christ’s death and glorification, it would be impossible. It is in fact on quite a different plane. Thus one person’s lack of faith cannot jeopardize the salvation of the whole world… So belief in her part in redemption implies belief in the irreplaceable and representative character of her faith [...].
Mary was no mere passive instrument of the Incarnation, she took an active part in it; so much so that, lacking her faith and her faithfulness, the salvation of the world would have been jeopardized [pp. 90-100].
This all makes theological sense to me. It’s hard to deny that the Virgin Mary, in a unique manner, cooperated in the work of our redemption; that in this limited but crucial sense she was a Co-Redemptrix. The big question, which we didn’t all agree on, is whether the doctrine should be defined!
[Lots of stuff here if you want to follow up the scripture, history, theology, patristics, Magisterium, FAQs, objections, etc: http://www.fifthmariandogma.com/ ]
Cardinal Ratzinger in”God and the World”said that this should not be defined as a dogma, worth reading his tex(.
This is often a great stumbling block to me when discussing my faith with non Catholics. This post has helped me greatly when asked about Our Lady. Thankyou Father Stephen and a very Happy New Year.
The same subject came up in a public book discussion group I joined. We spent 16 weekly sessions trawling through Ideas That Matter by A.C Grayling. Under Catholicism he states:
“The Virgin Mary occupies a tremendously significant and central place in Catholic observance, as Mother of God and (a relatively new doctrine) co-redemptrix with Christ in virtue of her sufferings at seeing the passion and death of her son.”
He doesn’t give any references except at the back of the book where the bibliography includes Rome Sweet Home by Scott & Kimberley Hahn and Catholicism in Modern Italy, 1861-the Present by J Pollard.
Most of the people who attend the discussion group are atheists (mainly in their early 60s). A former Billy Graham fan, turned atheist, leads the group. She leapt on the co-redemptrix idea to try and show that Catholics worship Mary above Christ. All I could find from the Catechism to refute the co-redemptrix statement was that it’s not in the Catechism and therefore not Catholic teaching.
If you want to follow some of this up do see all the articles here:
http://www.fifthmariandogma.com/
Pax et bonum!
Cardinal Ratzinger’s objection seemed to be that the actual formula ‘Co-Redemptrix’ is too much of a departure from Scripture – it would seem he had no objection to the doctrine as such.
My own opinion would be similar: I totally believe that the Blessed Virgin Mary is both ‘Co-Redemptrix’ and ‘Mediatrix of All Graces’ (the latter being implied by the Tradition that she is the Mother of all Christians); but those titles as they stand look too much like they’re contrary to Scripture. I would be much happier if some different words could be found to express the same doctrine. Rather like ‘Assumption’ is clearly different from ‘Ascension’.
I like this idea: Propose the same doctrine, but in language that would be less likely to mislead or confuse. What alternative title would you propose? ‘Cooperator with the Redeemer’ isn’t quite as snappy…
Not sure what to propose as an alternative to Co-Redemptrix – I’m hoping some theological genius will come up with something. For ‘Mediatrix of All Graces’, however, I might propose ‘Universal Intercessor’.
‘Cooperator with the Redeemer’ is too weak; maybe ‘Cooperator in our Redemption’?
The best idea I have at the moment is ‘Primary Co-Redeemer’. The addition of the word ‘primary’ implies (to me at least) that there are other co-redeemers, and therefore that the Blessed Virgin Mary is to be considered in comparison to them, and is not being set up as an equal to the Redeemer Himself.
What of Adam? If his sin is ‘truly necessary’ in order to ‘merit such and so great a redeemer’ (Exultet) is there any sense at all in which, profoundly paradoxically, the actor in the Fall is also Co-Redeemer.
But there is a difference between someone ‘cooperating’ (intentionally), and ‘causing’ (accidentally).
Father: thank you for this fascinating piece. It would be interesting to follow this up with a discussion of the title of Mediatrix.
Co- redemptrix I dont think works, In order to be be redeemed we need a tri-redemption, tri-redemptrix. tri-deem.
The redemption of us by our Lord is complete, whole, final. Without Him there is no redemption. but there are two others participation that it could only be possible with Mary and our own selves.
Our Lord gave us three wonderful gifts.
He gave us Himself in the Eucharist
He gave us His bride – the Church
And He gave us His Mother to be our Mother.
http://www.rosaryconference.com/