Co-Redeemer?

[thereselittleflower]

Hi TLF..I"m guessing your name is Therese.

Hi Kim

You can call me Therese I took my online name after a Saint of the Catholic Church, Therese of Lisieux known as Therese the Little Flower - hence my name here.

I guess the word Marian is a new to me too. We protestant (I dont even like titles I,m not protesting anything, just proclaiming Jesus is my Lord and Saviour)never really put Mary in any position, not that we don't both agree that Jesus was born of a virgin. I just see the trinity as Father ,Son and the Holy Spirit..

I hope you don't think we see the Trinity any other way! We do not elevate Mary to the position of the Trinity, or make her in any way a part of or equal to the Trintiy . . God forbid!

She is a created being, like you and me . .

You know I just learned something right before I posted this back I the OBOB. I was pmming a OBOB forum member about the niceen creed and there was a post about the word "catholic" meaning meaning universal. So the true believers in Christ are His Body or the universal or "catholic " church..You know when I think about it heaven will filled with true believers from every tongue,tribe and nation. You know there are people in all churches that I call pew sitters that are there for the ride, never accepting Christ as their Saviour. You don't see the fruit's that come from abideing In Christ evident in what they say or how they live.We become a new creature in Christ old things past away as we are born anew. You know if all the true believers in Christ could just come together agreeing on the core issues of salvation and the spreading of His Gospel, the world would be affected for the Kingdom of God..

I agree.

Thank you Sis for taking time to explain .You know we still are all seing thru the glass darkly, till we see Him face to face.No one really sees it perfect yet.. Thank God for His Redeeming, soul cleansing work of redemption..YBIC..Kim

Amen and you are very welcome. Any time you have questions about our faith, please don't hesitate to ask . . .


John Paul pray for us

 

[thereselittleflower]

I went to the EWTN FAQ, and found this answer regarding the doctrine of Mary as co-redemptrix:

Concerning the movement to have Mary dogmatically proclaimed "co-redemptrix and mediatrix of all graces," Eastern Christians in general are not very enthusiastic about it.


Eastern Christian theology is "apophatic," which means that we greatly value mystery - and define as little as possible. In our tradition a truth is only dogmatically defined if it is absolutely necessary to do so. If there isn't a pressing need to define a dogma, we prefer to leave things well enough alone.

Also, we only speak of Mary in relation to Christ. The titles "co-redemptrix and mediatrix of all graces," in as much as they appear to refer to Mary herself, are somewhat distasteful to many Eastern Christians. We prefer titles that clearly present Mary's relationship to her son, such as Theotokos (God Bearer).

This having been said, these titles when understood correctly are theologically sound, although "co-redemptrix" can be easily misunderstood. But just because a title is doctrinally sound does not mean it is necessary to elevate it to the level of dogma. Faithful Catholics are free to disagree on the merits of such a dogmatic definition. Personally, I believe that no title is more fitting and glorious for Our Lady than Theotokos. Almost all of the Eastern Catholics that I know feel this way. What honor could possibly be greater than being the Mother of God?

******

So I was incorrect in thinking "Co-mediatrix" is not theologically sound. But I was right that Catholics can disagree as to whether it needs to be defined as a dogma.


Forgive me....


~cleopa (sinner extraordinaire)

Well, until the Church defines this as dogma, it has not been done and we are free to hold to one side or the other in this question . .we just can't question the doctrine itself.



John Paul pray for us

 

[WarriorAngel]

Thanks for the link!!!

~cleopa

You are very welcome. Hope it helps understand the whole meaning. I know it helped me a great deal.

 

[thereselittleflower]

....and I still don't think it should be dogma.

~cleopa

You are very miuch entitled to hold this opnion . . and no one should make you fell wrong for doing so . . .

We simply must be ready to put our opinions aside if and when the Church comes out and proclaims something our opinions are contrary to . .. that willingness to submit our personal understanding to the teaching of the Church, which is the Pillar and Foundation of the truth, is indeed an act of humility and submission to Christ on our parts.



John Paul pray for us

 

[Rising_Suns]

Concerning the movement to have Mary dogmatically proclaimed "co-redemptrix and mediatrix of all graces," Eastern Christians in general are not very enthusiastic about it.


Eastern Christian theology is "apophatic," which means that we greatly value mystery - and define as little as possible. In our tradition a truth is only dogmatically defined if it is absolutely necessary to do so. If there isn't a pressing need to define a dogma, we prefer to leave things well enough alone.

Also, we only speak of Mary in relation to Christ. The titles "co-redemptrix and mediatrix of all graces," in as much as they appear to refer to Mary herself, are somewhat distasteful to many Eastern Christians. We prefer titles that clearly present Mary's relationship to her son, such as Theotokos (God Bearer).

This having been said, these titles when understood correctly are theologically sound, although "co-redemptrix" can be easily misunderstood. But just because a title is doctrinally sound does not mean it is necessary to elevate it to the level of dogma. Faithful Catholics are free to disagree on the merits of such a dogmatic definition. Personally, I believe that no title is more fitting and glorious for Our Lady than Theotokos. Almost all of the Eastern Catholics that I know feel this way. What honor could possibly be greater than being the Mother of God?

******

So I was incorrect in thinking "Co-mediatrix" is not theologically sound. But I was right that Catholics can disagree as to whether it needs to be defined as a dogma.


Forgive me....


~cleopa (sinner extraordinaire)

This is another reason why I am Catholic and not Eastern Orthodox. It seems only the Catholic Church sees just how profound a role God has given Our Lady. For me, personally, I just don't understand this hesitation or aversion to regard her higher than other saints. She is not only the greatest saint, but she has been elevated by God as our mother, and her intercessions carry more weight than all the angels and saints in heaven.

I want to run into her arms full force, without hesitation, for she will lead me closer to her Son. Everything she is and everything she does points to her Son, and she is a profound channel of His graces that she distributes according to her free will.

Blesssings,

-Davide

 

[cleopa_of_emmaus]

This is another reason why I am Catholic and not Eastern Orthodox. It seems only the Catholic Church sees just how profound a role God has given Our Lady. For me, personally, I just don't understand this hesitation or aversion to regard her higher than other saints. She is not only the greatest saint, but she has been elevated by God as our mother, and her intercessions carry more weight than all the angels and saints in heaven.

I want to run into her arms full force, without hesitation, for she will lead me closer to her Son. Everything she is and everything she does points to her Son, and she is a profound channel of His graces that she distributes according to her free will.

Blesssings,

-Davide

The quote from EWTN was talking about Eastern Catholics as well.

~cleopa

 

[Rising_Suns]

The quote from EWTN was talking about Eastern Catholics as well.

~cleopa

Perhaps that's what they claimed, but that is not reflected in the words they spoke.

Whoever wrote that sounds Eastern Orthodox, not Eastern Catholic, especially when he trivializes what the Catechism and past popes titled Mary.

To me, he is essentially rejecting the Catholic Church in favor of the Orthodox perspective. You can't get any more Orthodox than what was written above.

Blessings,

-Davide

 

[cleopa_of_emmaus]

I disagree. As an Eastern Catholic, I agree with everything he said.

~cleopa

 

[Letalis]

Everything she is and everything she does points to her Son, and she is a profound channel of His graces that she distributes according to her free will.

This regarding her title as 'Mediatrix of all graces?'

 

[Rising_Suns]

I disagree. As an Eastern Catholic, I agree with everything he said.

I don't understand how, as an Eastern Catholic, he can disagree with the titles the Magesterium and past popes have given to Mary.

 

[Rising_Suns]

This regarding her title as 'Mediatrix of all graces?'

Yes.

 

[Shane Roach]

In order to understand the nature of Christ's Church on earth, you must understand what Christ meant when He said that the Church is His bride. In this sense, she is a living organsim; she does not remain stagnant as some would pressume. As a bride seeks to grow and further unite with her husband, so too does the Church grow and seeks to further unite with Christ.

As such, you cannot expect the Church to be exactly the same as she was during the time of the Apostles. Such a mindset leads many people astray; they want to return to the time of the Apotles, as if the Church remained stagnant and never grew.

I would implore you not to fall into this same trap.

Without doubt the church has grown and evolved, but it is clear that the New Testament warns of false as well as true teachings, so we all struggle I think to sift the bad from the good teachings. Obviously I don't see myself as falling into a trap here.

I guess the point I am making here is that salvation does not seem to require any belief at all about Mary, but rests exclusively on Christ. I am reminded just now of the verse regarding John the Baptists who said, "I must decrease so that He may increase," and things such as this seem to reinforce the idea that focus should be always on Christ, whom the Spirit reveals to us all.

Yes, but who hears the groanings?

Remember, a family is not complete without a mother. We have a complete family in heaven, because God elevated Mary to a very special role as our mother, one whom cares and nutures for us by bringing our petitions to God. Since she is spouse of the Holy Spirit (Mary conceived Christ with the Holy Spirit), she submits to Him as a wife is to submit to her husband. That's why the groanings of the Holy Spirit are heard by her.

Also, please read my signature.

Blessings,

-Davide

Well, Romans 8:26-30 seems to trace intercessions from the Spirit, to Christ, to the Father.

As far as Mary being married to the Holy Spirit separately from Christ's marriage to the church, there seems to be no mention of it in revelation as anything distinct. There are no mentions anywhere of needing Mary's intercessions between man and the Holy Spirit, and as I mentioned before the Holy Spirit actually appears to dwell in every Christian. "Do you not know your body is a temple?" That sort of thing.

This all becomes dangerously close to debate and I am constantly at pains not to press it in that direction. Obviously, I am not yet in full communion so to speak with the Catholic teaching here, and I am as I was, merely asking if there are teachings or ideas that directly address these issues.

Thanks again an again for all your help! Looking foreward to the whole Conclave. Whatever else one believes, it seems clear this is going to be a crucial historic moment and I am curious as to how it will turn out.

Take care.

 

[Letalis]

Yes.

Is this the only interpretation of that title?

 

[Rising_Suns]

I guess the point I am making here is that salvation does not seem to require any belief at all about Mary, but rests exclusively on Christ. I am reminded just now of the verse regarding John the Baptists who said, "I must decrease so that He may increase," and things such as this seem to reinforce the idea that focus should be always on Christ, whom the Spirit reveals to us all.

Why do you assume that devotion to Mary somehow takes away one's focus from Christ? Why does it have to be either/or? This has always confused me.

Well, Romans 8:26-30 seems to trace intercessions from the Spirit, to Christ, to the Father.

As far as Mary being married to the Holy Spirit separately from Christ's marriage to the church, there seems to be no mention of it in revelation as anything distinct. There are no mentions anywhere of needing Mary's intercessions between man and the Holy Spirit, and as I mentioned before the Holy Spirit actually appears to dwell in every Christian. "Do you not know your body is a temple?" That sort of thing.

I would be careful not to use the Bible as your only source of God's authority. No where in Scripture does Scripture say that it alone is God's exclusive authority. Being Catholic and knowing how the Bible came into existence, we know that God gave His authoirty to the Church.

This all becomes dangerously close to debate and I am constantly at pains not to press it in that direction. Obviously, I am not yet in full communion so to speak with the Catholic teaching here, and I am as I was, merely asking if there are teachings or ideas that directly address these issues.

Thanks again an again for all your help! Looking foreward to the whole Conclave. Whatever else one believes, it seems clear this is going to be a crucial historic moment and I am curious as to how it will turn out.

Take care.

You're welcome anytime here.

Blessings,

-Davide

 

[Rising_Suns]

Is this the only interpretation of that title?

Well, "Mediatrix of All Graces" means that, just as God came through Mary into the world, so too does God's graces come through Mary into the world.

It is a doctrine of faith to believe that Mary is a channel of God's graces--if not in full, atleast in part.

Blessings,

-Davide

 

[Letalis]

Well, "Mediatrix of All Graces" means that, just as God came through Mary into the world, so too does God's graces come through Mary into the world.

It is a doctrine of faith to believe that Mary is a channel of God's graces--if not in full, atleast in part.

Blessings,

-Davide

I thought I had heard another interpretation that I found myself able to accept. The interpretation was that grace came to the world through the womb of Mary (meaning Jesus). Thus the title 'Mediatrix of all graces.' The interpretation was something similiar to that.

 

[Shane Roach]

Why do you assume that devotion to Mary somehow takes away one's focus from Christ? Why does it have to be either/or? This has always confused me.

More or less by definition, if one is relying on Mary to speak to the Holy Spirit when one has been told to rely on the Holy Spirit directly, there appears to be a lessening of the role of the Father, as in Matthew 16:17, or the Spirit which in turn is the one who points us to Christ, according to verses like Romans 8:16 and 1 John 5:6.

I would be careful not to use the Bible as your only source of God's authority. No where in Scripture does Scripture say that it alone is God's exclusive authority. Being Catholic and knowing how the Bible came into existence, we know that God gave His authoirty to the Church.



You're welcome anytime here.

Blessings,

-Davide

Indeed, without the prompting of the Holy Spirit, none of us would know the Bible from a book of Wicca. Still, there are many verses to be had on the subject of proper instruction, choosing leaders, and discerning a false from a true teaching. So rather than worry about whether or not I am succumbing to any number of presuppositions, if any one has an explanation as far as the roots of this teaching and how it relates to the questions I had, that would be more helpfull.

I know that many of you have been plagued by scrutiny of your faith from people who have these various assumptions. I'm sure I am not free of assumptions of various types myself. I am simply trying to figure out the nature of what is unique about Mary, where the teaching comes from, and how it is ballanced with other teachings I am familiar with.

 

[marciadietrich]

I thought I had heard another interpretation that I found myself able to accept. The interpretation was that grace came to the world through the womb of Mary (meaning Jesus). Thus the title 'Mediatrix of all graces.' The interpretation was something similiar to that.

But the Catechism states (paraphrase) that Mary in heaven has not laid aside this saving office, in other words, she still now mediates graces in and active fashion, and not just by merit of having given birth to Christ which is a more passive viewpoint.

For me the solution is that Mary is the ultimate "type" of the Church (mother of the Church and represents the Church itself and all its members), and it is via the Church we gain salvation (outside the Church no salvation) ... so all who are saved gain grace via the Church regardless of if they are in the Catholic church as a member because know it or not all grace for salvation is in and from the Church.

This was a problem area for me with that active role of mediating all grace. So understand as I was where you are now not that long ago.

 

[Shane Roach]

I thought I had heard another interpretation that I found myself able to accept. The interpretation was that grace came to the world through the womb of Mary (meaning Jesus). Thus the title 'Mediatrix of all graces.' The interpretation was something similiar to that.

That would be something I could wrap my head around more easily as well, actually. But after years of praying to the Father or to Jesus I find the prospect of praying to Mary somehow a misplacement of my faith.

I pray by the Spirit through Christ to the Father, is my understanding. I can't figure why that would be a bad thing, or less effective than praying through Mary by the Spirit through Christ to the Father. I can't find any reason to enlist Her other than perhaps as has been mentioned as a co-intercessor, and even then it would seem to me a strange sort of diversion of effort. Even like, the Lord's Prayer, is directed to the Father.

Hmm.

 

[Paul S]

That would be something I could wrap my head around more easily as well, actually. But after years of praying to the Father or to Jesus I find the prospect of praying to Mary somehow a misplacement of my faith.

I assume, then, you never ask anyone to pray for you?