Mary as Co-redemptrix

[polishbeast]

Mother Teresa of Calcutta, "Of course Mary is the Co-redemptrix - she gave Jesus his body, and his body is what saved us."

I think this pretty much sums it up. Thoughts, or comments?

 

[Uphill Battle]

thoughts: uh-oh.

comments: Ant hill has now been kicked.

 

[E.C.]

One could then argue that she is Co-second-person-of-the-Trinity.

But, that would not be correct, would it?

 

[MamaZ]

What did Mary do to redeem mankind?

 

[MamaZ]

....

 

[MamaZ]

What did Mary do to redeem mankind? We can also then say Adam is co-redemtrix..

 

[Kristos]

I think Paul is more of a co-redemptrix

1Co 9:22 To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.

Not really - I'm just messin'

I think Theotokos is sufficient.

 

[Dark_Lite]

Co-redemptrix is such a terrible term to describe the role of Mary. It's too far open to misinterpretation given the meaning of "redeem" today.

 

[MrPolo]

Co-redemptrix is such a terrible term to describe the role of Mary. It's too far open to misinterpretation given the meaning of "redeem" today.

Very true. I see responses here to that effect from those who don't even know what this term means.

For educational purposes, here is a good article explaining this term. Scroll to What Does Co-Redemptrix Really Mean? and also read One Redeemer and Savior.

 

[MamaZ]

We have no co-redeemer..

 

[Uphill Battle]

Very true. I see responses here to that effect from those who don't even know what this term means.

For educational purposes, here is a good article explaining this term. Scroll to What Does Co-Redemptrix Really Mean? and also read One Redeemer and Savior.

Why would you say that Theotokos is not sufficient? I understand what Catholics really MEAN when they say Co-Redemptrix. I understand that there is no intention to supplant/supercede/match the redemption that is soley at the hands (and feet, and side) of Christ. However, does it not "toe the line?"

is it not really a superflouous title, one that if thought out clearly, might be considered a bad idea?

(take for example, the Canadian Reform Alliance Party.... they didn't think things through before chosing the name. Nothing like having a CRAP button on your lapel.)

and since it could be rightly said of the whole geneological line of Mary, the same? Mary's dad? Co-redeemer. Christ would not be in this world if Mary wasn't fathered by him, etc... etc...

It seems, IM(ns)HO quite unneccessary, and a source or unneccessary conflict.

 

[buzzini]

what is it with the desire to elevate human activity of any kind to match the supernatural work of God? For God the unfathomable lower Himself to become man. yet some of us so desire to match such miracle with human merit? If God choose, can't He not came out of a rock rather then Mary?

 

[MrPolo]

Why would you say that Theotokos is not sufficient?

I think you meant to reply to Kristos.

 

[MrPolo]

Very true. I see responses here to that effect from those who don't even know what this term means.

For educational purposes, here is a good article explaining this term. Scroll to What Does Co-Redemptrix Really Mean? and also read One Redeemer and Savior.

We have no co-redeemer..

 

[Uphill Battle]

I think you meant to reply to Kristos.

nope, you... just a poorly worded first sentence.

replace that with "Why would you not consider Theotokos as sufficient?"

 

[Mary of Bethany]

It's not that, correctly understood, it's necessarily wrong, but why does Rome go beyond what is necessary and make such declarations where no declaration of dogma/doctrine is needed?

Co-Redemptrix, Co-Mediatrix, Dispenser of All Graces, etc., etc. These are all problematic, and do more to cause over reactions to the other extreme.

Mary

 

[MrPolo]

nope, you... just a poorly worded first sentence.

replace that with "Why would you not consider Theotokos as sufficient?"

Well, first, it should be noted, the co-redemptrix idea is not yet dogma. It is a widespread theology and may be defined as such some day.

Second, the Church does not determine what is "sufficient" per se. I do not get that attitude here and elsewhere of people saying "such and such is sufficient" or "we don't need to delve into such and such further", etc... Transubstantiation is another subject where you see this attitude. The Church is subject to the movement of the Holy Spirit. If the Holy Spirit so moves to Church into a particular understanding, then the Church will articulate it. The Church's response is not "We don't need to know that", but rather "Yes, Master, be it said as You wish." So if God wishes to say, "Look at My sovereignty. Look at how I operate through my creatures, especially the woman I desired to deliver Personified Salvation to the world," then we say, "Amen!"

Now of course, others here to not believe the Catholic bishops have the unique charism as the ones protected from error by the Spirit, but that's a different subject.

 

[Uphill Battle]

Now of course, others here to not believe the Catholic bishops have the unique charism as the ones protected from error by the Spirit, but that's a different subject.

indeed it is! Thanks for responding. I won't drag the rest of it into a debate.

 

[E.C.]

It seems, IM(ns)HO quite unneccessary, and a source or unneccessary conflict.

It's not that, correctly understood, it's necessarily wrong, but why does Rome go beyond what is necessary and make such declarations where no declaration of dogma/doctrine is needed?

Co-Redemptrix, Co-Mediatrix, Dispenser of All Graces, etc., etc. These are all problematic, and do more to cause over reactions to the other extreme.

Mary

I have to third the "it is not necessary" sentiment.

Afterall, Theotokos as a title was deemed (for lack of a better word) 'necessary' in the 5th century when a certain Nestorius began to say that because the Theotokos could not possibly bear God into the world, she is only Christokos and that Christ was not united in one body.

Really, where along the line of the last 1,600 years, give or take a few, has it become necessary for 'co-Redemptrix'?

Now of course, others here to not believe the Catholic bishops have the unique charism as the ones protected from error by the Spirit, but that's a different subject.

Define Catholic.

 

[prodromos]

If God choose, can't He not came out of a rock rather then Mary?

No. Rocks had no need of salvation, humanity did. To take on our nature so it could be nailed to the cross, go to Hades and burst its gates from the inside to destroy deaths hold over humanity, He had to receive His human flesh from a human.

John