Prayers to Theotokos...Some QuestionsI've

[Stabat Mater dolorosa]

Certainly she cooperated in our salvation...though we also cooperate in our salvation. We don't save ourselves, but we do cooperate to provide the personal conditions to allow God's salvation. I don't believe we have the same level of participation, as her participation affected all of mankind. Certainly her role is unique. That said, just as I need redemption, the Theotokos also needed redemption.

@ArmyMatt said this in another thread in response to "do Orthodox believe Mary is co-redemptrix":

So we agree
It turns out that it's not as much about the the term then, but rather about the associations attached to the use of it.

 

[Stabat Mater dolorosa]

Mariology 1.0.2 ?

 

[All4Christ]

So we agree
It turns out that it's not as much about the the term then, but rather about the associations attached to the use of it.

If the definition is what I wrote, then I think we agree on that part (although I think the term is then misleading imho). Many writings I've read describing co-redemptress put much more than what I wrote into the definition...for example, Bishop Malou of Brouges

“In three respects—as Daughter, as Mother, and as Spouse of God—the Holy Virgin is exalted to a certain equality with the Father, to a certain superiority over the Son, to a certain nearness to the Holy Spirit” (“ The Immaculate Conception,” Malou, Bishop of Brouges).

We don't agree with that description

I'm also uncomfortable with the phrase “Complement to the Trinity".

 

[~Anastasia~]

So Mary shouldn't be seen as co-redemrix ?
her cooperation and yes to God was/is vital for the salvation of mankind.
It's from her and her alone Christ has his human DNA or nature if you like.

She suffered so much as part of Christ's crucifixion.
Her womb nurtured him for nine months.

How is she not a co-redemrix ?

I actually meant to ask just exactly what is meant by "co-redemptrix?" When I started investigating more deeply, I never got around to that question.

When I was a Protestant, it was one of the major issues I had with Catholicism. I had assumed it somehow put the work of the Virgin Mary on an equal footing with the work of Christ in our salvation. To be fair, that's kind of what "co-" means. And I objected strongly to that, and still would.

But to be fair, I never got around to asking Catholics just what it meant. Might be a good question for TT. And I don't want to have a knee-jerk reaction against what I do not understand.

But if the Virgin Mary's work is not considered on a level with Christ's, then I don't think "co-" is a good way of expressing it.

After all, there are many "helpers" and participants for most of us in our salvation. And her role is most certainly critical, as the Incarnation was necessary and came through her agreement. But ... Still not on a level with Christ.

This incidentally is where many of the charges of Mary-worship are founded and/or fed as well. I'm not telling Catholics what to do, but the term itself can be a problem, imo, if for no other reason that it creates misunderstanding.

But I do want to know exactly what is meant.

 

[~Anastasia~]

All is well. I have been very busy at work, which is why I have not posted much lately.

Glad to hear all is well.

As for me, I've been here MORE lately than I probably would have otherwise. But all things are good, may it all be blessed.

It really is good to see you.

 

[All4Christ]

So we agree
It turns out that it's not as much about the the term then, but rather about the associations attached to the use of it.

"Co" seems like Mary is equally the redeemer. She cooperates with Christ's redemption, but isn't the one who redeems us. Does that make sense?

 

[All4Christ]

But if the Virgin Mary's work is not considered on a level with Christ's, then I don't think "co-" is a good way of expressing it.

After all, there are many "helpers" and participants for most of us in our salvation. And her role is most certainly critical, as the Incarnation was necessary and came through her agreement. But ... Still not on a level with Christ.

^ This is exactly what I was trying to say

 

[Stabat Mater dolorosa]

Then I stand closer to the EO in my way of using the word cause I share your disapproval of confusing the Holy mother together with divinity.

She is all she is because of the trinity while the trinity is divine in and of itself.

 

[Stabat Mater dolorosa]

"Co" seems like Mary is equally the redeemer. She cooperates with Christ's redemption, but isn't the one who redeems us. Does that make sense?

Yes.
I'm making use of the term as a venerable way of referring to her.
She said yes on the behalf of all mankind were Eve said no thank you.

Co-redemrix in the sense I use it is more like a priest who sacrifice a lamb and in this picture I'm painting Christ is the lamb.

It's like every mass needs a priest for it to be a valid mass.

I don't know if I make sense?

 

[Stabat Mater dolorosa]

To be honest and completely so I consider the quote to be a grave heresy.

 

[~Anastasia~]

To be honest and completely so I consider the quote to be a grave heresy.

Which quote?

 

[Stabat Mater dolorosa]

“In three respects—as Daughter, as Mother, and as Spouse of God—the Holy Virgin is exalted to a certain equality with the Father, to a certain superiority over the Son, to a certain nearness to the Holy Spirit” (“ The Immaculate Conception,” Malou, Bishop of Brouges).

 

[All4Christ]

To be honest and completely so I consider the quote to be a grave heresy.

As do I. That's where my concern lies in using the term. Perhaps that is why "Co-redemptress" was not made the 5th Marian dogma of the Catholic Church? I don't believe the term is even in the CCC(?). Yet the description and teachings similar to the quote can easily be found in other writings. As we said earlier...context is key - but wording is also very important.

 

[~Anastasia~]

“In three respects—as Daughter, as Mother, and as Spouse of God—the Holy Virgin is exalted to a certain equality with the Father, to a certain superiority over the Son, to a certain nearness to the Holy Spirit” (“ The Immaculate Conception,” Malou, Bishop of Brouges).

Ouch.

I had to think about that one for a minute. I can see daughter, spouse, and mother.

But to say daughter of God the Father makes her equal to Him, makes NO sense at all. We are all (hope to be) sons and daughters of God the Father - that doesn't make us equal to Him in any sense. Merely adopted.

And during the childhood of Christ, I'm sure she nurtured and cared for Him. I can see where the thinking comes from, but this is no normal Child, so a strictly human point of view is not appropriate.

Now as to closeness, I actually imagine she has that advantage on most of humanity - I doubt there are any/many who ever could claim the closeness to God that she has had in various ways during her life on earth, and after. But still ...

(And that closeness mainly through Christ, I would say.)

Yeah overall, I have several problems with that. Understood. Thanks for sharing.

 

[All4Christ]

Yes.
I'm making use of the term as a venerable way of referring to her.
She said yes on the behalf of all mankind were Eve said no thank you.

Co-redemrix in the sense I use it is more like a priest who sacrifice a lamb and in this picture I'm painting Christ is the lamb.

It's like every mass needs a priest for it to be a valid mass.

I don't know if I make sense?

I think it makes sense....still processing though I'm still a bit tired!

 

[seekingsolace]

With the image of priesthood I think it differs from the concept in Orthodoxy of deification, and in the doctrines of priesthood and redemption. Rather we all, "a chosen generation, a priestly kingdom, a holy nation" as the Church Militant and the Church Triumphant participate in Christ's redemptive work.

I'm not well versed enough to explain it. Or Orthodox enough I expect.

 

[All4Christ]

I've been reading a bunch of Orthodox prayers to the Theotokos...akathists, canons, etc. to try to understand better.

While doing that, I came across this explanation of "In thee, O Mother of God, I place all my hope; keep me under thy protection". Would you all concur with this explanation?

All here should be understood in the sense of "the fullness of" or "the totality of" (the sense it has in the Greek). It is not, in other words, referring to placing all hope to the exclusion of others as if one had a limited amount of hope to have, but rather it means that since she gave birth to God in the flesh and continues to supplicate before Him on our behalf to this very day, we place the fullness of our hope (a measure of the greatness of our hope) in her as an intercessor before God. The way that we place our full hope in the Theotokos differs qualitatively from how we place our full hope in God insofar as we hope in the Theotokos as intercessor, but we hope in God alone as the source of our renewed life in Him.

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php?topic=61232.5;wap2

 

[truefiction1]

The Orthodox soul doesn't agonize over things like "Most Holy Theotokos save us!"

The Orthodox soul knows that the Holy Trinity is God, and there is no other. The Orthodox soul knows that the Most Holy Trinity does not hoard Their Glory. They share it with all Who will to receive it. Their Glory is Love.

What was the lie that the serpent told Eve? The lie was that God did not wish to have Eve be equal to God in Glory, basically. God does indeed wish Eve, and everyone else, to be equal to God in Glory. The Glory of God is Love. God is Love.

To say "Most Holy Theotokos save us", really means "Most Holy Theotokos Love us! Save us by your prayers!"

The Glory we give to the Theotokos and to the saints is Love. God does not disapprove of Love. God is Love. The Orthodox soul is Love. Love saves us. Love is not a thing. Love is a verb that exists between persons. Love Lives between us all, connecting us all.

I will venerate the Most Holy Theotokos, saying "save us". I will do it in the fear of God, with Faith and with Love. This is in accordance with the testimony of the True saints of God, who knew and Loved God, and others as themselves.

 

[truefiction1]

I've been reading a bunch of Orthodox prayers to the Theotokos...akathists, canons, etc. to try to understand better.

While doing that, I came across this explanation of "In thee, O Mother of God, I place all my hope; keep me under thy protection". Would you all concur with this explanation?



http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php?topic=61232.5;wap2

I concur with that explanation. I will add, however that the language is poetic language (metaphorical and not literal) so as to draw out of us a deep sense of humility and neediness for God's saving grace. For an explanation as to why this is so important in Orthodox spirituality, please see the first chapter in "Unseen Warfare".

 

[All4Christ]

I concur with that explanation. I will add, however that the language is poetic language (metaphorical and not literal) so as to draw out of us a deep sense of humility and neediness for God's saving grace. For an explanation as to why this is so important in Orthodox spirituality, please see the first chapter in "Unseen Warfare".

For anyone else interested, I did a quick search and found this PDF (http://www.stnicholasdc.org/files/Orthodoxy/Unseen-Warfare.pdf).

Do you recommend the entire book? Looking forward to reading it.