www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Co-redemptrix and Mediatrix ?

Dr. John and others. I appreciate your charity and scholarship! :-)

What I am saying is that there will be those individuals who have a heretical "latria" for the Blessed Virgin, and they will exist with the dogmatic proclamation of Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix or not. However, this superstition is primarily confined to poorly catechized individuals. A hotbed of this is in Latin America, and those individuals who think Our Lady is the Fourth Person of the Trinity are now being indoctrinated into Fundamentalist Protestantism, which is the other extreme! i believe that there always has to be a proper catechetical element to every pronouncement, lest one fall into heretical notions.

I agree wholeheartedly with Alex. Although one, strictly, does not NEED veneration of the Holy Virgin and of the Saints, (like one does not absolutely have to have a water baptism), it certainly makes Salvation easier!

Like I said before, I'm not supporting a dogmatic declaration at this time. I think ecumenical dialogue is important. But I think a lot of the differences between Latins and Byzantines (and Orthodox) over this issue in general stems from our differing views of the development of doctrine. In my support of the titles, I'm not trying to force Eastern Catholics to co-opt a Latin Mariology. I want to emphasize that.

God bless.
Bill

Thanks, Bill! You have pointed out one element that has been overlooked: that of the necessity of veneration of the Virgin Mary being necessary for salvation.

Above, Alex posted:

Is faith in and devotion to the Theotokos necessary for salvation?

The Orthodox Church and the Eastern CAtholic Churches would answer "yes."

If we say that right belief in the Theotokos is necessary for salvation, since this is integral to faith in the INcarnate Word, then veneration is also necessary."

Actually, the only faith and devotion necessary is to the statements of the Creed(s), any of the four. The primary references to the Mother-of-God in the creeds are to the Virgin Birth in response to the propositional request of the Angel. There really is nothing substantial beyond that in the creeds. BUT, when one thinks about it, the idea that a young, teenaged, uneducated/unsophisticated, and probably very frightened little Jewish girl heard the words from the angel, and just said: "Yes." How wondrous! There's the model for all of us: "Yes."

Blessings!

Dear Dr. John,

I get a little nervous, Sir, when I hear terminology like "necessary" when it comes to salvation.

That presupposes that we can know absolutely what parts of the Christian Message, as maintained and communicated by the Church, the Body of Christ, are more "necessary" for salvation than others.

And we really can't and if we say we can then we get into the Protestant downward spiral which is where we definitely do not want to be.

I think we're looking at the Theotokos "on Her own."

And Orthodox faith doesn't allow us to do that.

She is always holding Her Son as the Bearer of God and when we praise Her, we praise Her Son who is God Incarnate.

"All generations shall call me Blessed." And the Eastern tradition has always understood this in a "devotional" sense not in the sense of a title, "Blessed Virgin Mary."

The Angel in Luke's Gospel blesses Mary first and then Her Son.

And all this is in the New Testament which I place on an even higher level than the creeds.

The Saints too stand in an intimate relation to the Body of Christ, the Communion of the Saints, outside which there is no salvation.

It is not something that is done for their sake but for Christ's and the mediation that continues, and does not end, with the Incarnate God, Jesus.

The best and only Orthodox way we have to proclaim the truth of the Incarnation of Christ is "Theotokos." A Council was called to define and defend it.

Right belief in this doctrine is at one and the same time right veneration. Again, one does not exist without the other in the Eastern Church which is what sets it apart from others.

Right belief in and right veneration of, in short, "Orthodoxy," of the Mother of the Word is an integral part of the life in Christ.

I am sure that salvation can be achieved by people who, through no fault of their own, are not in that Life. But I, for one, wouldn't want to try it!

Alex

Dear Bill,

Thank you for your erudition and insight on this matter!

I would reiterate again that Our Lady is not an "add-on" to the faith, but is central to the Mystery of the Incarnation of our Lord, God and Saviour, Jesus Christ.

Salvation is "through the Man Jesus Christ" as St Paul tell us, reminding us of God's choice in saving us, that is, in becoming Man.

The Church has always seen Mary in this way, as an integral part of the Incarnation (how can it be otherwise?).

We cannot but affirm Mary's Divine Motherhood if we believe in Christ!

All I am saying is that the Church has always believed that "right believing" and "right worshipping" are integral parts of the SAME coin.

To say that belief in our Lady's Divine Motherhood is necessary, but that veneration of Her as such is not, is to say something that the historic Orthodox and Catholic Church of Christ would consider foreign to her ears and Spirit.

If someone can show me how we can separate the two, then I will agree that devotion to the Bearer of God, the Theotokos is a "nice aside" in our Christian lives, but certainly not "necessary" for our salvation.

But the two cannot be divided and I will argue that until the cows come home . . .

Most HOly Theotokos, save us!

Alex

>>>Most HOly Theotokos, save us!<<<

Forgive me for sounding Protestant, but isn't Jesus the one who does/did the saving?

I prefer "ora pro nobis" after invocation of the Blessed Virgin's name

As to your other points, I see what your saving as far as not dividing the mysteries of our Faith. However, I'm still having trouble. I know that your not suggesting this, but it sounds like you're making Christ's Redemptive act on the cross insufficient for Salvation. Are we not saved by the precious Blood shed on the cross?

Of course the Theotokos and the saints are powerful allies in our journey towards Salvation. Wishing to be saved without calling upon their help would be folly givn our own weakness. I'm just trying to reconcile the "right belief, right worship" points you made(which I agree with), with the other points you made that I'm having trouble with.

Sorry, but I am still in agreement with Dr.John and Bill.

Most Holy Theotokos, ora pro nobis!

Columcille

Dear Columcille,

The invocation "Most Holy Theotokos save us" is the gem of Byzantine Church devotion to our Lady.

Of course, we ask Her to save us with Her intercession.

But She alone among the saints is addressed this way and it is probably closest to what the Western Co-Redemptrix proposal contains.

Eastern devotion to our Lady takes second place to none!

Of course, our salvation was wrought by the One Mediator, Jesus Christ on the Cross.

But, as Catholicism and Orthodoxy teach, that salvation is mediated to us through the Church, the Communion of Saints in which Our Lady figures prominently.

The main difference between Catholicism and Protestantism lies in how the two see "mediation."

For Protestantism, there is no question that to speak of mediation other than Christ is to weaken it theologically.

But for Catholicism and Orthodoxy, Christ as Mediator didn't come to end mediation, but to enable matter and other people to act as mediators of what He has done with His life, death and resurrection.

The Church mediates Christ's salvation through the sacraments, Mass, the minstry of the priesthood etc.

The salvation of Christ is also mediated through the intercession of those who have gone on ahead of us, the Communion of Saints.

The Church Universal proclaimed at the Seventh Council that those who do not invoke the Saints as our mediators with Christ in Heaven - Ana . . . you get the picture!

We honour Mary as Mother of God, not for Her own sake, but for the role she played, and continues to play, in mediating to us the Salvation of Christ.

She did it in a way we can never do, She actually gave God His Body and Blood which we receive in Holy Communion.

To quote Meyendorff, just as She nurtured the Body of Christ as His Mother, so too She continues to nurture the members of His Body, the Church, today.

To proclaim Her "Mother of God," is to do two things at once: To affirm this truth and to celebrate it through veneration.

The New Testament and the Creeds affirm this and so do the Councils.

We cannot separate "theory" from "practice." "Orthodoxy" is something that unites the two.

There is a hierarchy of truth, to be sure.

But they are all related. This is why there were those who became martyrs in defence of icons and iconography.

Icons are not nearly as important as faith in Christ. Yet, they affirm the truth of His Incarnation and to oppose iconography is to deny the truth that God became like us in every way save sin.

Conversely, we honour the Theotokos when we delve into a proper understanding of the Incarnation of God the Word.

Methodists who took seriously the Incarnation, for example, soon developed their own forms of honouring their martyrs and preachers, stopping short of invocation since they don't accept that.

Again, what is "necessary for salvation" is a kind of Protestant phrase that imagines a core of truth that is "necessary" while all the rest is somehow superfluous or "add-ons."

We can be saved like the Good Thief, with a simple confession and affirmation in Christ. He certainly didn't go to Confession nor did He attend the Liturgy (and he certainly never said the Rosary ).

Belief in and veneration of the Theotokos is an integral part of Christian faith and tradition. It is integral to the liturgy. It is part of our belief in and worship of God Incarnate, Jesus Christ.

Can anyone provide a "list" of what is absolutely necessary for salvation?

Sorry, but "outside the Church" there is no salvation, I once heard. The Church is the Communion of Saints and we constantly rely on one another's intercession and prayer.

God would not want our salvation to be worked out in any other way.

Alex

Alex,

Once again, great points that I shall think and pray about.

When it comes to debating you, I am way out of my league

But in doing so, I am learning ALOT. Conversing with you will prove quite valuable when it comes time to pass the Faith to my son.

Thank you

Columcille

Dear Columcille,

Thank you for your kindness, wholly undeserved by me!

We are together on this, you and I, and that is why we are discussing it.

For me, it is not so much the devotion to the Theotokos or any new titles for her, as the idea about what is "necessary" for salvation.

I like to think of everything being necessary, every insight I learn from people such as yourself, as well as your prayers.

I can't afford to reject anything on my road to Christ!

This reminds me of a fellow who was dying on his bed.

The minister came to him and asked him if he "accepted Christ and rejected the devil."

He said, "Sir, as for your first request, yes I most certainly do!"

"As for your second, however, I am in no position to antagonize anybody!"

Alex

Pax Domini sit semper Vobiscum!
Excellent posts Alex! You hit the nail on the head!

I hope this "model" of the Blessed Virgin that I have will be a benefit for you Columcille. Think of Our Lady as being like the Holy Father. There is a Marian "collegiality" with the other Saints because she is a Holy Creature, flesh and blood, and not Divine. (Dulia) There is a Marian "primacy" over all Saints because she is the Most Holy Mother of God. (the "Hyper" part of Hyperdulia) Devotion to the communion of Saints is very efficacious, but devotion to the God-bearing one is even more so. Her intimate connection with the Triune God (Daughter of the Father, Mother of the Son, Spouse of the Holy Spirit) connects her to All glorious and Blessed Trinity in a way that us mere mortals cannot grasp. This connection makes her the strongest link to our God. Having her close by draws us to the Lord in the most perfect way. It is only when people misrepresent her most sacred charism, that superstition takes place. But this can be rectified with teaching. Devotion to her, as Venerable Pius XII has said, "redounds" back to Christ. Having a "low" Mariology oftentimes leads to a low Christology. There was a poll once that said like only 42%of all Evangelical Pastors believed that Christ was truly God. Mary's title of "Theotokos" is truly Christo-centric. The Rosary is extremely Christo-centric, as is the Akathist Hymn.
I hope this helps Columcille, my friend in Christ!
God bless.
Bill Tooke

As posted above:

Belief in and veneration of the Theotokos is an integral part of Christian faith and tradition. It is integral to the liturgy. It is part of our belief in and worship of God Incarnate, Jesus Christ.

Can anyone provide a "list" of what is absolutely necessary for salvation?

Sorry, but "outside the Church" there is no salvation, I once heard. The Church is the Communion of Saints and we constantly rely on one another's intercession and prayer."

The fact is, according to Canon Law: salvation comes from baptism and from the profession of faith (i.e., the Creed). Just as we do in the rite of baptism.

The idea that we constantly rely upon one another's intercession and prayer comes from nowhere else but the Credal statement: "communion of saints".

The idea of "extra ecclesia nulla est salus" (='outside the church there is no salvation') was condemned by Pius XII. And by the statements of Vatican II.

The Mother-of-God has a very special and specific place in orthodox Christian theology. The attempt to move the role of the Theotokos beyond what we have traditionally believed and professed might well be a good thing: BUT! It absolutely and positively HAS TO conform to what we have already understood and professed.

Mediatrix? Sure. And so are a lot of posters on this board, who mediate perspectives that lead to grace.

Co-redemptrix? In the sense of "equal" redeemer? NO! Christ obtained our salvation. As a way of honoring the Mother-of-God, it might seem nice -- BUT it seems to put the Theotokos on a linguistic equal-standing with Christ. And this is heresy. So: avoid the term like the plague.

Blessings!

Dear Dr. John,

I never said that I was in favour of proclaiming the doctrines we began talking about on this thread.

And if we were to avoid certain linguistic terms because they create the wrong impression then no one would ever call Mary the "Mother of God" because it connotes that She is equal to Her Son as a Goddess - something that John Calvin raised in his time.

The fact of the matter is, Sir, that the Eastern liturgical heritage already contains many pious references to the Mother of God whose intercession can "save us" etc. without placing Her (God forbid) on an "equal footing" with God.

I think you are overreacting to a Protestant audience that just isn't here!

The fact is also that our devotion to the Mother of God is part and parcel of the theology of the Incarnation whereas in the West there were problems with it being somewhat disconnected from it at times.

As for my reference to "outside the Church there is no salvation," I am well aware of the citations you present. I was using it as a metaphor, but perhaps I should have made that clear.

I do NOT believe that Hindus, Muslims and others are consigned to hell for their beliefs etc.

But for those who DO believe in Christ, for them outside the Church of Christ there is no salvation.

And the Church of Christ has to do with the Communion of Saints. We cannot, finally, say that "this and this" of the Christian tradition is "necessary" for salvation, while "this and that," however nice, is not really and we'll do it if we have time.

That is all I was saying.

But if I am a heretic as you implied, please do give me the full sixty days to reconsider and recant .

Love y'a, Dr. John, just love y'a!

Alex

ISTM that the movement to bestow the title Co-Redemtrix or other titles is motivated by a need to bestow a special recognition or title on the Blessed Virgin.

So why invent one that is fraught with problems and misunderstanding? The East has used the title "Theotokos" for centuries. It seems to have all of the virtues of the new proposed titles of the Western Church with none of the baggage. Is this just a matter of "Well, we can't use that because the Orthodox have it"?

Salutations Deacon Ed.
Read the documents of Vatt II they already use the terms and the teaching.
You are correct. When properly understood in the light of the fact that Mary is the New Eve and the mother of all humanity, there is no problem.

If only people would sincerely look into this doctrine before jumping to conclusions.
Ahh but then life would not be so interesting. (Or should I say frustrating!)
Stephanos
Servant of the Most Holy Theotokos

It's the language. Co- means "equal" in the minds of most English speakers.

However we wish to designate or understand the role of the Mother-of-God, we have to realize that the title: "Co-Redemptrix" appears to most English speakers to place Mary on an equal level with Christ, and this is not theologically acceptable nor does it appear to serve the goals of understanding the real elements of salvation history.

Though I am with anyone who wishes to discover or create new pathways to honor the Virgin Morther of God, I am steadfastly against any terminology that -- intentionally or unintentionally -- obfuscates the salvific actions of the passion, death and resurrection of Christ.

We are Christians, not Marianists.

Blessings!

I'm new here. It's not my intent to insult anyone or cause hostility - what follows is my understanding of part of what co-redemptrix means.

I am looking at Catholicism and Orthodoxy to see which is the true church. My difficulties with Orthodoxy would be that they have no central unity, can't seem to hold an ecumenical council, have no universal teaching on things like organ donation, and has nobody that *really* speaks for Orthodoxy. But this is background and not the major thrust of this post.

My difficulty with Catholicism is mainly centered around the doctrines of merit and the things that flow from that. Particularly the idea that Mary is the co-redemptrix.

I realize this term has not been dogmatically defined. Yet all the underlying theology has been generally taught for a very long time. It's my understanding that the Catholic church teaches that by offering up our sufferings that God combines them with those of Jesus on the cross and uses our suffering to help atone/pay for the sins of the world. Good Catholics can be mini-redemptors in a very direct way as they are actually paying/atoning for the sins of the world via their own sufferings. Of course this all works in subordination to Christ and is only possible through his grace, etc.

Sorry to be so long winded. I went into all that detail because I'm not sure that's what the Catholic church teaches - only what I think it teaches. Correct me if I'm wrong.

To get to the idea of co-redemptrix there is usually some (very loose seeming to me) argument that says that Mary participated more fully & in a unique way with the sufferings of her Son... and offered her own sufferings as she saw him dieing on the cross... and this all works because her heart and his were "united" in some mysterious way. Thus she is the co-redemptrix in that her sufferings pay/atone more than most people's.

I am aware of the common rebuttal that co-redemptrix in some sense means that she said "yes" to God and was very important in salvation history. Also that tradition indicates there she in some way is the second Eve that will work with her Son to crush Satan, etc.

But these are a long way from Mary and other beleivers atoning for the sins of others.
This is VERY, VERY troublesome for me! Sounds like we're getting into dangerous waters with such doctrine.

Please reply as these issues are major stumbling block for me.

Eric