www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Mary as co-redemptrix

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

[This message has been edited by Eric, the Inquirer (edited 07-06-2001).]

Dear Eric:

First, we need to look at semantics. The term "co" in this sense is coming from the latin meaning fo the word co instead of the english meaning. The latin meaning means "subserviant or lesser participant" and the english means "equal participant."

You are right in that by offering our sufferings to Christ they can aid int eh salvation of the world. Mary did share more in this suffering and was therefore a bigger co-redemptrix then any of us could be, because Jesus was her one and only son. He was also the only family she had left at the time of His crucifixion. Therefore she suffered more then most people do. She offered this suffering to Christ and therefore participated in the act of redeeming the world.

As an ex-Protestant, I can tell you that these issues are very hard to grasp at first. But do not let this doctrine serve as a stumbling block to keep you out of the Church. It is only popular devotion at this point in time and therefore is not official doctrine central to the Catholic faith.

Dominus Vobiscum,
Joe Zollars

Ref. "co-" in latin. Yes, I'm aware that "co" does not mean equal just a co-pilot is not the equal of the pilot or co-pays are not a full payment for medicines.

But yes or no - you are saying that people can ATONE for the sins of others in this way - even if subordinate to Jesus' atoning?!

Ref. keeping me out of the church and this being popular devotion right now: the term co-redemptrix is popular devotion, but is the underlying theology (others ATONING for my sins) popular devotion?? I thought this was very much defined doctrine as it had been generally taught for a very long time.

Others cannot atone for your sins. This issue is very complicated. I think there is a section in the catechism on the topic of "Redemptive Suffering." I encourage you to look at this section.

Joe Zollars

PS: It is never officially defined doctrine until the Holy Father officially declares it speeking from the papal throne. This would make it an officially defined doctrine. It has not as of yet been officially declared.

There I make a red face back at ya!

Boy you are one angry individual!

Part of atoning for our sins is repentence. To repent for our sins.

St. John the Baptist always preached that..."Repent! Repent."

Also Jesus even said to those who want to follow Him is to TAKE UP THE CROSS.

In order to rise from the dead...we MUST DIE! How can resurrection happen without death?

Only God atones for our sins. Use your common sense! Of course the Catholic Church teaches that! But we have to do our part! That is to walk away from temptations...sins...death...repenting...being sorry for our sins...etc. That is part of atoning.

Otherwise...we can do all the evil bad things and be saved? Huh? Is that the true atonement? Huh? Use your head!

Geesh! What a grouchy man.

spdundas,

The red face was because I am angry and frustrated over not being able to discern which church is the true church. I would not have wasted anyone's time here by being angry with them personally or even at the Catholic church itself. I will be more careful next about using the red angry face since it seems to have the power to make faces red.

Reference your unhelpful use of the words "common sense", etc.: I hope this is just because you are feeling frustrated with what you thought I meant - if so then no harm, no foul as I wasn't very clear.

There are some things in theology (even Catholic) that are not "common" sense though the Catholic church would uphold that they do not oppose reason itself.

I have used a nice, yellow smiley face hoping to smooth ruffled feathers.

Eric

[This message has been edited by Eric, the Inquirer (edited 07-03-2001).]

<Font>

Johanam,

Others cannot atone for your sins. This issue is very complicated. I think there is a section in the catechism on the topic of "Redemptive Suffering." I encourage you to look at this section.

This is an excellent suggestion! Thank-you very much. I own a copy of the Catechism and will look this up tonight.

PS: It is never officially defined doctrine until the Holy Father officially declares it speeking from the papal throne. This would make it an officially defined doctrine. It has not as of yet been officially declared.

I was under the impression that while ex cathedra statements are certainly very official (the most official, actually), that which the church has generally taught for a very long time is held to be true as well. I thought this was called "the general teaching authority" or "general magisterium" of the church as opposed to particular pronouncements from councils or Popes.

I *think* there are many things in the Catechism that have never been officially (or particularly) taught by a council or Pope.

But I am on the outside looking into the Catholic church and am open to correction on this.

Eric

</Font>


[This message has been edited by Eric, the Inquirer (edited 07-03-2001).]

Welcome Eric. Might I suggest that you go to forum #4 where there is quite a substantial thread on this topic. I think that once you have read through it (and goten the requisite headache) more elements of this topic will fall into place.

In essence, the teaching of the Catholic (and Orthodox) churches is to be found in the Sacred Scripture and in the 4 Creeds. If you don't have a problem with anything you find in them, then welcome home. There are other issues that people will beat into subatomic particles and then some. But, it is the Scriptures and the Creeds that hold up the roof of the Church.

Blessings!

Allright I'll use a smiley face

Okay. Which Church is true Church? Easy answer...it is Catholic and Orthodox. Both have Apostolic succession, have Sacraments started by Jesus Christ Himself.

As for the Pope pronouncing ex-cathedra. The Pope of Rome has done it TWO TIMES in the last 2000 years of Catholic History.

There are two different kinds of excathedra pronouncements: One from the Pope (like I said was done twice) and the other one is the Pope in UNION WITH ALL THE BISHOPS...from the MAGESTERIUM...from the COUNCIL. The Pope is like the leader of the Councils...and uses an "imaginary" hammer (what is that hammer that the judges use called?" He would like in "imaginary way" bang the hammer to say, "The Council has decided...'So Be It'."

I really don't know what the fuss about the Pope from the Orthodox side. I can understand their fears and apprehension. But the Pope is in NO WAY threatening to the Orthodox Church's hiearchy and system. At least NOT ANYMORE. In fact it will help the Orthodox become stronger in their voice...in unity. You are right...the Orthodox are very decentralized...and is in need of more uniformitive voice. And you are right the Catholic is way too centralized....but is in the process of being relaxed a little...but it is very important to have a "earthly head" of the Church...to make sure the all the Churches are in good well being and all are united with each other. The Catholic Church is a communion of all different Churches.

Does that make sense? I think you are reading way too much into this. All you have to do is to read the early Church Fathers, read the history (both Church's and secular point of view...you will find both are complimentary of each other) and most of all look at the Scriptures...you will find many things in the Scriptures...that will point you to the Church. The Church is the LIVING Scripture....is the author of the Scriptures...is the Mother of the Scriptures and most importantly...an OFFICIAL INTERPRETER of the Scriptures...which is important to know that...who would be a better interpreter than the author? That is the Church!

And also...you need to pray to the Holy Spirit. He will guide you to the true Church.

Besides that...we need to be doing what Christians are supposed to be doing...helping the poor, clothe the naked, feed the hungry, instruct the ignorant, pray for others, just being a good example to others.



spdundas

Forgive the ignorance of a poor non-Chalcedonian, Dr. John, but which are the FOUR Creeds? I can think of the Niceno-Constantinopolitan, the Athanasian (Quicumque vult), and the Apostles', but which is the fourth? Or if I've added some not in your list, which are the four?

Having read this far - and thanks to all for increasing my knowledge - you have triggered a memory from waaaaaaay back - being accurate between 1959 and 1964 or so [ Prehistoric times I know and I am giving away my age here].
Can anyone supply me with an URL so I can download the version of the Athanasian Creed which I recall saying as an Anglican during Sung Eucharist ?
I have found several versions since reading the post before this, none of which *rang* any bells. I did find a link taking me to the 1662 version of the Book of Common Prayer [ we used it in those far off days days before modernisation] but the link was not working on my iMac. I am now thoroughly frustrated that my memory has let me down - it is one of those bits of information that I would like to keep even though I do not use it now.
Angela

Aaargh - where's my manners ? I apologise for interrupting the thread and doing a hi-jack.
Mea Culpa mea culpa mea maxima culpa.
Put it down to advancing senility. I'll try not to do it again.

[This message has been edited by Our Lady's slave of love (edited 07-05-2001).]

Dear Angela,

There is a wonderful Anglican Catholic site, www.anglican-catholic.com [anglican-catholic.com] that has, I believe, the Athanasian Creed.

They also have an Anglican Scriptural Rosary and an article on "Scripture and Tradition."

God bless,

Alex

Dear Catholicos Mor Ephrem,

While we're at it, I would also like to know at which point the Catholic Church removed Tradition from the Scripture/Tradition/Magisterium-based Deposit of Faith?

The Orthodox Church has, as the four pillars of Orthodoxy, as I understand, "Scripture, Holy Tradition, the Holy Canons and the sacred Dogmas of the Ecumenical Councils."

I guess I have been misled into thinking this way . . .

Alex

Sorry, must have been either a 'senior moment' or (as the kids say) a 'brain fart'. I was thinking four gospels at the same time I was supposed to be typing three creeds. You saw what came out. Now, if I can only remember where I left my shoes.....

Blessings!