Mary is not the Co-Redeemer

[Vetus Ordo]

Even the Blessed Virgin had to be saved and her heart rejoiced in it.

What was she saved from?

The curse of Adam.

[Daniel]

[ Even the Blessed Virgin had to be saved and her heart rejoiced in it.

What was she saved from ?

She had to be saved from sin and hell, like everyone else. Salvation includes preservation. God preserved her from all sin.

Co-operation with a certain act is not the same thing as doing said act. All the graces of redemption flow through the saints and the Church, with the Blessed Virgin on top, but the saints, the Church and the Blessed Virgin are themselves fruits of redemption not causes of it.

But what about the historical aspect? I'd say she's a cause in at least some sense. Perhaps an instrumental cause. Because what do you suppose would have happened had Mary cursed out Gabriel and then proceeded to have an abortion or commit suicide? If such a thing were even metaphysically possible (probably not, granted Mary's impeccability), then how would God have redeemed us? Perhaps He'd have found some other woman to be His mother, but then that other woman would be the instrumental cause of our salvation.

[Prayerful]

Maria Co-Redemptrix is one of these phrases, which work out, as Humpty Dumpty in Alice in Wonderland said: 'When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

[Acolyte]

Even the Blessed Virgin had to be saved and her heart rejoiced in it.

What was she saved from?

The curse of Adam.

That is what I thought it was, but do we have a soul before we are conceived ?

If not, perhaps to say she was spared of the stain of original sin, rather than saved from something her soul was never threatened with.

[Acolyte]

Double post

[Michael Wilson]

Theosist,
you can argue anything you want, it doesn't matter to me; it simply isn't Catholicism that you are promoting here on this forum.

Then stop addressing me if you have no argument. I'm not promoting anything on this forum. I'm making a sound argument as to what the Roman Catholic church has dogmatically defined regarding the sole redeemer of man. And you have shown yourself to be unable to refute it.

Why don't you return to the sacraments and to the practice of the faith; that is more important than wasting your time on here. 

[Michael Wilson]

Maria Co-Redemptrix is one of these phrases, which work out, as Humpty Dumpty in Alice in Wonderland said: 'When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

Its not Alice in Wonderland; the arguments being used here against Mary's Co-Redemption are exactly the same ones that Protestants use against praying to the Saints viz. "Our Lord is the sole Mediator therefore to pray to the saints and to Our Blessed Mother is to take away from the Honor of Our Lord and to attribute to a creature the powers of Our Lord.

[Michael Wilson]

V.O. Stated:

Fr. Faber literally stated that "Our Blessed Lord is the sole Redeemer of the world in the true and proper sense of the word, and in this sense no creature whatsoever shares the honor with Him, neither can it be said of Him without impiety that He is co-redeemer with Mary.

Of Course is the sole Redeemer and Mediator with God, but that does not prevent him from associating Our Blessed Mother with the work of redemption:

Corredemptrix
Sacrae Theologiae Summa
Vol IIIA; pg. 445 ffdd:
The cooperation of Mary in the work of the redemption is affirmed constantly. And that is not only in the application of the redemption, but also in its accomplishment; for these two sometimes are expressly distinguished (Leo XIII, St. Pius X). This cooperation is also different from the divine maternity (Pius XII).
The root of that cooperation is located in the mystical union with Christ. This is not a mere joining together of the Mother with the Son; rather, it is had by a special divine will to admit and associate Her with Christ in the work of the redemption. Hence:
Theological note. That Mary cooperated in the work of redemption, At least mediately, is a matter of faith (de fide).

Further: ibid:

b) That she also cooperated immediately is a doctrine more in conformity with the quoted texts of the Holy Pontiffs. Indeed these texts, taken together as a whole, signify the constant teaching for a century of the Roman Pontiffs proposed to the whole Church more clearly with the passage of time. For they are not unaware of the disputes of theologians over this matter.
c) That the title of Corredemptrix is used rightly is certain; and it is not licit to doubt about its suitability.

Why the B.V.M. Is Co-Redemptrix:

Thesis 9. The B.V.M. participated with Christ in the work of the redemption and therefore she is rightly  called corredemptrix. 155. Definition of Terms: "The Work of redemption", that is the summary of the actions by which the human race was freed from the slavery of the devil.
"Participated With Christ": She was associated and united with Christ the Redeemer in order  to accomplish that work. But we understand this causality as immediate and moral (therefore distinct from the causality by which by which she became mother of Christ the Redeemer). However, as it is secondary (not necessary except on the supposition of the divine will) and subordinate (having its total efficacy from the primary and absolutely necessary causality of Christ the Redeemer). "Is Rightly Called Corredemptrix": That is, because she is truly redemptrix in the defined sense, this title can justly be applied to her. 

Comment: That would satisfy V.O.'s main objections viz. How Can the B.V.M. Be called "corredeptrix" when Our Lord is the sole Redeemer of the Human Race.

[Michael Wilson]

S.T. S. IIIA. pg.443.

156. Doctrine of the Church 1) Pius IX: "Just as Christ, the Mediator of God and men, having assumed a human nature. destroying the handwritten decree against us, in triumph nailed it to the cross, so also the Holy Virgin, joined to him by a close and unbreakable bond, together  with him and through Him exercising eternal enmity against the poisonous serpent, crushed his head with her Immaculate foot.("Ineffabilis Deus).

Note, the very same Encyclical which V.O. Cited earlier on the thread to attempt to argue against the coredemptrix, also teaches the same doctrine as other Popes on the same.

2)Leo XIII: "She took her part in the laborious expiation made by her Son for the sins of the world." (Iucundus semper). "To thee we lift our prayers, for thou art the Mediatrix, powerful at once and pitiful, of our salvation". (Iucundus Semper).  And truly the Immaculate Virgin, chosen to be the Mother of God and thereby associated with Him in the work of man's salvation, has a favor and a power with her Son greater than any human or angelic creature has ever obtained, or ever can gain. (Semper Apostolatus).
3). St. Pius X.:"And from this communion of will and suffering between Christ and Mary, she merited to become most worthily the reparatrix of the lost world, and dispensatrix of all the gifts that our Savior purchased for us by his death and by his blood...Yet, since Mary carries jit over all in holiness and union with Christ and has been associated by Christ in the work of the redemption, she merits for us "de congruo"  (in a congruous manner), in the language of theologians, what Christ merits for us "de condigno" (in a codign manner). D-3370.

So this last quote from St. Pius X should satisfy V.O.'s Second main objection, viz: If Our Lord merited for us our eternal redemption; how can the B.V.M. Merit this for us in any way; and to say so is a blasphemy.
The Pope explains that Our Lord merited for us "de condigno'' i.e. In strict justice; but He willed to associate with His act of the redemption that of His most Holy Mother; and she merited also for us and in cooperation with her Son in a congruous or fitting matter.
I am certain that everyone here is aware that we Catholics can merit by our good works in union with Christ the conversion of sinners and the freeing of the souls in Purgatory; this is the Catholic doctrine of the "Communion of Saints"; But Our Blessed Mother is indeed the most holy and perfect creature and her actions done in union with her Son are so much more meritorious and pleasing than those of the angels, saints and faithful together.

[Michael Wilson]

Acolite,
on the "salvation of B.V.M."; Our Blessed Mother was preserved from the stain of Original Sin from the very first instant of her conception; by the foreseen merits of Our Lord's death on the Cross. Just as those born before the said redemption were able by these same foreseen merits, to have their sins forgiven and to save their souls. The issue of the Immaculate Conception was disputed in the Church for many centuries, because it was not clear how Our Lady could be redeemed by Our Lord, and at the same time conceived without sin. It wasn't until John Duns Scotus, a 14 C.Theologian was able to clearly reconcile both truths, that this doctrine was fully accepted and latter defined by Pope Pius IX.

[Michael Wilson]

“Adam-Christ; Eve-Mary”;

160. Proof From Tradition: “In the Fathers” already at the beginning the teaching appears about the association of Mary with Christ in his work under the comparison of Eve-Mary. The general formula for this can be: “Death through Eve, life through Mary,” (St. Jerome. Epist. 22, 105: ML. 22. 408); Thus St. Justin (R 141), St. Irenaeus (R 224). Tertullian (R 358). St. Augustine (R 1578). Similar statements are made by St. Cyril of Jerusalem, St. Epiphanius, St. Jerome, St. Peter Chrysologus, St. John Damascene. (Ft. 21 various reference works).
This teaching which appeared in ancient times in the writings of the Fathers, is necessarily connected with revelation. For, it has its origin in the Gen  3: 15( St. Irenaeus, St. Justin the Bull Munificentissimus”). In Rev. 12 (St. Irenaeus), in the teaching of St. Paul about the second Adam (St. Irenaeus).
b) “In the Middle Ages” the same parallelism was taught by St. Bernard, Peter Blesensis, St. Bonaventure, and especially by Pseudo-Albert the Great. Here are some of his words on this: “Eve generated all to death, Mary to heaven…;the former is the principle of mortality, the latter the principle of regeneration…; the former was the occasion of loss to her husband, the latter help to her Son for redemption.” The same idea recurs often in Latin hymns. Worthy of special mention “Ave Maris Stella” (8 or 9 c.).

Elsewhere (I will have to look for it); I have seen it explained thusly: The Devil ruined the human race through the co-operation of a Man a woman and a tree; so it was fitting that God should undo this ruin also through a Man a woman and the tree of the Cross.

[abc123]

Maria Co-Redemptrix is one of these phrases, which work out, as Humpty Dumpty in Alice in Wonderland said: 'When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

Its not Alice in Wonderland; the arguments being used here against Mary's Co-Redemption are exactly the same ones that Protestants use against praying to the Saints viz. "Our Lord is the sole Mediator therefore to pray to the saints and to Our Blessed Mother is to take away from the Honor of Our Lord and to attribute to a creature the powers of Our Lord.

I must disagree. These are two different arguments. The argument being made against Mary as being co-redeemer has to do with Christ's unique office of high priest and mediator of the New Covenant: our salvation. Christ, and Christ alone, accomplished our salvation.

The argument against praying to saints involves questions of temporal intercession and whether saints who have passed on can hear our prayers.

[Miriam_M]

I must disagree. These are two different arguments. The argument being made against Mary as being co-redeemer has to do with Christ's unique office of high priest and mediator of the New Covenant: our salvation. Christ, and Christ alone, accomplished our salvation.

The argument against praying to saints involves questions of temporal intercession and whether saints who have passed on can hear our prayers.

The latter may be an additional argument, familiar to you, but there are those of us who, growing up Catholic, heard the dominant objection:  That praying to saints was a form of idolatry contrary to the First Commandment.

[Innocent Smith]

According to Merriam Webster's online dictionary, the prefix "co" has five possible definitions:

Definition of co- (Entry 5 of 5)

1: with : together : joint : jointly
coexist
coheir

2: in or to the same degree
coextensive

3a: one that is associated in an action with another : fellow : partner
coauthor
coworker
b: having a usually lesser share in duty or responsibility : alternate : deputy
copilot

4: of, relating to, or constituting the complement of an angle
cosine

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/co#:~:text=3%20corrections%20officer-,co-,with%20another%20%3A%20fellow%20co-conspirator

It seems that Mary's role in our redemption fits definitions 1, 3a and 3b, especially 3a and 3b. I really don't see what the objection is to defining Mary as Co-Redemptrix. If I call someone a copilot, it takes nothing away from the pilot. If I label someone a coworker, it does not negate the existence of the other workers, or dictate their order of importance.

Either Mary participates in our redemption or she doesn't. If she has and she does, then why not give her the title she deserves?

I don't know, maybe because we participate in our own redemption as well.  Along with all the Saints in the Militant and Triumphant.  And no I don't mean Saints in the Protestant sense as I believe there are Saints among us doing works for the benefit of all and that are very pleasing to our Lord.

I probably agree with Michael Wilson in sentiment.  We just write about it from different angles.  As far as I'm concerned the Mother of God does not need the title as it may even be a drop in status as I see things.

Although I do see the point that Jesus as True Man and True God could have sinned as could His and our Mother.  So in that sense I see it.  But I don't think most think these things through even that far. 

This is heavy theological stuff for which I am not qualified in the slightest.  Although I don't have much trouble opining.  Should probably have to work on that a bit more. 

I don't find it particularly beneficial to try and pigeon hole the second most important person to me that ever walked this earth and intercedes on my behalf in heaven. 

[Acolyte]

Well, my thought is this,

Our Father in Heaven willed the Immaculate Conception of Mary. It's not at all hard to accept that and believe it. Because Christ His Son was born of Mary. A woman born with original sin would not be a fitting mother of Him. A woman in need of Redemtion.

So Mary was never in need of redemption from original sin. It is because of this that it's possible she is Co-Redemptrix. And I believe she is.

Her cooperation with God's Will at the Annunciation fulfilled God's Ultimate Will for " the Word made flesh". The Redeemer now "Dwelt Among Us".

That said, is it heretical to say Mary was never in need of redemption of Original Sin ? Her soul never knew sin.