Mary is not the Co-Redeemer

[Michael Wilson]

Here is a note from the Haydock online commetary on the New Testament on Col. 1.
https://www.ecatholic2000.com/haydock/ntcomment192.shtml

Ver. 24. And fill up those things . . . in my flesh for his body, which is the church.[5] Nothing was wanting in the sufferings or merits of Christ, for a sufficient and superabundant redemption of mankind, and therefore he adds, for his body, which is the church, that his sufferings were wanting, and are to be endured by the example of Christ by the faithful, who are members of a crucified head. See S. Chrys. and S. Aug. Wi. — Wanting. There is no want in the sufferings of Christ himself as head; but many sufferings are still wanting, or are still to come in his body, the Church, and his members, the faithful. Ch. — S. Chrysostom here observes that Jesus Christ loves us so much, that he is not content merely to suffer in his own person, but he wishes also to suffer in his members; and thus we fill up what is wanting of the sufferings of Christ. S. Chrys. — The wisdom, the will, the justice of Jesus Christ, requireth and ordaineth that his body and members should be companions of his sufferings, as they expect to be companions of his glory; that so suffering with him, and after his example, they may apply to their own wants and to the necessities of others the merits and satisfaction of Jesus Christ, which application is what is wanting, and what we are permitted to supply by the sacraments and sacrifice of the new law.

[Prayerful]

Somewhere in the Legion of Mary handbook, there should be something pertinent. I think I found something: 'Redemption is the joint gift of the Father and of Mary.' (Legion Handbook, 1937 edition, p. 256).

[Pete Vere]

It's difficult to define because of a linguistic difference between East and West. Among Latins she is hailed as Co-Redemptrix, whereas in traditional Byzantine liturgy the Blessed Theotokos is venerated as Co-Redemptress.

[Fleur-de-Lys]

It's difficult to define because of a linguistic difference between East and West. Among Latins she is hailed as Co-Redemptrix, whereas in traditional Byzantine liturgy the Blessed Theotokos is venerated as Co-Redemptress.

Are you suggesting that there is some difference in meaning between the two terms? To my knowledge redemptrix and redemptress are both simply feminine forms of redeemer.

[Fleur-de-Lys]

Ah... you were joking, of course. Sorry, I deal with so much linguistic hair-splitting all day, it seemed entirely plausible. 

Welcome to the forum, Pete.

[Pete Vere]

Ah... you were joking, of course. Sorry, I deal with so much linguistic hair-splitting all day, it seemed entirely plausible. 

Welcome to the forum, Pete.

Thank-you for the warm welcome!

Sadly, I am only half-joking. In my experience there is a very strong aversion among Eastern traditionalists to the term "co-redemptrix" while use of the terms "co-redeemer" or "co-redemptress" appear within traditional Eastern prayers to the Blessed Theotokos. So sometimes it is better to leave terms specific to either Eastern or Western usage undefined when East and West use two similar (but distinct) terms to convey more-or-less the same belief. This is because the moment one sides moves to dogmatically define its particular term--thus binding the entire Church--the differences between the two terms will become "theologized" by the other side. 

It's not unlike the Filioque controversy ("and the Son" vs "through the Son").
Or the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary vs The Dormition and Translation of the Holy Theotokos.

[Daniel]

It's not unlike the Filioque controversy ("and the Son" vs "through the Son").
Or the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary vs The Dormition and Translation of the Holy Theotokos.

Also, the West's use of "consubstantial" (one substance, three persons) versus the East's "homoousian" (one essence, three substances).

[aquinas138]

Ah... you were joking, of course. Sorry, I deal with so much linguistic hair-splitting all day, it seemed entirely plausible. 

Welcome to the forum, Pete.

Thank-you for the warm welcome!

Sadly, I am only half-joking. In my experience there is a very strong aversion among Eastern traditionalists to the term "co-redemptrix" while use of the terms "co-redeemer" or "co-redemptress" appear within traditional Eastern prayers to the Blessed Theotokos. So sometimes it is better to leave terms specific to either Eastern or Western usage undefined when East and West use two similar (but distinct) terms to convey more-or-less the same belief. This is because the moment one sides moves to dogmatically define its particular term--thus binding the entire Church--the differences between the two terms will become "theologized" by the other side. 

It's not unlike the Filioque controversy ("and the Son" vs "through the Son").
Or the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary vs The Dormition and Translation of the Holy Theotokos.

Do you have an example of "co-redemptress" in the Byzantine liturgy? I don't recall ever coming across it in the canons at Matins and Compline.

[christianchannel]

Jesus Himself uses the term Co-Redeemer for her , i think i saw it in the book of Maria Valtorta

[abc123]

Jesus Himself uses the term Co-Redeemer for her , i think i saw it in the book of Maria Valtorta

And is this book inspired Scripture with the authority to bind the conscience?

[St.Justin]

Jesus Himself uses the term Co-Redeemer for her , i think i saw it in the book of Maria Valtorta

So says Maria Valtorta~~~~~~~

[Pete Vere]

Do you have an example of "co-redemptress" in the Byzantine liturgy? I don't recall ever coming across it in the canons at Matins and Compline.

You popped this question at a good time as I actually am in the middle of going through traditional Eastern liturgical prayers to the Blessed Theotokos for some of my Latin friends preparing Advent services.

As long as the moderators don't mind, I will cut-and-paste from an Orthodox version I found online. However, my Byzantine Catholic paper version uses very similar language:

From the Small Paraklesis to the Most Holy Theotokos:

It is truly fitting to call you blessed, the Theotokos, the ever-blessed and all-pure Theotokos. More honourable than the Cherubim, and beyond compare more glorious than the Seraphim, you who without corruption gave birth to God the Word, the very Theotokos, you do we magnify.

The priest censes the Holy Table and the people, or the house where the Paraklesis is being chanted; and we chant the following Megalynaria:

You are higher than the heavens above, and you are much purer than the radiance of the sun; for you have redeemed us out of the curse that held us, O Mistress of creation, with hymns we honour you.

From the great abundance of all my sins, ill am I in body, ailing also am I in soul. I have you as refuge; help me, therefore, O hope of all the hopeless, for you are full of grace.

O Lady and Mother of Christ our God Who saves, receive supplication from us wretches who beg for your entreaty to the One born from you; O Mistress of creation, intercede for us.

Now we chant with eagerness to you with this ode most joyful, O all-hymned Theotokos; together with the Baptist and all the saintly choirs, beseech, O Theotokos, that we find clemency.

Speechless be the lips of the impious who refuse to reverence your revered icon which is known by the name Directress, and which has been depicted for us by the Apostle Luke the Evangelist.

Now obviously "co-" with and through Christ is implied whenever our Eastern tradition venerates the Blessed Theotokos for having redeemed us. But usually what I see translated is redeemer, co-redeemer, redemptress, or co-redemptress. I have never seen "redemptrix" or "co-redemptrix" within a traditional Eastern context, not even as a translation. Which is why I am not in favour of the Church defining this as a Marian dogma binding upon the entire Church.   

EDIT TO ADD:

From the dismissal of the same service quoted above:

As the faithful kiss the icon of the Theotokos, the following Troparia are chanted with prostrations:

You shelter, all those who in faith flee to you, with your mighty hand, O pure one, as you are good; no one else have we who sin as a perpetual intercession with our God in dangers and sorrows, we who have been burdened with our abundant sins, Theotokos in the highest. Therefore, we all fall down before you; rescue us, your servants from adversities.

You are the joy of all that sorrow, and of the oppressed a guardian, and nurture of all the poor, comfort to the estranged, a support you are to the blind, visitation of all the sick, a shelter and succour to those brought down by pain, helper of orphaned ones: you are Theotokos in the Highest, O spotless Maiden; hurry, we beg you, to redeem your slaves.

[Non Nobis]

Jesus Himself uses the term Co-Redeemer for her , i think i saw it in the book of Maria Valtorta

Here is evidence that the pre-Vatican II Church condemned this book, and the good reasons: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/false-visions-maria-valtorta.html

I listen to Popes such as Pope St. Pius X who praised the title "Co-Redemptrix", and don't need to read books that were condemned.

https://fsspx.news/en/news-events/news/pope-francis-considers-virgin%E2%80%99s-title-co-redemptrix-%E2%80%9Cfoolishness%E2%80%9D-53579
...
Saint Pius X

This holy pope also evoked the doctrine of co-redemption in his famous encyclical Ad diem illum (1904), for the fiftieth anniversary of the proclamation of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception: “And from this community of will and suffering between Christ and Mary she merited to become most worthily the Reparatrix of the lost world (Eadmeri Mon. De Excellentia Virg. Mariae, c. 9) and Dispensatrix of all the gifts that Our Savior purchased for us by His Death and by His Blood.” The Holy Pope in turn highlighted the link between co-redemption and universal mediation.

During the pontificacy of this glorious pope, a decree from the Holy Office on June 26, 1913 praised “the custom of adding after the name of Jesus that of His Mother, our Co-Redemptrix, the Blessed Virgin Mary.” The same congregation granted an indulgence for the recitation of the prayer in which Mary is called “co-redemptrix of the human race” on January 22, 1914.

[Miriam_M]

I think a lot of these discussions are good illustrations of the term "nuance."  Let's just say that some of these distinctions are difficult to put into words but might be easier to apprehend intuitively.

I think that a role can be quite nuanced, whereas a title is often more narrow, especially if it's an exclusive title.  Sorry to reduce this to a secular parallel, but I do so only for the analogy.  A co-chairman, for example does not necessarily share power and importance equally with a chairman.

Mary gets no power except by and from Her Son.  He willingly chooses to bestow a certain importance to her in the economy of salvation, even though she is not Our Savior or Our Redeemer in the literal sense.  Whatever role she has in our Redemption is one He has dispensed to her and exists only through Him.  For me, that's why the title does not disturb me, even though it's not something I meditate on or dwell on.  The title that I prefer for her is Mediatrix of all Graces because it is undeniable that she is exactly that -- but again, only by choice of Her Son.  He has bestowed that power and position on her because of her reliable submission to the Holy Ghost, as spouse. It's a power that is ultimately His at its source.

I don't know if that obscures or clarifies the debate.

[aquinas138]

Now obviously "co-" with and through Christ is implied whenever our Eastern tradition venerates the Blessed Theotokos for having redeemed us. But usually what I see translated is redeemer, co-redeemer, redemptress, or co-redemptress. I have never seen "redemptrix" or "co-redemptrix" within a traditional Eastern context, not even as a translation. Which is why I am not in favour of the Church defining this as a Marian dogma binding upon the entire Church.

Thank you for that; the Ruthenian/Carpatho-Russian tradition I'm most familiar with sings the stichera after Axion estin in a different order, and I just checked the version the Ruthenians use, and it translates that as "Let us praise, O faithful, the Queen of all creation, who has delivered us from our ancestral curse" — that's the only version I've ever attended, so that explains why I never heard "redeem." I wonder if that translation was a deliberate attempt to avoid controversy. For those interested, the Greek of this verse is:

Τὴν ὑψηλοτέραν τῶν οὐρανῶν, καὶ καθαρωτέραν λαμπηδόνων ἡλιακῶν, //
τὴν λυτρωσαμένην ἡμᾶς ἐκ τῆς κατάρας, τὴν Δέσποιναν τοῦ κόσμου, ὕμνοις τιμήσωμεν.

Higher than the heavens, and more pure than the brilliance of the sun, //
who redeemed/ransomed us from the curse, the Mistress of the world, with hymns we honor you.

I don't know enough Slavonic to check it. I think the redemptress vs. redemptrix thing is just the influence of Latin on the latter. Orthodox and Eastern Catholic sources are not being translated from Latin, so they aren't inclined to take the Latin word; -tress is just the English form of -trix. In the canons of Matins and Compline, I consistently see "mediatress" in the ROCOR translation I usually use.

For years, I was uncomfortable with the whole "Co-Redemptrix" thing, but after years attending Byzantine rite services, I realize it's the "co-" that is my problem, not the "redemptrix." I have no problem saying "Most holy Theotokos, save us" multiple times a night during Compline, but I would be deeply uncomfortable calling her "Co-Savior" (or "Co-Salvatrix," if we want to be Latinate). And I understand that "co-" can mean something different in Latin than in English, and I understand the reasoning behind it, but in English, it has always struck me as wrong. It strikes me as a thoroughly unnecessary dogmatic definition, for sure.