Mary as "with the redeemer"

[Jesuspaidtheprice]

I'm not one to twist anyones words in a knot, so if Catholics tell me that 'co-redemptrix' means that Mary was 'with the Savior' on His journey to save our souls, I'll take you at your word. Here is my confusion though, even with your 'development of doctrine', how can we know that the Apostles wouldn't have thought such an idea to be absurd, if not Mary worship in biblical times? What early sources do we have on such devotion to Mary as the Catholic Church professes today?

[jasJis]

I'm not sure what you mean. Catholics don't 'worship' Mary. As the Bible says, all generations shall call her Blessed because she was overshadowed by the Grace of God. That's not very confusing.

The co-redemptrix part is a little different. First you have to understand that Jesus is both Fully Man and Fully Divine. As Man and God he is our Savior. Mary is only Fully Human but she is filled with God's Grace and was a human, chosen by God Himself, to be the earthly womb that God became Man. On a human level by the Grace of God, she became Co-Remptrix. She, like you and me, is human, but by the Grace of God, can do participate in the Divine.

[Jesuspaidtheprice]

But I didn't assert that Catholics worshipped Mary. I know you believe that you do not worship her. I'm taking you on your word on that one. What I'm asking is, with such a doctrine only being formulated over 1500 years after Christ, how can we know this is something the Apostles would have believed or accepted with its absence in the scriptures or the writings of the early Church. It seems this doctrine was formulated out of other doctrines in the Catholic Church without any reasonable basis.

Or maybe I don't correctly understand the doctrine, so you are welcome to give me a correct explaination.

[jasJis]

[quote name='Jesuspaidtheprice' date='Oct 12 2005, 10:27 AM']But I didn't assert that Catholics worshipped Mary. I know  you believe that you do not worship her. I'm taking you on your word on that one. What I'm asking is, with such a doctrine only being formulated over 1500 years after Christ, how can we know this is something the Apostles would have believed or accepted with its absence in the scriptures or the writings of the early Church. It seems this doctrine was formulated out of other doctrines in the Catholic Church without any reasonable basis.

Or maybe I don't correctly understand the doctrine, so you are welcome to give me a correct explaination.
[right][snapback]755269[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]Take a quick look at this link:

[url="http://www.ewtn.com/library/SCRIPTUR/MARSCR.TXT"]"On Mary in Scripture"[/url]
that is also in Phatmass' "resources" link above. That way we can talk on the same page.

[Aloysius]

The Council of Ephesus, early on gave Mary the title of the holy THEOTOKOS- or God-bearer.

that's not 1500 yrs... that's about a couple centuries (431 AD). and to prove devotions to Mary had already been in existence when the council declared this: people paraded through the streets in celebration after this decree.

from very ancient times we find Christian writings on the importance of Mary. if I remember correctly I believe Augustine thought of her as the new Eve if Christ was the new Adam (I could be wrong, I'm not sure if Augustine thought that or not but I know it's very anceint and venerable Church tradition)

[thessalonian]

The doctrine is that Mary co-operated and still co-operaties with the plan of redemption. Co in the latin means with, not equal or another as Protestants want to twist it. So you ask is there any sign of it in the early Church writings.

"Just as Eve, wife of Adam, yet still a virgin, became by her disobedience the cause of death for herself and the whole human race, so Mary, too, espoused yet a virgin, became by her obedience the cause of salvation for herself and the whole human race." [3]

This is from St. Irenaus. Biblically of course it is exemplified in scripture "let it be done unto me according to your word". This is the first step in Mary's cooperation in the plan of redemption of mankind. I don't see how it can be denied.

St. Jerome said: "Death through Eve, life through Mary."
Otheres throughout the ages, while not using the term co-redemptrix have stated the essence of the doctrine in a similar manner. So you are quite wrong. It is not a late developement of doctrine, i.e. new doctrine. It has always been in Catholic teaching. Current teaching just makes it more explicit. It is not dogma yet.

[son_of_angels]

Co-redemptrix is a term that may be being abused here. Mary is Co-Redemptrix in that she is the summit of the whole concept of "co-redemption", according to the prophecy, "And a sword shall pierce your heart also." We believe that in a spiritual way she suffered a martyrdom of love through the crucifixion, thus her suffering was joined, uniquely and supremely as the Mother of God, with Christ.

In the same way we experience union, however to a lesser degree, with her when we cooperate with the sufferings of Christ in our own lives, a thing called "co-redemption." This gives meaning to every suffering which we endure, for we are walking with the crucified Christ. The catechism especially points to this in 1508

[quote]1508 The Holy Spirit gives to some a special charism of healing118 so as to make manifest the power of the grace of the risen Lord. But even the most intense prayers do not always obtain the healing of all illnesses. Thus St. Paul must learn from the Lord that "my grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness," and that the sufferings to be endured can mean that "in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for the sake of his Body, that is, the Church."[/quote]

I think also of the notion from Romans 12:1 "offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, dedicated and acceptable to God" (NJB). Yet elsewhere Paul speaks explicitly about the efficacy and supremecy of the sufferings of Christ himself. How then will these things avail us if not to participate in the sufferings which Christ himself suffered? This is why Mary is Co-Redemptrix, because she joined, being the Mother of God, perfectly and prophetically according to Scripture, her own sufferings to those of Christ.

[dspen2005]

she has not been declared co-redemptrix as being a dogma of the Faith -- there are groups that are pushing for this to be done -- the so-called Fifth Marian Dogma. She has been named Mediatrix of All Grace (if I am not mistakened)

[Benedict]

[quote name='Jesuspaidtheprice' date='Oct 12 2005, 07:10 AM']What early sources do we have on such devotion to Mary as the Catholic Church professes today?
[/quote]
[i]Sub Tuum Praesidium [/i](~250 AD)

We fly to your patronage,
O Holy Mother of God,
despise not our petitions
in our necessities,
but deliver us from all danger,
O ever glorious and blessed Virgin.

The early Church prayed the [i]Sub Tuum Praesidium [/i]to ask the Blessed Virgin for her prayers.

[photosynthesis]

"It was through the Blessed Virgin Mary that Jesus came into the world, and it is also through her that he must reign in the world." - St. Louis Marie de Montfort

while he's not an early Church father, he is one of the most prolific Marian writers of the Church.

[Brother Adam]

[quote name='photosynthesis' date='Oct 13 2005, 04:28 PM']"It was through the Blessed Virgin Mary that Jesus came into the world, and it is also through her that he must reign in the world."  - St. Louis Marie de Montfort

while he's not an early Church father, he is one of the most prolific Marian writers of the Church.
[right][snapback]757377[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Now I'm a Catholic and statements like that still make me cringe.

[thessalonian]

[quote name='Brother Adam' date='Oct 13 2005, 04:20 PM']Now I'm a Catholic and statements like that still make me cringe. 
[right][snapback]757409[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

De Monfort goes about as far as you can I think. But I believe that it is our lack of understanding that makes us cringe rather than an error on his part. In the context of the Old Testament and the Queen Mother I do not think his words are out of line. The spiritual birth of God's children is accomplished through Mary. All is through her because all grace came in to the world through her. This is not contradictory but complentary to it being through Christ.

Blessings

[Brother Adam]

Certianly, I'm merely commenting on the difficulty former Protestants experience with certain statements. Then again I would need more clarification on what the statement actually means by reading it in context.

[phatcatholic]

yea, Montefort's words are a major obstacle to protestants. i usually point out that his words are passionate and devotional in nature. they aren't meant to be theologically precise. these articles help too:

[url="http://www.mark-shea.com/poetry.html"]http://www.mark-shea.com/poetry.html[/url]
[url="http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/a81.htm"]http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/a81.htm[/url]

pax christi,
phatcatholic

[thessalonian]

[quote name='phatcatholic' date='Oct 14 2005, 09:24 AM']yea, Montefort's words are a major obstacle to protestants. i usually point out that his words are passionate and devotional in nature. they aren't meant to be theologically precise. these articles help too:

[url="http://www.mark-shea.com/poetry.html"]http://www.mark-shea.com/poetry.html[/url]
[url="http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/a81.htm"]http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/a81.htm[/url]

pax christi,
phatcatholic
[right][snapback]758149[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


Thanks phat. Those articles put a whole new light on the subject. Especially Shea's. I grew today in understanding. Praise the Lord!