Author Topic: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix  (Read 37362 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Aindriú

  • Faster! Funnier!
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,918
    • Blog
Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« on: August 14, 2010, 04:37:55 PM »
One of the more realistically different and irreconcilable differences between Catholicism and Orthodoxy is Mary Theotokos as Co-redemtrix.

My point of view: I disagree with the Catholics.

The position this places Mary is far beyond what she deserves in my opinion. While the intention is not to elevate her to equality with Christ, I believe that it is an inevitability. I seems to me, that people are much more likely to pray to her for her graces than to her as the supreme vision of sainthood. Of which there is a distinction.

*kicks hornet's nest*
Thoughts?

I'm going to need this.

Offline Wyatt

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,465
  • Faith: Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Latin Church
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #1 on: August 14, 2010, 04:45:37 PM »
The term co-redemptrix is confusing because most people think it means she is equal to Christ. It means no such thing. I think it is wise that the Catholic Church has not declared this a dogma of the faith. There are already way too many misunderstandings between us and Orthodoxy and us and the Protestants. We need not add this to the list of them.

Offline elijahmaria

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,515
    • Irenikin: The Skete
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #2 on: August 14, 2010, 05:10:08 PM »
The term co-redemptrix is confusing because most people think it means she is equal to Christ. It means no such thing. I think it is wise that the Catholic Church has not declared this a dogma of the faith. There are already way too many misunderstandings between us and Orthodoxy and us and the Protestants. We need not add this to the list of them.

I have found agreement among Orthodox who accept her role as co-mediatrix.

I have also found agreement among Orthodox who accept that we all have a co-redemptive role in salvation history and in that way the Mother of God is included in an especial way.

Whatever other oddities Catholics add to either role is not something I pay much attention to so I cannot comment on anything but the very basics.

Mary

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,385
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #3 on: August 14, 2010, 06:21:18 PM »
Just for the record, the Orthodox do not, nor have we, looked on the Holy Theotokos as "coredemtrix," nor shall we ever.

Just so when the Vatican makes her "Coredemtrix," you have all been warned, and we can't be told that we always believed and only changed our beliefs because the pope of Rome made it a dogma.

Though I think we will still be told so.
Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth

Offline tuesdayschild

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,000
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #4 on: August 14, 2010, 06:28:45 PM »
so I cannot comment on anything but the very basics.

Mary


Offline deusveritasest

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,521
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #5 on: August 14, 2010, 06:37:36 PM »
I don't think I really understand either term. Can someone explain what both of them mean in mainstream Roman teaching?

Offline elijahmaria

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,515
    • Irenikin: The Skete
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #6 on: August 14, 2010, 06:54:35 PM »
I don't think I really understand either term. Can someone explain what both of them mean in mainstream Roman teaching?

Take a look at this thread...why come back for more of the same.

I am sure you can find something on line.

Offline deusveritasest

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,521
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #7 on: August 14, 2010, 07:26:27 PM »
Take a look at this thread...

I did and it did not involve a succinct explanation of what the terms mean.

why come back for more of the same.

I don't understand what you are trying to mean here.

I am sure you can find something on line.

Yes, but it would probably be difficult to find something as succinct, particular and educated as if someone on this thread explained the terms.

Offline elijahmaria

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,515
    • Irenikin: The Skete
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #8 on: August 14, 2010, 08:23:14 PM »
Take a look at this thread...

I did and it did not involve a succinct explanation of what the terms mean.

why come back for more of the same.

I don't understand what you are trying to mean here.

I am sure you can find something on line.

Yes, but it would probably be difficult to find something as succinct, particular and educated as if someone on this thread explained the terms.

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,13075.0.html

Already been done

Offline Jetavan

  • Argumentum ad australopithecum
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,940
  • Tenzin and Desmond
    • The Mystical Theology
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #9 on: August 14, 2010, 11:31:45 PM »
Quote
The request for a dogmatic definition concentrates on three titles of the Blessed Virgin: Coredemptrix, Mediatrix, and Advocate.

The Declaration of Czestochowa correctly observes that while each of these titles can be given a content in conformity with the deposit of the faith, nevertheless such "titles, as proposed, are ambiguous, as they can be understood in very different ways". This is a serious observation, for, in a doctrinal pronouncement of such weight as a dogmatic definition, it is necessary that the terms should not lend themselves to ambiguous interpretations and that they be understood in a substantially univocal way. For example, the title of Mediatrix has been understood throughout the centuries and is presently understood in notably different ways. It is enough to check recent books on Mariology - from 1987 to the present some 20 manuals have been published - to note that the mediation of the Blessed Virgin Mary is treated by theologians in contrasting ways - in terms of its doctrinal evaluation, the determination of the area in which it is exercised and in comparison with the mediation of Christ and the Holy Spirit. Prescinding from any other consideration, in the case of the mediation of Mary, with respect to many of its aspects one finds oneself before a quaestio disputata, far from that substantial theological unanimity which, in relation to every doctrinal question, is the necessary prelude for proceeding to a dogmatic definition.

....

With respect to the title of Coredemptrix, the Declaration of Czestochowa notes that "from the time of Pope Pius XII, the term Coredemptrix has not been used by the papal Magisterium in its significant documents" and there is evidence that he himself intentionally avoided using it. An important qualification, because here and there, in papal writings which are marginal and therefore devoid of doctrinal weight, one can find such a title, be it very rarely. In substantial documents, however, and in those of some doctrinal importance, this term is absolutely avoided. Thus, the title Coredemptrix was intentionally avoided in the Dogmatic Constitution Munificentissimus Deus (1950), in the Encyclicals Fulgens corona (1953) and Ad caeli Reginam (1954) of Pius XII, in chapter eight of Lumen gentium (1964) of the Second Vatican Council, in the Apostolic Exhortations Signum magnum (1967) and Marialis cultus of Paul VI (1974), as well as in the Encyclical Redemptoris Mater (1986) of John Paul II, which because of its subject matter could have been a propitious occasion for its use. This is a significant fact which can not be overlooked. It is surprising then that the movement in favour of a definition would ask the papal Magisterium to proceed to a dogmatic definition - the highest expression of magisterial teaching - of a title about which the Magisterium itself harbours reservations and systematically avoids.
« Last Edit: August 14, 2010, 11:35:18 PM by Jetavan »
If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.

Offline Aindriú

  • Faster! Funnier!
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,918
    • Blog
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #10 on: August 15, 2010, 12:56:36 AM »
http://www.catholicplanet.com/CMA/


What does one have to say from either the orthodox or catholic about this article's points?

I'm going to need this.

Offline Shlomlokh

  • 主哀れめよ!
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,356
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Bulgarian/GOA
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #11 on: August 15, 2010, 02:28:34 PM »
http://www.catholicplanet.com/CMA/


What does one have to say from either the orthodox or catholic about this article's points?
I don't see the point of why there would be a need to define such a thing. Why is it necessary for a Christian's salvation according to the Roman Catholic perspective? I personally think all of these doctrinal and dogmatic definitions are getting out of hand.

In Christ,
Andrew
"I will pour out my prayer unto the Lord, and to Him will I proclaim my grief; for with evils my soul is filled, and my life unto hades hath drawn nigh, and like Jonah I will pray: From corruption raise me up, O God." -Ode VI, Irmos of the Supplicatory Canon to the Theotokos

Offline Wyatt

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,465
  • Faith: Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Latin Church
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #12 on: August 15, 2010, 04:23:54 PM »
Just for the record, the Orthodox do not, nor have we, looked on the Holy Theotokos as "coredemtrix," nor shall we ever.

Just so when the Vatican makes her "Coredemtrix," you have all been warned, and we can't be told that we always believed and only changed our beliefs because the pope of Rome made it a dogma.

Though I think we will still be told so.
Okay, so the Orthodox don't believe the Theotokos cooperated with God's redemption by her obedience in saying yes to God. Got it. ;)

Offline John Larocque

  • Catholic
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 529
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #13 on: August 15, 2010, 04:28:13 PM »
It won't happen under this pope. The next one, who knows?

Offline theistgal

  • Byzantine (Ruthenian) Catholic gadfly
  • Site Supporter
  • Archon
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,087
  • don't even go there!
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #14 on: August 15, 2010, 04:32:26 PM »
It's not so much that they don't believe it, but more "why make a special dogma out of it?"
"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)

Offline Wyatt

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,465
  • Faith: Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Latin Church
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #15 on: August 15, 2010, 04:43:48 PM »
It's not so much that they don't believe it, but more "why make a special dogma out of it?"
I have a theory as to why the Catholic Church tends to dogmatically define so many things. Our Church is the only Church that has had to combat Protestantism directly since it is our Church that the Protestant Reformation sought to rebel against. Because of this, it was necessary in the West to dogmatically define a lot of teachings since the Protestants criticized a lot of Catholic teachings. Since the East never had large scale contact with Protestantism, it was not necessary to elevate so many teachings to dogma. Teachings are defined whenever they are challenged, and since Protestantism challenged a lot of Catholic teachings, it became necessary to have a lot of dogmas. Trent was a response to Protestantism just as Nicea was a response to Arianism and, to a lesser degree, councils and dogmas after Trent were no doubt a response to Protestantism as well. Since Protestants like to downplay the Blessed Mother so much, it only makes sense that the Catholic Church would dogmatically define exactly what it believes about her.

Now as far as whether the Catholic Church will make "co-redemptrix" a Marian dogma I do not know. I would tend to think not since dogma is meant to clarify Church teachings, and this would seem to do the opposite since many, many people misunderstand what the term means.
« Last Edit: August 15, 2010, 04:45:11 PM by Wyatt »

Offline Paisius

  • Ditry Pope-loving ecumenist
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,341
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Depends on the mood
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #16 on: August 15, 2010, 04:54:50 PM »
I don't see the point of why there would be a need to define such a thing. Why is it necessary for a Christian's salvation according to the Roman Catholic perspective?

Since when has that stopped them before? What possible bearing does the Immaculate Conception have on anyone's salvation?  8)

« Last Edit: August 15, 2010, 04:55:35 PM by Paisius »

Offline Ionnis

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,077
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #17 on: August 15, 2010, 05:08:22 PM »
I agree with St. John of San Francisco's views regarding the impious teachings of the Latin church regarding the Immaculate Conception and Mary as Co-Redeemer:

"It is not an exaltation and greater glory, but a belittlement of Her, this "gift" which was given Her by Pope Pius IX and all the rest who think they can glorify the Mother of God by seeking out new truths. The Most Holy Mary has been so much glorified by God Himself, so exalted is Her life on earth and Her glory in heaven, that human inventions cannot add anything to Her honor and glory. That which people themselves invent only obscures Her Face from their eyes. Brethren, take heed lest there shall be any one that maketh spoil of you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ, wrote the Apostle Paul by the Holy Spirit (Col. 2:8 ).

Such a "vain deceit" is the teaching of the Immaculate Conception by Anna of the Virgin Mary, which at first sight exalts, but in actual fact belittles Her. Like every lie, it is a seed of the "father of lies" (John 8:44), the devil, who has succeeded by it in blaspheme the Virgin Mary. Together with it there should also be rejected all the other teachings which have come from it or are akin to it. The striving to exalt the Most Holy Virgin to an equality with Christ ascribing to Her maternal tortures at the Cross an equal significance with the sufferings of Christ, so that the Redeemer and "Co-Redemptress" suffered equally, according to the teaching of the Papists, or that "the human nature of the Mother of God in heaven together with the God-Man Jesus jointly reveal the full image of man" (Archpriest S. Bulgakov, The Unburnt Bush, p. 141)-is likewise a vain deceit and a seduction of philosophy. In Christ Jesus there is neither male nor female (Gal. 3:28), and Christ has redeemed the whole human race; therefore at His Resurrection equally did "Adam dance for joy and Eve rejoice" (Sunday Kontakia of the First and Third Tones), and by His Ascension did the Lord raise up the whole of human nature. " -St. John of San Francisco

http://www.stmaryofegypt.org/library/st_john_maximovich/on_veneration_of_the_theotokos.htm

« Last Edit: August 15, 2010, 05:10:55 PM by Ionnis »
"If you cannot find Christ in the beggar at the church door, you will not find Him in the chalice.”  -The Divine John Chrysostom

“Till we can become divine, we must be content to be human, lest in our hurry for change we sink to something lower.” -Anthony Trollope

Offline Shlomlokh

  • 主哀れめよ!
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,356
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Bulgarian/GOA
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #18 on: August 15, 2010, 06:39:13 PM »
I don't see the point of why there would be a need to define such a thing. Why is it necessary for a Christian's salvation according to the Roman Catholic perspective?

Since when has that stopped them before? What possible bearing does the Immaculate Conception have on anyone's salvation?  8)


My point exactly. It's somewhat hard for them to turn back the clock on that, even if they wanted to do so. It is considered an infallible statement, so one cannot be a Roman Catholic in good standing and deny it. They are kind of backed into a corner on that one. :/

In Christ,
Andrew
"I will pour out my prayer unto the Lord, and to Him will I proclaim my grief; for with evils my soul is filled, and my life unto hades hath drawn nigh, and like Jonah I will pray: From corruption raise me up, O God." -Ode VI, Irmos of the Supplicatory Canon to the Theotokos

Offline elijahmaria

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,515
    • Irenikin: The Skete
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #19 on: August 15, 2010, 07:25:29 PM »
I don't see the point of why there would be a need to define such a thing. Why is it necessary for a Christian's salvation according to the Roman Catholic perspective?

Since when has that stopped them before? What possible bearing does the Immaculate Conception have on anyone's salvation?  8)


My point exactly. It's somewhat hard for them to turn back the clock on that, even if they wanted to do so. It is considered an infallible statement, so one cannot be a Roman Catholic in good standing and deny it. They are kind of backed into a corner on that one. :/

In Christ,
Andrew


:laugh:

Spare us the sympathies. 

The spiritual joys of a devotion to the Immaculate Conception are one of the great benefits of being Catholic.

This is one item on the Orthodox poopsheet that I could care less about whether or not y'all approve.

Seriously.

M.

Offline deusveritasest

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,521
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #20 on: August 15, 2010, 08:23:17 PM »
Just for the record, the Orthodox do not, nor have we, looked on the Holy Theotokos as "coredemtrix," nor shall we ever.

Just so when the Vatican makes her "Coredemtrix," you have all been warned, and we can't be told that we always believed and only changed our beliefs because the pope of Rome made it a dogma.

Though I think we will still be told so.
Okay, so the Orthodox don't believe the Theotokos cooperated with God's redemption by her obedience in saying yes to God. Got it. ;)

If one captured a man in a cage so that another could stab him to death, would you call him who captured him "co-slayer"? Obviously he was not literally involved in the slaying of the man, though he certainly helped to provide the condition under which he could be slain. I think under this same reasoning, Mary acting to help provide the conditions under which God would accomplish redemption does not logically make her co-redemptrix. She likewise is not literally involved in the actual act of our redemption.

Correct me if I'm wrong here?

Offline deusveritasest

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,521
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #21 on: August 15, 2010, 08:23:17 PM »
It's not so much that they don't believe it, but more "why make a special dogma out of it?"
I have a theory as to why the Catholic Church tends to dogmatically define so many things. Our Church is the only Church that has had to combat Protestantism directly since it is our Church that the Protestant Reformation sought to rebel against. Because of this, it was necessary in the West to dogmatically define a lot of teachings since the Protestants criticized a lot of Catholic teachings. Since the East never had large scale contact with Protestantism, it was not necessary to elevate so many teachings to dogma. Teachings are defined whenever they are challenged, and since Protestantism challenged a lot of Catholic teachings, it became necessary to have a lot of dogmas.

Seeing as how we generally believe your process of over-dogmatizing began even before the Protestant Reformation, I don't think defending against Protestantism really explains the core of it.

Offline elijahmaria

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,515
    • Irenikin: The Skete
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #22 on: August 15, 2010, 08:32:14 PM »
Just for the record, the Orthodox do not, nor have we, looked on the Holy Theotokos as "coredemtrix," nor shall we ever.

Just so when the Vatican makes her "Coredemtrix," you have all been warned, and we can't be told that we always believed and only changed our beliefs because the pope of Rome made it a dogma.

Though I think we will still be told so.
Okay, so the Orthodox don't believe the Theotokos cooperated with God's redemption by her obedience in saying yes to God. Got it. ;)

If one captured a man in a cage so that another could stab him to death, would you call him who captured him "co-slayer"? Obviously he was not literally involved in the slaying of the man, though he certainly helped to provide the condition under which he could be slain. I think under this same reasoning, Mary acting to help provide the conditions under which God would accomplish redemption does not logically make her co-redemptrix. She likewise is not literally involved in the actual act of our redemption.

Correct me if I'm wrong here?

The flaw in this reasoning of course is the, oft repeated Orthodox affirmation of, the freely offered obedience of the Theotokos to God's will.  In that light your whole little proposition there just falls apart at the seams.

When any of us fully cooperate in the will of God and participate in his divine nature through theosis, we share in his saving acts that happen in time, of course, but are not limited to time.

M.

Offline elijahmaria

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,515
    • Irenikin: The Skete
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #23 on: August 15, 2010, 08:33:28 PM »
It's not so much that they don't believe it, but more "why make a special dogma out of it?"
I have a theory as to why the Catholic Church tends to dogmatically define so many things. Our Church is the only Church that has had to combat Protestantism directly since it is our Church that the Protestant Reformation sought to rebel against. Because of this, it was necessary in the West to dogmatically define a lot of teachings since the Protestants criticized a lot of Catholic teachings. Since the East never had large scale contact with Protestantism, it was not necessary to elevate so many teachings to dogma. Teachings are defined whenever they are challenged, and since Protestantism challenged a lot of Catholic teachings, it became necessary to have a lot of dogmas.

Seeing as how we generally believe your process of over-dogmatizing began even before the Protestant Reformation, I don't think defending against Protestantism really explains the core of it.

s'cuse me?  How many dogmatic constitutions have there been in the west as compared to the east?....really!!

M.

Offline Shlomlokh

  • 主哀れめよ!
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,356
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Bulgarian/GOA
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #24 on: August 15, 2010, 08:37:39 PM »
I don't see the point of why there would be a need to define such a thing. Why is it necessary for a Christian's salvation according to the Roman Catholic perspective?

Since when has that stopped them before? What possible bearing does the Immaculate Conception have on anyone's salvation?  8)


My point exactly. It's somewhat hard for them to turn back the clock on that, even if they wanted to do so. It is considered an infallible statement, so one cannot be a Roman Catholic in good standing and deny it. They are kind of backed into a corner on that one. :/

In Christ,
Andrew


:laugh:

Spare us the sympathies. 

The spiritual joys of a devotion to the Immaculate Conception are one of the great benefits of being Catholic.

This is one item on the Orthodox poopsheet that I could care less about whether or not y'all approve.

Seriously.

M.

Well, I could not care less whether you like or dislike our approval of your communion's insatiable desire to bring everything into the Christian faith into bullet points of belief.  ;) :P :D


Poopsheet?

Seriously.


In all seriousness though, Blessed Seraphim of Platina said it succinctly when he was talking to someone (a convert, or catechumen, I cannot remember which) about Orthodoxy. The person was trying to understand what was necessary for belief in Orthodoxy and what was "metaphorical" and what was "literal." Blessed Seraphim said, "Don't you get it?! It's the whole thing!" In Orthodoxy we don't worry about what is a doctrine and what is a dogma and what is not. It's the whole thing! :) And we are content with that.

In Christ,
Andrew
"I will pour out my prayer unto the Lord, and to Him will I proclaim my grief; for with evils my soul is filled, and my life unto hades hath drawn nigh, and like Jonah I will pray: From corruption raise me up, O God." -Ode VI, Irmos of the Supplicatory Canon to the Theotokos

Offline Rowan

  • Lurker, Writer, Science-lover, yada yada yada...
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 159
  • -- Defying Gravity --
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #25 on: August 15, 2010, 08:38:45 PM »
Just for the record, the Orthodox do not, nor have we, looked on the Holy Theotokos as "coredemtrix," nor shall we ever.

Just so when the Vatican makes her "Coredemtrix," you have all been warned, and we can't be told that we always believed and only changed our beliefs because the pope of Rome made it a dogma.

Though I think we will still be told so.
Okay, so the Orthodox don't believe the Theotokos cooperated with God's redemption by her obedience in saying yes to God. Got it. ;)

If one captured a man in a cage so that another could stab him to death, would you call him who captured him "co-slayer"? Obviously he was not literally involved in the slaying of the man, though he certainly helped to provide the condition under which he could be slain. I think under this same reasoning, Mary acting to help provide the conditions under which God would accomplish redemption does not logically make her co-redemptrix. She likewise is not literally involved in the actual act of our redemption.

Correct me if I'm wrong here?

Actually, in American law, the captor could be charged with murder as well.

That's how it works on Law and Order, at least ;)
Finally, brethren, whatever things are true, whatever things are noble, whatever things are just, whatever things are pure, whatever things are lovely, whatever things are of good report, if there is any virtue and if there is anything praiseworthy—meditate on these things. ~Philippians 4:8; St Paul

Offline Jetavan

  • Argumentum ad australopithecum
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,940
  • Tenzin and Desmond
    • The Mystical Theology
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #26 on: August 15, 2010, 08:52:40 PM »
Just for the record, the Orthodox do not, nor have we, looked on the Holy Theotokos as "coredemtrix," nor shall we ever.

Just so when the Vatican makes her "Coredemtrix," you have all been warned, and we can't be told that we always believed and only changed our beliefs because the pope of Rome made it a dogma.

Though I think we will still be told so.
Okay, so the Orthodox don't believe the Theotokos cooperated with God's redemption by her obedience in saying yes to God. Got it. ;)

If one captured a man in a cage so that another could stab him to death, would you call him who captured him "co-slayer"? Obviously he was not literally involved in the slaying of the man, though he certainly helped to provide the condition under which he could be slain. I think under this same reasoning, Mary acting to help provide the conditions under which God would accomplish redemption does not logically make her co-redemptrix. She likewise is not literally involved in the actual act of our redemption.

Correct me if I'm wrong here?

Actually, in American law, the captor could be charged with murder as well.

That's how it works on Law and Order, at least ;)
Law and Order heads to Hollywood in the Fall. Just thought you'd like to know. :o
« Last Edit: August 15, 2010, 08:53:32 PM by Jetavan »
If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.

Offline elijahmaria

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,515
    • Irenikin: The Skete
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #27 on: August 15, 2010, 10:02:52 PM »

In all seriousness though, Blessed Seraphim of Platina said it succinctly when he was talking to someone (a convert, or catechumen, I cannot remember which) about Orthodoxy. The person was trying to understand what was necessary for belief in Orthodoxy and what was "metaphorical" and what was "literal." Blessed Seraphim said, "Don't you get it?! It's the whole thing!" In Orthodoxy we don't worry about what is a doctrine and what is a dogma and what is not. It's the whole thing! :) And we are content with that.

In Christ,
Andrew

Dear Andrew,

I think you may have missed my reference.  The Poopsheet, from my perspective, is that ever-shifting laundry list of stuff that supposedly demands that we remain out of communion.   Near the top of the list is the Immaculate Conception.  Many of the items on the long list, I would take time to explain or discuss.  What I was saying was that I won't even bother arguing the Immaculate Conception with anyone for any reason.

At any rate that is nifty slap at my faith that you offered here.

It might shock you silly to know that I too have managed over the years to "see" the wholeness in Catholic doctrinal teaching through my liturgical life and prayer, and in the lives of the saints and their writings and experiences.  It is a gift to be firm in the faith.

But of course I am not allowed that as a heretic...eh?  Somehow that has to be denigrated too...

OK...have a hoot on me!!

M.

Offline Jetavan

  • Argumentum ad australopithecum
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,940
  • Tenzin and Desmond
    • The Mystical Theology
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #28 on: August 15, 2010, 10:10:23 PM »
But of course I am not allowed that as a heretic...eh?  Somehow that has to be denigrated too...
Offer it up. :)
If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.

Offline deusveritasest

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,521
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #29 on: August 15, 2010, 10:19:10 PM »
I don't see the point of why there would be a need to define such a thing. Why is it necessary for a Christian's salvation according to the Roman Catholic perspective?

Since when has that stopped them before? What possible bearing does the Immaculate Conception have on anyone's salvation?  8)



It has more bearing on the nature of redemption if you assume the traditional Latin view of original sin.

Offline deusveritasest

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,521
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #30 on: August 15, 2010, 10:19:11 PM »
It's not so much that they don't believe it, but more "why make a special dogma out of it?"
I have a theory as to why the Catholic Church tends to dogmatically define so many things. Our Church is the only Church that has had to combat Protestantism directly since it is our Church that the Protestant Reformation sought to rebel against. Because of this, it was necessary in the West to dogmatically define a lot of teachings since the Protestants criticized a lot of Catholic teachings. Since the East never had large scale contact with Protestantism, it was not necessary to elevate so many teachings to dogma. Teachings are defined whenever they are challenged, and since Protestantism challenged a lot of Catholic teachings, it became necessary to have a lot of dogmas.

Seeing as how we generally believe your process of over-dogmatizing began even before the Protestant Reformation, I don't think defending against Protestantism really explains the core of it.

s'cuse me?  How many dogmatic constitutions have there been in the west as compared to the east?....really!!

M.

It doesn't matter if there is more discussion about dogma in the East than in the West; that doesn't negate what I am saying about more dogmas being defined in the West than the East.

Offline deusveritasest

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,521
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #31 on: August 15, 2010, 10:19:12 PM »
Just for the record, the Orthodox do not, nor have we, looked on the Holy Theotokos as "coredemtrix," nor shall we ever.

Just so when the Vatican makes her "Coredemtrix," you have all been warned, and we can't be told that we always believed and only changed our beliefs because the pope of Rome made it a dogma.

Though I think we will still be told so.
Okay, so the Orthodox don't believe the Theotokos cooperated with God's redemption by her obedience in saying yes to God. Got it. ;)

If one captured a man in a cage so that another could stab him to death, would you call him who captured him "co-slayer"? Obviously he was not literally involved in the slaying of the man, though he certainly helped to provide the condition under which he could be slain. I think under this same reasoning, Mary acting to help provide the conditions under which God would accomplish redemption does not logically make her co-redemptrix. She likewise is not literally involved in the actual act of our redemption.

Correct me if I'm wrong here?

Actually, in American law, the captor could be charged with murder as well.

That's how it works on Law and Order, at least ;)

He was only an accomplice. He did not participate in the actual act of slaying.

Offline deusveritasest

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,521
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #32 on: August 15, 2010, 10:19:34 PM »
Just for the record, the Orthodox do not, nor have we, looked on the Holy Theotokos as "coredemtrix," nor shall we ever.

Just so when the Vatican makes her "Coredemtrix," you have all been warned, and we can't be told that we always believed and only changed our beliefs because the pope of Rome made it a dogma.

Though I think we will still be told so.
Okay, so the Orthodox don't believe the Theotokos cooperated with God's redemption by her obedience in saying yes to God. Got it. ;)

If one captured a man in a cage so that another could stab him to death, would you call him who captured him "co-slayer"? Obviously he was not literally involved in the slaying of the man, though he certainly helped to provide the condition under which he could be slain. I think under this same reasoning, Mary acting to help provide the conditions under which God would accomplish redemption does not logically make her co-redemptrix. She likewise is not literally involved in the actual act of our redemption.

Correct me if I'm wrong here?

The flaw in this reasoning of course is the, oft repeated Orthodox affirmation of, the freely offered obedience of the Theotokos to God's will.  In that light your whole little proposition there just falls apart at the seams.

When any of us fully cooperate in the will of God and participate in his divine nature through theosis, we share in his saving acts that happen in time, of course, but are not limited to time.

M.

I was taking that into account Mary. I don't see how Mary's participation in bringing about the conditions that would make redemption possible means that she actually is involved in redemption along with Christ.

Offline elijahmaria

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,515
    • Irenikin: The Skete
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #33 on: August 15, 2010, 10:38:06 PM »
But of course I am not allowed that as a heretic...eh?  Somehow that has to be denigrated too...
Offer it up. :)

 :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:.........pthhhhhhhhh

Offline elijahmaria

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,515
    • Irenikin: The Skete
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #34 on: August 15, 2010, 10:40:24 PM »

I was taking that into account Mary. I don't see how Mary's participation in bringing about the conditions that would make redemption possible means that she actually is involved in redemption along with Christ.

Then you don't believe that all of us participate in Christ's redemptive acts either, right?

M.




Offline elijahmaria

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,515
    • Irenikin: The Skete
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #35 on: August 15, 2010, 10:41:48 PM »
It's not so much that they don't believe it, but more "why make a special dogma out of it?"
I have a theory as to why the Catholic Church tends to dogmatically define so many things. Our Church is the only Church that has had to combat Protestantism directly since it is our Church that the Protestant Reformation sought to rebel against. Because of this, it was necessary in the West to dogmatically define a lot of teachings since the Protestants criticized a lot of Catholic teachings. Since the East never had large scale contact with Protestantism, it was not necessary to elevate so many teachings to dogma. Teachings are defined whenever they are challenged, and since Protestantism challenged a lot of Catholic teachings, it became necessary to have a lot of dogmas.

Seeing as how we generally believe your process of over-dogmatizing began even before the Protestant Reformation, I don't think defending against Protestantism really explains the core of it.

s'cuse me?  How many dogmatic constitutions have there been in the west as compared to the east?....really!!

M.

It doesn't matter if there is more discussion about dogma in the East than in the West; that doesn't negate what I am saying about more dogmas being defined in the West than the East.

Point by point there have been more dogmatic statements come out of the east...that's axiomatic for most of us :P

M.

Offline Paisius

  • Ditry Pope-loving ecumenist
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,341
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Depends on the mood
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #36 on: August 15, 2010, 10:48:38 PM »
It has more bearing on the nature of redemption if you assume the traditional Latin view of original sin.


But what bearing does it have on your salvation?

Offline Paisius

  • Ditry Pope-loving ecumenist
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,341
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Depends on the mood
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #37 on: August 15, 2010, 10:52:51 PM »
Point by point there have been more dogmatic statements come out of the east...that's axiomatic for most of us :P

M.


But they were all made to:

A) Define the faith against a threatening heresy and

B) Because they do have a direct bearing on our salvation because they speak directly to what we believe about God and how He interacts with humanity

Offline elijahmaria

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,515
    • Irenikin: The Skete
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #38 on: August 15, 2010, 11:02:52 PM »
Point by point there have been more dogmatic statements come out of the east...that's axiomatic for most of us :P

M.


But they were all made to:

A) Define the faith against a threatening heresy and

B) Because they do have a direct bearing on our salvation because they speak directly to what we believe about God and how He interacts with humanity

So do the Marian dogma.  They are an integral part of Catholic Christology and Trinitarian Theology and Grace.  In that way they become an integral part of my own spiritual life.  That is why I won't argue it.  It is too important to my personal salvation.

M.

Offline Paisius

  • Ditry Pope-loving ecumenist
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,341
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Depends on the mood
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #39 on: August 15, 2010, 11:17:53 PM »
They are an integral part of Catholic Christology and Trinitarian Theology and Grace.


So what does the Immaculate Conception say about Christology and Trinitarian theology?



Offline Shlomlokh

  • 主哀れめよ!
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,356
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Bulgarian/GOA
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #40 on: August 15, 2010, 11:25:39 PM »

In all seriousness though, Blessed Seraphim of Platina said it succinctly when he was talking to someone (a convert, or catechumen, I cannot remember which) about Orthodoxy. The person was trying to understand what was necessary for belief in Orthodoxy and what was "metaphorical" and what was "literal." Blessed Seraphim said, "Don't you get it?! It's the whole thing!" In Orthodoxy we don't worry about what is a doctrine and what is a dogma and what is not. It's the whole thing! :) And we are content with that.

In Christ,
Andrew

Dear Andrew,

I think you may have missed my reference.  The Poopsheet, from my perspective, is that ever-shifting laundry list of stuff that supposedly demands that we remain out of communion.   Near the top of the list is the Immaculate Conception.  Many of the items on the long list, I would take time to explain or discuss.  What I was saying was that I won't even bother arguing the Immaculate Conception with anyone for any reason.

At any rate that is nifty slap at my faith that you offered here.

It might shock you silly to know that I too have managed over the years to "see" the wholeness in Catholic doctrinal teaching through my liturgical life and prayer, and in the lives of the saints and their writings and experiences.  It is a gift to be firm in the faith.

But of course I am not allowed that as a heretic...eh?  Somehow that has to be denigrated too...

OK...have a hoot on me!!

M.
What?! ??? I made no such attempt to take hits at your faith, and I sincerely apologize if you were offended by what I wrote. I probably should have made that clear from the beginning, but I did not think that it was necessary. In no wise was I trying to mock your Catholic faith. I was speaking about Orthodoxy (this is an Orthodox message board) and why we do not feel the need to define certain dogmas because we believe "it is the whole thing!" From my perspective, I do not see the Roman Catholic Church in the same vein. Surely you would understand this whether you agree with my perspective or not.

Who is calling you a heretic? I said no such thing. Please do not ascribe to me things I never said or even thought. The only hoot I'll be having is this:


In Christ,
Andrew
"I will pour out my prayer unto the Lord, and to Him will I proclaim my grief; for with evils my soul is filled, and my life unto hades hath drawn nigh, and like Jonah I will pray: From corruption raise me up, O God." -Ode VI, Irmos of the Supplicatory Canon to the Theotokos

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #41 on: August 15, 2010, 11:41:03 PM »
Just for the record, the Orthodox do not, nor have we, looked on the Holy Theotokos as "coredemtrix," nor shall we ever.

Just so when the Vatican makes her "Coredemtrix," you have all been warned, and we can't be told that we always believed and only changed our beliefs because the pope of Rome made it a dogma.

Though I think we will still be told so.
Okay, so the Orthodox don't believe the Theotokos cooperated with God's redemption by her obedience in saying yes to God. Got it. ;)

If one captured a man in a cage so that another could stab him to death, would you call him who captured him "co-slayer"? Obviously he was not literally involved in the slaying of the man, though he certainly helped to provide the condition under which he could be slain. I think under this same reasoning, Mary acting to help provide the conditions under which God would accomplish redemption does not logically make her co-redemptrix. She likewise is not literally involved in the actual act of our redemption.

Correct me if I'm wrong here?

The flaw in this reasoning of course is the, oft repeated Orthodox affirmation of, the freely offered obedience of the Theotokos to God's will.  In that light your whole little proposition there just falls apart at the seams.

When any of us fully cooperate in the will of God and participate in his divine nature through theosis, we share in his saving acts that happen in time, of course, but are not limited to time.

M.

I like to think of Mary as the Co-Punisher or the Co-Purger.   One of Christ's saving acts is to punish those in Purgatory, a punishment which the Pope tells us (Indulgentiarum Doctrina) is required by the sanctity and justice of God.



Offline elijahmaria

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,515
    • Irenikin: The Skete
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #42 on: August 15, 2010, 11:55:34 PM »


Who is calling you a heretic? I said no such thing. Please do not ascribe to me things I never said or even thought. The only hoot I'll be having is this:


In Christ,
Andrew


Fair enough!...

It is unfortunate that we cannot share the personal experiences of the integrity of our respective confessions...

M.

Offline Wyatt

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,465
  • Faith: Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Latin Church
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #43 on: August 16, 2010, 01:12:55 PM »
If one captured a man in a cage so that another could stab him to death, would you call him who captured him "co-slayer"? Obviously he was not literally involved in the slaying of the man, though he certainly helped to provide the condition under which he could be slain. I think under this same reasoning, Mary acting to help provide the conditions under which God would accomplish redemption does not logically make her co-redemptrix. She likewise is not literally involved in the actual act of our redemption.

Correct me if I'm wrong here?
I totally see what you are saying, and this is the main reason why I am glad the Catholic Church has not defined co-redemptrix as a dogma. Because when we say "co-redemptrix" we do not mean equal, but the majority of those outside of the Catholic Church will think that is what we mean since that is the standard use of the prefix "co." Because of this it would create more confusion. This is the complete opposite of what a dogma should do, which is to bring clarity.
« Last Edit: August 16, 2010, 01:14:27 PM by Wyatt »

Offline deusveritasest

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,521
Re: Mary as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix
« Reply #44 on: August 16, 2010, 10:52:23 PM »
It's not so much that they don't believe it, but more "why make a special dogma out of it?"
I have a theory as to why the Catholic Church tends to dogmatically define so many things. Our Church is the only Church that has had to combat Protestantism directly since it is our Church that the Protestant Reformation sought to rebel against. Because of this, it was necessary in the West to dogmatically define a lot of teachings since the Protestants criticized a lot of Catholic teachings. Since the East never had large scale contact with Protestantism, it was not necessary to elevate so many teachings to dogma. Teachings are defined whenever they are challenged, and since Protestantism challenged a lot of Catholic teachings, it became necessary to have a lot of dogmas.

Seeing as how we generally believe your process of over-dogmatizing began even before the Protestant Reformation, I don't think defending against Protestantism really explains the core of it.

s'cuse me?  How many dogmatic constitutions have there been in the west as compared to the east?....really!!

M.

It doesn't matter if there is more discussion about dogma in the East than in the West; that doesn't negate what I am saying about more dogmas being defined in the West than the East.

Point by point there have been more dogmatic statements come out of the east...that's axiomatic for most of us :P

M.

Many dogmatic definitions have come out of the East. However, most of those have been accepted by the West. If you consider how many dogmas are actually recognized as defined by Rome and how many by Constantinople, I'm pretty sure the former would be significantly more extensive.