Fr Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange OP continues his discussion of Our Lady's role as 'mediatrix of all graces' by considering precisely how and why she has been given this role by God.
Hello, Mr. Wright. I hope you are well. I would appreciate your opinion on something. The new Vatican document is certainly problematic for its modernism and ecumenical aspects. However, there are some orthodox, pre-conciliar theologians, such as Mgr. Van Noort, who in their manuals also cautioned against the use of co-redemptrix:
"Mary cooperated in the Redemption in a manner altogether unique, though entirely subordinate to Christ. Her fiat made the Incarnation possible; her compassion was joined to His passion; she offered her Son to the Father. Yet all this cooperation was dependent, secondary, and dispositive — not efficient in the same order as Christ’s redemptive act.”
(Dogmatic Theology, Vol. III, § 221)
“Some authors have used the title Co-Redemptrix; but the term is not without danger, since it may suggest an equality or coordination with the Redeemer Himself. It is better to say that the Blessed Virgin cooperated in the work of Redemption in a subordinate and ministerial manner.”
(ibid., § 221, note)
Also, if I am not mistaken, Mgr. Fenton did not favor the use of the title co-redemptrix. (Journal 5, p. 63; Aug. 20, 1958 – Nov. 18, 1960).
I have no desire to defend the new Vatican document; rather, I am wondering if there is a reasonable objection to use of the term from the standpoint of pre-conciliar theology?
First let's distinguish from mediatrix which has certainly been used in the papal magisterium.
The title co-redemptrix is subject to legitimate debate. One does not cease to be a Catholic by raising objections to it.
However, we are not going to pay any attention to what the illegitimate modernist usurpers say, let alone when they state their arguments are ecumenical in nature.
Pope Pius XI used the tittle "Co-Redemptrix" on at least two occasions:
132 Pius XI: Radio Message to the pilgrims at Lourdes, April 28, 1935
Mother most faithful and most merciful, who as co-Redemptrix and partaker of they dear Son’s sorrow, didst assist Him as He offered the sacrifice of our redemption on the altar of the Cross.”
126 Pius XI: Allocution to pilgrims from Vicenza, Novermber 30, 1933.
From the nature of His work, the Redeemer ought to have associated His Mother with His work. For this reason we invoke her under the title of co-Redemptrix. She gave us the Saviour, she accompanied Him in the work or redemption as far as the Cross itself, sharing with Him the sorrows of the agony and the death in which Jesus consummated the redemption of mankind. And immediately beneath the Cross, at the last moments of His life, she was proclaimed by the Redeemer, our Mother, the Mother of the whole universe.
I like your approach on this. It seems like too many people are making comments based in emotion, and I find it very unhelpful and divisive. You "guys" at the WM Review do a great job of presenting arguments in reasonable ways that help cut through some of the drama that gets stirred up. Trying to defend a position the Novus Ordo happens to agree with can be quite penitential. I look forward to any future commentary you may have on this topic. Pax et bonum +
Theological Note: Theologically certain.Equivalent term: Dogmatic fact; theological conclusion.Explanation: A truth logically following from one proposition which is Divinely revealed and another which is historically certain.Example: Legitimacy of Pope Pius XI.Censure attached to contradictory proposition: Error (in theology).Effects of denial: Mortal sin against faith.
Ludwig Ott, "Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, pg. 212
The Title "Corredemptrix"+Coredemptress, which has been current since the fifteenth century, and which also appears in some official Church documents under Pius X (cf D1978 a).....
If you think about it, it's actually a good thing Leo & Co. oppose the titles of Co-Redemptrix & Mediatrix of Grace, since if they supported it and especially if it were formally declared by Leo, many semi-trads who might be having second thoughts about his validity, and that of the V2 church, would continue in their support for him when they otherwise might come to reject the counterfeit conciliar-synodal church under false popes, like they should.
It is certain that heaven is not pleased. It's one more grievous offence added to so many others.
"There are so many souls whom the Justice of God condemns for sins committed against me, that I have come to ask reparation: sacrifice yourself for this intention and pray." (Our Lady of Fatima to Sr Lucia, 1929)
Thank you. The Virgin Mary is certainly the Mediatrix of All Graces.
Hello, Mr. Wright. I hope you are well. I would appreciate your opinion on something. The new Vatican document is certainly problematic for its modernism and ecumenical aspects. However, there are some orthodox, pre-conciliar theologians, such as Mgr. Van Noort, who in their manuals also cautioned against the use of co-redemptrix:
"Mary cooperated in the Redemption in a manner altogether unique, though entirely subordinate to Christ. Her fiat made the Incarnation possible; her compassion was joined to His passion; she offered her Son to the Father. Yet all this cooperation was dependent, secondary, and dispositive — not efficient in the same order as Christ’s redemptive act.”
(Dogmatic Theology, Vol. III, § 221)
“Some authors have used the title Co-Redemptrix; but the term is not without danger, since it may suggest an equality or coordination with the Redeemer Himself. It is better to say that the Blessed Virgin cooperated in the work of Redemption in a subordinate and ministerial manner.”
(ibid., § 221, note)
Also, if I am not mistaken, Mgr. Fenton did not favor the use of the title co-redemptrix. (Journal 5, p. 63; Aug. 20, 1958 – Nov. 18, 1960).
I have no desire to defend the new Vatican document; rather, I am wondering if there is a reasonable objection to use of the term from the standpoint of pre-conciliar theology?
First let's distinguish from mediatrix which has certainly been used in the papal magisterium.
The title co-redemptrix is subject to legitimate debate. One does not cease to be a Catholic by raising objections to it.
However, we are not going to pay any attention to what the illegitimate modernist usurpers say, let alone when they state their arguments are ecumenical in nature.
Does that make sense?
Pope Pius XI used the tittle "Co-Redemptrix" on at least two occasions:
132 Pius XI: Radio Message to the pilgrims at Lourdes, April 28, 1935
Mother most faithful and most merciful, who as co-Redemptrix and partaker of they dear Son’s sorrow, didst assist Him as He offered the sacrifice of our redemption on the altar of the Cross.”
126 Pius XI: Allocution to pilgrims from Vicenza, Novermber 30, 1933.
From the nature of His work, the Redeemer ought to have associated His Mother with His work. For this reason we invoke her under the title of co-Redemptrix. She gave us the Saviour, she accompanied Him in the work or redemption as far as the Cross itself, sharing with Him the sorrows of the agony and the death in which Jesus consummated the redemption of mankind. And immediately beneath the Cross, at the last moments of His life, she was proclaimed by the Redeemer, our Mother, the Mother of the whole universe.
I stand corrected. Shouldn't reply in a hurry. Interested to know if they were included in the Acta.
I like your approach on this. It seems like too many people are making comments based in emotion, and I find it very unhelpful and divisive. You "guys" at the WM Review do a great job of presenting arguments in reasonable ways that help cut through some of the drama that gets stirred up. Trying to defend a position the Novus Ordo happens to agree with can be quite penitential. I look forward to any future commentary you may have on this topic. Pax et bonum +
Thank you Michael.
Blessings and appreciation from Sydney Australia.
here is the Sacrae Theologiae Summa on the title of the Blessed Virgin Mary as "Corredemptrix"
pg. 446:
c) That the title of Corredemptrix is used rightly is certain; and it is not licit to doubt about its suitability.
Then From Caterini's "Theological notes"
https://isidore.co/calibre/#panel=book_details&book_id=8506
Fifth note:
Theological Note: Theologically certain.Equivalent term: Dogmatic fact; theological conclusion.Explanation: A truth logically following from one proposition which is Divinely revealed and another which is historically certain.Example: Legitimacy of Pope Pius XI.Censure attached to contradictory proposition: Error (in theology).Effects of denial: Mortal sin against faith.
On the title "Corredemtrix" appearing in the AAS
Ludwig Ott, "Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, pg. 212
The Title "Corredemptrix"+Coredemptress, which has been current since the fifteenth century, and which also appears in some official Church documents under Pius X (cf D1978 a).....
If you think about it, it's actually a good thing Leo & Co. oppose the titles of Co-Redemptrix & Mediatrix of Grace, since if they supported it and especially if it were formally declared by Leo, many semi-trads who might be having second thoughts about his validity, and that of the V2 church, would continue in their support for him when they otherwise might come to reject the counterfeit conciliar-synodal church under false popes, like they should.
novusordowatch.org
Indeed. On the other hand, it’s possible that Heaven is not pleased…
It is certain that heaven is not pleased. It's one more grievous offence added to so many others.
"There are so many souls whom the Justice of God condemns for sins committed against me, that I have come to ask reparation: sacrifice yourself for this intention and pray." (Our Lady of Fatima to Sr Lucia, 1929)