There can be no question that Mary is the Mother of Jesus Christ. As such, she certainly participated in our redemption like no other. But is she truly Co-Redemptrix along with our Lord and Savior?
I’ve been mulling this question over since I first heard Mary referred to as Co-Redemptrix many years ago. In all honesty, I’ve never been entirely comfortable with this title.
The DDF’s Doctrinal Note
Last year I seriously started thinking about it again when the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF) issued Mater Populi Fidelis, a “Doctrinal Note on Some Marian Titles Regarding Mary’s Cooperation in the Work of Salvation.”
As Edward Pentin wrote at the time, “One of the Catholic Church’s foremost associations of Mariologists issued a strongly critical response to Mater Populi Fidelis.”
Pentin summed up Mater Populi Fidelis saying, “The doctrinal note reaffirms approved Marian titles such as Mother of God and Mother of the Church, but judges the titles “Co‑redemptrix” and certain uses of “Mediatrix of all graces” pastorally and theologically ambiguous, discouraging their use in official teaching or liturgy, while not denying the truths they seek to express.” In short Mater Populi Fidelis said the title is inappropriate or inopportune to use.
The International Marian Association Theological Commission disagreed that Mary’s “Co‑Redemptrix” title is inappropriate. They argued that if this is the case “the popes who approved or used the title were acting in an inappropriate and imprudent manner.”
As Pentin pointed out, “The 2010 edition of the New Catholic Encyclopedia states that the title Co-redemptrix first appeared in Catholic literature toward the end of the fourteenth century and that “Catholics no longer question its legitimacy” as the title has been used at various times in the intervening centuries, including by the Holy See in the 20th century.”
The Just Concluded Conference
The recent International Conference at the Augustinian Patristic Institute in Rome on October 7-8, entitled “The Blessed Virgin Mary in dogma and worship,” got me thinking seriously about the Mary’s Co-redemptrix title yet again. In talks at the conference, according to Pentin, Cardinal Burke and Cardinal Müller, along with other respected theologians, defended the use of Mary’s Co-Redemptrix title.
Cardinal Müller said that, “the title “Co-Redemptrix” must be understood analogically, saying that Christ alone redeems humanity in the primary and perfect sense, while Mary’s role is entirely dependent on and derived from his grace.”
But that little, two-letter prefix “co” carries quite a wallop. Merriam-Webster says “co” means “with : together : joint : jointly.” So if someone is a co-founder it means that the someone shares equal billing in the founding of something. If someone is a co-director it means that person is equally responsible for leading some group of organization. Someone can also be a co-conspirator, meaning that the person has equal responsibility for a conspiracy of some sort.
So saying Mary is “Co-Redemptrix” means that Mary is just as responsible for our Redemption as Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. And saying the title must be understood “analogically” is not a good argument for its continued use. It’s saying, “Well, Jesus is our Redeemer, but we can say Mary is our co-redeemer because of her uniquely singular role as the Mother of Jesus Christ.” But the semantics of this statement overwhelm any analogical meaning. It is not a true or an accurate statement.
What Might Mary Think?
But over and above this, I have to wonder what Our Blessed Mother herself might think of this title. I just cannot imagine her referring to herself as the “Co-Redemptrix.”
At Lourdes Mary referred to herself as the Immaculate Conception. This was just four years after Pope Pius IX officially defined the Immaculate Conception as a dogma. So Mary affirmed the dogma. But as she herself also said, “I am the handmaid of the Lord” [Luke 1:38]. And a handmaid is a servant.
As the Pentin article points out, the term Co-Redemptrix is not a new title. It was first used in the fourteenth century. But, in my humble opinion, Mary is probably never going to affirm the title Co-Redemptrix.
Mary has had many titles bestowed on her through the ages. She is the Queen of Heaven, Our Blessed Mother, the New Eve, Mediatrix of all Graces, our spiritual mother, Mother of the Church, and of course, Theotokos (Mother of God). All of these titles honor Mary and acknowledge her role in our salvation.
God’s Humble Handmaid
But despite these titles, no one can doubt that Our Blessed Mother is the epitome of humility. And as God’s humble handmaid, she might be uncomfortable with some of these titles. And of all the titles, Co-Redemptrix might just be the title she likes the least.
My wife and I certainly had a hand in bringing my sons into the world – my wife more so than me. But I would be a lousy father, and my wife be a lousy mother, if one of our sons won a Nobel prize and we tried to share in the credit for his achievement.
As Cardinal Müller, and the Catholic Church, states, “Christ alone redeems humanity.” Referring to Mary as Co-Redemptrix just creates confusion.
I fully concur with devotion to our Blessed Mother. However, I don’t think she would be happy with anyone trying to elevate her unique and singular role in our redemption to something it is not – even if it is just expressing an analogy.
Mary was God’s lowly handmaid and Jesus’ mother. And I would wager these are the titles she holds most dear.
Jesus Redeems with ‘Mary’s flesh, blood and bone – and bone not broken, ever One’.
Jesus is the Redeemer and Redeems with Mary’s Flesh His, her Body His, Her Bone His, not a bone broken, just as the Bond of Redeemer and CoRedeeming Mother is forever not Broken established One – in nature and grace, O Felix Culpa ever ancient, ever new….ancient adam and eve, Falling, now ever new adam and eve, Redeeming! Alleluia!!!
Peter-One can without contradiction say that she agrees with what you say and that Mary redeemed no one. RE: the “co-pilot” analogy and that the co-pilot is in some way “subordinate”- if the pilot goes unconscious, the co-pilot flies the plane and becomes the pilot. Mary did not and can cannot take on the role of redeemer. Each of my children “took on my flesh.” I promise you, I was not a co-breast-nursing parent. I have sometimes been “one with Jesus.” If some want to call me a “Co-Jesus,” OK. That will be a real and perhaps profitable conversation starter. Guy, Texas
This article unfortunately merely re-echoes the arguments of the DDF document.
That document only serves to clarify the truth of the actual teaching of Mary’s subordinate, but real, participation in the Redemption wrought by Christ. Of course, He alone is the Redeemer. No one denies that.
All that the DDF did was to point out how the doctrine may be misunderstood. The same is true of all of the other titles of Mary cited in this article.
Yes. “She is the Queen of Heaven, Our Blessed Mother, the New Eve, Mediatrix of all Graces, our spiritual mother, Mother of the Church, and of course, Theotokos (Mother of God).”
But all of these titles are denied by many who misunderstand, or deny, their meaning. And yet we continue to use them, and to explain them. Especially “Mother of God.”
“Mediatrix” was criticized by the DDF for the same reasons.
[Comment Edited due to length]
Thank you for this. My former pastor– now retired– used Occam’s Razor when I questioned him about our Blessed Mother as Co-Redemptrix. “Whom did she redeem?” He replied.
Without Christ, none, with Christ all He Redeems: Mary is Mother of Christ the Head and His Body, the Redeemer and Redeemed…thus, She is the With-Co Redeeming Mother as there can be no Bodiless Redeemer Head or Headless Redeemed Body without the With-Co Redeeming Mother of the Head and Body…that would be monster….we all have by analogy the work of little co-redeemers builders of living stones in Christ as God the Holy Spirit says in Paul (Col 1:24; Jms 5:20). Jesus is the Redeemer and Redeems with Mary’s Flesh His, Her Body His, Her Bone His, not a bone broken, just as the Bond of Redeemer and CoRedeeming Mother is forever not Broken established One, NewAdam, NewEve!
I woke up thinking about Luke 12:8–10 this morning and one of its parallels – the particular witness of Jesus that I was having is when He shared, “Father, what you have hidden from the learned and clever, you have revealed to the humble and little, Father you have graciously willed it so…”. This is the heart of the point of Newman in his letter to Pusey (1) I shared earlier (below slightly?).
But it seems the discussion of Mother Mary as the Beloved’s Allied Co-Redeemer at times leaves Christ and becomes about our understanding. I in my ‘learned cleverliness’ defend and propose what Cardinal Newman, was proposing to Pusey so that he might see and rejoice in the Beloved God’s Light, Love and Beauty!
I think we all need that divine love which is not arrogant or prideful so we can see what the Living God has done, glorifying and proclaiming the Beloved’s Work in Mary.
[Comment Edited due to length]
as one author shares: What then does the Church mean when she calls the Blessed Virgin Mary the “Co-redemptrix?” The prefix, “co-” derives from the Latin term “cum,” which means “with” and not “equal to.” Although some modern languages, such as English, sometimes use the prefix “co” with connotations of equality, the true Latin meaning remains “with.”
St. Paul identifies the early Christians as “co-workers with God” (1 Cor. 3:9) in a meaning and context of “co” which cannot possibly denote equality.
The Latin verb, “redimere” (or re(d)-emere), signifies literally ” to buy back.” The Latin suffix, “-trix” is feminine, denoting “one who does something.” The etymological meaning of Co-redemptrix therefore is “the woman who buys back with.”
The title “Mary Co-redemptrix” as used by the Church denotes the unique and active participation by Mary, the Mother of Jesus, in the work of Redemption as accomplished by Jesus Christ, the divine and human Redeemer.
[Comment Edited due to length]
“When they found you with the Fathers calling her Mother of God, Second Eve, and Mother of all Living, the Mother of Life, the Morning Star, the Mystical New Heaven, the Sceptre of Orthodoxy, the All-undefiled Mother of Holiness, and the like, they would have deemed it a poor compensation for such language, that you protested against her being called a Co-redemptrix . . . .
— Saint and Doctor John Henry Cardinal Newman to Pusey (1)
Mary of her own free will said YES to Gabriel, setting our redemption into play via the Incarnation. Without her YES, would Jesus become our Redeemer? Does her YES make her Co-Redemptress?
There are a few problems with this piece.
First, the idea that the prefix “co-” denotes equality–and thus would unjustly elevate Mary to the same level as Christ–is a uniquely modern linguistic take. MPF itself acknowledges that it was introduced as a modifier to “Redemptrix,” to make clear Mary’s dependence on her Son in this role.
Second, the idea that “Co-Redemptrix” detracts from Christ’s own role runs into a rather pointed rebuttal from St. Paul in Col 1:24. Paul makes clear in this verse that our participation is of value not only to ourselves, but also to the rest of the church.
Which leads into the third point: Mary is unique. The value and efficacy of her participation in her Son’s afflictions far outstrips that of any other human being.
Indeed, in that sense, as Mary is our model, the recognition of her as “Co-Redemptrix” can be seen as a long-overdue remedy to the heresy of sola fide,.
[Comment Edited due to length]
LV, you are correct that co-, in the past, denoted a lesser role. But if ‘equal’ is a “modern linguistic take” then it is the meaning of ‘co-‘ in the present. And this is why co-redemptrix can be problematic.
You may be misreading St. Paul. There is nothing that anyone can add to Christ’s suffering on the Cross. Paul is speaking of the subjective dimension of our redemption. (See “What is the meaning of Colossians 1:24?” — https://www.catholic.com/qa/how-can-christs-sufferings-lack-anything)
Yes, Mary is unique. We should look to her as our model of virtue and the perfection of humility.
It has to be so that Mary is Co-Redeemer or Christ would not be the Redeemer. Christ is the Redeemer and in Himself Redeems in His CoRedeemer (Mother) and His little co-redeemers (Body members, each) [cf Col 1:24]! How beautiful and triune divine!!!
All those united to the Head-Redeemer participate in His Head-Redeeming, Mary as Co-Redeemer Mother and ‘His baptized little co-redeemer members making up the Redeeming Sufferings of Christ, that is of His Members or Body’ (cf Col 1:24ff).
If the Body participates in redeeming in Christ, the Mother must, before and then with the Body with the Head, Her Son, the Redeemer!
These are not analogies, this is the very essence and reality of the New and Eternal Redeemer in Covenant Salvation, Wisdom, Perfection, Love, Life and Holiness!
No Mother Mary, no Son Jesus; no Mother Mary Co-redeemer, no Son Jesus Redeemer – no Body Redeemed as little co-redeemers.
Blessings and mercies!
[Comment Edited due to length]
[Comment Deleted]
Co means “with or together”, of course everything is by the power of God. But He chose to include the Blessed Virgin Mary (and us for that matter) in what He does. For a good understanding i would refer to St. Louis DeMontfort, especially his classic “True devotion to Mary” and Jesus’s unity prayer in the Gospel of John ch17. v 20-23. Biggest part is saying yes to God and accepting what He has taught, and allowing ourselves to be enlightened, this is what Mary did in her Fiat, not so much trying to understand perfectly. God bless.
As with original sin, adam and eve in a co[with]-role/fall other than man’s or all mankind’s, who with “original sin…”sins” only in an analogical sense: it is a sin “contracted” and not “committed” – a state and not an act” – so too with the Redemption, the NewAdam and NewEve in a Co[With]-role/Redemption other than all of baptized mankind’s little co-redeeming, who do so analogically, in union with the NewAdam and NewEve who Redeem objectively with role and responsibility, respectively and accordingly (cf. Jn 19:26-7; Col 1:24).
Jesus is the Redeemer, Mary the With/Co-Redeemer with Their respective unique and inseparable role and responsibility, and the baptized participatory little ‘with(co)’-redeemers have their role and responsibility! Easter Victory, Light, Love and Life – Beauty ever ancient ever new, O Felix Culpa!
Love the title. But I don’t think of it as she is equally as part, like Jesus! She said yes and is an important part of bringing Christ into the world. But Co means equal, to me and most people. Mary is not God, but completely human, therefor for that reason cannot be co-redemptrix.
That’s were the confusion lies. In the meaning of the part of the word of Co-. I read it is used as both to mean equal in some words and subordinate in others such as co-pilot. Co-pilot: “An assistant or second pilot who is subordinate to the main captain.” Co-Chair:Historically used when a secondary chairperson was subordinate to the primary chair, though it now frequently means equal sharing of duties.Subordinate Role: Proponents of the title state that the Latin prefix co- comes from cum, which means “with” rather than “equal to”. The title Co-Redemptrix is subordinate, not equal, to Jesus Christ in Catholic theology
The flesh that was sacrificed on the cross by Jesus came from Mary’s flesh. Without Mary’s fiat of Yes, Jesus would not have been born- God chose her to form the savior within her flesh and with her blood, hearts beating together. The Saints such as Louis DeMonfort, Pope John Paul II and Maximillian Kolbe have declared this truth- there are no Saints among those who are challenging it. Certainly not the author of Mater Populi Fidelis.
Mary is Co Redemptrix, she is one with Jesus, thats the way God made it.
So too are you, MS. Michael Co-Redemptrix following this reasoning. Guy, Texas
Yes, that is correct. By Gods power. God is my Father. Mary my Mother. Parents want there children to do what they do, otherwise Gods love would be lacking and that’s not possible. Another subject you may want to look at is the Church’s teaching from the Fathers of the Church and Holy Scripture on divinization. It is quite amazing…
MS, I have looked at that subject: https://catholicstand.com/mary-deified-human-hypostasis/
That is a good article.
Dear MS, TY for reading! GM
yes, but not in the unique and inseparable manner as Mary…, for Jesus is Flesh of Her flesh, bone of Her bone and Blood of Her blood, but not of we…blessings (Col 1:24)
yes, different manner…..'”My Father and Holy Spirit, at last, finally from ‘the Seed of the Woman, Flesh of Her flesh, Bone of Her bone, Blood of Her Blood” I come forth of Her very substance My Redeemer’s Flesh, Bone and Blood Her’s, Mine, Redeemer Son, Co/With-Redeemer Woman Body ours, Mine, NewAdam, New Eve”‘…true for Jesus and Mary but not us which is analogical to Theirs…blessings
Assume it is only an analogy. As such it is not stating an identity – it does not say Mary is redeemer. So- why not Gene Van Son is a co-redemtrix? no worries -it’s just an analogy. Add in the accepted doctrine of theosis-we all become partakers of the divine nature – and Gene co-redemtrix is not much of a stretch. [Guy Co-R: that’s a stretch too far].
Thank you Gene for making this so clear. Guy, Texas
A minor correction, Guy. The Latin suffix “-trix” is feminine. A male would be co-redemptor. But I’d have a problem with that as well. Humans may be able to share in God’s divine nature (theosis) but that does not mean we can claim an equal part in either our own creation or in our own redemption. Analogies can be useful but Mary’s role in our redemption doesn’t really require an analogy. She is the God-bearer and her ‘yes’ to God made our redemption possible. That being said, if someone finds the co-redemptrix analogy helpful, he or she is certainly free to think of Mary in that way – as long as he or she realizes it is an analogy.
no, it is reality and the reality, it is not an analogy, neither univocal, equivocal or analogous. God the Holy Spirit has attested to this…It is His Work, the Church Fathers and Doctors, the Saints and Holy Fathers have attested and they often have been given infused Wisdom, and Holy Fathers the same along with the Gift of Infallibility, better to trust in these than nought…we are joined to the One Christ whose Power and Grace is in reality and actuality, not analogously, within us! – His little ones are not simply puppets on a string, they actually with Him actually reign and participate and do by union with Him! Mary’s beingness is a co-redeeming constituent and inseparable reality of Christ’s redemptive work! Blessings!
(Comment Edited due to length]
PadreMG, it’s obvious from your many comments here that you strongly approve of the Co-Redemptrix title for Mary. That’s fine. Even Pope St. John Paul II used this title in speaking of Mary. But take care in how you promote the title.
Pope’s are indeed infallible in matters of faith and morals but no pope has infallibly declared Mary Co-Redemptrix. It is one of many titles that have been bestowed on Mary. But as the Vatican’s Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith noted in Mater Populi Fidelis (#22), “it is always inappropriate to use the title “Co-redemptrix” to define Mary’s cooperation. This title risks obscuring Christ’s unique salvific mediation and can therefore create confusion and an imbalance in the harmony of the truths of the Christian faith.”
The reality is, as Patricia D. makes clear, write all the words you want to, present all the possible arguments, expound as we say down here til the cows come home – Mary redeemed no one. I had a role in each of my children’s conception and birth. I was not a co-conceiver, I was not a co-mother. Guy, Texas