www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Co-redeemer???

Dear friends,

"Tais presviais tis Theotokou, Soter, soson imas" - "Throgh the prayers of the Mother of God, savior, save us"- found in Dinine Liturgy antiphons is the expresion of the tradition of the Eastern Church about the participation of the Mother of God in the Salvation. The exclamation "Yperagia Theotoke, Soson imas" is not found in the old liturgical books,that is just something holy-singers introduced in the Liturgy for musical reasons, and should be translated "Most Holy Mother of God, defend us" , or "deliver us" and not "save us". In some places in Greece they prefer to say "Yperagia Theotoke, presveve yper imon", "Most holy Mother of God, pray for us".

But that has no relation with the participation of Mary in the Salvation . In fact te Greek verb "sozo" is used in the liturgy with two meanings "save" (eternal salvation)and "defend, protec, deliber" (deliber us from any danger or difficulty). When at the Great Litany (Eirinika) we pray "For the peace of God and the salvation of our souls, let us pray to the Lord" is appropiate to translate the word "sotiria" by the word "salvation", when later we pray "For travelers by land, sea, and air, for the sick, the suffering, the captives, and for their salvation, let us pray to the Lord" the Greek word "Sotiria" in this case should be better translated by the word "savekeeping". Those who know Latin will apreciate that in Latin we find the same problem with the word "salus" that means "salvation" but also "health".

From my point of view the Most Holy Mother of God is not considered "co-redentrix" or "mediatrix of all the graces" in Eastern Church theology. Our Lord God and Savior Jesus Christ is own only Redeemer, Mary is the Mother of the Savior and the "prologue" to the Book of our Salvation, Mary was the necesary colaborator in the work of the salvation in God's economy, the socia redemptoris, as some pope, whose name I can not remember, said. Mary can not be considered "mediatrix of all the graces" by any "Orthodox" christian. In the prayer of the third antiphon we say "Lord, You have given us grace to offer these common prayers with one heart. You have promised to grant the requests of two or three gathered IN YOUR NAME". Jesus told us that the Father would grant us whatever we would ask IN HIS NAME, the Gospel sais nothing about THE NAME OF OUR LADY. I suguess that Latin theologians could find better ways of expressing their love or devotion to the Most Holy Mother of God, than making new dogmas. I call myself Christian whith the name of my Lord Jesus Christ, not with the name of His Most Holy Mother. I love very much our Lady but I will never stop being "Christian" to be "Marianist". Eastern Theology is "Christocentric", Latin or Western Theology is...well I do not know. In Vatican Council II the dogmatic teaching of the Church about the Virgin was between the "Christology" and the "Ecclesiology". Mary, Mother of God and image of the New Jerusalem in Heaven !!! That the point!!! Well, many in the Latin Church have forgotten the teaching of the last Council, and most of them seem to ignore also the first seven councils...probably some of them have forgotten the Gospel as well. The right devotion to the Mother of God drive nearer to Christ. The Virgin does not want more dogmatic definitions that may put her Son in some kind of secondary place, she wants to remain "the servant of the Lord". New definitions would be not only contrary to the Eastern Church tradition but also contrary to the Mariology of the II Vatican Council. I can just say "Most Holy Mother of God, defend us from those devotes of you who want to destroy the Mystical Body of your Son".

Dear Francisco,

There is no doubt that the focus of devotion to the Most Holy Mother of God is always a greater and more comprehensive devotion to Her Son and our Lord, Jesus Christ!

But the Mother of God does not compete with Her Son in any way.

She exists totally as the medium by which the Incarnation was effected.

And God chose to become Man and to save us through His Humanity and through His Church, Sacraments, the Communion of Saints etc.

The Incarnation did not end mediatorship, but extended it.

I really did not have a good appreciation for just what the Incarnation and Crucifixion of Christ meant for my salvation until I received it through Mary, the Most Holy Mother of God.

She is the window through which I see Christ, experience Christ and love Christ as God Incarnate.

Christ sent me to His Mother, and She sent me back to Him.

Our Byzantine Liturgy sings the Virgin Mary's praise higher than the Western liturgy does.

The icon of the Madonna holding Her Child is nothing else but the Icon of the Incarnation.

And He Who became Man for us is ONLY to be found in others.

The Byzantine liturgy's services to Mary and the Saints are a Divine service - we honour the Christ Who lives in them and Who deifies them.

That is truly incarnational theology!

Does She save us? She truly does with Her intercession and protection.

God came to us through Mary, and we go to Him through Her.

The early chapters of Luke have the Archangel Gabriel and St Elizabeth blessing her, Mary, first and then Her Son "Blessed are you among women and blessed is the Fruit of you womb."

The emphasis on coming to Christ alone is not a Catholic or Orthodox one.

My veneration for the Most Holy Mother of God always brings me squarely to the Feet of Christ.

Only She can do that for us in the way She does.

I will only go to Christ with Her. I believe that is His Will.

Alex

Francisco,

If you can read English well, I said the Orthodox Church called Theotokos a Mediatrix!

So, are you going to challenge the Orthodox Church based on your opinion?

"Presvyataya Bohoroditse spasi nas", "most Holy Mother of God save us" is a most popular response in the Moleben to the Theotokos loved by both Orthodox and Greek Catholics.

The significant issue is that the Savior Christ redeems through His salvific acts in the Paschal Mystery. He alone can be the Redeemer because only He acted through the Paschal Mystery.

The Theotokos "saves" in the sense of the words of the Moleben through her unique intercession to Christ as our Mother. So again, in the end it is only Christ who actually redeems, performs the "act" of redemption.

This is kind of a funky analogy. It's like a door. Only one person has the key. Someone very close to that person may plead to have the person with the key open the door, and they may acquiesce, but it is still the person with the key who performs the "act" of opening the door. We don't say both can open the door, as only the one person with the key can open the door. The "key" in this case is the Paschal Mystery of our Lord, God and Savior Jesus Christ.

Dear Diak,

Yes, excellent!

To celebrate the Mother of God is to celebrate the mystery of the Divine Incarnation.

She is inseparable from Her Son and Her importance lies precisely in the fact that She gave God the Humanity through which we are saved as St Paul says, "Salvation is through the Man Jesus Christ."

She is also at the centre of the fruit of Christ's Salvation, Theosis and She became the first among our race to have achieved God's plan for humanity in being taken, body and soul, to heaven.

This is why I cannot understand anyone implying there is some sort of "competition" between Her and Her Son.

It is by Her that I feel fully enclosed in the embrace of Her Son.

Alex

My dearest Spdundas,

I am terribly sorry because of being a poor and stupid Spaniard who can not read English at all, I can just read Spanish and Greek. I do apologize as well for my ignorance of the English and Slavonic translations of the Divine Liturgy, I just know the Divine Liturgy in Greek, that if I am not wrong is the original language Byzantine Divine Holy Liturgy was celebrated (or was it in Church Slavonic?). Sunday Liturgy's ordinary Kontakion sung from All Saints Sunday to July 27th and from September 22nd to November 8th in all the Orthodox and Byzantine Catholic Churches along the world and not just in at a local Antiochian Orthodox Church sais in Greek:

"Prostasia ton Christanon akataischynte, mesiteia pros ton poiitin ametathete, mi paridis amartolon deiseon fonas alla prophthason os agathi eis tin voitheia imon, ton piston krafgazonton soi, tachynon eis presveian kai spefson eis eikesian, i prostatevousa aei Theotoke ton timonton se"

That can be translated in English (not by me obviously as I am just an ignorant):

"O never-failing protection of Christians and their ever-present intercession before the Creator, do not be heedless to prayerful voices of sinners, but in your goodness come to us in time to help us who call upon you with confidence. Hasten, Oh Mother of God, to intercede for us. You have always protected those who honor you"

The words "prostasia" means in Greek "protection" not "intercessor", the word "mesiteia" means "intercession" not "Mediatrix".
Does the kontakion say that Mary is the "Co-Redentrix" or the "Mediatrix of all the graces". Obviously NO, and thousand times NO. And, my most beloved Spdundas, be sure that I would never challenge the Orthodox Church based on my opinion. In this forum I have not just expressed my personal opinions but rather I have tried to find out what is the teaching of the Church about the Most Holy Mother of God Our Lady and Ever Virgin Mary, as it is expressed by the liturgical texts and the Oecumenical Councils. Is there any thing wrong about it? Do you think that it is un-orthodox? Our love and devotion for the Mother of God can not make us to be rude with those, who, shearing our own faith, have different opinions about topics that have not been object of a dogmatical definition by the Church. Please excuse me, an ignorat, for my poor English.

Dear Alex,

I agree completely with you, I apreciate your religion experience very much and the role plaid in it by Our Lady. I have not say that Mary is not our mediatrix before Christ, I have just said that she is not the "Mediatrix of all the graces". The is an important diference. Mary played a very significant role in the history of our salvation according with God's economy, but she is not "co-Redentrix", she is the neccesary colaboration in the work of the Redemtion. Remember that "No body will go to the Father if it is not by me", said the Lord.

Yours in Christ and in the Most Holy Theotokos.

Speaking for myself, I've always been confused by the western titles for Mary. "Theotokos" says so very much, what need have we of other (and frankly inferior) titles?

I would say that "Theotokos" includes the role of Mary as a mediatrix (dunno if the co- is necessary, since Mary can bring our concerns directly to her Son), and she certainly fulfills that role in the Gospels when she says, simply, "They have no wine." That is so beautiful. Mary speaks our needs before the Son of God. And the Son of God responds.

The title of co-reedemer kind of bothers me. I'm not sure what is meant by it, but it seems inherently confusing. Christ is the Redeemer. He is, to quote the RC Divine Praises, both "true God and true Man." That's pretty darned profound and quite beautiful in its expression, in and of itself and as a simple statement of truth.

Mary says very little in the Gospels. But by simply saying, "They have no wine," she shows her concern for the everday needs of everyday human beings and her willingness to bring these directly to her Son's attention. And He shows his willingness to listen to His most holy Mother. Wow - again, I find that to be really beautiful. Mary cares a lot about these people at their wedding and their seemingly mild social dilemma - and our petitions become her petitions, if only we ask her to intercede.

Again, I really think "Theotokos," simple as it is, is a fine title to encompass Mary as we know her from both tradition and Gospel accounts. It includes all lesser, incomplete titles we might come up with for the great and holy Mother of God.

Dear Francisco,

I fully intend to go back to Spain next year . . . I miss it . . . sniff . . .

Well, I don't know!

St. Padre Pio's great devotion was to "Our Lady, Mediatrix of all Graces."

You are of the West - you explain it to this Byzantine Barbarian

Perhaps my ignorance is due to the fact that my ancestors spent too many years outside of communion with Rome?

I have no problem with this title - Christ came to us through Mary, and we go to Him through Her - no problem with that and that is what my Byzantine liturgical tradition is teaching me all the time too.

Yes, Christ has two Wills, but the human will follows the Divine Will, and as our Oriental Orthodox brothers and sisters will tell us it is one "Divine-Human Will."

The Filioque too came out of Spain . . .

I wanted to share this passage from the thoughts of Pope John Paul II:

". . .At one point I began to question any devotion to Mary, believing that, if it became too great, it might end up compromising the supremacy of the worship owed to Christ. At that time, I was greatly helped by a book by St Louis Marie Grignion de Montfort entitled "Treatise of True Devotion to the Blessed Virgin." There I found the answers to my questions. Yes, Mary does bring us closer to Christ, she does lead us to Him, provided that we live her mystery in Christ . . . thanks to Saint Louis, I began to discover the immense riches of Marian devotion from fresh perspectives."

Juan Pablo Segundo

Gift and Mystery, pp. 28-30

The above fellow inspired me in the same direction and I was privileged to personally express my gratitude to him in July of this here during the Papal visit.

He's a very nice man, you know . . .

Alex

The only shrine that I feel comfortable with is Walsingham. It�s focus is on the incarnation of God as man. It may be my Anglo-catholic heritage, but at the same time the Holy Mother at Walsingham is directing us to God with no promises of salvation from her prayers, just Christ the Son of God. BTW it is the only shrine that prots (Anglican/Methodist), Catholic and Orthodox all view as �real�. :p

Dear Anne,

In any event, that title is something that would not affect us Easterners - to quote from that Byzantine Bastion of ours, Cantor Joe, it is a "One Lung" consideration.

Her role in the Crucifixion of Christ was to suffer this, as Simeon foretold in the Temple, in her soul.

And just as She is the Mother of our Lord according to His Body, so too is she the Mother of the Church which is His Body.

She nourishes us and guides us and covers us with her mantle as she leads us to ever more closer union with her Son.

Just as John took her home after the Crucifixion, so too do we take her home to be our Sovereign Lady. The Apostles used to leave a place for her at their supper table after she went to be with her Son in Heaven.

Orthodox monasteries still do that in a ritual called the "Trapeza."

At daily Compline, just before the Prayer to the Theotokos, there is the invocation "Save, help and protect us, O Theotokos and Ever-Virgin Mary!"

This is, in fact, the ancient invocation used by the Apostles themselves, and revealed to them in a vision of the Mother of God when she told them she would always come to assist whomever used this invocation to call on her help - something granted to her by her Son Himself.

And because John was told by Christ on the Cross "Behold your Mother," the Syrians (?) refer to him as "John, Son of Mary."

Alex

Dear Alex,

To be completely sincere I do not care if "Our Lady, Mediatrix of all Graces" was Saint Padre Pio (Saint Pio, Priest and Friar sounds really better)great devotion or not. I do not know if Father Pio was or was not a saint (sorry I do know nothing about his life), I have no reason to put in doubt his holiness or the "orthodoxy
" of his teachings, but as far as I know Padre Pio is not one of the Fathers or Doctors of the Church, or a "Guide of Orthodoxy". Saint Agustin is considered a saint and Father of the Church both by Catholic and Orthodox although Orthodox and Catholic theologians have put in doubt the "orthodoxy" of some of his teachings. St. Hippolytus, one of the Fathers of the Church, is the only anti-pope, an schismatic, to be venerated as a saint. So please tell me me about Padre Pio's virtues, not about his Mariology.

Well, I am not so much of the West as you think, as far as I am living now in Greece, where I have being studing during the last years. I would never use the word "Barbarian" talking about Byzantines. That was the word Greeks and Byzantines used to talk about their "savage neirboughs", some of them from the West.

I do not think you are an ignorant. I would never say something like that. In any case your hypotetic ignorance has no relation with the attitude of your ancestors towards the Holy Roman See, in fact someone can be Catholic and an ignorant at the same time.

Are you really trying to say that the Virgin is Christ's Human Will? Well, I would say that this kind of affirmations are at least "dangerous" from the theological point of view, but I am not a theologian or a priest. Is there any body who could tell Alex and all us about the Church's doctrine about Christ's two wills, please? Can you help us please?

Can you tell me what do you mean when you say "The Filioque too came out of Spain . . . ". What is from your point of view the relationship among Mariology, Pneumatology and the country I come from? Did I say something wrong or inapropiate about your country or your national backgrounds, if so, please tell me? Do you think that it is apropiate to make personal references when talking about theology?
By the way the filioque does not come from Spain, the church in Spain used the right expresion "ex Patre procedentem" till 6th century Council of Braga, when they decided, ignorats of the canons of the first ecumenical council, to insert the words "et Filio". They did so because they wanted to show the Arrians and "Pneumatomachi" Visigoths invasors that the Word and the Holy Spirit were trully God and not creations. Probably that was a wrong way but nor the Pope nor the Patriarchate of Constantinople accused the Chuch of Spain of heresy. Two centuries later the Popes (Adrian I, Leon III)and the Patriarch of Constantinople condemed the Council of Aix-la-Chapelle and the Frank-Germanic Church for the introduction of the expression "qui Patre Filioque procedit". Probably the did so because Spanish Church made a mistake when fighting against the heresy, whereas Frank-German Church did the same when fighting againts the primacy of the Pope of Rome and the Byzantine Impire. The "Filoque"is a long and always exciting story.

Talking about devotions. I think that the place of the Theotokos in the life of the Church is much more important than a devotion. Devotion is something particular (rosary, meddals...), whereas I think that the role of Mary must have a public (liturgical) and strong ecclesiastical character. The liturgy is a commemoration of the Salvation, in which Mary paid a significant role. She is in fact the image of the Church, the New Jerusalem. When Christians consider the figure of Mary in the contex of the Incarnation and Salvation misteries and from an ecclesiological perspective there is no danger of compromising the supremacy of the worship owed to Christ. When we consider the figure of Mary from the devotial point of view (I mean without a Christological and Eclesiological perspective) that can only drive us to all kind of errors.

En Chisto

Dear Francisco,

Well, your last paragraph summarizes what I believe and what we should all believe!

No, I don't believe Our Lady is the "Human Will" of Christ! Heaven forbid!

And you said nothing to offend anyone.

I perhaps joke too much . . .

But I love Spain and so I consider all Spaniards to be like my relatives.

And I am always joking with relatives . . .

Alex

I LOVE Annie-SFO's insight. "They have no wine."

No theologizing, no hypostatic metaphysics, no canonical folderol. Just a Mom asking her Son to do something for her (and ultimately) for the wedding party. What more need one say about the Mother-of-God?

Blessings!

Dear Francisco,

CIX!

Just a few points

"Tais presviais tis Theotokou, Soter, soson imas" - "Throgh the prayers of the Mother of God, savior, save us"- found in Dinine Liturgy antiphons is the expresion of the tradition of the Eastern Church about the participation of the Mother of God in the Salvation. The exclamation "Yperagia Theotoke, Soson imas" is not found in the old liturgical books,that is just something holy-singers introduced in the Liturgy for musical reasons, and should be translated "Most Holy Mother of God, defend us" , or "deliver us" and not "save us".

I'm afraid I don't agree, this doesn't square with the bits of Classical Greek that I know - more below.

But that has no relation with the participation of Mary in the Salvation . In fact te Greek verb "sozo" is used in the liturgy with two meanings "save" (eternal salvation)and "defend, protec, deliber" (deliber us from any danger or difficulty).

I don't think so. Derivations from the verb CWZW are used in those two meanings, but not the original verb itself - Liddell & Scott's entry on the verb seems quite clear on that. The primary meaning is to save, keep safe, and in that exclamation in the liturgy, we say CWICWN HMAC - an aorist imperative, meaning "save us RIGHT NOW!!!"

When at the Great Litany (Eirinika) we pray "For the peace of God and the salvation of our souls, let us pray to the Lord" is appropiate to translate the word "sotiria" by the word "salvation", when later we pray "For travelers by land, sea, and air, for the sick, the suffering, the captives, and for their salvation, let us pray to the Lord" the Greek word "Sotiria" in this case should be better translated by the word "savekeeping".

Yes, for CWTHPIA, but not the verb CWZW!

Those who know Latin will apreciate that in Latin we find the same problem with the word "salus" that means "salvation" but also "health".

This is true, CWTHPIA does mean saving, deliverance, a safe return home or a safekeeping.

Perhaps we might understand it in the way one theologian (I forget which) put it - that Heaven and Hell start right now for us, and whenever we are in a state of sin or despondency, we are in a sort of Hell, and it is that sort of Hell that we are asking the Mother of God to deliver us from. Eternal salvation is not just a matter of what happens after death, after all, but a matter of the here and now.

Just one point about the "co-redemptix" - there's a line in the Akathistos Hymn to the Mother of God that comes dangerously(!) close to this: "Dispenser of God's grace". Hmm, food for thought?

Just my two obols.

in Domino,

Edward

Regarding the whole question of asking the Virgin to "save us", I read either here or elsewhere someone (I honestly don't know who) saying that this verse, at least in the Akathist to the Virgin, should be interpreted in context, the context for the Akathist being the Annunciation, and the "save us" our request to the Virgin to say "yes" to the Angel Gabriel and be the Mother of God the Word. When I first read this explanation (if I've stated it right), it reminded me a lot of that passage from the writings of Saint Bernard of Clairvaux which is read during Advent in the Office of Readings in the West, which has all creation pause and wait eagerly to hear what she will say to Gabriel.

I like it.