A post by Bishop Rob Mutsaerts, Auxiliary Bishop of 's-Hertogenbosch (Bois-le-Duc), Netherlands. Translated from his blog in Dutch here.
Cardinal Fernandez causes confusion once again.
It never ceases to amaze me that in the modern world, people are primarily afraid of words. People no longer seem to fear sin or foolishness, but only misunderstandings. And as if it were not clear enough: there is no truth that cannot be misunderstood. Roman Catholic theology has always placed an extraordinary emphasis on Christ as the only Savior. That is precisely why I have never seen any threat in the way one speaks of Mary. Christ's position is so absolute that it would be absurd to think that anyone could truly overshadow Him. Cooperation does not mean rivalry. If God truly became man, then He not only humbled Himself, but also made Himself dependent on human obedience: first on Mary, later on the apostles, and ultimately on all of us. Cardinal Fernandez is seeing phantoms when he says that it is no longer advisable to use the title “Co-Redemptrix” for Mary.
So I see nothing unreasonable in the idea that Mary, in a manner totally subordinate and arising from grace, participated in the work of Christ. The term Co-Redemptrix is not as shocking as some fear. And, honestly, if Cardinal Fernandez is afraid that people will put Mary on an equal footing with Christ, then the problem lies not with Mary, but with Fernandez. It is precisely Mary's presence that reminds me that the Christian faith is not an idea, a philosophy, or a moral system, but history. The factual reality of Mary's cooperation in the work of our redemption does not stem from human invention, but from the fact that God Himself decided to work through human mediation. Every step in the history of salvation shows that God does not act in spite of man, but through man. Mary's “fiat” is the first, and perhaps clearest, example of this supernatural cooperation.
When the Church speaks of Mary as Co-Redemptrix—a term not used lightly by saints and popes—it does not mean that her merits have any value in themselves, or that she detracts from Christ's unique place. Tradition means that, through an ineffable grace, she is involved in an incomparable way in what Christ accomplished.
This doctrine has undergone a certain development. The development of the doctrine does not mean a change in dogma, but rather the unfolding of what was always present in its seed. It seems to me that the title Co-Redemptrix is not a novelty, but a consequence of what has always been believed: that Mary, through grace, was the instrument through which the Word became flesh, and that she participated in Christ's work of salvation through faith, love, and suffering.
For centuries, the title Co-Redemptrix was peacefully written in the pages of the Church. Saints did not use the word recklessly, but out of reverence. Thus, St. Bonaventure spoke of Mary as the one who “worked with Christ in redemption.” Bernardin of Siena had the courage to praise the Virgin's cooperation with the Son, because he knew that cooperation (co-operatio) is not equality. The Church Fathers were not concerned that the faithful would forget Christ as soon as Mary was praised. They trusted that people would understand the distinction as they could understand the distinction between the Sun and the moon.
And the Popes? Leo XIII spoke of Mary as the one “through whom we received the mystery of Redemption.” Pius X spoke of her unique union with Christ in his suffering. Benedict XV used words that would be considered dangerous today: he called her struggle on the cross “almost equal” in intention to that of Christ—almost, I repeat, not really, and only the poorly listening world would fail to hear the difference. Pius XI, the pope who was not known for romantic weaknesses, even explicitly used the word Co-Redemptrix in a speech, as if it were the most natural thing in the world for the Mother of the Lord to bear such a title. The saints and popes did not fear that Mary would become too great. They feared above all that we would become too small.
It is a strange phenomenon that Fernandez wants to ban a word because he is afraid that it will be misunderstood. You would expect him to first try to make it understood by simply explaining it. If someone says that a map is confusing, teach him to read maps. You don't tear the map to shreds and then declare the world flat. If you say that a theological term is dangerous, you could explain that “co” comes from cum, “with”; it is not a coordinating term. There has never been any misunderstanding about that. But instead, the head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith makes the word suspect.
If God was not afraid to give a girl from Nazareth the title “Mother of God,” why should we be afraid to give her lesser titles? Ancient heretics cringed at this divine paradox, but the Church did not. Who can imagine a more humble creature than Mary herself? And yet God gave her a title that shook the universe. This proves that God likes to create greatness out of humility.
Catholicism is the faith that teaches us that God works with human beings. The Gospel begins with cooperation: an angel waits for a human being's answer, and the human being says “yes,” and heaven holds its breath. If that is not cooperation, then the word does not exist. The whole story of the Incarnation is the triumph of God's desired cooperation between Creator and creature. And if humanity—through Mary—was allowed to be involved in the coming of the Savior, why not in his sacrifice on the cross, in a way that is entirely dependent on God's grace? It is better and also easier to explain big words than to heal a small faith. Converting Christians is still a pagan task. The Church has never wanted to diminish the truth in order to reassure people. It has always wanted to elevate people so that they can bear the truth.
I would like to offer a few suggestions: (1) Teach people the meaning, rather than deleting words. (2) Ecclesiastical continuity should not be dependent on contemporary sensibilities. (3) Paradox and complex language are part and parcel of Catholic identity. And (4) Mary's role is not a threat to Christ, but rather a confirmation of His incarnation and love for human cooperation.
+Rob Mutsaerts
[Rorate Note: on the same matter, it was also reported yesterday that Cardinal Fernandez did not consult with any Mariologist before his disastrous note - source. It figures...]
