A doctrinal statement from the Vatican has affirmed some titles for Mary, and says that others, including “Co-redemptrix”, should not be used. Limits on Catholic devotion to Mary are carefully delineated in the new statement.
The “Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith,” once known as the Inquisition, has issued the note called Mater populi fidelis (MPF) with the approval of Pope Leo XIV. Unlike most Protestants, Catholics express a “devotion” to Mary, and this note affirms that as a Catholic belief while providing guidelines for how this is to be done.
“In this positive framework, the doctrinal text analyses a number of Marian titles, encouraging the adoption of some of those appellations and warning against the use of others,” Vatican News reports. “Titles such as ‘Mother of Believers,’ ‘Spiritual Mother,’ ‘Mother of the Faithful’ are noticed with approval in the Note. Conversely, the title of ‘Co-redemptrix’ is deemed inappropriate and problematic.”
More succinctly, the Catholic News Agency (CNA) simply headlines their report as “Vatican nixes use of ‘Co-Redemptrix’ as title for Mary”
The new note can be seen as a pushback on the use of the “Co-redemptrix” title for Mary by previous popes. CNA reports: “Saint John Paul II referred to Mary as ‘Co-redemptrix’ on at least seven occasions, particularly relating this title to the salvific value of our sufferings when they are offered together with the sufferings of Christ, to whom Mary is united especially at the Cross.”
MPF supports the Bible’s teaching that Jesus is the only mediator: “The biblical statement about Christ’s exclusive mediation is conclusive. Christ is the only Mediator, ‘for there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all’ (1 Tim 2:5-6). The Church has clarified this unique place of Christ in light of the fact that he is the eternal and infinite Son of God, hypostatically united with the humanity he assumed. This is exclusive to Christ’s humanity, and the consequences that derive from it can only be properly applied to him. In this precise sense, the Incarnate Word’s role is exclusive and unique. Given this clarity in the revealed Word of God, special prudence is required when applying the term ‘Mediatrix’ to Mary. In response to a tendency to broaden the scope of Mary’s cooperation through this title, it is helpful to specify the range of its value as well as its limits.
“On the one hand, we cannot ignore the fact that the word ‘mediation’ is commonly used in many areas of everyday life, where it is understood simply as cooperation, assistance, or intercession. As a result, it is inevitable that the term would be applied to Mary in a subordinate sense. Used in this way, it does not intend to add any efficacy or power to the unique mediation of Jesus Christ, true God and true man.”
MPF goes on to detail the limits of using the word mediation, affirming that in terms of salvation, Jesus is the only mediator, while leaving a place for Mary in the Catholic doctrine in praying to saints.
“On the other hand, it is clear that Mary had a real mediatory role in enabling the Incarnation of the Son of God in our humanity, since the Redeemer was to be “born of woman” (Gal 4:4). The account of the Annunciation shows that this involved not only a biological mediation since it highlights Mary’s active involvement in asking questions (cf. Lk 1:29, 34) and accepting with a firm resolve: “fiat” (Lk 1:38). Mary’s response opened the gates of the Redemption that all humanity had awaited and that the saints described with poetic drama. At the wedding feast in Cana, Mary also fulfils a mediating role when she presents the needs of the newlyweds to Jesus (cf. Jn 2:3) and instructs the servants to follow his directions (cf. Jn 2:5).
“The Second Vatican Council’s terminology regarding mediation primarily refers to Christ; it sometimes also refers to Mary, but in a clearly subordinate manner. In fact, the Council preferred to use a different terminology for her: one centered on cooperation or maternal assistance. The Council’s teaching clearly formulates the perspective of Mary’s maternal intercession, using expressions such as ‘manifold intercession’ and ‘maternal help.’ These two aspects together define the specific nature of Mary’s cooperation in Christ’s action through the Spirit. Strictly speaking, we cannot talk of any other mediation in grace apart from that of the incarnate Son of God. Therefore, we must always recall, and never obscure, the Christian conviction that ‘must be firmly believed as a constant element of the Church’s faith” regarding “the truth of Jesus Christ, Son of God, Lord and only Savior, who through the event of his incarnation, death, and resurrection has brought the history of salvation to fulfillment, and which has in him its fullness and center.’”
Corrected: Leo to XIV
Modification of the attributed role for Mary is being “reimagined” as pressure from archaeology artefacts, especially from Alexandria, is exhibiting a close historical parallel between Isis and Mary. There are references in the Bible to the Queen of Heaven which the Israelites were forbidden to worship – but did so anyway. The text of Jeremiah is traditionally interpreted to be a reference to Ishtar or Ashtoreth. The Greeks and Romans had the title for Hera and Juno. However the title was also applied to the Egyptian goddess Isis. Isis began to influence the Greek and Roman world when the cult was brought to Corinth by sailors via the hundreds of ships which frequently stopped at Corinth, which was a major port. Great festivals, miracle healings and afterlife were dedicated to Isis at Corinth which captivated the city. This is reflected in the ancient writer Aupleius “I am she that is the natural mother of all things, mistress and governess of all the elements, the initial progeny of worlds, chief of powers divine, Queen of Heaven… and the Egyptians which are excellent in all kind of ancient doctrine, and by their proper ceremonies accustomed to worship me, do call me Queen Isis” By the time Paul arrived in Corinth Isis was a major force and had been granted official protection by the Roman state. Delivering the Christian message at Corinth was thus a major problem which is why Paul dedicated so much to that city, writing 1 and 2 Corinthians (probably a lost 3 and 4 Corinthians) as well as writing Romans while at Corinth. If this was not bad enough, when Christianity found its way to Egypt it encountered Isis firmly entrenched there worshipped as the Queen of Heaven.
It is suggested that elevating Mary to the status seen in Catholicism occurred to counteract the strength and influence of Isis. This was especially consolidated under Constantine who had political reasons also to bring Egypt, his eastern province, under the one religious and theological banner at Nicea. His empire was at risk of being split in two, Eastern and Western, part of the reason was division in belief of Jesus, but also the role of Isis. The Nicean Apostles creed solved the Jesus issue, but not the Isis issue. The elevation of Mary eventually solved the Queen goddess Isis matter, but the true Mary may have been lost in the fusion of theological imagery.
Despite the infallibility of Pope John Paul II, he says one thing, and the infallibility of Pope Leo XIV, he says another. And this is consistent with history. Yet the Roman Catholic Church prides itself upon the fact that it never changes This also despite the fact that it has introduced numerous new doctrines, heresies, over the centuries.