New document forthcoming from the DDF(CDF) about Marian Titles

15 Comments

1. Gregg the Obscure says:

   30 October 2025 at 8:08 PM

   “do be a jerk in writing” heh.
2. R2D says:

   30 October 2025 at 9:17 PM

   Do be a jerk in writing, padre :)

   The Co-Redemptrix title has always been controversial and my guess is this is likely to at the very least officially discourage it. It’s not as strongly rooted in the theological tradition as a lot of it’s proponents claim, and the 20th century has mixed views on it. St. John Paul II used it, but it was kept out of Lumen gentium, and Ratzinger was skeptical of it as CDF prefect. It’s the doctrinal equivalent of some of the extremely popular Marian apparitions that have both support and strong opposition in orthodox Catholic circles. The best way to make people happy on it would be to say nothing.

   I wouldn’t be shocked if they cite the Ratzinger/Seewald interview very early in any published text as well as some Francis interview quotes. Interviews aren’t magisterial, but they’re going to want to cover their left and right flanks here since no matter what’s said a bunch of people will be angry.
3. TonyB says:

   31 October 2025 at 12:47 AM

   Mary is Mediatrix of All Graces.

   None was ever saved, who has been saved, except by her intercession.

   Mary Immaculate, Star of the Morning
   Chosen before Creation Began
   Chosen to bring, for thy bridal adorning,
   Woe to the Serpent, and Rescue to Man:
   Sinners, we worship thy Sinless Perfection,
   Fallen and Weak, for thy pity we plead;
   Grant us the shield of thy Sovereign Protection,
   Measure thine aid by the depth of our need.
   Bend from thy throne at the voice of our crying;
   Bend to this Earth, which thy footsteps hath trod.
   Streatch out thine arms to us, Living and Dying:
   Mary Immaculate, Mother of God.
4. Benedict Joseph says:

   31 October 2025 at 9:09 AM

   Of all things this is the pool the DDF wants to do at the beginning of the new pontificate — which is fast looking like the last pontificate.
   Stuck on stupid.
5. Geoffrey says:

   31 October 2025 at 11:25 AM

   I personally find the title “Co-Redemptrix” much easier to understand / explain than “Mediatrix of All Graces”, but I believe them both, have used them in prayer, etc. I am hoping this document will explain each title rather than discourage them, but I doubt it…
6. Dantesque says:

   31 October 2025 at 11:08 PM

   I’m with Ratzinger on this one. And also very wary of this attitude I have seen in a good number of the people pushing for the proclamation, of insisting that it’d be a silver bullet that will magically solve Church problems. If anything, if we are going to go by what happened after the last two Marian dogmas were proclaimed, a new dogmatic declaration would bring tragedy and trial of one kind or another to the Church.
7. Not says:

   1 November 2025 at 6:54 AM

   I don’t need Rome to tell me how to call on my Mother. I call on Her with every Rosary. I speak to Her 5 ft. Statue in my home.

   I was taught this by my dearly departed Mother.
8. R2D says:

   1 November 2025 at 10:03 AM

   The fact that it’s being handled by DDF and not the pope tells you all you need to know. They’re not known for issuing documents promoting new things.

   That said it’s a weird thing to make a big deal of. They should just ignore all the people calling for the proclamation of the fifth dogma. Doing nothing has the same effect as condemning in this case.
9. Benedict Joseph says:

   1 November 2025 at 10:13 AM

   @Dantesque: “… if we are going to go by what happened after the last two Marian dogmas were proclaimed, a new dogmatic declaration would bring tragedy …” ? The only ones bruised by the proclamation of the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption of the Most Blessed Virgin Mary were and are those well on their way to a deconstructed katholicism more at home in Geneva than Rome.
   I once heard a “peritus” at “the” council, Godfrey Diekmann OSB joke that the Assumption was the greatest assumption of them all.
   That put the seal on my estimation of the mid-century council and the wisdom figures in their own minds who confected it.
   It surely has not improved in the last fifty years.
10. Dantesque says:

    2 November 2025 at 1:14 AM

    @Benedict Joseph:

    What I’m refereing to is the sort of almost superstitious attitude by which apparently we are being punished with… the current ecclesiastical and world situation because the fifth dogma hasn’t been proclaimed, but once it is done, boom! world peace! A traditionalist sweep! Mass conversions!

    Well, after the Immaculate Conception was proclaimed, the Pope lost his estates and was little more than a prisoner for decades until the concordat with the Italian state. After the Assumption, we got the postconciliar chaos and everything else that went with it.

    Yes, God punishes and gives miracles, but he’s disinclined to behave like an idol we manipulate to give us what we want with little personal effort.
11. Benedict Joseph says:

    2 November 2025 at 12:47 PM

    @Dantesque: Yours rings indeed of a sort of superstitious perspective. We are to believe that the proclamations of the Marian dogmas are responsible for unfortunate events which followed?
    I think not.
    Both the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption of the Most Blessed Virgin Mary were long held as true for centuries. Those realities yet to be elevated to dogma (and they will be despite the present dalliance the theological academy has with post-Christian protestant minimalism) Mediatrix of All Grace and Co-Redemptrix are blazingly apparent.
    Mary of Nazareth in mystical union and cooperation with the Holy Spirit consented to the conception of the Messiah, the Redeemer of the World. the fulfillment of God’s Grace. Her very substance gave a body to the realization of God’s redemption of fallen humanity.
    Co-Redemptrix: Witness to the sufferings of His humanity, of the tortures of Good Friday, standing next to the tree where her Divine Son was pinned in agony. Tell me any parent who would not be participating in the that redemptive act. There is not one.
    Surely St. Paul provides wider application of this concept in 1 Corinthians 3:9 and Colossians 1:24.
    If you and I can be co-workers with Christ and “make up for what is lacking in the sufferings of Christ” the Mother of the Son of God did so supremely.
    Ever Virgin Mary, Mediatrix of All Grace and Co-Redemptrix, pray for the Church of your Divine Son, Jesus Christ.
12. Dantesque says:

    2 November 2025 at 7:02 PM

    @Benedict Joseph:

    (If father, in his patience, allows)

    No. What I am pointing out is that the proclamation of Marian dogmas did not produce mini-Christian Millenniums before, and so the belief that it will this time is completely unfounded.

    There are many things that have been held to be true and venerable in Catholicism for many centuries, that are not dogmas; that does not make them any less true or venerable. It’s not the function of dogmatic declarations to catalogue every true and venerable thing firmly believed by Christians for centuries.
13. R2D says:

    2 November 2025 at 10:17 PM

    The controversy around “co-redemptrix” is that it’s not “readily apparent”, or at least it wasn’t to Pius XII, who declined to proclaim it a dogma, the council fathers, who discussed and intentionally declined to include it in Lumen gentium, Ratzinger, who said it strayed from the biblical and patristic tradition and could be a source of confusion, or Francis, who more or less had the same stance as CDF era Ratzinger.

    The history is that it’s a medieval title that more or less fell into disuse after Trent and was revived in the 19th century, became associated with some questionable apparitions in the mid-to-late 20th century, and then got a huge boost because John Paul II believed in the theology behind it and used it a few times in his works.

    That history presents a much more difficult question for Rome than either the Immaculate Conception (which had been debated for centuries and the only remaining question was whether Mary was sanctified in the womb or conceived free from sin) or the Assumption (one of the oldest Marian doctrines and feasts of the Church where Pius XII left the only debated question, whether she died or not, intentionally unanswered.)

    It took about 600 years for us to finally conclude on the question of the Immaculate Conception. I don’t think it’s fair for people on either side of the issue of the Co-Redemptrix title to claim their preferred outcome at this point is the obvious one. The popes and bishops have gone back and forth on it in the 117 years since it first appeared in print in Rome.

    Which goes back to Fr. Z’s point: people should stay calm on this, read, and discuss the points in contention in a charitable manner.
14. GregB says:

    3 November 2025 at 4:45 PM

    In the Fall it wasn’t until Adam and Eve had both eaten of the forbidden fruit that their eyes were opened. Suggesting that Original Sin was a one flesh sin. Would not the redemption be a one flesh redemption? Adam was the priest of Eden. Jesus is the Eternal High Priest. We call Original Sin the sin of Adam, even though Adam and Eve had both sinned. The same could be said for our redemption. Jesus takes primacy in the redemption like Adam takes primacy in Original Sin. Adam failed in his priestly duties, whereas Christ fulfilled His priestly duties with His self sacrifice on the Cross. Remember Mary is known as Our Lady of Sorrows with her Seven Sorrows depicted as swords piercing her Immaculate Heart. Through her fiat and her Seven Sorrows Mary shared in Christ’s Passion and Death. We call Mary the Undoer of Knots, reversing Eve’s sin. Co-redemption could mean together or with and not necessarily equal.
15. R2D says:

    3 November 2025 at 11:06 PM

    Draft leaked online:
    1) affirms the explanations of her share in the redemptive work
    2) points out that the Co-Redemptrix title is a relatively modern phenomenon; traces its history and explains what JP2 meant when he used it
    3) Quotes Ratzinger magisterially replying to dubia and in his Seewald interview opposing it as not being in line with the biblical or patristic traditions and saying it is not a part of the Deposit of Faith
    4) A bunch of quotes from St. Paul
    5) Repeats all of Francis’ opinions on it
    6) Concludes that the title is too confusing to use and has the potential to undermine the understanding of the unique nature of Christ’s salvation
    7) Condemns the title as always inappropriate based on point 6.

    I should have placed bets… only a partial leak so there could be more, but that seems to be the heavy parts.