Is it OK to Petition the Pope for a Marian Dogma?

One of the objections I hear often when talking with people who are uncertain about the movement for a dogmatic proclamation of Mary’s role in salvation history goes something like this:

I accept the doctrine of Mary’s role in redemption. And I accept that the definition of a dogma would be good for the Church. However, I don’t think it’s appropriate to petition the Holy Father for the proclamation of a dogma. After all, faith and morals are not decided by popular opinion.

This is true that doctrines of the faith are not settled by popular opinion. Popular opinion often errs in matters of faith and morals. So in that case, is it right to petition the Holy Father for another Marian dogma? Does this in some way restrict the spiritual freedom and discernment of the Holy Father?

Further, in a second counterargument some have compared the nature of petitioning the Holy Father for a Marian dogma with that of petitioning the Holy Father in favor of allowing wider use of artificial contraception. The argument goes:

What if millions of the faithful had petitioned Pope Paul VI ahead of the issuing of Humanae Vitae? Perhaps he would have changed the Church teachings.

First, a response to the latter objection, then we’ll look at the former.

Let’s look at the circumstances surrounding the birth of the Humanae Vitae document. In that case, the Holy Father called a commission of clergy and lay faithful to examine the question of contraception. The commission concluded that the Church should change her longstanding Tradition in light of the developments of the modern age. Pope Paul VI, however, disregarded their recommendation, but issued Humanae Vitae and affirmed the Church's constant Tradition. There is no reason to believe that had petitions been sent to the Holy Father (and they probably were) that he would have acted any differently in the case of Humanae Vitae, because in that case, the faithful would not have been acting in accordance with the true sensus fidei, or "sense of the faithful" (see, Donum Veritatis, a CDF document of 1990 also known as the Ecclesial Vocation of the Theologian, n. 35). The guarantee of infallibility protects the Sovereign Pontiff from error in faith and morals, no matter how many petitions he receives.

Another thing to consider: Marian coredemption is already the Church's present doctrine. This is and has been a matter of faith and morals from the beginning of the Church and was taught explicitly by St. Irenaeus in the second century ("Mary became the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race," Against Heresies, quoted in Lumen Gentium, Chapter VIII, n. 56, Second Vatican Council). Contraception, however, has never been an acceptable practice in the Catholic Church. The doctrine on contraception has always been that it is forbidden. Marian coredemption and spiritual motherhood, on the other hand, has been Church doctrine from the beginning. So clearly the example differs entirely (petitioning for the definition of an already existing Marian doctrine; vs. petitioning to alter the moral teaching of the Church [as if such a change were even possible]).

Finally, with regard to our first objection as to whether a petition could prevent some sort of spiritual obstacle to the Holy Father, Church history offers the best answer to the first question.

The two most recently proclaimed Marian dogmas were promulgated by Bl. Pope Pius IX in 1854 (the Immaculate Conception of Mary) and by Pope Pius XII in 1950 (the Assumption of Mary into heaven). Both Popes were inundated with petitions from the lay faithful before the respective definitions. How did they respond? Negatively?

Quite the contrary. Some may find it surprising, but both Pius IX and Pius XII praised the petition drives. The popes thanked the faithful for assisting the discernment process and for their heartfelt desire to see these doctrines elevated to the level of Church dogma.

In fact, Blessed Pius IX described how the Church considered the petitions "most attentively with particular joy in our heart." Pope Pius XII called such actions "pious striving" that associated the faithful in a "wonderful way" with their bishops.

In light of this holy precedent set by our faithful brothers and sisters in Christ who have gone before us, we continue in this great tradition of beseeching the Holy Father for a dogmatic definition. It would be my joy to continue discussion on this topic if you are as yet unconvinced for the need or appropriateness or even the truth of such a dogma.

If you are convinced, then I invite you to join your more than 7 million Catholic brothers and sisters who have already sent in their petitions to the Holy Father asking that he solemnly define the doctrine that Mary is Co-redemptrix, Mediatrix of all graces, and Advocate – the Spiritual Mother of all humanity. To sign the online petition or for instructions on how to mail yours in today, go to FifthMarianDogma.com.

Mary is the Immaculata, but is she the Co-redemptrix?

Co-redemptrix – the idea that the Blessed Virgin could be dogmatically proclaimed under this title makes Protestants and even some Catholics cringe. Would this dogma virtually elevate Mary to the level of the “fourth person of the Trinity”? The Church has always condemned the idea that Mary could be a divine person. But is this what “Co-redemptrix” actually means?

The saints know that Mary is not God (otherwise, they would not be saints, because that would be idolatry), so what do they say about calling Mary Co-redemptrix?

Many saints in fact, throughout the centuries in both the East and the West, have testified to the truth of Mary’s participation in the work of redemption: St. Justin Martyr, St. Ephraem, St. Augustine, St. Andrew of Crete, St. Anselm, St. Bernard of Clairvaux, St. Bonaventure, St. Catherine of Siena, St. Alphonsus Ligouri, Ven. John Henry Cardinal Newman, and more.

St. Irenaeus in the second century said, “Mary became the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race.”

St. Francis Xavier Cabrini, the first American to be canonized, stated that on Calvary Mary “merited to become our most worthy Co-redemptrix.”

St. Edith Stein: “Mary leaves the natural order and is placed as Co-redemptrix alongside the Redeemer.”

St. Maximilian Kolbe, who along with Belgian Cardinal Mercier strongly advocated for the proclamation of the dogma of Marian coredemption and mediation of all graces, said, “Mary, as Mother of Jesus the Savior, becomes Coredemptrix, while as Spouse of the Holy Spirit she takes part in the distribution of all graces.”

St. Josemaria Escrivà, founder of Opus Dei, wrote, “The Supreme Pontiffs have rightly called Mary ‘Co-redemptrix.’ At that point, together with her Son who was suffering and dying, she suffered and almost died; at that point she abdicated her maternal rights over her Son for the salvation of humanity and immolated Him, insofar as she was able, in order to placate the justice of God; thus one can rightly say that she redeemed the human race together with Christ.”

St. Padre Pio wrote, “Now I seem to be penetrating what was the martyrdom of our most beloved Mother. … Oh if all people would but penetrate this martyrdom! Who could succeed in suffering with this, yes, our dear Co-redemptrix?”

John Paul II called Mary Co-redemptrix at least six times during his papacy. He said, “Mary, though conceived and born without the taint of sin, participated in a marvelous way in the sufferings of her divine Son, in order to be Co-redemptrix of humanity.”

Mother Teresa of Calcutta stated: “Of course Mary is the Co-redemptrix. She gave Jesus his body, and the body of Jesus is what saved us.”

John Paul II’s quote above best highlights the connection with today’s feast. Mary is the Co-redemptrix because she is the Immaculata – she is the Immaculate Conception, as she told St. Bernadette at Lourdes in 1858, four years after the truth was dogmatically defined by Bl. Pius IX. Mary had no taint of original sin that she would be able to give Jesus a body undefiled.

The Problem of the Immaculata’s Sufferings
The reality of Jesus’ sufferings would be an infinite injustice on account of His innocence and supreme dignity as a divine person were it not for the infinitely redemptive value of His sufferings. His suffering is union and love with all who suffer from injustice and is redemption for all who commit injustice – as such, His infinitely merciful act is an act of perfect mercy and perfect justice. There is no contradiction between the two, because as divine attributes (pure perfections), justice and mercy are one in the same.

But what of the suffering Mother? If it is as some hold, that her sufferings are not in any way meritorious, then there is great injustice perpetrated on Calvary, injustice perpetrated not by man but by God. The accusations the feminist theologians have been making against the patriarchal God who they say has little esteem for women would then be true. For in His strivings to redeem the world, He would have wounded His mother by His own hand with the sword of sorrow (Lk 2:35) when by His own power He could have spared her in the first place.

(Of course, we know this to be impossible. It is contrary to God’s nature that He could ever be unjust. By His very nature, He is Justice personified.)

First of all, we all know that she suffered – the Gospel of John attests to her presence at the foot of the Cross of her Son (see John 19:25-27). We remember her sorrows during the Stations of the Cross every Friday during Lent when we pray the Stabat Mater. We commemorate her sorrows on September 15 every year. That she suffered is not in question.

Now if Mary were not immaculately conceived, it could rightly be said that her sufferings were due to her sins. Her suffering would not be problematic. Yet Mary is immaculately conceived and she suffers. Let me say that one more time, because its importance must be seen:

Mary is immaculately conceived and she suffers.

And because she is the Immaculata (as St. Maximilian Kolbe often called Our Lady), there is no greater martyrdom in the history of the followers of Jesus than her own. “It was on Calvary that Mary’s suffering, beside the suffering of Jesus, reached an intensity which can hardly be imagined from a human point of view …” (Pope John Paul II, Salvifici Doloris, n. 25). Her Immaculate Conception meant that she had all the original innocence of Adam and Eve before the fall. Suffering is the result of sin. Yet there she stands in all her innocence engulfed in suffering.

It would seem that Mary has incurred injustice. How could it be justice that the effects of sin fall upon a sinless creature who is altogether undeserving of the consequences? The position is altogether unthinkable that God in His goodness could grant infinite merit to the sufferings of His divine Son, unblemished by the stain of sin, and withhold merit altogether in the face of the sufferings of the unblemished mother.

The Superabundance of Christ’s Merit
and Mary’s Suffering as Gift for Redemption
Would Christ in His act of infinite love, the redemption of the world, transgress the Fourth Commandment in such a cruel manner? For surely He could have taken her into heaven before His glorious Passion. Yet there she stands at the foot of the Cross.

No my friends. Christ did not transgress the Fourth Commandment. He did not perpetrate injustice against His suffering mother. It is a supreme act of justice and love that Mary stands at the foot of the Cross. The reality of Mary’s suffering—though altogether undeserving of pain and sorrow because of her immaculate nature—means one thing and one thing only: Her sufferings are gift, meritorious in the one Merit of her Son, redemptive in the one Redemption of her Son. Her suffering is love and it is Love that gives her the gift of suffering with her Son.

She is the suffering handmaid of the Suffering Servant. Together the New Adam and the New Eve suffer together in an immaculate human nature to make satisfaction for us and merit our incorporation into this new humanity.

Again, it must be emphasized that it is the one merit of Christ that accomplishes all of salvation. But in the superabundance of His merit, He has seen fit to involve the Blessed Mother in a secondary and subordinate way in the plan of salvation, that her suffering in Christ is made “supernaturally fruitful for the redemption of the world” (John Paul II, SD, n. 25).

It is as St. Josemaria Escrivà said, “she abdicated her maternal rights over her Son for the salvation of humanity and immolated Him, insofar as she was able, in order to placate the justice of God; thus one can rightly say that she redeemed the human race together with Christ.”

If you remain unconvinced, let us have dialogue in this matter, so that you will at least know that the Catholic doctrine of coredemption in this way does not obscure the one Redemption of Christ, but rather glorifies it. For what gift is greater: the gift that satisfies the individual, or the gift given so superabundantly that it cannot help but transform the recipients into givers themselves to all who are able to receive? The one giver is the same. The abundance of the gift is the question here.

Mary merits in and under the totality of merits acquired by her Son in an altogether unique way from sinful humanity. But through her we see that we, too, may make a generous offering of our sufferings in union with Jesus to merit in Him as well. Then we may say with St. Paul that “in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for the sake of His Body, that is, the Church” (Col 1:24).

The infinite mercy of God the Father is neither compromised nor obscured by Mary Co-redemptrix. To the contrary, Mary Co-redemptrix magnifies the Lord and her spirit rejoices in God her savior.

For those of you who are convinced that the Immaculata is the Co-redemptrix, I invite you to join your name to Mother Teresa, St. Maximilian and the more than 7 million Catholic brothers and sisters who have already sent in their petitions to the Holy Father asking that he solemnly define the doctrine that Mary is Co-redemptrix, Mediatrix of all graces, and Advocate – the Spiritual Mother of all humanity.

I sent my petition to Pope Benedict XVI one year ago today. To sign the online petition or for instructions on how to mail yours in today, go to FifthMarianDogma.com.