Mary's titles of Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix of All Graces do not compromise Christ's unique mediation but rather emphasize the universal distribution of the grace He alone Originated.
Distinction: Christ the Redeemer and Mary the Co-Redemptrix
Objection Syllogism:
@chrisgriffin
The objection argues that Christ is the Sole Mediator in a way that excludes secondary or cooperative roles, rendering the titles "Co-Redemptrix" and "Mediatrix" false.
Major Premise (Universal Principle of Mediation): The saving office of Redemption and the ultimate Mediation between God and humanity must be held by one, unique, and infinite Source of grace. (This premise asserts the exclusivity and uniqueness of the principal saving office).
Minor Premise (Application to Mary's Titles): The titles Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix of All Graces attribute to Mary roles that appear to share or divide this singular saving office of Redemption and Mediation. (This premise assumes that "Co-" and "Mediatrix" imply an equality or a conflict with the unique Source).
Conclusion (The Objection): Therefore, the titles Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix of All Graces are not only unacceptable, but false, as they compromise the dogma of Christ's unique Redemption …More
KR, your argument was meant to be referenced: it can however only have 3 terms (Major, Minor, and Middle Terms). The predicate of your Minor premise introduced a fourth term…
Ok. Thanks! In the Rebuttal syllogism there is a major premise, a minor premise and the conclusion. I simply changed the minor premise to include the distinction. You’re right however: syllogisms have three terms only. I will review again.
@canonist
Logical Soundness of My Rebuttal Syllogism:
I reviewed the formal logic rules with regards to syllogisms applied to my specific deductive argument.
My analysis and review confirms that my inclusion in the minor premise of the phrase:
'in a secondary, supporting and associative role' is essential.
This descriptive qualifier, though lengthy, precisely defines and distinguishes the co-related terms Redeemer and Mediator from the co-related terms: 'Co-Redemptrix/Co-Mediatrix'
In logic, this entire qualified description functions as a single, complex term, thereby successfully preventing the formal fallacy of four terms, or “Quaternio Terminorum”, which is often caused by an ambiguous, or equivocal middle term.
Conclusion: My logical structure is sound as it establishes a logical non-contradiction through definitional distinction.
Thank you for this enlightening post defending Our Blessed Mother! God bless you!
Apologia pro Jesu per Mariam. To defend the honour of Mary is to defend the honour of Jesus as in every natural family on earth. To denigrate Mary, as Luther, Calvin, Knox, Cranmer, Zwingli and Hus did, is to denigrate Jesus. What is so clear to the Holy Trinity, to the angels and saints in heaven, to natural godly families on earth, and to Satan in hell is obscure and opaque to the Protestant heretical founders, yesterday as today, and, now, finally, at the highest levels of the institutional Church ie. Roman Protestants, less Catholic than some High church anglicans. We should shudder in holy outrage as St. Louis Marie Grignon de Montfort did: "It is through the most Blessed Virgin Mary, that Jesus Christ came into the world, and it is also through her, that He will reign in the world." Such is the Economy of Salvation. Genesis 3:15: “ 15 And I will establish a feud between thee and the woman, between thy offspring and hers; she is to crush thy head, while thou dost lie in ambush at her heels.” This is what Lucifer saw in eternity, rejected, and the reason why, according to the Church Fathers, he fell from Heaven to the eternal of Hell…along with all of his anti-Marian followers.
@K R Ross...I had no idea that you were so highly trained which shows in your excellent style and vocabulary. I still must demure on the following basis...
1. There is no reason to change. Mary and Jesus are fine just like they are. Mary cannot originate and dispense grace.
2. Mary as Redemptrix would give Protestants rock solid evidence that Catholics worship 3 Gods in 1 person, PLUS God the Blessed Virgin.
3.Co-redemptrix is wrong. "Co" in American English has come to mean "equal" as in Co-pilot, Co-defendant, Co-owner, Co-worker, Co-Chair, Co-signer etc. which of course Jesus and Mary are not equal.
4..Your phrase "through Mary to Jesus" admits that she is inferior to Jesus which she is. Jesus is God, Mary is creature and never the twain shall meet. Therefore the only proper term to use would be Sub-Redemptrix.
5. Many Bibles say Genesis 3:15 referrers to a male...Jesus.
Thank you very much. Yes, Cana was marvelous.
Mary's titles of Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix of All Graces do not compromise Christ's unique mediation but rather emphasize the universal distribution of the grace He alone Originated.
Chris, I agree with you, the BVM is Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix, but the syllogism you articulate above is fallacious (Fallacy of the Four Terms).
@canonistChris’ position was the Objection (mine and the Church’s position the rebuttal): Christ is the sole Redeemer and sole Mediator. Which logically excludes Mary from being Redeemer (Originator) and Mediator (Source). Therefore, to say Mary is Co-Redemptrix and Co-Mediatrix in that sense is false. True, but only in the false context of the above incorrect and incomplete syllogism.
A distinction needs to be made: Mary is Co-Redemptrix and Co-Mediatrix not in the sense of sole Originator nor sole Mediator, but in the sense (hence, the distinction) an associative, secondary, non-causal sense: distributes the effects of the Redemption, all graces, as the sole Channel not as the sole Source.
This distinction to the minor premise is perfectly logical. They went to Mary when the wine ran out. Mary went to Jesus with their request. Jesus did His first miracle turning water into the very best wine. Why? His Mother asked Him too. He hastened His Time for her which shows her role as Co-Mediatrix.
What’s the fix? Can you rewrite the syllogism correctly please?