A Defense of Our Lady: Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix of All Graces

[Stone]

A Defense of Our Lady: Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix of All Graces
A Rebellion of Love Against the Vatican’s Attempt to Silence the Mother of God

Chris Jackson via Hiraeth in Exile [slightly adapted] | Nov 06, 2025


The new Vatican document Mater Populi Fidelis lands with the tone of an apology written to Protestant houseguests. It pretends to “clarify” Marian devotion but really performs a slow erasure; wrapping up centuries of theology and piety into a few cautious phrases about “maternal closeness.” The title sounds like a lullaby; the substance reads like damage control.

We are told that the Church must avoid “expressions that might obscure the unique mediation of Christ.” Translation: the post-conciliar project is still terrified that Mary might look too Catholic.

Far from correcting error; this note sterilizes love. It reduces the Woman who stood beneath the Cross to a friendly chaperone hovering at the edge of salvation history. It praises her tenderness, then strips her of the titles that give her tenderness cosmic weight.

The same men who canonize ambiguity everywhere else suddenly discover a mania for precision when it comes to Mary. Co-redemptrix? “Always inappropriate.” Mediatrix of all graces? Too risky. Better to call her a “helpful mother.”

They call this prudence. It’s really fear; the fear of sounding Catholic in front of the Reformers.


The Gospel According to Cowardice

The Note begins by admitting what every catechized child once knew: Mary’s role runs from Genesis to Revelation, from “the woman” promised in Eden to “the woman clothed with the sun.” Then, with academic sleight of hand, it cancels its own evidence.

Yes, Mary stood at the foot of the Cross, they say; but careful! She did not co-redeem. Yes, she is mother of all believers; but don’t you dare call her Mediatrix. Yes, she is full of grace; but “every spiritual blessing” is only in Christ, so we’d better keep her name out of the sentence.

It’s the theology of subtraction. Every compliment to Mary is immediately followed by a disclaimer.

This is how modern Rome prays now:

“Hail Mary, full of grace, but not too full. The Lord is with thee, but please, don’t make it sound exclusive. Blessed art thou among women, but in a subordinate sense, of course.”

What began as the Magnificat has been rewritten as a footnote to Protestant sensitivities.


The Scriptural Case They Pretend Not to See

The entire argument collapses once you stop reading the Bible like a bureaucrat. Scripture shows not a rivalry between Christ and Mary but a participation; the same participation that defines every saint’s life, raised to its perfect form.

The angel waits for her consent before the Incarnation; that alone reveals her cooperation. At Calvary she stands, not as a helpless observer, but as the New Eve beside the New Adam. Her Son calls her “Woman,” the very word used in Genesis. When He says, “Behold your mother,” He is doing more than providing domestic care. He is declaring her maternity over all who are born in grace.

The logic is unmistakable: the one who gave flesh to the Redeemer cooperates, under Him and through Him, in the Redemption itself.

Every Protestant instinct wants to seal heaven off from any creaturely participation. Every Catholic instinct knows the Incarnation itself destroys that fear. The Word became flesh through her. Salvation began by mediation. Why would it stop there?


What Co-Redemptrix Really Says

The Church never meant two redeemers. The prefix co- means with, not equal.

Mary cooperates as no other creature can because she gave to the Word the very flesh by which He redeemed us and because she united her will with His at every step. Her consent at Nazareth and her consent at Calvary bookend the same mystery: the human cooperation God Himself willed.

When the old popes called her Co-redemptrix, they weren’t inventing a new dogma. They were putting a name to what every Christian heart already saw : that she who suffered with Christ for our salvation shares in the work of salvation in a unique way.

But modern Rome treats words like land mines. The bureaucrats prefer a language so safe it can never be loved.

So they tell us the title is “always inappropriate.” Tell that to the centuries of theologians, saints, and faithful who prayed it without apology. Tell that to the generations who saw in her pierced heart the echo of the Cross itself.

It is not Mary who endangers Christ’s glory. It is cowardice that does.


When “Only God Gives Grace” Becomes a Weapon

The Note keeps repeating the truism that “only God confers grace.” No Catholic ever denied it. The question is how God confers grace, and the answer, given by Scripture itself, is through created instruments.

The humanity of Christ, the sacraments, the preaching of the apostles, even our own intercession for one another; all these are secondary means by which God’s grace touches the world.

Mary is not the fountain; she is the channel chosen by the Fountain. Her role does not compete with the Source but reveals His generosity.

To say “only God gives grace” and then deny any creaturely mediation is to reject the very logic of the Incarnation, in which the divine entered history through the consent of a woman. God loves instruments. He writes salvation not directly from heaven but with human ink. Mary is the pen in His hand.


Ecumenism: The Tail That Wags the Theology

The entire document reads like it was ghost-written by an ecumenical press office. Every sentence trembles with the anxiety of offending Protestants.

Instead of teaching the truth and letting it shine, the authors try to sand down the edges until the Faith looks like a manageable misunderstanding.

The result is a theology with all the poetry of a risk assessment memo. They turn the Mother of God into a “sign of maternal accompaniment,” as if she were a Vatican social worker.

That is not how the saints spoke. The early Fathers called her the New Eve, the cause of salvation for herself and for all mankind. Medieval Christendom called her the Neck of the Mystical Body, through which every grace passes from the Head to the members. Pre-conciliar popes called her the Dispensatrix of all graces.

Only after Vatican II did we begin apologizing for our own language. The Note continues that apology and calls it development.


The East Knows Better

The authors invoke the Eastern liturgies as if they were models of moderation. Anyone who has actually prayed the Akathist Hymn knows better. The East calls her “the bridge leading those on earth to heaven,” “the cause of our deification,” “the one through whom the Giver of life is given to us.”

If anything, the East outpaces the West in boldness. The difference is that the East never developed a guilt complex about its own devotion. The modern West did.

So while Orthodox hymnographers exalt her, Roman theologians now issue disclaimers. The East sings theology; Rome edits footnotes.


Objective and Subjective Redemption

Catholic tradition has always made a simple distinction. Christ alone accomplished the objective Redemption; the earning of all grace by His Passion. But the subjective application of that grace, its flow into souls, unfolds through His instruments.

Mary participates in both spheres: objectively, by her free consent to the Passion and her union with the Victim; subjectively, by her maternal intercession that applies those fruits to her children.

The popes before the Council said so in plain words. They called her partner, associate, minister. They said she offered her Son to the Father and that she merited for us in fitting proportion what He merited by right. They taught that the distribution of every grace bears the imprint of her maternal will.

But now the Vatican prefers phrases like “maternal closeness,” a sentimental reduction that treats the Queen of Heaven like an emotional support figure. They praise her warmth precisely to deny her power.


“Mediatrix of All Graces”: The Title They Fear

This phrase terrifies the new theologians because it implies structure; an order of grace in which everything passes through Mary’s hands. But that is exactly what the tradition meant.

God willed that the Mother who gave the world the Author of grace should also be the channel of that grace’s diffusion. Not because He needed her, but because He loves to magnify His gifts through the humble.

Every conversion, every sacrament, every movement of grace touches her in the order of intercession. The saints called her the treasurer of the King, the aqueduct of mercy, the Mediatrix of all graces.

The new Vatican says that language is confusing. Of course it is confusing; to people who no longer believe in causes, cooperation, or hierarchy. To the modern mind, everything must be horizontal and immediate. God acts directly; Mary only inspires feelings.

But heaven is not a committee. It is a hierarchy of love. And the highest creature in that hierarchy remains the channel through which the Creator first entered His creation.


John Paul II and the Council They Pretend to Follow

When the Note appeals to Vatican II, it forgets to quote the parts that refute it. The Council called Mary’s influence “salutary” and said it “flows forth from the superabundance of Christ’s merits.” John Paul II took that line and developed it into an entire theology of “maternal mediation.”

He never flinched from calling her Co-redemptrix in the true sense; the one who suffered with Christ for our redemption. He never treated her role as a mere symbol.

Today’s Vatican bureaucrats cherry-pick his prudential caution and ignore his substance. They use his name as camouflage for their own shrinkage of the Faith.


The Cost of Cowardice

Banishing these titles does more than tidy up theology. It wounds the heart of Catholic piety.

When you tell the faithful that Co-redemptrix is off limits, you teach them that Mary’s suffering beneath the Cross was only sentimental, not salvific. When you downplay her mediation, you train them to approach Christ as orphans, not as children of a Mother.

And when you reduce her to “maternal closeness,” you make her proximity meaningless; for what good is a mother who cannot obtain graces for her children?

This is the quiet apostasy of minimalism. It preaches Christ without His Mother, grace without instrumentality, heaven without hierarchy. It speaks in soft tones but does the work of iconoclasm.


The Real Balance

Catholic theology already resolved the supposed tension centuries ago. Christ is the only Redeemer by right; Mary cooperates by grace. Christ merits de condigno; Mary merits de congruo. He is the Head; she is the neck. Everything flows from Him, but through her.

That is the balance. That is the harmony. That is the Catholic sense that both honors Christ’s supremacy and exalts His generosity in sharing it.

If the Vatican were serious about fidelity to tradition, it would teach that balance instead of banishing it.


The Gospel of Participation

The Note keeps insisting on Christ’s “unique mediation,” but refuses to see what that uniqueness means. Christ’s mediation is so powerful that it does not exclude cooperation; it creates it. It draws His members into His own work.

That is why we can suffer for others, preach, baptize, forgive, and intercede. If every Christian shares in Christ’s mediation, how much more the one who bore Him, suffered with Him, and reigns with Him?

The only thing the new document proves is how little the authors understand the economy of grace. They think participation threatens Christ, when in truth it glorifies Him. His victory is so abundant that it spills over into His creatures.

Mary is the first and fullest overflow.


The Faith the Bureaucrats Can’t Erase

The faithful will go on calling her what the Vatican refuses to print. They will still whisper “Co-redemptrix” under their breath at the foot of the altar. They will still ask the Mediatrix of all graces to obtain mercy for them at the hour of death.

No committee can unteach what the Church has sung for centuries. The faithful know, even if the prefects do not, that Christ crowned His Mother precisely so that His grace might come to us with a mother’s touch.

The revolutionaries of ecumenism cannot comprehend that logic because they no longer believe grace is personal. To them, salvation is a process. To the saints, it is a Person; and that Person came through Mary.


Conclusion: The Mother Remains

The architects of Mater Populi Fidelis wanted to make the Church safe for dialogue. Instead, they’ve made it sound foreign to its own children. They mistake reticence for reverence, diplomacy for doctrine.

But the Church will outlive them, as she outlived every rationalist before them. The faithful will keep their Rosaries, their Marian hymns, their daring titles. They will still call her Queen, Co-redemptrix, Mediatrix, Mother of Grace; because love is bolder than bureaucracy.

Christ did not fear to share His Cross with His Mother. We will not fear to name it.

In the end, her heel will crush the serpent; not her “maternal closeness,” but her royal power, her participation in the very act of redemption. The modernists can redact the titles; they cannot rewrite heaven.

The Woman still stands beneath the Cross, and at the center of every Mass, and at the heart of every grace. She does not need their permission to be what God made her.


Epilogue: A Foretaste of Leo and Tucho?

In the Jesuit Church of the Gesus in Rome, to the right of the altar sits Pietro Le Gros’ sculpture entitled The Triumph of Faith over Heresy. This sculpture depicts Mary casting Martin Luther and his precursor, Jan Huss, out of heaven. An attendant angel (lower left) rips their translations of the Bible and their writings to shreds.