Pope John Paul II's Ordinary Magisterium on Marian Coredemption:
Consistent Teaching and More Recent Perspectives 
by Arthur Burton Calkins
In the course of the longest pontificate of the twentieth century which has now extended into the twenty-first, Pope John Paul II has enriched the Church with extraordinarily solid teaching on faith and morals, but perhaps in no area has he been more illuminating than in his Marian magisterium. As one who has been chronicling it from early in the pontificate, I continue to be amazed at his prodigious output -- and even more at the quality of its content. This is to take nothing away from the significance of the Marian magisterium of all his predecessors, especially since the pontificate of Blessed Pope Pius IX (1846-1878). Each of the modern popes has passed on to the Church a precious patrimony of Marian doctrine (including the dogmatic definitions of the Immaculate Conception in 1854 and the Assumption in 1950) and devotion (including the consecration of the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary in 1942 and the establishment of the Feast of the Immaculate Heart of Mary in 1944 and of Our Lady's Queenship in 1954) while making his own unique contribution to the Church's millennial Marian tradition.
The study of this body of teaching on the person of the Mother of God and of her intimate relationship with Christ and the Church provides a magnificent illustration of the teaching of the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council on the organic development of the Church's doctrine:
The Council Fathers further clarify that "the task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. This teaching office, as we know, is exercised in a most authoritative way by the Pope, the Vicar of Christ and Head of the Apostolic College. 
A. Previous Studies of the Magisterium on Marian Coredemption
The teaching of the papal magisterium on Mary's collaboration in the work of our redemption has been the object of my particular study in the course of the past several years. I was pleased to have been able to present a detailed study on "The Mystery of Mary Coredemptrix in the Papal Magisterium" at the theological symposium on Marian Coredemption held in Castelpetroso, Italy in September of 1996 and subsequently published by the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate in their first volume of studies entitled Maria Corredentrice: Storia e Teologia. In that work I analyzed many texts of Pope John Paul II in terms of their strict continuity with the teaching of his predecessors, especially since the pontificate of Blessed Pius IX.
I had earlier done a brief study on "The Heart of Mary as Coredemptrix in the Magisterium of Pope John Paul II"  and then a more extended study on "Pope John Paul II's Teaching on Marian Coredemption" which was published in Miles Immaculatae  as well as in Dr. Mark Miravalle's second anthology of theological studies devoted to the theme of Mary Coredemptrix, Mediatrix and Advocate  . In 1998 I published an article in Marianum  as a response to an earlier article in that same learned journal  in which I dealt at some length with the magisterial teaching on the topic of Marian Coredemption. During that same year I authored three articles for the popular Marian magazine, Soul, in which I also discussed the the same topic.  These articles were later published in Dr. Miravalle's third anthology on Mary Coredemptrix, Mediatrix and Advocate.  In 1999 I also offered a brief resumé on Pope John Paul II's teaching on this matter for the popular Italian monthly Madre di Dio.
B. The Marian Catecheses
What I propose to do here is to continue to build on and develop what I have already published on this matter by taking into consideration the Holy Father's more recent teaching on Marian Coredemption, especially that contained in the 70 Marian catecheses which he has given us in the course of his Wednesday general audience addresses from 6 September 1995 to 19 November 1997. These provide a remarkable summary of his own teaching and a further consolidation of that of his predecessors and that of the Second Vatican Council, which constitutes a privileged point of reference for him. It must be readily admitted that these addresses are not infallible declarations, every word of which must be considered as revealed doctrine and thus settling every conceivable issue which theologians discuss. But on the other hand, these discourses may be justly regarded as an important exercise of the ordinary magisterium of the Roman Pontiff and thus should be received by the faithful "with religious submission of mind and will". 
These Marian catecheses emerge from among thousands of the Pope's homilies, prayers, addresses preceding the recitation of the Angelus or the Regina Cæli, acts of consecration or entrustment to Our Lady, references in pontifical documents and encyclicals which he has pronounced and published before, during and after these reflections. Many of the points in these catechetical presentations can be further illustrated and amplified from this greater body of the Pope's teaching and as well as from that of his predecessors and of the Church's whole millennial Marian tradition. What is particularly noteworthy about this series of Marian teachings, however, is that it is unparalleled in the history of the papacy. Never before has any pope ever undertaken such a systematic exposition on the Mother of God. This alone would be enough to claim the serious attention of Mary's devoted children.
But there is more. From the first days of his pontificate he has striven to be a faithful interpreter of the Council. While in his Marian encyclical Redemptoris Mater and in these catecheses he rightly professes to elucidate the Marian teaching of the Council (the bulk of which is contained in the eighth chapter of the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church Lumen Gentium), he also does more. In effect, in many ways he further refines and clarifies the teachings of the Council, complementing and completing them. This was also the judgment of the late Cardinal Vincenzo Fagiolo:
Perhaps the Pope's contribution to the development of Marian doctrine is nowhere clearer in these catecheses than in his treatment of Our Lady's collaboration in the work of our salvation.  It is well known that on the eve of the Council a good number of bishops desired a comprehensive treatment of this matter. Father Michael O'Carroll, C.S.Sp. informs us that of the 54 bishops at the Council who wanted a conciliar pronouncement on Mary as Coredemptrix, 36 sought a definition and 11 a dogma of faith on this matter.  On the related question of Mary's mediation, he tells us that 362 bishops desired a conciliar statement on Mary's mediation while 266 of them asked for a dogmatic definition. Obviously such definitions did not issue from the Council and many contemporary Mariologists would have us believe that the Council definitively closed the door on such a project. The Pope's handling of the question, however, is much more even-handed. As we will see in the ninth of his catecheses, that of 13 December 1995, he states that
This is an astute observation made by one who has continued to meditate on and develop these very themes. To my knowledge, it is the first explicit public acknowledgement on the part of a pope of the currents at the Council which shaped the writing of chapter 8 of Lumen Gentium. It also makes graceful reference to the Fathers who "wished further to enrich Marian doctrine with other statements on Mary's role in the work of salvation" without labelling them as promoters of "pre-conciliar ideas whose time has passed", as any number of modern Mariologists are only too anxious to do.
These general audience addresses were originally given in Italian and appeared in the daily edition of L'Osservatore Romano. They were later published by the Vatican publishing house as the fifth volume of Pope John Paul II's catecheses on the Creed  and eventually in the apposite volumes of the Insegnamenti di Giovanni Paolo II to which I will refer in the notes. Ordinarily I will use the translations that originally appeared in the English edition of L'Osservatore Romano and will also provide references to them in the convenient volume of these catecheses published by the Daughters of St. Paul where the word order and paragraph divisions sometimes diverge slightly from the earlier translations.
II. The Development of Doctrine on Marian Coredemption
Just what does the Church teach on Mary's role in our redemption? Let us listen to the Holy Father as he traces the history of doctrinal development on this issue for us in broad strokes:
From its earliest days, then, the Church has had an intuitive grasp of the importance of Mary's consent and obedience in the work of our salvation. And for well over a millennium it has been slowly coming to a deeper grasp of her cooperation in the redemptive sacrifice. Indeed this process of doctrinal development under the guidance of the Holy Spirit came about not only through the work of theologians and spiritual writers, but also, as the Pope points out:
Obviously, when one thinks of Mary's collaboration in our redemption, one thinks first of the event of the Annunciation as, no doubt, St. Irenaeus did and as the Pope underscores:
We should also note here a consistent insistence on the part of the magisterium: Mary's cooperation in the work of our redemption is always secondary, subordinate and dependent on that of Christ; she is not his equal. But at the same time God willed that her consent be a necessary condition for the coming of the Saviour into the world.
As the Holy Father had already pointed out in his catechesis of 25 October 1995, "Only gradually could the revealed truth [about Mary's collaboration in the work of our redemption] be unfolded in all its richness". He illustrates this magnificently in his catechesis of 9 April 1997:
The above citation is a lengthy one, but it is particularly rich in doctrine and in its precision. It accentuates the historical development of the Church's insight into Mary's cooperation in the work of our redemption. It highlights the subordinate nature of Mary's cooperation while at the same time recognizing that her cooperation is altogether singular because she "cooperated during the event itself and in the role of mother" and thus "the participation of the Saviour's Mother in humanity's Redemption is a unique and unrepeatable fact".
Contrary to some appearances, there can be no doubt that the teaching of the Second Vatican Council, most notably Lumen Gentium #56 to 62, marked a further development in the Church's understanding of Mary's role in our redemption as the Pope clearly indicates:
Before moving on to the next point, I would like to present two precisions offered by our Holy Father with regard to the role of the Holy Spirit in this process of the development of Marian doctrine. Just as we have seen that the conciliar Constitution on Divine Revelation underscores the role of the Holy Spirit in all legitimate doctrinal development, so Pope John Paul II indicates his all-important function in the transmission as well as in the reception of the doctrine. First, the Pope points out the action of the Holy Spirit already at work through the human authors or transmitters of the Old Testament:
Secondly, and perhaps even more importantly, he points to the necessity of the docile acceptance of the Spirit's guidance as we strive to penetrate the doctrine which has been received:
III. Mary as the "New Eve"
We have already noted above the Holy Father's reference to St. Irenaeus's teaching about Mary as the "New Eve" in his catechesis of 25 October 1995. Indeed, St. Justin Martyr (+ 165), St. Irenaeus (+ after 193) and Tertullian (+ after 220), all of whom belong to the sub-Apostolic period, signalled the parallelism and contrast between Mary and Eve. This fascinating parallelism, never absent from the Church's liturgy  and magisterium , was highlighted in Lumen Gentium #56 and in the Catechism of the Catholic Church #411. This theme sheds notable light on Mary's role in our redemption and Pope John Paul II has often enlarged upon it. Here is a basic exposition from his catechesis of 15 October 1997:
He further speaks of Mary as the "new woman desired by God to atone for Eve's fall". He says that
Again he tells us that
In teaching about Mary's glorious Assumption into heaven, the Pope further specifies that, while we may speak of Jesus and Mary as "a couple, a new pair", we must also recognize that there is an important difference as well.
Classical mariology has long known and taught that there is an analogy, a certain "likeness in difference" between Christ and Mary, a certain symmetry and complementarity, though not identity, between them. This principle of analogy is very germane to the topic under discussion and, indeed, the entire discourse on Mary's role in the work of our redemption cannot be understood without it. Thus in the above catechesis the Holy Father is careful to underscore and illustrate this principle. He does so as well as in the following catechesis in which he treats of the Kingship of Christ and the Queenship of Mary:
Let us note well the "likeness in difference": Christ is King because (1) he is Son of God and (2) because he is Redeemer; Mary is Queen because (1) she is Mother of God and (2) because she cooperated in the work of the redemption.
IV. From the Fiat of the Annunciation to the Fiat of Calvary
The Dogmatic Constitution on the Church Lumen Gentium #58 makes a brief but profound statement about Mary's cooperation in the work of the redemption: "This union of the mother with the Son in the work of salvation is made manifest from the time of Christ's virginal conception up to his death." We find this emphasis consistently repeated in the teaching of Pope John Paul II as in the statement in his Encyclical Letter Evangelium Vitæ that "The 'yes' spoken on the day of the Annunciation reaches full maturity on the day of the Cross"and in his comment in a general audience address that Mary's cooperation in the work of our salvation "having begun with the Incarnation, is destined to be expressed in the whole work of divine salvation."
I wish to highlight just two further instances in which the Pope underscores the significance of Mary's fiat at the Annunciation as being the operative principle in her entire life. The first is from a notable general audience address of 4 May 1983:
The second comes from his Message of 15 August 1996 to the 12th International Mariological Congress and emphasizes that the fiat at the Annunciation is continued at the foot of the cross:
V. The Presentation in the Temple: Prelude to Offering on Calvary
Of all of the events in the life of Jesus which anticipate his offering on Calvary and Mary's active participation in it, none is more charged with meaning than his presentation in the temple of Jerusalem when he was forty days' old (cf. Lk. 2:22-40). Father Stefano Manelli, F.I. provides a masterful overview of recent exegesis on this pericope in his perceptive study of biblical mariologywhile Father Ignazio M. Calabuig, O.S.M. offers us some valuable reflections on this theme from the perspective of Mary as "offerer" of Jesus in a recently published volume on Mary and the Eucharist. In his sketch of doctrinal development on Mary's collaboration in the work of redemption in his catechesis of 25 October 1995 the Holy Father points to the figure of St. Bernard of Clairvaux as underscoring Mary's offering of Jesus in the temple as an anticipation of his offering on the cross:
Indeed, Pope John Paul II shows himself to be in the great tradition of interpretation of this Gospel pericope pioneered in the Latin West by Ambrose Autpert (+ 784), Peter Abelard (+ 1142) and St. Bernardin his numerous commentaries on this scene. In his general audience address of 4 May 1983 he links Simeon's prophecy (Lk. 2:35) with Mary's offering of Jesus in the temple and her fiat at the Annunciation:
He also developed this theme of Mary's offering of Jesus in the temple in his Message of 6 January 1997 for the first World Day for Consecrated Life:
In his catechesis on this same Gospel scene two days later he develops the notion of Mary's offering of herself in union with the offering of her Son -- a concept that has been consistently advanced by the magisterium with regard to Mary's presence on Calvary:
Let us also note the precise accent here on Jesus as having the principal role and the primacy in salvation while Mary's role is described as "serving the mystery of Redemption under and with him".
The mysteries, the events, of the lives of Jesus and Mary are like magnificent gems. Each time we return to them under a wise guide we can see new facets, brilliance that we did not detect before. The Holy Father is such a guide for us. Let us listen to how he presents the presentation in the temple on yet another occasion:
The Catholic tradition sees the Presentation in the temple as the first of Mary's principal sorrows with good reason: from that moment she is definitively united "with the sorrowful destiny of her Son". She will be united on Calvary "with her Son in his redemptive sacrifice" because she became "her Son's faithful co-worker for the salvation of the human race." Finally, notice how all of this in communicated under the symbolism of Mary's Heart.
VI. The Joint Sacrifice of Calvary
The Fathers of the Second Vatican Council highlighted Mary's collaboration in the work of the redemption with this strikingly clear statement in Lumen Gentium #58:
It should be noted that the high point of Mary's collaboration is described as (1) enduring suffering with her Son, (2) associating herself with his sacrifice and (3) consenting to the immolation of the victim. It might be argued that the first two verbs put the emphasis on Mary's offering of herself or uniting herself to the offering of Jesus while the third verb speaks more precisely of her consenting to the offering of her Son to the Father "insofar as it depended on her", according to the expression of Pope Benedict XV.
In other studies I have distinguished between these two different offerings on Mary's part which took place on Calvary: (1) her offering of or consenting to the sacrifice of Jesus and (2) her offering of herself. Indeed, it is possible to cite texts of the Holy Father which illustrate both of these points quite clearly. Here, however, I will indicate these two logically distinct dimensions of the sacrifice, but, I have chosen to comment on texts of the Holy Father which place the emphasis on how Mary's sacrifice is inseparable from that of Jesus, how, in the words of the Holy Father, it is a "joint but subordinate action with Christ the Redeemer". Let us listen to the beautiful commentary the Pope made on Lumen Gentium #58 in his catechesis of 2 April 1997:
Let us note briefly how the Holy Father brings both of these dimensions of Mary's offering together by referring to her "compassion" or "suffering with" Jesus as well as insisting that her "consent to Jesus' immolation" was "a genuine act of love, by which she offers her Son as a 'victim' of expiation for the sins of all humanity." Another point to be noted is how beautifully and carefully the Pope puts "the Mother's involvement in her Son's redeeming passion" into the proper theological perspective: it is always to be understood as "subordinate", but at the same time "her sharing in his suffering" completes "her Son's redeeming passion".
These two dimensions of Mary's offering are gracefully intermingled by the Holy Father in his catechesis of 10 September 1997 in which he presents Mary as "the Church's model for generously participating in sacrifice":
The gift of herself is seen as completed in her association with the suffering of her Son whom she offered in the temple as an infant and now offers again on Calvary.
This intermingling of Mary's offering of Jesus and of herself was magnificently expressed in the Pope's homily at the Commemoration of Abraham "Our Father in Faith" during the Great Jubilee of the Year 2000:
Here the reference to the amalgamating of the two sacrifices on the part of Mary is subtle but real. Mary is compared to Abraham in that both of them gave their consent to the sacrifice of their only son, but in the case of Abraham, the consent was all that was required. In the case of Mary, however, the sacrifice was carried out, effectively requiring of her the sacrifice of her maternal heart, indeed of her very life.
The "joint but subordinate" sacrifice on the part of Mary has profound ecclesial reverberations. In treating of the "woman clothed with the sun", who appears in the twelfth chapter of the Book of Revelation, as being an image of the Church and of Mary, the Pope makes this comment in his catechesis of 29 May 1996:
Here the Pope, in effect, proposes a datum of the tradition i.e., that while Mary gave birth to Jesus in a painless way, her intense sufferings in union with Jesus on Calvary were the birth pangs by which she "begets as her children all those who become [his] disciples". This truth is magnificently synthesized in the preface of the second Mass of "Mary at the Foot of the Cross" published in the Collection of Masses of the Blessed Virgin Mary:
At the foot of the cross, then, Mary is not only a partner in the passion (socia passionis), but is instrumental in giving birth to the Church. Note well that there are two striking symbols for the generation of the Church on Calvary: the pierced Heart of Jesus from which flows blood and water, "the fountain of sacramental life in the Church"  and the Heart of Mary to which the Holy Father makes an allusion in the above text by referring to Lk. 2:35.
Quite clearly, there is a partnership for the sake of our salvation, but it is not a partnership of strict equality, as the Holy Father tells us in the same catechesis of 29 May 1996:
Developing the notion of Mary's labor pains on Calvary for the birth of the Church (cf. Rev. 12:2), the Pope stated in his catechesis of 17 September 1997:
Always subordinate and secondary, nonetheless Mary's "maternal contribution to the work of salvation" is unique and the sacrifice by which the Church was born cannot be separated by her maternal collaboration.
VII. Titles for Mary's Role in Our Redemption
There are many other facets of Pope John Paul II's teaching on Mary's collaboration in the work of our redemption which the constraints of space and time will not allow me to develop here, such as her being a model for all of the faithful in our participation in the sacrifice of Calvary  and more generally in our work for the growth of the Church in holiness and numbers.
The final topic that I would like to deal with is this: "How do we best describe this secondary and subordinate, but nonetheless active and unique role willed by God for Mary in the work of our redemption?" Our Holy Father has used a good number of descriptive titles such as collaborator and cooperator, associate and ally. He has called her "the perfect co-worker in Christ's sacrifice" (perfetta cooperatrice del sacrificio di Cristo)and "the perfect model for those who seek to be united with her Son in his saving work for all humanity".
This is a matter on which neither our present Holy Father nor any of his predecessors have pronounced and we are quite free to debate it. My argument would simply be that none of the one-word titles such as collaborator, cooperator, co-worker, associate, partner and ally sufficiently accentuates the uniqueness of Mary's role whereas others seem to me to be either lengthy phrases or cumbersome circumlocutions.
The fact is that there is a word which was coined and has become hallowed by usage to describe Mary's unique role: Coredemptrix. Once it has been made clear that the "co" in Coredemptrix does not mean equal to the Redeemer, but subordinate to him, it is arguable that it expresses the reality of Mary's position better than any other. This term has been in theological circulation since at least the fifteenth centuryand passed into usage by the magisterium at the beginning of the twentieth century. The word was used three times by Pope Pius XI (1922-1939), was not used by Pius XII (1939-1958) because of controversies about the doctrine which were only clarified at the end of his pontificate, and was described in the Prænotanda of the first draft of the schema which would eventually become chapter 8 of Lumen Gentium as among those words which are "absolutely true in themselves" [in se verissima], but were being avoided out of ecumenical sensitivity. We are also free to debate about the wisdom and effectiveness of such a strategy.
What is very interesting, however, is that Pope John Paul II has used the word or a cognate form thereof to describe Our Lady's role in the work of our redemption six times, three times more than the only other pope to use this term. He has also used the word "coredeemer" or "coredemption" at least three times in speaking of the on-going collaboration of Christians in the work of Redemption. Despite these facts, there has been what seems a carefully orchestrated chorus stating that none of these instances are of any theological value.
First of all there was the "Declaration of the Theological Commission of the Pontifical International Marian Academy" made in Czestochowa, Poland in August of 1996 made by an "ad hoc" commission composed of 18 Catholics, 3 Orthodox, an Anglican and a Lutheran and released by L'Osservatore Romano on 4 June 1997. Dealing with the titles Coredemptrix, Mediatrix and Advocate, it states:
From what I have already stated and documented, it is apparent that this declaration is not above criticism for the way it attempts to deal with facts and that it has no magisterial value. It dismisses the use of the term by Pope John Paul II as not occurring in significant magisterial documents.
Together with the declaration in L'Osservatore Romano appeared two commentaries: one unsigned with the title "A new Marian dogma?"and the other under the signature of Salvatore M. Perrella, O.S.M. entitled "Mary's co-operation in the work of Redemption: Present state of the question". The unsigned commentary offers a further specification with regard to the usage of this term by the present Pontiff:
At this point I deem it indispensable to introduce into this discussion #25 of the Second Vatican Council's Dogmatic Constitution on the Church Lumen Gentium, a text of capital importance on the Pope's magisterium or teaching office:
On the basis of a careful analysis of this passage I have argued in my book Totus Tuus that the Pope's teaching on consecration or entrustment to Mary forms an important component of his "ordinary magisterium"and that he has brought this doctrine to a new level of importance.
I believe that a similar case may be made for his teaching on Mary's altogether unique role in the work of our redemption and even for his use of the term Coredemptrix. I would certainly not argue that his use of the word Coredemptrix occurs in papal documents of the highest teaching authority or that he has proclaimed the doctrine or used the word in the most solemn manner. I do believe, however, that my presentation here and in the other essays that I have written on this topic demonstrates beyond the shadow of a doubt that the Holy Father's teaching on Mary's unique collaboration in and contribution to the work of our redemption has brought the teaching to a new clarity and is an unmistakable component of his ordinary magisterium -- precisely on the basis of the second criterion indicated in Lumen Gentium #25, the frequency with which he has proposed this doctrine. I will go further and argue that six instances of his use of the term Coredemptrix to characterize Our Lady's collaboration in the work of our redemption -- especially in the light of previous magisterial usage -- do not deserve to be cavalierly dismissed as "marginal [and] therefore devoid of doctrinal weight".
I am grateful to Father Ignazio Calabuig, O.S.M., one of the signers of the Czestochowa Declaration and President of the Pontifical Faculty Marianum, and his colleagues who have recently acknowledged that my study of the use of the term Coredemptrix published in Maria Corredentrice: Storia e Teologia I was done with praiseworthy precision and clearly indicates that the title is not proscribed and is susceptible of a correct reading. I still respectfully disagree with them, however, when they state that the word occurs only in documents of a non-magisterial character.
While granting that five of Pope John Paul II's usages of the term were passing references, I do not believe that these should be undervalued any more than the three usages by Roman Congregations at the beginning of the last century or the three usages by Pope Pius XI. These are a testimony to the Church's living tradition and to the legitimate employment of the term. What I wish to present here as a conclusion and recapitulation of this study, however, is a very deliberate use of the terminology of Coredemption by Pope John Paul II in which he teaches the doctrine with clarity and summarizes his teaching by speaking of "Mary's role as Coredemptrix".
On 31 January 1985, in an address at the Marian shrine in Guayaquil, Ecuador, he spoke thus:
This excerpt from the Holy Father's homily constitutes in itself a magnificent catechesis on the various ways in which Mary collaborated in the work of our redemption. Let us note how carefully the Pope develops this theme.
1. First he underscores that Mary's cooperation with God's plan for our salvation actually began with Mary's Immaculate Conception. He created her full of grace precisely in view of the role which he had predestined for her. This gift of being totally transformed by grace from the first moment of her existence in her mother's womb was so that her cooperation with God's designs would be unimpeded by the pull of the flesh. As he said so beautifully on 29 May 1996, "Christ is all holy by virtue of the grace that in his humanity derives from the divine person: Mary is all holy by virtue of the grace received by the merits of the Saviour."
2. Next he points out that her collaboration becomes deliberate and explicit in her response to the angel: "Let it be done to me according to your word" (Lk. 1:38). As he was later to declare in his Encyclical Letter Evangelium Vitæ, "The 'yes' spoken on the day of the Annunciation reaches full maturity on the day of the Cross"
3. Then the Pope delineates Mary's interior dispositions on Calvary. He describes her as "accepting and assisting at the sacrifice of her son" and cites here the classic text of the Second Vatican Council about how Mary "lovingly consented to the immolation of this Victim which she herself had brought forth" (Lumen Gentium, 58). He would present this reality in his catechesis of 2 April 1997 by stating that
4. Integral to her offering of Jesus as victim to the Father is her offering of herself in union with him. The Holy Father stresses that Mary "united herself with the sacrifice of her Son that led to the foundation of the Church". Thus he underscores the fact that, though secondary and subordinate to Jesus' all-sufficient sacrifice, Mary's sacrifice cannot be separated from that of her son. We have seen how beautifully he recapitulated this idea in his catechesis of 17 September 1997 utilizing the same scripture text which he used in his homily in Guayaquil:
5. Precisely because Mary is a co-offerer of the sacrifice of Calvary, John Paul II describes her as "crucified spiritually with her crucified son". This may at first seem to be a shocking assertion, even an exaggeration, until the Pope provides us with his point of reference, Saint Paul's bold declaration to the Galatians: "I have been crucified with Christ" (2:20). If the Apostle of the Gentiles can say this of himself and invite us to be imitators of him (cf. I Cor. 4:16; Phil. 3:17), how much more can this be attributed to Mary, the "New Eve," she who collaborates with Jesus in bringing forth the Church? The Pope presented the reality of Mary's co-suffering with Christ in order to bring forth the Church in terms of Revelation 12:2 on 17 September 1997 when he stated that
I submit that all of the doctrinal richness of the numerous texts we have explored above is neatly synthesized by the Pope in his reference to Mary's "role as Coredemptrix" and that the homily at Guayaquil, far from being "marginal [and] therefore devoid of doctrinal weight" is a magisterial text of notable value.
Laus Cordibus Jesu Virginisque Matris Eius
KEY TO ABBREVIATIONS
AAS Acta Apostolicæ Sedis (1909 -- ).
Flannery Austin Flannery, O.P., ed., Vatican Council II: The Conciliar and Post Conciliar Documents (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1975).
Foundations I Mark I. Miravalle, S.T.D., (ed.), Mary -- Coredemptrix, Mediatrix, Advocate -- Theological Foundations -- Towards a Papal Definition? (Santa Barbara, CA: Queenship Publishing, 1995).
Foundations II Mark I. Miravalle, S.T.D., (ed.), Mary Coredemptrix, Mediatrix, Advocate, Theological Foundations II: Papal, Pneumatological, Ecumenical (Santa Barbara, CA: Queenship Publishing Company, 1997).
Inseg Insegnamenti di Giovanni Paolo II, I (1978 ) (Città del Vaticano: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1979 ).
MCat Pope John Paul II, Theotókos - Woman, Mother, Disciple: A Catechesis on Mary, Mother of God with a Foreword by Eamon R. Carroll, O.Carm, S.T.D. (Boston: Pauline Books and Media, 2000).
MMC Arthur Burton Calkins, "Il Mistero di Maria Corredentrice nel Magistero Pontificio" in Autori Vari, Maria Corredentrice: Storia e Teologia I (Frigento [AV]: Casa Mariana Editrice «Bibliotheca Corredemptionis B. V. Mariæ» Studi e Ricerche 1, 1998) 141-220
Messages Messages of John Paul II: Servant of Truth (Boston: St. Paul Editions, 1979).
OR L'Osservatore Romano, daily Italian edition.
ORE L'Osservatore Romano, weekly edition in English. First number = cumulative edition number; second number = page.
Totus Tuus Arthur Burton Calkins, Totus Tuus: John Paul II's Program of Marian Consecration and Entrustment (New Bedford, MA: Academy of the Immaculate "Studies and Texts," No. 1, 1992).
 The Second Vatican Council's Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation Dei Verbum (henceforth referred to as DV) #8 (Flannery 754).
 DV #10 (Flannery 755).
 Cf. The Second Vatican Council's Dogmatic Constitution on the Church Lumen Gentium (henceforth referred to as LG) #18-25.
 "Il Mistero di Maria Corredentrice nel Magistero Pontificio" in Autori Vari, Maria Corredentrice: Storia e Teologia I (Frigento [AV]: Casa Mariana Editrice «Bibliotheca Corredemptionis B. V. Mariae» Studi e Ricerche 1, 1998) 141-220. Henceforth referred to as MMC. Cf. Key to Abbreviations on the last page.
 S. Tommaso Teologo: Ricerche in occasione dei due centenari accademici (Città del Vaticano: Libreria Editrice Vaticana "Studi Tomistici #59," 1995) 320-335. An Italian translation entitled "Il Cuore di Maria Corredentrice nel Magistero di papa Giovanni Paolo II" was published in Corredemptrix: Annali Mariani 1996 del Santuario dell'Addolorata (Castelpetroso, Isernia, 1997) 97-114.
 "Pope John Paul II's Teaching on Marian Coredemption," Miles Immaculatæ XXXII (Luglio/Dicembre 1996) 474-508.
 Foundations II 113-147.
 "'Towards Another Marian Dogma?' A Response to Father Angelo Amato," Marianum LIX (1997) 159-167. An Italian translation under the title of "Verso un'altro Dogma Mariano?" was published in Eco del Santuario dell'Addolorata (N. 3, Maggio-Giugno 1998) 6-12.
 Angelo Amato, S.D.B., "Verso Un Altro Dogma Mariano?", Marianum LVIII (1996) 229-232.
 "The Case for New Marian Titles," Soul 49, No. 1 (January-February 1998) 20-21, 27; "Correcting Misleading Impressions," Soul 49, No. 2 (March-April 1998) 22-23, 27; "Zeroing in on the Term Coredemptrix," Soul 49, No. 3 (May-June 1998) 26-27.
 "A Response to the Declaration of the Commission of the Pontifical International Marian Academy" in Mark I. Miravalle, S.T.D., (ed.), Contemporary Insights on a Fifth Marian Dogma; Mary Coredemptrix, Mediatrix, Advocate: Theological Foundations III (Santa Barbara, CA: Queenship Publishing Company, 2000) 125-134. Unfortunately the last paragraph on p. 134 was changed without my permission. The first of these articles was also translated into German and the others were summarized in Paul Maria Sigl, Die Frau Aller Völker: Miterlöserin, Mittlerin, Fürsprecherin (Goldach, Schweiz: Schmid-Fehr, 1998) 95-101.
 "Amorosamente consenziente al sacrificio del Figlio: Maria Corredentrice nei discorsi di Giovanni Paolo II," Madre di Dio 67, N° 11 (Novembre 1999) 28-29.
 LG #25. For a further discussion on how the ordinary magisterium of the Supreme Pontiff may be recognized, cf. Arthur Burton Calkins, Totus Tuus: John Paul II's Program of Marian Consecration and Entrustment (New Bedford, MA: Academy of the Immaculate, third printing 1997) 266-269.
 LG #54.
 Giovanni Paolo II, Maria Madre di Cristo e della Chiesa: Catechesi mariane a cura e commento del Cardinale Vincenzo Fagiolo (Casale Monferrato [AL]; Edizioni Piemme, 1998) 5 (my trans.).
 By his treatment of "maternal mediation" in his Encyclical Letter Redemptoris Mater (#38-50) he had already put the spotlight on a theme that many post-conciliar Mariologists had consigned to past history. Cf. Totus Tuus 180-188.
 Cf. Michael O'Carroll, C.S.Sp., Theotokos: A Theological Encyclopedia of the Blessed Virgin Mary (Wilmington, DE: Michael Glazier, Inc.; Dublin: Dominican Publications, 1982) 308.
 Cf. Michael O'Carroll, C.S.Sp., "Mary's Mediation: Vatican II and John Paul II" in Virgo Liber Verbi: Miscellanea di studi in onore di P. Giuseppe M. Besutti, O.S.M. (Rome: Edizioni «Marianum», 1991) 543; Theotokos 352. In the latter article Father O'Carroll gives the number of Father asking for a statement on Mary's mediation as 382.
 Inseg XVIII/2 (1995) 1369-1370 [ORE 1421:13; MCat 51-52]. Italics my own.
 Giovanni Paolo II, Maria nel Mistero di Cristo e della Chiesa (Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1998). The Italian texts are also reproduced in Cardinal Fagiolo's volume cited above with his commentary. The first four volumes in the series on the Creed are devoted respectively to the Father, Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit and the Church.
 Inseg XVIII/2 (1995) 934-935 [ORE 1414:11; MCat 25-27].
 Inseg XVIII/2 (1995) 1123 [ORE 1417:11; MCat 34].
 Inseg XVIII/2 (1995) 1318-1319 [ORE 1420:11; MCat 45-46].
 Inseg XX/1 (1997) 621-622 [ORE 1487:7; MCat 185-186].
 Inseg XVIII/2 (1995) 1369; ORE 1421:13; MCat 51.
 Inseg XIX/1 (1996) 853-854 [ORE 1435:3; MCat 75].
 Inseg XIX/1 (1996) 10 [ORE 1423:11; MCat 54].
 Cf. my treatment of this theme in "Mary as Coredemptrix, Mediatrix and Advocate in the Contemporary Roman Liturgy," Foundations I 55-57.
 Cf. my treatment of this theme in MMC 179-18.
 Cf. my treatment in "Pope John Paul II's Teaching on Marian Coredemption," Foundations II 128-132.
 Inseg XX/2 (1997) 565 [ORE 1513:11; MCat 246].
 Inseg XIX/1 (1996) 116 [ORE 1426:11; MCat 62].
 Inseg XIX/1 (1996) 1392 [ORE 1444:11; MCat 96].
 Inseg XX/1 (1997) 750-751 [ORE 1489:11, MCat 189-190].
 Inseg XX/1 (1997) 622 [ORE 1487:7; MCat 186].
 Inseg XX/2 (1997) 35 [ORE 1500:7; MCat 208]. Italics my own.
 Cf. my treatment of this matter in Totus Tuus 162-168.
 Inseg XX/2 (1997) 56 [ORE 1502:7; MCat 210]. Italics my own.
 For the magisterial background and foundation for this analogy, cf. Totus Tuus 85-86, 102-105.
 Flannery 416.
 Inseg XVIII/1 (1995) 731; AAS LXXXVII (1995) 520 [ORE 1385:XIX].
 Inseg XIX/2 (1996) 491-492 [ORE 1461:11; MCat 141].
 Inseg VI/1 (1983) 1136 [ORE 783:1].
 OR 6 settembre 1996, p. 4 [ORE 1461:8].
 Stefano M. Manelli, All Generations Shall Call Me Blessed: Biblical Mariology trans. Peter Damian Fehlner, F.I. (New Bedford, MA: Academy of the Immaculate, 1995) 235-250.
 Ignazio M. Calabuig, O.S.M., "La Vergine offerente, modello della Chiesa che offre e si offre: Spunti dalla liturgia romana," in Ermanno M. Toniolo, O.S.M. (ed.), Maria e L'Eucaristia: "Fine d'Anno con Maria" 20 (Rome: Centro di Cultura Mariana «Madre della Chiesa», 2000) 259-296.
 Inseg XVIII/2 (1995) 935 [ORE 1414:11; MCat 26]. On St. Bernard's interpretation of the presentation, cf. Calabuig 272-281.
 Cf. Calabuig 265-281.
 Inseg VI/1 (1983) 1136-1137 [ORE 783:1]. Italics my own.
 Inseg XX/1 (1997) 25, 26 [ORE 1476:3]. Italics my own.
 Cf. my treatment of this theme in MMC 189-212.
 Inseg XX/1 (1997) 29, 30 [ORE 1474:11; MCat 161, 162]. Italics my own except for under and with him.
 Inseg XIX/2 (1996) 1046-1047, 1048; [ORE 1472:11; MCat 158-159, 160]. Italics my own.
 Flannery 417. Italics my own. I have changed the word "associated" to "associating".
 The expression quantum ad se pertinebat occurs in his Letter Inter Sodalicia of 22 May 1918 [AAS 10 (1918) 181-182]. Some of the language of the former document [non sine divino consilio, Filium immolavit] is incorporated into the text of Lumen Gentium #58, but without being cited in the footnote. Cf. my commentary on this text in MMC 191-193.
 I have treated these two dimensions separately in MMC 188-212 and in my study in Foundations II 132-140.
 Inseg XX/1 (1997) 621 [ORE 1487:7; MCat 185].
 Inseg XX/1 (1997) 572 [ORE 1486:11; MCat 183]. Italics my own.
 Inseg XX/2 (1997) 297 [ORE 1508:7; MCat 232].
 OR 24 febbraio 2000, p. 7 [ORE 1632:11]. Italics my own.
 Cf. my treatment of the sacrifice of Mary's maternal Heart in MMC 213-218; Foundations II 140-144. For a more detailed study of the Heart of Mary as a symbol of her collaboration in the work of our salvation, cf. my article, "The Heart of Mary as Coredemptrix in the Magisterium of Pope John Paul II" in S. Tommaso Teologo: Ricerche in occasione dei due centenari accademici (Città del Vaticano: Libreria Editrice Vaticana «Studi Tomistici #59», 1995) 320-335; An Italian trans. "Il Cuore di Maria Corredentrice nel Magistero di papa Giovanni Paolo II" was published in Corredemptrix: Annali Mariani 1996 del Santuario dell'Addolorata (Castelpetroso, Isernia, 1997) 97-114.
 Inseg XIX/1 (1996) 1391 [ORE 1444:11; MCat 95].
 Collection of Masses of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Vol. I: Sacramentary (New York: Catholic Book Publishing Co., 1992) 117; original Latin text in Collectio Missarum de Beata Maria Virgine I (Città del Vaticano: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1987) 49. Italics my own.
 On the concept of Mary as associate or partner in the work of salvation according to the liturgy, cf. my study in Foundations I 52-54. On this same concept according to the magisterium, cf. my studies in MMC 167-179 and in Foundations II 1126-127.
 Roman Missal, Preface of the Sacred Heart of Jesus.
 Inseg XIX/1 (1996) 1392 [ORE 1444:11; MCat 96]. Italics my own.
 Inseg XX/2 (1997) 331 [ORE 1509:11; MCat 234]. Italics my own.
 Cf. my article on "Mary's Presence in the Mass," Homiletic & Pastoral Review XCVII, No. 10 (July 1997) 8-15.
 Inseg XIX/1 (1996) 1344 [ORE 1446:6].
 Inseg XVIII/2 (1995) 54 [ORE 1399:3].
 With apologies to Father Aidan Nichols, O.P. I would put his proposal of "The Redemptive Collaboratrix" among these. Cf. his article "Von Balthasar and the Coredemption" in Mary at the Foot of the Cross: Acts of the International Symposium on Marian Coredemption (New Bedford, MA: Academy of the Immaculate, 2001) 314.
 Cf. Mark I. Miravalle, S.T.D., Mary: Coredemptrix, Mediatrix, Advocate (Santa Barbara, CA: Queenship Publishing, 1993) xv; MMC 147-148; Foundations II 117-118.
 Cf. Juniper B. Carol, O.F.M., "Our Lady's Coredemption," Mariology 2 (Milwaukee: Bruce Publishing Company, 1957) 398-400; René Laurentin, Le titre de Corédemptrice: Étude historique (Rome: Éditions «Marianum», 1951) 15-16; Gabriele Roschini, O.S.M., Problematica sulla Corredenzione (Rome: Edizioni «Marianum», 1969) 15-17.
 Cf. MMC 149-151.
 Cf. MMC 151-153.
 Cf. Alessandro M. Apollonio, F.I., Il "calvario teologico" della Corredenzione mariana (Castelpetroso: Casa Mariana Editrice, 1999) 7-8.
 Cf. my treatment in Foundations II 119 and MMC 155-156.
 Cf. my article "'Towards Another Marian Dogma?' A Response to Father Angelo Amato," Marianum LIX (1997) 163-165.
 I have enumerated five of these instances in Foundations II 121-124 and in MMC 161-166. Since then I have found a sixth instance in an address to the sick and those who serve them on 24 March 1990 in which the Pope describes Mary as the "Coredemptrix of the human race next to her Son" [Corredentrice del genere umano accanto al suo Figlio] in Inseg XIII/1 (1990) 743.
 Inseg IV/1 (1981) 896; V/1 (1982) 91; XI/2 (1988) 1216.
 OR 4 Giugno 1997, p. 10 [ORE 1494:12].
 OR 4 Giugno 1997, p. 10 [ORE 1497:10].
 OR 4 Giugno 1997, p. 10-11 [ORE 1498:9-10].
 OR 4 Giugno 1997, p. 10 [ORE 1497:10].
 Flannery 379. I have added the numbers.
 Cf. Totus Tuus 266-269.
 The Italian speaks of documenti pontifici secondari, e quindi senza peso dottrinale.
 Ignazio M. Calabuig, O.S.M. e il Comitato di redazione della rivista Marianum, "Riflessione sulla richiesta della definizione dogmatica di «Maria corredentrice, mediatrice, avvocata»," Marianum LXI (1999) 157 n. 50.
 Inseg VIII/1 (1985) 318-319 [ORE 876:7]; Italics my own.
 Inseg XIX/1 (1996) 1392 [ORE 1444:11; MCat 96]. Italics my own.
 Inseg XVIII/1 (1995) 731; AAS LXXXVII (1995) 520 [ORE 1385:XIX].
 Inseg XX/1 (1997) 572 [ORE 1486:11; MCat 183].
 Inseg XX/2 (1997) 331 [ORE 1509:11; MCat 234].
 Inseg XX/2 (1997) 331 [ORE 1509:11; MCat 234].
Copyright ©; Msgr Arthur Calkins 2002
Version 30th November 2002