It is almost like they want to force a sort of crisis and split the faithful. We should listen to the good bishop Schneider and ignore these spurious modern prescriptions.
Yours is a very pertinent point. The first question to be raised from now in the theological academy an in the Church is not to be actually about the topic under assault, but exactly why it is a target...
The academic theologians, the profit grabbing authors, and the ecclesiastics anxious to be seen as edgy and scholarly are disingenuous spiritually bankrupt wanna-bes looking for the limelight and approbation from atheist academics and the Marxist secularists who pull the global strings.
Not everyone is afraid of acknowledging the truth which is that these men beginning with John XXIII and all subsequent usurpers of the Chair of Peter were/are not faithful Catholics.
Where have you been the last 60 years? The Modernist apostates engineered a crisis to split the faithful and to eventually destroy the true Catholic faith with their Second Vatican Council whose documents clearly expose their apostacy and heresies.
Free will…He allows free will and we get a chance to defend the Faith…we may not be physical martyrs but this gives us a chance to be spiritual ones..good practice and good training for us.
Bravo, Bishop Schneider and you, Diane, for giving this worthy subject the importance it deserves. Sensus Fidelium is a subject for heirarchs all the way the highest offices of the Pope's curia to reflect and meditate on. Devotees of our Blessed Mother do not share in the confusion of prelates with numerous, impressive theological degrees who can't see the forest for the trees. Bishop Schneider has proven he is a better Church historian and theologian than the Prefect of the DDF. I hope Pope Leo XIII takes note. P. Sevilla, San Antonio, TX.
Apologize once again for mistake. I wrote: Pope Leo XIII; should be Pope Leo XIV.
It is important to respect Our Blessed Mother's role in salvation history. Popes and bishops did just that which gave us four Marian dogmas: Mother of God, her Perpetual virginity, her Immaculate Conception, and Assumption. Her Son, our Savior and Redeemer has given His mother a special, exalted place in His mission as Redeemer. Bishop Schneider justifiably provides evidence from the history of the Church that these titles being debated have been supported. Let's be open to the debate.
This is just the opening salvo in attempts to marginalize Mary. Lucifer was successfully with Luther and now he is moving on as he has moved into the hierarchy of the catholic church. He will use his minions to slowly prune Mary's role out of his new religion and use the illusion of authority in his anti-pope and bishops to fool lukewarm Catholics.
Ironically, the very person at the heart of this question namely Our Blessed Mother, would be the first to tell us to stop wasting time on giving me a title and focus on my Son 🙏. Don't we have more important issues to deal with? This seems focused on more ecumenism with people who have problems with Mary beyond just this one title anyway. I can understand the word CO-redemptrix can seem to imply equality with Christ's work of Redemption. Again, if we completely removed this particular title I don't think Our Blessed Mother would be offended or even care about such worldly words....not having this title takes nothing away from Mary's role in salvation and the Church has more important things to deal with....most Catholics probably don't even use this title or many have never heard of it until this so-called 'crisis' arose....
I was not very Marian before this doctrinal note. Something about this conflict has been weighing on my heart heavily. Of course, Mary is more humble than any of us and wants us focused on her Son. But, this IS an issue of fidelity to her Son. Her entire being, the incarnation in her womb, all her titles are ultimately about His glory, not hers. It’s not possible to deny her without offending Him.
And then, there is the matter of truth and consistency. The Church itself loses credibility each time it reaches for ecumenism over objective truth. Especially one well documented by the Saints and Church of the past. It causes a spiritual crises within the faithful.
And for what? It’s not going to convert anyone. Because the reality remains that Mary IS honored above all saints, she does have special grace granted by her Son, and if you reject her, you’ll never be a true Catholic.
It is the poison of ecumenism to soften or banish Catholic truths that schismatic protestants don’t like. What other truths do you think we shouldn’t worry about- Transubstantiation? Incarnation? The Trinity?
Maybe instead of dismissing traditional Catholic beliefs, you might study to understand and defend them better. “Co-“ means “with,” not “equal.” Could you explain that to a protestant?
Sadly, I am not understanding why we need to appeal to anyone other than other Catholics. After all, I don't see these clarifications moving any other religious population to become Catholics.
We need to appeal to non-Catholics because our Lord commanded us to, and because outside the Church there is no salvation. We preach the Truth in season and out. Whether the Truth will move others to convert or not is up to God and their free will, but our job is to teach Truth with reason and charity.
Your Substack contains zero Notes, zero Posts, zero Likes and 2 Reads (of the same Substack).
This a very common pattern on this platform -- when we see jarring, disruptive and disrespectful comments aiming to discredit the entire message of a Post. A nondescript, one-size-fits-all Substack name like your "independent_forever" also is a hallmark of trolls and bots. And it is an odd choice, given that your sole interest to date is supposedly the Catholic Faith. You have zero content even remotely related to the topic of "independence" (or any other subject area, for that matter).
You also speak for the Mother of God: "Our Blessed Mother, would be the first to tell us to stop wasting time on giving me a title" and "I don't think Our Blessed Mother would be offended or even care about such worldly words". "worldly words" ??
The best policy is to ignore trolls and bots, and I almost always follow it. But I make exceptions for particularly malicious ones like you -- or whoever or whatever generated your attempt to belittle Catholics devoted to Our Lady. Of course, you might simply have not gotten enough attention when you were a little boy.
I believe that Bishop Schneider is wrong and that "Ironically, the very person at the heart of this question namely Our Blessed Mother, would be the first to tell us to stop wasting time on giving me a title and focus on my Son ".
I think it's passive-aggressive to state something like "We really shouldn't ever call the Blessed Mother co-redemptrix" when, to take just one example, Pope Saint John Paul II called her that. So if you are teaching your kids that the Pope called our lady "co-redemptrix" you are on 100% solid ground. This statement (1) says your not, and (2) doesn't deal with the complexity of the centuries of contradictions to the statement. It treats lay people in a rude manner, like children who need to have there knuckles rapped.
So good Catholics have disagreed on whether there was a rupture in the Church after Vatican II. But how can anyone now defend the Synodalists who have unequivocally deemed the previous Magisterium's use of "Co-Redemptrix" as "ALWAYS" inappropriate. There is no "hermeneutic of continuity" any longer, if there ever was.
I'm new to this Substack. I left one other comment earlier today. I'd like to leave another.
From a Traditional Catholic perspective, without defending Fernández, without excusing his past behavior, and without slipping into rash judgment about the interior state of his soul.
I wonder mostly "why" he said this — not what he said and not whether it is correct (we know it is not).
Cardinal Fernández’s insistence that the term Co-redemptrix is “always inappropriate” does not originate with him personally, nor with Pope Francis, nor with the Dicastery in 2024. It comes from a consistent post–Vatican II theological agenda that tries to prevent any Marian title that appears “too exalted” or “too close” to Christ’s mediatorship.
This agenda has three possible main motivations:
1. Fear of Ecumenical Backlash
(Primary motivator since the 1960s)
For decades, the theological establishment has been terrified that titles like Co-redemptrix will “alienate” Protestants.
This is explicitly documented in the debates of Vatican II:
The Council came close to defining Mary as Co-redemptrix and Mediatrix of all Graces.
These efforts were blocked — because ecumenical observers warned it would harm “dialogue.”
Fernández is formed entirely by this school. It is the air he breathes. To him, Co-redemptrix is “dangerous” because it:
Makes Mary appear too exalted,
Appears (to Protestants) to diminish Christ’s unique mediatorship,
Threatens the ecumenical project that Vatican II prioritized.
2. A Modernist View of Language:
If a title requires explanation, it must be rejected.
The doctrinal note explicitly states:
“When an expression requires many, repeated explanations… it becomes unhelpful.”
This is a purely modern principle. The entire Catholic tradition thrives on terms that require explanation:
Homoousios
Hypostatic union
Transubstantiation
Theopaschite formula
Mediatrix, Advocata, Cooperatrix
Every dogmatic term in the Creed requires explanation.
But modern theologians (especially the school that formed Fernández) operate by the rule: “Only use terms that the average layman or non-Catholic won’t misunderstand.”
This makes it emotionally impossible for them to accept a term like Co-redemptrix, which:
Requires nuance
Must be distinguished from equality with Christ
Expresses a mystery of cooperation with grace
Implies a hierarchical structure of mediation
Implies a sacrificial dimension in Mary’s motherhood
This school hates those theological categories.
Thus the second reason is: Modernist reductionism:
They reject terms that evoke transcendence, hierarchy, or mystery.
3. The Personalism of Pope Francis and Fernández
Pope Francis and his chosen theologians (Fernández is his closest) have a consistent pattern:
They want Mary emphasized as disciple, not Queen.
They want her seen as mother, not Mediatrix.
They want her close to the people, not enthroned.
They want to avoid any title that appears “too triumphalistic” or “too exalted.”
Francis has personally attacked the term Co-redemptrix multiple times, calling it:
“nonsense”
“foolishness”
“an exaggeration”
“a distortion of Mary”
Fernández is simply implementing Francis’s worldview in magisterial form. He is doing exactly the job Francis promoted him for.
Thus the third reason:
The current pontificate seeks to suppress exalted Marian titles in order to promote a pastoral, horizontal, “humble” image of Mary.
But Why the Stronger Wording?
Why change “not appropriate” to “always inappropriate”?
That change is extremely revealing. It reflects:
A desire to “shut the door” permanently.
The original wording left room for discussion.
The revised wording attempts to foreclose future theological development.
Put bluntly: They want to bury the term because the current regime views it as dangerous to its theological program.
It is an act of doctrinal gatekeeping.
About Fernández himself. Someone in this comment referenced his disturbing book. (I will refrain from posting the title here in case I stir curiosity).
While we must avoid rash judgment of souls, it is perfectly legitimate to observe patterns:
He was not known for theological depth.
He is emblematic of a “sentimental theology” school that is suspicious of metaphysics.
His formation is shaped far more by psychology and “affective personalism” than by scholasticism.
His appointment to the DDF was widely understood as political, not doctrinal.
Given that background, it is not surprising that he:
Mistrusts technical Marian terminology,
Rejects hierarchical concepts like “cooperation in redemption,”
Dislikes precise distinctions,
Prefers emotionally accessible language.
A man who writes romanticized pseudo-spiritual works may understandably recoil from the solemn, metaphysical, hierarchical Marian titles of Tradition.
I write this not to defend Fernandez, I personally think there is something quite wrong with his mental health. I say this because I prefer to explore both sides before making any decisions on what to think.
Hope this was helpful.
May God forgive me and have mercy on me if I acted foolishly in writing this comment.
How blessed we are to have such faithful shepherds as Bishop Schneider. In these times it behooves us to know our faith well . Modern interpretations are lacking in the sound and true and straight teachings of our Fathers . Thank You, Lord, for Your Holy Catholic Church.
Should I not notice that yet another heretical Pope is tormenting and stabbing the Body of Christ?
--
Modernism has been defined as the synthesis of all heresies (St. Pius X's formulation) and by the 1958 College of Cardinals election of the Modernist Pope (John XXIII)
a majority of Cardinals were heretical Modernists. The 1958 Modernist Pope immediately started the path that resulted in Heretical Vatican II.
He refused to release the 3rd Secret of Fatima in 1960 as directed my Our Lady of Fatima, and many believe the real version is still not released - that a false version was made public, Testimonies from a few that had read it state it contained warnings of Satan taking control of Vatican, and a false new-mass, and other things that have since fallen true.
Vatican II contain not less than 2 clear heresies and many relaxations of ridged aspects, so clearly unTrue, unJust, disOrdering, imprudent, uncharitable, and Scandalous. So much so that any well catechized Catholic should not have stayed silent, but the Modernists had already spread division and confusion within the Church and a paralyzesation existed as it exists today.
By Church Law the Laity is helpless to correct a heretical Pope, only the Bishops may and most failed and still are failing their Office Duties and even supporting the Modernist Heresies, excommunicating themselves in with heretical public inactions and actions.
The Modernists that hold and held Church Offices from before 1958 and Papal Office since 1958 were legal Office holders but since all accepted Offices with intent to harm Church and fail in Office Duties they are in perpetual grave sin and never received the specific Graces, Charmes, Gaudian Angelic protections, and Holy Ghost focuses that come with the Office when not demonic-controlled.
The newest Modernist in Papal Office now is the legal Pope but Graceless and Spiritually dead without Holy Ghost presence.
of course sacramental grace operates ex opere operato, so even a heretical Pope's Ordination of a Bishop has the Holy Effect, as do heretical Bishops ordination of Priests, and heretical Priests transubstantiate Bread-Wine into Host Body-Blood through Jesus Christ.
And still a heretical Pope can be known to lack the normal Holy Ghost divine guidance and protection from Papal error, same for all other Offices.
1917 Cannon includes public defection from the Catholic faith, among other acts rendering the officeholder unfit. Recently the Pope share worship with the head of the Church of England, a grave sin, in Public, and likely be now 50 more such harms and scandals - like previous Pope the public heresies seem to occur at a rate of a few a week.
Catholic worshiping with non-Catholic in public where special exemption did not apply. Ignorance also does not apply.
Offices are not empty until charged by legal body of Bishops, I forget the details, but they all have effectively blocked any correction the Church gravely needs.
Bishops have been publicly failing in duty since Vatican II and most to nearly all have actively supported the Modernist heresies placed by Vatican, so if Bishops are unwilling to repent and return to duty then should be publicly shamed until they each leave or return to duty.
Same situations for College of Cardinals especially failed duties by electing 2nd flamingly out-of-closet Modernist in a row. Cardinals must leave or repent, Traditional Bishops replace them, and traditional priests fill in bishop's office as needed.
The Holy Ghost must Move through Church in each step at each critical man, then Holy Ghost moves College to elect I Rightful Pope.
The erudite have responded incisively to this disgusting affront on the magnificent dignity implicit in our Blessed Mother from the moment of her conception. I have nothing to add that could approach the academics and doctrinal history. My response arises from my contemplative life, specifically in this instance, my relationship to her in consecrations and daily prayer. Her creation existentially validates the title Co Redemptrix since she existentially as Immaculate Conception and Immaculata aligns every thought and act as an ongoing ascent to the will of God in her life which in some instances implicates her role as Stabat Mater as well. All the virtues were absolutely exercised throughout as she assented to the unfolding of God's will, His Redemptive Will for humanity and His created universe. She is the Shema incarnate which out of her absolute love and fidelity she was gifted with bringing forth and enclosing The Word incarnationally. That flesh was from her flesh; the flesh we consume in Eucharist. It was through her flesh that creation, humanity implicated, that God assumed to Himself for the redemption of creation because it was her flesh in Jesus that was the material component Satan unleashed the fulness of his hatred which would have crushed any human but for the Word incarnate, the Divine Personhood of the Word upholding the surrender of the material to The Father as God-man second Adam for us poor creatures and creation. Human will absolutely surrendered to The Father bodily. She is the posture, 'Be it done unto me according to Thy Word' that every human must present self to God as creature for mercy and forgiveness because she is absolute as mold. It is the Divine Word Who says, 'Woman behold thy son and to the disciple, and every prospective disciple, behold thy Mother'. The breath-taking titles illuminate albeit superficially literally something of who she is in the Little Office of the Immaculate Conception. They can only be somewhat understood and appreciated mystically by grace yet still fail to manifest her divinized motherhood; God's Motherhood toward man. She purportedly conveyed to a saint that the title she loves most of all her titles is "Admirable Mother". We catch a glimpse of infant sucking at her breast and both swooning in life and love....Divine Word Incarnate fed by her blood for 9 months and now her milk. What this article poignantly reveals and exposes is that neither papal canonist nor nepotic incompetent legate know the Virgin Immaculate because they do not have a dialogical dialectical communion with her which would implicate a lens to see how erroneous and insulting their superficial concern and idea really is at its core. They would do best to attend to her Fatima request and fulfill what no Pope has done from John 23 throughout in their disgusting insubordination. I am not a sedevacantist. As Fr. Gruner wrote in his book entitled "World Enslavement or Peace...It's Up To The Pope". I tell you most solemnly, all that's happening in the unravelling of democracies, the social order, and the church lay squarely are the feet of the papacy and higher clerics. Either grow two and exercise the four looking squarely at the three (cardinal and theological virtues) in fearless composure and trust or shut up because all the equivocating and role playing mean nothing until her words are respected and honored for which reason a divine correction may be coming sooner than later. I would not want to be responsible for the cowardice and ecclesial tomfoolery drama as God's children and prospective children are murdered through carelessness, depraved human wisdom, and cowardice.
Thank you, Diane, for the precision and balance you bring to this developing conversation. Your attention to the linguistic shifts, the historical layers, and the wider theological stakes is precisely what the Church needs right now. Too much commentary treats this debate as if it burst into existence in 2025, rather than as the latest chapter in a long and complex history of reception.
Bishop Schneider’s intervention is therefore essential not because it “wins” an argument, but because it forces the deeper question your reporting highlights: How does the Church today interpret and receive her own prior magisterial language? For centuries, saints, doctors, and popes used these titles within a clear, subordinate, and Christocentric framework. Even among those who welcome the Dicastery’s caution, that continuity cannot be dismissed.
From the vantage point of my own research (notably on how Vatican II sought to harmonize a Christological and ecclesial Marian vision), this moment reveals precisely the tension your article surfaces. The challenge is not one of maximalism versus minimalism, but rather whether we can speak about Mary in a way that preserves the Church’s sacramental, participatory imagination without obscuring Christ’s unique mediation. Mater Populi Fidelis tries to secure clarity; the tradition insists on depth. Holding both together is the real task.
Your work helps readers perceive that deeper horizon rather than reducing this to another round of ecclesial polarization. Grateful for the care and theological literacy you bring to it. God bless!
I thank God that we still have a few good Bishops like Schneider. This denial of the hierarchy of Our Lady as Mediatrix and Co-Redemptrix is so very heretical. I hope there will be an outcry throughout the Church forcing them to take step towards a fifth Marian dogma codifying her as Mediatrix and Co-Redemtrix once and for all. This whole mess is shameful.
You know what else is always inappropriate? Letting homosexual activists into St. Peter's. Yet here we are. As this lovely little note is neither ex cathedra nor in line with the teachings of the doctors or fathers, it is as binding on the Church as a laxative.
It is almost like they want to force a sort of crisis and split the faithful. We should listen to the good bishop Schneider and ignore these spurious modern prescriptions.
Yours is a very pertinent point. The first question to be raised from now in the theological academy an in the Church is not to be actually about the topic under assault, but exactly why it is a target...
The academic theologians, the profit grabbing authors, and the ecclesiastics anxious to be seen as edgy and scholarly are disingenuous spiritually bankrupt wanna-bes looking for the limelight and approbation from atheist academics and the Marxist secularists who pull the global strings.
Lost souls.
Same lost souls that promograted and push hard for the institution of " Blessing Couples"! Anything that comes from them we need to ignore, OMHO.
There needs to be split. There already is a split. It's just that everyone is afraid of the consequences of acknowledging it, so they don't.
Not everyone is afraid of acknowledging the truth which is that these men beginning with John XXIII and all subsequent usurpers of the Chair of Peter were/are not faithful Catholics.
Where have you been the last 60 years? The Modernist apostates engineered a crisis to split the faithful and to eventually destroy the true Catholic faith with their Second Vatican Council whose documents clearly expose their apostacy and heresies.
And when they’re finally exposed? Turn on a light in a hovel and watch the cockroaches scurry to darkness
They have been exposed by many people in all kinds of positions. Yet God still allows them to spread their errors for some reason which only He knows.
Free will…He allows free will and we get a chance to defend the Faith…we may not be physical martyrs but this gives us a chance to be spiritual ones..good practice and good training for us.
This guy name Fernandez is not the same guy that wrote couple books, about weird stuff? 🤔🤔
Absolutely. Go to a search engine and read all about it.
Victor Cardinal Fernandez wrote "Heal Me With Your Mouth: The Art of Kissing."
I better trust Bishop Athanasius Schneider than Bergoglio's Fernández.
Thanks to God for faithful Bishops like Bishop Athanasius Schneider. 🙏🙏🙏
Bravo, Bishop Schneider and you, Diane, for giving this worthy subject the importance it deserves. Sensus Fidelium is a subject for heirarchs all the way the highest offices of the Pope's curia to reflect and meditate on. Devotees of our Blessed Mother do not share in the confusion of prelates with numerous, impressive theological degrees who can't see the forest for the trees. Bishop Schneider has proven he is a better Church historian and theologian than the Prefect of the DDF. I hope Pope Leo XIII takes note. P. Sevilla, San Antonio, TX.
Correction: spelling - hierarchs
Apparently it is a subject of the heresiarch’s as well!
And how this man Fernandez qualifies as a prefect of his present office is a grave scandal in and of itself.
Apologize once again for mistake. I wrote: Pope Leo XIII; should be Pope Leo XIV.
It is important to respect Our Blessed Mother's role in salvation history. Popes and bishops did just that which gave us four Marian dogmas: Mother of God, her Perpetual virginity, her Immaculate Conception, and Assumption. Her Son, our Savior and Redeemer has given His mother a special, exalted place in His mission as Redeemer. Bishop Schneider justifiably provides evidence from the history of the Church that these titles being debated have been supported. Let's be open to the debate.
This is just the opening salvo in attempts to marginalize Mary. Lucifer was successfully with Luther and now he is moving on as he has moved into the hierarchy of the catholic church. He will use his minions to slowly prune Mary's role out of his new religion and use the illusion of authority in his anti-pope and bishops to fool lukewarm Catholics.
Ironically, the very person at the heart of this question namely Our Blessed Mother, would be the first to tell us to stop wasting time on giving me a title and focus on my Son 🙏. Don't we have more important issues to deal with? This seems focused on more ecumenism with people who have problems with Mary beyond just this one title anyway. I can understand the word CO-redemptrix can seem to imply equality with Christ's work of Redemption. Again, if we completely removed this particular title I don't think Our Blessed Mother would be offended or even care about such worldly words....not having this title takes nothing away from Mary's role in salvation and the Church has more important things to deal with....most Catholics probably don't even use this title or many have never heard of it until this so-called 'crisis' arose....
I was not very Marian before this doctrinal note. Something about this conflict has been weighing on my heart heavily. Of course, Mary is more humble than any of us and wants us focused on her Son. But, this IS an issue of fidelity to her Son. Her entire being, the incarnation in her womb, all her titles are ultimately about His glory, not hers. It’s not possible to deny her without offending Him.
And then, there is the matter of truth and consistency. The Church itself loses credibility each time it reaches for ecumenism over objective truth. Especially one well documented by the Saints and Church of the past. It causes a spiritual crises within the faithful.
And for what? It’s not going to convert anyone. Because the reality remains that Mary IS honored above all saints, she does have special grace granted by her Son, and if you reject her, you’ll never be a true Catholic.
It broke my heart. She has been my patron since I founded my business, MG Rosary. Guess what MG stands for?
Mother of God? 🥰
Mediatrix of Grace
It is the poison of ecumenism to soften or banish Catholic truths that schismatic protestants don’t like. What other truths do you think we shouldn’t worry about- Transubstantiation? Incarnation? The Trinity?
Maybe instead of dismissing traditional Catholic beliefs, you might study to understand and defend them better. “Co-“ means “with,” not “equal.” Could you explain that to a protestant?
Sadly, I am not understanding why we need to appeal to anyone other than other Catholics. After all, I don't see these clarifications moving any other religious population to become Catholics.
We need to appeal to non-Catholics because our Lord commanded us to, and because outside the Church there is no salvation. We preach the Truth in season and out. Whether the Truth will move others to convert or not is up to God and their free will, but our job is to teach Truth with reason and charity.
Your Substack contains zero Notes, zero Posts, zero Likes and 2 Reads (of the same Substack).
This a very common pattern on this platform -- when we see jarring, disruptive and disrespectful comments aiming to discredit the entire message of a Post. A nondescript, one-size-fits-all Substack name like your "independent_forever" also is a hallmark of trolls and bots. And it is an odd choice, given that your sole interest to date is supposedly the Catholic Faith. You have zero content even remotely related to the topic of "independence" (or any other subject area, for that matter).
You also speak for the Mother of God: "Our Blessed Mother, would be the first to tell us to stop wasting time on giving me a title" and "I don't think Our Blessed Mother would be offended or even care about such worldly words". "worldly words" ??
The best policy is to ignore trolls and bots, and I almost always follow it. But I make exceptions for particularly malicious ones like you -- or whoever or whatever generated your attempt to belittle Catholics devoted to Our Lady. Of course, you might simply have not gotten enough attention when you were a little boy.
I believe that Bishop Schneider is wrong and that "Ironically, the very person at the heart of this question namely Our Blessed Mother, would be the first to tell us to stop wasting time on giving me a title and focus on my Son ".
Why in the world would you think I care what you believe?
Any title of the Blessed Mother focuses on Christ. Denying these titles reduces His glory, and puts a limit on our understanding of soteriology.
I think it's passive-aggressive to state something like "We really shouldn't ever call the Blessed Mother co-redemptrix" when, to take just one example, Pope Saint John Paul II called her that. So if you are teaching your kids that the Pope called our lady "co-redemptrix" you are on 100% solid ground. This statement (1) says your not, and (2) doesn't deal with the complexity of the centuries of contradictions to the statement. It treats lay people in a rude manner, like children who need to have there knuckles rapped.
So good Catholics have disagreed on whether there was a rupture in the Church after Vatican II. But how can anyone now defend the Synodalists who have unequivocally deemed the previous Magisterium's use of "Co-Redemptrix" as "ALWAYS" inappropriate. There is no "hermeneutic of continuity" any longer, if there ever was.
I'm new to this Substack. I left one other comment earlier today. I'd like to leave another.
From a Traditional Catholic perspective, without defending Fernández, without excusing his past behavior, and without slipping into rash judgment about the interior state of his soul.
I wonder mostly "why" he said this — not what he said and not whether it is correct (we know it is not).
Cardinal Fernández’s insistence that the term Co-redemptrix is “always inappropriate” does not originate with him personally, nor with Pope Francis, nor with the Dicastery in 2024. It comes from a consistent post–Vatican II theological agenda that tries to prevent any Marian title that appears “too exalted” or “too close” to Christ’s mediatorship.
This agenda has three possible main motivations:
1. Fear of Ecumenical Backlash
(Primary motivator since the 1960s)
For decades, the theological establishment has been terrified that titles like Co-redemptrix will “alienate” Protestants.
This is explicitly documented in the debates of Vatican II:
The Council came close to defining Mary as Co-redemptrix and Mediatrix of all Graces.
These efforts were blocked — because ecumenical observers warned it would harm “dialogue.”
Fernández is formed entirely by this school. It is the air he breathes. To him, Co-redemptrix is “dangerous” because it:
Makes Mary appear too exalted,
Appears (to Protestants) to diminish Christ’s unique mediatorship,
Threatens the ecumenical project that Vatican II prioritized.
2. A Modernist View of Language:
If a title requires explanation, it must be rejected.
The doctrinal note explicitly states:
“When an expression requires many, repeated explanations… it becomes unhelpful.”
This is a purely modern principle. The entire Catholic tradition thrives on terms that require explanation:
Homoousios
Hypostatic union
Transubstantiation
Theopaschite formula
Mediatrix, Advocata, Cooperatrix
Every dogmatic term in the Creed requires explanation.
But modern theologians (especially the school that formed Fernández) operate by the rule: “Only use terms that the average layman or non-Catholic won’t misunderstand.”
This makes it emotionally impossible for them to accept a term like Co-redemptrix, which:
Requires nuance
Must be distinguished from equality with Christ
Expresses a mystery of cooperation with grace
Implies a hierarchical structure of mediation
Implies a sacrificial dimension in Mary’s motherhood
This school hates those theological categories.
Thus the second reason is: Modernist reductionism:
They reject terms that evoke transcendence, hierarchy, or mystery.
3. The Personalism of Pope Francis and Fernández
Pope Francis and his chosen theologians (Fernández is his closest) have a consistent pattern:
They want Mary emphasized as disciple, not Queen.
They want her seen as mother, not Mediatrix.
They want her close to the people, not enthroned.
They want to avoid any title that appears “too triumphalistic” or “too exalted.”
Francis has personally attacked the term Co-redemptrix multiple times, calling it:
“nonsense”
“foolishness”
“an exaggeration”
“a distortion of Mary”
Fernández is simply implementing Francis’s worldview in magisterial form. He is doing exactly the job Francis promoted him for.
Thus the third reason:
The current pontificate seeks to suppress exalted Marian titles in order to promote a pastoral, horizontal, “humble” image of Mary.
But Why the Stronger Wording?
Why change “not appropriate” to “always inappropriate”?
That change is extremely revealing. It reflects:
A desire to “shut the door” permanently.
The original wording left room for discussion.
The revised wording attempts to foreclose future theological development.
Put bluntly: They want to bury the term because the current regime views it as dangerous to its theological program.
It is an act of doctrinal gatekeeping.
About Fernández himself. Someone in this comment referenced his disturbing book. (I will refrain from posting the title here in case I stir curiosity).
While we must avoid rash judgment of souls, it is perfectly legitimate to observe patterns:
He was not known for theological depth.
He is emblematic of a “sentimental theology” school that is suspicious of metaphysics.
His formation is shaped far more by psychology and “affective personalism” than by scholasticism.
His appointment to the DDF was widely understood as political, not doctrinal.
Given that background, it is not surprising that he:
Mistrusts technical Marian terminology,
Rejects hierarchical concepts like “cooperation in redemption,”
Dislikes precise distinctions,
Prefers emotionally accessible language.
A man who writes romanticized pseudo-spiritual works may understandably recoil from the solemn, metaphysical, hierarchical Marian titles of Tradition.
I write this not to defend Fernandez, I personally think there is something quite wrong with his mental health. I say this because I prefer to explore both sides before making any decisions on what to think.
Hope this was helpful.
May God forgive me and have mercy on me if I acted foolishly in writing this comment.
You deserve a hundred likes. Well written and accurate. I am the first to like? Wow.
thank you very much arcbishop athanasius schneider and diane montagna.
Our Lord is using this dicument to further expose heresy. The Arians and Nestorians are crawling out of the woodwork.
How blessed we are to have such faithful shepherds as Bishop Schneider. In these times it behooves us to know our faith well . Modern interpretations are lacking in the sound and true and straight teachings of our Fathers . Thank You, Lord, for Your Holy Catholic Church.
Should I not notice that yet another heretical Pope is tormenting and stabbing the Body of Christ?
--
Modernism has been defined as the synthesis of all heresies (St. Pius X's formulation) and by the 1958 College of Cardinals election of the Modernist Pope (John XXIII)
a majority of Cardinals were heretical Modernists. The 1958 Modernist Pope immediately started the path that resulted in Heretical Vatican II.
He refused to release the 3rd Secret of Fatima in 1960 as directed my Our Lady of Fatima, and many believe the real version is still not released - that a false version was made public, Testimonies from a few that had read it state it contained warnings of Satan taking control of Vatican, and a false new-mass, and other things that have since fallen true.
Vatican II contain not less than 2 clear heresies and many relaxations of ridged aspects, so clearly unTrue, unJust, disOrdering, imprudent, uncharitable, and Scandalous. So much so that any well catechized Catholic should not have stayed silent, but the Modernists had already spread division and confusion within the Church and a paralyzesation existed as it exists today.
By Church Law the Laity is helpless to correct a heretical Pope, only the Bishops may and most failed and still are failing their Office Duties and even supporting the Modernist Heresies, excommunicating themselves in with heretical public inactions and actions.
The Modernists that hold and held Church Offices from before 1958 and Papal Office since 1958 were legal Office holders but since all accepted Offices with intent to harm Church and fail in Office Duties they are in perpetual grave sin and never received the specific Graces, Charmes, Gaudian Angelic protections, and Holy Ghost focuses that come with the Office when not demonic-controlled.
The newest Modernist in Papal Office now is the legal Pope but Graceless and Spiritually dead without Holy Ghost presence.
of course sacramental grace operates ex opere operato, so even a heretical Pope's Ordination of a Bishop has the Holy Effect, as do heretical Bishops ordination of Priests, and heretical Priests transubstantiate Bread-Wine into Host Body-Blood through Jesus Christ.
And still a heretical Pope can be known to lack the normal Holy Ghost divine guidance and protection from Papal error, same for all other Offices.
1917 Cannon includes public defection from the Catholic faith, among other acts rendering the officeholder unfit. Recently the Pope share worship with the head of the Church of England, a grave sin, in Public, and likely be now 50 more such harms and scandals - like previous Pope the public heresies seem to occur at a rate of a few a week.
Catholic worshiping with non-Catholic in public where special exemption did not apply. Ignorance also does not apply.
Offices are not empty until charged by legal body of Bishops, I forget the details, but they all have effectively blocked any correction the Church gravely needs.
Bishops have been publicly failing in duty since Vatican II and most to nearly all have actively supported the Modernist heresies placed by Vatican, so if Bishops are unwilling to repent and return to duty then should be publicly shamed until they each leave or return to duty.
Same situations for College of Cardinals especially failed duties by electing 2nd flamingly out-of-closet Modernist in a row. Cardinals must leave or repent, Traditional Bishops replace them, and traditional priests fill in bishop's office as needed.
The Holy Ghost must Move through Church in each step at each critical man, then Holy Ghost moves College to elect I Rightful Pope.
God Bless., Steve
The erudite have responded incisively to this disgusting affront on the magnificent dignity implicit in our Blessed Mother from the moment of her conception. I have nothing to add that could approach the academics and doctrinal history. My response arises from my contemplative life, specifically in this instance, my relationship to her in consecrations and daily prayer. Her creation existentially validates the title Co Redemptrix since she existentially as Immaculate Conception and Immaculata aligns every thought and act as an ongoing ascent to the will of God in her life which in some instances implicates her role as Stabat Mater as well. All the virtues were absolutely exercised throughout as she assented to the unfolding of God's will, His Redemptive Will for humanity and His created universe. She is the Shema incarnate which out of her absolute love and fidelity she was gifted with bringing forth and enclosing The Word incarnationally. That flesh was from her flesh; the flesh we consume in Eucharist. It was through her flesh that creation, humanity implicated, that God assumed to Himself for the redemption of creation because it was her flesh in Jesus that was the material component Satan unleashed the fulness of his hatred which would have crushed any human but for the Word incarnate, the Divine Personhood of the Word upholding the surrender of the material to The Father as God-man second Adam for us poor creatures and creation. Human will absolutely surrendered to The Father bodily. She is the posture, 'Be it done unto me according to Thy Word' that every human must present self to God as creature for mercy and forgiveness because she is absolute as mold. It is the Divine Word Who says, 'Woman behold thy son and to the disciple, and every prospective disciple, behold thy Mother'. The breath-taking titles illuminate albeit superficially literally something of who she is in the Little Office of the Immaculate Conception. They can only be somewhat understood and appreciated mystically by grace yet still fail to manifest her divinized motherhood; God's Motherhood toward man. She purportedly conveyed to a saint that the title she loves most of all her titles is "Admirable Mother". We catch a glimpse of infant sucking at her breast and both swooning in life and love....Divine Word Incarnate fed by her blood for 9 months and now her milk. What this article poignantly reveals and exposes is that neither papal canonist nor nepotic incompetent legate know the Virgin Immaculate because they do not have a dialogical dialectical communion with her which would implicate a lens to see how erroneous and insulting their superficial concern and idea really is at its core. They would do best to attend to her Fatima request and fulfill what no Pope has done from John 23 throughout in their disgusting insubordination. I am not a sedevacantist. As Fr. Gruner wrote in his book entitled "World Enslavement or Peace...It's Up To The Pope". I tell you most solemnly, all that's happening in the unravelling of democracies, the social order, and the church lay squarely are the feet of the papacy and higher clerics. Either grow two and exercise the four looking squarely at the three (cardinal and theological virtues) in fearless composure and trust or shut up because all the equivocating and role playing mean nothing until her words are respected and honored for which reason a divine correction may be coming sooner than later. I would not want to be responsible for the cowardice and ecclesial tomfoolery drama as God's children and prospective children are murdered through carelessness, depraved human wisdom, and cowardice.
Thank you, Diane, for the precision and balance you bring to this developing conversation. Your attention to the linguistic shifts, the historical layers, and the wider theological stakes is precisely what the Church needs right now. Too much commentary treats this debate as if it burst into existence in 2025, rather than as the latest chapter in a long and complex history of reception.
Bishop Schneider’s intervention is therefore essential not because it “wins” an argument, but because it forces the deeper question your reporting highlights: How does the Church today interpret and receive her own prior magisterial language? For centuries, saints, doctors, and popes used these titles within a clear, subordinate, and Christocentric framework. Even among those who welcome the Dicastery’s caution, that continuity cannot be dismissed.
From the vantage point of my own research (notably on how Vatican II sought to harmonize a Christological and ecclesial Marian vision), this moment reveals precisely the tension your article surfaces. The challenge is not one of maximalism versus minimalism, but rather whether we can speak about Mary in a way that preserves the Church’s sacramental, participatory imagination without obscuring Christ’s unique mediation. Mater Populi Fidelis tries to secure clarity; the tradition insists on depth. Holding both together is the real task.
Your work helps readers perceive that deeper horizon rather than reducing this to another round of ecclesial polarization. Grateful for the care and theological literacy you bring to it. God bless!
I thank God that we still have a few good Bishops like Schneider. This denial of the hierarchy of Our Lady as Mediatrix and Co-Redemptrix is so very heretical. I hope there will be an outcry throughout the Church forcing them to take step towards a fifth Marian dogma codifying her as Mediatrix and Co-Redemtrix once and for all. This whole mess is shameful.
You know what else is always inappropriate? Letting homosexual activists into St. Peter's. Yet here we are. As this lovely little note is neither ex cathedra nor in line with the teachings of the doctors or fathers, it is as binding on the Church as a laxative.