Archive for November, 2025

There has been a lot of fuss over a Vatican Document Mater Populi Fidelis that came out this week noting that the term “co-redemptrix” can cause people to misunderstand the role of Mary in salvation history. The key section(s) are here:

7. The title “Co-redemptrix” first appeared in the fifteenth century as a correction to the invocation “Redemptrix” (as an abbreviated form of the title, “Mother of the Redeemer”), which had been attributed to Mary since the tenth century. Saint Bernard assigned Mary a role at the foot of the Cross that gave rise to the title “Co-redemptrix,” which first appears in an anonymous fifteenth-century hymn from Salzburg.[31] Although the designation “Redemptrix” persisted throughout the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, it disappeared entirely in the eighteenth century, having been replaced by the title “Co-redemptrix.” Theological research on Mary’s cooperation in Christ’s Redemption in the first half of the twentieth century led to a deeper understanding of what the title “Co-redemptrix” signifies.[32]

18. Some Popes have used the title “Co-redemptrix” without elaborating much on its meaning.[33] Generally, they have presented the title in two specific ways: in reference to Mary’s divine motherhood (insofar as she, as Mother, made possible the Redemption that Christ accomplished[34]) or in reference to her union with Christ at the redemptive Cross.[35] The Second Vatican Council refrained from using the title for dogmatic, pastoral, and ecumenical reasons. Saint John Paul II referred to Mary as “Co-redemptrix” on at least seven occasions, particularly relating this title to the salvific value of our sufferings when they are offered together with the sufferings of Christ, to whom Mary is united especially at the Cross.[36]

19. In the Feria IV meeting on 21 February 1996, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who was the Prefect of the then Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, was asked whether the request from the movement Vox Populi Mariae Mediatrici to define a dogma declaring Mary as the “Co-redemptrix” or “Mediatrix of All Graces” was acceptable. In his personal votum, he replied: “Negative. The precise meaning of these titles is not clear, and the doctrine contained in them is not mature. A defined doctrine of divine faith belongs to the Depositum Fidei — that is, to the divine revelation conveyed in Scripture and the apostolic tradition. However, it is not clear how the doctrine expressed in these titles is present in Scripture and the apostolic tradition.”[37] Later, in 2002, he publicly voiced his opinion against the use of the title: “the formula ‘Co-redemptrix’ departs to too great an extent from the language of Scripture and of the Fathers and therefore gives rise to misunderstandings… Everything comes from Him [Christ], as the Letter to the Ephesians and the Letter to the Colossians, in particular, tell us; Mary, too, is everything that she is through Him. The word ‘Co-redemptrix’ would obscure this origin.” While Cardinal Ratzinger did not deny that there may have been good intentions and valuable aspects in the proposal to use this title, he maintained that they were “being expressed in the wrong way.”[38]

Now for me Cardinal Ratzinger’s (later Pope Benedict XVI) opinion is pretty trustworthy on a subject like this. The conclusion (emphasis mine):

22. Given the necessity of explaining Mary’s subordinate role to Christ in the work of Redemption, it is always inappropriate to use the title “Co-redemptrix” to define Mary’s cooperation. This title risks obscuring Christ’s unique salvific mediation and can therefore create confusion and an imbalance in the harmony of the truths of the Christian faith, for “there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12). When an expression requires many, repeated explanations to prevent it from straying from a correct meaning, it does not serve the faith of the People of God and becomes unhelpful. In this case, the expression “Co-redemptrix” does not help extol Mary as the first and foremost collaborator in the work of Redemption and grace, for it carries the risk of eclipsing the exclusive role of Jesus Christ — the Son of God made man for our salvation, who was the only one capable of offering the Father a sacrifice of infinite value — which would not be a true honor to his Mother. Indeed, as the “handmaid of the Lord” (Lk 1:38), Mary directs us to Christ and asks us to “do whatever he tells you” (Jn 2:5).

As you might guess there are a lot of people who were upset at this and there are plenty of people making their beans online over the church “insulting Mary” et/al. One only needs to check youtube to find examples of this.

This might be fun if you’re primary worry is clicks and your primary drive is anger at the Vatican but if you really want to see if such a statement is consistent with Catholic teaching on Mary the best thing to do is to go to actual sources of said teaching and when it comes to Catholic Teaching on Mary you can’t do much better than Saint Louis de Montfort (1673-1716) who literally wrote the book(s) on Marian Devotion: True Devotion to Mary: with Preparation for Total Consecration as well as the Excellent The Secret of the Rosary

In his True Devotion to Mary The Saint describes Mary thus:

4. God the Father willed that she should perform no miracle during her life, at least no public one,
although he had given her the power to do so. God the Son willed that she should speak very little although he had imparted his wisdom to her. Even though Mary was his faithful spouse, God the Holy Spirit willed that his apostles and evangelists should say very little about her and then only as much as was necessary to make Jesus known.

5, Mary is the supreme masterpiece of Almighty God and he has reserved the knowledge and possession of her for himself. She is the glorious Mother of God the Son who chose to humble and conceal her during her lifetime in order to foster her humility. He called her “Woman” as if she were a stranger, although in his heart he esteemed and loved her above all men and angels. Mary is the sealed fountain and the faithful spouse of the Holy Spirit where only he may enter. She is the sanctuary and resting-place of the Blessed Trinity where God dwells in greater and more divine splendour than anywhere else in the universe, not excluding his dwelling above the cherubim and seraphim. No creature, however pure, may enter there without being specially privileged.

6. I declare with the saints: Mary is the earthly paradise of Jesus Christ the new Adam, where he
became man by the power of the Holy Spirit, in order to accomplish in her wonders beyond our
understanding. She is the vast and divine world of God where unutterable marvels and beauties are to be found. She is the magnificence of the Almighty where he hid his only Son, as in his own bosom, and with him everything that is most excellent and precious. What great and hidden things the all- powerful God has done for this wonderful creature, as she herself had to confess in spite of her great humility, “The Almighty has done great things for me.” The world does not know these things because it is incapable and unworthy of knowing them.

Pretty strong stuff for the introduction to his book and if you stopped there you might have a case to make against the Vatican statement, but he doesn’t stop there. In the very first paragraph of his piece under the heading: Mary’s Part in the Incarnation he opens with this (emphasis mine)

14. With the whole Church I acknowledge that Mary, being a mere creature fashioned by the hands of God is, compared to his infinite majesty, less than an atom, or rather is simply nothing, since he alone can say, “I am he who is”. Consequently, this great Lord, who is ever independent and self-sufficient, never had and does not now have any absolute need of the Blessed Virgin for the accomplishment of his will and the manifestation of his glory. To do all things he has only to will them.

This seems rather conclusive.

He follows this paragraph noting that God the unchanging having used Mary to give Christ to the world he of course continues to use her to she that is full of grace to bring the world to her son, and in paragraph 27 under the heading: Mary’s part in the sanctification of souls he gives what I consider the conclusive statement on the subject: (again emphasis mine)

Since grace enhances our human nature and glory adds a still greater perfection to grace, it is certain that our Lord remains in heaven just as much the Son of Mary as he was on earth. Consequently he has retained the submissiveness and obedience of the most perfect of all children towards the best of all mothers.

We must take care, however, not to consider this dependence as an abasement or imperfection in Jesus Christ. For Mary, infinitely inferior to her Son, who is God, does not command him in the same way as an earthly mother would command her child who is beneath her. Since she is completely transformed in God by that grace and glory which transforms all the saints in him, she does not ask or wish or do anything which is contrary to the eternal and changeless will of God. When therefore we read in the writings of Saint Bernard, Saint Bernardine, Saint Bonaventure, and others that all in heaven and on earth, even God himself, is subject to the Blessed Virgin, they mean that the authority which God was pleased to give her is so great that she seems to have the same power as God. Her prayers and requests are so powerful with him that he accepts them as commands in the sense that he never resists his dear mother’s prayer because it is always humble and conformed to his will.

In short de Montfort says that Mary is the perfect disciple to God whose humble prayers always conforms to God & thus always grants them which can give to us the illusion of an authority that she neither has not wishes to have.

This is exactly the point that the Vatican’s statement is making.

Neither this Pope nor any other suggests that we curtail devotion to Mary, on the contrary they would encourage us to mimic her devotion to Christ and call upon her aid to help lead us to her son. All this Pope is saying is that Mary is not God & we should take care not to mistake the graces she gives and the any more than St. Louis De Montfort would. For nobody else asks and receives from Christ better than Mary & when we humbly entreat Mary to intercede with her son in a matter conforming to God’s will we can be confident that her prayer will be answered.

May we strive for the humility of Mary in obedience to God and his holy church.

Just like St. Louis de Montfort.

James Hacker: Will you answer a direct question?

Sir Humphrey Appleby: I strongly advise you not to ask a direct question.

James Hacker: Why?

Sir Humphrey Appleby: It might provoke a direct answer.

Yes Minister: The Moral Dimension 1982

Were the sacrifices of World War 2 worth it?

My father who served in the pacific braving Kamikazes & Subs to keep capital ships & carriers supplied died would have turned 104 last week on Halloween but died just after I was engaged but before I was married at the age of 65 so while I have an opinion of what he might think of this subject I can’t state it as fact.

However Alec Penstone who served in the Royal Navy is still with us at the age of 100. As soon as he was of age he left his factory job for the Royal Navy braving U-Boats and Air attacks to protect Great Britain from actual Nazis (as opposed to the phony Antifa cosplayers of today) and saw many of his friends lose their lives doing so.

Thus is was an awful shock to the British TV show when on Good Morning Britain he was asked what Remembrance Day (Veterans day for us) means to him and he answered thus:

However the moving segment took a turn when Kate asked him what Remembrance Sunday means to him. He said he felt that winning the war was “not worth” how the country had turned out today. “My message is, I can see in my mind’s eye those rows and rows of white stones and all the hundreds of my friends who gave their lives, for what? The country of today?” he said sadly.

“No, I’m sorry – but the sacrifice wasn’t worth the result of what it is now. What we fought for was our freedom, but now it’s a darn sight worse than when I fought for it.”

It’s one thing for a blogger like myself online or even a Tommy Robinson during a protest to say that The Few, the term used to describe the pilots in the battle of Britain who defeated the German Luftwaffe, would be ashamed of what the Brits have done with the freedom they bought for them. It’s very easy for the powers that be to dismiss us.

It’s quite another thing for a man who fought and saw his friends die enduring all the Nazi Kriegsmarine could throw at him saying so on live television to an entire nation.

Here is the full interview:

What was really interesting however was his response when one of the hosts Aldi Ray followed up with a question concerning what he had just said:

“What do you mean by that, though?” the GMB host probed, prompting the WWII veteran to reply: “What we fought for, and what we fought for was our freedom.

“We find that even now it’s downright worse than when I fought for it.”

Ms Garraway intervened to bring the discussion to a close before Mr Penstone could face any further questions from Mr Ray. “Oh, Alec, I’m sorry you feel like that,” she said.

Ray is ironically getting hit for asking that follow up question because even those who have been so determined to Bring down the Britain that Mr. Penstone fought for dare not publicly attack him for giving that honest answer. As the Irish Sun put it:

It was a heartbreaking admission from a war hero and a damning indictment on the state of Britain today.

Alec Penstone may not realize it but he just preformed one last great duty for his country speaking the truth outloud for the entire country to hear. Giving one final warning concerning the path that those he fought to protect have taken.

How the nation reacts to that warning will determine if Britain falls.

“First we must cross the river,” Benito was saying.  “Do you believe me now when I tell you that you must not attempt to swim it, or even get wet from it, or must you try that too?”

“What happens if I just dive in?”

“Then you will be as you were in the bottle.  Aware and unable to move.  but it will be very cold, and very uncomfortable, and you will be there for all eternity knowing that you put yourself there.”

Larry Niven & Jerry Pournelle Inferno 1976

Looking at the results of last nights elections in VA & NJ and particularly NYC two truths are apparent.

The first was expressed at Instapundit last night from Stacy Campfield a former state rep from Tennessee:

“Republicans can’t be surprised that they aren’t winning races in places that they are also leaving in droves.”

Before I list the 2nd and more important quote you need some background:

The quote comes from the SABR site, a baseball analytics group which reprinted a piece about first baseman Hal Chase by Jacob Pomrenke about Hal Chase, a first baseman who played from 1905 to 1919.

Chase was universally considered the best defensive first baseman anyone to that time had ever seen. Both Babe Ruth and Walter Johnson named him the best first baseman of all time.

But Chase was also known from the very start of his career as a man who fixed games. For years in every city where he played allegations had been out there that he threw games or arranged them to be thrown. Allegations that he loudly denied. Then in 1916 he joined the Cincinnati Reds managed by Christy Matterson the great pitcher considered one of the gentleman of baseball. A man so honest that umpires would consult him on close calls. Matterson suspended Chase for trying to bribe players to fix games, as Pomrenke noted:

The suspension by Mathewson was the first time any baseball official had seriously punished Chase for his transgressions. As usual, it didn’t stick. NL president John Heydler reluctantly exonerated Chase after Mathewson joined the military and could not testify against Chase while serving overseas.

Chase would go on to have a part in the fixing of the 1919 World Series. When He heard about this Mathewson said the quote I find relevant to this election:

 “Damn them, [baseball officials] deserve it. They whitewashed two players after I caught them with the goods.” 

The swearing was VERY out of character for Christy Mathewson but he was pissed.

And that brings us to the night after the 2025 elections in California, Virginia, New Jersey and New York:

In California I didn’t expect better after all this is the man the state keeps backing:

In New Jersey the Democrat running for Governor was involved in a scandal concerning her time at the Navel Academy. It didn’t matter, the state that Trump lost by only 5 points elected her by 13 points.

In Virginia not only did Abagail (duck and run) Springer win by double digits but the man made famous for wanting GOP kids dead won by over six points.

But the real thing is New York City:

You have a open socialist, an open communist, an open antisemite. A person whose opinion on all these things have been well documents and are even available in his own words online for years. A rich kid who never did or ran anything in his life and he not only won the election in NYC but he took over 50% of the vote in a three way race.

What’s the bottom line? Just this: In all of these elections particularly in NYC people in their respective states KNEW who and what these people were and what they supported and STILL not only voted for them, but voted for them overwhelmingly winning margins, with apologies to Sarah Hoyt, well beyond the margin of fraud.

Now it’s very possible that this might hurt the Democrats nationally in states where people have not gone insane as Scott Jennings notes:

I think we’re at the point where we have to stop pretending that Democrat voters don’t understand what Communism is, or antisemitism is or violence is or corruption is. I think we have to stop pretending that they are being decieved.

This is what the Democrat/left is. This is what they believe in and what they support this is the government that they want and by golly they’re going to get the government they deserve.

The only question left in my mind is will they be surprised when they get it?

Here is the Indulgence Calendar for November:

And if you read this page you’ll know that for the next eight days there are special plenary indulgences available:

Visiting a cemetery and praying for the dead always carries a partial indulgence but carries a Plenary Indulgence if done from today Nov 1st through Nov 8th

Furthermore there is a Plenary Indulgence for visiting ANY church on all souls day (Nov 2)

And to top that off, because of the jubilee year you can earn TWO plenary indulgences a day rather than the normal 1

So you are in a position to earn a plenary indulgence for a loved one AND for yourself every single day this week through next Saturday.

And remember a plenary indulgence removes ALL temporal punishment for sins already forgiven so if applied to a soul in purgatory it finishes the job and gets them to heaven and if applied to yourself removes (from that point) any time due in Purgatory for sins already confessed and forgiven.

Remember God’s mercy keeps you from Hell (That’s being saved) God’s justice requires restitution for your sins and purification from the effects of those sins as something imperfect can’t enter heaven (Thus Purgatory) or as Christ himself put it:

If you are to go with your opponent before a magistrate, make an effort to settle the matter on the way; otherwise your opponent will turn you over to the judge, and the judge hand you over to the constable, and the constable throw you into prison.

I say to you, you will not be released until you have paid the last penny.”

Luke 12:58-59 Emphasis mine