What’s the right way to honor Mary?

As far back as the 15th century, some Roman Catholics have referred to Mary, the mother of the Lord, as the “Co-redemptrix,” underscoring the Catholic belief that she somehow cooperates in the redeeming work of her Son in the lives of the faithful. This title has never been recognized as official Roman Catholic dogma, but it has been used by several influential Catholics (including Pope John Paul II) and by many in popular devotion as well.

In a recent document produced by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, the department of the Roman curia tasked with safeguarding the faith and morals of the Church, the title “Co-redemptrix” has been deemed “inappropriate” and “unhelpful.” The document, Mater populi fidelis (“The Mother of the Faithful People”), was approved by Pope Leo XIV in October and has been welcomed by many as an important ecumenical sign.

It provides an opportunity for both Catholics and Protestants (and the Orthodox as well) to clarify areas of agreement and disagreement regarding the role of Mary in God’s redemptive plan.

So, what exactly does the document say? We should be careful to note that Mater populi fidelis does not overturn the fundamentals of Roman Catholic Mariology. In the Roman Catholic perspective, official church dogma is unalterable. So, there is obviously nothing here that would reverse the Marian dogmas that Protestants find biblically and theologically problematic: the immaculate conception (and sinlessness) of Mary and her assumption (in both body and soul) to heaven. Nor does it undermine Catholic devotion to Mary as the mother of all believers, expressed in veneration and prayer, that Protestants also find objectionable.

Still, the document’s caution about certain Marian titles (not only Co-redemptrix but also Mediatrix) should be welcomed by Protestants as a helpful clarification. Especially important is the reasoning behind this clarification, namely, an eagerness to affirm the exclusive and unique mediation of Christ. According to the doctrinal note, “it is always inappropriate to use the title ‘Co-redemptrix’ to define Mary’s cooperation” because “it 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.” Because the title requires so many qualifications, it is “unhelpful” and “carries the risk of eclipsing the exclusive role of Jesus Christ.” In response to these affirmations, a Protestant can say nothing other than a hearty “Amen!”

The doctrinal note also points out that these concerns are not new. In 1996, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the future Pope Benedict XVI, then Prefect of this same curial department (what was then known as the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith), rejected a proposal that would make the Marian titles “Co-redemptrix” and “Mediatrix of All Graces” official dogma. Ratzinger argued that these titles obscured the unique origin of all grace in Jesus Christ. Pope Francis also opposed the title. “There is only one Redeemer,” Francis said, “and this title cannot be duplicated.”

Once again, the doctrinal note does not overturn the fundamentals of Catholic Mariology. Protestants will search in vain for any attenuation of Mary’s sinlessness or of the Church’s veneration of and devotion to her. If anything, the document provides Protestants with a fresh opportunity to articulate a distinctively Protestant understanding of Mary. A century ago, the Southern Baptist New Testament scholar, A. T. Robertson, lamented that while Catholic devotion to Mary can border on deifying her in popular piety, she is too often subjected to “cold neglect” by Protestants.

In his book, The Mother of Jesus: Her Problems and Her Glory, Robertson does not treat Mary as immaculately conceived or sinless; neither does he suggest any veneration of Mary or any prayers offered to her. Still, he speaks of Mary in reverent and even superlative ways. She is “the woman of destiny” who fulfills “the hopes of her people through the long years.” She receives a “hymn of praise” from her cousin Elizabeth. She is the “chief mother of the race” who “measures up to her high dignity” as the mother of the Lord.

No one, Robertson suggests, “should be allowed to take her crown of glory away from her.” Mary’s character is upright and pure, which is a consequent of the grace given to her. Even when Jesus gives an “apparent rebuff” to his mother in John 2, Robertson suggests that Jesus implies no disrespect to her. Mary’s greatest glory, for Robertson, is that “Jesus was her joy and her pride, her first-born, her hope. She lived for him and in him.” Robertson invites us to stand with Mary (Stabat Mater) at the foot her Son’s cross and to see His passion and death through her eyes.

Robertson builds to a crescendo near the end of his work. Mary is “the greatest of mothers” and “the mother of the Son of God.” Robertson even acknowledges the “limited sense” in which Mary may be called the “mother of God” (theotokos): “She was the mother of the Son of God in his human nature.” This title, articulated by the ancient ecumenical councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon, is mainly about the singularity of the divine person Mary bore and is only secondarily about her graced status in fulfilling this role. According to Robertson, Mary “occupies the highest pedestal among mothers, and mothers rank above all other persons.” Her “coronation” is not her bodily assumption to heaven but her simple and faithful service to her Son. Mary’s abiding message to the church is summarized in her words at Cana: “Do whatever he tells you” (Luke 2:5).

Robertson’s book has largely been forgotten, but it is truly remarkable. When Protestants speak about Mary, it is almost exclusively in polemical terms, rejecting Roman Catholic accretions. But Robertson’s work offers something more positive. As such, it provides an important example of how Protestants today might think more constructively and reverently about Mary’s role in God’s plan.