Mater Populi Fidelis: Authored by Antichrist and Propagated by His Conciliar Agents, part one

Victor Manuel Fernandez has written a love letter to the devil himself in the form of a “doctrinal note” entitled Mater Populi Fidelis, Mother of the Faithful People. The note was approved by Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XVI on Tuesday, October 7, 2025, the Feast of the Holy Rosary of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and published today, Tuesday, November 4, 2025, the Feast of Saint Charles Borromeo and the Commemoration of Saints Vitalis and Agricola.

Mater Populi Fidelis is a pernicious but nevertheless clever attack on the whole concept of Marian theology as it developed throughout the First and Second Millennia, even including Karol Jozsef Wojtyla/John Paul II’s version of Mariology, as it denies Our Lady’s titles as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix of All Graces, ultimately reducing Our Lady to the “Mother of the Faithful People” or, in some renderings, “Mother of the Faithful Believers.”

Mater Populi Fidelis’s seems to be a serious effort to delineate references to the now “condemned” titles, even they used by canonized saints, including Saint Bernard of Clairvaux, a Doctor of the Church and by the Patron of Moral Theologians, Saint Alphonsus de Liguori, as being “incompatible” with its own “contemporary” reading of Sacred Scripture that, it claims is more in line with the view of the “Eastern Churches” without referring to the Orthodox as such. This means that a countless string of true popes left the “exaggerations” of Saint Bernard of Clairvaux, Saint Alphonsus de Liguori, Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., Father Frederick William Faber, and so many others go uncorrected for nine hundred years until the “correction” to be found in Mater Populi Fidelis.

The “humble” servants of the “poor” who want a “poor church” and a “simple" liturgy really do think a whole lot about themselves.

In other words, Mater Populi Fidelis’s methodology is essentially that of Protestantism, which to so say that its methodology is if a rationalist nature that rejects constant Catholic Tradition in favor of a Sola Scriptura approach that had been advanced by the great “restorer of tradition” himself, Joseph Alois “Cardinal” Ratzinger, when he responded negatively on a personal level to a petition submitted to him in 1996 to have Our Lady’s titles as Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix of All Graces solemnly defined by “Pope John Paul II”:

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.”[36] 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.”[37]

20. The then Cardinal Ratzinger referred to the Letters to the Ephesians and to the Colossians, where the vocabulary and the theological dynamism of the hymns present the unique redemptive centrality of the incarnate Son in such a way as to leave no room to add any other form of mediation — for, “every spiritual blessing” is bestowed upon us “in Christ” (Eph 1:3); we are adopted as sons and daughters through him (cf. Eph 1:5); in him we have been graced (cf. Eph 1:6); “we have redemption through his blood” (Eph 1:7); and his grace has been “lavished on us” (Eph 1:8). “In him, we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined” (Eph 1:11). In him “all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell” (Col 1:19) and for him and through him, God willed “to reconcile all things” (Col 1:20). Such praise for the unique place of Christ calls us to situate every creature in a clearly receptive position in relation to him and to exercise careful, reverent caution whenever proposing any form of possible cooperation with him in the realm of Redemption.

Thus, Mater Populi Fidelis’s “authority” for dismissing the Our Lady’s title as Co-Redemptrix is none other than Joseph Alois Ratzinger’s personal interpretation of Sacred Scripture, which is why, my Catholic friends, I find it very necessary to continue to point out Joseph Alois Ratzinger’s role in the entire conciliar agenda as I did two days ago in The Real Architect of Prevost/Leo's Address to the Nestorians was Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI.

Ah, Senor Tucho Fernandez, who is said to have drafted the text of Amoris Laetitia for his late friend and fellow apostate from Argentina, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, also cited Bergoglio’s three gratuitous denials of Our Lady as the Co-Redeptrix:

21. On at least three occasions, Pope Francis expressed his clear opposition to using the title “Co-redemptrix,” arguing that Mary “never wished to appropriate anything of her Son for herself. She never presented herself as a co-Savior. No, a disciple.”[38]Christ’s redemptive work was perfect and needs no addition; therefore, “Our Lady did not want to take away any title from Jesus… She did not ask for herself to be a quasi-redeemer or a co-redeemer: no. There is only one Redeemer, and this title cannot be duplicated.”[39] Christ “is the only Redeemer; there are no co-redeemers with Christ.”[40] For “the sacrifice of the Cross, offered in a spirit of love and obedience, presents the most abundant and infinite satisfaction.”[41] While we are able to extend its effects in the world (cf. Col 1:24), neither the Church nor Mary can replace or perfect the redemptive work of the incarnate Son of God, which was perfect and needs no additions.

22. Given the necessity of explaining Mary’s subordinate role to Christ in the work of Redemption, it would not be appropriate 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 noted in the report just quoted, Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s rejection and disparagement of the doctrine of Our Lady as Co-Redemptrix is something that he had quite in common with his supposedly “more erudite” predecessor in the conciliar seat of apostasy, Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, who once described himself as “much too much of a rationalist.” The the late German “new theologian” said the following in God and the World: A Conversation, one of his numerous book length interviews with Peter Seewald, that was published in 2002, and summarized as follows in an article quoted on this site nineteen years ago:

What counts in Ratzinger's eyes are the "essentials," the "profound inner level" of understanding, conviction, and commitment. Here may be one of the reasons, a personal as well as a professional one, why he assesses the movement in favor of the dogmatization of Mary's co-redemption with caution. He points out that Christ "builds a profound and new community with us" (Seewald, 306). Redemption is the heart of the "great exchange": what is his became ours, and what is ours becomes his. This "being with" is expressed in exemplary fashion in Mary who is the "prototype of the Church," and so to speak, "the Church in person." It must not lead us "to forget the 'first' of Christ: . . . Mary, too, is everything that she is through him" (Seewald, 306). Ratzinger finds that the expression "co-redemptrix" would obscure this absolute origin in Christ, and departs to "too great extent from the language of Scripture and Fathers." The continuity of language with Scripture and Fathers is essential for matters of faith. It would be improper, according to Ratzinger, to "simply manipulate language." He sees in the movement promoting Mary's co-redemption a "correct intention" being expressed in the wrong way. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith holds that "what is signified by this (scil. 'Co-redemptrix') is already better expressed in other titles of Mary." And so his answer to the request is summarized in the following sentence: "I do not think there will be any compliance with this demand, which in the meantime is being supported by several million people, within the foreseeable future" (As found at Ratzinger and Mary, quoting Peter Seewald, God and the World, Saint Ignatius Press, 2002, p. 306.)

Ratzinger had the temerity to talk about manipulating language!

Joseph Alois/Ratzinger/Benedict XVI was one of the foremost manipulators of language in human history, and we live at time when such manipulators of language—and thus of truth itself—abound in halls of the Occupied Vatican on the West Bank of the Tiber River in the upper echelons and nooks and crannies of government, law, “healthcare,” “news,” “entertainment,” “sports,” “education,” and the entirety of the corporate and banking worlds. All manner of atheistic, totalitarian elites at hard at work every day and every night to manipulate the language in order to control the masses.

Men such as Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict/XVI and Jorge Mario Bergoglio worked hard their entire lives to make the Catholic Faith something that it is not and to make the Church Fathers and Holy Mother Church’s Doctors into veritable witnesses on behalf of their own conciliar revolutionary precepts that are false on their nature and, in many cases, have been anathematized by Holy Mother Church’s true general councils and/or her true popes. Ratzinger and Bergoglio may have had their differences on the margins on various matters, but they were joined at the hip as men who believed that the Catholic doctrine is defined by sentimentality and emotionalism and is not to be found in the “cold” and “crystal-clear” formulations Holy Mother Church, she who is the repository of the Sacred Deposit of Faith that she has taught under the infallible guidance of the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, from the first Pentecost Sunday to now. Neither Ratzinger nor Bergoglio cared anything for objective truth. Each was a rationalist of the first order, although they had different means of expressing this rationalism. Each lived in a world of contradiction, paradox, and dilemma.

The Theology of Redemptive Suffering is Excluded by Denying Our Lady as the Co-Redemptrix

Before providing a brief review of some of the papal explications of the substance of the doctrine of Our Lady as the Co-Redemptrix, perhaps it would be useful at this juncture to point out that a rejection of Our Lady as the Co-Redemptrix and/or of the notion of “co-redeemers” in the work of salvation wrought by Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ during His Passion and Death on the wood of the Holy Cross on Good Friday does away with the whole theology of redemptive suffering. If there is no redemptive suffering, of course, then one comes to view human suffering as something to be avoided and not to be embraced as the means to sanctify our souls and to make reparation for one’s own sins and those of the whole world. If there is no redemptive suffering, therefore, the first recourse to suffering is to anesthetize it or, in the case of chronic or fatal illnesses, to call in the hospice brigade for a “dignified” end to one’s suffering.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio said on December 12, 2019, the Feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe, when he first denied the doctrine of Our Lady as our Co-Redemptrix in the work of her Divine Son’s salvation:

Christ is the Mediator, Christ is the bridge that we cross to turn to the Father (see Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2674). He is the only Redeemer: there are no co-redeemers with Christ. He is the only one. He is the Mediator par excellence. He is the Mediator. Each prayer we raise to God is through Christ, with Christ and in Christ and it is fulfilled thanks to his intercession. The Holy Spirit extends Christ’s mediation through every time and every place: there is no other name by which we can be saved: Jesus Christ, the only Mediator between God and humanity (see Acts 4:12). (General Audience Address, March 24, 2021.)

While Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ is the one and only Redeemer and that it is true there is no other name by which we can be saved, something that no conciliar people has ever preached to the Jews, Mohammedans, Hindus, Buddhists, et al., the Apostle to the Gentiles explained that we can fill up what is wanting in the sufferings of Our Lord in His Mystical Body, Holy Mother Church, by bearing our share of hardship which the Gospel entails:

And you, whereas you were some time alienated and enemies in mind in evil works: [22] Yet now he hath reconciled in the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unspotted, and blameless before him: [23] If so ye continue in the faith, grounded and settled, and immoveable from the hope of the gospel which you have heard, which is preached in all the creation that is under heaven, whereof I Paul am made a minister. [24] Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up those things that are wanting of the sufferings of Christ, in my flesh, for his body, which is the church: [25] Whereof I am made a minister according to the dispensation of God, which is given me towards you, that I may fulfill the word of God: (Colossians 1: 21-25.)

Father George Leo Haydock provided a concise explanation Verse 24 that Jorge Mario Bergoglio conveniently ignored:

And fill up those things….in my flesh for his body, which is the church.[5] Nothing was wanting in the sufferings or merits of Christ, for a sufficient and superabundant redemption of mankind, and therefore he adds, for his body, which is the church, that his sufferings were wanting, and are to be endured by the example of Christ by the faithful, who are members of a crucified head. See St. Chrysostom and St. Augustine. (Witham) — Wanting. There is no want in the sufferings of Christ himself as head; but many sufferings are still wanting, or are still to come in his body, the Church, and his members, the faithful. (Challoner) — St. Chrysostom here observes that Jesus Christ loves us so much, that he is not content merely to suffer in his own person, but he wishes also to suffer in his members; and thus we fill up what is wanting of the sufferings of Christ. (St. Chrysostom) — The wisdom, the will, the justice of Jesus Christ, requireth and ordaineth that his body and members should be companions of his sufferings, as they expect to be companions of his glory; that so suffering with him, and after his example, they may apply to their own wants and to the necessities of others the merits and satisfaction of Jesus Christ, which application is what is wanting, and what we are permitted to supply by the sacraments and sacrifice of the new law. (Haydock Bible Commentary on Colossians, Chapter 1.)

This is pretty clear, and Catholic theologians have long used the term “co-redeemers with Christ” to explain the theology of redemptive suffering while making the proper distinctions as provided in Father Hadock’s commentary and are to be found also in the commentary of Bishop Richard Challoner. We must suffer to be purified of our sins, and we must suffer for the sanctification and salvation of others. Indeed, self-sacrifice was at the heart of Our Lady’s messages to Saint Bernadette Soubirous in the Grotto of Massabielle, in Lourdes, France, in 1858, and to the Fatima seers in the Cova da Iria near Fatima, Portugal, in 1917.

On the contrary, though, the late ecclesiastical termite named Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI always disparaged Our Lady’s Fatima Message, which included Our Lady’s consistent reminders to Jacinta and Francisco Marto and their cousin, Sister Lucia dos Santos, to sacrifice themselves for sinners, and Jorge Mario Bergoglio altogether ignored the true words of Our Lady at Fatima when he visited there May of 2017. However, the words of Our Lady are very clear:

“Are you willing to offer yourselves to God and bear all the sufferings He wills to send you, as an act of reparation for the conversion of sinners?”

“Then you are going to have much to suffer, but the grace of God will be your comfort.” (May 13, 1917.)

"Continue to come here every month. In October, I will tell you who I am and what I want, and I will perform a miracle for all to see and believe."

Lucia made some requests for sick people, to which Mary replied that she would cure some but not others, and that all must say the rosary to obtain such graces, before continuing: "Sacrifice yourselves for sinners, and say many times, especially when you make some sacrifice: O Jesus, it is for love of You, for the conversion of sinners, and in reparation for the sins committed against the Immaculate Heart of Mary." (July 13, 1917.)

“Pray, pray very much, and make sacrifices for sinners; for many souls go to hell, because there are none to sacrifice themselves and pray for them.” (August 19, 1917.)

“The moment has come in which God asks the Holy Father, in union with all the Bishops in the world, to make the consecration of Russia to my Immaculate Heart, promising to save it by this means. There are so many souls whom the Justice of God condemns for sins committed against me, that I have come to ask reparation: sacrifice yourself for this intention and pray.” (Words of Our Lady to Sister Lucia dos Santos during the Apparition of the Most Holy Trinity in Tuy, Spain, June 13, 1929.) (As found at Our Lady’s Words at Fatima.)

Jorge Mario Bergoglio disparaged the practice of personal mortification throughout his life as a lay Jesuit revolutionary, doing so within three months of his “election” on March 13, 2013:

"In the history of the Church there have been some mistakes made on the path towards God. Some have believed that the Living God, the God of Christians can be found on the path of meditation, indeed that we can reach higher through meditation. That's dangerous! How many are lost on that path, never to return. Yes perhaps they arrive at knowledge of God, but not of Jesus Christ, Son of God, the second Person of the Trinity. They do not arrive at that. It is the path of the Gnostics, no? They are good, they work, but it is not the right path. It’s very complicated and does not lead to a safe harbor. "

"Others - the Pope said - thought that to arrive at God we must mortify ourselves, we have to be austere and have chosen the path of penance: only penance and fasting. Not even these arrive at the Living God, Jesus Christ. They are the pelagians, who believe that they can arrive by their own efforts. " But Jesus tells us that the path to encountering Him is to find His wounds:

"We find Jesus’ wounds in carrying out works of mercy, giving to our body – the body – the soul too, but – I stress - the body of your wounded brother, because he is hungry, because he is thirsty, because he is naked because it is humiliated, because he is a slave, because he's in jail because he is in the hospital. Those are the wounds of Jesus today. And Jesus asks us to take a leap of faith, towards Him, but through these His wounds. 'Oh, great! Let's set up a foundation to help everyone and do so many good things to help '. That's important, but if we remain on this level, we will only be philanthropic. We need to touch the wounds of Jesus, we must caress the wounds of Jesus, we need to bind the wounds of Jesus with tenderness, we have to kiss the wounds of Jesus, and this literally. Just think of what happened to St. Francis, when he embraced the leper? The same thing that happened to Thomas: his life changed. "

Pope Francis concluded that we do not need to go on a “refresher course” to touch the living God, but to enter into the wounds of Jesus, and for this "all we have to do is go out onto the street. Let us ask St. Thomas for the grace to have the courage to enter into the wounds of Jesus with tenderness and thus we will certainly have the grace to worship the living God. " (We encounter the Living God through His wounds.)

Catholics embrace penance and mortification as a means of conquering self, of dying to self, in order to live more fully for Christ the King as He has revealed Himself through His true Church.

A true Jesuit and a true priest, Father John Croiset, wrote as follows on interior mortification:

It is not enough to mortify ourselves in some things, for some time; we must, as far as possible, mortify ourselves in everything and at all times, with prudence and discretion. A single unlawful gratification allowed to human nature will do more to make it proud and rebellious than a hundred victories gained over it. Truce with this sort of enemy is victory for him; “Brethren,” said Sr. Bernard, “what is cut will grow again, and what appears extinguished will light again, and what is asleep will awake again.”

To preserve the interior spirit of devotion, the soul must not be dissipated with exterior distractions, and as the prophet says, must be surrounded on all sides by a hedge of thorns. Now, if we omit to do that, it will be for us the cause of tepidity, back sliding, and want of devotion. When we mortify our disordered inclinations in one thing, we generally make up for it by some other satisfaction which we allow ourselves. During the time of retreat, we are recollected, but as soon as it is over, we open the gates of the senses to all kinds of distractions.

The exercise of this interior mortification, so common in the lives of the saints, is known by all who have a real desire to be perfect. In this matter we have only to listen to the Spirit of God. The love of Jesus Christ makes people so ingenious, that the courage and energy which they display and the means of mortifying themselves with which the Holy Spirit inspires even the most uncultured people, surpass the genius of the learned, and can be regarded as little miracles.

There is nothing which they do not make an occasion to contradict their natural inclinations; there is no time or place which does not appear proper to mortify themselves without ever going beyond the rules of good sense. It is enough that they have a great desire to see or to speak, to make them lower their eyes or keep silent; the desire to learn news, or to know what is going on, or what is being said, is for them a subject of continual mortification which is as meritorious as it is ordinary, and of which God alone is the Witness. The appropriate word, a witticism in conversation, can bring them honor, but they make it the matter of a sacrifice.

There is hardly a time of the day but gives opportunities for mortification; whether one is sitting or standing, one can find a place or an attitude that is uncomfortable without being remarked. If they are interrupted a hundred times in a serious employment, they will reply a hundred times with as much sweetness and civility as if they had not been occupied. The ill-humor of a person with whom we have to live, the imperfections of a servant, the ingratitude of a person under obligations to us, can give much exercise for the patience of a person solidly virtuous. Finally, the inconveniences of place, season or persons suffered in a manner to make people believe that we do not feel them are small occasions of mortification, it is true, but the mortification on these occasions is not small; it is of great merit.

It may be said that great graces and even sublime sanctity usually depend on the generosity with which we mortify ourselves constantly on these little occasions. Exact fulfillment of the duties of one’s state and conformity in all things to community life without regard to one’s inclinations, employment, or age involve that continual mortification which is not subject to vanity but which is in conformity with the spirit of Jesus Christ.

If occasions for exterior mortifications are wanting, those for interior mortification are ever at hand. Modesty, recollections, reserve require mortification; honesty, sweetness and civility may the effects of education, but are more usually the result of constant mortification. Without this virtue it is difficult for a person to be always at peace, to be self-possessed, to do his actions perfectly, and be always content with what God wills. (Mortification.)

Our true popes have called for personal sacrifice and mortification through the history of Holy Mother Church, an example of which can be found in Pope Leo XIII’s Exeunte Iam Anno, December 25, 1888.)

Now the whole essence of a Christian life is to reject the corruption of the world and to oppose constantly any indulgence in it; this is taught in the words and deeds, the laws and institutions, the life and death of Jesus Christ, "the author and finisher of faith." Hence, however strongly We are deterred by the evil disposition of nature and character, it is our duty to run to the "fight proposed to Us," fortified and armed with the same desire and the same arms as He who, "having joy set before him, endured the cross." Wherefore let men understand this specially, that it is most contrary to Christian duty to follow, in worldly fashion, pleasures of every kind, to be afraid of the hardships attending a virtuous life, and to deny nothing to self that soothes and delights the senses. "They that are Christ's, have crucified their flesh, with the vices and concupiscences"-- so that it follows that they who are not accustomed to suffering, and who hold not ease and pleasure in contempt belong not to Christ. By the infinite goodness of God man lived again to the hope of an immortal life, from which he had been cut off, but he cannot attain to it if he strives not to walk in the very footsteps of Christ and conform his mind to Christ's by the meditation of Christ's example. Therefore this is not a counsel but a duty, and it is the duty, not of those only who desire a more perfect life, but clearly of every man "always bearing about in our body the mortification of Jesus." How otherwise could the natural law, commanding man to live virtuously, be kept? For by holy baptism the sin which we contracted at birth is destroyed, but the evil and tortuous roots of sin, which sin has engrafted, and by no means removed. This part of man which is without reason -- although it cannot beat those who fight manfully by Christ's grace -- nevertheless struggles with reason for supremacy, clouds the whole soul and tyrannically bends the will from virtue with such power that we cannot escape vice or do our duty except by a daily struggle. "This holy synod teaches that in the baptized there remains concupiscence or an inclination to evil, which, being left to be fought against, cannot hurt those who do not consent to it, and manfully fight against it by the grace of Jesus Christ; for he is not crowned who does not strive lawfully." There is in this struggle a degree of strength to which only a very perfect virtue, belonging to those who, by putting to flight evil passions, has gained so high a place as to seem almost to live a heavenly life on earth. Granted; grant that few attain such excellence; even the philosophy of the ancients taught that every man should restrain his evil desires, and still more and with greater care those who from daily contact with the world have the greater temptations -- unless it be foolishly thought that where the danger is greater watchfulness is less needed, or that they who are more grievously ill need fewer medicines. (Pope Leo XIII, Exeunte Iam Anno, December 25, 1888.)

Pope Leo XIII explained that is not a "counsel but a duty" to walk in the footsteps of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and conform our minds to His as seek to live in a penitential manner and refuse to be drawn into a spirit of worldliness, especially during Holy Week, the week in which our redemption was wrought on the wood of the Holy Cross on which the Saviour of the world paid in His Sacred Humanity the debt of human sin that was owed to Him in His Sacred Divinity. We are not to have the false spirit of the world within our hearts, which must beat in unison with the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

What is a duty in the Catholic Church is considered to be but outdated foolishness in the counterfeit church of conciliarism, whose very General Instruction to the Roman Missal summarizes its rejection of outward penances as “belonging to another age in the history of the Church:”

In this manner the Church, while remaining faithful to her office as teacher of truth, safeguarding "things old," that is, the deposit of tradition, fulfills at the same time the duty of examining and prudently adopting "things new" (cf. Mt 13:52).

For part of the new Missal orders the prayers of the Church in a way more open to the needs of our times. Of this kind are above all the Ritual Masses and Masses for Various Needs, in which tradition and new elements are appropriately brought together. Thus, while a great number of expressions, drawn from the Church's most ancient tradition and familiar through the many editions of the Roman Missal, have remained unchanged,
numerous others have been accommodated to the needs and conditions proper to our own age, and still others, such as the prayers for the Church, for the laity, for the sanctification of human labor, for the community of all nations, and certain needs proper to our era, have been newly composed, drawing on the thoughts and often the very phrasing of the recent documents of
the Council.

On account, moreover, of the same attitude toward the new state of the world as it now is, it seemed to cause no harm at all to so revered a treasure if some phrases were changed so that the language would be in accord with that of modern theology and would truly reflect the current state of the Church's discipline. Hence, several expressions regarding the evaluation and use of earthly goods have been changed, as have several which alluded to a certain form of outward penance which was proper to other periods of the Church's past. . In this manner the Church, while remaining faithful to her office as teacher of truth, safeguarding "things old," that is, the deposit of tradition, fulfills at the same time the duty of examining and prudently adopting "things new" (cf. Mt 13:52).

For part of the new Missal orders the prayers of the Church in a way more open to the needs of our times. Of this kind are above all the Ritual Masses and Masses for Various Needs, in which tradition and new elements are appropriately brought together. Thus, while a great number of expressions, drawn from the Church's most ancient tradition and familiar through the many editions of the Roman Missal, have remained unchanged, numerous others have been accommodated to the needs and conditions proper to our own age, and still others, such as the prayers for the Church, for the laity, for the sanctification of human labor, for the community of all nations, and certain needs proper to our era, have been newly composed, drawing on the thoughts and often the very phrasing of the recent documents of
the Council.

On account, moreover, of the same attitude toward the new state of the world as it now is, it seemed to cause no harm at all to so revered a treasure if some phrases were changed so that the language would be in accord with that of modern theology and would truly reflect the current state of the Church's discipline. Hence, several expressions regarding the evaluation and use of earthly goods have been changed, as have several which alluded to a certain form of outward penance which was proper to other periods of the Church's past. (General Instruction to the Roman Missal, 2002 edition.)

Remember, the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical abomination makes no references to a God Who judges men or provides any kind of substantive reminder to Catholics that they could lose their souls for all eternity. The conciliar religion is “feel good” religion of “fellowship” and “glad tidings,” a spirit that is reflected perfectly in the Novus Ordo travesty and in Mater Populi Fidelis’s reliance upon Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s belief that it was “foolishness” those who “cling” to the past, including to the title of Our Lady as the Co-Redemptrix.

Joseph Alois Ratzinger or Saint Bernard of Clairvaux?

Jorge Mario Bergoglio or Saint Bernard of Clairvaux?

I report.

You decide.

The Meaning of Our Lady as Co-Redemptrix

Although the doctrine of Our Lady as the Co-Redemptrix has not been defined solemnly, the fact that the substance of the title has been explained by some of Holy Mother Church’s Fathers and Doctors and by six successive true popes means that it is part of the Catholic Faith just as were the doctrines of Our Lady’s Immaculate Conception and Assumption had been prior to their solemn definitions by Pope Pius IX (Ineffabilis Deus, December 8, 1854) and Pope Pius XII in 1950.

Writing in the Twelfth Century, Saint Bernard explained that Our Lady is the Queen of Martyrs and thus participated fully in the work of her Divine Son’s Redemptive Act:

The Martyrdom of the Virgin is set before us, not only in the prophecy of Simeon, but also in the story itself of the Lord’s Passion. The holy old man said of the Child Jesus, Luke ii. 34, Behold, this Child is set for the fall and the rising again of many in Israel; and for a sign which shall be spoken against; yea, said he unto Mary, a sword shall pierce through thine own soul also Even so, O Blessed Mother! The sword did indeed pierce through thy soul! for nought could pierce the Body of thy Son, nor pierce thy soul likewise. Yea, and when this Jesus of thine had given up the ghost, and the bloody spear could torture Him no more, thy soul winced as it pierced His dead Side His Own Soul might leave Him, but thine could not.

The sword of sorrow pierced through thy soul, so that we may truly call thee more than martyr, in whom the love, that made thee suffer along with thy Son, wrung thy heart more bitterly than any pang of bodily pain could do. Did not that word of His indeed pierce through thy soul, sharper than any two-edged sword, even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, Heb. iv. 12, Woman, behold thy son! John xix. 26. O what a change to thee! Thou art given John for Jesus, the servant for his Lord, the disciple for his Master, the son of Zebedee for the Son of God, a mere man for Very God. O how keenly must the hearing of those words have pierced through thy most loving soul, when even our hearts, stony, iron, as they are, are wrung at the memory thereof only!

Marvel not, my brethren, that Mary should be called a Martyr in spirit. He indeed may marvel who remembereth not what Paul saith, naming the greater sins of the Gentiles, that they were without natural affection, Rom. i. 31. Far other were the bowels of Mary, and far other may those of her servants be! But some man perchance will say Did she not know that He was to die? Yea, without doubt, she knew it. Did she not hope that He was soon to rise again? Yea, she most faithfully hoped it. And did she still mourn because He was crucified? Yea, bitterly. But who art thou, my brother, or whence hast thou such wisdom, to marvel less that the Son of Mary suffered than that Mary suffered with Him? He could die in the Body, and could not she die with Him in her heart? His was the deed of that Love, greater than which hath no man, John xv. 13; her’s, of a love, like to which hath no man, save He. (Saint Bernard of Clairvaux, Matins, Feast of the Seven Dolors of Our Lady.)

Saint Alphonsus de Liguori wrote the following in The Glories of Mary about the sufferings of Our Lady as she stood so valiantly at the foot of her Divine Son’s Most Holy Cross:

The Martyrdom of the Virgin is set before us, not only in the prophecy of Simeon, but also in the story itself of the Lord’s Passion. The holy old man said of the Child Jesus, Luke ii. 34, Behold, this Child is set for the fall and the rising again of many in Israel; and for a sign which shall be spoken against; yea, said he unto Mary, a sword shall pierce through thine own soul also Even so, O Blessed Mother! The sword did indeed pierce through thy soul! for nought could pierce the Body of thy Son, nor pierce thy soul likewise. Yea, and when this Jesus of thine had given up the ghost, and the bloody spear could torture Him no more, thy soul winced as it pierced His dead Side His Own Soul might leave Him, but thine could not.

Yes, Our Lady is indeed the Queen of Martyrs. She is our Sorrowful Mother whom our sins brought tears to her eyes and sorrow to her Immaculate Heart as those sins, having transcended time, took their toll on her Divine Son, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

Pope Pius IX, without using the title of Co-Redemptrix in Ineffabilis Deus, December 8, 1854, explained its meaning while referring to her as the Reparatrix, which is simply another term for Co-Redemptrix or Co-Redemptress:

The Fathers and writers of the Church, well versed in the heavenly Scriptures, had nothing more at heart than to vie with one another in preaching and teaching in many wonderful ways the Virgin’s supreme sanctity, dignity, and immunity from all stain of sin, and her renowned victory over the most foul enemy of the human race. This they did in the books they wrote to explain the Scriptures, to vindicate the dogmas, and to instruct the faithful. These ecclesiastical writers in quoting the words by which at the beginning of the world God announced his merciful remedies prepared for the regeneration of mankind — words by which he crushed the audacity of the deceitful serpent and wondrously raised up the hope of our race, saying, “I will put enmities between you and the woman, between your seed and her seed”^[13] — taught that by this divine prophecy the merciful Redeemer of mankind, Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, was clearly foretold: That his most Blessed Mother, the Virgin Mary, was prophetically indicated; and, at the same time, the very enmity of both against the evil one was significantly expressed. Hence, just as Christ, the Mediator between God and man, assumed human nature, blotted the handwriting of the decree that stood against us, and fastened it triumphantly to the cross, so the most holy Virgin, united with him by a most intimate and indissoluble bond, was, with him and through him, eternally at enmity with the evil serpent, and most completely triumphed over him, and thus crushed his head with her immaculate foot.^[14]

This sublime and singular privilege of the Blessed Virgin, together with her most excellent innocence, purity, holiness and freedom from every stain of sin, as well as the unspeakable abundance and greatness of all heavenly graces, virtues and privileges — these the Fathers beheld in that ark of Noah, which was built by divine command and escaped entirely safe and sound from the common shipwreck of the whole world;^[15] in the ladder which Jacob saw reaching from the earth to heaven, by whose rungs the angels of God ascended and descended, and on whose top the Lord himself leaned’^[16] in that bush which Moses saw in the holy place burning on all sides, which was not consumed or injured in any way but grew green and blossomed beautifully;^[17] in that impregnable tower before the enemy, from which hung a thousand bucklers and all the armor of the strong;^[18] in that garden enclosed on all sides, which cannot be violated or corrupted by any deceitful plots;^[19] as in that resplendent city of God, which has its foundations on the holy mountains;^[20] in that most august temple of God, which, radiant with divine splendors, is full of the glory of God;^[21] and in very many other biblical types of this kind. In such allusions the Fathers taught that the exalted dignity of the Mother of God, her spotless innocence and her sanctity unstained by any fault, had been prophesied in a wonderful manner.

In like manner did they use the words of the prophets to describe this wondrous abundance of divine gifts and the original innocence of the Virgin of whom Jesus was born. They celebrated the august Virgin as the spotless dove, as the holy Jerusalem, as the exalted throne of God, as the ark and house of holiness which Eternal Wisdom built, and as that Queen who, abounding in delights and leaning on her Beloved, came forth from the mouth of the Most High, entirely perfect, beautiful, most dear to God and never stained with the least blemish. . . .

As if these splendid eulogies and tributes were not sufficient, the Fathers proclaimed with particular and definite statements that when one treats of sin, the holy Virgin Mary is not even to be mentioned; for to her more grace was given than was necessary to conquer sin completely.^[24] They also declared that the most glorious Virgin was Reparatrix of the first parents, the giver of life to posterity; that she was chosen before the ages, prepared for himself by the Most High, foretold by God when he said to the serpent, “I will put enmities between you and the woman.”^[25]-unmistakable evidence that she was crushed the poisonous head of the serpent. And hence they affirmed that the Blessed Virgin was, through grace, entirely free from every stain of sin, and from all corruption of body, soul and mind; that she was always united with God and joined to him by an eternal covenant; that she was never in darkness but always in light; and that, therefore, she was entirely a fit habitation for Christ, not because of the state of her body, but because of her original grace. (Pope Pius IX, Ineffabilis Deus, December 8, 1854.)

Pope Leo XIII used the title of Co-Redemptrix explicitly in Iucunda Semper Expectatione, September 8, 1894:

The recourse we have to Mary in prayer follows upon the office she continuously fills by the side of the throne of God as Mediatrix of Divine grace; being by worthiness and by merit most acceptable to Him, and, therefore, surpassing in power all the angels and saints in Heaven. Now, this merciful office of hers, perhaps, appears in no other form of prayer so manifestly as it does in the Rosary. For in the Rosary all the part that Mary took as our co-Redemptress comes to us, as it were, set forth, and in such wise as though the facts were even then taking place; and this with much profit to our piety, whether in the contemplation of the succeeding sacred mysteries, or in the prayers which we speak and repeat with the lips. First come the Joyful Mysteries. The Eternal Son of God stoops to mankind, putting on its nature; but with the assent of Mary, who conceives Him by the Holy Ghost. Then St. John the Baptist, by a singular privilege, is sanctified in his mother's womb and favored with special graces that he might prepare the way of the Lord; and this comes to pass by the greeting of Mary who had been inspired to visit her cousin. At last the expected of nations comes to light, Christ the Savior. The Virgin bears Him. And when the Shepherds and the wise men, first-fruits of the Christian faith, come with longing to His cradle, they find there the young Child, with Mary, His Mother. Then, that He might before men offer Himself as a victim to His Heavenly Father, He desires to be taken to the Temple; and by the hands of Mary He is there presented to the Lord. It is Mary who, in the mysterious losing of her Son, seeks Him sorrowing, and finds Him again with joy. And the same truth is told again in the sorrowful mysteries.

In the Garden of Gethsemane, where Jesus is in an agony; in the judgment-hall, where He is scourged, crowned with thorns, condemned to death, not there do we find Mary. But she knew beforehand all these agonies; she knew and saw them. When she professed herself the handmaid of the Lord for the mother's office, and when, at the foot of the altar, she offered up her whole self with her Child Jesus -- then and thereafter she took her part in the laborious expiation made by her Son for the sins of the world. It is certain, therefore, that she suffered in the very depths of her soul with His most bitter sufferings and with His torments. Moreover, it was before the eyes of Mary that was to be finished the Divine Sacrifice for which she had borne and brought up the Victim. As we contemplate Him in the last and most piteous of those Mysteries, there stood by the Cross of Jesus His Mother, who, in a miracle of charity, so that she might receive us as her sons, offered generously to Divine Justice her own Son, and died in her heart with Him, stabbed with the sword of sorrow. (Pope Leo XIII, Iucunda Semper Expectatione, September 8, 1894.)

Pope Leo XIII repeated this theme in one year later in another of his annual encyclical letters on Our Lady’s Most Holy Rosary, Adjutricem, September 5, 1895):

7. It is impossible to measure the power and scope of her offices since the day she was taken up to that height of heavenly glory in the company of her Son, to which the dignity and luster of her merits entitle her. From her heavenly abode she began, by God’s decree, to watch over the Church, to assist and befriend us as our Mother; so that she who was so intimately associated with the mystery of human salvation is just as closely associated with the distribution of the graces which for all time will flow from the Redemption.

8. The power thus put into her hands is all but unlimited. How unerringly right, then, are Christian souls when they turn to Mary for help as though impelled by an instinct of nature, confidently sharing with her their future hopes and past achievements, their sorrows and joys, commending themselves like children to the care of a bountiful mother. How rightly, too, has every nation and every liturgy without exception acclaimed her great renown, which has grown greater with the voice of each succeeding century. Among her many other titles we find her hailed as “our Lady, our Mediatrix,”[3] “the Reparatrix of the whole world,”[4] “the Dispenser of all heavenly gifts.”[5]

9. Since faith is the foundation, the source, of the gifts of God by which man is raised above the order of nature and is endowed with the dispositions requisite for life eternal, we are in justice bound to recognize the hidden influence of Mary in obtaining the gift of faith and its salutary cultivation-of Mary who brought the “author of faith”[6] into this world and who, because of her own great faith, was called “blessed.” O Virgin most holy, none abounds in the knowledge of God except through thee; none, O Mother of God, attains salvation except through thee; none receives a gift from the throne of mercy except through thee.”[7]

10. It is no exaggeration to say that it is due chiefly to her leadership and help that the wisdom and teachings of the Gospel spread so rapidly to all the nations of the world in spite of the most obstinate difficulties and most cruel persecutions, and brought everywhere in their train a new reign of justice and peace. This it was that stirred the soul of St. Cyril of Alexandria to the following prayerful address to the Blessed Virgin: “Through you the Apostles have preached salvation to the nations. . . through you the priceless Cross is everywhere honored and venerated; through you the demons have been put to rout and mankind has been summoned back to Heaven; through you every misguided creature held in the thrall of idols is led to recognize the truth; through you have the faithful been brought to the laver of holy Baptism and churches been founded among every people.”[8]

11. Nay she has even, as this same Doctor claims, upheld and given strength to the “sceptre of the orthodox faith.”[9] It has been her unremitting concern to see to it that the Catholic Faith stands firmly lodged in the midst of the people, there to thrive in its fertile and undivided unity. Many and well known are the proofs of her solicitude, manifested from time to time even in a miraculous manner. In the times and places in which, to the Church’s grief, faith languished in lethargic indifference or was tormented by the baneful scourge of heresy, our great and gracious Lady in her kindness was ever ready with her aid and comfort.

12. Under her inspiration, strong with her might, great men were raised up-illustrious for their sanctity no less than for their apostolic spirit-to beat off the attacks of wicked adversaries and to lead souls back into the virtuous ways of Christian life, firing them with a consuming love of the things of God. One such man, an army in himself, was Dominic Guzman. Putting all his trust in our Lady’s Rosary, he set himself fearlessly to the accomplishment of both these tasks with happy results.

13. No one will fail to remark how much the merits of the venerable Fathers and Doctors of the Church, who spent their lives in the defense and explanation of the Catholic Faith, redound to the Virgin Mother of God. For from her, the Seat of Divine Wisdom, as they themselves gratefully tell us, a strong current of the most sublime wisdom has coursed through their writings. And they were quick to acknowledge that not by themselves but by her have iniquitous errors been overcome. Finally, princes as well as Pontiffs, the guardians and defenders of the faith-the former by waging holy wars, the latter by the solemn decrees which they have issued- have not hesitated to call upon the name of the Mother of our God, and have found her answer powerful and propitious.

14. Hence it is that the Church and the Fathers have given expression to their joy in Mary in words whose beauty equals their truth: “Hail, voice of the Apostles forever eloquent, solid foundation of the faith, unshakable prop of the Church.”[10] “Hail, thou through whom we have been enrolled as citizens of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.”[11]”Hail, thou fountain springing forth by God’s design, whose rivers flowing over in pure and unsullied waves of orthodoxy put to flight the hosts of error.”[12] “Rejoice, because thou alone hast destroyed all the heresies in the world.”[13] (Pope Leo XIII, Adjutricem, September 5, 1895.)

According to Mater Populi Fidelis, however, this is entirely non-Scriptural and elevates Our Lady that belongs to her Divine Sona alone.

The saints and popes who used use the phase Co-Redemptrix were thus “misguided” and are guilty of “exaggerating” Our Lady’s role in the redemption of the human race..

Among the popes have to “exaggerated” Our Lady’s role in the economy of salvation has been Pope Saint Pius X, who reiterated the teachings of his two immediate predecessors, Pope Pius IX and Pope Leo XIII, in his encyclical letter Ad Diem Illum Laetissimum, February 2, 1904, on the approaching fiftieth anniversary of Pope Pius IX’s issuance of Ineffabilis Deus, December 8, 1854, explained some of the prerogatives of Our Lady’s Immaculate Conception and the private and public honor that is owed to her as the Mother of God and the Mediatrix of All Graces and as our Reparatrix of “the lost world.”:

11. If then the most Blessed Virgin is the Mother at once of God and men, who can doubt that she will work with all diligence to procure that Christ, Head of the Body of the Church (Coloss. i., 18), may transfuse His gifts into us, His members, and above all that of knowing Him and living through Him (I John iv., 9)?

12. Moreover it was not only the prerogative of the Most Holy Mother to have furnished the material of His flesh to the Only Son of God, Who was to be born with human members (S. Bede Ven. L. Iv. in Luc. xl.), of which material should be prepared the Victim for the salvation of men; but hers was also the office of tending and nourishing that Victim, and at the appointed time presenting Him for the sacrifice. Hence that uninterrupted community of life and labors of the Son and the Mother, so that of both might have been uttered the words of the Psalmist “My life is consumed in sorrow and my years in groans” (Ps xxx., 11). When the supreme hour of the Son came, beside the Cross of Jesus there stood Mary His Mother, not merely occupied in contemplating the cruel spectacle, but rejoicing that her Only Son was offered for the salvation of mankind, and so entirely participating in His Passion, that if it had been possible she would have gladly borne all the torments that her Son bore (S. Bonav. 1. Sent d. 48, ad Litt. dub. 4). And from this community of will and suffering between Christ and Mary she merited to become most worthily the Reparatrix of the lost world (Eadmeri Mon. De Excellentia Virg. Mariae, c. 9) and Dispensatrix of all the gifts that Our Savior purchased for us by His Death and by His Blood.

13. It cannot, of course, be denied that the dispensation of these treasures is the particular and peculiar right of Jesus Christ, for they are the exclusive fruit of His Death, who by His nature is the mediator between God and man. Nevertheless, by this companionship in sorrow and suffering already mentioned between the Mother and the Son, it has been allowed to the august Virgin to be the most powerful mediatrix and advocate of the whole world with her Divine Son (Pius IX. Ineffabilis). The source, then, is Jesus Christ “of whose fullness we have all received” (John i., 16), “from whom the whole body, being compacted and fitly joined together by what every joint supplieth, according to the operation in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in charity” (Ephesians iv., 16). But Mary, as St. Bernard justly remarks, is the channel (Serm. de temp on the Nativ. B. V. De Aquaeductu n. 4); or, if you will, the connecting portion the function of which is to join the body to the head and to transmit to the body the influences and volitions of the head — We mean the neck. Yes, says St. Bernardine of Sienna, “she is the neck of Our Head, by which He communicates to His mystical body all spiritual gifts” (Quadrag. de Evangel. aetern. Serm. x., a. 3, c. iii.).

14. We are then, it will be seen, very far from attributing to the Mother of God a productive power of grace — a power which which belongs to God alone. Yet, since Mary carries it over all in holiness and union with Jesus Christ, and has been associated by Jesus Christ in the work of redemption, she merits for us “de congruo,” in the language of theologians, what Jesus Christ merits for us “de condigno,” and she is the supreme Minister of the distribution of graces. Jesus “sitteth on the right hand of the majesty on high” (Hebrews i. b.). Mary sitteth at the right hand of her Son — a refuge so secure and a help so trusty against all dangers that we have nothing to fear or to despair of under her guidance, her patronage, her protection. (Pius IX. in Bull Ineffabilis).

15. These principles laid down, and to return to our design, who will not see that we have with good reason claimed for Mary that — as the constant companion of Jesus from the house at Nazareth to the height of Calvary, as beyond all others initiated to the secrets of his Heart, and as the distributor, by right of her Motherhood, of the treasures of His merits,-she is, for all these reasons, a most sure and efficacious assistance to us for arriving at the knowledge and love of Jesus Christ. Those, alas! furnish us by their conduct with a peremptory proof of it, who seduced by the wiles of the demon or deceived by false doctrines think they can do without the help of the Virgin. Hapless are they who neglect Mary under pretext of the honor to be paid to Jesus Christ! As if the Child could be found elsewhere than with the Mother! (Pope Saint Pius X, Ad Diem Illum Laetissimum, February 2, 1904.)

This is, of course, all quite foreign to the naturalistic and Modernist text of Mater Populi Fidelis, and this is not even to repeat here the references to Our Lady as Co-Redemptrix made by the Holy Office in 1908 when replying to a question to elevate the Feast of the Seven Founders of the Order of Servites to a double of the second class nor to the several times that Pope Pius XI used the title in the 1930s. (See Our Lady as Co-Redemptrix for those specific references.)

According to Mater Populi Fidelis, another “misguided” soul who
“exaggerated” the role of Our Lady in the economy of salvation must have been Father Adolphe Tanquery, who wrote the following in his Manual of Dogmatic Theology:

II. THE RELATIONS OF MARY WITH CREATURES

These are four in particular which proceed from her divine maternity: The Blessed Virgin is first, the mother of Christians, secondly, the cooperatrix in the Redemption, thirdly, the queen of creatures, fourthly, the mediatrix of grace.

839 A. Mary is the spiritual mother of men.

1. This is proved from her divine maternity: Mary is the mother of Christ, the head of the mystical body the members of which are men. But the fact that she is the mother of the head makes her mother of her members. Mary's spiritual motherhood is proved also from the title of donation or gift since Christ dying on the cross gave us to her as sons, saying to John (and through extension to all Christians): "Behold thy mother".

2. The manner in which Mary is our spiritual mother. Truly she bears us spiritually because she is the meritorious (de congruo) and exemplar cause of our justification; in a secondary degree, however, dependently on Christ.

840 B. Mary is Christ's cooperatrix in the Redemption; she is co-redemptrix. She cooperated in man's salvation secondarily and dependently on Christ by consenting both to the Incarnation of the World and to the death of Christ.

1. Proof from Scripture. In the Gospel story the Angel announces to Mary the conception of the Son of God who will be the Savior of the world. Mary, however, with the greatest humility gives her consent. Also, she is associated in the work of the Passion and therefore of the Redemption: she stands at the cross, suffering along with the suffering Christ.

2. Proof from Tradition. The Fathers compare Eve, who was the cause of death, to Mary, who is the cause of our salvation. Thus writes St. Irenaeus. This doctrine Pius X and Benedict XVI confirm, the latter with these words: "She (Mary) with Christ redeemed the human race".

841 C. Mary is the Queen of men and of all creatures. She is the Mother of Christ Who is the King of men and of all creatures. So we say: Hail, Queen" and we call her Queen in the Litany of Loreto. She carries on a royal rule of benevolence and of mercy. (Father Adolph Tanquerey, A Manual of Dogmatic Theology, 1894.)

Father Adolphe Tanquerey had accepted by 1894 the title of Our Lady as Co-Redemptrix as a summary of the means by which she cooperated perfectly as the New Eve in her Divine Son’s work of Redemption as the New Adam. Yet it is that the late Jorge Mario Bergoglio would have us consider Father Tanquerey to have been “foolish.”

Although not mentioned within the text of Mater Populi Fidelis, it is clear that the attacks upon The Mystical City of God by the Jansenists of the Sorbonne in 1694 resonate within the darkened intellects and hearts of the conciliar revolutionaries, who thus do not the following words of Venerable Mary of Agreda as found in the New English Edition of The Mystical City of God that Our Lady herself inspired:

452. The eternal Father graciously received this prayer of our Redeemer and sent innumerable hosts of his angelic courtiers to assist at the wonderful works which Christ was to perform in that place. While this happened in the Cenacle most holy Mary in her retreat was raised to highest contemplation in which She witnessed all that passed as if She was present; thus She was enabled to cooperate and correspond as a most faithful Coadjutrix, enlightened by the highest wisdom. By heroic and celestial acts of virtue She imitated the doings of Christ our Savior, for all of them awakened fitting resonance in her bosom and caused a mysterious and divine echo of like petitions and prayers in the sweetest Virgin; moreover, She composed new and admirable canticles of praise for all the sacred humanity of Christ was now about to accomplish in obedience to the divine will and in accordance and fulfillment of the figures of the written law.

453. Very wonderful and worthy of all admiration would it be for us, as it was for the holy Angels and as it will be for all the Blessed, if we could understand the divine harmony of the works and virtues in the Heart of our great Queen, which like a heavenly chorus neither confused nor hindered each other in their superabundance on this occasion. Being filled with the intelligence of which I have spoken, She was sensible of the mysterious fulfillment and accomplishment of the legal ceremonies and figures of the old law through the most noble and efficacious Sacraments of the new. She gazed upon the vast fruits of the Redemption in the predestined; the ruin of the reprobate; the exaltation of the Name of God and of the most holy humanity of her Son Jesus; the universal notice and faith in the Divinity which the Lord himself was preparing for the world; that He would open heaven, closed for so many ages, so from now on the children of Adam could enter it by the establishment and progress of the new evangelical Church and all of its mysteries; and how of all this her most holy Son was the admirable and most prudent Artificer, with the praise and admiration of all the courtiers of heaven. For these magnificent results, without forgetting the least of them, She now blessed the eternal Father and rendered Him ineffable gratitude in the consolation and jubilation of her soul.

454. However, She also reflected how all these admirable works were to cost her divine Son the sorrows, ignominies, affronts and torments of his Passion, and at last the death of the cross, so hard and bitter, all of which He was to endure in the very humanity He had received from Her, while at the same time so many of the children of Adam for whom He suffered would ungratefully waste the copious fruit of the Redemption. This knowledge filled with bitter sorrow the most sincere Heart of the pious Mother; yet since She was a living and faithful reproduction of her most holy Son, all these sentiments and operations found room in her magnanimous and expanded Heart, and therefore She was not disturbed or dismayed, nor did She fail to console and instruct her companions, but without losing touch of her high intelligences She descended to their level of thought in her words of consolation and eternal life for their instruction. O admirable Instructress and superhuman example entirely to be followed and imitated! It is true that in comparison with this sea of grace and light our prerogatives dwindle into insignificance; but it is also true that our sufferings and trials in comparison with hers are so to say only imaginary and not worthy to be even noticed, since She suffered more than all the children of Adam together. Yet neither in order to imitate Her, nor for our eternal welfare, can we be induced to suffer with patience even the least adversity. All of them excite and dismay us and take away our composure; we give vent to our passions; we angrily resist and are consumed with restless sorrow; in our stubbornness we lose our reason, give free reign to evil movements, and hasten on toward the precipice. Even good fortune lures us into destruction, and so no reliance can be placed on our infected and spoiled nature. Let us remember our heavenly Mistress on these occasions in order to repair our disorders. (Venerable Mary of Agreda, The New English Edition of The Mystical City of God, Book VI, The Transfixion, Chapter X.)

No, quite to the contrary, you see, Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV and Victor Manuel Fernandez, having accepted the “insights” of Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI and Jorge Mario Bergoglio, are one with the anti-Marian Jansenism of Dr. Adrian Baillet as expressed in Monita Saluatria, which almost single-handedly helped to undermine Marian devotion in France less than a century before the French Revolution.

Dom Prosper Guerager, O.S.B., reviewed Baillet’s work and reported on it in the articles in published in L’Univers between 1858 and 1859:

10. Further on (p. 34) the author, speaking of the titles of Mediatrix, Advocate, Mother of Mercy and Grace, which the Church gives to Mary, dares to say: “We confess in good faith that we have not found these titles in the writings of the Apostles or of their disciples, and that our language seems to have been unknown to the first faithful.” For the time being, this remark will not displease the Protestants; yet in the meantime a simple faithful could reply to the learned doctor that the Apostles, having left us no rules for the language we should use when it is a question of praising Mary, we defer to the Church which is directed by the same Holy Ghost who inspired the Apostles. As for the non-liturgical terms of Co-Redemptrix and Reparatrix, Baillet thinks that the Church had thought it could conceal or excuse them in the writings of some zealous people. It is not my place to undertake here the justification of these terms used by theologians of the first order; the reader can consult what the learned Fr. Faber says about them in his beautiful book entitled The Foot of the Cross. But if our doctor does not agree to give amnesty to the title of Co-Redemptrix, he has found a way to give a good meaning to that of Mother of Mercy. Listen: “We call the Blessed Virgin Mother of mercy and grace, because He of whom she is Mother is the only author of grace and mercy” (Page 45). This is ingenious, and will certainly not scandalize Protestants. But that is not all: In order to banish from the minds of Christians any temptation to consider Mary as Mother and minister of mercy, Baillet announces to the sinner that this Advocate in whom he hopes will be his terrible and pitiless judge on Judgment Day, for he says “we would not, to flatter our imagination, lower the condition of Mary below that of the Apostles whom Jesus Christ promised to make judges of the twelve tribes of Israel, or that of all the other saints who are to judge the nations” (p. 49). Thus, let us no longer see in Mary a compassionate Mother of men; let us tremble at the thought of her as at that of a formidable judge. Baillet does not love Mary; that is a judged question. Yet he exposes himself a little to the risk of his sinner saying to him: “Since, according to you, Mary must appear on Judgment Day, armed with the vengeful wrath of divine anger, that moment not having arrived yet, I beg you to let me implore in her the Mother of Mercy. The Apostles and the other saints who are to judge the world with Jesus Christ on the last day deign, in the meantime, to show themselves accessible to our wishes and our confidence; why should I not expect from the merciful Queen of heaven a kindness equal to her power?” We will come back to this book, pardoned in Paris and condemned in Rome; it played too great a role in the historical episode we have undertaken to recount, and it has exercised too serious and too long an influence for us to deal with it only in passing. (Mary of Agreda and The Mystical City of God: 28 Articles by Dom Prosper Gueranger, OSB, Abbot of Solesmes, theological, liturgist, historian, and author of the Liturgical Year. Originally published in L’Univers, Paris, 1858-1859. Translated from the original French using Deepl.com by Timothy A. Duff, M.S. Ed., Editor of The New English Edition of The Mystical City of God. © 2024 HOMBOL Publications, 8711 St. Michael’s Road, Spokane, Washington, pp. 231-233.)

Dom Prosper Gueranger devoted such time to Adrien Baillet’s prejudices against Our Lady and thus against Holy Mother Church’s Mariology because of the decisive influence Baillet’s popularization of Monita salutaria—and the subsequent Roman censure of Baillet’s work for containing poisonous influences—had upon the doctors of the Sorbonne in their warfare against The Mystical City of God in 1696. Unlike The Mystical City of God that was on the Index for grand total of three months in 1681 before being removed therefrom by Blessed Pope Innocent XI, Baillet’s works remained condemned in perpetuity. It is clear that the spirit of Adrian Baillet lives on in the minds and heart of the conciliar revolutionaries as reflected in the text of Mater Populi Fidelis.

Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., wrote the following reflection at the beginning of his commentary on the Feast of the Seven Dolors of the Blessed Virgin Mary that contained a brief history of the placement of this feast in the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church up to the time of his own writing in the Nineteenth Century:

'O all yet that pass by the way, attend, and see if there be any sorrow like to my sorrow!' Is this, then, the first cry of the sweet babe, whose coming brought such pure joy to our earth? Is the standard of suffering to be so soon unfurled over the cradle of such lovely innocence? Yet the heart of mother Church has not deceived her: this feast coming at such a time, is ever the answer to that question of the expectant human race: What shall this child be?

The Saviour to come is not only the reason of Mary's existence, He is also her exemplar in all things. It is as His Mother that the blessed Virgin came, and therefore as the 'Mother of sorrows'; for the God, whose future birth was the very cause of her own birth, is to be in this world, 'a Man of sorrows and acquainted with infirmity.' 'To whom shall I compare thee?' sings the prophet of lamentations: 'O Virgin . . . great as the sea is thy destruction.' On the mountain of the sacrifice, as Mother gave her Son, as bride she offered herself and as Mother, she was the co-redemptress of the human race. This teaching and these recollections were deeply engraved on our hearts on that other feast of our Lady's dolours which immediately preceded Holy Week.

Christ dieth no more: and our Lady's sufferings are over. Nevertheless the Passion of Christ is continued in His elect, in His Church, against which hell vents the rage it cannot exercise against Himself. To this Passion of Christ's mystical body, of which she is also Mother, Mary still contributes hercompassion; how often have her venerated images attested the fact, by miraculously shedding tears! This explains the Church's departure from liturgical custom, by celebrating two feasts, for different reasons, under one same title.

On perusing the register of the apostolic decrees concerning the sacred rites, the reader is astonished to find a long and unusual interruption lasting from March 20, 1809 to September 18, 1814, at which latter date is entered the decree instituting on this present Sunday, a second Commemoration of our Lady's Dolours. 1809-1814, five sorrowful years, during which the government of Christendom was suspended; years of blood which beheld the Man-God agonizing once more in the person of His captive Vicar. But the Mother of sorrows was still standing beneath the cross, offering to God the Church's sufferings; and when the trial was over, Pius VII, knowing well whence the mercy had come, dedicated this day to Mary as a fresh memorial of the day of Calvary.

Even in the seventeenth century, the Servites had the privilege of possessing this second feast, which they celebrated as a double of the second class, with a vigil and an octave. It is from them that the church has borrowed the Office and the Mass. This honor and privilege was due to the Order established by our Lady to honour her sufferings and to spread devotion to them. Philip Benizi, heir to the seven holy Founders, propagated the flame kindled by them on the heights of Monte Senario; thanks to the zeal of his sons and successors, the devotion to the Seven Dolours of the blessed Virgin Mary, once their family property, is now the treasure of the whole world.

The prophecy of the aged Simeon, the flight into Egypt, the loss of the divine Child, the carrying of the cross, the Crucifixion, the taking down from the cross, and the burial of Jesus: these are the seven mysteries into which are grouped the well-nigh infinite sufferings which made our Lady the Queen of martyrs, the first and loveliest rose in the garden of the Spouse. Let us take to heart the recommendation from the Book of Tobias which the Church reads during this week in the Office of the time: Thou shalt honour thy mother: for thou must be mindful what and how great perils she suffering in giving thee birth. (Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., The Liturgical Year: Time After Pentecost, Book V, pp. 208-210.)

As we know, only a handful of genuine mystics, such as the Venerable Anne Katherine Emmerich and the Venerable Mary of Agreda, and truly great spiritual writers, such as the late Father Frederick Faber of the Brompton Oratory of Saint Philip Neri, Saint Alphonsus de Liguori and, among others, Saint Louis de Montfort, have been able to comprehend fully the depth of the pain and sorrow that pierced Our Lady's Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart during her life. Most of us erring sinners, while relying upon her maternal intercession as her consecrated slaves, do not meditate too often or too deeply on the sufferings Our Lady endured as her Divine Son, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, bore the weight and the horror of our sins to redeem us on the wood of the Holy Cross. One of the ways to meditate more frequently on the sufferings of Our Lady is to pray the Seven Dolors of Our Lady, reflecting on the seven dolors or sorrows that Our Lady experienced as she fulfilled her role as the Co-Redemptrix of the human race.

Each one of our sins, no matter how small or venial, caused Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to suffer unspeakable horror in His Sacred Humanity during His Passion and Death. Those sins also caused Our Lady to suffer in a perfect communion with the sufferings of her Divine Son. Having been preserved from all stain of Original and Actual Sin, Our Lady's Immaculate Heart was perfectly joined to the Sacred Heart of Jesus. His sufferings were her sufferings. Her sufferings were His sufferings. The matchless union of hearts that existed once in time and exists in Heaven for all eternity between Our Lady and Our Lord requires from us a response of total surrender and submission. We must detest each one of our sins and seek to do penance for our forgiven mortal sins and for all of our venial sins and our general attachment to sin. Although our sins are wiped away in the Sacrament of Penance, the debt we owe for our forgiven sins remains. We are thus called, as one of the prayers in the Miraculous Medal Novena notes, to "recover by penance what we have lost by sin.”

Indeed, we must do much penance for our sins, for which we are being chastised by having to live at the same time as purported officials of the Catholic Church who please the devil no end by disparaging the role of Our Lady, who has crushed his head with her heel, in the economy of the salvation of the human race by her Divine Son, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

Herewith, therefore, are two prayers from The Raccolta that give witness to Holy Mother Church's official sanctioning of the title of Our Lady as Co-Redemptrix even we are told now that such “piety” was “exaggerated” does not truly correspond to the conciliar interpretations of Sacred Scripture.

We, however, should pray these prayers in reparation for the blasphemies committed in the past against Our Lady by the Jansenists of the Sorbonne in the Seventeenth Century and by the likes of Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Victor Manuel Fernandez, Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV during these “enlightened” days of conciliarism’s new “insights” for its utterly false religion:

In Reparation for Insults Offered to the Blessed Virgin Mary

O blessed Virgin, Mother of God, look down in mercy from Heaven, where thou art enthroned as Queen, upon me, a miserable sinner, thine unworthy servant. Although I know full well my own unworthiness yet in order to atone for the offenses that are done to thee by impious tongues, from the depths of my heart I praise and extol thee as the fairest, the holiest creature of all God’s handiwork. I bless thy holy Name, I praise thine exalted privilege of being truly Mother of Go, ever-Virgin, conceived without stain of sin, Co-Redemptrix of the human race. I bless the Eternal Father who chose thee in an especial way for His daughter; I bless the Word Incarnate who took upon Himself our nature in thy bosom and so made thee His Mother; I bless the Holy Spirit who took thee as His bride. All honor, praise and thanksgiving to the ever-blessed Trinity who predestined thee and love thee so exceedingly from all eternity as to exalt thee above all creatures to the most sublime heights. O Virgin, holy and merciful, obtain for all who offend thee the grace of repentance, and graciously accept this homage from me thy servant, obtaining likewise for me from thy divine Son, the pardon and remission of all my sins. Three Hail Marys. The Raccolta: A Manual of Indulgences, Prayers and Devotions Enriched with Indulgences: approved by Pope Pius XII, May 30, 1951, and published in English by Benziger Brothers, New York, 1957, No. 328, pp. 228-229.)

O merciful Queen of the Rosary of Pompeii, thou, the Seat of Wisdom, hast established a throne of fresh mercy in the land that once was pagan, in order to draw all nations to salvation by means of the chaplet of thy mystic roses: remember thy divine Son hath left us this saying: “Other sheep I have that are not of this fold; them also must I bring, and they shall hear voice; and there shall be one fold, and one Shepherd.” Remember likewise that on Calvary thou didst become our Co-Redemptrix, by virtue of the crucifixion of Thy heart cooperating with Thy Crucified Son in the salvation of the world; and from that day thou didst become the Restorer of the human race, the Refuge of sinners, and the Mother of all mankind. Behold, dear Mother, how man souls are lost every hour! Behold, how countless millions of those who dwell in India, in China, and in barbarous regions do not yet know our Lord Jesus Christ! See, too, how many others are indeed Christians and are nevertheless far from the bosom of Mother Church which is Catholic, Apostolic and Roman! O Mary, powerful mediator, advocate of the human race, full of love for us who are mortal, the life of our hearts, blessed Virgin of the Rosary of Pompeii, where thou dost nothing else save dispense heaven’s favors upon the afflicted, grant that a ray of thy heavenly light may shine forth to enlighten those many blinded understanding and to enkindle so cold hearts. Intercede with thy Son and obtain grace for all the pagans, Jews, heretics and schismatics in the whole world to receive supernatural light and to enter with joy into the bosom of the true Church. Hear the confident prayer of the Supreme Pontiff [of Holy Church in these times of papal vacancy], that all nations may be joined in the one faith, may know and love Jesus Christ, the blessed fruit of thy womb, who liveth and reigneth with the Father and the Holy Spirit world without end. And then all men shall love thee also, thou who art the salvation of the world, arbiter and dispenser of the treasures of God, and Queen of mercy in the valley of Pompeii. And glorifying thee, the Queen of Victories, who by means of thy Rosary, dost trample upon all heresies, they shall acknowledge that thou givest life to all the nations, since there must be a fulfillment of the prophecy in the Gospel: “All generations shall call me blessed.” (The Raccolta: A Manual of Indulgences, Prayers and Devotions Enriched with Indulgences, approved by Pope Pius XII, May 30, 1951, and published in English by Benziger Brothers, New York, 1957, Number 628, pp. 501-503.)

There is a whole lot of good, solid Catholic theology in the prayer just above.

Our Lady is the Co-Redemptrix of the human race.

Our Lady is the Seat of Wisdom.

Our Lady is our Refuge of Sinners.

Our Lady is the Treasurer of all the graces won for us by her Divine Son on the wood of the Holy Cross.

For Mater Populi Fidelis to be correct, Pope Pius XII erred when approving prayers included in The Raccolta that included titles that do not properly belong to the Blessed Virgin Mary.

Such is the enormity of the blasphemous Mater Populi Fidelis.

Oh, yes, there is one last point to be made in part one of this two-part commentary about Mater Populi Fidelis, and it is this: Our Lady’s Most Holy Rosary, which, very tellingly, is not mentioned once in the text of Mater Populi Fidelis.

Not once.

We, for our parts, though, must continue praying Our Lady’s Most Holy Rosary with love, fervor, and devotion while resting assured in the truth that Holy Mother Church has not “exaggerated” the titles of Our Lady, who is indeed our Co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix, and Advocate.

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.

Saint Charles Borromeo, pray for us.

Saint Vitalis and Agricola, pray for us.

Blessed Martin de Porres, pray for us.

The Holy Relics, pray for us.

All the Saints, pray for us.

You are here

Mater Populi Fidelis: Authored by Antichrist and Propagated by His Conciliar Agents, part one

Support Christ or Chaos