Posted on 04/05/2007 11:10:10 AM PDT by MarkBsnr
Fundamentalists are sometimes horrified when the Virgin Mary is referred to as the Mother of God. However, their reaction often rests upon a misapprehension of what this particular title of Mary signifies, and what the Protestant Reformers had to say regarding this doctrine.
A woman is a man’s mother either if she carried him in her womb or if she was the woman contributing half of his genetic matter or both. Mary was the mother of Jesus in both of these senses; because she not only carried Jesus in her womb but also supplied all of the genetic matter for his human body, since it was through her—not Joseph—that Jesus "was descended from David according to the flesh" (Rom. 1:3).
Since Mary is Jesus’ mother, it must be concluded that she is also the Mother of God: If Mary is the mother of Jesus, and if Jesus is God, then Mary is the Mother of God. There is no way out of this logical syllogism, the valid form of which has been recognized by classical logicians since before the time of Christ.
Although Mary is the Mother of God, she is not his mother in the sense that she is older than God or the source of her Son’s divinity, for she is neither. Rather, we say that she is the Mother of God in the sense that she carried in her womb a divine person—Jesus Christ, God "in the flesh" (2 John 7, cf. John 1:14)—and in the sense that she contributed the genetic matter to the human form God took in Jesus Christ.
To avoid this conclusion, Fundamentalists often assert that Mary did not carry God in her womb, but only carried Christ’s human nature. This assertion reinvents a heresy from the fifth century known as Nestorianism,
(Excerpt) Read more at catholic.com ...
Soul are spiritual; bodies are material. You can touch a body with with a material part of you, but not a soul. The most you can do with a soul is influence it. The soul must have a body to be in the Earth. You created bodies, dear. God created the souls that reside in those bodies.
How is this not self evident? 
If one believes that Jesus is God, then Mary is the mother of God. Those that believe Jesus is not God, then Mary is the mother of Jesus. It is what it is.
Certainly, but extending it to 'mother of God' may or may not be stretching the truth. It is just semantics, but I see no reason to have to stretch what is said in the Bible.
You are arguing against a fact that is not in dispute.
The problem is not the definition of of bodies or souls - the definition in question is “mother”. What it means to be a mother.
this also falls into the realm of the long ago condemned heresy of nestorianism....
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10755a.htm
I’ll say it yet again...Elizabeth called Mary “mother of my Lord” - and so do I.
trying to diminish the salutation of Elizabeth is, in my opinion, stretching it quite a bit.
Jesus called Mary “mother.” Elizabeth called her “mother”.
There is no example in scripture of anyone nitpicking about her being Mother of physical vs. divine nature.
Again...trying to separate Christ’s divine/human nature like that slides into nestorianism.
The author also does not address the implication of authority that many fraw from "Mother of God". He does, however, say:
Although Mary is the Mother of God, she is not his mother in the sense that she is older than God or the source of her Son’s divinity, for she is neither. Rather, we say that she is the Mother of God in the sense that she carried in her womb a divine person—Jesus Christ, God "in the flesh" (2 John 7, cf. John 1:14)—and in the sense that she contributed the genetic matter to the human form God took in Jesus Christ.
Jesus is God, but Jesus also sits at the right hand of God. They are the same, but yet they are separate. Can man really comprehend this relationship? Saying Jesus is God is Biblical, but does Jesus encompass all that God is? Who knows. My point is stick what is in the Bible and don't try to extrapolate based on human knowledge.
God does not submit to Mary. The term mother must imply pre existion offspring, that is not the case here either. Titles mean things yet God has never given Mary this title, nor any of the other hundreds of titles ascribed to her by the RCC.
Where did I do that. I thought I was clear, calling Mary the Mother of the Lord was Biblical. Just because the Bible says Jesus is God, does not mean that is all God is. Jesus is referred to as both God and as separate from the Father. So saying Mary is the Mother of God, you would be saying Mary is both the Mother of the Son and the Mother of the Father. I can not say that.
That is accurate, but does that mean you can say mary is Mother of God?
It would seem that the issue isn't so much the "of God" part of the phrase, as it is the unspoken assumptions /definitions around the term "Mother of".
"Angry Write Mail" tells us that "the term Mother of God is an issue of authority", and to he honest, that's how I had defined it myself until I got involved in these Religion Forum threads. As "Always Right" correctly points out, it's really a matter of how each party defines (or doesn't) their terms. Some look at the nurturing aspect, some at the genetic/biological aspect, and others at the hierarchical aspect. "Is Mary the Mother of God?" might receive different answers, depending on the definition of "mother" used in the asking.
So in conclusion I have to say "no" to our sick Scotswife (hope you get better soon). IMO these threads are nothing like "beating a dead horse". They do serve a purpose, however small, in God's plan!
Mary is the earthly mother of the second person of the Trinity - the Word made flesh. It doesn't imply that she is also the mother of the First and the Third who were not made flesh.
“Just because the Bible says Jesus is God, does not mean that is all God is.
ok...so now you’re talking about the mystery of the Holy Trinity?
“So saying Mary is the Mother of God, you would be saying Mary is both the Mother of the Son and the Mother of the Father. I can not say that.”
That is not what we are saying...we say it because we agree that Jesus is God.
We do realize she is not the mother of the Holy Spirit - who is God, or the mother of God the Father who is God.
So maybe we are being a bit lazy where we could say...”Mary mother of God, 2nd person of the Holy Trinity.
but that gets wordy, and because we know the disntinction, we say “mother of God” for short.
referring to your post regarding “praying to” saints.
I usually find this discussion revolved around the definition of “prayer” - and also whether or not souls in heaven can intercede.
To a catholic, to “pray” can mean to ask. Think of the term “pray tell?”
adoration- worship is something reserved for God alone.
prayer is something I can ask of others here on earth or in heaven.
I ask my family/friends/fellow christians for intercessory prayer.
It isn’t that I don’t also go to God myself because the two don’t exclude each other. I do both.
I also ask (”pray”) for friends in heaven for their intercessory prayer.
In fact - I consider their intercession to be very valuable as they already behold the beatific vision - they are very close to God.
We don’t consider this worship, we consider it intercessory prayer -the same type we ask of others here on earth.
I usually find that many christians of certain denominations don’t think that souls in heaven are capable of intercessory prayer - which is another discussion I suppose.
As one of relatively few Catholics in an Indiana county with only one Catholic Church, surrounded by many different, and often rather zealous, I was exposed to such as this on a regular basis. One of my engineers, a rather zealous man, decided that he HAD to save me from Hell. It made things interesting.
“As one of relatively few Catholics in an Indiana county with only one Catholic Church, surrounded by many different, and often rather zealous, I was exposed to such as this on a regular basis. One of my engineers, a rather zealous man, decided that he HAD to save me from Hell. It made things interesting.”
my daughter got scolded at a summer camp about “Mary mother of God”.
It really gets under people’s skin.
It's really convenient to put a name on an observation of reality and call it a "heresy". Your link is filled with Catholic notions of reality, which I find to be neither scriptural nor observable.
Mary is the mother of the Body of Jesus Whom God inhabited as Christ. Mary did not create God. The notion she did is absurd.
When you gave birth to your children, you built their bodies, not their souls. The notion that is even possible is found nowhere in scripture. Therefore also absurd.
Goodness, lady, do you not read the Bible for yourself? If the magisterium said water runs uphill, would you believe it in spite of what's before you eyes?
you are again...ignoring the definition of “mother” and arguing facts that are not in dispute.
The article is filled with “catholic notions of reality” because the nestorian heresy was part of catholic history, and recorded by the catholic church.
You are, afterall, not going to get the full historical perspective of Nestorius from a baptist encyclopecia.
“Mary is the mother of the Body of Jesus Whom God inhabited as Christ”
You are separating the two natures of Christ - which is why I consider you a nestorian.
“Mary did not create God. The notion she did is absurd.”
no one made the claim Mary created God.
That notion is indeed absurd. Agreed.
“When you gave birth to your children, you built their bodies, not their souls.”
And yet I am still called their “mother”
That is because being a “mother” does NOT mean that I created them.
It means that I bore them in my womb and gave birth to them.
I didn’t even build their bodies. I don’t know how to build a body.
God built their bodies and their souls.
He just used my womb as an incubator.
” The notion that is even possible is found nowhere in scripture. Therefore also absurd. “
your view is found nowhere in scripture.
What did Elizabeth call Mary?
What did Jesus call Mary?
“Goodness, lady, do you not read the Bible for yourself? If the magisterium said water runs uphill, would you believe it in spite of what’s before you eyes?”
could you try to be more of a jerk?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.