Mary, Mother of God

http://www.catholic.com ^ | October 12, 2013 | Tim Staples

[NKP_Vet]

The most common objection I get to Mary as Mother of God, especially from Fundamentalists, but not limited to them, is, “The words ‘Mother of God’ are nowhere to be found in the Bible. Therefore, I will not accept it as true.”

This line of reasoning fails in dramatic fashion when carried to its logical conclusion when we consider the central mystery of the Christian Faith, the Trinity, is not found in Scripture verbatim as well. And we could go on. The Incarnation would fall by the wayside. Essential terms we use to do theology, like homoousios (Gr.—same nature, Jesus has the “same nature” as his Father), hypostatic union, the circumincessions of the persons of the Blessed Trinity, etc. All gone! The canon of Scripture, the nature of the sacrament of Holy Matrimony, and so much more we believe as Christians would be out the door because none of these things are made explicit in Scripture.

And this is not to mention “justification by faith alone.” Can anyone agree there is just a bit of irony in the fact that the same fellow who tells me he will not accept Mary as “Mother of God” because those words “are not found in the Bible,” will accept justification by faith alone when the only time those words are found in the Bible the words “not by” are right in front of them (cf. James 2:24)?

[piusv]

But she uses the same word, Lord, a couple of sentences later to clearly mean God:

Blessed is she who has believed that the Lord would fulfill his promises to her!”

This refers to God fulfilling his promises, not the Messiah. So, no, when she said Lord, she meant Lord.

"....the mother of my Lord (God)."

[NKP_Vet]

Without the Catholic Church you have never heard of Jesus, much less the Holy Spirit. Don’t you think a little thanks is due?

[Arthur McGowan]

“Sola scriptura”

Another Protestant tradition that is not in Scripture.

[Arthur McGowan]

But why am I so favored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? (Luke 1:43) Right. No Scriptural support. That, and the way the angel Gabriel tell Mary that she is to conceive by the Holy Spirit, and bear a son, who shall be called "Son of God." No Scriptural support!

[narses]

“And I’m saying that it is NOT the most common objection unless he was cherry-picking the data.”

So where is YOUR data?

[Arthur McGowan]

Also keep in mind I am not a Catholic (anymore) That explains the hate.

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

” That explains the hate.”

---

Your response explains one of my reasons for leaving. The RCC is filled with closet liberals who think everything boils down to “hate,” and not because there is any rational and spiritual reasoning.

[smvoice]

"Without the Catholic Church you have never heard of Jesus, much less the Holy Spirit. Don't you think a little thanks is due?"

OH MY G. This is the ultimate. THAT one is going to come back to bite you HARD, NKP Vet. Wow.

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

“Another Protestant tradition that is not in Scripture.”

---

From the scripture:

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
(2Ti 3:16-17)

From “Protestant” tradition:

“Have thou ever in your mind this seal, which for the present has been lightly touched in my discourse, by way of summary, but shall be stated, should the Lord permit, to the best of my power with the proof from the Scriptures. For concerning the divine and holy mysteries of the Faith, not even a casual statement must be delivered without the Holy Scriptures; nor must we be drawn aside by mere plausibility and artifices of speech. Even to me, who tell you these things, give not absolute credence, unless thou receive the proof of the things which I announce from the Divine Scriptures. For this salvation which we believe depends not on ingenious reasoning , but on demonstration of the Holy Scriptures.” (Cyril of Jerusalem, Cat. Lecture 4, Ch. 17)

[Mrs. Don-o]

I can hardly go through this point by point (I have other things to do) but just to take a whack at it:

• Your charge that listening to prayers would necessitate Mary being omniscient/omnipotent. Not so. It would only necessitate that she, like all the angels and saints now in heaven, is freed from the limitations of time and space. You will have such powers yourself, if you end up in Haven, as we can fondly hope. Think of the implications of being outside of the realm of physics. Think of that! This doesn't make you a deity in a pantheon. It makes you a citizen of Heaven. "Eye has not seen," as you know.

• Bowing, offering praise, incense, etc. - Anyone might assume that was adoration if they were thinking like a threadbare secular American with no contact with more ceremonial societies. If you were in contact with more traditional cultures (e.g the Hebrews) you'd likely "get" that it's not adoration: it's courtly behavior. I have a much fuller discussion of that on an earlier FR thread (Link, #65) --- and I really think you would gain an insight if you would click and read it.

• On devotional prayers such as the Rosary: of course I endorse the praying of the Rosary. It is an intimate immersion of the mind, imagination and affections in the lives of Jesus and Mary. The Rosary consists of a series of meditations upon sacred scenes in the infancy of Jesus, His ministry and miracles upon this earth, His passion and death for our salvation, and His glorious resurrection and ascension. Thinking of these things draws us closer to Christ in gratitude, in contrition for our sins, in thanksgiving for our salvation, in adoration of Him as our Lord and God. Not adoration of Mary. Adoration of Jesus Christ our Lord.

  The Rosary is an excellent form of prayer because it helps us to devote our memory, understanding, and will, to God. Anyone who does this, impelled by grace, draws closer to Our Lord in love. We trust His mercy. And this notion that Mary has "more" mercy is nonsense. God is the source of ALL mercy: He is infinitely greater than those creatures like Mary and like ourselves who, in our small human capacities, can give and receive only a drop from the great fountain of His love.

  Mary could never be, as you say, more merciful and knowledgeable than her Son: she is no rival deity who is more approachable, foresighted and merciful than Christ Himself. If you take this as the meaning of devotion to Mary, you have got it quite out of balance.

Once again, I urge people who want to know what Catholic doctrine is, to go to the online, clickable, searchable Catechism (Link)

You would do well to consider the difference between devotional literature and dogma; and between passing opinion and papal doctrine. I always make a point of that with my RCIA students. It takes a certain maturity (it's not for 8th graders!), and at least a little familiarity with the varieties of culture.

[Rashputin]

I'm not among those who throw out part of the Bible.

You tell me, why do people elevate themselves above the Holy Spirit to throw out part of the Word of God and worship their own Self?

[DungeonMaster]

Here is an objection “Words mean things!”.

[narses]

St. Cyril’s doctrine is expressed in his creed, which seems to have run thus:

I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Creator of Heaven and earth and of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten by the Father true God before all ages, God of God, Life of Life, Light of Light, by Whom all things were made. Who for us men and for our salvation came down, and was incarnate by the Holy Ghost and the Virgin Mary, and was made man. He was crucified . . . and buried. He rose again on the third day according to the Scriptures, and sat at the right hand of the Father. And He cometh in glory to judge the living and the dead, whose kingdom shall have no end. And in one Holy Ghost, the Paraclete, Who spake by the prophets; and in one baptism of repentance for the remission of sins, and in one holy Catholic Church, and in the resurrection of the body, and in life everlasting.

[narses]

St. Cyril’s teaching about the Blessed Sacrament is of the first importance, for he was speaking freely, untrammelled by the “discipline of the secret”. On the Real Presence he is unambiguous: “Since He Himself has declared and said of the bread: This is My Body, who shall dare to doubt any more? And when He asserts and says: This is My Blood, who shall ever hesitate and say it is not His Blood?” Of the Transformation, he argues, if Christ could change water into wine, can He not change wine into His own Blood? The bread and wine are symbols: “In the type of bread is given thee the Body, in the type of wine the Blood is given thee”; but they do not remain in their original condition, they have been changed, though the senses cannot tell us this: “Do not think it mere bread and wine, for it is the Body and Blood of Christ, according to the Lord’s declaration”. “Having learned this and being assured of it, that appears to be bread is not bread, though perceived by the taste, but the Body of Christ, and what appears to be wine is not wine, though the taste says so, but the Blood of Christ . . . strengthen thy heart, partaking of it as spiritual (food), and rejoice the face of thy soul”.

“Your ancestors ate the manna in the desert, but they died;
this is the bread that comes down from heaven so that one may eat it and not die.
I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world.”
The Jews quarreled among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us (his) flesh to eat?”
Jesus said to them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you.
Whoever eats 19 my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day.
For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink
Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him.
Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me.
This is the bread that came down from heaven. Unlike your ancestors who ate and still died, whoever eats this bread will live forever.”
These things he said while teaching in the synagogue in Capernaum
Then many of his disciples who were listening said, “This saying is hard; who can accept it?”
Since Jesus knew that his disciples were murmuring about this, he said to them, “Does this shock you?
What if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before?
It is the spirit that gives life, while the flesh is of no avail. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and life.
But there are some of you who do not believe.” Jesus knew from the beginning the ones who would not believe and the one who would betray him.
And he said, “For this reason I have told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by my Father.”
As a result of this, many (of) his disciples returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied him
Jesus then said to the Twelve, “Do you also want to leave?”
Simon Peter answered him, “Master, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life.
We have come to believe and are convinced that you are the Holy One of God.”
Jesus answered them, “Did I not choose you twelve? Yet is not one of you a devil?”
He was referring to Judas, son of Simon the Iscariot; it was he who would betray him, one of the Twelve.” [John 6: 49-71]

[narses]

“Also keep in mind I am not a Catholic (anymore) That explains the hate.”

Or the divorce. Often the reason.

[count-your-change]

Mother of Lord (not God), Son of God (not God the Son) nor Mother of God. Words have meanings and these show exactly that..No Scriptural support.

Words don’t mean just anything one wishes.

[Mrs. Don-o]

You have a verbal argument there which adds up only if one ignores the fact that sometimes we use the word "God" to mean the Godhead, the Trinity, and sometimes we use "God" to mean, for instance the Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit as distinct Persons.

For instance, we say without hesitation that Jesus is the Son of God. But --- though the Trinity is God --- we don't mean He's the "son of the Trinity." He's the Son of the Father.

Likewise, although we say that Jesus is the Son of God, we don't mean He's the Son of the Holy Spirit. We can't say:

Jesus is the Son of God.

The Holy Spirit is God.

Therefore, Jesus is the Son of the Holy Spirit.

Keeping that in mind, we can say that Mary is the Mother of God only in this sense: that she gave birth to a particular, individual Person, a baby known as Jesus Christ, and that Person is God.

There are other, heretical, senses which must be excluded: that she be erroneously thought to be the Mother of the Trinity; or that she be thought to be older than God (!); that she be though to be the mother of the Father or of the Holy Spirit; or that she be thought the creator of the Creator, or the ultimate source of Being; or that she be thought to take precedence over her Son in all things, by virtue of supposedly being before Him. All that would be false and heretical.

Almost any doctrine of the Faith can be understood in its true sense, or misunderstood in some heretical sense.

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to explain the true sense.

I think it's important because Mary did not give birth to a "nature", but to a person. It's like this: say you're Jane Jones and you marry Sam Smith, and you have a child. You are not just the mother of half of him, the Jones part of him: you are his mother, plain and simple: because you gave him birth.

Putting it in this way is necessary to protect and emphasize the indivisible Personhood of Christ, which is the whole point of this doctrine.

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

“Your charge that listening to prayers would necessitate Mary being omniscient/omnipotent. Not so. It would only necessitate that she, like all the angels and saints now in heaven, is freed from the limitations of time and space.”

---

By definition, if you are omnipresent and omniscient, you are free of the limitations of time and space, since you can be in more than one place at one time in the temporal world, where all people who are praying live in. But this is not the case for spirits of any kind, whether of human or angels, as the Angel Gabriel was held up by the demonic Prince of Persia for a period of time, and was unable to meet with the Prophet Daniel until another angel (Michael) could pick up the battle from him (Dan 10:12-14).

“Bowing, offering praise, incense, etc. - Anyone might assume that was adoration if they were thinking like a threadbare secular American with no contact with more ceremonial societies.”

---

In other words, with no contact with more superstitious societies. It so happens I have contact with such a society, being Hispanic, and being intimately involved with Hispanic Catholics, and having been one myself. But just because one might be desensitized to kneeling before idols and praising them, doesn’t mean that it’s okay. This is no argument at all. It’s just sophistry.

As for the claim about the Hebrews, your link provides no evidence from any source to back it up, or even any evidence that the comparison is possible. I’ve never seen any Jew ever give an assenting nod to Roman Catholic practice.

“On devotional prayers such as the Rosary: of course I endorse the praying of the Rosary. It is an intimate immersion of the mind, imagination and affections in the lives of Jesus and Mary.”

---

This is all irrelevant to the point, since you do not explain upon what justification we should believe that Mary is saving people from Christ’s wrath because of the number of rosaries they pray.

“You would do well to consider the difference between devotional literature and dogma; and between passing opinion and papal doctrine.”

---

IOW, you approve of the teachings while at the same time denying them. But the first reply is, these things are founded upon the Catechism, as should be obvious (CCC 969, 966), so your Popes weren’t misinterpreting something or inventing something on the spot when they taught and endorsed these things. Secondly, your Popes have an authentic teaching authority and cannot be dismissed simply because they are embarrassing to you.

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

“Or the divorce. Often the reason.”

---

You spread hate when you accuse us of being divorcees, een though the vast majority of Catholics don’t follow Catholic teaching anyway on contraception, divorce, or whatever. In fact, the majority of them favor gay marriage, as recent polls have shown. As for me, I’ve never even been married, and I am, in fact, a virgin, despite my age. Most Catholics lose it before they’re 18.

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

But luckily, I don’t even need to heed Cyril on all his teachings, by his own recommendation: Cyril of Jerusalem: “Even to me, who tell you these things, give not absolute credence, unless thou receive the proof of the things which I announce from the Divine Scriptures. “