Developing Dogmas and Doctrines

[PRmerger]

My intentions behind this logic go to show why I do not call her the mother of God. Mary is the mother of Jesus Christ, that is true. ** Jesus Christ is God.**

Yes.

However, she is not the mother of God the Father or of God the Holy Spirit.

Interesting that you have no problem separating Jesus from God the Father and God the Holy Spirit, in the above bolded section.

Yet, you seem to say that when Mary is the Mother of God it means all 3 persons.

Why don’t you say, “I won’t say Jesus is God because Jesus is NOT God the Father or God the Holy Spirit”?

Instead, you note that Jesus is God means the 2nd person of the Godhead, not that Jesus is the Trinity.

And, you ought to be able to note that saying Mary is the Mother of God means the 2nd person of the Godhead, not that Mary is the Mother of the Trinity.

 

[Janet1983]

Yet, you seem to say that when Mary is the Mother of God it means all 3 persons.

I am saying that this can easily be misinterpreted, so I refrain from calling her such.
Therefore I will not actively call her the mother of God as I do not wish to be a stumbling block for anybody who might then assume that she was the mother of the Trinity.

I (and I am only speaking for myself) will therefore refrain from using such vocabulary. I will instead point to Him who is my Saviour, my Deliverer, my King, my Master, my Lord and my God: Jesus Christ.

 

[PRmerger]

I am saying that this can easily be misinterpreted, so I refrain from calling her such.

Then why don’t you refrain from saying “Jesus is God”, as that can easily be misinterpreted to mean “Jesus is the Trinity.”

And, as stated earlier, saying Mary is the Mother of God is actually providing a trenchant catechesis. You ought to say that, esp. to a pagan, in order to proclaim exactly who this Jesus is.

 

[KathleenGee]

I think it silly to imagine a church put on earth at Pentecost with with the New Testament Bible, church buildings, guideline for worship, central authority or not, all finished and ready to go off the press…

But unfortunately, the outward form of the church, because of its universal scope and rapid expansion, persecution, the sprouting of errors and misunderstandings, abuses at gatherings, scandals, simony, different cultures, races, languages…the outward form of church took some time.

The full definition of Christ was not fully defined until the Council of Nicea in the Nicene Creed, 300 plus years later. Liturgy and Scripture also took over a hundred years to define norms and which books the Holy Spirit guided the Early Fathers to use. It was all the Holy Spirit working through men…many people, many years, nothing coming out of the sky, ready made.

This gradual building of the Church has its own heritage and journey, mistakes and fallen faith just as the Jewish people had in the Old Testament.

You cannot separate the Bible from the Church; the Church came before the written Word of God.

But no words can fully describe the apostolic faith…it is being centered in Christ in communion with all believers and we come to the summit of Christ in our faith in the Eucharist. People can come on here and say we are this or that, but we know who we are and we are not bound or limited by others’ perceptions of how they think we believe.

Yes, baptism, a Catholic rite, incorporates us into the Body of Christ…but without faith in Christ’s church, you do not consciously experience the communion of saints that go back 2,000 years. There is the spiritual experience we have in reception of the Eucharist that renders its own spirituality, as does the sacrament of confession. Who Mary is says something back to who we are and what is promised for us.

Mary makes us a family. She is the Mother of the Son of God…how about that one? Can that pass? I would rather have my faith be dependent on the sacraments and the Word of God in context of the faith of our apostles, than to be alone with a Bible with my own interpretation.

 

[ERose]

Yes, Jesus is both God and man. Let me therefore repeat what I said while changing it to where it will mean what I wanted to say. I will add comments in brackets:

My intentions behind this logic go to show why I do not call her the mother of God. Mary is the mother of Jesus Christ, that is true. Jesus Christ is God.
However, she is not the mother of God the Father or of God the Holy Spirit.
Therefore I will not actively call her the mother of God as I do not wish to be a stumbling block for anybody who might then assume that she was the mother of the Trinity.

I (and I am only speaking for myself) will therefore refrain from using such vocabulary. I will instead point to Him who is my Saviour, my Deliverer, my King, my Master, my Lord and my God: Jesus Christ.

So you are saying that Jesus is not fully God?

I think that you are confused about the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. In its definition it teaches that the Father is fully God, the Son is fully God, and the Holy Spirit is fully God. Yet not three Gods but one God. Calling Mary the Mother of God is not saying that she is the Mother of the Father and the Spirit but rather of the Son. From your thinking this mean that Jesus as God is the spouse of Mary yet also the Son of Mary.

 

[ERose]

I am saying that this can easily be misinterpreted, so I refrain from calling her such.
Therefore I will not actively call her the mother of God as I do not wish to be a stumbling block for anybody who might then assume that she was the mother of the Trinity.

I (and I am only speaking for myself) will therefore refrain from using such vocabulary. I will instead point to Him who is my Saviour, my Deliverer, my King, my Master, my Lord and my God: Jesus Christ.

So you are saying you don’t have the ability to explain to someone that Jesus in not the Holy Trinity but a member thereof? What is so hard about that?

The only people it is a stumbling block to is those that have been taught that this truth is blasphemy.

 

[Janet1983]

Then why don’t you refrain from saying “Jesus is God”, as that can easily be misinterpreted to mean “Jesus is the Trinity.”

And, as stated earlier, saying Mary is the Mother of God is actually providing a trenchant catechesis. You ought to say that, esp. to a pagan, in order to proclaim exactly who this Jesus is.

I am saying Jesus is God because He is.

 

[Janet1983]

So you are saying that Jesus is not fully God?

What are you trying to tell me?

So you are saying you don’t have the ability to explain to someone that Jesus in not the Holy Trinity but a member thereof? What is so hard about that?

The only people it is a stumbling block to is those that have been taught that this truth is blasphemy.

I simply will not call her the mother of God.

Apart from that you may believe about me what you want. I believe Jesus Christ is God. Fully God. I believe that God the Father is God. Fully God. I believe that the Holy Spirit is God. Fully God.
That does however not change the fact that I do not think that the title “mother of God” is sound from all perspectives because of the aforementioned reasons.

 

[joe370]

Janet, in your opinion, was Jesus in fact God, when Mary was 7 months along in her pregnancy with Jesus? If your answer is yes then it’s safe to say that Mary gave birth to God incarnate, in human form, logically speaking - right?

 

[PRmerger]

I am saying Jesus is God because He is.

Yet when you say that it could be misinterpreted to mean “Jesus is Trinity”.

Thus, if you refrain from saying “Mother of God” because it could be misinterpreted to mean “Mother of the Trinity”, then you ought not say “Jesus is God” for the same reason.

I think this reluctance to speak the dogma of Mother of God really lies in your distaste of Catholic dogma, not in your concern that others may misinterpret it.

 

[PRmerger]

**Can anyone prove that Paul, the Disciples, Apostles believed in what Catholics call the developed Doctrines and Dogmas about Mary, the Pope, Infallibility, etc.?

Can anyone show the chain of transmission of this knowledge?**

No. these doctrines, like the canon of scripture, were not developed for some centuries after the Apostles had gone to their heavenly reward

Interestingly, I found this from another thread:

This scrap of papyrus, dated to 250 AD, bears the earliest prayer yet discovered to the Virgin Mary . It is a prayer still used in the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches. It is one of the texts considered in my 2007 book, “The Lost Gospel of Mary: The Mother of Jesus in Three Ancient Texts.”

The text is:

“Under thy compassion we take refuge, Theotokos [Birthgiver-of-God]; do not disregard our prayers in the midst of tribulation, but deliver us from danger, O Only Pure, Only Blessed One.”

 

[KathleenGee]

Catholics are not People of the Book.

We Catholics have a living relationship with Jesus Christ, – and may be that is why there is some annoyance to say we also have a personal relationship with Christ…I mean, if we believe we are receiving the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist, and then to find the need that we also have to state that we have a personal relationship with Jesus, seems cliche and trite.

Just as the Jews had their own salvation history, it is only right and most proper that after waiting 3000 years, that those who turned to Christ and follow Him, also have a history and tradition to give to the world.

Catholicism has a paper trail going back 2,000 years through various sources and types of documents, archeology, the passing down of teachings and insights from personal relationships with the apostles, their own sharing of Mary, how the Church was incarnated the Word of God.

The New Testament is not the end of Christianity. Christ said He would give us His advocate the Holy Spirit Who would come to teach us many things. And that is found in Tradition, how the Church through the coming together of many peoples, grew and expanded, and many norms created to ensure that the Word of God in its true intent is passed down to all peoples and races and tongues.

There is a great history of the saints, the great works of the Church, its artifacts…all built in truth and beauty to profess our glory to the Lord, Groom of His Church.

 

[guanophore]

So you are saying that Jesus is not fully God?

I think that you are confused about the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. In its definition it teaches that the Father is fully God, the Son is fully God, and the Holy Spirit is fully God. Yet not three Gods but one God. Calling Mary the Mother of God is not saying that she is the Mother of the Father and the Spirit but rather of the Son. From your thinking this mean that Jesus as God is the spouse of Mary yet also the Son of Mary.

No, Janet is not confused about the Trinity. Her faith is Catholic in this matter. She just finds it prudent to refrain from using the Catholic expression of Theotokos because she imagines that refraining from speaking the Truth will prevent misunderstandings.

I am sure glad that Jesus and the Apostles did not take that approach!

 

[guanophore]

:hypno:

Janet, in your opinion, was Jesus in fact God, when Mary was 7 months along in her pregnancy with Jesus? If your answer is yes then it’s safe to say that Mary gave birth to God incarnate, in human form, logically speaking - right?

Janet has repeatedly testified that she believes Jesus is God, and that Mary is the mother of Jesus. She just does not want to use the phrase “Mother of God” because other people have unsound perspectives about it. :hypno:

 

[Janet1983]

:hypno:

Janet has repeatedly testified that she believes Jesus is God, and that Mary is the mother of Jesus. She just does not want to use the phrase “Mother of God” because other people have unsound perspectives about it. :hypno:

Finally. I cannot express my gratitude enough.
Thank you so much for ending this!

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

There are some protestants who reject the title, Mother of God. They prefer Mother of Christ.



Thank you,
Jon

Don’t they consider Christ part of the trinity? Would that not make her Mother of God then?

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

Sorry Janet…I had only got to this part when I had to comment.

Too bad that you want to hide the truth…what a wonderful learning opportunity it would be…

 

[ERose]

What are you trying to tell me?

I simply will not call her the mother of God.

Apart from that you may believe about me what you want. I believe Jesus Christ is God. Fully God. I believe that God the Father is God. Fully God. I believe that the Holy Spirit is God. Fully God.
That does however not change the fact that I do not think that the title “mother of God” is sound from all perspectives because of the aforementioned reasons.

Then do you believe that Mary is the Mother of God and not want to use this title for some reason or do you believe Mary is not the Mother of God?

 

[ERose]

Finally. I cannot express my gratitude enough.
Thank you so much for ending this!

So why would you be afraid to speak the truth to other people. If it is true, why would it be a stumbling block? Why are evangelicals and some protestants so anti-Mary to the point that you cannot call her what she is? You obviously know that denying that Mary is the mother of God is the same as denying the incarnation of Jesus. So why is this teaching such a stumbling block?

 

[schaick]

PRmerger-

Thank you for that link: frederica.com/gallery/places-and-things/1067611

See also:

campus.udayton.edu/mary/resources/lostgospelofmary.htm

It is the Proto-Gospel of James written about AD 150

Do Catholics consider this a part of the Gospel message- is it in the Catholic Bible?

If not do you know why the Catholic Church failed in putting this into Scripture?

Did any of the early Church fathers reference it?