HELP! Defending Masculinity of God with stupid Liberal Professor!

[ronnie_bonigli]

ronnie bonigli;7636691:

I’m surprised you don’t realise that Jesus was - and had to be - realistic. He knew full well His mission would be doomed to failure if He didn’t make any allowance for Jewish beliefs, values and customs. Eventually He **was **

executed because His teaching was revolutionary. If He had thrown all caution to the winds **right from the start **He wouldn’t have survived as long as He did. As it was He was almost lynched before He even reached Jerusalem…

The Jews didn’t call God Father, “inventing” the concept of God the Father wasn’t exactly “going along to get along”

P.S. Just an FYI, when you find Ranklyfrank agreeing 100% with your theology, that’s a pretty good indicator that it’s no longer Catholic theology

 

[tonyrey]

Oh really… that’s why? Are you *sure *about that? How sure? What is your certainty based on?

You’re following your usual practice of asking questions without ever presenting your point of view… Your reputation for being rude, sarcastic and bad-tempered is flourishing.

In any case, the next question would be: *Why *was He was born into a patriarchal society (which - allegedly - would have rejected Him outright if He had been a woman or called God “Our Mother”)?

I’m amazed you can’t think of the answer… Do you really have no ideas?

 

[tonyrey]

I’m bloomin’ blown out of the water! I agree 100% on this with Tonyrey.

Thanks, Frank! Unlike certain others you can see the logic of my argument…

 

[tonyrey]

I’m surprised you don’t realise that Jesus was - and had to be - realistic. He knew full well His mission would be doomed to failure if He didn’t make any allowance for Jewish beliefs, values and customs. Eventually He **was **

1. You haven’t refuted any of my statements.
2. Your statement about Frank is unsubstantiated - and uncharitable.

 

[TMC]

I asked for specific lines, not vague references. You know things like “Lord, teach us how to pray. And he said to them, when you pray say 'Our Father who art in heaven . . .” and “Father forgive them for they no not what they do”, and “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit” and dozens more. I just gave you three off the top of my head. If you can’t give me any references to the bible or “some saints” calling God Mother or “she” then maybe you should stop saying that they are there.

I have cited on portion of the catechism that makes my point - paragraph 239, which teaches that God is both Father and Mother. Another paragraph of the catechism making a similar point is paragraph 370:

370 In no way is God in man’s image. He is neither man nor woman. God is pure spirit in which there is no place for the difference between the sexes. But the respective “perfections” of man and woman reflect something of the infinite perfection of God: those of a mother and those of a father and husband.241

Off the top of my head, some of the specific places in Scripture that refer to God has having feminine qualities are Isiah 49, which describes God relationship with man as being like a mother’s for her child; Psalm 131, which uses similar imagery. The catechism provides citations to more. St. Julian comes to mind as a Saint that referred to God in the feminine, I am sure there are more.

Given that it is clear that the Church teaches that God is neither gender, but serves as the perfect model for both, a better question may be whether there is any Church teaching that says one cannot refer to God in the feminine. I am not talking about gender-neutralizing the Mass or the established prayers (and I am not arguing for either of those things). The issue is whether it is appropriate for individual Catholics to refer to God in the feminine-- where does the Church say that it is wrong?

 

[tonyrey]

I have cited on portion of the catechism that makes my point - paragraph 239, which teaches that God is both Father and Mother. Another paragraph of the catechism making a similar point is paragraph 370:
have cited on portion of the catechism that makes my point - paragraph 239, which teaches that God is both Father and Mother. Another paragraph of the catechism making a similar point is paragraph 370:

 	 		 370 In no way is God in man's image. He is neither man nor woman. God is pure spirit in which there is no place for the difference between the sexes. But the respective "perfections" of man and woman reflect something of the infinite perfection of God: those of a mother and those of a father and husband.241

Off the top of my head, some of the specific places in Scripture that refer to God has having feminine qualities are Isiah 49, which describes God relationship with man as being like a mother’s for her child; Psalm 131, which uses similar imagery. The catechism provides citations to more. St. Julian comes to mind as a Saint that referred to God in the feminine, I am sure there are more.

Given that it is clear that the Church teaches that God is neither gender, but serves as the perfect model for both, a better question may be whether there is any Church teaching that says one cannot refer to God in the feminine. I am not talking about gender-neutralizing the Mass or the established prayers (and I am not arguing for either of those things). The issue is whether it is appropriate for individual Catholics to refer to God in the feminine-- where does the Church say that it is wrong?

Off the top of my head, some of the specific places in Scripture that refer to God has having feminine qualities are Isiah 49, which describes God relationship with man as being like a mother’s for her child; Psalm 131, which uses similar imagery. The catechism provides citations to more. St. Julian comes to mind as a Saint that referred to God in the feminine, I am sure there are more.

Given that it is clear that the Church teaches that God is neither gender, but serves as the perfect model for both, a better question may be whether there is any Church teaching that says one cannot refer to God in the feminine. I am not talking about gender-neutralizing the Mass or the established prayers (and I am not arguing for either of those things). The issue is whether it is appropriate for individual Catholics to refer to God in the feminine-- where does the Church say that it is wrong?

Well quoted! Those words are worth hammering home as they admit of no room for doubt whatsoever:

370 In no way is God in man’s image. He is neither man nor woman. **God is pure spirit in which there is no place for the difference between the sexes. **But the respective “perfections” of man and woman reflect something of the infinite perfection of God: those of a mother and those of a father and husband.241 .

 

[ronnie_bonigli]

I have cited on portion of the catechism that makes my point - paragraph 239, which teaches that God is both Father and Mother. Another paragraph of the catechism making a similar point is paragraph 370:

Off the top of my head, some of the specific places in Scripture that refer to God has having feminine qualities are Isiah 49, which describes God relationship with man as being like a mother’s for her child; Psalm 131, which uses similar imagery. The catechism provides citations to more. St. Julian comes to mind as a Saint that referred to God in the feminine, I am sure there are more.

Given that it is clear that the Church teaches that God is neither gender, but serves as the perfect model for both, a better question may be whether there is any Church teaching that says one cannot refer to God in the feminine. I am not talking about gender-neutralizing the Mass or the established prayers (and I am not arguing for either of those things). The issue is whether it is appropriate for individual Catholics to refer to God in the feminine-- where does the Church say that it is wrong?

Your still vacillating with vague references to “some passages here”, and “some saint said something there”, without giving us any concrete and specific passages. If you are going to say that all the people who believe Jesus really meant that we are to call God Father are wrong, then how about some real passages to back up your claim? I don’t think I’m asking too much here.

 

[tonyrey]

If you are going to say that all the people who believe Jesus really meant that we are to call God Father are wrong, then how about some real passages to back up your claim?

There is a vast difference between calling God “Father” and believing it has a sexual connotation…

 

[ronnie_bonigli]

There is a vast difference between calling God “Father” and believing it has a sexual connotation…

Oh my Go. . . that has got to be one of the most bizarre responses I’ve ever seen here. Have you not been paying attention to the last 5 pages of this thread? How could someone read what’s been debated here and come up with THAT response?

 

[JimG]

The Church does not refer to God as mother. Actually the Church herself is referred to as mother–i.e. Holy Mother Church. The Church sees itself and its people as feminine in relationship to God. The qualities of fatherhood and motherhood are not interchangeable, and are applied to God analogically.

In reality, it is not that God mirrors human fatherhood and the Church mirrors human motherhood. It is rather that the supreme Fatherhood of God in relation to humanity is feebly reflected in human fatherhood. And the receptivity of the Church to the overshadowing of God’s grace is reflected in human motherhood.

It is quite true that God in his essence is pure spirit, and pure spirit has no gender. That’s a given. But we still do not call God “IT,” nor do we call God “She,” because the Trinity has been revealed to us as Father, Son, and Spirit. That’s what we have received from divine revelation; we are not free to change it.

 

[John_Pascendi]

Ok, so currently I reading through material to be discussed at a class later this week in which the author says that Masculinity conquered “The Great Mother” and replaced it with a masculine God and now we must reclaim feminine spirituality.

Ok, at this PATHETIC school I am at, all if not most of the professor believe in calling God “she” and using he and she interchangeably. I have talked to a priest, a seminarian, and TWO people with master in theology about this so I now perfectly well why this is just a load of ****. But I am already gearing up to openly debate my professor in class about this because I am DONE sitting there and letting him flat out lie about what our church teaches.

The thing is, every time I get fired about and ready to debate him (there is one in particular at my “Catholic” school is ridiculously liberal and for lack of a better word, just stupid) I just remember he has a doctorate in theology and makes his living off of speaking and I back down. But this time I don’t want to do that.

Can anyone please give me some good arguments about this? And sources to read up on? Prayers for the courage to debate him in front of my peers and other professors (the class is taught by multiple professor so I may end up not just having to fight with one unfortunately.)

Here is what Im thinking about saying:
One, I understand that we will never be able to fully understand God
Two: Our reverence of Mary keeps feminine spirituality well alive
Three: No where is this dumb ideal in the catechism

Thats about all I got… I need a lot of help!!!

…jkust tell him that the Founder of your church used the expression in what He called the proper way to pray."Our Father,who art in heaven etc etc’ notice the word Father! This makes it easy to understand for we humans and since our Founder said it thats the way to go…

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

Ultimately God is beyond gender----but Jesus called God “Father,” so I would go with that. Paul also made a statemnt in one of his epistles which intimated that it was Ok to consider the Allmighty as a moter figure.

It is also for convenience’s sake. MY opinion, of course.

Ancient Kabbalistic Judaism also posited a “mate” for god----called Sekkinah. I disagree with that “one”----just telling you what I know.

I’ve noticed that the people who try to push the “God is Feminine” meme are also folks with a radical (often feminist) agenda and are also subtly trying to push “gender politics.”

Again, my opinion.

 

[abucs]

If we limit gender to physical terms then spirit has no gender. But can gender be extended to spiritual terms? After all, psychologically there is a difference between men and women. Whom is the Father closest to pyschologically, or his He exacly some half way between?

And why did Jesus go out of his way to call God continually his ‘father’? Are there any insights to the Trinity’s nature or does it have symbolic relationships for Christians that need to be uppermost in our minds? For Jesus continually to refer to God as Father was very unusual in Jewish culture and we shouldn’t be so dismissive that the reasons were patriachial and so a great portion of Christian theology should then be dumped (or augmented) because it conflicts with a minority and outdated 1960 political correctness. Is it symbolic, a reflection of Gods nature (as above) or a distinguishing use of language between the different persons of the Trinity? Who knows?

I don’t know the answer to many of these questions but people who are full bent on calling God mother don’t know either and having been around many of them i truthfully have to say they do not have the same religion as myself. I cannot help but think such people have their own non-Catholic agendas going on with little to do with faithfullness to the Church or respect for revelation and the continuuing presence of the Holy Trinity in the Church…

I have also noticed at Universirty that the people pushing for ‘God mother’ are also in open rebellion against the ‘patriachial’ priesthood, the position of the Pope, the accomplishments of the Church and also have a loathing for any devotion to our lady, the greatest non divine role model for us all. The other thing i notice is that these people are overwhelmingly old and had their youth in the 1960’s and i believe are still trapped in the mindset of those times whereas everyone else has moved on.

As far as my experience goes, as i said before, i don’t see these people as Catholic. There seems to have been a time some decades ago when this thinking permeated religious orders but that time has long since passed - thankfully.

I think your professor is simply at the tail end of the silliness from those times.

 

[mark_avery]

GOD said I AM because I AM.

made in his image but not mind+woman came from man,just like Jesus said the church was made for man,not man ect.

 

[Betterave]

You’re following your usual practice of asking questions without ever presenting your point of view… Your reputation for being rude, sarcastic and bad-tempered is flourishing.

LOL! I see you’re following your usual practice of making apparently silly/groundless assertions and then refusing to answer questions about them, instead resorting to rude and irrational ad hominem attacks. Poor Tony.

I’m amazed you can’t think of the answer… Do you really have no ideas?

I never said nor implied that I couldn’t think of an answer. Your reply, on the other hand, is just another rude, irrational dodge.

 

[Betterave]

Yeah, I suppose it is.

Seriously? You’re just going to graciously admit that in response to my question?! Astounding!

(Tony, please take note: this is the kind of straightforward response that a mature and open-minded person gives to a question about his/her claims.)

The OT refers to God’s feminine qualities and refers to God as a female in a few instances, but the OT never addresses God as Mother (or Father). I am not aware of any “official” Catholic prayers that refer to God as Mother, but the Church does refer to God as our mother, so I can’t see how it can be wrong for us to address God in the feminine.

The OT does not refer to God as a female. It does (very rarely) use feminine imagery. That is an important distinction.

[You mentioned Isaiah 49: “14 And Sion said: The Lord has forsaken me, and the Lord has forgotten me. 15 Can a woman forget her infant, so as not to have pity on the son of her womb? And if she should forget, yet will not I forget you.” Note that the passage first *compares God’s love to that of a mother, then contrasts it. It certainly doesn’t *refer *to God as “mother.”]

And the *Church *does not refer to God as our mother. She refers to Mary (and to herself) as our mother. You might be able to find a rare exception to this, and if you can please post it, but the exception would hardly invalidate the rule or add up to the claim that “Father” and “Mother” can with equal right be used as terms to refer to God.

 

[Betterave]

1. You haven’t refuted any of my statements.
2. Your statement about Frank is unsubstantiated - and uncharitable.

Yeah, what about that, ronnie? I sure haven’t noticed Frank saying anything that would suggest his theology is anything but 100% orthodox Catholic… don’t you need to substantiate that?

 

[TMC]

Your still vacillating with vague references to “some passages here”, and “some saint said something there”, without giving us any concrete and specific passages. If you are going to say that all the people who believe Jesus really meant that we are to call God Father are wrong, then how about some real passages to back up your claim? I don’t think I’m asking too much here.

I have given specific citations, you just want more. I have referred you to the citations in the Catechism, you can look those up yourself.

I never said that those that say Jesus said to call God Father are wrong - in fact I have said just the opposite. Please try to respond to what I am actually saying. I am saying that God is neither masculine nor feminine, but that God is the source and model for both. I am saying that there is nothing wrong with referring to God in the feminine - just as there is nothing wrong with referring to God in the masculine. I am saying that the Church does not say we cannot refer to God in the feminine. Despite your many posts, you have never actually addressed any of those points. You keep saying Jesus said to call God Father - no one is denying that. You and some others are saying it is wrong to refer to God in the feminine, but you have given absolutely no basis for that assertion.

 

[Waiting]

GOD said I AM because I AM.

made in his image but not mind+woman came from man,just like Jesus said the church was made for man,not man ect.

God called Himself I AM because He always was and always will be. In other words, all time is present to God.

 

[tonyrey]

Oh my Go. . . that has got to be one of the most bizarre responses I’ve ever seen here. Have you not been paying attention to the last 5 pages of this thread? How could someone read what’s been debated here and come up with THAT response?

370. God is pure spirit in which there is no place for the difference between the sexes.