How do I reconcile this doctrine with Aquinas?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jshy
  • Start date Start date
Yes , so what’s the problem your having? I don’t see any problem at all. This is not a biblical question so much to as We are investigating the terminology of the word substance and How it relates in metaphysics and the compatibility between specific views on how the term is used within the church And in Thomism. To put it short The body and soul are composited as one complete substance ( thing) and we are trying to determine if these things in Aquinas’s view can Be legitimately called substances when separated… and it seems they can be just not in the sense of completeness and only in weak terms… the body is a part of the substance . But you can loosely call it one in a weaker sense it seems according to what has been presented to me here on the forum.
 
Last edited:
the Son, and the Holy Spirit are of one substance, but we do not say that the Virgin Mary gave birth to the unity of the Trinity, but only to the Son, who alone assumed our nature in the unity of His person. Also, we must believe that the entire Trinity accomplished the Incarnation of the Son of God, because the works of the Trinity are inseparable. However, only the Son took the form of a servant (cf. Ph 2,7) in the singleness of His person, not in the unity of His divine nature; in what is proper to the Son, not in what is common to the Trinity; and this form was adapted to Him for unity of person so that the Son of God and the Son of man is one Christ, that is, Christ in these two natures exists in THREE SUBSTANCES ; of the Word, which must refer to the essence of God alone, of the body, and of the soul, which pertain to true man…END
Most people I speak to would say that because Mother Mary give birth to the Son, and we should not separate the unity of the Holy Trinity, therefore, Mary is the Mother of God.

But in my understamding, exactly because of that very same argument (we should see God as One, The Holy Trinity inseparable), that we should never call Mother Mary as The Mother of God. (Because Mother Mary is not the mother of the other two persons in the inseparable Holy Trinity)

Now, I also think that scripture teach the distinction between the spirit & the flesh. These two has two distinct wills (Romans 7 & 8).
But this has nothing to do with separation/ unity of “body&soul” because “the spirit” is not exactly the same as “soul”. It is too hard to trace what those foreign things refer to in scriptures. Indeed they are two different source of thoughts.

Greek philosophy was the origin of our science now. I find it easier to use scientific evidence to prove God, than to use old greek philosophy because the truth of it cannot be checked because they were “almost science” and is now obsolete. God’s word in scripture, however, does not go obsolete & proven to be able to keep up with our modern science.
 
Last edited:
Now, I also think that scripture teach the distinction between the spirit & the flesh. These two has two distinct wills (Romans 7 & 8).
But this has nothing to do with separation/ unity of “body&soul” because “the spirit” is not exactly the same as “soul”. It is too hard to trace what those foreign things refer to in scriptures. Indeed they are two different source of thoughts.
Yes there is a distinction between spirit and flesh but the flesh belongs to a soul . And it depends on how flesh is being used isn’t the Bible because most the time it refers to sin and not just your body . But regardless of all that some souls have spirit and some don’t . Dogs have no spirit . They are just flesh and soul . Only humans and angels and demons are contingent spiritual beings . We are both animal and spirit . We are rational souls… and non of this has to do with the term substance . We are a human being that’s our substance . Which is a composite of body and soul .
Greek philosophy was the origin of our science now. I find it easier to use scientific evidence to prove God, than to use old greek philosophy because the truth of it cannot be checked because they were “almost science” and is now obsolete. God’s word in scripture, however, does not go obsolete & proven to be able to keep up with our modern science .
This is false it’s not obsolete because science can’t explain metaphysics… you can’t collapse all philosophy into empiricism . That’s called logical positivism and is self refuting because in order for any statement to be true only if it’s empirically verified has to be empirically verified itself in order to be a true statement… But with reasoning we can know things beyond subatomic particles which science can’t go beyond . And also divine revelation explains the theology of God it doesn’t explain the philosophy . These are two different sides of the same coin. Philosophy helps us look at the world around up and reason to come to a explanation of what things are fundamentally and know that God exists .We can know God by negation and analogy But then through divine revelation we can start with God and know how he is connected to this world and his people and creation and it helps bring the philosophy to a full circle and they are in perfect harmony together . Because even atheist can know a God exists through reasoning and that he has to have attributes and be all knowing , all powerful and eternal , all present , all Good and so on . They can now this through reasoning and using negation and analogy. But then to know who this God is and what he wants of us we need to then go into theology which comes from divine revelation… but I’m talking a born philosophy side of things like the term substance. What makes something a substance and what is it defined as
 
Last edited:
Most people I speak to would say that because Mother Mary give birth to the Son, and we should not separate the unity of the Holy Trinity, therefore, Mary is the Mother of God.
But in my understamding, exactly because of that very same argument (we should see God as One, The Holy Trinity inseparable), that we should never call Mother Mary as The Mother of God. (Because Mother Mary is not the mother of the other two persons in the inseparable Holy Trinity)
No it’s infallibly declared that Mary is the mother of God. You have to believe that as a Catholic. Jesus Christ is God. Yes God is three persons in one But What you seem to be doing is falling into a form of Sabellianism which is a heresy , so be careful . Jesus is not part of God and Together with the other three make up a full God … no HE IS fully God … Each persons Of the trinity are FULLY the same God . Just not the same persons Because they are eternally separate persons ( se we can’t be modalist) but They are United in the sense of having the same essence ( God )
 
Last edited:
No it’s infallibly declared that Mary is the mother of God.
Mary The Theotokos, yes

Theotokos literal meaning is The Bearer of The Incarnate God.


In the eastern churches tradition, Hail Mary prayer does include “theotokos”. But the translation into The Mother of God, add too much and therefore changes the meaning.

God is the cause of ALL things, and He Alone has no Cause. To say Mother of God is to confuse that principle, that is, God as the first cause Who has no cause. Motherhood to God contradicts this principle and potentially confuse many people, into worshiping Mary.

The error of worshiping a creation instead of the creator is idolatry. The history of Israel, full of stories when they had fallen into idolatry. It is not impossible that the father of lies is still trying to set that trap on us now.

The eastern churches has more authentic Mary veneration tradition.


We are allowed to say a prayer according to what we believe. Besides, this is under private revelation, isnt it? So, whenever I pray Hail Mary, I don’t say the part “mother of God” & “us sinners now & at the time of our death”. I remove those and only say “Mother Mary, Pray for us” instead.
 
in order for any statement to be true only if it’s empirically verified has to be empirically verified itself in order to be a true statement… But with reasoning we can know things beyond subatomic particles which science can’t go beyond . And also divine revelation explains the theology of God it doesn’t explain the philosophy .
I am not good at the above. I have read some of the theories. They are rather difficult to empirically verify . I think philosophy & theology only good when it is backed with scriptures. For example the Holy Trinity teaching is clear in scriptures. But Mary Mother of God contradict scriptures. So, in the end, Divine Revelation is the important one. If God has never revealed it, then it is not so.
 
God is the cause of ALL things, and He Alone has no Cause. To say Mother of God is to confuse that principle, that is, God as the first cause Who has no cause. Motherhood to God contradicts this principle and potentially confuse many people, into worshiping Mary.
No it doesn’t because she is not God or above him . She is not divine . Go on YouTube and type in Matt Fradd and tim Staples , he explains this in the interview .Catholics are very clear on this … she is the source of his human body but not his divinity . Just like how my kids came from me I’m a source of there biological processes through sperm and the mother is the one who gave birth to them but we didn’t create there souls. But they are still a soul and I’m the father of a soul regardless if I am the source of there soul or not .

JOHN II 533-535

“One of the Trinity Suffered,” and the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God *

[From epistle (3) “Olim quidem” to the senators of Constantinople, March, 534]

401 Dz 201 [Since] Justinian the Emperor, our son, as you have learned from the tenor or his epistle, has signified that arguments have arisen with regard to these three questions, whether one of the Trinity can be called Christ and our God, that is, one holy person of the three persons of the Holy Trinity whether the God Christ incapable of suffering because of deity endured [suffering in] the flesh; whether properly and truly (the Mother of God and the Mother of God’s Word become incarnate from her) the Mother of our Lord God Christ ought to be called Mary ever Virgin. In these matters we have recognized the Catholic faith of the Emperor, and we show that this is clearly so from the examples of the prophets, and of the Apostles, or of the Fathers. For in these examples we clearly point out that one of the Holy Trinity is Christ, that is, one of the three persons of the Holy Trinity is a holy person or substance, which the Greeks call (Greek text deleted) (various witnesses are brought forward, as Gn 3,22 1Co 8,6 the Nicene Creed; Proclus’ letter to the Westerners, etc. ); but let us confirm by these examples that God truly endured in the flesh (Dt 28,66 Jn 14,6 Mt 3,8 Ac 3,15, 20, Ac 28 1Co 2,8 Cyrilli anath. 1Co 12 LEO Flavium etc. ).

Dz 202
We rightly teach that the glorious Holy ever Virgin Mary is acknowledged by Catholic men [to be] both properly and truly the one who bore God, and the Mother of God’s Word, become incarnate from her. For He Himself deigned from earliest times properly and truly to become incarnate and likewise to be born of the holy and glorious Virgin Mother. Therefore, because the Son of God was properly and truly made flesh from her and born of her, we confess that she was properly and truly the Mother of God made incarnate and born from her, and (properly indeed), lest it be believed that the Lord Jesus received the name of God through honor or grace, as the foolish Nestorius thinks; but truly for this reason, lest it be believed that He took flesh in a phantasm or some other manner, not true flesh from the virgin, just as the impious Eutyches has asserted
.
 
Last edited:
I am not good at the above. I have read some of the theories. They are rather difficult to empirically verify . I think philosophy & theology only good when it is backed with scriptures. For example the Holy Trinity teaching is clear in scriptures. But Mary Mother of God contradict scriptures. So, in the end, Divine Revelation is the important one. If God has never revealed it, then it is not so.
Is Jesus God ? . It doesn’t contradict scripture . If you start denying Mary is the mother of God then you are denying that Jesus is God

APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTION OF
POPE PIUS XII

MUNIFICENTISSIMUS DEUS

DEFINING THE DOGMA OF THE ASSUMPTION

November 1, 1950
  1. Now, just like the present age, our pontificate is weighed down by ever so many cares, anxieties, and troubles, by reason of very severe calamities that have taken place and by reason of the fact that many have strayed away from truth and virtue. Nevertheless, we are greatly consoled to see that, while the Catholic faith is being professed publicly and vigorously, piety toward the Virgin MOTHER OF GOD is flourishing and daily growing more fervent, and that almost everywhere on earth it is showing indications of a better and holier life. Thus, while the Blessed Virgin is fulfilling in the most affectionate manner her maternal duties on behalf of those redeemed by the blood of Christ, the minds and the hearts of her children are being vigorously aroused to a more assiduous consideration of her prerogatives

Irenaeus​

“The Virgin Mary, being obedient to his word, received from an angel the glad tidings that she would bear God” ( Against Heresies , 5:19:1 [A.D. 189]).

Hippolytus​

“[T]o all generations they [the prophets] have pictured forth the grandest subjects for contemplation and for action. Thus, too, they preached of the advent of God in the flesh to the world, his advent by the spotless and God-bearing ( theotokos ) Mary in the way of birth and growth” ( Discourse on the End of the World 1 [A.D. 217]).

Gregory the Wonderworker​

“For Luke, in the inspired Gospel narratives, delivers a testimony not to Joseph only, but also to Mary, the Mother of God, and gives this account with reference to the very family and house of David” ( Four Homilies 1 [A.D. 262]).

“It is our duty to present to God, like sacrifices, all the festivals and hymnal celebrations; and first of all, [the feast of] the Annunciation to the holy Mother of God, to wit, the salutation made to her by the angel, ‘Hail, full of grace!’” (ibid., 2)

Methodius​

“While the old man [Simeon] was thus exultant, and rejoicing with exceeding great and holy joy, that which had before been spoken of in a figure by the prophet Isaiah, the holy Mother of God now manifestly fulfilled” ( Oration on Simeon and Anna 7 [A.D. 305]).

 
Last edited:
POPE Adeodatus II
From a cursory check on the life of this Pope it seems that he was fighting the heresy of MONOTHELETES a variant of Monophysitism which argues that Jesus did not have a human will.
The contention was that Jesus since HE was a true human had a human soul and hence a human will.
GOD also has a will but does not have a soul. So the contention was between these 2 notions.
Anyhow hope this helps.
Peace!
 
Son of God was properly and truly made flesh from her and born of her, we confess that she was properly and truly the Mother of God made incarnate and born from her
I add bold to your post above.
Catholics are very clear on this … she is the source of his human body but not his divinity .
To remove “made incarnate”, from “God made incarnate” adds too much to Mary’s motherhood.

Mary’s motherhood is to Jesus incarnate body before his resurrection. His new body after his resurrection is a body He himself raised. And Jesus said
His Body which is The Temple, in several bible translations is translated as “and I will rebuild it in three days”

Our veneration to Mary should be centered around our gratefulness that she was willing to carry Jesus’s old body and raised to be a good man that he was, only to find out, and had to willingly accept, the fact that her son had to suffer & die on the cross as a sacrifice to save us.

However, Mother Mary is not the mother of Christ Divinity, and therefore it cannot be said Mary is The Mother of God.

Mary

  1. was the mother of the incarnate God, and
  2. She also was the bearer of God, but not in motherhood did she bore the Divine. She was merely a bearer of the Divine
 
Last edited:
However, Mother Mary is not the mother of Christ Divinity, and therefore it cannot be said Mary is The Mother of God.
The Church disagrees with you.

CCC 495 Called in the Gospels “the mother of Jesus”, Mary is acclaimed by Elizabeth, at the prompting of the Spirit and even before the birth of her son, as “the mother of my Lord”. In fact, the One whom she conceived as man by the Holy Spirit, who truly became her Son according to the flesh, was none other than the Father’s eternal Son, the second person of the Holy Trinity. Hence the Church confesses that Mary is truly “Mother of God” ( Theotokos )
 
the second person of the Holy Trinity. Hence the Church confesses that Mary is truly “Mother of God” ( Theotokos )
As you have said it, she is the mother of the Second Person (only) of the Holy Trinity. She’s not the mother of THE WHOLE Holy Trinity. Hence not the Mother of God.

And that Second Person of the Holy Trinity said:
1. John 3:6
Flesh gives birth to flesh, spirit gives birth to spirit.
2. John 4:24
God is spirit
, and his worshipers must worship Him in the Spirit and in truth.”
3. John 2:19-21
Destroy this Temple (Jesus own body), and I (Jesus, not Mary) will rebuild it in three days.
 
Last edited:
Natures don’t have mothers. Persons have mothers.
Jesus has two natures, a divine nature, and a human nature.
But he is just one Person–The Second Person of the Trinity, who is God.
Therefore Mary is the Mother of God.
That doesn’t mean she precedes God, or created the divine nature; just as my mother did not create my immortal soul.
 
Jesus body was born of virgin Mary . But after the resurrection, He has a new body which He himself raised.

I am sure that term did not refer to his old body which was born of virgin Mary .
If you are saying that Jesus did not have the same body than what you are saying is that Jesus did not raise form the dead. There is a difference between Jesus’ body changing into a glorious body and Him having a different body.

John 20:20 confirms Jesus had the same body
27 Then he said to Thomas, `Put your finger here and see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it in my side. Do not doubt but believe.

But in my understamding, exactly because of that very same argument (we should see God as One, The Holy Trinity inseparable), that we should never call Mother Mary as The Mother of God. (Because Mother Mary is not the mother of the other two persons in the inseparable Holy Trinity)
Your understanding is wrong and is a heresy called Nestorianism which is the belief that Mary was only the mother of Jesus the man and should not be addressed as the Mother of God as though Jesus was two separate persons instead of one person with two natures.

Your position that Mary is not the Mother of God must than say Jesus had not mother. That He was never born. That scripture is false on this point. Of course you are not saying that but you are saying that Mary gave birth but that Jesus wasn’t God. Your not saying that either? Of course you are, Mary gave birth to Jesus who is both man and God. Mary is still the mother of Jesus. To say that she is not His mother goes against scripture,
God is the cause of ALL things, and He Alone has no Cause. To say Mother of God is to confuse that principle, that is, God as the first cause Who has no cause. Motherhood to God contradicts this principle and potentially confuse many people, into worshiping Mary.
You are confused about what it means that Mary is the Mother of God. To borrow from Catholic answers

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.

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.
And a big no does this in anyway confuse people into “worshiping Mary”
We are allowed to say a prayer according to what we believe. Besides, this is under private revelation, isnt it?
No it is not. Mary’s divine motherhood was proclaimed at the Council of Ephesus in 431. To repeat to hold your belief is to hold the heresy of Nestoriansim
 
CCC 495 Called in the Gospels “the mother of Jesus”, Mary is acclaimed by Elizabeth, at the prompting of the Spirit and even before the birth of her son, as “the mother of my Lord”. In fact, the One whom she conceived as man by the Holy Spirit, who truly became her Son according to the flesh, was none other than the Father’s eternal Son, the second person of the Holy Trinity. Hence the Church confesses that Mary is truly “Mother of God” ( Theotokos )
That translation of Theotokos into Latin and then into English is a very bad translation, and has misled many in our church.
 
Last edited:
the Council of Ephesus in 431
“mother of god” = “mother of the divine”

“Mary Mother of God” = “Mary Mother of Jesus Divinity”

which is wrong according to that same council.
To repeat to hold your belief is to hold the heresy of Nestoriansim
Just simply because you know the condemnations, it does not mean you can automatically conclude “what is” from “what’s not”.

Our bible knowledge is still more useful & edifying (because the bible gives inderstanding of “what is”), as being compared to the knowlege about condemnations by those councils, who only gives expert knowledge about “what’s not”.
 
Last edited:
A good translation should correctly & accurately represent the theology behind it.

In this case, Theotokos has been utterly misrepresented into bad translation that contradict the theology behind it, and this misrepresentation is rather misleading at the very least, and potentially idolatrous for those who fall into Mary Worship.

When I pray Hail Mary, I remove the non-biblical second part, and replace those with “Mary Mother of Jesus pray for us” or something similar.

For example

Hail Mary, Full of Grace
The Lord is with you
Blessed are you among women and
Blessed is the fruit of your womb, Jesus.
Mother Mary, Mother of Jesus, pray for us.

Or

Hail Mary, Full of Grace
The Lord is with you
Blessed are you among women and
Blessed is the fruit of your womb, Jesus.
Mother Mary, thankyou for giving birth to Jesus, The Christ who has saved me.
Mother Mary, please pray for me that I can be a good parent to my children, as you to Jesus.
May my children be as Jesus, the sons and daughters of God.
Amen.
 
Last edited:
If you refuse to use the title Mother of God you are stating the Church is wrong and you are right.
 
There is a difference between Jesus’ body changing into a glorious body and Him having a different body.

John 20:20 confirms Jesus had the same body
27 Then he said to Thomas, `Put your finger here and see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it in my side. Do not doubt but believe.
Eventhough His Glorious Body still carry the signs of His suffering, His Glorious Body is no longer subjected to death as the one Mother Mary carried in her womb.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top