How do I reconcile this doctrine with Aquinas?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jshy
  • Start date Start date
Don’t take me wrong but my “ freedom of speech” becomes babbling nonsense when confronted with Ratzinger to give an example .And I am being simply realistic …😳
Try and read the Cathecism and over 2000 years of wisdom . It is beautiful and beautifully written.
Have a nice day.
 
There is no contradiction. Mary isn’t the mother of divinity . She is the mother of a divine person though ( Jesus ) . Mary is the mother of the divine Jesus . Jesus is divine no matter what . He is both God and man. Mary had the divine God in her womb . She raised God as a mother and took care of him . She is the mother of the divine God man. She is not the source of his divinity though. ( he was God before he was conceived into her womb by the Holy Spirit ) the word was with God and the word was God and the word became flesh and dwelled amongst us …
You also seem to keep inferring that since Mary didn’t give birth to the whole trinity then she can’t be called the mother of God , so not only are you falling into the heresy called Nestorianism but your also falling into Partialism ( saying that only the Godhead is “ God” And each person of the trinity are 1/3rd of God and together they all make up one complete God ) please do yourself a favor and get “Behold your mother” by Tim Staples
And
Watch this ::
 
Last edited:
francisca.chapter3 said:
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”.
Click to expand...
Not sure what you meant but the fact remains that denying the title of Mother of God rejects Jesus being God. To hold this belief is the heresy of Nestoriansim.
 
francisca.chapter3 said:
Even if The Council of Ephesus themselves condemned it.
Click to expand...
I cannot find such a condemnation please provide a link or some evidence.

Twelve Anathemas Proposed by Cyril and accepted by the Council of Ephesus​

  1. If anyone does not confess that Emmanuel is God in truth, and therefore that the holy virgin is the mother of God (for she bore in a fleshly way the Word of God become flesh, let him be anathema .
I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
Click to expand...
20
None of the Anathemas says anything that it condemns mother of the divine. I could find nothing that even mentions it but maybe you can?
It should be pointed out that the Title Mother of God has more to do with Jesus than Mary. it is an affirmation that Jesus is God to deny that Mary is the Mother of God is to deny Jesus is God. Hence a heresy.
 
Last edited:
It is however the same body that Mary carried in her body just glorified. Like the bodies we hopefully will have one day.The correct title meant by the Council for Mary was “The Theotokos”, which translate “The God Bearer”.
The correct title meant by the Council for Mary was “The Theotokos”, which translate “The God Bearer”.
Click to expand...
Theotokos (Greek: Θεοτόκος, Greek pronunciation: [θeoˈtokos]; literally “God-bearer”) is a title of Mary, mother of Jesus, used especially in Eastern Christianity.The usual Latin translations, Dei Genitrix or Deipara (approximately “parent (fem.) of God”), are “Mother of God” or “God-bearer”.
University of Dayton

Meaning of Theotokos​

Q: What is the meaning of Mary’s title: Theotokos ?A:* Theotokos derives from the Greek terms: Theos / ‘God’; and tiktein / ‘to give birth’. Mary is the Theotokos , the one who gave birth to God. This single word sums up the meaning of Luke’s phrase: ‘Mother of the Lord’ (Lk 1:43) and represents a counterpoint to John’s teaching that the ‘Word was made flesh’ (Jn 1:14). Usually the term is translated into English as ‘Mother of God’. However, Greek-speaking Christians also used the equivalent Meter Theiou . The latter form offers a more comprehensive vision of Mary’s motherhood in line with a personalist point of view.

The title, Mother of God, seems to have first been used in liturgical and devotional practice by Christians in Egypt. It appears in an ancient prayer, Sub Tuum Praesidium which dates back to the third century. There was some controversy about the use of this title since the pagan goddess, Isis, was referred to as Mother of God. However, there are radical differences between the myths about divine births to pagan goddesses (e.g. Isis, mother of Horus) and the gospel accounts of Jesus’ incarnation in Mary. For example, the Gospels portray Jesus as conceived by Mary in Spirit while pagan myths portray the conception of gods in passion and removed from the mysterious destiny of the Incarnation.

Nevertheless, the title, Mother of God, was used in an Alexandrian creedal formula. When challenged in 322, Patriarch Peter of Alexandria defended its legitimacy. Use of the title, Theotokos was formally sanctioned by the Ecumenical Council of Ephesus in 431. The Church declared that both Divine and human natures were united in the person of Jesus, the son of Mary. Hence, Mary may be called Theotokos , since the son she bore according to the flesh, Jesus, is truly one of the Divine persons of the Trinity. This Marian title is really a Christological statement, which affirms that the second person of the Trinity, who was born into history as fully human, is really 'God with us
 
Last edited:
I think He or She is referring to this : Council of EPHESUS (3rd Ecumenical) June 22 - September 431

1st session of the Cyrillians, June 22, 431.

LA DS 250-251
b) 2. letter from Nestorius to Cyril

The union of natures in Christ

251d(Chap. 6) … In all places of divine Scripture, when it mentions the economy of the Lord, the generation and the Passion which are presented are not those of the divinity, but of the humanity of Christ , so that the Blessed Virgin should be called by a more exact denomination mother of Christ and not Mother of God. Listen also to these words of the Gospel which proclaim: “Book of the generation of Jesus Christ, it is said, son of David, son of Abraham” Mt 1,1 It is therefore clear that the Word God was not son of David. Please learn another testimony: “Jacob begot Joseph the husband of Mary, from whom was begotten Jesus who is called Christ” Mt 1,16 Examine yet another voice which testifies to us: " This is the generation of Jesus Christ: As his mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, she found herself pregnant by the operation of the Holy Spirit "Mt 1,18. Who would suppose that the divinity of the only Son was a creature of the Spirit? And what to say about this word: “The mother of Jesus was there” Jn 2,1. And again: “With Mary the mother of Jesus” Ac 1,14, and “What was begotten in her comes from the Holy Spirit” Mt 1,20 and: "Take the child and his mother and flee to the 'Egypt "Mt 2,13 and:
About his Son who was born of the race of David according to the flesh “Rom 1,3 and again about the Passion:” God, having sent his Son in a likeness to the flesh of sin and because of sin , condemned Sin in the flesh “Rom 8,3 and again:” Christ died for our sins “1Co 15,3 and:” Christ suffered in his flesh “1P 4,1, and:” This is “not my divinity, but” my body broken for you "1Co 11:24.
 
251E

(Chap. 7) And as an infinity of other voices testify to the human race that one should not look at the divinity of the Son as recent or as susceptible of bodily suffering, but indeed the flesh united to the nature of the divinity (d 'where does it happen that Christ calls himself Lord of David and his son: “What is your feeling, he said,” on Christ? Whose son is he? “They say to him:” of David. "Jesus Jesus answered them: “How therefore David, under the action of the Spirit calls him Lord, saying: the Lord said to my Lord: Sit at my right hand” Mt 22,42-44, in the thought that he is totally the son of David according to the flesh, but Lord of David according to the divinity), it is good and in accordance with the evangelical tradition to confess that the body is the Temple of the divinity of the Son and a Temple united according to a supreme and divine conjunction, so that the nature of the divinity appropriates what belongs to this Temple; but in the name of this appropriation, to attribute to the Word to the properties of the joint flesh, I mean the generation, the suffering and the mortality, it is the fact, brother, of a thought or lost by the Greeks, or sick of the madness of Apollinaire, Arius and the other heresies, or rather it is something more serious than these. Because of all necessity those who let themselves be carried away by the word “appropriation” will have to make the God Word to breastfeeding, because of the appropriation, make him participate in the progressive growth and the fear at the time of the Passion and put him in need of the assistance of an angel. And I pass over in silence circumcision, sacrifice, sweat, hunger, all things which, attached to the flesh, are adorable as having happened because of us, but which, if they are attributed to the divinity, are false and cause for us, as slanderers, of a just condemnation.
 
But he or she is confusing this with a contradiction when the point of that document is to show that Jesus was also Human so while we was suffering it was his human side not the divine side . Because his divinity did not come from Mary even though she gave birth to a divine person and was the mother of God .

Council of EPHESUS (3rd Ecumenical) June 22 - September 431

1st session of the Cyrillians, June 22, 431.

LA DS 250-251
b) 2. letter from Nestorius to Cyril

The union of natures in Christ

251d(Chap. 6) … In all places of divine Scripture, when it mentions the economy of the Lord, the generation and the Passion which are presented are not those of the divinity, but of the humanity of Christ , so that the Blessed Virgin should be called by a more exact denomination mother of Christ and not Mother of God. Listen also to these words of the Gospel which proclaim: “Book of the generation of Jesus Christ, it is said, son of David, son of Abraham” Mt 1,1 It is therefore clear that the Word God was not son of David. Please learn another testimony: “Jacob begot Joseph the husband of Mary, from whom was begotten Jesus who is called Christ” Mt 1,16 Examine yet another voice which testifies to us: " This is the generation of Jesus Christ: As his mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, she found herself pregnant by the operation of the Holy Spirit "Mt 1,18. Who would suppose that the divinity of the only Son was a creature of the Spirit? And what to say about this word: “The mother of Jesus was there” Jn 2,1. And again: “With Mary the mother of Jesus” Ac 1,14, and “What was begotten in her comes from the Holy Spirit” Mt 1,20 and: "Take the child and his mother and flee to the 'Egypt "Mt 2,13 and:
About his Son who was born of the race of David according to the flesh “Rom 1,3 and again about the Passion:” God, having sent his Son in a likeness to the flesh of sin and because of sin , condemned Sin in the flesh “Rom 8,3 and again:” Christ died for our sins “1Co 15,3 and:” Christ suffered in his flesh “1P 4,1, and:” This is “not my divinity, but” my body broken for you "1Co 11:24.

COUNCIL OF EPHESUS 431 - Ecumenical III (against the Nestorians)

The Anathemas of the Chapter of Cyril * (against Nestorius) *

252 Dz 113 Can. 1. If anyone does not confess that God is truly Emmanuel, and that on this account the Holy Virgin is the Mother of God (for according to the flesh she gave birth to the Word of God become flesh by birth), let him be anathema.
 
There is no contradiction , read all my posts to HOPE above . … what the council is saying in 251D is not that Mary is not the mother of God and should never be called such ( because on 251” last picture I posted “ and on 252 they affirm that se is the mother of God infallibly ) But the point they make In 251D is that whenever scripture is referring to Jesus’s suffering or Him being born or such this is expressing the context of his human nature and not his divine nature therefore in those contexts scripture called Mary the mother of the Lord or Christ ( instead of God ) to express that he took on the form of a servant and has a human nature and that he was God before Mary gave birth to him . ! So it’s not focusing On just the divine Nature of the person but Jesus as A WHOLE PERSON who Has two natures ( fully God and fully human) that’s how I take this, because Jesus is God + man :

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.) (Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.) (Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.) (Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.) (Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
Last edited:
Jshy said:
I think He or She is referring to this : Council of EPHESUS (3rd Ecumenical) June 22 - September 431
Click to expand...
You are probably right and you rightly pointed out the correct way to look at. Her claim however is that the council condemned calling Mary mother of the divine which is not there. Please correct me if I am wrong but what you posted wasn’t the conclusion but the discussion. What was accepted by the council was That Jesus is God and therefore Mary is the mother of God.
 
As I have posted before, the removal of “incarnate” from the “God incarnate” makes big theological difference.

The term “mother of God” has created a nuance (at least for the lay people like me) as if Mary is the mother of the whole Holy Trinity (even if unspoken explicitly), when actually, theologially, it is not intended to be understood in this manner.

The expression “mother of God” makes Mary motherhood as if more “powerful” than the true meaning of the theology behind it.
 
Last edited:
francisca.chapter3 said:
As I have posted before, the removal of “incarnate” from the “God incarnate” makes big theological difference.

The term “mother of God” has created a nuance (at least for the lay people like me) as if Mary is the mother of the whole Holy Trinity (even if unspoken explicitly ), when actually, theologially, it is not intended to be understood in this manner.

The expression “mother of God” makes Mary motherhood as if more “powerful” than the true meaning of the theology behind it.
Click to expand...
Church doctrine states that Mary is truly Mother of God.
I believe the Church trumps any opinion you have.
 
It can be improved by way of improving Theotokos translation in our Hail Mary prayer.

It will lessen the possibility of people being mislead and and potential causes Mary Worship.
 
Last edited:
francisca.chapter3 said:
It can be improved by way of improving Theotokos translation in our Hail Mary prayer.

It will lessen the possibility of people being mislead and and potential causes Mary Worship.
Click to expand...
Nobody should do what you have done. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the wording of the Hail Mary prayer.
Stop telling us what we have to do when the Church disagrees with you. It clearly states Mary is truly Mother of God.
We listen to the Church. We do not listen to you.
 
francisca.chapter3 said:
Theologically, the terms “Mother of God”, “Mother of Incarnate God” (and its variants) should not be taken to imply that Mary is the source of the divine nature of Jesus, who existed with the Father from all eternity .[14][15]

Within the Orthodox and Catholic tradition, Mother of God has not been understood, referring to Mary as Mother of God from eternity — that is, as Mother of God the Father — but only with reference to the birth of Jesus, that is, the [Incarnation]
Click to expand...
We already explained this. I have already told you and showed you the church teachings that Mary is not the source of his divinity . Every Christians knows this… Jesus was God before he was born as a man from the womb. The word became flesh but was with God and was God from the beginning of time … how many times do I have to repeat this. No Catholic ever says Mary is the source of divinity . She is the source of his human body but Jesus is a divine person and she raised him and gave birth to him ( she is the mother of God ) I showed you the infallible church teachings so I don’t care whatever you post… the church has spoken infallibly . If you say she isn’t the mother of God then your anathema . Jesus is fully God and fully man… Mary gave birth to God incarnate . Who is fully God . You can say that Mary is the mother of God incarnate if you want, or mother of Christ If you prefer but you can’t say there is something wrong With saying she is the mother of God … because then that’s having a problem with Jesus being called God. Jesus is God and if Mary is the mother of Jesus then she is the mother of God … the second person of the trinity is God no less than the Holy Spirit or the Father. The only difference between the three is that the Father is the source of them all who eternally begotten his son Jesus and the Holy Spirit proceeds from the father through the son ( or from the father and the son ) filoque… that’s the only different between the persons… but Jesus is just as much God as the father is and the Holy Spirit the same . … that and the fact that Jesus has a additional nature which is fully man as well. He took the form of a servant to the father in the flesh . And our good Shepard.
 
Last edited:
No one will be mislead . That’s why we have a church to teach us … and if someone actually thinks that Mary is the source of Gods divinity then they clearly are not actually listening or reading the church’s documents and catechism . So clearly they are not real Catholics. . So that whole statement is pretty much Irrelevant… people can start saying” well mass shouldn’t be called a sacrifice because Christ was sacrificed once and for all and it confuses people when we say it’s a sacrifice , therefore we should just say it’s a continued offering but not a sacrifice of Christ “ That’s basically the same logic your using. You forget though that we have a living teaching authority that can correct us and guide us . If you actually follow church teachings and listen and ask questions then you won’t be misguided . And a simple reading from the catechism can show you this . If your not even reading that then your not putting in effort to learn and that’s your fault ( not talking about you personally but generally anyone who is that lazy that they rather just be mislead so easily instead of just reading the catechism )… I mean clearly you read the documents and know what we are talking about , and in order for you to make the claims you do then you have to know what the church teaches , so why even try to simplify things for the sake of confusion when you research it all anyways? That right there refutes your whole claim that we need to over simplify things for the sake of confusion or else we will be mislead … we won’t be mislead because you can see I just showed you what the church teaches… simple study and basic knowledge shows that the Catholic Church doesn’t think Mary is the source of divinity . So there is no reason to try to modify what the church has infallibly stated already and has defended and taught In great lengths … your trying to do the work for the church that is simply already right there in front of Catholics faces… your trying to give people a excuse to be lazy and not study what the church believes and instead rather just change terminology so people don’t get misguided . But while doing this your causing confusion for Catholics instead … and as I have shown , we have a church that guides people And have explained what we believed We don’t have to worry about All that stuff .
 
Last edited:
Jshy said:
if someone actually thinks that Mary is the source of Gods divinity then they clearly are not actually listening or reading the church’s documents and catechism . So clearly they are not real Catholics.
Click to expand...
Those documents are too confusing for many.

Even reading it from wikipedia is hard.

Reading the bible is much much easier for me.

Btw, thankyou so much for your answering my questions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top