N
Neithan
Guest
Since God is three Persons, shouldn’t we use ‘they’ instead of ‘he’? Or is it simply a reference to the Father whenever we speak of God in the singular?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
Three Divine Persons but in One God.
It’s a mystery.
It’s a mystery.
J
jrnami
Guest
Human language is limited and couldn’t possibly accurately describe Almighty God. Besides, God isn’t really a male. Jesus of course was a male, but refering to God as ‘he’ doesn’t literally mean God is a male.
D
drforjc
Guest
Yet the entire Judaeo-Christian usage, both in scripture and tradition, constantly refers to God using male pronouns. Jesus’ constant references to his “Father” completely underscore this.Human language is limited and couldn’t possibly accurately describe Almighty God. Besides, God isn’t really a male. Jesus of course was a male, but refering to God as ‘he’ doesn’t literally mean God is a male.
To change this would be so drastic as to constitute a complete rupture with received tradition and would endanger the faith “delivered once for all to the saints.”
D
Derrickdcosta
Guest
A short point made in the book “THE APOSTLES CREED BY MICHAEL MÜLLER, C.SS.R.” which shows somewhat the reasons why Catholics refer to God as Father, and why this title has so much more dignity than “Lord” for instance.Human language is limited and couldn’t possibly accurately describe Almighty God. Besides, God isn’t really a male. Jesus of course was a male, but refering to God as ‘he’ doesn’t literally mean God is a male.
**Why is the first person called Father ? **
***Because, from all eternity, he begets a Son, who is equal to Him in all things, and who is called the Word, the Wisdom of God. ***
The first person of the Holy Trinity is called God the Father. What we consider and admire in a father is, as has already been said, his great yearning to communicate himself and all his goods, as far as possible, to his children. This yearning of communicating himself and all his goods in God the Father is infinite, it is essential to his nature ; for God is infinite love. Love, however, culminates in the reproduction of itself, that is, of generating its own image.
The first person in God being Father, eternally begets, as such another self, who is his Son, his most perfect image. He, together with his Son, sends forth a third self, proceeding from both, who is their reciprocal love, the Holy Ghost; so that the one divine Essence is quite the same in each of the three divine persons. ***Hence it is something far greater in God to be Father than to be Lord : for, as Father, he generates his Son, who is equal to himself; whilst, as Lord, he has created the universe, which is infinitely less than himself. ***
C
cpayne
Guest
In Indo-European languages, “He” denotes personality. “He” is opposed to “it,” not opposed to “she.” We are saying God is personal in nature, as opposed to being a “thing.”
Also singular in nature, as has already been pointed out. One God, manifest in three Persons.
Also singular in nature, as has already been pointed out. One God, manifest in three Persons.
M
mariam1976
Guest
this is true…God isn’t really a male. Jesus of course was a male, but refering to God as ‘he’ doesn’t literally mean God is a male.
check out genesis
*27So God created humankind in his image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them. ***
O
Orionthehunter
Guest
it is a matter of context. The posts below are also correct. But when trying to confine and define an infinite God using finite words of our invention, we are doomed to fall short. Keep in mind that God is not His name. It is only a description of the I AM.
This being said. It is tradition to use “He” for all persons of the Trinity. God the Father as a he because He chose to reveal himself as Father. Jesus the Son for obvious reasons. And, cpayne explains it with regard to the Holy Spirit.
When referring to the Trinity as one God, He is proper as described by cpayne. However, there is context where “They” and other derivatives of the plural is appropriate. This is when we are referring to each person together. Read Chapter 18 of Genesis when the Trinity appeared to Abraham. Scripture refers to the Lord as “them”, “yourselves”, and “they”.
This being said. It is tradition to use “He” for all persons of the Trinity. God the Father as a he because He chose to reveal himself as Father. Jesus the Son for obvious reasons. And, cpayne explains it with regard to the Holy Spirit.
When referring to the Trinity as one God, He is proper as described by cpayne. However, there is context where “They” and other derivatives of the plural is appropriate. This is when we are referring to each person together. Read Chapter 18 of Genesis when the Trinity appeared to Abraham. Scripture refers to the Lord as “them”, “yourselves”, and “they”.
J
John_Hiner
Guest
The sign of the cross entails the same unity of three: In THE name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit: one name, three persons.
This phrase is from the mouth of the Savior: “Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Matthew 28:19 (Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition.)
Pax Christi vobiscum.
John Hiner
This phrase is from the mouth of the Savior: “Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Matthew 28:19 (Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition.)
Pax Christi vobiscum.
John Hiner
D
Derrickdcosta
Guest
Another good quote from the Ratzinger Report”: ***“Christianity is not a philosophical speculation; it is not a construction of our mind. Christianity is not ‘our’ work; it is a Revelation; it is a message that has been consigned to us, and we have no right to reconstruct it as we like or choose. Consequently, we are not authorized to change the Our Father into an Our Mother: the symbolism employed by Jesus is irreversible; it is based on the same Man-God relationship he came to reveal to us.” ***this is true…
check out genesis
*27So God created humankind in his image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them. ***
And another quote from God the Father, the Trinity and Vertical Inclusive Language-by James A. Urda and Bruce Sabalaskey
"Some say a patriarchal society was the reason for a masculine Judeo-Christian God; yet, Israel’s pre-existing and co-existing pagan neighbors (e.g. Canaanites, Greeks, Egyptians, and Persians) had prominent goddesses and priestesses. They were quite at-home with male and female religious images, although not in economics, politics, or in the military. Why didn’t God make use of this pre-existing religious mindset by using the Mother/She title in revelation to the emerging Israel or to the Apostles? Indeed, Israel not using feminine personal names and pronouns for deity was counter-cultural. "
To be frank I imagine that God was blessing His chosen people with a true conception of Him. Perhaps the Church should define this issue to avoid contraversy and scandal. God bless
D
Derrickdcosta
Guest
One more good meditation on the concept of God as Father comes from The Summa of St. Thomas Aquinas Part I, 33 Article 2 which states that “It is said (Psalm 88:27): “He shall cry out to me: Thou art my Father.” I answer that, “The proper name of any person signifies that whereby the person is distinguished from all other persons. For as body and soul belong to the nature of man, so to the** concept** of this particular man belong this particular soul and this particular body; and by these is this particular man distinguished from all other men. Now it is paternity which distinguishes the person of the Father from all other persons. Hence this name **“Father,” **whereby paternity is signified, is the proper name of the person of the Father”
• And in Article 3 of the Summa, St Thomas Aquinas continues as though he has heard the echoes of the issues of our day, declaring that ***God is Father in the most perfect manner conceivable ***“Now it is manifest from the foregoing (27, 2; 28, 4), that the perfect idea of paternity and filiation is to be found in God the Father, and in God the Son, because one is the nature and glory of the Father and the Son. But in the creature, filiation is found in relation to God, not in a perfect manner, since the Creator and the creature have not the same nature; but by way of a certain likeness, which is the more perfect the nearer we approach to the true idea of filiation. For God is called the Father of some creatures, by reason only of a trace, for instance of irrational creatures, according to Job 38:28: “Who is the father of the rain? or who begot the drops of dew?” Of some, namely, the rational creature (He is the Father), by reason of the likeness of His image, according to Dt. 32:6: “Is He not thy Father, who possessed, and made, and created thee?” And of others He is the Father by similitude of grace, and these are also called adoptive sons, as ordained to the heritage of eternal glory by the gift of grace which they have received, according to Rm. 8:16,17: “The Spirit Himself gives testimony to our spirit that we are the sons of God; and if sons, heirs also.” Lastly, He is the Father of others by similitude of glory, forasmuch as they have obtained possession of the heritage of glory, according to Rm. 5:2: “We glory in the hope of the glory of the sons of God.” Therefore it is plain that “paternity” is applied to God first, as importing regard of one Person to another Person, before it imports the regard of God to creatures.”
Perhaps modern society has too many problems in understanding God because we may not in all cases have ideal earthly fathers. But God is a perfect father in ways we may never in this life fully understand.
God bless
• And in Article 3 of the Summa, St Thomas Aquinas continues as though he has heard the echoes of the issues of our day, declaring that ***God is Father in the most perfect manner conceivable ***“Now it is manifest from the foregoing (27, 2; 28, 4), that the perfect idea of paternity and filiation is to be found in God the Father, and in God the Son, because one is the nature and glory of the Father and the Son. But in the creature, filiation is found in relation to God, not in a perfect manner, since the Creator and the creature have not the same nature; but by way of a certain likeness, which is the more perfect the nearer we approach to the true idea of filiation. For God is called the Father of some creatures, by reason only of a trace, for instance of irrational creatures, according to Job 38:28: “Who is the father of the rain? or who begot the drops of dew?” Of some, namely, the rational creature (He is the Father), by reason of the likeness of His image, according to Dt. 32:6: “Is He not thy Father, who possessed, and made, and created thee?” And of others He is the Father by similitude of grace, and these are also called adoptive sons, as ordained to the heritage of eternal glory by the gift of grace which they have received, according to Rm. 8:16,17: “The Spirit Himself gives testimony to our spirit that we are the sons of God; and if sons, heirs also.” Lastly, He is the Father of others by similitude of glory, forasmuch as they have obtained possession of the heritage of glory, according to Rm. 5:2: “We glory in the hope of the glory of the sons of God.” Therefore it is plain that “paternity” is applied to God first, as importing regard of one Person to another Person, before it imports the regard of God to creatures.”
Perhaps modern society has too many problems in understanding God because we may not in all cases have ideal earthly fathers. But God is a perfect father in ways we may never in this life fully understand.
God bless
C
chevalier
Guest
Not to be picky, but the paternity of Jesus is denoted in Isaiah by Eternal Father as one of the names of Jesus along with Prince of Peace or Emmanuel. Not sure if I’ve ever come across a reference to the Holy Spirit as a father, though.
J
John_Hiner
Guest
Sometimes this strikes me as ironic, since the Holy Spirit is the Person of the Trinity credited with making the Virgin Mary pregnant.Not to be picky, but the paternity of Jesus is denoted in Isaiah by Eternal Father as one of the names of Jesus along with Prince of Peace or Emmanuel. Not sure if I’ve ever come across a reference to the Holy Spirit as a father, though.
Pax.
John Hiner
A
AndyF
Guest
He is.Since God is three Persons, shouldn’t we use ‘they’ instead of ‘he’? Or is it simply a reference to the Father whenever we speak of God in the singular?
Q. Who should I say sent me?
A. You say “I am sent me”.
One person singular.
AndyF
Z
Zirconia
Guest
But Jesus is God…Human language is limited and couldn’t possibly accurately describe Almighty God. Besides, God isn’t really a male. Jesus of course was a male, but refering to God as ‘he’ doesn’t literally mean God is a male.
Jesus is also a literal male, and while the other two Persons might not be, They seem to always use masculine imagery to describe Themselves.
It sure sounds like God is male, or at the very least identifies much more closely with that half of humanity.
Zirconia
C
cpayne
Guest
One reason God may have revealed Himself as male (besides the linguistic reasons already given) is that He was revealing Himself to the Jews as transcendent, separate from the creation they were always tempted to worship. In the common act of procreating children, mothers are much more “identified” with their creation than fathers are. Fathers in that sense are separate or “transcendent” from their creation, while the mothers are “identified” with their creation. God as “He” seems more like a transcendent Creator than like a “Mother Earth,” identified with her creation.But Jesus is God…
Jesus is also a literal male, and while the other two Persons might not be, They seem to always use masculine imagery to describe Themselves.
It sure sounds like God is male, or at the very least identifies much more closely with that half of humanity.
Zirconia
J
jrnami
Guest
I think this is probably very true.One reason God may have revealed Himself as male (besides the linguistic reasons already given) is that He was revealing Himself to the Jews as transcendent, separate from the creation they were always tempted to worship. In the common act of procreating children, mothers are much more “identified” with their creation than fathers are. Fathers in that sense are separate or “transcendent” from their creation, while the mothers are “identified” with their creation. God as “He” seems more like a transcendent Creator than like a “Mother Earth,” identified with her creation.
G
Greg27
Guest
Strictly speaking, we need to be careful when talking about God.
Catholic philosophers and theologians have generally divided theology or talk about God into two approaches; the way of eminence (saying positive things about God) or the way of negation (denying certain things of God).
St Thomas said we can talk about God using the perfections we find in creatures and predicating these perfections on God himself, provided we understand these perfections exist in a more ‘eminent’ (in fact at an infinitely higher level) than they do in any creature. For example, if we call a rainbow beautiful, and we say God is beautiful, then God is infinitely more beautiful than a rainbow is, but God is not a rainbow.
However St Thomas also said the truest knowledge we can have of God in this life is in fact to know he is completely incomprehensible and unknowable, at least in ‘what’ he is, or the nature of the divine essence. In this sense he agrees a lot with Eastern Christian theology, which says only negative statements about God (i.e. God is not this or God is above this) are the truest, i.e. God is not a body, God is not corporeal, God is not a creature, or God is above Being, Goodness, Truth, Life or any other category or property of name as we understand it. Catholic tradition affirms both approaches to God as correct and valid, though generally in dogmatic theology or philosophical theology the ‘way of eminence’ is most important, while the negative approach is strongest in mystical or contemplative theology.
Catholic tradition affirms God is ‘He’ not because God is a man in his own nature, but because this is how scripture has referred to him. This is also because God became a man (Jesus) in the incarnation, not a woman. This does not mean strictly speaking we can’t say God is like a mother, i.e. in terms of ‘birthing’ creation or in caring for creation or for his people like a loving mother. It is very important to emphasize God’s inner nature or essence is not ‘gendered’ or cut up in any way; God is One.
But, tradition also affirms God’s being or nature exists as three different persons; Father, Son and Holy Spirit. As St Basil said though, this is the most accurate way we can describe who God is in our language given what has been revealed to us by scripture, and it is a mystery which transcends rational comprehension. These names of God are critical to all Christian understanding as they show us Who God is, and to the limit we can understand, what God is; without of course telling us exactly what God’s transcendant essence in itself is. The three persons subsisting in one nature show us God exists as infinite and perfect love which is perfectly one and three at the same time, a living reality of goodness and infinite beauty which only wishes to share its own goodness. But at the same time God in the Trinity is also an infinite mystery no mind, human or angelic (or any other created creature in the cosmos) could ever understand.
It is important then for Christians to worship God with abundant words of thanks and praise for his beauty, goodness, love, justice and mercy, but at the same time it is also essential to be silent before the awesome majesty and infinite mystery of God, as much beautiful contemplative prayer does. In approaching God we worship the one who desires communion with us, to bring us to him in an intimate relationship, like married spouses, but also at the same time one who is above and beyond any concept, idea or image we could possibly form to him. The best Christian philosophy and theology about God incorporates both approaches, equally balanced.
Catholic philosophers and theologians have generally divided theology or talk about God into two approaches; the way of eminence (saying positive things about God) or the way of negation (denying certain things of God).
St Thomas said we can talk about God using the perfections we find in creatures and predicating these perfections on God himself, provided we understand these perfections exist in a more ‘eminent’ (in fact at an infinitely higher level) than they do in any creature. For example, if we call a rainbow beautiful, and we say God is beautiful, then God is infinitely more beautiful than a rainbow is, but God is not a rainbow.
However St Thomas also said the truest knowledge we can have of God in this life is in fact to know he is completely incomprehensible and unknowable, at least in ‘what’ he is, or the nature of the divine essence. In this sense he agrees a lot with Eastern Christian theology, which says only negative statements about God (i.e. God is not this or God is above this) are the truest, i.e. God is not a body, God is not corporeal, God is not a creature, or God is above Being, Goodness, Truth, Life or any other category or property of name as we understand it. Catholic tradition affirms both approaches to God as correct and valid, though generally in dogmatic theology or philosophical theology the ‘way of eminence’ is most important, while the negative approach is strongest in mystical or contemplative theology.
Catholic tradition affirms God is ‘He’ not because God is a man in his own nature, but because this is how scripture has referred to him. This is also because God became a man (Jesus) in the incarnation, not a woman. This does not mean strictly speaking we can’t say God is like a mother, i.e. in terms of ‘birthing’ creation or in caring for creation or for his people like a loving mother. It is very important to emphasize God’s inner nature or essence is not ‘gendered’ or cut up in any way; God is One.
But, tradition also affirms God’s being or nature exists as three different persons; Father, Son and Holy Spirit. As St Basil said though, this is the most accurate way we can describe who God is in our language given what has been revealed to us by scripture, and it is a mystery which transcends rational comprehension. These names of God are critical to all Christian understanding as they show us Who God is, and to the limit we can understand, what God is; without of course telling us exactly what God’s transcendant essence in itself is. The three persons subsisting in one nature show us God exists as infinite and perfect love which is perfectly one and three at the same time, a living reality of goodness and infinite beauty which only wishes to share its own goodness. But at the same time God in the Trinity is also an infinite mystery no mind, human or angelic (or any other created creature in the cosmos) could ever understand.
It is important then for Christians to worship God with abundant words of thanks and praise for his beauty, goodness, love, justice and mercy, but at the same time it is also essential to be silent before the awesome majesty and infinite mystery of God, as much beautiful contemplative prayer does. In approaching God we worship the one who desires communion with us, to bring us to him in an intimate relationship, like married spouses, but also at the same time one who is above and beyond any concept, idea or image we could possibly form to him. The best Christian philosophy and theology about God incorporates both approaches, equally balanced.
C
CatholismRox
Guest
It is a mystery indeed. He is proper though.
J
John_Hiner
Guest
It may be that God is called Father because He is male in His personality and thinking in a fundamental way. There are differences in the male and female way of thinking and of having relationships.
What is the basis for people asserting that God is neither male nor female? I have heard it asserted, but no one has ever cited a basis for asserting this. I am not saying that there is no such basis, but I have not seen it.
Has anyone ever read the book “Brain Sex,” and its discussion of the various differences in male and female perception and thinking? Is there a reason to think that these differences are not important in considering the persons of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit?
Pax Christi tecum.
John Hiner
What is the basis for people asserting that God is neither male nor female? I have heard it asserted, but no one has ever cited a basis for asserting this. I am not saying that there is no such basis, but I have not seen it.
Has anyone ever read the book “Brain Sex,” and its discussion of the various differences in male and female perception and thinking? Is there a reason to think that these differences are not important in considering the persons of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit?
Pax Christi tecum.
John Hiner
- Status
- Not open for further replies.