C
coptsoldier
Guest
The quote you referenced wasnt saying that st mary was only the mother of his humanity, but rather combatting that heresy.
- Status
A
andrewstx
Guest
Excellent then!
K
KjetilK
Guest
Did you read my post? Where would you get the impression that I disagree?
C
clem456
Guest
Jesus is a **divine person **with both human and divine nature. True God and true man, but his personhood is divine.
vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p122a3p1.htm
…
vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p122a3p1.htm
…
C
clem456
Guest
Perhaps most beneficial for us to ponder:
God, who creates all things, and can do as he wills in all things,
entrusts and espouses himself to a poor Jewish woman, in order that he might accomplish our way to salvation. He gives himself fully to us through her.
For us to know Christ, it is essential to know this woman whom God himself created and chose as the mold for his own flesh.
God, who creates all things, and can do as he wills in all things,
entrusts and espouses himself to a poor Jewish woman, in order that he might accomplish our way to salvation. He gives himself fully to us through her.
For us to know Christ, it is essential to know this woman whom God himself created and chose as the mold for his own flesh.
C
Chatter163
Guest
Something important to remember is that the Church has officially sanctioned the Litany of Loreto for universal public use. Thus, one knows that it is completely orthodox. So rather than asking if the Church has promulgated something heretical, the proper question to ask is how may I may understand the passage in question, according to the mind of the Church?
C
clem456
Guest
Yes, and a good way to understand is to ask our Mother for guidance. To hear as she hears, to be obedient as she is, to trust in her guidance. She cannot lead us astray, she always points us to the truth, which is her son.
S
SyroMalankara
Guest
“She who bore the Creator, of creatures in Bethlehem, lived in a cave in poverty” - part of the Syriac Church’s (Catholic and Orthodox) Sunday morning prayer
There are many more phrases like this in the Hymns of St. Ephrem.
There are many more phrases like this in the Hymns of St. Ephrem.
A
andrewstx
Guest
Sorry Fr. K.
I have had a stroke and my concentration and understanding skills are not what they were.
R
rfgoons
Guest
Hi this is my first post. I view this in a practical way. Jesus Christ is true God and true man. He is the Word that became flesh, to dwell with us and be our Lord and Savior. To do that, He must have a human mother to fulfill the Gospel’s promise. Thus, the Blessed Virgin Mary became His mother. She is thus the mother of God incarnate. We call her mother of God to describe her role in God’s plan. She is not God but the mother of God. By analogy, an engineer whose mother is not an engineer can be aptly described in the community as mother of an engineer. A mother of a lawyer is often identified in a locality as a mother of a lawyer although such mother is not a lawyer. Therefore, the Blessed Virgin Mary is, for all practicality, be best described as the mother of God although she is not God. I hope I am not off tangent on this. If I am, I apologize.
G
GangGreen
Guest
Someone can spend their entire lives pondering the Trinity, but even then we still won’t truly understand it. 
T
Tom_Baum
Guest
If Jesus is True God and True Man, than the “True Man” part, so to speak, had to come into being at some time or He would not be True Man, when do you think that it was?
If you do not think that the True Man, so to speak, came into being than wouldn’t that make Jesus True God and True God?
As far as “worded poorly”, why would you say that?
As far as “As it stands it is highly unorthodox”, isn’t it orthodox to refer to Jesus as True God and True Man?
T
Tom_Baum
Guest
Jesus’s human nature came into existence at some point, no matter how fancy people want to dance around something that they can NOT fully understand.
Jesus is either True God and True Man or He isn’t, I happen to believe that He is and therefore His human nature came into existence, just as my human nature and everyone else’s came into existence.
Mary is 100% Jesus’s Mom just as my Mom is 100% my Mom and everyone else’s Mom is 100% their Mom.
S
SyroMalankara
Guest
It’s more proper to say God the Word or the Son, incarnated or became incarnate, not came into being - His Being is Divine and eternal, and cannot come into being.
T
Tom_Baum
Guest
If the humanity of Jesus did NOT come into being than Jesus is NOT True Man, are you saying that Jeus is “just” True God and True God because that is exactly what you are saying by trying to be “more proper”?
Are you saying that Jesus just appeared to be a Man rather than to actually be a Man?
Seems to me that Jesus referred to Himself as “Son of Man” so many times to get thru our thick skulls that He really was human, not that He just seemed to be human.
Wouldn’t this be considered among some of the first heretical things concerning Jesus, that He was not True God AND True Man?
S
SyroMalankara
Guest
Tom, no one here is saying Jesus is not True God and True Man; but Jesus is a Divine person. You seem to be pushing away Docetism and embracing Nestorianism, another heresy.
T
Tom_Baum
Guest
I am saying very simply that the Incarnation is God becoming One of us in the humanity of Jesus and before Mary said YES, the humanity of Jesus did NOT exist.
The Incarnation either did or did not happen at a very specific point in time and space in the history of creation.
Before the Incarnation, God was NOT Incarnate therefore God-Incarnate did not exist but He Who would become God-Incarnate did exist as Who is referred to as the Second Person of the Trinity.
Mary’s YES was when God became Incarnate, if you or anyone else disagrees with this are you saying that Mary had no say in the Incarnation?
I looked up your “theological words”
Nes·to·ri·an: one of a sect of followers of Nestorius who denied the hypostatic union and were represented as maintaining the existence of two distinct persons in Christ.
and
Do·ce·tism:
- an early Christian doctrine that the sufferings of Christ were apparent and not real and that after the crucifixion he appeared in a spiritual body.
- Roman Catholic Church . an ancient heresy asserting that Jesus lacked full humanity.
I am NOT a theologian, not even close, and as far as “hypostatic union”, all that means to me is that some people come up with a fancy word to make it look like they know something more than the fancy word that they have come up with.
Just as I am 100% from my Dad and 100% from my Mom which makes me 100% me, this is how I look at Jesus in that Jesus the human being, True Man, that was born of Mary was 100% from His Dad and 100% from His Mom which makes Him 100% Him, this is how I “simply” look at it rather than hiding behind fancy sounding theological words that even the theologians don’t know how it came to be but they have come up with a fancy-dancy phrase for it.
I look at Jesus’s birth as being like most other human births, it is Jesus’s conception that I look at differently than any other human conception.
I don’t try to pull the wool over anyone’s eyes and pretend that I understand how this happened and I also don’t use fancy words to make it look like I know more than I do.
Using words like “hypostatic union” to me pretty much tells me that they know no more about how God “achieved” this than me so they hide behind fancy theologically sounding sounds.
And as far as what “Docetism” means, sure seems to me that some on here adhere to what this means or I am misunderstanding what they write.
Was Mary’s YES needed or was Mary just forced into what she did?
I happen to believe that Mary’s YES was indeed needed and without her YES, there would have been no Incarnation, any thoughts concerning Mary’s use of her God-given free will in this matter?
C
clem456
Guest
I’m not sure why you chose my post to go in this direction?
The Church clearly teaches that Christ became incarnate as you say.
Christ, the second divine person of the Trinity, “assumed a human nature” .
I don’t think anyone is disagreeing with you.
vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p122a3p1.htm
S
SyroMalankara
Guest
Tom,
I understand you are not a theologian, but those words - derived from Greek, Latin, Syriac and other sources are rich in meaning and not throw-aways.
Before getting into Mary’s free-will “yes”, let’s stick to the original question and answer clearly; instead of jumping from here to there and all around.
I understand you are not a theologian, but those words - derived from Greek, Latin, Syriac and other sources are rich in meaning and not throw-aways.
Before getting into Mary’s free-will “yes”, let’s stick to the original question and answer clearly; instead of jumping from here to there and all around.
You are correct here and in line with Apostolic teaching.
ok.
Again, this is the Apostolic teaching, yes.
This is also Apostolic teaching and correct
No one disagrees with this, no one Catholic, Orthodox, or mainstream Protestant.
- Status