Archbishop Welby: No Sacrifice too Great to Obey Christ’s Call to Unity

(Vatican Radio) The head of the Anglican Communion, the Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby, said he hopes to “produce a few surprises” with Pope Francis in terms of ecumenical relations between the two churches, but declined to disclose any details.

The archbishop made the comment in an interview with Vatican Radio’s Philippa Hitchen at the 10th Assembly of the World Council of Churches, currently underway in Busan, South Korea.

He also reflected on the challenges and concessions that need to be made for the sake of Christian unity. The longer Christians “exist in different church communities around the world,” he said, “the more our different communities embed their own institutions and put down roots.”

“Perhaps we need to reimagine what it means to look like the church and to surrender some of the things that give us our sense of identity in the cause of Christ,” he said.

The churches need to be sure they are working on the important doctrinal and dogmatic differences between them “in the context of churches and ecclesial communities that say no sacrifice is too great to be obedient to the call of Christ that we may be one,” he said.

Q.: This is your first WCC Assembly. How important do you see the role of the WCC today?

Archbishop Welby: It’s my first experience, so I’m very much here learning. I think the first thing that struck me is the breadth and scale of the church and I think one of the things that the WCC does is bring together every point of the church, many of which disagree quite strongly, but you get a sense of the breadth and the depth and the width of the work of Christ........

“But Mary IS the Mother of God.”

Not only is it not in the Bible, such a phrase infers meaning where none exists. Mary was the mother of the child, Jesus, after the flesh. After the Spirit, Jesus is the Son of God, having no earthly father.

As Jesus grew to adulthood, at some point He assumed the duties of a son to His earthly mother, Mary, apparently because Joseph died (as he is never mentioned after Christ reaches maturity). On the cross He conferred His earthly responsibilities toward His mother to His trusted disciple John, and ONLY John. He said, “Woman, behold your son.” He did not say sons. From then on Mary lived in John’s house. She did not live with Peter, nor James, nor Paul. She lived with John who also outlived all of the other disciples, being the youngest of them.

The title of God is most often used in scripture to refer to the Father or to all three persons of the Godhead simulateously. My point is that Mary IS NOT the mother of God the Father, nor is she mother to God the Holy Spirit. Though Jesus is God in the fullest sense, yet He is not the only person of the Godhead. Therefore, it is accurate to describe Mary as the mother of Jesus, but it is inaccurate to describe her as the mother of God.

This is the simplest of logical fallacies which is the fallacy of division. If there is one black swan in a lake and some white swans also, it would be wrong to say the swans in the lake are black.

Further, Christ existed before Mary. And He was her Lord and Savior. This is the same theological dilema which the pharisees could not comprehend about Christ being the son of David and yet David calling Him “Lord”. (See Matthew 22:41-46.)

I accept the confirmed authority of the apostles and the words that came directly from their lips and preserved for us on the pages of scripture. I reject the self-proclaimed apostolic authority that meets none of the criteria for apostleship specified in scripture by the apostles. Christ commends those who test those who say they are apostles and find them to be liars. (See Revelation 2:2.) Paul defends his apostleship and tells us what the qualifications are which include having seen the risen Christ, having been personally instructed by Him, and having confirming miracles. Such apostles universally condemn the use of idols, yet the Catholic church claims unfounded apostolic authority and claims we should ignore this commandment to supposedly honor Mary by making images of her supposed likeness and bowing to it and making offerings to it and directing our prayers toward it, and invoking blasphemous names such as “mother of God” upon it. No holy angel or apostle ever accepted men bowing to them but all outright forbad it (though Satan saught for Christ to bow to and worship him, and wicked Herod received worship from his audience for which he died).

“Man are you mixed up. If Christ existed before Mary, where was he?”

Wow. Have you ever read the Bible?

Really, now you are just embarrassing yourself. How could anyone who claims any knowledge of the Bible ask what you just asked?

John 1:1
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”

John 6:38
“For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me.”

John 6:62
“What then if you should see the Son of Man ascend where He was before?”

John 8:58
Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.”

John 17:5
“And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.”

Logically:
Mary is the mother of Jesus,
Jesus is God,
therefore Mary is the mother of God the Son.

Your contention is:
Mary is the mother of Jesus,
Jesus is God,
however, Mary is not the mother of God the Son because somehow, God the Son cannot be called God.

The concept of the Trinity is that the three persons are one; co-equal, co-eternal and consubstantial, and each is God, whole and entire.

Therefore, Mary is the mother of God, in the person of the Son, who is God, whole and entire.

I have no objection to describing Mary as having been the mother of Christ, the mother of the Savior, the mother of Jesus, the mother of our Lord, or even the mother of the Son of God. Some of these are used in scripture. Some are not.

However, “Mother of God” is innacruate for the reasons I have already provided.

Further, there is an obvious effort to elevate and exalt Mary in a way she herself would find grievous.

Nowhere did anyone in the Bible bow to Mary or her likeness. When people wanted to bow to the apostles or make offerings to them, the apostles vehemently protested. When John was tempted to prostrate himself before an angel, the angel forbade him from doing so. Being a holy and godly woman, Mary would have done the same if it happened to her.

What did Christ say about the lofty position of His mother?

Mark 3:35
“For whoever does the will of God is My brother and My sister and mother.”

What did Christ say when a listener proclaimed how blessed Mary was?

Luke 11:27-28
“And it happened, as He spoke these things, that a certain woman from the crowd raised her voice and said to Him, ‘Blessed is the womb that bore You, and the breasts which nursed You!’ But He said, ‘Yes rather, blessed are those who hear the word of God and keep it!’”

I answered this in post #24. I told you in post #30 that I had already answered this. What I said in post #24 is:

This is the simplest of logical fallacies which is the fallacy of division. If there is one black swan in a lake and some white swans also, it would be wrong to say the swans in the lake are black.

Your argument for calling Mary the “mother of God” is the logical fallacy of division. Now, you saying the same thing over and over is not going to change that this is a logical fallacy. The sooner you realize this is a simple logical principle and not even subject to debate, the sooner you can move on to some other idea or thought which has not already been refuted.

“There is also an obvious effort to diminish Mary.”

The effort is to exalt Christ. He said that the Law and Prophets “prophecied until John” and then the kingdom of Heaven was preached. Christ said that up until that point (i.e. the new dispensation of the kingdom), no one born of women was greater than John the Baptist.

Matthew 11:11,13
“Assuredly, I say to you, among those born of women there has not risen one greater than John the Baptist; but he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he...For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.”

This means, and it is without logical fallacy, that John the Baptist was greater than Mary, the mother of Christ. Since Mary was born during the dispensation of the Law and Prophets, and she was born by a woman, according to Jesus (not according to my estimation, but as a matter of fact and not opinion), John was greater than Mary. So here is the point... do we exalt John? Did he seek to be exalted? No.

John said this of himself and of Jesus:

“He (i.e. Jesus) must increase, but I must decrease.” (John 3:30) This is what John said when his followers left him to follow Jesus.

This is the mark of greatness and true spirituality. The Bible gives us many great, godly examples to learn from which includes John, Mary, and many, many others. But Christ is without comparison. He is the One Who is to be exalted more and more, and all others decrease because the exaltation and glory all belong to Him.

Matthew 17:1-8
“Now after six days Jesus took Peter, James, and John his brother, led them up on a high mountain by themselves; and He was transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and His clothes became as white as the light. And behold, Moses and Elijah appeared to them, talking with Him. Then Peter answered and said to Jesus, ‘Lord, it is good for us to be here; if You wish, let us make here three tabernacles: one for You, one for Moses, and one for Elijah.’ While he was still speaking, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them; and suddenly a voice came out of the cloud, saying, ‘This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. Hear Him!’ And when the disciples heard it, they fell on their faces and were greatly afraid. But Jesus came and touched them and said, ‘Arise, and do not be afraid.’ When they had lifted up their eyes, they saw no one but Jesus only.”

Peter was briefly tempted to make tents on the mountain where Jesus was transfigured. He thought of making three - one for Christ, one for Moses, and one for Elijah.

But what did God say? And this rebuke was just over tents. God does not want shrines set up for these saints, no matter what great, godly examples they may be. To do so is to detract from the glory of Christ. Moses, Elijah, John the Baptist, John the Apostle, Peter and Mary all have some scripture which tells us about their lives. These are written for us to learn from, not so we can make shrines to them, make images of them to bow toward and pray toward. Unlike these, ALL scripture is about Jesus. This cannot be said of any other man or woman, including Mary.

This was the mindset of John the Baptist, the apostles, the holy angels, and must have been for Mary as well because she was a godly woman. No godly man or woman or holy angel would accept anyone bowing to them because of their glory or virtue. So the Mary (and the image of her supposed likeness) that is bowed to in Catholic owned facilites around the globe is NOT the same Mary of the Bible. The statues of Jesus they bow to are not the same Jesus of the Bible but are some other Jesus (since the true Jesus, the true Son of God taught against idolatry). Now go learn what the scripture means when it says, “he who comes preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached” in 2 Corinthians 11:4.

The sooner you realize this is a simple logical principle and not even subject to debate, the sooner you can move on to some other idea or thought which has not already been refuted.

Sorry for my lack of understanding, but I simply do not follow your logic.

It is true that one cannot assert that, if one swan is black, and other swans are white, then the other swans are black. But I do not see how that negates the assertion that if Mary is the mother of Jesus, and Jesus is God, then Mary is the mother of God. The two assertions do not appear to be analogous.

The fallacy of division logic structure is, if A is true about B, then it is true about b1, b2, and b3.

To apply this logic to Mary as mother would be to say, if Mary is the mother of God the Son, then she is the mother of God the Father and God the Holy Spirit. Just as the white swans are not black, Mary is not the mother of the Father or the Spirit. She is the mother of God the Son.

The structure for the assertion that Mary is the mother of God is the transitive property of equality. That is, if A is true about B, and B is true about C, then A is true about C.

That is to say, if Mary is the mother of Jesus, and Jesus is God, then Mary is the mother of God. To use your example, if a cygnet is the mother of a swan, and the swan is black, then the cygnet is the mother of a black swan.

I understand how A can be true about B but not true about b1, b2, and b3. But I need further understanding on how A cannot be C if A is B and B is C.

“then the cygnet is the mother of a black swan.”

True. Mother of “a” swan. Not mother of all swans or some other logical fallacy.

The Holy Spirit is God. The Father is God. Jesus is God. There are three persons of the One True God.

Mary is not the mother of the Holy Spirit. She is not the mother of the Father. She is the mother of Jesus.

Because she is NOT mother to all of the Godhead, she is NOT the “mother of God”. She is the mother of one person of the Godhead, Jesus.

She is only His mother in relation to His humanity because Jesus became a man (i.e. a human being) at the incarnation. But He existed from eternity past, being Creator of all things, INCLUDING Mary His earthly mother.

Further, after the resurrection Paul explains that we no longer relate to Christ in a merely natural way:

2 Corinthians 5:16
“Therefore, from now on, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know Him thus no longer.”

What does that mean, to have “known Christ after the flesh”?

He is describing familial and human relationships. For example, James, who wrote the book of the Bible which bears his name, was the Lord’s brother. (See Matthew 13:55) Yet, James does not use his familial relationship as the basis of any authority when he writes letters to the believers. (See James 1:1 and Acts 15:13-29.)

It is not the fleshly and human relationship that James or Mary had with Christ that is the most important. It is the spiritual dimension of their relationship. At one time Christ’s brothers, including James, did not even believe on Him. James’s being a family member did not avail him anything until he later received faith. Likewise, Mary, being Christ’s earthly mother would never have availed her of anything apart from the faith and obedience she demonstrated. It was not her earthly bond of motherhood that makes her an example, but the spiritual pattern.

You can go on and on and on seeking to justify calling Mary “mother of God” along with the many other uniquely Catholic abominations of making images in her likeness to bow down to them, to make offerings to them, to invoke her name as a means of forgiveness of sins (as in saying the Rosary), to call upon her name in prayer, making shrines to her, singing praises to her, and endless other offenses against God and Mary, His servant; but in the end you (as everyone) must give account to God for refusing to obey His commandments.

The structure for the assertion that Mary is the mother of God is the transitive property of equality. That is, if A is true about B, and B is true about C, then A is true about C.

After posting #32, I got to thinking that the above is not quite that simple. A is true about b2, that is, Mary is the mother of God the Son. B is God, b1 the Father, b2 the Son, and b3 the Spirit. So the question is, if Mary is the mother of God the Son (b2), can she truly be called the mother of God without also being the mother of the Father and the Spirit?

This is where the mystery of the Trinity comes in to play. God manifests Himself to us in different ways as He so chooses. As the Father, He has made Himself known to us as a voice from heaven, in the burning bush, in a whisper in the wind. As the Son, He has made Himself known to us in the flesh and in appearances after His resurrection. As the Spirit, He has appeared to us as a dove, tongues of fire, and as a breath. Can the Father become flesh? Can the Son appear as a dove? Can the Spirit become a burning bush? I would guess so. Is God whole and complete in each one of these manifestations? In other words, can the bush be called God? Can the living Christ be called God? Can the dove appearing above Jesus be called God. I believe so. In the same way, I believe Jesus at His birth can be called God, and Mary, as the mother of Jesus, can also be called the mother of God.

The Holy Spirit is God. The Father is God. Jesus is God. There are three persons of the One True God.

I am truly trying to understand these things. When God appeared to Moses in the burning bush, was that the same God whose voice was heard from heaven at the baptism of Jesus and at the Transfiguration? In all these appearances, was that not the One True God, the Godhead? When the Holy Spirit descended on the apostles, was that not the One True God, the Godhead? When Jesus performed miracles and forgave sins, was that not the One True God, the Godhead?

I believe it was the same God, whole and entire, manifesting Himself to us in different ways. And it was the same God who lowered Himself to become a human as the son of Mary. Jesus told Phillip that He is in the Father and the Father is in Him, and further, that the Father dwells in Him. The Father and the Son, along with the Holy Spirit are One, and when God appears to us as one of the three persons, all three are within Him. Just so, when Jesus was born of Mary, all three persons were within Him.

“when God appears to us as one of the three persons, all three are within Him. Just so, when Jesus was born of Mary, all three persons were within Him.”

Not exactly. There is an aspect or person of the Godhead which has been manifested in the flesh which is Jesus. There is a person of the Godhead who is a Spirit, that is the Holy Spirit, and cannot be seen because He is spirit. (The Holy Spirit has been manifested in visible form, but cannot be seen in His actual essence because that essence is spirit which is invisible to human eyes. See John 3:5-8 and 1 Corinthians 2:14.) The Father is a person of the Godhead who has not and cannot be seen directly because to see His face would consume and destroy us because His glory is too intense.

This theology explains what might be perceived by some as paradoxes in scripture.

Exodus 33:11
“So the Lord spoke to Moses face to face, as a man speaks to his friend...”

Exodus 33:20
“But He said, ‘You cannot see My face; for no man shall see Me, and live.’”

How can it be that God spoke to Moses face to face, but then says no one can see His face and live?

John 1:18
“No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him.”

It is because ALL of the appearances of God to people in the Old Testament were the pre-incarnate Christ. (See Luke 24:27, John 12:41, and 1 Corinthians 10:9.)

When we read of God walking in the garden of Eden in the cool of the day, it was Christ. (See Genesis 3:8.)

When two angel and another “man” appeared to Abraham on the way to destroy Sodom, Abraham realized the third visitor was God. This was also an appearnace of Christ. (See Genesis 18:2, 33.)

When Jacob saw God in his vision / dream, it was Christ.(See Genesis 28:12.)

When Moses, Aaron and the elders of Israel saw God, they were seeing Christ. (See Exodus 24:9-11.)

When Gideon saw God, he too was seeing Christ. (See Judges 6:22-23.)

When Samon’s parents were visited by a theophany, they realized afterward that they had seen God. This was also Christ. (See Judges 13:22.)

When Isaiah saw the Lord of Hosts in His glory, he was also seeing Christ. (See Isaiah 6:1.)

When the king saw one “like the Son of God” in the fiery furnace, he was seeing Christ. (See Daniel 3:25.)

So when we read that he who has seen the Son has seen the Father, and that the Father is in the Son and the Son in the Father, in John 14:9-10, it does not mean they are the same person. Rather, Christ Jesus is the express image of the Father.

Hebrews 1:1-3
“God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds; who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high...”

There is an aspect or person of the Godhead which has been manifested in the flesh which is Jesus. There is a person of the Godhead who is a Spirit, that is the Holy Spirit, and cannot be seen because He is spirit. (The Holy Spirit has been manifested in visible form, but cannot be seen in His actual essence because that essence is spirit which is invisible to human eyes. See John 3:5-8 and 1 Corinthians 2:14.) The Father is a person of the Godhead who has not and cannot be seen directly because to see His face would consume and destroy us because His glory is too intense.

It is true that God manifests Himself in different ways; e.g., as a voice from heaven, as a burning bush, as a whisper in the wind, as a dove, as tongues of fire. When He manifested Himself to us as Jesus, He was born of Mary, and became man. And while He was man, he subjected Himself to all things human, including having Mary as His mother.

“And while He was man, he subjected Himself to all things human, including having Mary as His mother.”

True. This is part of Biblical history.

We celebrate the incarnation, the birth, the ministry of Christ. We learn from the brief lessons recorded on Mary’s life. We learn also of John the baptist, the apostles, etc.

However, Jesus is no longer a babe in a manger. He is the Lord of Heaven in all His glory. We can come to Christ with an understanding and realization of who He is that was not fully understood during His earthly vocation by those closest to Him. This why Mary could merely keep the words spoken and ponder them. This is why it was only after the Lord rose from the dead and also after He was revealed in His glory that His disciples fell down before Him and declared “my Lord and my God”.

The familial relationships are pattern, examples and ways for us to learn; they are NOT the basis for our relationship with Christ, though. As I pointed out before, we no longer know Christ “after the flesh”. Jesus said we can have the same relationship as His mother, sisters, and brother by obedience to His word. Just as Christ was in Mary’s womb for a few short months, now Christ can abide in our hearts through faith.

Mary and the apostles did their job of bringing Christ to us and, through their words, us to Christ. The Law of Moses served the same purpose, to lead us to Christ. Our focus is no longer on these but on Christ, just like a gift wrapped in a package. The gift is beautiful with colors and ribbons and decorations, but we tear these wide open and discard them once we have the gift inside.

All of these people and all of Christ’s servants that follow, if His true servants, share the same message as John, “He must increase, but I must decrease.”

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.