Posted on 01/05/2010 9:46:47 PM PST by the_conscience
The Mother of Elizabeth's Lord is NOT the Mother of Elizabeth's God...
http://www.ewtn.com/library/Montfort/TRUEDEVO.HTM
I don't have time or energy to wade into all the outrageous and excellent examples you posted. That one is sufficient. Indefensible. Wholesale indefensible. Yet, I have no doubt that the rationalizations will shortly comprise an ever growing pile . . .
Unlike my mother, who ontologically gave me humanity, Mary ontologically did not give or add to Jesus Divinity, even though in the mystery of the incarnation we understand, as as thru a dark glass, that there is a commingling of the two natures in God being manifest in the flesh, and the Word being made flesh.
We can continue to argue, and i do allow for some degree of interpretation in this, but even if the term can be technically allowed, again, my real contention is that its typical use as part of the supererogatory adulation of Mary.
That interesting little phrase, “begotten, not made” would seem to indicate that for Christ to be fully God and fully man, He HAD to have a human mother, and the Almighty as His Father. So, Mary is the Mother of God.
Christ was begotten. No one is begotten without a mother. God did not beget His Son on nothing, but on (in) the humble human flesh of Mary. Again, Mary is the Mother of God. Christ is fully God AND fully man, He is not split into two, with Mary only having to do with His human aspect, there was no such thing.
Fully God, He was sinless, fully man, He died. He took His nature, which is fully God and fully man, from His mother, Mary, and His Father, God. Just as you are a combination of your mother and father, so is Christ. But you are human flesh, partly your mother and partly your father. But God cannot be split into “half-God” — there is no such thing. QED, Christ is fully God. Since He was born of a woman and died, He was also fully man.
I like to say that it’s a mystery, and I may not ever understand it, yet, I accept it. God can do many things which I will never understand, even in eternity with Him, because I will never be omniscient. Ho problem.
It is only when you try splitting up Christ or fiddling with His humanity that you run into problems with Mary.
(But of course they're lying.)
So we make the distinction, and it's only a "claim?" So even if we agree with you we're still wrong?
It seems silly to me.
The hell generated millenia goddess worshipping efforts of the fallen angels is about to be brought to fruition in the GREAT END TIMES DECEPTION that the Bible speaks of.
Fatima and other Marian 'appearances' are identical to a list of other UFO related phenomena--identical--with just the star of the show changed--in terms of the personage cast, costumed and put forward.
God have mercy.
Right out of the mouth of Satan thru the mouths of these Catholic priests or popes or whatever they call themselves...
I'd be embarrassed to call myself a Catholic in public after reading that...
<It’s really cold here and my fingers are stiff.<
The church of Climatology church may be able to explain this as a confirmation of Global Warming. Colder than normal here also, and i know what stiff fingers mean even without cold.
I do not agree that it denotes that. Here we have an insistence that we are using the term Mother uniquely and, evidently, only in this context.
Aristotle does not use it that way. Modern Biology does not use it that way. Nobody else uses it that way. But when Catholics say "Mother of God," we mean something by "mother" that nobody else means. And that thing is wrong.
Somehow I'm not ready to plead guilty.
To whom? In whose mind? Not in mine. Who are these people that think that Mother of God means Mary is before God? Where are the people who think and who say in so many words that the declarations of Ephesus and Chalcedon put Mary before God? The very Doctrine of the Immaculate Conception denies that. She was conceived in time.
My tagline evidently makes mere mannerliness are real challenge for some Protestants. So while we get harassed for that doctrine, when the doctrine demonstrates beyond doubt or cavil that we do NOT think Mary exists before God or is before Him in any way, THEN the dogma is ignored.
As to praying to the saints. I call “Shoot and Move.” We’ve been over that, and no doubt we’ll go over it again. But it is an issue not unique to Mary. I pray to LOTS of saints!
In my experience, theology is better with whiskey.
Mary "contributed" a fallible, human nature to Christ who was completely man and completely God.
But once again we see Roman Catholics choosing the opinions of various "church fathers," all fallen men, over the clear and simple understanding found in Scripture.
When Jesus was asked where His mother and brothers were, He pointed to believers as His family.
Rome points away.
Could we have some dates for this construction of history, please?
AGREED.
It is only when you try splitting up Christ or fiddling with His humanity that you run into problems with Mary.
I disagree. MoG inherently connotes, infers, embellishes in outrageously blasphemous ways and degrees--and unnecessarily. "God Bearer" does not carry the same outrageous connotations.
It is fascinating that many Vatican associates can be hyper sensitive to CONNOTATIONS HEREON . . . EXCEPT IN THIS CASE RE MARY AND THE TERM "MOTHER OF GOD" . . . WHERE SUDDENLY the Vatican associates are suddenly blind and deaf about connotations. Most curious and most disturbing.
THAT kind of . . . double standard is more than a LOT disturbing to a LOT of Prottys.
Gosh, if only the martyrs who thought that to call Caesar "kyrios," would be idolatry had known that! There would have been a lot less blood.
Yeah . . . with some texts, hazmat suit hipwaders are grossly inadequate.
I think the discussion on to TULIP or not deserves a thread of its own. I will work on how I think these verses are to be interpreted, and will post it as a new thread. I will ping you when it is ready. It will take at least a day, perhaps longer - lots to type.
It was HTML and typing practice. Beer worked as advertised, I screwed it up.
While not “official teaching, as with what many Catholics evidence they believe (and dis-believe), implicit sanction or allowance of such excesses, as well as disagreement official doctrine, is effectually conveyed. The main message conveyed by many churches is that as long as one is a member, all will be taken care of, and how much more when a church promotes herself as the supreme and infallible authority.
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.