Jesus is my mother-a testimony

[benedictaoo]

But it does mean that there is nothing in the orthodox express of blessed Juliana that is against the faith.

I get your concern. But I think people are a bit jumpy as of late. Some of it is with good reason...but some is a bit hair-trigger.

Here is a brief overview of her work from the Catholic encyclopedia: link

And, as it says...and as is always the proper context to look at:

Throughout her revelations Juliana submits herself to the authority of the Church:"I yield me to our mother Holy Church, as a simple child oweth."

In that example and careful expression we can find the riches of her theology without falling into error.

proper context is key and when you have issues with Mary as a mother, what kind of context will there be?

 

[Viribus Unitis]

I have just thought that it might be a good idea to ask first for clarifications, in private if possible. Foot in mouth syndrom can be prevented that way

 

[kisstheson]

Well folks... upon returning to this thread I'm on the verge of tears. I only just glanced over the replies as I'm in a hurry to do some errands. Thanks to all those who offered words of comfort and support. I'll be back later for a more thorough reading.

This is the crux of the thread...

"Some of you may not know that when I was a little baby I lost my mom most likely due to suicide. Having three children under the age of five and a son who only lived twenty four hours, she had post pardum depression and was found floating dead in the creek outside my garndmother's house at the age of twenty seven. I was told when I was a child that it was most likely suicide and not an accidental slip that cuased her death. Over the years my aunts have argued as to whether or not her death was a suicide but in any case I didn't have a mom growing up. My dad was an absentee father. he worked on the tugs in NYC and when he was home he would drink a lot.

I share this so you will understand how I came to discover a very important aspect about Christ. When I decided that I wanted to know the Lord in a more personal way one of the things I began to experience is the "mothering" of Christ. I had always denied the imporatnce of having a mother. I concluded I didn't miss what I never had. I didn't understand the importance of bonding, touch and affection that a mother gives to her child."

I am only sharing about how Jesus was like a mother to me and healed some deep emotional needs in me. I can't believe that some people could read the different posts on this subject that I have written and be upset with my sharing. All I wanted to do is talk about Jesus...

While Mary certainly is our Mother Jesus is the greater Mother as he feeds and nourishes our souls with His very own Body and Blood.

This is all too sad...Can't we just talk about Jesus and how He heals the motherless and fatherless? Why make a big issue out of this just because I didn't include Mary in my topic? Can't you see the true heart of the matter? Wouldn't it be better if you are offended that you just moved on instead of debating a very sensitive issue? Please permit those of us who have experienced Christ in this way the freedom of expressing what has been our healing and may possibibly be healing for others.

"I will not leave you as orphans. I will come to you." (Christ-The gospel of John.)

 

[Davidnic]

and KTS, having the problems she does with Catholicism, has to be careful this is not where she ends up. I think stuff like this is truly meant for ppl who are strong in the faith. Much like De Montfort is...

Many, even those strong in the faith need to be careful with this type of deep mysticism. So yes, I see and echo that concern for anyone actually.

You know how it is when we do not defer to the Church and we wing it on our own, thinking the the Spirit leads us...

This can lead into full blown New Ageism and given the issues with Mary and authority and not really getting anywhere with them... this can be dangerous ...is all I'm saying... when one does not defer to the authority of the Church to TEACH them and they feel they can TEACH themselves.

I get that.

I'm not down with this notion of let me pick and chose what i like about Catholicism and discard what i don't.

This is not getting the person anywhere to do that.

Again, we do not disagree on that. That does not get anyone anywhere. My point is that in the defense of what the Church teaches we must not attack valid expressions. And we must be able to provide that expression rather than react in a manner that denies any validly to the line of thought. That skews to suppression of the thought and then lends false validity to incorrect expression rather than presenting it in it's correct form. In the latter the Truth of the Church is maintained and the false interpretation is rebuffed. But to wholesale rebuff the whole theology where there is validity to it...lends credibility to the invalid interpretations as well because they have not been excised.

The main problem post in this thread is not by kisstheson.

 

[BAFRIEND]

proper context is key and when you have issues with Mary as a mother, what kind of context will there be?

Is the problem here that she found comfort in a relationship with Jesus instead of with or bypassing Mary ?

Maybe someone else here has issues...

I can relate to what kts is stating, I lost my father when I was very young and St. Joseph became my guardian.

 

[ShannonMcCatholic]

Or even better - we can take the grace He gives us and work our butt off to seek and apply healing to our lives--instead of just staying wounded and seeking comfort. Jesus doesn't just suffer and die- He is resurrected. Too many people use Jesus as a crutch- and an excuse to stay wounded and victimized their whole lives. Yes, He is a comfort. Yes, Jesus might mirculously in one fail swoop heal us--but more often than not--as with all things we have to participate in redemption by going past being coddled, and work to heal ourselves. He gives us the strength and fortitude and courage to facilitate our healing, be we have to go out and pursue that peace.

I am sorry you lost your mom. That is a tragedy, for sure. But hopefully you aren't still defining relationships by that loss. If you are then you have my prayers-if you aren't, you have them anyway.

 

[kisstheson]

Or even better - we can take the grace He gives us and work our butt off to seek and apply healing to our lives--instead of just staying wounded and seeking comfort. Jesus doesn't just suffer and die- He is resurrected. Too many people use Jesus as a crutch- and an excuse to stay wounded and victimized their whole lives. Yes, He is a comfort. Yes, Jesus might mirculously in one fail swoop heal us--but more often than not--as with all things we have to participate in redemption by going past being coddled, and work to heal ourselves. He gives us the strength and fortitude and courage to facilitate our healing, be we have to go out and pursue that peace.

I am sorry you lost your mom. That is a tragedy, for sure. But hopefully you aren't still defining relationships by that loss. If you are then you have my prayers-if you aren't, you have them anyway.

Exactly...

It is because Jesus has healed my emotional pain (and is still healing me as we are always growing. I ain't perfect. obviously. LOL!,) that I was able to get over anger, bitterness, low self esteem, emotional dependance on others, fear...also I found my feminine self. At one time I was very masculine in my tastes etc. I have good healthy relationships. but you are right...all this didn't happen over night. I do have to tell though while Jesus encouraged me not to wallow in a pity party there were times when Christ was not only a crutch but a stretcher. I couldn't have made it without His total support and strength.

 

[stone]

what little scripture there is in the op and in the followup post supporting this view of a man being a mother, are all taken out of context.

I'll side with jp2 on this one. I agree that this teaching is in error.

AS for the op, i sympathize.

 

[Gwendolyn]

Jesus is fully human, whilst being fully divine. His divinity has no gender, but His inseperable humanity most certainly does. We can't separate the hypostatic union, even if it gives us warm fuzzies to do so.

I agree.

Seriously let's not over react too much.

If Kisstheson had said, Jesus nurtured me like a mother, I don't believe anyone would have had an issue. God has attributes that are both male and female and things we can't even relate to.

...

Seriously God is. His attributes and actions can be compared to that of both men and women.....heck, His constant love and affection is also similar to my dog but it doesn't make Him a dog.

...

I'm sorry about your early loss and blessed to see that God was able to fill the needs you have in His abundance. I hope that you see with all the good teaching that has gone on, what the difference is between Jesus being mother and Jesus acting as a mother.

I do think that this is very, very important. Jesus definitely acts as a mother does - in terms of nurturing, comforting, healing. But He cannot be a mother, because... well... He's a he.

God has motherly qualities, too, though He transcends gender (if male and female are made in His image than... well... it's obvious that He has no proper gender like we do). However, throughout History and Scripture He has chosen to reveal Himself to us in the Fatherly role. He has acknowledged motherly qualities - again, nurturing, comforting, healing, etc. - but He is, first and foremost, Father. Jesus taught us to call God our Father even when we pray, and even if we may not understand or even like that (I definitely know a few girls who have embraced feminism and think that God's identity as Father is oppressive and patriarichal), our Scriptures abound with the Father imagery and abound with references to God's identity as Father.

I really do you think a person could spend a lifetime contemplating God's choice to reveal Himself as Father. And I'm sure there are people who already have!

But what I really think that KTS is trying to communicate, even a mongst some mistaken images, is that Jesus has, over the years, helped heal the gaping wounds left by her mother's death, and by growing up without a mother in her life. Shouldn't we rejoice in that? That Jesus can heal such horrible wounds? Instead a few of you are jumping on her when the point isn't that she has some mistaken images about God's motherly qualities - it is that God has worked some real good in her life to bring good out of something so awful.

Quite frankly, I admire KTS's strength in turning to Jesus. If I myself had been in that situation, I would have wasted away. I desperately cling to my mother, even now in my twenties, hence why I'm in therapy But seriously, I really do think it takes a strong person to see such devastation in their life and turn to God instead of other things.

I thought it was a nice testimony.

 

[suzeequeue]

KTS, i seldom post anywhere on CF and have never posted here in OBOB as far as i can remember, but i wanted to tell you that i agree, of course Jesus is your mother. He is mine too! i'm so happy He is there for all of us as mother, father, sister, brother, friend and Saviour.

God bless you, sister.

 

[BAFRIEND]

Or even better - we can take the grace He gives us and work our butt off to seek and apply healing to our lives--instead of just staying wounded and seeking comfort. Jesus doesn't just suffer and die- He is resurrected. Too many people use Jesus as a crutch- and an excuse to stay wounded and victimized their whole lives. Yes, He is a comfort. Yes, Jesus might mirculously in one fail swoop heal us--but more often than not--as with all things we have to participate in redemption by going past being coddled, and work to heal ourselves. He gives us the strength and fortitude and courage to facilitate our healing, be we have to go out and pursue that peace.

I am sorry you lost your mom. That is a tragedy, for sure. But hopefully you aren't still defining relationships by that loss. If you are then you have my prayers-if you aren't, you have them anyway.

kts will never know her mother's voice in her lifetime. Forget what you called being coddled- your entire post is what it is- CRUEL.

 

[MyLordIsMyLife]

I am only sharing about how Jesus was like a mother to me and healed some deep emotional needs in me. I can't believe that some people could read the different posts on this subject that I have written and be upset with my sharing. All I wanted to do is talk about Jesus...

While Mary certainly is our Mother Jesus is the greater Mother as he feeds and nourishes our souls with His very own Body and Blood.

This is all too sad...Can't we just talk about Jesus and how He heals the motherless and fatherless? Why make a big issue out of this just because I didn't include Mary in my topic? Can't you see the true heart of the matter? Wouldn't it be better if you are offended that you just moved on instead of debating a very sensitive issue? Please permit those of us who have experienced Christ in this way the freedom of expressing what has been our healing and may possibly be healing for others.

"I will not leave you as orphans. I will come to you." (Christ-The gospel of John.)

I'm with you sister.

I believe that Jesus' relationship to each one of us is between the soul and its Lord/Father/Mother/Brother/Lover/Friend or whatever Jesus is to the individual.

The relationship between soul and Jesus is one of LOVE- and love has no rules.
_________________________________________________________________
So let's be thankful for the gift of Jesus. I know KissTheSon is- Jesus means the world to her, and if she wants to profess that love, IMHO we should support her.

 

[thereselittleflower]

The issue is not whether or not feminine imagery is used to desscribe characteristics of God's care for us.

The issue is, is it appropriate to refer to God/Jesus as our Mother?

The scriptures, while they give us maternal imagery of God to help us understand better God's care for us, this is all it is.

The scriptures never refer to God as "she" or call God "Mother".

The scriptures never use feminine pronouns to refer to God.

The Church never refers to God as "she" or calls God "Mother".

The Church never uses feminine pronouns to refer to God.

Divine revelation always tells us God is masculine, "He", "Father".

To refer to God as "She" or "Mother" is dangerous for it sets up a contradiction to Divine Revelation which clearly always calls God "FATHER".


Word on this from within Catholicism:

Decree on Religious Doctrine - 3


§XXIV. Inclusive Language.

We believe that the use of inclusive language - within the meaning of “gender-revised” language - in biblical, liturgical, catechetical, prayer book, and other ecclesial texts, is an attempt, in most cases, to re-indoctrinate the Faithful to modern social and political ideologies and sensitivities, and has no relevant part in Christian custom. The Order of Celtic Benedictines therefore affirms and adheres to the following norms in regard to inclusive language:

The Church must always seek to convey accurately in translation the texts she has inherited from the biblical, liturgical and patristic tradition and instruct the Faithful in their proper meaning.

The first principle with respect to biblical texts is that of fidelity, maximum possible fidelity to the words of the text. Biblical translations should be faithful to the original language and to the internal truth of the inspired text, in such a way as to respect the language used by the human author in order to be understood by his intended reader. Every concept in the original text should be translated in its context. Above all, translations must be faithful to the sense of Sacred Scripture understood as a unity and totality, which finds its center in Christ, the Son of God incarnate, as confessed in the Creeds of the Church.

The translation of Scripture should faithfully reflect the Word of God in the original human languages. It must be listened to in its time-conditioned, at times even inelegant, mode of human expression without “correction” or “improvement” in service of modern sensitivities.

The natural gender of personae in the Bible, including the human author of various texts where evident, must not be changed insofar as this is possible in the receptor language.
The grammatical gender of God, pagan deities, and angels according to the original texts must not be changed insofar as this is possible in the receptor language.

In fidelity to the inspired Word of God, the traditional biblical usage for naming the persons of the Trinity as Father, Son and Holy Spirit is to be retained.

Similarly, in keeping with the Universal Church’s tradition, the feminine and neuter pronouns are not to be used to refer to the person of the Holy Spirit.

There shall be no systematic substitution of the masculine pronoun or possessive adjective to refer to God in correspondence to the original text.

Kinship terms that are clearly gender specific, as indicated by the context, should be respected in translation.

“I remain unashamedly of the opinion that whereas Christianity can rejoice in our God who metaphorically has a ‘feminine face’ … it has no authority from scripture or tradition to address God as ‘Mother’. God is whom Jesus says God is, namely ‘Our Father’.” (Canon Michael Banks, Leicester Cathedral quarterly newsletter.)

http://www.ocbusa.org/index_files/Doctrine3.htm

​

Furthermore even within protestantism, the dangers of refering to God/Jesus as our mother are well understood:

The change of the biblical imagery of the Fatherhood of God to God as mother has far-reaching implications. It is not an innocent change, rather it is the replacement of Christianity with a new kind of religion. The deification of the female principle found its expression in the early literary cultures of the ancient Near East. Some of the more famous goddesses are the Mesopotamian Innina-Ishtar, the Syrian Astarte, the Egyptian Isis and Hathor, the Cretan Great Goddess and the Cyprian Aphrodite. Hinduism presents the most developed example of the feminization of the sacred in the contemporary world.Feminine images of the deity are as numerous, popular, and well developed as the male aspects of deity. They are worshipped and portrayed alone or with their husband consorts. Kali, traditionally a consort of Shiva, is widely worshipped to this day in Bengal, as the supreme mother. Kali is often pictured as having great fangs, with skulls hanging around her neck. Dr. J. H. Bavinck, renowned missiologist commented on the feminization of the sacred. His remarks are worth noting.

"Man has the subconscious idea that a mother-goddess makes him feel less guilty. Apparently she is looked upon as a deity that does not take our sin quite as seriously as a father-god would, and understandingly smiles down on it with motherly tenderness. The mother-goddess is often a personification of the all-bearing earth, dark, and at the same time fruitful, from which all life emerges."
​

​

So, through the influence of liberation ideologies, there is now a great interest in the female imagery of the sacred; an imagery rooted in ancient and modern paganism.

God Revealed

On our own, we cannot know God. God introduces Himself to us in Scripture. We may not make an image of Him, and thus fit Him into our theology. We don't reach for God. He makes Himself known to us. Man's quest for God is always doomed to failure. Unless the God of the Bible is accepted, God will remain unknown. In Scripture, God reveals Himself as the Father God, the Creator and Controller of our lives, and we are subordinate to Him as His children. (James 1:17-18) Both the Old and the New Testaments alike affirm the sovereignty and the Fatherhood of God. God in His care for Israel is frequently compared to that of a father (Hosea 11:1; Deut 14:1; 2 Sam. 7:14). In a narrower sense, God-is the Father of the God-fearing among the nation, rather than of the nation of Israel as a whole (Ps. 103:12; Mal. 3:17).God is the eternal Father. He is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. The Lord Jesus has a personal relationship with His Father (John 5:17). God loves His own Son (John 5:20, 10:17, 17:24, 26). Christ does not only call God His Father, but also His God (Matt. 27:26; John 20:17). God calls Jesus His only Son (Matt. 3:17). Jesus gave a largely increased prominence to the Fatherhood of God. The number of instances of the word "Father" as applied to God in the Gospels is more than double the number found in the remaining books of the New Testament. In the Gospel of John it occurs 107 times. The Father is revealed as sovereign, righteous and merciful. Prayer may confidently be offered to Him through Jesus His Son. What a comfort that we may call ourselves as Christians the children of our Father God. We have been adopted into His family (Rom. 8:16, 17, 23)

.A Feminine Side?

Is there no feminine side to God at all? The Bible does not avoid feminine images of God. God is said to have given birth to Israel (Dent. 32:18; Isa. 42:14, 46:3). Jesus likens God to a loving and saddened mother hen crying over the waywardness of her children (Matt. 23:37-39). In the parable of the lost coin, Jesus compares God to a woman who painstakingly looks through her house for that one coin. In the same way, God searches for His lost children. Isaiah 66:13 gives this beautiful image of God: "As one whom his mother comforteth, so will I comfort you; and ye shall be comforted in Jerusalem." Though the actions of God are sometimes described in feminine terms, the person of God is never described as feminine. God is never referred to as a She. Dr. J.H. Bavinck observed that God has a feminine quality – something that is motherly and tender and caring. One may acknowledge all this and at the same time feel that it is not without reason that God reveals Himself as a Father in heaven, but generally not as mother. Bavinck says that the Bible speaks so little of God as mother, because of the danger of distortion. God warns us that, when we see Him first of all as a mother, we take dangerous risks, as the history of religion shows clearly again and again. The Gospel does not start with the Cross of Christ or the gifts of the Spirit, but with the Father who loved the world so much that He gave His only Son (John 3:16). The Father is the source of everything in both creation and redemption. He is not only the source of everything, but also the goal of everything.Praise be the Father, Lord, our God of Grace,....Sovereign in your faithful, covenant embrace.From this day together, make our love endure,Ever self-effacing, passionate, and pure

http://74.125.45.132/search?q=cache...rch+"God+as+mother"&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=58&gl=us

​

And the words of our Pope Benedict XVI

"Even if we can't give absolutely cogent reasons, the language of the prayer of the entire Bible remains normative for us, in which, the great metaphors of maternal love notwithstanding, 'mother' is not a title of God, and is not an appellation with which one may address God. We must pray as Jesus, on the basis of the Holy Scripture, has taught us to pray, not as it might strike us or please us. Only thus do we pray in the right way."
Jesus of Nazareth
​

​

​

​

​

​

 

[thereselittleflower]

Seriously let's not over react too much.

If Kisstheson had said, Jesus nurtured me like a mother, I don't believe anyone would have had an issue. God has attributes that are both male and female and things we can't even relate to.

Absolutely! You perfectly understand the issue. It is not about whether or not Jesus can nuture us LIKE a mother. We all know He can and does.

But that doesn't make Him our MOTHER.

It is crossing the line to go from saying God is "like" a mother to calling God "Mother".

That is the issue.

Annie's addition of the inaccurate translations is what leads this thread down the bad path but I'm sure no harm was intended and that has clearly been corrected.

I spent time in a liberal protestant community that tried to define God as female every time they had a chance. Quite disturbing and totally unnecessary. "Ruah is a feminine word and is the Holy Spirit so the Holy Spirit must be female." That type of stuff. One of the girls in my youth group at the time said, "So because the word "table" has a feminine form all tables are female?"

Seriously God is. His attributes and actions can be compared to that of both men and women.....heck, His constant love and affection is also similar to my dog but it doesn't make Him a dog.

Kisstheson,

I'm sorry about your early loss and blessed to see that God was able to fill the needs you have in His abundance. I hope that you see with all the good teaching that has gone on, what the difference is between Jesus being mother and Jesus acting as a mother.

May you be blessed.

[/quote]

Amen.

 

[thereselittleflower]

I am not saying Blessed Juliana's Theology is not tricky and complex. It is. But it can be validly expressed. Remember one of the earliest representations of Christ was as a mother Pelican. In many ways the mystical side of the theology stems from that. And I didn't read anything in Kisstheson's analysis that is unorthodox.

And I am saying that in today's age, the age of the heresies of modernism, the New Age, and feminism, it is dangerous to refer to God/Jesus as "Mother". In fact, as we see above, our Pope says as much. It is way too easy to go off in radical tangents away from the true faith.

 

[thereselittleflower]

I do understand the worry of some. Given how modernism twists things in this day and age...this type of expression is right in the wheelhouse for misinterpretation. But I will not start kicking valid mystics to the curb because modernist heresy attempts to appropriate them.

Just because a mystic wrote something that does not elevate it to the level of Divine Revelation or make it appropriate for our use today.

What was more easily understood in a time centuries removed from ours, does not mean it is well understood in our time, or even right to use.

The CHURCH has never sanctioned called God/Jesus "Our Mother".

That is all the more reason to stand firm with the correct expression of their work and theology in the light of the Truth in Church teaching.

It is the theology of the Church we must stand firm in, not the theology of mystics David.

 

[Davidnic]

I think you all are over-reacting. Blessed Juliana of Norwich can be expressed in an Orthodox way...and she does use those terms. As I mentioned one of the earliest images for Christ is a female pelican feeding her young on he own blood.

Yes there is an issue with the language...but the language is the language of a mystic. We need to expect such things to not always follow the beaten path. Her theology is tricky at times but it is not some modernist nuke waiting to end civilization. Yes...her theology can be misrepresented. It must be understood as a product of mysticism and a product of the understandings of the time.

Blessed Juliana's work does contain some errors. Most mystical works do. Inner Locutions are kind of like that because they require a filter through the consciousness of the receiver.

The important thing is that Blessed Juliana herself offered her work, as is proper, to the Church and subjected it to the authority of the Church.

It is a difficult work to understand, but full of good things...as well as some pitfalls.

I just think everyone seems on edge lately.

 

[thereselittleflower]

David, are you saying Pope Benedict is wrong?

And the words of our Pope Benedict XVI

"Even if we can't give absolutely cogent reasons, the language of the prayer of the entire Bible remains normative for us, in which, the great metaphors of maternal love notwithstanding, 'mother' is not a title of God, and is not an appellation with which one may address God. We must pray as Jesus, on the basis of the Holy Scripture, has taught us to pray, not as it might strike us or please us. Only thus do we pray in the right way."
Jesus of Nazareth ​

 

[Davidnic]

Just because a mystic wrote something that does not elevate it to the level of Divine Revelation or make it appropriate for our use today.

What was more easily understood in a time centuries removed from ours, does not mean it is well understood in our time, or even right to use.

The CHURCH has never sanctioned called God/Jesus "Our Mother".


It is the theology of the Church we must stand firm in, not the theology of mystics David.

Didn't say it made it divine revelation. I said it has a proper expression within Church teaching. I have not understated the pitfalls involved.

Of course the works of mystics and mystical theology can not be taken as divine revelation on par with the deposit of faith. Now one is suggesting such a thing. Mystical visions are filtered through the perceptions of the visionary without the guarantee of the Holy Spirit that there will be no misunderstanding.

The deposit of faith and the Magisterium has the guarantee that there is no error in that revelation. One (The deposit of faith) is necessary to salvation the other (Mystical private revelation) is not. I never suggested otherwise.

 

[Davidnic]

David, are you saying Pope Benedict is wrong?

And the words of our Pope Benedict XVI

"Even if we can't give absolutely cogent reasons, the language of the prayer of the entire Bible remains normative for us, in which, the great metaphors of maternal love notwithstanding, 'mother' is not a title of God, and is not an appellation with which one may address God. We must pray as Jesus, on the basis of the Holy Scripture, has taught us to pray, not as it might strike us or please us. Only thus do we pray in the right way."
Jesus of Nazareth ​

Sigh.

No. When did I say that? I said that her theology has a proper and orthodox expression. I did not advocate one that goes against the teachings of the Church.

It must be viewed in the language of mystics and the context of private revelation. It must be subjected to what the Church teaches as true. I never said otherwise.