Do you agree with this statement?

[Rick Otto]

How would do you see the Mother of God's importance as compared, for example, to the New Testament?

Subordinate. Important, but relatively unimportant.
About the same as with George Washington's mother and the USA.

 

[Albion]

I think it is more accurate to state that she is the mother of Jesus...who is also God.

If you wish, but the birth of Jesus was an event that did take place at a certain point in time.

 

[Albion]

Jesus is several things and has many titles and roles. It seems misleading to me to take a title (God) which can be applied, and is typically applied, to another member of the trinity and use it in this manner. Would Mary seem as significant if we referred to her as the Morther of the High Priest?

I can appreciate that approach to the matter, but I thought it was worth mentioning that that title never meant that Mary originated God, literally like our mothers might be said to have done. Yet that is the most common criticism.

 

[patricius79]

Subordinate. Important, but relatively unimportant.
About the same as with George Washington's mother and the USA.

why is the New Testament more important than God's Mother?

 

[bbbbbbb]

The title of "mother of God" (theotokos) was applied to Mary in response to the heretical belief that Jesus was not God and man in one person. It is not a statement about Mary but is in defense of Jesus' divinity. If some had claimed that Jesus was not the High Priest, perhaps Mary would have been given such a title as you suggest.

edit to add: It is not in the slightest misleading to we who use the expression, and it is something we have made sure to clarify every time it crops up in these threads, of which you are no doubt aware.

Yes, I am aware of both the care taken here at CF to make the distinction and the apparent lack of care by many members of churches which celebrate Mary to an extent beyond that provided in scripture.

 

[Rick Otto]

why is the New Testament more important than God's Mother?

Why is it not?

 

[patricius79]

Why is it not?

It seems you can't back up your oral tradition that the N.T. is much more important than God's Mother.

To answer your question, it is not because the Word of God can be transmitted through oral tradition (2 Thes 2:15, 1 Thes 2:13), and because Mary is God's own Mother, the New Eve, Queen of Heaven, and the Mediatrix of all graces.

 

[Rick Otto]

It seems you can't back up your oral tradition that the N.T. is much more important than God's Mother.

To answer your question, it is not because the Word of God can be transmitted through oral tradition (2 Thes 2:15, 1 Thes 2:13), and because Mary is God's own Mother, the New Eve, Queen of Heaven, and the Mediatrix of all graces.

I respect your second opinion.

 

[Meowzltov]

Why do we have to determine which is more important than the other? Can't we simply say that both are integral and leave it at that?

 

[Meowzltov]

I can appreciate that approach to the matter, but I thought it was worth mentioning that that title never meant that Mary originated God, literally like our mothers might be said to have done. Yet that is the most common criticism.

Right, Albion. I was taught it simply means that He who is God passed through her birth canal.

 

[patricius79]

Why do we have to determine which is more important than the other? Can't we simply say that both are integral and leave it at that?

Sure. I just object to the idea that the Bible--which is not a person--is more important than Mary, who is a person and is the Mother of God, the New Eve, and the Mediatrix of all Graces.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Sure. I just object to the idea that the Bible--which is not a person--is more important than Mary, who is a person and is the Mother of God, the New Eve, and the Mediatrix of all Graces.

So, who is more important - Jesus Christ, who is compared with the Word of God and, indeed, is the Word of God incarnate, or Mary, His mother?

 

[Albion]

Sure. I just object to the idea that the Bible--which is not a person--is more important than Mary, who is a person and is the Mother of God, the New Eve, and the Mediatrix of all Graces.

They may both be important, but it's not the case that they are important IN THE SAME way. Interchanging God's revelation with one of his most illustrious creatures doesn't make any sense, and we ought not talk as though that can logically be done.

 

[patricius79]

So, who is more important - Jesus Christ, who is compared with the Word of God and, indeed, is the Word of God incarnate, or Mary, His mother?

Jesus Christ is infinitely more important than His Mother, through whom he came into the world. Yet I think no creature or Book is or could be more exalted than the Mother of God.

 

[patricius79]

They may both be important, but it's not the case that they are important IN THE SAME way. Interchanging God's revelation with one of his most illustrious creatures doesn't make any sense, and we ought not talk as though that can logically be done.

They are both means of salvation. As St. Irenaeus--the father of Catholic orthodoxy-- said in the 100s, Mary is the cause of our salvation.

 

[Albion]

Jesus Christ is infinitely more important than His Mother, through whom he came into the world. Yet I think no creature or Book is or could be more exalted than the Mother of God.

Another example of the "just a book" attitude towards the Holy Scriptures...and yet it's always denied that anyone thinks this way. Strange.

 

[Albion]

They are both means of salvation. As St. Irenaeus--the father of Catholic orthodoxy-- said in the 100s, Mary is the cause of our salvation.

Cause of our salvation does not equate to means of salvation.

I think Irenaeus would be shocked to hear his observation so incorrectly presented. It may also serve as a good example of what's wrong with making "Tradition" one's guide to doctrine.

 

[Hank77]

They are both means of salvation. As St. Irenaeus--the father of Catholic orthodoxy-- said in the 100s, Mary is the cause of our salvation.

Totally taken out of context. If one wants to know what Irenaeus actually said they need read them in context as the whole.
Last time I posted something that Justin Martyr said about the Eucharist the response was well IF he really said that....
Sheesh...I even gave the link to the complete writings of the early church fathers, where they could read them for themselves. But because what he said took away from a short quote used by their church to build their doctrine, they didn't want to hear it.
To say that Mary is the Cause of our salvation is to put Mary equal to the Father.

 

[patricius79]

Totally taken out of context. If one wants to know what Irenaeus actually said they need read them in context as the whole.
Last time I posted something that Justin Martyr said about the Eucharist the response was well IF he really said that....
Sheesh...I even gave the link to the complete writings of the early church fathers, where they could read them for themselves. But because what he said took away from a short quote used by their church to build their doctrine, they didn't want to hear it.
To say that Mary is the Cause of our salvation is to put Mary equal to the Father.

How is it taken out of context?

 

[patricius79]

Totally taken out of context. If one wants to know what Irenaeus actually said they need read them in context as the whole.
Last time I posted something that Justin Martyr said about the Eucharist the response was well IF he really said that....
Sheesh...I even gave the link to the complete writings of the early church fathers, where they could read them for themselves. But because what he said took away from a short quote used by their church to build their doctrine, they didn't want to hear it.
To say that Mary is the Cause of our salvation is to put Mary equal to the Father.

How is it taken out of context?

I believe that the Mother of God, the highest or all creatures, is the Cause of our Salvation without in any way comparing her to Her Divine Son or the Father.