• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Jesus is my mother-a testimony

Status
Not open for further replies.

kisstheson

Contributor
Aug 6, 2005
10,839
752
68
✟14,639.00
Faith
Christian
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. But before I go on I would like to point out scripturally that Christ does have motherly attributes.

Jesus our Mother.
Here's a few scriptures to think about. (Sorry I can't give you the exact verses, just the whereabouts.)

1.) From Jeremiah "Can a woman forget her nursing child or fail to have compassion upon it? She may forget but no will I not. Israel you are always before Me."

In Isaiah: 'Your mother and father may forsake you but I will not."

Jesus in the Gospels "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, how often have I longed to gather you as a mother hen gathers her chicks under her wings."

From these few scrptures we see that Christ loves us with a love likened to a father and a mother. A father's love is strong and protecting. The same can be said of a mother's love but even more so a mother has nourishing qualties. This is what I want to address: how Jesus loves us like a mother and why it is important in relation to our Vine-Life with Jesus.

Perhaps this will be a new vision for some, seeing
Jesus as our mother. I think we will be greatly encouraged as we meditate on how Jesus keeps us and how close we actually are to Him.

Now let's watch how this beautiful truth unfolds. Didn't He know you and I before we were ever born? Even in Genesis when Adam and Eve had fallen the plan of salvation was already set in motion. We know from Psalms that David said all our days have been alotted to us and that we were fearfully and wonderfully made. God had knit us together in our mother's womb.

Imagine a good mother-to-be being told she was pregnant. What joy she has in knowing that soon she will bear a child! What a precious secret between her and her unborn child in that she alone knows what it feels like to carry that child, to know the movements and growth of the little one, and the child knows the mother more than anyone else. Not even her husband can experience this deep bond between mother and child. The child utterly depends on the mother for everything.

So how does this tie into Jesus? How can we find Jesus in this picture? I'll talk more about it tomorrow. In the mean time let's rejoice that we His!
__________________
 

thereselittleflower

Well-Known Member
Nov 9, 2003
34,832
1,526
✟57,855.00
Faith
Catholic
This is dangerous ground kisstheson.

God is God, and we are made in God's image, male and female, so God inherently has all the characteristics we have male and female. It is no wonder that we experience His maternal as well as paternal care.

However, that is no reason to be callilng Jesus our Mother. To go beyond that, and call Jesus our Mother, borders on gnostic type knowledge.

Jesus is not our Mother. He is our savior and BROHTER.

Mary is our Mother, the Church is our Mother, and given all the other threads about Mary, and your expressed opposition to all of the Church's teaching on Mary, it is obvious this thread was started to minimize Mary's importance as our mother, passing it to Jesus.

In today's time, when modernism and liberalism, promoting gender/transgender inclusive language and ideas, even into Catholicism, trying to downplay the masculinity of God as Father, the massive attempts of feminism to inject itself into Catholic thought and faith, such language is indeed dangerous for it can too easily be taken off in faith destroying directions very, very easily.

"Jesus our Mother" has been used in some circles to argue for the ordination of women.

This is not an innocuous title in the climate the Church finds itself today.

This is OBOB, and such dangerous language from someone who rejects the full teaching on Mary in the Catholic Church is not leading where Catholics are led to by the Church.

And this is what calling Jesus "Our Mother" can lead to- radical feminism and gnosticism.

There has been a great push for gender inclusive language which has even found its way into Catholic bibles - in the Catholic Student Bible that was put out a few years ago, such language was included that referred to God as our Mother in articles interspersed among the pages of scrpiture.

This bible was pulled by the Catholic Church and gender-inclusive, feminist language was removed before it would be allowed to be re-issued.

The Catholic Church does not promote, or permit to be promoted, such gender/transgender-inclusive language about the Divine God.

It is inappropriate to promote such language here in this forum when the Church does not use or promote such use, and has in fact discouraged such use within the Church.

Please respect our Church kisstheson.

The title "Jesus our Mother" is not found in Catholic teaching. Please don't promote something contrary to Catholic teaching here.

It is one thing to talk about the maternal, nuturing characteristics and nature of God, it is quite another to call Jesus our Mother.
 
Upvote 0

kisstheson

Contributor
Aug 6, 2005
10,839
752
68
✟14,639.00
Faith
Christian
This is dangerous ground kisstheson.

God is God, and we are made in God's image, male and female, so God inherently has all the characteristics we have male and female. It is no wonder that we experience His maternal as well as paternal care.

However, that is no reason to be callilng Jesus our Mother. To go beyond that, and call Jesus our Mother, borders on gnostic type knowledge.

Jesus is not our Mother. He is our savior and BROHTER.

Mary is our Mother, the Church is our Mother, and given all the other threads about Mary, and your expressed opposition to all of the Church's teaching on Mary, it is obvious this thread was started to minimize Mary's importance as our mother, passing it to Jesus.

In today's time, when modernism and liberalism, promoting gender/transgender inclusive language and ideas, even into Catholicism, trying to downplay the masculinity of God as Father, the massive attempts of feminism to inject itself into Catholic thought and faith, such language is indeed dangerous for it can too easily be taken off in faith destroying directions very, very easily.

"Jesus our Mother" has been used in some circles to argue for the ordination of women.

This is not an innocuous title in the climate the Church finds itself today.

This is OBOB, and such dangerous language from someone who rejects the full teaching on Mary in the Catholic Church is not leading where Catholics are led to by the Church.

And this is what calling Jesus "Our Mother" can lead to- radical feminism and gnosticism.

There has been a great push for gender inclusive language which has even found its way into Catholic bibles - in the Catholic Student Bible that was put out a few years ago, such language was included that referred to God as our Mother in articles interspersed among the pages of scrpiture.

This bible was pulled by the Catholic Church and gender-inclusive, feminist language was removed before it would be allowed to be re-issued.

The Catholic Church does not promote, or permit to be promoted, such gender/transgender-inclusive language about the Divine God.

It is inappropriate to promote such language here in this forum when the Church does not use or promote such use, and has in fact discouraged such use within the Church.

Please respect our Church kisstheson.

The title "Jesus our Mother" is not found in Catholic teaching. Please don't promote something contrary to Catholic teaching here.

It is one thing to talk about the maternal, nuturing characteristics and nature of God, it is quite another to call Jesus our Mother.


"In some of her later showings she stretches our understanding and images of God, especially of Jesus, by calling Jesus our mother. In a culture that tended to think of God as a distant and often angry king and judge, Julian used images of Jesus as a loving, comforting mother.
"Our high Father, almighty God, who is being, knew us and loved us before any time. From this knowing in His most marvelous deep charity, He willed that the Second Person should become our mother, our brother, and our savior, by the foreseeing endless counsel of all the blessed Trinity.
From this it follows that, as truly God is our Father, so truly is God our mother. Our Father wills, our mother works, and our good Lord the Holy Spirit confirms." [Julian of Norwich, The Revelations of Divine Love, Chapter 59]
Julian then related the suffering and death of Christ to what a mother goes through.
"We realize that all our mothers bear us for pain and for dying, and what is that? But our true mother, Jesus - All love – alone bears us for joy and for endless living, blessed may he be! Thus he sustains us within himself in love and hard labor, until the fullness of time." [Julian of Norwich, The Revelations of Divine Love, Chapter 60]
Julian lived in a time when people’s images of God and their spirituality tended to be very negative. There was a lot of emphasis on hell, damnation, and sin. Hers was a time when people had a deep of fear of God, and a time of tremendous problems in the Church. In the midst of this we see a woman who spent most of her adult life isolated yet who has had a tremendous impact throughout history. Both in her era and in our times she gives an image of God that continues to be extremely powerful even in our day, an image of God who is tender, loving and consoling. Julian’s experiences are ones that we can continue to learn and grow from today."


Does Jesus feed us with His own body and blood? Does He give us to drink of the wound in His side? I'm am NOT saying that Jesus is not male. This is not New Age theology. Jesus is a Father and a Mother to the Soul.

This is a Catholic link: http://www.stgertrudes.org/Ministry/Spirit_Center/Online_Retreats/Julian/julian_day6.htm
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

thereselittleflower

Well-Known Member
Nov 9, 2003
34,832
1,526
✟57,855.00
Faith
Catholic
Those are some pretty heavy accusations there Little Flower. Nothing I have said goes aginst the teachings of the Catholic Church. Have you ever heard of Julian of Norwich, a Catholic mystic in the middle adges? Did you know that Christ is often represented as mother pelican feeding her young with her blood?

"Julian adhered closely to the regime of Catholic phallogocentrism at least in part for survival. As a woman mystic during the persecution of Lollard heretics she was already moving in contested territory. Playing with divine gender in a way that celebrated the feminine, even in an already established (male) literary tradition that <b>represented Christ as Mother,</b>moved her more closely toward the transgressive realm. By means of this hierarchy of distinctions, medievals could posit metaphors in grace or substance while they regulated more strictly other performances in kynde or sensualite. Thus while Jesus was troped as Mother, and the Virgin as priest (Bynum Fragmentation, 101, 103, 212), medievals could also maintain a tradition of misogyny and reserve and exclusively male priesthood.






Notes​
  1. The text of Julian of Norwich's mystical account exist in roughly two forms: the sort text (an earlier version) and the long text of 86 chapters that includes the <b>revelation of Christ as Mother</b>. I will look at the long text in an edition by Marion Glasscoe.
  2. Julian seems also to be alluding to the ancient Hebrew wisdom tradition deriving from the ninth chapter of the Book of Wisdom and the eighth chapter of the Book of Proverbs.
  3. Finally, Julian represents the Church itself as a Mother to whose breasts believers go for sustenance.
  4. Among other invaluable documentation, in <b>"Jesus as Mother and Abbot as Mother: Some Themes in Twelfth-Century Cistercian Writing"</b>Caroline Bynum historicizes the modern retrieval of the Jesus Mother devotion with André Cabassut's 1949 "Une dévotion médiévale peu connue: la dévotion à ‘Jesus Notre Mère.'" This image was initially dismissed by male theologians (and according to Bynum, distaste for the image still persists in College and Walsh's two-volume critical edition), but has been restored by Christian feminism.
  5. In addition to those whom I use extensively here, there are many other useful discussions of transgendered divinity themes. These include Ritamary Bradley's "Mysticism in the Motherhood Similitude of Julian of Norwich"; Helen Busshart's 1985 Fordham dissertation, "Christ as Feminine in Julian of Norwich in Light of the Psychology of C.G. Jung"; Donald Christopher Nugent's reflective essay, "There Was a Feminine Mysticism"; Paula Barker's "The Motherhood of God in Julian of Norwich's Theology"; Rachel Jacoff's "God as Mother: Julian of Norwich's Theology of Love"; Jennifer Heimmel's "'God is Our Mother': Julian of Norwich and the Medieval Image of Feminine Divinity" (based on her 1980 dissertation).
  6. In a translation by "I.T." published by John Windet, for Mathew Lownes in 1609, a verse preface advises its readers to feed the infant soul so that it is strong enough when old and the body is feeble:
    . . . Then since you may be wretched, poore and old, Let no such infants starve for lacke of care, Who shall like thankefull children you uphold, When they more strong, when you more feeble are . . . (Consolation)
Does Jesus feed us with His own body and blood? Does He give us to drink of the wound in His side? I'm am NOT saying that Jesus is not male. This is not New Age theology. Jesus is a Father and a Mother to the Soul.
I am quite familiar with Julian Of Norwich. She is not the magesterium of the Church, and so cannot be used in the way you are attempting to use here her.

However, that was 700 years ago, in a different time and place. Modernism and feminism were not plaguing the Church, inclusive language, trying to minimize the masculinity of God as taught by the Church, in attempts to undermine Church teaching and practice, drawing away the faithful with error.

In our day today, this is dangerous ground as I said above. The Church does not promote such language about God for good reason. The Church actively discourages and does not permit it.

And given your opposition to the full teaching of the Church on Mary, it seems this is a continuation of the same.

What you have offered us is more than some insight you have. You have gone beyond that to presenting yourself as an instructer of truth to those of us here in OBOB.

And look at what you quote and what they attribute such use of language to today christian feminism. There is no such thing as legitimate christian feminism. It is the feminist agenda that tries to promote a transgendered God just as your source admits.


And from your source a part you did not quote:
A few years ago Pope John Paul II, in preparation for a visit to the United States, told American bishops of his concern about "bitter, ideological" feminists, who according to the pope are involved with goddess worship and nature religions, thus threatening Christian faith itself. What is remarkable about his claims is the power of patriarchal anxiety even in the twentieth century about (female) gendered representations of divinity.
And also:
"most Gnostic sources that have survived represent forms of Jewish or Christian gnosticism, and their uses of female imagery are indeed often in striking contrast to what is normally encountered in more ‘orthodox' forms of Judaism or Christianity'
You would do well to keep these things in mind.


Please consider this.

We are to imitate Jesus.

This imitation is not just limted to the time of His ministry. It includes all His life.

We are to become as little children, for such is the kingdom of heaven.

God became a little child, and placed all his dependence on Mary, His mother and ours.

In imitating Him, as we are called to do, we imitate Him best when we also turn to Mary our Mother, and placce all our depence on, and trust in, her.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

thereselittleflower

Well-Known Member
Nov 9, 2003
34,832
1,526
✟57,855.00
Faith
Catholic
I never said that Jesus isn't male. He is many things to the soul including a Mother as I have demonstrated by the scriptures I posted in my OP.

What I have said is not against the teachings of the Church.

Now I'm done arguing with you.

Peace.

kisstheson, you really need to respond to what was said, instead of what you imagine.

You are not dealing in any meaningful way with the issues I raised about using the title Jesus our Mother you gave in your post.

Your not dealing with the feminist underpinnings of its use today, and I see you changed your post to remove the source you originally gave - but I found it, and it is radical and has nothing to do with authentic Christianity.
 
Upvote 0

kisstheson

Contributor
Aug 6, 2005
10,839
752
68
✟14,639.00
Faith
Christian
Continuing...

A long time ago, even in eternity past you and I were in the heart of the Trinity. This heart was like a womb for in order for something to be birthed there needs to be a womb. The full expression of this womb within God was found in Jesus.

The coming of Christ at Christmas was not only the beginning of His human life here on earth but it was also the coming of us in Him. For all of His life Jesus carried us within Himself. The days He experienced hardship, thirst, the heat of the desert, the cold winter rains, sweat and toil, times of rejection, sadness ~ these were all labor pains. Jesus wouldn't have traded these pains for anything for He dearly loved what He carried in His heart-womb, You and I. We were so special and precious to Him. He, Abba and Spirit delighted in the glorious secret growth of God's holy intention.

Jesus was the one Vine, the shoot of Jesse planted in the barren earth. He had yet many branches within, unseen to all the world. Jesus had great joy in His hidden knowledge and He longed for the day when that which was hidden would be revealed.

"I have a baptism to undergo. How I am longing for it to be accomplished."

"With great desire I have desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer."

So often people who did not understand who Jesus was and His hidden mystery tried to kill Him but that was before His time.

"A woman when her times has come is sad because she knows she is about to deliver a child into the world. But once she has delivered her child her sadness turns into joy." Jesus said these words at the last supper, the night before His death. He announced His time had come.

He had carried us through eternity past, and into His incarnation, throughout all the days of His boyhood, even unto His manhood and now in the prime of His life the labor pains intensified. Throughout His Passion how terrible the oain.
The beatings
The lashing
The crowning of thorns
The mocking
The spitting
The carrying of the cross
The crucifixion

All during His contractions Jesus never lost focus of you and I. He knew we would have days of great joy, days when we would experience a wonderful closeness with Him, days when we would be obedient, when we would learn and grow, but He also knew there would be days we would stumble and fall, days when we would disobey and throw temper tantrums wanting our own way. Yet this knowledge did not in the least cause Jesus to say even for a second, "No the pain of their disobedience will be too much. If I can't have them absolutely perfect I will not go through with this birth."
No good mother would ever think such a thing, neither did Jesus.

One thing our Christ had which earthly mothers lack was the full knowledge of how we would look when we were all "grown up." Jesus saw our perfected state as well but He knew we could not be perfected unless we remained in Him. So our birth would have to be different than natural birth. We would have to remain intimately united to Him and utterly dependant on Him. How could this happen? What miracle would bring about this wonderous expression of His heart?

We will find out as we continue our meditation.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote 0

Globalnomad

Senior Veteran
Apr 2, 2005
5,390
660
72
Change countries every three years
✟23,757.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
I will answer you, TLF.

You said it yourself that God is both Father and Mother. We refer to him as He, for lack of an all-encompassing pronoun, but we must never reduce Him to mere maleness, or even to predominant maleness. We all know perfectly well, if we understand the most basic truth about God and ourselves, that He is equally male and female, so to speak. (While transcending both maleness and femaleness, of course)

Feminist underpinnings? Are YOU LETTING the feminists force you into adopting a partial, impoverished, theologically incorrect view of God just because you want to distance yourself from them? Poor you. And poor everyone else who does. "Feminist underpinnings" are the worst possible reason for denying God's femininity.
 
Upvote 0

kisstheson

Contributor
Aug 6, 2005
10,839
752
68
✟14,639.00
Faith
Christian
kisstheson, you really need to respond to what was said, instead of what you imagine.

You are not dealing in any meaningful way with the issues I raised about using the title Jesus our Mother you gave in your post.

Your not dealing with the feminist underpinnings of its use today, and I see you changed your post to remove the source you originally gave - but I found it, and it is radical and has nothing to do with authentic Christianity.
TLF,

Again nothing I said goes against what the RCC teaches. True some feminist groups may misuse Julian's teachings. A lot of things can be misquoted and misused. this does not mean they are wrong in the first place.

Jesus does have nurturing qualities. I never said he wasn't male. There is nothing wrong with saying Christ is a mother to the soul.

This is my last reply to you in this thread. Might I suggest if you don't like viewing Christ in this manner please don't visit or contribute to this topic.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

kisstheson

Contributor
Aug 6, 2005
10,839
752
68
✟14,639.00
Faith
Christian
I will answer you, TLF.

You said it yourself that God is both Father and Mother. We refer to him as He, for lack of an all-encompassing pronoun, but we must never reduce Him to mere maleness, or even to predominant maleness. We all know perfectly well, if we understand the most basic truth about God and ourselves, that He is equally male and female, so to speak. (While transcending both maleness and femaleness, of course)

Feminist underpinnings? Are YOU LETTING the feminists force you into adopting a partial, impoverished, theologically incorrect view of God just because you want to distance yourself from them? Poor you. And poor everyone else who does. "Feminist underpinnings" are the worst possible reason for denying God's femininity.

I would be grateful if people could see how seeing Christ as both a Father and Mother brought much emotional healing in my life. He is many things to our soul, Father, Brother, Teacher, Friend, Lord, Savior etc...

Thanks for your input. I sure do appreciate it right now.
 
Upvote 0

Annie2

getting there
Nov 30, 2008
26
4
✟22,666.00
Faith
Christian
"El Shaddai" is one of the many Judaic names of God.

According to Exodus 6:2, 3, Shaddai is the name by which God was known to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The name 'Shaddai' is used as a name of God later in the Book of Job.
El Shaddai is often translated as "God Almighty", but that hides the meaning of the hebrew word.

Because the epithet/agnomen gives God a feminine aspect.:yum:

'Shadayim' means "breasts" in Hebrew. In several instances it is connected with fruitfulness: "May God Almighty [El Shaddai] bless you and make you fruitful and increase your numbers…" (Gen. 28:3). "I am God Almighty [El Shaddai]: be fruitful and increase in number" (Gen. 35:11). "By the Almighty [El Shaddai] who will bless you with blessings of heaven above, blessings of the deep that lies beneath, blessings of the breasts [shadayim] and of the womb [racham]" (Gen. 49:25).

The Talmud says that 'Shaddai' stands for "Mi she'Amar Dai L'olamo" - "He who said 'Enough' to His world", when God was creating the world.
"God who is sufficient." God is Enough; sufficient to supply all of one's needs. As the mother supplies the newborn baby, fulfilling all his needs: feeding him, giving him tender loving care.

El Shaddai, "God who has breasts", who feeds His children, supplies them, is all-sufficient in their needs.

(couldn't post a link to: www hebrew4christians dot com/Names_of_G-d / El / el.html - remove all spaces)
 
Upvote 0

thereselittleflower

Well-Known Member
Nov 9, 2003
34,832
1,526
✟57,855.00
Faith
Catholic
"El Shaddai" is one of the many Judaic names of God.

According to Exodus 6:2, 3, Shaddai is the name by which God was known to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The name 'Shaddai' is used as a name of God later in the Book of Job.
El Shaddai is often translated as "God Almighty", but that hides the meaning of the hebrew word.

Because the epithet/agnomen gives God a feminine aspect.:yum:

'Shadayim' means "breasts" in Hebrew. In several instances it is connected with fruitfulness: "May God Almighty [El Shaddai] bless you and make you fruitful and increase your numbers…" (Gen. 28:3). "I am God Almighty [El Shaddai]: be fruitful and increase in number" (Gen. 35:11). "By the Almighty [El Shaddai] who will bless you with blessings of heaven above, blessings of the deep that lies beneath, blessings of the breasts [shadayim] and of the womb [racham]" (Gen. 49:25).

The Talmud says that 'Shaddai' stands for "Mi she'Amar Dai L'olamo" - "He who said 'Enough' to His world", when God was creating the world.
"God who is sufficient." God is Enough; sufficient to supply all of one's needs. As the mother supplies the newborn baby, fulfilling all his needs: feeding him, giving him tender loving care.

El Shaddai, "God who has breasts", who feeds His children, supplies them, is all-sufficient in their needs.

(couldn't post a link to: www hebrew4christians dot com/Names_of_G-d / El / el.html - remove all spaces)

You are promoting error here in OBOB.

Exodus 6:2 does not use shaddai - it uses elohim.

verse 3 does.

Now lets look at the word in verse 3

Translated as "ALMIGHTY"
Lexicon Results
Strong's H7706 - Shadday
&#1513;&#1491;&#1497;
Transliteration
Shadday

Pronunciation
shad·dah'·&#275; (Key)

Part of Speech
masculine noun with reference to deity


Root Word (Etymology)
from H7703

TWOT Reference
2333

Outline of Biblical Usage
1) almighty, most powerful
a) Shaddai, the Almighty (of God)

Note, it is MASCULINE, not feminine.

It is not derived from the feminine form either. The feminine form is not used of God and does not control our understanding of the masculine form.

There is a difference in language between feminine and masculine forms for a reason.

The error of your post is that it fails to make this distinction, and attempts to make the feminine controlling over the masculine, and this simply is not the case.

In fact, if you look at the information I presented above, you will see what it really is derived from:
Lexicon Results
Strong's H7703 - shadad
&#1513;&#1491;&#1491;
Transliteration
shadad

Pronunciation
shä·dad' (Key)

Part of Speech
verb


Root Word (Etymology)
a primitive root

TWOT Reference
2331




Outline of Biblical Usage
1) to deal violently with, despoil, devastate, ruin, destroy, spoil
a) (Qal)
1) to violently destroy, devastate, despoil, assail
2) devastator, despoiler (participle) (subst)
b) (Niphal) to be utterly ruined
c) (Piel)
1) to assault
2) to devastate
d) (Pual) to be devastated
e) (Poel) to violently destroy
f) (Hophal) to be devastated


El Shaddai does NOT mean the "God who has breasts". FAR FROM IT!



Please stop posting in contradiction to the teaching of the Church and promoting heterodox teachings that have no basis in apostolic christianity.
 
Upvote 0

Debi1967

Proudly in love with Rushingwind62
Site Supporter
Dec 2, 2003
20,540
1,129
58
Green Valley, Illinios
Visit site
✟94,055.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
MOD HAT ON

DEFINITION OF A FELLOWSHIP POST

1) It is not debate or apologetics (defense).

Those who disagree with a congregation’s Statement of Faith will not discuss reasons for or against any subject being discussed on this sub-forum. This includes questions that essentially are rebuttal or argumentative in nature. Those who disagree will not engage in theological discussions that defend their particular point of view on scriptural, theological, doctrinal, social, or political issues.

2) It is not answering questions or teaching.

Only a member of the congregational forum may give answers to and instruct on doctrinal questions. While there may be many very good ideas on the subject from non-members, they may not give instruction. Earnest questions are always welcome, from anyone.

3) What Fellowship is:

Essentially fellowship is defined as the discussion of topics of association, of companionship - i.e. discussions of things like friends, family, work..... these topics are fellowship. Posts that offer friendship would certainly be described as fellowship.

MOD HAT OFF
 
Upvote 0

thereselittleflower

Well-Known Member
Nov 9, 2003
34,832
1,526
✟57,855.00
Faith
Catholic
Further on Catholic thought - commenting on a "God our Mother" prayer:

Besides being, as Anders put it, one of the hippiest prayers ever- the invocation of God as Mother as well as Father is completely out of line with Church teaching. This probably should not have shocked me, since Mr. Tom Rinkoski, the man who brought Gainesville Magdalene, is in charge of Religious Education at St. Augustine’s.

So what is wrong with calling God Mother? Put simply, God has revealed Himself as our Father, not Mother. If we call God Mother, we are fashioning God in our own image- how we would like Him to be. This is idolatry. Our Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI, said while he was Cardinal Ratzinger: “Christianity is not our work; it is a Revelation… we are not authorized to change the Our Father into an Our MotherSo in calling God Mother, we are not only misunderstanding the nature of God, but the nature of Divine Revelation as well.

Some might say that we may call God ‘Mother’ because the Scriptures contain several references to God using maternal characteristics. Examples include Jesus wanting to gather Jerusalem “as a hen gathers her brood under her wings” (Matthew 23:37) and when God says that he “will cry out like a woman with labor pains.” (Isaiah 42:14) These passages from the Bible, however, do not show that God is a Mother. In fact, Pope John Paul II said that “it is significant that in the passages from the Prophet Isaiah, the fatherhood of God is enriched by images of motherhood.” So it is not attributing motherhood to God, but complementing His fatherhood with maternal images.

The fundamental reason why God is called Father is related to creation. In the procreative process, the father is the source of life. The mother is more or less passive as the father impregnates the egg cell within her, creating new life. In Creation, God is the source of our being. To say that He is the Mother takes away from His role in Creation as Father. Secondly, God created man in His image. Now both man and woman are created in His image in that we have an intellect and an immortal soul. But, according to St. Thomas Aquinas, who quotes 1 Corinthians 11, “for man was not made from woman, but woman from man.” Therefore, God also made man in His image in a way that He did not make woman in His image.
We must then ask the question, why is there the need to make God our Mother? Jesus called God Our Father, we pray the Our Father, we say in the Creed that we believe in God the Father Almighty, and that Jesus was begotten of the Father. Our Lord gave us His own mother, the Blessed Virgin Mary, for our mother. Let us pray to her, that she might show us the Truth in Christ’s Church, and the Truth about the Divine Nature. Praised be the Blessed Trinity- Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

http://www.testimonytotruth.com/2008/05/god-our-father-not-our-mother.html
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.