You mean at the top. That's how totem poles work
Then you'll be happy to know that comment put you a little farther down on the totem pole.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
trinity; monotheistic or polytheistic?
- Thread starter syo
- Start date
Then you'll be happy to know that comment put you a little farther down on the totem pole.
Trinitarianism is a confused sort of polytheism.
Resolve the logical problems (or "mysteries", as Trinitarians often call them) to make it consistent polytheism and it's no longer Trinitarianism.
No, that's Subordinationism, which is considered heretical by Trinitarians:
Subordinationism - Wikipedia
This.I'd say it's kind of like Polymorphic Monotheism, that there is one original Supreme deity who takes many forms, like the religion i am a part of. What do you think of this position?
There is considerable controversy on how "proper" Trinitarianism, Mary worship and other situations are from a monotheistic perspective.
I don't really understand why (and I remain wondering what is meant in Islaam by "God with no partners"), since the Abrahamic's conception of divinity is supposed to transcend all limitations and should therefore be presumed to have as many aspects as anyone might want to perceive.
Disagree, Mary described as the Mother of God, and the Queen of Heaven elevates here to Goddess status the wife of the King, God the Father.
Actually, this is a valid objection to traditional Christianity in that God does not have a wife, Mary, Queen of heaven, nor a God the Son seated on the right hand of the throne with God the Father.
Last edited:
As I stated, in the teaching of the Church, 'God is one', no contradiction to 'Hear O Israel......'
This reflects the belief of Jews, Moslems and Baha'is as pure Monotheism, The problem is traditional Christianity complicates things with the mythology of Tri-theism resulting in a pantheon of Divinities.
Last edited:
If Elizabeth II is the queen of England, who is its king?
That doesn't follow.
Perhaps not just by itself, but it's part of a big picture in which Mary is worshiped.
Sure, theory's against it and learned theologians will explain patiently and at length what orthodoxy says and requires.
But ─ just as with so many saints ─ the faithful will go on worshiping Mary, and addressing prayers to her in the confident expectation that she herself will fulfill them, not just mail them on to HQ.
I even found this link where a former nun says she used to do just that till she was corrected. She was willing to be corrected. Many of the faithful will think she instead just lost sight of the obvious.
Considering Mary Created separate without sin, Mother of God and Queen of Heaven pretty much describes her as Goddess of the highest order.
Mary is described as the mother of God insofar as she is the mother of the incarnate Christ. Nevertheless the second person as God does not derive his divinity or origins from her. It simply does not follow to assert that Mary being Theotokos implies divinity on her part, although it does imply a unique and extolled place in the created order.
I'm not interested in debating the merits of the doctrine itself. (I have no illusions that I'm going to convince a Baha'i and a sceptic). I only point out that shunydragon's inference is not valid.
If you actually look at most of the marian prayers you'll notice that they very often, if not almost always involve the request (both explicitly and implicitly) that Mary, as the Mother of God pray on our behalf and present our prayers before Christ.
Last edited:
I agree in the sense in which it was originally intended, which was informed by the idea that the material for the offspring came entirely from the man, and the woman's contribution was just to provide a warm womb where the man's progeny could incubate.
With the benefit of a few thousand more years of understanding, we now realize that the man and woman contribute equally to the genes of the offspring, so it's hard for modern readers to infer that the term "mother" doesn't have any connotations of providing a significant part of the substance of her "son".
Sure. Holy Mary, mother of God, pray for us sinners now and the hour of our death amen. (Where I grew up, one radio station used to run the Angelus every 6pm.)
Of my close friends over the years, four have been RC. One of them was my best man, as I was his; his wife would firmly agree with you, and he wouldn't disagree. The third and the fourth, each French, would agree whole-heartedly with me.
And even without them, I've seen others in action; my taxi-driver touching his St Christopher, indifferent to the latter's Vatican demotion; even woeful ladies sobbing to Mary; she'd understand what God plainly didn't.
The facts out there on the ground don't always follow theory. We're dealing with humans here.
It might have to do with how Dt 6 is interpreted. Consider, "Yahweh is our God, Yahweh alone", this would be an affirmation of exclusive devotion to Yahweh and not monotheism. This confession of faith Jesus identified as the greatest commandment.
Exclusive devotion ti Yahweh our God, Yahweh alone, is indeed an affirmation of strict monotheism. and yes the confession of faith Jesus identified as the greatest commandment, but the corruption of Christianity, the Trinity, Tri-theism and deification of Mary came later.
Considering that according to orthodox belief Jesus had no biological father, one could infer that the entirety of his DNA would have had to come from Mary.
But when we use the word 'substance' in a philosophical or theological sense, we're not talking about the biological or physical attributes of a person or thing. Mary really is the mother of Christ in a biological sense, yet that the second person took on a human nature (which includes a physical body) is not innate to what God is as God. That Mary is genetically related to the incarnated Christ does not imply that Mary shares his substance as God.
Of course, a certain religious group (and its offshoots) may have a vested interest in perpetuating a mangled understanding of the Trinity and incarnation, but you almost certainly already know that.
Devotion to Mary is devotion to Christ, therefore one can never go 'too far' in such devotion. The reason we invoke Mary and the saints isn't because we're seeking to bypass God or that we feel that we can't invoke God directly, but because not all prayers are equal in the eyes of God. Some people are closer to God than others, and even closer to God than even the holiest monastic are the people already in Heaven. Who better to pray on one's behalf than the very mother of God himself?
Catholic teaching here is unambiguous even for the poorly catechized, that there is only one God. What you may see as 'worship' of Mary or a saint, may in fact just be typical Catholic devotion well within the bounds of orthodoxy. And of course, pointing out that many among the ranks of the rosary clutching, headscarf wearing old ladies may not have particularly sophisticated understanding of the details of Catholic theology isn't news to anyone. But even still, I have never seen anyone believe that a saint can answer prayers independently of the will of God. No matter who one invokes, it's God who does the answering ultimately. It is just that it (according to catholic belief) pleases God to involve his saints in the granting of graces, much as it pleases God to use angels to protect and guide us. Not that God actually needs the help of any being or power.
Last edited:
There is no Christian God, the God whom Christians worship is the one God of Israel. But this one God is not solitary. There is dialogue within. There is no formulation of the Trinity in the Gospels, but there is found in Mt instruction to baptize in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. In Acts Luke presents vision of Steven before his execution in which he sees God with Jesus and the Holy Spirit at his {Steven's) side.
Being raised in the Roman Church and studying for the Priesthood for a year I consider this a dodge of the reality of the description of the nature of the Trinity and Mary. You side step the fact that Mary is also the 'Queen of Heaven.
Describing the Trinity as three distinct beings with their own identity, and Jesus Christ seated on the right hand of God, most definitely fits the definition of Tri-Theism (note bold in the citation which you have chosen to avoid) and Mary with the status of Goddess wife of God the Father.
[cite=[URL='http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p1s2c1p2.htm']Catechism of the Catholic Church - PART 1 SECTION 2 CHAPTER 1 ARTICLE 1 PARAGRAPH 2[/URL]]
The dogma of the Holy Trinity
253 The Trinity is One. We do not confess three Gods, but one God in three persons, the "consubstantial Trinity".83 The divine persons do not share the one divinity among themselves but each of them is God whole and entire: "The Father is that which the Son is, the Son that which the Father is, the Father and the Son that which the Holy Spirit is, i.e. by nature one God."84 In the words of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), "Each of the persons is that supreme reality, viz., the divine substance, essence or nature."85
254 The divine persons are really distinct from one another. "God is one but not solitary."86 "Father", "Son", "Holy Spirit" are not simply names designating modalities of the divine being, for they are really distinct from one another: "He is not the Father who is the Son, nor is the Son he who is the Father, nor is the Holy Spirit he who is the Father or the Son."87 They are distinct from one another in their relations of origin: "It is the Father who generates, the Son who is begotten, and the Holy Spirit who proceeds."88 The divine Unity is Triune.
255 The divine persons are relative to one another. Because it does not divide the divine unity, the real distinction of the persons from one another resides solely in the relationships which relate them to one another: "In the relational names of the persons the Father is related to the Son, the Son to the Father, and the Holy Spirit to both. While they are called three persons in view of their relations, we believe in one nature or substance."89 Indeed "everything (in them) is one where there is no opposition of relationship."90 "Because of that unity the Father is wholly in the Son and wholly in the Holy Spirit; the Son is wholly in the Father and wholly in the Holy Spirit; the Holy Spirit is wholly in the Father and wholly in the Son." [/cite]
How so?
I have affirmed the Trinity (I mention the second person multiple times) affirmed both the humanity and divinity of Christ and have affirmed that Mary being properly called the Mother of God holds the greatest place of any created creature. What exactly have I sidestepped? Catholic doctrine is clear that as unique and extolled as Mary is, she is not in any way divine. And you darn well know that if as you claim you have studied Catholicism. All you've done is to assert what Catholic doctrine means, by the authority of your own bias.
You're being dishonest. It's not three beings, but three persons in one substance. There is one being that is God, each person of that being contains the entirety of that one being, one nature, one substance.
And your quotation doesn't help your case, it spells out explicitly that the three persons comprise one God.
The Father is that which the Son is, the Son that which the Father is, the Father and the Son that which the Holy Spirit is, i.e. by nature one God."84 In the words of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), "Each of the persons is that supreme reality, viz., the divine substance, essence or nature."85
You will occasionally hear in the devotional language of certain Catholic writers of Mary as the spouse of the Holy Spirit, but if you take that to literally mean that Mary is married to God in the sense she was married to St Joseph then you don't quite understand the notion of metaphor. Also I have never heard the claim that Mary is the wife of God the Father, which doesn't even make sense as the miraculous conception of Christ is explicitly stated in the Gospels to have been the action of the Holy Spirit.
Last edited:
I have presented the case with facts, and citations. This polytheistic belief in the Trinity, and the Goddess Mary is mirrored in Greek, Roman, and ancient Canaanite/Ugarit polytheism, and is rejected by Judaism, Islam and the Baha'i Faith. There is no support for these beliefs in the OT, and vague interpretive conclusions in the NT, and not in Jesus Christ's own words. In other words the polytheistic Trinity, and station of Mary is NOT Biblical, but a later corruption by the Roman Church.
The description of Mary a 'Mother of God' and 'Queen of Heaven' are not a metaphors based on the Catechism of the Roman Church.