Friday, June 23, 2006

My rant begins

While one might accept that in their Divinity God, Christ and the Holy Spirit encompass all facets of both male and female gender, or neither; have we not been taught that in His Incarnation the scriptural Jesus (well documented by other autographs of the time likewise) was an historical person, of male gender, and fully human?

And, if that is the case, how can our titular head elect refer to Him (Jesus) as mother on a sound theological basis?

Furthermore, without sound theology, from whence can proceed respect?



At 12:20 PM, Blogger Sophia said...

It's from Julian of Norwich and other Middle Age sources. Our PB elect was not pulling it out of nowhere but rather using something that was just a bit too obscure for some.

At 2:29 PM, Blogger The Observer said...

I am aware that Julian of Norwich (in the 14th Century, BTW) made the reference. I am also aware that's where she pulled it from. I feel however, and have every right to do so, that the PB Elect's comments are ungrounded theologically and stand by my original comments.

There is no sound theology for Jesus, the man who walked the earth, to be referred to as Mother. Consequently, I repeat, were the comment with regard to Christ (the Divine Manifestation of a part of the Trinity) the Theology is OK. With regard to Jesus, No Way!


Post a Comment

<< Home