Our mother Jesus gives birth to a new creation — and you and I are His children. If we’re going to keep on growing into Christ-images for the world around us, we’re going to have to give up fear. —Bishop-elect Katharine Jefferts Schori
Talk about confusion with referring to Jesus as both mother and being his children. I wonder if she refers to Father Mary?
38 comments
Jeff, Great post, but she’s not bishop-elect, she’s already a Bishopette and is “Presiding Bishop(ette) elect”, the American equivalent of the Archbishop of Canterbury.
Bishopette? Hm – while clever, it lacks a certain…I don’t know.
I prefer “High Preistess” And since they declined to pass a motion to recognize Jesus Christ as the only path to salvation, I’m not sure I’d even call them Christian anymore.
Lord, but one of them even said “How you live your life is more important than what you believe.”
Mercy. May they be inflicted with their own Protestants.
How is it that these people aren’t struck by lightning!?
Seriously, though, comments like this make me cross myself to ward off the evil contained within.
Would the last “progressive” Episcopalian left please turn off the lights before closing the door? Thanks.
–Mother Jesus
Is that the new agey way to say, “Be not afraid”? If so, I thought Pope John Paul II did much better.
She says some scarier stuff later on. I’m so sorry for those in the church who still love Jesus.
Does this mean he wasn’t married?
Oh great, I can just see Dan Brown’s newest book, “Mother Jesus, The Da Vinci Diva”, where he exposes the church’s 2000 year attempt to cover up the fact that Jesus was a cross dresser!
Mother Jesus? just unbelievable
While there is not a precident for calling Jesus “mother” and I would not support such a move for several reasons, there is a similar theme in the Church Fathers who speak of Christ giving birth to the Church from the cross, even referring to the “womb of Christ.” Likewise, it is appropriate to speak of the pre-existent Logos, or Holy Wisdom as a “she” in relation to God the Father. Let’s just be careful that in our worthy defence of God’s self-revelation as Father (and Son and Spirit) that we do not domesticate God and presume that any one name or title is adequate.
Heresy–and that is what all the forms of Protestantism are–eventually reaches the point where its only hymn is “Bring in the Clowns” followed by death. The only trouble is that a dead carcass sends out deadly bacteria that can wipe out whole healthy populations. And we can be sure the secular media will endeavor to become the carrier agents for any spawn from this carrion. Sorry if this language seems strong, but some of the mainstream Protestant churches really seem to be going beserk doctrinally and morally wholesale (not just having trouble with a few rotten clergy or grossly incompetent bishops).
Sorry to interrupt this, but…
The new Episcopalean Primate is making a reference to….
–> CATHOLIC IDEAS
Yes, folks.
“Our mother Jesus” comes straight out of Julian(a) of Norwich.
Here’s a document for you from the Vatican website:
http://www.vatican.va/spirit/documents/spirit_20010807_giuliana-norwich_en.html
— (begin quote from Vatican)
God is our Mother
“It is a characteristic of God to overcome evil with good.
Jesus Christ therefore, who himself overcame evil with good, is our true Mother. We received our �Being� from Him � and this is where His Maternity starts � And with it comes the gentle Protection and Guard of Love which will never ceases to surround us.
Just as God is our Father, so God is also our Mother.
And He showed me this truth in all things, but especially in those sweet words when He says: �It is I�.
As if to say, I am the power and the Goodness of the Father, I am the Wisdom of the Mother, I am the Light and the Grace which is blessed love, I am the Trinity, I am the Unity, I am the supreme Goodness of all kind of things, I am the One who makes you love, I am the One who makes you desire, I am the never-ending fulfilment of all true desires. (…)
Our highest Father, God Almighty, who is �Being�, has always known us and loved us: because of this knowledge, through his marvellous and deep charity and with the unanimous consent of the Blessed Trinity, He wanted the Second Person to become our Mother, our Brother, our Saviour.
It is thus logical that God, being our Father, be also our Mother. Our Father desires, our Mother operates and our good Lord the Holy Ghost confirms; we are thus well advised to love our God through whom we have our being, to thank him reverently and to praise him for having created us and to pray fervently to our Mother, so as to obtain mercy and compassion, and to pray to our Lord, the Holy Ghost, to obtain help and grace.
I then saw with complete certainty that God, before creating us, loved us, and His love never lessened and never will. In this love he accomplished all his works, and in this love he oriented all things to our good and in this love our life is eternal.
With creation we started but the love with which he created us was in Him from the very beginning and in this love is our beginning.
And all this we shall see it in God eternally.”
From �Revelations of Divine Love� by Juliana of Norwich (1342-1416), (LIX, LXXXVI).
— (end quote from Vatican) —
Here is a bit of context, the paragraph from “Homily preached the General Convention’s Closing Eucharist Wednesday, June 21, 2006 The Right Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori”
—
That bloody cross brings new life into this world. Colossians calls Jesus the firstborn of all creation, the firstborn from the dead. That sweaty, bloody, tear-stained labor of the cross bears new life. Our mother Jesus gives birth to a new creation — and you and I are His children. If we’re going to keep on growing into Christ-images for the world around us, we’re going to have to give up fear.
—
Excerpt from
Revelations of Divine Love: Julian of Norwich: Reflections on Selected Texts by Austin Cooper, O.M.I. (Twenty-Third Publications, Mystic, CT, 1986), 14, 102.
—
So Jesus Christ who sets good against evil is our real Mother. We owe our being to him�and this is the essence of motherhood! –and all the delightful, loving protection which ever follows. God is as really our Mother as he is our Father�
The human mother will suckle her child with her own milk, but our beloved Mother, Jesus, feeds us with himself, and with the most tender courtesy does it by means of the Blessed Sacrament, the precious food of all true life (Chapters 59, 60).
—
From the CCEL text of Julian of Norwich:
—
God rejoiceth that He is our Father,
and God rejoiceth that He is our Mother (ch. LII)
He is our Mother, Brother, and Savior (ch. LVIII)
—
And even the Apostle Paul, in chapter 4 of his letter to the Galatians, spoke of how he was “in labor” as a mother to the Galatians until Christ was formed in them.
So, lets at least acknowledge that she is referring to Catholic ideas that have been around since the 14th century, at least.
http://www.gloriana.nu/mother.htm
If numerous Catholic priests can preach on this, why can’t an Episcopal bishop?
(If you want to bash the Episcopalean bishop, and want to pick up “outrage” from conservative Episcopalean websites, at least make sure the ideas are not Catholic before throwing stones…)
Context is (almost) everything, O.Z.
A feminist bishop known for her curious doctrinal musings is going to raise eyebrows — or howls — when she refers to “Mother Jesus” and asks us to give up “fear.”
The fact that a Catholic said it does not make it a Catholic idea. Juliana of norwich is a favorite of new agers and feminists because of this kind of twaddle, but these ideas are profoundly UNCatholic. Christ Jesus is out BROTHER, firstborn of the dead and only begotton Son of the Father. God the creator is our FATHER, who has adopted us for the sake of His Son, that we might inherit the kingdom forfeited by our first mother and father. The Church is our MOTHER, recreating us as children of God, nourishing us in this world that we might one day see our Father face-to-face.
Note that it is not St. Juliana of Norwich, Doctor of the Church, nor the great theologian Juliana of Norwich, nor Beata Juliana. She is classed as a mystic largely because people couldn’t even figure out what she was talking about most of the time.
If you get genuine insight and spiritual gain from reading her writings, by all means do so, but don’t call this tripe Catholic.
Hey guys,
If you all think this is “uncatholic” tripe,
then write to Pope Benedict XVI
and tell him to take it off the Vatican website.
The document at the Vatican quoting Julian of Norwich, titled “God our Mother,” is part of the “Paths of the Spirit” series introduced in 2000 as follows:
—
VATICAN CITY, JULY 10 (ZENIT.org).- Over the last few days, the Holy See’s web page has been offering a new space to broaden the horizons of web surfers to the wealth of timeless Christian spirituality.
In the section entitled “Latest,” there is a link to “Paths of the Spirit”, an opportunity to meditate some of the insights offered by the great masters of the Church that lead to an encounter with God. The first series of meditations was prepared by the Pontifical Athenaeum “Regina Apostolorum,” and soon other Pontifical Universities and Athenaeums will be invited to contribute as well.
—
So, “God Our Mother” is an “insights offered by the great masters of the Church”.
I say again, if you think this is “uncatholic tripe,” well, talk to the Pope.
It’s his website.
O.Z., does the fact that it was used during their liturgy give you any qualms? Moreover, the document you cite concerns maternal aspects of God, not how we address Him. It’s similar in that sense to the dustup concerning the Presbytarians’ renaming the Trinity as “Mother, Child, and Womb.” The Trinity may contain familial aspects akin to that relationship, but it’s not how we address God.
Rich,
It was a homily.
It was not prayer.
It was not addressed to God.
She is not telling anyone to pary to “Mother Jesus.”
She was expounding on Colossians 1:11-20.
Here is part of that passage (NAB):
—
He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.
For in him were created all things in heaven and on earth…all things were created through him and for him.
…
He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead,
…
and through him to reconcile all things for him, making peace by the blood of his cross (through him), whether those on earth or those in heaven.
—
Here, again, is the paragraph from which the “shocking quote” was lifted:
—
That bloody cross brings new life into this world. Colossians calls Jesus the firstborn of all creation, the firstborn from the dead. That sweaty, bloody, tear-stained labor of the cross bears new life. Our mother Jesus gives birth to a new creation — and you and I are His children. If we’re going to keep on growing into Christ-images for the world around us, we’re going to have to give up fear.
—
She is preaching (not praying) on Colossian 1, specifically 1:15-20.
For comparison, this is from a sermon by CH Spurgeon in 1915 on the New Creation:
—
It pleased the Father to bruise him; he hath put him to grief; he hath made his soul to be an offering for sin.” That dolorous pain, then, of the Master was the world’s new-making. It was then and there that the world was born again. No mother’s pangs, when she brought forth a man-child, were such as those of Christ when he brought forth the new creation. It was there in the travail of his soul–did you ever catch that idea, the travail of his soul?–it was there that the new world was born! “Behold I make all things new” is a mysterious voice from the broken heart of a dying Saviour. From the empty tomb, as he rises, I hear it come in silvery notes, “Behold I make all things new.” You must trace the birth of the new creation up to the grave of our Lord Jesus Christ, to the place where the cross stood, and where his body lay.
—
What is the big deal?
This issue of the anglican communion splitting is yet another excellent proof in real life of why the church needs to be One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic. Without any final authority over issues of faith and morals and how to interpret the Bible, history will repeat itself again and again as the churches have been doing since 1517. It’s Deja Vu all Over again
Old Zhou — there are other authors, such as Origen, whose writings can vary between strongly orthodox and deeply problematic (in the case of Origen in particular, many of the problems were resolved, against his views, after his life, and so it would be wrong to see him as a heretic). And Origen is a writer whose thought has been seen as deeply important and influential, with a great deal of influence on Catholic theology. This does NOT mean that everything he wrote is correct; nor does the celebration of his influence imply an acceptance of everything that he wrote. And seeing the work of Julian of Norwich in the same light would be correct, I think.
Also, keep in mind that Julian was (I think! If I am wrong, please correct) one of the mystics of the way of negation, so references such as ‘Father’ or ‘Mother’ are already somewhat problematic, as it could be understood as making a positive statement about the nature of God. From her approach, it might be that the use of EITHER the term ‘Father’ or ‘Mother’ might be in no way a description of God, but a label to give a referent to our (incomplete) idea. Jesus, however, does not suffer from our limitation of intellect, and so we should see his use of the term ‘Father’ (and the Church’s adoption of this) as fundamentally different than Julian’s meaning behind ‘Mother’.
But do you really think that the new ‘archbishop’ (scare quotes are necessary here…she is no more a bishop than I am) didn’t mean to make a political statement here?
I agree with Old Zhou that refering to Jesus as “mother” as regards his birthing of the Church is not only theologically acceptable, but a valuable insight.
On the other hand, it is not appropriate to simply throw the title and image out in a homily without the proper theological explanation surrounding it. And Aaron C. is right in that the “Episcopal bishop’s” intent hardly seems meritorious or deeply theological.
Old Zhou, +Schori is a non-theist like her mentor, +Spong. She’s even had him doing her diocesan clergy training. You may not have heard of him, but +Spong is famous for speaking against miracles, the resurrection, and theism in general (“theism is immoral”).
But why rely on me? Why not listen to +Schori in her own words repudiate the most deeply held beliefs of Christianity?
Listen here on the day-before yesterday’s show (6/19) at around 32:20: Albert Mohler Show +Schori denies an actual afterlife in answer to a plain, blunt question.
All +Schori truly believes in are the Millenium Development Goals of the U.N.. She makes that abundantly clear. She only quotes the Bible or the writings of saints in order to lead people astray, not to deepen their faith.
The question was asked why these folks do not get hit with lightning? We could hypothesize that this is sort of a “pre-sort” when separating the sheep from the goats.
Actually, Danby, I’m pretty sure it IS “Beata Juliana.” Old Zhou is right. Now, I’m not always great at following Juliana–some of her writing (what I’ve read of it, years ago) is a bit dense. But it seems to me that she’s saying “insofar as we can call God a father (in spite of his lack of generative organs), we can also call him a mother, because the qualities of his love are both constant and protective (fatherly) and nourishing (motherly).”
Maybe I’m misreading.
Seriously….I think there’s like a website that generates that stuff for Ms. Schori. Seriously, you pop in a few keywords and it generates the homily for you.
Just posted over on Rich Leonardi’s blog, which references this blog…
Hi Rich,
I think it is dishonest to say that Bp. Jefferts Shori “invoked” “Mother Jesus.”
(1) No “invocation”
“Invoked” means to call upon “in-vocare” from Latin, and in this sense it would be in prayer. She was not praying, she did not say, “O Mother Jesus…” whatever. This was a homily on Colossians 1, about the work of the cross, the blood and suffering, through which Jesus brought forth the new creation.
(2) No “Mother Jesus”
Pay attention to your capitalization. “Mother” was not used by the bishop as a name, in apposition to “Jesus.” You make it sound like this is an alternative to “Jesus Christ” (i.e., a compound appellative).
Read the text of her homily again. Here is the paragraph:
—
That bloody cross brings new life into this world. Colossians calls Jesus the firstborn of all creation, the firstborn from the dead. That sweaty, bloody, tear-stained labor of the cross bears new life. Our mother Jesus gives birth to a new creation — and you and I are His children. If we’re going to keep on growing into Christ-images for the world around us, we’re going to have to give up fear.
—
Notice that “mother” is lower case. It is not appellative, but attributive. It is describing an attribute of Jesus who brings for the new creation by his labor on the cross. It is not a name to be invoked, anymore than our “big-brother Jesus” or “our friend Jesus” or “our wisdom Jesus” or “our salvation Jesus.”
Feel free to critique this woman and what she teaches, but do it fairly and honestly.
1:33 PM
Bottom line: I’m glad I’m Catholic. I do not want this or any other woman as my shepherd.
“Our mother Jesus gives birth, etc.” No matter how you rationalize the imagery–it is what you would expect from a bishopess at the head of a morally decaying church which embraces bishops who can’t tell a genuine marriage from unnatural vice.
If the trashing talk and “we’re better than them” attitude so evident in many of the comments here is what can be expected from Rome, why would anyone with an orthodox mindset from ECUSA in their right mind turn towards the Tiber instead of Joseph Smith, L. Ron Hubbard, or Mary Baker Eddy? You folks sure offer one bodacious backhanded welcome with whips and chains ………………. My wife tells of the nuns in parochial school teaching about pagan babies burning in hell; why don’t you just come right out and just tell every Protestant that that’s their fate and be done with it?
Joey W: This site encourages humor. Humor, especially the kind with a lot of truth, can be very harsh.
Considering that +Schori is a non-theist who, by her own words, does not believe in heaven… Jesus would have very, very harsh words for her. Perhaps Matthew 23:13-16 is appropriate:
“Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the kingdom of heaven in men’s faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to. Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as you are. Woe to you, blind guides!”
Matthew 23:13-16
When we repudiate false teachers we are following the example of Christ. It is Christian charity to do so.
Joey — a couple of points:
(a) Actually, I have a relative who is an orthodox member of the ECUSA who is leaving for Rome precisely BECAUSE of the fact that he recognizes that (1) truth is better than falsehood, and (2) the ECUSA has divorced itself from biblical truth. Speaking bluntly and uncompromisingly against error is something that many, many saints did. And it can attract those who are seeking the truth.
(b) Question: When did your wife attend parochial school? And do you take the words of Jesus seriously, when he speaks of the salvific power of Baptism, of the headship of Peter (and, secondarily, the Apostles) over the Church, the necessity to partake of the Body of Christ in order to have eternal life, etc.? I am not certain if you are coming from a non-Christian or a non-Catholic perspective…but at least accept that the Church takes the words of Jesus very,very seriously…
What’s creepy though is that Episcopalians have good music but bad leadership (e.g., female presiding bishop), while Roman Catholics have good leadership (less guys like Fishperson, Mahorny, and Tod Brown) and crappy music.
BMP
Consanescerion,
You say that this site encourages humor, which can be harsh. Am I to take it, then, that you’re saying to the ECUSA orthodox “we’re not really making fun of you, we just like to laugh at people who aren’t Catholics?”
Philosoph123,
When or where my wife attended any particular school isn’t actually germane. My own perspective is far more orthodox Christian than that of 95% of at least one local RC parish – I know this by having sat through several discussion groups (why was I there? I was required to be there because a child in my care was attending the parish school) at the aforesaid parish (the majority of whom present, one would presume, were members) and listened while people supported abortion, divorce, and birth control; denied the presence of Christ in Holy Communion; and openly criticized the lack of female and gay clergy.
Do I believe in the salvific power of Baptism? Not quite as you put it; I believe in the power of God to forgive sins through Baptism. I do NOT accept the primacy of Peter; having researched the organization of the primitive church thoroughly, it is clear that originally the See of Rome was co-equal with that of Jerusalem, Antioch, et al. The dominance of Rome comes about in parallel with political events; I do not find the “Petrine” argument convincing evidince for the papacy. And I take the teachings of Christ VERY seriously – that’s why I find it so frustrating when people take potshots at fellow [orthodox] Christians (even in jest) and think that they are somehow doing right. The idea of my original comment was to get people here to re-read what they had written and consider that they may be doing more harm than good. If I’m wrong about that, I’ll gladly stand before my Lord and be judged by Him.
Joey: I’m not laughing. I’m weeping for the tragedy that is Episcopalianism now. I know orthodox in that denomination whose hearts are being shredded. They have no choice but to leave. To stay is to support the Spongian anti-theists who have taken control. I pray that these evil beasts lead no others away from the saving power of our Lord.
We Catholics also contend with modernist apostasy and outright rebellion to God, but it varies by diocese and parish. It hasn’t touched our catechism or the Vatican. Further, the liberals are dying out or being retired. They know this… Fr. McBrien complains of it bitterly. Their day is done, thank God.
The kind of apostasy that has won the war in the Episcopalian denomination has never completely won in the 2,000 year history of the RCC. And it never, ever will. Jesus promised us that the gates of hell will not stand against us, and so far, those gates keep falling.
Joey, you should see Mark Shea’s comments “what I meant when I said the ECUSA is now manifestly an enemy of the gospel”.
Enemy of the Gospel
Apparently, since you believe that Jesus is the way the truth and the light, the Episcopalian leadership regards you as Nazi. And not just any old Nazi, but those in the death camps who selected out who should go to the gas chambers.
That seems less than Christian charity to me, but then, these people are not followers of Christ. Not even close.
oops… light=>life
I know tht the Anglicans, like us Catholics, call them “Father”. Do they call the priestesses “Father” or “Mother”?
D: Mother.
Remember the lady is a fallen away Catholic; who in her interview said:” We (her parents and family when she was 9) left a church that spoke latin for one that spoke english; a large and impersonal church for an intimate and caring one”. Remember, most of the protestant prayerbook is taken from the latin misaal and breviary; changing those things that defended the traditional faith. And MY experience as a former P.E. is the intimate and caring is often snobbish and exclusive. God bless the nice lady and may she be the push that many need to come back to Rome.
Comments are closed.