God As Gender Neutral...

[Veridicus]

I feel like I need to repeat what I stated in a previous post once again: there is a difference between sex and gender. Sex is defined by physicality. Hence we can say that Christ is a male while we cannot say that God the Father is a 'male' being because he doesnt' have a body. However, gender is defined relationally. What is 'masculine' is dependent upon the relationship that exist between the (biologically) male individual and those around him. God the Father's eternal relationship to the son, His relationship to creation, and the language used in the New Testament (all of which Apotheoun mentioned) all reveal God's essentially masculine characteristics. This does not mean that God the Father 'lacks' feminine characteristics (as if He could somehow be limited by masculine gender), it just means that in divine revelation He seems to have chosen to reveal Himself through masculinity.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Madame Vengier' post='1535637' date='May 20 2008, 09:54 PM']No one is questioning the Fatherhood of God. But the original question was regarding "gender" of which God clearly has none. The other point was that God has attributes of both mother and father, as confirmed in the catechism.

We seem to be repeating ourselves and each other...some of us.[/quote]
I disagree, because God -- based upon scripture, tradition, and the writings of the patristic authors -- has gender, and He is revealed as Father. While our Lord Jesus Christ, the eternal Logos and Son of God, due to His connection with the Church, can be said to be -- at least in reference to the people of God -- "Mother." That said, as an Eastern Christian I hold that it is absolutely contrary to the Triadological tradition of the Church to identify God the Father with feminine gender, remembering that gender is a linguistic category, because in the doctrine of the Byzantine Fathers, and the Cappadocians in particular, God is always Father, and so I refuse to confuse the abstract notion of "God" with the divinely revealed doctrine of the Christian faith. I do not worship an abstract notion; instead, I worship the three persons of the Trinity. Moreover, it must be borne in mind that in essence the Trinity is beyond being, and so nothing can be attributed essentially to the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; while hypostatically Fatherhood, Sonship, and Spiritual Holiness can be attributed to each person distinctly as their [i]tropos hyparxeos[/i].

In other words, the Trinity of persons has gender, and their gender is revealed in both scripture and tradition in masculine terms. The Father is the Father of the only-begotten Son and sole origin of the Spirit; whereas the Spirit is the breath of the Father and the Son, and the source of sanctification and life; while the Son, due to the incarnation, has both gender and sex, i.e., He is Son within the Trinity, and as Son of the Father -- due to His intimate connection with His body -- He can even be seen as "Mother", but again this is only applicable when referring to the Church, which is the perpetual extension of His incarnation throughout time.

Thus, I have no qualms in saying that God is not mother, but is in fact Father, i.e., the Father of the Son and of all creation, and the processor of the Spirit. While our Lord Jesus Christ is Son, Brother, Bridegroom, and -- in relation to His body the Church -- Mother, because Christ and the Church are one mystical Man. And finally, the Holy Spirit is giver of life, Spouse of the Holy Theotokos, and source of sanctity to the Church and to all of creation, because His energy glorifies the Son, while simultaneously permeating created reality.

Edited May 21, 2008 by Apotheoun

[Madame Vengier]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1535805' date='May 21 2008, 12:55 AM']I disagree, because God -- based upon scripture, tradition, and the writings of the patristic authors -- has gender, and He is revealed as Father.[/quote]

No one is arguing God is Father. Catechism 370: God has no gender, as he is pure spirit.

[Madame Vengier]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1534978' date='May 20 2008, 03:34 PM']One must be careful when quoting CCC #370 that he does not take it in isolation, because through the incarnation God truly, and not in mere appearance, became man (i.e., a concretely existing male individual).[/quote]

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, so now we're not taking Catechism on face value. That's convenient, isn't it? PM'ers love to throw catechism all around this forum, but when it's thrown to them the answer is "don't take it in isolation". Unbelievable. Just UNBELIEVABLE.

The catechism has spoken: God is revealed as Father, yet he has no gender and is pure spirit. Period.

[Cure of Ars]

[quote name='Madame Vengier' post='1535928' date='May 21 2008, 07:18 AM']Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, so now we're not taking Catechism on face value. That's convenient, isn't it? PM'ers love to throw catechism all around this forum, but when it's thrown to them the answer is "don't take it in isolation". Unbelievable. Just UNBELIEVABLE.

The catechism has spoken: God is revealed as Father, yet he has no gender and is pure spirit. Period.[/quote]


Madame, everyone agrees that God is not literally male or female. We speak in metaphors when we speak about God because that is all we really can do. The metaphors in reference to God take the male gender.

Edited May 21, 2008 by Cure of Ars

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Madame Vengier' post='1535928' date='May 21 2008, 06:18 AM']Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, so now we're not taking Catechism on face value. That's convenient, isn't it? PM'ers love to throw catechism all around this forum, but when it's thrown to them the answer is "don't take it in isolation". Unbelievable. Just UNBELIEVABLE.

The catechism has spoken: God is revealed as Father, yet he has no gender and is pure spirit. Period.[/quote]
First of all, I do not "love to throw [the Latin Church's] catechism" around like other Phatmassers; and second of all, I do not believe that isolated texts from the Latin Church's catechism express the Trinitarian faith definitively.

Gender is a grammatical construct and Christ spoke of God as Father not mother, and He never referred to the Holy Spirit as mother either. Now, as far as Logos Himself is concerned, He became man (i.e., a concrete existing male individual), and consequently He is spoken of preeminently in masculine terms, which is quite natural. Nevertheless, Christ, because the Church which is His body is referred to as female, can be called in theological discourse "Mother" (cf. Julian of Norwich's "Showings"); although this is not done in liturgical prayer. That said, I really do not see what your problem is with my position. Clearly we disagree, and such is life.

Edited May 21, 2008 by Apotheoun

[Madame Vengier]

[quote name='Cure of Ars' post='1536002' date='May 21 2008, 08:16 AM']Madame, everyone agrees that God is not literally male or female. We speak in metaphors when we speak about God because that is all we really can do. The metaphors in reference to God take the male gender.[/quote]

No, not everyone agrees on that. There are several people posting here that have made statements such as "he is male". This is simply not true. When I posted that God is neither male nor female and that he embodies attributes of both male and female, mother and father, someone wrote this was "almost heresy". When I then quoted the Catechism that stated exactly what I had already said, another poster said that quote can't be taken at face value.

No, not everyone is agreeing on the basic, fundamental, simple teaching already stated in the Catechism.

What we have here is a battle of egos where certain people do not want to admit they were wrong or at least partially wrong, even if it means flat-out ignoring #370 or making excuses for it can't be taken literally.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Madame Vengier' post='1535928' date='May 21 2008, 06:18 AM']The catechism has spoken: God is revealed as Father, yet he has no gender and is pure spirit. Period.[/quote]
You are confusing "sex" with "gender."

The Catechism does not "speak" because it is simply a book, nor does it represent the sum total of Catholic life and practice. Moreover, I gave up the "Sola Scriptura" doctrine when I converrted to Catholicism more than 20 years ago, and I have never embraced the modern "Sola Catechism" idea popular at the present time among Latin Catholics.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Madame Vengier' post='1535921' date='May 21 2008, 06:14 AM']No one is arguing God is Father. Catechism 370: God has no gender, as he is pure spirit.[/quote]
The word "gender" does not appear in CCC #370. It says that God, who I hold is properly speaking "the Father," is neither a man nor a woman. On the other hand, the second person of the Holy Trinity became man, and so He is a concrete existing male individual. I refuse to embrace either Docetism or Monophysitism.

Edited May 21, 2008 by Apotheoun

[Madame Vengier]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1536011' date='May 21 2008, 08:24 AM']First of all, I do not "love to throw [the Latin Church's] catechism" around like other Phatmassers; and second of all, I do not believe that isolated texts from the Latin Church's catechism express the Trinitarian faith definitively.

Gender is a grammatical construct and Christ spoke of God as Father not mother, and He never referred to the Holy Spirit as mother either. Now, as far as Logos Himself is concerned, He became man (i.e., a concrete existing male individual), and consequently He is spoken of preeminently in masculine terms, which is quite natural. Nevertheless, Christ, because the Church which is His body is referred to as female, can be called in theological discourse "Mother" (cf. Julian of Norwich's "Showings"); although this is not done in liturgical prayer. That said, I really do not see what your problem is with my position. Clearly we disagree, and such is life.[/quote]

That is just it: We DON'T disagree. It is you and others here with your wordiness and your long paragraphs (which often I enjoy reading) carrying on and on repeating the same thing, who are trying to MAKE it LOOK like we disagree. I have made TWO statements--the same two statements--and none of you has YET to prove how these two statements are wrong. You just keep talking and talking, and then ending with "we just have to disagree". The statements I have made are that God is neither male nor female (well, he's ISN'T)...this has nothing to do with the revelation of God as Father which I CLEARLY don't dispute. How could anyone in a clear mind dispute that?? The second statement I made was that God embodies attributes of male and female, and mother and father. Again, how is this wrong?

Neither of my statements are wrong, so stop saying "we disagree". My issue is with people saying "God is male" as if he truly had a gender. Every time I dispute the statement "God is male" one of you comes back with "Jesus revealed him as Father" as if I don't believe that!

You guys are making something out of nothing and trying to use theology to do so.

[Cure of Ars]

[quote name='Madame Vengier' post='1536017' date='May 21 2008, 08:29 AM']No, not everyone agrees on that. There are several people posting here that have made statements such as "he is male". This is simply not true. When I posted that God is neither male nor female and that he embodies attributes of both male and female, mother and father, someone wrote this was "almost heresy". When I then quoted the Catechism that stated exactly what I had already said, another poster said that quote can't be taken at face value.

No, not everyone is agreeing on the basic, fundamental, simple teaching already stated in the Catechism.

What we have here is a battle of egos where certain people do not want to admit they were wrong or at least partially wrong, even if it means flat-out ignoring #370 or making excuses for it can't be taken literally.[/quote]


I think it more likely that people are talking past each other. Let me ask you a question that I thinks gets to the root.

Do you agree that it would be wrong to change the words of the "Our Father" to "Our Mother"?

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Madame Vengier' post='1536028' date='May 21 2008, 07:36 AM']That is just it: We DON'T disagree. It is you and others here with your wordiness and your long paragraphs (which often I enjoy reading) carrying on and on repeating the same thing, who are trying to MAKE it LOOK like we disagree. I have made TWO statements--the same two statements--and none of you has YET to prove how these two statements are wrong. You just keep talking and talking, and then ending with "we just have to disagree". The statements I have made are that God is neither male nor female (well, he's ISN'T)...this has nothing to do with the revelation of God as Father which I CLEARLY don't dispute. How could anyone in a clear mind dispute that?? The second statement I made was that God embodies attributes of male and female, and mother and father. Again, how is this wrong?

Neither of my statements are wrong, so stop saying "we disagree". My issue is with people saying "God is male" as if he truly had a gender. Every time I dispute the statement "God is male" one of you comes back with "Jesus revealed him as Father" as if I don't believe that!

You guys are making something out of nothing and trying to use theology to do so.[/quote]
If you think, in all of your wordiness, that God can be called "mother", then we disagree. God is not mother. God is Father, i.e., the Father of the only-begotten Son and processor of the Holy Spirit.

Edited May 21, 2008 by Apotheoun

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Madame Vengier' post='1536028' date='May 21 2008, 07:36 AM']You guys are making something out of nothing and trying to use theology to do so.[/quote]
The Church has always held that words are important, and that is why the Fathers fought the Arian, Semi-Arian, and Eunomian heretics over the use of the words "homoousios" and "homoiousios."

Words can either express the faith, to the degree that that is possible, or they can corrupt it.

[Madame Vengier]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1536041' date='May 21 2008, 08:42 AM']The Church has always held that words are important, and that is why the Fathers fought the Arian, Semi-Arian, and Eunomian heretics over the use of the words "homoousios" and "homoiousios."

Words can either express the faith, to the degree that that is possible, or they can corrupt it.[/quote]


Whatever, Apotheoun. If you could come down off your high horse on occasion and try thinking and talking like an average human being instead of some kind of theological Superman, you would see more clearly what others are trying to say. And you would see clearly when they are saying the same thing as you are. As it stands you over-analyze and over-critique to the point that others' statements are cast into a doubtful (or even erroneous) light when they are not. It's thoroughly impossible for you to say that someone is right or that you agree with someone...maybe you have done that but I have never seen it in the 2 months I've been in this forum...you always find something to correct. Always. It's as if your brain is in constant over-drive to find error. And you do find it. Even where none exists.

I am going to clarify for the last time because I don't want to exit this discussion with any wrong ideas about my orthodoxy. Others may not care but I do. And then I'm done. I do not believe God has a gender, as he is pure spirit. But I believe Jesus revealed him to be as a Father. I also believe he has attributes of male and female (for example, the protecting nature of male and the nurturing nature of female) as evidenced by the fact that we humans are made in his image. I am not some leftist crackpot feminist who wants to make God a woman or who wants to make him nothing because I'm offended by maleness. I love maleness. But God is NOT male and that's the simple fact. We speak of him in the masculine as he was revealed as our Father but also because human language is so limited and we have to speak of him in terms that we are able to express and understand within those limitations. I am NOT okay with people referring to God as "she". I am an orthodox Roman Catholic who has no issues or disagreements with authentic Catholic teaching.

[Apotheoun]

I don't own a horse, a low or a high one.

If you believe that God can be called mother, you are simply wrong. God is Father, because He is Father of the only-begotten Son and processor of the Holy Spirit.

[Madame Vengier]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1536036' date='May 21 2008, 08:39 AM']If you think, in all of your wordiness, that God can be called "mother", then we disagree. God is not mother. God is Father, i.e., the Father of the only-begotten Son and processor of the Holy Spirit.[/quote]

See, this is what you do that makes me soooooooooo angry. [b]You find error where there is none[/b], as I stated in the post above this one.

I NEVER, EVER, EVER, EVER said that "God can be called Mother". NEVER. How many times have I posted in this thread?? And from those many times you gleaned from me a statement I NEVER MADE.

I'm not going to repeat it again, Apotheoun, because I already have numerous times.

[Apotheoun]

Being "nurturing" is not a "female attribute." My dad was quite nurturing, and my mom was quite tough.

God does not have male and female attributes; instead, human beings have attributes that iconically signify the divine attributes ([i]energeiai[/i]) of the Holy Trinity.

[Madame Vengier]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1536055' date='May 21 2008, 08:59 AM']If you believe that God can be called mother, you are simply wrong.[/quote]


WHAT DID I JUST SAY?????????????????????

I swear, I'm starting to think you're crazy. Sorry about that, but this is so troubling I don't know what else to think.

[Madame Vengier]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1536058' date='May 21 2008, 09:02 AM']Being "nurturing" is not a "female attribute." My dad was quite nurturing, and my mom was quite tough.

God does not have male and female attributes; instead, human beings have attributes that iconically signify the divine attributes ([i]energeiai[/i]) of the Holy Trinity.[/quote]

[b]I'm finished with you. [/b]

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Madame Vengier' post='1536059' date='May 21 2008, 08:02 AM']WHAT DID I JUST SAY?????????????????????

I swear, I'm starting to think you're crazy. Sorry about that, but this is so troubling I don't know what else to think.[/quote]
I simply don't subscribe to the nonsense that you are spouting on this topic, if that makes me crazy, GREAT.

Edited May 21, 2008 by Apotheoun