As conversations between Catholics and Protestants grow, many are revisiting traditional views on Mary. What do these titles mean, and how should Christians engage across theological lines? Join the discussion in Crosswalk Forums.
When Catholics call Mary the “Mother of God” or venerate her as the “Queen of Heaven,” many Protestants pause. Some see these titles as biblical reverence for the woman who bore Christ. Others see them as doctrinal overreach, bordering on idolatry.
But do we really understand what these terms mean—or why they matter?
This article from Crosswalk breaks down what Catholics actually believe about Mary, and how that affects the way different parts of the Church view her role:
Logically they left out the Mother and call the Holy Spirit a person. Wrong, logically. The Family of God is the Holy Spirit, not a person, and together with the Father and The Son is The Mother in One Holy Spirit Family One God in being, Created From the Father through The Mother for the Son in The Christ becoming again in all One Holy Spirit Family One God in being.
Romans 11:36 For from Him, Created from the Father and through Him (Her Mary) and for Him Jesus are all things. In Him The Holy Spirit Family One God in being be the glory forever. Amen.
God of Transformation and Queen of Heaven. Immaculate Conception from the Annunciation becoming the Mind of God in the first flesh becomming "Woman in the Word, Mary God of Mercy The First Christ on earth in the Mind of God from Holy Spirit incorruption through Her Soul becoming immaculste immortal flesh for New Eve through His Passion, to me.
God of Transformation and Queen of Heaven. Immaculate Conception from the Annunciation becoming the Mind of God in the first flesh becomming "Woman in the Word, Mary God of Mercy The First Christ on earth in the Mind of God from Holy Spirit incorruption through Her Soul becoming immaculste immortal flesh for New Eve through His Passion, to me.
Peace to you—but brother, we’ve officially left the pages of Scripture and landed in the deep end of mystical invention.
Mary is not God. She is not “the first Christ,” not the “Mind of God in flesh,” and not a “God of Mercy.” That kind of language may sound reverent, but it’s blasphemous if we’re being honest. Scripture never deifies Mary—it magnifies Christ alone (Phil. 2:9–11, Col. 1:15–20).
Yes, she was chosen. Yes, she bore the Messiah. But she needed a Savior too (Luke 1:47). She’s the servant, not the source. The vessel, not the vine.
Let’s be clear: there is one God (Deut. 6:4), one mediator between God and man—the man Christ Jesus (1 Tim. 2:5). No queen of heaven shares His throne. That title, in fact, is used in Jeremiah as a rebuke against idolatry (Jer. 7:18).
So I say this with love but with fire: Step back from mystical language and step into the Word. God doesn’t need poetic reinvention—He’s already revealed Himself perfectly in Jesus Christ.
Truth matters more than imagination. Let’s build on rock, not reverent-sounding sand.
OMNILogically, Mary is the personal God of Transformation, God of Mercy for mortal flesh of the Old Eve Becoming through the New Eve for all mankind, Baptized immortal reborn into the Church, The New Temple, The Body of Christ from the Holy Spirit through the souls of all mankind for the flesh in The Body of our own personal Christ from Sacrifice through Penence, forgiven becoming again One Holy Spirit One God in being.
We know salvation is through the Faith of Abraham and nothing is being taken from faith through presenting logic with respect to the logical formulas of the Wondrous Mysteries of the Faith in the Christ becoming again in all, One God.
Now all together, Glory Hallelujah, God is Good.
Logically Mary is the Mother of God through the Holy Spirit in the New Eve and Mother of Son of Man through the flesh of The New Eve, both Our Mother and Our Sister, and to me, No Body knows this OMNILogic, not even Catholics. Catholics think the Holy Spirit is a person in being, and Mary is not in the Trinity, and I am not judging, only generalizing logic that I See as rational. Pope Francis always says, don’t preach or prosetytize, only generalize. Yes, Papa Francis, God bless you always.
So true, SincereThinker, if everything were written not even the world could contain the books.
Here is the Logical Rational test, from the Faith of Abraham, becoming again through two natures, from The Spirit out of the Bosom through the Flesh of Jesus descending with flesh through the Christ emptying the chasm of the Bosom of the Bosom of Abraham stealing back His souls like the Parable of the thief in the Night with all the saints and angels and Old Covenent Saved and Dismas with Him crosses over to the Chasm of Hell with flesh and bust down the Gates of hell and binds the strong man in his own home, Satan tearing down his walls and destroying death forever and we know in this story, Jesus is not the bad guy resurrecting spirit and life becoming again in all mankind One Holy Spirit Family One God in being.
St John the Baptist is The greatest born of all creation and yet least in the Kingdom to come? Logically this can be because of only one way rationally, and this is your logical test, without faith how can one prove St John is the least in the Kingdom, truthfully logically?
The hint is both Jesus and Mary were transformed without Baptism, became Baptized to be able to become from death becoming again through resurrection glorified and transfigured back to from where they Came, in One Holy Spirit Family One God in being.
StephenAndrew, brother—peace back at you, but I’m gonna need to borrow your thesaurus, your decoder ring, and possibly a fire extinguisher. Let’s dive.
You say “OMNILogically” Mary is the “personal God of Transformation.” Stop. Full stop. That’s not logic—it’s word salad with a side of heresy. Mary is not God. She is not a god. She is the Mother of God—the Theotokos—not because she generated divinity, but because the One she bore is God. That’s Chalcedon 101, not OMNILogic 9.0.
You said: “Logically Mary is the Mother of God through the Holy Spirit in the New Eve…” That’s a poetic twist, sure. But here’s the problem: logic isn’t truth unless it’s biblically anchored. And Scripture never elevates Mary into the Godhead. You don’t “generalize” someone into the Trinity because it sounds mystical. That’s how cults start, not churches.
Let’s look at actual logic—with Scripture:
“For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.” – 1 Timothy 2:5
Not Mary. Not “the flesh of the New Eve.” One Mediator. Christ.
You said Catholics are confused because they think the Holy Spirit is “a person in being.” I hate to break it to you, but if the Holy Spirit isn’t a person, you’ve just unplugged the entire Trinity. The Spirit is not a force, not a vibe, not a metaphor. He’s the third Person of the Trinity. Jesus said:
“But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things…” – John 14:26
Notice the pronoun: He. Not “it.” Not “generalized divine transformation essence.” He.
Now, your riff on Jesus raiding the chasm of Abraham’s Bosom is dramatic, but you’ve dressed up a biblical moment in theological cosplay. Yes, Christ descended to the dead (1 Peter 3:19), yes He defeated death, but no, He didn’t “steal back His souls like a thief.” That’s not exegesis—that’s an action movie rewrite.
And your “logical test” about John the Baptist? Jesus already explained it:
“Truly I tell you, among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater than John the Baptist; yet whoever is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.” – Matthew 11:11
That’s not a paradox. That’s a picture of new covenant elevation. John was the last of the Old Covenant prophets. The least believer post-resurrection is in Christ, filled with the Spirit—something even John didn’t experience before his martyrdom.
And this line here? “The hint is both Jesus and Mary were transformed without Baptism…” That’s not a hint. That’s a miss. Jesus was baptized (Luke 3), to fulfill all righteousness. Mary? No Scripture says she was baptized or needed to be. She said “my spirit rejoices in God my Savior” (Luke 1:47)—meaning, like the rest of us, she needed saving.
So here’s the truth: Mary is to be honored (Luke 1:48), not deified. The Spirit is a person, not a philosophy. And Christ is the center, not OMNILogic.
Blessings, yes—but with a side of biblical clarity and a firm boot back into orthodoxy.
Wow, like: “StephenAndrew, brother—peace back at you, but I’m gonna need to borrow your thesaurus, your decoder ring, and possibly a fire extinguisher. Let’s dive.” SincereSeeker, 2025
Please read slowly with logical glasses on, tightly, thanks in advance, Stephen, mystic in training.
Thank you Brother SincereSeeker, turning down the heat, thanks, Good information on John the Baptist, and sound theology, thanks for your intellectual understanding and from you always, and I did take the tangent route there for the moment, now back online, thanks for the bump. I still think Saint John the Baptist is born immortal and incorruptible from the womb, and is the The Greatest Born as The Sacrament of Baptism to mankind transforming all immortalized from the living waters through the flesh into the Church, requiring for him no additional sanctification or sacraments to become again, glorified and transfigured back to Heaven from where we all came from cousins now sisters and brothers through the Blood and Water from the cross in the One God.
Where did all of the blood and water even come from, He was dead? No, the blood and water is from rebirth from the cross for all mankind through the gates now reopened from the “Firstborn Christ of all Creation” back from where The Holy Family came, to the New Heaven and Earth, Heaven for all. Even the earth was Baptized through the flood, everything was at least 40 feet underwater, to become again.
And I think you may agree, partially on Mary, and we know Jesus refers to the Holy Spirit as “He” primarily because he uses the masculine Greek word “parakletos,”
In Romans 11:36, there are three persons and one group to me logically in the sentence. From Him, Through Him and For Him are all, In Him be the Glory of One Him?
Romans 11:36
36 For from him and through him and for him are all things. In him be the glory forever! Amen.
Maybe there is a mistranslation of the second person, or perhaps even a faux pas or social blunder leaving the Woman out of the Trinity, calling Mary as Him and then if corrected, the Holy Spirit can now be the Family of God, One God in being?
What logical gender is The Holy Spirit? as a Family non-gender, or even more truthfully logically, all gender because the Holy Spirit is the Family of God together with all genders, all mankind, saints and angels and Gods, becoming again in all One God in being.
You said and If Jesus is the third person, then, who is the second Him? and could the second Him be a Her?, Mary, making the to Him be the glory, be then The Holy Spirit Family One God in being?
In all generalization each are Gods and there is not a first or second or third God but are Gods, personal Gods in being and all equal in the powers of God and equal in the power of God separately and together One God, One Holy Spirit Family in being, rationally.
Theologically, the personal relationship is the rebirth, New Eve and salvation, New Adam from the personal Gods and members of The Holy Spirit Family in One God in being, created from The Father. There has to be a Father there together with the Son and The Mother together, in on Personal Holy Family? Or there has to be Her Son there together with The Mother and the Father, for all to become again? Or there has to be a Mother there for a Father together with His Son to become again One Holy Spirit Family One God in being in all mankind? We become again united as One in Being, From the Father through the Mother for the Son becoming The Christ in all mankind becoming again One Holy Spirit Family One God in being, two nature spirit and life physiologically, personally, faithfully.
The God from the Faith of Abraham is the Two Nature God, from the spirit through the souls of all for the flesh, The Body for all becoming again as He promised to Abraham and swore by His own name eternal life the the descendants of Abraham and 2000 years later fulfilled His Promise for His Son through our own personal Holy Family conceived through our flesh becoming our own personal Christ becoming again in all One God in being.
The Holy Spirit Family is neither gender because The Holy Spirit Family of God is all beings in One Holy Family One God in being, in all generalization.
In all rationality, now born becoming transformed immortal and is through the New Eve and saved for Jesus from the New Adam becoming The Christ in all mankind becoming again glorified and incorruptibly Holy Spirit transfigured One Holy Spirit Family One God in being,
Thanks in advance, and to me the common denominator of all faiths is the spirit and in Catholicism and Protestants too, the spirit is personal Gods in being becoming inside of us to live and becoming again fulfilled logical infallible intelligence undefiled manifesting through the created souls of all for the flesh, The Body through two natures, Spirit and Life, loving only and only loving in the most love becoming again One Holy Spirit Family One God in being.
The logic is in the reading, follows the logical formulas of the faith trusted and verified through transforming the concepts becoming again transfigured in all generalization.
If this logic is true, with respect to the teachings of The Church and the glasses you are wearing, then tell me where did this logic come from?
Peace received—and returned with a double portion of clarity and a splash of theological espresso. You asked for logic, so buckle up. Because I’m about to run your theological blender on high and see what’s pulp and what’s smoothie.
Let’s cut to the sacred chase:
1. John the Baptist: Immortal? Incorruptible? The Sacrament Itself?
Brother, John said “He must increase, I must decrease” (John 3:30). Not “I am the fountain of sacraments.” Yes, he was filled with the Holy Spirit in utero (Luke 1:15), but if he was born glorified, then why did Jesus say, “Among those born of women there has arisen no one greater… yet the least in the Kingdom is greater than he” (Matthew 11:11)? If he’s the prototype of glorified humanity, why is he less than the least in the Kingdom?
You’re honoring the forerunner by making him the finish line. Let the Baptist point to the Lamb and step aside.
2. Blood and Water from the Cross—Not Metaphysical Kool-Aid
Jesus was pierced after death (John 19:34). The blood and water were real, not just allegorical. Yes, they represent baptism and the Eucharist, but they weren’t conjured from theological imagination—they gushed from the rent flesh of the slain Lamb. That’s not mystical metaphor, that’s messy mercy. Fulfilled prophecy, not floating philosophy.
3. The Holy Spirit’s Gender? You’re Asking the Wrong Question
God is not a creature. God transcends gender. The Holy Spirit is referred to with masculine pronouns because of Greek grammar, not genitalia. You don’t build theology on syntax. That’s like building a cathedral on a Jell-O mold.
Mary is not the third person of the Trinity. She’s the mother of God (Theotokos), not God the Mother. Elevate her, don’t deify her. Scripture won’t support swapping out the Holy Ghost for a Marian upgrade.
4. Trinity ≠ Holy Family
You’re blending the Triune God with the Holy Family like a theological smoothie, and friend—it curdles. The Trinity is eternal: Father, Son, Spirit. The Holy Family is temporal: Joseph, Mary, Jesus. One is uncreated; the other needed diapers. Don’t collapse categories that Scripture keeps separate.
5. “Personal Gods in Being” — That’s Polytheism with a Haircut
God is One (Deut. 6:4). Not “many persons who are each gods in being.” That’s not the Trinity—that’s a Marvel multiverse with robes. The Persons of the Trinity are not three gods but one God in three Persons. Co-equal, co-eternal, consubstantial. This is not negotiable theology; this is Nicaean orthodoxy. If your logic leads you to a pantheon, throw out the logic and open the Word.
TL;DR:
Your zeal is evident. But brother, theological creativity doesn’t excuse doctrinal confusion. If your “logic” turns Mary into a member of the Trinity, John the Baptist into an immortal demi-sacrament, and the Holy Spirit into a cosmic family tree of all genders and beings, then it’s time to stop and consult the Map again—the Scriptures.
“Test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world.” (1 John 4:1)
You don’t need a new revelation—you need a firm foundation. Christ is enough. The Spirit is real. The Father is sovereign. And Mary is blessed, yes—but not divine.
@StephenAndrew , I cannot digest this argument. I’ll tell why, @SincereSeeker, pls look into it
All claims are put forward my @StephenAndrew from his previous posts. I just summarized certain controversial points in the form of claims, and I will answer those claims. if I have recognised any claim in the wrong manner, @StephenAndrew is free to correct me. I did in claim-response format so one doesn’t confuse my ideas, Claims from @StephenAndrew posts Response from my side
Let’s dive into it
Claim1 Mary as a “personal God”- baptism confers inherent immortality and incorruptibility.
My response @StephenAndrew proposes that Mary is a “personal God of transformation” and speculates that she may constitute a fourth kind of hypostasis or member within the Trinity, as a part of a so-called “Holy Spirit Family”. This is not merely heterodox, but it’s tantamount to quartodeism (the introduction of a fourth divine person), which violates the most fundamental article of the Christian faith: the unity of a Triune God. The Christian understanding of God, dogmatically defined in the First Council of Constantinople and reaffirmed in the Athanasian Creed, holds that GOd is one ousia, in three hypostases: Father, Son and Holy Spirit- distinct, co-equal and co-eternal. TO introduce a fourth person into this unity is to obliterate the monotheistic essence of Christianity, rendering it metaphysically incoherent.
Mary is Theotokos- God bearer, but this is a Christological title, not a divine attribute. She is venerated as the most exalted of all creatures, but remains a creature. She is not divine in nature (physis) and doesn’t share in the communication idiomatum (communication of properties) in the way Christ’s two natures do. Scripture is unambiguous, as
“For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus” (1 Timothy 2:5).
“The Lord our God, the Lord is one” (Deut. 6:4, Shema Yisrael).
“I am the Lord, and there is no other; besides me there is no God” (Isaiah 45:5).
Thus any attribution of divinity or mediatorship to Mary as an ontological being, rather than as a cooperative creature, constitutes a gross error and misunderstanding against the simplicity of God (divina simplicitas) Claim 2 Mary is the Holy Spirit generalised My response:
One blurs the identity of the Holy Spirit, reducing the Spirit to a generalised divine force and then equating or merging the Spirit with Mary. This amounts to pneumatological confusion bordering on modalism and theological syncretism. The Holy Spirit is a distinct divine person (hypostasis), not a feminine abstraction nor a spiritualized projection of Mary. The scripture is crystal clear on this matter
“The Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things…” (John 14:26).
“Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed…” (Ephesians 4:30).
Here, the Greek pronoun ekeinos (“He”) affirms personhood. The term Paraklētos (“Advocate”) is grammatically masculine in Greek, but more importantly, the Spirit is ontologically personal. He is the Giver of Life and Sanctifier. and proceeds from the Father and the Son (Filioque, per western tradition)
Mary, as full of grace (kecharitōmenē, Luke 1:28), is filled with the Spirit, but she is not the Spirit. The confusion here is analogical at best. TO collapse the ontological distinction between the uncreated Spirit and the created vessel of grace is to reject the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), which stated clearly: Inter creatorem et creature non potest tanta similitude notari, quin maior sit inter eos dissmilitudo (“Between Creator and creature no similarity can be noted without noting an even greater dissimilarity”)
Next Claim 3 John the Baptist was born immortal and did not require sanctification My response:
This soteriological fiction contradicts the doctrine of Original Sin (peccatum originale) and sacramental regeneration through Christ. While it is true that John the Baptist was filled with the Holy Spirit from his mother’s womb (Luke 1:15), this pre-sanctification is an extraordinary grace and not an exception from fallen human nature. Even the Immaculate Conception of Mary is a singular privilege granted by God because of the merits of Christ (Refer Ineffabilis Deus, 1854), not due to inherent sinlessness. John, though pre-sanctified, still inherited concupiscence and mortality. He died and awaits the resurrection like all the righteous.
Romans 5:12 is definitive:
“Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned…”
The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC 405) confirms
“Original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam’s descendants. It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice…”
John the Baptist is the greatest among those born of women, but he is still a creature and a member of the Old Covenant, not glorified or transfigured in an eschatological sense until the Resurrection.
Next Claim 4 Jesus’ blood and water from the Cross came from some metaphysical pre-existence or family unity My response:
The Speculation that the blood and water from Christ’s side were not natural but symbolic o a pre-existent “Holy Family” descending from heaven, is a confusion of Christology and sacramental typology, and it departs from the realism of the Incarnation (verbum caro factum est - John 1:14)
The blood and water that flowed from Christ’s side (John 19:34 are saacremental signs, pointing towards Eucharist and Baptism, the Church’s birth from the new Adam
As St. Augustine writes “The Church was born from the side of Christ as Eve was born from the side of Adam.”
This is a typological realism, not metaphysical speculation. Jesus’ blood is real, generated through His human nature, which He assumed from Mary. The union of divine and human natures in the hypostatic union doesn’t involve pre-existent matter from heaven. It is historical and incarnational. To mystify it into some celestial biological is the error of docetism or apollinarianism.
Next Claim5
**All are personal Gods in being/general divinatization ** My response: @StephenAndrew claims that all persons are “personal Gods in being”,(correct me if I’m wrong), suggesting that humans become God in essence rather than by participation. This is a monstrous confusion of the doctrine of theosis with pantheism. True Christian divinization (theosis,θέωσις) means participating in God’s divine nature ( 2 Peter 1:4) by grace not by nature. We do not become homoousious with God, rather we are *adopted into divine life by grace through Christ.
St. Athanasius clarified this in De Incarnatione Verbi: “God became man so that man might become God”—that is, by participation, not by essence."
TO say we are “personal Gods” is to blur the infinite ontological distinction between Creator and creature. The Church condemns any assertion that the soul is consubstantial with God or that human persons can become deities in themselves. Such gives an idea of Eastern monism, not Trinitarian Christianity.
Last Claim 6 The Holy Spirit is a non-gendered family essence, and we are saved through a cosmic return to a Mother-Father-Son unity My response:
This is an attempt to build a mythological metaphysic out of familial archetypes, distorting the Trinity into a cosmic triad or Jungian psychology model. The Trinity is not a family in any natural or anthropological sense. The Father is not the male parent of the Son. The “Father” and “Son” language is analogical and relational, not familial. The immanent Trinity (God as He is in Himself)must never be confused with the economic Trinity (God as revealed in salvation history)
The Holy Spirit as Mother idea, explored poetically by some mystics like Kilian of Norwich, has no basis in dogmatic theology. The Church holds that God is neither male nor female but uses masculine titles to express authority, origin and revelation. The Holy Spirit is “He”, not because of Biology but because of personal distinction.
This triadic family model risks subordinationism, tritheism and modalism all at once. It replaces the revealed, ineffable mystery of the Trinity with an imaginative schema, more aligned with New Age Metaphysics.
This is not merely heterodox, but it’s tantamount to quartodeism (the introduction of a fourth divine person), which violates the most fundamental article of the Christian faith: the unity of a Triune God.
Peace to all,
There is no forth divine person, because the Holy Spirit Family of God in a Family Of God becoming again in all mankind, One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Spirit and Life Family One God in being through Two natures, Spirit and life.
Three personal Gods preexisting before creation was ever created was even created, Father, Mother, and Son becoming again in all One Holy Spirit Family One God in being, simple OMNILogiic, to me.
The Holy Spirit is not a person inbeing, making Mary the Third GOd in teh One Holy Spirit Family One God in being.
Three Gods, From Creation from the Father through transformation through the Mother for the Son becoming the Christ in all manking becoming again The One Holy Spirit Family One God in being.
On One Logical person will ever argue the OMNILogic in the Holy Spirt Family One God in being.
StephenAndrew, my dude—whatever spirit you’re channeling, it’s not Holy and it’s definitely not Scriptural. So let’s slice this OMNILogic omelet with the Sword of the Spirit and see what’s really cookin’.
ERROR #1: “Three Personal Gods”
You said:
“Three personal Gods preexisting… Father, Mother, and Son…”
That’s not theology. That’s tritheism with a heretical hat-trick.
Scripture isn’t playing a cosmic episode of Family Feud. There is ONE God:
“Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one.” – Deut. 6:4
Not three Gods. Not “Father, Mother, and Son.” The Trinity is one Being, three Persons—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Mary is not eternal, not co-equal with God, and not divine. She was created, chosen, and graced—not begotten, not pre-existent, and definitely not the “third God.” That’s pagan goddess talk wrapped in soft-spoken confusion.
ERROR #2: “Holy Spirit is not a person”
You said:
“The Holy Spirit is not a person inbeing…”
Let’s check the Word. Jesus said:
“When He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all truth…” – John 16:13
Not “it.” Not “the divine vibe.” He.
The Holy Spirit speaks (Acts 13:2), grieves (Eph. 4:30), wills (1 Cor. 12:11). That’s not poetic metaphor—that’s personhood. Denying the Spirit’s personhood cuts out the core of Trinitarian truth.
ERROR #3: Mary as “Third God”
You said:
“…making Mary the Third God in the One Holy Spirit Family One God in being.”
Sir. Just—no.
Mary was blessed among women (Luke 1:28), not enthroned among the Godhead. The Bible says:
“Before Me there was no God formed, Nor shall there be after Me.” – Isaiah 43:10
Calling Mary “God” is not veneration—it’s idolatry in a theological trench coat.
FINAL VERDICT: Burn the OMNILogic
What you’re doing isn’t building theology—it’s tossing spiritual spaghetti at the wall and calling it doctrine. You’re remixing the Trinity, deifying Mary, and turning biblical truth into a mystical word smoothie.
I’ll say this with love but not leniency: Repent of this OMNILogic mess before the logic of God consumes it. Because the Lord doesn’t need new “logical revelations”—He’s already spoken.
“Forever, O LORD, Your word is settled in heaven.” – Psalm 119:89
Peace? Only when it’s grounded in truth. Until then—consider this your divine fact-check.
@StephenAndrew, ik brother @SincereSeeker take this as an addition to your ans, pls see my prev posts on reply to Stephen, then read this one, otherwise, there gonna be confusion, my brother.
The claim that the “Holy Spirit Family” is a collective entity encompassing a multitude of divine persons collapses the essential distinction between hypostasis and ousia, crucial to trinitarian Theology. The Nicene-Constantinopolitan creed (381AD) affirms one God in three personae: Father, Son and Holy Spirit, not a family.
Holy Spirit (to Pneuma to Hagion) is a distinct persona with divine attributes (Theou hypostasis), consubstantial with the Father and the Son (homoousios), eternally proceeding from the Father (and the Son in the Western Church through the Filioque). Theologians like St.Athanasius insist that the Spirit is not an impersonal force or an anthropomorphic family but a personally hypostatic, co-equal, co-eternal with Father and Son (De Incarnatione)
@StephenAndrew assertion that the Holy Spirit is “not a person in being” and that Mary is the “Third God” is not at all digestible, because it elevates a created human being to divine status and distorts the mystery of the Trinity.
The Theotokos(God-bearer), Mary, is venerated as Mother of God in the sense that she bore the incarnate Word (Jesus, the Second Person of the Trinity), in her womb. She is not divine by nature, she is a creature, the highest of all creatures, but not part of the Godhead. This is consistent with the Council of Ephesus (431 AD) and subsequent Orthodox Christology.
Assigning Mary divinity, equal to Father and Son, violates the simplicitas and unity of God’s essence. This is condemned by the First Commandment and the Church Fathers.
Stephen Brother’s claim that there are Three Personal Gods (Father, Mother and Son) undermines monotheism, replacing it with tritheism, condemned by the First Council of Constantinople and the Council of Chalcedon.
The doctrine of tres eprsonae, una essentia, teaches that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit share the same divine nature, inseparable yet distinct in hypostases. The concept of “family” as a collection of divine beings is foreign to orthodox doctrine, which emphasises perichoresis, the interpenetration of the three persons without confusion or division.
@StephenAndrew phrase of “One God in being through Two natures, Spirit and Life” conflates the Trinitarian personae with Christological natures. In orthodox theology
God, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit each possess the one divine nature (ousia). There are no “two natures” in God but one.
“Two natures”(duae naturae) belong only to the person of Jesus Christ, fully divine and fully human (hypostatic union) as defined by the Council of Chalcedon (451 AD)
Spirit and Life are not separate natures but attributes or actions of God. Life flows from the Spirit, but they are not distinct essences.
“OMNILogic” is a meaningless term not found in Scripture, Tradition or Theology. Orthodox theology affirms the mystery of the Trinity, accessible only through divine revelation and safeguarded by apophatic theology (recognition that God transcends human logic). I explained this on the previous topic, which was later merged with this post.
Only use theology, scriptures…go after what’s revealed, don’t go after what’s unrevealed, and don’t go after new age metaphysics.
Biblical texts such as Matthew 28:19 (“baptising… in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit”) and John 1:1-3 affirm the three-personal nature of God without division or multiplication.
The Church Fathers (eg, St.Gregory of Nazianzus and St.Augustine) consistently emphasise the personal distinctions and unity of the Trinity, not a “family” of gods.
To address the topic’s question directly. “What do Catholics believe about Mary”, my curt response is “I don’t know”. It has been my observation, however, that “Catholic” beliefs about Mary, the spouse of Joseph is about as varied as Catholic beliefs on just about every other ecclesiastical subject; they are all over the proverbial map. To bear the label “Catholic” does not imply much unity of doctrine, as I have witnessed it anyway.
I thought I might interject a few “truths” about Mary, the spouse of Joseph, as we are taught from God’s word. In no particular order, Mary was:
Espoused (betrothed) to, and eventually married Joseph, the son of Jacob.
Received prophetic revelation of impending events from an Angel named Gabriel. (Lk 1:26)
Mary spontaneously prophesied to her relative Elizabeth (what we call The Magnificat) (Lk 1:46-55)
Was impregnated, and gave birth to a son (Jesus) while still a virgin.
Her newborn (infant) child was worshiped, by shepherds and by Magi from the east.
Mary and Joseph offered the requisite sacrifice in the temple for their firstborn son.
She and Joseph were blessed by Simeon, and Mary was told that a sword would pierce her own heart (soul). (Lk 2:35)
Had other children by Joseph; James, Joses, Judas, Simon, and some sisters. (Mk 6:3)
She raised Jesus, with Joseph, in Nazareth, and continued to practice The Law as a family (Lk 2:41)
She and Joseph accidently left Jesus behind, in Jerusalem, when he was 12. They returned to look for him for 3 days. (Lk 2:46)
She followed Jesus in His ministry, and was present as He was crucified. (Jn 19:25)
She was put her into the care of his beloved disciple John by Jesus, as he hung on the cross.
She continued in the faith with the disciples, and with the new ecclesia (Acts 1:14)
We read or learn little else about her life; about how she apparently outlived her husband, and how or when she eventually died. I mention these things because many of the above facts are very human, and would be inconsistent, and even inconceivable if Mary were without sin, or some sort of deity. Some pagan cultures speak of humans becoming deity, but orthodox Jewish and Christians never do. The created simply never becomes the uncreated, in any form of logic, not even “Novelogicalicisim” (or Hollywood speak). By diligently collecting all the instances of some subject on which we are taught from God’s Word, and being enlightened with an indwelling of The Holy Spirit of God, we arrive at transcendent truth; we find we have ears to hear.
Mary was called “the highly favored one” was told “the Lord is with you” and that she was “blessed among women!" (Luke 1:28). Any other title, or aptronym added to her would be extrabiblical, and I am quite sure would not be appreciated by Mary.
KPuff, I really appreciate your thoughtful and orderly walk through the biblical life of Mary—it’s refreshingly grounded in Scripture and refreshingly free of theological gymnastics. But let me nudge the conversation just a bit deeper.
You said Catholic beliefs about Mary are “all over the map.” Fair point—in practice, that’s often true. Some treat her like a quiet, blessed servant of the Lord (which she was), while others practically crown her the fourth member of the Trinity. That’s not official Catholic doctrine—but it’s absolutely a real problem in the pews. And here’s where Protestant eyebrows go up and stay up:
It looks like worship.
It sounds like worship.
And in some cases? It is.
People kneel before statues, light candles to her, pray entire rosaries about her, and sometimes speak to her with more intimacy than they speak to Christ. That’s not “hyperdulia.” That’s functionally latria—worship in all but name. It may not be what the Catechism teaches, but it’s what grandma in the front row is doing every morning before Mass.
So yeah—we see it, and we call it what it looks like: duck theology. Walks like worship, quacks like idolatry… you get the point.
But let’s pull it back to solid ground. What the Church officially teaches (and what the early Church affirmed) is this:
Mary is not divine.
Mary is not a co-redeemer.
Mary is not the source of grace.
She is the chosen vessel. The handmaiden. The new Eve. Blessed among women, but still a woman. Saved by grace, not the giver of it.
“My spirit rejoices in God my Savior.” – Luke 1:47
She needed a Savior too.
Where we all should agree is here:
Mary points to Jesus.
Mary magnifies the Lord.
Mary’s final recorded words are, “Do whatever He tells you.” (John 2:5)
That’s the Mary I’ll gladly honor. Not crown. Not enthrone. But honor. Because that’s what Scripture does.
So if Marian devotion gets in the way of Christ? Toss it in the theological fire.
If it helps someone obey Christ more deeply? Great.
But the minute she becomes the focus instead of the finger pointing to the Son, we’ve crossed the line from reverence to rivalry.
And Mary? She wouldn’t want that glory for a second.
I will do this is in argument-response format because I like either claim-response or argument-response since they are commonly used in many theological communities, so ima do this here. Argument: “Mary needed a Saviour- so she couldn’t have been immaculately conceived”
My response would be
This statement is a gross misunderstanding of or prevenient grace, a concept affirmed even in Reformed theology. The Immaculate Conception does not teach that Mary did not need salvation. Rather, it teaches that she was saved more perfectly than the rest of us. Preventatively and not curatively. This is what the St. Thomas Aquinas said. Doctor BI.John Duns Scotus defined it with theological precision. That “Potuit, decuit, ergo fecit” meaning “God could do it, it was fitting, therefore He did it.”
The greek verb (I prefer Greek reading because when u reed greek u get a clear understanding of object-verb, gender, plural-singular contexts which cannot be replicated in Eng) in Luke 1:28 is κεχαριτωμένη (kecharitōmenē) is a perfect passive participle, meaning Mary was already fully graced at the moment of greeting. THe perfect tense in greek is Koine Greek implies a completed action with continuing effects. THis is not mere favour, this is plērōma charitos(I like greek, and use greek to understand the bible, the word means plentitude of grace, unblemished and perpetual). TO be kecharitōmenē is to exist in a state of sanctifying grace without interruption. Thus, the very grammar of angelic salutation is against the protestant arguments.
Furthermore, in Romans 5, Paul speaks of Christ as “new Adam”. The parallel with Mary as “new Eve” ( refer to St. Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses Book V) demands that just as the first Eve was created in original justice before the fall, so too the second Eve must be immaculately created to inaugurate the new creation. Anything less would render the typology incoherent.
2. Argument: “Catholics worship Mary. It looks like worship, sounds like worship, and sometimes is worship.”
My response:
This argument is predicated on what I call, and others in the theological community say, a phenomenological fallacy, meaning judging internal dispositions based on external postures. THe Thomistic distinction between latria, dulia and hyperdulia is not a invention but its a metaphysical necessity based on analogia entis, the analogy of being. Latria means worship due to God alone because He alone is Infinite in essence; we call this esse simpliciter.
Dulia is veneration accorded to created persons who manifest divine grace
Hyperdulia is a unique category acknowledging Mary’s quadi-infinite participation in grace, but NOT BY NATYRE BUT BY DIVINE GIFT, meaning gratia plenissima (I like latin too)
To claim kneeling, candles, and hymns imply latria is to ignore centuries of theological refinement and misapply Deuteronomic iconoclasm to post Incarnational Christian liturgy. Were the Israelites idolaters when they bowed before the Ark in 2 Samuel 6 or Solomon when he kenly before Bathsheba (now if u read NIV it may not be evident, but if u read GREEK LXX or Young’s literal translation u can see it) In fact, the QUeen Mother (gebirah) in Davidic kingdom typology holds a seat at the right hand of the King. THis si precisely fulfilled in Mary as seen in Revelation 12:1, as the crowned woman with twelve stars is not the Chruch Abstractly but the Theotokos MYSTICALLY united to it (I had a 6hr long debate and another of 3hrs on Revelation 12, so if u want u can refer that, I’ll give u the link) Argument:“Catholics worship Mary. It looks like worship, sounds like worship, and sometimes is worship.”
My response:
This is an illusion rooted in sola Scriptura anachronism (again, I had a 6hr+6hr debate on this, now it was deleted, but yes, we debated in-depth on this topic). One must not confuse doctrinal development with doctrinal innovation
The Vincentian Canon in which we see quad unique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus (what has been believed everywhere, always, and by all) applies materially, not formally. That is, truth may exist in seed form in the apostolic deposit and reach dogmatic flowering over time. THis is what I learnt from John Henry Newman, Essay on the Development of Christian doctrine, and it struck me when I read @SincereSeeker’s post and @KPuff 's posts this is what I understand.
here is some: St. Irenaeus (2nd century): “The knot of Eve’s disobedience was untied by Mary’s obedience” (Adv. Haer., III.22.4). St. Ephraim (4th century): “Thou alone and thy Mother are more beautiful than any others; for there is no blemish in thee, nor any stain in thy Mother.” St. Cyril of Jerusalem (4th century): calls Mary Theotokos—“God-bearer.” Council of Ephesus (431 A.D.): dogmatically affirms Theotokos, safeguarding Christological orthodoxy.
Are some evidence from my notes.
Doctrines like Immaculate Conception and Assumption were not added but clarified under the guidance of the Holy Spirit promised to the Chruch (refer to John 16:13). They are logically entailed by the Incarnation and Christ’s salvific perfection. To deny them is to sever Christ from the fullness of his redemptive mission. Argument:“Mary isn’t a Mediatrix. Only Christ is our Mediator.”
My response:
Here is what I call a False dichotomy. Christ is indeed the unique and ontological Mediator (mediator Dei et hominum in 1 Tim 2:5), but the notion that this excludes all subordination mediation is biblically and metaphysically indefensible. Paul himself claims to be a mediator, as “We are ambassadors for Christ, God making His appeal through us” (2 Cor. 5:20). Moses mediated the Old Covenant. Angels are ministering spirits. Intercessory prayer is a form of mediation. Mary is called Mediatrix of all graces because every grace that flows from the Head (Christ) to the Body (the Church) first passed through her at the Incarnation., She is the neck in the mystical Body analogy (refer to St Bernard of Clairvaux). She is not eh source, but the channel, a position that magnifies Christ s mediatorship by showing its power to work through human cooperation.
A notable quote is “As Christ is the one Mediator by nature, so Mary is the one Mediatrix by grace.” (Pope Leo XIII) Argument: “If Marian devotion gets in the way of Christ, toss it in the fire.”
My response:
This is clear subjectivism. The proper fuel fo faith is not one’s emotional reaction or aesthetic discomfort, but rule of orthodoxy. Marian devotion, when rightly understood, is not competition but completion. She is the moon reflecting the sun’s light, and she is not the moon eclipsing the sun (its a wonderful analogy that I read in a blog)
Christ crowned her Queen (refer to Revelation 12) gave her to the beloved disciple (John 19:26), and fashioned her as the Ark of the Covenant (refer to Luke 1:43 and parallel it with 2 Sam 6:9). Devotion to Mary flows from Christ and returns to Christ. TO love what He loves is to conform one’s heart to His. Additional note: The Duck test argument is funny because in theological debates, its rarely used because it’s all just words, it’s a blunder, as it tries to encapsulate and argue over a theologically deep topic by weak analogy. Meaning, it judges theology by appearance, not substance; that argument doesn’t work. It ignores defined disnctions between latria and hyperdulia, conflates devotional expressions with idolatry and replaces doctrinal nuance with superfical impression, which undermines centuries of theological prescision, its just appealing to emotion and it doesn’t and must not be use to argue such deep topics which require hours and hours of study, its what called as “Superfical argument” looks all good when read at first but lackes substance.
Samuel_23, I appreciate the depth, zeal, and scholarly precision you brought to this—Greek, Latin, Aquinas, Duns Scotus, and even a shoutout to Young’s Literal. That’s a rich buffet of theological fine dining. But allow me, respectfully and firmly, to walk back into the kitchen and ask: Is the recipe faithful to the Gospel, or just exquisitely seasoned speculation?
Let’s sharpen the steel here:
⸻
“Mary was saved more perfectly than the rest of us”
You say this is prevenient grace, and I get it—Reformed folks do believe in prevenient grace too. But here’s the issue: Scripture never applies that concept to Mary’s nature pre-birth. Mary rejoicing in “God my Savior” (Luke 1:47) is not poetic window dressing. It’s theological fact. If Mary needed a Savior, then she needed saving. The Immaculate Conception says she was preserved from sin. That’s nice—but it’s still not biblically explicit. It’s reverse-engineered from a Christological logic loop: “God could do it, it was fitting, therefore He did.” That may work for philosophical theology, but it doesn’t pass the sola scriptura smell test.
⸻
“Kecharitōmenē = perpetually in grace”
Yes, the Greek is a perfect passive participle—completed action with ongoing effect. But that doesn’t prove sinlessness or Immaculate Conception. Kecharitōmenē isn’t a divine fingerprint. It means she was graced—not deified, not pre-cleansed before the Fall, not filled with plērōma charitos. That term never appears in Luke 1. You’re importing theology into grammar like it’s a Trojan horse. Paul uses charis in all sorts of ways—and none of them require sinlessness (e.g., Rom. 3:24, Eph. 2:8).
⸻
“If it looks like worship, but isn’t—blame the viewer”
You called this the “phenomenological fallacy,” and you’re right that internal intent matters. But let’s be honest, brother: optics matter too. If it looks like idolatry to every outsider, you may want to re-evaluate the external form, not just defend it with metaphysics. The early church bowed before Christ, not statues. They prayed through Christ, not to intermediaries. If grandma is lighting candles, kneeling, and chanting Marian prayers that never mention Jesus—your Thomistic categories aren’t helping her. That’s not a “fallacy.” That’s pastoral failure dressed in philosophical robes.
⸻
“Mary is Mediatrix of all graces”
Respectfully, no chapter, no verse. The Bible gives us one Mediator—not in kind, not in category, but in function:
“For there is one God and one Mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus.” – 1 Tim. 2:5
Saying Mary is a “channel” doesn’t soften it—it multiplies the mediators. Yes, God uses means—pastors, prophets, people—but they don’t become universal pipelines of all grace. That’s not exegesis, that’s theological inflation. The neck of the Body analogy isn’t in Scripture—it’s in Bernard’s poetic musings, not Paul’s doctrine.
⸻
“Duck test = weak argument”
I see the frustration. You think it’s superficial. But here’s the kicker: Jesus Himself used duck logic. He said:
“You will recognize them by their fruits.” – Matt. 7:16
The fruit of some Marian devotion is spiritual confusion. The optics matter. When the average Catholic knows more Marian prayers than Scripture, something’s broken.
And no—this isn’t emotion over doctrine. This is the Reformers doing what they always did: dragging church traditions back under the light of Scripture. If a practice causes confusion, obscures Christ, or blurs the Creator-creature line—it’s not holy. It’s hazardous.
⸻
Final Thought: Theology Should Clarify, Not Complicate
Mary was blessed, no doubt. Chosen. Honored. Obedient. But once theological systems elevate her into typologies that make her the neck, the ark, the Queen of Heaven, the Mediatrix of all graces—you’ve left the Gospels and entered speculative orbit.
If theology needs six hours of Greek, Latin, metaphysics, and Newman’s development theory to defend why it doesn’t violate sola Christus—maybe it does.
Give Mary honor.
Give Jesus everything.
And if anything—even a hyperdulia hymn—distracts from the Lamb on the throne?
All Catholics as True Cathoics in logic, trusted and verified from the logical formulas through the Wondrous Mysteries of the Faith in Jesus becoming The Christ in all mankind with flesh saving the angels and with all mankind becoming again One Holy Family, believe One does not have to be Catholic to go to Heaven.
The angels were told by God of the becoming power of flesh in Heaven.
To me, understanding Mary, the Mother of God allows us to logically understand the Trinity. I can say with 100% confidence there is no Catholic on this planet that “logically” understands the Trinity, to me. And I mean this in a good way, for all.
One Holy Catholic Incorruptibly Glorified Spirit and Apostolic Resurrected Life Family One God in One Curch.
No Popes, Bishops, Cardinals, no Priests or Deacons, Acolites, or Lay ministers seem to not even be able to imagine not using logic how to see God and all come very close faithfully and we all know faith is all we need, and for then all we had. To me no religious leader can explain the Family of God, logically from three powers preexisting becoming through two natures becoming again in One God in being. No government official, no Caesar of today can know the Mind of God, truthfully who until what I call OMNILogic, or logic with respect to the Mind of God in everything is understood OMNILogicalGod 2025, to me.
So true, SincereSeeker, “If theology needs six hours of Greek, Latin, metaphysics, and Newman’s development theory to defend why it doesn’t violate Sola Christus—maybe it does.” SincereSeeker
To me today we have to understand logical undefiled intelligence manifesting eternal infallibility becoming from One Holy Spirit Family One God in being to earth from the failed spirit through the created souls of all for the flesh creating choice to love or not to love through the Two Nature Body, spirit and life, becoming through both natures immortalized through flesh from the incorruptible spirit through The Christ loving only and loving with only the most love becoming again back to One Holy Incorruptibly Glorified Spirit and Resurrected Life Family One God in being.
Faithfully, The Protestants are right, to me, not even knowing what theologically logically “is” The Christ. And faithfully the Catholics are right in understanding “The Host” as The Body of God, but are wrong in trying to explain “The Family of God” and just where logically love came from and connot logically explain intelligence logic fulfilled to anyone, to me. I can say with 100% confidence there is no Catholic on this planet that “logically” understands the Trinity, but me, peroid. I can hear it now asking a Catholic what is “The Holy Spirit?” and I always get, “Jibber babble baby blubble,” to me. And ask the same guy next day, Hi, And what again to you, is “The Holy Spirit,” and it goes like, “Betty Botter bought and batch of bitter butter and on, on, illogical, nonsensical, huh? and guess what? they think they got it right?” Wow, I say to myself and then I say, Good job? And I tell my story perhaps 11 times a day, 5 don’t get it, 5 don’t want to hear it, but one, just one gets the logic of the Kingdom of the Divine Will and The Will of The Father, and becomes that mystic that understands the common denominator of all faith is the spirit and in Christianity the spirit is Our God coming inside of us and living becoming again in all One Holy Spirit Family One God in being. To all than can’t hear, don’t get it, I say Thanks,? and try again next time I hopefully see them. To me the problem is no one knows the Logical Mind of God and to me “His Being” is in being The Holy Spirit Family of God’s logic very easily understood for all through OMNILogic.
We know not to preach or proselytize our God and only in generalization do we speak. Why logically call it generalization? Because with out even knowing it generalizing is preaching and proselytizing and is the same thing as “glorifying and praising” the same God through a different word.
Logically “Sola Christus,” meaning “Christ alone,” is a central tenet of Protestant theology during the Reformation. What is the Christ, rationally? The Christ is the Power of the Holy Spirit conceived through the flesh of Jesus. Jesus is conceived by The Power of The Holy Spirit Family One God in being becoming The Christ in all mankind. The Word is the Intelligence of infallible creation incorruptible and never failing in only one way only loving and loving with only the most love becoming again through the flesh of Jesus, The Christ, The Holy Family of God in Two Natures, from the Incorruptible Holy Spirit Family of God conceived through the soul of The Eternal Priestly Authority of Spirit and Life conceived in the flesh of Jesus, His Flesh, His Holy Spirit Family One God in being, “The Word, The “Sophia”, The Entire Wisdom of The Holy Family One God in being becomes flesh” becoming His Body becoming in all The Christ, The Word, Teh Family of God becomes Flesh" through The Christ, truly Fully God and fully Man, both natures, spirit and life in all mankind becoming again One Holy Spirit Family One God in being.
And we ask How does God even do it? Where is Stephen? Remember that move where the guy goes like, “We don’t need no stinking badges”, goes like, We don’t need no Stephen. Well in all generalization, truthfully we only need OMNILogic, and everything The Christ taught on earth, which can’t all be written because the earth is to little to hold all of the books that could be written, rationally.
We know through faith are we saved and now we can know logically why we follow the undefiled pattern of fulfilled logical intelligence manifesting through two natures, spirit and life, becoming again in One Holy Spirit Family One God in being from Holy Spirit Power manifesting through the souls of all for the flesh, The Body to “Follow Him,” in What would Jesus do in all cases from the Fulfilled Faith and Morality through the Christ becoming again One Holy Spirit Family One God in being in all mankind.
Caring about Mary we become to know the OMNILogical Personal relationship of Jesus conceived by the Power of The Holy Spirit Family through His Flesh becoming The Christ in all mankind all from The Faith of Abraham.
So true, we know we are saved from the Faith of Abraham, and OMNILogic brings the Mind of God to mankind through today’s logical mind for all to see the Holy Spirit the Holy Family Family of God One God in being.
Thinking rationally from The Faith of Abraham, now for all to see with new Logical understanding from the Personal relationship of Jesus allows us all to see The Father and The Mother in One Holy Spirit Family One God in being in "The OMNILogical Trinity Family of God becoming again in all One Holy Family through the Two Nature God of Abraham.
We, soon ONNILogically will be in The Trinity.
Mary is blessed, no doubt. Picket to carry the Chosen “New Living Sacrifice” in the Ark of The New Covenant. Honored. Obedient. And once rational and OMNILogical theological systems see Her with New Eyes becoming into typologies that make her the neck, the ark, the Queen of Heaven, the Mediatrix of all graces—we become into the understanding of The Mind of God through the Annunciation and God provided Two Nature flesh sanctification becoming immortalization through spirit nature incorruption from the Power of Holy Spirit through Mary’s Soul for the Mother of God through Mary’s Immaculate Flesh becoming The New Eve in all mankind.
The First Commandment, “,” is a cornerstone of both Jewish and Christian faith, emphasizing the exclusive worship of God. Church Fathers, early Christian leaders, played a crucial role in interpreting and applying this commandment, emphasizing its significance in the Christian life and promoting the love and devotion of the Trinity.
Mary is in the Trinity and God of Mercy.
In orthodox theology
God, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit each possess the one divine nature (ousia). There are no “two natures” in God but one. Until the Word becomes flesh through the Flesh nature.
Failed is Eve giving up her mortal eternal life away from the Garden now having to till the ground for food laughing at The Serpent saying “So what,” and I will do so with the greatest Gift I created, “Love” by eating the fruit of Knowledge of Good and Evil. I know Authority, Adam told me, but I choose Adam’s failed spirit of Authority is wrong because now My Spirit an Life brings to Adam all that is good even if it means my own death. And Adam’s choice now becomes do I live forever without the Love of The “Dying” Eve or do I eat of the “Fruit” to know and to die “With the Love of a Living forever Eve” for the serpent said, "Surly Eve will never die and He is right, and yet wrong in the same line as “The Father of Lies” because The Spirit lives forever and brings eternal spirit and life to Adam through from The New Eve through The New Adam in sanctified Holy Spirit Family incorruption from the New Eve from death of the mortal Eve failed flesh through The Christ, the Holy Spirit and Life Family of God conceived through the Flesh of Jesus becoming immortality through the flesh from the incorruptibly Holy Spirit Family One God in being through Both Natures from the undefiled Holy Spirit incorruptible nature through immortal life nature becoming again through the Christ in One Holy Spirit Family One God in being, OMNILogically, to me,
@SincereSeeker, u aint getting the point im trying to make.
The immaculate conception is ontological fittingness and redemptive preemption. The Immaculate conception is not an unnecessary doctrinal ornament but a theologically necessitated implication of the hypostatic union and redemptive perfection of Christ. Theoloigcans such as Duns Scotus proposed the praeredemptio (pre-redemption) model, potuit, decuit, ergo fecit ("He could do it, it was fitting, therefore He did ") This is no mere syllogism of imagination but its the revelation of divine economy under the guidance of oikonomia you mystēriou (Eph 3:9). Mary’s salvation ante peccatum doesn’t contradict Romans 3:23m since prevenient grace (gratia praeveniens) is not opposed to redemption but is its most sublime modality. She was saved, but in a higher modality, by being preserved from the stain of sin, rather than restored from it. Thus, Christ is her Saviour, not by recovery but by prevention, affirming both her need for salvation and the supremacy of Christ’s work. In the same way that God’s grace sanctified Jeremiah in the womb and John the Baptist Leapt with the Holy Spirit ( as in Luke 1:41), it is not unreasonable to affirm that Mary was sanctified even earlier, at the first moment of her conception, for a vocation unique, to bear the Logos ensarkos.
Now
Kecharitōmenē word and ur arguments now makes us go to Perfect Passive Participal theology. The Greek word Kecharitōmenē is the perfect passive participle of charitoō (to endow with grace). This is not a simple aorist or present participle. IT denotes a completed action with continuing results implying that Mary has been perfectly graced in the past, and remains in that state of divine favour. This participial construction is unique in the entire New Testament. When Gabriel addresses her not as Maria but as kecharitōmenē, it functions as a theological title, not a mere descriptor. The form is analogous to other theologically significant perfect participles like gegennēmenos (John 1:18) where grammatical form underlines ontological truth
Moreover, kecharitōmenē implies not merely the presence of grace, but the exclusion of sin. One doesn’t speak of someone as perfectly graced while remaining in a state of alienation from God. Thus, the Greek forms give clear evidence about the immaculate conception.
In theology, when we discuss about mediators, a common misconception among the general is Mediatrix is a competitive agency; ur wrong, its participatory causality. The objection that there is one Mediator between God and man as in 1 Tim 2:5, I have already answered before, and am gonna elucidate on it as False Dichotomy. Catholic and Orthodox affirm Christus Mediaor unicus (sole ontological and salvific mediator) while also distinguishing between primary and secondary mediation through doctirn of participated causality. If Paul can call himself a minister of reconciliation (2 Cor 5:18-20), and acknowledge that he fills up what it’s lacking in the afflictions of CHrist, then clearly instrumental mediation under Chrsit is not just permitted but its Scriptural. Mary’s mediation is unique, not in kind, that’s the misconception ur bringing forward. But rather it is the degree, she mediated de congruo, whereas Christ mediates de condigno. Now, if u don’t know de congruo means fittingness and participation, whereas de conigno means by intrinsic merit. THe typology of Mary as the New Eve and Ark of Covenant (ron ha-berit, refer Rev 11:19-12:1) and queen mother (gebirah Refer 1 kings 2:19-20) builds the biblical architecture for her role as Mediatrix of all graces, “graces which flow from Christ through her never apart from him”
Now telling that Mary is not explicitly called as Ark of Covenant and May is not referred to as New Eve in the Scriptures are what I commonly encounter with arguments against protestants, this is because they don’t recognise biblical-parallelism, which is clearly another important pillar of sciptural decoding and analyzing layers of scriptures, for scipture is multi-layered, not a single layer.
Now u can say that ‘dulia, hyperdulia, and latria’ are just made-up words, but the one who brought this concept didn’t bring it up to make a name, but rather it introduces Theological Precision in Devotion, and brings forward Ontological discipline. Latria belongs to God alone. Dulia is the veneration due to saints and hyperdulia, a term brought in the Council of Florence, is uniquely reserved for Theotokos due to her incomparable cooperation with divine grace. TO accuse us of worshipping Mary due to some external gestures is gained called phenomenological fallacy, confusing interior intention with exterior form. Intent governs meaning. I asked, u recognised what u said was a phenomenological fallacy, but then u brought that “optics matter” ligit bro that’s a phenomenological fallacy ur just repeating the same mistake, you can’t see intent by optics, only God can see the Intent. Moreover, the incarnational principle, that matter mediates grace, is at the heart of all Christian sacramentality. If Christ could take on sarx (flesh) without violating divine majesty, then He can certainly allow His creatures to participate in His mission without losing exclusivity.
Then Marian Doctrines are not a distraction. The elevation of Mary is not a distraction from Christ, but a protection of His humanity and divinity. Deny her role as Theotokos, then ur risking by dividing the Person of Christ (Nestorianism, studied it very well brooo) and Deny her Sinlessness, then u subtly import imperfection into the flesh that God assumed. Deny her cooperation, then u abstract Christ Mission from the very humanity He came to redeem.
Thus Marian Doctrines safeguard Christology.
ERROR 
FINAL VERDICT: Burn the OMNILogic
