Lovely piece. I have a seven sorrows rosary which I pray not nearly enough and I'm also reading the Glories of Mary at present, which is marvellous. Mary's involvement in our redemption is something I find myself increasingly pondering at the moment.
Her involvement is a great mystery that is very much worth pondering. I do not believe we will get to the bottom of it in this life. In the follow up articles, I will explore that mystery more. I pray that it aids in your pondering!
If Mary was the only contributor to the humanity of Jesus, how would Jesus be the Son of God? My understanding is that, biologically, Jesus would have been a woman if there had been no male contribution. I think that the Incarnation is more complex than simply believing that the Eternal Son assumed a human nature only from Mary.
Thank you for your comment! Yes, if we merely look at a biological reproduction, the offspring would be female. This is what is called parthenogenesis. It is a type of asexual reproduction that always results in a female of the species. The thing is, it has never been observed in a the human species before. With that being said, we are not looking at a strictly biological reproduction, there is also a miraculous intervention by the Holy Spirit, as told to us in the Gospel of Luke (Lk 1:35). The Holy Spirit descends on Mary and overshadows her. Theologically, we understand that this is a miraculous conception done by the Holy Spirit. He takes Mary's humanity and with it, creates the needed male Chromosome. The best way to think about it is the Holy Spirit creates, Ex Nihilo (from nothing) the Y chromosome needed to make Our Lord a biological male, and then took the genetic material from Mary, including her X chromosome in fashioning the humanity of Jesus Christ in the womb of the Blessed Virgin which is assumed by the Eternal Son in the very moment of fashioning.
Thus, the Eternal Son assumes a human nature created from the Blessed Virgin and her alone.
Did the Father create the male contribution from Mary; or did He create it apart from Mary; and then, combined it with Mary’s contribution? This brings up an interesting conversation about the composition of Jesus’ blood as to whether His blood could have been produced without a miraculous male contribution. Prior to our present understanding of chromosomes and DNA, it would have been easy to assume that Jesus had only Mary’s blood contribution.
The male contribution was created by God from nothing. Just as He created in the beginning. Genetically though, Our Lord was all Mary. This means His blood, DNA, and genetic makeup were from Mary only. So, yes, you are correct, Jesus had Mary's blood. This is why I make reference to Mary giving to Christ the humanity that He uses to redeem us. Mary gives to Him all that she is, God makes up for what would be lacking, and God becomes incarnate.
Simply, it's because the Father has no blood to give. Christ has a body because it was given to Him by the Blessed Virgin. Christ's eternal Sonship from the Father is one of nature not flesh or blood. The Son is begotten of the Father, as the Creed says, God from God. Christ is the Son of God because He receives His divine nature from the Father, eternally.
Think of it this way, prior to the incarnation, which is the moment when Christ received His body, was He still the Son of God? The answer is yes, because the Son has always existed. Even before He had a body or blood, He was the Eternal Son, Begotten of the Father.
Also, we want to affirm that Mary did not just give Christ her blood but she gave Him her entire human nature. The one Person, Jesus Christ, possesses two natures--- one divine from the Father and one human from Mary--- So that He is truly and fully God and truly and fully man. He is God from eternity and man from the moment of the Incarnation.
Lovely piece. I have a seven sorrows rosary which I pray not nearly enough and I'm also reading the Glories of Mary at present, which is marvellous. Mary's involvement in our redemption is something I find myself increasingly pondering at the moment.
Her involvement is a great mystery that is very much worth pondering. I do not believe we will get to the bottom of it in this life. In the follow up articles, I will explore that mystery more. I pray that it aids in your pondering!
If Mary was the only contributor to the humanity of Jesus, how would Jesus be the Son of God? My understanding is that, biologically, Jesus would have been a woman if there had been no male contribution. I think that the Incarnation is more complex than simply believing that the Eternal Son assumed a human nature only from Mary.
Thank you for your comment! Yes, if we merely look at a biological reproduction, the offspring would be female. This is what is called parthenogenesis. It is a type of asexual reproduction that always results in a female of the species. The thing is, it has never been observed in a the human species before. With that being said, we are not looking at a strictly biological reproduction, there is also a miraculous intervention by the Holy Spirit, as told to us in the Gospel of Luke (Lk 1:35). The Holy Spirit descends on Mary and overshadows her. Theologically, we understand that this is a miraculous conception done by the Holy Spirit. He takes Mary's humanity and with it, creates the needed male Chromosome. The best way to think about it is the Holy Spirit creates, Ex Nihilo (from nothing) the Y chromosome needed to make Our Lord a biological male, and then took the genetic material from Mary, including her X chromosome in fashioning the humanity of Jesus Christ in the womb of the Blessed Virgin which is assumed by the Eternal Son in the very moment of fashioning.
Thus, the Eternal Son assumes a human nature created from the Blessed Virgin and her alone.
I hope this helps!
Wow. Truly, Andrew, this is the best spiritual and scientific explanation I've heard. Wonderful and excellent! Thank you.
Did the Father create the male contribution from Mary; or did He create it apart from Mary; and then, combined it with Mary’s contribution? This brings up an interesting conversation about the composition of Jesus’ blood as to whether His blood could have been produced without a miraculous male contribution. Prior to our present understanding of chromosomes and DNA, it would have been easy to assume that Jesus had only Mary’s blood contribution.
The male contribution was created by God from nothing. Just as He created in the beginning. Genetically though, Our Lord was all Mary. This means His blood, DNA, and genetic makeup were from Mary only. So, yes, you are correct, Jesus had Mary's blood. This is why I make reference to Mary giving to Christ the humanity that He uses to redeem us. Mary gives to Him all that she is, God makes up for what would be lacking, and God becomes incarnate.
If the Father did not contribute the blood, I don’t see how Jesus would be the Son of God.
Simply, it's because the Father has no blood to give. Christ has a body because it was given to Him by the Blessed Virgin. Christ's eternal Sonship from the Father is one of nature not flesh or blood. The Son is begotten of the Father, as the Creed says, God from God. Christ is the Son of God because He receives His divine nature from the Father, eternally.
Think of it this way, prior to the incarnation, which is the moment when Christ received His body, was He still the Son of God? The answer is yes, because the Son has always existed. Even before He had a body or blood, He was the Eternal Son, Begotten of the Father.
Also, we want to affirm that Mary did not just give Christ her blood but she gave Him her entire human nature. The one Person, Jesus Christ, possesses two natures--- one divine from the Father and one human from Mary--- So that He is truly and fully God and truly and fully man. He is God from eternity and man from the moment of the Incarnation.
Genetically, Jesus could not have been all Mary if, as you said, the male contribution was created by God from nothing.