[Alex Murphy]

For example, at post 3 Angry Write Mail says "Mary was the mother of the MAN Jesus"; how is that different from what you quote and call libel?

Sure, there are the occasional fringe groups - there are always exceptions. And I'm not even sure AWM's usage should be read in the way many are reading it. My primary objection was to the article's use of the adverb "often" in regard to Fundamentalists, i.e.

To avoid this conclusion, Fundamentalists often assert that Mary did not carry God in her womb, but only carried Christ’s human nature.

[annalex]

Typically, those who object to the title at all, prefer "Mother of Christ" and the conversation then draws distinctions between Christ the Man and Christ the God. The author correctly implies that in order to draw such distinction, one has to make Mary the mother of Christ's human nature only. I agree that it is not the language a Fundamentalist would use, at least not often, and the author leaps through a logical step or two here without explaining them.

The author also does not address the implication of authority that many fraw from "Mother of God". He does, however, say:

Although Mary is the Mother of God, she is not his mother in the sense that she is older than God or the source of her Son’s divinity, for she is neither. Rather, we say that she is the Mother of God in the sense that she carried in her womb a divine person—Jesus Christ, God "in the flesh" (2 John 7, cf. John 1:14)—and in the sense that she contributed the genetic matter to the human form God took in Jesus Christ.