Replies

"...was point out that renaming Mary as *mother of God* LEADS to heresy."

I saw that. Thanks for pointing that out for the few here interested who may have missed it.

It leads to either heresy that God is a created being, or that Mary is deity.

It surely can. I could be wrong, but I *think" that may have been part of what Nestor was reaching towards heading off when he preferred to speak of Mary as "mother of Christ our Lord and Savior" as the scripture words that to be, rather than adopt or agree with the "Mother of God" nomenclature.

Yet Nestor was upstaged by his rival who took what Nestor was otherwise suggesting, which was the main controversy ---two persons loosely linked as one, one "person" being the divine, and the other the created being, or man, with the rival adopting language of two natures fused together inseparably, which is more the winner overall, as far as that goes, but which swept in the "Mother of God" description as having "official" approval at the same time. Which can lead to the idea that Mary be Mother of (as a source or origin) to the divine nature --which came from God, and was God made flesh --but did not originate from within herself, any more than a fertilized egg became fertilized by any female [mammal].

We’ve already had one Catholic poster upthread state that Mary we the mother of BOTH of Jesus’ natures. By that I take it you meant to write another upthread said "Mary was the mother of both".

We notice too that came about in correction of another, who had said she was mother of his earthly nature --which in past times on these pages would have induced accusation of "Nestorian!" be hurled at who ever said it, but since it was a "Catholic", then it's ok for them to "divide Christ(!)" and only receive a gentle reminder, instead of some accusation of heresy be hurled at them.

The other phrase made by the [ahem] 'divider' [lol?];

Obviously, Mary was not the mother of Jesus’ eternal nature.

I agree with you, is not "obvious" much at all. In fact, even though it seem obvious enough on one hand...the very talk of Mother of God can be seen to part of the hyper-inflated "hyper" of the "dulia", which in effect (if one reads Roman Catholic Marion devotional web pages) elevates "Mary" to some continuing integral role --font of all blessing-- and the like, making her out to be a fourth member of the Trinity, in the mind, and theologically in all but declared name. Of course, obviously [snicker?] they won't go quite that far and openly proclaim four were there were once three. But no one except "Mary" gets the same regard as to what she can accomplish, or "hear" or do in the realm of Heaven, for she has been made "Queen" in declared Roman Catholic proclamation, there can be no denying of that.

It’s really too bad that they can’t see the problems messing with Scripture causes. The Holy Spirit referred to Mary as *mother of Jesus* for a reason, and that reason seems to escape Catholics in their indoctrination about Mary. You said a mouthful, there, you little heretic. God Bless you, may the Lord be with powerfully and gently too, ever and on.