Actually there needs to be a clear definition of Who God is.
The original intent I believe is something different than what has manifested itself in Roman Catholicism and the overwhelming worship of Mary.
If Mary is the "mother of God" then by implication she is the mother of the Spirit and the Father.
It could be further argued this elevates Mary above all three in that a mother has to exist before the offspring.
There is currently an appeal among some Roman Catholics to have a fifth Marian dogma.
The proclamation of the Dogma of Mary Co-redemptrix, Mediatrix, and Advocate by the Holy Father will enable the Mother of Jesus to shower the world with a historic outpouring of grace, redemption, and peace in a new and dynamic way—an event which Marian apparitions like Fatima refer to as the “Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.”
http://www.fifthmariandogma.com/
It seems the birth, death and resurrection of Christ is somehow insufficient for Roman Catholicism.
I really think this whole issue of Jesus' deity and humanity could have been resolved by an appeal to John 1.
1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was in the beginning with God. 3All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. 4In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. 5The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it. The Witness John 6There came a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7He came as a witness, to testify about the Light, so that all might believe through him. 8He was not the Light, but he came to testify about the Light. 9There was the true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man. 10He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. 11He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him. 12But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, 13who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God. The Word Made Flesh 14And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.
John 1:1-14 NASB
You could say that in Trinitarian thought “is” is not commutative. The Son is God, but God is not the Son ... kinda like that.
So if the Chalcedonian formula and the Nicene formula are taken together, it does not follow that Mary is the mother of the other “persons.”
...
The Incarnation is about the eternal entering temporality. God is not before or after. He is. It's risky but I think of him surrounding or “comprehending” time.
So, the problem of a mother having to pre-exist the child is not a difficulty. It IS a wonder. Our Advent Marian hymn, Alma Redemptoris Mater riffs on the wonder:
..., tu quæ genuísti,
Natúra miránte, tuum sanctum Genitórem ...
You who “generated”, nature marveling, your holy “Generator.”
(Hey, I don't write this stuff ... Srsly, we don't have a good English word for “genitor.”)
So, especially if you think of eternity not as time extending infinitely forward and backward but as outside of time, there is not a huge problem with reconciling the way Mary is “before” Jesus and the way she cannot be thought of as “before” God. The Incarnation is God entering the realm he made, the realm of time and change and therefore of before and after.
And there are good reasons for thinking of eternity that way, having to do with the changelessness of God. Time is “the measure of change.” So until there's something that changes, it is hard to imagine what time would be. Yet there would be God. etc., etc., yatta, yatta.
As to coredemptrix and all, it seems to me that every good dogma has the possibility of starting erroneous trains of thought, and parsing out in what way humans are channels of redemption and in what way they can't be has to be left for another time if we're going to pick apart “Mother of God.”
But now I have to go prepare a class on ... the Rosary! LOL!
The council of Ephesus clearly explained what "mother of God"/"Theotokos" meant:
... we confess that the Only begotten Word of God, begotten of the same substance of the Father, True God from True God, Light from Light, through Whom all things were made, the things in heaven and the things in the earth, coming down for our salvation, making himself of no reputation (καθεὶς ἑαυτὸν εἰς κένωσιν), was incarnate and made man; that is, taking flesh of the holy Virgin, and having made it his own from the womb, he subjected himself to birth for us, and came forth man from a woman, without casting off that which he was; but although he assumed flesh and blood, he remained what he was, God in essence and in truth.
And since the holy Virgin brought forth corporally God made one with flesh according to nature, for this reason we also call her Mother of God, not as if the nature of the Word had the beginning of its existence from the flesh.
That's the Catholic belief. When you accuse someone of believing that Mary is the mother of the Father or the Holy Spirit, you're not talking about what Catholics believe.