“IF the Vatican emphasis was strictly to note that Mary was Jesus’ Mother—they could just as easily use the phrase
MOTHER OF JESUS.
THEY DELIBERATELY CHOSE OTHERWISE.
THERE IS NO BEHAVIOR WITHOUT A REASON!
I find the most plausible reason for that word choice to be devilish, seductive, blasphemous, idolatrous and disingenuously so.”
____________________________________________________________________________
You’re right, there is no behavior without a reason.The Council of Ephesus defined the doctrine of Mary, the Mother of God, in 431 to counter the dangerous heresy of Nestorianism, which proposed that Jesus was two persons, the human one born of Mary and the Divine one. This was a most devilish and seductive heresy, to borrow your words.
Ironically, you have delineated the real reason for the Vatican’s correct definition in your post! “THEY DELIBERATELY CHOSE OTHERWISE”.
Fabulous!
If you believe that Mary is ONLY the mother of the man Jesus and not also the Mother of the Son of God, you are a modern-day Nestorian.
http://www.ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/jp2bvm37.htm
By the fourth century, the term Theotókos was frequently used in the East and West. Devotion and theology refer more and more to this term, which had by now become part of the Church’s patrimony of faith.
One can therefore understand the great protest movement that arose in the fifth century when Nestorius cast doubt on the correctness of the title “Mother of God”. In fact, being inclined to hold that Mary was only the mother of the man Jesus, he maintained that “Mother of Christ” was the only doctrinally correct expression. Nestorius was led to make this error by his difficulty in admitting the unity of Christ’s person and by his erroneous interpretation of the distinction between the two natures—divine and human—present in him.
In 431 the Council of Ephesus condemned his theses and, in affirming the subsistence of the divine and human natures in the one person of the Son, proclaimed Mary the Mother of God.
3. Now, the difficulties and objections raised by Nestorius offer us the opportunity to make several useful reflections for correctly understanding and interpreting this title. The expression Theotókos, which literally means, “she who has begotten God”, can at first sight seem surprising; in fact it raises the question as to how it is possible for a human creature to give birth to God. The answer of the Church’s faith is clear: Mary’s divine motherhood refers only to the human begetting of the Son of God but not, however, to his divine birth. The Son of God was eternally begotten of God the Father, and is consubstantial with him. Mary, of course, has no part in this eternal birth. However, the Son of God assumed our human nature 2,000 years ago and was conceived by and born of Mary.
In proclaiming Mary “Mother of God”, the Church thus intends to affirm that she is the “Mother of the Incarnate Word, who is God”. Her motherhood does not, therefore, extend to all the Trinity, but only to the Second Person, the Son, who, in becoming incarnate, took his human nature from her.
Motherhood is a relationship of person to person: a mother is not only mother of the body or of the physical creature born of her womb, but of the person she begets. Thus having given birth, according to his human nature, to the person of Jesus, who is a divine person, Mary is the Mother of God.
Nestorianism and Arianism appear in relatively pure form on these threads.
Amen, dear Deo volente!
Moreover you wrote:
The expression Theotókos, which literally means, “she who has begotten God”, can at first sight seem surprising; in fact it raises the question as to how it is possible for a human creature to give birth to God. The answer of the Church’s faith is clear: Mary’s divine motherhood refers only to the human begetting of the Son of God but not, however, to his divine birth. The Son of God was eternally begotten of God the Father, and is consubstantial with him. Mary, of course, has no part in this eternal birth. However, the Son of God assumed our human nature 2,000 years ago and was conceived by and born of Mary.So amazingly well said! Thank you oh so very much!
In proclaiming Mary “Mother of God”, the Church thus intends to affirm that she is the “Mother of the Incarnate Word, who is God”. Her motherhood does not, therefore, extend to all the Trinity, but only to the Second Person, the Son, who, in becoming incarnate, took his human nature from her.Thank you ever so much for these illuminating observations, dear brother in Christ!