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!
Sorry.
However, the qualifications don’t wash.
FOLKS PERSISTENTLY HEAR
ONLY
THE PHRASE
MOTHER OF GOD.
THAT IS THE PHRASE. THAT IS THE MESSAGE.
THAT IS THE MESSAGE THAT IS EMBELISHED UP ONE SIDE AND DOWN THE OTHER.
There is not immediately following qualification about it NOT AT ALL IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM INCLUDING THE FATHER.
It is just starkly that
MOTHER OF GOD.
NOPE. Doesn’t wash with this psychologist.
WORDS ARE IMPORTANT.
THE IMPRESSIONS AND MEMES AND HYPNOTIC EFFECTS OF WORDS
ARE IMPORTANT—ALL THE MORE SO RELIGIOUS WORDS AND PHRASES WITH ALL MANNER OF INSTITUTIONAL ACCOUTRAMENTS ATTACHED.
NOPE. DOESN’T WASH BY A TRILLION MILES.
And those words are a deception, falsehood that the Vatican uses to squeak by on an extremely thin technicality.
AT the risk of offending my dear Friend and Sister . . . let me try an analogy that I think MAY highlight the problem.
Let’s take the family unit of Alamo-Girl.
Alamo-Girl has a dog.
That dog has a mother.
By some stretch, one might refer to the mother of that dog as Alamo-Girl’s Mother. After all, that dog’s mother is the mother of Alamo-Girl’s currently only in-home ‘child.’
Of course, in this case, it’s brazenly and plainly absurd.
And to many Proddys the other VERY DECEPTIVE phrase is just as brazenly absurd and inappropriate.
I think, Dear Heart, on this issue, you are somewhat
victimized/saved
by the purity of your heart and thought.
You fail to see satan’s seductiveness in the phrase because you are more focused on Christ and His Light.
However, the problem is a very real one with damnable consequences.
In a loud voice she exclaimed: "Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child you will bear! 43But why am I so favored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?Think of the context--she's the wife of a Jewish priest; she's referring to the Lord, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the one who delivered Israel out of Egypt.
“Mother of the Incarnate Word”. Then why didn't they just leave it at that? Why go with the obviously provocative title "Mother of God" that they rightly acknowledged would cause confusion and misunderstanding? I would happily accept the title “Mother of the Incarnate Word”. It says what is clearly proven from scripture and no true Christian doesn't believe that Mary was the virgin mother of Jesus Christ who is God incarnate.
Thank you for your kind words. They’re very much appreciated!
I can’t take credit for those thoughts, as I copied and pasted them. Here’s the link:
http://www.ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/jp2bvm37.htm
I should have made that more clear in my formatting of the post.