I did a lot of googling and found this: "theologians generally admit that while Mary does not belong to the Hypostatic Union (Christ alone does), yet she belongs to the Hypostatic Order, either directly, according to some (Suarez, Saavedra, Cardinal Lépicier), or at least indirectly, according to others. (16) The reason is that it was in her, and through her own generative act, that the Union was accomplished."
Additionally the same article has this: "The objection of the Nestorians against the term Theotokos was based on a false notion of motherhood, and also of the Hypostatic Union. (13) To understand the Catholic dogma, we must have exact ideas concerning both. Motherhood is the relationship established when a woman communicates to her offspring a nature identical to her own, and this by means of a true generation (conception, gestation, birth). The terminus of generation is the whole son, not only the physical body furnished by the mother. Thus, we say that St. Ann is the mother of Mary (i.e., this whole and complete person: Mary), and not only of Mary's body, even though we know that St. Ann did not furnish Mary's soul.
In Christ there are two natures (one divine, one human), and these two natures are inseparably united in one Person, namely, the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity. That most perfect union is called the Hypostatic Union.
Now Mary did not supply Christ with either His divine nature or His divine Person. Both existed from all eternity. She furnished only His human nature. But since that human nature was inseparably united to the divine Person in the very first instant of Christ's conception, we say that Mary conceived and gave birth to a Son who is truly God, and hence she is the Mother of God.
The fact that there are two natures in Christ entails a twofold sonship. Because His divine nature was generated from the Father from all eternity, Christ is the true Son of God the Father. Because His human nature was generated from Mary, Christ is the true Son of Mary. However, this twofold sonship does not imply two Sons. Being one undivided Person, Christ the Son of the eternal Father is absolutely identical with Christ the Son of Man. Hence Mary is truly the Mother of God. By destroying this oneness of Christ's Person, the Nestorians were led to deny Mary's divine Motherhood. By this same token, when the Church defended and defined Mary's divine Motherhood, she was also safeguarding the revealed Catholic doctrine concerning the Hypostatic Union. They necessarily stand or fall together."
One might well ask "what was that all about?" Well... The Docetae, Anabaptists, and other heretics held that Christ was true God, but not a true man; hence, in their opinion, Mary could not be said to have begotten Him. On the contrary, the Ebionites, Arians, Rationalists and others hold that Christ was a true man, but not God; hence, Mary may be called the Mother of Christ, but in no way the Mother of God. The third error is that of the Nestorians, who claim that there were two persons in Christ (one divine and one human), and that Mary gave birth only to the human person; therefore, she cannot be called Mother of God.
Above emphasis mine. Credit to the author: Fr. Juniper B. Carol, O.F.M., was a world-renowned authority on Mariology and the founder of The Mariological Society of America. This article was excerpted from Fundamentals of Mariology, Benziger Brothers, 1956.
All of that to merely address what's being talked about in one line. I seriously doubt most people could even read it all without experiencing a brain hemorrhage.
Many of the other condemned propositions make reference to power or authority being granted or coming to Mary. I think the obvious response is that if they were given to her then they do not have her as their origin and so the focus must turn to the nature of the relationship between the Son and His mother.
Let me add at this point that I don't like dueling Scripture verses. I'm not dogmatic about this but in my opinion it often comes close to blasphemy. I'm familiar with 2 Timothy 3:16, the Apostle is not saying throw verses back and forth at each other until someone walks off in a huff, I have yet to see that approach work for any side. I'm also familiar with the 4th chapter of St. Matthew's Gospel and I don't want to be the guy who puts someone in a position of defiling the Word of God. With that in mind I'm already well aware of Luke 11:28, Mark 3:35 and Matthew 12:50.
What then is the nature of the relationship between Jesus Christ and Mary. We all have mothers, what do our mothers mean to us? If, in His sacred Humanity, Our Lord was like us in everything but sin then surely His mother really was His mother in all that implies. Unfortunately we live in a society that has so devalued parents that they often get sent off to "rest homes" and so many of us dishonor our parents. We go off to live our lives and forget their sacrifices, hardships and burdens... usually caused by us. My own parents live 1000 miles from me, and very soon that's going to be a big problem. I love my mother (and my father of course) and if I could give her something special, I would give her eternal youth and beauty, and I'd want all my friends to know her, and I'd want people to ask her advice and bring her flowers and just... everything. And anyone who said she wasn't the best and greatest and most wonderful mother ever would be in for a world of hurt.
If I, broken, sinful, finite mortal that I am would want that for my mother... consider Our Perfect, Infinite, Eternal Lord.
WOW.
I’m impressed. A reasoned, sane response.
Looks like you’re trying to give Mad Dawg some competition in the sane, reasonable RC responder category!
I think my main quibble would be that Christ made clear that Believers who do the Will of The Father are significantly more His priority and focus than the ESSENTIALLY temporary role Mary had as the Mother of His earthly body.
The idea that Mary was an occasion for The Father, Son or Spirit to change the Godhead’s stance over all history by shoehorning her into their DEITY is beyond preposterous in any way, shape, or form.
Paul read Peter the riot act over Peter’s slippery siding with Jews vs Gentile Christians—preferring one type of Christian over another. There’s not a shred of Biblical evidence that ANY of the NT Christians did that toward Mary with God’s blessing. Nor is there any evidence that Mary would have tolerated such.
NONE of the convincing extra-Biblical accounts I’ve read wherein the Heavenly visitors saw or heard anything at all about Mary—she was not in any REMOTELY special category in Heaven, AT ALL. The rather few cases I’ve read that note anything about her at all note that she was merely teaching aborted babies the ways of God . . . as were other Heaven bound believers and angels.
I still don’t understand the—for me—logical disconnect: CHRIST, PLANNED BEFORE THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD AS
THE
MEDIATOR BETWEEN GOD AND MAN
accomplishes the horrendous goal on The Cross, is Resurrected, seated at the Right Hand of The Father . . .
and then farms out, SUB-LETS a GARGANTUAN portion of the MOST SACRED ROLE to the ESSENTIALLY TEMPORARY MOTHER OF HIS PHYSICAL BODY????
NO WAY. NO WAY WHATSOEVER.
RC’S excuse that Scripture about
MAT 12:49-50
49And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!
50For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.KJV
Matthew 12:49-50 (The Message)
48-50Jesus didn’t respond directly, but said, “Who do you think my mother and brothers are?” He then stretched out his hand toward his disciples. “Look closely. These are my mother and brothers. Obedience is thicker than blood. The person who obeys my heavenly Father’s will is my brother and sister and mother.”
Matthew 12:49-50 (Amplified Bible)
49And stretching out His hand toward [not only the twelve disciples but all] [a]His adherents, He said, Here are My mother and My brothers.
50For whoever does the will of My Father in heaven is My brother and sister and mother!
Matthew 12:49-50 (New Living Translation)
49 Then he pointed to his disciples and said, “Look, these are my mother and brothers. 50 Anyone who does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother!”
. . . .
THAT PASSAGE TOTALLY SHREDS THE HERETICAL, BLASPHEMOUS, IDOLATROUS NOTION THAT MARY HAS ANY SPECIAL INTERCESSOR ROLE IN HEAVEN WHATSOEVER.
It’s fascinating that RC’s obsess over the meaning of “the bread and the wine” insisting on their interpetation of every word of Christ in those verses . . .
and utterly ignore or slide quickly by the above WORDS OF CHRIST in those verses as having no relevance to all their hereical dogma about Mary—IN ADDITION to ignoring the bit about blood SIBLINGS—other BLOOD CHILDREN of Mary.
I find that absolutely mind-bogglingly horrendous.
AT MINIMUM, CHRIST IS SAYING THAT WHATEVER ROLE(S) Mary has had in His life and reality, ALL WHO OBEY THE FATHER HAVE EQUAL ROLES.
THAT ALONE SHREDS the special categories RC’s compulsively obsessively, blasphemously, idolatrously shoehorn her into.