As we see in this discussion, it is all about Jesus. Debates about Mary are debates about Jesus. That is the point of Theotokos, the point of the council in rejecting Nestorius. It was his belief about Jesus that was revealed in his statments about Mary.
The Incarnation interweaves the two. Get either one wrong and you get them both wrong as well as the Incarnation.
non-Catholics will never understand that point, well said.
( how can they when they think there were no Christians before the 16th century? )
So why then all the hyperventilating whenever a non-Catholic tries to express the belief that Jesus IS God in the flesh, incarnated, but say it doesn't by default make Mary the Mother of God? I think they could have done a good job of explaining the Deity of Jesus without going into what it made Mary. Of course, if one believes that Jesus is Almighty God, the Son of God, in the flesh, it only stands to reason that Mary gave birth to the incarnate Son of God. I think they went overboard by calling Mary the Mother of God because look at all the consternation it has caused not to mention the developing dogmas that were invented outside of Holy Scripture that gave her attributes reserved to God alone. From this decision of the Council, evolved the sinlessness of Mary, her ever-virgin state and her bodily assumption - dogmas that all the "faithful" are required to give ascent under threat of excommunication. "Because we said so" is the reason given.
I think y'all can believe whatever you want about the subject, but other Christians can disagree and STILL be Christians. Nobody here is disrespecting Mary.
Not necessarily. Catholicism has too interwoven them and attributed too much importance to Mary and too much importance to someone's opinion of Mary.
That is the point of Theotokos, the point of the council in rejecting Nestorius. It was his belief about Jesus that was revealed in his statments about Mary.
Only for those looking for a reason to oppose him. It's well enough known that he opposed the up and coming Catholic church and what better way to silence someone than brand them a heretic.
The Incarnation interweaves the two. Get either one wrong and you get them both wrong as well as the Incarnation.
The long and short of it is that understanding the Incarnation *properly* or completely, is beyond the pay grade of any finite, sinful human being. There is no way that an in depth understanding of it is required for salvation. It is enough to know that Jesus is Immanuel, God with us. HOW that came to be is obviously not of import to us otherwise God would have told us in Scripture.
THAT it IS is all we're required to believe.