Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: narses; RnMomof7
Contemporary Protestants distance themselves from the title, “Mother of God,” and perhaps for good reason. The term has evolved in its usage. What was once a rich theological term expressing a doctrinal truth about Christ developed quickly into a venerating praise to Mary. The term Theotokos can be translated with a strong Christocentric nuance as, “the one who gave birth to the one who is God.”[16] In the fifth century, the term was brought to the theological forefront by conflict with Nestorius. He argued that only the human nature of Jesus Christ had been born of Mary, thus provoking debate on the validity of the term. His concern was to protect the divine nature from similarities with the mother deities of paganism. [17]

Unlike modern Protestants, Luther did not shy away from using the term, “Mother of God,” and he was fully cognizant of its correct usage. He succinctly analyzes the Nestorian heresy, and concludes that Nestorius:

Insisted on the literal meaning of the words, “God born of Mary,” and interpreted “born” according to grammar or philosophy, as though it meant to obtain divine nature from the one who bore him, … We too know very well that God did not derive his divinity from Mary; but it does not follow that it is therefore wrong to say that God was born of Mary, that God is Mary’s Son, and that Mary is God’s mother. [18]

Throughout his career, one finds Luther expressing not only the rich Christ- centered usage of Theotokos when discussing the incarnation or Christ’s Deity, but he also uses the term simply as a synonym for Mary, which was common in sixteenth century Western Christendom.[19] In a Table Talk entry from 1542, one finds Luther using the title as a mode of exclamation, “O Mary, mother of God!”[20] This is not to suggest that Luther did not think of Mary as particularly special. To the contrary, Luther was to call her “Mother of God, exalted above all mortals”[21] when he considered she was given the great gift of being mother to the Messiah.

Luther though shifts the emphasis back to God: “She does not desire herself to be esteemed; she magnifies God alone and gives all glory to Him. She leaves herself out and ascribes everything to God alone, from whom she received it.”[22] For Mary to be exalted, was actually for her to “magnify God alone, to count only Him great and lay claim to nothing.”[23] As Heiko Oberman points out, when Luther uses the term “Theotokos,” “There is indeed little chance that Mary can become the thing signified rather than the sign.”[24] Mary, serving as the sign pointing to Christ, was to say: “I am but the workshop in which He performs His work; I had nothing to do with the work itself. No one should praise me or give me the glory for becoming the Mother of God, but God alone and His work are to be honored and praised in me.”[25]

He also compounds the term with “blessed”: “most blessed Mother of God,”[26] or “Blessed Virgin, Mother of God.”[27] Even in the usage of “blessed” though, Luther shifts the emphasis away from Mary and back to God. He explains that Mary thought herself “blessed” because God “regarded” her; that is, God turned His face toward her and gave grace and salvation, as he likewise did when He chose to give grace to Abel, rather than Cain. He explains, “But for this one thing alone, that God regarded her, men will call her blessed. That is to give all the glory to God as completely as it can be done… Not she is praised thereby, but God’s grace toward her.”[28] Luther sees this “regarding” as God’s bestowal of grace in choosing His children unto salvation and sanctification: “For where it comes to pass that God turns His face toward one to regard him, there is nothing but grace and salvation, and all gifts and works must follow.” [29]

(http://tquid.sharpens.org/luther_mary1.htm#III

Take note of this: no one should put his trust or confidence in the Mother of God or in her merits, for such trust is worthy of God alone and is the lofty service due only to him. Rather praise and thank God through Mary and the grace given her. Laud and love her simply as the one who, without merit, obtained such blessings from God, sheerly out of his mercy, as she herself testifies in the Magnificat. (Martin Luther, Luther’s Works, 43:10.)

37 posted on 01/11/2012 8:16:48 PM PST by boatbums (Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us. Titus 3:5)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]


To: boatbums

Thanks, that is a sensible view to take if one is made uncomfortable with the term Mother of God, because to them it implies Mary has precedence over the Godhead. It is a sensible middle ground that does not come even close to suggesting Christ was not fully human and fully divine.


125 posted on 01/11/2012 9:05:53 PM PST by lastchance ("Nisi credideritis, non intelligetis" St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

To: boatbums

Insisted on the literal meaning of the words, “God born of Mary,” and interpreted “born” according to grammar or philosophy, as though it meant to obtain divine nature from the one who bore him, … We too know very well that God did not derive his divinity from Mary; but it does not follow that it is therefore wrong to say that God was born of Mary, that God is Mary’s Son, and that Mary is God’s mother. [18]

>>This is STILL Catholic teaching. If anyone deviates from this teaching, it is likely due to poor catechesis.

Mary is nothing without Jesus and points the way to him.


588 posted on 01/12/2012 6:38:28 PM PST by rzman21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson