"Theotokos" is the most theologically correct title for the virgin Mary. The only reason its not used in western Christianity (Roman Catholic and Protestant churches) is because it's a Greek term and the liturgical language of the west has been Latin. There's no exact way to say "Theotokos" in another language. The closest English phrase would be "God-bearer". Mary is God-bearer.
All Catholics have no problem accepting that Mary is God-bearer. The disturbing thing is that numerous protestants claim to accept traditional Christian doctrine but refuse to admit that Mary is God-bearer. In fact, I can show you numerous posts on this very thread where they vehemently insist that Mary "only gave birth to Jesus" and that his divinity was separate and not united with his humanity when he was in Mary. This is a heresy in Christianity. Protestants on this thread who claim that she "only gave birth to Jesus" are preaching that Mary is Christotokos ("Christ-bearer") rather than Theotokos. Again, the concept that Mary is only Christotokos has been rejected as a heresy in ALL of Christendom for the last 1600 years.
I suggest you read post #518 from Kolokotronis. The English translation of the original Greek statement reads that Christ was:
"born of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, according to the Manhood; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten"
That has been accepted by the ENTIRE Christian world for 1600 years. Its not something the Roman Catholic Church "invented" years later to "exhalt Mary". If you have a problem with the statement as written in 451 A.D., you have a problem with mainstream Christian theology.
A man issued statement?? Over the Word?? No.
Well that is a step in the right direction!
The only reason its not used in western Christianity (Roman Catholic and Protestant churches) is because it's a Greek term and the liturgical language of the west has been Latin. There's no exact way to say "Theotokos" in another language. The closest English phrase would be "God-bearer". Mary is God-bearer.
Nice try but even saying that is "the only reason" is untenable and unreasonable.
1. As seen by the distinctive use of the title "priest" for NT pastors/presbyteros, from a Greek word word used exclusively for Hebrew or pagan priests (in Latin word "sacerdos" which is said to have no morphological or lingual relationship with the Latin word for “presbyter”) but never for NT presbyteros (outside all believers being calls priests), and Catholicism's choice of terms can easily be theologically driven - as here via imposed functional equivalence - versus a lack of lingual equivalents.
2. Since when is no exact way to say something a problem? I read that it has been found that the equivalent phrase "Mater Dei" (Mother of God) is more common in Latin and so also in the other languages used in the Western Catholic Church. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_(mother_of_Jesus)#Titles)
The "Myroure of our Ldy" written for the Bridgettine nuns of Syon (fifteenth century) states,
Some saye at the begynnyng of this salutacyon Ave benigne Jesu and some saye after 'Maria mater Dei'...(http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07110b.htm)
3. Rather than MOG being a satisfactory correct term or lacking one in Latin: “The term Theotokos — Θεοτοκος — does not mean the same as “Mother of God” in English or the common Latin translation. In English one must translate Theotokos as “Bearer of God.” The correct Latin would be deipara or dei genetrix, not Mater Dei. (“The Significance of the Term Theotokos” from The Byzantine Fathers of the Fifth Century (Fr. Georges Florovsky) June, 1987).
4. Rather than adding a qualifying note (such as God is careful to do in Rm. 9:5) that would make MOG more theologically correct, instead Catholicism uncritically abundantly and formally uses it as part of their hyperexaltation of Mary, even largely paralleling Christ.
All Catholics have no problem accepting that Mary is God-bearer.
For beginners, while what they end up with is a demigoddess to whom Christ owes His sinless blood to.
The disturbing thing is that numerous protestants claim to accept traditional Christian doctrine but refuse to admit that Mary is God-bearer.
You are now debating what I did not argue, and i am not representing or promoting a particular church belief that does, while you represent Catholic error.
In fact, I can show you numerous posts on this very thread where they vehemently insist that Mary "only gave birth to Jesus" and that his divinity was separate and not united with his humanity when he was in Mary.
If true, it is likely due to inability to articulate that what they are opposing is that Mary authored or contributed anything to the Divine nature of Christ, which the title "God" represents, and that Mary is ontologically the mother of Deity is what MOG most naturally conveys and is what is being protested.
his divinity was separate and not united with his humanity when he was in Mary. This is a heresy in Christianity.
As is attributing to Mary glory and attributes only God is shown having, including being the dispenser of all graces in Heaven, and the object of prostrating praise and prayer addressed to her in Heaven, which she can hear and respond to. Out of over 200 prayers in Scripture by believers, only the Lord is addressed and alone shown to be able to hear all such . Offering prayers in memorial before the final judgments does not do it, nor is asking one another to pray for you on earth translate into this.
The English translation of the original Greek statement reads that Christ was: "born of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God,
Other, as show, deny that Theotokos means the same as “Mother of God” in English or the common Latin translation, while this Chalcedonian Definition adds the qualifier, "according to the Manhood," which characteristic lack of continues to be an issue in the protest against MOG.
That has been accepted by the ENTIRE Christian world for 1600 years.
But which does not make it Scriptural, not any of the erroneous other accretions seen in the progressive deformation of the post-NT church (while yet holding to salvific truths) and the use of MOG cannot be divorced from the unScriptural exaltation of Mary which it is part of.
Saying that Mary is the mother of God is not merely saying that she was the God bearer. It goes well beyond that.
Nor did Mary bear God. She bore God Incarnate. She's the mother of Jesus, as the Holy Spirit refers to her in Scripture, not the mother of God as the Catholic church invented later.