Catholic Belief understanding about Mary

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gokul
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

Gokul

Guest
Why do the council took place in Ephesus about Mary suggest the title “Theotokos” - The mother of God rather than the specificiation that she is “The Mother of Logos”? Is it blasphemy to use term Theotokos, while the Father is a spirit and a person also the Holyspirit, who has no beginning and the end?
 
Last edited:
Why would it be blasphemous to use a term defined by an ecumenical council?

The idea isn’t that Mary isn’t prior to God, metaphysically or temporally. This is obvious. She isn’t greater than God, nor did she come before him. The Logos always was, even before he entered into human history in the Incarnation.

It’s simple logic:

Jesus is God.

Mary is the Mother of Jesus.

Therefore, Mary is the Mother of God.

The problem Ephesus was dealing with was that to call Mary “Mother of Christ” could lead to obscuring that Jesus was God, if carried to its logical conclusion. Here we have an example of how the Church’s teaching on Mary always teaches us about Jesus and who he is. Even in doctrine, Mary points the way to her Son.

-Fr ACEGC
 
The term Theotokos also give an idea about the mother of Trinity ,that is what we mean by God which includes The Father, Logos (before manifested) , The Holyspirit.

Why didn’t the council specifically defined a term which means Mary is the mother of Logos manifested, who has a divine nature which is came from above?

What is the motive for defining Theotokos rather than something like Theologotokos or Logotheotokos or Theochristotokos or Christotheotokos
 
The term doesn’t necessarily imply that Mary is the Mother of the Trinity because that would be impossible and illogical. The term was coined to defend the divinity of Jesus.

“Mother of the Logos” actually has just the same problem that you say “Mother of God” does, since it makes it sound like Mary existed before the Logos and was superior to it. Also, “Mother of God” is more precise. There have been uses of the word “Logos” from before Christ. The Logos in Greek philosophy was the ordering principle of the universe who constituted everything from preexisting matter. So to say Mother of God necessarily contains the idea that Jesus is the Divine and eternal Logos, but to merely call Jesus the Logos doesn’t necessarily do this either.

My question to you would be: do you really think we’ve gone all this time without thinking of your objection? The formulation of the council is more than sufficient. Are we really to believe that it took 1500 years to think of what you’re saying?
 
I agree the idea that JESUS is God, Mary is the mother of JESUS but the term used or defined by the council need more specificity. It will be a great tragedy for translation of the term Theotokos into other languages, which give an idea of Mary being the mother of Trinity as God is Trinity.

My real question is why didn’t the council referred a specific word for “Mary, the mother of my Lord”?

Pslams 110:1
Like 1:43
 
What about it? The Bible acknowledges Mary is the Mother of God. The doctrine as defined at Ephesus is biblical.
 
Gokul said:
I agree the idea that JESUS is God, Mary is the mother of JESUS but the term used or defined by the council need more specificity. It will be a great tragedy for translation of the term Theotokos into other languages, which give an idea of Mary being the mother of Trinity as God is Trinity.

My real question is why didn’t the council referred a specific word for “Mary, the mother of my Lord”?

Pslams 110:1
Like 1:43
Click to expand...
Notice that a human being has a rational soul and a body, the divine is the Most Holy Trinity. The divine person of the Son of God is the person of Jesus the Anointed One that has assumed a human rational soul and body: two natures and two wills. St. Cyril of Alexandria explained:
We must not, therefore, divide the one Lord Jesus Christ into two Sons. Neither will it at all avail to a sound faith to hold, as some do, a union of persons; for the Scripture has not said that the Word united to himself the person of man, but that he was made flesh. This expression, however, “the Word was made flesh,” can mean nothing else but that he partook of flesh and blood like to us; he made our body his own, and came forth man from a woman, not casting off his existence as God, or his generation of God the Father, but even in taking to himself flesh remaining what he was. This the declaration of the correct faith proclaims everywhere. This was the sentiment of the holy Fathers; therefore they ventured to call the holy Virgin, the Mother of God [Theotokos], not as if the nature of the Word or his divinity had its beginning from the holy Virgin, but because of her was born that holy body with a rational soul, to which the Word being personally united is said to be born according to the flesh.
Click to expand...
 
Natures don’t have mothers. Persons have mothers. Jesus has both a divine nature and a human nature, but he is only one Person, and that is the Second Person of the Trinity
 
edward_george1 said:
Here we have an example of how the Church’s teaching on Mary always teaches us about Jesus and who he is. Even in doctrine, Mary points the way to her Son.
Click to expand...
I see it clearly, with Mother of God and underatand the necessity of her being a virgin prior to the birth and appropriatnesz of her remaining one afterwards. However I don’t see what the Immaculate Conception or Assumption add to our umderstanding of Christ. I see them as graces given to Mary, but not necessary.
 
Last edited:
Gokul said:
Why do the council took place in Ephesus about Mary suggest the title “Theotokos” - The mother of God rather than the specificiation that she is “The Mother of Logos”? Is it blasphemy to use term Theotokos, while the Father is a spirit and a person also the Holyspirit, who has no beginning and the end?
Click to expand...
You, like other Protestants, are only seeking a roundabout way of saying the same thing that we are saying. “Mother of Jesus”, “Mother of God” and “Mother of the Lord” all mean the same thing, and if you oppose one, logic would dictate that you oppose the others.

Is Theotokos just “too Catholic” for your taste?
 
Last edited:
I’m opposing the idea behind the word, I’m saying what the spirit has inspired to call Mary in scriptures ,The spirit has inspired Elizebth to say the word “my Lord” (son of man) rather than “Lord” (ABBA) or which means Theotokos.Both “Lord” and “my Lord” are two separate persons but are one in essence, God, which cannot be separated. Infact “my Lord” has an additional nature when he became flesh which is the human nature and my Lord has put his divinity aside inorder to fulfill the blood covenant. Jesus doesn’t seek his glory which reveals he came to fulfill the blood covenant so that his righteousness will provided.Jesus did no miracles until the Holyspirit came. He lived as a man with his divinity as a recessive inorder to fulfill the covenant. I’m not taking away his divinity, the Scriptures is clear that he is fully man and fully God.

On calling Theotokos doesn’t mean mother of partial essence of God rather the word itself declares mother of the essence of God which includes “Lord” and “my Lord”
 
Last edited:
I see the logic in calling the Virgin Mary “Theotokos” because she indeed is the mother of Christ, who is God - the second person of the Holy Trinity. However, I still have some suspicions about some negative symbolism in where the Theotokos pronouncement came about.

I don’t think it was a coincidence that the Early Church leaders chose Ephesus as the place to convene a council to pronounce the Virgin Mary as Theotokos. After all, Ephesus had been home for many centuries to the female goddess Artemis of the ancient Mediterranean world, and calling Mary “Theotokos” served to solidify Christ’s standing as divine (a good thing) while secondarily (not so good, in my opinion) serving to pacify the people of Ephesus and the Mediterranean world who still desired to pay homage to the female divine after all those centuries of their families worshiping Artemis/Diana. After all, they were subjected to a more patriarchal faith in Christianity that had kind of left them “high and dry” in terms of the female divine personage to worship and adore until Mary was pronounced “Mother of God”.

While official Church teaching was and is still that Mary is not divine, it still doesn’t stop some of the faithful from raising her status higher than intended in their devotion, although I firmly believe that all Catholics on CAF that I have interacted with put her in proper context and don’t adore her as a goddess.

In contrast, I acknowledge that most Protestants I know don’t give Mary the honor that she truly deserves. In fact, she is ignored most of the year and barely is mentioned outside of her role in the Christmas story, which is an injustice to her and the sacrifices she made and risks she took to be the mother of our Lord. I realize that is the case since coming to CAF, and I’ve grown to appreciate her more and more and even recite the "Hail Mary’ prayer from time to time and occasionally ask her to pray for me as an intercessor as I would a devout prayer partner here on earth.

By the way, here is the article I read that has some of things that I was mentioning on Mary. I didn’t form my opinion from it, but I saw that the writer was more articulate in writing what I already thought on the subject. I am open to being wrong and that I may have misconceptions about The Virgin Mary like I used to be on some other Catholic dogmas, but if possible I’d like a Catholic to read the article (it’s not terribly long) and tell me where they miss the mark.

My biggest pet peeve question is, “Why did they choose Ephesus of all places to have a council on Mary being pronounced Theotokos out of all the cities in the Roman world, especially in light of Ephesus having been the epicenter of Artemis/DIana worship for centuries, if there is to be no symbolic connection between the two?”

 
Gokul said:
I’m opposing the idea behind the word, I’m saying what the spirit has inspired to call Mary in scriptures ,The spirit has inspired Elizebth to say the word my Lord (son of man) rather than Lord (ABBA) or which means Theotokos.
Click to expand...
Was Elizabeth inspired to say “Lord”, or was it only within her own mind to say it? If it was inspired, what do you think that He Who inspired her to say it desired for it to mean?
 
Tommy that article is not in line with Church teachings. The “goddesses” are not real, they were and always will be false idols. To call Virgin Mary a false idol is offending to her faith in God, because she was a faithful Jewish woman, and an offense to God to imply that on one side He gives laws against false idols and on the other He would somehow gratify one of them as His mother (which He didn’t).
St. Paul never approved the cult of Artemis, in the NT it is said that his spirit was very angry against the idol but he calmed himself down and changed the discussion towards a God who was unknown to the Greeks and it is historically accurate that a shrine offered to “an unknown god” existed.
 
Gokul said:
I agree the idea that JESUS is God, Mary is the mother of JESUS but the term used or defined by the council need more specificity. It will be a great tragedy for translation of the term Theotokos into other languages, which give an idea of Mary being the mother of Trinity as God is Trinity.
Click to expand...
That doesn’t really hold up, though. After all, if I point to your Mom and say “mother of Gokul”, does that imply the entire family of Gokul? Your spouse? Your children? No, of course not – it means what it says: she’s your mother. Jesus is God. Mary is the mother of God. (Not of the Trinity.)

Here’s the context of the assertion: prior to the council, there were those who were claiming that Jesus wasn’t God. Therefore, they tried to claim that Mary was only the mother of a person who was not divine – that is, she was only the mother of the Christ. The council’s decision was to affirm the divinity of Jesus. We know who Mary gave birth to… don’t we? There’s literally no one who asserts that Mary gave birth to the Holy Spirit or to the Father. So, when we call Mary ‘Theotokos’, the implication is clear: she is the mother of Jesus. Jesus is God.
 
I’m not sure if I understand your question, Gokul.

The first and primary Marian dogma is Mary, Mother of God. Jesus is God the Son. As Father said, therefore: Mary is the Mother of God.

That’s the beginning of all of our Marian devotion as Catholics.

I just think you’re overthinking this.
 
I agree the context what the council promote, and I disagree with the idea of nostorians.

I just want to know why the council choose the title “my Lord’s mother” inspired in scriptures by the holyspirit before Mary through Elizabeth, when they met.
 
Gokul said:
I just want to know why the council choose the title “my Lord’s mother” inspired in scriptures by the holyspirit before Mary through Elizabeth, when they met.
Click to expand...
From Luke:
“1:43 And whence is this to me that the mother of my Lord should come to me?
1:43 Et unde hoc mihi, ut veniat mater Domini mei ad me ?”
Click to expand...
Mater Domini. Mother of the Lord. What translation are you using? From a quick Google search, it sounds like you’re using the Good News Bible translation. Is that correct?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top