The Mother of God

[sonseeker]

You said:

If Mary is not the Mother of God,
then Jesus is not God.

C’mon Jim, this is completely in error.

Jesus is God, pre-existent and eternal; He needs no mother to be God, unless you are saying that Mary is “God the Mother,” in relation to “God the Father,” “God the Son,” “God the Holy Spirit?”

Bill

 

[sonseeker]

You said:

This is sad. How can he say that Jesus is not God the Son, the 2nd person of the Trinity?

You misunderstood what I said, and that is entirely my fault; I assumed you would follow my thinking, and I should not have assumed that.

Let me clarify, I said: “Jesus is nowhere in Scripture called ‘God the Son,’ rather He is called ‘The Son of God.’” That is a true statement; what I was getting at is the distinction the writers make in calling Jesus “the Son of God,” (which phrase appears some 42 times in the N.T.), and calling Him “the son of Mary,” (which phrase appears only once in Mk 6:3). Mary is more often called “the Mother of Jesus” (3 times: Jn 2:1,3; Acts 1:14). The emphasis is on Jesus as the “Son of God,” not as the “son of Mary.” The distinction made by the writers is not accidental. Even the translators, capitalize “Son,” in reference to Jesus’ relationship to the Father, while they use lower case, “son,” in reference to Jesus’ being Mary’s son.

Sorry for the misunderstanding

Bill

 

[sonseeker]

You said:

Mickey:

Using a quote from The First Seven Ecumenical Councils—Their History and Theology: “…For the common people, Christ had defeated heresy; May, Mother of God had triumphed over Nestorius.”

The thrust of the councils dealing with Nestorius were centered on Christ’s deity, and humanity; it was not centered on Mary, though she was mentioned. You may disagree, but that’s what they were about. I assume that the quote you have used is made by the writer of the history book (correct me if I am wrong), interjecting his sentiments.

I offer again, an excerpt from the Chalcedonian Definition (451 A.D.):

“… as regards his Godhead, begotten of the Father before the ages, but yet as regards his manhood begotten, for us men and for our salvation, of Mary the Virgin, the God-bearer; one and the same Christ,…”

Do you accept, or reject that statement?

You said, my theology regard Mary as the Mother of God is unpopular? I’m not sure what you are saying. The only place that I know of where that theology is popular is in your church. It is not, as you think, popular outside of it. That is because it (Marian theology in general) cannot be supported historically.

Respectfully,

Bill

 

[Mickey]

sonseeker:

The thrust of the councils dealing with Nestorius were centered on Christ’s deity, and humanity; it was not centered on Mary, though she was mentioned.

Mary was key in dealing with the Nestorian heresy. Why? Because Nestorius claimed Mary was the mother of Jesus’ humanity only. Other heresies claimed that Jesus was only divine. By proclaiming Mary as “Theotokos”, God-bearer, or Mother of God, meant that Jesus’ natures could not be separated. Mary was mother of God the Son. Both the divine and human natures. Mary was vital in this dispute, as hard as that is for you to accept.

sonseeker:

I offer again, an excerpt from the Chalcedonian Definition (451 A.D.):

“… as regards his Godhead, begotten of the Father before the ages, but yet as regards his manhood begotten, for us men and for our salvation, of Mary the Virgin, the God-bearer; one and the same Christ,…”

Do you accept, or reject that statement?

I accept that statement. And I offer this to you again. One who bears God in the womb, (and I take it that you accept Theotokos also), Gives birth to God the Son, and breast feeds and nurtures that child, is the Mother of God.

sonseeker:

You said, my theology regard Mary as the Mother of God is unpopular? I’m not sure what you are saying. The only place that I know of where that theology is popular is in your church. It is not, as you think, popular outside of it.

I have close relationships with many individuals associated with many different denominations. Not one of them denies that Mary is the Mother of God. You are also the only poster here amonst numerous protestants, who rejects that title. So I ask you again, since you don’t list your particular denomination or non-denomination–where do you get this unpopular heretical theology?

sonseeker:

That is because it (Marian theology in general) cannot be supported historically.

Marian theology, I’m willing to bet is about 1500 years older than your church. If that’s not supported historically I don’t know what is! The earliest devotional marian prayer was found about the year 250, on an already weathered piece of Egyptian papyrus, it’s call the sub tuum. Here it is:

**We fly to your patronage, **
**0 holy Mother of God; **
**despise not our prayers in our necessities, **
**but deliver us always from all dangers, **
**O glorious and blessed Virgin. **

 

[Mickey]

Council of Ephesus

“We confess, then, our Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, perfect God and perfect man, of a rational soul and a body, begotten before all ages from the Father in his Godhead, the same in the last days, for us and for our salvation, born of Mary the Virgin according to his humanity, one and the same consubstantial with the Father in Godhead and consubstantial with us in humanity, for a union of two natures took place. Therefore we confess one Christ, one Son, one Lord. According to this understanding of the unconfused union, **we confess the holy Virgin to be the Mother of God **because God the Word took flesh and became man and from his very conception united to himself the temple he took from her” (*Formula of Union *[A.D. 431]).

 

[Mickey]

Gregory the Wonderworker

“For Luke, in the inspired Gospel narratives, delivers a testimony not to Joseph only, but also to Mary, the Mother of God, and gives this account with reference to the very family and house of David” (*Four Homilies *1 [A.D. 262]).

“It is our duty to present to God, like sacrifices, all the festivals and hymnal celebrations; and first of all, [the feast of] the Annunciation to the holy Mother of God, to wit, the salutation made to her by the angel, ‘Hail, full of grace!’” (ibid., 2).

Peter of Alexandria

“They came to the church of the most blessed Mother of God, and ever-virgin Mary, which, as we began to say, he had constructed in the western quarter, in a suburb, for a cemetery of the martyrs” (*The Genuine Acts of Peter of Alexandria *[A.D. 305]).

"We acknowledge the resurrection of the dead, of which Jesus Christ our Lord became the firstling; he bore a body not in appearance but in truth derived from Mary the Mother of God" (*Letter to All Non-Egyptian Bishops *12 [A.D. 324]).

Methodius

“While the old man [Simeon] was thus exultant, and rejoicing with exceeding great and holy joy, that which had before been spoken of in a figure by the prophet Isaiah, the holy Mother of God now manifestly fulfilled” (*Oration on Simeon and Anna *7 [A.D. 305]).

“Hail to you forever, you virgin Mother of God, our unceasing joy, for unto you do I again return. . . . Hail, you fount of the Son’s love for man. . . . Wherefore, we pray you, the most excellent among women, who boast in the confidence of your maternal honors, that you would unceasingly keep us in remembrance. O holy Mother of God, remember us, I say, who make our boast in you, and who in august hymns celebrate your memory, which will ever live, and never fade away” (ibid., 14).

 

[Mickey]

**Cyril of **Jerusalem

“The Father bears witness from heaven to his Son. The Holy Spirit bears witness, coming down bodily in the form of a dove. The archangel Gabriel bears witness, bringing the good tidings to Mary. The Virgin Mother of God bears witness” (*Catechetical Lectures *10:19 [A.D. 350]).

Ephraim the Syrian

“Though still a virgin she carried a child in her womb, and the handmaid and work of his wisdom became the Mother of God” (*Songs of Praise *1:20 [A.D. 351]).

Athanasius

“The Word begotten of the Father from on high, inexpressibly, inexplicably, incomprehensibly, and eternally, is he that is born in time here below of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God” (*The Incarnation of the Word of God *8 [A.D. 365]).

**Epiphanius of **Salamis

“Being perfect at the side of the Father and incarnate among us, not in appearance but in truth, he [the Son] reshaped man to perfection in himself from Mary the Mother of God through the Holy Spirit” (The Man Well-Anchored 75 [A.D. 374]).

**Ambrose of **Milan

“The first thing which kindles ardor in learning is the greatness of the teacher. What is greater than the Mother of God? What more glorious than she whom Glory Itself chose?” (*The Virgins *2:2[7] [A.D. 377]).

Gregory of Nazianz

“If anyone does not agree that holy Mary is Mother of God, he is at odds with the Godhead” (*Letter to Cledonius the Priest *101 [A.D. 382]).

Jerome

“As to how a virgin became the Mother of God, he [Rufinus] has full knowledge; as to how he himself was born, he knows nothing” (*Against Rufinus *2:10 [A.D. 401]).

“Do not marvel at the novelty of the thing, if a Virgin gives birth to God” (*Commentaries on Isaiah *3:7:15 [A.D. 409]).

 

[Mickey]

Cyril of Alexandria

“I have been amazed that some are utterly in doubt as to whether or not the holy Virgin is able to be called the Mother of God. For if our Lord Jesus Christ is God, how should the holy Virgin who bore him not be the Mother of God?” (*Letter to the Monks of *Egypt 1 [A.D. 427]).

“This expression, however, ‘the Word was made flesh’ [John 1:14], 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,’ 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” (*First Letter to Nestorius *[A.D. 430]).

“And since the holy Virgin corporeally brought forth God made one with flesh according to nature, for this reason we also call her Mother of God, not as if the nature of the Word had the beginning of its existence from the flesh” (*Third Letter to Nestorius *[A.D. 430]).

“If anyone will not confess that the Emmanuel is very God, and that therefore the holy Virgin is the Mother of God, inasmuch as in the flesh she bore the Word of God made flesh [John 1:14]: let him be anathema” (ibid.).

Vincent of Lerins

“Nestorius, whose disease is of an opposite kind, while pretending that he holds two distinct substances in Christ, brings in of a sudden two persons, and with unheard-of wickedness would have two sons of God, two Christs,—one, God, the other, man; one, begotten of his Father, the other, born of his mother. For which reason he maintains that Saint Mary ought to be called, not the Mother of God, but the Mother of Christ” (*The Notebooks *12[35] [A.D. 434]).

 

[Mickey]

John Cassian

"Now, you heretic, you say (whoever you are who deny that God was born of the Virgin), that Mary, the Mother of our Lord Jesus Christ, cannot be called the Mother of God, but the Mother only of Christ and not of God—for no one, you say, gives birth to one older than herself. And concerning this utterly stupid argument . . . let us prove by divine testimonies both that Christ is God and that Mary is the Mother of God" (*On the Incarnation of Christ Against Nestorius *2:2 [A.D. 429]).

"You cannot then help admitting that the grace comes from God. It is God, then, who has given it. But it has been given by our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore the Lord Jesus Christ is God. But if he is God, as he certainly is, then she who bore God is the Mother of God" (ibid., 2:5).

 

[sonseeker]

John Cassian

"Now, you heretic, you say (whoever you are who deny that God was born of the Virgin), that Mary, the Mother of our Lord Jesus Christ, cannot be called the Mother of God, but the Mother only of Christ and not of God—for no one, you say, gives birth to one older than herself. And concerning this utterly stupid argument . . . let us prove by divine testimonies both that Christ is God and that Mary is the Mother of God" (*On the Incarnation of Christ Against Nestorius *2:2 [A.D. 429]).

"You cannot then help admitting that the grace comes from God. It is God, then, who has given it. But it has been given by our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore the Lord Jesus Christ is God. But if he is God, as he certainly is, then she who bore God is the Mother of God" (ibid., 2:5).

You are right Mickey. I don’t know what got into to me.

Sorry.

Bill

 

[Mickey]

sonseeker:

You are right Mickey. I don’t know what got into to me.

Sorry.

Bill

Glad I could help, Bill. But the credit goes to St John Cassian.

 

[Church_Militant]

Council of Ephesus

“We confess, then, our Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, perfect God and perfect man, of a rational soul and a body, begotten before all ages from the Father in his Godhead, the same in the last days, for us and for our salvation, born of Mary the Virgin according to his humanity, one and the same consubstantial with the Father in Godhead and consubstantial with us in humanity, for a union of two natures took place. Therefore we confess one Christ, one Son, one Lord. According to this understanding of the unconfused union, **we confess the holy Virgin to be the Mother of God **because God the Word took flesh and became man and from his very conception united to himself the temple he took from her” (*Formula of Union *[A.D. 431]).

This just pretty much nails it to the wall for me. I just can’t divorce that Son of God/Son of Man thing the way some do. The reasoning from Ephesus is just airtight to me, and ties in with Mary’s position as Giberah, in the OT sense as well.

I’ve read the statements from the pilars of the reformation and was surprised that modern Protestants don’t share their view, but have discovered that very few moderns do on a great many things.
Pax tecum,

 

[mercygate]

sonseeker:

You are right Mickey. I don’t know what got into to me.

Sorry.

Bill

Nothing got into you that hasn’t also got into a lot of other people who kind of fell off the edge of the earth around 1900. This particular beef is a really LATE post-Reformation development.

Mainstream Protestants who have an Orthodox doctrine of God ALL understand that the title “Mother of God” takes nothing away from the eternal Godhead, moreover it in no way exaggerates the role of person of Mary. One of the best defenders of this doctrine is R. C. Sproul of Ligonier Ministries, a card-carrying sola Scriptura/sola fide Presbyterian. As I said earlier on this thread, this is NOT one of the issues that separates Protestants from Catholics.

We got enough to squabble about. Let’s not add this non-issue!

 

[JimG]

sonseeker:

C’mon Jim, this is completely in error.

Jesus is God, pre-existent and eternal; He needs no mother to be God, unless you are saying that Mary is “God the Mother,” in relation to “God the Father,” “God the Son,” “God the Holy Spirit?”

Bill

Of course God needs no mother. He chose to have a mother. In becoming incarnate, the Word chose Mary to be His mother.

But Jesus is one person, not two. One person, two natures–human and divine. Saying that Mary is the mother of God, does not mean that she pre-existed him, or is superior to him, or is not created by him.

Saying that Mary is the mother of God simply preserves the truth that Jesus is God.

Persons have mothers. Natures don’t have mothers. And Jesus is God the Second Person of the Trinity. And Mary is his mother.

I have a body and soul. My body came genetically from my parents; I was carried in my mother’s womb. I don’t believe that my mother created my soul. My soul was directly created by God. Yet I don’t say, “She is the mother of my body only.” No, she is my mother. Can human mothers create a soul? Obviously not. Yet humans with immortal souls do have human mothers.

Only if you do not really accept that Jesus is God can you deny that Mary is the mother of God.

 

[JimG]

Bill,

Sorry I didn’t read through all the posts before posting. You said in a previous post that you could accept the term Theotokos—God-bearer—but you didn’t think it was equivalent to “Mother of God.” I do think that the two terms are equivalent, but if you accept that Mary is “God-bearer,” perhaps we’re only quibbling over semantics. Theotokos is fine with me.

One who bears a child, is after all a mother to the child she bears.

Catholics don’t believe that Mary somehow creates God, not even the Second Person of the Trinity. We know that God created her. We further believe that God chose her to bear God the Son—the Word—in the Incarnation.

The Incarnation—God becoming Man—seems to me to be a much harder concept to accept, than to accept that in doing so God had a human mother.

 

[sonseeker]

JimG:

Bill,

Sorry I didn’t read through all the posts before posting. You said in a previous post that you could accept the term Theotokos—God-bearer—but you didn’t think it was equivalent to “Mother of God.” I do think that the two terms are equivalent, but if you accept that Mary is “God-bearer,” perhaps we’re only quibbling over semantics. Theotokos is fine with me.

One who bears a child, is after all a mother to the child she bears.

Catholics don’t believe that Mary somehow creates God, not even the Second Person of the Trinity. We know that God created her. We further believe that God chose her to bear God the Son—the Word—in the Incarnation.

The Incarnation—God becoming Man—seems to me to be a much harder concept to accept, than to accept that in doing so God had a human mother.

Thanks Jim, it is a touchy subject on both sides.

Grace,
Bill