From: eje@irenaeus.mlo.dec.com (Eric James Ewanco)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Infallibility
Date: 9 Sep 92 08:36:50 GMT
Reply-To: ewanco@kalvin.enet.dec.com
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation

In article <Sep.5.17.14.32.1992.17645@athos.rutgers.edu>, creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Steve Creps) writes:
From: creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Steve Creps)
Subject: Re: Infallibility
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 92 17:14:33 GMT+5:00
Organization: Indiana University

> In article <Sep.1.03.43.24.1992.13615@athos.rutgers.edu> dyer@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer) writes:
> >In article <Aug.31.03.33.22.1992.25874@athos.rutgers.edu> OFM (Chuck Hedrick) comments:
> >>Perhaps a better example would
> >>be Mary as mother of God.  I think the phrase "Mary mother of
> >>God" should be seen as intentionally provocative.  There was a
> >>dispute, and the Church chose to deal with it be asserting its
> >>view in the most aggressive possible way.
> >
> >Frankly, I don't think Catholics who use the phrase "Mother of God"
> >to describe Mary have provocation on their mind.  It's religious
> >jargon, and perfectly comprehensible in its context, which is not
> >at all an ecumenical one.  In fact, isn't "Mater Dei" a very old
> >title for Mary?

>    It may be provocative, but to say the title is an inaccurate one is
> to espouse heresy.  To say that Mary is the mother of Jesus the man
> only, and not the mother of Jesus, God, is to separate Jesus' divinity
> from His humanity.  And that particular heresy was condemned more than
> 1500 years ago.

> -	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
> Steve Creps, Indiana University
> creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu

Risking censure from my own church <grin> I'd like to offer something.

While I certainly would not call "Mater Dei" inaccurate, I think it can be
misleading.  Simple-minded people, and children, upon hearing "Mother of God"
often have images of Mary being the mother of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
This of course is heresy.  And for all the glories of refuting Arians and
other heretics, I wonder if this term should not be discarded, because I
think it evokes images it was never intended to invoke.

I believe we should use the ancient and venerable term 'Theotokos', Greek for
God-bearer, which if I am not mistaken was originally the term used to describe
our most Blessed Mother.  I am not sure "Mater Dei" arose directly as a
refutation of Arianism, but rather as a translation of Theotokos (at the time
of Nicaea Greek was the predominate language of the church, I believe).  I
think "God-bearer" emphasizes that the Theotokos is one of us -- for the
church also ascribes the term "Christotokos", or Christ-bearer, to Christians,
because we bear Christ, and His light, to all people.

Theotokos has been used as long if not longer than Mater Dei in the Eastern
church (as well as the Western church).  Because it does not cause scandal or
misunderstanding to Protestants, and because I find it clearer, you will find
that I rarely use the term "Mother of God", but instead, I use Theotokos.

Plus I just like to be different ;-)  (I also have a penchant for Eastern
Christian thought.)

Eric
--
/=============================================================================\
| Eric Ewanco - Software Engineer     For the rash and outrageous opinions ex-|
| Digital Equipment Corp, Maynard MA  pressed herein I alone am responsible;  |
| ewanco@kalvin.enet.dec.com          they do not belong to DIGITAL(TM).      |
\==============================- 2 Th 2:15 -==================================/
    "...[T]he greatest and most ancient Church known to all, founded and
    organized at Rome by [] Peter and Paul, [is] that Church which has the
    tradition and faith which comes down to us after having been announced
    to men by the Apostles.  For with this Church, because of its superior
    origin, all Churches must agree ...  and it is in her that the
    faithful everywhere have maintained the Apostolic tradition."
       -- St. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, c. 180 A.D., 3,3,3.