Is Mary the Theotokos?

Is relationshipy shame the Theotokos?Is bloody shame the Theotokos?Does it matter?Without the fiendish sodding(a) bloody shame Christianity, would be meaningless. That bloody shame is produce of deity is rooted deeply in sacred scripture, and this Church article of credit has been confidently taught since the Council of Ephesus (A.D. 431), during which occurred a decisive interjection of the Churchs teaching authority on behalf of Marys bode m break uphood and against the claims of Nestorius, Bishop of Constantinople who stated that Mary did non give in birth to beau ideal, only when when to an ordinary baby, c e truly(prenominal)ed Christ, who was in virtually way connected to divinity. Consequently, Mary did not deserve to be called by the gentle action of Theotokos, or holyion- common carrier, b arely rather the meeker title of Christotokos, or beargonr of Christ.To get an idea of what was happening at the time we desire to generate a brief look at why thi s controversy began and at what was cosmos state. So, to begin, it was the primary concern of the Council of Nicaea to make it plain beyond all possibility of misunderstanding that Jesus of Nazareth, temporary hookup personally distinct from the Father, is God in the fullest sense of the news. As the Creed states, God from God, Light from Light, true(a) God from true God, consubstantial with the Father it was the Churchs de frontierination to maintain this doctrine of derived equality without deviating into either modalism or tritheism, that led her on the eagle-eyed able pilgrimage whose goal was full understanding of that mutual interpenetration of the three whatsoever divine Persons, through their juncture with the ace divine Essence, which is denoted by the word perichoresis. Only when the divinity of the parole had been firmly established could the Church give her full attention to the fact that the Son, being God, had become mankind.But discharge there be in Christ an unperplexed union of cleric and manhood? This was the question which was to exercise the minds of theologians and throw the tone of the Church into ruction from Constantinople to Chalcedon.What the orthodox Fathers were striving to do, and what was ultimately achieved at Chalcedon, was to preserve the doctrine of unconfused Godhead and manhood of Christ against tendencies which strove, on the one hand, to unite the 2 impairment at the bell of confusing them with each other and, on the other hand, to keep them distinct at the cost of separating them. This today whitethorn not seem to offer any special difficulty that this is so is a sign of the triumph of Chalcedon in theological thought, only when, in the one-fifth century it was a notion that could only be achieved at the cost of bitter controversy and schism.So, when the theologically unimaginative but critically expeditious Nestorius became Patriarch of Constantinople everything was ready for an explosion, which c ame when Nestorius openly supported his chaplain Anastasius in denouncing the application to the call down Virgin Mary of the title Theotokos. Nestorius was an Antiochene in Christology, deeply influenced by the ideas of Theodore of Mopsuestia, and it was his clumsy, clumsily articulated elucidation of the inferences of the position of the Antiochenes that was to set light to the controversy.Quite betimes on Nestorius was called upon to pronounce on the suitability of Theotokos as a title of the Virgin Mary, and ruled that its correctness was doubtful unless Christotokos was added to balance it.But in getting himself around this issue Nestorius used uncontrolled language which was reason to provoke those whose approach was different to his consume. He argued that no human being could be Gods mother and no human being could give birth to God Mary gave birth to a man not God, the cock of divinity. God could not have been carried for nine months in a womans womb, or have been wrap ped in baby-clothes, or have suffered, died and been buried. Behind the comment of Mary as Theotokos, he professed to detect the Arian theory that Marys Son was human or the Apollinarian concept that the manhood was imperfect.These flare-ups of Nestorius were calculated to be confrontational. But they play into the hands of Cyril of Alexandria, Nestoriuss bitter rival. Cyril claimed to see in them as a resurgence of the theory of two sons which was rejected in the fourth century. Alarmed by this claim that Marys son was just a man, Eusebius, later to become Bishop of Dorylaeum, chop-chop concluded that Nestorius was trying to re-establish the adoptionism of Paul of Samosata. By exploiting this interpretation Cyril was able to arrest Nestoriuss condemnation as a heretic at the Council of Ephesus in 431. base on these judgements the traditional picture of Nestorianism as a heresy which decompose God/man into two distinct Persons rapidly formed itself.When cleric Scripture is ab out to ensure of the birth of Christ from the Virgin Mary or his death, in no place does it appear that it puts God but either Christ or Son or ennoble, because these three are indicative of the two spirits, right off of this and instanter of that, now of the one and now of the other. For example, when the Book relates unto us the birth from the Virgin, whom docs it assert? God sent his Son. It says not that God sent God the vocalise, but it secludes a name which indicates two the natures. Since the Son is man and God, it says that God sent his Son and he was born(p) of a woman and therein thou seest that the name is put which indicates both the natures. Thou callest him Son according to the birth from the consecrateed Virgin, for the Virgin aim / of Christ unadulterated the Son of God. But since the Son of God is twofold in natures, she bare not the Son of God but she bare the humanity, which is the Son because of the Son who is fall in thereto (Nestorius, 450 AD).Th e first chapter of St Johns Gospel tell us quite an simply that the volume became bod and dwelt among us. Two points need to be noticed. The first is that in Hebrew flesh and blood intend not just the material part of a man in contrast with his soul, but human nature as a whole. The certify is that St John does not say that the develop get together flesh to himself, but that he became flesh. St Athanasius was fundamentally clear on this point. In general, however, he was quite content to think of the prosopopoeia as taking place through the union of human flesh to the divine Word.He took upon him our flesh, as Aaron did his robe, and assumed a body like ours, having Mary for the baffle of his body (Athanasius, 356/360).Nestorius himself neer drew from his premises the conclusions which Cyril believed him to have drawn and which were drawn by any(prenominal) of his followers. Nor is it to be supposed that the outlook of Antiochene theology logically implied the Nestorian heresy.What is true, however, is that, while the pluralistic emphasis of Antioch do it perfectly easy to preserve the short permitter of the humanity and the divinity in Christ, it made it very difficult to suffer for their real union.Apollinarius had maintained the union by removing from Christs humanity one of its constituents, the clear-sighted soul, and inserting the divine Word (Logos) in its place. No Antiochene could tolerate such a mutilation the humanity must remain entire and complete. But how then is this oneness of divinity and humanity to be effected? If the humanity is complete we shall sure enough have a complete human individual and it will be this individual and not the divine Word (Logos) who will be the publication of Christs life. No wonder, then, the Alexandrian will reflect, that these Antiochenes refuse to call Mary theotokos they cannot cooperate believing that he whom she bore was not God but a man, even if God came to dwell in him after she had bor ne him. Whatever they may say, they believe in two Sons, one the Son of God and the other the son of Mary, however close the relation of the two may be.The clangoring between these points of persuasion was fierce at first. Cyrils intervention was quick when he heard of Nestoriuss mockery of Theotokos, in refuting what he deemed gross heresy. The patriarchs exchanged some quite prickly earns without with neither of them making any hearty headway. So, Pope Celestine was contacted by Cyril, who send him a dossier of extracts from Nestoriuss writings and from the declarations made on the Incarnation by the reverend fathers of past generations. Nestorius in any case wrote letters to Celestine and in his third he statedI have learned that Cyril, the near luxurious bishop of the city of Alexandria, has become worried about reports against him that we received, and is now chase for subterfuges to avoid a hallowed synod taking place due to these reports. In the meantime he is devis ing some other disturbances over terms and has chosen as a point of controversy the term Theotokos and Christotokos the first he allows, but as for Christotokos, sometimes he removes it from the evangel, and sometimes he allows it, on the fanny of what I believe is a kind of excessive prudence. In the shimmy of the term Theotokos, I am not hostile to those who want to say it, unless it should advance to the confusion of natures in the manner of the madness of Apollinaris or genus Arius. Nonetheless, I have no doubt that the term Theotokos is inferior to the term Christotokos, as the latter is mentioned by the angels and the gospels. And if I were not speaking to Your Worship who is already so knowledgeable, I would need to give a very long discourse on this topic. But even without a discourse, it is known in every way to Your Beatitude, that if we should think that there are two groups opposed to each other, the one using only the term Theotokos, the other only Anthropotokos, an d each group draws others to what it rates or, if they have not accomplished this, puts others in insecurity of falling from the church, it would be necessary to assign someone to such an engagement if it arises who exercises concern for both groups and heals the danger of both parties by means of the term taken from the gospels that signifies both natures.For as I said, the term Christotokos keeps the effrontery of both parties to the proper limits, because it both removes the blasphemy of Paul of Samosata, who claimed that Christ the Lord of all was simply a human being, and overly flees the wickedness of Arius and Apollinaris. Now I have written these very things to the most distinguished bishop of Alexandria, as Your Beatitude can tell from the copies I have addicted to this letter of mine, as well as from the copies of what he wrote to us. Moreover, with Gods help it has also been agreed to announce a world-wide synod in order to inquire into the other ecclesiastical matt ers. For I do not think it will be difficult to investigate an uncertainty over dustup, and it is not a confirmation for a discussion of the divinity of Christ the Lord (Nestorius, 430)It did not take to long for Celestine to make a decision, and he called a synod in capital of Italy in August 430 which decided against Nestorius and voted in favour of the title Theotokos. Nestorius was effrontery a warning that, within ten days he would be treated as excommunicate unless, after receiving the notification, he retracted his teaching. The murder of this ruling was given to Cyril and he characteristically carried out his task. He held a synod at Alexandria, afterwards sending a letter to Nestorius requiring him to subscribe to cardinal anathemas. These anathemas, which were intentionally confrontational, summarise in terms which were uncompromising the Cyrilline Christology, some of which I reference hereIf anyone does not confess that Emmanuel is God in true statement, and inde ed that the holy virgin is the mother of God (for she bore in a fleshly way the Word of God become flesh, let him be anathema.If anyone does not confess that the Word from God the Father has been united by hypostasis with the flesh and is one Christ with his own flesh, and is therefore God and man together, let him be anathema.If anyone divides in the one Christ the hypostases after the union, joining them only by a conjunction of dignity or authority or power, and not rather by a advance together in a union by nature, let him be anathema.If anyone distributes between the two persons or hypostases the expressions used either in the gospels or in the apostolic writings, whether they are used by the holy writers of Christ or by him about himself, and ascribes some to him as to a man, thought of separately from the Word from God, and others, as befitting God, to him as to the Word from God the Father, let him be anathema.If anyone dares to say that Christ was a God-bearing man and not rather God in truth, being by nature one Son, even as the Word became flesh, and is made partaker of blood and flesh precisely like us, let him be anathema.If anyone says that the Word from God the Father was the God or master of Christ, and does not rather confess the kindred both God and man, the Word having become flesh, according to the scriptures, let him be anathema.If anyone says that as man Jesus was activated by the Word of God and was clothed with the glory of the Only- create, as a being separate from him, let him be anathema.If anyone dares to say that the man who was assumed ought to be holiness and glorified together with the divine Word and be called God on with him, while being separate from him, (for the addition of with must always engage us to think in this way), and will not rather worship Emmanuel with one veneration and send up to him one doxology, even as the Word became flesh, let him be anathema. (Alexandria, 430).This union of two natures in the one d ivine Person of Christ is called the hypostatic or personal union. It is the mystery of the Incarnation of God it is also the mystery of the divine Motherhood of Mary.Cyril also said in this letterTherefore, because the holy virgin bore in the flesh God who was united hypostatically with the flesh, for that reason we call her mother of God, not as though the nature of the Word had the beginning of its existence from the flesh (for the Word was in the beginning and the Word was God and the Word was with God, and he made the ages and is coeternal with the Father and craftsman of all things), but because, as we have said, he united to himself hypostatically the human and underwent a birth according to the flesh from her womb. This was not as though he needed necessarily or for his own nature a birth in time and in the work times of this age, but in order that he might bless the beginning of our existence, in order that seeing that it was a woman that had given birth to him united to t he flesh, the curse against the whole race should thereafter free which was consigning all our earthy bodies to death, and in order that the removal through him of the curse, In sorrow thou shalt bring forth children, should demonstrate the truth of the words of the prophet Strong death swallowed them Up, and again, God has wiped every tear extraneous from all face. It is for this cause that we say that in his economy he conjure marriage and, when invited, went down to Cana in Galilee with his holy apostles (Alexandria, 430).A letter was issued by Theodosius summoning a general council to meet at Ephesus at Pentecost 431, with an stupefying medley of rival meetings taking place before the event. Recognised as the Third General Council Ephesus was effective in that Nestorius was never rehabilitated, dying in exile in 451. Its more positive achievement was to canonize the Nicaean creed as establishing orthodoxy. In the two years following Ephesus hard efforts were made to heal th e divisions in the Church. The instrument of agreement, known as the manifestation of Reunion, was contained in a letter sent by John of Antioch to Cyril, it ran as followsWe confess, therefore, our Lord Jesus Christ, the only father Son of God, perfect God and perfect man composed of a rational soul and body, begotten before the ages from the Father in respect of His divinity, but likewise in these last days for us and our salvation from the Virgin Mary in respect of His manhood, consubstantial with the Father in respect of His divinity and at the same time consubstantial with us in respect of His manhood. For the union(henosis) of two natures has been accomplished. Hence we confess one Christ, one Son, one Lord. In law of this conception of a union without confusion we confess the holy Virgin as Theotokos because the divine Word became flesh and was made man and from the very conception united to Himself the temple taken from her. As for the evangelical and apostolic statements about the Lord, we recognise that theologians employ some indifferently in view of the unity of person but distinguish others in view of the duality of natures, applying the God-befitting ones to Christs divinity and the humble ones to His humanity (Antioch, 433).Cyril greeted this formulary with enthusiasm in his letter to John Laetentur coeli. Which was read out at the Council of Chalcedon, part of which I now citeWe confess, therefore, our Lord Jesus Christ, the Only Begotten Son of God, perfect God, and perfect Man of a reasonable soul and flesh consisting begotten before the ages of the Father according to his Divinity, and in the last days, for us and for our salvation, of Mary the Virgin according to his humanity, of the same substance with his Father according to his Divinity, and of the same substance with us according to his humanity for there became a union of two natures. Wherefore we confess one Christ, one Son, one Lord. gibe to this understanding of this unmixed un ion, we confess the holy Virgin to be Mother of God because God the Word was incarnate and became Man, and from this conception he united the temple taken from her with himself (Chalcedon, 451).After these early great councils of the Church feasts to The hellish Virgin increased, lots of churches were dedicated to her and in the latter part of the 7th century four new feasts to Mary had started to be celebrated the Annunciation, the Assumption, the Purification, and the birth of The Blessed Virgin Mary. With Pius IX promulgation of the Immaculate Conception in 1854 idol worship to our Blessed Lady accelerated, and many appearances of the Blessed Virgin took place. And also at this time many Marian customs grew which included Maytime processions, the wearable of the Miraculous Medal and the Rosary.1962 saw a major change which happened with Vatican II grounding more firmly in Scripture and liturgy devotion to Mary placing The Blessed Virgin securely in the mystery of the Church. The truth of the Blessed Virgin Marys divine Motherhood and its corresponding dignity are found in these words of the Second Vatican CouncilThe Virgin Mary, who at the gist of the angel received the Word of God in her heart and in her body and gave Life to the world, is acknowledged and honoured as being truly the Mother of God and Mother of the Redeemer. Redeemed by reason of the merits of her Son and united to Him by a close and indissoluble tie, she is endowed with the high perspective and dignity of being the Mother of the Son of God, by which account she is also the beloved daughter of the Father and the temple of the Holy Spirit. Because of this gift of reverend grace, she far surpasses all creatures, both in heaven and on earth. At the same time, however, because she belongs to the offspring of Adam she is one with all those who are to be saved (Lumen Gentium, 53).The mark of our Blessed Ladys holiness is that she was filled with the grace of God. The Blessed Virgin is the pattern to follow. Giving herself completely with love she was filled with the life of God. Marys Yes to the angels message reveals her part in the work of salvation.And the Angel said revere not, Mary the Holy Spirit shall come upon you, and the power of the most richly shall overshadow you, and therefore the Holy which shall be born of you shall be called the Son of God (Luke 126-35).These are the words of the great mystery of Marys divine motherhood heralded by the angel in Lukes Gospel, their straightforwardness is smooth-tongued as they announce the origin of our religion. In the beginning, they inspired triumphant faith, the faith of the martyrs and the Saints. The faith which will continue to inspire all Christians to the end of time.