|
© Copyright - material in this site may not be reproduced in any media without the express permission of the Web Master. Care has been taken by this site to ensure that all necessary copyright permissions have been obtained. If this is not the case in any instance, this is an inadvertent error. Please contact the Web Master and this will be rectified. |
THE THEOTOKOS, THE EVER-VIRGIN MARY Explorers Sermon 3rd September 2005 (by Fr. John-Mark) This morning’s talk is advertised as "The Theotokos, the Ever-Virgin Mary" and if you wanted to know what the Orthodox believe about her, that title sums it up very neatly. People are surprised when they are told that we only have two doctrines concerning the Blessed Mary in spite of the prominence she is given in our worship. The first concerns her virginity and follows on from the revelations in the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Luke, both of which are explicit on this subject. The Church has extended the written words of the Evangelists and proclaimed Mary to be "ever-virgin" taking her own words, "all generations shall call me blessed" as the starting point for this. Most of the earliest commentators on the New Testament were of Middle Eastern origin and saw no difficulty in the Gospel mentions of "brothers" of the Lord Jesus like modern Western commentators do. Still today in Melanesia, for example, most families have what they call in English a "cousin-brother" – amusingly they use this term whether the child is male or female. What they mean by this is, that the person so-called is not their mother’s child, and in exactly the same way, we believe that those named "brothers" of Jesus in the Gospels are not Mary’s children, but Joseph’s by his former wife. This is born out by the hostility of these so-called "brothers" to Jesus during much of His preaching ministry, though mostly this attitude changed after His Resurrection. For what it is worth, and in my opinion, those who are uneasy with the doctrine of Mary remaining ever-virgin, are not looking at the question from Mary’s point of view. She was quite sure of whose Child she had borne; she was quite sure that all generations would call her blessed; and it is my belief that she would realize that any further children could never match the Unique Child born to her in Bethlehem. Blessed indeed are those who recognize that their hour of greatness has come, and passed, and cannot be repeated. Mary, we believe, rightly remained ever-virgin. The second dogma is summed up by the Greek word "Theotokos" but in using that word we are not being pedantic, or showing off knowledge of a foreign language. It is really a matter of expediency, simply because there is no single word in our language to translate it. The word was chosen by the Fathers of the third Ecumenical Council which met in Ephesus in 431 and their intention was to safeguard the position and place of the Blessed Virgin certainly, but also, and perhaps more importantly, of Our Lord Himself. The best translation in English is "birth-giver of God;" ("God-bearer" always sounds a bit rude to me) and of course, often used in the West is "Mother of God". Rightly understood this phrase is Orthodox but it is easily mis-understood. Both the Anglican and Roman Catholic churches in Papua New Guinea used this title, "Mother of God"as being simple, basic English. The Melanesians have no conception of royalty, or family hierarchy but they do have a great regard for our Royal family, probably because Prince Charles spent three months in their country whilst at School for a year at Geelong in Australia. This is the only explanation I can offer for the discovery that most Christians there thought that because Mary bore the Son of God, she herself must be a Goddess! This, of course, is exactly the opposite of what the Fathers of the 3rd Ecumenical Council intended. So much for simple, basic English and we stick to the original, the Greek word Theotokos, which is both a title and a description of her role. The doctrine of the virginity of Mary relates to her person and her privacy. The doctrine of the Theotokos – the God-Bearer – relates to her, but also to the Son whom she bore. This is the means by which the Church protects the faith that God the Word (as St John describes Him in the fourth Gospel) became flesh and dwelt among us. In that description the word "flesh" is all important. It means that in the Person of Jesus Christ, God was joined to man from the moment of His Conception in the womb of the Blessed Virgin Mary and that being perfect man He is also, Perfect God. St Ignatius of Antioch, who was martyred in 108, declared: "our God, Jesus Christ, was in the womb of Mary" and "Good took flesh of the Virgin Mary." In the Creed put together at the first two Ecumenical Councils, Jesus is described as being of "one essence with the Father" and "was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and of the Virgin Mary, and became Man". In this neat way is God described as becoming Man as well. Later in the fifth century, the Council of Ephesus ratified the teaching of the earlier Councils and sought to end controversy by declaring Mary of be "Theotokos," the Birth-Giver of God. In doing this, the Fathers were building on the words in St Luke’s Gospel of the Mother of St John the Baptist, and the Lord’s Forerunner when she declared "why is this granted to me, that the Mother of my Lord should come to me?"(1.43) And St Paul in his epistle to the Galatians says: "When the time had fully come, God sent forth his Son, born of a woman, born under the law"(4.4) In the face of all this evidence, it seemed right that the one who gave Birth to the Son of God is, and should be called, Theotokos. It is important to realize that at the time, the object of the Councils, was not to glorify the Blessed Virgin Mary. Their intention was, to protect the Person and place of Jesus by stating clearly and un-equivocally the person and place of His Mother. It is unfortunate that at times in the Church’s history, the cult of Mary has separated her from that of Her Son. It is understandable, too, that when modern theologians have discounted the place of Mary in God’s scheme of things, they have then, usually, lost sight of the full grandeur of the Son. By contrast, we are fortunate in Orthodoxy that our worship and also our art hold both the Son and His Mother together and this gives both of them their rightful place. Our icons show Mary usually holding her Son and pointing to him in a way which reminds us of her command to the stewards at the Wedding Feast at Cana: "Do whatever He tells you" (John 2.5) And there is an important distinction in our worship where we are urged to "Call to remembrance our all holy, immaculate and glorious lady, Theotokos and ever Virgin Mary" but then to "commend ourselves and each other and our whole life, unto Christ our God." We remember, gladly, the love and obedience of the Theotokos. But we commit out lives to Christ our God In these ways, the true faith of the Church and her Creeds and Councils, is preserved. |
