John Calvin “I cannot conceal that that title being commonly attributed to the Virgin in sermons is disapproved, and, for my own part, I cannot think such language either right, or becoming, or suitable. . . . for to call the Virgin Mary the mother of God, can only serve to confirm the ignorant in their superstitions.” 1
G.C. Berkouwer “Another question is whether the term “Mother of God” is the most acceptable term for the expression of this truth. There is room for a difference of opinion on this point and some may judge that in a given historical situation the term may create misunderstanding. This was the case when in later periods Mary’s halo grew and became brighter, and the term “Mother of God” became an integral part of Mariological adoration. It is our conviction that in one’s use of terms also one is responsible for the life of the whole church and that one does not do anyone any good by using this term (however well intended by the councils in their polemic with Nestorianism) apart from its subsequent development; it is no longer obvious that the term implies a rejection of a dualism in Christology. We know that attempts have been made to break the aversion to “theotokos” and to settle this for good but, since the term may create the impression of elevating Mary and does not add anything to the confession of the church of all ages, it is subject to serious objections.” 2
Wyatt Graham “Nestorius did not want to use the term theotokos since it was not a biblical term, and, he thought, it could lead to misunderstandings. His concern is a valid one.” 3
Theotokos is the standard title for Mary in Eastern Orthodoxy (EO) and Oriental Orthodoxy (OO), which means that she is recognized as the “Mother of God.” The Roman Catholic Church (RCC) also uses the term “Mother of God” and the Catechism of the Catholic Church officially affirms the title Theotokos as dogmatic truth.4 In Protestantism, Lutherans, Anglicans, Methodists officially accept the title as part of the Nicene Creed and the Council of Ephesus (431 AD), though it is less common in everyday speech compared to “Mary” or “Mother of Jesus.” Where then does the Evangelical find himself amongst these groups?
As an Evangelical—who understands the implications of the 5th century debate—it is clear why so many have accepted the term “Mary the Mother of God.” It was meant to be a theological firewall against dividing Christ’s nature. However, the landscape and discussion has shifted greatly since the 5th century, and it is widely accepted now that Jesus has two natures (human and divine) and is one person (hypostasis). This is especially true within the broad Evangelical landscape. With that said, I want to look at concerns with the language, and then move to a slight reformulation of the terminology.