Marian titles

A sample of a recent debate I had on Facebook:

Mark

Theotokos/God-bearer? 

or Mother of God?

or both?

Hays 

I'll stick with "Mary"

Adam 

Both are true, to deny either as they were meant at Ephesus and Chalcedon is heresy.

Hays 

Yes, it's heretical to deny a made-up, manmade title.

Adam

Yes. The word Trinity is a man-made title...If you deny the trinity you are also a heretic.

Hays 

Denying the concept of the Trinity is heretical. It's convenient to have a label for the concept, but from a Protestant perspective, the concept antedates the label or conciliar/patristic formulations.

We don't need to invent Marian titles to make Christological statements about Jesus. Guess what–we are able to coin Christological titles to make Christological statements about Jesus, like God-Man, God-Incarnate. We don't have to infer Christology from invented Marian titles. We can denote the person of Christ directly.

A problem with Marian titles is that it shifts the focus to exegeting a Marian title. That's a very roundabout way to do Christology. In addition, Marian titles are a wedge tactic into Roman Catholic Mariology.

Adam 

It's also a simple formula for detecting heresy - applying the theology to a particular case study and working it out. 

Hays 

You unwittingly illustrate the problem by making Marian titles a litmus test of Christological orthodoxy. That's unnecessary. Once again, we don't have to infer the person of Christ from invented Marian titles. The Bible provides copious direct material for the person of Christ. And that can be turned into direct theological formulations. It's a diversion to get bogged down into dissecting invented Marian titles. We don't require that detour to know who and what Jesus is. 

Church councils have no intrinsic authority. They are only authoritative insofar as they are true. There must be a litmus test for church councils independent of church councils.

Adam

Personally, I don't think it is "unnecessary" - Nestorius argued his case from copious direct biblical material and he turned it into direct theological formulation which seemed to many to be persuasive - but which in fact were heresy and were demonstrated to be so primarily in the context of running them out to their logical conclusion with regards to his mother and his cross. 

Hays 

"Mother of God" is an ambiguous title, and Catholic apologists exploit that ambiguity. "Mother of God" muddies the theological waters rather than clarifying the theological waters.