Why the shouts at the start of the New Year? Why the fireworks? What are people
celebrating? A new year brings hope of change, the possibility of progress. But is the
hope that things can change an illusion? Do things really get better? Surveys indicate
that most people don’t expect things to be better in 2025.
Many people in the world feel a sense of futility. On this World Day of Peace, many
people in countries such as the Ukraine and Gaza are subject to atrocities committed
against themselves and their loved ones. Does it make sense to talk of peace, to speak
of hope for a new year?
Many people who celebrate the new year don’t really feel hope. With a few drinks,
things may have looked better for a few hours but in the morning things aren’t much
different than they were in 2024. Does time really bring progress? Are we going
anywhere or are we stuck in futility?
The feast that we are celebrating today, the Solemnity of Mary, Mother of God speaks
to these questions. Such a connection might seem remote at first but the connection is
there.
In the second reading, Paul tells us “God sent forth His Son born of a woman…” (Gal
4:4). The fact that God sent His Son means that humanity is extremely important to
God. Why did God send His Son? “So that we might receive our status as adopted sons
[and daughters]” (Gal 4:4). Our lives are so important that God enters into them to bring
us to a fuller relationship with Him. Jesus’ birth speaks of God’s desire to be with us in a
most powerful way.
Jesus comes to us by being “born of a woman.” Before the first century was completed,
there were people who denied that Jesus had a real body because they assumed that
anything truly spiritual could not be material. In response, St. Ignatius of Antioch, writing
about 110, uses Jesus’ birth of Mary as a proof that Jesus really had taken our
humanity in a real way, “He was truly born of the Virgin…” 1
A second-century Gnostic, Valentinus, maintained that the Child’s body was not from
Mary’s body. A heavenly body had been introduced into Mary and passed through her
like water does through a channel.
In his Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew, St. Thomas Aquinas notes that Matthew
doesn’t say “through whom” or “from whom” but “of her was born Jesus” (Mt 1:16) and
the Letter to the Galatians affirms that God sent His Son “born of a woman” (Gal 4:4).
Just as John declared “The Word was made flesh” (Jn 1:14), so Jesus’ real birth of
Mary demonstrates the union of the Son of God with our physicality.

1 Ignatius of Antioch, Smyrneans, 1.1, in The Apostolic Fathers, trans. Gerald G. Walsh, S.J.
(New York: CIMA Publ. Co, 1947), 118.

Jesus was not a tourist to our humanity. Thomas comments: “Christ’s body is said to be
formed of the most chaste and purest blood of the Virgin” (3a. 31, 5, ad 3). 2 Jesus’ body
really was formed from Mary.
According to Thomas, Jesus’ taking flesh from Mary ennobles our nature: “Although the
Son of God could have taken flesh from whatever matter He willed, it was nevertheless
most becoming that He should take flesh from a woman… because in this way the
entire human nature was ennobled” (3a. 31, 4). Our lives are not experiments in futility.
Our lives have meaning because the Son of God made Himself one with us by taking
flesh from Mary.
The fifth-century patriarch of Constantinople, Nestorius, accepted that Mary was Jesus’
mother but he maintained that Mary was the mother of Jesus’ human nature and not of
the divine Person who eternally came forth from the Father. For this reason, he rejected
the customary title Theotokos or “God-bearer,” (understood in Latin as Mater Dei,
“Mother of God”) and insisted that Mary should be called “Christ-bearer.”
The underlying issue was who dwelt in Mary’s womb for nine months and who was
born? Was it a nature separate from the Divine Person? The Council of Ephesus (431)
acknowledged that the Son of God pre-existed from all eternity in His divinity. However,
the Council made clear that His birth is not the birth of a “nature” but of a “person,” in
whom two natures are united. Thomas asserts: “in Christ, there is a union of two
natures in one person.” The person in Mary’s womb and the person who was born was
the Divine person in His human nature. 3
Why is it important that the Eternal Son of God went through the experiences of being in
the womb and being born and learning to walk and learning to talk? Our being in the
process of being born, of walking and talking are significant because the Son of God
chose all of this.
In his apostolic Letter, “Joy of the Gospel,” Pope Francis wrote: “Broadly speaking,
‘time’ has to do with fullness as an expression of the horizon which constantly opens
before us, while each individual moment has to do with limitation as an expression of
enclosure.” 4 So frequently we get caught up with the limitations that seem to enclose us.

2 When a reference in the Summa Theologiae attaches an “ad” (the Latin word for “to”) it means
Thomas’ response to an objection that he raised at the beginning of the article.
3 Thomas refers to the practice, called “communication of idioms”, which was common even in Nestorius’
time of attributing to one nature what belongs to the other nature. Thomas explains “things of God are
attributed to the man, and conversely.” This custom can be found in our Christmas carols and in hymns
about the Passion, which make connections between Jesus’ divinity and His humanity. “Christ has the
relation of Son in regard to His mother because it is implied in the relationship of motherhood to Christ…
Christ is really the Son of the Virgin-Mother” (3a. 35, 5). St. Thomas Aquinas notices that Matthew refers
to Mary as “His mother” (Mt 2:10). As Thomas explains, if Mary is His mother then Jesus is her Son.

4 Pope Francis, Evangelii Gaudium, 222.

The Pope urges us to look beyond what limits and enter the process that takes place in
time.
Motherhood is a process par excellence by which a woman gives herself to time, during
the pregnancy and birth. Especially at this time of year, Mary’s motherhood is
associated with her giving birth to Jesus. In fact, this feast is the octave of Christmas.
Karl Rahner emphasizes that Mary’s maternity is more than a physical relationship to
Christ. Jesus is a gift from God to her as He is to us. She gave Him the ability to be a
member of the human race and ultimately its Savior. Her motherhood is not just a
biological event nor is it her personal history, but a motherhood effected by faith (Lk
1:43; 2:27 ff.), “a true partnership with God’s action for mankind.” 5 Mary’s motherhood
occurs by God’s grace, and through her motherhood, she accepts grace for the world. 6
Rahner affirms that by her consent, the Word of God was made flesh: “The divine
motherhood of the blessed Virgin is therefore God’s grace alone, and her own act,
inseparably.” 7
Motherhood is also a life-long process of nurturing. Mary’s motherhood was not
completed when she delivered the baby. St. Thomas Aquinas notices that Matthew
refers to Mary as “His mother” (Mt 2:10). Thomas explains: “Christ has the relation of
Son in regard to His mother because it is implied in the relationship of motherhood to
Christ… Christ is really the Son of the Virgin-Mother” (3a. 35, 5). 8
When Thomas affirms that Christ is the Son of the Virgin-Mother, he is indicating that
intimacy that develops in childhood and continues in maturity was also present in the
relationship between Jesus and His mother. Jesus did not set aside that aspect of His
humanity when he stepped out of his baby clothes.
Luke indicates that Mary would be affected by the life of her Son, as Simeon predicts
that a sword of sorrow will pierce her heart. Thomas teaches that Mary’s closeness to
Jesus allowed her to be affected by her Son in a deeper way:
Christ is the principle of grace, authoritatively as to His Godhead, instrumentally
as to His humanity: whence (Jn. 1:17) it is written: “Grace and truth came by
Jesus Christ.” But the Blessed Virgin Mary was nearest to Christ in His humanity:
because He received His human nature from her. Therefore it was due to her to
receive a greater fullness of grace than others (3a. 27, 5).
Thomas is struck by the honor that is given to Mary in her motherhood:

5 Karl Rahner, Mary Mother of the Lord (London: Catholic Book Club, 1963), 12.
6 Ibid.
7 Karl Rahner, Mary Mother of the Lord (London: Catholic Book Club, 1963), 61.
8 References to the Summa Theologiae give the part of the Summa, in this case, the third part.
Then the question is given, in this case, question 35, and then the article within the question, in this case,
the fifth article.

Here is shown her dignity: for it has been granted to no creature, no man, no
angel, to be the father or mother of God. But this was a privilege of a singular
grace that she become the mother not only of a man but of God. Therefore, it
says in Rev (12:1): “A woman clothed with the sun,” as though filled with the Holy
Trinity.
The Second Vatican Council took as its own the statement of St. Augustine that Mary is
“clearly the mother of (Christ’s) members . . . because by her charity she cooperated in
bringing about the birth of the faithful in the Church, who are the members of its Head.” 9
The Mother of God is also our mother.
Denis Vincent Wiseman, O.P.