Understanding Luke 1:43- Mother of My Lord

One of the greatest logical fallacies in trying to defend the Roman Catholic (and in extension Orthodox) tradition of Mary is in the "mother of my Lord" verse.  At first glance, it seems that Elizabeth was calling her cousin Mary the "mother of God" and giving her the adoration and worship that only God deserves but further analysis should prove it wrong.  They appeal to the Greek of Lord meaning "Kurious" meaning "supreme in authority".  No doubt that Jesus is Lord.  However He also shared the nature of being man aside from being God throughout the whole human ministry.  As God, He doesn't have a mother but as a man, He has a mother. 

Now appealing again to Luke, Luke 8:21 has the Lord Jesus Christ saying that whoever does His will is His family- mother, brother or sister.  Now the logical cycle can go this way: if anybody becomes a believer then that person is a mother of God.  Now that is just plain crazy logic.  Now going back to Elizabeth, Elizabeth knew that Jesus is Lord both God and man.  She was actually referring to Mary being the EARTHLY mother of Jesus Christ, not the mother of Jesus as God.  Going back to His hypostatic union, Matthew 22:45 has the skeptical crowd asking Jesus, "If David called Him Lord, how can He be His Son?"  Then again, David was Jesus' ancestor in His incarnation in the flesh but as God, He had no ancestor.  The same goes for Mary (who is a descendant of David via Nathan the full brother of Solomon).  In fact, in Galatians 1:19, Paul also called James the BROTHER of the Lord Jesus Christ not the brother of God.

Now here's something written in the early Roman Catholic Church taken from Augustine from his Tract in Ioannem (VIII, 9) proving that the whole system of Mary worship was just manmade and debated upon, not inspired by the Holy Spirit:

Why, then, said the Son to the mother, "Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come?" Our Lord Jesus Christ was both God and man. According as He was God, He had not a mother; according as He was man, He had. She was the mother, then, of His flesh, of His humanity, of the weakness which for our sakes He took upon Him. But the miracle which He was about to do, He was about to do according to His divine nature, not according to His weakness; according to that wherein He was God not according to that wherein He was born weak. But the weakness of God is stronger than men. His mother then demanded a miracle of Him; but He, about to perform divine works, so far did not recognize a human womb; saying in effect, "That in me which works a miracle was not born of thee, thou gavest not birth to my divine nature; but because my weakness was born of thee, I will recognize thee at the time when that same weakness shall hang upon the cross." This, indeed, is the meaning of "Mine hour is not yet come." . . . How then was He both David’s son and David’s Lord? David’s son according to the flesh, David’s Lord according to His divinity; so also Mary’s son after the flesh, and Mary’s Lord after His majesty. Now as she was not the mother of His divine nature, whilst it was by His divinity the miracle she asked for would be wrought, therefore He answered her, "Woman, what have I to do with thee?"