Author Topic: Assumption of Mary as a Dogma  (Read 987 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline zaphod

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 51
Assumption of Mary as a Dogma
« on: November 19, 2007, 01:31:06 AM »
Rome has defined the assumption of Mary as a dogma.

I've heard it said that Orthodox don't really think it ought to be declared a dogma. That it's not the sort of thing that ought to be binding.

On the other hand I've heard it said that Tradition in Orthodoxy is every bit as binding to the Orthodox as official dogma would be to Roman Catholics.

Any comments?

Along a similar line of thought, how ought I as Orthodox regard St George and the dragon? Am I to believe in dragons?



Offline PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,749
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Assumption of Mary as a Dogma
« Reply #1 on: November 19, 2007, 01:35:38 AM »
zaphod,

How do you define Tradition?
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline GiC

  • Resident Atheist
  • Site Supporter
  • Merarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,490
Re: Assumption of Mary as a Dogma
« Reply #2 on: November 19, 2007, 02:05:01 AM »
Rome has defined the assumption of Mary as a dogma.

I've heard it said that Orthodox don't really think it ought to be declared a dogma. That it's not the sort of thing that ought to be binding.

On the other hand I've heard it said that Tradition in Orthodoxy is every bit as binding to the Orthodox as official dogma would be to Roman Catholics.

Any comments?

Along a similar line of thought, how ought I as Orthodox regard St George and the dragon? Am I to believe in dragons?

If it's not clearly defined by the Oecumenical Synods it's not the kind of dogmatic tradition that is 'binding'. I personally don't think that this is the kind of thing that really needs to be dogmatized, traditionally we have only dogmatized theologies directly relating to the nature of the Trinity or one of the Members of the Trinity, to dogmatize something like this would just be to create unnecessary division. Though I have no problems with this particular doctrine, to dogmatize it would be, at the very least, imprudent.
"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry

Offline Fr. George

  • formerly "Cleveland"
  • Administrator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *******
  • Posts: 20,188
  • May the Lord bless you and keep you always!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Re: Assumption of Mary as a Dogma
« Reply #3 on: November 19, 2007, 09:47:57 AM »
GiC's comment is spot-on; even things like dogmatizing the title "Theotokos" for the Virgin Mary have repercussions on our view of Christ - if she's not "Theotokos", then He's either not Theos, or He became Theos after birth, or something else.

Mary's assumption has no bearing on our doctrine of the Trinity.  Since God alone receives our worship, our dogma has traditionally centered around what God has revealed about Himself.  Changes in belief about Mary's assumption, conception, etc. only would have a bearing on our reverence of her, not on our worship of God.
"O Cross of Christ, all-holy, thrice-blessed, and life-giving, instrument of the mystical rites of Zion, the holy Altar for the service of our Great Archpriest, the blessing - the weapon - the strength of priests, our pride, our consolation, the light in our hearts, our mind, and our steps"
Met. Meletios of Nikopolis & Preveza, from his ordination.