Author Topic: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception  (Read 226654 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #450 on: May 01, 2009, 09:06:01 AM »
The Grace Mary received at her Conception, in distinction, was different - specifically, it was merely the Grace of Baptism. 

Can you offer us official sources of Catholic teaching (the Catechism, papal statements)  which agree with your equation of the Immaculate Conception or rather, Immaculate Ensoulment with Conceptional Baptism?

Do you ever discuss your theological theories with a competent Catholic theologian?

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #451 on: May 01, 2009, 09:06:02 AM »
Are you not reading all of my posts?  I already addressed this several times.  I am in complete agreement with HH Pope Shenoute. 

All I've ever stated is that in my study of Catholicism, I've never found anything about it that contradicts my Coptic Tradition.

Marduk, I feel that your studies may be too narrowly focused according to your personal theological preferences and you may be misrepresenting Coptic teaching.

__________________________________
St. Mary’s Immaculate Conception:

Some Church fathers do not believe Virgin Mary to be without faults, such as St. Irenaus, Origen, St. John Chrysostom. However, these opinions do not represent the widespread Mariologicall Tradition of the early Church. We believe that St. Mary’s holiness is unique and surpasses heavenly creatures; she passed all her life in holiness as the true Ark of the Covenant, which was made of incorruptible wood laid with Gold from inside and outside. The Orthodox Church, whose love towards St. Mary is deep-rooted, considers her more holy than all the heavenly creatures, whilst a natural member of the human race.

We do not set her apart from the human race by assuming that she was born without original sin (immaculate conception), as if she was born of no human seed. Thus, the Church makes a distinction between St. Mary’s life before and after the moment of Divine Incarnation.

St. Mary herself declared her need of salvation when she said, “my spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior.”
(Lk 1:47)

This Orthodox concept preserved our Church from any exaggeration or confusion between Lord Jesus Christ and His blessed mother; no worship is offered to her, but only veneration and praise. In other words, in the Orthodox Church there is an accurate line that divides Lord Jesus Christ from His blessed
mother; the only one who was Immaculately Conceived is our Lord Jesus Christ.

This lecture is adapted from ‘Comparative Theology’ by H.H. Pope Shenouda III and ‘St. Mary in the Orthodox Concept’ by Fr. Tadros Malaty.
http://www.suscopts.org/messages/lectures/marilecture1.pdf

Offline Papist

  • Patriarch of Pontification
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,758
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #452 on: May 01, 2009, 09:19:26 AM »
It is easy to see that St. Basil’s statement here does not dictate against the teaching of the IC of Mary.

Absolutely! St Basil would never refute such a doctrine because it did not exist.

But he does say:  “There is none without stain before Thee, even though his life be but a day, save Thou alone….

I have already provided a quote from St. Ambrose where he disagrees with basil on this.
"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

Offline Mickey

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,309
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #453 on: May 01, 2009, 09:20:28 AM »
But you have been shown several times that the dogma of the IC does not refer to her physical conception, but to her spiritual conception, the moment of her ensoulment.
 
Yes Mark. You can go on and on about ensoulment and conceptional baptism. We have heard you talk about it before. However St Bernard is very clear when he says: “She could not be sanctified in the moment of Her conception by reason of the sin which is inseparable from conception, then it remains to believe that She was sanctified after She was conceived in the womb of her mother.”

In fact, his “conceived by the Holy Spirit” argument may not have been a straw man at all, but something he heard from an Eastern proponent of the IC.

I see. St Bernard is reacting to some Eastern gossip? Sheesh!


All his arguments against it indirectly demonstrate that the Eastern Fathers believed in the IC, not to mention the direct testimony of Eastern Fathers themselves at the time.
Nice tactic Mark. You have attempted to thrust the IC innovation upon the Eastern Fathers. LOL!

Offline Dan-Romania

  • BANNED for rules violations
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 938
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #454 on: May 01, 2009, 09:20:59 AM »
Mardukm if I look back on this thread i might find that you have maybe 1/2 of different opinions about the IC. In a way or another none of them convincing , and all revealing the chaos trying to explain something that it isn`t true . It gets to chaos and nonsens, that is how i see it .
This user no longer posts here.

Offline Mickey

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,309
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #455 on: May 01, 2009, 09:24:51 AM »
Even Mary needed Christ as her Redeemer, as St. Bonaventure stated.

Indeed! But St Bonaventure is not confirming the IC with that statement.  ;)

Offline Mardukm

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 423
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #456 on: May 01, 2009, 09:28:58 AM »
His statements do not deny in any way the teaching of the IC. 

He says nothing about the Virgin's Immaculate conception, or conceptional baptism, or salvation at ensoulment.
And says nothing to contradict it either.

Quote
St. Ambrose maintained that St. Joachim’s seed was immaculate – which would account for Mary’s IC.

The Orthodox use the term "Immaculate" for Our Lady often and they are not referring to the IC. Neither does the language for St Joachim's immaculate seed refer to the Vatican's definition of the IC.
Father Ambrose was talking about his seed, not about Mary.  Take it up with Father Ambrose.

Quote
Nice try though Mark!
Are you able to give a response without a snide remark?

Blessings

Offline Mardukm

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 423
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #457 on: May 01, 2009, 09:31:02 AM »
The Grace Mary received at her Conception, in distinction, was different - specifically, it was merely the Grace of Baptism. 

Let me get this straight. You say that Our Lady received the grace to conceive the Saviour at the annuciation and the IC merely refers to a spontaneous divine baptism in the womb at the moment of conception.

Does Rome agree with this explanation?
I'll be giving an explanation for Fr. Ambrose in a moment.

Blessings

Offline Mickey

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,309
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #458 on: May 01, 2009, 09:31:18 AM »
It is plainly evident that this statement by this EO saint is staggeringly false

So far, you have corrected two RC saints (Bernard and Bonaventure) and you have insulted St John Maximovitch.  

These traits that you carry do not further your arguments.

Offline Mardukm

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 423
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #459 on: May 01, 2009, 09:32:57 AM »
It is easy to see that St. Basil’s statement here does not dictate against the teaching of the IC of Mary.

Absolutely! St Basil would never refute such a doctrine because it did not exist.

But he does say:  “There is none without stain before Thee, even though his life be but a day, save Thou alone….
So, basically, what you're saying is that you can't refute the argument that he is only referring to the NATURAL state of Jesus, as distinct from those who can be without stain BY GRACE.  Good.  That's settled then.

Blessings

Offline Mardukm

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 423
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #460 on: May 01, 2009, 09:34:47 AM »
It is plainly evident that this statement by this EO saint is staggeringly false

So far, you have corrected two RC saints (Bernard and Bonaventure) and you have insulted St John Maximovitch.  

These traits that you carry do not further your arguments.
So you believe EVERYTHING a Saint says is infallible? ???

Blessings

Offline Mickey

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,309
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #461 on: May 01, 2009, 09:35:36 AM »
Another modern EO witness, which is not patristic, and not very faithful to the teaching of historic EO’xy (though it *might* be faithful to the teaching of modern EO’xy).


Now you have attacked St Ignatius. Are you able to respond without snide remarks?

Offline Mickey

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,309
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #462 on: May 01, 2009, 09:38:28 AM »
So, basically, what you're saying is that you can't refute the argument that he is only referring to the NATURAL state of Jesus, as distinct from those who can be without stain BY GRACE.  Good.  That's settled then.

Nope. I am saying that you attack straw men and then attempted to create a nice neat little scenario that agrees with your odd understanding of the IC--whether it be conceptional baptism, immaculate ensoulment, or whatever it is you are trying to say.  Is that clear? Good. That's settled then.

Offline Mardukm

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 423
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #463 on: May 01, 2009, 09:40:11 AM »
In arguing the “veneration of the father and mother of Holy Mary…the same for Her grandparents and great-grandparents,” St. Bernard seems to have forgotten a very important fact.  Mary was not divine, but Jesus IS.  So the honor of the IC need not extend beyond the Theotokos.  Obviously, the “conceived of the Holy Spirit” argument is merely a straw man.  The concupiscence argument I address in the next section. 

Of course! St Bernard is offering a warning not let such innovations spiral out of control. He says: “…but the glorification given to the Queen of Heaven demands discernment.”

Our Lady is greatly venerated with many dignities. But St Bernard is telling us that the doctrine of the IC has crossed the line when he says:  “But what does one yet need to add to these dignities?”
No, he is saying simply that one should not add the Eastern Feast to the Western Tradition.  Why do you support St. Bernard's arguments against the Feast of the Conception of St. Anne?

Quote
St. Bernard seems to have forgotten a very important fact.

It is a good thing that you are here to correct him.  ::)
I guess your lack of refutation of what I stated means you agree.  Good. That's settled then.

Blessings

Offline Papist

  • Patriarch of Pontification
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,758
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #464 on: May 01, 2009, 09:41:38 AM »
The Grace Mary received at her Conception, in distinction, was different - specifically, it was merely the Grace of Baptism. 

Can you offer us official sources of Catholic teaching (the Catechism, papal statements)  which agree with your equation of the Immaculate Conception or rather, Immaculate Ensoulment with Conceptional Baptism?

Do you ever discuss your theological theories with a competent Catholic theologian?
I don't see how you can't see that Marduk is simply drawing a reasonable conclusion from the teachings on baptism, original sin, and the immaculate conception
"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

Offline Papist

  • Patriarch of Pontification
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,758
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #465 on: May 01, 2009, 09:44:08 AM »
It is plainly evident that this statement by this EO saint is staggeringly false

So far, you have corrected two RC saints (Bernard and Bonaventure) and you have insulted St John Maximovitch.  

These traits that you carry do not further your arguments.

Not much different from what I have seen from many EOs here either. They often contradict their own saints. A good example is the EO rejection of St. Gregory Palamas' teaching on Mary being created without Original Sin. Further, they insult Catholic saints like Sts. Francis and Thomas Aquinas all the time. Those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. BTW, did you ever try that Cape Cod?
"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

Offline Dan-Romania

  • BANNED for rules violations
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 938
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #466 on: May 01, 2009, 09:44:26 AM »
Mardukm try harder , put a little bone on it , but try from heart , not look for justification of you opinions , but look to find the truth .
This user no longer posts here.

Offline Mickey

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,309
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #467 on: May 01, 2009, 09:46:09 AM »
I guess your lack of refutation of what I stated means you agree.  Good. That's settled then.

You have been thoroughly refuted throughout this thread. You'll have to learn to accept it.  :laugh:

Offline Mardukm

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 423
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #468 on: May 01, 2009, 09:46:22 AM »
Another modern EO witness, which is not patristic, and not very faithful to the teaching of historic EO’xy (though it *might* be faithful to the teaching of modern EO’xy).


Now you have attacked St Ignatius. Are you able to respond without snide remarks?
How is that a snide remark?  How did I attack him?  When I gave the post early on quoting EO Fathers supporting the IC, you didn't say a word.  Like I said, are Saints infallible to the point that one can't even offer an opposing view to what they're saying? You have often in the past expressed your disagreement with Catholic Saints, and say that they have departed from historic Catholic Orthodoxy.  Why don't you try defending the content of their statements instead of making these silly comments?

Blessings

Offline Mickey

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,309
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #469 on: May 01, 2009, 09:46:47 AM »
Personally, though I fully accept the teaching of the dogma of the IC, I don’t think the “merits of Christ” clause is necessary for my own belief in the dogma.

Is that not part of the Vatican I language? Will you be ex-communicated for not accepting that part of the language?

Offline Mickey

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,309
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #470 on: May 01, 2009, 09:49:02 AM »
Why don't you try defending the content of their statements instead of making these silly comments?

Now you have resorted to ad hominem.

My defense is evident. I will not respond further to the insults you throw at our Orthodox saints.

The action must be slow for you over at CAF, eh?

Offline Mardukm

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 423
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #471 on: May 01, 2009, 09:50:37 AM »
The Grace Mary received at her Conception, in distinction, was different - specifically, it was merely the Grace of Baptism. 

Can you offer us official sources of Catholic teaching (the Catechism, papal statements)  which agree with your equation of the Immaculate Conception or rather, Immaculate Ensoulment with Conceptional Baptism?

Do you ever discuss your theological theories with a competent Catholic theologian?
The use of reason is often sufficient.

Offline Mickey

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,309
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #472 on: May 01, 2009, 09:50:55 AM »
It was included to satisfy particularly LATIN concerns, but can do fully well without it, IMO.


Wow!!! Unbelievable!!! Now you are re-writing RC doctrine. You are quite the theologian!

Offline Mardukm

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 423
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #473 on: May 01, 2009, 09:55:14 AM »
I guess your lack of refutation of what I stated means you agree.  Good. That's settled then.

You have been thoroughly refuted throughout this thread. You'll have to learn to accept it.  :laugh:
Just saying so doesn't prove anything.  I think there are those who think snide, snippy comments amount to a "refutation." Thank you for your input, anyway. But I think any reader with an open mind will agree that the IC would be at least a legitimate theologoumenon and not a heresy. 

Blessings

Offline Mardukm

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 423
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #474 on: May 01, 2009, 09:56:58 AM »
It was included to satisfy particularly LATIN concerns, but can do fully well without it, IMO.


Wow!!! Unbelievable!!! Now you are re-writing RC doctrine. You are quite the theologian!
Did I re-write it?  I do recall that I stated that I submit to everything in the dogma. Or is that another one of your myriad extrapolations?

Blessings

Offline Papist

  • Patriarch of Pontification
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,758
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #475 on: May 01, 2009, 09:58:16 AM »
So, basically, what you're saying is that you can't refute the argument that he is only referring to the NATURAL state of Jesus, as distinct from those who can be without stain BY GRACE.  Good.  That's settled then.

Nope. I am saying that you attack straw men and then attempted to create a nice neat little scenario that agrees with your odd understanding of the IC--whether it be conceptional baptism, immaculate ensoulment, or whatever it is you are trying to say.  Is that clear? Good. That's settled then.
You seem very upset about this whole Immaculate Conception thing. You keep trying to get us to over define the mystery and then are frustated taht we cannot because it is a spiritual mystery. Why so angry about something that has nothing to do with your Church?
"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

Offline Mickey

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,309
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #476 on: May 01, 2009, 09:59:02 AM »
Just saying so doesn't prove anything. 

Amen.

Offline Mickey

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,309
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #477 on: May 01, 2009, 09:59:18 AM »
Nothing you have quoted so far makes a case against the teaching of the IC.


Sorry Mark. I believe everything I have quoted points to the refutation of the doctrine of IC.  The Early Fathers did not know this strange doctrine.  You are trying to retroactively make their words support it.  It is difficult to show that an Early Church Father supported something that did not exist!


If you don’t accept it, fine

Fine. We can leave it at that.



but are you willing to admit that it is not heresy?

My personal belief is that the doctrine of the IC is an innovation of post schism Rome and heterodox.

Offline Papist

  • Patriarch of Pontification
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,758
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #478 on: May 01, 2009, 09:59:58 AM »
It was included to satisfy particularly LATIN concerns, but can do fully well without it, IMO.


Wow!!! Unbelievable!!! Now you are re-writing RC doctrine. You are quite the theologian!
Actually, I think you are trying to re-write Marduk's arguements.
"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

Offline Mickey

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,309
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #479 on: May 01, 2009, 10:01:56 AM »
You seem very upset about this whole Immaculate Conception thing.

Not at all. It seems that Mark is the one who is a tad disheveled.

Offline Mickey

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,309
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #480 on: May 01, 2009, 10:02:35 AM »
Actually, I think you are trying to re-write Marduk's arguements.

What argument?  ;D

Offline Mickey

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,309
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #481 on: May 01, 2009, 10:06:15 AM »
I do recall that I stated that I submit to everything in the dogma. Or is that another one of your myriad extrapolations?

You said that you submit to it--then you said: I don’t think the “merits of Christ” clause is necessary... 

Obviously you do not submit to everything. Which is it Mark? All of it? Or some of it?

Offline Papist

  • Patriarch of Pontification
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,758
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #482 on: May 01, 2009, 10:07:06 AM »
You seem very upset about this whole Immaculate Conception thing.

Not at all. It seems that Mark is the one who is a tad disheveled.
Not from what i have read. But maybe you are so jittery because you have still not tried that Cape Cod.
"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

Offline Papist

  • Patriarch of Pontification
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,758
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #483 on: May 01, 2009, 10:07:45 AM »
Actually, I think you are trying to re-write Marduk's arguements.

What argument?  ;D
Which is the root of the problem. You refuse to see because you refuse to listen Rush...er... uh... I mean Mickey.
"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

Offline Mickey

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,309
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #484 on: May 01, 2009, 10:08:03 AM »
But maybe you are so jittery because you have still not tried that Cape Cod.

I do not drink.

Offline Papist

  • Patriarch of Pontification
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,758
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #485 on: May 01, 2009, 10:08:09 AM »
I do recall that I stated that I submit to everything in the dogma. Or is that another one of your myriad extrapolations?

You said that you submit to it--then you said: I don’t think the “merits of Christ” clause is necessary... 

Obviously you do not submit to everything. Which is it Mark? All of it? Or some of it?
Yawn.
"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

Offline Papist

  • Patriarch of Pontification
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,758
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #486 on: May 01, 2009, 10:08:50 AM »
But maybe you are so jittery because you have still not tried that Cape Cod.

I do not drink.
That explains soooooooooo much. The scriptures say that Wine maketh good the heart of man. I am telling you man it would really help you calm down.
"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

Offline Mickey

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,309
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #487 on: May 01, 2009, 10:09:41 AM »
[You refuse to see because you refuse to listen  

It is difficult to see or listen to a doctrine that does not exist for the Holy Orthodox Church.

Offline Mickey

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,309
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #488 on: May 01, 2009, 10:11:35 AM »
That explains soooooooooo much. The scriptures say that Wine maketh good the heart of man. I am telling you man it would really help you calm down.

No thank you. I am a very relaxed individual.

I do not drink alcohol to relax. There are much better ways.

Offline Mardukm

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 423
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #489 on: May 01, 2009, 10:13:43 AM »
The Grace Mary received at her Conception, in distinction, was different - specifically, it was merely the Grace of Baptism. 

Can you offer us official sources of Catholic teaching (the Catechism, papal statements)  which agree with your equation of the Immaculate Conception or rather, Immaculate Ensoulment with Conceptional Baptism?

Do you ever discuss your theological theories with a competent Catholic theologian?
Father, please don't misrepresent me.  I never stated that Mary had a "Conceptional Baptism."  Mary did NOT have a Baptism.  Baptism by definition REMITS sin.  Her possession of Sanctifying Grace did not come about by virtue of Baptism, but rather by a unique action by God that prevented Original Sin from touching her Soul, and infused her with Sanctifying Grace - the same Grace we receive at our own Baptisms. That's all I've ever stated.  If perchance you ever go around trying to verify what I've stated at Catholic websites or the like, please make sure to represent what I've stated correctly.  Thanks.

Humbly,
Marduk

Offline Dan-Romania

  • BANNED for rules violations
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 938
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #490 on: May 01, 2009, 10:14:47 AM »
For this dogma the Catholic Church has departed from God , and gave Jesus` atributes to Mary,making Mary at least as great as Jesus , maybe greater, look at the catholics dogmas and devotions ... that is self explainatory ;D i laugh but it is not laughable but is cryable  :'(.  I advice you to go back in chapter 6 of this thread and re-read it . I advice true christians to be very sceptical about the CC and keep away from Lucifer`s light , because it blinds . Re-read and re-think everything . Start from chapter 6 .
This user no longer posts here.

Offline Papist

  • Patriarch of Pontification
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,758
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #491 on: May 01, 2009, 10:20:48 AM »
For this dogma the Catholic Church has departed from God , and gave Jesus` atributes to Mary,making Mary at least as great as Jesus , maybe greater, look at the catholics dogmas and devotions ... that is self explainatory ;D i laugh but it is not laughable but is cryable  :'(.  I advice you to go back in chapter 6 of this thread and re-read it . I advice true christians to be very sceptical about the CC and keep away from Lucifer`s light , because it blinds . Re-read and re-think everything . Start from chapter 6 .
These are the kinds of arguements that make it hard for Catholics to make Eastern Orthodoxy a serious option. You do more damage to your Church when you sink to this kind of nonsense. I suggest that you stick with the stronger arguements presented by your EO bretheren.
"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

Offline Mardukm

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 423
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #492 on: May 01, 2009, 10:22:42 AM »
Dearest Father Ambrose,

Are you not reading all of my posts?  I already addressed this several times.  I am in complete agreement with HH Pope Shenoute. 

All I've ever stated is that in my study of Catholicism, I've never found anything about it that contradicts my Coptic Tradition.

Marduk, I feel that your studies may be too narrowly focused according to your personal theological preferences and you may be misrepresenting Coptic teaching.

__________________________________
St. Mary’s Immaculate Conception:

Some Church fathers do not believe Virgin Mary to be without faults, such as St. Irenaus, Origen, St. John Chrysostom. However, these opinions do not represent the widespread Mariologicall Tradition of the early Church. We believe that St. Mary’s holiness is unique and surpasses heavenly creatures; she passed all her life in holiness as the true Ark of the Covenant, which was made of incorruptible wood laid with Gold from inside and outside. The Orthodox Church, whose love towards St. Mary is deep-rooted, considers her more holy than all the heavenly creatures, whilst a natural member of the human race.

We do not set her apart from the human race by assuming that she was born without original sin (immaculate conception), as if she was born of no human seed. Thus, the Church makes a distinction between St. Mary’s life before and after the moment of Divine Incarnation.

St. Mary herself declared her need of salvation when she said, “my spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior.”
(Lk 1:47)

This Orthodox concept preserved our Church from any exaggeration or confusion between Lord Jesus Christ and His blessed mother; no worship is offered to her, but only veneration and praise. In other words, in the Orthodox Church there is an accurate line that divides Lord Jesus Christ from His blessed
mother; the only one who was Immaculately Conceived is our Lord Jesus Christ.

This lecture is adapted from ‘Comparative Theology’ by H.H. Pope Shenouda III and ‘St. Mary in the Orthodox Concept’ by Fr. Tadros Malaty.
http://www.suscopts.org/messages/lectures/marilecture1.pdf

If you read HH's statements carefully, you'll notice that he rejects the Immaculate Conception on the basis that "as if she was born of no human seed."  There was indeed at one time a belief in the early Eastern Church, revived by Latins during the debates about the IC in the late Middle Ages/Rennaisance, that stated that Mary was IC'd by way of a virgin birth.  I think you know what happened with that opinion, Father, because I've already pointed it out to you two times earlier in the thread- it was CONDEMNED by Pope Benedict XIV in the 17th century.  So it turns out that HH Pope Shenoute's teaching is completely in line with what the Catholic Church believes.

Like I keep saying, and I know you are aware of this. My coming into the Catholic Communion was not based on a rejection of anything that made me Oriental Orthodox, and, particularly, Coptic Orthodoxy, but based only on a rejection of MISconceptions I had about what the Catholic Church taught. Indeed, before I investigated Catholicism firsthand, and not through the lens of NON-Catholic literature, I also believed that the dogma of the IC taught that Mary was not born of human seed - and thus I rejected the dogma.  Now, I know better, and thereby I accept it.

Humbly,
Marduk

Offline Dan-Romania

  • BANNED for rules violations
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 938
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #493 on: May 01, 2009, 10:26:27 AM »
 1Tim2:13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
 1Tim2:14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
 1Tim2:15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

 :angel:
This user no longer posts here.

Offline Papist

  • Patriarch of Pontification
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,758
Re: Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #494 on: May 01, 2009, 10:41:14 AM »
1Tim2:13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
 1Tim2:14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
 1Tim2:15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

 :angel:
What???   ???
"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.