OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 31, 2014, 07:25:57 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Did Mary die from Love?  (Read 4754 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Jetavan
Argumentum ad australopithecum
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Science to the Fourth Power
Jurisdiction: Ohayo Gozaimasu
Posts: 6,580


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« on: May 05, 2009, 11:59:13 PM »

Would Orthodoxy consider as acceptable (a theologumen, perhaps) the Catholic idea that Mary died from love, not because she had to die?
Quote
Mary's death was not necessarily the effect of violence; it was undergone neither as an expiation or penalty, nor as the effect of disease from which, like her Divine Son, she was exempt. Since the Middle Ages the view prevails that she died of love, her great desire to be united to her Son either dissolving the ties of body and soul, or prevailing on God to dissolve them. Her passing away is a sacrifice of love completing the dolorous sacrifice of her life. It is the death in the kiss of the Lord (in osculo Domini), of which the just die.

« Last Edit: May 06, 2009, 12:00:46 AM by Jetavan » Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #1 on: May 06, 2009, 12:02:50 AM »

Would Orthodoxy consider as acceptable (a theologumen, perhaps) the Catholic idea that Mary died from love, not because she had to die?
Quote
Mary's death was not necessarily the effect of violence; it was undergone neither as an expiation or penalty, nor as the effect of disease from which, like her Divine Son, she was exempt. Since the Middle Ages the view prevails that she died of love, her great desire to be united to her Son either dissolving the ties of body and soul, or prevailing on God to dissolve them. Her passing away is a sacrifice of love completing the dolorous sacrifice of her life. It is the death in the kiss of the Lord (in osculo Domini), of which the just die.



No.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #2 on: May 06, 2009, 12:26:09 AM »

Would Orthodoxy consider as acceptable (a theologumen, perhaps) the Catholic idea that Mary died from love, not because she had to die?
Quote
Mary's death was not necessarily the effect of violence; it was undergone neither as an expiation or penalty, nor as the effect of disease from which, like her Divine Son, she was exempt. Since the Middle Ages the view prevails that she died of love, her great desire to be united to her Son either dissolving the ties of body and soul, or prevailing on God to dissolve them. Her passing away is a sacrifice of love completing the dolorous sacrifice of her life. It is the death in the kiss of the Lord (in osculo Domini), of which the just die.

What Orthodoxy would not agree with is

1) the notion that the Theotokos was exempt from disease and death since she lived under the conditions of the Fall.

2) the notion that her death was a "sacrifice" (the notion itself is self-contradictory; why would it be a "sacrifice" to be with her Son?)

Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
LBK
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,259


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #3 on: May 06, 2009, 12:28:09 AM »

Gawd. Mountains out of molehills, sentimental, emotionalist extrapolation. Look up the text of the Vigil for the Dormition of the Mother of God, for goodness sake.
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #4 on: May 06, 2009, 12:31:07 AM »

Jetevan is asking a valid question and has started an interesting discussion point.
I don't think we need to be confrontational and belligerent.
It would make a nice change to have a civil discussion on the forum.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
EofK
Mrs. Y
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 3,976


lolcat addict


« Reply #5 on: May 06, 2009, 03:20:07 PM »

It would make a nice change to have a civil discussion on the forum.

Agreed. 

For reference, here is the OCA's page on the Dormition of the Theotokos
Logged

Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so. -- Douglas Adams
Michael_Gerard
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catechumen
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 74


« Reply #6 on: December 21, 2010, 08:03:12 PM »

Is it a dogma that Mary died?

I find it strange that her tomb wasn't venerated, and there's no tradition concerning it's exact whereabouts (and I believe "The Dormition of The Virgin Mary," which discribes her burial and resurrection, dates from the 6th century?)

I believe she's in heaven (body and soul) with her Son, but is the belief that she died before getting there a dogma?
Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,328


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #7 on: December 21, 2010, 08:25:04 PM »

Is it a dogma that Mary died?

I find it strange that her tomb wasn't venerated, and there's no tradition concerning it's exact whereabouts (and I believe "The Dormition of The Virgin Mary," which discribes her burial and resurrection, dates from the 6th century?)

I believe she's in heaven (body and soul) with her Son, but is the belief that she died before getting there a dogma?

Everyone must die before the second coming.  God showed that even His Incarnate Son wasn't exempt from death (although His Incarnate Son did it not naturally, but willingly for our salvation).  But to say that the Theotokos was exempt from death and disease in a similar way to Christ is not correct.  Given the interpretation of the immaculate conception is consistent with the views of those I've read in this board, if baptized people die naturally, why is the Theotokos exempt?

I think to extend this view to say that she died out of love and willfulness, and not of our her own natural inclinations is blasphemy.
« Last Edit: December 21, 2010, 08:33:17 PM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #8 on: December 21, 2010, 08:52:07 PM »

Given the interpretation of the immaculate conception is consistent with the views of those I've read in this board, if baptized people die naturally, why is the Theotokos exempt?

Because there is a lot of theologoumena surrounding the "exempt from the stain of original sin". Some people think that means Original Sin and all it's effects (death/concupiscence). Taken that way, she is unable to have died and, if she did die... then... *scratch head*

I think to extend this view to say that she died out of love and willfulness, and not of our her own natural inclinations is blasphemy.

Agreed. I think I'll die now... *blegh*
« Last Edit: December 21, 2010, 08:52:59 PM by Azurestone » Logged


I'm going to need this.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #9 on: December 21, 2010, 08:53:24 PM »

Is it a dogma that Mary died?

I find it strange that her tomb wasn't venerated, and there's no tradition concerning it's exact whereabouts (and I believe "The Dormition of The Virgin Mary," which discribes her burial and resurrection, dates from the 6th century?)

I believe she's in heaven (body and soul) with her Son, but is the belief that she died before getting there a dogma?
Yes.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #10 on: December 21, 2010, 09:39:12 PM »

I was in the Cloisters museum in NY the weekend before last, and noted a Western carving of the Dormition from the Middle Ages. The idea that the Theotokos was Assumed into Heaven before bodily death (an idea that many Roman Catholics hold now) seems to be a late notion then.
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
Michael_Gerard
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catechumen
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 74


« Reply #11 on: December 21, 2010, 09:48:10 PM »

Quote
Everyone must die before the second coming.

Than why did Paul say "Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed" (1 Cor. 15:51-52)?

And if the Theotokous died (in Adam), and rose (in Christ, 2000 years before "His coming"), how does that fit in with what Paul says here?

"For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. Then cometh the  end..." (1 Cor. 15:22-24.)

It makes more sense to me that she isn't mentioned here because she never died "in Adam," and her "Assumption" anticipates the instantaneous "change"" of those alive at the second coming (and perhaps that's why there's no "tomb of the virgin" in the vicinity of the garden tomb today?)

BTW: I believe Roman Catholics would consider this a matter of theological opinion (i.e. they can go either way on this), what about the Orthodox?

Is the death of the Virgin, before her bodily assumption, truly a dogma of the Orthodox Church???
« Last Edit: December 21, 2010, 10:13:54 PM by Michael_Gerard » Logged
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #12 on: December 21, 2010, 10:15:15 PM »

Quote
Is the death of the Virgin, before her bodily assumption, truly a dogma of the Orthodox Church???

Absolutely. Read the hymns for the Feast of the Dormition. "What we pray, is what we believe" to quote the old (Latin) maxim.
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
Michael_Gerard
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catechumen
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 74


« Reply #13 on: December 21, 2010, 10:23:33 PM »

Quote
Is the death of the Virgin, before her bodily assumption, truly a dogma of the Orthodox Church???

Absolutely. Read the hymns for the Feast of the Dormition. "What we pray, is what we believe" to quote the old (Latin) maxim.

Is that old Latin maxim dogma?

Is everything sung in hymn on the same level as the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed?
« Last Edit: December 21, 2010, 10:24:23 PM by Michael_Gerard » Logged
Tzimis
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 2,374



« Reply #14 on: December 21, 2010, 10:26:22 PM »

Quote
Everyone must die before the second coming.

Than why did Paul say "Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed" (1 Cor. 15:51-52)?

And if the Theotokous died (in Adam), and rose (in Christ, 2000 years before "His coming"), how does that fit in with what Paul says here?

"For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. Then cometh the  end..." (1 Cor. 15:22-24.)

It makes more sense to me that she isn't mentioned here because she never died "in Adam," and her "Assumption" anticipates the instantaneous "change"" of those alive at the second coming (and perhaps that's why there's no "tomb of the virgin" in the vicinity of the garden tomb today?)

BTW: I believe Roman Catholics would consider this a matter of theological opinion (i.e. they can go either way on this), what about the Orthodox?

Is the death of the Virgin, before her bodily assumption, truly a dogma of the Orthodox Church???

This could be speaking of the second coming and when Christ returns those who are alive will be transformed.  A physical death would be meaningless at that moment.
Logged

Excellence of character, then, is a state concerned with choice, lying in a mean relative to us, this being determined by reason and in the way in which the man of practical wisdom would determine it. Now it is a mean between two vices, that which depends on excess and that which depends on defect.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #15 on: December 21, 2010, 10:27:34 PM »

Quote
Everyone must die before the second coming.

Than why did Paul say "Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed" (1 Cor. 15:51-52)?

And if the Theotokous died (in Adam),
We all, as St. Paul wrote, died in Adam. That is not what the Dormition commemorates.


Quote
and rose (in Christ, 2000 years before "His coming"), how does that fit in with what Paul says here?

"The dead shall be raised incorruptible." By the time that St. Paul had written this, she had already fallen asleep, and was raised.

Quote
"For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. Then cometh the  end..." (1 Cor. 15:22-24.)

It makes more sense to me that she isn't mentioned here because she never died "in Adam," and her "Assumption" anticipates the instantaneous "change"" of those alive at the second coming (and perhaps that's why there's no "tomb of the virgin" in the vicinity of the garden tomb today?)
She is not mentioned here because she was not personally the proclamation of the Church. Hence why St. Paul never mentions her by name, and only alludes to here when he states the Christ was "born of a woman."

Quote
I would like to know whether what we're discusing is doctrine, dogma, or theological opinion?

I believe Roman Catholics would consider it theological opinion (i.e. they can go either way on this), what about the Orthodox???
It is dogma that she fell asleep.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Michael_Gerard
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catechumen
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 74


« Reply #16 on: December 21, 2010, 10:31:14 PM »

Quote
It is dogma that she fell asleep.

By what ecumenical council was it declared a dogma?

When?

Quote
We all, as St. Paul wrote, died in Adam

I believe he used the present tense.

You used the past tense.

Are you refering to original sin (as in we all died spiritually when Adam sinned)?

Is that dogma too?
« Last Edit: December 21, 2010, 10:35:55 PM by Michael_Gerard » Logged
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #17 on: December 21, 2010, 10:34:45 PM »

Quote
It is dogma that she fell asleep.

By what ecumenical council was it declared a dogma?

When?

Dogmas do not have to be declared by an ecumenical council. It is declared by the liturgical texts of August 15.
« Last Edit: December 21, 2010, 10:35:22 PM by Fr. Anastasios » Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
Michael_Gerard
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catechumen
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 74


« Reply #18 on: December 21, 2010, 10:37:29 PM »

So any liturgical text is as much a dogma as the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed?

Does the liturgical text of August 15th pronounce any anathemas against those who disagree?
« Last Edit: December 21, 2010, 10:39:32 PM by Michael_Gerard » Logged
Alveus Lacuna
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,928



« Reply #19 on: December 21, 2010, 10:39:52 PM »

I find it strange that her tomb wasn't venerated, and there's no tradition concerning it's exact whereabouts...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary's_Tomb

See attached photo. By clicking on it, the photo becomes larger.
« Last Edit: December 21, 2010, 10:44:21 PM by Alveus Lacuna » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #20 on: December 21, 2010, 10:41:03 PM »

Quote
It is dogma that she fell asleep.

By what ecumenical council was it declared a dogma?

The same one that declared her dormition.

Quote
When?
After Chalcedon.

Quote
We all, as St. Paul wrote, died in Adam

I believe he used the present tense.

You used the past tense.

When St. Paul wrote it, the Theotokos had died.

Quote
Are you refering to original sin (as in we all died spiritually when Adam sinned)?
That's what St. Paul is refering to.

Quote
Is that dogma too?
Ancestral sin? Yes.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Michael_Gerard
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catechumen
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 74


« Reply #21 on: December 21, 2010, 10:42:53 PM »

Quote
This could be speaking of the second coming and when Christ returns those who are alive will be transformed.  A physical death would be meaningless at that moment.

And if the ever virgin Theotokous was full of Grace, never sinned, and wasn't guilty of any "ancestral sin", maybe a physical death would have been meaningless for her.
« Last Edit: December 21, 2010, 10:44:57 PM by Michael_Gerard » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #22 on: December 21, 2010, 10:43:27 PM »

I find it strange that her tomb wasn't venerated, and there's no tradition concerning it's exact whereabouts...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary's_Tomb

See attached photo. By clicking on it, the photo becomes larger.

Thanks. I missed the quoted post: I've been blessed to have visited the Tomb of the Holy Theotokos, and it is very much venerated, even by the Muslims. (btw, I've also visited the Virgin's house in Ephesus).
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #23 on: December 21, 2010, 10:46:34 PM »

So any liturgical text is as much a dogma as the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed?

Depends on what you are talking about: the liturgical text wouldn't contradict the Creed.

In the case in point, the only statement we have on her ultimate fate is on the Dormition.  Which says "Dormition."

Quote
Does the liturgical text of August 15th pronounce any anathemas against those who disagree?
Doesn't have to. It's not needed.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #24 on: December 21, 2010, 10:48:33 PM »

Quote
This could be speaking of the second coming and when Christ returns those who are alive will be transformed.  A physical death would be meaningless at that moment.

And if the ever virgin Theotokous was full of Grace, never sinned, and wasn't guilty of any "ancestral sin", maybe a physical death would have been meaningless for her.
It would have meant that Christ did not assume human nature, was not the son of Adam, and consequenty not the New Adam, and human nature was not redeemed.

Btw, none of us is guilty of 'ancestral sin.' Except Adam and Eve.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
LBK
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,259


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #25 on: December 21, 2010, 10:52:35 PM »

Quote
It is dogma that she fell asleep.

By what ecumenical council was it declared a dogma?

When?

Dogmas do not have to be declared by an ecumenical council. It is declared by the liturgical texts of August 15.

Michael, the hymnography for the feast of the Dormition of the Mother of God is full of references to her death. Lex orandi, lex credendi, as others have said. The physical death of the Mother of God is not a theologoumenon (theological opinion) or an "optional belief". She is the most honoured of all creation, more glorious than even the angels, but she was still fully human and mortal, and subject to death as we all are. Some examples from Vespers and Matins for August 15:

O marvellous wonder! The source of life is laid in a grave, and the tomb becomes a ladder to heaven. Be glad, O Gethsemane, the holy shrine of the Mother of God. Let us the faithful cry, with Gabriel as our captain: Hail, Lady Full of grace! The Lord is with you, who grants the world through you His great mercy.

The all-honoured choir of the wise Apostles was wondrously assembled to bury with glory your immaculate body, O all-praised Mother of God. With them the multitudes of Angels also raised their song as they reverently praised your Translation, which we celebrate with faith.

Your birth-giving, conception was without seed; your Dormition, death was without corruption. A double wonder ran to meet a wonder, O Mother of God; for how could one who knew not wedlock suckle a babe, yet remain pure? How could God’s Mother be carried as a corpse, yet exude sweet fragrance? So with the Angel we cry to you: Hail, Lady full of grace.

You have carried off prizes of victory against nature, pure Virgin, in bearing God; yet, imitating your Maker and Son, you submit to nature’s laws; and so dying, you rise with your Son and live forever.

Knowing you, all-blameless Lady, to be a mortal woman, but beyond nature Mother of God, with fearful hands the illustrious Apostles touched you, as you blazed with glory, gazing on you as the Tabernacle that had received God.

A company of theologians from the ends of the earth and a multitude of Angels hastened to Zion at an all-powerful command, that they might fittingly minister at your burial, Sovereign Mistress.

Death has become for you, pure Virgin, a crossing to an eternal and better life, translating you from one which perishes to one which is truly divine and without change, to gaze in joy upon your Son and Lord.

Strange marvel it was to see the living heaven of the universal King going down below the hollows of the earth. How wonderful are Your works! Glory to Your power, O Lord!

If her fruit, who is beyond understanding, because of whom she was called Heaven, willingly underwent burial as a mortal, how will she refuse burial, who bore Him without wedlock?

The inspired tongues of men who were theologians, resonant with the Spirit, cried out louder than trumpets the burial hymn for the Mother of God: Hail, unsullied source of God’s incarnation, origin of life and salvation for all.

Life dawned from you without loosing the keys of your virginity. How then has your spotless tabernacle, source of life, become a partaker in the experience of death?

Once the sacred enclosure of life, you have found eternal life; for through death you, who gave birth to Life in person, have passed over to life.

Beyond and above the understanding are the wonders of the Ever-virgin and Mother of God. Going to dwell in the tomb, she made it a paradise. Standing beside this tomb today, we sing with joy: O works of the Lord, bless the Lord and exalt Him above all forever.


Exaposteilarion of the feast:

O Apostles, assembled here from the ends of the earth, bury my body in Gethsemane; and you, my Son, receive my spirit.

It is abundantly clear from this hymnography that the Orthodox Church teaches that the Mother of God was mortal, died a human death, and was buried. Some time later, her body did vanish from the tomb and was taken to heaven, and this, too, is spoken of in the hymns. But she died first.
Logged
Michael_Gerard
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catechumen
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 74


« Reply #26 on: December 21, 2010, 11:00:24 PM »

I find it strange that her tomb wasn't venerated, and there's no tradition concerning it's exact whereabouts...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary's_Tomb

See attached photo. By clicking on it, the photo becomes larger.

Thanks. I missed the quoted post: I've been blessed to have visited the Tomb of the Holy Theotokos, and it is very much venerated, even by the Muslims. (btw, I've also visited the Virgin's house in Ephesus).

If the tomb was known and venerated by the early Church,  it's strange that Saint Epiphanius of Salamis (in 377 A.D.) would say that "no one knew whether Mary had died or not."

You can also find that on Wikipedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assumption_of_Mary
« Last Edit: December 21, 2010, 11:02:32 PM by Michael_Gerard » Logged
FrChris
The Rodney Dangerfield of OC.net
Site Supporter
Taxiarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 7,252


Holy Father Patrick, thank you for your help!


« Reply #27 on: December 21, 2010, 11:03:12 PM »

I find it strange that her tomb wasn't venerated, and there's no tradition concerning it's exact whereabouts...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary's_Tomb

See attached photo. By clicking on it, the photo becomes larger.

Thanks. I missed the quoted post: I've been blessed to have visited the Tomb of the Holy Theotokos, and it is very much venerated, even by the Muslims. (btw, I've also visited the Virgin's house in Ephesus).

If the tomb was known and venerated by the early Church,  it's strange that Saint Epiphanius of Salamis (in AD 377) would say that "no one knew whether Mary had died or not."

You can also find that on Wikipedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assumption_of_Mary

When was Saint Epiphanius considered infallible, whose opinion could overturn the Tradition of the Church? I must have missed that....
Logged

"As the sparrow flees from a hawk, so the man seeking humility flees from an argument". St John Climacus
Michael_Gerard
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catechumen
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 74


« Reply #28 on: December 21, 2010, 11:04:30 PM »

Quote
Michael, the hymnography for the feast of the Dormition of the Mother of God is full of references to her death

I know it's taught that she died, I was asking if that teaching is dogma.
Logged
LBK
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,259


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #29 on: December 21, 2010, 11:08:33 PM »

Quote
Michael, the hymnography for the feast of the Dormition of the Mother of God is full of references to her death

I know it's taught that she died, I was asking if that teaching is dogma.

If it's in the hymnography (and, in this case, so profusely), then how can it be OK for an Orthodox christian to disbelieve it? Not being able to understand a teaching out of honest ignorance is one thing, and can be remedied. Wilful rejection of a clear teaching is quite another matter, and a serious one.
Logged
Michael_Gerard
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catechumen
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 74


« Reply #30 on: December 21, 2010, 11:08:57 PM »

Quote
When was Saint Epiphanius considered infallible, whose opinion could overturn the Tradition of the Church? I must have missed that....

I didn't suggest that he was infallible, only that this 4th century saint seemed ignorant of the existence of this tomb.

Does Wikipeia give any information on how long it's been venerated?
Logged
Michael_Gerard
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catechumen
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 74


« Reply #31 on: December 21, 2010, 11:10:49 PM »

Quote
If it's in the hymnography (and, in this case, so profusely), then how can it be OK for an Orthodox christian to disbelieve it? Not being able to understand a teaching out of honest ignorance is one thing, and can be remedied. Wilful rejection of a clear teaching is quite another matter, and a serious one.

So you're saying that all teaching is dogma, is that correct?

Would all the Fathers, Bishops, Metropolitans, and Patriarchs of the Orthodox Church agree with you on that?
« Last Edit: December 21, 2010, 11:13:31 PM by Michael_Gerard » Logged
LBK
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,259


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #32 on: December 21, 2010, 11:25:34 PM »

Michael, I'm not sure of the reason for your apparent insistence on separating doctrine and dogma. Could you please elaborate?
Logged
Ionnis
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 1,071



« Reply #33 on: December 21, 2010, 11:29:05 PM »

Humble yourself!  You are a catechumen, you don't get to decide what the Church teaches and what it does not.  The Holy Church teaches that the Mother of God experienced bodily death.  We do not lie in our liturgical hymns, but preach the truth boldly!  Inquiring is all well and good, but you appear to be going beyond that.
« Last Edit: December 21, 2010, 11:29:57 PM by Ionnis » Logged

"If you cannot find Christ in the beggar at the church door, you will not find Him in the chalice.”  -The Divine John Chrysostom

“Till we can become divine, we must be content to be human, lest in our hurry for change we sink to something lower.” -Anthony Trollope
Michael_Gerard
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catechumen
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 74


« Reply #34 on: December 21, 2010, 11:35:37 PM »

Michael, I'm not sure of the reason for your apparent insistence on separating doctrine and dogma. Could you please elaborate?

I want to understand the difference, if there is any.

Are you saying there's not?

As to the Dormition, I've never been able to reconcile the Blessed Virgin's death and resurrection with the order given in 1 Cor. 15 (Christ the first fruits of the dead, then those who are Christ's at the second coming.)

It's much easier for me to believe that she never died, then it is for me to try and fit her resurrection into what Paul says there.

(And as I find myself questioning her death, any distinction between doctrine and dogma is relevant to me here.)
Logged
Ionnis
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 1,071



« Reply #35 on: December 21, 2010, 11:38:55 PM »

Christ was resurrected before His Mother.  And what of the resurrection of Lazarus?
Logged

"If you cannot find Christ in the beggar at the church door, you will not find Him in the chalice.”  -The Divine John Chrysostom

“Till we can become divine, we must be content to be human, lest in our hurry for change we sink to something lower.” -Anthony Trollope
Michael_Gerard
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catechumen
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 74


« Reply #36 on: December 21, 2010, 11:40:52 PM »

Humble yourself!  You are a catechumen, you don't get to decide what the Church teaches and what it does not.  The Holy Church teaches that the Mother of God experienced bodily death.  We do not lie in our liturgical hymns, but preach the truth boldly!  Inquiring is all well and good, but you appear to be going beyond that.

And you appear to be saying that all teaching is equally authoritative.

In all humility, I again ask you if you're really saying that there's no difference between doctrine and dogma?

Christ was resurrected before His Mother.  And what of the resurrection of Lazarus?

I always assumed that Lazarus was merely raised to mortal life.

Are you saying that he was raised "incorruptible," and received "a spirtual body" (as Paul was talking about in 1 Cor. 15)?
« Last Edit: December 22, 2010, 12:01:28 AM by Michael_Gerard » Logged
Michael_Gerard
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catechumen
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 74


« Reply #37 on: December 21, 2010, 11:43:30 PM »

Good Night.
« Last Edit: December 21, 2010, 11:49:13 PM by Michael_Gerard » Logged
LBK
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,259


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #38 on: December 21, 2010, 11:53:02 PM »

Quote
And you appear to be saying that all teaching is equally authoritative.

In all humility, I again ask you if you're really saying that there's no difference between doctrine and dogma?

What is read, sung and chanted in Orthodox services is nothing less than the authoritative teaching of the Church. We pray what we believe, and we believe what we pray. The distinction you are seeking to make here between doctrine and dogma suggests to me that you are taking a reductionist, minimalist approach to what the Church teaches. "If it's dogma, I have to believe it, if it's doctrine, I don't need to believe all of it".

Quote
Humble yourself!  You are a catechumen, you don't get to decide what the Church teaches and what it does not.  The Holy Church teaches that the Mother of God experienced bodily death.  We do not lie in our liturgical hymns, but preach the truth boldly!  Inquiring is all well and good, but you appear to be going beyond that.

Ionnis' advice is blunt, but completely correct. Sure, there are parts of Orthodox teaching which newcomers to the Church find hard to understand or accept at first, but, with time, do get to accept and understand them. Have you talked to your priest about it?
Logged
Ionnis
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 1,071



« Reply #39 on: December 21, 2010, 11:53:18 PM »

You are right, Lazarus was not raised incorruptible.  That was a terrible example on my part.  Forgive me, brother.  

Good night.  
Logged

"If you cannot find Christ in the beggar at the church door, you will not find Him in the chalice.”  -The Divine John Chrysostom

“Till we can become divine, we must be content to be human, lest in our hurry for change we sink to something lower.” -Anthony Trollope
Michael_Gerard
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catechumen
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 74


« Reply #40 on: December 22, 2010, 12:12:06 AM »

You are right, Lazarus was not raised incorruptible.  That was a terrible example on my part.  Forgive me, brother.  

Good night.  

Forgive me Father, if I seemed argumentative.

But before I turn in, let me state my problem more clearly.

If Christ was the first to be raised inncorruptible, and if Mary was next, why does Paul say that the next will be "those who are Christ's at His coming"?

I've been drawn to Orthodoxy because I believed that it's the Church of scripture, but if I have to reject scripture to be Orthodox, I'd be damning myself.

Either there's a way to fit the hymnology of Aug. 15th into 1 Cor. 15, the hymnology isn't dogma, or I'll never be Orthodox.

Good night.

« Last Edit: December 22, 2010, 12:22:51 AM by Michael_Gerard » Logged
Ionnis
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 1,071



« Reply #41 on: December 22, 2010, 12:23:01 AM »

Michael, I admit I do not have an answer, but I am sure some of the more intellegent here will be able to help you.  I am a fairly simply person. I am glad that you were able to be more specific in your concern though, as I said, I am confident that someone will be able to help you. 

For me, there isn't a doubt in my mind that the Holy Orthodox Church is the Church of Christ, the Church spoken of in the Holy Scriptures, and so such questions do not disturb me, even if I don't have an answer to them.  But for you, who are still inquiring into the Church of Christ, I can see how these issues could be very important.  Forgive me if I have minimized the anxiety that these sorts of questions cause you, but I still implore you (and myself) to be humble when we approach Christ and His Holy Church.

John

P.S.  I am not a priest or a monk.  I assume you mistook me for one based upon my profile picture. That is a photograph of holy Elder Paisios of Mount Athos.  Forgive me.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2010, 12:23:32 AM by Ionnis » Logged

"If you cannot find Christ in the beggar at the church door, you will not find Him in the chalice.”  -The Divine John Chrysostom

“Till we can become divine, we must be content to be human, lest in our hurry for change we sink to something lower.” -Anthony Trollope
Michael_Gerard
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catechumen
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 74


« Reply #42 on: December 22, 2010, 12:27:31 AM »

I did assume you were a priest, and I'm sorry.

I forgive you, and I ask you to forgive me.

Good night (and God Bless.)
Logged
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #43 on: December 22, 2010, 12:27:59 AM »

How do the Fathers of the Church interpret the Scriptural passage which Michael cites?

It seems odd that the West also apparently believed Mary died well in to the Middle Ages, yet now some think she didn't. I suppose someone will have written a study on this?
« Last Edit: December 22, 2010, 12:28:40 AM by Fr. Anastasios » Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #44 on: December 22, 2010, 12:32:56 AM »


I don't think he's a spiritual Father...not sure about the earthly though....


You are right, Lazarus was not raised incorruptible.  That was a terrible example on my part.  Forgive me, brother.  

Good night.  

Forgive me Father, if I seemed argumentative.

But before I turn in, let me state my problem more clearly.

If Christ was the first to be raised inncorruptible, and if Mary was next, why does Paul say that the next will be "those who are Christ's at His coming"?

I've been drawn to Orthodoxy because I believed that it's the Church of scripture, but if I have to reject scripture to be Orthodox, I'd be damning myself.

Either there's a way to fit the hymnology of Aug. 15th into 1 Cor. 15, the hymnology isn't dogma, or I'll never be Orthodox.

Good night.


Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #45 on: December 22, 2010, 12:34:59 AM »

I find it strange that her tomb wasn't venerated, and there's no tradition concerning it's exact whereabouts...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary's_Tomb

See attached photo. By clicking on it, the photo becomes larger.

Thanks. I missed the quoted post: I've been blessed to have visited the Tomb of the Holy Theotokos, and it is very much venerated, even by the Muslims. (btw, I've also visited the Virgin's house in Ephesus).

If the tomb was known and venerated by the early Church,  it's strange that Saint Epiphanius of Salamis (in 377 A.D.) would say that "no one knew whether Mary had died or not."

You can also find that on Wikipedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assumption_of_Mary

The reference of St. Epiphanisu, Ad Hare. 78.10-11, 23 says
Quote
If any thing I am mistaken, moreover, let them search the scriptures and neither find Mary's death, nor whether or not she died, nor whether or not she was buried-even though John surely traveled through Asia.  And yet, nowhere does he say that he took the holy Virgin with him. Scripture kept silence because of the overwhelming wonder, not to throw men'sminds into consternation.
For I dare not say-though I have my suspicions. I keep silent......I cannot decide for certain, and am not saying that she remained immortal. But neither am I affirming that she died.
If the holy Virgin died and was buried, her falling-asleep was honorable and her end holy; her crown consisted in her virginity. Or if she was put to death Or if she was put to death, according to the Scripture, 'A sword shall pierce her soul,' her fame is among the martyrs and her holy body should be an object of our veneration, since through it light came into the world. Or else she remained alive; for it is not impossible for God to do whatever he wills. In fact, no one knows her end.  But we must not honor the saints to excess; we must honor their master.  It is time for the error of those who have gone astray to cease.  Mary is not God and does not have her body from heaven but by human conception, though, like Isaac, she was provided by promise. And no one should make offerings in her name, for he is destroying his own soul.  But neither, in turn, should he be insolent and offer insult to the holy Virgin. Heaven forbid, she had no sexual relations after or before the Saviour's conception..
he goes on, but he is arguing against the idea that the Holy Theotokos ever had relations with St. Joseph the Betrothed, and the issue of her death is incidental to his argument.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
bogdan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,615



« Reply #46 on: December 22, 2010, 12:40:27 AM »

I always assumed that St Paul meant "we will not all die" as a general statement about Christians, not about anyone who was actually alive on earth at that time, who have indeed all died.

St John Chrysostom says of the verse: "The expression, 'we,' he uses not of himself, but of them that are then found alive." He does not literally mean that some of the people then alive would never die (which, if I understand correctly, was what Michael was having trouble with).

For more detail and context, see: http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/220142.htm
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #47 on: December 22, 2010, 12:50:05 AM »

Quote
Michael, the hymnography for the feast of the Dormition of the Mother of God is full of references to her death

I know it's taught that she died, I was asking if that teaching is dogma.
Yes, as teaching otherwise would contradict, for instance, the dogma of Ancestral sin.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Michael_Gerard
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catechumen
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 74


« Reply #48 on: December 22, 2010, 12:50:34 AM »

I always assumed that St Paul meant "we will not all die" as a general statement about Christians, not about anyone who was actually alive on earth at that time, who have indeed all died.

St John Chrysostom says of the verse: "The expression, 'we,' he uses not of himself, but of them that are then found alive." He does not literally mean that some of the people then alive would never die (which, if I understand correctly, was what Michael was having trouble with).

For more detail and context, see: http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/220142.htm

I understand Paul to be saying that not all Christians will die, but that some living at the time of Christ's return will be changed from mortal to immortal.

I believe that's what St. Chrysostom is saying Paul meant, right?

The problem is that Paul says that there's an order to the resurrection to immortality--First Christ, then those who are His at the second coming (when these living Christians are changed and caught up with those who are raised.)

If Mary died, and her bodily assumption was precceded by her resurrection (in the first century), where does that fit in here?
« Last Edit: December 22, 2010, 12:54:05 AM by Michael_Gerard » Logged
Michael_Gerard
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catechumen
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 74


« Reply #49 on: December 22, 2010, 12:51:57 AM »

It seems odd that the West also apparently believed Mary died well in to the Middle Ages

If Wikipedia's got it right, Saint Epiphanius of Salamis testified to a general lack of any information regarding her death in 377 A.D. (regardless of what his main point was.)

That seems equally odd.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2010, 12:55:22 AM by Michael_Gerard » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #50 on: December 22, 2010, 12:55:40 AM »

How do the Fathers of the Church interpret the Scriptural passage which Michael cites?

It seems odd that the West also apparently believed Mary died well in to the Middle Ages, yet now some think she didn't. I suppose someone will have written a study on this?
it is mixed up with the spread of the IC.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #51 on: December 22, 2010, 12:56:24 AM »

It seems odd that the West also apparently believed Mary died well in to the Middle Ages

If Wikipedia's got it right, Saint Epiphanius of Salamis testified to a general lack of any information regarding her death in 377 A.D. (regardless of what his main point was.)

That seems equally odd.
Look at thte full quote I provided above.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2010, 12:59:47 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,328


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #52 on: December 22, 2010, 01:01:52 AM »

It's one thing to debate whether the Theotokos died or not.  It's another to say that the Theotokos had a body that could not have died if she willed it.  The latter puts her equal to Christ.  I'm not sure about the former, but in my opinion, the former opinion actually would put her above Christ.  Why would Christ die, and not everyone else?  That makes no sense.  We must partake of everything Christ did.  That's part of our salvation.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Michael_Gerard
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catechumen
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 74


« Reply #53 on: December 22, 2010, 01:30:31 AM »

Quote
Why would Christ die, and not everyone else?

I don't know, but Paul specifically tells us that not all humans will die (in 1 Cor. 15.)

If there are Christians living in the last generation of human history, who wont die, why would Christ have to allow His mother to die?
Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,328


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #54 on: December 22, 2010, 01:33:33 AM »

Quote
Why would Christ die, and not everyone else?

I don't know, but Paul specifically tells us that not all humans will die (in 1 Cor. 15.)

If there are Christians living in the last generation of human history, who wont die, why would Christ have to allow His mother to die?

It seems like St. John Chrysostom is interpreting this to be the end times, not necessarily those who are alive with him.  In other words, all bodies are naturally mortal and will die, unless Christ second coming occurs while someone are still alive.

But this is how St. John Chrysostom interpreted it.  I want to read what other Church fathers have to say.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2010, 01:34:00 AM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Michael_Gerard
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catechumen
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 74


« Reply #55 on: December 22, 2010, 01:36:22 AM »

It seems odd that the West also apparently believed Mary died well in to the Middle Ages

If Wikipedia's got it right, Saint Epiphanius of Salamis testified to a general lack of any information regarding her death in 377 A.D. (regardless of what his main point was.)

That seems equally odd.
Look at thte full quote I provided above.

Thank you.

I almost overlooked this:

 "For I dare not say-though I have my suspicions. I keep silent......I cannot decide for certain, and am not saying that she remained immortal. But neither am I affirming that she died"

Very interesting.

How could he have said this if the location of her tomb were known and venerated in his day?
« Last Edit: December 22, 2010, 01:38:49 AM by Michael_Gerard » Logged
Alveus Lacuna
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,928



« Reply #56 on: December 22, 2010, 03:45:09 AM »

How could he have said this if the location of her tomb were known and venerated in his day?

I believe Isa (ialmisry) has argued that the tomb was venerated locally in the Jerusalem church, but that generally it was kept a secret until it was no longer possible to do so. I believe that this had to do with an emperor at the Council of Chalcedon requesting that her relics be transferred to Constantinople, so they were obviously unaware that there were no relics remaining. I think it was this imperial pressure that finally let the cat out of the bag.

Why such a thing would be kept secret is probably speculation, but I believe Isa tied it in with the public preaching of the gospel. Or maybe it was someone else.  Anyway, basically the Mother of God has always been deeply revered in the Apostolic Church, but she has always been a part of the inner life of the Church, not for the outsiders. She was never included in the public proclamation of the gospel, as the death and resurrection of Christ is central in public preaching. This remains true to this day, and this is why our All-Holy Mother remains baffling and confusing to most Protestants: she is not their Mother. Anyway, perhaps this miraculous event was played-down in the life of the early Church so as not to distract from the resurrection of Christ himself, nor to offer unnecessary detours when trying to convey the core doctrines of salvation.

But if this was true, it would present an interesting new question. If you are dogmatically required to believe this to be an Orthodox catechumen in good standing with the Church, how can this be so if this event remained unknown throughout most of the Church for almost 500 years? Of course then you could apply that to formally explained concepts like the Trinity, which also were not clearly taught and defined in the earliest centuries. Perhaps that's a good parallel, perhaps not.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2010, 03:45:32 AM by Alveus Lacuna » Logged
Michael_Gerard
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catechumen
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 74


« Reply #57 on: December 22, 2010, 11:04:22 AM »

Quote
I  believe Isa (ialmisry) has argued that the tomb was venerated locally in the Jerusalem church, but that generally it was kept a secret until it was no longer possible to do so...Anyway, basically the Mother of God has always been deeply revered in the Apostolic Church, but she has always been a part of the inner life of the Church, not for the outsiders.

But Saint Epiphanius of Salamis was an insider, and he didn't say he knew, and remained silent.

He said "I cannot decide for certain, and am not saying that she remained immortal. But neither am I affirming that she died...If the holy Virgin died and was buried...her holy body should be an object of our veneration, since through it light came into the world. Or else she remained alive; for it is not impossible for God to do whatever he wills. In fact, no one knows her end."

He's clearly saying that he didn't know if she died (not that he's keeping what he knows to himself), and that no one in his day knew (and that would have been around 377 A.D.)
« Last Edit: December 22, 2010, 11:06:00 AM by Michael_Gerard » Logged
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #58 on: December 22, 2010, 12:23:24 PM »

Is it a dogma that Mary died?

I find it strange that her tomb wasn't venerated, and there's no tradition concerning it's exact whereabouts (and I believe "The Dormition of The Virgin Mary," which discribes her burial and resurrection, dates from the 6th century?)

I believe she's in heaven (body and soul) with her Son, but is the belief that she died before getting there a dogma?

AFAIK, even the RC's don't make it dogma that she didn't die, merely that she was assumed. They leave it up to the discretion of the believer.

 
Logged
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #59 on: December 22, 2010, 12:24:56 PM »

Quote
I  believe Isa (ialmisry) has argued that the tomb was venerated locally in the Jerusalem church, but that generally it was kept a secret until it was no longer possible to do so...Anyway, basically the Mother of God has always been deeply revered in the Apostolic Church, but she has always been a part of the inner life of the Church, not for the outsiders.

But Saint Epiphanius of Salamis was an insider, and he didn't say he knew, and remained silent.

He said "I cannot decide for certain, and am not saying that she remained immortal. But neither am I affirming that she died...If the holy Virgin died and was buried...her holy body should be an object of our veneration, since through it light came into the world. Or else she remained alive; for it is not impossible for God to do whatever he wills. In fact, no one knows her end."

He's clearly saying that he didn't know if she died (not that he's keeping what he knows to himself), and that no one in his day knew (and that would have been around 377 A.D.)

Strange indeed that the dormition/assumption story had not reached the ears of Saint Epiphanius.
Logged
bogdan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,615



« Reply #60 on: December 22, 2010, 12:50:19 PM »

Quote
Why would Christ die, and not everyone else?

I don't know, but Paul specifically tells us that not all humans will die (in 1 Cor. 15.)

If there are Christians living in the last generation of human history, who wont die, why would Christ have to allow His mother to die?

Because his mother was not alive at the second coming. Christ provided a special service to His Mother by receiving her soul directly, which is depicted in the icon of the Dormition. She did not have to face whatever we face after death (be it tollhouses or whatever else), because Christ took her soul directly into heaven. But she still had to die, as is appointed for all men to do (Hebrews 9).

All men must die. The only people who will not die are the special case of those who happen to be alive at the Second Coming, and those people will be transfigured in "the twinkling of an eye". To apply St Paul's words to the Mother of God exclusively is a stretch and is not supported by the context of the verse or the Church's historical witness.

Even if the Virgin's death is not well-attested to in early sources (which we hold as the Apostles protecting her privacy), it is a huge stretch to therefore make the extraordinary claim that she never died. It is an argument from silence at best, which is not good enough quite frankly.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2010, 12:55:11 PM by bogdan » Logged
Michael_Gerard
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catechumen
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 74


« Reply #61 on: December 22, 2010, 01:10:06 PM »

Quote
All men must die. The only people who will not die are the special case of those who happen to be alive at the Second Coming, and those people will be transfigured in "the twinkling of an eye".

If those who happen to be alive at the second coming are instantaneously changed in the twinking of an eye (as I believe, and as Saint Paul said) there are exceptions--not all men must die.

Quote
To apply St Paul's words to the Mother of God exclusively is a stretch and is not supported by the context of the verse or the Church's historical witness.

Who applied St. Paul's words to the Mother of God "exclusively"?

All I said is that if there are (any) exceptions to the rule that all men must die, God could have made an exception for Her.

Her assumption could "anticipate" the change "in the twinkling of an eye" as easily as her resurrection could anticipate our resurrection (and doesn't disrupt the order of "Christ the first fruits, then those who are Christ's at His coming.")
Logged
Apotheoun
"Three realities pertain to God: essence, energy, and the triad of divine hypostaseis." St. Gregory Palamas
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: Melkite Catholic
Posts: 1,388


St. John Maximovitch


WWW
« Reply #62 on: December 22, 2010, 06:25:24 PM »

Would Orthodoxy consider as acceptable (a theologumen, perhaps) the Catholic idea that Mary died from love, not because she had to die?
Quote
Mary's death was not necessarily the effect of violence; it was undergone neither as an expiation or penalty, nor as the effect of disease from which, like her Divine Son, she was exempt. Since the Middle Ages the view prevails that she died of love, her great desire to be united to her Son either dissolving the ties of body and soul, or prevailing on God to dissolve them. Her passing away is a sacrifice of love completing the dolorous sacrifice of her life. It is the death in the kiss of the Lord (in osculo Domini), of which the just die.
No.
Ialmisry's answer best sums up my own view of the matter.
Logged

"All that the Father has belongs likewise to the Son, except Causality."
St. Gregory Nazianzen

"We should believe that divine grace is present in the icon of Christ and that it communicates sanctification to those who draw near with faith."
St. Theodore Studite
Michael_Gerard
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catechumen
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 74


« Reply #63 on: December 22, 2010, 07:36:29 PM »

Quote
The problem is that Paul says that there's an order to the resurrection to immortality--First Christ, then those who are His at the second coming (when these living Christians are changed and caught up with those who are raised.)

If Mary died, and her bodily assumption was precceded by her resurrection (in the first century), where does that fit in here?

It might seem odd to reply to my own post, but I did think of a possible answer today (and I haven't seen anyone else even try to answer this question.)

Paul didn't actually say "at the second coming."

What he said was "those who are His at His coming."

The Dormition presupposes that Christ came for His Mother three days after Her blessed soul was seperated from Her body (even if it wasn't visible to everyone, as His future coming will be.)

Mary was certainly "His" when He came for Her, so maybe she is included in "those who are His at His coming" (even if He came for Her a little early.)

I think that might actually answer my question (and I apologize if I offended anyone.)
« Last Edit: December 22, 2010, 07:37:35 PM by Michael_Gerard » Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,328


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #64 on: December 22, 2010, 07:44:56 PM »

Quote
The problem is that Paul says that there's an order to the resurrection to immortality--First Christ, then those who are His at the second coming (when these living Christians are changed and caught up with those who are raised.)

If Mary died, and her bodily assumption was precceded by her resurrection (in the first century), where does that fit in here?

It might seem odd to reply to my own post, but I did think of a possible answer today (and I haven't seen anyone else even try to answer this question.)

Paul didn't actually say "at the second coming."

What he said was "those who are His at His coming."

The Dormition presupposes that Christ came for His Mother three days after Her blessed soul was seperated from Her body (even if it wasn't visible to everyone, as His future coming will be.)

Mary was certainly "His" when He came for Her, so maybe she is included in "those who are His at His coming" (even if He came for Her a little early.)

I think that might actually answer my question (and I apologize if I offended anyone.)

What you quoted from was in the context of the second coming, when our bodies that are corruptible now will be raised incorruptible, "when the sound of the trumpet" occurs, i.e. the second coming.  To take this out of context and claim that it can't be the second coming is like taking verse 49 in that chapter and say that our flesh will rot away and will just rise up with only our spirits.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2010, 07:46:00 PM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Michael_Gerard
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catechumen
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 74


« Reply #65 on: December 22, 2010, 10:33:35 PM »

Quote
What you quoted from was in the context of the second coming, when our bodies that are corruptible now will be raised incorruptible, "when the sound of the trumpet" occurs, i.e. the second coming.  To take this out of context and claim that it can't be the second coming...

I didn't say "it can't be the second coming."

I was thinking that maybe (if you're right about the Virgin dying, and being raised, before Her bodily assumption) it's that AND more.

If Christ came for Her (privately) before the second coming, He took His own to Himself (just as He will then.)

Christ the first fruits, then those who are His at His coming (whether for Mary 2,000 years ago, or the rest of the departed saints when the trumpet sounds.)

It's just a thought that helped me see how the Dormition might not contradict what Paul said here, and I'm suprissed you have a problem with it.

Can you offer some other way of fitting Mary's premature death and resurrection into what Paul says (regarding "each in his own order--Christ the first fruit, then those who are His at His coming")?
Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,328


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #66 on: December 23, 2010, 12:50:29 AM »

Can you offer some other way of fitting Mary's premature death and resurrection into what Paul says (regarding "each in his own order--Christ the first fruit, then those who are His at His coming")?

I'm not sure if I agree to this particular tradition because I haven't fully researched it on my own, but I see the wisdom in this tradition.  The Coptic Church has a tradition where her body is assumed and is still reposed, but not on earth.  Therefore, the Coptic Church seems to maintain an idea that her body is assumed, but she is not risen from the dead, which will occur in the second coming.  This seems to be consistent with the consensus of the Church fathers, as I will show, and compatible to the verse in question you're asking.

I've been doing a bit of digging in CCEL to see interpretations of 1 Cor. 15:51.  What comes first to mind is the fact that the Greek says one thing, and the Aramaic and Latin translations say another thing, and this goes as far back as Tertullian, so far in my superficial searching:

Quote from: Tertullian, On the Resurrection of the Flesh
It is the transformation these shall undergo which he explains to the Corinthians, when he writes: “We shall all indeed rise again (though we shall not all undergo the transformation) in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump”—for none shall experience this change but those only who shall be found in the flesh. “And the dead,” he says, “shall be raised, and we shall be changed.”

St. Aphrahat (Demonstrations (Of Monks), Demonstrations (of the Resurrection of the Dead)), St. Jerome (A Commentary on the Apostles Creed, Letter to Minervious and Alexander), and St. Augustine (numerous places he repeats this, but to name a few, Confessions, City of God, Exposition on the Psalms) agree pretty much with Tertullian's "We shall all sleep, but not all will be changed."

Origen (Contra Celsus), St. Gregory of Nyssa (On the Making of Man) and St. John Chrysostom (Homilies on the Philippians and someone else provided for us his homily on 1 Corinthians) read it as "We shall not all sleep, but we shall be changed."

Generally those who take the Latin/Aramaic translation will say that all are due to die, and all will rise from the dead, but not all will be part of the glory of the Kingdom of Heaven (this is what the Coptic Church believes presently).  Those who take the Greek will say that most of us will die except until at the moment of the second coming of the Lord, those that are still alive then.  It's understood that therefore everyone is due to die unless the second coming of the Lord occurs and you're still alive.  At that moment, those who are dead will rise from the dead.  And then those who will partake of the glory of the Kingdom of Heaven will change, both those who have risen and those who did not get a chance to die.

Either way, it looks like at least there's a consensus that unless the second coming of the Lord is happening, you will die.
« Last Edit: December 23, 2010, 12:50:56 AM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
LBK
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,259


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #67 on: December 23, 2010, 04:40:00 AM »

Icons of the dormitions of other saints, such as Ephraim the Syrian, Anna the mother of the Mother of God, Irene Chrysovalantou, and others, show the saint's soul being taken to heaven by an angel.

The iconography of the Dormition of the Mother of God, as well as the hymnography I quoted in an earlier post, features Christ taking the soul of His mother as a babe in swaddling-clothes Himself to heaven, not even entrusting it to angels. This is all fitting and proper for the woman who is "more honorable and more glorious than the hosts on high". Nothing less would do.

This motif, therefore, proclaims the bodily death of the Mother of God. The soul is separated from the body at death, is it not? This destroys any notion of her being bodily assumed into heaven without dying first. As for Apostle Thomas arriving three days later than the others at her tomb, and finding it empty, this simply says that her body was assumed into heaven, something that is also expressed in the hymnography. The dead body of the woman who was spared bodily corruption and destruction while conceiving, bearing, and giving birth to God Incarnate, was again spared corruption - the corruption of the grave.

Was she physically resurrected before ascending, as Christ was? I don't believe Orthodox Tradition has ever taught this. Was her body and soul reunited in heaven? Perhaps. Perhaps not. It's a mystery, and we must be content to leave it at that. What we do know is that she stands closest to the throne of God, alive in Christ as are all the saints, and she, with a mother's boldness, unceasingly intercedes on our behalf to her Son and God.
Logged
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #68 on: December 24, 2010, 01:09:31 AM »

I was in the Cloisters museum in NY the weekend before last, and noted a Western carving of the Dormition from the Middle Ages. The idea that the Theotokos was Assumed into Heaven before bodily death (an idea that many Roman Catholics hold now) seems to be a late notion then.
Of course the RC dogma of the Assumption says nothing about whether or not the Blessed Virgin Mary died before being assumed body and soul into heaven. As far as what individual RCs believe I cannot say, but the dogma certainly doesn't specify whether or not she experienced death before being assumed.
Logged
Michael_Gerard
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catechumen
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 74


« Reply #69 on: December 26, 2010, 12:34:56 AM »

Quote
The idea that the Theotokos was Assumed into Heaven before bodily death (an idea that many Roman Catholics hold now) seems to be a late notion then.

Saint Eppiphanius of Salamis not only said that no one knew what became of her, but mentioned the possibility that she never died (in 377 A.D.)

His exact words were "I cannot decide for certain, and am not saying that she remained immortal. But neither am I affirming that she died...If the holy Virgin died and was buried...her holy body should be an object of our veneration, since through it light came into the world. Or else she remained alive; for it is not impossible for God to do whatever he wills. In fact, no one knows."

(So mybe the idea that the Theotokos was assumed into heaven before bodily death isn't such a late notion?)


As to whether Orthodox are free to believe this, I found this online (at a web site called "Orthodox Answers.")

Quote
ANSWER:
The first thing to say is that belief in the traditions surrounding the Dormition (and assumption) of the Theotokos are not dogma in Orthodoxy - they are not binding on the conscience of Orthodox Christians. One may privately - until the Spirit convicts otherwise - have doubts in regards to these traditions. However, they reflect the pious conviction of the ancient churches and are worthy of veneration and consideration. An excellent scholarly source, which shows that these are ancient traditions, is "Shoemaker: Ancient Traditions of the Virgin Mary's Dormition" by Oxford University Press. There are also Biblical hints that point to this understanding of the Dormition of the Theotokos, and it is worth noting that all the ancient churches, including the Coptic which separated after 451, share the same belief. Note also that there are no traditions anywhere regarding relics of the Theotokos, which is consistent with the account that her body was transfered into the Kingdom...
Answered on 1/05/2010
http://orthodox-church.info/answer/479/
« Last Edit: December 26, 2010, 12:58:54 AM by Michael_Gerard » Logged
NicholasMyra
Avowed denominationalist
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,992


When in doubt, say: "you lack the proper φρόνημα"


« Reply #70 on: December 26, 2010, 05:00:08 PM »

Michael, it seems you are reading St. Paul in a very Protestant way. As if the resurrection of the deceased Theotokos would somehow "nullify" the "infallible scriptures" were it to superficially contradict one tradition's interpretation of Paul's statement.
« Last Edit: December 26, 2010, 05:01:06 PM by NicholasMyra » Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.
Michael_Gerard
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catechumen
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 74


« Reply #71 on: December 26, 2010, 05:12:02 PM »

Michael, it seems you are reading St. Paul in a very Protestant way. As if the resurrection of the deceased Theotokos would somehow "nullify" the "infallible scriptures" were it to superficially contradict one tradition's interpretation of Paul's statement.

Maybe, but that's why I tried to look at "then those who are His, at His coming" in a broader way.

The only way I can see Paul not excluding a resurrection between "Christ, the first fruit" and the quickening of the faithful at the parousia, is if Christ's early coming (for His Mother, who is one of His own) is somehow included in "those who are His at His coming" (or parousia.)

Since I'm sure you're not suggesting that scripture is uninspired, or that there is some real contradiction here--how do you see it?

BTW: I do believe She's with Her Son in Heaven (body and soul), and I don't think many Protestants agree with that.
« Last Edit: December 26, 2010, 05:21:51 PM by Michael_Gerard » Logged
NicholasMyra
Avowed denominationalist
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,992


When in doubt, say: "you lack the proper φρόνημα"


« Reply #72 on: December 26, 2010, 05:25:23 PM »

I'm saying that if Paul says "Christ is the firstfruits of the resurrection" and left out that the Theotokos (Christ's tabernacle) was raised before "those who are his at his coming" it would not seem to me to nullify the authority of scripture. (As Thomas Hopko said in one of his podcasts, Paul may have not even known the Theotokos's name during the writing of some of his epistles.) This is because I do not believe that scripture is logically infallible or subject to complete internal coherency, which is what enlightenment and post-enlightenment protestants believe.

If the scriptures were completely internally coherent in a scientific/logical fashion without the need of a Holy interpretation grid, there would not be 40,000 denominations.
« Last Edit: December 26, 2010, 05:27:27 PM by NicholasMyra » Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #73 on: December 26, 2010, 06:07:20 PM »

It's not to say that she wouldn't have died from natural causes eventually, but if she died of love, and that strengthens a person's faith to believe so, where is the harm?
Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,328


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #74 on: December 26, 2010, 06:27:49 PM »

It's not to say that she wouldn't have died from natural causes eventually, but if she died of love, and that strengthens a person's faith to believe so, where is the harm?

I'm not going to dispute whether or not the Theotokos died, even though I strongly disagree with any notion that she didn't die.  However, to say that she died out of love is probably borderline blasphemy because only Christ had that power to die out of love.  We die out of the weakness of our nature.  Christ died naturally, but His human nature was not weak, and He willfully died on the Cross.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #75 on: December 26, 2010, 06:50:19 PM »

It's not to say that she wouldn't have died from natural causes eventually, but if she died of love, and that strengthens a person's faith to believe so, where is the harm?

I'm not going to dispute whether or not the Theotokos died, even though I strongly disagree with any notion that she didn't die.  However, to say that she died out of love is probably borderline blasphemy because only Christ had that power to die out of love.  We die out of the weakness of our nature.  Christ died naturally, but His human nature was not weak, and He willfully died on the Cross.

Hmm interesting perspective. I guess I didn't see it that way; I was just thinking that Christ died out of love (voluntary self-sacrifice) for all of mankind, and I assumed the point of view being expressed here is that Mary died from love; that is missing and longing to be with her Son and Savior. I have heard similar stories of elderly people 'dying out of love' wanting to be with their lost love ones who perhaps have gone before them, and I didn't think of this case to be much different than that I suppose.
« Last Edit: December 26, 2010, 06:50:40 PM by Ortho_cat » Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,328


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #76 on: December 26, 2010, 07:16:48 PM »

It's not to say that she wouldn't have died from natural causes eventually, but if she died of love, and that strengthens a person's faith to believe so, where is the harm?

I'm not going to dispute whether or not the Theotokos died, even though I strongly disagree with any notion that she didn't die.  However, to say that she died out of love is probably borderline blasphemy because only Christ had that power to die out of love.  We die out of the weakness of our nature.  Christ died naturally, but His human nature was not weak, and He willfully died on the Cross.

Hmm interesting perspective. I guess I didn't see it that way; I was just thinking that Christ died out of love (voluntary self-sacrifice) for all of mankind, and I assumed the point of view being expressed here is that Mary died from love; that is missing and longing to be with her Son and Savior. I have heard similar stories of elderly people 'dying out of love' wanting to be with their lost love ones who perhaps have gone before them, and I didn't think of this case to be much different than that I suppose.

If it's interpreted that way, then that implies the necessity for her to actually die.  In which case, the argument that the Theotokos did not die is irrelevant.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #77 on: December 26, 2010, 07:28:31 PM »

It's not to say that she wouldn't have died from natural causes eventually, but if she died of love, and that strengthens a person's faith to believe so, where is the harm?

I'm not going to dispute whether or not the Theotokos died, even though I strongly disagree with any notion that she didn't die.  However, to say that she died out of love is probably borderline blasphemy because only Christ had that power to die out of love.  We die out of the weakness of our nature.  Christ died naturally, but His human nature was not weak, and He willfully died on the Cross.

Hmm interesting perspective. I guess I didn't see it that way; I was just thinking that Christ died out of love (voluntary self-sacrifice) for all of mankind, and I assumed the point of view being expressed here is that Mary died from love; that is missing and longing to be with her Son and Savior. I have heard similar stories of elderly people 'dying out of love' wanting to be with their lost love ones who perhaps have gone before them, and I didn't think of this case to be much different than that I suppose.

If it's interpreted that way, then that implies the necessity for her to actually die.  In which case, the argument that the Theotokos did not die is irrelevant.

Yes, of course. I suppose I didn't read far enough back into this thread to realize that the subject of her dying or not was actually relevant here... Embarrassed
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #78 on: December 27, 2010, 12:21:24 PM »

It's not to say that she wouldn't have died from natural causes eventually, but if she died of love, and that strengthens a person's faith to believe so, where is the harm?

I'm not going to dispute whether or not the Theotokos died, even though I strongly disagree with any notion that she didn't die.  However, to say that she died out of love is probably borderline blasphemy because only Christ had that power to die out of love.  We die out of the weakness of our nature.  Christ died naturally, but His human nature was not weak, and He willfully died on the Cross.

Are you suggesting here that Jesus's body could not die? 

That he had no need for a glorified human body? 

That he forced an already perfected human body to die for no other reason, but show or display?

Is that what you are saying?
Logged

Tags: Theotokos 
Pages: 1 2 All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.241 seconds with 106 queries.