Author Topic: A question on the Immaculate Conception  (Read 121217 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Cosmos

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 140
  • أيها الرب يسوع المسيح ابن الله, إرحمني أنا الخاطئ
Re: A question on the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #1260 on: May 25, 2010, 04:04:41 PM »



Cosmos  ;D
« Last Edit: May 25, 2010, 04:07:24 PM by Cosmos »
Κύριε Ἰησοῦ Χριστέ, ἐλέησόν με!

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 39,294
Re: A question on the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #1261 on: May 25, 2010, 04:26:04 PM »
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

Offline Alpo

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,737
  • Faith: Orthodox. Truly, madly, deeply
Re: A question on the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #1262 on: May 25, 2010, 04:29:34 PM »
The user should probably be sleeping by now.

Offline PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,085
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline akimel

  • Fr Aidan
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 520
    • Eclectic Orthodoxy
Re: A question on the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #1264 on: May 25, 2010, 06:16:33 PM »

Offline Cosmos

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 140
  • أيها الرب يسوع المسيح ابن الله, إرحمني أنا الخاطئ
Re: A question on the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #1265 on: May 25, 2010, 06:40:35 PM »
Κύριε Ἰησοῦ Χριστέ, ἐλέησόν με!

Offline akimel

  • Fr Aidan
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 520
    • Eclectic Orthodoxy
Re: A question on the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #1266 on: May 25, 2010, 06:42:13 PM »


Lucy always wins!  Sigh.  Poor Charley Brown.  :(

Offline Cosmos

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 140
  • أيها الرب يسوع المسيح ابن الله, إرحمني أنا الخاطئ
Re: A question on the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #1267 on: May 25, 2010, 07:13:51 PM »
Κύριε Ἰησοῦ Χριστέ, ἐλέησόν με!

Offline Fr. George

  • formerly "Cleveland"
  • Administrator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *******
  • Posts: 20,238
  • May the Lord bless you and keep you always!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Re: A question on the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #1268 on: May 25, 2010, 07:14:54 PM »
We get the point.  Stop hogging the bandwidth, please.
« Last Edit: May 25, 2010, 07:15:05 PM by Fr. George »
"O Cross of Christ, all-holy, thrice-blessed, and life-giving, instrument of the mystical rites of Zion, the holy Altar for the service of our Great Archpriest, the blessing - the weapon - the strength of priests, our pride, our consolation, the light in our hearts, our mind, and our steps"
Met. Meletios of Nikopolis & Preveza, from his ordination.

Offline Cosmos

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 140
  • أيها الرب يسوع المسيح ابن الله, إرحمني أنا الخاطئ
Re: A question on the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #1269 on: May 25, 2010, 07:17:46 PM »
Κύριε Ἰησοῦ Χριστέ, ἐλέησόν με!

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,991
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: A question on the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #1270 on: May 25, 2010, 10:12:42 PM »

I am still hoping that Father Al Kimel or someone from the Orthodox community here will read the selections from Archbishop Hilarion on the ancestral sin and tell me what the Catholic Church teaches that is different from what is contained in the Archbishops little catechetical teaching....please.


Dear Mary,

The wiser among us have realised long ago that there is very little an Orthodox Christian can say meaningfully about the Catholic teaching on original sin.

I have watched the exploration of the Catholic teaching on original sin for many years on Catholic forums. I have seen the fierce inter-Catholic disagreement on this.

The doctrine is in a state of transition and trying to get a handle on it, especially for an Orthodox outsider, is impossible and it is not a topic in which I involve myself.

"Current Roman Catholic theology of original sin is undergoing a radical transition and is marked by considerable pluralism..."

"Systematic theology: Roman Catholic perspectives"
By Francis Schüssler Fiorenza, John P. Galvin

http://tinyurl.com/26vkexv

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,991
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: A question on the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #1271 on: May 25, 2010, 10:16:39 PM »

How does this text differ from the age old Catholic teaching of original sin?

Is this to be considered part of Orthodox tradition?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://orthodoxeurope.org/page/10/1.aspx#25

THE FALL



Dear Mary,

The wiser among us have realised long ago that there is very little an Orthodox Christian can say meaningfully about the Catholic teaching on original sin.

I have watched the exploration of the Catholic teaching on original sin for many years on Catholic forums. I have seen the fierce inter-Catholic disagreement on this.

The doctrine is in a state of transition and trying to get a handle on it, especially for an Orthodox outsider, is impossible and it is not a topic in which I involve myself.

"Current Roman Catholic theology of original sin is undergoing a radical transition and is marked by considerable pluralism..."

"Systematic theology: Roman Catholic perspectives"
By Francis Schüssler Fiorenza, John P. Galvin

http://tinyurl.com/26vkexv

Offline elijahmaria

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,482
    • Irenikin: The Skete
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: A question on the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #1272 on: May 25, 2010, 10:22:10 PM »
I understand that you and Father Kimel have different perspectives on the same message.  I disagree with both of you absolutely, and I am not alone, beginning with Father Hal and moving on to Stan and many others who are well trained in the faith, in monastic life and in universities.  I am not going to tell you what the collective estimation of your positions is from those nearest to me, but the disagreement is absolute.

Can you answer my questions about the catechetical teaching offered by Metropolitan Hilarion?

Mary

PS: Allow me to amend this enough to say that I am aware that their are academic positions on the doctrine, many of them in fact,  but they are not what dictate the formal teaching of the Catholic Church, Fiorenza or any other schoolman notwithstanding.  Besides when I told Father Hal and Stan that you were shoving Fiorenza under my nose they said "Shake the dust." 





How does this text differ from the age old Catholic teaching of original sin?

Is this to be considered part of Orthodox tradition?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://orthodoxeurope.org/page/10/1.aspx#25

THE FALL



Dear Mary,

The wiser among us have realised long ago that there is very little an Orthodox Christian can say meaningfully about the Catholic teaching on original sin.

I have watched the exploration of the Catholic teaching on original sin for many years on Catholic forums. I have seen the fierce inter-Catholic disagreement on this.

The doctrine is in a state of transition and trying to get a handle on it, especially for an Orthodox outsider, is impossible and it is not a topic in which I involve myself.

"Current Roman Catholic theology of original sin is undergoing a radical transition and is marked by considerable pluralism..."

"Systematic theology: Roman Catholic perspectives"
By Francis Schüssler Fiorenza, John P. Galvin

http://tinyurl.com/26vkexv
« Last Edit: May 25, 2010, 10:30:57 PM by elijahmaria »

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,991
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: A question on the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #1273 on: May 25, 2010, 10:34:13 PM »
I understand that you and Father Kimel have different perspectives on the same message.  I disagree with both of you absolutely, and I am not alone, beginning with Father Hal and moving on to Stan and many others who are well trained in the faith, in monastic life and in universities.  I am not going to tell you what the collective estimation of your positions is from those nearest to me, but the disagreement is absolute.

Can you answer my questions about the catechetical teaching offered by Metropolitan Hilarion?

It could be done, I suppose.  You have asked us to compare it with "the age old Catholic teaching of original sin."  So before we could proceed, you will need to define that for us.

However you have already started another thread on this article of Metropolitan Hilarion and perhaps you should shift the discussion over there?




How does this text differ from the age old Catholic teaching of original sin?

Is this to be considered part of Orthodox tradition?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://orthodoxeurope.org/page/10/1.aspx#25

THE FALL



Dear Mary,

The wiser among us have realised long ago that there is very little an Orthodox Christian can say meaningfully about the Catholic teaching on original sin.

I have watched the exploration of the Catholic teaching on original sin for many years on Catholic forums. I have seen the fierce inter-Catholic disagreement on this.

The doctrine is in a state of transition and trying to get a handle on it, especially for an Orthodox outsider, is impossible and it is not a topic in which I involve myself.

"Current Roman Catholic theology of original sin is undergoing a radical transition and is marked by considerable pluralism..."

"Systematic theology: Roman Catholic perspectives"
By Francis Schüssler Fiorenza, John P. Galvin

http://tinyurl.com/26vkexv

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,991
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: A question on the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #1274 on: May 25, 2010, 10:37:45 PM »

PS: Allow me to amend this enough to say that I am aware that their are academic positions on the doctrine, many of them in fact,  but they are not what dictate the formal teaching of the Catholic Church, Fiorenza or any other schoolman notwithstanding.  Besides when I told Father Hal and Stan that you were shoving Fiorenza under my nose they said "Shake the dust." 


I see that Fiorenza distresses you, but are you not aware of other big-name Catholic theologians who agree with Fiorenza

"Current Roman Catholic theology of original sin is undergoing a radical transition and is marked by considerable pluralism..."


Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,991
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: A question on the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #1275 on: May 25, 2010, 10:51:36 PM »
Dear Mary,

Here is the concurrent thread on original sin.

Its topic is precisely the text of Met Hilarion which you desire to discuss.

 "Original Sin, Orthodox and Catholic Teaching"


http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,27635.0.html
« Last Edit: May 25, 2010, 10:52:20 PM by Irish Hermit »

Offline elijahmaria

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,482
    • Irenikin: The Skete
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: A question on the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #1276 on: May 25, 2010, 11:26:05 PM »

PS: Allow me to amend this enough to say that I am aware that their are academic positions on the doctrine, many of them in fact,  but they are not what dictate the formal teaching of the Catholic Church, Fiorenza or any other schoolman notwithstanding.  Besides when I told Father Hal and Stan that you were shoving Fiorenza under my nose they said "Shake the dust."  


I see that Fiorenza distresses you, but are you not aware of other big-name Catholic theologians who agree with Fiorenza

"Current Roman Catholic theology of original sin is undergoing a radical transition and is marked by considerable pluralism..."



It's very simple Father.  Professional theologians have never dictated the language or meaning of doctrinal teaching by virtue of their secular credentials.  

So unless we can work with that as a very basic premise, then there's really no point in continuing.

To begin with a premise that formal Catholic teaching reflects the current or ongoing conflict or confusion or contradiction or even agreement, in the dialogues of the theologians,  is not a realistic premise.

It seems to be the only premise that you and Father Al will accept so I don't think I will engage.

M.
« Last Edit: May 25, 2010, 11:33:18 PM by elijahmaria »

Offline Cosmos

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 140
  • أيها الرب يسوع المسيح ابن الله, إرحمني أنا الخاطئ
Re: A question on the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #1277 on: May 25, 2010, 11:37:53 PM »

Hip Hip Hooray!  ;)
Κύριε Ἰησοῦ Χριστέ, ἐλέησόν με!

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,991
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: A question on the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #1278 on: May 25, 2010, 11:41:42 PM »

PS: Allow me to amend this enough to say that I am aware that their are academic positions on the doctrine, many of them in fact,  but they are not what dictate the formal teaching of the Catholic Church, Fiorenza or any other schoolman notwithstanding.  Besides when I told Father Hal and Stan that you were shoving Fiorenza under my nose they said "Shake the dust." 


I see that Fiorenza distresses you, but are you not aware of other big-name Catholic theologians who agree with Fiorenza

"Current Roman Catholic theology of original sin is undergoing a radical transition and is marked by considerable pluralism..."



It's very simple Father.  Professional theologians have never dictated the language or meaning of doctrinal teaching by virtue of their secular credentials. 

So unless we can work with that as a very basic premise, then there's really no point in continuing.


If you are unable to see that the contemporary teaching on original sin is in a state of flux, then there is indeed no point in continuing.

Perhaps Fr Kimel can recommend Catholic theologians who are aware of this transitioning...?

Is it not said that the contemporary teaching is drawing the Church of Rome a little closer to Orthodox understandings and that this is music in the ears of those praying for unity?

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,991
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: A question on the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #1279 on: May 25, 2010, 11:48:42 PM »

Offline elijahmaria

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,482
    • Irenikin: The Skete
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: A question on the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #1280 on: May 26, 2010, 12:05:53 AM »

PS: Allow me to amend this enough to say that I am aware that their are academic positions on the doctrine, many of them in fact,  but they are not what dictate the formal teaching of the Catholic Church, Fiorenza or any other schoolman notwithstanding.  Besides when I told Father Hal and Stan that you were shoving Fiorenza under my nose they said "Shake the dust." 


I see that Fiorenza distresses you, but are you not aware of other big-name Catholic theologians who agree with Fiorenza

"Current Roman Catholic theology of original sin is undergoing a radical transition and is marked by considerable pluralism..."



It's very simple Father.  Professional theologians have never dictated the language or meaning of doctrinal teaching by virtue of their secular credentials. 

So unless we can work with that as a very basic premise, then there's really no point in continuing.


If you are unable to see that the contemporary teaching on original sin is in a state of flux, then there is indeed no point in continuing.

Perhaps Fr Kimel can recommend Catholic theologians who are aware of this transitioning...?

Is it not said that the contemporary teaching is drawing the Church of Rome a little closer to Orthodox understandings and that this is music in the ears of those praying for unity?

There has been no change in the teaching, Father.  No change in the core teachings of original sin.  I am sitting here with three systematic theology books spanning the 20th century and two doctrinal histories...and there's been no change.

So when you begin the discussion by pointing out that theologians are discussing the fine points of the core truths of the teaching on original sin, as a catechist, I get to say "That's nice." and keep on teaching.

I have, believe it or not, an active intellectual curiosity so I may read some of that discussion, but that does not change what I teach or what I would have taught 500 years ago or a 1000 years ago or 1500 years ago.  The papal Church has NEVER taught personal guilt in original sin.  That is the primary concern and it is no concern at all.  The papal Church has NEVER taught that concupiscence is sin itself.  So that is not of concern to me either.

Do you remember when Cardinal Ratzinger had to give up his wonderful world of speculative theology when he took the job as chief cook and bottle washer for the CDF?  He did that because formal Church teaching is NOT dependent on the discussions of professional theologians, and he could no longer engage the luxury of what-iffin'

M.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,991
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: A question on the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #1281 on: May 26, 2010, 12:20:54 AM »

PS: Allow me to amend this enough to say that I am aware that their are academic positions on the doctrine, many of them in fact,  but they are not what dictate the formal teaching of the Catholic Church, Fiorenza or any other schoolman notwithstanding.  Besides when I told Father Hal and Stan that you were shoving Fiorenza under my nose they said "Shake the dust." 


I see that Fiorenza distresses you, but are you not aware of other big-name Catholic theologians who agree with Fiorenza

"Current Roman Catholic theology of original sin is undergoing a radical transition and is marked by considerable pluralism..."



It's very simple Father.  Professional theologians have never dictated the language or meaning of doctrinal teaching by virtue of their secular credentials. 

So unless we can work with that as a very basic premise, then there's really no point in continuing.


If you are unable to see that the contemporary teaching on original sin is in a state of flux, then there is indeed no point in continuing.

Perhaps Fr Kimel can recommend Catholic theologians who are aware of this transitioning...?

Is it not said that the contemporary teaching is drawing the Church of Rome a little closer to Orthodox understandings and that this is music in the ears of those praying for unity?

There has been no change in the teaching, Father.  No change in the core teachings of original sin.  I am sitting here with three systematic theology books spanning the 20th century and two doctrinal histories...and there's been no change.

So when you begin the discussion by pointing out that theologians are discussing the fine points of the core truths of the teaching on original sin, as a catechist, I get to say "That's nice." and keep on teaching.

I have, believe it or not, an active intellectual curiosity so I may read some of that discussion, but that does not change what I teach or what I would have taught 500 years ago or a 1000 years ago or 1500 years ago.  The papal Church has NEVER taught personal guilt in original sin.  That is the primary concern and it is no concern at all.  The papal Church has NEVER taught that concupiscence is sin itself.  So that is not of concern to me either.

Do you remember when Cardinal Ratzinger had to give up his wonderful world of speculative theology when he took the job as chief cook and bottle washer for the CDF?  He did that because formal Church teaching is NOT dependent on the discussions of professional theologians, and he could no longer engage the luxury of what-iffin'

M.

I have replied on

"Original Sin, Orthodox and Catholic Teaching"
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,27635.0.html

Offline BoredMeeting

  • Loving the Life of a Council Member
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 722
Re: A question on the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #1282 on: June 03, 2010, 02:24:53 PM »

Is this to be considered part of Orthodox tradition?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://orthodoxeurope.org/page/10/1.aspx#25

A single web post contradicting centuries of Orthodox teaching and tradition?

No, it is more likely a problem with translation.

Perhaps the same sort of thing that led Augustine into error?

Offline elijahmaria

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,482
    • Irenikin: The Skete
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: A question on the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #1283 on: June 03, 2010, 02:39:21 PM »

Is this to be considered part of Orthodox tradition?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://orthodoxeurope.org/page/10/1.aspx#25

A single web post contradicting centuries of Orthodox teaching and tradition?

No, it is more likely a problem with translation.

Perhaps the same sort of thing that led Augustine into error?

This is a hoot!!

Metropolitan Hilarion is too ignorant to proof read his own book after it has been translated into English?

Is that what you are telling me?  That Metropolitan Hilarion did not bother to proof his text in translation?

Why don't you write to him and let him know he goofed!!  He has a large website on-line.  No difficulty in reaching him there, I am absolutely certain.

Mary

Offline PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,085
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: A question on the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #1284 on: June 03, 2010, 03:40:57 PM »

Is this to be considered part of Orthodox tradition?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://orthodoxeurope.org/page/10/1.aspx#25

A single web post contradicting centuries of Orthodox teaching and tradition?

No, it is more likely a problem with translation.

Perhaps the same sort of thing that led Augustine into error?

This is a hoot!!

Metropolitan Hilarion is too ignorant to proof read his own book after it has been translated into English?

Is that what you are telling me?  That Metropolitan Hilarion did not bother to proof his text in translation?

Why don't you write to him and let him know he goofed!!  He has a large website on-line.  No difficulty in reaching him there, I am absolutely certain.

Mary
Who said anything about proof reading? ???
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline elijahmaria

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,482
    • Irenikin: The Skete
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: A question on the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #1285 on: June 03, 2010, 03:54:24 PM »

Is this to be considered part of Orthodox tradition?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://orthodoxeurope.org/page/10/1.aspx#25

A single web post contradicting centuries of Orthodox teaching and tradition?

No, it is more likely a problem with translation.

Perhaps the same sort of thing that led Augustine into error?

This is a hoot!!

Metropolitan Hilarion is too ignorant to proof read his own book after it has been translated into English?

Is that what you are telling me?  That Metropolitan Hilarion did not bother to proof his text in translation?

Why don't you write to him and let him know he goofed!!  He has a large website on-line.  No difficulty in reaching him there, I am absolutely certain.

Mary
Who said anything about proof reading? ???

Last time I participated in any proof reading for a woman I do translation work for, she went over the text, word by word, line by line, thought by thought, to make sure that the English that I used matched the concepts, sequencing and actions that she intended in the original French.

But maybe we are just too stupid to know what to call what we are doing.  That could be the case.

In any event I think Metropolitan Hilarion probably signed off on the English translation of his book.

Mary

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 39,294
Re: A question on the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #1286 on: June 03, 2010, 05:23:50 PM »

Is this to be considered part of Orthodox tradition?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://orthodoxeurope.org/page/10/1.aspx#25

A single web post contradicting centuries of Orthodox teaching and tradition?

No, it is more likely a problem with translation.

Perhaps the same sort of thing that led Augustine into error?

This is a hoot!!

Metropolitan Hilarion is too ignorant to proof read his own book after it has been translated into English?

Is that what you are telling me?  That Metropolitan Hilarion did not bother to proof his text in translation?

Why don't you write to him and let him know he goofed!!  He has a large website on-line.  No difficulty in reaching him there, I am absolutely certain.

Mary
Who said anything about proof reading? ???

Last time I participated in any proof reading for a woman I do translation work for, she went over the text, word by word, line by line, thought by thought, to make sure that the English that I used matched the concepts, sequencing and actions that she intended in the original French.

But maybe we are just too stupid to know what to call what we are doing.  That could be the case.

In any event I think Metropolitan Hilarion probably signed off on the English translation of his book.
Yet another ASSUmption that we are to take as the Gospel truth: is that what they taught you at Northern IL U?
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

Offline elijahmaria

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,482
    • Irenikin: The Skete
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: A question on the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #1287 on: June 03, 2010, 06:00:56 PM »

Is this to be considered part of Orthodox tradition?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://orthodoxeurope.org/page/10/1.aspx#25

A single web post contradicting centuries of Orthodox teaching and tradition?

No, it is more likely a problem with translation.

Perhaps the same sort of thing that led Augustine into error?

This is a hoot!!

Metropolitan Hilarion is too ignorant to proof read his own book after it has been translated into English?

Is that what you are telling me?  That Metropolitan Hilarion did not bother to proof his text in translation?

Why don't you write to him and let him know he goofed!!  He has a large website on-line.  No difficulty in reaching him there, I am absolutely certain.

Mary
Who said anything about proof reading? ???

Last time I participated in any proof reading for a woman I do translation work for, she went over the text, word by word, line by line, thought by thought, to make sure that the English that I used matched the concepts, sequencing and actions that she intended in the original French.

But maybe we are just too stupid to know what to call what we are doing.  That could be the case.

In any event I think Metropolitan Hilarion probably signed off on the English translation of his book.
Yet another ASSUmption that we are to take as the Gospel truth: is that what they taught you at Northern IL U?

 :laugh:  You da LAW, man!!   :laugh:

Offline BoredMeeting

  • Loving the Life of a Council Member
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 722
Re: A question on the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #1288 on: June 08, 2010, 09:24:39 AM »
A single web post contradicting centuries of Orthodox teaching and tradition?

No, it is more likely a problem with translation.

Perhaps the same sort of thing that led Augustine into error?

This is a hoot!!

Metropolitan Hilarion is too ignorant to proof read his own book after it has been translated into English?
Nice diversion, but no, that isn't what I said.

Any assertion that the Orthodox have embraced the Latin error of "original sin" is also in error.

Offline elijahmaria

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,482
    • Irenikin: The Skete
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: A question on the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #1289 on: June 08, 2010, 12:25:51 PM »
A single web post contradicting centuries of Orthodox teaching and tradition?

No, it is more likely a problem with translation.

Perhaps the same sort of thing that led Augustine into error?

This is a hoot!!

Metropolitan Hilarion is too ignorant to proof read his own book after it has been translated into English?
Nice diversion, but no, that isn't what I said.

Any assertion that the Orthodox have embraced the Latin error of "original sin" is also in error.

That quote that I gave from Metropolitan Hilarion's book is, also, the Catholic teaching.  So either Metropolitan Hilarion is either badly wrong, or he has an accurate grasp of Catholic teaching.   In any event it is not a case of poor translation.  I am sure the Metropolitan has the skill to check the English translations of his most important catechetical work to date.

Mary

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 39,294
Re: A question on the Immaculate Conception
« Reply #1290 on: December 17, 2011, 05:55:42 PM »
I have given you the formal teaching of the Catholic Church on both purgation and the Immaculate Conception, and will happily point you to an Orthodox layman's teaching on the filioque.

None of it is revisionist or delusional.

Your note says far more about you than it does about the objective reality of Catholic teaching.

You have given my your opinion on the matter, and nothing more. Your statements are not paraphrasing any sort of an official Vatican document, nor quoting a prominent theologian, nor anything else. It's your own personal formula; your own rationalization.

All of our posts reflect our own understanding, so it's not like you've "called me out" on anything. It's like saying: "What you've said is what you've said." Reminds me of Yoda's spiritual teachings. The Catechism of your church is about as "objective" a reality as the Vatican can muster, and it does not say what you just said.

My post reveals my irritation at the airiness of your posts, as if your somehow are above all the merely semantic babbling which has troubled hundreds of minds on both sides without cause. The solution is simple, if only we'd all listen. It's just so condescending and ridiculous. "Come, release your mind into Uniate bliss, where perfect harmony exists..."
B-U-M-P
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