OrthodoxChristianity.net
August 20, 2014, 03:19:49 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 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 »   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Imaculate Conception  (Read 18268 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
militantsparrow
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 626


militantsparrow
« on: November 23, 2011, 08:45:29 AM »

Ive read at least one Orthodox theologian make the argument that if Mary was born without original sin, then it would be no great feat for her to obey God in every way--that she would be incapable of sinning. But Eve was born without sin and she went against God's will.

Is this a normal argument for Orthodox or is it just the opinion of one theologian? Or, am I missing the point entirely?
Logged

"Yeah, the sparrow hath found an house..." -Psalm 84:3
FormerReformer
Convertodox of the convertodox
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: I'll take (e) for "all of the above"
Posts: 2,404



WWW
« Reply #1 on: November 23, 2011, 10:27:45 AM »

Without an exact quote I can't really say too much. I would say that while if Mary had been born without original sin it wouldn't mean she was incapable of sinning, but it would mean she wouldn't have any inner inclination to sin- Satan would have had to appear to her and tempt her from without like with Eve or even our Lord Himself. This would certainly place her in a very different state from the rest of humanity, and certainly makes most obedience seem almost trivial compared to the rest of us- the Theotokos wasn't being asked to die for us in a gruesome and painful manner after all.
Logged

"Funny," said Lancelot, "how the people who can't pray say that prayers are not answered, however much the people who can pray say they are."  TH White

Oh, no: I've succumbed to Hyperdoxy!
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
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: 37,322



« Reply #2 on: November 23, 2011, 10:33:33 AM »

Ive read at least one Orthodox theologian make the argument that if Mary was born without original sin, then it would be no great feat for her to obey God in every way--that she would be incapable of sinning. But Eve was born without sin and she went against God's will.

Is this a normal argument for Orthodox or is it just the opinion of one theologian? Or, am I missing the point entirely?
Eve was not living in a world swirling with temptation to sin (at least until she did).  The Holy Theotokos did.  For that reason, it raises amongst most Orthodox of whether she could sin if the IC were true, as it plucks her out of the maelstrom into which she was born.
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
Melodist
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: The Faith That Established The Universe
Jurisdiction: AOANA
Posts: 2,523



« Reply #3 on: November 23, 2011, 12:26:39 PM »

Ive read at least one Orthodox theologian make the argument that if Mary was born without original sin, then it would be no great feat for her to obey God in every way--that she would be incapable of sinning. But Eve was born without sin and she went against God's will.

Is this a normal argument for Orthodox or is it just the opinion of one theologian? Or, am I missing the point entirely?

I've heard various arguments for and against the IC ranging from decent to just terrible from both sides. I've also heard a range of Orthodox opinions on how divisive this is between us from "they must renounce it" to "they just shouldn't have dogmatized it". Almost all of the Orthodox opinions have one thing in common - this isn't part of our eastern tradition of theological expression. There are Orthodox fathers (at least one that I know of for sure) that say that Mary was sanctified and filled with grace at least from her early childhood, but don't claim her as being unaffected by the fall or having a nature other than what she received from her parents. The miracle of her conception isn't taught as being (at least in part) free from original sin, but that her mother was barren and past childbearing years and is compared to Abraham and Sarah conceiving Isaac.

I would consider that to be the opinion of a theologian (I wouldn't say "just one", there are probably a number of individuals who share the same opinion).

Here's a few questions. Is the IC really necessary for her to be the Theotokos? Is it possible for her to be born with our fallen nature and still be cooperative with divine grace, (just like John the Baptist was in the womb) filled with the Holy Spirit, and still be obedient to God as she was? Is it necessary for any of us to first be cleansed of the stain of original sin (to use the latin terminology as it applies to the IC) before we can respond positively to grace, say yes to God, and receive Christ and be united to Him (especially unbaptized adult converts to Christianity) just as Mary responded to God and received Christ by the overshadowing of the Holy Spirit?

Just a few thoughts.
Logged

And FWIW, these are our Fathers too, you know.

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
militantsparrow
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 626


militantsparrow
« Reply #4 on: November 23, 2011, 02:45:55 PM »

Without an exact quote I can't really say too much. I would say that while if Mary had been born without original sin it wouldn't mean she was incapable of sinning, but it would mean she wouldn't have any inner inclination to sin- Satan would have had to appear to her and tempt her from without like with Eve or even our Lord Himself. This would certainly place her in a very different state from the rest of humanity, and certainly makes most obedience seem almost trivial compared to the rest of us- the Theotokos wasn't being asked to die for us in a gruesome and painful manner after all.

Ive read at least one Orthodox theologian make the argument that if Mary was born without original sin, then it would be no great feat for her to obey God in every way--that she would be incapable of sinning. But Eve was born without sin and she went against God's will.

Is this a normal argument for Orthodox or is it just the opinion of one theologian? Or, am I missing the point entirely?
Eve was not living in a world swirling with temptation to sin (at least until she did).  The Holy Theotokos did.  For that reason, it raises amongst most Orthodox of whether she could sin if the IC were true, as it plucks her out of the maelstrom into which she was born.

So the Theotokos, like all humans, was born into a corrupt world due to Adam's sin. Because of this corruption (and free will) she could have sinned at any time. She of course chose to always follow God's will, but she always had the option and plenty of temptation.

Eve was born into an uncorrupted world. She had no internal temptation--only external. It had to have been harder for Eve to sin than it would have been for Mary. Mary was surrounded by sin. Eve was not.

Even if the IC were true, Mary was still born into a corrupt world surrounded by sin and temptation. Her decision to always follow God's will would still be awe inspiring. In either case, what the Theotokos did was special.

I guess the bottom line is that this person was wrong to conclude that Mary (if the IC were true) would not be capable of sin. But I do understand the Orthodox position better now and maybe even where this person was coming from.

Logged

"Yeah, the sparrow hath found an house..." -Psalm 84:3
militantsparrow
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 626


militantsparrow
« Reply #5 on: November 23, 2011, 02:47:53 PM »

Here's a few questions. Is the IC really necessary for her to be the Theotokos?

No. I don't think so.

Quote
Is it possible for her to be born with our fallen nature and still be cooperative with divine grace, (just like John the Baptist was in the womb) filled with the Holy Spirit, and still be obedient to God as she was?

Yes. Absolutely.

Quote
Is it necessary for any of us to first be cleansed of the stain of original sin (to use the latin terminology as it applies to the IC) before we can respond positively to grace, say yes to God, and receive Christ and be united to Him (especially unbaptized adult converts to Christianity) just as Mary responded to God and received Christ by the overshadowing of the Holy Spirit?

No. I don't believe so.
Logged

"Yeah, the sparrow hath found an house..." -Psalm 84:3
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,182


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #6 on: November 25, 2011, 01:57:25 PM »


I guess the bottom line is that this person was wrong to conclude that Mary (if the IC were true) would not be capable of sin.

Exactly. However, trying to convince EO appologists of this fact is like trying to convince protestants that we don't worship the Saints.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
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: 37,322



« Reply #7 on: November 25, 2011, 02:40:04 PM »

Without an exact quote I can't really say too much. I would say that while if Mary had been born without original sin it wouldn't mean she was incapable of sinning, but it would mean she wouldn't have any inner inclination to sin- Satan would have had to appear to her and tempt her from without like with Eve or even our Lord Himself. This would certainly place her in a very different state from the rest of humanity, and certainly makes most obedience seem almost trivial compared to the rest of us- the Theotokos wasn't being asked to die for us in a gruesome and painful manner after all.

Ive read at least one Orthodox theologian make the argument that if Mary was born without original sin, then it would be no great feat for her to obey God in every way--that she would be incapable of sinning. But Eve was born without sin and she went against God's will.

Is this a normal argument for Orthodox or is it just the opinion of one theologian? Or, am I missing the point entirely?
Eve was not living in a world swirling with temptation to sin (at least until she did).  The Holy Theotokos did.  For that reason, it raises amongst most Orthodox of whether she could sin if the IC were true, as it plucks her out of the maelstrom into which she was born.

So the Theotokos, like all humans, was born into a corrupt world due to Adam's sin. Because of this corruption (and free will) she could have sinned at any time. She of course chose to always follow God's will, but she always had the option and plenty of temptation.

Eve was born into an uncorrupted world. She had no internal temptation--only external. It had to have been harder for Eve to sin than it would have been for Mary.

No, except in Augustianism, which held that Adam and Eve were at the height of perfection in paradise, rather than growing towards it as the Orthodox, following the consensus of the Fathers, hold.

It also goes to the difference between Eve being created without sin and the idea of the new Eve being conceived outside of sin: the former doesn't cut her off from sharing our nature (or rather, us sharing hers), but the latter does cut her off (and hence her Son) from being one in nature with us.  Again, II Cor. 5:21 points out the IC is not required by your next point:
Mary was surrounded by sin. Eve was not.

Even if the IC were true, Mary was still born into a corrupt world surrounded by sin and temptation. Her decision to always follow God's will would still be awe inspiring. In either case, what the Theotokos did was special.
Not so much, if the IC were true, in which case God would be making her who knew sin to be made immaculate for us, in which case the Incarnation would be not only superfluous, but of no benefit to us.

I guess the bottom line is that this person was wrong to conclude that Mary (if the IC were true) would not be capable of sin. But I do understand the Orthodox position better now and maybe even where this person was coming from.
Don't really have the time nor mind right now to defend the idea the IC makes the Theotokos impeccable, since scholasticism has a lot of wiggle room, and there are more devastating aspects of the dogma.
« Last Edit: November 25, 2011, 02:40:40 PM 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
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #8 on: November 25, 2011, 09:16:23 PM »


No, except in Augustianism, which held that Adam and Eve were at the height of perfection in paradise, rather than growing towards it as the Orthodox, following the consensus of the Fathers, hold.


I've never heard of such a thing in formal Catholic teaching.  Adam and Eve were sinless but hardly perfect.  They were certainly free to choose to conform to God's will...or not.  And they had never been touched by sin.  Yet they chose not.

« Last Edit: November 25, 2011, 09:21:34 PM by elijahmaria » Logged

Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #9 on: November 25, 2011, 10:20:36 PM »


I guess the bottom line is that this person was wrong to conclude that Mary (if the IC were true) would not be capable of sin.

Exactly. However, trying to convince EO appologists of this fact is like trying to convince protestants that we don't worship the Saints.

I've never thought that the IC meant that Catholics believed the Mother of God would be incapable of sinning.
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 #10 on: November 26, 2011, 03:02:18 AM »

I've never thought that the IC meant that Catholics believed the Mother of God would be incapable of sinning.
Fr. Hardin wrote about this in his catechism:

"Was the Blessed Virgin free from stain because she did not offend God, or because she was impeccable and incapable of sin?  The latter is common teaching in Catholic Tradition, while distinguishing it from the impeccability enjoyed by Christ.  His may be called absolute and derived from the union of His human nature with the divinity.  He could not sin because He was God, and God is infinitely holy.  Mary could not sin by reason of an inherent quality, which some place midway between the state of souls in the beatific vision and that of our first parents before the fall.

Concretely this quality may be identified with perseverance in grace as regards grave sin, and confirmation in grace for lesser sins.  In either case, however, her incapacity for sin differed radically from that of Christ.  Where His was based on the fact that He is a divine person, hers was an added prerogative.  It was absolutely necessary that He could not sin, since God is sinless.  It was a free gift of God's mercy that Mary could not sin, but only because she was protected by divine favor."

Taken from pages 159-160 of "The Catholic Catechism" by Fr. John Hardon (New York: Doubleday, 1981).
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
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #11 on: November 26, 2011, 03:23:39 AM »

I've never thought that the IC meant that Catholics believed the Mother of God would be incapable of sinning.
Fr. Hardin wrote about this in his catechism:

"Was the Blessed Virgin free from stain because she did not offend God, or because she was impeccable and incapable of sin?  The latter is common teaching in Catholic Tradition, while distinguishing it from the impeccability enjoyed by Christ.  His may be called absolute and derived from the union of His human nature with the divinity.  He could not sin because He was God, and God is infinitely holy.  Mary could not sin by reason of an inherent quality, which some place midway between the state of souls in the beatific vision and that of our first parents before the fall.

Concretely this quality may be identified with perseverance in grace as regards grave sin, and confirmation in grace for lesser sins.  In either case, however, her incapacity for sin differed radically from that of Christ.  Where His was based on the fact that He is a divine person, hers was an added prerogative.  It was absolutely necessary that He could not sin, since God is sinless.  It was a free gift of God's mercy that Mary could not sin, but only because she was protected by divine favor."

Taken from pages 159-160 of "The Catholic Catechism" by Fr. John Hardon (New York: Doubleday, 1981).

Then I am wrong and must apologise.  I thought Catholic teaching was that the Mother of God *could* sin but never did.

Papist’s words in messasge 6 about Orthodox apologists are therefore incorrect.  The Orthodox apologists understand Catholic teaching correctly and she was incapable of sinning, and Papist is a bit wobbly.

Logged
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #12 on: November 26, 2011, 10:05:49 AM »

It seems that, basically, there is really only one dividing issue between Catholicism and Orthodoxy, and that is the role of the Pope in Catholic ecclesiology. I don't think the idea of the Immaculate Conception is really as troubling to the Orthodox as is the idea of how it was dogmatized in our Church (by the Pope). Really, all the differences between our Churches boil down to this one issue: what is the role of the Pope of Rome within the Church. Filioque, the Immaculate Conception, Purgatory, etc. all ultimately come down to that one issue.
Logged
militantsparrow
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 626


militantsparrow
« Reply #13 on: November 26, 2011, 01:54:42 PM »

Apotheoun,
Wow! Thank you for sharing. Fr. Hardon is considered by many to be the definitive catechist so his words carry weight beyond a regular priest. This is troubling.
Logged

"Yeah, the sparrow hath found an house..." -Psalm 84:3
Andrew21091
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 1,268



« Reply #14 on: November 26, 2011, 02:06:29 PM »

It seems that, basically, there is really only one dividing issue between Catholicism and Orthodoxy, and that is the role of the Pope in Catholic ecclesiology. I don't think the idea of the Immaculate Conception is really as troubling to the Orthodox as is the idea of how it was dogmatized in our Church (by the Pope). Really, all the differences between our Churches boil down to this one issue: what is the role of the Pope of Rome within the Church. Filioque, the Immaculate Conception, Purgatory, etc. all ultimately come down to that one issue.

I agree with you on this point.
« Last Edit: November 26, 2011, 02:06:49 PM by Andrew21091 » Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #15 on: November 26, 2011, 02:31:09 PM »

I've never thought that the IC meant that Catholics believed the Mother of God would be incapable of sinning.
Fr. Hardin wrote about this in his catechism:

"Was the Blessed Virgin free from stain because she did not offend God, or because she was impeccable and incapable of sin?  The latter is common teaching in Catholic Tradition, while distinguishing it from the impeccability enjoyed by Christ.  His may be called absolute and derived from the union of His human nature with the divinity.  He could not sin because He was God, and God is infinitely holy.  Mary could not sin by reason of an inherent quality, which some place midway between the state of souls in the beatific vision and that of our first parents before the fall.

Concretely this quality may be identified with perseverance in grace as regards grave sin, and confirmation in grace for lesser sins.  In either case, however, her incapacity for sin differed radically from that of Christ.  Where His was based on the fact that He is a divine person, hers was an added prerogative.  It was absolutely necessary that He could not sin, since God is sinless.  It was a free gift of God's mercy that Mary could not sin, but only because she was protected by divine favor."

Taken from pages 159-160 of "The Catholic Catechism" by Fr. John Hardon (New York: Doubleday, 1981).

Father Hardon has never been recognized by the Church as being representative of either pre- or post-Vatican II teaching.  So all of your "wowing" is actually for nothing.

I will add this much only: There was an element in the Church from about the mid-1700s to the beginning of the 20th century who taught in such a way that free will was compromised.  That teaching has not withstood the test of time and though it remains in individuals who continue to think and teach that way, it has never been picked up as a formal part of Church teaching.

Dom Marmion has, for example.  Find his works and read them and you will see a very different approach from the French and Irish Jansenists who influenced Father Hardon.

If you are not that interested, don't bother, but don't expect to find much traction for your ideas outside of these kinds of venues where the history of the Catholic Church in any real accurate detail, is virtually unknown.

M.

« Last Edit: November 26, 2011, 02:35:43 PM by elijahmaria » Logged

elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #16 on: November 26, 2011, 03:10:29 PM »


I will add this much only: There was an element in the Church from about the mid-1700s to the beginning of the 20th century who taught in such a way that free will was compromised.  That teaching has not withstood the test of time and though it remains in individuals who continue to think and teach that way, it has never been picked up as a formal part of Church teaching.

Dom Marmion has, for example.  Find his works and read them and you will see a very different approach from the French and Irish Jansenists who influenced Father Hardon.

If you are not that interested, don't bother, but don't expect to find much traction for your ideas outside of these kinds of venues where the history of the Catholic Church in any real accurate detail, is virtually unknown.

M.


In addition to Dom Marmion, I'd like to suggest Dom Juan Arintero to the list of representative authors on the spiritual life that are pre-Vatican II and reflect the best of what was taken into the CCC when it was written after the close of the Second Vatican Council.

This authors should also help dispel some of the idiocy that says that the doctrine and spiritual life of the Catholic Church changed radically after the Second Vatican Council.

You cannot separate the spiritual life of the Church from the doctrinal life...

As with Orthodoxy, there are times when one can only find the 'true' Church in the monasteries.

M.

Logged

ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
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: 37,322



« Reply #17 on: November 26, 2011, 03:52:47 PM »

I've never thought that the IC meant that Catholics believed the Mother of God would be incapable of sinning.
Fr. Hardin wrote about this in his catechism:

"Was the Blessed Virgin free from stain because she did not offend God, or because she was impeccable and incapable of sin?  The latter is common teaching in Catholic Tradition, while distinguishing it from the impeccability enjoyed by Christ.  His may be called absolute and derived from the union of His human nature with the divinity.  He could not sin because He was God, and God is infinitely holy.  Mary could not sin by reason of an inherent quality, which some place midway between the state of souls in the beatific vision and that of our first parents before the fall.

Concretely this quality may be identified with perseverance in grace as regards grave sin, and confirmation in grace for lesser sins.  In either case, however, her incapacity for sin differed radically from that of Christ.  Where His was based on the fact that He is a divine person, hers was an added prerogative.  It was absolutely necessary that He could not sin, since God is sinless.  It was a free gift of God's mercy that Mary could not sin, but only because she was protected by divine favor."

Taken from pages 159-160 of "The Catholic Catechism" by Fr. John Hardon (New York: Doubleday, 1981).

Father Hardon has never been recognized by the Church as being representative of either pre- or post-Vatican II teaching.
Sure was:
Quote
Imprimi Potest: Michael J. Lavelle, S.J., Provincial
Detroit Province, May 20, 1981
Nihil Obstat:William B. Smith, S.T.D. Censor Librorum
Imprimatur+Joseph T. O'Keefe, Vicar General
Archdiocese of New York, July 7, 1981

So all of your "wowing" is actually for nothing.
Au contraire, it is your "Sic Maria Dixit" which counts for naught.

I will add this much only: There was an element in the Church from about the mid-1700s to the beginning of the 20th century who taught in such a way that free will was compromised.  That teaching has not withstood the test of time and though it remains in individuals who continue to think and teach that way, it has never been picked up as a formal part of Church teaching.
The IC wasn't picked up as a fomal part of Vatican teaching for centuries either.  "1981" is nearly a century after "the beginning of the 20th century," and it is still around.  So much for your "test of time" argument.

What does Dr. Mark Miravalle have to say?

Dom Marmion has, for example.  Find his works and read them and you will see a very different approach from the French and Irish Jansenists who influenced Father Hardon.

If you are not that interested, don't bother, but don't expect to find much traction for your ideas outside of these kinds of venues where the history of the Catholic Church in any real accurate detail, is virtually unknown.
The history of the Catholic Church, and the Vatican, are well known here. That's the IC's problem.
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
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #18 on: November 26, 2011, 04:04:13 PM »


Father Hardon has never been recognized by the Church as being representative of either pre- or post-Vatican II teaching. 


Mary, I hate to pull you up but .....

I wrote this of him when you were not happy with his words about purgatory....

“I am sure that all the Catholics on this Forum who contend so well for their faith are aware of the Jesuit priest Fr Hardon (recently deceased and already on track for beatification.) Fr Hardon has been one of the pre-eminent apologists of the Catholic Faith over the last 40 years. His works are everywhere, on EWTN, etc., etc.   Fr Hardon served as a consultant for the drafting of the Catechism of the Catholic Church promulgated by Pope John Paul II in 1992.”

Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
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: 37,322



« Reply #19 on: November 26, 2011, 04:06:42 PM »


I will add this much only: There was an element in the Church from about the mid-1700s to the beginning of the 20th century who taught in such a way that free will was compromised.  That teaching has not withstood the test of time and though it remains in individuals who continue to think and teach that way, it has never been picked up as a formal part of Church teaching.

Dom Marmion has, for example.  Find his works and read them and you will see a very different approach from the French and Irish Jansenists who influenced Father Hardon.

If you are not that interested, don't bother, but don't expect to find much traction for your ideas outside of these kinds of venues where the history of the Catholic Church in any real accurate detail, is virtually unknown.

M.


In addition to Dom Marmion, I'd like to suggest Dom Juan Arintero to the list of representative authors on the spiritual life that are pre-Vatican II and reflect the best of what was taken into the CCC when it was written after the close of the Second Vatican Council.

This authors should also help dispel some of the idiocy that says that the doctrine and spiritual life of the Catholic Church changed radically after the Second Vatican Council.

You cannot separate the spiritual life of the Church from the doctrinal life...

As with Orthodoxy, there are times when one can only find the 'true' Church in the monasteries.
I know of no such "time" in Orthodoxy, do you have something particular in mind?

Not old enough to remember Vatican II, but I do remember picking my grandmother up from mass, after she had gone for the first time in decades, and the shell shocked look on her face.
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
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: 37,322



« Reply #20 on: November 26, 2011, 04:09:28 PM »


Father Hardon has never been recognized by the Church as being representative of either pre- or post-Vatican II teaching.


Mary, I hate to pull you up but .....

I wrote this of him when you were not happy with his words about purgatory....

“I am sure that all the Catholics on this Forum who contend so well for their faith are aware of the Jesuit priest Fr Hardon (recently deceased and already on track for beatification.) Fr Hardon has been one of the pre-eminent apologists of the Catholic Faith over the last 40 years. His works are everywhere, on EWTN, etc., etc.   Fr Hardon served as a consultant for the drafting of the Catechism of the Catholic Church promulgated by Pope John Paul II in 1992.”
Quote
Father Hardon was a very prominent member of the Jesuit community, which is known for its academic rigor, and wrote dozens of books on religion and theology, including: The Catholic Catechism (1975), a defining volume of Catholic orthodoxy; and the Modern Catholic Dictionary(1980), the first major Catholic reference dictionary published after the Second Vatican Council (1962–1965). Hardon was also a major contributor to Catholic newspapers and magazines and was executive editor of The Catholic Faith magazine. Hardon had a close working relationship with Pope Paul VI, engaging in several initiatives at the Pope's request, including his authoring of The Catholic Catechism.

Father Hardon's Catholic Catechism was a significant post–Vatican II work in the sense that it essentially brought modern Catholic teaching and faith into one book, unlike any other before, and was a precursor to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which is the official codified teaching of the Catholic Church, promulgated by Pope John Paul II in 1992. Hardon served as a consultant for the drafting of that document.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hardon
« Last Edit: November 26, 2011, 04:11:32 PM 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
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #21 on: November 26, 2011, 04:24:48 PM »


Father Hardon has never been recognized by the Church as being representative of either pre- or post-Vatican II teaching.


Mary, I hate to pull you up but .....

I wrote this of him when you were not happy with his words about purgatory....

“I am sure that all the Catholics on this Forum who contend so well for their faith are aware of the Jesuit priest Fr Hardon (recently deceased and already on track for beatification.) Fr Hardon has been one of the pre-eminent apologists of the Catholic Faith over the last 40 years. His works are everywhere, on EWTN, etc., etc.   Fr Hardon served as a consultant for the drafting of the Catechism of the Catholic Church promulgated by Pope John Paul II in 1992.”
Quote
Father Hardon was a very prominent member of the Jesuit community, which is known for its academic rigor, and wrote dozens of books on religion and theology, including: The Catholic Catechism (1975), a defining volume of Catholic orthodoxy; and the Modern Catholic Dictionary(1980), the first major Catholic reference dictionary published after the Second Vatican Council (1962–1965). Hardon was also a major contributor to Catholic newspapers and magazines and was executive editor of The Catholic Faith magazine. Hardon had a close working relationship with Pope Paul VI, engaging in several initiatives at the Pope's request, including his authoring of The Catholic Catechism.

Father Hardon's Catholic Catechism was a significant post–Vatican II work in the sense that it essentially brought modern Catholic teaching and faith into one book, unlike any other before, and was a precursor to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which is the official codified teaching of the Catholic Church, promulgated by Pope John Paul II in 1992. Hardon served as a consultant for the drafting of that document.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hardon

You can say the same thing about The Teaching of Christ.  A Catholic Catechism for Adults:  otherwise known as 'the Wuerl' catechism:  Now Cardinal Wuerl, Archbishop of Washington.

You'd actually have to read the texts and compare them but Cardinal Wuerl's catechism is very different in tone and content from Father Hardon's.

So again, I say, you cannot take a local catechism and simply, on such a forum as this, expand it by your own authority to represent the formal teaching of the Catholic Church on ANYTHING at all without being open to correction and revision.

wow...
Logged

ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
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: 37,322



« Reply #22 on: November 26, 2011, 04:33:25 PM »


Father Hardon has never been recognized by the Church as being representative of either pre- or post-Vatican II teaching.


Mary, I hate to pull you up but .....

I wrote this of him when you were not happy with his words about purgatory....

“I am sure that all the Catholics on this Forum who contend so well for their faith are aware of the Jesuit priest Fr Hardon (recently deceased and already on track for beatification.) Fr Hardon has been one of the pre-eminent apologists of the Catholic Faith over the last 40 years. His works are everywhere, on EWTN, etc., etc.   Fr Hardon served as a consultant for the drafting of the Catechism of the Catholic Church promulgated by Pope John Paul II in 1992.”
Quote
Father Hardon was a very prominent member of the Jesuit community, which is known for its academic rigor, and wrote dozens of books on religion and theology, including: The Catholic Catechism (1975), a defining volume of Catholic orthodoxy; and the Modern Catholic Dictionary(1980), the first major Catholic reference dictionary published after the Second Vatican Council (1962–1965). Hardon was also a major contributor to Catholic newspapers and magazines and was executive editor of The Catholic Faith magazine. Hardon had a close working relationship with Pope Paul VI, engaging in several initiatives at the Pope's request, including his authoring of The Catholic Catechism.

Father Hardon's Catholic Catechism was a significant post–Vatican II work in the sense that it essentially brought modern Catholic teaching and faith into one book, unlike any other before, and was a precursor to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which is the official codified teaching of the Catholic Church, promulgated by Pope John Paul II in 1992. Hardon served as a consultant for the drafting of that document.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hardon

You can say the same thing about The Teaching of Christ.  A Catholic Catechism for Adults:  otherwise known as 'the Wuerl' catechism:  Now Cardinal Wuerl, Archbishop of Washington.

You'd actually have to read the texts and compare them but Cardinal Wuerl's catechism is very different in tone and content from Father Hardon's.

So again, I say, you cannot take a local catechism and simply, on such a forum as this, expand it by your own authority to represent the formal teaching of the Catholic Church on ANYTHING at all without being open to correction and revision.

wow...
we do not need to sort out your mess for you.  We were accused of attributing teachings that the Vatican/its following do not have.  We (rather Apotheum, who is communion with Pope Benedict XVI of Rome) have shown that we are not "making this stuff up."  Proving ourselves innocent of bearing false witness, our duty is discharged.
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
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #23 on: November 26, 2011, 04:36:29 PM »

I've never thought that the IC meant that Catholics believed the Mother of God would be incapable of sinning.
Fr. Hardin wrote about this in his catechism:

"Was the Blessed Virgin free from stain because she did not offend God, or because she was impeccable and incapable of sin?  The latter is common teaching in Catholic Tradition, while distinguishing it from the impeccability enjoyed by Christ.  His may be called absolute and derived from the union of His human nature with the divinity.  He could not sin because He was God, and God is infinitely holy.  Mary could not sin by reason of an inherent quality, which some place midway between the state of souls in the beatific vision and that of our first parents before the fall.

Concretely this quality may be identified with perseverance in grace as regards grave sin, and confirmation in grace for lesser sins.  In either case, however, her incapacity for sin differed radically from that of Christ.  Where His was based on the fact that He is a divine person, hers was an added prerogative.  It was absolutely necessary that He could not sin, since God is sinless.  It was a free gift of God's mercy that Mary could not sin, but only because she was protected by divine favor."

Taken from pages 159-160 of "The Catholic Catechism" by Fr. John Hardon (New York: Doubleday, 1981).

Another way to express something similar to this idea is to say that the Mother of God was entirely without concupiscence or, as understood in the Catholic Church, as the inclination toward sin.  That the Mother of God did not have an inclination toward sin was something taught by Blessed John Paul II in his lifetime.

Now:  It is clear that saying that one is without the inclination toward sin or evil is not quite the same as saying that it is impossible for them to sin.   Eve did not have the inclination toward sin or evil, but it is clear that she indeed could sin.

I believe Father Hardon, in this particular teaching, took it a step too far and also took it a step farther than formal Catholic teaching.

The teaching of Blessed John Paul II is closer to the reality taught by the Church that the Mother of God is the New Eve.

M.
« Last Edit: November 26, 2011, 04:37:21 PM by elijahmaria » Logged

Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #24 on: November 26, 2011, 04:42:30 PM »


You can say the same thing about The Teaching of Christ.  A Catholic Catechism for Adults:  otherwise known as 'the Wuerl' catechism:  Now Cardinal Wuerl, Archbishop of Washington.

You'd actually have to read the texts and compare them but Cardinal Wuerl's catechism is very different in tone and content from Father Hardon's.

So again, I say, you cannot take a local catechism and simply, on such a forum as this, expand it by your own authority to represent the formal teaching of the Catholic Church on ANYTHING at all without being open to correction and revision.

wow...

Are you saying that the Wuerl Catechism supports Papist (message 6) and the Mother of God was in fact capable of sinning (something the Hardon Catechism denies.) 
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #25 on: November 26, 2011, 04:50:08 PM »

Cardinal Wuerl's local catechism deals with the Immaculate Conception without the Jansenist exaggeration of the Mother of God's sinlessness.  That is why I posted what I did below.  This is the formal teaching of the Church concerning the Mother of God and her sinlessness, and it is reflected in The Teaching of Christ...without the Jansenist additions of Father Hardon which have never been formally picked up by the Church for inclusion in the universal teaching of the Church.

Jansenism, however well meaning, is still a heresy.



Another way to express something similar to this idea is to say that the Mother of God was entirely without concupiscence or, as understood in the Catholic Church, as the inclination toward sin.  That the Mother of God did not have an inclination toward sin was something taught by Blessed John Paul II in his lifetime.

Now:  It is clear that saying that one is without the inclination toward sin or evil is not quite the same as saying that it is impossible for them to sin.   Eve did not have the inclination toward sin or evil, but it is clear that she indeed could sin.

I believe Father Hardon, in this particular teaching, took it a step too far and also took it a step farther than formal Catholic teaching.

The teaching of Blessed John Paul II is closer to the reality taught by the Church that the Mother of God is the New Eve.

M.
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 #26 on: November 26, 2011, 05:19:52 PM »

Apotheoun,
Wow! Thank you for sharing. Fr. Hardon is considered by many to be the definitive catechist so his words carry weight beyond a regular priest.
The moral - but not metaphysical - impeccability of the Blessed Virgin Mary is a traditional aspect of Roman Catholic Mariological teaching.  Here are a few additional quotations on the topic from other reputable theologians of the Roman Catholic Church:



"No one can attain the Love of God without humility; and that is a gift of God above all temporal gifts.  Humility brings true peace to the heart of man; for no one is quarrelsome or sinful, but he who lacks peace.  If a man were truly humble he would never sin again.  Mary could not sin because she was truly humble; and wherever God finds humility, there He does great things.  Augustine says:  'The lowliest on earth is also the holiest.'"

Johannes Tauler, OP
The Inner Way
Sermon XXXIV



"According to the teaching of the Church and the nature of the matter, the fact of Mary's sinlessness is based on a special and supernatural grace, or rather on an exceptional privilege of grace.  For the reason that this grace made complete sinlessness possible, it was called 'the gift of impeccancy' as in the first couple, and its main feature is freedom from concupiscence.  In so far as it ensured effective freedom from sin, it was called, in relation to mortal sins, the 'gift of confirmation in grace' or of 'perfect perseverance'; in relation to venial sins, the 'gift of perfect confirmation in good.'  In this respect its main characteristic is the fullness of the graces of supernatural sanctification, actual as well as habitual, whereby God, who was with and in Mary in a special manner, so guarded her that she never committed a single sin. 

The precise meaning of this grace and its manner of action are linked with the question, whether the confirmation in grace abolished not only the reality but also the possibility of sin, or the reality by the very impossibility, in the same way as the inclination to irregular motions of concupiscence, and thereby to formal sin, was eradicated by the extinction of the fomes.

As clear as it is that Mary is distinguished from God and Christ by the fact that, considered in her being, she was capable of sin, it is just as clear that, because of the divine protection and assistance which Mary enjoyed, it can and must be said in a certain sense that she could not have sinned, that in her, sin was impossible, hence her sinlessness includes the incapability of sinning.  This, in a sense at least, is analogous to what, relative to the teaching authority of the Church, is said of the pope, that he cannot fail in certain acts and that his freedom from error includes infallibility.

In fact, Mary's incapability of sinning, as the pillar and vesture of her sanctity, is the original type and guarantee of the infallibility of the Church, like a pillar and vesture of truth.  Just as the Church's truth rests on the words, 'I am with you all days,' so Mary's sanctity rests on 'The Lord is with thee.'  Both are prophesied in a typical sense by the words:  'The stream of the river maketh the city of God joyful:  the most High hath sanctified His own tabernacle.  God is in the midst thereof, it shall not be moved.'"

Fr. Matthias J. Scheeben
Mariology (Volume 2)
(St. Louis:  B. Herder Book Company, 1948)
Pages 132-134



"Impeccability may be either metaphysical or moral.  Metaphysical impeccability belongs exclusively to God, whereas moral impeccability may also be enjoyed by creatures.  It is enjoyed, e.g., by the angels and saints in Heaven.  God is impeccable because He is absolutely and infinitely holy; Christ, in consequence of the Hypostatic Union; the angels and saints, by virtue of the beatific vision of the Godhead which they enjoy.  How are we to conceive of the impeccability of the Blessed Virgin Mary?  It is quite obvious that her impeccability must differ specifically from that proper to God and the God-man Jesus Christ.  Here is not a divine attribute, nor is it conditioned by or based upon a personal union of divinity with humanity.  It cannot be a result of the beatific vision, because Mary during her sojourn on earth was a wayfarer like ourselves and did not enjoy beatitude.  Comparing her impeccability to that of the angels and saints and to that of our first parents in Paradise, we may define it as an intermediate state between the two.  It would be asserting too much to say that the Blessed Virgin was capable of committing sin like our first parents; and too little to assert that during her life-time she was incapable of sinning as the angels and saints of Heaven are now, in consequence of the beatific vision.  In what, then, did her impeccability consist?  We are probably not far from the truth when we assume that God gave her the gift of perfect perseverance as against mortal sin, and that of confirmation in grace as against venial sin.  Together with her freedom from concupiscence these two graces may be regarded as the proximate cause of Mary's impeccability.  For its ultimate cause we must go back to the higher and more comprehensive prerogative of her divine motherhood.  God owed it to His own dignity and holiness, so to speak, to bestow the grace of perfect perseverance and confirmation in grace upon her from whom His Divine Son was to assume human nature.  This idea is aptly illustrated by 'the woman clothed with the sun' whom St. John visioned in the twelfth chapter of the Apocalypse.  The analogy between Mary's impeccability and that of her Divine Son would seem to render this theory all the more acceptable, though we must, of course, never forget that the impeccability of Christ is based upon the Hypostatic Union of Godhead and manhood, whereas that of His Mother rests merely upon the grace of divine motherhood."

Fr. Joseph Pohle
Dogmatic Theology VI
Mariology: A Dogmatic Treatise on the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God

(St. Louis:  B. Herder Book Company, 1916)
Pages 80-82



"There are two types of impeccability:  metaphysical and moral.  The former is predicated exclusively of God who is holiness itself, and also of Christ, due to the Hypostatic Union.  The latter belongs to the angels and saints on account of the beatific vision, and likewise to Our Blessed Lady, although for reasons other than those mentioned in the case of God, Christ, the angels and saints.

According to Alexander of Hales (d. 1245), Mary was impeccable because of her fullness of grace.  According to St. Bonaventure (d. 1274), Mary received a special divine assistance which strengthened the potencies of her soul, and this made it impossible for her to sin.  St. Thomas (d. 1274) thought that Mary was impeccable owing to the constant act of divine Providence removing all occasions of sin from her path.  Finally, in the opinion of Suarez (d. 1617) and most theologians, the remote cause of Mary's impeccability was the divine Motherhood; the proximate cause was threefold:  the lack of concupiscence, the fullness of grace, and an act of divine Providence which not only removed all occasions of sin from her but also confirmed her in grace."

Fr. Juniper B. Carol, OFM
Fundamentals of Mariology
(New York:  Benziger Brothers, Inc., 1956)
Pages 140-141
« Last Edit: November 26, 2011, 05:42:27 PM by Apotheoun » 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
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #27 on: November 26, 2011, 05:26:36 PM »

Tauler, Scheeben, Pohle, Carol - all with Irish Jansenist grannies?   laugh
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #28 on: November 26, 2011, 05:37:20 PM »

Tauler, Scheeben, Pohle, Carol - all with Irish Jansenist grannies?   laugh

Ah!...so I have to understand that heresies like Jansenism are culture specific so that ONLY the Irish or ONLY the French can express the exaggerations of the heresy?

really?....

I don't think so.

Eve was without concupiscence and still she sinned.

There is no formal teaching in the Catholic Church that says that it is absolutely impossible for the Mother of God to sin.

There is, however, the ancient teaching that she is the New Eve. 

The Mother of God CHOSE not to sin. 

Also there is the explicit teaching in the west that the Mother of God exercises freedom of the will in choosing the good, and not evil.

Deal with it.

M.
« Last Edit: November 26, 2011, 05:38:01 PM by elijahmaria » Logged

elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #29 on: November 26, 2011, 05:57:58 PM »



According to Alexander of Hales (d. 1245), Mary was impeccable because of her fullness of grace.  According to St. Bonaventure (d. 1274), Mary received a special divine assistance which strengthened the potencies of her soul, and this made it impossible for her to sin.  St. Thomas (d. 1274) thought that Mary was impeccable owing to the constant act of divine Providence removing all occasions of sin from her path.  Finally, in the opinion of Suarez (d. 1617) and most theologians, the remote cause of Mary's impeccability was the divine Motherhood; the proximate cause was threefold:  the lack of concupiscence, the fullness of grace, and an act of divine Providence which not only removed all occasions of sin from her but also confirmed her in grace."

Fr. Juniper B. Carol, OFM
Fundamentals of Mariology
(New York:  Benziger Brothers, Inc., 1956)
Pages 140-141

IF you want to penetrate the truths of this section, which has great truth in it, then you have to read it with several things in mind:  It is NOT because of her Immaculate Conception alone that she is sinless:  She DOES exercise free will in her choices NOT to sin:  She is especially graced because of her motherhood, which is NOT the same thing as her immaculate conception.

THEN you need to look at the stories of the desert fathers and see that for ANY human being who grows in holiness, it becomes ever more difficult to sin, until such time as it SEEMS that it is impossible for them to sin and they will tell you that it is unthinkable that they sin.  Does this then mean that they have no free will?  That the graces that they have been given over-ride their free will?

The Mother of God is set aside because of her motherhood, yet we can be set aside [made holy] because of our faith and love and hope, fully lived, fully alive.

That is NOT the kind of "impossible" that your assertions indicate in this thread.  You seem to be looking for something far more absolute and that is a Jansenist interpretation, regardless of your cultural background or granny.

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 #30 on: November 26, 2011, 06:01:09 PM »



According to Alexander of Hales (d. 1245), Mary was impeccable because of her fullness of grace.  According to St. Bonaventure (d. 1274), Mary received a special divine assistance which strengthened the potencies of her soul, and this made it impossible for her to sin.  St. Thomas (d. 1274) thought that Mary was impeccable owing to the constant act of divine Providence removing all occasions of sin from her path.  Finally, in the opinion of Suarez (d. 1617) and most theologians, the remote cause of Mary's impeccability was the divine Motherhood; the proximate cause was threefold:  the lack of concupiscence, the fullness of grace, and an act of divine Providence which not only removed all occasions of sin from her but also confirmed her in grace."

Fr. Juniper B. Carol, OFM
Fundamentals of Mariology
(New York:  Benziger Brothers, Inc., 1956)
Pages 140-141

IF you want to penetrate the truths of this section, which has great truth in it, then you have to read it with several things in mind:  It is NOT because of her Immaculate Conception alone that she is sinless:  She DOES exercise free will in her choices NOT to sin:  She is especially graced because of her motherhood, which is NOT the same thing as her immaculate conception.

THEN you need to look at the stories of the desert fathers and see that for ANY human being who grows in holiness, it becomes ever more difficult to sin, until such time as it SEEMS that it is impossible for them to sin and they will tell you that it is unthinkable that they sin.  Does this then mean that they have no free will?  That the graces that they have been given over-ride their free will?

The Mother of God is set aside because of her motherhood, yet we can be set aside [made holy] because of our faith and love and hope, fully lived, fully alive.

That is NOT the kind of "impossible" that your assertions indicate in this thread.  You seem to be looking for something far more absolute and that is a Jansenist interpretation, regardless of your cultural background or granny.
What are you talking about?  I have simply provided quotations from approved Roman Catholic authors that assert Mary's impeccability (i.e., her inability to sin).  You are of course free to transcribe texts from other Roman Catholic authors that assert the opposite.
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
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #31 on: November 26, 2011, 06:05:25 PM »

Tauler, Scheeben, Pohle, Carol - all with Irish Jansenist grannies?   laugh

Ah!...so I have to understand that heresies like Jansenism are culture specific so that ONLY the Irish or ONLY the French can express the exaggerations of the heresy?

really?....

Please note smiley!
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #32 on: November 26, 2011, 06:07:07 PM »

Pardon: my comments below were not directed to Todd even though he is the one who provided the quote below making it seem as though I was referring to him, I guess.



According to Alexander of Hales (d. 1245), Mary was impeccable because of her fullness of grace.  According to St. Bonaventure (d. 1274), Mary received a special divine assistance which strengthened the potencies of her soul, and this made it impossible for her to sin.  St. Thomas (d. 1274) thought that Mary was impeccable owing to the constant act of divine Providence removing all occasions of sin from her path.  Finally, in the opinion of Suarez (d. 1617) and most theologians, the remote cause of Mary's impeccability was the divine Motherhood; the proximate cause was threefold:  the lack of concupiscence, the fullness of grace, and an act of divine Providence which not only removed all occasions of sin from her but also confirmed her in grace."

Fr. Juniper B. Carol, OFM
Fundamentals of Mariology
(New York:  Benziger Brothers, Inc., 1956)
Pages 140-141

IF you want to penetrate the truths of this section, which has great truth in it, then you have to read it with several things in mind:  It is NOT because of her Immaculate Conception alone that she is sinless:  She DOES exercise free will in her choices NOT to sin:  She is especially graced because of her motherhood, which is NOT the same thing as her immaculate conception.

THEN you need to look at the stories of the desert fathers and see that for ANY human being who grows in holiness, it becomes ever more difficult to sin, until such time as it SEEMS that it is impossible for them to sin and they will tell you that it is unthinkable that they sin.  Does this then mean that they have no free will?  That the graces that they have been given over-ride their free will?

The Mother of God is set aside because of her motherhood, yet we can be set aside [made holy] because of our faith and love and hope, fully lived, fully alive.

That is NOT the kind of "impossible" that your assertions indicate in this thread.  You seem to be looking for something far more absolute and that is a Jansenist interpretation, regardless of your cultural background or granny.


Logged

Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #33 on: November 26, 2011, 06:12:36 PM »


THEN you need to look at the stories of the desert fathers and see that for ANY human being who grows in holiness, it becomes ever more difficult to sin, until such time as it SEEMS that it is impossible for them to sin and they will tell you that it is unthinkable that they sin.  Does this then mean that they have no free will?  That the graces that they have been given over-ride their free will?


The day you meet a monk in the deserts of Athos or Syria or the Russian forests and he tells you it has become unthinkable for him to sin, run a mile.  He could be in the grip of the devil. Run a mile too from any disciples who tell you the same of their elder.  If he has not disabused them of such insanity then he is living in illusion.
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 #34 on: November 26, 2011, 06:20:39 PM »

Fr. Peter Fehlner addresses Mary's impeccability in the educational talk linked below.  The question about her impeccability begins at about the 22 minute mark in the audio recording (Question 32), so anyone who wants to just listen to the pertinent material should skip ahead to that point. 

http://s3.amazonaws.com/airmaria/mctc/mctc0005.mp3

Fr. Peter distinguishes between the impeccability of Christ, who cannot sin because He is a divine person; and the impeccability of Mary, who cannot sin because she has received a special privilege of grace from God.  Enjoy!
« Last Edit: November 26, 2011, 06:33:38 PM by Apotheoun » 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
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #35 on: November 26, 2011, 06:22:56 PM »


THEN you need to look at the stories of the desert fathers and see that for ANY human being who grows in holiness, it becomes ever more difficult to sin, until such time as it SEEMS that it is impossible for them to sin and they will tell you that it is unthinkable that they sin.  Does this then mean that they have no free will?  That the graces that they have been given over-ride their free will?


The day you meet a monk in the deserts of Athos or Syria or the Russian forests and he tells you it has become unthinkable for him to sin, run a mile.  He could be in the grip of the devil. Run a mile too from any disciples who tell you the same of their elder.  If he has not disabused them of such insanity then he is living in illusion.

That is your opinion.  There is another set of opinions in Orthodoxy that understands that the more genuinely holy a person becomes the more difficult it becomes for the soul to sin because the will becomes ever more oriented toward God.

It is in this light that the Mother of God would be without sin.

Not because there are not temptations:  Not because there is not danger:  Not because there is no choice.

But because there is great and abiding holiness.
Logged

elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #36 on: November 26, 2011, 06:29:08 PM »

Fr. Peter Fehlner addresses Mary's impeccability in the educational talk linked below.  The question about her impeccability begins at about the 22 minute mark in the audio recording (Question 32), so anyone who wants to just listen to the pertinent material should skip ahead to that point.  

http://s3.amazonaws.com/airmaria/mctc/mctc0005.mp3

Fr. Peter distinguishes between Christ who cannot sin because He is a divine person, and Mary who cannot sin because she has received a special privilege of grace from God.  Enjoy!

Father Peter Damian with Dr Mark Miravalle...is it?

You cannot pawn these perspectives off as formal Catholic teaching any more than you can pawn any other fringe teaching off as formal Catholic teaching.  There is some truth in them all...but there is not all-truth in any one of them alone.
Logged

ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
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: 37,322



« Reply #37 on: November 26, 2011, 06:31:51 PM »



According to Alexander of Hales (d. 1245), Mary was impeccable because of her fullness of grace.  According to St. Bonaventure (d. 1274), Mary received a special divine assistance which strengthened the potencies of her soul, and this made it impossible for her to sin.  St. Thomas (d. 1274) thought that Mary was impeccable owing to the constant act of divine Providence removing all occasions of sin from her path.  Finally, in the opinion of Suarez (d. 1617) and most theologians, the remote cause of Mary's impeccability was the divine Motherhood; the proximate cause was threefold:  the lack of concupiscence, the fullness of grace, and an act of divine Providence which not only removed all occasions of sin from her but also confirmed her in grace."

Fr. Juniper B. Carol, OFM
Fundamentals of Mariology
(New York:  Benziger Brothers, Inc., 1956)
Pages 140-141

IF you want to penetrate the truths of this section, which has great truth in it,

so you claim.  A claim that we have rejected, having been found wanting.

then you have to read it with several things in mind:
no, we do not.  We do not, nor ever have, held the dogma, and hence have no need nor want of salvaging/saving it.

It is NOT because of her Immaculate Conception alone that she is sinless:  She DOES exercise free will in her choices NOT to sin:  She is especially graced because of her motherhood, which is NOT the same thing as her immaculate conception.
which is why there is no need of the IC.

THEN you need to look at the stories of the desert fathers and see that for ANY human being who grows in holiness, it becomes ever more difficult to sin, until such time as it SEEMS that it is impossible for them to sin and they will tell you that it is unthinkable that they sin.
St. Sisoes the Great on his deathbed tells us the direct opposite.

Does this then mean that they have no free will?  That the graces that they have been given over-ride their free will?
Since the sayings of the desert fathers, at least those I have seen, do not fit your characterization, what they "mean" is an open question.

The Mother of God is set aside because of her motherhood, yet we can be set aside [made holy] because of our faith and love and hope, fully lived, fully alive.

That is NOT the kind of "impossible" that your assertions indicate in this thread. 
What "impossible"?

You seem to be looking for something far more absolute and that is a Jansenist interpretation, regardless of your cultural background or granny.
So, a Jansenist had a hand in writing the CCC?  And the Vatican is going to canonize him.  Interesting.
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
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 #38 on: November 26, 2011, 06:35:54 PM »

Fr. Peter Fehlner addresses Mary's impeccability in the educational talk linked below.  The question about her impeccability begins at about the 22 minute mark in the audio recording (Question 32), so anyone who wants to just listen to the pertinent material should skip ahead to that point. 

http://s3.amazonaws.com/airmaria/mctc/mctc0005.mp3

Fr. Peter distinguishes between Christ who cannot sin because He is a divine person, and Mary who cannot sin because she has received a special privilege of grace from God.  Enjoy!

Father Peter Damian with Dr Mark Miravalle...is it?

You cannot pawn these perspectives off as formal Catholic teaching any more than you can pawn any other fringe teaching off as formal Catholic teaching.  There is some truth in them all...but there is not all-truth in any one of them alone.
I see no reason to demean and belittle Fr. Peter's personal integrity simply because you disagree with him on the topic being investigated in this thread.  Such attacks are reprehensible.
« Last Edit: November 26, 2011, 06:39:19 PM by Apotheoun » 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
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
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: 37,322



« Reply #39 on: November 26, 2011, 06:41:35 PM »

Tauler, Scheeben, Pohle, Carol - all with Irish Jansenist grannies?   laugh

Ah!...so I have to understand that heresies like Jansenism are culture specific so that ONLY the Irish or ONLY the French can express the exaggerations of the heresy?

really?....

I don't think so.
Then why did you say so?

the French and Irish Jansenists who influenced Father Hardon.

M.

Eve was without concupiscence and still she sinned.

There is no formal teaching in the Catholic Church that says that it is absolutely impossible for the Mother of God to sin.
You are right: there isn't.  But then we don't preach the IC either.  The Vatican does not have any formal teaching that the Mother of God could sin.

There is, however, the ancient teaching that she is the New Eve. 

The Mother of God CHOSE not to sin.
Yes, those are, unlike the IC, ancient teachings.

Also there is the explicit teaching in the west that the Mother of God exercises freedom of the will in choosing the good, and not evil.

Deal with it.
we have.
Quote
The one holy, catholic and apostolic Church of the seven Ecumenical Councils teaches that the supernatural incarnation of the only-begotten Son and Word of God, of the Holy Ghost and the Virgin Mary, is alone pure and immaculate; but the Papal Church scarcely forty years ago again made an innovation by laying down a novel dogma concerning the immaculate conception of the Mother of God and ever-Virgin Mary, which was unknown to the ancient Church (and strongly opposed at different times even by the more distinguished among the papal theologians).
http://orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/encyc_1895.aspx
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
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: 37,322



« Reply #40 on: November 26, 2011, 06:47:51 PM »


THEN you need to look at the stories of the desert fathers and see that for ANY human being who grows in holiness, it becomes ever more difficult to sin, until such time as it SEEMS that it is impossible for them to sin and they will tell you that it is unthinkable that they sin.  Does this then mean that they have no free will?  That the graces that they have been given over-ride their free will?


The day you meet a monk in the deserts of Athos or Syria or the Russian forests and he tells you it has become unthinkable for him to sin, run a mile.  He could be in the grip of the devil. Run a mile too from any disciples who tell you the same of their elder.  If he has not disabused them of such insanity then he is living in illusion.

That is your opinion.
 
and a well grounded one at that.

There is another set of opinions in Orthodoxy that understands that the more genuinely holy a person becomes the more difficult it becomes for the soul to sin because the will becomes ever more oriented toward God.

It is in this light that the Mother of God would be without sin.

Not because there are not temptations:  Not because there is not danger:  Not because there is no choice.

But because there is great and abiding holiness.
can you attribute these words to some Orthodox by quoting them?
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
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: 37,322



« Reply #41 on: November 26, 2011, 06:53:14 PM »

Fr. Peter Fehlner addresses Mary's impeccability in the educational talk linked below.  The question about her impeccability begins at about the 22 minute mark in the audio recording (Question 32), so anyone who wants to just listen to the pertinent material should skip ahead to that point.  

http://s3.amazonaws.com/airmaria/mctc/mctc0005.mp3

Fr. Peter distinguishes between Christ who cannot sin because He is a divine person, and Mary who cannot sin because she has received a special privilege of grace from God.  Enjoy!

Father Peter Damian with Dr Mark Miravalle...is it?

You cannot pawn these perspectives off as formal Catholic teaching any more than you can pawn any other fringe teaching off as formal Catholic teaching.  There is some truth in them all...but there is not all-truth in any one of them alone.
Dr. Miravalle is a doctor of theology licenses by the Vatican (in all senses of the word: he graduated from the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas (Angelicum) in Rome), with the rank of professor, award winning, at Francisco University at Steubenville as a specialist in Mariology.  Not some crackpot on the internet (or, at least not just some crack pot).
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
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 #42 on: November 26, 2011, 07:00:56 PM »

"Two special factors rendered Mary impeccable or unable to sin. The first was her constant awareness of God, living always in his presence, and the second was her reception of special and extraordinary graces. These special graces made it possible for Mary to maintain a perfect harmony in her mind, will and emotions and to recognize always what was the right thing to do and then to do it."

Fr. Kenneth Baker, S.J.
Fundamentals of Catholicism: God, Trinity, Creation, Christ, Mary (Volume 2)
(San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1983)
Page 332
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
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 #43 on: November 26, 2011, 07:11:28 PM »

Dr. Miravalle is a doctor of theology licenses by the Vatican (in all senses of the word: he graduated from the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas (Angelicum) in Rome), with the rank of professor, award winning, at Francisco University at Steubenville as a specialist in Mariology.
Well said!  I took two different classes with Dr. Miravalle while working on my MA in Theology at Franciscan University, and I can attest to the fact that he is an honest and kindhearted man; and moreover, during my time at the university he was never accused by anyone of teaching heresy or of promoting theological error of any kind.
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
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 #44 on: November 26, 2011, 07:40:30 PM »

"We can also say that Our Lady enjoyed the gift of a certain impeccability, by which is understood indefectibility in the moral order, or the inability to sin.  One type of impeccability is that of Christ as man, owing to the Hypostatic Union.  In Christ there is only one Person, that of the Word, to whom all actions, both divine and human, are attributed.  Secondary causes of Christ's impeccability are also the fullness of habitual grace and the beatific vision.  Hence Christ possesses metaphysical impeccability.  On the other hand, the angels and saints enjoy physical impeccability, because they cannot turn away from the beatific vision of God in His essence.  Our Lady, in her life on earth enjoyed moral impeccability, because given her personal dignity as Mother of God she could not incur the stain of sin."

Fr. Paul Haffner
The Mystery of Mary
(Chicago:  Liturgy Training Publications, 2004)
Pages 94-95
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
Tags: Charitable Ultramontanists Medieval Augustine Immaculate Conception 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 »   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 0.186 seconds with 72 queries.