OrthodoxChristianity.net
September 01, 2014, 10:24:39 PM *
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 18417 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,189


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #225 on: December 14, 2011, 03:35:50 PM »

Dear Papist,

One more comment.  The idea of applying merits is a very legalistic way of looking at things.  It implies there is a "thing" that can be transferred.  Christ's actions are not "things" that can be issued like a check. 

Salvation is a result of an individual choosing to accept the Gospel and participating in the life of Christ through the sacraments and engaging in the process of theosis (sanctification).  Its not about applying merits to obtain a pardon, or paying reparations to God.  The individual is responsible to pick up the Cross and follow.  Its not about sending in payment for a debt.

Peter
Its actually quite legalistic to say that God could not have applied the remeption won by Christ before he died on the cross. It ignores the mystery of God's eternity.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,349


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #226 on: December 14, 2011, 03:41:15 PM »

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?

It is necessary for her to be immaculately conceived for her to be the Mother of God,because it is fitting and proper for God to be conceived as man in purity,and not in impurity. A human person remains essentially what he or she is at conception until death. Being cleansed and filled by the Holy Spirit does not remove all the damage caused by original sin,because the weakness for evil is an intrinsic defect of the person at conception. Jesus inherited from Mary her own intrinsic purity of soul and body.

A person who is conceived with a fallen nature can co-operate with divine grace,but it is not likely that a girl with a fallen nature,who did not know and love Jesus,would have strong enough faith to trust the angel Gabriel's words and be willing to bear the Son of God out of wedlock.




So if the Virgin Mary was Immacuately Conceived, then her being holy is no big deal then. Afterall, it means that she got it easy since God protected her from sin then. Right?


Who do you think protects you and me from sin, when we do not sin?

God and his grace are the bulwark.  When I go to confession, my Church teaches me that the greatest benefit that I derive from that confession are the sacramental graces that help me to not sin again.

I have the choice to cooperate with those graces or not.

The same holds true for the immaculate Mother of God.
It does not hold true because if the IC is correct, she had a special advantage that nobody else did it makes her holiness an afterthought because it was taken care of for her.

I still ask from above. If Mary had to be immacuately conceived for Jesus' sake, why were Joachim and Anna not for Mary's sake? Or their parents, et al?

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,189


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #227 on: December 14, 2011, 03:42:55 PM »

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?

It is necessary for her to be immaculately conceived for her to be the Mother of God,because it is fitting and proper for God to be conceived as man in purity,and not in impurity. A human person remains essentially what he or she is at conception until death. Being cleansed and filled by the Holy Spirit does not remove all the damage caused by original sin,because the weakness for evil is an intrinsic defect of the person at conception. Jesus inherited from Mary her own intrinsic purity of soul and body.

A person who is conceived with a fallen nature can co-operate with divine grace,but it is not likely that a girl with a fallen nature,who did not know and love Jesus,would have strong enough faith to trust the angel Gabriel's words and be willing to bear the Son of God out of wedlock.




So if the Virgin Mary was Immacuately Conceived, then her being holy is no big deal then. Afterall, it means that she got it easy since God protected her from sin then. Right?


Who do you think protects you and me from sin, when we do not sin?

God and his grace are the bulwark.  When I go to confession, my Church teaches me that the greatest benefit that I derive from that confession are the sacramental graces that help me to not sin again.

I have the choice to cooperate with those graces or not.

The same holds true for the immaculate Mother of God.
It does not hold true because if the IC is correct, she had a special advantage that nobody else did it makes her holiness an afterthought because it was taken care of for her.

I still ask from above. If Mary had to be immacuately conceived for Jesus' sake, why were Joachim and Anna not for Mary's sake? Or their parents, et al?

PP
Does that mean that Adam and Eve had a special advantage that nobody else does?
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Apotheoun
"Three realities pertain to God: essence, energy, and the triad of divine hypostaseis." St. Gregory Palamas
OC.net guru
*******
Online Online

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


St. John Maximovitch


WWW
« Reply #228 on: December 14, 2011, 03:43:54 PM »

Based upon the text quoted so far in this thread, I would make one small change (highlighted in boldface) to what Elijahmaria wrote in the post below:

Are you all noting carefully that in all of these quotes and discussions that it is never suggested that the Theotokos never lived free from all temptation, or free from all emotional responses?  Have you noted that the Catholic Church venerates her sorrows as does Orthodoxy?  And that none of these quotes provided by Todd suggest that she did not sorrow?  All they say is that no matter how much she might have been tempted, she was incapable of yielding in any way to that temptation...and she never yielded by grace, and her cooperation with that grace.
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
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,349


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #229 on: December 14, 2011, 03:45:11 PM »

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?

It is necessary for her to be immaculately conceived for her to be the Mother of God,because it is fitting and proper for God to be conceived as man in purity,and not in impurity. A human person remains essentially what he or she is at conception until death. Being cleansed and filled by the Holy Spirit does not remove all the damage caused by original sin,because the weakness for evil is an intrinsic defect of the person at conception. Jesus inherited from Mary her own intrinsic purity of soul and body.

A person who is conceived with a fallen nature can co-operate with divine grace,but it is not likely that a girl with a fallen nature,who did not know and love Jesus,would have strong enough faith to trust the angel Gabriel's words and be willing to bear the Son of God out of wedlock.




So if the Virgin Mary was Immacuately Conceived, then her being holy is no big deal then. Afterall, it means that she got it easy since God protected her from sin then. Right?


Who do you think protects you and me from sin, when we do not sin?

God and his grace are the bulwark.  When I go to confession, my Church teaches me that the greatest benefit that I derive from that confession are the sacramental graces that help me to not sin again.

I have the choice to cooperate with those graces or not.

The same holds true for the immaculate Mother of God.
It does not hold true because if the IC is correct, she had a special advantage that nobody else did it makes her holiness an afterthought because it was taken care of for her.

I still ask from above. If Mary had to be immacuately conceived for Jesus' sake, why were Joachim and Anna not for Mary's sake? Or their parents, et al?

PP
Does that mean that Adam and Eve had a special advantage that nobody else does?
Since we dont claim Adam and Eve to be holy and spotless, does it matter?

So, about Joachim and Anna......
PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,189


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #230 on: December 14, 2011, 03:46:04 PM »

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?

It is necessary for her to be immaculately conceived for her to be the Mother of God,because it is fitting and proper for God to be conceived as man in purity,and not in impurity. A human person remains essentially what he or she is at conception until death. Being cleansed and filled by the Holy Spirit does not remove all the damage caused by original sin,because the weakness for evil is an intrinsic defect of the person at conception. Jesus inherited from Mary her own intrinsic purity of soul and body.

A person who is conceived with a fallen nature can co-operate with divine grace,but it is not likely that a girl with a fallen nature,who did not know and love Jesus,would have strong enough faith to trust the angel Gabriel's words and be willing to bear the Son of God out of wedlock.




So if the Virgin Mary was Immacuately Conceived, then her being holy is no big deal then. Afterall, it means that she got it easy since God protected her from sin then. Right?


Who do you think protects you and me from sin, when we do not sin?

God and his grace are the bulwark.  When I go to confession, my Church teaches me that the greatest benefit that I derive from that confession are the sacramental graces that help me to not sin again.

I have the choice to cooperate with those graces or not.

The same holds true for the immaculate Mother of God.
It does not hold true because if the IC is correct, she had a special advantage that nobody else did it makes her holiness an afterthought because it was taken care of for her.

I still ask from above. If Mary had to be immacuately conceived for Jesus' sake, why were Joachim and Anna not for Mary's sake? Or their parents, et al?

PP
Does that mean that Adam and Eve had a special advantage that nobody else does?
Since we dont claim Adam and Eve to be holy and spotless, does it matter?

So, about Joachim and Anna......
PP
They were holy and spotless before the fall.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,349


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #231 on: December 14, 2011, 03:48:26 PM »

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?

It is necessary for her to be immaculately conceived for her to be the Mother of God,because it is fitting and proper for God to be conceived as man in purity,and not in impurity. A human person remains essentially what he or she is at conception until death. Being cleansed and filled by the Holy Spirit does not remove all the damage caused by original sin,because the weakness for evil is an intrinsic defect of the person at conception. Jesus inherited from Mary her own intrinsic purity of soul and body.

A person who is conceived with a fallen nature can co-operate with divine grace,but it is not likely that a girl with a fallen nature,who did not know and love Jesus,would have strong enough faith to trust the angel Gabriel's words and be willing to bear the Son of God out of wedlock.




So if the Virgin Mary was Immacuately Conceived, then her being holy is no big deal then. Afterall, it means that she got it easy since God protected her from sin then. Right?


Who do you think protects you and me from sin, when we do not sin?

God and his grace are the bulwark.  When I go to confession, my Church teaches me that the greatest benefit that I derive from that confession are the sacramental graces that help me to not sin again.

I have the choice to cooperate with those graces or not.

The same holds true for the immaculate Mother of God.
It does not hold true because if the IC is correct, she had a special advantage that nobody else did it makes her holiness an afterthought because it was taken care of for her.

I still ask from above. If Mary had to be immacuately conceived for Jesus' sake, why were Joachim and Anna not for Mary's sake? Or their parents, et al?

PP
Does that mean that Adam and Eve had a special advantage that nobody else does?
Since we dont claim Adam and Eve to be holy and spotless, does it matter?

So, about Joachim and Anna......
PP
They were holy and spotless before the fall.
And? They fell so adding them to this discussion is irrelevant. I never sinned before I sinned too, so what? (spoken rhetorically, not as a jerk, which I KNOW that is how it sounded)

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,189


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #232 on: December 14, 2011, 03:55:15 PM »

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?

It is necessary for her to be immaculately conceived for her to be the Mother of God,because it is fitting and proper for God to be conceived as man in purity,and not in impurity. A human person remains essentially what he or she is at conception until death. Being cleansed and filled by the Holy Spirit does not remove all the damage caused by original sin,because the weakness for evil is an intrinsic defect of the person at conception. Jesus inherited from Mary her own intrinsic purity of soul and body.

A person who is conceived with a fallen nature can co-operate with divine grace,but it is not likely that a girl with a fallen nature,who did not know and love Jesus,would have strong enough faith to trust the angel Gabriel's words and be willing to bear the Son of God out of wedlock.




So if the Virgin Mary was Immacuately Conceived, then her being holy is no big deal then. Afterall, it means that she got it easy since God protected her from sin then. Right?


Who do you think protects you and me from sin, when we do not sin?

God and his grace are the bulwark.  When I go to confession, my Church teaches me that the greatest benefit that I derive from that confession are the sacramental graces that help me to not sin again.

I have the choice to cooperate with those graces or not.

The same holds true for the immaculate Mother of God.
It does not hold true because if the IC is correct, she had a special advantage that nobody else did it makes her holiness an afterthought because it was taken care of for her.

I still ask from above. If Mary had to be immacuately conceived for Jesus' sake, why were Joachim and Anna not for Mary's sake? Or their parents, et al?

PP
Does that mean that Adam and Eve had a special advantage that nobody else does?
Since we dont claim Adam and Eve to be holy and spotless, does it matter?

So, about Joachim and Anna......
PP
They were holy and spotless before the fall.
And? They fell so adding them to this discussion is irrelevant. I never sinned before I sinned too, so what? (spoken rhetorically, not as a jerk, which I KNOW that is how it sounded)

PP
It's completely relevant. You are saying that Mary was granted a special advantage by being created like Adam and Eve.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #233 on: December 14, 2011, 03:56:04 PM »

Since we dont claim Adam and Eve to be holy and spotless, does it matter?
So God created Adam and Eve with sin and evil already on their soul? Sounds blasphemous to me.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,483



« Reply #234 on: December 14, 2011, 03:57:01 PM »

It's completely relevant. You are saying that Mary was granted a special advantage by being created like Adam and Eve.
Yes, as could not be created like Adam and Eve and take her humanity from Adam and Eve at the same time.
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
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,349


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #235 on: December 14, 2011, 03:59:08 PM »

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?

It is necessary for her to be immaculately conceived for her to be the Mother of God,because it is fitting and proper for God to be conceived as man in purity,and not in impurity. A human person remains essentially what he or she is at conception until death. Being cleansed and filled by the Holy Spirit does not remove all the damage caused by original sin,because the weakness for evil is an intrinsic defect of the person at conception. Jesus inherited from Mary her own intrinsic purity of soul and body.

A person who is conceived with a fallen nature can co-operate with divine grace,but it is not likely that a girl with a fallen nature,who did not know and love Jesus,would have strong enough faith to trust the angel Gabriel's words and be willing to bear the Son of God out of wedlock.




So if the Virgin Mary was Immacuately Conceived, then her being holy is no big deal then. Afterall, it means that she got it easy since God protected her from sin then. Right?


Who do you think protects you and me from sin, when we do not sin?

God and his grace are the bulwark.  When I go to confession, my Church teaches me that the greatest benefit that I derive from that confession are the sacramental graces that help me to not sin again.

I have the choice to cooperate with those graces or not.

The same holds true for the immaculate Mother of God.
It does not hold true because if the IC is correct, she had a special advantage that nobody else did it makes her holiness an afterthought because it was taken care of for her.

I still ask from above. If Mary had to be immacuately conceived for Jesus' sake, why were Joachim and Anna not for Mary's sake? Or their parents, et al?

PP
Does that mean that Adam and Eve had a special advantage that nobody else does?
Since we dont claim Adam and Eve to be holy and spotless, does it matter?

So, about Joachim and Anna......
PP
They were holy and spotless before the fall.
And? They fell so adding them to this discussion is irrelevant. I never sinned before I sinned too, so what? (spoken rhetorically, not as a jerk, which I KNOW that is how it sounded)

PP
It's completely relevant. You are saying that Mary was granted a special advantage by being created like Adam and Eve.
No, I am saying that Mary was given a special advantage. If the IC is correct, than God protected her from the stain of Original Sin. Im not saying she was was like Adam and Eve. They were created before Original Sin existed. Mary was conceived after original Sin existed. She was protected from it. My question is, what the big deal of her being holy then? She had an advantage that made it easier. Secondly, if Mary had to be immaculately conceived for Jesus' sake, why were Joachim and Anna not for Mary's sake? Or their parents? or theirs? Certianly, if God wanted to, he could have Christ born with out all this trouble of Mary being born without taint. It makes no sense.
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
peteprint
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 704



« Reply #236 on: December 14, 2011, 04:02:20 PM »

The RC position is that the Virgin Mary was incapable of sinning by a special act of God.  The Orthodox position is that the Virgin Mary was capable of sinning, but made the choice to accept God's call to be the Mother of the Lord.  She had the choice.

Beyond that, there are differences in opinion among Orthodox, including the belief that she was completely purified at the Annunciation.  The majority of Orthodox believe that Mary never sinned, while a smaller minority believe she might have in some minor way prior to her purification.

The big difference is the incapable part mentioned by a previous poster.  We have a problem with the idea of God making her incapable of any choice in the matter.  Where is the synergy?  Where is the Virgin's struggle?
Logged
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,349


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #237 on: December 14, 2011, 04:03:58 PM »

The RC position is that the Virgin Mary was incapable of sinning by a special act of God.  The Orthodox position is that the Virgin Mary was capable of sinning, but made the choice to accept God's call to be the Mother of the Lord.  She had the choice.

Beyond that, there are differences in opinion among Orthodox, including the belief that she was completely purified at the Annunciation.  The majority of Orthodox believe that Mary never sinned, while a smaller minority believe she might have in some minor way prior to her purification.

The big difference is the incapable part mentioned by a previous poster.  We have a problem with the idea of God making her incapable of any choice in the matter.  Where is the synergy?  Where is the Virgin's struggle?
Can't we just say she lived a holy life and leave it at that?

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
peteprint
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 704



« Reply #238 on: December 14, 2011, 04:04:57 PM »

If sin is missing the mark, then what is being free of the stain of original sin?  Being incapable of missing the mark?
Logged
peteprint
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 704



« Reply #239 on: December 14, 2011, 04:05:24 PM »

The RC position is that the Virgin Mary was incapable of sinning by a special act of God.  The Orthodox position is that the Virgin Mary was capable of sinning, but made the choice to accept God's call to be the Mother of the Lord.  She had the choice.

Beyond that, there are differences in opinion among Orthodox, including the belief that she was completely purified at the Annunciation.  The majority of Orthodox believe that Mary never sinned, while a smaller minority believe she might have in some minor way prior to her purification.

The big difference is the incapable part mentioned by a previous poster.  We have a problem with the idea of God making her incapable of any choice in the matter.  Where is the synergy?  Where is the Virgin's struggle?
Can't we just say she lived a holy life and leave it at that?

PP

Yes!   Smiley
Logged
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,349


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #240 on: December 14, 2011, 04:09:38 PM »

If sin is missing the mark, then what is being free of the stain of original sin?  Being incapable of missing the mark?
I agree, but Im trying to equate the concept of Original Sin and the IC. Neither make no sence what so ever to me.
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,189


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #241 on: December 14, 2011, 04:10:05 PM »

If sin is missing the mark, then what is being free of the stain of original sin?  Being incapable of missing the mark?
No, it means that one is not born with a fallen nature. It means that such a person was created like Adam and Eve.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,349


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #242 on: December 14, 2011, 04:11:41 PM »

Quote
it means that one is not born with a fallen nature
Of that, I agree. Our nature is tarnished...i believe I heard that somewhere  laugh

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
peteprint
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 704



« Reply #243 on: December 14, 2011, 04:17:18 PM »

If sin is missing the mark, then what is being free of the stain of original sin?  Being incapable of missing the mark?
No, it means that one is not born with a fallen nature. It means that such a person was created like Adam and Eve.

These quotes are from a good article on the Fall and fallen nature:

"Before their fall in Paradise, however, writes St. Athanasius of Alexandria, our forefathers "did not die and did not decay, escaped death and corruption. The presence of the Word with them shielded them from natural corruption, as also the Book of Wisdom says, God created man for incorruption and as an image of His own eternity; but by the envy of the devil death entered into the world (Wis. 2:23f.) When this happened, men began to die, and corruption spread unchecked among them and held sway over men to more than a natural degree, because it was the penalty concerning which God had forewarned would be the reward of transgressing the commandment" (On the Incarnation of the Word)."

"St. Cyril of Alexandria, for instance, observes: "Since [Adam] produced children after falling into this state, we, his descendants, are corruptible as the issue of a corruptible source. It is in this sense that we are heirs of Adam's curse. Not that we are punished for having disobeyed God's commandment along with him, but that he became mortal and the curse of mortality was transmitted to his seed after him, offspring born of a mortal source . . . So corruption and death are the universal inheritance of Adam's transgression" (Doctrinal questions and answers, 6). Elsewhere, commenting on St. Paul's teaching, he explains: "Human nature became sick with sin. Because of the disobedience of one (that is, of Adam), the many became sinners; not because they transgressed together with Adam (for they were not there) but because they are of his nature, which entered under the dominion of sin . . . Human nature became ill and subject to corruption through the transgression of Adam, thus penetrating man's very passions" (On Romans 5.18)."

http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/dogmatics/golubov_rags_of_mortality.htm
Logged
Apotheoun
"Three realities pertain to God: essence, energy, and the triad of divine hypostaseis." St. Gregory Palamas
OC.net guru
*******
Online Online

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


St. John Maximovitch


WWW
« Reply #244 on: December 14, 2011, 04:43:26 PM »

According to St. Irenaeus, Adam, i.e., initially after his creation, is a mere infant with the potential to grow in virtue (see St. Irenaeus, "Proof of the Apostolic Preaching," no. 12).  In other words, St. Irenaeus holds that Adam was innocent when he was placed in Paradise by God, but that he had not yet actualized any of the virtues that are inherently present within his nature as a mere potency.  Now in order for the virtues to be actualized - i.e., so that Adam can become righteous, holy, and just - it is necessary for him to practice ascetic discipline, and in fact that is what he was supposed to do by keeping the commandments of God through his tending of the Garden.  Alas, as is clear from the Biblical texts, he failed in his assigned task.

Finally, St. Irenaeus' approach to the mystery of creation was ultimately taken up by the greater Greek Patristic tradition, which distinguished between man's creation in the "image of God" and his "likeness to God," where the former term concerns the properties of human nature, while the latter term concerns man's personal activity by which he likens himself to God through the practice of virtue.
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
*******
Online Online

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


St. John Maximovitch


WWW
« Reply #245 on: December 14, 2011, 04:46:06 PM »

Below is another text I found that talks about Mary's impeccability:



"31.  In what does the Immaculate Conception of Mary consist?
In this, that from the first instant of her conception, she was preserved free from all stain of original sin.

32.  Through whose merits was the Blessed Virgin preserved from original sin?
By an anticipated application of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Saviour of mankind.

33.  How was Jesus Mary's Redeemer?
Jesus Christ is the Redeemer of all; He redeemed sinners by paying their ransom, and His mother, by preserving her from the slavery of sin.

34.  Was Mary impeccable?
Yes; by a special privilege of God, who confirmed her in grace.  She never committed any sin, whether mortal or venial; she was always all fair and without spot.

35.  Did Mary, even though impeccable, acquire merits?
Yes, she acquired merits without number and of such value as is known to God alone; for all her actions were done freely, under the impulse of actual grace, and with perfect charity."

Br. John Chrysostom
Course of Religious Instruction
Institute of the Brothers of the Christian Schools
Manual of Christian Doctrine:  Comprising Dogma, Moral, and Worship
29th Edition:  Authorized English Version revised in accordance with the Code of 1918
(New York: John Joseph McVey, 1923)
Pages 77-78
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
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,349


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #246 on: December 14, 2011, 04:53:53 PM »

So again 2 things.
1. Mary's holiness is no big deal then. She was given a special "leg up".
2. Still wondering about Joachim and Anna, and their parents, and their parents, etc.

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
peteprint
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 704



« Reply #247 on: December 14, 2011, 05:03:37 PM »

Below is another text I found that talks about Mary's impeccability:



"31.  In what does the Immaculate Conception of Mary consist?
In this, that from the first instant of her conception, she was preserved free from all stain of original sin.

She was still subject to physical death.

32.  Through whose merits was the Blessed Virgin preserved from original sin?
By an anticipated application of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Saviour of mankind.

The concept of merits and transferring them to others is not Orthodox.

33.  How was Jesus Mary's Redeemer?
Jesus Christ is the Redeemer of all; He redeemed sinners by paying their ransom, and His mother, by preserving her from the slavery of sin.

He saved Mary in the same way as he saves others, not by preserving her from sin.

34.  Was Mary impeccable?
Yes; by a special privilege of God, who confirmed her in grace.  She never committed any sin, whether mortal or venial; she was always all fair and without spot.

We don't accept that Mary was preserved from sin by a special privilege of God.

35.  Did Mary, even though impeccable, acquire merits?
Yes, she acquired merits without number and of such value as is known to God alone; for all her actions were done freely, under the impulse of actual grace, and with perfect charity."

Again, we have no concept of a treasury of merits.  Even the expression "without number," is contradictory.  Either they are measurable or they are not.  How many merits did St. Augustine acquire, or St. John of the Cross?  The system is nonsensical to us.

Br. John Chrysostom
Course of Religious Instruction
Institute of the Brothers of the Christian Schools
Manual of Christian Doctrine:  Comprising Dogma, Moral, and Worship
29th Edition:  Authorized English Version revised in accordance with the Code of 1918
(New York: John Joseph McVey, 1923)
Pages 77-78

Sorry, but I have to say that I reject these beliefs, but of course I would since I am Orthodox.  You have clearly put forth the Roman Catholic position however, thank you.

« Last Edit: December 14, 2011, 05:04:37 PM by peteprint » Logged
Apotheoun
"Three realities pertain to God: essence, energy, and the triad of divine hypostaseis." St. Gregory Palamas
OC.net guru
*******
Online Online

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


St. John Maximovitch


WWW
« Reply #248 on: December 14, 2011, 05:05:36 PM »

Since we dont claim Adam and Eve to be holy and spotless, does it matter?
So God created Adam and Eve with sin and evil already on their soul? Sounds blasphemous to me.
The Orthodox, as I understand it, hold that Adam was created innocent, i.e., like a little child, with the potential to become righteous, holy, and just, by actualizing the potency for virtue within his nature.
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
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,189


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #249 on: December 14, 2011, 05:06:34 PM »

So again 2 things.
1. Mary's holiness is no big deal then. She was given a special "leg up".
2. Still wondering about Joachim and Anna, and their parents, and their parents, etc.

PP
What about her parents?
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,488



« Reply #250 on: December 14, 2011, 05:28:18 PM »

So again 2 things.
1. Mary's holiness is no big deal then. She was given a special "leg up".
2. Still wondering about Joachim and Anna, and their parents, and their parents, etc.

PP
What about her parents?

Put your Aristotelian logic to work. It's turtles all the way down.

The IC just denies the struggle and working out of salvation with God of the Hebrews to bring forth finally a person who could be obedient to God enough to always say yes.

It didn't require any magical sex or conception. It required the blood, sweat, tears,  sin, and repentance of all who came before her and she as well.

There is no need for the theological gymnastics. Scripture is plain enough.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,349


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #251 on: December 14, 2011, 05:51:18 PM »

So again 2 things.
1. Mary's holiness is no big deal then. She was given a special "leg up".
2. Still wondering about Joachim and Anna, and their parents, and their parents, etc.

PP
What about her parents?
I've asked the question enough. im not repeating myself for the 6th time.

So again 2 things.
1. Mary's holiness is no big deal then. She was given a special "leg up".
2. Still wondering about Joachim and Anna, and their parents, and their parents, etc.

PP
What about her parents?

Put your Aristotelian logic to work. It's turtles all the way down.

The IC just denies the struggle and working out of salvation with God of the Hebrews to bring forth finally a person who could be obedient to God enough to always say yes.

It didn't require any magical sex or conception. It required the blood, sweat, tears,  sin, and repentance of all who came before her and she as well.

There is no need for the theological gymnastics. Scripture is plain enough.
Aristotelian logic to work is the problem I think, to begin with here Smiley


PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #252 on: December 14, 2011, 07:15:27 PM »

Dear Papist,

One more comment.  The idea of applying merits is a very legalistic way of looking at things.  It implies there is a "thing" that can be transferred.  Christ's actions are not "things" that can be issued like a check. 

Salvation is a result of an individual choosing to accept the Gospel and participating in the life of Christ through the sacraments and engaging in the process of theosis (sanctification).  Its not about applying merits to obtain a pardon, or paying reparations to God.  The individual is responsible to pick up the Cross and follow.  Its not about sending in payment for a debt.

Peter

Apparently you have no idea what my Church means by "merits"...

But that is nothing new...
Logged

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

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #253 on: December 15, 2011, 12:00:59 AM »

So again 2 things.
1. Mary's holiness is no big deal then. She was given a special "leg up".
2. Still wondering about Joachim and Anna, and their parents, and their parents, etc.

PP
What about her parents?
I've asked the question enough. im not repeating myself for the 6th time.

So again 2 things.
1. Mary's holiness is no big deal then. She was given a special "leg up".
2. Still wondering about Joachim and Anna, and their parents, and their parents, etc.

PP
What about her parents?

Put your Aristotelian logic to work. It's turtles all the way down.

The IC just denies the struggle and working out of salvation with God of the Hebrews to bring forth finally a person who could be obedient to God enough to always say yes.

It didn't require any magical sex or conception. It required the blood, sweat, tears,  sin, and repentance of all who came before her and she as well.

There is no need for the theological gymnastics. Scripture is plain enough.
Aristotelian logic to work is the problem I think, to begin with here Smiley


PP

Wake up, PP.  Aristotle gave you "ousia"... There's more Aristotle and Origen in the patristic fathers than Plato...
Logged

primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,349


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #254 on: December 15, 2011, 01:26:44 PM »

So again 2 things.
1. Mary's holiness is no big deal then. She was given a special "leg up".
2. Still wondering about Joachim and Anna, and their parents, and their parents, etc.

PP
What about her parents?
I've asked the question enough. im not repeating myself for the 6th time.

So again 2 things.
1. Mary's holiness is no big deal then. She was given a special "leg up".
2. Still wondering about Joachim and Anna, and their parents, and their parents, etc.

PP
What about her parents?

Put your Aristotelian logic to work. It's turtles all the way down.

The IC just denies the struggle and working out of salvation with God of the Hebrews to bring forth finally a person who could be obedient to God enough to always say yes.

It didn't require any magical sex or conception. It required the blood, sweat, tears,  sin, and repentance of all who came before her and she as well.

There is no need for the theological gymnastics. Scripture is plain enough.
Aristotelian logic to work is the problem I think, to begin with here Smiley


PP

Wake up, PP.  Aristotle gave you "ousia"... There's more Aristotle and Origen in the patristic fathers than Plato...
I mean tit as a sideways joke. Sorry if I offended. So, will I get an answer to my multi-asked question or......

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
peteprint
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 704



« Reply #255 on: December 15, 2011, 02:14:09 PM »

Dear Papist,

One more comment.  The idea of applying merits is a very legalistic way of looking at things.  It implies there is a "thing" that can be transferred.  Christ's actions are not "things" that can be issued like a check.  

Salvation is a result of an individual choosing to accept the Gospel and participating in the life of Christ through the sacraments and engaging in the process of theosis (sanctification).  Its not about applying merits to obtain a pardon, or paying reparations to God.  The individual is responsible to pick up the Cross and follow.  Its not about sending in payment for a debt.

Peter

Apparently you have no idea what my Church means by "merits"...

But that is nothing new...

Here is what the Catholic Encyclopedia says about merits:

"Each good action of the just man possesses a double value: that of merit and that of satisfaction, or expiation. Merit is personal, and therefore it cannot be transferred; but satisfaction can be applied to others..."

"Since the satisfaction of Christ is infinite, it constitutes an inexhaustible fund which is more than sufficient to cover the indebtedness contracted by sin, Besides, there are the satisfactory works of the Blessed Virgin Mary undiminished by any penalty due to sin, and the virtues, penances, and sufferings of the saints vastly exceeding any temporal punishment which these servants of God might have incurred. These are added to the treasury of the Church as a secondary deposit, not independent of, but rather acquired through, the merits of Christ."

"The existence of an infinite treasury of merits in the Church is dogmatically set forth in the Bull "Unigenitus", published by Clement VI, 27 Jan., 1343, and later inserted in the "Corpus Juris" (Extrav. Com., lib. V, tit. ix. c. ii): "Upon the altar of the Cross", says the pope:

"Christ shed of His blood not merely a drop, though this would have sufficed, by reason of the union with the Word, to redeem the whole human race, but a copious torrent. . . thereby laying up an infinite treasure for mankind. This treasure He neither wrapped up in a napkin nor hid in a field, but entrusted to Blessed Peter, the key-bearer, and his successors, that they might, for just and reasonable causes, distribute it to the faithful in full or in partial remission of the temporal punishment due to sin."

I think I understand the concept quite well.  So it's the satisfaction acquired by others that is transferred.  same difference.  The quote from the Pope specifically states that he can distribute it to others.  So why is it not called the Treasury of Satisfaction"?

So the Lord's excess blood, more than was needed to save mankind, is held in trust by the Church?

Where do these ideas come from?  Shocked

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07783a.htm


 
« Last Edit: December 15, 2011, 02:15:00 PM by peteprint » Logged
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,349


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #256 on: December 15, 2011, 04:45:48 PM »

Ok, Im going to ask one more time since I have been conveniently ignored the last few times I have asked.

If the IC was necessary for Jesus' sake, why was it not necessary for Mary's sake? Why were not Joachim and Anna not protected from "Original Sin"? Why would then not have to be? What about their parents? or theirs? or theirs?

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,189


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #257 on: December 15, 2011, 05:20:30 PM »

Ok, Im going to ask one more time since I have been conveniently ignored the last few times I have asked.

If the IC was necessary for Jesus' sake, why was it not necessary for Mary's sake? Why were not Joachim and Anna not protected from "Original Sin"? Why would then not have to be? What about their parents? or theirs? or theirs?

PP
The Immaculate Conception was not necessary for Jesus' sake. However, it was fitting.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #258 on: December 15, 2011, 05:23:15 PM »

So again 2 things.
1. Mary's holiness is no big deal then. She was given a special "leg up".
2. Still wondering about Joachim and Anna, and their parents, and their parents, etc.

PP
What about her parents?
I've asked the question enough. im not repeating myself for the 6th time.

So again 2 things.
1. Mary's holiness is no big deal then. She was given a special "leg up".
2. Still wondering about Joachim and Anna, and their parents, and their parents, etc.

PP
What about her parents?

Put your Aristotelian logic to work. It's turtles all the way down.

The IC just denies the struggle and working out of salvation with God of the Hebrews to bring forth finally a person who could be obedient to God enough to always say yes.

It didn't require any magical sex or conception. It required the blood, sweat, tears,  sin, and repentance of all who came before her and she as well.

There is no need for the theological gymnastics. Scripture is plain enough.
Aristotelian logic to work is the problem I think, to begin with here Smiley


PP

Wake up, PP.  Aristotle gave you "ousia"... There's more Aristotle and Origen in the patristic fathers than Plato...
I mean tit as a sideways joke. Sorry if I offended. So, will I get an answer to my multi-asked question or......

PP

oooooooooooooops!!...my dum.   Not offended.  Jest surprised.  Now enlightened... Smiley

I hafta go and look at your question...
Logged

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

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #259 on: December 15, 2011, 05:23:15 PM »

Ok, Im going to ask one more time since I have been conveniently ignored the last few times I have asked.

If the IC was necessary for Jesus' sake, why was it not necessary for Mary's sake? Why were not Joachim and Anna not protected from "Original Sin"? Why would then not have to be? What about their parents? or theirs? or theirs?

PP

I never bother with this question because the Immaculate Conception is descriptive of the relationship between the Mother of God and the Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.  It is a doctrine that addresses the spiritual holiness and has nothing to do with the material nature of the Theotokos's humanity.  She is an ordinary human by nature [birth]...but she is exemplary by grace.

Orthodox apparently ask this question incessantly because...somebody else did, I suppose.  It certainly shows a woeful lack of understanding of the teaching to continue to ask such a meaningless question.

Also the Church has never said that the Immaculate Conception is "necessary" for the Incarnation.

M.
Logged

primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,349


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #260 on: December 15, 2011, 05:31:37 PM »

From the Catholic Encyclopedia

Quote
Mary needed the redeeming Saviour to obtain this exemption, and to be delivered from the universal necessity and debt (debitum) of being subject to original sin
So, in light of the above, my question is still valid.

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #261 on: December 15, 2011, 06:21:53 PM »

From the Catholic Encyclopedia

Quote
Mary needed the redeeming Saviour to obtain this exemption, and to be delivered from the universal necessity and debt (debitum) of being subject to original sin
So, in light of the above, my question is still valid.

PP

In light of the above my answer is vindicated.
Logged

ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,483



« Reply #262 on: December 15, 2011, 06:48:36 PM »

Also the Church has never said that the Immaculate Conception is "necessary" for the Incarnation.
No, the Church never did.

The Vatican said "Potuit, decuit ergo fecit."
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 #263 on: December 16, 2011, 02:40:06 AM »

Also the Church has never said that the Immaculate Conception is "necessary" for the Incarnation.


The Vatican said "Potuit, decuit ergo fecit."

Indeed you are correct.  The Vatican is the Petrine See of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.
Logged

anthony022071
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 47


« Reply #264 on: December 16, 2011, 02:06:41 PM »

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?

It is necessary for her to be immaculately conceived for her to be the Mother of God,because it is fitting and proper for God to be conceived as man in purity,and not in impurity. A human person remains essentially what he or she is at conception until death. Being cleansed and filled by the Holy Spirit does not remove all the damage caused by original sin,because the weakness for evil is an intrinsic defect of the person at conception. Jesus inherited from Mary her own intrinsic purity of soul and body.

A person who is conceived with a fallen nature can co-operate with divine grace,but it is not likely that a girl with a fallen nature,who did not know and love Jesus,would have strong enough faith to trust the angel Gabriel's words and be willing to bear the Son of God out of wedlock.




So if the Virgin Mary was Immaculately Conceived, then her being holy is no big deal then. After all,it means that she got it easy since God protected her from sin then. Right?

Her being immaculately conceived is a big deal,because she is the New Eve and the one who bore Christ. Immaculate Conception means "pure beginning". She is the beginning of the renewal of humanity. Her purity of conception does not mean that she was not tempted to sin. And she certainly did not get off easy. She suffered greatly for how Jesus suffered and was put to death.

Quote
So why were Her parents not protected from original Sin too? After all if the Virgin was to be sinless, and using the same criteria for Mary would it not be used for her parents as well? What about theirs? How far back does it go? If not, why not?

It was not necessary for her parents and ancestors to be immaculately conceived,because only she was to bear Christ. Her purity of conception doesn't depend upon a lineage of a pure conceptions,as if God had to do it in a mechanistic way.


Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,483



« Reply #265 on: December 16, 2011, 02:34:20 PM »

Also the Church has never said that the Immaculate Conception is "necessary" for the Incarnation.


The Vatican said "Potuit, decuit ergo fecit."

Indeed you are correct.  The Vatican is the Petrine See of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.
I believe the phrase is soi-disant, like much of what the Vatican teaches.

Alexandria and Antioch-and now Rome again

teach the Faith of St. Peter in the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.  And, needless to say, they do not teach the IC.
Logged

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

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,483



« Reply #266 on: December 16, 2011, 02:37:18 PM »

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?

It is necessary for her to be immaculately conceived for her to be the Mother of God,because it is fitting and proper for God to be conceived as man in purity,and not in impurity. A human person remains essentially what he or she is at conception until death. Being cleansed and filled by the Holy Spirit does not remove all the damage caused by original sin,because the weakness for evil is an intrinsic defect of the person at conception. Jesus inherited from Mary her own intrinsic purity of soul and body.

A person who is conceived with a fallen nature can co-operate with divine grace,but it is not likely that a girl with a fallen nature,who did not know and love Jesus,would have strong enough faith to trust the angel Gabriel's words and be willing to bear the Son of God out of wedlock.




So if the Virgin Mary was Immaculately Conceived, then her being holy is no big deal then. After all,it means that she got it easy since God protected her from sin then. Right?

Her being immaculately conceived is a big deal,because she is the New Eve and the one who bore Christ. Immaculate Conception means "pure beginning". She is the beginning of the renewal of humanity. Her purity of conception does not mean that she was not tempted to sin. And she certainly did not get off easy. She suffered greatly for how Jesus suffered and was put to death.

Quote
So why were Her parents not protected from original Sin too? After all if the Virgin was to be sinless, and using the same criteria for Mary would it not be used for her parents as well? What about theirs? How far back does it go? If not, why not?

It was not necessary for her parents and ancestors to be immaculately conceived,because only she was to bear Christ. Her purity of conception doesn't depend upon a lineage of a pure conceptions,as if God had to do it in a mechanistic way.
She received her human nature in the same mechanistic way the rest of us got ours.  Otherwise she couldn't give it to Him Who knew no sin Whom God made sin for us.  Hence the IC does not comport with the Orthodox teaching from the Scripture through the Catholic Tradition of the Church.
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
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,349


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #267 on: December 16, 2011, 02:46:41 PM »

Quote
It was not necessary for her parents and ancestors to be immaculately conceived,because only she was to bear Christ. Her purity of conception doesn't depend upon a lineage of a pure conceptions,as if God had to do it in a mechanistic way
So why does some legalistic mumbo jumbo need to be done for Christ? If a lineage of pruity is not necessary, why was it necessary for Jesus' sake?

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
anthony022071
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 47


« Reply #268 on: December 16, 2011, 03:07:34 PM »

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?

It is necessary for her to be immaculately conceived for her to be the Mother of God,because it is fitting and proper for God to be conceived as man in purity,and not in impurity.


Quote
He made Him Who knew no sin to become sin for us.  II Corinthians 5:21.

That's a figure of speech. Christ bore our sins and suffered and was put to death as if he were guilty of them,to atone for our sins. But he did not actually become sin itself. Sin is neither divine nor human.

Quote
So much for your "need," which in fact contradicts scripture on this very point.  

If she is immaculately conceived, then Christ did not assume fallen humanity to raise it up.

He assumed humanity,but not our fallen nature. He did not exalt our inclination to sin. There's a difference between our human weakness of sinful inclinations and our human weakness of suffering and death.

A human person remains essentially what he or she is at conception until death.

Quote
So baptism is useless, and you are still lost in your sins.

Baptism cleanses us of the guilt of original sin,it does not remove the damage caused by original sin. That is obvious from experience. We still have a weakness for sin for not being in a perfect state of grace,we are still physically imperfect and frail,and we still die.
« Last Edit: December 16, 2011, 03:08:28 PM by anthony022071 » Logged
anthony022071
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 47


« Reply #269 on: December 16, 2011, 03:11:01 PM »

Quote
He made Him Who knew no sin to become sin for us.  II Corinthians 5:21.

That's a figure of speech. Christ bore our sins and suffered and was put to death as if he were guilty of them,to atone for our sins. But he did not actually become sin itself. Sin is neither divine nor human.

Quote
So much for your "need," which in fact contradicts scripture on this very point.  

If she is immaculately conceived, then Christ did not assume fallen humanity to raise it up.

He assumed humanity,but not our fallen nature. He did not exalt our inclination to sin. There's a difference between our human weakness of sinful inclinations and our human weakness of suffering and death.

A human person remains essentially what he or she is at conception until death.

Quote
So baptism is useless, and you are still lost in your sins.

Baptism cleanses us of the guilt of original sin,it does not remove the damage caused by original sin. That is obvious from experience. We still have a weakness for sin for not being in a perfect state of grace,we are still physically imperfect and frail,and we still die.

Logged
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 0.189 seconds with 72 queries.