Perpetual virginity (not a hate thread)

[Tu Es Petrus]

....The IC is an unnecessary, late, and frankly, unbiblical invention.....

Can you point to a scripture that you feels proves that Mary WAS born into original sin?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Here's what confuses me, Jack- what in these writings 1. supports IC or 2. Conflicts with my assertions?

Obviously, as an EO Christian, I am/ we are informed by the ECFs. That does not, of course, mean that everything ever written by an ECF is the 'word of God.' What shall we make of Chrysostom's description of Jews, or Origen's Universalism?

Returning to point: The IC is an unnecessary, late, and frankly, unbiblical invention. We acknowledge that She was spotless/righteous- but, as has been said, so were many OT Saints- proving our assertion that Augustinian inherited sin, and more precisely, Calvin's Utter Depravity are utter falsehood.

I suppose that means we and the Church should look to the Inspired word of God in the Scriptures to indeed make sure all that the ECFs wrote line up with the Word. Is that a correct assessment?

John 5:39 "Ye are searchingthe Writings that ye are seeming in them life age-during to be having, and those are the ones-testifying about Me".

Reve 14:11 And the smoke of the tormentingof them into ages of ages is ascending and not they are having Rest day and night

 

[Thekla]

Very well said, and I do agree with you on these points. For me though, I have no issue with this viewpoint and the Immaculate Conception both being true.

sorry to butt in

But if Mary was immaculately conceived, did she still have the ability to sin ?
This is a crucial point, I think.

 

[Musa80]

sorry to butt in

But if Mary was immaculately conceived, did she still have the ability to sin ?
This is a crucial point, I think.

As far as I am aware, yes, and the Catholic Catechism does not say any different.

 

[Thekla]

As far as I am aware, yes, and the Catholic Catechism does not say any different.

If she still had the ability to sin (excuse me for being dense !) how is her conception "different" or immaculate, and what does this condition of conception confer ?

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Here's what confuses me, Jack- what in these writings 1. supports IC or 2. Conflicts with my assertions?

Obviously, as an EO Christian, I am/ we are informed by the ECFs. That does not, of course, mean that everything ever written by an ECF is the 'word of God.' What shall we make of Chrysostom's description of Jews, or Origen's Universalism?

Returning to point: The IC is an unnecessary, late, and frankly, unbiblical invention. We acknowledge that She was spotless/righteous- but, as has been said, so were many OT Saints- proving our assertion that Augustinian inherited sin, and more precisely, Calvin's Utter Depravity are utter falsehood.

We must understand more than one thing about Mary and her role in bearing Jesus as a baby.

One is that she is forever virgin.
Another is that she is Full of Grace.
And that she was assumed into Heaven.

In the studies of these three things and using all that the ECFs can offer to help us understand we will find that these truths lead to Mary and her Immaculate Conception.

So, it is not that I am taking the ECfs writings as inspired, though some obviously are. Nor is it that I am suggesting anything new has been given or created to the deposit of Christianities teahcings. Instead I am saying that the Immaculate Conception is something the only and best conclusion.

 

[Thekla]

Can you point to a scripture that you feels proves that Mary WAS born into original sin?

(the EO doesn't teach "original sin, but "ancestral sin", so perhaps "original sin" needs a brief explanation )

 

[JacktheCatholic]

I suppose that means we and the Church should look to the Inspired word of God in the Scriptures to indeed make sure all that the ECFs wrote line up with the Word. Is that a correct assessment?

John 5:39 "Ye are searchingthe Writings that ye are seeming in them life age-during to be having, and those are the ones-testifying about Me".

Reve 14:11 And the smoke of the tormentingof them into ages of ages is ascending and not they are having Rest day and night

The Bible is not all that Christians have looked to for the Word of God in inspired writings.

Just thought that needed to be said...

 

[Musa80]

If she still had the ability to sin (excuse me for being dense !) how is her conception "different" or immaculate, and what does this condition of conception confer ?

I'll defer to the definition of the IC in the Catechism as it explains it better than I can. But do notice it says nowhere that she was incapable of committing sin during her lifetime.

The Immaculate Conception

490 To become the mother of the Saviour, Mary "was enriched by God with gifts appropriate to such a role." 132 The angel Gabriel at the moment of the annunciation salutes her as "full of grace". 133 In fact, in order for Mary to be able to give the free assent of her faith to the announcement of her vocation, it was necessary that she be wholly borne by God's grace.
491 Through the centuries the Church has become ever more aware that Mary, "full of grace" through God, 134 was redeemed from the moment of her conception. That is what the dogma of the Immaculate Conception confesses, as Pope Pius IX proclaimed in 1854:

The most Blessed Virgin Mary was, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God and by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, Saviour of the human race, preserved immune from all stain of original sin. 135​

492 The "splendour of an entirely unique holiness" by which Mary is "enriched from the first instant of her conception" comes wholly from Christ: she is "redeemed, in a more exalted fashion, by reason of the merits of her Son". 136 The Father blessed Mary more than any other created person "in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places" and chose her "in Christ before the foundation of the world, to be holy and blameless before him in love". 137
493 The Fathers of the Eastern tradition call the Mother of God "the All-Holy" (Panagia), and celebrate her as "free from any stain of sin, as though fashioned by the Holy Spirit and formed as a new creature". 138 By the grace of God Mary remained free of every personal sin her whole life long.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

The IC is an unnecessary, late, and frankly, unbiblical invention.

I will say that the IC is what happened and that because of this it is not an invention nor unnecessary. The IC and Assumption compliment and bring further understanding to the Word being made Flesh.

Let me share a source and a quote:

The Assumption


The doctrine of the Assumption says that at the end of her life on earth Mary was assumed, body and soul, into heaven, just as Enoch, Elijah, and perhaps others had been before her. It’s also necessary to keep in mind what the Assumption is not. Some people think Catholics believe Mary "ascended" into heaven. That’s not correct. Christ, by his own power, ascended into heaven. Mary was assumed or taken up into heaven by God. She didn’t do it under her own power.

The Church has never formally defined whether she died or not, and the integrity of the doctrine of the Assumption would not be impaired if she did not in fact die, but the almost universal consensus is that she did die. Pope Pius XII, in Munificentissimus Deus (1950), defined that Mary, "after the completion of her earthly life" (note the silence regarding her death), "was assumed body and soul into the glory of heaven."

The possibility of a bodily assumption before the Second Coming is suggested by Matthew 27:52–53: "[T]he tombs also were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised, and coming out of the tombs after his resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many." Did all these Old Testament saints die and have to be buried all over again? There is no record of that, but it is recorded by early Church writers that they were assumed into heaven, or at least into that temporary state of rest and happiness often called "paradise," where the righteous people from the Old Testament era waited until Christ’s resurrection (cf. Luke 16:22, 23:43; Heb. 11:1–40; 1 Pet. 4:6), after which they were brought into the eternal bliss of heaven.

Source: http://www.catholic.com/library/Immaculate_Conception_and_Assum.asp


The Assumption and Immaculate Conception are connected.

The ECFs wrote of Mary's assumption and so we know this is no invention because we have existing proof because it was not lost.

The Assumption of Mary (400): http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0832.htm

 

[Tu Es Petrus]

sorry to butt in

But if Mary was immaculately conceived, did she still have the ability to sin ?
This is a crucial point, I think.

As far as I am aware, yes, and the Catholic Catechism does not say any different.

Considering our belief in Free Will, I'd have to agree: Yes, she had the "ability".
But God's grace in her was so perfected that she was never inclined to do so.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

I suppose that means we and the Church should look to the Inspired word of God in the Scriptures to indeed make sure all that the ECFs wrote line up with the Word. Is that a correct assessment?

John 5:39 "Ye are searchingthe Writings that ye are seeming in them life age-during to be having, and those are the ones-testifying about Me".

Reve 14:11 And the smoke of the tormentingof them into ages of ages is ascending and not they are having Rest day and night

Here is a writing considered to be valuable to the teaching of Christians and which was used like the NT until the 4th century when the 27 books were chosen.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1010.htm

Clement of Rome.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Considering our belief in Free Will, I'd have to agree: Yes, she had the "ability".
But God's grace in her was so perfected that she was never inclined to do so.

Mary had the ability to sin as did Adam and Eve and that is why her life is such a strong testament. Mary is the New Eve like Jesus was the New Adam.

And for Mary to pay her part in this Divine play for our salvation she had to have free will.

The difference is that she was saved from Original Sin when she was conceved and so lived without Concupiscense.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04208a.htm

Concupiscence

tt=73
In its widest acceptation, concupiscence is any yearning of the soul for good; in its strict and specific acceptation, a desire of the lower appetite contrary to reason. To understand how the sensuous and the rational appetite can be opposed, it should be borne in mind that their natural objects are altogether different. The object of the former is the gratification of the senses; the object of the latter is the good of the entire human nature and consists in the subordination of reason to God, its supreme good and ultimate end. But the lower appetite is of itself unrestrained, so as to pursue sensuous gratifications independently of the understanding and without regard to the good of the higher faculties. Hence desires contrary to the real good and order of reason may, and often do, rise in it, previous to the attention of the mind, and once risen, dispose the bodily organs to the pursuit and solicit the will to consent, while they more or less hinder reason from considering their lawfulness or unlawfulness. This is concupiscence in its strict and specific sense. As long, however, as deliberation is not completely impeded, the rational will is able to resist such desires and withhold consent, though it be not capable of crushing the effects they produce in the body, and though its freedom and dominion be to some extent diminished. If, in fact, the will resists, a struggle ensues, the sensuous appetite rebelliously demanding its gratification, reason, on the contrary, clinging to its own spiritual interests and asserting it control. "The flesh lusteth against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh."

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

The Bible is not all that Christians have looked to for the Word of God in inspired writings.

Just thought that needed to be said...

Tis true. Now that I am Orthodox I will have to become non-solo-scriptura ......

 

[Thekla]

490 To become the mother of the Saviour, Mary "was enriched by God with gifts appropriate to such a role." 132 The angel Gabriel at the moment of the annunciation salutes her as "full of grace". 133 In fact, in order for Mary to be able to give the free assent of her faith to the announcement of her vocation, it was necessary that she be wholly borne by God's grace.
491 Through the centuries the Church has become ever more aware that Mary, "full of grace" through God, 134 was redeemed from the moment of her conception. That is what the dogma of the Immaculate Conception confesses, as Pope Pius IX proclaimed in 1854:

The most Blessed Virgin Mary was, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God and by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, Saviour of the human race, preserved immune from all stain of original sin. 135​

492 The "splendour of an entirely unique holiness" by which Mary is "enriched from the first instant of her conception" comes wholly from Christ: she is "redeemed, in a more exalted fashion, by reason of the merits of her Son". 136 The Father blessed Mary more than any other created person "in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places" and chose her "in Christ before the foundation of the world, to be holy and blameless before him in love". 137
493 The Fathers of the Eastern tradition call the Mother of God "the All-Holy" (Panagia), and celebrate her as "free from any stain of sin, as though fashioned by the Holy Spirit and formed as a new creature". 138 By the grace of God Mary remained free of every personal sin her whole life long.

if I can get clarification point by point:
490. How does Mary compare to others who were "well pleasing to God" and "righteous"(Noah, the prophets, Moses, etc.) -- are they similarly conceived ?
491.
What does "preserved from original sin" mean ? If this were 'ancestral sin', she would perhaps be immortal ... (we teach she died and was assumed into heaven). If she is "immune" (aside from being immortal in flesh), does her not sinning result from choice (free will) ?
492.
A) Aren't all humans a "unique creation" ?
B)In the OT, those "well pleasing to God" are 'overshadowed' (shekkinah) by the Holy Spirit. In Mary's case, she is the "arxi/first" of Christians who experience "theosis", the indwelling of the Holy Spirit because she conceives the preincarnate Christ, the second person of the Trinity who is undivided (she contains the uncontainable). This cannot happen without her assent and preparation (manner of life and willing dedication to God).
493.
All holy as much as is possible by a human - she does not voluntarily sin/willfully turn from God.

 

[Musa80]

if I can get clarification point by point:
490. How does Mary compare to others who were "well pleasing to God" and "righteous"(Noah, the prophets, Moses, etc.) -- are they similarly conceived ?
491.
What does "preserved from original sin" mean ? If this were 'ancestral sin', she would perhaps be immortal ... (we teach she died and was assumed into heaven). If she is "immune" (aside from being immortal in flesh), does her not sinning result from choice (free will) ?
492.
A) Aren't all humans a "unique creation" ?
B)In the OT, those "well pleasing to God" are 'overshadowed' (shekkinah) by the Holy Spirit. In Mary's case, she is the "arxi/first" of Christians who experience "theosis", the indwelling of the Holy Spirit because she conceives the preincarnate Christ, the second person of the Trinity who is undivided (she contains the uncontainable). This cannot happen without her assent and preparation (manner of life and willing dedication to God).
493.
All holy as much as is possible by a human - she does not voluntarily sin/willfully turn from God.

Good questions, and I don't have any fast answers unfortunately. I'd have to do a bit of studying and percolate on these a bit before rendering an opinion. If anyone else, better studied than I, can answer these please do so.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Tis true. Now that I am Orthodox I will have to become non-solo-scriptura ......

I have always seen the Orthodox as having a very pious group of people. I would hope that one day the RCC would have more members wanting to make sacrifices like the Orthodox do. I am very happy that you have found your home with the Orthodox and know you will be close to God there.

 

[Rdr Iakovos]

Can you point to a scripture that you feels proves that Mary WAS born into original sin?

Why would I prove or attempt to prove that she was born into something that never existed, and is the unfortunate invention of a mistranslation of the Koine by the otherwise stunning mind, Augustine?

There is plenty in scripture, and in the writings of the ECFs, to demonstrate Mary was born fallible. That she is without stain or blemish is a function of her Theosis, not a deliverance from a non-existent condition.

Allow me to be blunt, please: Original (Inhereited/Imputed) Sin, as defined by Augustine, and understood by Pontiffs even into this century, does not exist. The IC is a device that addresses this non-existent problem.

 

[Rdr Iakovos]

I suppose that means we and the Church should look to the Inspired word of God in the Scriptures to indeed make sure all that the ECFs wrote line up with the Word. Is that a correct assessment?

John 5:39 "Ye are searchingthe Writings that ye are seeming in them life age-during to be having, and those are the ones-testifying about Me".

Reve 14:11 And the smoke of the tormentingof them into ages of ages is ascending and not they are having Rest day and night

Yes and no-good question, but a tough one to answer categorically.

The ECFs are expositors of scripture- they explain what scripture is saying, in toto. But scripture is still the canon, the rule and guide, so we are to look to it as the clearest guide of what is true, as the ECFs remarked.

But shall we, as many Protestants have, look at the ECF position on Mary's Virginity (perpetual), and decide that Jesus' brothers are exactly that, ergo ECFs were wrong about the PV?

IOW, interpret the interpreter as a wrongful interpretor?
Sticky- or is it slippery, as in slippery slope.

We all interpret, whether we use ECFs to do so, or scripture, or both, or neither.

 

[Rdr Iakovos]

We must understand more than one thing about Mary and her role in bearing Jesus as a baby.

One is that she is forever virgin.

Such is the witness of the ECFs, and so seems to indicate certain scriptures.

Another is that she is Full of Grace.

That's a quote. With you thus far...

And that she was assumed into Heaven.

Pious tradition- NOT dogma.
Of course, why wouldn't She be?
But we haven't got scripture AND ECF on this one, so go carefully...

In the studies of these three things and using all that the ECFs can offer to help us understand we will find that these truths lead to Mary and her Immaculate Conception.

So, it is not that I am taking the ECfs writings as inspired, though some obviously are. Nor is it that I am suggesting anything new has been given or created to the deposit of Christianities teahcings. Instead I am saying that the Immaculate Conception is something the only and best conclusion.

It's funny how little separates us, yet how vital that little bit is:
The ONLY need for the conclusion of IC is if one accepts a priori Augustine's Imputed guilt doctrine. Otherwise, Mary strides onto the stage as a fallible child of awesome, loving, Godly parents who cooperates with God's grace like no one before or after, and so becomes the Mother to us all, a new Eve.

The thing we agree on: We love Our Lady.