• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Did Mary ever need forgiveness of sin?

narnia59

Regular Member
Site Supporter
Jul 17, 2007
5,805
1,315
✟482,495.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Please do not say things that we are not saying ... I never said she was not sinless...Personally think she was it is just that she is called spotless in our hymns and there is the tradition that does. The church NEVER made it into dogma and out of piety we do reverence her in such way. I prefer to call a spade a spade instead of mincing my words that is all I will say. Tradition is different from dogma we just do not have it :(
You'll have to point out where I said that you said she was not sinless. I simply said that many Orthodox sites I've seen reflect that, and then provided same from the Greek Orthodox church of America that supported the statement. So please do not say that I've said something I haven't said....

I understand that it is not doctrine, but can't say I understand incorporating that which must not be believed into the liturgy. Do those who do not believe she is spotless just not say/sing that part?



She is the new Eve not becasue she was born like that .....as a New Eve. And please find me where the ECFs say Mary was born pre-fall nature... That would be awesome so we know which ECFs you refer to ...

She was the New Eve AFTER the incarnation that does not mean she was the New Eve prior... I think the RC has a problem with postiori and priori...
From what I can tell, the ECF don't specify when she becomes the new Eve. If you have something that specifies, please share.

Uniqueness cannot change one's nature... you are either human and in a fallen state or not. Where do you see the Fathers says she was given EXTRA Grace for the EXTRA job she had...I think the grace like I said before was given to her and it was what she did with it that is unique and extaordinary. Yeah she was special and all and pious but to say that she had "extra grace" we are walking on muddy ground that God favors some and some he does not???

"Set apart" and for the job does not mean that you are "more than human"
at all...It means you are extra blessed for the special job you are chosen for. You are blessed and have more responsibility than other with grater hats comes more responsibility and the credit is given both to you and God. To the person who is chosen also needs to meet the challenge of that choice. Many are called but few are chosen... comes to mind. The chosen are the ones who indeed answer that call and become worthy of that calling.
I know from Scripture that our gifts differ according to the grace given to us (Romans 12:6) and that grace is given to each of us according to the measure of Christ's gift (Eph 4:7), so I don't think there's a basis to believe that each receives the same from God. Scripture records multiple people God favors over others -- he favors Jacob over Esau from the womb if I recall. Christianity is not based on any premise of "equality for all" that I can see -- it's about gift and response and I see no Scriptural support that the gift each receives is the same (parable of talents comes to mind as well).

Aside from that, the "extraordinary grace" language in relationship to Mary was introduced into the thread by one of your fellow Orthodox, not me.
 
Upvote 0

Philothei

Love never fails
Nov 4, 2006
44,893
3,217
Northeast, USA
✟75,679.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
You'll have to point out where I said that you said she was not sinless. I simply said that many Orthodox sites I've seen reflect that, and then provided same from the Greek Orthodox church of America that supported the statement. So please do not say that I've said something I haven't said....
You did say that you are surprised some of us do not get it did you? Not that it matters ...but like I said and explained why 'some" do not. But whatever...

I understand that it is not doctrine, but can't say I understand incorporating that which must not be believed into the liturgy. Do those who do not believe she is spotless just not say/sing that part?


Ok as long as you know it I am ok like I said let's call a spade a spade. I do not know ...ask St. John Chrysostom he probably did not believe so but look he edited the liturgy you would think he did not sing that part?

:cool:

From what I can tell, the ECF don't specify when she becomes the new Eve. If you have something that specifies, please share.


You are asking me to prove your point? Nah it is up to you who said that the ECF say it... Not me not my dogma ...
I know from Scripture that our gifts differ according to the grace given to us (Romans 12:6) and that grace is given to each of us according to the measure of Christ's gift (Eph 4:7), so I don't think there's a basis to believe that each receives the same from God. Scripture records multiple people God favors over others -- he favors Jacob over Esau from the womb if I recall. Christianity is not based on any premise of "equality for all" that I can see -- it's about gift and response and I see no Scriptural support that the gift each receives is the same (parable of talents comes to mind as well).

Aside from that, the "extraordinary grace" language in relationship to Mary was introduced into the thread by one of your fellow Orthodox, not me.[/

It does not matter who introduced it show me where the ECFs again or any council calls for the extaordinatry grace? :confused:
 
Upvote 0
May 10, 2011
677
29
✟23,534.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Actually I believe otherwise, but that does not mean that Mary didn't need Jesus to die for her. So false statement from the get-go.

Catholic teaching is clear that Mary needed a Savior, and that Savior was Jesus Christ.

The difference between the sinlessness of Christ and the sinlessness of Mary is that Christ is sinless by nature, and Mary is sinless by grace. Grace merited by Christ's offering of himself on the cross.

But it would appear that you believe that before God can save someone from sin, he has to wait for them to sin. Is that correct?
He doesn't have to wait long
 
Upvote 0
May 10, 2011
677
29
✟23,534.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Certainly it would be sad, but I think unlikely. Like I said what is on popular internet sites and the facts on the ground are usually quite different and none of the canonical Orthodox Churches teach that she committed sin in any official capacity.



Yup, we all agree that the Virgin was pure, sinless and unique, we only disagree on whether this was ontological or whether Mary was able to significantly contribute .

In all honesty I don't think this would be such a conflict between our churches if it wasn't for the fact that Rome declared it an infallible dogma that must be believed to be 100% true. While it's origins may lie in perfectly Orthodox beliefs, such as the sinlessness of Mary and her status as the New Eve, it was only fully developed in the post-schism West and with distinctly Western ideas of original sin. As such the Eastern Churches (be they Chalcedonian or Miaphysite) could never accept it as anything more than a pious opinion.



Allow me to clarify what I meant: I would argue that the separation of soul and body is in itself both "spiritual" and physical- spiritual in the sense that it is inherited from Adam as a result of his sin and physical in the sense that it is induced by physical means; certainly I'm not proposing that Mary experienced that true "spiritual death" that is separation from God.

In any case I think its a matter that can only be left in agreement to disagree. In Orthodoxy we have no example other than Christ (who died unnaturally and voluntarily) of an unfallen human living in a fallen world so exactly what would happen is very much a matter of speculation for us.
In light of how you portray Mary, as wonderful as she is, I can understand now why Catholics see her as co-redemer, and pray to her as one would pray to God........I'm sure this would make Mary sick to her stomach
 
Upvote 0

Philothei

Love never fails
Nov 4, 2006
44,893
3,217
Northeast, USA
✟75,679.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Thanks Nick, appreciate the discussion. I do think most of the more official sites I've seen either say she is sinless or do not address the issue at all.

I understand that type of fluidity is more inherent in Orthodoxy than Catholicism -- you guys would see that as more positive as we would see the nailing things down as being a plus. Different strokes I suppose.

Glad you realize that there is not such thing as dogma and there is not need to "nail" this to the T and that still there is not problem. And more Glad Nick was able to explain it to you better than me :)
 
Upvote 0

LOCO

Church Militant
Jun 29, 2011
1,143
68
✟24,189.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
In Relationship
In light of how you portray Mary, as wonderful as she is, I can understand now why Catholics see her as co-redemer, and pray to her as one would pray to God........I'm sure this would make Mary sick to her stomach



How do you know that Catholics pray to Mary as they would to God? That is an ignorant statement. To make that accusation you would have to read peoples minds and hearts.

There is more than one definition of the word 'pray' i.e. pray to worship diety used by many religions not just Christianity and to pray as in 'ask for' something.

Catholics have Prayers of Worship directed to the Holy Trinity only.

We also have Prayers of Petition, asking Saints of which Mary is one to pray to God on our behalf.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Philothei
Upvote 0

Philothei

Love never fails
Nov 4, 2006
44,893
3,217
Northeast, USA
✟75,679.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I know from Scripture that our gifts differ according to the grace given to us (Romans 12:6) and that grace is given to each of us according to the measure of Christ's gift (Eph 4:7), so I don't think there's a basis to believe that each receives the same from God. Scripture records multiple people God favors over others -- he favors Jacob over Esau from the womb if I recall. Christianity is not based on any premise of "equality for all" that I can see -- it's about gift and response and I see no Scriptural support that the gift each receives is the same (parable of talents comes to mind as well).

Aside from that, the "extraordinary grace" language in relationship to Mary was introduced into the thread by one of your fellow Orthodox, not me.

However, we do believe that the Virgin Mary is an image, as St. Maximos the Confessor says, of the Christian goal of becoming Christ-like, of theosis. Just as the Theotokos gave birth to Christ in a bodily way, so we must, St. Maximos tells us, give birth to Christ in an unbodily or spiritual way. In so doing, we imitate her practical spiritual life, including the purity and humility by which she formed her free will into perfect obedience to the Will of God. Of this practical image of the Virgin Mary, one of our readers, Archdeacon Basil Kuretich, D.D., has written some words that bear repeating here. They give us a clear picture of the importance of the model which she presents for every Orthodox believer:
"We...are aware of the part played by Divine Grace in the Virgin Mary’s life and are aware of the perfection of her virtue.

An Orthodox View of the Virgin Mary
 
Upvote 0
May 10, 2011
677
29
✟23,534.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
How do you know that Catholics pray to Mary as they would to God? That is an ignorant statement. To make that accusation you would have to read peoples minds and hearts.

There is more than one definition of the word 'pray' i.e. pray to worship diety used by many religions not just Christianity and to pray as in 'ask for' something.

Catholics have Prayers of Worship directed to the Holy Trinity only.

We also have Prayers of Petition, asking Saints of which Mary is one to pray to God on our behalf.
call me ignorant, but I don't see one instance where the apostles or Jesus prayed to Mary, and after Jesus was resurrected, we still see no indication from scripture that Mary was prayed to.........only after we are warned in 2 Peter about false teachers would enter the flock and lead it astray and also Paul warned of the coming apostasy in 1 timothy 4 with the forbidding to marry and the commanding to abstain from foods.........( ring a bell) do we see this practice of praying to Mary and other destructive teachings such as bowing down and kissing idols, and myriad of other detestable practices that all through the old testiment God made mention as being obominable in His eyes are now just common place in many christians lives.......
 
Upvote 0

narnia59

Regular Member
Site Supporter
Jul 17, 2007
5,805
1,315
✟482,495.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Glad you realize that there is not such thing as dogma and there is not need to "nail" this to the T and that still there is not problem. And more Glad Nick was able to explain it to you better than me :)
I have no issues with it not being considered dogma. If some Orthodox want to believe Mary was sinless and others don't -- fine by me.

I think it's problematic when one can go to two different somewhat 'official' Orthodox sites and one says that even after the birth of Christ Mary committed sins (Greek Orthodox church of America) and one says "that the Orthodox Church believes that Mary, as a human being, could indeed have sinned, but chose not to" (OCA). If indeed there is no formal teaching of Orthodoxy on the subject, it would seem more prudent for all Orthodox teaching sites either be silent on the issue or to profess that there is no formal teaching, but that from tradition some hold her sinless while others do not. As it is, it makes it extremely difficult to learn about Orthodoxy and to conclude that there is indeed unity in teaching.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ortho_Cat
Upvote 0

narnia59

Regular Member
Site Supporter
Jul 17, 2007
5,805
1,315
✟482,495.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
In light of how you portray Mary, as wonderful as she is, I can understand now why Catholics see her as co-redemer, and pray to her as one would pray to God........I'm sure this would make Mary sick to her stomach
You're not even speaking to a Catholic person.....
 
Upvote 0

narnia59

Regular Member
Site Supporter
Jul 17, 2007
5,805
1,315
✟482,495.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
You did say that you are surprised some of us do not get it did you? Not that it matters ...but like I said and explained why 'some" do not. But whatever...
The thing that surprises me is when Orthodox make this statement:

In the Roman Catholic understanding, it seems that Mary, who according to Roman doctrine had been exempted from the guilt of original sin [the Orthodox do not accept that humans share the guilt of the first sin but, rather, only the consequences] before all eternity, and thus could not have sinned

OCA - Q &amp A - Sinlessness of Mary

I believe you expressed a similar concept in this thread -- that if Mary was conceived without original sin, that means she could not have sinned.

There is no logic in that statement as far as I could see. Adam and Eve were created without original sin, and we know how that went. If what is being expressed here is accurate, the world could never have fallen, because Adam and Eve had no original sin, so therefore never could have sinned.

That's the part that I don't see any logic to in Orthodox thinking, makes no sense, and yes, I can't see why some Orthodox would express an opinion that one's free will is removed and they therefore cannot sin if they do not have original sin. History proved that view wrong from the get-go.


Ok as long as you know it I am ok like I said let's call a spade a spade. I do not know ...ask St. John Chrysostom he probably did not believe so but look he edited the liturgy you would think he did not sing that part?

:cool:
I can't fathom why he would have written that part if he didn't believe it.
:confused:


You are asking me to prove your point? Nah it is up to you who said that the ECF say it... Not me not my dogma ...


It does not matter who introduced it show me where the ECFs again or any council calls for the extaordinatry grace? :confused:

Don't have time to go digging through all the ECF. Here's something I had bookmarked from one of the Orthodox patriarchs that may be helpful.

The Virgin Mary had the fullness of God's Grace, in comparison to (other) people. Of course, Christ, as the Word of God, has the whole fullness of Graces, but the Virgin Mary received the fullness of Grace from the fullness of Graces of her Son. For this reason, in relation to Christ she is lower, since - Christ had the Grace by nature, whereas the Virgin Mary had it through participation. In relation to people, however, she is higher.
....
In these frameworks Saint John of Damascus' saying that on the day of the Annunciation the Virgin Mary received the Holy Spirit, which cleansed her and gave her power receptive of the Word's divinity, simultaneously a birth-giving power, should be interpreted. That is the Virgin Mary received from the Holy Spirit a cleansing grace, but also a grace receptive and able to give birth to the Word of God as a man.

The Annunciation of the Virgin Mary

If the Holy Spirit 'cleansed' the Virgin Mary at the time of the annunciation, she received a 'cleansing grace' -- I'm not sure how that would not be viewed as 'extraordinary'.

And I think I have to apologize to Nick because I think I'm the person who introduced the term into the thread and he simply agreed with it.
 
Upvote 0

narnia59

Regular Member
Site Supporter
Jul 17, 2007
5,805
1,315
✟482,495.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
He doesn't have to wait long

By virtue of the fact you believe he has to wait at all demonstrates you believe he is subject to creation, not master of it. Bound and limited by created time, just as we are.

It would seem the problem is not that the Orthodox and Catholics have too high a view of Mary. The problem rather is that others have too low a view of God.
 
Upvote 0

Frogster

Galatians is the best!
Sep 7, 2009
44,343
3,067
✟81,817.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Republican
Nor can you use Romans 5 to prove that Mary was not free from sin.

Sure I did, All means ALL, and many, is just another word for ALL. And you can't show otherwise. Give us something out of 5, I have clealry shown that the overt text, proves she was an Adam, so she had to have sin in her also.

I await for sopmething, anything, that disproves the obvuious thoughts of 5.
 
Upvote 0

Frogster

Galatians is the best!
Sep 7, 2009
44,343
3,067
✟81,817.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Republican
By virtue of the fact you believe he has to wait at all demonstrates you believe he is subject to creation, not master of it. Bound and limited by created time, just as we are.

It would seem the problem is not that the Orthodox and Catholics have too high a view of Mary. The problem rather is that others have too low a view of God.

It's actually a low view of God, to exalt a human, to the Level of God, and act like Mary was like Jesus in Romans 5, when we see no exemption for her in 5, and in fact, the whole point was this..


Since all would be alive in Christ, (who beleive)that shows all had to be dead in Adam, that is a fact, that you simply can not ignore.
 
Upvote 0

Standing Up

On and on
Sep 3, 2008
25,360
2,757
Around about
✟73,735.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I have no issues with it not being considered dogma. If some Orthodox want to believe Mary was sinless and others don't -- fine by me.

I think it's problematic when one can go to two different somewhat 'official' Orthodox sites and one says that even after the birth of Christ Mary committed sins (Greek Orthodox church of America) and one says "that the Orthodox Church believes that Mary, as a human being, could indeed have sinned, but chose not to" (OCA). If indeed there is no formal teaching of Orthodoxy on the subject, it would seem more prudent for all Orthodox teaching sites either be silent on the issue or to profess that there is no formal teaching, but that from tradition some hold her sinless while others do not. As it is, it makes it extremely difficult to learn about Orthodoxy and to conclude that there is indeed unity in teaching.

Why? Millions of Christians from across the spectrum do it everyday, including Catholics (RC, Old Catholic, etc). It's only the facade of visible unity that gives the problem. Behind that, it's the born-again brothers and sisters of Christ by grace are we saved where unity may be found.
 
Upvote 0

Dorothea

One of God's handmaidens
Jul 10, 2007
21,649
3,635
Colorado Springs, Colorado
✟273,491.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
In light of how you portray Mary, as wonderful as she is, I can understand now why Catholics see her as co-redemer, and pray to her as one would pray to God........I'm sure this would make Mary sick to her stomach

We're not Roman Catholics.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ortho_Cat
Upvote 0

Dorothea

One of God's handmaidens
Jul 10, 2007
21,649
3,635
Colorado Springs, Colorado
✟273,491.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
The thing that surprises me is when Orthodox make this statement:

In the Roman Catholic understanding, it seems that Mary, who according to Roman doctrine had been exempted from the guilt of original sin [the Orthodox do not accept that humans share the guilt of the first sin but, rather, only the consequences] before all eternity, and thus could not have sinned

OCA - Q &amp A - Sinlessness of Mary

I believe you expressed a similar concept in this thread -- that if Mary was conceived without original sin, that means she could not have sinned.

There is no logic in that statement as far as I could see. Adam and Eve were created without original sin, and we know how that went. If what is being expressed here is accurate, the world could never have fallen, because Adam and Eve had no original sin, so therefore never could have sinned.

That's the part that I don't see any logic to in Orthodox thinking, makes no sense, and yes, I can't see why some Orthodox would express an opinion that one's free will is removed and they therefore cannot sin if they do not have original sin. History proved that view wrong from the get-go.
No, that's not what we're saying...that one cannot sin because they do not have original sin. We all die - that's the consequence - the ancestral sin that Adam passed on, and through sinning, the result is death, yes. That's what happened with Adam and Eve. Mary was born like the rest of us - with free will to choose to sin or be obedient to God in everything and also dying one day, as she did. That's what ancestral sin is to us.

Mary was born not in the Garden, but after the Fall, so therefore, she was born like all the rest of humanity after the Fall, explained above. Yes, she was cleansed in preparation for the birth of Christ. Then, we believe she was ever virgin and was sinless through piety the rest of her days, which, as was pointed out, is not a dogma in our Church. Whether Mary was 100% sinless the rest of her life does not have a bearing on our salvation, and dogmas are there as borders, to keep us on the right path, and they are what is believed for our salvation. This is why the Assumption of Mary is also not dogma in our Church.

Here's an interesting link on the Garden and such:

We start with the Garden of Eden. Since in the Greek this is paradeisoz (Paradise) we may rightly understand the Garden and indeed Heaven as a real place in space-time but removed from the fallen domain of this world. In this dimension, our first Parents communed with the world, each other and God. The Fathers, (Sts. Theophilus of Antioch, Ephraim the Syrian, Hilary of Poitiers, Maximus the Confessor), insist that our first parents were created neither mortal nor immortal. Until the point of his disobedience Adam was sinless but not perfect and able to sin. He was not immortal but capable of achieving immortality through obedience. This is most important for what comes after and especially as we compare the biblical doctrine of our original state with what later emerged in the post-Orthodox west.

We learn from this starting point that Adam was like a child, fully capable of growing up in obedience to his Heavenly Father and achieving immortality. We know that he ate the fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil in disobedience to God’s Word and suffered death as a result. We are not dealing here with the Promethean myth of Greek paganism in which Prometheus stole fire from the gods and paid the price for his audacity. The fruit itself was not placed in Eden with a permanent exclusion zone around it leaving humanity in state of infantile innocence. God’s intention was that Adam should grow up through obedience until he received the necessary spiritual maturity to handle such things. Like a child he had to be taught. But like many children and adults he would not be taught. He wanted to be autonomous; to be God-like without God and he thereby brought death down upon his head.

Listen to St. Irenaeus:-

"Man was a little one, and his discretion still undeveloped, wherefore also he was easily misled by the deceiver."

St. Irenaeus and the Fathers generally, therefore, do not see death as a divine punishment for the disobedience of our first parents. This distortion arose later in the west under the influence of Augustine. The Fathers rather interpret the consequences of the Fall as something we brought on ourselves when we distanced ourselves from God. God still walks in the Garden. It is we who hide and shamefully cover our nakedness. Likewise, the expulsion of Adam and Eve from Paradise and the angel standing guard with the flaming sword is not an act of divine retribution but a compassionate and merciful provision lest we eat of the second tree, the Tree of Life, and die eternally. The fruit of this tree, if we had eaten it, would have condemned us forever.

Listen to St. John Chrysostom:-

"Partaking of the tree, the man and woman became liable to death and subject to the future needs of the body. Adam was no longer permitted to remain in the Garden, and was bidden to leave, a move by which God showed His love for him … he had become mortal, and lest he presume to eat further from the tree which promised an endless life of continuous sinning, he was expelled from the Garden as a mark of divine solicitude, not of necessity."

[Hom. in Gen XVIII, 3 PG 53 151]

The sin of Adam and Eve was one of disobedience born out of a demonically induced pride and we know from St. Paul that wages of such sin is death [Romans 6:23]. Cast out of Eden and barred from re-entry for their own good, Adam and Eve, in their mortality are now subject to the corruption of death. Corruption here does not merely mean physical decay, it describes the fallout from the Fall as death spawns yet new evils. As St. Paul taught in the context of the resurrection as the remedy for sin and death, ("O death where is thy sting …?"), "the sting of death is sin." [1 Corinthians 15:55-56]

Listen to St. Cyril of Alexandria :-

"Adam had heard: ‘Earth thou art and to the earth shalt thou return,’ and from being incorruptible he became corruptible and was made subject to the bonds of death. But since he produced children after falling into this state, we his descendents are corruptible coming from a corruptible source. Thus it is that we are heirs of Adam’s curse."

[Doctrinal Questions and Answers, IX, 6 in Cyril of Alexandria, Selected Letters]

Notice that there is huge difference between this belief that we share in Adam’s curse through the corruption of death and the view common in the west since Augustine that we are punished by death for an original sin in Eden. The west came to believe that this original sin was transmitted to subsequent generations through sexual reproduction and that we inherit thereby not only the sin of Adam but the guilt as well. This view is first found in Augustine.

" … now when this (the Fall) happened, the whole human race was ‘in his loins’ (Adam). Hence in accordance with the mysterious and powerful natural laws of heredity it followed that those who were in his loins and were to come into this world through the concupiscence (lustful desires) of the flesh were condemned with him." [Treatise against Julian the Pelagian]

Aquinas and later the Reformers for whom Augustine was all felt constrained to repeat :-

" … the commingling of the sexes which, after the sin of our first parent, cannot take place without lust, transmits original sin to the offspring." [Aquinas: Comp. Theol., 224]

This is not Orthodox. We are responsible for the sins that we commit, not the sins of our forefathers and not the sins of our first parents. Moreover, the Fall is not a taint in our character transmitted by sex, nor is sex itself necessarily tainted by lust. Orthodox refer instead to "ancestral sin," by which we mean our participation in the disobedience of the first Adam as inherited through death, not sex. It is a curse that the Law exposed in the inability of humans to fulfil the Mosaic Covenant. It is a curse which has been redeemed by Christ. [Galatians 3:13].

Some western commentators criticise the Orthodox understanding at this point by reminding us that,. according to Psalm 50(51):5 "behold I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me." (NKJV: Masoretic text). As stated, this is capable of being interpreted either in the "western" manner or in the Orthodox manner. However, the Septuagint (LXX) version of the Psalm translated into English reads: "Behold I was brought forth in iniquities, and in sins (plural) did my mother conceive me." This makes it quite clear that sin is endemic to the human condition from birth to death. It says nothing about transmission, let alone transmission by sex. We must assume that the Jewish scholars in Alexandria knew what they were doing when they translated the Hebrew text into Greek. The Orthodox Church certainly accepts their scholarship and, importantly, there is nothing in Judaism then or now that comes anywhere close to the Christian west's understanding of original sin which is rather important if one wants to understand St. Paul's teaching on Adam and Christ the New Adam in Romans 5 and 1 Corinthians 15. After all, St. Paul like our Lord, was a Jew by birth and by training, adept in the Law.

This, then, is the characteristic understanding of the Fall in the Orthodox Church: sin generated by the corruption of death. In the post-Orthodox, post Christian west however, many people see death as both the natural created state of man and an unacceptable reality. This mental bind is also not Orthodox. Death, being the curse of Eden, is an unnatural enemy, neither designed into Creation by God nor desired by Him. Death, as the ultimate threat causes people to flee from their brothers, their sisters and their God in a selfish pursuit of earthly things as if these will put off the evil day. "Eat drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die," as the saying goes. This is the real death, the death of the spirit from whence death itself has cast a longer and longer shadow over the God-less secularism of western materialism.

For the rest:
Ancestral Sin
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Kristos

Servant
Aug 30, 2006
7,379
1,068
Minnesota
✟45,052.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
It's actually a low view of God, to exalt a human, to the Level of God, and act like Mary was like Jesus in Romans 5, when we see no exemption for her in 5, and in fact, the whole point was this..


Since all would be alive in Christ, (who beleive)that shows all had to be dead in Adam, that is a fact, that you simply can not ignore.

On one side, I would say that the accusation of exalting a human to the level of God is a strawman. Obviously it has been stated over and over. Mary is not another diety - she is not a four person of the Godhead etc etc. This is very clear, so to assert it is really pointless. But, Man is created in the image and likeness of God, and following the the gospel, we are called to be literally Christians - not just in name, but in reality - we are called to be little Christs - to be by grace what God is by nature. This is not unique in anyway to Mary - it is the calling of all mankind - to be the new israel, the new temple, the new dwelling place of God. Mary is often used to personify this calling because she answered in a most humble way - saying Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dorothea
Upvote 0