Hopko and Schmemann?

[gzt]

and to be fair to Fr Tom, in his talk on Revelation (another excellent talk of his, in my humble opinion), he does say that Mary gave birth to Christ without pain. just remembered that point on my drive back to my barracks

So it seems the concern here is a bit of a nothing-burger.

 

[ArmyMatt]

So it seems the concern here is a bit of a nothing-burger.

no, because there were other issues brought out. the biggie being that her physical virginity was always preserved, not just that she did not suffer

 

[gzt]

All he said is that, in accordance with the text of the Gospel According to St Luke, the womb was opened. I think we need some discussion of what that text means - I pointed out the exact Greek words - before we can say there's a problem here. He says that in the context of affirming the Ever-Virginity of the Theotokos, after all.

 

[gzt]

I mean, unless you guys have a problem with St Luke...

 

[ArmyMatt]

no problem with St Luke, simply that the hymns and prayers that say the seal was never broken is in line with Luke, and those who say it was are not

 

[gzt]

Great, so we agree Fr Thomas is still in agreement with them when he says "her womb was opened" (as that's what St Luke says).

 

[ArmyMatt]

Great, so we agree Fr Thomas is still in agreement with them when he says "her womb was opened" (as that's what St Luke says).

well, again, I don't have the books with me. if Fr Tom says that the seal of her virginity was broken and that is what he means by womb was opened, then no. he would be wrong. the Church says that the seal of her womb was never broken and no after birth. if Fr Tom meant that, I have no problem jumping behind that (like I did when I remembered he affirmed the birth was painless).

 

[gzt]

He explicitly referenced the biblical text I quoted.

 

[gzt]

I think we need a kind of fundamental charity here that rests on the presumption that maybe, just maybe, Fr Thomas isn't a heretic, despite what the noise in various groups is, at least until we actually, like, look closely at what the texts of record say. Just sayin'.

 

[ArmyMatt]

no one on here said he is a heretic. simply because someone's theology might have errors does not make him a heretic. like I said in my first post, bishops determine heretics.

 

[ArmyMatt]

He explicitly referenced the biblical text I quoted.

I get that, and like I said, I don't have my books with me. all I know is what I have been taught and what we pray, which is the seal of her womb was not broken. if Fr Tom meant that, I have no problem taking back that he was in error.

 

[gzt]

Well, sure. "Says heretical things".

 

[ArmyMatt]

Well, sure. "Says heretical things".

folks do. heck, I'll throw Capp a bone and say I used to have a more Sabellian understanding of the Trinity before he corrected me a while back (and rightly so).

Met Athony of ROCOR taught that man's salvation was accomplished at Gethsemane and not Calvary (or at least came close to it).

 

[gzt]

Here's the relevant page that I was thinking of.

 

[ArmyMatt]

the verse you bring up actually does not show that in her case the womb was opened. it was reference to the Law and a woman's firstborn. prior to Christ, the idea that someone could give birth without breaking the seal of the womb was unheard of. but being devout Jews, they still followed the Law because Christ was the firstborn and He had already willingly submitted to the Law by being circumcised.

so yeah, that is what the Greek probably says, but Mary was a special case that was not on anyone's radar

 

[gzt]

Yes, the Greek is what I posted earlier, it's about the all sons who open the womb (literally) which is applied to Jesus Christ in the context.

 

[FenderTL5]

[pardon the interruption] What is the background for the painless childbirth? I'm not real familiar with this aspect, although I've heard it mentioned a few times.

 

[HoleyHermit]

I read some article about "opening the womb" violating the mother's virginal integrity. Since, generally, mothers are not virgins, I don't think it means that.


We see barren women, such as Hannah, being described as having closed wombs. These women were certainly not virgins.


I tend to think that "opening the womb" simply means pregnancy. But as the great Fr. Tom was known to say, I could be wrong.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Yes, the Greek is what I posted earlier, it's about the all sons who open the womb (literally) which is applied to Jesus Christ in the context.

yes, but the context of that Scripture was the Old Covenant, because there never was such a thing as a Virgin Birth. they submitted to the Law because Christ was the firstborn of Mary, but His was very different. Luke also records Mary following the days of purification, which she did not need since the birth was spotless. she followed the days to be obedient to the Law, much the same to present Christ Who is her firstborn.

the Scripture does not actually say He opened her womb, but simply records why they went to present Christ because every firstborn until Him open the womb.

and again, our hymns and prayers clearly say her seal was never broken.

 

[Lukaris]

I believe St. Irenaeus referred to the Blessed Virgin Mother as the new Eve. Since our theology of the Lord is incarnational, it seems fitting that His redemptive work begins with His incarnation and that His very birth would not engender the travail brought upon by ancestral sin ( Genesis 3:16 ).

I think the honorable woman of the apocalypse ( Revelation 12 ), at times represents the Theotokos or the Church or even both at times. The travail would pertain to things like the martyrs etc. I guess.