Immaculate Conception - Why Did It Take 1,854 Years to Discover This Doctrine?

[mont974x4]

The idea of her being sinless is unbiblical. Unless you think the Bible can be wrong and not everyone is a sinner and fallen short of His glory? Romans 3

 

[Ormly]

The idea of her being sinless is unbiblical. Unless you think the Bible can be wrong and not everyone is a sinner and fallen short of His glory? Romans 3

Oh, I see and agree, she was not and didn't need to be. I read you wrong and thought it was referring to their church being sinless.

 

[mont974x4]

ahh, sorry for any confusion.


How can a church be sinless when they all have people in them?

 

[Ormly]

ahh, sorry for any confusion.


How can a church be sinless when they all have people in them?

Thats true and that is why I asked.

Do you believe the church should consist of unbelievers as well as believers?

 

[mont974x4]

It's really an impossibility. Unbelievers may sit in our pews and many even serve in our churches, but they are not members of the Church.

 

[Ormly]

It's really an impossibility. Unbelievers may sit in our pews and many even serve in our churches, but they are not members of the Church.

That wasn't what I had in mind when I asked my question but I won't reword it. Thanks, Lets move on.

 

[mont974x4]

well alrighty then

 

[Ormly]

It would have only led to confusion and mis-understanding.

 

[Albion]

Who founded your church and why? It's a good history lesson.

Joseph of Arimathaea, possibly in the company of one or more of the Apostles. At least that is what the historical record indicates. And you ask "Why?" I'd say that "Why" any of the ancient Christian churches was founded was in order to carry out Christ's commission to go into the whole world, preach, the Gospel, and make disciples.

 

[Albion]

i dont have to interview them, just look up their doctrines online.

Honestly, I do not believe that you can find online what every Christian of the first century said about his beliefs. You said that "no one in the ancient Churches from the beginning ever dared think she had sin."

If you find such a site, please let all of us know. But I'd advise caution about making the internet the basis of your religious beliefs in any case.

futhermore, i have seen the EO defend her sinlessness.

Why don't you just post that then? It would be worth more to this thread than a search for what every Christian of the first century believed. And we both know that despite you sticking your neck out to say that not a single Christian in any of the early churches believed Mary ever had sin, you are just talking and don't have any way of knowing.

 

[Ormly]

Joseph of Arimathaea, possibly in the company of one or more of the Apostles. At least that is what the historical record indicates. And you ask "Why?" I'd say that "Why" any of the ancient Christian churches was founded was in order to carry out Christ's commission to go into the whole world, preach, the Gospel, and make disciples.

Are you quite sure it wasn't Henry VIII?

 

[Albion]

Are you quite sure it wasn't Henry VIII?

Yes, quite sure.

Explaining the entire history of the church would take some time, you understand, but the all-too-familiar theory that outsiders have about Henry and the church is in error.

 

[WarriorAngel]

Honestly, I do not believe that you can find online what every Christian of the first century said about his beliefs. You said that "no one in the ancient Churches from the beginning ever dared think she had sin."

If you find such a site, please let all of us know. But I'd advise caution about making the internet the basis of your religious beliefs in any case.



Why don't you just post that then? It would be worth more to this thread than a search for what every Christian of the first century believed. And we both know that despite you sticking your neck out to say that not a single Christian in any of the early churches believed Mary ever had sin, you are just talking and don't have any way of knowing.

Such a site...?

Ok, Albion, let us get into this deeper ....it is with utmost proof that anytime someone 'disagreed' with the Church, they were argued against, and sometimes most often removed via excommunication. If their grievous errors were not repented....
And for those who were considered good fathers, but did not report 100% the same teachings, they did not receive the title Saint.
Oregin is one example of this.

Because of his stand on some issues he never got title Saint.

So, i dont think any disagreed with the sinlessness of Mary... or we would have it written somewhere in argument.

However; there are writings from the East calling her the Immaculata.

Since no one argued against her grace [and i already posted what kecharitomene
meant], it was highly unlikely since they knew the language that they would have a case to argue against that.

The ancient Church did not embrace relativism.

 

[Ormly]

Yes, quite sure.

Explaining the entire history of the church would take some time, you understand, but the all-too-familiar theory that outsiders have about Henry and the church is in error.

How so? I have always run with that.

 

[Albion]

Ok, Albion, let us get into this deeper ....it is with utmost proof that anytime someone 'disagreed' with the Church, they were argued against, and sometimes most often removed via excommunication.

We were not speaking of excommunications in general but about one issue--belief in the Immaculate Conception which you said not a single person in the early church doubted. I asked for proof of that claim.

So, i dont think any disagreed with the sinlessness of Mary... or we would have it written somewhere in argument.

That's not evidence, let alone proof.

However; there are writings from the East calling her the Immaculata.

Feel free to quote extensively from these writings in order to show what these writings said about Mary. Then we can move to ascertaining if everyone thought the same--which was your claim.

Since no one argued against her grace

You don't know that no one argued against her grace, nor have you defined "her grace." To believe in "her grace" is not necessariliy to believe in the Immaculate Conception. The Immaculate Conception is the issue.

 

[Ormly]

Such a site...?

Ok, Albion, let us get into this deeper ....it is with utmost proof that anytime someone 'disagreed' with the Church, they were argued against, and sometimes most often removed via excommunication. If their grievous errors were not repented....
And for those who were considered good fathers, but did not report 100% the same teachings, they did not receive the title Saint.
Oregin is one example of this.

Because of his stand on some issues he never got title Saint.

So, i dont think any disagreed with the sinlessness of Mary... or we would have it written somewhere in argument.

However; there are writings from the East calling her the Immaculata.

Since no one argued against her grace [and i already posted what kecharitomene
meant], it was highly unlikely since they knew the language that they would have a case to argue against that.

The ancient Church did not embrace relativism.

None of that 'sinlessness' of Mary is found in scripture. Scripture never sets her apart in any of that talk. Further evidence of mother church usurping Father's authority over her.

BTW, Pauls called all believers saints. More evidence of the above usurping.

 

[Albion]

How so? I have always run with that.

Simply put, the church was almost 1500 years old in Britain by Henry's time. Unlike most of the national churches of Europe, it had always been independent or semi-independent of Rome. What Henry did was to reassert that historic role. No new church was started by him. No new faith was inaugurated by him or permitted in his country.

BTW, this is also a digression and not related to the subject of this thread. If you, therefore, want to discuss it further, I'd ask you to start a new thread.

 

[WarriorAngel]

In the early 5th century, Nestorius was preaching that Mary was not the mother God.

At 431 AD, the Council of Ephesus condemned Nestorius's teaching as heresy and affirmed that Mary was the "mother of God"

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Ephesus

<just curious>
How do they do that?

First how the Pope from the West came to dogmatize the concept.
http://www.churchyear.net/ic.html
"We declare, pronounce and define that the doctrine which asserts that the Blessed Virgin Mary, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God, and in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, Saviour of the human race, was preserved free from every stain of original sin is a doctrine revealed by God and, for this reason, must be firmly and constantly believed by all the faithful." With these words in 1854, Pope Pius IX in the Papal Bull ineffabilis Dei, declared Mary's Immaculate Conception to be dogma. Pius was simply affirming a long-held belief of many Christians East and West before him, that Mary was conceived free of the stain of original sin, on account of Christ's work, in order to bear God-made-flesh.

http://www.ancient-future.net/marynew.html

A helpful site.

http://oca.org/QA.asp?ID=116&SID=3

QUESTION:

How exactly does the Orthodox Church view the sinlessness of Mary?

ANSWER:

The Virgin Mary requires a thorough explanation of some of the secondary issues to which you refer, such as original sin, the Immaculate Conception, supernatural grace, etc.

I can say, in short, that the Orthodox Church believes that Mary, as a human being, could indeed have sinned, but chose not to. 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.

Jesus Christ is Mary's Savior, as well as ours, as testified in her own statement in St Luke -- the Magnificat -- where she says, "My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior." If Mary had been "sin-proofed," so to speak, from all eternity, the Orthodox would argue as to why she would need a Savior.

Mary is the "new Eve" who said "yes" to God where the first Eve said "no." She did have a choice, the text of the Kanon from Matins for the Great Feast of the Annunciation, in which you will see a beautiful dialogue between Mary and the Archangel Gabriel in which she debates whether or not to accept the archangel's news, only in the end accepting that which he announced.

While much that the Orthodox say of Mary "sounds" similar to that which is taught by Roman Catholicism, there are serious differences on many levels. You are correct in saying, however, that the Orthodox Church does not seem to have such a highly developed mariological tradition as the Christian West; it is, at least in my experience, only in recent times, with the growing interest in Orthodoxy especially among many evangelicals, that we have had to delve so deeply -- and sometimes deeper than we should -- into the role of Mary. Sometimes our answers seem somewhat lame, but in reality there is only so much one can say before one must acknowledge that, while there are certain things we simply cannot fully understand about this, reasoned faith, as defined in St James, becomes the only recourse.


Again, whether or not the EO and RC agree how or what, neither will ever suggest she sinned.

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Pope St. Hormisdas[SIZE=-1]Died 523. The father of Pope Silverius. ... quia in sede apostolica immaculata est semper Catholica conservata religio" (The first means of safety is to ...
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Juan Bautista de Lezana[SIZE=-1](1) "Liber apologeticus pro Immaculata Conceptione" (Madrid, 1616). ... Dedicated to the Immaculate Heart of the Blessed Virgin Mary ...[/SIZE]

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07674d.htm
Scripture that were understood for Mary's sinlessness.

Worth the time to read;

My Belief in the Immaculate Conception Doctrine. By Daniel Joseph Barton. A former eastern Orthodox Priest examines Orthodox objections to the doctrine.
On the Immaculate Conception. Quotes from church fathers.
Memorandum on the Immaculate Conception by John Henry Cardinal Newman​

And the Church Father quotes;​

Immaculate Conception

"He was the ark formed of incorruptible wood. For by this is signified that His tabernacle was exempt from putridity and corruption."
Hippolytus,Orat. Inillud, Dominus pascit me(ante A.D. 235),in ULL,94

"This Virgin Mother of the Only-begotten of God, is called Mary, worthy of God, immaculate of the immaculate, one of the one."
Origen,Homily 1(A.D. 244),in ULL,94

"Let woman praise Her, the pure Mary."
Ephraim,Hymns on the Nativity,15:23(A.D. 370),in NPNF2,XIII:254

"Thou alone and thy Mother are in all things fair, there is no flaw in thee and no stain in thy Mother."
"Ephraem,Nisibene Hymns,27:8(A.D. 370),in THEO,132

"Mary, a Virgin not only undefiled but a Virgin whom grace has made inviolate, free of every stain of sin."
Ambrose,Sermon 22:30(A.D. 388),in JUR,II:166

"We must except the Holy Virgin Mary, concerning whom I wish to raise no question when it touches the subject of sins, out of honour to the Lord; for from Him we know what abundance of grace for overcoming sin in every particular was conferred upon her who had the merit to conceive and bear Him who undoubtedly had no sin."
Augustine,Nature and Grace,42[36](A.D.415),in NPNF1,V:135

"As he formed her without my stain of her own,so He proceeded from her contracting no stain."
Proclus of Constantinople,Homily 1(ante A.D. 446),in ULL,97

"A virgin, innocent, spotless, free of all defect, untouched, unsullied, holy in soul and body, like a lily sprouting among thorns."
Theodotus of Ancrya,Homily VI:11(ante A.D. 446),in THEO,339

"The angel took not the Virgin from Joseph, but gave her to Christ, to whom she was pledged from Joseph, but gave her to Christ, to whom she was pledged in the womb, when she was made."
Peter Chrysologus,Sermon 140(A.D. 449),in ULL,97

"[T]he very fact that God has elected her proves that none was ever holier than Mary, if any stain had disfigured her soul, if any other virgin had been purer and holier, God would have selected her and rejected Mary."
Jacob of Sarug(ante A.D. 521),in CE

"She is born like the cherubim, she who is of a pure, immaculate clay" Theotoknos of Livias,Panegyric for the feast of the Assumption, 5:6(ante A.D. 650),in THEO,180

"Today humanity, in all the radiance of her immaculate nobility, receives its ancient beauty. The shame of sin had darkened the splendour and attraction of human nature; but when the Mother of the Fair One par excellence is born, this nature regains in her person its ancient privileges and is fashioned according to a perfect model truly worthy of God.... The reform of our nature begins today and the aged world, subjected to a wholly divine transformation, receives the first fruits of the second creation"
Andrew of Crete,Sermon I,On the Birth of Mary(A.D. 733),in THEO,180

"[T]ruly elect, and superior to all,not by the altitude of lofty structures, but as ecelling all in the greatness and purity of sublime and divine virtues, and having no affinity with sin whatever."
Germanus of Constantinople,Marracci in S. Germani Mariali(ante A.D. 733),in ULL,98

"O most blessed loins of Joachim from which came forth a spotless seed! O glorious womb of Anne in which a most holy offspring grew."
John of Damascus,Homily I in Nativ.(ante A.D. 749),in THEO,200

THE fathers have shown through out the ages in their writings and homiles that she was BORN without sin.​

SO NO...it didnt take 1854 years.​

[/SIZE]

 

[Albion]

SO NO...it didnt take 1854 years.

You may not have noticed, but none of that extensive cut and pasting shows that the belief was from the beginning...and that is what you are out to prove because that is what you claimed is the case.

I for one acknowledge that the idea of the I. C. was around for awhile before the Papacy made it into a dogma, but it was not an Apostolic belief, just an opinion that men added as they sought to increase devotion to Mary.

 

[WarriorAngel]

You may not have noticed, but none of that extensive cut and pasting shows that the belief was from the beginning...and that is what you are out to prove because that is what you claimed is the case.

I for one acknowledge that the idea of the I. C. was around for awhile before the Papacy made it into a dogma, but it was not an Apostolic belief, just an opinion that men added as they sought to increase devotion to Mary.

As I said previously to ormly, who said all will die thru this....
That means then all of the Christian history which held it would have died then.

So my point was prooven that if it was ever...ever not Apostolic teaching, then these fathers, many of them Saints...would have been argued against for ever making such a teaching as early as 235 or 244 AD if it did not match what was already taught.

WE see no where that an argument against Mary ever existed ...

It was an agreed upon teaching, or many of the Church would have been removed or shown to wrong.

So not only do these writings proove this teaching is ancient, that it was led by the Holy Spirit to be taught as such and maintained in the Church. But you will not find an argument amongst the Church against this teaching.