Immaculate Conception

[bbbbbbb]

Well ... Orthodox do not believe in the Immaculate Conception, and we further disagree with the theology that makes it important to Catholics. We are on very opposite sides of the issue from them.

However, to be fair, I doubt any Catholics place their faith in the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception. Their faith is in Christ, just as mine is, and your own as well. We are just disagreeing about some of the details of how that comes about.

Not that those details are unimportant. I think they are important. But it's really not fair to consider that Catholics place their faith in the IC rather than in Christ.

Peace be with you.

It is problematic with Catholics. Because this doctrine has been elevated to the status of a dogma for them which is essential to their salvation, if they do not place an acceptable amount of faith in it they cannot be saved. The problem comes to what a reasonable amount of faith in the Immaculate Conception is. For the majority of Catholics it is merely lip service and not a denial of the doctrine. For a small minority, whose faith in Mary has become their core identity, then I would say there is a genuine problem.

 

[~Anastasia~]

It is problematic with Catholics. Because this doctrine has been elevated to the status of a dogma for them which is essential to their salvation, if they do not place an acceptable amount of faith in it they cannot be saved. The problem comes to what a reasonable amount of faith in the Immaculate Conception is. For the majority of Catholics it is merely lip service and not a denial of the doctrine. For a small minority, whose faith in Mary has become their core identity, then I would say there is a genuine problem.

Well, you do have a point. But they have other dogmas I disagree with as well. One reason I'm not Catholic.

I still don't quite think that translates into having faith in something that replaces Christ.

Rather, its more particular requirements placed by their leaders, that I wouldn't agree with.

But that is not to say their faith is not placed in Christ.



I don't have much more to say on that. If a Catholic asked me why I disagree, or wanted to understand the differences, I'm happy to discuss. But it's not my place to hunt down what is wrong in their doctrines and judge their salvation based on that. (I'm not saying that's what you are doing, but if I went too far in that direction, it's what I would be doing.)

Rather, I accept them as brothers and sisters in Christ, just as I do those of whatever denomination or no denomination who claim Him. God will sort out the details and judge.

 

[Erose]

It is problematic with Catholics. Because this doctrine has been elevated to the status of a dogma for them which is essential to their salvation, if they do not place an acceptable amount of faith in it they cannot be saved. The problem comes to what a reasonable amount of faith in the Immaculate Conception is. For the majority of Catholics it is merely lip service and not a denial of the doctrine. For a small minority, whose faith in Mary has become their core identity, then I would say there is a genuine problem.

What an insane comment, based in nothing. 7bs I really expect more from you.

 

[Erose]

And it matters greatly what the object of our faith is. If, as in this particular thread, one places one's faith in a dubious doctrine about a person who is not God, then one's faith is misplaced and is in vain. However, if one's faith is truly in the person and work of Jesus Christ, then one's faith is precious in God's sight.

So if I put my faith in my wife that she will be faithful to me and true, them my faith is misplaced and is in vain?

 

[Erose]

Well ... Orthodox do not believe in the Immaculate Conception, and we further disagree with the theology that makes it important to Catholics. We are on very opposite sides of the issue from them.

I don't think we are completely on opposite sides on this matter, as I understand and correct me if I'm wrong, that the Eastern Churches believe in the sinlessness of Mary.

However, to be fair, I doubt any Catholics place their faith in the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception. Their faith is in Christ, just as mine is, and your own as well. We are just disagreeing about some of the details of how that comes about.

True. One does not put their faith in a doctrine, but in a Person, who we believe will do what He said He will do. That is our primary faith.

Now we do put our faith in Mary that she will always direct us toward her Son, and will intercede for us before Him, in our time of need we ask her to.

Not that those details are unimportant. I think they are important. But it's really not fair to consider that Catholics place their faith in the IC rather than in Christ.

Peace be with you.

 

[prodromos]

Then you need to explain what it is to all of us because you have just confused me.

It was explained to you earlier in this thread following on from your post #301

 

[bbbbbbb]

So if I put my faith in my wife that she will be faithful to me and true, them my faith is misplaced and is in vain?

If you are trusting your wife to give you eternal salvation then your faith is misplaced and is in vain.

We all trust various individuals for various areas of life. I don't trust my barber to be an expert brain surgeon, do you?

 

[bbbbbbb]

What an insane comment, based in nothing. 7bs I really expect more from you.

I am surprised that you have such high expectations of me and am sorry to disappoint you. There was a Catholic poster here at CF a few years back who was off the deep end about Mary to the point that fellow Catholics were embarrassed. These people, although uncommon in the Catholic communion, are there and I have known several.

 

[~Anastasia~]

I don't think we are completely on opposite sides on this matter, as I understand and correct me if I'm wrong, that the Eastern Churches believe in the sinlessness of Mary.

Forgive me. I meant something slightly different.

The sinlessness of Mary is one of those areas (as it was explained to me) we have some freedom in our belief. If one wants to believe she was sinless, that is accepted. One can also believe her to be blameless, righteous, in the sense that a number of people in Scripture are said to be blameless. Certainly we do not believe that she had any major sin in her life. But one priest showed me, for example, a writing (I was too new to be able to recall what it was) where she got a bit irritated and impatient with someone at a meeting. That level of sin is no problem for us theologically. And she was, after all, under the curse of death as all mankind is.

The IC is a problem for several reasons, and this is why I said we are on opposite sides of the fence. Most of it stems from the Catholic view of original sin, perhaps. We have some differences in how we view Adam's sin, so we usually refer to ancestral sin. You probably know all of that. But it boils down to Mary having no need to be preserved from original sin (since we don't believe in it), because ancestral sin was not a problem for her to be the bearer of Christ.

More importantly, IF Mary was conceived immaculately, then she is of a slightly different nature from the rest of us. I suppose she would be like pre-lapsarian Adam? In that case, we have concerns that the flesh Christ took from her was not like our flesh. If He did not become one if us then He did not deify the same nature that other men have. So there is no open door for theosis. That would actually make salvation impossible, from our point of view, God forbid!

And then people always ask, if God could simply cause Mary to be conceived without sin, why couldn't He do that for everyone? This is a philosophical conundrum, not a theological point, and as such we are not much concerned with it. But it would seem to paint God a bit more capricious than we know Him to be.

But because of these things, not only do we not believe in the Immaculate Conception, but it is opposed to our theology of salvation. This is what I meant that we are on opposite sides of the fence.

(Yes, we do believe Mary was "full of grace" as the Archangel Gabriel addressed her - she HAD already lived a special life and had been the recipient of the grace of God, and had cooperated with it. And when she was overshadowed by the Holy Spirit, she would have been cleansed, however it would have been necessary, to bear Christ. But the full IC we do not and cannot agree with.)

No offense intended ... these are simply our differences, and reasons for them.

 

[prodromos]

Forgive me. I meant something slightly different.

The sinlessness of Mary is one of those areas (as it was explained to me) we have some freedom in our belief. If one wants to believe she was sinless, that is accepted. One can also believe her to be blameless, righteous, in the sense that a number of people in Scripture are said to be blameless. Certainly we do not believe that she had any major sin in her life. But one priest showed me, for example, a writing (I was too new to be able to recall what it was) where she got a bit irritated and impatient with someone at a meeting. That level of sin is no problem for us theologically. And she was, after all, under the curse of death as all mankind is.

The IC is a problem for several reasons, and this is why I said we are on opposite sides of the fence. Most of it stems from the Catholic view of original sin, perhaps. We have some differences in how we view Adam's sin, so we usually refer to ancestral sin. You probably know all of that. But it boils down to Mary having no need to be preserved from original sin (since we don't believe in it), because ancestral sin was not a problem for her to be the bearer of Christ.

More importantly, IF Mary was conceived immaculately, then she is of a slightly different nature from the rest of us. I suppose she would be like pre-lapsarian Adam? In that case, we have concerns that the flesh Christ took from her was not like our flesh. If He did not become one if us then He did not deify the same nature that other men have. So there is no open door for theosis. That would actually make salvation impossible, from our point of view, God forbid!

And then people always ask, if God could simply cause Mary to be conceived without sin, why couldn't He do that for everyone? This is a philosophical conundrum, not a theological point, and as such we are not much concerned with it. But it would seem to paint God a bit more capricious than we know Him to be.

But because of these things, not only do we not believe in the Immaculate Conception, but it is opposed to our theology of salvation. This is what I meant that we are on opposite sides of the fence.

(Yes, we do believe Mary was "full of grace" as the Archangel Gabriel addressed her - she HAD already lived a special life and had been the recipient of the grace of God, and had cooperated with it. And when she was overshadowed by the Holy Spirit, she would have been cleansed, however it would have been necessary, to bear Christ. But the full IC we do not and cannot agree with.)

No offense intended ... these are simply our differences, and reasons for them.

Just to add to the above, Catholicism makes Mary the great exception, whereas Orthodoxy sees her as the great example. If she was preserved by God from sinning then where is her virtue? From our viewpoint the IC actually diminishes Mary.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Just to add to the above, Catholicism makes Mary the great exception, whereas Orthodoxy sees her as the great example. If she was preserved by God from sinning then where is her virtue? From our viewpoint the IC actually diminishes Mary.

Thank you - I forgot that, and it is indeed important.

 

[Erose]

I will only address what I see is...curious?

More importantly, IF Mary was conceived immaculately, then she is of a slightly different nature from the rest of us. I suppose she would be like pre-lapsarian Adam? In that case, we have concerns that the flesh Christ took from her was not like our flesh. If He did not become one if us then He did not deify the same nature that other men have. So there is no open door for theosis. That would actually make salvation impossible, from our point of view, God forbid!

I'm kind of surprised by this paragraph to be honest. I didn't know that Orthodoxy believed that it is in our nature to be sinful. This is surprising to me in all honesty.

Anyway, here is my understanding of it. Human beings are not naturally prone to sin. That would mean that God created us to be sinners. This would be a strange idea. Even after the fall of man, one cannot say that God changed the nature of man to become sinners. This would be a strange idea as well. The understanding of the fallen nature of man, is that man has been weakened in his nature or maybe a better word would be damaged or diseased? Another way to look at it, is that before the fall, man lived in the full grace of God, and thus he was righteous before God; the sin of Adam, turned humanity away from God, and thus rejected God's grace and humanity ceased to naturally be righteous. Anyway the point I'm trying to make here is that we don't see the nature of man to be sinful, and right now mankind lives in a state less than what they are suppose to be. In a sense mankind, along with the fallen angels, are the only creatures of God, that are not fulfilling our nature as we were made to be.

And then people always ask, if God could simply cause Mary to be conceived without sin, why couldn't He do that for everyone? This is a philosophical conundrum, not a theological point, and as such we are not much concerned with it. But it would seem to paint God a bit more capricious than we know Him to be.

The best way to look at this IMO and I don't think that it is a conundrum, is that between mother and child there is always a very unique bond of love, as having shared in the same flesh for 9 months. I don't see how Jesus would have been different, especially considering that Jesus is God, and God is Charity (Agape). When we say that Mary is the Immaculate Conception we are truly saying that at no point, even at her conception, has the bond of love between her and her Son, ever broken. Is that not what sin is? Turning our backs on God's Love and Goodness, to love something else more?

But because of these things, not only do we not believe in the Immaculate Conception, but it is opposed to our theology of salvation. This is what I meant that we are on opposite sides of the fence.

I don't think that when one truly delves into the differences that there is truly an opposition. I know this would be a disagreement, but I do think that they are not irreconcilable.

 

[Erose]

Just to add to the above, Catholicism makes Mary the great exception, whereas Orthodoxy sees her as the great example. If she was preserved by God from sinning then where is her virtue? From our viewpoint the IC actually diminishes Mary.

We don't say God preserved her from sinning, as she had a free will just like the rest of us. We say that God preserved her from Sin. Here is the thing. Mary had the power to sin. She wasn't forced by God to live a life of righteousness. She lived a life of righteousness because she loved God. Did He give her the grace to live that life of righteousness, without a doubt He did, she was the mother of His Son, was she not.

No from our point of view, the IC speaks more of the Son's love of His mother than anything else. When one truly delves deep into what humanity's fallen nature truly means, it really starts to make more sense, IMO.

 

[Erose]

I am surprised that you have such high expectations of me and am sorry to disappoint you. There was a Catholic poster here at CF a few years back who was off the deep end about Mary to the point that fellow Catholics were embarrassed. These people, although uncommon in the Catholic communion, are there and I have known several.

This may be the case, I don't know. I haven't really met anyone who worships Mary as a goddess. I've heard that some forms of voodoo folks do, but that is about it.

 

[Erose]

If you are trusting your wife to give you eternal salvation then your faith is misplaced and is in vain.

That wasn't your point before. Moving the goalposts here. I trust Mary and the Saints to intercede for me before my Lord and Savior, and to assist me as much as they can or are asked to, to help me on my journey to eternal salvation.

That trust does not diminish the hope I have in Jesus that if I believe in Him, in all that this entails, then I will have everlasting life. No it really increases that hope, because I'm not doing this alone, that I have all of my brethren here on earth, helping me on my journey as well as all my brethren in heaven as well. What I see is all these "helps" that Jesus has given me to insure that I will run a good race.

 

[Major1]

Forgive me. I meant something slightly different.

The sinlessness of Mary is one of those areas (as it was explained to me) we have some freedom in our belief. If one wants to believe she was sinless, that is accepted. One can also believe her to be blameless, righteous, in the sense that a number of people in Scripture are said to be blameless. Certainly we do not believe that she had any major sin in her life. But one priest showed me, for example, a writing (I was too new to be able to recall what it was) where she got a bit irritated and impatient with someone at a meeting. That level of sin is no problem for us theologically. And she was, after all, under the curse of death as all mankind is.

The IC is a problem for several reasons, and this is why I said we are on opposite sides of the fence. Most of it stems from the Catholic view of original sin, perhaps. We have some differences in how we view Adam's sin, so we usually refer to ancestral sin. You probably know all of that. But it boils down to Mary having no need to be preserved from original sin (since we don't believe in it), because ancestral sin was not a problem for her to be the bearer of Christ.

More importantly, IF Mary was conceived immaculately, then she is of a slightly different nature from the rest of us. I suppose she would be like pre-lapsarian Adam? In that case, we have concerns that the flesh Christ took from her was not like our flesh. If He did not become one if us then He did not deify the same nature that other men have. So there is no open door for theosis. That would actually make salvation impossible, from our point of view, God forbid!

And then people always ask, if God could simply cause Mary to be conceived without sin, why couldn't He do that for everyone? This is a philosophical conundrum, not a theological point, and as such we are not much concerned with it. But it would seem to paint God a bit more capricious than we know Him to be.

But because of these things, not only do we not believe in the Immaculate Conception, but it is opposed to our theology of salvation. This is what I meant that we are on opposite sides of the fence.

(Yes, we do believe Mary was "full of grace" as the Archangel Gabriel addressed her - she HAD already lived a special life and had been the recipient of the grace of God, and had cooperated with it. And when she was overshadowed by the Holy Spirit, she would have been cleansed, however it would have been necessary, to bear Christ. But the full IC we do not and cannot agree with.)

No offense intended ... these are simply our differences, and reasons for them.

I am glad we can agree. You gave a very detailed explination of why Mary was not sinless and I agree.

 

[Major1]

That wasn't your point before. Moving the goalposts here. I trust Mary and the Saints to intercede for me before my Lord and Savior, and to assist me as much as they can or are asked to, to help me on my journey to eternal salvation.

That trust does not diminish the hope I have in Jesus that if I believe in Him, in all that this entails, then I will have everlasting life. No it really increases that hope, because I'm not doing this alone, that I have all of my brethren here on earth, helping me on my journey as well as all my brethren in heaven as well. What I see is all these "helps" that Jesus has given me to insure that I will run a good race.

And the debate is real simple. IF Mary intercedes for you as does other believers then all you have to do is post the Scriptures from the Word of God which say so.

Please post as well the Scriptures which as you say......" and to assist me as much as they can or are asked to, to help me on my journey to eternal salvation. "

Do that and I am pretty sure that every single person on this web site will never be heard from again on this subject.

So what are those Bible Scriptures my dear friend.........................

 

[Major1]

This may be the case, I don't know. I haven't really met anyone who worships Mary as a goddess. I've heard that some forms of voodoo folks do, but that is about it.

You have to be kidding us!!!!

You have got to get of the computer and get out of the hose more.

The Marian shrine Basilica of Our Lady of Guadalupe in Mexico City was the most visited Catholic shrine in the world in 1999.

It was followed by San Giovanni Rotondo also Marian shrine.

Our Lady of Aparecida in Brazil had 3.9 million people vist the number has since reached eight million pilgrims per year.

Given the millions of visitors per year to Our Lady of Lourdes and Our Lady of Fatima, the major Marian churches receive over 30 million pilgrims per year. In December 2009, the Basilica of Our Lady of Guadalupe set a new record with 6.1 million pilgrims during Friday and Saturday for the anniversary of Our Lady of Guadalipe.

 

[prodromos]

You have to be kidding us!!!!

You have got to get of the computer and get out of the hose more.

The Marian shrine Basilica of Our Lady of Guadalupe in Mexico City was the most visited Catholic shrine in the world in 1999.

It was followed by San Giovanni Rotondo also Marian shrine.

Our Lady of Aparecida in Brazil had 3.9 million people vist the number has since reached eight million pilgrims per year.

Given the millions of visitors per year to Our Lady of Lourdes and Our Lady of Fatima, the major Marian churches receive over 30 million pilgrims per year. In December 2009, the Basilica of Our Lady of Guadalupe set a new record with 6.1 million pilgrims during Friday and Saturday for the anniversary of Our Lady of Guadalipe.

6 million people visit the Lincoln Memorial every year. Do you claim the visitors are worshipping him as a god?

 

[Major1]

6 million people visit the Lincoln Memorial every year. Do you claim the visitors are worshipping him as a god?

The context of my post was the comment be "Eros" that............
"This may be the case, I don't know. I haven't really met anyone who worships Mary as a goddess".

Since no one accepts Lincoln as anything more than a past President of the USA, the better question is do you believe that the millions of people who went to a Catholic religious site Named after and promoted in the name of Mary, went there for any other reason than to worship Mary?

The point is that even though he may not know of any one who worships Mary, there are millions who do.