Saint Photius, Saint Gregory Palamas and others explicitly teaching the Immaculate Conception?

[TheLostCoin]

So, I came across some various discussions in regards to the dogma of the Immaculate Conception in Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, and I came across this, which was written by Father Lev Gillet, from 1928.

The Immaculate Conception and the Orthodox Church

He seems to say that the Immaculate Conception was specifically proclaimed by Saint Photius himself, saying that the Virgin Mary was sanctified by God from the beginning of her existence as an Embryo - "ek Brephous" in Greek, literally, "from the origin as an Embryo."

Sure enough, I looked up this specific homily online, and came across this.

The Homilies of Photius, Patriarch of Constantinople

Page 116.

"...But because she had maintained her desires unsullied; because since she was a babe she had been sanctified to God as a living and unquarried temple."


So, the question is: Have I been lied to this entire time? It seems that the Immaculate Conception existed in Eastern Orthodoxy for centuries, but it has been explicitly denied since the 19th century in response to Roman dogmatization.

Thoughts?

 

[ArmyMatt]

no, the IC says the merits of Christ were applied to Mary at her conception, removing original guilt. that is not the same as saying she was holy since her conception.

 

[TheLostCoin]

no, the IC says the merits of Christ were applied to Mary at her conception, removing original guilt. that is not the same as saying she was holy since her conception.

But I've heard (and parroted admittedly) so many arguments which argue that the Immaculate Conception even blasphemes the Mother of God, because the Immaculate Conception implies that we can't be as holy as she is and that the fact that God sanctifies her at conception makes her alien to us in terms of looking up to her as a role model. I've heard this from people online and even from my own priest (who says repeatedly "the Virgin Mary is the first among us, not the exception among us"). I've also heard the theory from Orthodox priests that she was explicitly sanctified at the Annunciation, but I never EVER understood the problems of the Immaculate Conception were simply just errors in Scholastic / Satisfaction theology, but just the mere act of the Theotokos being sanctified and given Extraordinary Grace from the first moment of her conception.


I feel like I've been viciously lied to by Orthodox clergy and laypeople, to such an extent that I feel like - quite frankly - that there's no way in heck ANYBODY anywhere has preserved Apostolic Christianity in it's fullest, and the claims of the Eastern Orthodox Church having received the Original Undefiled Faith is ultimately - well, to avoid offensive language - the 2nd Bolgia of Malebolge, according to Dante's Inferno - where the flatterers end up in.



I mean, how can I even go to confession if the Priest I go to will rebuke me for possibly blaspheming the Mother of God by admitting my blasphemy against the Mother of God?

 

[icxn]

Being sanctified at birth or even as an embryo doesn't mean she did not have a fallen human nature (she did, after all, she died) and therefore she was subject to temptation. IC denies all that.

 

[TheLostCoin]

Being sanctified at birth or even as an embryo doesn't mean she did not have a fallen human nature (she did, after all, she died) and therefore she was subject to temptation. IC denies all that.

How so? If she is continually sanctified from the time of conception onwards such that she cannot sin, how is that temptation equivalent to the temptations we experience? And how does that not constitute a change in fallen human nature?

I also don't get how this is fair or just that one person gets this special gift of Grace to be able to resist all sins to the degree of Adam, not unlike the rest of us, who sin even unintentionally, who throw tantrums as babies whenever we need milk and don't immediately get it, or scream in Church when we get bored and a lack of attention in Church as babies.

 

[~Anastasia~]

So, I came across some various discussions in regards to the dogma of the Immaculate Conception in Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, and I came across this, which was written by Father Lev Gillet, from 1928.

The Immaculate Conception and the Orthodox Church

He seems to say that the Immaculate Conception was specifically proclaimed by Saint Photius himself, saying that the Virgin Mary was sanctified by God from the beginning of her existence as an Embryo - "ek Brephous" in Greek, literally, "from the origin as an Embryo."

Sure enough, I looked up this specific homily online, and came across this.

The Homilies of Photius, Patriarch of Constantinople

Page 116.

"...But because she had maintained her desires unsullied; because since she was a babe she had been sanctified to God as a living and unquarried temple."


So, the question is: Have I been lied to this entire time? It seems that the Immaculate Conception existed in Eastern Orthodoxy for centuries, but it has been explicitly denied since the 19th century in response to Roman dogmatization.

Thoughts?

I don't have time to read it all but I read several pages and thought about it.

Thoughts include ... that quote follows the comment that SHE made HERSELF ... SHE prepared HERSELF. That speaks to something apart from her conception. How could she orchestrate her own conception? It must be something of how she lived her life ...

And then I look at the exact words ... especially "since she was a babe she had been sanctified to God". That language puts me in mind of children dedicated to God from birth, like the prophet Samuel. Which the Theotokos was, and raised in the temple, and so on.

So it seems in my reading to be saying in this excerpt at least what Orthodoxy teaches.

 

[~Anastasia~]

I also don't get how this is fair or just that one person gets this special gift of Grace to be able to resist all sins ... unlike the rest of us

Exactly.


Though it would make sense if God had to do it that way in order to offer salvation. But He doesn't have to. And theologically it does present certain problems if the flesh Jesus took from Mary isn't like our flesh.

 

[TheLostCoin]

I don't have time to read it all but I read several pages and thought about it.

Thoughts include ... that quote follows the comment that SHE made HERSELF ... SHE prepared HERSELF. That speaks to something apart from her conception. How could she orchestrate her own conception? It must be something of how she lived her life ...

So it seems in my reading to be saying in this excerpt at least what Orthodoxy teaches.

Well, Jesus fasted in the desert for 40 days despite being completely free of sin.

And how do you explain the other theological opinions like St. Gregory Palamas and others?

 

[~Anastasia~]

Well, Jesus fasted in the desert for 40 days despite being completely free of sin.

And how do you explain the other theological opinions like St. Gregory Palamas and others?

I'm no theological expert here and don't want to speak beyond my understanding. But to say it simply - Orthodoxy doesn't have a problem with the Theotokos being holy, blameless, pure, unspotted, full of grace.

The objection is to how Catholicism makes her that way -- and why.

 

[ArmyMatt]

But I've heard (and parroted admittedly) so many arguments which argue that the Immaculate Conception even blasphemes the Mother of God, because the Immaculate Conception implies that we can't be as holy as she is and that the fact that God sanctifies her at conception makes her alien to us in terms of looking up to her as a role model. I've heard this from people online and even from my own priest (who says repeatedly "the Virgin Mary is the first among us, not the exception among us"). I've also heard the theory from Orthodox priests that she was explicitly sanctified at the Annunciation, but I never EVER understood the problems of the Immaculate Conception were simply just errors in Scholastic / Satisfaction theology, but just the mere act of the Theotokos being sanctified and given Extraordinary Grace from the first moment of her conception.


I feel like I've been viciously lied to by Orthodox clergy and laypeople, to such an extent that I feel like - quite frankly - that there's no way in heck ANYBODY anywhere has preserved Apostolic Christianity in it's fullest, and the claims of the Eastern Orthodox Church having received the Original Undefiled Faith is ultimately - well, to avoid offensive language - the 2nd Bolgia of Malebolge, according to Dante's Inferno - where the flatterers end up in.



I mean, how can I even go to confession if the Priest I go to will rebuke me for possibly blaspheming the Mother of God by admitting my blasphemy against the Mother of God?

but how has the Church lied to you? everything the laity have told you is true. God is infinitely holy, so just because she is blessed from the womb, that doesn't mean she wasn't sanctified more.

what you are bringing up aren't the errors of the IC.

 

[TheLostCoin]

but how has the Church lied to you? everything the laity have told you is true. God is infinitely holy, so just because she is blessed from the womb, that doesn't mean she wasn't sanctified more.

what you are bringing up aren't the errors of the IC.

I feel lied to because I am constantly told everytime the topic of the Immaculate Conception comes up (especially on feast days regarding Joachim and Anna, the Conception of the Theotokos, the Conception of Saint John the Baptist, etc.) that she was just like us, she's not the exception, but the first, there's nothing special at her compared to us, etc.

But the fact that her sinlessness was aided by Supernatural Grace in such a way that wasn't her own choosing or decision makes me wonder why I should even bother following her as a role model if such a feet requires such Supernatural Sanctification from Conception.

And many of the criticisms from lay people of what I have heard are extremely significant if we were to accept that the Virgin Mary was sanctified from the first moment of her conception - why does God give this specific privilege to her and not everybody else in terms of Extraordinary Grace? It's an especially puzzling question given the fact that she is the Queen of Heaven, the highest above all the Saints, second to only Christ Himself, the perfect role model of womanhood, etc.
How can we even follow her or look at her as a role model if she had supernatural assistance from the moment of her conception to avoid sin, etc., in ways not of HER OWN CHOICE.

It almost seems to imply Calvinism; God can make a bunch of special people who get to Heaven for completely subjective reasons, while everyone else is damned for not being chosen.

Why does the Virgin Mary even need to be conceived with Sanctification from the moment of her conception anyways if Anna gave birth to her through ordinary means of reproduction?

So what is explicitly heterodox about the Immaculate Conception that people in the Church have tried to explain - because I apparently don't understand it.

 

[ArmyMatt]

I feel lied to because I am constantly told everytime the topic of the Immaculate Conception comes up (especially on feast days regarding Joachim and Anna, the Conception of the Theotokos, the Conception of Saint John the Baptist, etc.) that she was just like us, she's not the exception, but the first, there's nothing special at her compared to us, etc.

But the fact that her sinlessness was aided by Supernatural Grace in such a way that wasn't her own choosing or decision makes me wonder why I should even bother following her as a role model if such a feet requires such Supernatural Sanctification from Conception.

And many of the criticisms from lay people of what I have heard are extremely significant if we were to accept that the Virgin Mary was sanctified from the first moment of her conception - why does God give this specific privilege to her and not everybody else in terms of Extraordinary Grace? It's an especially puzzling question given the fact that she is the Queen of Heaven, the highest above all the Saints, second to only Christ Himself, the perfect role model of womanhood, etc.
How can we even follow her or look at her as a role model if she had supernatural assistance from the moment of her conception to avoid sin, etc., in ways not of HER OWN CHOICE.

It almost seems to imply Calvinism; God can make a bunch of special people who get to Heaven for completely subjective reasons, while everyone else is damned for not being chosen.

Why does the Virgin Mary even need to be conceived with Sanctification from the moment of her conception anyways if Anna gave birth to her through ordinary means of reproduction?

So what is explicitly heterodox about the Immaculate Conception that people in the Church have tried to explain - because I apparently don't understand it.

where do we ever say she was aided by a supernatural grace that isn't offered to the rest of us?

 

[RobNJ]

LostCoin..... The wall you're running in to here, is that you are looking at this through the lens of the Western/Augustinian view of Original Sin.

Someone else can probably get into more detail... But the short form:
Western View: Original Sin means you are born into a fallen world , with the inclination to sin, and bearing the inherited guilt of Adam's sin itself.
Orthodox View:Original Sin means you are born into a fallen world , with the inclination to sin, BUT.. the only "guilt" (for lack of a better word) YOU carry, is for your own actions.
Mary did not sin. We should try to emulate that.

 

[icxn]

How so? If she is continually sanctified from the time of conception onwards such that she cannot sin, how is that temptation equivalent to the temptations we experience? And how does that not constitute a change in fallen human nature?

I also don't get how this is fair or just that one person gets this special gift of Grace to be able to resist all sins to the degree of Adam, not unlike the rest of us, who sin even unintentionally, who throw tantrums as babies whenever we need milk and don't immediately get it, or scream in Church when we get bored and a lack of attention in Church as babies.

If she had a special gift of Grace that rendered her impervious to sinning then she deserves no special honor or reward. Virtue and reward are to be found where there is struggle and the ability to choose (what is good). God judges us not by our ‘per capita’ performance, but by our ‘net profit.’ If you were given one talent and produce two you are better off than the person who having five produced only four.

If a person is suffering from internal bleeding and as a result, lightheadedness, wouldn’t you say that he should take care of the former i.e. the cause of the problem than trying to find temporary relief with just a few aspirins?

The envy that you feel - what I gather from reading your post, forgive me if I'm wrong - is the internal bleeding. Finding fault with doctrinal matters is the headache.

 

[TheLostCoin]

LostCoin..... The wall you're running in to here, is that you are looking at this through the lens of the Western/Augustinian view of Original Sin.

Someone else can probably get into more detail... But the short form:
Western View: Original Sin means you are born into a fallen world , with the inclination to sin, and bearing the inherited guilt of Adam's sin itself.
Orthodox View:Original Sin means you are born into a fallen world , with the inclination to sin, BUT.. the only "guilt" (for lack of a better word) YOU carry, is for your own actions.
Mary did not sin. We should try to emulate that.

While admittedly the Augustinian view of Original Sin has been extraordinarily frustrating to me and has built up frustration culminating in this thread post (that is, the Council of Carthage and the Council of Orange which both seemed to confirm the Augustinian view of Original Sin and anathematized anybody who disagreed),

Inherited Original Sin and Inherited Guilt aren't really the point. We are still fallen human beings who are prone to sin (and will likely sin) due to Adam's action.

If the Virgin Mary was sanctified such that, from her conception not of her own free will, she could overcome every single sin by Supernatural assistance, why should we bother seeing her as a role model? She didn't even have anywhere close near the same level of temptation, and she is more alien than human by the fact that God can just cause her to be immune to temptation.

Yeah, she gave birth to Jesus, but how could she even relate to us?

And how is it Just of God to pick and choose who gets to know how to avoid sin and who doesn't?

 

[TheLostCoin]

The envy that you feel - what I gather from reading your post, forgive me if I'm wrong - is the internal bleeding. Finding fault with doctrinal matters is the headache.

If the lightheadedness causes a seizure (that is, massive doctrinal contradiction), who cares if I'm internally bleeding?

 

[TheLostCoin]

where do we ever say she was aided by a supernatural grace that isn't offered to the rest of us?

What else does sanctified in the womb such that all her desires were immediately restrained possibly mean then?

 

[ArmyMatt]

What else does sanctified in the womb such that all her desires were immediately restrained possibly mean then?

it has to do with the dispassion of her parents at her conception.

 

[ArmyMatt]

While admittedly the Augustinian view of Original Sin has been extraordinarily frustrating to me and has built up frustration culminating in this thread post (that is, the Council of Carthage and the Council of Orange which both seemed to confirm the Augustinian view of Original Sin and anathematized anybody who disagreed),

Inherited Original Sin and Inherited Guilt aren't really the point. We are still fallen human beings who are prone to sin (and will likely sin) due to Adam's action.

If the Virgin Mary was sanctified such that, from her conception not of her own free will, she could overcome every single sin by Supernatural assistance, why should we bother seeing her as a role model? She didn't even have anywhere close near the same level of temptation, and she is more alien than human by the fact that God can just cause her to be immune to temptation.

Yeah, she gave birth to Jesus, but how could she even relate to us?

And how is it Just of God to pick and choose who gets to know how to avoid sin and who doesn't?

just because she was sanctified from the womb, that doesn't mean her free will wasn't involved.

 

[icxn]

If the lightheadedness causes a seizure (that is, massive doctrinal contradiction), who cares if I'm internally bleeding?

That’s precisely the issue. More aspirins i.e. arguments to satisfy your perceived doctrinal contradictions, won’t alleviate the problem.

TLC, I'm not passing judgement or being denigrating here. I have my own internal wounds to take care of.

Forgive me.