The Immaculate Conception and Free Will

[garysibio]

If Mary was given a special grace that kept her from sinning throughout her life, how can it be said that she had free will. These graces were supposed to be given to her at conception. Clearly she could not have consented to this. (I don't use consent to imply that she would not have chosen this had she been given the option, but only that she did not have the choice.)

 

[narnia59]

If Mary was given a special grace that kept her from sinning throughout her life, how can it be said that she had free will. These graces were supposed to be given to her at conception. Clearly she could not have consented to this. (I don't use consent to imply that she would not have chosen this had she been given the option, but only that she did not have the choice.)

The grace given to Mary did not keep her from sinning; it enabled her to not sin. Still her choice. She was created in the same state as Eve, who quite obviously had free will.

 

[bbbbbbb]

The grace given to Mary did not keep her from sinning; it enabled her to not sin. Still her choice. She was created in the same state as Eve, who quite obviously had free will.

However, Eve managed to sin quite willingly. If Eve is the model of Mary, then one can reasonably conclude that because Eve was not only capable of sin and did sin, so Mary was capable of sin and did sin.

If she never sinned she assuredly had no reason for the grace of God in salvation from sin and its effects.

 

[narnia59]

However, Eve managed to sin quite willingly. If Eve is the model of Mary, then one can reasonably conclude that because Eve was not only capable of sin and did sin, so Mary was capable of sin and did sin.

Do you also "reasonably" conclude that since Adam is the model of Christ that Christ sinned? For that is where such logic must take you.

If she never sinned she assuredly had no reason for the grace of God in salvation from sin and its effects.

If grace is a legalistic "get out of jail free" card, you would have a point. But it's not. It is that which sanctifies us, and it is only by grace that Mary was sanctified and could indeed remain sinless. She was indeed saved from sin by grace.

 

[justinangel]

If Mary was given a special grace that kept her from sinning throughout her life, how can it be said that she had free will. These graces were supposed to be given to her at conception. Clearly she could not have consented to this. (I don't use consent to imply that she would not have chosen this had she been given the option, but only that she did not have the choice.)

Every human being has a free will, but is not absolutely free to determine everything for himself or herself. If it were otherwise, then we would have the freedom to choose being born and avoiding death. Only God is absolutely self-determining, for God is essentially pure existence and being as opposed to non-being; pure act and non-contingent. God alone does not rely on any other object for his existence or form of being. God is pure cause (the First Cause of everything else that has been effected) and not the effect of anything else. By his very essence God eternally determines who he is and what he is. God said to Moses: "I am who I am."

Being a recipient of divine grace presupposes one has a free will to begin with. By our will, we naturally choose what is good for us, and so, if we have faith in God, we will accept and cooperate with his grace knowing it is for our own good. Our free will is compromised by succumbing to our sinful inclinations and resisting God's grace. The consequence is the forfeiting of our freedom and being enslaved by sin.

Mary had no sinful nature like ours, meaning in the modern theological sense, as opposed to the classical one formulated by Augustine, her life was a constant state of a conversion experience. She was sanctified in the womb by God's efficacious grace which Mary still could have resisted and rendered merely sufficient at some point in her life. But she was perpetually under this divine influence (the conscious state of conversion) which compelled her to always conform her will the the will of God. She was fashioned so that she would only want to do what God wanted of her and be who God wanted her to be - pleasing in his sight - because of her unique calling. Yet she had the ability to want for a reason in view of weighed options. Think of Mary as any ordinary person who is offered a deal too good to refuse and is conscious of it throughout her life. The human will can be deflected from pursuing its natural course, the truly good, under the wrong infuence which impairs our better judgment. But Mary's cardinal gift of prudence was exceptionally strong and protected her from the machinations of the serpent.

Grace is a free gift from God. He bestows his grace on anyone regardless of whether they ask for it or are conscious of its origin. One eventually "consents" to receiving God's grace by acknowledging it and cooperating with it. This takes the gifts of knowledge and wisdom from the Holy Spirit, even though intellectual knowledge is not a prerequisite for initially receiving any form of grace.

Our God is in the heavens; He does whatever He pleases.
Psalm 115, 3 [NASB]

"Mary, a Virgin not only undefiled but a Virgin whom grace has made inviolate, free of every stain of sin."
St. Ambrose, Sermon 22:30 [A.D. 388]

Pax Christu,
J.A.

 

[seashale76]

The immaculate conception is an RCC belief. The Orthodox do not share it.

 

[justinangel]

The immaculate conception is an RCC belief. The Orthodox do not share it.

The Greek Orthodox Church unanimously believed in the Immaculate Conception until the 15th century when some Greek Orthodox theologians began to embrace the idea that Mary became sinless from the time she conceived Jesus at the Annunciation. Eventually the Greek Orthodox church broke from a tradition that it shared with the Byzantine Catholic church. In the Divine Liturgy both Byzantine Catholics and Orthodox greeted Mary as archrantos, "the immaculate, spotless one" eight times. The Byzantine Catholics still believe in the Imamculate Conception. The Tipikon of St. Sabbas indicates that the Feast of the Immaculate Conception was already celebrated in the Eastern Church by A.D. 485, almost half a millennium before the Great Schism. The Feast of the Immaculate Conception was estabilished in the Latin West by Pope Sixtus lV on 28 February 1476 - much later than in the Greek East, and almost 400 years before the doctrine was defined as dogma by Pope Pius lX in 1854.

Finally, I should point out that Mary had already found favour with God by the time the angel Gabriel appeared to her and before she conceived Jesus: "Hail, O highly favoured one (Chaire kecharitomene). The Lord is with you" (Luke 1:28). "Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favour with God" (Luke 1:30). Kecharitomene, even according to Protestant exegetes, means "having been perfected / made perfect by grace (charis).

Pax Christu,
J.A.

 

[Mark_Sam]

But then again, RCs and EOs have different understandings of what it means to be immaculate (going back to the Augustinian definition of original sin and all that stuff). Right?

 

[Nick T]

The Greek Orthodox Church unanimously believed in the Immaculate Conception until the 15th century when some Greek Orthodox theologians began to embrace the idea that Mary became sinless from the time she conceived Jesus at the Annunciation. Eventually the Greek Orthodox church broke from a tradition that it shared with the Byzantine Catholic church. In the Divine Liturgy both Byzantine Catholics and Orthodox greeted Mary as archrantos, "the immaculate, spotless one" eight times. The Byzantine Catholics still believe in the Imamculate Conception. The Tipikon of St. Sabbas indicates that the Feast of the Immaculate Conception was already celebrated in the Eastern Church by A.D. 485, almost half a millennium before the Great Schism. The Feast of the Immaculate Conception was estabilished in the Latin West by Pope Sixtus lV on 28 February 1476 - much later than in the Greek East, and almost 400 years before the doctrine was defined as dogma by Pope Pius lX in 1854.

Finally, I should point out that Mary had already found favour with God by the time the angel Gabriel appeared to her and before she conceived Jesus: "Hail, O highly favoured one (Chaire kecharitomene). The Lord is with you" (Luke 1:28). "Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favour with God" (Luke 1:30). Kecharitomene, even according to Protestant exegetes, means "having been perfected / made perfect by grace (charis).

Pax Christu,
J.A.

For a start please don't tell us what we believe- if you want to find out just ask or even better find the answer online.

There is not, and never has been, a feast of the "Immaculate Conception" in Eastern Christianity. What you are referring to is the Feast of the Conception of the Theotokos- the same event but you believe she was given some extraordinary saving grace during it.

We do indeed consider the Theotokos to be all-holy and immaculate, but this has nothing to do with her conception or the Annunciation. Rather she simply lived a holy and sinless life, plain and simple, no need for any special "Immaculate Conception".

The difference here is that in Orthodoxy we consider man to have inherited the consequences of Adam's sin (.e.g. death) but not guilt from Adam's sin. As such Mary, through great and extraordinary piety, was able to live a sinless life without needing any guilt specially taken away or anything like that. However she still inherited death and so still had to be saved by her son, Jesus Christ.

Mary was a human like any of us- it was because of her piety and obedience that she is called the all-holy, not because of any special act of God.

So you see where the difference is- you say that for Mary to have been immaculate she needed to have original sin removed. We say that Mary was immaculate without need for any original sin removal (as we have different views on what original sin entails); in fact from an Orthodox POV removing original sin would entail immortality and no need for Christ.

 

[bbbbbbb]

For a start please don't tell us what we believe- if you want to find out just ask or even better find the answer online.

There is not, and never has been, a feast of the "Immaculate Conception" in Eastern Christianity. What you are referring to is the Feast of the Conception of the Theotokos- the same event but you believe she was given some extraordinary saving grace during it.

We do indeed consider the Theotokos to be all-holy and immaculate, but this has nothing to do with her conception or the Annunciation. Rather she simply lived a holy and sinless life, plain and simple, no need for any special "Immaculate Conception".

The difference here is that in Orthodoxy we consider man to have inherited the consequences of Adam's sin (.e.g. death) but not guilt from Adam's sin. As such Mary, through great and extraordinary piety, was able to live a sinless life without needing any guilt specially taken away or anything like that. However she still inherited death and so still had to be saved by her son, Jesus Christ.

Mary was a human like any of us- it was because of her piety and obedience that she is called the all-holy, not because of any special act of God.

So you see where the difference is- you say that for Mary to have been immaculate she needed to have original sin removed. We say that Mary was immaculate without need for any original sin removal (as we have different views on what original sin entails); in fact from an Orthodox POV removing original sin would entail immortality and no need for Christ.

Thank you for your clear, concise explanation which, for me, helps to differentiate the difference between the EOC and the RCC on this doctrine.

 

[narnia59]

For a start please don't tell us what we believe- if you want to find out just ask or even better find the answer online.

There is not, and never has been, a feast of the "Immaculate Conception" in Eastern Christianity. What you are referring to is the Feast of the Conception of the Theotokos- the same event but you believe she was given some extraordinary saving grace during it.

We do indeed consider the Theotokos to be all-holy and immaculate, but this has nothing to do with her conception or the Annunciation. Rather she simply lived a holy and sinless life, plain and simple, no need for any special "Immaculate Conception".

The difference here is that in Orthodoxy we consider man to have inherited the consequences of Adam's sin (.e.g. death) but not guilt from Adam's sin. As such Mary, through great and extraordinary piety, was able to live a sinless life without needing any guilt specially taken away or anything like that. However she still inherited death and so still had to be saved by her son, Jesus Christ.

Mary was a human like any of us- it was because of her piety and obedience that she is called the all-holy, not because of any special act of God.

So you see where the difference is- you say that for Mary to have been immaculate she needed to have original sin removed. We say that Mary was immaculate without need for any original sin removal (as we have different views on what original sin entails); in fact from an Orthodox POV removing original sin would entail immortality and no need for Christ.

It's been my experience that there is not agreement among the Orthodox as to whether Mary lived a sinless life.

Catholicism does not profess that we inherit the guilt from Adam's sin either. That seems to be a misunderstanding the Orthodox have about us.

405 Although it is proper to each individual, original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam's descendants. It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it, subject to ignorance, suffering and the dominion of death, and inclined to sin - an inclination to evil that is called "concupiscence". Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ's grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle.

And Catholic teaching would be that it is only by the merits of Christ that Mary was spared the affects of original sin, so it in no way would mean she had no need of Christ -- quite the opposite.

 

[Nick T]

It's been my experience that there is not agreement among the Orthodox as to whether Mary lived a sinless life.

Catholicism does not profess that we inherit the guilt from Adam's sin either. That seems to be a misunderstanding the Orthodox have about us.

405 Although it is proper to each individual, original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam's descendants. It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it, subject to ignorance, suffering and the dominion of death, and inclined to sin - an inclination to evil that is called "concupiscence". Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ's grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle.

And Catholic teaching would be that it is only by the merits of Christ that Mary was spared the affects of original sin, so it in no way would mean she had no need of Christ -- quite the opposite.

Because the matter is not dogma in Orthodoxy there are some who disagree with it, however that is not the dominant view and the liturgy very clearly states that the Theotokos is "all-holy" and "spotless" which doesn't, in my view, leave much room to doubt the belief.

Thanks for correcting me about original sin- it seems I made the mistake of equating Augustine with modern Catholicism.

However if you do not believe that original sin means guilt then why is there any necessity for the Immaculate Conception in the first place?

 

[LOCO]

If Mary was given a special grace that kept her from sinning throughout her life, how can it be said that she had free will. These graces were supposed to be given to her at conception. Clearly she could not have consented to this. (I don't use consent to imply that she would not have chosen this had she been given the option, but only that she did not have the choice.)

Hello Gary,

Mary did not have a choice in her 'immaculate conception' that she was born 'sinless'. It was a gift from God.

She did however have free will to say 'no' when she was asked to be the mother of Our Saviour.

Mary was sinless by the Grace of God.
Jesus was sinless by nature.



Let's say a man walks toward a large hole and falls in it and Jesus pulls him out of it. Therefore, Jesus is his Savior.

But then again, let's say Mary walks towards a large hole but Jesus stops her before she falls into it. Jesus would still be her Savior too.

Now imagine the hole is sin.

 

[LOCO]

However, Eve managed to sin quite willingly. If Eve is the model of Mary, then one can reasonably conclude that because Eve was not only capable of sin and did sin, so Mary was capable of sin and did sin.

If she never sinned she assuredly had no reason for the grace of God in salvation from sin and its effects.

No these are two quite different women.

Eve listened to the bad angel and contributed to the fall of man
Mary listened to the good angel and contributed to the salvation of man

Adam calls Eve 'woman'
Jeus calls Mary 'woman'

Eve prompted Adam to his first evil act
Mary prompted Jesus to his first glorious act at the Wedding in Cana

Eve was cursed for disbelief
Mary was blessed for she believed

Through Eve comes sin and death
Through Mary comes life and grace

Eve is the mother of all the living
Mary is the mother of all those who obey God and hold testimony to Jesus


By the grace of God Mary was born without 'original sin'. Catholics believe all man is born with original sin thanks to Eve.

Mary is the Ark of the New Covenant.

The Ark of the Old Covenant contained the Rod of Aaron, the High Priest.
The Ark of the New Covenant contained Jesus, the Eternal High Priest.

The Ark of the Old Covenant contained Manna, Bread for Earthly life.
The Ark of the New Covenant contained Jesus, Bread of Eternal life.

The Ark of the Old Covenant contained the 10 Commandments etched in stone - The word of God (small w)
The Ark of the New Covenant contained Jesus, the Word of God (capital W) the word of God made flesh

 

[narnia59]

Because the matter is not dogma in Orthodoxy there are some who disagree with it, however that is not the dominant view and the liturgy very clearly states that the Theotokos is "all-holy" and "spotless" which doesn't, in my view, leave much room to doubt the belief.

Thanks for correcting me about original sin- it seems I made the mistake of equating Augustine with modern Catholicism.

However if you do not believe that original sin means guilt then why is there any necessity for the Immaculate Conception in the first place?

I agree with you about the terminology in your liturgy, but I've run into lots of different Orthodox interpretations about what that means, and specifically that means she at some point achieved that state but wasn't always in it.

I don't think our position on original sin is "modern" Catholicism. Augustine wrote a lot, and I think some of his writings have been misunderstood. I read through a lot of his stuff at one point, and it seemed to me he was saying that by our own personal sin our guilt becomes part of the guilt of Adam and Eve. It's been a while since I looked at it though.

As for your question, I would say it's based on the same understanding as expressed here by the Orthodox:

St. Gregory of Nazianzus wrote, “The Holy Spirit divinizes (deifies) the person who is baptized.” Baptism, according to Orthodox theology, does more than set us free from the bondage of original sin, it clothes us with Christ and makes us partakers of His divine nature. Hence the singing during the baptismal service of the verse from the letter of Paul to the Galatians, “As many of you as have been baptized in Christ have put on Christ.”
Sermon: Remembering Our Baptism-Uniting With Christ — Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America

Original sin is in itself a bondage. Without freeing Mary from this bondage, her own will would be impacted in such a way it would not be possible for her to freely choose to remain sinless. You stated you believe Mary remained sinless without any special grace from God -- I would say that in our fallen nature, that's not possible.

The Immaculate Conception also aligns with the traditional understanding of Mary as the new Eve -- created in the same state as Eve, but with a very different outcome. Just as Christ is a very different outcome from Adam.

 

[justinangel]

For a start please don't tell us what we believe- if you want to find out just ask or even better find the answer online.

I'm not telling you what Eastern Orthodox Christians believe now. I'm aware of our different views on original sin. Catholics have always seen original sin to be an inherited tainting of the soul and a stain; whereas you perceive original sin to be the inheritance of its consequences and effects. But we both agree that physical death is an the effect of the sin of Adam and Eve and that sanctifying grace is needed for us to be free of sin and spiritual death. However, the Fathers of the Eastern Church appear to have held the Catholic position on original sin and the need for God's singular intervention with his sanctifying grace to render Mary holy in his sight at the moment her soul was fashioned or at least before she was born.

"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]

"As he formed her without any stain of her own, so He proceeded from her contracting no stain."
Proclus of Constantinople, Homily 1 [ante A.D. 446]

"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 Vl:ll [ante A.D. 446]

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."
St. John Damascene, Homily 1 [ante A.D. 749]

There is not, and never has been, a feast of the "Immaculate Conception" in Eastern Christianity. What you are referring to is the Feast of the Conception of the Theotokos- the same event but you believe she was given some extraordinary saving grace during it.

The Byzantine Catholic Feast of the Conception of St. Anne (apparently originally celebrated in the Patriarchate of Jerusalem in the 5th century] celebrates Mary's miraculous virginal conception and birth. From the Divine Liturgy:

"This day, O faithful, from saintly parents begins to take being the spotless lamb, the most pure tabernacle, Mary...She is conceived the only immaculate one."

May I remind you what the Apostle Paul has to say about saving grace:

For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God.
Ephesians 2, 8

How can Mary be conceived "the only immaculate one", "formed without any stain of her own, (an exception to the rule) or be "free of all defect, lile a lily sprouting among thorns" (the rest of humankind) if her soul hadn't been infused with God's sanctifying grace when fashioned unlike ours?

We do indeed consider the Theotokos to be all-holy and immaculate, but this has nothing to do with her conception or the Annunciation. Rather she simply lived a holy and sinless life, plain and simple, no need for any special "Immaculate Conception".

Well the Greek Fathers of the Church held a different view from yours. They believed that a sinful human nature was a consequence of original sin and that we were all born sinners as a result. Mary would have been born a sinner as well if her soul hadn't been sanctified by the infusion of divine grace at least before her birth. St. Maximus the Confessor (d.662) wrote about "the mark of original sin on all"; St. Symeon the New Theologian (d.1022) concurred "we are all born sinners from our forefather Adam who sinned", and Cyprian of Carthage (d.258) "the contagion of original sin passed from us to Adam.". Why do you think the rest of us have to be baptized, if not to have our souls sanctified and restored to the original state of holiness and justice which Adam and Eve had forfeited for us?

The difference here is that in Orthodoxy we consider man to have inherited the consequences of Adam's sin (.e.g. death) but not guilt from Adam's sin. As such Mary, through great and extraordinary piety, was able to live a sinless life without needing any guilt specially taken away or anything like that. However she still inherited death and so still had to be saved by her son, Jesus Christ.

The Immaculate Conception is necessary if we are all conceived in a fallen state. Catholics do not believe that Mary had been forgiven in the womb for Adam and Eve's personal transgression. On the contrary, because Mary wasn't culpable of their act of transgression, she could be exempted from contracting the stain of original sin and the remnants of sin, notably concupiscence, and be redeemed by a preventive measure without compromising the Divine justice. But the truth is concerning all of us:

True, I was born guilty, a sinner, as even my mother conceived me.
Psalm 51, 7 [NAB]

Mary was a human like any of us- it was because of her piety and obedience that she is called the all-holy, not because of any special act of God.

You make it sound like she was never in need of God's saving grace. Do you at least believe that Mary was conceived a sinner in her mother's womb and relied on God's grace every instance of her life since she was born to lead a perfectly sinless life?

So you see where the difference is- you say that for Mary to have been immaculate she needed to have original sin removed. We say that Mary was immaculate without need for any original sin removal (as we have different views on what original sin entails); in fact from an Orthodox POV removing original sin would entail immortality and no need for Christ.

So you believe that all of us have been conceived reconciled with God, but only Mary had never committed any personal sins? You cannot call her immaculate unless she never sinned in her life. So much for our need to be baptized! May Paul remind us that "we are all children of wrath" and have "fallen short of the glory of God" unless God takes the initiative and intervenes with his efficacious grace. He did with Mary who could exclaim "My soul proclaims the glory of the Lord, my spirit rejoices in God my saviour. For he has looked upon the lowliness of his handmaid." (Lk 1:46-47).

Pax Christu,
J.A.

 

[Nick T]

I agree with you about the terminology in your liturgy, but I've run into lots of different Orthodox interpretations about what that means, and specifically that means she at some point achieved that state but wasn't always in it.

That is, I suppose, one of the problems of not having the matter defined as an official Church dogma.

I don't think our position on original sin is "modern" Catholicism. Augustine wrote a lot, and I think some of his writings have been misunderstood. I read through a lot of his stuff at one point, and it seemed to me he was saying that by our own personal sin our guilt becomes part of the guilt of Adam and Eve. It's been a while since I looked at it though.

I was not suggesting that Official Catholic teaching had changed but simply how this teaching was viewed. In the past Catholic theologians have tended to see things thorugh a more Augustinian lense (such as babies in Limbo) than they currently do. The doctrine itslef did not change, simply what implication the majority thought that doctrine had.

As for your question, I would say it's based on the same understanding as expressed here by the Orthodox:

St. Gregory of Nazianzus wrote, “The Holy Spirit divinizes (deifies) the person who is baptized.” Baptism, according to Orthodox theology, does more than set us free from the bondage of original sin, it clothes us with Christ and makes us partakers of His divine nature. Hence the singing during the baptismal service of the verse from the letter of Paul to the Galatians, “As many of you as have been baptized in Christ have put on Christ.”
Sermon: Remembering Our Baptism-Uniting With Christ — Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America

Original sin is in itself a bondage. Without freeing Mary from this bondage, her own will would be impacted in such a way it would not be possible for her to freely choose to remain sinless. You stated you believe Mary remained sinless without any special grace from God -- I would say that in our fallen nature, that's not possible.

I would say that with God's help it is possible; Mary was an extraordinary woman and one blessed by the Lord. She was not born any different from any other human but through her extraordinary piety she worked with God in a way none have ever been able to do so before or since, keeping herself pure from sin.

It's not a matter of God giving her anything special that eliminates original sin- rather she was able to resist temptation with God's aid while still inheriting this original sin.

The Immaculate Conception also aligns with the traditional understanding of Mary as the new Eve -- created in the same state as Eve, but with a very different outcome. Just as Christ is a very different outcome from Adam.

As I understand it Mary's status as the New Eve is because of her obedience, not the way in which she was born.

The reason why there is much contention in the Orthodox Churches regarding this belief is that it is simply not present in the Easter Tradition. Sure, its origins are in the East (the idea that Mary was sinless and the idea that Mary as the New Eve) the belief that Mary was preserved from original sin at conception by God simply is not. This is why it is not found in any of the Eastern or Oriental Orthodox Churches (except perhaps the Ethiopians but I'm not sure of the specifics there).
As such the fact that the Pope made it an infallible dogma is seen as a forcing of a purely western belief onto the whole Church.

Anyways I'm gonna back out of this thread now- my intention was to explain that while we do recognise her as sinless none of the Eastern or Oriental Orthodox Churches follow or have followed the western belief in an Immaculate Conception; I do not intend to get into a debate about the validity of the Western vs. the Eastern views but simply to state the differances. Since the topic of this thread is the relation between the Catholic belief and Free will I'll move on before I derail the thread any further.

 

[Nick T]

I'm not telling you what Eastern Orthodox Christians believe now. I'm aware of our different views on original sin. Catholics have always seen original sin to be an inherited tainting of the soul and a stain; whereas you perceive original sin to be the inheritance of its consequences and effects. But we both agree that physical death is an the effect of the sin of Adam and Eve and that sanctifying grace is needed for us to be free of sin and spiritual death. However, the Fathers of the Eastern Church appear to have held the Catholic position on original sin and the need for God's singular intervention with his sanctifying grace to render Mary holy in his sight at the moment her soul was fashioned or at least before she was born.

"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]

"As he formed her without any stain of her own, so He proceeded from her contracting no stain."
Proclus of Constantinople, Homily 1 [ante A.D. 446]

"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 Vl:ll [ante A.D. 446]

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."
St. John Damascene, Homily 1 [ante A.D. 749]



The Byzantine Catholic Feast of the Conception of St. Anne (apparently originally celebrated in the Patriarchate of Jerusalem in the 5th century] celebrates Mary's miraculous virginal conception and birth. From the Divine Liturgy:

"This day, O faithful, from saintly parents begins to take being the spotless lamb, the most pure tabernacle, Mary...She is conceived the only immaculate one."

May I remind you what the Apostle Paul has to say about saving grace:

For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God.
Ephesians 2, 8

How can Mary be conceived "the only immaculate one", "formed without any stain of her own, (an exception to the rule) or be "free of all defect, lile a lily sprouting among thorns" (the rest of humankind) if her soul hadn't been infused with God's sanctifying grace when fashioned unlike ours?



Well the Greek Fathers of the Church held a different view from yours. They believed that a sinful human nature was a consequence of original sin and that we were all born sinners as a result. Mary would have been born a sinner as well if her soul hadn't been sanctified by the infusion of divine grace at least before her birth. St. Maximus the Confessor (d.662) wrote about "the mark of original sin on all"; St. Symeon the New Theologian (d.1022) concurred "we are all born sinners from our forefather Adam who sinned", and Cyprian of Carthage (d.258) "the contagion of original sin passed from us to Adam.". Why do you think the rest of us have to be baptized, if not to have our souls sanctified and restored to the original state of holiness and justice which Adam and Eve had forfeited for us?



The Immaculate Conception is necessary if we are all conceived in a fallen state. Catholics do not believe that Mary had been forgiven in the womb for Adam and Eve's personal transgression. On the contrary, because Mary wasn't culpable of their act of transgression, she could be exempted from contracting the stain of original sin and the remnants of sin, notably concupiscence, and be redeemed by a preventive measure without compromising the Divine justice. But the truth is concerning all of us:

True, I was born guilty, a sinner, as even my mother conceived me.
Psalm 51, 7 [NAB]



You make it sound like she was never in need of God's saving grace. Do you at least believe that Mary was conceived a sinner in her mother's womb and relied on God's grace every instance of her life since she was born to lead a perfectly sinless life?

So you believe that all of us have been conceived reconciled with God, but only Mary had never committed any personal sins? You cannot call her immaculate unless she never sinned in her life. So much for our need to be baptized! May Paul remind us that "we are all children of wrath" and have "fallen short of the glory of God" unless God takes the initiative and intervenes with his efficacious grace. He did with Mary who could exclaim "My soul proclaims the glory of the Lord, my spirit rejoices in God my saviour. For he has looked upon the lowliness of his handmaid." (Lk 1:46-47).

Pax Christu,
J.A.

None of your quotes prove anything about Mary being preserved from original sin- they simply state that she was sinless .a.k.a. free from personal sin.

No human inherits personal sin from Adam and Eve- we inherit the consequences of their sin which is death. We also inherit a tendency to sin but not actual sin in itself.

As such Mary was born, like all humans without personal sin and, because of her piety and favor in the eyes of the Lord, she did not commit any personal sins in her life.

However she still inherited original sin, the consequence of sin which is death. Mary still died and still required Jesus Christ to save her from eternal death and bring her into eternal life. This has nothing to do with her lack of personal sin in life.

We are saved from our sins, that is true, but we are also saved from the consequences of original sin, that is death. We cannot escape this as we are all born inheriting death and so all require Christ for salvation.

Your claims that the Byzantine Catholics have preserved this and that the Orthodox have not make no historical sense- most Byzantine Catholic Churches united with Rome in the 16th Century or later, way after you accuse us of changing the original teaching.

Not only that but no Eastern Church, be they Eastern or Oriental Orthodox have any kind of immaculate conception doctrine. This clearly is not an Eastern thing or the Eastern Churches would have accepted it without any need for Western intervention.

If you want more info look here: http://www.suscopts.org/q&a/index.php?qid=1024&catid=203

Its Coptic but it nevertheless clearly explains the historical Orthodox view on the matter.

In any case I'm not here to debate the nature of sin, I am merely expressing the historical view of the Orthodox Chuches on the matter.

 

[xfisherman]

Any doctrine not backed up by the teachings of the Bible is standing on shaky ground,just my 2 cents worth.

 

[narnia59]

That is, I suppose, one of the problems of not having the matter defined as an official Church dogma.

It does leave people latitude in going places where perhaps the intent was never to be. Which is generally why things become defined as dogma anyway -- people start to move away from what's always been.

I was not suggesting that Official Catholic teaching had changed but simply how this teaching was viewed. In the past Catholic theologians have tended to see things thorugh a more Augustinian lense (such as babies in Limbo) than they currently do. The doctrine itslef did not change, simply what implication the majority thought that doctrine had.

Gotcha.

I would say that with God's help it is possible; Mary was an extraordinary woman and one blessed by the Lord. She was not born any different from any other human but through her extraordinary piety she worked with God in a way none have ever been able to do so before or since, keeping herself pure from sin.

It's not a matter of God giving her anything special that eliminates original sin- rather she was able to resist temptation with God's aid while still inheriting this original sin.

I think then you might want to rephrase something you said earlier, which was in effect that Mary didn't require any special grace from God to be sinless. It seems you think maybe she did, but simply not the removal of original sin?

As I understand it Mary's status as the New Eve is because of her obedience, not the way in which she was born.

The reason why there is much contention in the Orthodox Churches regarding this belief is that it is simply not present in the Easter Tradition. Sure, its origins are in the East (the idea that Mary was sinless and the idea that Mary as the New Eve) the belief that Mary was preserved from original sin at conception by God simply is not. This is why it is not found in any of the Eastern or Oriental Orthodox Churches (except perhaps the Ethiopians but I'm not sure of the specifics there).
As such the fact that the Pope made it an infallible dogma is seen as a forcing of a purely western belief onto the whole Church.

Anyways I'm gonna back out of this thread now- my intention was to explain that while we do recognise her as sinless none of the Eastern or Oriental Orthodox Churches follow or have followed the western belief in an Immaculate Conception; I do not intend to get into a debate about the validity of the Western vs. the Eastern views but simply to state the differances. Since the topic of this thread is the relation between the Catholic belief and Free will I'll move on before I derail the thread any further.

Stating differences is a good thing.