H
Hesychios
Guest
I agree with the words of the liturgy on the subject.
Clarification on the sinlessness of Mary from the Orthodox Perspective
- Status
R
RyanBlack
Guest
In an Orthodox context, I would be inclined to agree. In a Catholic context, and especially in a Roman Catholic context, I think there is a real distinction.
M
Mickey
Guest
Yes. That is what crossed my mind also.
P
PumpkinSeed
Guest
Even if she was a sinner, it would not change my perception of her. She was a very godly woman that all women should look up to. She is obviously good enough to the Jesus’ mother so I would definitely say she was a spectacular person. Whether she sinned or not doesn’t really matter to me because obviously she didn’t do it that much, and she was saved anyways.
N
Nine_Two
Guest
I think the distinction informs on what is and isn’t an Orthodox Christian. Ideally an Orthodox Christian accepts all the dogma, and all the doctrine which the Church teaches, after all if you accept its teaching authority on the big things it follows that one should accept it on the little things. But even so, some of those smaller things may be a stumbling block to one individual or another, and it is important that we create a situation in which they won’t be turned away from the Church over a matter that isn’t of the utmost importance.
I admit though that my opinion on this is largely formed as a consequence of an Orthodox Christian I know and respect who struggles many of these smaller things.
I
Ignatios
Guest
Doctrine would include non dogmatic belief, one can be part of the Church without holding to them so long he/she are not against them such as the Assumption of the Lady Theotokos to Heaven after she fell asleep in the Lord, simply because this is has nothing to do with the salvation of man.
Where Dogma is a must and one cannot be member of the Church without holding to it such as the Trinity or the Deity of our Lord the Christ Jesus, The Dogma of the Orthodox Church is in the Nicene Creed, Dogma in the Orthodox Church is everything that has to do with Divinity.
Where Dogma is a must and one cannot be member of the Church without holding to it such as the Trinity or the Deity of our Lord the Christ Jesus, The Dogma of the Orthodox Church is in the Nicene Creed, Dogma in the Orthodox Church is everything that has to do with Divinity.
I
Ignatios
Guest
Thank you Brother Cavaradossi, well put… However Carlos, here is the Orthodox Dogma in a nutshell:That was beautifully put I think Catholics can agree with most of what you said.
But I don’t think I got an answer to my questions. and please understand that I ask with utmost respect.
Are there any Orthodox dogmatic books? similar the the Catechism
Also from reading orthodox forums, most believers default to the writings of the Fathers. For this particular question about the sinlessness of the Theotokos ( l love that term), what is the official Orthodox answer. You seem to say that it does not matter. Is that the official Orthodox position?
**I believe in one God, Father Almighty, Creator of
heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of
God, begotten of the Father before all ages;
Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten,
not created, of one essence with the Father
through Whom all things were made.
Who for us men and for our salvation
came down from heaven and was incarnate
of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary and became man.
He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate,
and suffered and was buried;
And He rose on the third day,
according to the Scriptures.
He ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father;
And He will come again with glory to judge the living
and dead. His kingdom shall have no end.
And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Creator of life,
Who proceeds from the Father, Who together with the
Father and the Son is worshipped and glorified, Who
spoke through the prophets.
In one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.
I confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
I look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the age to come.
**
Amen.
If you were looking for something like the RCC dogmas, you won’t find, because in the Orthodox Church Dogma pertain to Divine.
F
FrKimel
Guest
The recent comments on the differences between dogma, doctrine, and church teaching inspired me to rummage through my library to see if a consensus exists among Orthodox theologians about these distinctions. My impression is that usage appears to be somewhat fluid. As far as I can tell, most writers use “dogma” and “doctrine” synonymously–both signify the revealed truths of the Christian faith. See, e.g., Fr Michael Pomazansky, Orthodox Dogmatic Theology, and Archbishop Stylianos Harkanakis, “Dogma and Authority in the Church.”
On the other hand, some Orthodox theologians prefer to use the word “dogma” to signify doctrinal formulations defined by the Ecumenical Councils. Thus, e.g., Met John Zizioulas: “Dogma is the doctrine that, through its councils, the Church confess as the truth that brings salvation for every human being” (Lectures in Christian Dogmatics, p. 6). Doctrines that become dogmas through conciliar definition and ecclesial reception acquire an irreformability that must be respected and acknowledged by all Orthodox believers (p. 14).
I’m not sure how any of this helps answer the question “Is the doctrine of the Assumption of the Theotokos a teaching that must be believed by all Orthodox Christians?” Vladimir Lossky, for example, denies that it enjoys dogmatic status, as it belongs to the hidden depths of the Church’s inner consciousness (“Panagia”). But I seriously doubt that he considered it to be an optional belief. The Church’s special veneration and invocation of the Blessed Virgin appears to be predicated on the belief that she now lives with God in her glorified body. It has been suggested that the Assumption is not a truth of salvation. I disagree. Not only does the Orthodox Church liturgically commemorate the bodily assumption of the Theotokos, but I suggest that the special role of the Theotokos within the Church’s life of prayer depends on its truth. But I am not a theologian and not capable of offering a sustained and persuasive argument.
On the other hand, some Orthodox theologians prefer to use the word “dogma” to signify doctrinal formulations defined by the Ecumenical Councils. Thus, e.g., Met John Zizioulas: “Dogma is the doctrine that, through its councils, the Church confess as the truth that brings salvation for every human being” (Lectures in Christian Dogmatics, p. 6). Doctrines that become dogmas through conciliar definition and ecclesial reception acquire an irreformability that must be respected and acknowledged by all Orthodox believers (p. 14).
I’m not sure how any of this helps answer the question “Is the doctrine of the Assumption of the Theotokos a teaching that must be believed by all Orthodox Christians?” Vladimir Lossky, for example, denies that it enjoys dogmatic status, as it belongs to the hidden depths of the Church’s inner consciousness (“Panagia”). But I seriously doubt that he considered it to be an optional belief. The Church’s special veneration and invocation of the Blessed Virgin appears to be predicated on the belief that she now lives with God in her glorified body. It has been suggested that the Assumption is not a truth of salvation. I disagree. Not only does the Orthodox Church liturgically commemorate the bodily assumption of the Theotokos, but I suggest that the special role of the Theotokos within the Church’s life of prayer depends on its truth. But I am not a theologian and not capable of offering a sustained and persuasive argument.
C
carlos19
Guest
well this cannot be true surely there is more to Orthodox dogma than the Nicene Creed…where is the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist?
Orthodox creeds and doctrines from what you all have written stem from councils, writings of the fathers (and modern theologians) and traditions found in various places and sources.
It would be nice for to have someone bring them all together in one book or series of books.
Hypothetically speaking… Do you all think it would be hard to bring together the pan-orthodox world and have them develop one?
Why or Why not?
N
Nine_Two
Guest
Not wishing to argue, but I’m curious, where does the Church liturgically commemorate her bodily assumption? I can’t seem to ever recall hearing it liturgically commemorated. The Dormition seems the logical time, but I just can’t recall anything about the assumption.
N
Nine_Two
Guest
It would be near impossible, simply because there is very little demand for one.
There have been a few “attempts” in the past, but none of those were efforts to arrange an agreed upon list of dogma, they were all individuals who compiled stuff. The best known in the Rudder which I mentioned before, but there are others.
C
Cavaradossi
Guest
During the presanctified liturgy, the priest says this prayer as he prepares the presanctified (that is, they are already consecrated) Holy Gifts, reserved from the Sunday liturgy, for the entrance through the Royal Doors and to be placed upon the altar:Holy Master, infinitely good, we entreat You, rich in mercy, to be gracious to us sinners, and to make us worthy to receive Your only Son and our God, the King of Glory. For behold, His spotless body and life giving blood are about to make their entrance at this hour, to be laid on this mystical table, invisibly attended by a multitude of the heavenly host. Grant that we may receive them in blameless communion, so that as the eyes of our understanding see the light, we may become children of light and of day."The people too, before the presanctified Gifts are taken out and placed upon the altar, sing “Now the Powers of Heaven minister invisibly with us. For, behold, the King of Glory enters.”
I think it wouldn’t be too difficult. As I’ve said, there are plenty of books out there, even ones written in the 20th century, they just aren’t widely available to English speakers. It is not ideal, but that’s just the way the cookie crumbles. When your Church’s most celebrated theologians of the last century spoke either Greek, Russian, French, Serbian or Romanian, there’s going to be a lack of material.
F
FrKimel
Guest
Read through the prayers and hymns appointed for the Feast of the Dormition.
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
Amen,
All sounds very similar to me with the profound ring of Blessed Mothers reality yesterday and today. .
Dogma is defined in the CCC 88, 89 and 90. And I believe in a few other places also. The basis is sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture and the Magesterium guided by the Holy Spirit.
Really isn’t much different in 2000 years but the continued work of the Saints in their perspective area’s. Which coincide and clarify even further.
For example Mary as Mediatrix isn’t dogma, however all the groundwork is laid from very early on in the Apostolic Churchs, should the elect deem this need be done in the Lords will for the well being of Souls.
From Luke and the Annunciation/Incarnation Full of Grace here on earth was acknowledged. All Grace in the Divinity of the Lord overshadowed Mary through the Word become Flesh.
Peace
All sounds very similar to me with the profound ring of Blessed Mothers reality yesterday and today. .
Dogma is defined in the CCC 88, 89 and 90. And I believe in a few other places also. The basis is sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture and the Magesterium guided by the Holy Spirit.
Really isn’t much different in 2000 years but the continued work of the Saints in their perspective area’s. Which coincide and clarify even further.
For example Mary as Mediatrix isn’t dogma, however all the groundwork is laid from very early on in the Apostolic Churchs, should the elect deem this need be done in the Lords will for the well being of Souls.
From Luke and the Annunciation/Incarnation Full of Grace here on earth was acknowledged. All Grace in the Divinity of the Lord overshadowed Mary through the Word become Flesh.
Peace
N
Nine_Two
Guest
H
Hesychios
Guest
I have always wondered what Roman Catholics mean by Mediatrix of all Graces. I have never really been given a concise answer from posters on this site.
If you want to introduce the idea that it is already a belief of the church I humbly suggest you start a new thread thread on this somewhere on CAF where you can lay out the arguments and explanations. Perhaps in the Traditional Catholicism Forum, where I would think there is a lot of sympathy for the concept.
Since it has not been declared a dogma of your church even after many people have been advocating and petitioning for it, I will assume that your own church does not support or agree with your theory.
M
Marybeloved
Guest
Mary Mediatrix, as I’ve understood it, is about Mary being the channel through which all grace has entered the world, as she is the channel through which the very source of Grace has entered the world…At least that was what I was taught. That no grace comes to us without passing through her because Christ himself has come to us through her and in him are all graces.
I
Ignatios
Guest
Okay, now you moved on to something else, my answer was concentrated on the Mother of GOD as the title said.
To believe or not to believe whether it is true, it is your GOD giving gift to accept whatever you wish, however, if you think it is not true then by all means show me how or where the Dogmas listed in the Nicene Creed are not true to the Orthodox.
Now if you feel that there should be some more Dogmas included, such as the Eucharist for example, again, and as I mentioned to you before the N.C. contains the Orthodox Dogmas in a nutshell, take for example the part of the N.C. where it says “I believe in one BAPTISM…” for the Orthodox, Baptism, Chrismation and receive the Holy Eucharist is all done in the same time, one cannot become Orthodox if he accept the Baptism and refuse to receive the Holy Eucharist but he/she can become Orthodox if he chose not to hold to the teaching that he should kiss the Icon, so long he is not against it, where in the RCC he/she cannot receive the Eucharist until Chrismated/confirmed which is about 14 yrs old or so.
I see your Idea to be helpful for the Western mind since you are accustomed into having things in black and white, and I believe that one day this will be done for the Western world, remember we are still new to this world and really still under the radars of many, but Orthodoxy is not a set of rules that it is written and coded, Orthodoxy is to be experienced because it is life, ask those who came across from the other side they may be able to help in this more that I since I was born into the Faith.
Again in the Orthodox world it is not a problem so they can have such a council, for us to say that one must accept the Eucharist in order to become Orthodox is irrational, it is like saying to be Orthodox you must become Orthodox, however, I think, there is plenty of sites now in the English Language, was made specifically for the English speaking people …. Ooopppsss that was irrational,( I was only trying to get you to see things through similiar scope) anyhow Carlos I understand your point since there is many denominations in the west that believe you can be Christian without Baptism or Eucharist or …etc.
serfes.org/orthodox/theorthodoxteachings.htm ** “In order to learn about the Orthodox teachings about the Most Holy Trinity, I would like to humbly share with you first the fundamental dogmas of the Orthodox Church are briefly stated in the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, i.e., in the confession of faith proclaimed by the two Ecumenical Councils held in Nicea. (Translated from the Greek by His Eminence, Metropolitan Isaiah, and Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Denver).
- I believe in one God…” **
A religious truth issuing from divine revelation and indisputably defined by the Church.
Source & Basis of Dogma
• Revelation- God’s self revelation to His Creation…
C
carlos19
Guest
I think you misunderstood me my friend and I you. When you said that what the orthodox believe is in a nutshell in the nicene creed because it has to do with the divine. Well I thought to myself, there is nothing more divine in both our liturgies than the Eucharist so that is why I mentioned it.
I did not mean to imply that the Orthodox did not believe in the Nicene creed or that one can be Christian without a sacrament.
My initial beef so to speak is that a significant portion of the orthodox at least on internet forums felt that the virgin either was definitely a sinner or that it did not matter if she was or not. Even in this thread most felt that it did not matter but it was made clear that the official position was that she did not.
It got me to thinking that maybe having an orthodox Catechism might be the solution for the orthodox faithful to refer to so that basic orthodox beliefs might not misunderstood. I asked about dogmatic books and I was given some materials to read, the rudder and the catechism of st cyril. I was then told to be careful on reading the rudder because it had outdated canon.
It appears that the orthodox posters feel that a catechism is not needed however. I conjectured that the reason why one was never developed was because maybe there might be cultural differences and or maybe the lack of having your doctrines challenged by competing Christian denominations.
I just have been asking a lot of questions just to wrap my mind around the whole issue. While I appreciate your comments that the faith is meant to be experienced(the carmelites and benedictines would agree) , I cannot help but feel that orthodoxy needs a little shot if you will of a little black and white (to use your terms)
Thank you so much for your comments this has been a learning experience.
N
Nine_Two
Guest
In fairness the stance that a belief does not matter is not contrary to the point on whether or not the Church teaches it.
For example I questioned where in the liturgy the Assumption is taught, I did not question whether or not it was a teaching.
I feel that these questions are always difficult to answer because it is not clear for the beginning if you are asking whether something is taught, or whether a belief is a requirement to consider yourself an Orthodox Christian. I for one interpreted your op to be asking whether it was a required belief. That it is taught is, as established, difficult to question.
For example I questioned where in the liturgy the Assumption is taught, I did not question whether or not it was a teaching.
I feel that these questions are always difficult to answer because it is not clear for the beginning if you are asking whether something is taught, or whether a belief is a requirement to consider yourself an Orthodox Christian. I for one interpreted your op to be asking whether it was a required belief. That it is taught is, as established, difficult to question.
- Status