P
Peter_J
Guest
I think not. Rather someone else took advantage of your question to open up his own can of worms.I fear I’ve opened a can of worms…
- Status
E
East_and_West
Guest
Not really. His response was completely in context with regard to the matter at hand. It was asked whether or not eastern Catholics must accept the Immaculate Conception. Chaldean Rite simply responded.
I think not. Rather someone else took advantage of your question to open up his own can of worms.
B
BennyBoy89
Guest
Actually, that was not what I asked. My question was about the Eastern concept of original sin and how it is different to that of the West. I then asked a side question about the IC. Nowhere did I ask whether Eastern Catholics must accept the IC as dogma. I assumed they believed it to be just as true, but merely didn’t define it in the same way that Rome does.
C
Chaldean_Rite
Guest
Correct me if I am wrong anyone, but doesn’t statment imply that the Eastern Catholic Churches do not accept the IC? At least, this is what I get from it.
W
wjp984
Guest
If the definition of Original Sin is different in the East and West, then this actually makes perfect sense to deny it if you take a stirct meaning.
According to the West, original sin is the stain of sin passed down from generation to generation. So of course Mary is free from this. The East don’t need to deny this since it is not applicable to their concept of original sin.
However, according to the East, original sin is the fact that we will all have a physical death. Since it is believed that Mary first died and aged to say that Mary did not have original sin does not makes sense to the East according to their definition.
Therefore, the East do not deny the fact that the Mary would be free from the Latin concept of Original Sin. It just id not necessary to do so since it is not applicable to them. As mentioned I actually realy like that link posted eariler since it explains so much but I probably still have it confused somewhat.
According to the West, original sin is the stain of sin passed down from generation to generation. So of course Mary is free from this. The East don’t need to deny this since it is not applicable to their concept of original sin.
However, according to the East, original sin is the fact that we will all have a physical death. Since it is believed that Mary first died and aged to say that Mary did not have original sin does not makes sense to the East according to their definition.
Therefore, the East do not deny the fact that the Mary would be free from the Latin concept of Original Sin. It just id not necessary to do so since it is not applicable to them. As mentioned I actually realy like that link posted eariler since it explains so much but I probably still have it confused somewhat.
W
wjp984
Guest
If the definition of Original Sin is different in the East and West, then this actually makes perfect sense to deny it if you take a stirct meaning.
According to the West, original sin is the stain of sin passed down from generation to generation. So of course Mary is free from this. The East don’t need to deny this since it is not applicable to their concept of original sin.
However, according to the East, original sin is the fact that we will all have a physical death. Since it is believed that Mary first died and aged to say that Mary did not have original sin does not makes sense to the East according to their definition.
Therefore, the East do not deny the fact that the Mary would be free from the Latin concept of Original Sin. It just is not necessary to do so since it is not applicable to them. As mentioned I actually realy like that link posted eariler since it explains so much but I probably still have it confused somewhat
According to the West, original sin is the stain of sin passed down from generation to generation. So of course Mary is free from this. The East don’t need to deny this since it is not applicable to their concept of original sin.
However, according to the East, original sin is the fact that we will all have a physical death. Since it is believed that Mary first died and aged to say that Mary did not have original sin does not makes sense to the East according to their definition.
Therefore, the East do not deny the fact that the Mary would be free from the Latin concept of Original Sin. It just is not necessary to do so since it is not applicable to them. As mentioned I actually realy like that link posted eariler since it explains so much but I probably still have it confused somewhat
W
wjp984
Guest
The only thing I wonder is whether the East can have an easier time believeing in a more merciful situation for the unborn and those who die before baptism. If Original Sin is not a stain and just merely a physical death, does this mean that the poor innocent souls who are otherwise free from sin can go straight to Heaven?
C
Catherine_Grant
Guest
Note from Moderator:
The Eastern Catholic understanding and response to the Immaculate Conception is a legitimate topic of discussion in its own right. Those who want to discuss it may either continue this recent thread or start a new one.
Eastern Catholics, Western Catholics, Original Sin, and the Immaculate Conception…
Please limit all further posts to this thread on the below topic:
BennyBoy89:
The Eastern Catholic understanding and response to the Immaculate Conception is a legitimate topic of discussion in its own right. Those who want to discuss it may either continue this recent thread or start a new one.
Eastern Catholics, Western Catholics, Original Sin, and the Immaculate Conception…
Please limit all further posts to this thread on the below topic:
Thank you.
- Status