Official Eastern Orthodox teaching: Immaculate Conception

[Gabriel_of_12]

I think that’s arguable. But you made a generalization about the Holy Trinity and the Immaculate Conception. Address that.

I could add more…but I fear the mods do not like a Catholic challenging the Church.

Sorry I had to clean my computer;

The Church’s definition is not arguable. What is arguable are the misconceptions of attributing the Church’s definition of transubstantiation as defining the mystery of the Eucharist as per Aristotle’s metaphysics which is wrong. When the Church’s definition of Transubstantiation only supports the ancient biblical Apostolic faith that a “change” has occurred from bread into the body of Christ.

Holy Trinity = Father, Son, Holy Spirit 3 distinct persons in one God

Immaculate Conception = God graced Mary Immaculate from her conception, we Know this because the Angel Gabriel names her “full of Grace” long before she knew of conceiving Emmanuel God with us in her womb.

I would welcome your challenge of the Catholic faith in any capacity. I believe the moderaters only referee the lack of charity when addressing these issues. I don’t think anyone should fear challenging the Catholic faith.

 

[adoglover1956]

Sorry I had to clean my computer;

The Church’s definition is not arguable. What is arguable are the misconceptions of attributing the Church’s definition of transubstantiation as defining the mystery of the Eucharist as per Aristotle’s metaphysics which is wrong. When the Church’s definition of Transubstantiation only supports the ancient biblical Apostolic faith that a “change” has occurred from bread into the body of Christ.

Holy Trinity = Father, Son, Holy Spirit 3 distinct persons in one God

Immaculate Conception = God graced Mary Immaculate from her conception, we Know this because the Angel Gabriel names her “full of Grace” long before she knew of conceiving Emmanuel God with us in her womb.

I would welcome your challenge of the Catholic faith in any capacity. I believe the moderaters only referee the lack of charity when addressing these issues. I don’t think anyone should fear challenging the Catholic faith.

I wouldn’t challenge the Catholic faith…since I am an involved Catholic in many ways. I guess what I’m trying to argue is that the Eastern Church just has a different way of looking at things. Of course Mary has always been full of grace and I believe the Orthodox teach the same thing. They do have different understanding of original sin and its affect on humanity and therefore do not see the need for the doctrine of the IC. That’s really all I’m trying to say. I’m not Orthodox and can’t speak for them…but that is my understanding.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

adoglover1956;8997442]I wouldn’t challenge the Catholic faith…since I am an involved Catholic in many ways. I guess what I’m trying to argue is that the Eastern Church just has a different way of looking at things

.

I agree many things they oppose too in the West, has not went through their philosophical washing machines to be digested when the West is “expressing Faith” it contradicts their theology from a philosophical standpoint.

For example the Immaculate Conception; The Catholic Faith expresses “Simply” a “Faith” in God’s Grace at Mary’s conception. Orthodox philosophical theology argues outside of faith here, inorder to argue with complicated philosophy and understandings outside of "faith being expressed in Mary “full of Grace,” revealed by heaven to Orthodox’s objection of “no” to the Immaculate Conception.

They argue, their understanding do to Orthodox theology of sin, on when it occurrs etc… In other words for God “when” to save Mary in his grace, remains a mystery to them because their “minds” or theological understanding does not reach faith, it maintains logic and suspends faith to mere logic understandings.

Yet they object to the Immaculate Conception at the same time not really denying it. Because to accept it in faith as Catholics do, would mean Orthodox subjecting to a Western concept expressing an already believed Apostolic faith. When it is the Greeks are the only ones who can enter these mysteries with their Greek philosophical thinking.

On the surface it would appear that Orthodoxy is simple faith expressed. I don’t see it that way anymore, once you enter into these mysteries thinking they are simple. You will find yourself as a student empty without knowledge, to be filled with their great philosophical, understandings and teachings of this simple faith, that if one is not careful, will end up with a head full of knowledge and complicated argument to defend their knowledge that “Faith” can at times take a back seat when compared to Orthodox theology.

Mary has always been full of grace and I believe the Orthodox teach the same thing. They do have different understanding of original sin and its affect on humanity and therefore do not see the need for the doctrine of the IC.

If the Orthodox could leave “Faith alone when Mary is full of Grace” like Catholics simply profess this biblical faith. Without having to argue sin, original sin, or when and what sin is, in order to proclaim faith in the Immaculate Conception. There is no need to introduce other theological understandings of sin, to have faith in Gabriel naming Mary “full of Grace”.

Why argue the sky is blue on a clear sunny day, with different shades of blue? This is what you appear to be agreeing with the Orthodox here. I am merely stating the Orthodox will address the different shades of blue at different elevations just so as to object to the Western definitions of the Immaculate Conception. Yet the Orthodox will not deny the sky is blue, just not blue in the way expressed by any simple minded person looking up at that blue sky.

That’s really all I’m trying to say. I’m not Orthodox and can’t speak for them…but that is my understanding.

Your point is well taken. I don’t think it becomes a competition for which theological expression of faith is correct or better.

Here’s my experience; Catholic theology expresses what is believed in “Faith first” followed by reason, logic, theological terms expressing theological thought reaching to define “the Apostolic faith” in definitions that all languages and cultures can understand and come to faith in Jesus Christ.

Orthodox theology expresses philosophical thought with theology first to arrive at “Faith” in order to believe it. This believed faith has to come first from Greek thought, Greek language and Greek philosophy first to be believed.

I think I just revealed one hidden reason of the Pride of men that divides us.

In short; Both Catholic and Orthodox come from two different angles at expressing one another’s faith. I rest assured that the substance of each ones faith is the same unchanged, but expressed differently.

Peace be with you

 

[Yerusalyim]

As a Catholic without a strong devotion to Mary I’ve always viewed the Orthodox position on Mary as a bit more well balanced. I’ve seen too many abuses in the other direction. One example is well meaning but horribly mistaken Catholics that placed a large statue of Mary on the same table that the tabernacle was on in a military chapel overshadowing the tabernacle…having the effect of making it look like we genuflected to Mary…which was their stated intent. I moved the statue to a more appropriate place (I was the Chaplain Assistant in charge of setting up the chapel).

Don’t get me wrong, I accept the Marian dogmas…but I think some people overemphasize Mary. Mary must always point to Christ…that’s why the now seemingly abated move to have Mary named as Co-Redemptorix bothered me…it was unnnecessary and too easily confused by well meaning Catholics and not so well meaning enemies of the Church. While I do not think the Orthodox position on Mary is complete…they lack some of our doctrines…it is balanced.

 

[KathleenGee]

The military chapel is not following rubrics.

The environment of the church is always a form of catechetics…How we believe, we pray.

My former parish had a small statue of Mary in front of the priest’s pulpit who had been there many years. The new pastor removed it. Then he said he was going to remove the tabernacle from the main altar and people were ready to blow up. Many follow the faith of St. Charles Borromeo…Christ is at the center of our lives, and He should be placed at the center of the Church.

Others see the Lord’s tabernacle placed to the side, preferably in the chapel. Our parish chapel is enclosed by glass with a large sliding wall/door. So we can see the tabernacle at Mass…and in most places in the church. At Mass, it is the assembly with the presider at the altar.

 

[adoglover1956]

As a Catholic without a strong devotion to Mary I’ve always viewed the Orthodox position on Mary as a bit more well balanced. I’ve seen too many abuses in the other direction. One example is well meaning but horribly mistaken Catholics that placed a large statue of Mary on the same table that the tabernacle was on in a military chapel overshadowing the tabernacle…having the effect of making it look like we genuflected to Mary…which was their stated intent. I moved the statue to a more appropriate place (I was the Chaplain Assistant in charge of setting up the chapel).

Don’t get me wrong, I accept the Marian dogmas…but I think some people overemphasize Mary. Mary must always point to Christ…that’s why the now seemingly abated move to have Mary named as Co-Redemptorix bothered me…it was unnnecessary and too easily confused by well meaning Catholics and not so well meaning enemies of the Church. While I do not think the Orthodox position on Mary is complete…they lack some of our doctrines…it is balanced.

 

[jwinch2]

Don’t get me wrong, I accept the Marian dogmas…but I think some people overemphasize Mary. Mary must always point to Christ…that’s why the now seemingly abated move to have Mary named as Co-Redemptorix bothered me…it was unnnecessary and too easily confused by well meaning Catholics and not so well meaning enemies of the Church. While I do not think the Orthodox position on Mary is complete…they lack some of our doctrines…it is balanced.

I concur.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

As a Catholic without a strong devotion to Mary I’ve always viewed the Orthodox position on Mary as a bit more well balanced. I’ve seen too many abuses in the other direction. One example is well meaning but horribly mistaken Catholics that placed a large statue of Mary on the same table that the tabernacle was on in a military chapel overshadowing the tabernacle…having the effect of making it look like we genuflected to Mary…which was their stated intent. I moved the statue to a more appropriate place (I was the Chaplain Assistant in charge of setting up the chapel).

Don’t get me wrong, I accept the Marian dogmas…but I think some people overemphasize Mary. Mary must always point to Christ…that’s why the now seemingly abated move to have Mary named as Co-Redemptorix bothered me…it was unnnecessary and too easily confused by well meaning Catholics and not so well meaning enemies of the Church. While I do not think the Orthodox position on Mary is complete…they lack some of our doctrines…it is balanced.

While I don’t disagree with your personal position here about Mary.

I don’t find any reason to object to those who share a Loving devotion to Mary as other Christians have not reached this level of Love and devotion to Jesus Mother in Mary. To arrive at a misconceived notion that this love displayed by those who Love much as being carried away too far or becoming dangerously close to idolatry?

How can one carry away too far or border line idolatry, while being in “LOVE” with Jesus Mother? when God is Love?

I would caution those who reject or find this Love and devotion displayed by the faithful in Spiritual realities especially with Jesus Mother the one whom scripture calls “full of grace”, “Most blessed among Woman and all ages will call me blessed”… not to judge these little ones, God has a special place for (us) them in His heart. Do not keep these little ones from the Father, when the Mother brings them to Him through her son Jesus.

To remove the Mother presence is to remove Jesus’s presence. Wherever the Mother is one is sure to find Jesus our savior there.

If your relocating statues and Icons of Mary from the presence of Jesus, then I would not question the faithful’s faith who reaches Jesus with Love shared in Mary’s love for her son. But I would question the lack of Love from the disposition of one viewing these spiritual things as becoming idols to themselves not the faithful’s love of God in Mary through Jesus Christ.

A large imposing Statue of a Saint that dwarfs a Tabernacle, never suggests to the Catholic faithful the saints statue appears to be idolized over Jesus presence. I draw the question to the disposition suggested by the objector, who is troubled in faith here, who misinterprets these spiritual things being described in spiritual realities by way of Love and devotion of the blessed Virgin Mary.

One who views a Catholic who may display a great love and devotion for Mary, should take into account and ask themselves? Wow, if this person has this much love and devotion to Jesus Mother? how much more Love does this devotee of Mary have for Jesus? And come away in Awe, not in discouragment.

We devotees to the blessed Mother are not moved by what others think, we are moved by the Love of God.

Peace be with you

 

[KathleenGee]

I did not come to heart felt devotion to Mary, saw no need to, saw Rosary as old ladies prayer until I came to her in December 1974, Christmas eve with Italian missionaries.

New dimension to my faith. Rosary greatest aid in helping people come to truth and reality.

 

[Nine_Two]

As a Catholic without a strong devotion to Mary I’ve always viewed the Orthodox position on Mary as a bit more well balanced. I’ve seen too many abuses in the other direction. One example is well meaning but horribly mistaken Catholics that placed a large statue of Mary on the same table that the tabernacle was on in a military chapel overshadowing the tabernacle…having the effect of making it look like we genuflected to Mary…which was their stated intent. I moved the statue to a more appropriate place (I was the Chaplain Assistant in charge of setting up the chapel).

Don’t get me wrong, I accept the Marian dogmas…but I think some people overemphasize Mary. Mary must always point to Christ…that’s why the now seemingly abated move to have Mary named as Co-Redemptorix bothered me…it was unnnecessary and too easily confused by well meaning Catholics and not so well meaning enemies of the Church. While I do not think the Orthodox position on Mary is complete…they lack some of our doctrines…it is balanced.

The issue of Mary is a stumbling block for many.

I know someone who is Orthodox but very Western in the way he looks at theology (he converted from Anglo-Catholicism in his 60s).
He often states one of his biggest issues (though not the only one) with Roman Catholicism is how Mary is portrayed in the church.
Of course he then goes on to joke that this is why he became Orthodox, where we have a large icon of her at the front of the church, and mention her at least once a minute in the Divine Liturgy.

 

[adoglover1956]

The issue of Mary is a stumbling block for many.

I know someone who is Orthodox but very Western in the way he looks at theology (he converted from Anglo-Catholicism in his 60s).
He often states one of his biggest issues (though not the only one) with Roman Catholicism is how Mary is portrayed in the church.
Of course he then goes on to joke that this is why he became Orthodox, where we have a large icon of her at the front of the church, and mention her at least once a minute in the Divine Liturgy.

Yes…I have a devotion to our Blessed Mother…but sometimes people take it too far. I don’t think it’s the fault of the Catholic Church but rather people just not understanding. I do have an issue with how mediatrix of graces is understood. But I may be the one misunderstanding.

 

[GaryTaylor]

I guess some people have a need to have things more defined to feel closer and to understand God more; others dont need that nearly as much.

As far as ego-driven, my general experience of observation is that as broken human beings, we really tend to be ego-driven more so than not. I dont think humility comes as easy to each of us as we would like or think that it does.

But then I listen to Abp Sheen’s teachings a great deal and he talks extensively on human ego and how it effect us and gets in our way. So it’s something I am aware of.

You are confusing ego thus “illusion” with Catholic Doctrine. There is no similarity. If one chose’s to reside in a simplicity of Faith, that is fine. The CC has not by large, had this opportunity. Accuate Historic, Oral Sacred Tradition has nothing to do with Ego. That is unless you would like to suggest the Ego gave life and escalated the Kingdom of God?

Just Sayin, Peace

 

[GaryTaylor]

What humility has to do with the OP I fail to see. Another assumption.

Whats the Big picture? I will take a guess and assume thats “Heaven”. Should one choose to follow in “Blind Faith” then so be it. Should another be drawn deeper into faith through deeper understanding, then where is the issue?

Through learning comes knowledge and through knowledge comes truth. Thus how does one suggest at some point “I’m good” or “fine” where I am with my faith. Yet presume another who continues to learn, comprehend, then understand somehow falls short in faith?

Thats an assumption that a lack of knowledge, is knowledge in itself.

I fail to see the connection. In fact if your “good” where your at? Then why are you here? To spread Blind Faith?

Here’s the repeat of my earlier post. Simply worded, there is “No” wrong in either path. If everyone found simplicity and beauty in undefined Christianity, then there would be no debate over it. This is not the case, nor has been, for 2000 years the church has been under attack by philosophy, theology, science and every other aspect including rhetoric.

The issue reside’s in the “assumption” the CC is wrong in there conclusions, and “no-one” has arrived to prove this as a fact, to date. Contrary to this, the deeper and longer we do study the doctrines the clearer they become, and in fact this has been the case with all aspects of Catholicism. And certainly no different with the IC with the Acts of Andrew from shortly after Christs death.

When one concludes that its just to much to defend, or research, thus choose simplicity, we say AMEN. For those who chose to actually research Christianity then the research which preceeds is vast, however it exists.

What you will find is the CC continues to confirm itself in History as we all have found who continued to follow threads the evidence, and continue to watch with amazment as they unravel.

There is no right or wrong, there is just History which seperates in time with specific churchs. Yet they are the same history simply recorded differently. There is only One History.

Peace