On Mary: Similarities & Differences between the Orthodox & the Catholics

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sunflower15
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Who said having your soul united with your body was a requirement to see and hear and even speak? When God walked in the Garden of Eden before the fall He had no physical body. Angels have no physical bodies yet they have appeared as if they did, and looked, heard and spoke as if they did.

John
You do have a valid point, but I wouldn’t use those examples, since both God and angelic beings are spiritual…they have no bodies to be joined with, while human beings are body/spirits joined together by nature.

However, your point could be represented by the prophet Samuel…who was summoned from the dead by the medium when Saul asked her to. His spirit appeared and spoke to Saul.

And being dead, he knew the answer to the question Saul asked…which means that the dead know things impossible for us to know…therefore the prohibition to seek the dead for answers to our problems. Samuel even sort of scolded Saul for breaking God’s law on this, so the dead remember or know God’s laws as well.

However, that was prior to Jesus…so it wouldn’t be an example of the resurrection, just of the dead being able to speak without being embodied.
 
It seems the Assumption is no problem, as long as she did die prior to being assumed into Heaven…which makes NO sense, since we die only due to original sin…and the Immaculate Conception did NOT have the original sin…but who knows, if it makes sense to theologians, who am I to ask?
I thought the statement was ‘at the end of her earthly life’, which doesn’t really say one way or the other if she died.

I’ve heard points on both sides.
If she didn’t have original sin, why would she die?
On the other hand, neither did her son, and he did die… and she would follow him.

There were many changes in man’s relationship to God, nature, woman, his own body, other men due to Adam’s sin. Mary, as we all do, bore all of these other condemnations for Adam’s sin … why not death as well?

Not real theology here … just my ramblings.
Cheers!

michel
 
Dear sister Sunflower,

I don’t know if anyone has told you yet (I have not read through the entire thread), but you are misrepresenting the Catholic dogma on the IC here. The dogma does NOT teach that Mary “did NOT have the original sin.”

I have spent my whole life at Catholic schools, and yes, that’s what I was taught…that she was conceived without original sin and without the “stain” [whatever that means]. It may have been an error, not all nuns are theologians, so it doesn’t matter if something wasn’t quite accurate in the way it was presented. I was taught she was created a new Eve, just like Adam & Eve were created without original sin, but she used her Free Will to remain in that state, unlike the other two.

It simply teaches that Mary was preserved from the STAIN of original sin, the STAIN of original sin being defined as the SPIRITUAL CONSEQUENCES of original sin (i.e., loss of sanctifying grace, loss of original justice). The dogma does NOT teach in any way or form that Mary was preserved from PHYSICAL consequences of the original sin (i.e., death, illness, corruption). Here is an excellent explanation from the old Catholic Encyclopedia (1917):

The term conception does not mean the active or generative conception by her parents. Her body was formed in the womb of the mother, and the father had the usual share in its formation. The question does not concern the immaculateness of the generative activity of her parents. Neither does it concern the passive conception absolutely and simply (conceptio seminis carnis, inchoata), which, according to the order of nature, precedes the infusion of the rational soul. The person is truly conceived when the soul is created and infused into the body. Mary was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin at the first moment of her animation, and sanctifying grace was given to her before sin could have taken effect in her soul… But she was not made exempt from the temporal penalties of Adam – from sorrow, bodily infirmities, and death.

This clearly explains she wasn’t exempt from death. However, “sanctifying grace was given…before sin could take effect”… to me means that the original sin [which happens AT moment of conception] was NOT present, and the the grace was given before she was ABLE to sin on her own free will.

In effect, the Grace Mary received at her conception is exactly the same Grace we receive at Baptism. In the same way that the Grace of Baptism does not preserve us from physical death and suffering, neither did the Grace Mary received at her conception preserve her from death and suffering.

Never thought of it this way…interesting. A foreshadowing of a sacrament!🙂

Further, the dogma of the IC does NOT teach that Mary was preserved from the stain of original sin at the moment of her conception for the purpose of bearing Christ. That is a notion that many Latins have simply assumed. It might logically flow from the dogma of the IC, but not necessarily so, and the dogma, nor its apostolic constitution, makes such an assertion or comment. Eastern and Oriental Christians rather believe, on the testimony of a few Fathers in the early Church, that the specific Grace to be able to bear the FULL and UNVEILED divinity of Christ (different from the Grace of Baptism she received at her conception) was given to her at the Annunciation. IMO, it is this new and different Grace that she received at the Annunciation by which Mary’s virginity was miraculously preserved despite giving birth to our Lord, as unanimously taught by the Fathers of the Church.

Well, again that was the purpose I was given as explanation for why Mary received this gift. It makes sense, so I never questioned it. And, I never heard of the other explanation, that she received that grace at the Annunciation, though it would make sense as well. In fact, it reminded me of our Confirmation, which we take later, as adults to use our free will to confirm our Baptism. Another foreshadowing of a Sacrament!🙂

Blessings,
Marduk
 
I thought the statement was ‘at the end of her earthly life’, which doesn’t really say one way or the other if she died.

I’ve heard points on both sides.
If she didn’t have original sin, why would she die?
On the other hand, neither did her son, and he did die… and she would follow him.

Her son died because of OUR sins, not HIS.

There were many changes in man’s relationship to God, nature, woman, his own body, other men due to Adam’s sin. Mary, as we all do, bore all of these other condemnations for Adam’s sin … why not death as well?

That’s precisely the point we’re arguing. IF she was without original sin, AND she did not sin afterwards by using her free will, THEN she has no reason to die, as sin is the cause of death…

If she were free from original sin [Adam’s sin as you call it] then she wouldn’t bear those “condemnations”, though she would still have the “corruptibility” that we all have.

Not real theology here … just my ramblings.

Same here…but we are commanded to strive to understand…not just go through the motions of our faith, right? This is the perfect medium for that!🙂 I have learned SO much from others in this forum…and I enjoy getting to know others who like these topics…I know of no one where I live who is into these discussions:(

Cheers!

michel
 
It may have been an error, not all nuns are theologians,
Right: it’s an error, but it’s what you might call an “understandable error”.

I think sometimes we focus too much on minor details of the faith, and not enough on the essential things, e.g. that Jesus really rose from the dead, that sex outside of marriage is wrong, etc. (I included an example from morality because on another thread we were discussing a recent poll that said, among other things, that 67% of Catholic Americans, and 57% of non-Catholic Americans, consider sex outside of marriage morally acceptable. Or, if you limit consideration to “regular church attendance”, then the number are 53% and 30%, respectively. Either way, the numbers are disturbingly high.)
 
Right: it’s an error, but it’s what you might call an “understandable error”.

So, Mary wasn’t created as a “new Eve” without the original sin? I want to make sure I understand this fully.

I think sometimes we focus too much on minor details of the faith, and not enough on the essential things, e.g. that Jesus really rose from the dead, that sex outside of marriage is wrong, etc. (I included an example from morality because on another thread we were discussing a recent poll that said, among other things, that 67% of Catholic Americans, and 57% of non-Catholic Americans, consider sex outside of marriage morally acceptable. Or, if you limit consideration to “regular church attendance”, then the number are 53% and 30%, respectively. Either way, the numbers are disturbingly high.)
Wow…I thought most knew it was wrong, but somehow failed…not that they thought it wasn’t wrong at all…

I always wondered every time I hear [let’s say on TV or the radio] that it is harsh for priests to have to be celibate…well, everyone has to! Except those who are married to each other. But, it applies to singles and divorced as well. I often wondered how come no one mentioned them…now it makes sense…
 
However, that was prior to Jesus…so it wouldn’t be an example of the resurrection,
I agree. In fact, in the Douay-Rheims translation it says “And Samuel said to Saul: Why hast thou disturbed my rest, that I should be brought up?” (although I notice that a lot of other translations don’t put it that way).
 
That’s precisely the point we’re arguing. IF she was without original sin, AND she did not sin afterwards by using her free will, THEN she has no reason to die, as sin is the cause of death…

If she were free from original sin [Adam’s sin as you call it] then she wouldn’t bear those “condemnations”, though she would still have the “corruptibility” that we all have.
It’s been a while since I read it … but “Mary: Grace and Hope in Christ” (a joint-statement from the Anglican - Roman Catholic International Commision) is really excellent. I don’t recall specifically, but it might address this issue. (Presumably, the Anglican side would have brought up the if-Mary-was-immaculately-conceived, why-did-she-die? objection.) I’ll take a look.
 
“At the moment of death, each human person is judged by God based on his conduct in this life, and goes immediately to his reward or punishment. Moreover, at the end of the world, Jesus Christ will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead. At that time, God’s whole plan for the world shall be revealed, and his mercy and justice demonstrated.”[ewtn.com/faith/teachings/lastsum.htm]](http://www.ewtn.com/faith/teachings/lastsum.htm])

I had to go back to search for a quick summary of the resurrection according to Catholics…and went to ewtn’s website.

Now, do we undergo 2 judgments? And, how does that work? I mean if someone made it to Heaven, or Hell, will that person come back at the end of times for the Last Judgment again? I know I must be missing something important here… can anyone help?

Can someone help me out on this? Now, I’m trying to figure out how is it possible to undergo 2 judgments…
I know they are alive, but I know their bodies are buried…
I know they are judged immediately after death, but I know there is a Last Judgment for the living and the dead…
How does this make sense?
 
Because we have those examples now 🙂

Touché…
Actually, the Danish Lutheran Church is one of the few (if not the only one, I’m not sure!) of the Lutheran Church bodies that does not have the Book of Concord as a confessional canon (for historical reasons that I do not want to bore you with ), so technically, “my” church is not bound by th Book of Concord. 🤓

Is your church bound by the Athanasian Creed? I have to admit, when I was helping my son do research for his paper on comparing/contrasting RC & Lutheranism, we got “stuck” a little with this creed [which is beautiful!, btw] and how did “sola scriptura” reconcile with this…

But un-technically (y’know what I mean 😉 ) your point is valid…and I can see a whole host of other issues opening up from that passage…

Hmmm…:hmmm:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top