Orthodox View of the Immaculate Conception

[twf]

[SIGN][/SIGN]

Orthodox believe that every human being conceived is 100% innocent of all sin. Humans are not born guilty of their parent’s or their ancestor’s sins.

Adam & Eve’s personal sin resulted in the rest of humanity to be conceived into a world in which sorrow, sickness, suffering & physical death are the results of Ancestral Sin. Scripture is clear that Mary, the Theotokos, personal experienced these results of Ancestral Sin.

Why is it that Catholics need Mary to have been conceived with special graces in order for her to have never sinned?

No one, not Adam, not Mary, not Jesus, not you, not me, not any child conceived today, was conceived guilty of another’s sin.

Mary was not conceived any differently than the rest of us, but she was, like Jesus Who alone was conceived differently - no human father, completely sinless her entire life Because she, given the same choices we all are, never ever sinned.

I don’t think you’ve read through all my posts on this thread. You’re not arguing against what I’ve written, but rather your preconceived notion of what you think Catholics believe. I quoted earlier in this thread from the Catechism of the Catholic Church demonstrating that the Church does NOT teach that we are personally guilty of Adam’s sin. We inherit the consequences, not person guilt - this is what the “guilt of original sin” refers to. The distinction is more clear in the Latin - it gets confusing in English.
You didn’t address my post at all. From what you’re telling me, Orthodox believe baptism is an empty gesture that makes no real difference to the soul? Catholics believe that Our Lady was a saint (in communion with the Divine Life of the Trinity) from the first moment of her conception. The rest of us are conceived separated from God - spiritually dead, though not guilty of any personal sin, until we “put on Christ” in baptism. The Orthodox, in your liturgy, clearly honor both Mary and John as saints from the first moment of their conceptions. There are only two possibilities:

1. for the Orthodox all of us are conceived as saints full of grace…baptism is a mere symbolic gesture which doesn’t really do anything as we are all created as saints…or
2. you are mistaken and there is something special about Mary (and also St John)

Our Lady’s conception was completely natural. She was conceived like all other human beings and born into a world where she faced the consequences and temptations of the Fall…but She herself received the full graces of baptism at the first moment of her conception.

 

[GaryTaylor]

This again?

ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/jp2bvm53.htm

There is no point on there I haven’t addressed. And if you actually read my posts, you would know that. And my address starts with the first sentence…

Some theologians have in fact maintained that the Blessed Virgin did not die and was immediately raised from earthly life to heavenly glory

I don’t which to excuse Mary from any of Gods love or blessing. I maintain as the Church, “body and soul”, not soul then body. And death simply is not understood as I also elaborated on.

The New Testament provides no information on the circumstances of Mary’s death. This silence leads one to suppose that it happened naturally, with no detail particularly worthy of mention.

Final point being, the method to obtain this understanding of the Dormition, is questionable at best, out right wrong at worst. And frankly its a developed tradition based on condemned writing of private revelation never approved and not until 500-ad when Marion cults were prevalent in the East does any of this appear. So in other words the triumphant idea of the truth always taught from antiquity is rather dubious.

 

[prodromos]

From what you’re telling me, Orthodox believe baptism is an empty gesture that makes no real difference to the soul?

Baptism is participation in the death and resurrection of Christ. Are you joining the ranks of those misrepresenting Orthodox beliefs?
Romans 6:3-6
Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.

For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his. We know that our old self was crucified with him so that the sinful body might be destroyed, and we might no longer be enslaved to sin.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Baptism is participation in the death and resurrection of Christ. Are you joining the ranks of those misrepresenting Orthodox beliefs?
Romans 6:3-6
Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.

For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his. We know that our old self was crucified with him so that the sinful body might be destroyed, and we might no longer be enslaved to sin.

No but they arrived on this thread which he addressed above. Originally I thought the ideal was written by John Romanides. He has had his own attacks of his writing and I believe much misunderstanding comes from this point. But its also a matter of completely understanding what he is saying. Unfortunately he is confusing because he speaks in various areas of Augustine and associates this exclusively with Rome. Thats a mistake which leads to confusion. Further his understanding of St Paul appears to imply the understanding just as suggested here. But I don’t believe his overall intent was as such but to point out his thinking opposed to Augustine of St Paul, which in so many words is implicit in confirmation the teaching doesn’t come from Augustine but was further elaborated on since Pelagius and grace became questioned. This wasn’t the issue with Augustine.

Anyway I suspect the same misunderstanding of baptism will come along now and again.

 

[GaryTaylor]

So in other words the triumphant idea of the truth always taught from antiquity is rather dubious.

Course I “might” be willing to concede the tradition from antiquity “has been” preserved since “500-AD”. Perhaps then the same confusion of understanding in other areas precedes 500-AD. Like that the primacy always existed=petrine model. But surely Marys sinless, forever Virgin recited in the Churches in the Liturgy is not of consequence.

I find the conversation ironic in that we would debate the point of body and soul with strict adhesion to a point, but the sinless, ever Virgin point with no-spot and no-stain seems rather illusive in comprehensive understanding to the nature and redemption of Christ along with all the other agree’d upon doctrines there’s little room to disagree. I don’t see anything wrong with either tradition, in fact I think they make a great balance. Further the understanding in the Greek Church with Grace/Holy Spirit and its different emphasis than Rome is absolutely beautiful. Its an illusive point which I believe many just don’t really grasp. From here comes the ideas the east is more mystical, and understanding divinization becomes un grounded from where the real beauty springs from.

 

[wynd]

There is no point on there I haven’t addressed. And if you actually read my posts, you would know that. And my address starts with the first sentence…

I don’t which to excuse Mary from any of Gods love or blessing. I maintain as the Church, “body and soul”, not soul then body. And death simply is not understood as I also elaborated on.

Final point being, the method to obtain this understanding of the Dormition, is questionable at best, out right wrong at worst. And frankly its a developed tradition based on condemned writing of private revelation never approved and not until 500-ad when Marion cults were prevalent in the East does any of this appear. So in other words the triumphant idea of the truth always taught from antiquity is rather dubious.

Hi Gary,

I have read your posts, I just don’t agree with you and I am trying to show you that (at least traditionally) the RCC doesn’t either. That last link was an address from Pope John Paul II. Do you disagree with him as well?

 

[GaryTaylor]

I just don’t agree with you

Which part as the rest was conjecture.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Orthodox believe that every human being conceived is 100% innocent of all sin. Humans are not born guilty of their parent’s or their ancestor’s sins.

Sacred Scripture says this:

Romans 5:18
18 Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people.

Romans 5:12-14
12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned—13 To be sure, sin was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not charged against anyone’s account where there is no law. 14 Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who is a pattern of the one to come.

1 Corinthians 15:22
For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.

Hebrews 7:9-10
9 One might even say that Levi, who collects the tenth, paid the tenth through Abraham, 10 because when Melchizedek met Abraham, Levi was still in the body of his ancestor.

Do you see? Levi paid the tenth to Melchizedek through his forefather Abraham because Levi was still in Abraham when Abraham met Melchizedek.

Levi gets credit for honoring Melchizedek simply by being “in Abraham” when Abraham offered a tithe. That’s the principle at work from a positive perspective. Negatively, however, we were all “in Adam” when he sinned, so we all suffer the consequences of that, too.

That is what Mary was protected from through her Immaculate Conception.

Adam & Eve’s personal sin resulted in the rest of humanity to be conceived into a world in which sorrow, sickness, suffering & physical death are the results of Ancestral Sin. Scripture is clear that Mary, the Theotokos, personal experienced these results of Ancestral Sin.

True. she did experience the suffering inherent in a fallen world.

Why is it that Catholics need Mary to have been conceived with special graces in order for her to have never sinned?

We don’t “need” it; we’re just explaining what actually happened. There are two issues: 1) Sin as a principle is at work meaning that we are all fallen of as a result of the fact that we were all in Adam when he sinned, and 2) personal sins that we commit every day.

Most of us experience both 1 and 2. Mary was not guilty of either.

No one, not Adam, not Mary, not Jesus, not you, not me, not any child conceived today, was conceived guilty of another’s sin.

If you sin, I am not guilty of that. But when Adam sinned, all of us were affected by that sin because we were all “in Adam”.

Mary was not conceived any differently than the rest of us, but she was, like Jesus Who alone was conceived differently - no human father, completely sinless her entire life Because she, given the same choices we all are, never ever sinned.

Amen! It is true that Mary never sinned personally. That is only half of the equation.

As for the other half, it is unfortunate that you have been misinformed, but I hope that you will read your scriptures more carefully to learn the truth.

 

[Randy_Carson]

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church

The consequences of Adam’s sin for humanity

402 All men are implicated in Adam’s sin, as St. Paul affirms: “By one man’s disobedience many (that is, all men) were made sinners”: "sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned."289 The Apostle contrasts the universality of sin and death with the universality of salvation in Christ. "Then as one man’s trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one man’s act of righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all men."290

403 Following St. Paul, the Church has always taught that the overwhelming misery which oppresses men and their inclination towards evil and death cannot be understood apart from their connection with Adam’s sin and the fact that he has transmitted to us a sin with which we are all born afflicted, a sin which is the “death of the soul”.291 Because of this certainty of faith, the Church baptizes for the remission of sins even tiny infants who have not committed personal sin.292

404 How did the sin of Adam become the sin of all his descendants? The whole human race is in Adam “as one body of one man”.293 By this “unity of the human race” all men are implicated in Adam’s sin, as all are implicated in Christ’s justice. Still, the transmission of original sin is a mystery that we cannot fully understand. But we do know by Revelation that Adam had received original holiness and justice not for himself alone, but for all human nature. By yielding to the tempter, Adam and Eve committed a personal sin, but this sin affected the human nature that they would then transmit in a fallen state.294 It is a sin which will be transmitted by propagation to all mankind, that is, by the transmission of a human nature deprived of original holiness and justice. And that is why original sin is called “sin” only in an analogical sense: it is a sin “contracted” and not “committed” - a state and not an act.

405 Although it is proper to each individual,295 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.

406 The Church’s teaching on the transmission of original sin was articulated more precisely in the fifth century, especially under the impulse of St. Augustine’s reflections against Pelagianism, and in the sixteenth century, in opposition to the Protestant Reformation. Pelagius held that man could, by the natural power of free will and without the necessary help of God’s grace, lead a morally good life; he thus reduced the influence of Adam’s fault to bad example. The first Protestant reformers, on the contrary, taught that original sin has radically perverted man and destroyed his freedom; they identified the sin inherited by each man with the tendency to evil (concupiscentia), which would be insurmountable. The Church pronounced on the meaning of the data of Revelation on original sin especially at the second Council of Orange (529)296 and at the Council of Trent (1546).297

 

[GaryTaylor]

For Catholics and Orthodox, because the Feast of the Assumption has been celebrated in the universal Church (both East and West) on this same date (August 15) since the sixth and seventh centuries the Assumption/Dormition is tradition. Yet we arrive at this slightly different as the Catholic Church cites Revelation 12 in relation to revelation along with selective quotations which can be read. . This also keeps in mind Scripture and tradition in the sense of the writing of Epiphanius of Salamis, the apocryphal discussed and ruled on, which doesn’t distract at all and is inclusive in the sense of selective readings and selective aspects. So when we speak of Tradition in the larger sense this is true but in the individual sense both Churches have their own tradition of which this too is known Further though many were cited by the Holy father and others in relation, no quotes were used which altered the infallible formula. Its impossible.

the Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory

When its stated completed Her earthly course the question of death isn’t contested [understanding death has no definition, nor has it been defined], its from this moment which resolves in body and soul, which is not soul then body at a later determined time.

That said I think Shoemaker is right an its a matter of keeping individual traditions. Its not a matter of consolidating but accepting the existing reality.

 

[twf]

Baptism is participation in the death and resurrection of Christ. Are you joining the ranks of those misrepresenting Orthodox beliefs?
Romans 6:3-6
Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.

For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his. We know that our old self was crucified with him so that the sinful body might be destroyed, and we might no longer be enslaved to sin.

Not at all. I know full well that the Orthodox believe that baptism is essential and imparts grace (for we “put on Christ” in baptism). My point was the particular poster I was addressing seems to imply that all of us are conceived as saints. Orthodox liturgy clearly honours Mary and John as saints at their conceptions- either they received the graces of baptism (the Indwelling of the divine life) at the moment of their conception (as Catholics believe at least in the case of Mary), or we are all conceived as saints which would render baptism pointless. It seems to me that Mary and John did receive special graces before being born even from an Orthodox perspective- yet I’m being told this isn’t the case. I am tryin to find common ground. I see the immaculate conception as primarily Our Lady receiving the graces of baptism at the moment of her conception and it seems to me Orthodox liturgy supports this. Where am I going wrong?

 

[babochka]

Not at all. I know full well that the Orthodox believe that baptism is essential and imparts grace (for we “put on Christ” in baptism). My point was the particular poster I was addressing seems to imply that all of us are conceived as saints. Orthodox liturgy clearly honours Mary and John as saints at their conceptions- either they received the graces of baptism (the Indwelling of the divine life) at the moment of their conception (as Catholics believe at least in the case of Mary), or we are all conceived as saints which would render baptism pointless. It seems to me that Mary and John did receive special graces before being born even from an Orthodox perspective- yet I’m being told this isn’t the case. I am tryin to find common ground. I see the immaculate conception as primarily Our Lady receiving the graces of baptism at the moment of her conception and it seems to me Orthodox liturgy supports this. Where am I going wrong?

If you’re wrong, then so am I, as I have the same understanding.

An excellent book on the subject, if you’re interested in going deeper, is the book that I bought my pastor for Christmas this year, after his homily on the feast of the Conception of St. Anne. He said that he’d tried to read Orthodox theologians on the subject in an attempt to be more Eastern in his approach, but it just left him feeling angry. The book is ***The Immaculate Conception: Why Thomas Aquinas Denied, while Johhn Duns Scotus, Gregory, Palamas, and Mark Eugenicus Profesed the Absolute Immaculate Existence of Mary. ***I’ve only been able to skim it so far, and I have to give it up to Father in a couple of days, but it has a balanced approach from both Eastern and Western theologians on the subject, as understood by both sides prior to the dogmatic definition.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Me too, but I think your on the right path with the above book. Here’s some of the same info…

books.google.com/books?id=D-GxAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA18&lpg=PA18&dq=%E2%80%9Cprokathartheisa%E2%80%9D+greek+to+english&source=bl&ots=2xWTkibquV&sig=Fyiy7UvLEgVpZfDoX-ptAf3v_PE&hl=en&sa=X&ei=43CYVJydOMGLgwSwm4TgCg&ved=0CCQQ6AEwAQ

google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Feasternchristianbooks.blogspot.com%2F2014%2F05%2Fthe-immaculate-conceptions-roots-in.html&ei=Em-YVPmHI8ibNufvg7AM&usg=AFQjCNEfOGIOvgdT0i3atresDF9gile1HQ

google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=7&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CEYQFjAG&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.patheos.com%2Fblogs%2Fyimcatholic%2F2012%2F12%2Ffor-mind-blowing-franciscan-thoughts-on-the-incarnation-by-bl-john-duns-scotus.html&ei=imiYVML0CImuggTsnIDoDw&usg=AFQjCNFwEjVYGGsHtzVN0zxOFhG-1nTnFg

Mark of Ephesus, The First Antirrhetic against Manuel Kalekas (scripsit 1430s). Mark but once referred to Mary in this moderately sized work. When he spoke of the Theotokos, he referred to her as the “prokathartheisa” or “prepurified”

All interesting.

 

[greypiper]

Orthodoxy never adopted the theory (from St Augustine) on original sin, that it is an inborn defect, almost like a spiritual birth defect. Orthodoxy teaches that because of Adam & Eve’s sin, all Creation fell with them, and made spiritual perfection impossible. In other words, we live with the CONSEQUENCES of “The Original Sin”, but do not personally bear guilt for it. In other other words, the idea of the Immaculate Conception in Orthodoxy doesn’t even make sense, as there was no inborn sin to preserve Her from! In other other other words, the Blessed Lady Theotokos WAS “immaculately conceived”, but only because we ALL are.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Orthodoxy never adopted the theory (from St Augustine) on original sin, that it is an inborn defect, almost like a spiritual birth defect. Orthodoxy teaches that because of Adam & Eve’s sin, all Creation fell with them, and made spiritual perfection impossible. In other words, we live with the CONSEQUENCES of “The Original Sin”, but do not personally bear guilt for it. In other other words, the idea of the Immaculate Conception in Orthodoxy doesn’t even make sense, as there was no inborn sin to preserve Her from! In other other other words, the Blessed Lady Theotokos WAS “immaculately conceived”, but only because we ALL are.

See post #109.

 

[Nektarios_Lady]

Sacred Scripture says this:

Romans 5:18
18 Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people.

Romans 5:12-14
12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned—13 To be sure, sin was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not charged against anyone’s account where there is no law. 14 Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who is a pattern of the one to come.

1 Corinthians 15:22
For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.

Hebrews 7:9-10
9 One might even say that Levi, who collects the tenth, paid the tenth through Abraham, 10 because when Melchizedek met Abraham, Levi was still in the body of his ancestor.

Do you see? Levi paid the tenth to Melchizedek through his forefather Abraham because Levi was still in Abraham when Abraham met Melchizedek.

Levi gets credit for honoring Melchizedek simply by being “in Abraham” when Abraham offered a tithe. That’s the principle at work from a positive perspective. Negatively, however, we were all “in Adam” when he sinned, so we all suffer the consequences of that, too.

That is what Mary was protected from through her Immaculate Conception.

True. she did experience the suffering inherent in a fallen world.

We don’t “need” it; we’re just explaining what actually happened. There are two issues: 1) Sin as a principle is at work meaning that we are all fallen of as a result of the fact that we were all in Adam when he sinned, and 2) personal sins that we commit every day.

Most of us experience both 1 and 2. Mary was not guilty of either.

If you sin, I am not guilty of that. But when Adam sinned, all of us were affected by that sin because we were all “in Adam”.

Amen! It is true that Mary never sinned personally. That is only half of the equation.

As for the other half, it is unfortunate that you have been misinformed, but I hope that you will read your scriptures more carefully to learn the truth.

Actually, you should.

This misunderstanding of Romans you keep presenting has already been addressed. Quick recap: Yes, all men die a physical death as a consequence of Adam & Eve’s personal sin, but “all sinned” isn’t inclusive of every human being - Mary didn’t sin, Jesus didn’t sin, infants don’t sin, mentally incapasitated don’t sin.

Yes, the consequences (not guilt, not eternal separation from God) are passed on to the human race (& all of creation) through Adam & Eve. Those consequences are outlined in Genesis. Those consequences have been felt by every human being, including Mary & Jesus.

Not sure how twisting the Holy Scriptures is an advantage to anyone.

 

[Nektarios_Lady]

Orthodoxy never adopted the theory (from St Augustine) on original sin, that it is an inborn defect, almost like a spiritual birth defect. Orthodoxy teaches that because of Adam & Eve’s sin, all Creation fell with them, and made spiritual perfection impossible. In other words, we live with the CONSEQUENCES of “The Original Sin”, but do not personally bear guilt for it. In other other words, the idea of the Immaculate Conception in Orthodoxy doesn’t even make sense, as there was no inborn sin to preserve Her from! In other other other words, the Blessed Lady Theotokos WAS “immaculately conceived”, but only because we ALL are.

Amen!!!

 

[GaryTaylor]

Actually, you should.

This misunderstanding of Romans you keep presenting has already been addressed. Quick recap: Yes, all men die a physical death as a consequence of Adam & Eve’s personal sin, but “all sinned” isn’t inclusive of every human being - Mary didn’t sin, Jesus didn’t sin, infants don’t sin, mentally incapasitated don’t sin.

Yes, the consequences (not guilt, not eternal separation from God) are passed on to the human race (& all of creation) through Adam & Eve. Those consequences are outlined in Genesis. Those consequences have been felt by every human being, including Mary & Jesus.

So God wasn’t subjected to this above, because He is God, sinless, and as darkness, and iniquity fell upon mankind which was wasting away, God who loved man so much He decided He better save them. So He in the midst of the wasting away of mankind, decides to Redeem man. Thus Mary faithful handmaid of the Lord is chosen as God looks down to be the new Ark and purifies Mary.

So in this bible story, above, God who is Omniscient, Omnipotent, Omnipresent. Who creates man through the Word from the start of Genesis, He allowed all the above to occur which He must have known, then at the last minute, when finally after all these years of iniquity, Mary comes along, and She finds favor with God alone[Full of Grace], then the moment of Redemption is decided and an Angel-messenger is sent with the Good News?

Its a plausible story, so we all agree as Mark of Ephesus stated and most others in the East; he referred to her as the “prokathartheisa” or “prepurified”?

Quick question, what was the Saints stance on private revelation in regards to purification?

So scripture Jeremiah “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you”

Psalm 139:16 Your eyes saw my unformed body; all the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be.

So Christs purification is linked to Marys sanctification. As they say Mary was “justified” - “Holy”.

So God who knows all, knew all this would indeed happen. Why did He wait till the last minute to sanctify Mary when… “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you”

 

[twf]

Actually, you should.

This misunderstanding of Romans you keep presenting has already been addressed. Quick recap: Yes, all men die a physical death as a consequence of Adam & Eve’s personal sin, but “all sinned” isn’t inclusive of every human being - Mary didn’t sin, Jesus didn’t sin, infants don’t sin, mentally incapasitated don’t sin.

Yes, the consequences (not guilt, not eternal separation from God) are passed on to the human race (& all of creation) through Adam & Eve. Those consequences are outlined in Genesis. Those consequences have been felt by every human being, including Mary & Jesus.

Not sure how twisting the Holy Scriptures is an advantage to anyone.

I have posted several times now asking the Orthodox if all of us are conceived as saints, full of grace and in full communion with the divine life of the Trinity…so far there has been no response. I have demonstrated from our Catechism that Catholics do NOT believe that we personally inherit Adam’s guilt…yet that has also been ignored even though I have referenced it multiple times in this thread.
When you state that we are all immaculately conceived, this suggests to Catholics that you believe we are all conceived as saints, and thus baptism would be rendered useless. Original sin refers primarily to the fact that we are conceived without sanctifying grace; that is, without the indwelling of the divine life of the Trinity within our souls. At baptism we return to our “pre-fallen” state as we “put on Christ” and “partake of the divine nature”. Our Lady simply received these graces from the first moment of her conception.

1. Do the Orthodox believe that we are all conceived full of divine life - that is, as saints? If so, what is the point of baptism?
2. It is clear in Orthodox liturgy that Mary and John are honored as saints from the first moments of their conception…if the rest of us are not conceived as saints, and are in fact in need of baptism, does that not suggest that Mary and John received these graces earlier than the rest of us and were thus, in some sense, special?
   I have spoken to Orthodox “in real life” who agree that Mary was indeed special in that she received the full graces of baptism at her conception…but on this thread it seems the Orthodox maintain we are all conceived as saints, which would suggest that baptism adds nothing of value. I don’t believe this is authentic Orthodox teaching.
   Certainly there is nothing in Scripture or the Fathers that suggests we, in a fallen world, are conceived as saints in full communion with the Blessed Trinity. Baptism was instituted to reincorporate us into the divine life.

 

[tdgesq]

JOINT COMMISSION FOR THE THEOLOGICAL DIALOGUE BETWEEN THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH AND THE ORTHODOX CHURCH. FAITH, SACRAMENTS AND THE UNITY OF THE CHURCH

1. The essential points of the doctrine of baptism on which the two Churches are agreed are the following:
2. The necessity of baptism for salvation;
3. The effects of baptism, particularly new life in Christ and liberation from original sin;
4. Incorporation into the Church by baptism;
5. The relation of baptism to the mystery of the Trinity;
6. The essential link between baptism and the death and resurrection of the Lord;
7. The role of the Holy Spirit in baptism;
8. The necessity of water which manifests baptism’s character as the bath of new birth.

I guess I’ll believe the Orthodox representatives at the Joint Commission rather than the internet warriors who deny that baptism is necessary for salvation and that it liberates us from original sin.