www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Hi, I'm Orthodox, and I believe in the IC.

So just forget for the moment everything you think you know or don't know about created grace. Let's just talk about uncreated grace and union with God.

One wonders how much Catholics know of their own theology of created and uncreated grace? We have been told here many times that uncreated grace is, in Catholic theology, the Holy Spirit. So are you asking about union with the Holy Spirit or...?

C'mon, Father. I'm neither trained in nor formed by scholastic theology. I'm an Anglican at heart, yet I have managed to come to a rudimentary, if flawed, understanding of the Catholic view of grace and original sin. If I can do it, so can you.

So let's get back to the issues at hand. Is ancestral sin in Orthodoxy properly described as a separation from God (uncreated grace)? If yes, please elaborate.

Ahh, Father, you vastly underestimate yourself. I bet you could give an answer if you tried really, really, really hard.

St. Mary’s Immaculate Conception:

Some Church fathers do not believe Virgin Mary to be without faults, such as St. Irenaus, Origen, St. John Chrysostom. However, these opinions do not represent the widespread Mariological Tradition of the early Church.

We believe that St. Mary’s holiness is unique and surpasses heavenly creatures; she passed all her life in holiness as the true Ark of the Covenant, which was made of incorruptible wood laid with Gold from inside and outside.

The Orthodox Church, whose love towards St. Mary is deep-rooted, considers her more holy than all the heavenly creatures, whilst a natural member of the human race.

We do not set her apart from the human race by assuming that she was born without original sin (immaculate conception), as if she was born of no human seed. Thus, the Church makes a distinction between St. Mary’s life before and after the moment of Divine Incarnation.

St. Mary herself declared her need of salvation when she said, “my spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior.”
(Lk 1:47)

This Orthodox concept preserved our Church from any exaggeration or confusion between our Lord Jesus Christ and His blessed mother; no worship is offered to her, but only veneration and praise. In other words, in the Orthodox Church there is an accurate line that divides Lord Jesus Christ from His blessed mother; the only one who was Immaculately Conceived is our Lord Jesus Christ.

This lecture is adapted from ‘Comparative Theology’ by H.H. Pope Shenouda III and ‘St. Mary in the Orthodox Concept’ by Fr. Tadros Malaty.
http://www.suscopts.org/messages/lectures/marilecture1.pdf

I think having the issue complain about is more important to Hieromonk Ambrose than opening his mind and heart to understanding.

Your post seems to confirm my "not if, but when" theory.

I am beginning to realise that I may have to admit that the Roman Catholic dogma of the Immaculate Conception is beyond the comprehension of all except probably the Catholic Magisterium itself.

I'd like to direct everyone's attention to John Meyendorff's discussion of the Theotokos as the New Eve in his Byzantine Theology [holytrinitymission.org]. The key sentence is: "Quotations can easily be multiplied, and they give clear indications that the Mariological piety of the Byzantines would probably have led them to accept the definition of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception of Mary as it has been defined in 1854 if only they shared the Western doctrine of original sin."

Okay, let's put aside all notions of original sin as original guilt and acknowledge right-off the mortality of the Blessed Virgin. Yet the Church has always confessed Mary as the Second or New Eve. What does it mean to confess Mary as the Second Eve and what are the implications for her? Instead of concerning ourselves with the IC dogma as defined in the 19th century, I suggest we focus instead on Mary as the New Eve.

Further thoughts:

1) Mary was not an accident of history. God was not sitting around hoping against hope that a Jewish maiden would appear on the scene who would assent to the Incarnation.

2) Mary did not achieve theosis in Pelagian-like fashion.

3) Mary's assent to the annunciation was free and perfectly wholehearted-- only thus was the rebellion of Eve (and Adam) undone.

4) At no point in her life did Mary sin against God. I think this is a dogma upon which Catholics and Orthodox would agree. This fact of Mary's life-long sinlessness cries out for explanation.

5) The Church celebrates the conception of the Blessed Virgin. Why? The Church also celebrates the conception of John the Baptist. Why? How is Mary's sanctity different from John's. And why aren't the conceptions of, say, the Apostles not also celebrated?

Please understand: I'm not trying to score any polemical points at this point at all. I'm trying to go behind both the polemics and theologizing to apprehend the faith of the Church.

Because we have troubled ourselves so much with the doctrine, that we just do not realize what the Church actually says.

Whatever we received at Baptism, the Mother of God, through a special and unique grace from God, received at the moment of her conception (which came about through natural means, that is, her partents' sexual intercourse).

Conversely, whatever we are promised for the Last Day, the Mother of God received at the moment of her dormition/assumption.

These two special graces do not place the Mother of God above or beyond our totally shared human nature. They simply show the fullest extent of God's saving love: total victory over sin and full theosis.

That isn't so complicated, is it?

6) Him, who knew no sin, He hath made sin for us, that we might be made the justice of God in Him. I Cor. 5:21.

Pretty much obviates any need for an Immaculate Conception of the Theotokos.

Now how does this verse impact, one way or another, the patristic teaching of the Blessed Virgin as the New Eve?

Is this how the Holy Fathers explain these events?