www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Why is the Immaculate Conception considered Ex-Catherda?

Previous Thread

Next Thread

Re: Why is the Immaculate Conception considered Ex-Catherda? ByzBob #354394 10/13/10 04:28 AM Joined: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 Northern California A Apotheoun Member Apotheoun Member A Joined: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 Northern California This is a re-post of a post that was lost: Originally Posted by Apotheoun Originally Posted by Latin Catholic However, as a convert to Catholicism I have made a promise to believe and confess all that the [Roman] Catholic Church believes, confesses and proclaims. Therefore, I try to avoid contradicting the teaching of the Popes and Councils of the Catholic Church. I believe all that the Melkite Catholic Church professes and believes, which is why I accept the Seven Ecumenical Councils as binding, and why I also accept the primacy, but not the supremacy, of the bishop of Rome ". . . as the first among the bishops, according to the limits recognized by the Holy Fathers of the East during the first millennium, before the separation."

Re: Why is the Immaculate Conception considered Ex-Catherda? ByzBob #354395 10/13/10 04:29 AM Joined: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 Northern California A Apotheoun Member Apotheoun Member A Joined: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 Northern California This is a re-post of a post that was lost: Originally Posted by ajk Originally Posted by Apotheoun There is no need for a theory of the "Immaculate Conception" in the East, because no one is born guilty or sinful. To be clear, like it or not, the Immaculate Conception is not Catholic "theory" but Catholic dogma. "no one is born guilty or sinful" -- but what about from conception? Is everyone also immaculately conceived? If "no one is born guilty or sinful" why are new-born babies baptized? What is the theology -- the faith -- for baptizing?

Re: Why is the Immaculate Conception considered Ex-Catherda? Apotheoun #354396 10/13/10 04:33 AM Joined: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 Northern California A Apotheoun Member Apotheoun Member A Joined: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 Northern California This is a re-post of a post that was lost: Originally Posted by Apotheoun Originally Posted by ajk Originally Posted by Apotheoun There is no need for a theory of the "Immaculate Conception" in the East, because no one is born guilty or sinful. To be clear, like it or not, the Immaculate Conception is not Catholic "theory" but Catholic dogma. You are welcome to consider it as such, but I do not. Originally Posted by ajk "no one is born guilty or sinful" -- but what about from conception? Is everyone also immaculately conceived? Yes. All that has being exists naturally in the divine energy (see St. Gregory Palamas, Capita Physica, no. 78).

Re: Why is the Immaculate Conception considered Ex-Catherda? ByzBob #354397 10/13/10 04:35 AM Joined: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 Northern California A Apotheoun Member Apotheoun Member A Joined: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 Northern California This is a re-post of a post that was lost: Originally Posted by Apotheoun Originally Posted by ajk If "no one is born guilty or sinful" why are new-born babies baptized? What is the theology -- the faith -- for baptizing? St. John Chrysostom answered this question in his Baptismal Instructions: "Blessed be God, who alone does wonderful things! You have seen how numerous are the gifts of baptism. Although many men think that the only gift it confers is the remission of sins, we have counted its honors to the number of ten. It is on this account that we baptize even infants, although they are sinless, that they may be given the further gifts of sanctification, justice, filial adoption, and inheritance, that they may be brothers and members of Christ, and become dwelling places for the Spirit" [St. John Chrysostom, Third Baptismal Instruction, no. 6].

Re: Why is the Immaculate Conception considered Ex-Catherda? Apotheoun #354398 10/13/10 04:38 AM Joined: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 Northern California A Apotheoun Member Apotheoun Member A Joined: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 Northern California This is a re-post of a post that was lost: Originally Posted by griego catolico Originally Posted by Apotheoun Originally Posted by Latin Catholic However, as a convert to Catholicism I have made a promise to believe and confess all that the [Roman] Catholic Church believes, confesses and proclaims. Therefore, I try to avoid contradicting the teaching of the Popes and Councils of the Catholic Church. I believe all that the Melkite Catholic Church professes and believes, which is why I accept the Seven Ecumenical Councils as binding, and why I also accept the primacy, but not the supremacy, of the bishop of Rome ". . . as the first among the bishops, according to the limits recognized by the Holy Fathers of the East during the first millennium, before the separation." Apotheoun, With all due respect, do you therefore ignore what the CDF stated that such profession is not possible? I am trying to understand how one can say he/she is Catholic and yet not accept what the Catholic Church teaches. Wouldn't this amount to an Eastern form of "cafeteria Catholicism"? I don't see any Church document that supports "Eastern Orthodox in communion with Rome". This is not a criticism of you. I am trying to undertsand your perspective.

Re: Why is the Immaculate Conception considered Ex-Catherda? Apotheoun #354399 10/13/10 04:43 AM Joined: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 Northern California A Apotheoun Member Apotheoun Member A Joined: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 Northern California This is a re-post of a post that was lost: Originally Posted by Apotheoun Originally Posted by griego catolico Apotheoun, With all due respect, do you therefore ignore what the CDF stated that such profession is not possible? I am trying to understand how one can say he/she is Catholic and yet not accept what the Catholic Church teaches. Yes, I reject the response to the Melkite Profession of Faith written by then Cardinal Ratzinger. I do not equate the Catholic Church with the Latin Church, and so what it believes on these issues is its own business. I am a Melkite Catholic, not a Roman Catholic.

Re: Why is the Immaculate Conception considered Ex-Catherda? ByzBob #354400 10/13/10 04:47 AM Joined: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 Northern California A Apotheoun Member Apotheoun Member A Joined: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 Northern California This is a re-post of a post that was lost: Originally Posted by Apotheoun Originally Posted by griego catolico Wouldn't this amount to an Eastern form of "cafeteria Catholicism"? No, that would only follow if to be Catholic meant to be Latin, but that is clearly a false proposition. Originally Posted by griego catolico I don't see any Church document that supports "Eastern Orthodox in communion with Rome". The Melkite Profession of Faith issued by the Melkite Catholic Holy Synod is a Church document. Originally Posted by griego catolico This is not a criticism of you. I am trying to undertsand your perspective. I am not offended by your questions. May God grant you many joyful years.

Re: Why is the Immaculate Conception considered Ex-Catherda? Apotheoun #354401 10/13/10 04:54 AM Joined: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 Northern California A Apotheoun Member Apotheoun Member A Joined: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 Northern California This is a re-post of a post that was lost: Originally Posted by ajk Originally Posted by Apotheoun Originally Posted by ajk Originally Posted by Apotheoun There is no need for a theory of the "Immaculate Conception" in the East, because no one is born guilty or sinful. To be clear, like it or not, the Immaculate Conception is not Catholic "theory" but Catholic dogma. You are welcome to consider it as such, but I do not. To be clear(er), I mean objectively. For instance, a recent, official presentation of the Catholic faith says: Quote 491 Through the centuries the Church has become ever more aware that Mary, "full of grace" through God, was redeemed from the moment of her conception. That is what the dogma of the Immaculate Conception confesses, as Pope Pius IX proclaimed in 1854: The most Blessed Virgin Mary was, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God and by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, Saviour of the human race, preserved immune from all stain of original sin. [emphasis added] CCC [vatican.va]. One may not like it, but there it is.

Re: Why is the Immaculate Conception considered Ex-Catherda? Apotheoun #354402 10/13/10 04:57 AM Joined: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 Northern California A Apotheoun Member Apotheoun Member A Joined: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 Northern California This is a re-post of a post that was lost: Originally Posted by ajk Originally Posted by Apotheoun Originally Posted by ajk "no one is born guilty or sinful" -- but what about from conception? Is everyone also immaculately conceived? Yes. All that has being exists naturally in the divine energy (see St. Gregory Palamas, Capita Physica, no. 78). Except for mortality and its consequences, how does this state differ from that of Adam before the Fall?

Re: Why is the Immaculate Conception considered Ex-Catherda? Apotheoun #354403 10/13/10 04:59 AM Joined: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 Northern California A Apotheoun Member Apotheoun Member A Joined: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 Northern California This is a re-post of a post that was lost: Originally Posted by ajk Originally Posted by Apotheoun Originally Posted by ajk If "no one is born guilty or sinful" why are new-born babies baptized? What is the theology -- the faith -- for baptizing? St. John Chrysostom answered this question in his Baptismal Instructions: "Blessed be God, who alone does wonderful things! You have seen how numerous are the gifts of baptism. Although many men think that the only gift it confers is the remission of sins, we have counted its honors to the number of ten. It is on this account that we baptize even infants, although they are sinless, that they may be given the further gifts of sanctification, justice, filial adoption, and inheritance, that they may be brothers and members of Christ, and become dwelling places for the Spirit" [St. John Chrysostom, Third Baptismal Instruction, no. 6]. Yet the clear point of the Creed is: Ὁμολογῶ ἓν βάπτισμα εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν. Confíteor unum baptísma in remissiónem peccatorum. I confess/profess one baptism unto/into/for the remission/forgiveness of sins. What then of un-baptized new-borns who die? Heaven? Hell? Etc.? If Etc.?, then what is it?

Re: Why is the Immaculate Conception considered Ex-Catherda? Apotheoun #354404 10/13/10 05:03 AM Joined: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 Northern California A Apotheoun Member Apotheoun Member A Joined: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 Northern California This is a re-post of a post that was lost: Originally Posted by Apotheoun Originally Posted by ajk Originally Posted by Apotheoun There is no need for a theory of the "Immaculate Conception" in the East, because no one is born guilty or sinful. To be clear, like it or not, the Immaculate Conception is not Catholic "theory" but Catholic dogma. I have no doubt that Roman Catholics think the theory of the Immaculate Conception is a dogma, but it is not. It does not represent the theological tradition of the East.

Re: Why is the Immaculate Conception considered Ex-Catherda? Apotheoun #354405 10/13/10 05:06 AM Joined: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 Northern California A Apotheoun Member Apotheoun Member A Joined: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 Northern California This is a re-post of a post that was lost: Originally Posted by Apotheoun Originally Posted by ajk Originally Posted by Apotheoun St. John Chrysostom answered this question in his Baptismal Instructions: "Blessed be God, who alone does wonderful things! You have seen how numerous are the gifts of baptism. Although many men think that the only gift it confers is the remission of sins, we have counted its honors to the number of ten. It is on this account that we baptize even infants, although they are sinless, that they may be given the further gifts of sanctification, justice, filial adoption, and inheritance, that they may be brothers and members of Christ, and become dwelling places for the Spirit" [St. John Chrysostom, Third Baptismal Instruction, no. 6]. Yet the clear point of the Creed is: Ὁμολογῶ ἓν βάπτισμα εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν. Confíteor unum baptísma in remissiónem peccatorum. I confess/profess one baptism unto/into/for the remission/forgiveness of sins. What then of un-baptized new-borns who die? Heaven? Hell? Etc.? If Etc.?, then what is it? I am sure that St. John Chrysostom was familiar with the creed, but he simply did not read it in an Augustinian fashion. No one is conceived or born sinful. As far as an unbaptized baby is concerned, his end is the same as that of every other man, i.e., he will participate for all eternity in the divine energy. Nevertheless, his (i.e., the unbaptized baby’s) experience of that divine presence will not be the same as that of a man who - through the free exercise of his will - lived a life of virtue, but he will not be punished with damnation, for as a mere babe he committed no sins. I am not an Augustinian.

Re: Why is the Immaculate Conception considered Ex-Catherda? Apotheoun #354406 10/13/10 05:09 AM Joined: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 Northern California A Apotheoun Member Apotheoun Member A Joined: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 Northern California This is a re-post of a post that was lost: Originally Posted by Apotheoun Originally Posted by ajk Originally Posted by Apotheoun Originally Posted by ajk "no one is born guilty or sinful" -- but what about from conception? Is everyone also immaculately conceived? Yes. All that has being exists naturally in the divine energy (see St. Gregory Palamas, Capita Physica, no. 78). Except for mortality and its consequences, how does this state differ from that of Adam before the Fall? Mortality is the difference, and all the consequences that flow from it (e.g., a tendency to fall into sin by trying to prolong this mortal existence, the unruliness of the passions which seek to fulfill pleasure with no thought to one's eternal destiny, etc.). Mortality is problem enough, which is why there is no need to invent a legal fiction that all men are conceived or born sinful.

Re: Why is the Immaculate Conception considered Ex-Catherda? Apotheoun #354407 10/13/10 05:16 AM Joined: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 Northern California A Apotheoun Member Apotheoun Member A Joined: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 Northern California This is a re-post of a post that was lost: Originally Posted by Apotheoun Originally Posted by ajk To be clear(er), I mean objectively. For instance, a recent, official presentation of the Catholic faith says: Quote . . . That is what the dogma of the Immaculate Conception . . . That is a Western presentation of the faith. Look, I understand that what I am saying is hard for many Catholics (Roman and Eastern) to accept, but as the Melkite Patriarch said back in 2002: "The difficulty lies in the fact that Rome is not ready to give the Eastern Catholic Churches the genuine rights they deserve. Rome would more easily give them to the Orthodox Churches. We do not represent, in a full sense, genuine Orthodoxy, to Rome or to the Orthodox Churches. Therefore, it is just and fit to ask: Are we allowed to have this role, to be a bridge, to be a window? Can we really fulfill such a role? Are we prepared for it? For my part, I answer: Yes! Because I am convinced of that role, in spite of the deep difficulty. I am convinced that nobody can do it on our behalf, or in our place, and that, even if this role is denied to us by different sides. My deep conviction is based upon the experience of the history of our Church. We, the Melkites, were able to accomplish this role for about 300 years of our communion with Rome. Even before that time (1724), we always played this role of openness, of flexibility, of reconciliation, of mediation. We always wanted to reconcile the two poles of ecclesiology: Constantinople and Rome. We did a lot to reconcile the two visions or ecclesiologies. We never asked for or requested reciprocity. We did what we did as genuine Orientals, because we consider that we are committed to something that is not extraneous to us or to our tradition. We are defending our own tradition in the framework of our communion with Rome. That is precisely the role of a bridge and a window. We can do a lot because of our Eastern character, our communion with Rome, and our deep sensibility to the Eastern tradition."

Re: Why is the Immaculate Conception considered Ex-Catherda? ByzBob #354408 10/13/10 05:20 AM Joined: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 Northern California A Apotheoun Member Apotheoun Member A Joined: Mar 2005 Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 Northern California This is a re-post of a post that was lost: Originally Posted by StuartK The key word in that that clause of the Creed is not "remission" but "one". As I said, the principal reason for its inclusion was pastoral--a rejection of the multiple baptisms for the remission of sins which was commonplace at the time (and in the absence of a fully developed Sacrament of Reconciliation). In any case, most catechumens in the late fourth century were adults--they had actual sins to remit, but remission of sins was not--and is not--the principal purpose of baptism, merely one of its happy concomitants. In fact, infant baptism was probably pretty rare at the time, and for quite some time, bishops flailed around looking for a good reason to do so. Augustine's answer was not the one accepted in the East, though.