www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West The Roman Catholic Doctrine of Mary's Impeccability

Why question Fr. Hardon at all? He has legitimate credentials as a Catholic theologian, what do you have? Nothing.

I did not say that Mary is outside the dominion of this sinful world (Mary still grieved, she was prone to natural sickness, she even experienced mortality). I said that sin (the spiritual condition) had no dominion over Mary.


I believe the Latin Church teaches that "predestination" is only "foreknowledge" - not God MAKING a person do what He wants ahead of time. So free volition is always an element of the Latin Church's understanding of Predestination.

The statement "it was not possible for Mary to voluntarily turn away from God" actually can have two philosophical interpretations. It can mean:
(1) God created a person who he imbued with Grace so she cannot sin and thus be able to be the Theotokos;

OR

(2) God foreknew of a woman who would always choose His will, and chose this woman to be Theotokos. If God knew she would waver, He would never have chosen her.

The second one is how I would interpret it.

Good point. I tend to think that these particular Latin theologians are either intentionally contradicting Catholic teaching, or are somehow able to satisfactorily rationalize their apparent inconsistencies in their own minds (rationalizations to which I am not privy). On the other hand, I do notice that while paradox is so easy to accept in the context of the non-Latin experience, when it occurs in the Latin context, it is often ridiculed even by those who accept paradox as a natural feature of our Faith.

Blessings,
Marduk

As a Melkite I have been taught that Mary was subject to the original sin, and so she was not impeccable, because she was subject to sin, as we all are, but by an act of her will in cooperation with the divine energy Mary chose not to sin.

I already stated why - didn't you read my comment about my convert friend? In any case, if you want to accept the word of Latin theologians as the be all and end all of the Latin Catholic Faith, that's your prerogative. I choose to depend on their episcopal Magisterium if I want to have knowledge about what the Latin Catholic Church actually teaches.

Blessings,
Marduk

I do not believe that this statement is accurate. Please supply supporting evidence from an approved Catholic source (i.e., a theologian or Scholastic, or even - if you prefer - a magisterial document).

Note that I do not limit you to "magisterial" sources, but if you have one then by all means post it. That said, failing the production of some type of supporting information (like I have been providing in this thread on Mary's impeccability) I must hold that the statement is simply your opinion, and I do not recognize you as a Catholic authority.

I have read your statement, which appears to be an attack upon Fr. Hardon's good name. As a Christian you should refrain from those types of attacks. Be that as it may, why should I believe what you say over what Fr. Hardon has written? Why are your comments important and his unimportant (or simply "popular" Latin theology)?

Sure, but you cannot deny that the question of how "impeccability" is itself to be defined is still an open question in Latin Catholic circles. So it is theologoumena, not doctrine.

Can you read. I told it that all of Christ's blood returning to his body in the resurrection has not been taught in any magisterial document, but the doctrine is a consequence of the dogma of the hypostatic union. The Word of God was hypostatically united to His human nature, which includes His blood, and so when He rose His blood was restored to Him. It is a common doctrine founded upon the prior dogma. [/quote]
True. And it is an accepted doctrine because no one has questioned it. But how "impeccability" itself is defined is still an open question in Latin Catholic circles, and has been so from the very beginning. So it is theologoumenon, not doctrine.

Blessings,
Marduk

Since I do not accept your restrictive use of the term "predestination" to mean only "foreknowledge" I reject your conclusion. Please support your contention that Catholics when speaking about predestination really only mean foreknowledge from some reputable (i.e., ecclesiastically approved) theologian or other source.

Mardukm,

Why should I take your word on this doctrine over that of the approved theologians I have quoted?

God bless,
Todd

Postscript: Mardukm, perhaps you can start a thread - so that this thread does not get hijacked from its proper topic - where you post quotations from approved Catholic theologians that hold this strange restrictive understanding of predestination.

If you want to assign infallibility to every Latin theologian you read, that's your problem, not mine.

Blessings,
Marduk

I have not assigned infallibility to anyone. I have asked that you stop attacking Fr. Hardon's character. He was a great theologian, and died in the peace of the Church.

As far as infallibility is concerned, I do not even assign infallibility to the pope. But please keep on topic. If you want to discuss other topics create new threads.

I have not found texts by reputable Catholic theologians that question the impeccability of the Virgin Mother of God, and as you can see I have been doing quite a lot of research on the topic.

Your opinion in this post is interesting, but not supported. All the texts that I have quoted so far in this thread have been printed with the proper ecclesiastical support. I have no reason to doubt that the authors are anything but faithful Catholic theologians.

"30. What prerogatives does the Blessed Virgin possess?
An immaculate conception, perfect sanctity, divine maternity, perpetual virginity, assumption into heaven, and special titles to our regard.

31. In what does the Immaculate Conception of Mary consist?
In this, that from the first instant of her conception, she was preserved free from all stain of original sin.

32. Through whose merits was the Blessed Virgin preserved from original sin?
By an anticipated application of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Savior of mankind.

33. How was Jesus Mary's Redeemer?
Jesus Christ is the Redeemer of all; He redeemed sinners by paying their ransom, and His mother, by preserving her from the slavery of sin.

34. Was Mary impeccable?
Yes; by a special privilege of God, who confirmed her in grace. She never committed any sin, whether mortal or venial; she was always all fair and without spot.

35. Did Mary, even though impeccable, acquire merits?
Yes, she acquired merits without number and of such value as is known to God alone; for all her actions were done freely, under the impulse of actual grace, and with perfect charity."

Br. John Chrysostom
Course of Religious Instruction Institute of the Brothers of the Christian Schools
Manual of Christian Doctrine: Comprising Dogma, Moral, and Worship
29th Edition: Authorized English Version revised in accordance with the Code of 1918
(New York: John Joseph McVey, 1923)
Pages 77-79

Who said anything about questioning her impeccability? I said that the definition of "impeccability" is still being debated. Thus, it cannot be considered a doctrine. You really need to stop reading things into what others say.

Blessings,
Marduk