It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
This innovative notion introduced and dogmatised by the RCC in the 19th century, is rejected not only by the Orthodox Church, but curiously enough, it was also rejected by great post-schism Fathers of the RCC, such as Thomas Aquinas and Bernard of Clairvaux.Mary was concieved without Original sin.
If you accurately portray the RCC understanding of St Mary’s sinlessness as being the voluntarily induced result of her voluntary submission to God, rather than the necessary result of her being involuntarily being immaculately conceived, then what purpose did the alleged Immaculate Conception really serve?She did not sin during her life, but it was not impossible for her to sin.
Whether or not she was truly deprived of her free will or not, according to your understanding of this dogma of your church, will depend on your answer to my above question. If your answer dictates that although St Mary could possibly have sinned despite being immaculately conceived, she could not have possibly been sinless without being immaculately conceived, then there is nonetheless a challenge to her free will to an extent, for it operates in a certain context where its abilities are enhanced so to speak.During her life she had just as much free will as any of us
Yet you miss the vital contrast, namely that Eve came into being via direct creation from God, whilst St Mary was born of a woman in a fallen world. The pre-fallen state of Eve was thus natural and logical, however an immaculately conceived state imputed upon the Virgin is not natural nor is it logical. The consequence of such a notion is that she is set apart from mankind according to nature; she can no longer be considered human like us.Some refer to her as the 'new eve'. Eve was also created free of sin, yet freely chose to sin and thus brought death into the world. Mary was also created free of sin, but where Eve said no Mary said Yes, and brought life into the world.
This does not sound Orthodox at all. Can you please define the term “stain”?Little children are baptized, and this removes from them the stain of original sin.
This reasoning is fundamentally flawed. IC was never optional in the pre-schism Church (whether we focus the point of schism to the fifth century in the context of the Coptic Orthodox understanding, or even to the 11th century in the context of the Eastern Orthodox understanding), and the fact it was never a formally condemned doctrine does not automatically render valid one’s ability to hold to it as a theological opinion.The Reason that the Immaculate Conception was optional was because No Anathema was given to those who did not believe.