The Primacy of Saint Peter

2»

Comments

  • I know we don't believe in the Immaculate Conception, but don't we believe in the Assumption of Mary?

    But also, how do they know when he says something that comes from the office of Peter? Is it whenever he happens to be sitting in that chair?
  • We do believe in the Assumption, but our Church has not made it a dogma. Dogma touches upon the Trinity, our relationship with the Trinity, and the Church and sacraments. Basically, the Nicean-Constantinopolitan Creed. So the Creed does mention the Theotokos as “Virgin” and that is dogma, even her perpetual virginity, because it carries a dimension into our relationship with Christ and with the Church, and perhaps a dimension of her role in our salvation as the “New Eve”. But the assumption of the Theotokos, while strongly held, is not a necessary dogma, perhaps not a necessary aspect of the paradigm of the “New Eve”. She simply becomes a great example to what is promised to us, and she may not have been the only one who was assumed either.
  • So regarding Mary's role in Salvation. I don't think we have the same view as the RCC who refers to her as the Co-Redepmtrix. What do we say about her role, especially what is different from the RCC?
  • @Lovejoypeace_ if I remember correctly, I was once given an analogy:
    Imagine the human race before Christ as a sick person. Christ is the medicine- by his death, we were healed. The RCC views Mary as a medicine along with Christ, while the OOC says she was not a medicine with Christ, but almost like the capsule the medicine is in- she is extremely important to salvation (getting better) but she is not the medicine that heals us (Christ)- she gave us Christ, as in, delivered Him to us. 
    I got this analogy a long time ago, and I may be messing it up... if anyone sees that I'm saying something wrong please correct me.
    Pray for me.
  • I don't know if this is relevant, but sometimes with a capsule people will empty it's contents into a drink or Apple sauce or something like that. Would this still apply, since the capsule still contained the medicine within It?
  • all images have only limited usefulness.

    for exemple, if the kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed, it does not mean all Christians make great pilau rice (with mustard, cumin etc.) but it means that it looks small but grows into something very big.

    so with saint mary, she is the golden censor, the rod of aaron, the ark of the covenant and many other 'containers' since the Lord our God dwelt in her womb.

    we don't say she is hot like the censor, stiff like the rod or wooden like the ark. these are aspects of these pictures that don't describe her.

    if you study all the songs used at tasbeha (evening and night praises), you will understand a lot about saint mary.

    in fact attending tasbeha is one of the best ways to learn more about out Lord God and about our orthodox Christian faith

    :)

  • Not topic relevant, but you mentioning Tasbeha made me remember.

    I never attended Tasbeha much until I started college in 2014. Until recently I never really loved it. It always seemed so long (which is weird because the liturgy is longer) And then in the about 2.5 months before taking my MCAT last month I didn't go at all. Sometimes because i was tired and sometimes because of work. When I finished my MCAT I went back and had this completely new appreciation for it, it now seems to go by so quickly and am finally understanding why people love Tasbeha so much. :)
  • I’m a little ambivalent about co-redemptrix in the way that it was explained by some. Using the analogy by Daniel Kyrillos, it seems Catholics are saying she is the "capsule" around the medicine, rather than a smaller medicine.  In the Coptic Church we also have strong language for the Theotokos, but this strong language is not exclusively for her but for all the human race who follows her example as well.  Think of every title you give the Theotokos, even the title "Theotokos" itself, and I think that is a title we should strive to become ourselves.

    She is unique in that this title is only absolutely her's historically, but even to a literal extent we can become "theotokoi" in our spiritual lives, or more commonly used "theophoroi".

    Sooooooo.....if the term "co-redemptrix" is something I TOO can have, then I don't think it's a heretical title.  But if it belongs ONLY to the Theotokos, I ask in what way?  Is it her's because of history?  Because she was the absolute "capsule" that bore the medicine for all humanity?  Or is she really "a" medicine that only she can be and no one else in the human race for us?  If the former, I don't see a problem with it.  If the latter, then yea, that's a problem.

    So, to be fair to Catholics, I don't really know what they mean when they say "co-redemptrix".  The Scriptures give promises to all humanity.  We will be "co-heirs" of the kingdom with Christ, some of us will be "co-judges" of angels on Judgment Day (St. Severus believed that St. Gregory the Theologian and St. Basil the Great would be his judges on judgement day).  St. Paul teaches us we are "co-workers" with God.  Heck, even St. Paul "saves" (Romans 11:14).  If that makes Paul a "co-redemptrix", then I don't mind thinking of the Theotokos the same way.  I can tell you there are people in my life in the Church who "saved" me by the grace of Christ working in them, or more accurately "co-working" in them.

    So if "co-redemptrix" is understood in an Orthodox sense, I don't think this is just a dogma to the Theotokos as much as it should be for the whole Church and the communion of saints.  If we believe the Church to be the body of Christ, the Church is the co-redemptrix, with the Theotokos as the prime example, not the prime exception (as Fr. Alexander Schmemann would say).
  • The analogy was only meant to illustrate how Catholics view St. Mary vs how we view her... don't read too much into it- I probably explained it wrong anyways.

    Just a quick message to @Lovejoypeace_ : Tasbeha only becomes enjoyable when you understand what you're saying. For a long time, I was vehemently against going to tasbeha, since they did a lot of Coptic and Arabic which I didn't understand. Now that I understand more of both, I can fully enjoy the liturgy.
    Abouna Daoud Lamei was recently at my church, and someone asked if knowing Coptic was necessary to be in the church. Abouna said that it is, not that we will/won't be saved because we did(n't) know Coptic, but because so many hymns and things are said in Coptic and praising without knowing what we're saying is pointless. Imagine I memorized how to say Ifra7i ya Mariam perfectly but I didn't know a speck of Arabic. Would I be praising? No, since I am not aware of what I'm saying. If you start paying attention and meditating on the words of the tasbeha and learning from it, you'll gain more from it. I went on a tangent, sorry!
  • In my church Tasbeha is half Coptic half English. I am still learning to read Coptic, and I follow with the English on the screen too. :)

    My favorite Tasbeha hymn is the Friday Theotokia (go to Tasbeha on Thursday nights because that's when they have it in the city for students/people who love there). :)
  • He took what is ours and gave us what us His :)
  • We praise and glorify Him, And exalt Him <3

  • I understand that in some doctrinal points one should listen to the catholic doctrine, by example: wich books are the canon of the bible?? in orthodox churches they did not set up the canon, so some authority is required.
Sign In or Register to comment.