Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception

Papist

Toumarches
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
13,771
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
39
Location
Albuquerque, New Mexico
This tread is in response to a post where a member suggested that the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception leads to the denial of one's Free will. I believe this to be false. First, the IC means that Mary was not born the fallen state of original sin. Rather she concieved and created like Adam and Eve were in the Garden with no defects in their soul. Thus Mary, pre-fallen Adam, and pre-fallen eve all were created alike with God's grace in them. We also know that being created in such a way did stop Adam nor Eve form maintaining a free will. In fact we see that Eve does a free will and uses it to disobdy God. Adam follows in like manner.
The difference between Adam/Eve and Mary is that Mary chose, by the Grace of God, to obey God and remain in his friendship. The opposite of what Adam and Eve chose. We can clearly see that Adam and Eve had free will and used it in one way, and Mary had free will and she chose to use it in another.
 

SolEX01

Toumarches
Joined
Apr 22, 2008
Messages
13,747
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Central Maryland
Website
www.goarch.org
Papist said:
This tread is in response to a post where a member suggested that the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception leads to the denial of one's Free will. I believe this to be false. First, the IC means that Mary was not born the fallen state of original sin. Rather she concieved and created like Adam and Eve were in the Garden with no defects in their soul.
Adam & Eve were not conceived but created.  I know you know that but just making sure you distinguish between Mary as a conceived being vs. Adam & Eve as created beings.  As you said, all 3 had Free Will and the differing consequences of decisions made via Free Will.
 

LBK

Toumarches
Joined
May 13, 2008
Messages
13,641
Reaction score
0
Points
0
... but if Mary indeed had free will to obey or disobey (a view which is completely compatible with Orthodox belief), then what is the point of her being immaculately conceived? It is one thing for her to have been purified by the Holy Spirit through her conception of the Son of God (as the Orthodox canon at Matins for the Annunciation proclaims), and quite another in herself being "immaculately conceived". To an Orthodox, it don't add up.
 

Irish Hermit

Merarches
Joined
Oct 11, 2003
Messages
10,980
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Middle Earth
Papist said:
This tread is in response to a post where a member suggested that the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception leads to the denial of one's Free will. I believe this to be false. First, the IC means that Mary was not born the fallen state of original sin..
Here is my limited understanding of the complexities of Roman Catholic theology on this matter.

Firstly, you are not correct in saying that the IC means the Mother of God was "not born the fallen state of original sin."  The true teaching is that she was not *conceived* in the fallen state of original sin.   I am surprised that you do not know that.  The very name should give you a clue - it is the Immaculate Conception and not the Immaculate Birth.

The consequence of this conception without original sin is that the Mother of God lacked some of the important aspects of free will.  These are aspects which the rest of humanity "enjoys."

Because she did not inherit original sin she did not have the "stains" of original sin.  A major one of these stains is concupiscnece.  Without concuspicience it is impossible to exercise your free will and choose to sin.

So she was able to have free will to make such a decision in the morning - today I am going to go into town, or today I am going to stay home and do my embroidery.

But she did not have such free will as - I am going to steal that apple on the neighbour's tree or, I am going to swear at the dog if he bites me again.

So in this very significant way, becaue of the lack of concupiscence, she lacked free will.

I humbly implore your pardon for presuming to raise my voice on Roman Catholic theology but when I saw your inaccurate understanding of the Immaculate Conception (that Mary was born immaculately instead of being conceived immaculately) I knew that I had to make a small contribution. 


 

Dan-Romania

High Elder
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
938
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Mary was born from Joachim and Ana . From men seed , not from God . The immaculated conception is an deviation from the true . Mary did not exist with the creation , She is not at the same level with Holy Spirit , she is not Quatriny or how is it called . The IC is an heresy , sorry for being so harsh .
 

Mardukm

Elder
Joined
Jul 8, 2008
Messages
423
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Irish Hermit said:
Because she did not inherit original sin she did not have the "stains" of original sin.  A major one of these stains is concupiscnece.  Without concuspicience it is impossible to exercise your free will and choose to sin.

So she was able to have free will to make such a decision in the morning - today I am going to go into town, or today I am going to stay home and do my embroidery.

But she did not have such free will as - I am going to steal that apple on the neighbour's tree or, I am going to swear at the dog if he bites me again.

So in this very significant way, becaue of the lack of concupiscence, she lacked free will.
I used to believe this rationale when I was an Orthodox NOT in communion with Rome.  But better minds than me convinced me of the illogical and unpatristic notion that concupisence is necessary for free will to have effect.  If I really believed this, then I would have to admit that Adam and Eve did not have free will.  I would also have to admit that Jesus Christ did not have free will, which would not make him fully human.  Pondering such heterodox consequences was enough to set my mind on the right track.

Blessings,
Marduk
 

Mardukm

Elder
Joined
Jul 8, 2008
Messages
423
Reaction score
0
Points
0
LBK said:
... but if Mary indeed had free will to obey or disobey (a view which is completely compatible with Orthodox belief), then what is the point of her being immaculately conceived? It is one thing for her to have been purified by the Holy Spirit through her conception of the Son of God (as the Orthodox canon at Matins for the Annunciation proclaims), and quite another in herself being "immaculately conceived". To an Orthodox, it don't add up.
She was the New Eve, the first woman of the New Creation from whom Christ would be born.  The EO Feast of the Conception of St. Anne states something to the effect that the formation of Jesus began with the conception of the Theotokos in St. Anne's womb.

The whole point of the dogma of the IC has nothing to do with her free will (that's already a given) - that focus was not the intent of the dogma, but was imposed on it by detractors.  The focus of the dogma is the perfection of Christ - it is primarily Christological in its focus, not Mariological.

Blessings,
Marduk
 

Irish Hermit

Merarches
Joined
Oct 11, 2003
Messages
10,980
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Middle Earth
Mardukm said:
Irish Hermit said:
Because she did not inherit original sin she did not have the "stains" of original sin.  A major one of these stains is concupiscnece.  Without concuspicience it is impossible to exercise your free will and choose to sin.

So she was able to have free will to make such a decision in the morning - today I am going to go into town, or today I am going to stay home and do my embroidery.

But she did not have such free will as - I am going to steal that apple on the neighbour's tree or, I am going to swear at the dog if he bites me again.

So in this very significant way, becaue of the lack of concupiscence, she lacked free will.
I used to believe this rationale when I was an Orthodox NOT in communion with Rome.  But better minds than me convinced me of the illogical and unpatristic notion that concupisence is necessary for free will to have effect.  If I really believed this, then I would have to admit that Adam and Eve did not have free will.  I would also have to admit that Jesus Christ did not have free will, which would not make him fully human.  Pondering such heterodox consequences was enough to set my mind on the right track.
As with Papist you have an inaccurate understanding of the complexities of Roman Catholic theology.   The absence of concupiscence (the result of the absence of original sin) in the Mother of God does not mean the elimination of *all* of her free will; I thought I had made that clear.   It means the absence of free will to sin.  Free will to sin can only be driven by concuspiscence and nothing else. She actually had no inner faculty which brought her free will into action with regard to choosing sin.

So the Mother of God had less free will than the ordinary human.

 

Mardukm

Elder
Joined
Jul 8, 2008
Messages
423
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Dan-Romania said:
Mary was born from Joachim and Ana . From men seed , not from God . The immaculated conception is an deviation from the true . Mary did not exist with the creation , She is not at the same level with Holy Spirit , she is not Quatriny or how is it called . The IC is an heresy , sorry for being so harsh .
You've expressed a bunch of claims about the dogma of the IC that it does not claim for itself.  Whatever it is you are rejecting, it is certainly not the dogma of the IC.  :)

Blessings,
Marduk
 

Irish Hermit

Merarches
Joined
Oct 11, 2003
Messages
10,980
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Middle Earth
Mardukm said:
The whole point of the dogma of the IC has nothing to do with her free will (that's already a given)
You still do not understand.  The absence of original sin means the absence of the stain of  concupiscence.  Without concupiscence the free will to sin is absent. 

So the dogma of the IC has quite a lot to do with her free will.  It did not eliminate it entirely but it removed any free will to commit sin.
 

Mardukm

Elder
Joined
Jul 8, 2008
Messages
423
Reaction score
0
Points
0
So you believe Jesus had less free will than any other human being also?

Do you also believe that Adam and Eve had less free will than any other human being?  If so, how did they sin?

Irish Hermit said:
Mardukm said:
Irish Hermit said:
Because she did not inherit original sin she did not have the "stains" of original sin.  A major one of these stains is concupiscnece.  Without concuspicience it is impossible to exercise your free will and choose to sin.

So she was able to have free will to make such a decision in the morning - today I am going to go into town, or today I am going to stay home and do my embroidery.

But she did not have such free will as - I am going to steal that apple on the neighbour's tree or, I am going to swear at the dog if he bites me again.

So in this very significant way, becaue of the lack of concupiscence, she lacked free will.
I used to believe this rationale when I was an Orthodox NOT in communion with Rome.  But better minds than me convinced me of the illogical and unpatristic notion that concupisence is necessary for free will to have effect.  If I really believed this, then I would have to admit that Adam and Eve did not have free will.  I would also have to admit that Jesus Christ did not have free will, which would not make him fully human.  Pondering such heterodox consequences was enough to set my mind on the right track.
As with Papist you have an inaccurate understanding of the complexities of Roman Catholic theology.   The absence of concupiscence (the result of the absence of original sin) in the Mother of God does not mean the elimination of *all* of her free will; I thought I had made that clear.   It means the absence of free will to sin.  Free will to sin can only be driven by concuspiscence and nothing else. She actually had no inner faculty which brought her free will into action with regard to choosing sin.

So the Mother of God had less free will than the ordinary human.
 

Mardukm

Elder
Joined
Jul 8, 2008
Messages
423
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Adam and Eve did not have concupiscence.  Can you explain how they were able to sin?

Irish Hermit said:
Mardukm said:
The whole point of the dogma of the IC has nothing to do with her free will (that's already a given)
You still do not understand.  The absence of original sin means the absence of the stain of  concupiscence.  Without concupiscence the free will to sin is absent. 

So the dogma of the IC has quite a lot to do with her free will.  It did not eliminate it entirely but it removed any free will to commit sin.
 

Irish Hermit

Merarches
Joined
Oct 11, 2003
Messages
10,980
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Middle Earth
Mardukm said:
So you believe Jesus had less free will than any other human being also?

Do you also believe that Adam and Eve had less free will than any other human being?  If so, how did they sin?
Because you cannot answer the objections to the Immaculate Conception you are starting to throw red herrings into the discussion.   Please do not take this thread off topic.  Deal with the topic - "Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception."
 

Irish Hermit

Merarches
Joined
Oct 11, 2003
Messages
10,980
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Middle Earth
Mardukm said:
Adam and Eve did not have concupiscence.  Can you explain how they were able to sin?
I do not want to pursue your red herrings but you seem confused and in need of a little help.  You appear to be equating the spiritual life of Adam and Eve with the spiritual life which Christ brought to earth for humanity.  They are NOT identical.  What Christ has brought to the human race exceeds whatever gifts and spiritual blessings He bestowed upon Adam and Eve.  Do not make the mistake of thinking that life in Christ equates to a return to the Garden.  It doesn't.
 

Dan-Romania

High Elder
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
938
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Of course it had to do with the chose of Mary , for Her to become Theotokos , remmeber when the angels give Her the good news , She said : 38"I am the Lord's servant," Mary answered. "May it be to me as you have said."(luke 1:38)
, and when She met Elizabeth , Elizabeth said : 45Blessed is she who has believed that what the Lord has said to her will be accomplished!" . The entire doctrine of IC is against what the bible says , and Mary herself says .

The virgin's name was Mary. 28The angel went to her and said, "Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you."

29Mary was greatly troubled at his words and wondered what kind of greeting this might be. 30But the angel said to her, "Do not be afraid, Mary, you have found favor with God. 31You will be with child and give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus. 32He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, 33and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever; his kingdom will never end."

34"How will this be," Mary asked the angel, "since I am a virgin?"

35The angel answered, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called[c] the Son of God. 36Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child in her old age, and she who was said to be barren is in her sixth month. 37For nothing is impossible with God."

38"I am the Lord's servant," Mary answered. "May it be to me as you have said." Then the angel left her.
39At that time Mary got ready and hurried to a town in the hill country of Judea, 40where she entered Zechariah's home and greeted Elizabeth. 41When Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. 42In a loud voice she exclaimed: "Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child you will bear! 43But why am I so favored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? 44As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy. 45Blessed is she who has believed that what the Lord has said to her will be accomplished!" 46And Mary said:
  "My soul glorifies the Lord
   47and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,
48for he has been mindful
     of the humble state of his servant.
  From now on all generations will call me blessed,
   49for the Mighty One has done great things for me—
     holy is his name.
50His mercy extends to those who fear him,
     from generation to generation.
51He has performed mighty deeds with his arm;
     he has scattered those who are proud in their inmost thoughts.
52He has brought down rulers from their thrones
     but has lifted up the humble.
53He has filled the hungry with good things
     but has sent the rich away empty.
54He has helped his servant Israel,
     remembering to be merciful
55to Abraham and his descendants forever,
     even as he said to our fathers."

Mary`s role is first as a servant of God , She was an humble woman , an eucharistic woman , she served the Temple since the age of 3 , according to Tradition . If she would have been IC , that she would not inherit the human nature , and therefore , Jesus would not be of human nature . Jesus inherit the human nature from Mary as the Creed says : who incarneted from Holy Spirit and from Virgin Mary . Therefore Jesus would have not been God-Man , but He would have been just a God . If Mary would have been IC , she would have been spotless , she would not needed to be Saved . The Scripture also tells us we all sinned and fallen from God`s grace . Mary never wanted to shine in front of God and Jesus . Mary is no redeemer . Mary needed a Saviour , like all humans . The focuss is Jesus , God`s big love and mercy . Not that Mary wishes us good and loves us , while Jesus and the Father wants to reveal the wrath on us . Remmeber what Jesus told the jews : Moses in wich you confide , he will blame you . It is impossible for someone born from seed of man , born from man and woman to be without sin, without inheriting the Ancestral Sin . Remmeber John 3:15 : 16"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,[f] that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Mary had the free will , she could of chose not to believe the angel , remmember the words of Elizabeth from above : Blessed is she who believed all this . The papist theory of IC is an atrocity , and subordonation to lies . Is a dogma wich doesn`t have life in itself , wich breaks the row of truth , and the misteries of God . Wich is not in the same line with the understanding of the bible , and therefore not in line with the true and a lie .
 

Mardukm

Elder
Joined
Jul 8, 2008
Messages
423
Reaction score
0
Points
0
These are not red herrings.  This goes to the very heart of the topic. It was you who claimed that lack of concupisence means a person loses the "enjoyment" of the full use of one's free will.  So this either means that Jesus was NOT fully human and could not relate to us fully, or it means that Adam and Eve cannot have sinned.  Otherwise, it means that not having concupisence does not deprive one of the free will NOT to sin. The fact that you cannot respond to these exigent circumstances indicates that your argument is not really valid at all.

I really don't think you understand what concupiscence is.  Concupiscence is NOT the free will to sin (which appears to be your definition since you define NOT having concupisence as the state of NOT having the free will to sin).  It is, rather, desires that are contrary to the real good and order of reason.  One can lack the desire to do something contrary to good reason, but that does not mean one does not have the free will NOT to sin.  One can lack the desire to sin (or lack the desire to do something contrary to good reason), but one can still be deceived to disobedience (as Adam and Eve were).  For instance, Mary would surely have considered that her fiat would have put her in danger of being a social outcast.  At that point, she could have been deceived out of fear to disobey (i.e., deceived into not trusting that God would provide for her).  Instead, she deliberately chose to surrender to God.
Irish Hermit said:
Mardukm said:
So you believe Jesus had less free will than any other human being also?

Do you also believe that Adam and Eve had less free will than any other human being?  If so, how did they sin?
Because you cannot answer the objections to the Immaculate Conception you are starting to throw red herrings into the discussion.   Please do not take this thread off topic.  Deal with the topic - "Inaccurate Understanding of the Immaculate Conception."
 

Mardukm

Elder
Joined
Jul 8, 2008
Messages
423
Reaction score
0
Points
0
We're not talking about states of spiritual existence.  We're just talking about the concept of concupiscence.  What was that you said about Red herrings? ;D

Irish Hermit said:
Mardukm said:
Adam and Eve did not have concupiscence.  Can you explain how they were able to sin?
I do not want to pursue your red herrings but you seem confused and in need of a little help.   You appear to be equating the spiritual life of Adam and Eve with the spiritual life which Christ brought to earth for humanity.   They are NOT identical.  What Christ has brought to the human race exceeds whatever gifts and spiritual blessings He bestowed upon Adam and Eve.  Do not make the mistake of thinking that life in Christ equates to a return to the Garden.  It doesn't.
 

Mardukm

Elder
Joined
Jul 8, 2008
Messages
423
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Dear Dan-romania,

Nothing you've said refutes the dogma of the IC.  Like I said, I really don't think you understand the dogma.  But you're free to rant and rave against your straw men.

Blessings,
Marduk

Dan-Romania said:
Of course it had to do with the chose of Mary , for Her to become Theotokos , remmeber when the angels give Her the good news , She said : 38"I am the Lord's servant," Mary answered. "May it be to me as you have said."(luke 1:38)
, and when She met Elizabeth , Elizabeth said : 45Blessed is she who has believed that what the Lord has said to her will be accomplished!" . The entire doctrine of IC is against what the bible says , and Mary herself says .

The virgin's name was Mary. 28The angel went to her and said, "Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you."

29Mary was greatly troubled at his words and wondered what kind of greeting this might be. 30But the angel said to her, "Do not be afraid, Mary, you have found favor with God. 31You will be with child and give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus. 32He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, 33and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever; his kingdom will never end."

34"How will this be," Mary asked the angel, "since I am a virgin?"

35The angel answered, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called[c] the Son of God. 36Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child in her old age, and she who was said to be barren is in her sixth month. 37For nothing is impossible with God."

38"I am the Lord's servant," Mary answered. "May it be to me as you have said." Then the angel left her.
39At that time Mary got ready and hurried to a town in the hill country of Judea, 40where she entered Zechariah's home and greeted Elizabeth. 41When Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. 42In a loud voice she exclaimed: "Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child you will bear! 43But why am I so favored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? 44As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy. 45Blessed is she who has believed that what the Lord has said to her will be accomplished!" 46And Mary said:
  "My soul glorifies the Lord
   47and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,
48for he has been mindful
     of the humble state of his servant.
  From now on all generations will call me blessed,
   49for the Mighty One has done great things for me—
     holy is his name.
50His mercy extends to those who fear him,
     from generation to generation.
51He has performed mighty deeds with his arm;
     he has scattered those who are proud in their inmost thoughts.
52He has brought down rulers from their thrones
     but has lifted up the humble.
53He has filled the hungry with good things
     but has sent the rich away empty.
54He has helped his servant Israel,
     remembering to be merciful
55to Abraham and his descendants forever,
     even as he said to our fathers."

Mary`s role is first as a servant of God , She was an humble woman , an eucharistic woman , she served the Temple since the age of 3 , according to Tradition . If she would have been IC , that she would not inherit the human nature , and therefore , Jesus would not be of human nature . Jesus inherit the human nature from Mary as the Creed says : who incarneted from Holy Spirit and from Virgin Mary . Therefore Jesus would have not been God-Man , but He would have been just a God . If Mary would have been IC , she would have been spotless , she would not needed to be Saved . The Scripture also tells us we all sinned and fallen from God`s grace . Mary never wanted to shine in front of God and Jesus . Mary is no redeemer . Mary needed a Saviour , like all humans . The focuss is Jesus , God`s big love and mercy . Not that Mary wishes us good and loves us , while Jesus and the Father wants to reveal the wrath on us . Remmeber what Jesus told the jews : Moses in wich you confide , he will blame you . It is impossible for someone born from seed of man , born from man and woman to be without sin, without inheriting the Ancestral Sin . Remmeber John 3:15 : 16"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,[f] that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Mary had the free will , she could of chose not to believe the angel , remmember the words of Elizabeth from above : Blessed is she who believed all this . The papist theory of IC is an atrocity , and subordonation to lies . Is a dogma wich doesn`t have life in itself , wich breaks the row of truth , and the misteries of God . Wich is not in the same line with the understanding of the bible , and therefore not in line with the true and a lie .
 

Irish Hermit

Merarches
Joined
Oct 11, 2003
Messages
10,980
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Middle Earth
Mardukm said:
These are not red herrings.  This goes to the very heart of the topic. It was you who claimed that lack of concupisence means a person loses the "enjoyment" of the full use of one's free will.  So this either means that Jesus was NOT fully human and could not relate to us fully,
You are being quarrelsome and that is causing you to forget basic theology.

Jesus Christ was like us in all things *except* sin.
 

Mardukm

Elder
Joined
Jul 8, 2008
Messages
423
Reaction score
0
Points
0
To clarify this a bit more:

The fact that one does not have a desire to sin, does not necessarily mean that one cannot be deceived unto disobedience or experience temptation.

Concupisence is a natural tendency to do something contrary to good reason.  However, that does not mean that, despite the lack of that tendency, someone cannot be tempted by an agent outside of oneself to disobey.  It simply means that the desire to disobey (or do something contrary to good reason) does not originate from oneself.  For example, it was not in Adam and Eve's nature to want to disobey God, or even feel about disobeying God.  But Satan put a new circumstance before them that tempted them.  On their own, such thoughts would not have presented itself in their mind.  They would never have thought on their own "this will make me like God."

Likewise, it would not have ever entered Jesus' mind to want to disobey God by desiring the riches of the world, etc.  But Satan put those things before him.  He must have thought about it at that instant (not that he ever thought of it on his own), but he used his free will, his good reason, to resist that temptation.

In conclusion, the lack of concupisence does not mean that one loses the free will not to sin.  Arguments to the contrary make no sense and makes a heterodox mess of our beliefs about Free will and the full humanity of Jesus Christ.
 
Top