Is it okay to agree with Immaculate Conception and still be Orthodox?

[PeterTheAleut]

Is it okay to agree with Immaculate Conception and still be Orthodox? No.

Merely repeating the question in the OP and then offering a short, 2-letter response with a period does not really make this post anything more than another low-content post.

 

[Severian]

Q: Is it okay to agree with Immaculate Conception and still be Orthodox?

A: I would also say no. The two reasons being:

1) In an Orthodox theological context it is an unnecessary solution to a nonexistent problem.

2) Believing in the immaculate conception involves adopting certain presuppositions; it involves accepting a view of sin which is not consistent with Orthodox teaching.

What do you all think?

 

[Benjamin the Red]

Is it okay to agree with Immaculate Conception and still be Orthodox? No.

Why?

Because, as it has been put recently, the Theotokos is the great example, not the great exception. The Immaculate Conception also presupposes the doctrine of original guilt, which is foreign to Orthodox teaching. We are born in a fallen state, but we are not born damned. We bare the consequences of the fall, but not the guilt of it. The IC exists because Christ cannot have original guilt, as He is God and must be sinless. Therefore, he must have a sinless flesh to assume, and so The Virgin Mary is protected against this original guilt so that she may properly give birth to Christ.

Further, not only does the presupposition of original guilt not exist in Orthodoxy, the presupposition of fallenness does. Christ must assume all of our human nature, even our fallenness. St. Paul tells us, "For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin." (Heb. 4:15). Christ struggled with the very same passions we do, being subject to human fallen nature, but due to His divinity, He did not sin. This is vital in Orthodox theology. As St. Gregory the Theologian states, "that which was not assumed is not healed; but that which is united to God is saved."

 

[PeterTheAleut]

Is it okay to agree with Immaculate Conception and still be Orthodox? No.

Why?

Because, as it has been put recently, the Theotokos is the great example, not the great exception. The Immaculate Conception also presupposes the doctrine of original guilt, which is foreign to Orthodox teaching. We are born in a fallen state, but we are not born damned. We bare the consequences of the fall, but not the guilt of it. The IC exists because Christ cannot have original guilt, as He is God and must be sinless. Therefore, he must have a sinless flesh to assume, and so The Virgin Mary is protected against this original guilt so that she may properly give birth to Christ.

Further, not only does the presupposition of original guilt not exist in Orthodoxy, the presupposition of fallenness does. Christ must assume all of our human nature, even our fallenness. St. Paul tells us, "For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin." (Heb. 4:15). Christ struggled with the very same passions we do, being subject to human fallen nature, but due to His divinity, He did not sin. This is vital in Orthodox theology. As St. Gregory the Theologian states, "that which was not assumed is not healed; but that which is united to God is saved."

Thank you for your very erudite answer, but I think Azurestone was trying to lure Fatman into giving us more than just a curt "NO."

 

[Benjamin the Red]

Is it okay to agree with Immaculate Conception and still be Orthodox? No.

Why?

Because, as it has been put recently, the Theotokos is the great example, not the great exception. The Immaculate Conception also presupposes the doctrine of original guilt, which is foreign to Orthodox teaching. We are born in a fallen state, but we are not born damned. We bare the consequences of the fall, but not the guilt of it. The IC exists because Christ cannot have original guilt, as He is God and must be sinless. Therefore, he must have a sinless flesh to assume, and so The Virgin Mary is protected against this original guilt so that she may properly give birth to Christ.

Further, not only does the presupposition of original guilt not exist in Orthodoxy, the presupposition of fallenness does. Christ must assume all of our human nature, even our fallenness. St. Paul tells us, "For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin." (Heb. 4:15). Christ struggled with the very same passions we do, being subject to human fallen nature, but due to His divinity, He did not sin. This is vital in Orthodox theology. As St. Gregory the Theologian states, "that which was not assumed is not healed; but that which is united to God is saved."

Thank you for your very erudite answer, but I think Azurestone was trying to lure Fatman into giving us more than just a curt "NO."

Lol. In that case, whoops!  :-X

 

[Irish Hermit]

Is it okay to agree with Immaculate Conception and still be Orthodox? No.

Why?

Because, as it has been put recently, the Theotokos is the great example, not the great exception. The Immaculate Conception also presupposes the doctrine of original guilt, which is foreign to Orthodox teaching. We are born in a fallen state, but we are not born damned. We bare the consequences of the fall, but not the guilt of it. The IC exists because Christ cannot have original guilt, as He is God and must be sinless. Therefore, he must have a sinless flesh to assume, and so The Virgin Mary is protected against this original guilt so that she may properly give birth to Christ.

Further, not only does the presupposition of original guilt not exist in Orthodoxy, the presupposition of fallenness does. Christ must assume all of our human nature, even our fallenness. St. Paul tells us, "For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin." (Heb. 4:15). Christ struggled with the very same passions we do, being subject to human fallen nature, but due to His divinity, He did not sin. This is vital in Orthodox theology. As St. Gregory the Theologian states, "that which was not assumed is not healed; but that which is united to God is saved."

Thank you for your very erudite answer, but I think Azurestone was trying to lure Fatman into giving us more than just a curt "NO."

I am very interested to hear more from fatman because he is an Old Believer.  We are constantly told by erudite Catholic apologists that the Old Believers have "maintained" the teaching of the Immaculate Conception.

With his access to reliable Old Believer sources and teaching fatman should be able to lay this to rest.