|
Post by Theotokos on Jun 29, 2005 3:25:33 GMT -5
Please explain the history behind the Immaculate Conception.
What are the primary sources?
|
|
|
Post by Our Lady of the Snows on Jun 30, 2005 19:38:16 GMT -5
Hi Theotokos I will try to help . . I have to look up some information I have on this somewhere . . I will try to get to it as soon as I can. Our Lady of the Snows
|
|
|
Post by Our Lady of the Snows on Jul 1, 2005 18:19:28 GMT -5
Theotokos . . I hope this information will help The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception in the Early ChurchFirst, I would like to note that the belief in the Immaculate Conception of Mary was first and foremost an Eastern one. The East were the first to actively promote this belief, they were the first to celebrate this belief, and they were the ones to most actively champion the firm belief that Mary was conceived Immaculate. Quotes from the Eastern Early Chuch Fathers: [/b](AD 306-373) wrote: (ie. implying no actual sins or original sin). St Ephraim continues with, ("Guilt" must mean the inherited taint of original sin on the soul, as well as actual sins. And Eve later did sin, thus obtaining guilt.) Also, St Gregory of Nyssa (AD 335-395) wrote about the Blessed Mother as St Ambrose (c. AD 430) wrote of Mary as, St Severus (d.538), Early Church Father and bishop of Antioch taught: St Sophronius (AD 556 - 638), Patriarch of Jerusalem, wrote St John Damascene wrote St John’s key words of “all sin†must include original sin The Feast of the Immaculate Conception was first celebrated in the East as early as the 7th century. It is known as the Feast of the Conception of St. Anne (referring to Mary's Conception by St. Anne) ( c.675-c.749 AD) It was adopted in the West centuries later. Thomas Aquinas attests to ist existence in churches of his day. (Summa Theologica, III, q 27, art. 2, ad 3) In the 8th century, the last of the Eastern Fathers composed this prayer rejoicing in Mary's (Immaculate) Conception free from all stain: The above prayer rejoices in the day of Mary's Conception "TODAY" writes St John Damascene. "Today" the root of Jesse has produced it's shoot - Mary "Today" God composes a new book - issuing from the heart of his Father, composed by the Holy Spirit - Mary "Today", the day that God composes this new book, her whole soul is completely open to God?s action and attentive to God alone. - Mary "Today" the day God composes this new book, all her desires are centered only on what merits to be sought and is worthy of love. "Today" the day God composes this new book, her heart is most pure, andfree from all stain We also see clear evidence that Mary was believed to have been immaculate at conception within the liturgy of the Eastern Church As we progress into the 2nd millenium, we see the strong and unanimous support among the East for Mary's Immaculate Conception: [/b] in his homilies "De Annuntiatione" and "De Nativitate Deiparae" (S. Aristarchis, "Photiou logoi kai homiliai" Vol. II [Constantinople, 1900], pp. 230-245, 368-380); George of Nicomedia in his homilies (PG 100, 1336-1504), especially "Conceptione deiparae" and "Praesentatione Mariae virginis"; Michael Psellos in the recently discovered and edited homily "De Annuntiatione" (PO 16, pp. 517-525); John Phurnensis, "Oratione de Dormitione" (G. Palamas, "Theophanous tou kerameos homiliai", [Jerusalem, 1860], append., pp. 271-276); Michael Glykas, "Annales", III (PG 158, 439-442); Germanus II, Patriarch of Constantinople, "In annuntiationem" (edit. Ballerini, op. cit., Vol. II, pp. 283-382); Theognostos the Monk, "In dormitionem" (PO 16, pp. 457-562); Nicetas David, "In nativitatem B.M.V." (PG 105, 16-28); Leo the Wise, "In dormitionem" and "In praesentationeum" (PG 107, 12-21); Patriarch Euthymius of Constantinople, "In Conceptionem Annae"(PO 16, pp. 499-505); Bishop Peter Argorum, "In conceptionem B. Annae"PG 104, 1352-1365); John Mauropos, "In dormitionem"(PG 120, 1075-1114); James the Monk, "In nativitatem et in praesentationem B.M.V. PO 16, pp. 528-538). Cf. Jugie, "'immaculee Conception dans l'Ecriture Sainte et dans la tradition orientale [Rome, 1952], pp. 164-307, for others. [/ul] In the Eastern Liturgies The Byzantine Orthodox Liturgies of 9 December Burton notes: One would wonder how anyone can sing these phrases and call her the "All-Holy" "Panagai" and think that she could have ever been anything other than the Panagia, the All-Holy. As we can see, the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of Mary was firmly believed and held by the Eastern Orthodox Church in the first millenium. How then did the Eastern Orthodox come to reject this doctrine? [/b] when the Skrizhal (Book of Laws) appeared in Russia, and proposed what the Slavs considered the "novel" doctrine of the Greeks. The views proposed in the Skrizhal were branded as blasphemous, especially among the _Staroviery_ (Old Believers), who maintained the ancient customs and beliefs, however small or inconsequential. [Cf. N. Subbotin, _Materialy dlja istorii Roskola_, Vol. IV (Moscow, 1878), pp. 39-50, 229, and Vol. 1 (Moscow, 1874), p. 457.] This reaction confirms the ancient Byzantine and Slav tradition of the immaculate conception. Only after Pope Pius IX defined the dogma in 1854 did opposition to the doctrine solidify among most Orthodox theologians. The Orthodox Church, however, has never made any definitive pronouncement on the matter. When Patriarch Anthimos VII, for example, wrote his reply to Pope Leo XIII's letter in 1895, and listed what he believed to be the errors of the Latins, he found no fault with their belief in the immaculate conception, but objected to the fact that the Pope had defined it.[/ul][/ul]
|
|
|
Post by Our Lady of the Snows on Jul 1, 2005 18:28:12 GMT -5
[/b]amas (d. 1359 AD) accepted that Mary had been purified at her very beginning (is not conception the very beginning?). He claims that the Greek Orthodox Church totally believed in the Immaculate Conception until the 15thcentury, when some Greek theologians began proposing the idea that Mary was made immaculate at her Annunciation. But such a view was considered a novel doctrine by Eastern Slavs, until the Skirzhal (Book of Laws) appeared in Russia in late 1667, which was branded blasphemous by the Russian Orthodox Old-Believers, who maintained the ancient customs/traditions however small. Paradoxically, the Russian Orthodox Church Synod of 1666 had approved Simeon Polatski’s Zezl Pravlenia (Rod of Direction), wherein it states textually, “ Mary was exempt from original sin beginning with her conception.†But in 1667, the same Synod approved the Skirzhal, which was a Slavic translation of The Divine Liturgy with Explanations of Different Customs. The later, by John Nathanael (then-secretary to Patriarch Jeremia II of Constantinople) had been written by him after his studies in England and Germany, and he included this book in a shipment to the Russians who had asked the Patriarchate for books on liturgical matters before convening the 1666 Synod. One cannot dismiss that this man was influenced by Protestant thought as to Mary being purified at her Annunciation. The Russian Orthodox Old-Believers became terribly persecuted by the Russian Czar and official Church for refusing to accept the reforms established by the Synod of Bishops of 1666-1667, and many fled Russia to establish a separate episcopal see in Bukovina at Bela Krinitza (Ukraine). Professor Soubbotine, who wrote a history of this diocese in 1874, cites a passage from the profession of faith by the Old Believers which reads, “ The Mother of the Creator of the whole universe, not only has in no way participated in the original stain, but she remained as pure as the heavens and all beautiful.†b. The Orthodox people of Ukraine, with religious center being Kiev, continued in their belief of the Immaculate Conception up through the mid-1700’s. St. Peter Moghila, Metropolitan Arch-bishop of Kiev (AD 1596-1647), although not embracing the Unia of western Ukraine (1596 and 1646), was a strong defender of Byzantine theology, but in none of his writings can one find a denunciation of the Immaculate Conception, which was known to him. He founded the Academy of Kiev, an Orthodox school of theology, in which all the rectors and theologians taught Mary’s exemption from original sin, and continued to do so until Father Stephan Javorski became rector (1721). The Byzantine “Uniate†Catholic Metropolitan Archbishop Cyprian Zokovsky of Polotsk (from 1646 to 1693), a devout defender of the Byantine rite/theology, worked fervently on deepening the piety and spirit among the clergy and laity. He absolutely rejected latinizations, but believed in the Immaculate Conception due to it being deeply rooted among the masses as well as the Basilian monasteries. He wrote a letter to the Apostolic Nuncio representing Rome that the devotion to the Immaculate Conception was very strong, and the Zerovytsky Monastery even had a special prayer in its daily divine service in honor of the Immaculate Conception. However, it appears that the Ukrainian Orthodox of mid-1700’s began to embrace the writings of Kiev’s theologian Theophane Prokopovich, whose writings rejected the Immaculate Conception in favor of Protestant Lutheranism’s claims of Mary purified at the Annunciation. When one considers that the Kievan Church was split between pro-Rome and pro-Moscow wings, and with the Czar’s Russian Church’s having turned away from the Immaculate Conception, and its slow absorption and “russification†of eastern Ukraine, one cannot be surprised at this change of thought. Some Orthodox today claim that the Polish Latin Catholic Jesuits had influenced the Byzantines of Russia and Ukraine to accept the doctrine, but such cannot be realistically accepted. The Slavic Byzantines were in spiritual war against latinizations, but accepted the Immaculate Conception as they already held it within their own theology, judging it to be in conformity to their own traditions, and finding testimony of it in their own liturgical books. c. As to the Greeks, Fr Casimir also points out that when the Greek Patriarch Anthimos VII wrote his reply to Pope Leo XIII’s letter in 1895, listing what he believed to be the errors of the Latins, the Patriarch found no fault with the Latin belief of the Immaculate Conception, but objected to the Pope (ie without an ecumenical council) defining it as a required dogmate www.geocities.com/loupizzuti/Preaching/danbimmaculate.pdf+C+Kucharek+liturgy+immaculate&hl=en [/ul]
|
|
|
Post by Our Lady of the Snows on Jul 1, 2005 18:36:45 GMT -5
More on the Divine Liturgy of the Fathers of the East And Eastern Worship [/b] FEASTS OF THE MOTHER OF GOD May Christ our true God have mercy on us and save us, through the prayers of His most holy Mother whose: Nativity (September 8) Immaculate Conception (December 8) Patronage (October 1) Annunciation (March 25) Presentation (November 21) Dormition (August 15) we gloriously celebrate today; through the prayers of our holy father John Chrysostom, archbishop of Constantinople, and of all the saints, for He is gracious and loves mankind. www.patronagechurch.com/HTML/DIVINE_LITURGY_SAINT_JOHN_CHRYSOSTOM.htmRegarding the Liturgy of St John Chrysostom - it replaced the Divine Litury of St. Basil the Great used till th 10th century - meaning The Divine Liturgy of St John Chrysostom was in wide use before the Great Schism of the 11th century: The Three Hierarchs, Saints Basil the Great, Gregory of Nazianzus and John Chrysostom, are frequently depicted in panel icons (cat. no. 20). Two of the three composed the texts of the Divine Liturgy. The Divine Liturgy of Basil the Great, widely used in Byzantium till the tenth century, when it was largely replaced by the Divine Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom, is now celebrated ten times a year. www.culture.gr/2/21/215/21505/215051/2150513/e21505119i.htmlGREEK OrthodoxConception by Saint Anne Dec 8th THE FEASTThe record of the birth of Mary is not found in the Bible. The traditional account of the event is taken from the apocryphal writings which are not part of the New Testament scriptures. The traditional teaching which is celebrated in this feast is that Joachim and Anna were a pious Jewish couple who were among the small and faithful remnant "the poor and needy" awaiting the promised Messiah. The couple was old and childless. They prayed earnestly to the Lord for a child, since among the Jews, barrenness was a sign of God's disfavor. In answer to their prayers, and as the reward of their unwavering fidelity to God, the elderly couple was blessed with the child who was destined, because of her own personal goodness and holiness, to become the Mother of the Messiah-Christ. The fact that there is no Biblical verification of the facts of Mary's birth is incidental to the meaning of the feast. Even if the background of the event as celebrated in the Church is questionable form an historical point of view, the divine meaning of it "for us men and for our salvation" is obvious. There had to be one born of human flesh and blood who would be spiritually capable of being the Mother of Christ, and she herself had to be born into the world of persons who were spiritually capable of being her parents. The feast of the Nativity of the Theotokos, therefore, is a glorification of Mary's birth, of Mary herself, and of her righteous parents. It is the celebration as well of the very first preparation of the salvation of the world. (Taken from Worship, The Orthodox Faith Vol. II by Fr. Thomas Hopko) HYMNS OF THE FEASTTROPARIONYOUR NATIVITY, O VIRGIN, HAS PROCLAIMED JOY TO THE WHOLE UNIVERSE! THE SUN OF RIGHTEOUSNESS, CHRIST OUR GOD, HAS SHONE FROM YOU,O THEOTOKOS! BY ANNULLING THE CURSE, HE BESTOWED A BLESSING. BY DESTROYING DEATH, HE HAS GRANTED US ETERNAL LIFE. KONTAKIONBY YOUR NATIVITY, MOST PURE VIRGIN, JOACHIM AND ANNA ARE FREED FROM BARRENNESS; ADAM AND EVE, FROM THE CORRUPTION OF DEATH. AND WE, YOUR PEOPLE, FREED FROM THE GUILT OF SIN, CELEBRATE AND SING TO YOU: THE BARREN WOMAN GIVES BIRTH TO THE THEOTOKOS, THE NOURISHER OF OUR LIFE! Regarding worship the close relationship between icon and Liturgy is reflected in Byzantine and Postbyzantine iconography. In a Byzantine church the iconographic programme of the iconostasis, as formulated during the Middle Byzantine period (9th-13th century), repeated on a smaller scale the iconographic programme of its mural decoration in paintings or mosaics. On the architrave was the Dodecaorton, that is the twelve major feasts of the liturgical year, which are represented either by one long icon or by twelve separate small ones. Frequently, instead of the Dodecaorton, or along with it in a second register, was the so-called Great Deesis, with the trimorph at the centre - Christ flanked by the Virgin and Saint John the Baptist- and the twelve apostles ranged on either side. As a rule the diastyle or despotic icons right and left of the Royal Door, depicted Christ and the Virgin. The position next to Christ was reserved for Saint John the Baptist and that next to the Virgin for the icon of the saint to whom the church was dedicated. The Annunciation was usually represented on the bema doors, consistent with the prophetic maxim of Ezekiel: "The gateway ... that faces towards the east shall be shut..." (Ezekiel 46:1 ), which has been linked in the patristic texts with the Virgin and the immaculate conception (cat. no. 2). ................. The icon in the Divine Liturgy and the Divine Liturgy in the icon. Ã relationship that is close and reciprocal, varied and vital, familiar yet with many facets unexplored. A relationship that is never static but continuously evolving -from Byzantine times to the Postbyzantine period and to this day... www.culture.gr/2/21/215/21505/215051/2150513/e21505119i.htmlThe Ministry of Culture is the governmental body responsible for cultural heritage and the Arts in Greece.Info: Ukrainian Catholic priest Father Casimir Kucharek December 9 Feast of the Conception by Saint Anna of the Theotokos Greek Orthodox Metropolis of DenverGreek Orthodox Archdiocese of AmericaEcumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople[/ul]
|
|
|
Post by Our Lady of the Snows on Jul 1, 2005 18:46:13 GMT -5
Current Orthodox Teaching [/b], USA saintgeorge.org/news_and_events/church_calendar/saint_of_the_day/09sep/sep_08_nativity_of_the_theotokos.phpCelebrates the FeastTuesday, December 9th The Conception by St. Anna of the Most Holy Mother of GodFather Theodore mailto:frtheodore@stjohngoc.org St. John the Baptist Greek Orthodox Church Portland, Oregon "The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception proclaimed by the Roman Catholics in 1858 is rejected by the Orthodox Church, but without in any way detracting from the dignity of the Mother of God. In fact, according to the Fathers, the inheritance from Adam consists not in a personal responsibility of all men for original sin, but simply in the inheritance of the consequences of sin: death, corruption and the passions (including procreation and fleshly union). Hence the Orthodox have no difficulty in recognizing that the Mother of God was heir, like us, of all the consequences of Adam's sin — Christ alone was exempt — but at the same time pure and without personal sin, for she freely kept herself from all attraction for the world and for the passions, and she voluntarily co-operated in God's purpose by obeying His will with docility: Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word, she replied to the Angel Gabriel (Luke 1:38)" (Synaxarion) chrisjdavis.org/wp-content/photos/december.txtMary’s parents were childless into old age. They were informed by arch-angel Gabrial that they would have a child. The angel said to Anna, “Anna, Anna, the Lord hath heard thy prayer, and thou shalt conceive and bring forth; and thy seed shall be spoken of in all the world.†Anna replied, “As the Lord my God liveth, if I beget either male or female, I will offer it as a gift to the Lord my God; and it shall minister unto Him all the days of its life.†The angel also came to Joachim, Mary’s father, who was in retreat after being rejected in the temple for being childless, and told him, “Anna will bring forth a daughter to thee and thou shalt call her name Mary. According to thy vow, she shall be devoted to the Lord from her infancy, and she shall be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from her mother’s womb. Mary shall not eat or drink anything un-clean, nor shall her conversation or life be among the crowds of people, but in the temple of the Lord, that it may not be possible to say, or so much as to suspect, any evil concerning her. So in the process of her years, as she shall be in a miraculous manner born of one that was barren, so she shall, while yet a virgin, in an incomparable manner, bring forth the Son of Most High, the Savior of all nations.†On the day following this visitation, Anna conceived by Joachim’s seed. Orthodox Christians do not believe in the “Immaculate Conception,†but believe the conception was of Joachim’s seed and there was a normal nine month gestation period. None of the ancient Fathers teach that God purified the Virgin Mary while yet in Anna’s wombSaint George Greek Orthodox Cathedral Greenville SC www.stgeorgegreenville.org/topics/Bulletin/volXVII-no16.pdf66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:CAWNoRZUH-cJ:www.stgeorgegreenville.org/topics/Bulletin/volXVII-no16.pdf+%22divine+liturgy%22+%27Conception+by+Saint+Anna%22&hl=en&start=23[/ul] I think it is helpful to compare the last statement to the information presented in the previous posts. I hope this helps to give you some information of the type you were asking for. Our Lady of the Snows
|
|
|
Post by Theotokos on Jul 1, 2005 20:04:38 GMT -5
Dear OLS:
NOTE: ERRORS IN THE COPIED TEXT
There is a problem with your text when you cut and paste. There is some corruption of the symbols and so I am seeing some weird things. Therefore some of the text is not legible from my computer. I tested these symbols (or font styles at CF and they also had problems).
For example
Mary’s Mary's
Look different on my computer.
The first one looks like MaryaCTMs with the raised TM and a dot above the /a/ following Mary. I think that this happens whenever the apostrophe /'/ symbol is used from the document you transferred here via cut and paste.
Just thought you might want to know.
Thanks for all the reading materials you researched. This will keep me busy for a while.
|
|
|
Post by Debbie on Jul 13, 2005 6:28:47 GMT -5
Immaculate Conception by Mark Bonocore
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The early Christian belief in the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption must be approached in two different ways. The Immaculate Conception
Let's take the Immaculate Conception first. The Immaculate Conception of Mary was declared to be a dogma of the Church in 1854. Before that time, it was merely what we call a theolegoumenon (a theological opinion). Thus, before the Church solemnly defined it in 1854, Catholics were free to either believe in the Immaculate Conception or reject it. Indeed, even some of our greatest Catholic saints, such as Thomas Aquinas and Bernard of Clairvaux (who had profound devotions to Our Lady) had serious problems with the idea that she was conceived without original sin (although they believed she was personally sinless). Yet, despite this, there were also others in the Church, such as St. Bonaventure and Blessed Duns Scotus who championed the Immaculate Conception. So, the Immaculate Conception was a debated question in the Church for centuries.
However, what was NOT a matter of debate was Mary's sinlessness. The universal witness of the Church, from Pentecost until today, has always professed that Mary was without sin. The only question was: "When did her sinlessness begin"? And it was from this question that we arrive at the Immaculate Conception. Indeed, even those saints of the Church (like Aquinas or Bernard) who rejected the Immaculate Conception, STILL taught that Mary was sinless; and they suggested that her sinlessness began at the time of her birth, rather than at her conception. And we see this belief in Mary's sinlessness going back to the earliest days of the Church. For example, ....
Around 390 AD, St. Augustine writes:
"Every personal sin must be excluded from the Blessed Virgin Mary for the sake of the honor of God."
Similarly, St. Ambrose of Milan (340-397) says:
"Mary, a virgin not only undefiled but a virgin whom grace has made inviolate, free from every stain."
Likewise, the Greek Liturgies of both St. Basil the Great (d. 379) and St. John Chrysostom (d. 407) call Mary "Panagia" ("All-Holy One") and "Panagiota" ("All-Sinless One").
Furthermore, in the Syrian Church, we have St. Ephraem the Syrian (c. 350), who says:
"Thou, and Thy Mother are alone in this. You are wholly beautiful in every respect. There is in Thee, Lord, no stain, nor any spot in Thy Mother." (Poem to Christ)
And,
"My Lady Most Holy, All-Pure, All-Immaculate, All-Stainless, All-Undefiled, All-Incorrupt, All-Inviolate ...Spotless Robe of Him Who clothes Himself with light as with a garment ...Flower unfading, purple woven by God, alone Most Immaculate." (Ibid)
Also, the Syrian St. John Damascene (645-750) speaks of Mary, saying: "The serpent never entered that Paradise."
Likewise, among the early Church Fathers, we have St. Irenaeus of Lyon (a disciple of St. Polycarp, who was the disciple of St. John the Apostle himself -- the caretaker of Mary, according to John 19:26-27). And, according to St. Irenaeus, writing in 180 AD, we are told,
"Consequently, then, Mary the Virgin is found to be obedient, saying: 'Behold, O Lord, your handmaid; be it done to me according to your word.' Eve, however, was disobedient; and when yet a virgin, she did not obey.... having become disobedient, was made the cause of death for herself and for the whole human race; so also Mary, betrothed to a man but nevertheless a virgin, being obedient, was made the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race.... Thus, the knot of Eve's disobedience was loosed by the obedience of Mary. What the virgin Eve had bound in unbelief, the virgin Mary loosed through faith." (Irenaeus, Against the Heresies, Book III c. 180 AD)
Here, St. Irenaeus uses "virginity" as a sign of sinlessness (i.e. Mary was sinless just as Eve was sinless before the Fall).
So, the Tradition of Mary's sinlessness was always there. The only question was: When did this sinlessness begin?
Like I said, for centuries, it was the prevailing belief that Mary was "saved" and thereafter preserved from sin from the moment of her birth (not her conception). This is what St. Bernard of Clairvaux (1090-1153) and St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) argued for when they disagreed with the Immaculate Conception. Yet, neither these two medieval fathers, nor any of the ancients, ever questioned Mary's sinlessness. Rather, Mary's sinlessness was a given; and all Christians until relatively recent times, including Martin Luther himself, maintained that Mary's sinlessness is taught in the Bible.
For example, when we first meet Mary in Scripture, in Luke 1:28, the angel Gabriel greets her with the phrase: "Hail, Full of Grace" -- a phrase which most modern Bibles mistranslate as "highly favored one" or even "highly favored daughter." Yet those words are not in the original Greek. In the Greek, it is "Kecharitomenae" -- literally, "Full of grace" or "Perfectly graced" implying an "overflowing" or "abundance" of grace.
Furthermore, the angel Gabriel uses this as a proper name for Mary; and we all know the significance of names in the Bible, right? Names define who and what the person is. For example, Jesus' Name means: "Yahweh is Salvation." And, indeed, that's what Jesus was and is.
So, if Mary is "Full of grace," how can this be if she was a sinner? One cannot be sinful and "full of grace" or "perfectly graced." That's a contradiction.
So, therefore, Mary must have been Baptized into Christ, right? (How else can a person be "full of grace"?) So, the only question is: When was Mary made this? Or, in "Protestant-ese," when was Mary "saved" ? It must have been before Luke 1:28, right? So, when was it?
We Catholics say that it was at the first moment of her conception in the womb of her mother. Why? Because of Genesis 3:15. Here, God speaks to satan, saying:
"I will place enmity between you (the serpent / satan) and the woman (Eve, or Mary the New Eve), and between your seed (sin /death) and her seed (the Messiah: Jesus), and He (Jesus) will strike at your head (i.e., crush your power), even as you strike at His heel (the Crucifixion).
This verse, according to both Jews and Christians, is the Proto-Evangelion: the first prophecy of the Messiah. And it reveals to us that the Mother of the Redeemer will be placed in opposition to satan, and not under his dominion. Thus, this New Eve could pass a sinless humanity onto her Son, the New Adam.
Yet, as I said, this realization took a while to develop in the Church, not being dogmatized for universal acceptance until 1854. So, we know that the early Church believed that Mary was sinless. Yet, was the Immaculate Conception believed by any Christians in ancient times? Yes it was.
The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception comes to us from the Syrian-speaking Church in the East -- the branch of early Christianity which was closest in culture to the original, Jewish community of believers. I've already presented two of the Syrian fathers, St. Ephraem and St. John Damascene, speaking about how sin never touched the Virgin Mary. Once again, they write,
St. Ephraem the Syrian (c. 350)
"Thou, and Thy Mother are alone in this. You are wholly beautiful in every respect. There is in Thee, Lord, no stain, nor any spot in Thy Mother." (Poem to Christ).
And,
"My Lady Most Holy, All-Pure, All-Immaculate, All-Stainless, All-Undefiled, All-Incorrupt, All-Inviolate ...Spotless Robe of Him Who clothes Himself with light as with a garment ...Flower unfading, purple woven by God, alone Most Immaculate." (Ibid).
St. John Damascene (645-750):
"The serpent never entered that Paradise."
"O blessed loins of Joachim, whence the all-pure seed was poured out! O glorious womb of Anna, in which the most holy fetus grew and was formed, silently increasing! O womb in which was conceived the living heaven, wider than the wideness of the heavens...This heaven is clearly much more divine and awesome than the first. Indeed he who created the sun in the first heaven would himself be born of this second heaven, as the Sun of Justice....She is all beautiful, all near to God. For she, surpassing the cherubim, exalted beyond the seraphim, is placed near to God." (Homily on the Nativity 2, 3, 9 PG 96:664,676)
Fr. Luigi Gambero notes: "John Damascene often speaks of Mary as a sublime creature, filled with spiritual treasures. Accordingly, his homily on the Nativity, for example, goes so far as to make clear and explicit allusions....to the mystery of the Immaculate Conception." (Mary and the Fathers of the Church [Ignatius Press, 1999], page 401-2)
Indeed, we know that there was a 5th Century feast called the "Immaculate Conception" celebrated in the Syrian Church on December 9th. However, then the Monophysite controversy came along, and many Syrian-speaking Christians embraced the heresy of Monophysitism, which taught that Christ had only one nature (that of God) as opposed to two natures (God and man). At this time, the Greek-speaking Emperor at Constantinople started to replace the native, Syrian-speaking bishops of Antioch and the other Syrian bishoprics with Greek bishops from Constantinople. These Greek bishops were resented by the Syrians, and called "Melchites" (from the Syrian word for "king") because they had been forced upon them by the Emperor.
Well, these Greek bishops had the Greek understanding of Original Sin (an understanding which is different from the Latin and Syrian understanding, and which is still prevalent in the Eastern Orthodox Church today). And, because of this, serious theological objections to this feast of Mary's Immaculate Conception came into being. Therefore, the feast was eventually withdrawn from both the Greek and the Syrian Liturgical calendar because of these theological disputes (much like the ones we see later in the 13th century). Yet, this December 9th feast was eventually restored in the East, and is still celebrated today in the Eastern Orthodox (Greek) Church as the "Conception of Mary" -- a more "politically correct" title for the wary Byzantines.
Yet, the feast of the Immaculate Conception did not disappear all together. In the 7th & 8th Centuries, as 1s!am was overruning the Christian Middle East and more and more Christian bishops fled to the West, we began to have a lot of Syrians elected as Pope! Among these were Pope John V (685-86), Pope St. Sergius I (687-701), Pope Constantine (708-15), Pope St. Gregory III (731-41), etc. Most likely through their influence, or the influence of their disciples, the Syrian feast of the Immaculate Conception was transported to Italy in the mid 7th century. However, it was later dropped from the Western calendar, because of still more theological disagreements -- all of which led to the serious debating of the doctrine in the 1200's. At this time, the Immaculate Conception was defended by men like St. Bonaventure (1221-1274) and Blessed Duns Scotus (1265-1308) against St. Thomas Aquinas and his Dominicans, who favored Mary's sinlessness beginning at the time of her birth, rather than at her conception.
Yet, while this debate was still going on, the feast of the Immaculate Conception was re-instated in Italy by Pope Sixtus IV in 1477, moving the date from December 9th to December 8th (the date we use today). Later, in 1708, the feast on December 8th was extended to the entire Church by Pope Clement XI. Then, in 1854, the doctrine was declared an official dogma of the Catholic Church by Pope Pius IX, thus bringing the theological debate to a close. So, Catholics had celebrated the feast of the Immaculate Conception on December 8th for 377 years before the dogma was defined; and, in the East, for 957 years before that on December 9th.
Thus, the Immaculate Conception was always with us. It just took some time for God's providence to bring it to the forefront.
|
|
|
Post by Mystic Rose on Jul 13, 2005 10:02:32 GMT -5
Dear OLS: NOTE: ERRORS IN THE COPIED TEXT There is a problem with your text when you cut and paste. There is some corruption of the symbols and so I am seeing some weird things. Therefore some of the text is not legible from my computer. I tested these symbols (or font styles at CF and they also had problems). For example Mary’s Mary's Look different on my computer. The first one looks like MaryaCTMs with the raised TM and a dot above the /a/ following Mary. I think that this happens whenever the apostrophe /'/ symbol is used from the document you transferred here via cut and paste. Just thought you might want to know. Thanks for all the reading materials you researched. This will keep me busy for a while. Being that the copied text might be copyrighted, and due to the fact of copyright laws, although we can copy and paste it we have to use it as it appears .... if because of the programming here it becomes slightly corrupted then there is nothing I nor OLS can do... I would rather save the integrity of the document being copied then mess with it .... Now if there is another problem that you believe should be addressed please take it to PM.... Lovingly In Christ Mystic Rose HAC ADMIN
|
|
|
Post by Our Lady of the Snows on Jul 14, 2005 0:58:08 GMT -5
Hi Debbie Something that is very interesting about St Thomas Aquinas is that for him, the issue was insoulment . . he did not believe that Mary was ensouled until several months later, so she could not be immaculate from conception as her soul did not exist, and so her person did not exist, from conception. But he believed she was free from all stain of sin before she was born . . I think what is most interesting here is that both East and West believed Mary was conceived/born sinless and remained sinless. And it was really only about 500 years ago that the opinion on this really began to change in the East. Whether something is Dogma or not does not mean it is free to be dissented from . . for the East incorporated this belief into Her liturgies, and it is in Her liturgies we find her doctrines expressed very clearly. Though individual theologians may dissent from some aspect of a doctrine, that does not mean the Church has not and does not teach it even prior to a teaching, a doctrine being declared a dogma. Thomas Aquinas had this to say in his Summa [/b] First, because the honor of the parents reflects on the child, according to Prov. 17:6: 'The glory of children are their fathers': and consequently, on the other hand, the Mother's shame would have reflected on her Son. Secondly, because of the singular affinity between her and Christ, who took flesh from her: and it is written (2 Cor. 6:15): 'What concord hath Christ with Belial?' Thirdly, because of the singular manner in which the Son of God, who is the 'Divine Wisdom' (1 Cor. 1:24) dwelt in her, not only in her soul but in her womb. And it is written (Wis. 1:4): 'Wisdom will not enter into a malicious soul, nor dwell in a body subject to sins.' "We must therefore confess simply that the Blessed Virgin committed no actual sin, neither mortal nor venial; so that what is written (Cant 4:7) is fulfilled: 'Thou art all fair, O my love, and there is not a spot in thee,' etc. "[/ul] It is also interesting to note the Greek's respnse to Thomas Aquinas regarding the Immaculate Conception: [/b] Demetrios Kydonios (fourteenth century) translated some of Aquinas' works into Greek, but vehemently opposed Thomas' views on the mmaculate conception. [Demetrios Kydonios, _Hom. in annuntiationem deiparae_, contained in _Cod. Paris gr._, 1213 (cf. Jugie, op cit., pp. 276-279.] No less did the other great Thomist, Georgios Scholarios (fifteenth century), in his synopsis of the immaculate conception. [Georgios Scholarios, _In dormitionem_ (PO 16, p. 577); cf. Petit-Siderides-Jugie; _Oeuvres completes de Georges Scholarios_, Vol. 1 [Paris, 1928], pp. 202-203; also Petit-Sisderides-Jugie, op. cit., I, p. 501; also Jugie, _Georges Scholarios et l'Immaculee Conception_, Echos d'Orient (Paris-Istanbul, 17 [1915], pp. 527-530.] www.cin.org/imconcep.html [/ul] Again, in regards to Thomas Aquinas, here is a quote from one of his writings on this matter: Also, to help explain Aquinas and his thoughts a little better, it is important to understand his concept of just what "conception" was all about. He did not view conception the way we do today. He theorized that, when it comes to the issue of conception and the infusion of the human soul, the human soul was not infused immediately into concepted physical material. For instance, in the same work as cited above, he says that the rational soul is infused at 40 days for males, and at 90 days for females. (Commentary on the Book of Sentences, Bk. III, dist. 3, q. 5, a. 2, Responsio.) (So I stand corrected on what I said above regading the timing of ensoulment according to Aquinas). As you can see from above, Aquinas did believe Mary was free from BOTH Original and Actual sin. Our Lady of the Snows
|
|
|
Post by Theotokos on Jul 15, 2005 19:49:18 GMT -5
I love St. Ephraim.
|
|