Eli.

That was one of the most concise and beautiful explanations of the Immaculate Conception that I've ever encountered. Thank you for enlightening me with your wisdom!

God bless,

Chris

Thank you. Very glad to hear that it made some good sense to you.

I am pretty certain that not all of that wisdom is mine. There a strong possibility that I have had some high powered assistance over the years as I struggled with my own unbelief.



Eli

I concur,Eli.
But when you wrote, "What happened to her at her birth, happens to us at our Baptism," did you not mean, "What happens to us at out Baptism is what happened to her at her conception"?

Yes. I didn't bother to go back and change it. The issue of when it happens will have to be addressed by the east and west together at some point in time.

I suppose that as long as I am content to believe it happened at her conception, I am equally content, for now, to accept those Orthodox who say it happened in Anne's womb or at the birth of the Theotokos or even at her Presentation.

I am least comfortable with any teaching that says that she was purified especially at the time of her fiat, because of the emphasis of the Greek words telling of that Annunciation, and the explicit words of the Messenger telling of her grace.

But even more, because I think if we say that the Mother of God is purified then and not before, it looses a moment of revelation that includes not only the Annunciation but also the message that metanoia is not a once-in-a-lifetime event and that conversion and perfection contiune for us throughout everlasting life, even for the most perfect human creation ever. Even she is capable of falling more in Love.

Take that continuing and growing desire to be part of the divinity away, and we endanger losing our sense of wonder in the face of the divine Trinity, don't you think?

Eli

Dear Friends,

Although a good book, especially when answering Protestant accusations etc, it is unfortunately somewhat tainted by a less than adequate understanding of: a) Western Mariology and what it actually affirms with respect to the Immaculate Conception and b) the fact that Orthodox theologians and saints have historically and privately accepted the Immaculate Conception (and the view of Original Sin on which it is based) and these have not been excommunicated or censured by Orthodoxy.

We've talked about these issues many times before . . .

Even the current Ecumenical Patriarch, when making a statement on this matter, seemed not to understand the differences between the Western teaching on Original Sin and that of the East - and we've also commented on this.

So I find the book to be confusing on this subject as it tries to bend over backwards to show the distance between Orthodoxy and Catholicism on the subject of Mariology.

Far better, I would say, is the treatment of this same subject by Fr. Michael Pomazansky in his "Orthodox Dogmatic Theology" where there is none of the strained effort that can be noted in St John's book to counter RC Mariology.

Fr. Pomazansky simply states the differences and then goes on to explain them straightforwardly.

As an Eastern Catholic, I can read Fr. Pomazansky's text without feeling that my faith is somehow under attack as with the above book by St John.

Alex

Dear Eli,

It is, in fact, a myth that Orthodox believe that our Lady was sanctified later in life etc.

This is sometimes the impression given by certain Orthodox writers, again to simply show how "different" Orthodoxy is when contrasted by Catholicism (a point also made by Archbishop Ware in his "The Orthodox Church).

The fact that the East continues to celebrate the feast of the Conception of St Anne, as Fr. Pomazansky and others also discuss, shows that the East believed the Mother of God was sanctified AT her Conception - since only the feasts of saints can be celebrated.

In addition, the Eastern Church celebrates the Holy Conception of St John the Baptist (and his Nativity as well as that of the Mother of God).

August 11 is the feast of the Nativity of St Nicholas which likewise suggests that he was conceived in holiness or else was sanctified at some point prior to his Nativity.

The fact that the Holy Spirit sanctified the Theotokos at other points in her life, such as the Annunciation, Pentecost etc. relates to the dynamic Orthodox view of her ongoing sanctification, even in Heaven.

Orthodox and Catholics believe the SAME things about the Theotokos, they just go about their Mariology differently.

But the fact that they do should not change the basic fact that there is no difference in terms of their devotion to the Theotokos.

Alex