Re: christian schools and doctrinal issues (was: Death penalty)
Mike Findlay <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.music.dadl.ot |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Am I correct that the immaculate conception didn't become Catholic doctrine until sometime in the 19th century? Mike F. ----- Original Message ---- From: Ronald Hatton <[email protected]> To: DADL (off topic) <[email protected]> Sent: Tue, November 9, 2010 3:05:39 PM Subject: Re: [DADL-OT] christian schools and doctrinal issues (was: Death penalty) On Nov 9, 2010, at 3:52 PM, Peter T. Chattaway wrote: > For example, whenever I hear Catholics talk about immaculate conception, they >tend to say it was something that needed to happen in order for Jesus to be >conceived without sin -- as though Jesus were the one at risk here. But the >Orthodox emphasis, as I've encountered it, has always been on the fact that >*Mary* was at risk for coming into such incredibly close contact with the divine >-- indeed, becoming "one flesh" with it, as it were. If I understand correctly, since Augustine apparently taught that Original Sin was passed to succeeding generations through intercourse. For Mary to be pure enough to bear the Son of God, she had to be conceived without sin. Thus, somehow, Joachim and Anna conceived Mary in which Original Sin was not passed on to her. It is not exactly an ancient doctrine, and at the risk of someone taking my credentials away from me, one that I neither understand nor accept. The Eastern understanding, which maintains that she was full of grace, all-pure, etc., is not Scholastically explained, just believed. -Fr. Ron -- dadl-ot mailing list http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot -- dadl-ot mailing list http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot