NYer, the first part of this article is great. The second part, with that 19th century IC “dogma” is truly unfortunate. I understand tat within the last 50 years or so the Maronites have signed on with that notion, but in the past I understand it was not accepted. I further understand that in Lebanon it isn’t accepted except to the extent that it is necessary to “pay lip service” as one Lebanese fellow put it to me the other day, to the “Magisterium”. True?
“There is absolutely NO Biblical truth in this: ...and “preserved from the stain of original sin” (CCC 508).”
and
“that is simply not true...you can not have the perfect, sinless, God-man, inside the body stained with sin.”
Remarkable how the unfortunate Augustinian innovation of “Original Sin”, a thoroughly non-patristic notion, causes trouble in Western Christianity.
RGF, what vpintheak has posted is thoroughly patristic. The Most Holy Theotokos was completely human, not some goddess, though I will grant you that the “Co Redemptrix” crowd might lead one to believe otherwise. She was born like all the rest of us, burdened with the consequences of the Sin of Adam. She was in need of the Savior just like the rest of us. The Latin innovation of the IC is a necessary result of the Augutinian theology of “Original Sin” which contributed so much to the West’s departure from the patristic theology of The Church.
And vpintheak, as I said, your conclusion is correct, but there is no such thing as “original sin” staining anyone’s soul!
Isn’t there something like if it’s Greek, it’s orthodox. Fact is that the Greeks never understood the nature of the conflict between Pelagius and Augustine, heace what Augustine or the Latin Church meant by “Original Sin.” Not understanding the history of the contraversy, the Greeks were fooled by Pelagius and his disciples, whose doctrine is more “Jewish” than many think. At the extreme, it requires no redeemer at all.
What is your proof of no original sin? I am interested.
As much respect as I have for my Orthodox brethren, I have always wondered how they reconcile the belief in 'no original sin' with the following passage from St. Paul's letter to the Romans:
Rom 5:12 Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned--
Rom 5:13 sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law.
Rom 5:14 Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sins were not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come.
Rom 5:15 But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man's trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift in the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many.
Rom 5:16 And the free gift is not like the effect of that one man's sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brings justification.
Rom 5:17 If, because of one man's trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ.
Rom 5:18 Then as one man's trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one man's act of righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all men.
Rom 5:19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by one man's obedience many will be made righteous.
Because the issue of the Immaculate Conception would be utterly irrelevant if there was no original sin...but the above quote is pretty persuasive regarding original sin. So how do you Orthodox types interpret the above passage without reference to original sin?
This individual is either ignorant of his Maronite faith or recognizing a devout Orthodox, decided to feed you what you wanted to hear ;-)
The Maronite Church maintains very strong bonds with the Vatican. Only last month, the Patriarch made an appeal for support of the situation in Lebanon and the Holy Father immdiately responded. The Maronites are very proud to be the only Eastern Church that has never separated from the Magisterium.