Replies

The IC posits that she is not human like the rest of us. That’s plain. Humans are born suffering the consequences of Adam’s sin. The IC says Panagia was not “infected” with Original Sin. If Rome is right and we are “infected” with Original Sin or if the Fathers were right and we suffer the consequences of ancestral sin, if Pnagai was preserved from that then she isn’t human.

Another straw man argument. The Roman Catholic Church holds absolutely and without doubt that Mary was and is human, not divine.

Secondly, the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception simply does not have the implications that you want it to have. If being without sin implied divinity, then by implication Adam and Eve would have been gods, not human beings. Clearly, Adam and Eve were human AND without sin, prior to the Fall. If they can be without sin and remain human, so can Mary. It's not brain surgery -- a pretty simple deduction.

Tell us, why should we venerate someone whose sinlessness was a foregone conclusion?

Based on your logic, we should not worship Christ because he had it easy, being without sin. I completely reject the premise of your argument. Mary suffered as a result of her obedience -- she had to watch her Son humiliated and die an agonizing death -- a choice she freely accepted by consenting to the Lord's request to bear His Son.

As for some of the canons of the Council of Carthage in 418, they were adopted by the Council of Trullo solely as disciplinary canons, not canons establishing The Faith. So far as I know, even Rome doesn’t accept all of them as viable today (for example, #9). As matters of discipline they accepted as binding on all The Church. They are NOT dogmatic matters of faith.

The issue is not whether they were dogmatic matters of faith, but the fact that no one of the Eastern Church condemned these doctrines at the time. Silence implies approval.

The anathemas which were lifted related to the anathemas of 1054, not to anything else. That event certainly did not end the schism. And we are not having a discussion of sacraments here.

You are splitting hairs. The point is that we should approach ecumenical dialogue in the same spirit as your Patriarchs this century, which has been generous, and for that many Roman Catholics are greatful and hopeful of resolving the schism that damages the Church and contradicts the wishes of Our Lord, who envisioned for us to be truly ONE holy catholic and apostolic Church. That is not a reason to abstain from the defense the Truth, of course, but there is a way to go about it with a spirit of generosity and a search for common ground rather than exaggerating doctrinal differences with straw man arguments and similar fallacious reasoning.

God bless.

“The Roman Catholic Church holds absolutely and without doubt that Mary was and is human, not divine.”

Does Rome say she is a type of single member sub species of humanity? How is she human?

“If being without sin implied divinity, then by implication Adam and Eve would have been gods, not human beings. Clearly, Adam and Eve were human AND without sin, prior to the Fall.”

Adam and Eve were created in both the image and likeness of God. That’s what humans were before the Fall. Not after...except for Mary, apparently, who was created as something different from human beings. Where does it stop, bdeaner? Can you see why the Protestants wonder that you think she needed a Redeemer like all the rest of us?

“Based on your logic, we should not worship Christ because he had it easy, being without sin.”

Christ is God, bdeaner.

“Mary suffered as a result of her obedience — she had to watch her Son humiliated and die an agonizing death — a choice she freely accepted by consenting to the Lord’s request to bear His Son.”

bdeaner, I sincerely dout you venerate women who have held their sons as they die agonizing deaths. Surely you venerate Panagia for some reason other than her agony at the foot of the Cross.

“The issue is not whether they were dogmatic matters of faith, but the fact that no one of the Eastern Church condemned these doctrines at the time.”

bdeaner, whether or not the canons of the local council of Carthage are dogmatic canons relating to faith is precisely the issue.

“Silence implies approval.”

Oh, please!

“there is a way to go about it with a spirit of generosity and a search for common ground rather than exaggerating doctrinal differences with straw man arguments and similar fallacious reasoning.”

bdeaner, the IC is one of the matters which will need to be resolved at an ecumenical council. It is nearly as much a stumbling block as the claim of papal infallibility. There is no exaggerating the extent of the disagreement.

In response to, “Tell us, why should we venerate someone whose sinlessness was a foregone conclusion?”, you write, “Based on your logic, we should not worship Christ because he had it easy, being without sin.”

But Scripture says, “17 Therefore he had to be made like his brothers in every respect, so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. 18 For because he himself has suffered when tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted.” - Hebrews 2, and

“15 For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin.” - Hebrews 4

Hmmm...Jesus “...in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin.”

If Jesus was incapable of feeling any allure to sin, then He was NOT tempted as I have been, yet without sin.