The Immaculate Conception and "Original Guilt"
Marian devotion is a very longstanding practice in the Catholic/Orthodox tradition. The Orthodox church honors Mary as the Theotokos (God Bearer) and has incorporated Marian devotion into the Liturgy and prayer life of the Church without elevating it to the level of Dogma. The Roman Church has made belief in the Immaculate Conception a Dogma (a belief that is required) while in Orthodoxy it has remained an honored tradition...but not a required belief. The Dogma of the Immaculate Conception rests on the Western Christian Doctrine of Original Sin...which I call "Original Guilt". According to St. Augustine (a not so recovered Manichean) we are all born already guilty of Adam's sin. In that scenario the Mother of God, in order to be "pure" enough to bear the Son of God would have had to be born without that original guilt.
This is the root issue standing in the way of reunification between the Eastern and Western Churches. The Orthodox Church considers Augustine's doctrine of Original Guilt a heresy. To the early Church and the the early Councils Original Sin was merely the observable fact of our human predisposition to sin and the inevitibility of it. But no one can be guilty of something someone else did. Alexander Komiakov (a Russian Orthodox theologian of the late nineteenth century) argued quite convincingly that most of the errors of the Protestant Reformation, especially Calvinism, are rooted in what he considers a vestage of the Manichean Heresy, from whence came Augustine and his peculiar twist on the obvious fact of Original Sin. According to the most ancient traditions of the Catholic/Orthodox Churches all that God created is essentially good. Augustine's Doctrine is Manichean in that it presumes that we are born morally depraved, and in fact all of physical creation is essentiually evil. Therfore we must be Baptised in order to be saved. This belief in our moral depravity is what makes room for the belief in such things a "purgatory" and "limbo" and the clergy as the only avenue that the ignorant and uneducated masses have to salvation...and down through the history of the Western Church to the selling of indulgences and the eventual "Dogma" of Papal Infallability. It's not about God or "tradition", now it's about control and power.
The "laity" are not just an important part of the Church the Laity IS the Church. The Clergy are servents, ideally raised up from among the Laity...not separate...not privilaged...and in every way accountable to the laity. No one has authority to govern anyone who does not consent to be governed by that person...regardless of who laid hands on him or her or how many crosses he or she puts in front of his or her name. That is an observable fact of our existence.
How we govern ourselves is not the mark of our Catholicism...it is the seven Sacraments and the historical continuity of Apostolic Succession. The laying on of hands does not turn a lay person into a Priest or Bishop...the community does that...and the laying on of hands affirms that choice in a physical, historical continuity going back to hands of Jesus himself. When we celebrate the Eucharist the bread doesn't become God because some guy in fancy vestmerts says some magic words....God becomes bread in the context of the Community Worship...because the Community has called God forth in the words of institution at the hands of the Celebrant. The Church is not "Clergy" and "Laity"...the church is the community...the entire community, from the youngest to the oldest.
Michael F. Iott
Society of Blessed John XXIII
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Michael, it is not necessarily official dogma authorized by a Church Council that is important (do not get me wrong church councils are
ReplyDeleteimportant) it is accepted practice and tradition. As you say the Orthodox Churches give adoration / veneration to the Theotokos several times at every liturgical service. It is not viewed as optional or unessential. The liturgy of the Orthodox churches has not changed substantially for probably 1500 years. In this case practice / belief is more important than doctrines such as the Immaculate Conception.
The Orthodox position thus is radically different than the liberal position that each member of the Church should decide for themselves how they view Mary. The fact is if the new reformed Roman Catholic Churches choose to ignore Mary in their masses because it is not essential that she be so honored then Marian belief itself will wither away. The fact is
that Roman Catholic liberalism post Vatican II is decidedly anti Marian. I would suggest that you read Charlene Spretnik's book "Missing Mary: The Queen of Heaven and Her Reemergence In The Modern Church" link
http://www.missingmary.com/
in which she discusses among other things the general dismissal of Mary by liberal Catholicism. By the way Charlene Spretnak was one of the founding members of the American Green movement and is hardly a rightwing reactionary.
Glenn
I left a post on the face book page. But saw this comment above. Gee.. Pope John Paul II wanted adn the church pretty much believes in co-redemption of both Jesus and Mary. Many in the RCC do believe this false belief. We hold as sacred the postiion of our Blessed Virgin Mary, the Mother of Jesus. She was teh chosen vessel of God to bring forth HIS SON.. Yet she allowed this by free will.. she chose to be Christ's mother. .she risked so much as an engaged woman in a society that demanded much of it's women.
ReplyDeleteMary has always pointed others to her beloved Son.. she is a mother, always took and accepted that role. In fact at times as a jewish mom she must've given Jesus quite a difficult time. Look at the first recorded mircale of Jesus at the Wedding.. it was she who requested He change the water into Wine..?! Can jsut see Jesus shaking his head but going ahead to follow him Mother's request. She was there at His Death and on Easter Morning. But is she a co-redemptrix.. or did she bodily rise into heaven.. ? I wasn't there and I dare saw no one else saw this honestly.
Yet the people do hold her in such high regard. .I doubt our love and devotion will fade away to nothing. Surely not with me..!
Fr. Jim Waters
I've been reading some interesting comments by my old friend and fellow NDE experiencer. He wrote on Original Guilt.. posed the point and question. are we truly made .. created in the image of God.. did God mess up on His Creation.. did He set us up to go to a so called Hell.. sort of like a trick question on a test. I remember at Bob Jones Univ. back in the 60's being constantly warned that if I didn't pray the sinner's prayer I'd go to hell.. no matter what. I knew a guy who went over the deepend from worry at being a TULIP Presbyterian in N. Ireland.. on predestination.. he believed he was destined for Hell.
ReplyDeleteLast time I was in a combat situation. .saw many people shot.. lots of death and my ownself laying in the midst of blood etc.. sure I may very well die.. is this my end. .did God allow me to choose by free will to be among the death of both terrorists and innocents.. are the 6 million jews who were murdered in the Death Camps to be sentenced to Hell.. is someone who treats others cruelly yet who said the sinner's prayer going to Heaven..? And most of all. .Why Would The Creator destroy His Creation.. sort of like a mother taking her newborn then killing it.. ! How .. I ask How.. ?
Oh sure we can talk in theological terms.. I ask in human terms as one who is all to human and facing cancer treatments.. who has lived out his nine lives too often.
Mr Iott:
ReplyDeleteYou're not exactly correct about the Orthodox position on the Immaculate Conception. It is not an honored tradition in the Orthodox Church. Belief in the Immaculate Conception is based on Original Sin, which you correctly note is considered heresy in the East. For that reason, the Immaculate Conception is rejected by the Orthodox Churches. If there were no belief in Original Sin (or, as you wisely interpret, Origina GUILT) in the Western Churches there would be no need for the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception. However, because Original Guilt was incorporated into the theology of the West, there had to be some way that the BVM could be exempted from it. To sum up the Orthodox position, since there is no Original Sin, there is no need for the Immaculate Conception. The Orthodox Churches DO believe that the children of Adam inherit the propensity to sin (and thus, we inherit death) but there is no sense of the "stain" of sin, propagated by intercourse, of which we are guilty. Adam fell, and all humanity fell. But the decision to sin is individual. We do enough sinning on our own. We don't have to worry about what Adam did!
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI left the Church over 35 years ago over my misunderstanding of the Augustinian position of Original Sin and spent most of my adult life as a tantric Buddhist. Then working on a PhD dissertation on Just War Theory I was able to but Augustine's position in context of his time and place. It was the Pelagians and Donatists who were the self-righteous moral majority Calvin like bigots of the time. I oppose the contemporary Church's dismissal of the primacy of its monastic heritage, but Augustine was right, being a good monk was not necessarily being Christlike. Also, those who did not sin during the persecutions were not necessarily the chosen ones over those who sinned and asked forgiveness.
ReplyDeleteWe should not throw Augustine out with the Calvinist bathwater. The Orthodox and Eastern Catholic position is superior, however, compared the Reformation or Counter-Reformation positions, because it is more authentic.