Here are my thoughts as an Orthodox catechumen. The Orthodox do not believe in original sin in the sense that it is inherited biologically. The belief is in ancestral sin. When we are born, we are not ourselves guilty of the sin of Adam, rather, we are born into a fallen world with a proclivity towards sin. The Orthodox view is that unbaptized infants do NOT got to hell. So, when the orthodox baptize their infants, it's not to "erase original sin", it't to welcome and initiate them into the Church, the living body of Christ "I confess one Baptism for the remission of sins", yes, baptism does this too. The Orthodox also believe that the Theotokos was "immaculate" and "most pure", but there is no need for her to have been "Immaculately conceived" because we don't believe in original sin in the first place. The thought process is that she was born sinless, and remained so (unlike the rest of us) as she was consecrated to God.
@@Quis_ut_Deus yes. of course it is, because either someone can live righteously without God, or we live sinfully in need of God. If we are only potentially capable of commiting sin, does that mean Christ only potentially sacrificed himself for our salvation?
@@Kryptic712 What I meant is that if we are not guilty of the original sin why we still have proclivity toward sin if not because we had also taken part in the same transgression, i.e. also being guilty of the original sin or being marked by the original sin? What I understand from Winter Rose is that we are almost born immaculate in a fallen world but we just don't succeed to stay so. My thought is that if we are first created in spirit by god we enter the world through the fault of the original sin, so also marked by the original sin. We are not only marked as because we are in a fallen world but because we are also guilty (for the majority of us) of the original sin, spiritually. It why we are not immaculate and why we are all sinners (at least all marked but not sure if all guilty). Except for Mary and Jesus (and maybe John the Baptist but I don't know) who were immaculate (not being marked nor guilty but still being in a fallen world).
@@Quis_ut_Deus Because of ancestral sin yes. But we can't do anything about that. If baptism is supposed to cleans us of original sin, then why do we still have a tendency to sin, even after baptism?
Correct verse: Luke 1:29: “But when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying, and considered what manner of greeting this was.” Amen. I think you choose a wrong verse to justify.
@@clockstseed3239 κεχαριτωμένη (Graced) is clearly showing that She was graced prior to Christ's redemption (it was said at the annunciation before Christ was born). the noun is only used in the new testament to refer to those in a state of grace thanks to baptism washing away original sin - yet it's applied to Mary beforehand. it was probably a typo; not an error on his part, cus it's Luke 1:28 - just one off Luke 1:29
It's amazing how many people are incapable of making the difference between "Being a sinner" (someone who has already made the free choice to sin) and "Being capable of sin" (someone who is capable of making a free choice to sin, but did not make that choice and chose not to sin instead).
@@nickchadwell5099 True, but we can at least avoid intentional sins like lying, stealing, cheating, etc. Those are always a choice. And thats' where the main difference between ordinary people and saints is. Saints have attained a significant self-control over their sinful impulses.
1 John 1:8 KJV [8] If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. Everyone is a sinner and will struggle with sin as long as they are in flesh Romans 7:14 and onwards... The only way to heaven is to be born again John 3:3. Ephesians 2:8-9 KJV [8] For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: [9] not of works, lest any man should boast. Real saving faith is God given John 6:28-29 KJV [28] Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? [29] Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.
You made a big leap from the immaculate conception to Mary not being fully human. Do you think God is incapable of protecting one of his creatures from sin if that is his will?
I will not make a silly argument about what God can do or cannot do or if placing limits on him is silly. That very statement is silly. I'm more concerned with what God has done and how he has chosen to interact with us. Jesus christ took on Human Nature with its corruption. The corruption came from the mother of God because she is a human being born with corruption because of sin. Whether she sinned or not is not a question. I don't try to answer that question. All human beings have corruptible flash after the sin of Adam and Eve. It is clear that she was a human being born with corruptible human flesh because she died. So did Jesus Christ. If we exempt the mother of God from this nature, then Jesus Christ is Exempted from this nature. It is clear that the intent to exempt Mary from being guilty when born, this idea of original sin, which we do not believe but the Latins do, then of course they would also exempt her from the effects of this sin, which would be corruptible human nature. It's very obvious that she had corruptible human nature and it's also obvious that Jesus did as well because he died. After his death, by his own power as God, he did not allow his human flesh to corrupt any further, and he rose from the dead on the third day. This is also available to us, through baptism and Christian struggle afterwards. most people who have argued with my points, don't actually address them. They either say, he's a heretic, or join the true church, the Catholics, or this Apparition or that Apparition said it so it must be true, or they have a strange emotionalism about trying to make the mother of God holy in an automatic way. She is Holy because of her choices. Priest Seraphim Holland
@Tony B Romans 8:3-4 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: (4) That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. Philippians 2:5-8 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: (6) Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: (7) But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: (8) And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Jesus is the prelapsarian man, without sin, but with the blameless passions, which included being subject to death.
@@fucduck no I do not believe that. If you had listened carefully or read my comments you would know that I absolutely do not believe that. We do not inherit sin we inherit corruption. If your name is meant to an unclean word, I will delete you. Please tell me if you're trying to make a joke or something
It is a false doctrine. Mary was born to human parents and was subject to the same influences as other humans. As a human she is a created being, and not innately divine, and therefore has no greater status than anyone else before God. She was created in Christ along wity the entire creation.
@@77goanywhere what the Devil said during the exorcism on Annaliese Michel: "The dogma of the Immaculata hurts us so much. Thank goodness no one believes in this truth anymore. If people believed this, all hell would tremble. Because of this disbelief of theirs many people are down here". Virgin Mary have been preserved by sin for grace of God since her conception: She is full of grace. She is the new Eve: if the sin came into the world for the first one, by Mary the sin have been defeated.
@@k.w.7973 Okay so was Jesus born with original sin? God can save humans he can't save himself. God saved Mary from original sin so that Jesus may be born without original sin. If Mary wasn't saved from original sin then God would have to save Jesus. But can God save God
She is the ark of the covenant. The arc was holy because it contained the manna from the wilderness, the staff of Aaron, and the broken tablets of the commandments. The Bible relates stories of Jews touching the arc and dying. Also it has been the tradition of the church for 2 thousand years that her birth was immaculate.
But if the Theotokos is with sin...then Jesus will inherit the original sin from his mother? And if she is not Immaculate why did the angel told her the she is "Full of grace" ?
See some other comments. The Theotokos was not born with sin, because none of us are born with inherited guilt. We say that she is full of grace, because at the moment in which she said let it be done to the slave of the Lord, the Holy Spirit came upon her and she was at that point for the Holy Spirit, and full of grace.
@@orthodoxnet Then why did the angel told her the she is "Full of grace" before the blessed Virgin utter her "Fiat"? Doesn't this tell that the Theotokos is full of grace before uttering her fiat?
@Oancea Tudor Church is living. As per its maturity the Holy Spirit will make the truths fully known through the Church. That's why there is an infallible authority. Every other denomination will have its own interpretations for every moral and theological concept. Thank God for the seat of Peter.
Except make Jews think that a woman that lived among them actually got pregnant not from her husband but from God. Also, forgetting that Jesus mother, grandmother, great grandmother were all Jews, so his cousins, neighbors and playmates witnessed what happened. All to be unquestionably dismissed.
@@simonbennatan8257 : the Divine Conception of Israel's Messiah (and His Incarnation and Virgin Birth) are not in discussion here. The Roman Catholic heresy of "the Immaculate Conception" - which is only a heresy when applied to another other than the Nazarene Y'shua, is what is being refuted in this video. That Christ's Emot Rishonot: Miriam, Channah and Miriam - His great grandmother, were Jews, we know. What His "cousins, neighbors (and playmates)" witnessed, we read about in the B'rit Hadashah - the Greater Testament which has fulfilled the Lesser Testament - the B'rit Yashanah. You would do well for yourself and the mishpochah/tzibbur to look into its pages.
@@terrytzaneros8007 you seem interested in the original text. why do you logically chose to refute what is in the Talmud? That Mary was married and that Pantero, a Roman, was Yoshka's father? Why do you chose to believe her and the God - Messiah over the Jews? We have always had stories about Jews not doing the right thing, being human, but good always prevailed, why, is it that you chose to label all Jewish experience of this generation as dismissive? Is it anger, shame, vindictiveness? (PS I'm not religious anymore, but I'm amazed at the logic of replacement theory, especially when Muslims are intended on doing the same with your religion and your lands)
@@simonbennatan8257 : chaver, Adoniteinu KolKadoshah, she who is EmEl, is the ensign pointing to her Son, (John 2:5). It is in the Virgin Birth of Mashiakh Y'shua, that the Talmud's Rabbanim have commenced the Halakhic matrilineal ruling for who is, and who is not, a Jew. This is thanks to God's favor shown to Miriam Bat Tzion and is no coincidence, but rather a Siman d' Shmayah. 'Miriam Menorah', that is how the Mother of God was represented - a pure vessel - by the Jewish Church in Yerushalayim - the Church of Ya'akov AkhEl (Brother of the Lord) the first Mashgiach Rosh Adat of Jerusalem. It is to this Church - the Church of the Jews that you should turn for the Messorah Mishpokhat Mashiakh and not the Targum fables. Roshav Maran Ahavel III (Patriarch Theophilos the 3rd) is a worthy custodian and steward of these Traditions of the Holy Church of Zion. Look to her.
We Ethiopian Orthodox believe that the holy virgin Mary is free from the original sin we believe God was able to keep her pure from the sin of origin, while she was in the womb as God is capable of protecting his servants at the womb level. "5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, [and] I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations." (Jeremiah 1:5)
The Immaculate Conception is not a 'recent' doctrine. What the original poster is referencing is that its status as a dogma of the Church is fairly recent. He also confuses being created immaculate with remaining in that condition. Adam and Eve were also created without stain and only later gave up their sinless status. If you don't believe that, you've got bigger theological problems; namely charging God the Creator as the Author of Evil.
@Jesus Christ Glorified which orthodox church do you belong to? Different churches have different degrees of theological development. While not always reaching the level of dogmatic proclamation, even various orthodox communities have some beliefs and traditions that they would prefer not to be removed.
I am Latin rite Catholic. We do not believe in inherited guilt of sin but in the inherited condition of separation from God which is an effect of Adam’s sin. For most of us this is removed at baptism; for Mary this was removed when she was conceived. I cannot argue with you about what Orthodox believe; I can argue with you about what you think Catholics believe.
I'm happy to be corrected about what the Latins believe about inherited guilt vs inherited corruption, however regardless of what they believe, they believe that the theotokos was changed at the moment of conception and therefore was born as a different kind of human being than all of the rest of humanity. That is the major argument against the so-called Immaculate Conception
not all orthodox reject immaculate conception. At least not the 5 original counties to accept Christianity(Ethiopia, Egypt, India, Armenia, syria. it was not the Roman Catholic that came up with it. the orthodox before Catholic taught the immaculate conception
Jesus is described in the Bible as “full of grace and truth.” The only other person in the entire Bible described as “full of grace” is the Blessed Virgin Mary. What is grace? Grace is the supernatural life of God. Based on this, why is it so hard to believe Mary to have been sinless and Immaculately Conceived?
Because if mary was born exempt from the effects of original sin, she would have been immortal, Because the result of original sin is death. That is what a human nature is, to be afflicted by death because of original sin. So without a human nature, she would have born from her a son that was also fully divine and did not inherit the effects of original sin (human nature) and could not suffer death on the cross. So to approve immaculate conception is to reject the crucifiction of christ.
I am an Ethiopian Orthodox we believe and know that Virgin Mary is immaculately conceived. i don't understand when they say orthodox christians reject the immaculate conception, which orthodoxes are they referring to?
Of course, being sinless makes us more human. You and I are not fully human yet because we have not yet attained to the measure and stature of Jesus Christ. He was the perfect human being, born in a sinful world, and subject to the blameless passions, but not sinful. Therefore, He lived a perfect human life without sin, and rose from the dead and transmitted to us the ability to become perfect through baptism. Jesus Christ of course was sinless, and of course had no original sin but in the latter case, neither did you or I, or any other human being. Original sin is a false doctrine as the Latins teach it. Because of the sin of Adam and Eve, we were born with passions. These passions develop very quickly into sins. Our Lord was born only with the sinless passions, those weaknesses that come from having mortal human flesh. These would be things like the need to sleep, and bleeding when cut, and dying when crucified. A technical term for the passions that Jesus had would be that he was born in the condition of Adam and Eve, and we that condition pre-lapsarian. And Adam and Eve were created, they had no sinful passions, only those characteristics that are common to human existence. The only reasonable (among some, I personally will not give an opinion about this) disagreement we can have regarding the Theotokos and sin is whether or not she actually sinned. It is an unreasonable disagreement to believe that the Theotokos was conceived in a way that was different from other human beings so that she would be something greater than a mortal human being even from the time of her conception. Many of the fathers think she did not sin, and some think she sinned in minor ways. I do not enter into that argument. She did not keep yourself pure because she was a holy robot. God did not program her to be sinless. She made the choice to obey God and to live a pure life. This is her great virtue. The Latin heresy of Original Sin forces them because of their legalistic way of thinking to create the doctrine of the immaculate conception. We in the church don’t have the burden of believing in Original Sin is the Latins teach it, therefore there is no need for the so-called “immaculate conception”. I deleted many long and emotional posts, some with insults and imprecations, because they all are deeply emotional and they are not looking at the theology. I don’t understand why they are so long and often rude, as if they are surprising an Orthodox Christian has a different theology than they do. None of them are talking about Original Sin which forces them to fabricate the immaculate conception. Original Sin is a given for them. It’s in their DNA. It is a false doctrine, which is led to other false doctrines, preeminently their idea that the Lord atoned for our sins by taking a punishment that God would require upon us in less a substitute took the punishment. This is the so-called substitutionary atonement.
orthodoxnet Hello, I’m learning about Jesus, God and Christianity and I’m trying to understand. Are you saying that it is not so that Jesus took the punishment for our sins? That this is a false doctrine that is called the substitutionary atonement? I keep hearing that he took the payment for us, are you saying this is not true? Then what is the truth then? I would really appreciate an answer to this
Such dogmas are so much deep theology that i would never consider it a difference between Catholic and Orthodox Church. Catholics say Theotokos didn t inherit the ancestral sin of Adam (immaculate conception) and Orthodox say she did inherit the ancestral sin of Adam (being born from humans). The problem is none of the consequences of this dogma make them different. It doesn't necessarily result in Mary not being human or Jesus not having the human nature (Orthodox say that only Jesus had an immaculate conception, in the way that the human nature of Jesus didn t inherit the ancestral sin of Adam). In the end, it's the same thing viewed from different angles. Orthodox also reject immaculate conception of Mary because they want to mark that the grace of Mary was gained, not awarded from birth. Thus the merit of Mary is greater. PS. I am Orthodox and i love my Catholic brothers
Alex Andersohn: that is precisely the problem: i.e: "The problem is none of the consequences of this dogma make them (Jesus and Mary) different." This conflation of the merits of Christ with the virtues of His mother is deliberate. The result? A dogma that is both toxic AND superfluous! One Immaculately Conceived Savior means One Redeemer, not two!
@@terrytzaneros8007 it is no more toxic than the prayer found at every Divine Liturgy "Most Holy Theotokos, SAVE us! Tell me, what do you think that means? Does the Theotokos save us, or does Christ?
"St. Michael the Archangel Orthodox Church": if that is indeed what you are, may decide for yourself if the "saving" by Mary qualitatively differs to the Saving by her Son.
@@terrytzaneros8007I believe you misread the comment. The point was made that the dogmas are the same, because the consequences of each are the same. When the most blessed an holy mother Theotokos was born, her parents were already ostracized because they were so old and St. Anna was thought to be barren. This was no good in that culture, and usually means they were out of God's favor. So, it was well known, from her birth, that she was special, and favored by God. In the Orthodox Church, we baptize at 40 days old. This is for the ancestral, as referenced. Also, women are not allowed to return to the church before 40 days after childbirth. Confession is the sacrament by which our sins are forgiven, as Orthodoxy recognizes one baptism. Even then, the priest does not grant forgiveness, only God can do that.
"Today the MOST-IMMACULATE and pure Lady hath issued forth from a barren wóman / Today all things rejoice in her natívity! The bonds of Adam have been broken and Eve has been freéd from the curse! / All those in heaven rejoice and mankind is gíven peace! / And we glorify her and crý aloud: / Glory to God in the Híghest, /// And on earth peace, good wíll among men!"
St Germanos of Constantinople: "She was three years old and supremely PERFECT WITH DIVINE GRACE, since She had been recognized and designated IN ADVANCE and had been chosen by God and Steward of all things.
Nothing new gets put into old wineskins. If Mary was tainted with sin, she would pass that down to Jesus. The power of the most high overshadowed her leaving no room for sin. Jesus was God man. That is why he bled and was tired. He received his earthly flesh (human) from Mary, who was human.
The power of the Most High overshadowed the Theotokos AFTER she was obedient, and said "Behold the Handmaiden of the Lord". As this point, the God-Man Jesus Christ was conscience by the Holy Spirit, AFTER Mary's CONSCIOUS, PERSONAL decision to be obedient. The Latin doctrine, forced upon them because of their legalistic misunderstanding of sin and salvation, takes away Mary's virtue. She was not personally holy in their system - it was done for her. In addition, being free of a sin no other human being is free from (according to their heresy of "original sin") she is DIFFERENT, superior to any other human being from the moment of her existence, and therefore, Jesus became human according to her humanity and not the rest of humanity.
@@legomego6943 Because the Angel at the Annunciation says she has been made full of grace. And it is very fitting that God preserved pure the vessel of his Incarnation. Mary was given the highest and most sacred role among creatures, higher than the Angels themselves and below only her Divine Son.
I recommend rereading the papal decree on the Immaculate Conception. There are several misconceptions you have said in this video that are in and of themselves causing confusion to the believer and leading them astray
Send me the link. Seraphim@orthodox.net. I will correct the idea of inherited guilt, but everything else stands. You are pretty confident that criticism of a novel doctrine announced by a false authority that actually demean the Theotokos is leading believers astray.
@orthodoxnet I am also Orthodox and I also believe Mary the Theotokos needed Jesus as a savior as the rest of us, as she claimed in her prayer Luke 1:47. The claim she was absolutely sinless is a positive claim, whereas when believers ask for a specific citation of it, biblically or elsewhere, the only reply they receive back is "wELL wHeRe dOeS tHe BiBle SaY sHe SiNnEd?" Which is a burden of proof fallacy. We know Christ is sinless because the Bible says Christ is God in 1 John 3:5 and John 1:1 and 1 Peter 1:19. "If we say we have no sin, we deceive OURSELVES, and the truth is not in us."
@@PeterM8987 In Holy Orthodoxy everyone is free to believe it or not. But some go too far in their rejection. They create "passions" and sins in the Most-Immaculate Theotokos which i completely against patristic teaching.
Thank you for your kind comment. Most of the comments are Latins who are upset that an Orthodox Christian does not believe as they do, and they seem to consider it their mission to contradict our teaching. They do not like the word heresy. A heresy is a fervently held falsehood. All heresy is bad theology, which leads to bad choices in life in general.
@@orthodoxnet for the record I'm a Roman catholic, and it depends on which faction in the church you talk to. The more liberal minded of us refuse, to a fault, to call anyone a heretic. I, on the other hand, and the more traditionally minded, have no problem calling people heretics and schismatics when they deserve it. Heresy is heresy and should pointed out when one sees it.
For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life. John 3: 16 “...Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near.” Matthew 3: 2
I don’t understand where you are coming from. Although I want to. As a newly reverted Catholic I find the Immaculate conception absolutely beautiful! For a few reasons being: 1) It shows God’s immense power 2) If man was born sinless as I presume you believe than how or why would we ever need God’s forgiveness? (We wouldn’t even need God and Christ’s death and Resurrection would be in Vain) 3) I love how Venerable Fulton Sheen put it: Mary was God’s DREAM COME TRUE. Mary is the Eve! And the Mother of the Church. Also why would God allow His only begotten Son to enter into a line of sinful humans? It makes no sense. The only thing that makes sense is that God created Mary because he can WITHOUT Original Sin so that when the right time came with Mary’s Yes to the Divine Will, His only begotten Son who is True God and True Man could come into the world in a pure vessel. I would love to hear what you think of this. May God bless you always, Sir.
This is easy to explain, we bear the consequences of the original sin committed by Adam and Eve, meaning that we are fallible and inclined towards sinning and away from God and that we are also mortal, but we don't bear the guilt of it, for we ourselves haven't committed it. Jesus's sacrifice thus is vital to help man, who is now no longer perfect, to get into a closer relationship with God, similar to the one Adam had enjoyed at first before his fall, or possibly even closer.
It's a tricky subject to navigate. Between Catholic and Orthodox there are different understandings of 1) original/ancestral sin 2) created vs uncreated grace 3) the relevance of St Augustine's theology 4) papal authority/infallibility 5) conciliar authority/infallibility 6) the weight of private revelation, and maybe a few more. Often Orthodox and Catholics are talking past each other on this point because of different pre-suppositions or starting points.
Being with child changes a woman's DNA. There's only one Mother to our Lord. And His lone sacrifice is enough for our Salvation. This grace was granted for this one SINGULAR act.
If Mary being without sin from conception means she's not fully human, does that mean that Jesus isn't fully human? Also CCC 405 says, "original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam's descendants." Doesn't that contradict the idea that Roman Catholics believe we're born with guilt?
The Roman Catholic Church teaches "Original Sin." The Eastern Orthodox Church teaches "Ancestral Sin." There is a difference between the two teachings.
From Orthodox Psalter to the Most Holy Theotokos and Evervirgin Mary: Come let us worship our Queen the Theotokos. (Great prostration) +++ Come let us worship the Virgin Mary our Queen the Theotokos. (Great prostration) +++ Come let us worship and fall down before our Lady, the Virgin Mary, our Queen the Theotokos. (Great prostration) +++
This priest is mistaken on the Orthodox position. This was the Boomer/Indiana-server position back in the day, not the one that Orthodox patriarchs and synods spoke of. The Orthodox reluctance to define the dogma has to do with the economic conversation of Christ in assuming the blameless passions. If the Theotokos experienced the blameless passions and did not do so voluntarily (as Christ chose to experience them), then she was subject to at least one aspect of original sin. Concupiscence, the blameworthy passions, are another thing entirely. I think perhaps the patristic and therefore Orthodox position is that she was completely passionless from conception and also completely sinless in her life.
What the Devil said during the exorcism on Annaliese Michel: "The dogma of the Immaculata hurts us so much. Thank goodness no one believes in this truth anymore. If people believed this, all hell would tremble. Because of this disbelief of theirs many people are down here".
It is very poor theology to base Dogma on apparitions and visions. The major arguments the Roman Catholics make in favor of this Doctrine are emotional and based on apparitions and Visions or just at the pope said it or because of some Obsession that the mother of God must somehow be pure in a way that no other human being is pure from the moment of her conception. The mother of God is pure because she chose to be. It Was an act of her will. She is not a holy robot, and no amount of visions where "she" apparently says she's the Immaculate Conception will be believed because they are false apparitions. There is only one "dogma" that I know of that is promoted by what seems like a kind of advertising and marketing.
Annaliese Michel never recovered from what she suffered from and literally died. I don't think quoting Satan saying something (during an unsuccessful exorcism that resulted in her death no less) in such an instance proves anything at all.
❤❤😇 St. Epiphanius Mary, the holy Virgin, is truly great before God and men. For how shall we not proclaim her great, who held within her the uncontainable One, whom neither heaven nor earth can contain? ❤❤😇
What you quoted is of course correct, and I would supplement it with another quote of his: “There is an equal harm in both these heresies, both when men demean the Virgin and when, on the contrary, they glorify Her beyond what is proper” -St. Epiphanius
Mary is not a goddess, she is the Mother of God. Catholic Christians hold her as the latter. "Blessed is she who believed..." ~ St. Elizabeth (Luke 2:45) "For behold from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed." ~ Mary, Most Holy (Luke 2:48) O Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to Thee. Virgin, Most Powerful(Our Lady) to St. Catherine of Siena
@@gertrudesantos5550 In the Holy Orthodox Church She is called "God after God" or "created God" or "God by grace". She is called ALLMIGHTY in prayers. Etc. She is on the boarder of created and uncreated
⚠️ ORTHODOXWIKI ⚠️ The term Original Sin (or first sin) is used among all Christian churches to define the doctrine surrounding Romans 5:12-21 and 1 Corinthians 15:22, in which Adam is identified as the man through whom death came into the world. How this is interpreted is believed by many Orthodox to be a fundamental difference between the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Western Churches. In contrast, modern Roman Catholic theologians would claim that the basic anthropology is actually almost identical, and that the difference is only in the explanation of what happened in the Fall. In the Orthodox Church the term ancestral sin (Gr. προπατορικό αμάρτημα) is preferred and is used to define the doctrine of man's "inclination towards sin, a heritage from the sin of our progenitors" and that this is removed through baptism. St. Gregory Palamas taught that man's image was tarnished, disfigured, as a consequence of Adam's disobedience.
Second Confession of Orthodox Bishops at their Consecration “The Word of God…took our whole fallen human nature from the PUREand VIRGINAL BLOOD of the ONLY IMMACULATE and pure Virgin…Furthermore I confess that He assumed all our human blameless passions that constitute our nature, excepting sin, i.e. hunger, thirst, weariness, tears, and such like: He underwent them not of necessity as in our case, but by His human will following His divine will; for willingly He hungered, willingly He thirsted, willingly He wearied, willingly He died.”.
In other words a ccording to you.Jesus was born with sin?? Or else if Mary was not sinless ,the scripture says everyone born of a woman is born in sin.This does not add up , we know Jesus took on everything human except sin, if he took his flesh from Mary and so Sinless is the Lord Jesus Christ , he must have prepared Mary sinless.Mary gives birth to a sinless generation before the fall of Eve, Eve had no sin until the devil came , so if Mary is the theotokos , God bearer ,she can only do so if she was sinless.The immaculate conception is simply true and divinely logical unless the orthodox declare that Jesus needed to be saved from sin too.I did not know orthodox don't believe in this mystery.I can not become orthodox.As a Protestant I have been blessed to understand this mystery , and many more that is why am entering the Catholic church at Rome.
orthodoxnet not true! It states the same in your Bible: that we are all born i sin! Not that we have sinned, but we are born because we carry it from Adam and Eve.
The Immaculate Conception makes sense. In the Old Testament if a High Priest was not spiritually clean, he would die when he entered the Holy of Holies. When Moses requested to see the Glory of God, he was hidden in the cleft of rock, and limited to seeing just God's 'hind parts'; otherwise he would have died. However, the Blessed Virgin Mary literally had the Holy of Holies dwell inside her womb, yet she did not die. If Mary was stained with any amount of sin, it would not be biblically consistent for her to have this encounter with God and live.
@AlbertMagnvs The justification by way of entering the holy of holies implies that anyone who was in the presence of Jesus should have died, not just Mary.
My Brother in Christ would God allow Himself to be tainted by sin? Is not the new wine put in new wine skin and not the old ( tainted ) . Also can God not apply the grace of salvation pre his sacrifice?
orthodoxnet Mary is without sin Genesis 3:15 she is in enmity so she don’t know sin and the Orthodox Church is not local with the holy Catholic Church Mary is the woman Gal 4:4 John 2:3-4 John 19:26-27 how god made Adam and Eve sinless pure immaculate so he made the new Adam and the new eve pure and sinless
"You have surpassed all couples on the earth, / O blessed Joachim and Ánna, / When you gave bírth to her who transcends all creátion. / Truly art thou bless’t, O Joachim, having become a parent or such a Maíden. / And blessèd is thy womb, O Anna, for thou hast sprouted for us the Móther of Life / Blessed are the breasts which nourished with milk her who nurtured the Sustainer of all creátion! / Beseéch Him, we pray you, O all-blessed ones, That He may grant our souls great mércy."
Exactly. . . ***John 1:16 And of His fullness we have all received, and grace for grace. . . Grace for grace. . Those who exhibit grace will be given grace. Mary being full of grace does not mean that she was sinless. It means that she was obedient and loved just as God said. She was humble, and showed mercy to her fellow man. . This is what made her the perfect mother to raise Jesus.
I know this is an old thread, but I have been studying ancient history about the world, the church and after some major analysis, the orthodox church seems to be the home I am much drawn too. I live in the States where there many different dominations and I always knew of the Catholic way as being MAIN way to Christ, but after learning about the great scism, things that the catholic church did as a power trip, the idealogies and spirituality aspects of Orthodoxy has drawn me in and I feel in my heart is the closest to god and christ. If you can answer this, I am just trying to have an accurate understanding, As far as the immaculate conception, it doesn’t make sense to me as to why we need to have a label for this. She was chosen by god as the carrier for the son, due to her being born with the instinct to sin, but chose not to and that is what made her the perfect mother. I feel claiming this as immaculate Conception just takes that respect away from her. Because if you were just chosen to be the vessel and you were given immunity, that just makes you a tool, and not a chosen because of your purity surrounded by sin. Also, wouldn’t Jesus be born and inherit sin as well since he is human as well as divine? The idea is he came down into sin and lived it, but chose not to sin. He lived through temptations just as we all did and then was crucified, he inherited all of sins for eternity. Am I looking at this wrong?
Dear Alexander, isn't solomon saying this to his bride ,isn't the bride of Jesus Christ , the church ? Aren't they holy because Jesus's righteousness was counted on them ?
@@johanroypaul2816 Read the Church Fathers and their Interpretation. These metaphors are often used for the Church and Theotokos. The woman clothed with the sun: Church and the Theotokos
@@ReasonAboveEverything No, it is not. We orthodox read the scriptures with the Holy Fathers and the church. The Song of songs is about the church the bride of Christ and the Theotokos.
The immaculate conception of Jesus is a biblical doctrine. Mary herself says on the pages of Scriptures that she never knew a man, referring to sexual relations and yet she got pregnant. And yes she was a human and a sinner in need of a Saviour just like everyone else is and the reason, Jesus wasn't under the curse is because His Father, as far as the conception is concerned, was the Holy Spirit/Ghost. Also read the book of Romans and you'll see that yes everyone is born with a sin nature and guilty before God and to be saved, one must believe on the Gospel of 1 Chorinthians 15:1-4, wich is the Death, Burial and Resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ: believe that He did that for you and that what He did alone, none of your good works save you and you'll have Eternal Life. All I said here is neither new doctrine, nor is it my opinion. It's written black on white, on the pages of Scripture. God Bless.
Rafael Iacsity and as well, to mention the fact that if she was immaculate, she would not have been allowed to then SIN! I mean: have MORE children, which she did after! With her husband. So, yea i agree with you
Rafael Iacsity yes. Not a sin in marriage. So, the point is: of course Jesus is different becuase he wasn’t conceived like the rest of us. But not because of Mary being immaculate, she was only made that at that moment through the Holy Spirit. That is all
You misunderstand. Being born with original sin doesn’t mean you are already guilty of sin. It means you have *tendencies* toward sin. And Mary was born without original sin.
Our Lady being free from sin does not make her less human. That’s a non sequitur. It makes her more human because in sinning we go against our natures and the goal for our humanity
We weren’t born in sin? Oh no? Then why do we die ? It’s a punishment for sin. See Genesis. Was David bone in sin? He himself tells us that he was: "[7] For behold I was conceived in iniquities; and in sins did my mother conceive me." [Psalms 50:7]
Jordan , Who told you that babies go to heaven? You must be baptized in order to go to Heaven and therefore, if a baby is not baptized, the baby, born a slave to Satan, goes to limbo, untouched by the fire of hell but in capable of seeing God in heaven
Jordan God knows best. The thing is, we are born in sin! But, it is the CHOICE of doing what is wrong or right, when we get to know what we are doing, that is what highlights the path we go: Heaven or Hell. A baby who hasn’t had a choice yet, cannot be at fault. But even so, i say it again;”: God knows BEST. We do not have the right to send or not a SOMEONE in Heaven.
,,…So then, after the assent of the holy Virgin, the Holy Spirit descended on her, according to the word of the Lord which the angel spoke, *purifying* *her* , and granting her power to receive the divinity of the Word, and likewise power to bring forth. …“ (St.John of Damascus, Exact exposition of the Orthodox faith, Book 3, Chapter 2. Concerning the manner in which the Word was conceived, and concerning His divine incarnation).
@@alexandermarkus9587 Angels were not redeemed by Christ. Only we were redeemed. If the Most Holy Theotokos who did not have any personal sins - that is shared by the Orthodox Church and is not disputed, was immaculately conceived and so did not have the original sin, she would be an exception of the humanity because she would not have been Redeemed on the Cross by our Lord Jesus Christ and so Christ would not have died for all.
I am always amazed by how many devout and learned Roman Catholics believe that the immaculate conception and the virgin birth are one and the same thing.
As others have said re: Mary, its not new at all and as for original sin, the Orthodox also affirm this position by virtue of the sixth ecumenical council.
No, not so. Orthodox Christians don't reject the Immaculate Conception. You must be a wolf under sheep clothe. Read this and repent. On December 8, 1854 Pope Pius IX defined as dogma that Mary of Nazareth was conceived without original sin. By this dogma, the Catholic Church confesses: “The most Blessed Virgin Mary was, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God and by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, Saviour of the human race, preserved immune from all stain of original sin.” (CCC #491-492, 508) Unfortunately, many Christians objected this dogma. Referring to Rm. 5:12-13, they argued that since sin has spread to all men, and that sin has been in the world before the law was given; Mary could not be conceived without sin. In addition, for Mary to be conceived without sin, they argued, her parents would have to be sinless as well. So was Mary conceived without sin? To answer this question, and to understand this teaching of the Catholic Church, it would be helpful to begin with the Book of Exodus, chapters 25-30. In these chapters, through Moses, the Lord commanded the Israelites to build a sanctuary that he may dwell in their midst. Within the boundary of the sanctuary were the tabernacle, the altar for burnt offering, the bronze laver and its base, and many other furnishings for the tabernacle. The heart of the sanctuary, however, was the tabernacle, which housed the Ark of the Covenant. When the Lord commanded the Israelites to build this sanctuary, he was very specific about the exact details as how everything had to be made, but most noticeable were the construction of the Ark of the Covenant, and the blending of the holy anointing oil. Concerning the construction of the Ark, the Lord said: Ex 25:10-22, (10) You shall make an ark of acacia wood; two and a half cubits long, one and a half cubits wide, and one and a half cubits high. (11) And you shall overlay it with pure gold, within and without shall you overlay it, and you shall make upon it a molding of gold round about. See Ex 25:12-22 for more details. To blend the anointing oil, the Lord commanded, Ex 30:23-25, (23) Take the finest spices: of liquid myrrh five hundred shekels, and of sweet-smelling cinnamon half as much, that is, two hundred and fifty, and of aromatic cane two hundred and fifty, (24) and of cassia five hundred, according to the shekel of the sanctuary, and of olive oil a hin; (25) and you shall make of these a sacred anointing oil blended as by the perfumer; a holy anointing oil it shall be. The Lord further commanded: Ex 30:26-29, (26) With this sacred anointing oil you shall anoint the meeting tent and the ark of the covenant, (27) and the table and all its utensils, and the lampstand and its utensils, and the altar of incense, (28) and the altar of burnt offering with all its utensils and the laver and its base. Then the Lord declared, Ex 30:29, When you have consecrated them, they shall be most holy; whatever touches them shall be holy. Thus, creatures consecrated to the Lord became holy, but note that the Ark became most holy even if, at the time of the consecration, it was empty, (Ex 25:16), and that the anointing oil was holy even if it wasn’t consecrated to the Lord. The anointing oil was holy because the Lord preserved it to be holy, he said, Ex 30:25, “...; a holy anointing oil it shall be.” So Scriptures tell Christians that though this world has been under a curse (Gn. 3:17-19), and that sin has spread to all men (Rm. 5:12); the Lord, in his omnipotence, can always have any of his creatures consecrated to him, and he can always preserve any of his creatures for his ‘personal use’. When he did, consecrated and preserved creatures became holy. Scriptures also tell Christians that the Lord had the old Ark of the Covenant made to house his covenant with the Israelites, or the stone tablets on which the ten commandments or the words of the Lord were written (Ex 40:20). This covenant was not the last, nor was it eternal; yet the Ark, which housed it, had to be the most holy. How holy then Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, in whom the Eternal Word dwells has to be? Therefore, since the old Ark which was made of acacia wood, by human hands, and covered with pure gold was the most holy among all things; the new Ark, Mary, who was created by God’ hands, over shadowed by the Most High (Lk 1:35), from whom the Eternal Word received his flesh must be the most holy among all creatures. One question, which will surely arise is: Who consecrated Mary to God? The answer is, of course, Mary did. She consecrated herself to God, and she did it freely saying, Lk. 1:38, Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord. May it be done to me according to your word. By her consecration of self, the Word incarnated in her virginal womb, and in her the Word really, truly, and substantially dwelled. Mary must be the most holy among all creatures, angels included. This, understandably, will lead us to the next question: Was Mary the most holy only from the time she consecrated herself to God, or was she always the most holy? As pointed out earlier, the old Ark was the most holy when it housed the words of God as well as when it was empty. Mary, the New Ark, therefore, had to be the most holy when she carried Jesus in her womb as well as when Jesus was not physically in her. In other words, Mary was the most holy throughout her life. This was so, for just in the same way that God had preserved the anointing oil to be holy, so that, by this oil, God gave consecrated creatures their holiness; God had also preserved Mary to be holy and free from sin, so that, through her, God gave his only Son to the world. This preservation, through Prophet Isaiah, God had announced to his people: Is 7:14, Therefore the Lord himself will give you this sign: The virgin shall be with child, and bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel. So it’s clear that God had preserved Mary to be the Virgin; God had also made his will known more than 700 years before Mary was conceived in her mother’s womb. Mary, therefore, had to be the most holy and free from original sin at the time of her conception. Thus, by defining as dogma that Mary of Nazareth was conceived without original sin, the Catholic Church did not define the Immaculate Conception as a new revelation. Instead, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, she only brought forward the favor, which the Almighty had bestowed on Mary, Lk. 1:30, "Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God.” This favor was only one of the many great things the Almighty had done for her so that all ages will call her blessed. (Lk. 1:39-56) Who through all ages will call her blessed? Only Mary’s offspring will. The offspring of her adversary will undoubtedly never call her blessed. (Gn 3:14-15) Finally, as for the argument: if Mary was conceived without sin, her parents would have to be sinless as well. It’s clear that since the consecration of the Ark made holy only the acacia wood and the gold which was used in the construction of the Ark, and that God preserved only Mary to be holy and free from sin to be the mother of his Son; neither the rest of the acacia wood and gold were made holy nor Mary’s parents were preserved to be sinless. Christians, please pray: “O Mary conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to Thee.” By praying this prayer, we ask Mary to pray for us, not that we pray to her.
O K calling eachother heretics does not solve the issues. Roman Catholics are no more heretics than Eastern Orthodox or oriental orthodox. Eastern Orthodox reject filioque even though st athanasius taught filioque in the Athanasian creed “22. The Holy Spirit is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.” (Athanasian creed verse 22) we do not have different faith only different expressions of faith. Eastern Orthodoxy is Extremely helenized to the point that the churches of Antioch and Alexandria of the Eastern Orthodox patriarchates are nothing like the original churches just Greek copies. The oriental Orthodox have the original liturgies from Antioch and Alexandria whereas the Eastern Orthodox are so heavily hellenized that even the Russians have lost quite a lot of tradition the schismatic old believers practice the original Russian orthodox faith, the current patriarchate is a Greek reformed version of its former glory thanks to Nikons reforms by order of the patriarchate of Constantinople. The big problem is the Eastern Orthodox’s view that all churches have to have the same expression of faith. The Oriental Orthodox and Catholic view is that the expression can be different but the faith has to be the same. That’s why catholics and oriental Orthodox have extremely diverse liturgies, whereas the Eastern Orthodox Liturgies are extremely similar, the only differences are in the vernacular, the vestments are quite similar other than the kamilavkion and the kamilavka (Russian) , and the differences in church design slightly. Oriental Orthodox have varying liturgies depending on the church the Coptic Orthodox Church uses vestments traditional to Alexandria, uses st marks liturgy and uses original Coptic dialects in liturgies, the also hold the original cathedral of st mark and hold their own traditions different from their other oriental orthodox brothers.The Syriac Orthodox Church of Antioch uses Syriac, the original vestments of the area, speaks and prays in Aramaic, their priests wear kippahs, and their churches are the original churches in Antioch. The Armenian Orthodox have their own unique vestments, liturgy, architecture, vernacular, and other such things yet they are still in unity with the original Orthodox churches. The tewahedo church is vibrant and has their own form of worship in liturgy, through their mezmurs, they have their own icon styles, they also have different vestments, and architecture.the St Thomas Christians of India maintain their own liturgy, traditions, iconography, vestments, architecture; and their own traditions . All the Oriental Orthodox churches are united in faith but express their faith quite differently, some use icons some don’t, some use stone work, some don’t, some use statues others do not. Their is not this same diversity in worship in the Eastern Orthodox only Hellenism asserting itself on the other patriarchates, the Russians weren’t even allowed to express their iconography in a different way the patriarch of Constantinople indemnes it as heresy and had Nikon destroy all the icons , the old believers still maintain the true Russian traditions, liturgy, vestments, etc. The only Apostolic Church other than the Oriental Orthodox that accepts liturgical diversity is the Catholic Church their are 33 eastern churches all with different liturgies they all express the faith differently even to the point that some do not use filioque, yet they are still in communion. The Eastern Orthodox patriarchates hold petty grudges and political ideologies that stubbornly prevent unity with both the Catholic Church and the Oriental Orthodox.
@@atanasiogreene8493 you are misinformed. The "Athanasian" creed is problematic and so your whole argument that the orthodox are misguided for discarding it is does not hold it's ground. The "creed" was not even written by Athanasius, but written by Latin christians in either Southern France or Spain and only ATTRIBUTED to Athanasius long after he himself had passed away. And it's not even a valid creed. It was never discussed in any of the Eucumenical councils of the church. But orthodox generally agree that, with the exception of the reference to the filioque, it's theologically sound. And I wonder why, if this creed is so essential to the western churches, it is not used more often nowadays. How do you justify the fact that it's use has declined?
IMMACULATE CONCEPTION in ISLAM: Muslims believe in the immaculate conception (i.e., not conceived in sin) of only two persons: Mary and Jesus, as do the Roman Catholic Church. All Christians believe in the immaculate conception of Jesus, but not all believe in the immaculate conception of Mary. The doctrine of Immaculate Conception of Mary was imposed as an Article of Faith in the Roman Catholic Church by Pope Pious IX on Dec. 18th, 1854. The Muslim belief stem from the hadiths: Narrated Said bin Al-Musaiyab: Abu Huraira said, "I heard Allah's Apostle saying, 'There is none born among the off-spring of Adam, but Satan touches it. A child therefore, cries loudly at the time of birth because of the touch of Satan, except Mary and her child." Then Abu Huraira recited: "And I seek refuge with You for her and for her offspring from the outcast Satan" (3.36) (Sahih Bukhari 4.641) Thus, Islam believes that only Mary and Jesus were not touched by Satan. Even Muhammad did not have this distinction
St. Ephraim the Syrian (c. 350): "Thou, and Thy Mother are alone in this. You are wholly beautifu in every respect. There is in Thee, Lord, no stain, nor any spot in Thy Mother. (Poem to Christ)
This is an incorrect representation of the Latin-Catholic view of original sin. Original sin does not mean that anyone is born with guilt. It means that we have to suffer the consequences of the fall (of Adam and Eve), which includes a strong inclination to sin, disorder, etc. Baptism into the body of Christ imparts the virtues of Faith, Hope, and Charity into one’s soul, and with that grace oneness with Christ. It doesn’t mean that the struggle won’t continue though. I really don’t get why some in the Orthodox Church characterize the Latin view as saying that one is born with guilt. “Actual” sin- which is the sin which one commits himself through the internal or external actions - is what makes you personally guilty in Latin theology. I feel like a lot of times some Orthodox misleadingly strawman attack the Latin Catholic view by describing a more Calvainist or Protestant view of sin and then attacking that as the “Latin” view. Very much not true.
It says HAIL MARY..... FULL OF *GRACE* in order for Jesus to be born Mary needed to be cleaned from all sin as no sin could touch God. Mary was different from everyone else because she was the vessel to bring the savior into the world. Yes she was fully human but she needed to be cleaned before birthing the lord. She is the ark of the covenant and the greatest saint that ever lived
Whether Mary was saved in advanced or without sin or whatever doesn’t matter. What matters is that she was simply a vessel for the Son of God. Period, that’s all that matters
We would not agree. Truth matters. The implications of the legalistic belief about original sin and the substitutionary atonement, and raising Mary to a level above normal humanity are toxic to the spiritual life.
orthodoxnet i agree with you, but what I’m saying is that discussions like these tends to divide rather than representing both sides so that an answer can be found. The title of your video is very generalizing and most likely won’t be taken well by orthodox Christians, you might have good intentions but it’s something to watch out for. I’m not orthodox or anything, but i hope you get what i mean. Ofc the truth matters, but I’m addressing how we get to that truth
@@clairestevens3194 You have described the Theotokos’ virtue wonderfully. The Latin understanding of her human nature is that her human nature was programmed to be superior to human nature from the beginning (free from inherited guilt, unlike every other human being according to their theology of Original Sin, which we do not believe). This removes the virtue that you spoke of. It makes her a holy pre-programmed robot. The Theotokos was either, according to some fathers, sinless from birth (she never sinned willfully), or was sinless from the time of the conception of Jesus Christ. However, she was not a different kind of human being than everyone else. She made choices, and the choices were not made for her. People get very confused because the Orthodox Christians think that Mary was either sinless from birth or sinless from the time of the Annunciation. They confuse this belief with the matins teaching of the “immaculate conception”. They don’t understand that she made choices, just as we do. God did not make her choices for her. Exempting Mary from inherited guilt makes the choice for her. Of course, there is no inherited guilt (there is inherited corruption, since both Mary and Jesus died flesh), and I have said many times before that the “immaculate conception” is a heresy which became necessary because of an ancient heresy, that of inherited guilt, or so-called “Original Sin”. The Latins believe in inherited guilt, the Orthodox Christians do not. Of course, many Orthodox Christians would say they do because they do not understand their faith. Some also have strange views on sexual morality, angels, fasting, and many other things because they don’t understand the faith. If their only experience of their faith is Divine Liturgy, then they would not understand the depth of our theology from the beautiful Vespers and Matins and other services. It’s very clear that we believe that mankind has an inherited weakness and predilection toward sin because of the passions, but not inherited guilt. Jesus Christ inherited all of the passions of humanity from the prelapsarian state of Adam and Eve. Adam and Eve were born with no sinful passions. They had the so-called blameless passions, which are part of being a human being. They developed sinful passions because they made sinful choices. Our Lord never made any sinful choices, and therefore remained completely free of sin. He passed on the ability to become completely free of sin to us through baptism. One might ask if the Lord was born in such a way that he had only the blameless passions and none of the sinless sinful passions, was he different in His human nature and the rest of humanity? No, he was not. Sin is an addition to prelapsarian human nature which distorts and sickens the soul. Sinful passions are like cancer. Having cancer does not change our human nature but it does sicken it and to some extent, medically distort it, since cancer always makes some parts of the body not function as they should.
Claire Stevens i agree with you, but her as a mother isn’t quite what this is about. She’s not limited to being “just a vessel” but she was a vessel, like how our mothers were as well for US, Mary was obviously set apart. my bad for giving the wrong impression
"This day, O faithful, from saintly parents begins to take being the SPOTLESS lamb, the MOST PURE tabernacle, Mary …” (From the Office of Matins, the Third Ode of the Canon.
It was fitting that the New Adam and the New Eve were made in the same perfection of the Old Adam and the Old Eve in order to correct the mistakes of choosing an imperfect state over our natural perfect state as human beings. The New Eve was not created inferior to the Old Eve. It was first the New Eve’s perfect obedience that made way for the New Adam’s perfect obedience. It is typologically and theologically perfect and fitting.
The concept of original sin is what holds me back the most from entertaining the thought that the Christian god is the living god. Why would god create me damned from the start. That’s not justice, or love.
look I appreciate what you're saying but if Mary being sinless means that she wasn't fully human, then obviously Jesus being sinless means that he wasn't fully human also. So, that whole thing falls apart. They either should both be sinless, or both be sinful.
"Today the MOST-IMMACULATE and PURE Lady hath issued forth from a barren wóman Today all things rejoice in her natívity! The bonds of Adam have been broken and Eve has been freéd from the curse!" All those in heaven rejoice and mankind is gíven peace! / And we glorify her and crý aloud: / Glory to God in the Híghest, /// And on earth peace, good wíll among men!
@orthodoxnet your forgetting the fact that sin is not the definition of bieng a human it just comes along with most humans but Mary was conceived without sin so how does this make her an alien or "not human?"
Does that make Adam and Eve less human? - for they were created without original sin... 🤔 I might add, if God incarnate (Jesus) inherited original sin from His mother, would that not mean that God is tainted by sin?... 🤔 Jesus, in His humanity, is like us in all ways, except for sin, for the Divine cannot partake of a sinful nature. Mary is the vessel through which our Lord obtained his humanity, so it only makes sense that she would be Immaculate, so that her Son could be, by extension. As a Catholic, I firmly reject this heresy, however it is interesting to see what others think. 😇 Thank you for sharing this information with us, I have had an inkling for some weeks that the Orthodox Church held these particular views on Mary, so I honestly appreciate your concise provision of the specifics pertaining to this topic. I have lots of respect for our Orthodox brothers, and their teachings, but this is one point on which we differ. :) Take care, and God Bless You, geniussnake497 :-)
Why would he obtain original sin from his mother? If God preserved Mary from original sin, why not just preserve Christ from original sin? If christ would be tainted by original sin due to mary, if she wasn't preserved. Then wouldnt mary also be tainted by original sin by her parents?
Mary in the example of how God is a gentleman. He preserved her to bring His only son. She is pure and loyal to Him. Mary didn’t know about Jesus. She didn’t know she was going to be gracious until the angel Gabriel told her.
This is a false vision, according to Orthodox Christians. Remember, I am an Orthodox Christian priest, and teach Orthodox doctrine, and do not go to Latin channels to contradict them or call them Heretics. This is a thing called "manners".
@@seraphimh With due respect for the office of the Holy Priesthood bestowed on you by Our Lord Jesus Christ and for you personally as a child of God, I do not intend to be impolite. God intended for us to have this exchange as I in general do not visit orthodox channels. In the charity of Christ, it is necessary for people to be aware of what Our Holy Mother has said, through which, as in all She does, gives Glory to God. May Our Lord Jesus Christ have mercy on us poor sinners.
Please, do not espouse doctrines could we consider to be heretical. I do not go to other people's channels or websites and contradict their religion. I'm trying to teach, and if you make a comment, fine but if you persist I won't be able to allow it. I do not want people to be exposed to Roman Catholic heresies because they have watched my video. This is not technically a discussion forum it is a forum where I have videos and people comment or ask questions. It it is not a polemical site where I am inviting people to debate me. I talked about manners before, and if there are Manners, I don't even need to say these things - they're just understood. Priest Seraphim Holland
@@seraphimh Patristic writings on Mary's purity abound. 1) The Fathers call Mary the tabernacle exempt from defilement and corruption (Hippolytus, "Ontt. in illud, Dominus pascit me"); 2) Origen calls her worthy of God, immaculate of the immaculate, most complete sanctity, perfect justice, neither deceived by the persuasion of the serpent, nor infected with his poisonous breathings ("Hom. i in diversa"); 3) Ambrose says she is incorrupt, a virgin immune through grace from every stain of sin ("Sermo xxii in Ps. cxviii); 4) Maximus of Turin calls her a dwelling fit for Christ, not because of her habit of body, but because of original grace ("Nom. viii de Natali Domini"); 5) Theodotus of Ancyra terms her a virgin innocent, without spot, void of culpability, holy in body and in soul, a lily springing among thorns, untaught the ills of Eve, nor was there any communion in her of light with darkness, and, when not yet born, she was consecrated to God ("Orat. in S. Dei Genitr."). 6) In refuting Pelagius St. Augustine declares that all the just have truly known of sin "except the Holy Virgin Mary, of whom, for the honour of the Lord, I will have no question whatever where sin is concerned" (On Nature and Grace 36). 7) Mary was pledged to Christ (Peter Chrysologus, "Sermo cxl de Annunt. B.M.V."); 8) it is evident and notorious that she was pure from eternity, exempt from every defect (Typicon S. Sabae); 9) she was formed without any stain (St. Proclus, "Laudatio in S. Dei Gen. ort.", I, 3); 10) she was created in a condition more sublime and glorious than all other natures (Theodorus of Jerusalem in Mansi, XII, 1140); 11) when the Virgin Mother of God was to be born of Anne, nature did not dare to anticipate the germ of grace, but remained devoid of fruit (John Damascene, "Hom. i in B. V. Nativ.", ii). 12) The Syrian Fathers never tire of extolling the sinlessness of Mary. St. Ephraem considers no terms of eulogy too high to describe the excellence of Mary'sgrace and sanctity: "Most holy Lady, Mother of God, alone most pure in soul and body, alone exceeding all perfection of purity ...., alone made in thy entirety the home of all the graces of the Most Holy Spirit, and hence exceeding beyond all compare even the angelicvirtues in purity and sanctity of soul and body . . . . my Lady most holy, all-pure, all-immaculate, all-stainless, all-undefiled, all-incorrupt, all-inviolate spotless robe of Him Who clothes Himself with light as with a garment . . . flower unfading, purple woven by God, alone most immaculate" ("Precationes ad Deiparam" in Opp. Graec. Lat., III, 524-37).To St. Ephraem she was as innocent as Eve before her fall, a virgin most estranged from every stain of sin, more holy than the Seraphim, the sealed fountain of the Holy Ghost, the pure seed of God, ever in body and in mind intact and immaculate ("Carmina Nisibena"). 13) Jacob of Sarug says that "the very fact that God has elected her proves that none was ever holier than Mary; if any stain had disfigured her soul, if any other virgin had been purer and holier, God would have selected her and rejected Mary". It seems, however, that Jacob of Sarug, if he had any clear idea of the doctrine of sin, held that Mary was perfectly pure from original sin ("the sentence against Adam and Eve") at the Annunciation. Source: www.newadvent.org/cathen/07674d.htm
@@orthodoxnet what do the orthodox teach on this matter.? Many comments I would prefer a comment from an Orthodox priest if you would I would highly appreciate it.
@@anomalousviewer3164 If you read through the comments, you will find I have made many questions. I am happy to respond to questions or comments. I just delete contradiction and Roman Catholic teaching.
St. John of Damascus: "Her whole being is the bridal chamber of the Holy Spirit; Her whole being is a City of the living God which "the flowings of the river gladden"; that is FLOODS OF THE GIFTS OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. She is ALL-FAIR, ENTIRELY THE COMPANION OF GOD
Why is Baptism necessary for salvation if human beings are not born with original sin. To believe this you would have to believe that you would have acted differently in the Garden of Eden, but our concupiscence and weakness to sin against God and betray His love for us by our sin is proof that we also would have done the same thing before we are regenerated through Christ.
Jesus was fully human and fully divine. If God wanted a human mother he would have wanted the PERFECT mother. Someone who would be as perfect as Adam and Eve when they were created by God, without sin. Mary being immaculate doesn't make her non-human. Because Jesus as well was fully human and was immaculate as well.
Vincenzo Rutigliano: it makes her less-than-human. 'It' - the Mariological Immaculate Conception - makes her a pre-conditioned automaton. i.e. that she was 'pre-programed' like a machine to say yes to God's plan. Where is the inviolable gift of free-will in that? She who bore Christ without seed was herself borne of seed. Christ inherited His Humanity through the seed of His Mother and through that human inheritance, the Davidic lineage. Therefore, mankind's Salvation is dependent upon Christ's redemptive taking up of the stained ancestral nature NECESSARILY borne of His Mother upon His Conception and Incarnation.
Someone, anonymously posted only the words "anathema on you" . This is a useless and stupid comment and I deleted it. First of all this poor person doesn't understand what an anethema is; it is to lift someone up to God. Is that Anonymous person praying for me or just saying a stupid comment in a hit-and-run? These hit-and-run comments never have any justification they just say you're a terrible person because you don't believe what I believe. I tire of them and I delete them because they just take up useless space. There are using it as a curse. They don't understand the word. Most people don't understand theology but they still talk about it.
I was brought up Roman Catholic and I'd wondered why the OC disputes this It has to do with the Orthodox East view of the fall of man and the redemption offered by Christ RC believe that Everyone is born "tainted" or somehow guilty of the sin of Adam. The Orthodox believe that Adam only bears the mark of his sin ....and that it cannot be transfered ...or inherited In OC view, Mary would not have inherited the sin of Adam, Anyway...that no 1 does She was made to be holy because God chose her to be Theotokos Further, Orthodox teach that we do not inherit the original sin of Adam ...but rather the "fallout" of that sin...namely age, sickness, death The Orthodox have a great devotion. to the Mother Of God
Christianity got astray from the right path. This is what God CLEARLY EXPLAINED WHEN HE SENT THE SEAL OF PROPHETS MUHAMMAD (PEACE BE UPON HIM). This is why you see Christians worship Jesus (peace be upon him) as a God or son of God which is CLEARLY WRONG. Since Adam (peace be upon him) God was only 1, he was not a human who eats and drink like any of us, he didn't have a son, he didn't walk in the markets like human do....etc He was only 1 with no partner. So worship him alone with no partner and believe in his last prophet, and follow Islam, and obey the commands of God and stay away from whatever he have forbidden, and do Good deeds for the sake of God. This is your way to please God, Your Creator and to enter Paradise in the hereafter.
Listen to Quran in TH-cam. Islam is a man made cult heresy. It was created by Muhammad a student of an Arian bishop, he was a warlord and pedophile. Islam is not a perfect religion, it is man made, Orthodoxy is not it is the only religion created by God.
Listen to Quran in TH-cam. Muhammad did not fix anything only bring back the things jesus fought against. Muhammad brought back the laws that Jesus fulfilled, he brought violence and the sword. Causing violent punishment for sins rather than leaving it in Gods hands. Islam is ruled by the clerics who make up quranic interpretations to form caliphates and other empires that persecuted what Muhammad called ‘people of the book’. Islam is nothing more than a restoration of the pharosaic heresies and the continuation of Arianism and Gnosticism.
So I’m new to learning about the orthodox faith (Protestant, Pentecostal currently though visiting a Russian Orthodox Church). My question is does the Orthodox Church not believe Mary had a virgin birth when she had Jesus?
The parents of the Panagia, past child conceiving age. I am Orthodox Eastern Orthodox. Maria was likely conceived without sin from the result of prayer by her parents. We can't say this for certain it is probable like 99%. I can agree she was conceived without sin.
I am deleting comments such as, with no explanation, “I am the Immaculate Conception.” Of course, this refers to apparitions of the Mother of God that are accepted by the Latins but not by Orthodox Christians. I’m an Orthodox Christian and I do not accept apparitions which in a self-serving way tell of a ***new*** dogma. A new dogma is actually an oxymoron. There are no new dogmas. If the Mother of God wanted us to think she was the Immaculate Conception she would’ve said it a long time ago. This is the only so-called dogma that I’m aware of where the Mother of God advertises for it. You may have a different opinion. It’s a free country. You can go to a Roman Catholic site and learn about the immaculate conception, but you’re not going to learn to believe the immaculate conception here. For Orthodox Christians, the Roman conception of the immaculate conception is false. I delete things that just contradict or say that I’m a heretic or other such things. I don’t go on Roman Catholic sites and call them heretics. I am trying to teach Orthodox doctrine here, and you may disagree with it, but you may not just contradict it and say nasty things.Priest Seraphim Holland
The faith is a living thing which must be explored and examined. New dogmas are not made by men rewriting God's word but by our growing in understanding it
mary did say to someone she is the immaculate conception, she said it to bernadette in lourdes in 1853 she said. ''I am the Immaculate Conception'' she said it from her own lips herself
It's a twisted doctrine. My baby brother died before being baptized. They disposed of its body. No funeral, no player. According to the church my brother will burn in hell. A dead dog gets a better burial. Dont give a damn what the church says. Human beings are born pure. From all Abrahamic religions, at least Islam acknowledged this.
I'm very sorry for your loss. You were describing an organization that is not the church. You describing the Roman Catholics not Orthodox. I would never do such a thing
@@seraphimh to be more precise, i am describing the Romanian Orthodox Church 35 years ago. About 19 years ago my mom wanted to give charity on behalf of my dead brother. The priest raised his voice and said "there's no charity for pagans" and forbade her to give charity for my brother on church's premises. That event made a strong impression on me. I don't deny your good intentions, but that's the official doctrine of the Orthodox Church put into practice. My mom could never get over the brother death, this took a toll on my parents' marriage and 32 years years later their finally divorced. Only after spending a couple of years in the Middle East I've finally found my inner peace.
His body is her body. As there was no earthly father. He was born without sin, and so He would have absolutely created her without sin. Makes sense to me that He wouldn't want to be conceived from a body that was sinful.
Your right. So much of the Catholic faith is based on non Biblcal concerns emphasized in their Councils of men. Openning the door to philosophy, pagan ideas of opinions, assumptions, theories, speculations and false conclusions adopted as fact. Thanks for your video.
I like this because it simply isn’t said in any scripture until a mistranslation from Hebrew to Greek. ‘Alma’ simply means a young woman of child bearing age and it certainly doesn’t mean ‘virgin.’
Mary Mareden, We celebrate the Theotokos Mary's conception on the 9th every December (New Style/Gregorian Calendar, and thirteen days thereafter in the 'Old' Style/Julian), the day following the RC's own 'Immaculate Conception' of the Virgin Mary to Ss Anna & Joachim. It is observed as The Conception by St. Anna of the Most Holy Theotokos. God continue to bless and enlighten you who bear Our Lady's most holy name.
Jesus was the sinless God-Man, period. And Mary was a human, and like all humans she had sin, whether small or big. P.S, Jesus called her “woman” more than once as recorded in the Bible, indicating that she was like all other human beings in need of a saviour; Jesus came to save her from her sins too.
The Catholic theologians distinguish between the original sin as a debt (The need for redemption to restore our justice upon God) and as an act (The proclivity towards evil). The Blessed Virgin Mary was preserved from the original sin as an act, in the sense that since her Conception she never had any tendency to sin, nor the Evil had any influence on her. Still, she obviously was a fully human being who needed the sacrifice of Our Lord Jesus Christ to enter Heaven.
The base misunderstanding is the word guilt. Guilt in the catholic sense here is not that you as a falle person are guilty, it's that you as a fallen person bear the effects of the sin (something that orthodox also believe). It's an old use if the word that people get confused about and understandably so because there are church documents that use that language
Here are my thoughts as an Orthodox catechumen. The Orthodox do not believe in original sin in the sense that it is inherited biologically. The belief is in ancestral sin. When we are born, we are not ourselves guilty of the sin of Adam, rather, we are born into a fallen world with a proclivity towards sin. The Orthodox view is that unbaptized infants do NOT got to hell. So, when the orthodox baptize their infants, it's not to "erase original sin", it't to welcome and initiate them into the Church, the living body of Christ "I confess one Baptism for the remission of sins", yes, baptism does this too. The Orthodox also believe that the Theotokos was "immaculate" and "most pure", but there is no need for her to have been "Immaculately conceived" because we don't believe in original sin in the first place. The thought process is that she was born sinless, and remained so (unlike the rest of us) as she was consecrated to God.
Refreshingly coherent.
If we have proclivity toward sin isn't it because of the original sin?
@@Quis_ut_Deus yes. of course it is, because either someone can live righteously without God, or we live sinfully in need of God. If we are only potentially capable of commiting sin, does that mean Christ only potentially sacrificed himself for our salvation?
@@Kryptic712 What I meant is that if we are not guilty of the original sin why we still have proclivity toward sin if not because we had also taken part in the same transgression, i.e. also being guilty of the original sin or being marked by the original sin?
What I understand from Winter Rose is that we are almost born immaculate in a fallen world but we just don't succeed to stay so.
My thought is that if we are first created in spirit by god we enter the world through the fault of the original sin, so also marked by the original sin. We are not only marked as because we are in a fallen world but because we are also guilty (for the majority of us) of the original sin, spiritually. It why we are not immaculate and why we are all sinners (at least all marked but not sure if all guilty). Except for Mary and Jesus (and maybe John the Baptist but I don't know) who were immaculate (not being marked nor guilty but still being in a fallen world).
@@Quis_ut_Deus Because of ancestral sin yes. But we can't do anything about that. If baptism is supposed to cleans us of original sin, then why do we still have a tendency to sin, even after baptism?
“And the Angel being come in, said unto her: Hail, *Full of Grace,* the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.” (Luke 1:29)
Amen. Our Lady is truly blessed and truly holy.
Correct verse: Luke 1:29: “But when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying, and considered what manner of greeting this was.” Amen.
I think you choose a wrong verse to justify.
@@clockstseed3239 κεχαριτωμένη (Graced) is clearly showing that She was graced prior to Christ's redemption (it was said at the annunciation before Christ was born). the noun is only used in the new testament to refer to those in a state of grace thanks to baptism washing away original sin - yet it's applied to Mary beforehand.
it was probably a typo; not an error on his part, cus it's Luke 1:28 - just one off Luke 1:29
It's amazing how many people are incapable of making the difference between "Being a sinner" (someone who has already made the free choice to sin) and "Being capable of sin" (someone who is capable of making a free choice to sin, but did not make that choice and chose not to sin instead).
Everyone sins. No matter how hard they try not to.
@@nickchadwell5099 True, but we can at least avoid intentional sins like lying, stealing, cheating, etc. Those are always a choice. And thats' where the main difference between ordinary people and saints is. Saints have attained a significant self-control over their sinful impulses.
@@nickchadwell5099 The Most Holy Theotokos was sinless. This is orthodox, catholic, anglican, early protestant, oriental doctrine!
1 John 1:8 KJV
[8] If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
Everyone is a sinner and will struggle with sin as long as they are in flesh Romans 7:14 and onwards...
The only way to heaven is to be born again John 3:3.
Ephesians 2:8-9 KJV
[8] For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: [9] not of works, lest any man should boast.
Real saving faith is God given
John 6:28-29 KJV
[28] Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? [29] Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.
@@Oozy9Millimeetah Protestant nonsense
You made a big leap from the immaculate conception to Mary not being fully human. Do you think God is incapable of protecting one of his creatures from sin if that is his will?
Putting limits on God is silly.
I will not make a silly argument about what God can do or cannot do or if placing limits on him is silly. That very statement is silly. I'm more concerned with what God has done and how he has chosen to interact with us. Jesus christ took on Human Nature with its corruption. The corruption came from the mother of God because she is a human being born with corruption because of sin. Whether she sinned or not is not a question. I don't try to answer that question. All human beings have corruptible flash after the sin of Adam and Eve. It is clear that she was a human being born with corruptible human flesh because she died. So did Jesus Christ. If we exempt the mother of God from this nature, then Jesus Christ is Exempted from this nature. It is clear that the intent to exempt Mary from being guilty when born, this idea of original sin, which we do not believe but the Latins do, then of course they would also exempt her from the effects of this sin, which would be corruptible human nature. It's very obvious that she had corruptible human nature and it's also obvious that Jesus did as well because he died. After his death, by his own power as God, he did not allow his human flesh to corrupt any further, and he rose from the dead on the third day. This is also available to us, through baptism and Christian struggle afterwards.
most people who have argued with my points, don't actually address them. They either say, he's a heretic, or join the true church, the Catholics, or this Apparition or that Apparition said it so it must be true, or they have a strange emotionalism about trying to make the mother of God holy in an automatic way. She is Holy because of her choices.
Priest Seraphim Holland
@@orthodoxnet Father, thank you for that clarification.
@Tony B Romans 8:3-4 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: (4) That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
Philippians 2:5-8 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: (6) Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: (7) But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: (8) And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
Jesus is the prelapsarian man, without sin, but with the blameless passions, which included being subject to death.
@@fucduck no I do not believe that. If you had listened carefully or read my comments you would know that I absolutely do not believe that. We do not inherit sin we inherit corruption. If your name is meant to an unclean word, I will delete you. Please tell me if you're trying to make a joke or something
Orthodox Christian from Germany here 🙋🏻♂️🇩🇪 God bless you all and your loved ones 🙏❤️☦️
Das ist fantastisch
Ich bin auf dem Weg in die Orthodoxie 🙏🏻😇
Same here
Grüß euch Leute, ich hatte heute meine erste göttliche Liturgie und es war wunderschön. Nächsten Sonntag gehe ich wieder. Gottes Segen euch!
You mean from one of Satan's headquarters?
Catholics don't say Mary was not human. She was preserved from the effects of sin just like oil and water do not mix
So then if God can make an exception for her, why not all of us, and spare us all the entire salvation narrative to begin with?
It is a false doctrine. Mary was born to human parents and was subject to the same influences as other humans. As a human she is a created being, and not innately divine, and therefore has no greater status than anyone else before God. She was created in Christ along wity the entire creation.
@@77goanywhere what the Devil said during the exorcism on Annaliese Michel: "The dogma of the Immaculata hurts us so much. Thank goodness no one believes in this truth anymore. If people believed this, all hell would tremble. Because of this disbelief of theirs many people are down here". Virgin Mary have been preserved by sin for grace of God since her conception: She is full of grace. She is the new Eve: if the sin came into the world for the first one, by Mary the sin have been defeated.
@@k.w.7973 Okay so was Jesus born with original sin?
God can save humans he can't save himself.
God saved Mary from original sin so that Jesus may be born without original sin. If Mary wasn't saved from original sin then God would have to save Jesus. But can God save God
@@alessandroferrari5262 So you believe what a devil says?
She is the ark of the covenant. The arc was holy because it contained the manna from the wilderness, the staff of Aaron, and the broken tablets of the commandments. The Bible relates stories of Jews touching the arc and dying. Also it has been the tradition of the church for 2 thousand years that her birth was immaculate.
And why is she the ark?
The ark is apart of the old covenant, one where salvation was through sacrifice and works. Our new covenant is one with grace and faith
Her conception was immaculate, not birth.
Are you describing something important cuz that sounds like a good lore for new world of warcraft dlc?
@@Kryptic712 She is the Living Ark who contained in her womb the Word Made Flesh.
But if the Theotokos is with sin...then Jesus will inherit the original sin from his mother? And if she is not Immaculate why did the angel told her the she is "Full of grace" ?
See some other comments. The Theotokos was not born with sin, because none of us are born with inherited guilt. We say that she is full of grace, because at the moment in which she said let it be done to the slave of the Lord, the Holy Spirit came upon her and she was at that point for the Holy Spirit, and full of grace.
@@orthodoxnet
Then why did the angel told her the she is "Full of grace" before the blessed Virgin utter her "Fiat"? Doesn't this tell that the Theotokos is full of grace before uttering her fiat?
Áhrante Nímfi Pánagne, Déspina Panagía,
@Oancea Tudor Church is living. As per its maturity the Holy Spirit will make the truths fully known through the Church. That's why there is an infallible authority. Every other denomination will have its own interpretations for every moral and theological concept. Thank God for the seat of Peter.
@@lorenzdecano6267
May God bless you for the responses you give. I am amazed by how truthfuly you act and in showing the truth..
God is powerfull. He can make anything real.
Except himself
Except make Jews think that a woman that lived among them actually got pregnant not from her husband but from God. Also, forgetting that Jesus mother, grandmother, great grandmother were all Jews, so his cousins, neighbors and playmates witnessed what happened. All to be unquestionably dismissed.
@@simonbennatan8257 : the Divine Conception of Israel's Messiah (and His Incarnation and Virgin Birth) are not in discussion here. The Roman Catholic heresy of "the Immaculate Conception" - which is only a heresy when applied to another other than the Nazarene Y'shua, is what is being refuted in this video. That Christ's Emot Rishonot: Miriam, Channah and Miriam - His great grandmother, were Jews, we know. What His "cousins, neighbors (and playmates)" witnessed, we read about in the B'rit Hadashah - the Greater Testament which has fulfilled the Lesser Testament - the B'rit Yashanah. You would do well for yourself and the mishpochah/tzibbur to look into its pages.
@@terrytzaneros8007 you seem interested in the original text. why do you logically chose to refute what is in the Talmud? That Mary was married and that Pantero, a Roman, was Yoshka's father? Why do you chose to believe her and the God - Messiah over the Jews? We have always had stories about Jews not doing the right thing, being human, but good always prevailed, why, is it that you chose to label all Jewish experience of this generation as dismissive? Is it anger, shame, vindictiveness? (PS I'm not religious anymore, but I'm amazed at the logic of replacement theory, especially when Muslims are intended on doing the same with your religion and your lands)
@@simonbennatan8257 : chaver, Adoniteinu KolKadoshah, she who is EmEl, is the ensign pointing to her Son, (John 2:5). It is in the Virgin Birth of Mashiakh Y'shua, that the Talmud's Rabbanim have commenced the Halakhic matrilineal ruling for who is, and who is not, a Jew. This is thanks to God's favor shown to Miriam Bat Tzion and is no coincidence, but rather a Siman d' Shmayah. 'Miriam Menorah', that is how the Mother of God was represented - a pure vessel - by the Jewish Church in Yerushalayim - the Church of Ya'akov AkhEl (Brother of the Lord) the first Mashgiach Rosh Adat of Jerusalem. It is to this Church - the Church of the Jews that you should turn for the Messorah Mishpokhat Mashiakh and not the Targum fables. Roshav Maran Ahavel III (Patriarch Theophilos the 3rd) is a worthy custodian and steward of these Traditions of the Holy Church of Zion. Look to her.
We Ethiopian Orthodox believe that the holy virgin Mary is free from the original sin we believe God was able to keep her pure from the sin of origin, while she was in the womb as God is capable of protecting his servants at the womb level. "5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, [and] I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations."
(Jeremiah 1:5)
Saint John of Damascus said that the Holy Mary is free from sin, I think that the Orthodox church accept this
Not original sin
The Immaculate Conception is not a 'recent' doctrine. What the original poster is referencing is that its status as a dogma of the Church is fairly recent.
He also confuses being created immaculate with remaining in that condition. Adam and Eve were also created without stain and only later gave up their sinless status. If you don't believe that, you've got bigger theological problems; namely charging God the Creator as the Author of Evil.
@Jesus Christ Glorified which orthodox church do you belong to? Different churches have different degrees of theological development. While not always reaching the level of dogmatic proclamation, even various orthodox communities have some beliefs and traditions that they would prefer not to be removed.
Lucae Absolutely right.
Jesus Christ Glorified Well then, sorry to say, but your church is not orthodox.
I am Latin rite Catholic. We do not believe in inherited guilt of sin but in the inherited condition of separation from God which is an effect of Adam’s sin. For most of us this is removed at baptism; for Mary this was removed when she was conceived. I cannot argue with you about what Orthodox believe; I can argue with you about what you think Catholics believe.
I'm happy to be corrected about what the Latins believe about inherited guilt vs inherited corruption, however regardless of what they believe, they believe that the theotokos was changed at the moment of conception and therefore was born as a different kind of human being than all of the rest of humanity. That is the major argument against the so-called Immaculate Conception
@@seraphimh it's simple. She was the new Eve, obvious that she is different from us
not all orthodox reject immaculate conception. At least not the 5 original counties to accept Christianity(Ethiopia, Egypt, India, Armenia, syria. it was not the Roman Catholic that came up with it. the orthodox before Catholic taught the immaculate conception
I am orthodox and defend the central point of the doctrine.
Jesus is described in the Bible as “full of grace and truth.” The only other person in the entire Bible described as “full of grace” is the Blessed Virgin Mary. What is grace? Grace is the supernatural life of God. Based on this, why is it so hard to believe Mary to have been sinless and Immaculately Conceived?
Because if mary was born exempt from the effects of original sin, she would have been immortal, Because the result of original sin is death. That is what a human nature is, to be afflicted by death because of original sin. So without a human nature, she would have born from her a son that was also fully divine and did not inherit the effects of original sin (human nature) and could not suffer death on the cross. So to approve immaculate conception is to reject the crucifiction of christ.
You base that on a mistranslation of the Latin Vulgate.
@@xanderLudahlif the doctrine of the ancestral sin is true, then how could Adam and Eve commit sin?
I am an Ethiopian Orthodox we believe and know that Virgin Mary is immaculately conceived. i don't understand when they say orthodox christians reject the immaculate conception, which orthodoxes are they referring to?
@@betelhemyemane2564 the Russians probably.
The RoC rejects the immaculate conception
I am orthodox from romania thr orthodox don't reject the immaculatr conception actually it is a base concept in the religion
This is not true. You have just stated something, but not backed it up.
@@orthodoxnet We orthodox are not crazy protestant heretics
Absolut correct!
Man Fathers, especially the Byzantine Fathers teach it or come very close to it.
I am an Ethiopian Orthodox and we truly believe the Immaculate Conception.
Does being without sin make you LESS human? I would think it made you more.
Of course, being sinless makes us more human. You and I are not fully human yet because we have not yet attained to the measure and stature of Jesus Christ. He was the perfect human being, born in a sinful world, and subject to the blameless passions, but not sinful. Therefore, He lived a perfect human life without sin, and rose from the dead and transmitted to us the ability to become perfect through baptism.
Jesus Christ of course was sinless, and of course had no original sin but in the latter case, neither did you or I, or any other human being. Original sin is a false doctrine as the Latins teach it. Because of the sin of Adam and Eve, we were born with passions. These passions develop very quickly into sins. Our Lord was born only with the sinless passions, those weaknesses that come from having mortal human flesh. These would be things like the need to sleep, and bleeding when cut, and dying when crucified. A technical term for the passions that Jesus had would be that he was born in the condition of Adam and Eve, and we that condition pre-lapsarian. And Adam and Eve were created, they had no sinful passions, only those characteristics that are common to human existence.
The only reasonable (among some, I personally will not give an opinion about this) disagreement we can have regarding the Theotokos and sin is whether or not she actually sinned. It is an unreasonable disagreement to believe that the Theotokos was conceived in a way that was different from other human beings so that she would be something greater than a mortal human being even from the time of her conception. Many of the fathers think she did not sin, and some think she sinned in minor ways. I do not enter into that argument.
She did not keep yourself pure because she was a holy robot. God did not program her to be sinless. She made the choice to obey God and to live a pure life. This is her great virtue.
The Latin heresy of Original Sin forces them because of their legalistic way of thinking to create the doctrine of the immaculate conception. We in the church don’t have the burden of believing in Original Sin is the Latins teach it, therefore there is no need for the so-called “immaculate conception”.
I deleted many long and emotional posts, some with insults and imprecations, because they all are deeply emotional and they are not looking at the theology. I don’t understand why they are so long and often rude, as if they are surprising an Orthodox Christian has a different theology than they do. None of them are talking about Original Sin which forces them to fabricate the immaculate conception. Original Sin is a given for them. It’s in their DNA. It is a false doctrine, which is led to other false doctrines, preeminently their idea that the Lord atoned for our sins by taking a punishment that God would require upon us in less a substitute took the punishment. This is the so-called substitutionary atonement.
orthodoxnet Hello, I’m learning about Jesus, God and Christianity and I’m trying to understand. Are you saying that it is not so that Jesus took the punishment for our sins? That this is a false doctrine that is called the substitutionary atonement? I keep hearing that he took the payment for us, are you saying this is not true? Then what is the truth then? I would really appreciate an answer to this
@@XGoldenPhoenixX I will try to answer this. I am lacking time right now.
orthodoxnet thank you I really appreciate it 🦋🌟
Rich Budd - It's amazing how clearly you think. And it's a shame that no one else got it.
Such dogmas are so much deep theology that i would never consider it a difference between Catholic and Orthodox Church. Catholics say Theotokos didn t inherit the ancestral sin of Adam (immaculate conception) and Orthodox say she did inherit the ancestral sin of Adam (being born from humans). The problem is none of the consequences of this dogma make them different. It doesn't necessarily result in Mary not being human or Jesus not having the human nature (Orthodox say that only Jesus had an immaculate conception, in the way that the human nature of Jesus didn t inherit the ancestral sin of Adam). In the end, it's the same thing viewed from different angles. Orthodox also reject immaculate conception of Mary because they want to mark that the grace of Mary was gained, not awarded from birth. Thus the merit of Mary is greater.
PS. I am Orthodox and i love my Catholic brothers
Alex Andersohn: that is precisely the problem: i.e: "The problem is none of the consequences of this dogma make them (Jesus and Mary) different." This conflation of the merits of Christ with the virtues of His mother is deliberate. The result? A dogma that is both toxic AND superfluous! One Immaculately Conceived Savior means One Redeemer, not two!
very well said! Most Orthodox cannot even grasp what you are you writing, but you are on target.
@@terrytzaneros8007 it is no more toxic than the prayer found at every Divine Liturgy "Most Holy Theotokos, SAVE us! Tell me, what do you think that means? Does the Theotokos save us, or does Christ?
"St. Michael the Archangel Orthodox Church": if that is indeed what you are, may decide for yourself if the "saving" by Mary qualitatively differs to the Saving by her Son.
@@terrytzaneros8007I believe you misread the comment.
The point was made that the dogmas are the same, because the consequences of each are the same.
When the most blessed an holy mother Theotokos was born, her parents were already ostracized because they were so old and St. Anna was thought to be barren. This was no good in that culture, and usually means they were out of God's favor.
So, it was well known, from her birth, that she was special, and favored by God.
In the Orthodox Church, we baptize at 40 days old. This is for the ancestral, as referenced. Also, women are not allowed to return to the church before 40 days after childbirth.
Confession is the sacrament by which our sins are forgiven, as Orthodoxy recognizes one baptism. Even then, the priest does not grant forgiveness, only God can do that.
Honest question for catholic or orthodox. Why did Mary call God her savior if she was sinless? What was she being saved from?
Saved from original sin
"Today the MOST-IMMACULATE and pure Lady hath issued forth from a barren wóman /
Today all things rejoice in her natívity!
The bonds of Adam have been broken and Eve has been freéd from the curse! /
All those in heaven rejoice and mankind is gíven peace! /
And we glorify her and crý aloud: /
Glory to God in the Híghest, ///
And on earth peace, good wíll among men!"
St Germanos of Constantinople:
"She was three years old and supremely PERFECT WITH DIVINE GRACE, since She had been recognized and designated IN ADVANCE and had been chosen by God and Steward of all things.
Nothing new gets put into old wineskins. If Mary was tainted with sin, she would pass that down to Jesus. The power of the most high overshadowed her leaving no room for sin. Jesus was God man. That is why he bled and was tired. He received his earthly flesh (human) from Mary, who was human.
The power of the Most High overshadowed the Theotokos AFTER she was obedient, and said "Behold the Handmaiden of the Lord". As this point, the God-Man Jesus Christ was conscience by the Holy Spirit, AFTER Mary's CONSCIOUS, PERSONAL decision to be obedient. The Latin doctrine, forced upon them because of their legalistic misunderstanding of sin and salvation, takes away Mary's virtue. She was not personally holy in their system - it was done for her. In addition, being free of a sin no other human being is free from (according to their heresy of "original sin") she is DIFFERENT, superior to any other human being from the moment of her existence, and therefore, Jesus became human according to her humanity and not the rest of humanity.
Mary being sinless doesn't mean she is not human like us
But she wasn’t sinless. There’s nothing to support this
why wasn’t she the sacrifice for our sins if she was sinless?
@@legomego6943 Because she isn't God
@@igorlopes7589 so how do you know that she lived her entire life sinless? Or is the claim just preconception of Jesus? I’m not debating, just asking
@@legomego6943 Because the Angel at the Annunciation says she has been made full of grace. And it is very fitting that God preserved pure the vessel of his Incarnation. Mary was given the highest and most sacred role among creatures, higher than the Angels themselves and below only her Divine Son.
I recommend rereading the papal decree on the Immaculate Conception. There are several misconceptions you have said in this video that are in and of themselves causing confusion to the believer and leading them astray
Send me the link. Seraphim@orthodox.net. I will correct the idea of inherited guilt, but everything else stands. You are pretty confident that criticism of a novel doctrine announced by a false authority that actually demean the Theotokos is leading believers astray.
@orthodoxnet I am also Orthodox and I also believe Mary the Theotokos needed Jesus as a savior as the rest of us, as she claimed in her prayer Luke 1:47. The claim she was absolutely sinless is a positive claim, whereas when believers ask for a specific citation of it, biblically or elsewhere, the only reply they receive back is "wELL wHeRe dOeS tHe BiBle SaY sHe SiNnEd?" Which is a burden of proof fallacy. We know Christ is sinless because the Bible says Christ is God in 1 John 3:5 and John 1:1 and 1 Peter 1:19. "If we say we have no sin, we deceive OURSELVES, and the truth is not in us."
Also, it is theoIougema.
@@Hypnotically_Caucasian I am also orthodox and believe in the immaculate conception of the Most Holy Theotokos.
@@PeterM8987 In Holy Orthodoxy everyone is free to believe it or not. But some go too far in their rejection. They create "passions" and sins in the Most-Immaculate Theotokos which i completely against patristic teaching.
This popped up on recommended and not sure what I was expecting, but I can say this is the first time I’ve ever heard someone say heresy seriously
Thank you for your kind comment. Most of the comments are Latins who are upset that an Orthodox Christian does not believe as they do, and they seem to consider it their mission to contradict our teaching. They do not like the word heresy. A heresy is a fervently held falsehood. All heresy is bad theology, which leads to bad choices in life in general.
orthodoxnet thank you for the reply, and insight into your life and beliefs
@Tony B You have not seen the posts I have deleted, from the "religious".
@@orthodoxnet for the record I'm a Roman catholic, and it depends on which faction in the church you talk to. The more liberal minded of us refuse, to a fault, to call anyone a heretic. I, on the other hand, and the more traditionally minded, have no problem calling people heretics and schismatics when they deserve it. Heresy is heresy and should pointed out when one sees it.
@@mariorizkallah5383 you are mistaken.
For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
John 3: 16
“...Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near.”
Matthew 3: 2
I don’t understand where you are coming from. Although I want to. As a newly reverted Catholic I find the Immaculate conception absolutely beautiful! For a few reasons being: 1) It shows God’s immense power 2) If man was born sinless as I presume you believe than how or why would we ever need God’s forgiveness? (We wouldn’t even need God and Christ’s death and Resurrection would be in Vain) 3) I love how Venerable Fulton Sheen put it: Mary was God’s DREAM COME TRUE. Mary is the Eve! And the Mother of the Church. Also why would God allow His only begotten Son to enter into a line of sinful humans? It makes no sense. The only thing that makes sense is that God created Mary because he can WITHOUT Original Sin so that when the right time came with Mary’s Yes to the Divine Will, His only begotten Son who is True God and True Man could come into the world in a pure vessel.
I would love to hear what you think of this. May God bless you always, Sir.
This is easy to explain, we bear the consequences of the original sin committed by Adam and Eve, meaning that we are fallible and inclined towards sinning and away from God and that we are also mortal, but we don't bear the guilt of it, for we ourselves haven't committed it.
Jesus's sacrifice thus is vital to help man, who is now no longer perfect, to get into a closer relationship with God, similar to the one Adam had enjoyed at first before his fall, or possibly even closer.
As a mixed race American girl who was raised southern black Baptist, I’m confused but here to take notes and learn
I'm a mixed race Orthodox Christian. Welcome!
@@richcook2007 hello! and thank you for the welcome❤️ I appreciate it, I hope that you’re having a blessed day
Good Day Sister
I'm here to advice , reading the scripture and following what it says about My LORD;s Birth.
It's a tricky subject to navigate. Between Catholic and Orthodox there are different understandings of 1) original/ancestral sin 2) created vs uncreated grace 3) the relevance of St Augustine's theology 4) papal authority/infallibility 5) conciliar authority/infallibility 6) the weight of private revelation, and maybe a few more.
Often Orthodox and Catholics are talking past each other on this point because of different pre-suppositions or starting points.
Exactly. Orthodox believe in ancestral sin. Human propensity toward sin. But not born guilty.
Being with child changes a woman's DNA. There's only one Mother to our Lord. And His lone sacrifice is enough for our Salvation. This grace was granted for this one SINGULAR act.
If Mary being without sin from conception means she's not fully human, does that mean that Jesus isn't fully human?
Also CCC 405 says, "original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam's descendants." Doesn't that contradict the idea that Roman Catholics believe we're born with guilt?
The Roman Catholic Church teaches "Original Sin." The Eastern Orthodox Church teaches "Ancestral Sin." There is a difference between the two teachings.
@@forrestb1165 explain what you mean, just don't parrot it!
From Orthodox Psalter to the Most Holy Theotokos and Evervirgin Mary:
Come let us worship our Queen the Theotokos. (Great prostration)
+++
Come let us worship the Virgin Mary our Queen the Theotokos. (Great prostration)
+++
Come let us worship and fall down before our Lady, the Virgin Mary, our Queen the Theotokos. (Great prostration)
+++
This priest is mistaken on the Orthodox position. This was the Boomer/Indiana-server position back in the day, not the one that Orthodox patriarchs and synods spoke of.
The Orthodox reluctance to define the dogma has to do with the economic conversation of Christ in assuming the blameless passions. If the Theotokos experienced the blameless passions and did not do so voluntarily (as Christ chose to experience them), then she was subject to at least one aspect of original sin.
Concupiscence, the blameworthy passions, are another thing entirely. I think perhaps the patristic and therefore Orthodox position is that she was completely passionless from conception and also completely sinless in her life.
What the Devil said during the exorcism on Annaliese Michel: "The dogma of the Immaculata hurts us so much. Thank goodness no one believes in this truth anymore. If people believed this, all hell would tremble. Because of this disbelief of theirs many people are down here".
It is very poor theology to base Dogma on apparitions and visions. The major arguments the Roman Catholics make in favor of this Doctrine are emotional and based on apparitions and Visions or just at the pope said it or because of some Obsession that the mother of God must somehow be pure in a way that no other human being is pure from the moment of her conception. The mother of God is pure because she chose to be. It Was an act of her will. She is not a holy robot, and no amount of visions where "she" apparently says she's the Immaculate Conception will be believed because they are false apparitions. There is only one "dogma" that I know of that is promoted by what seems like a kind of advertising and marketing.
Annaliese Michel never recovered from what she suffered from and literally died. I don't think quoting Satan saying something (during an unsuccessful exorcism that resulted in her death no less) in such an instance proves anything at all.
negative . she offered to die for poor souls she was asked by the blessed virgin if she was willing to suffer. she said Yes @@ramon1954
❤❤😇 St. Epiphanius
Mary, the holy Virgin, is truly great before God and men. For how shall we not proclaim her great, who held within her the uncontainable One, whom neither heaven nor earth can contain?
❤❤😇
What you quoted is of course correct, and I would supplement it with another quote of his:
“There is an equal harm in both these heresies, both when men demean the Virgin and when, on the contrary, they glorify Her beyond what is proper”
-St. Epiphanius
Mary is not a goddess, she is the Mother of God. Catholic Christians hold her as the latter. "Blessed is she who believed..." ~ St. Elizabeth (Luke 2:45)
"For behold from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed."
~ Mary, Most Holy (Luke 2:48)
O Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to Thee.
Virgin, Most Powerful(Our Lady) to St. Catherine of Siena
She's blessed but still human like the rest of us. She wasn't sinless. Only Jesus is.
@@pdxnikki1 She was ALL-SINLESS, ALL-IMMACULATE, ALL-STAINLESS, ALL-BLAMELESS....that's what the Holy Fathers say.
@@gertrudesantos5550 In the Holy Orthodox Church She is called "God after God" or "created God" or "God by grace". She is called ALLMIGHTY in prayers. Etc. She is on the boarder of created and uncreated
⚠️ ORTHODOXWIKI ⚠️
The term Original Sin (or first sin) is used among all Christian churches to define the doctrine surrounding Romans 5:12-21 and 1 Corinthians 15:22, in which Adam is identified as the man through whom death came into the world. How this is interpreted is believed by many Orthodox to be a fundamental difference between the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Western Churches. In contrast, modern Roman Catholic theologians would claim that the basic anthropology is actually almost identical, and that the difference is only in the explanation of what happened in the Fall. In the Orthodox Church the term ancestral sin (Gr. προπατορικό αμάρτημα) is preferred and is used to define the doctrine of man's "inclination towards sin, a heritage from the sin of our progenitors" and that this is removed through baptism. St. Gregory Palamas taught that man's image was tarnished, disfigured, as a consequence of Adam's disobedience.
Second Confession of Orthodox Bishops at their Consecration
“The Word of God…took our whole fallen human nature from the PUREand VIRGINAL BLOOD of the ONLY IMMACULATE and pure Virgin…Furthermore I confess that He assumed all our human blameless passions that constitute our nature, excepting sin, i.e. hunger, thirst, weariness, tears, and such like: He underwent them not of necessity as in our case, but by His human will following His divine will; for willingly He hungered, willingly He thirsted, willingly He wearied, willingly He died.”.
Our Lord Jesus was without sin. Was he not fully human?
He was fully human and fully God.
And fully holy Jehiel
Jehiel Hernandez: whereas Mary was not (fully) God and therefore susceptible to the influence of sin.
Terry Tzaneros yes , I do think Mary was not sinless
@@jehielhernandez8152: there is hope for us sinners in that.
In other words a ccording to you.Jesus was born with sin?? Or else if Mary was not sinless ,the scripture says everyone born of a woman is born in sin.This does not add up , we know Jesus took on everything human except sin, if he took his flesh from Mary and so Sinless is the Lord Jesus Christ , he must have prepared Mary sinless.Mary gives birth to a sinless generation before the fall of Eve, Eve had no sin until the devil came , so if Mary is the theotokos , God bearer ,she can only do so if she was sinless.The immaculate conception is simply true and divinely logical unless the orthodox declare that Jesus needed to be saved from sin too.I did not know orthodox don't believe in this mystery.I can not become orthodox.As a Protestant I have been blessed to understand this mystery , and many more that is why am entering the Catholic church at Rome.
You need another false doctrine to correct the first false doctrine. The Theotokos was not born guilty of sin, because no man is born guilty of sin.
orthodoxnet This can not be true. Why would baptism be so important then? We need baptism to be cleansed from our sins and be children of God.
@@Gabrieluchyp12 People go on to be sinners.
orthodoxnet not true! It states the same in your Bible: that we are all born i sin! Not that we have sinned, but we are born because we carry it from Adam and Eve.
The Ethiopian Orthodox church and the other oriental churches believe in the immaculate conception of Mary
The Immaculate Conception makes sense. In the Old Testament if a High Priest was not spiritually clean, he would die when he entered the Holy of Holies. When Moses requested to see the Glory of God, he was hidden in the cleft of rock, and limited to seeing just God's 'hind parts'; otherwise he would have died. However, the Blessed Virgin Mary literally had the Holy of Holies dwell inside her womb, yet she did not die. If Mary was stained with any amount of sin, it would not be biblically consistent for her to have this encounter with God and live.
Nor anyone else who interacted with Jesus after his birth?
Both of these views makes sense. Which of you is right?
@@evanwyatt2862everyone else didnt conceive God in their womb ans bore Him.
She doesn’t need to have been born free of sin. She could have had her sins washed away by the Holy Spirit prior to conception
@AlbertMagnvs The justification by way of entering the holy of holies implies that anyone who was in the presence of Jesus should have died, not just Mary.
My Brother in Christ would God allow Himself to be tainted by sin? Is not the new wine put in new wine skin and not the old ( tainted ) . Also can God not apply the grace of salvation pre his sacrifice?
The Immaculate Conception does not teach that Mary is not human. And it is a belief you find in the early church
The Immaculate Conception of the BVM does not make her not a human being.
It makes her superior to a human being. Christ took on human flesh, not a superior version of human flesh.
orthodoxnet Mary is without sin Genesis 3:15 she is in enmity so she don’t know sin and the Orthodox Church is not local with the holy Catholic Church Mary is the woman Gal 4:4 John 2:3-4 John 19:26-27 how god made Adam and Eve sinless pure immaculate so he made the new Adam and the new eve pure and sinless
"You have surpassed all couples on the earth, /
O blessed Joachim and Ánna, /
When you gave bírth to her who transcends all creátion. /
Truly art thou bless’t, O Joachim, having become a parent or such a Maíden. /
And blessèd is thy womb, O Anna, for thou hast sprouted for us the Móther of Life /
Blessed are the breasts which nourished with milk her who nurtured the Sustainer of all creátion! /
Beseéch Him, we pray you, O all-blessed ones,
That He may grant our souls great mércy."
I like the Harry Potter books on your bookshelf behind you. No need to fear good fiction if one’s theology is sound.
The words are curses in Latin.
Being full of grace does not mean a person is born sinless. They have sought God and he has filled them with grace.
Exactly.
.
.
***John 1:16
And of His fullness we have all received, and grace for grace.
.
.
Grace for grace.
.
Those who exhibit grace will be given grace. Mary being full of grace does not mean that she was sinless. It means that she was obedient and loved just as God said. She was humble, and showed mercy to her fellow man.
.
This is what made her the perfect mother to raise Jesus.
I know this is an old thread, but I have been studying ancient history about the world, the church and after some major analysis, the orthodox church seems to be the home I am much drawn too. I live in the States where there many different dominations and I always knew of the Catholic way as being MAIN way to Christ, but after learning about the great scism, things that the catholic church did as a power trip, the idealogies and spirituality aspects of Orthodoxy has drawn me in and I feel in my heart is the closest to god and christ. If you can answer this, I am just trying to have an accurate understanding, As far as the immaculate conception, it doesn’t make sense to me as to why we need to have a label for this. She was chosen by god as the carrier for the son, due to her being born with the instinct to sin, but chose not to and that is what made her the perfect mother. I feel claiming this as immaculate Conception just takes that respect away from her. Because if you were just chosen to be the vessel and you were given immunity, that just makes you a tool, and not a chosen because of your purity surrounded by sin. Also, wouldn’t Jesus be born and inherit sin as well since he is human as well as divine? The idea is he came down into sin and lived it, but chose not to sin. He lived through temptations just as we all did and then was crucified, he inherited all of sins for eternity. Am I looking at this wrong?
Song of songs: Christ speaking
7 "Thou art ALL FAIR , my love; there is no spot in thee."
Dear Alexander, isn't solomon saying this to his bride ,isn't the bride of Jesus Christ , the church ? Aren't they holy because Jesus's righteousness was counted on them ?
@@johanroypaul2816 Read the Church Fathers and their Interpretation. These metaphors are often used for the Church and Theotokos. The woman clothed with the sun: Church and the Theotokos
@@alexandermarkus9587 Thank you for the suggestion.
That's a massive stretch
@@ReasonAboveEverything No, it is not. We orthodox read the scriptures with the Holy Fathers and the church. The Song of songs is about the church the bride of Christ and the Theotokos.
The immaculate conception of Jesus is a biblical doctrine. Mary herself says on the pages of Scriptures that she never knew a man, referring to sexual relations and yet she got pregnant. And yes she was a human and a sinner in need of a Saviour just like everyone else is and the reason, Jesus wasn't under the curse is because His Father, as far as the conception is concerned, was the Holy Spirit/Ghost. Also read the book of Romans and you'll see that yes everyone is born with a sin nature and guilty before God and to be saved, one must believe on the Gospel of 1 Chorinthians 15:1-4, wich is the Death, Burial and Resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ: believe that He did that for you and that what He did alone, none of your good works save you and you'll have Eternal Life. All I said here is neither new doctrine, nor is it my opinion. It's written black on white, on the pages of Scripture.
God Bless.
Rafael Iacsity and as well, to mention the fact that if she was immaculate, she would not have been allowed to then SIN! I mean: have MORE children, which she did after! With her husband.
So, yea i agree with you
@@gracefaith2602 Technically, it wasn't sin for her to have children because she was married to Joseph, at least that I assume.
Rafael Iacsity yes. Not a sin in marriage.
So, the point is: of course Jesus is different becuase he wasn’t conceived like the rest of us. But not because of Mary being immaculate, she was only made that at that moment through the Holy Spirit. That is all
@@gracefaith2602 Amen.
Mary’s immaculate conception made her fully human. She is the model of the Church, what God wants us to be.
The original sin is the reason we die, that's it, it's not a sin that we are judged for. As simple as that, you are human=you have original sin
@@DeadPool---- Wrong, there is a sin that is washed away by baptism. All Fathers agree. Even the Service texts of the Orthodox Church.
@@DeadPool---- The Most Holy Theotokos shared our fallen human nature BUT WITHOUT SIN. FALLEN NATURE IS NOT THE SAME AS SINFUL NATURE
@alexpanagiotis4706 my guy do you even know the difference between original sin, sin and passions? You sound like you have no freaking idea
@@DeadPool---- Yes, I do! But you do not. You do not know the patristic teaching of original sin and the fall of Adam.
You misunderstand. Being born with original sin doesn’t mean you are already guilty of sin. It means you have *tendencies* toward sin. And Mary was born without original sin.
Our Lady being free from sin does not make her less human. That’s a non sequitur. It makes her more human because in sinning we go against our natures and the goal for our humanity
Correct! In Holy Orthodoxy the Most Holy Theotokos is absolute sinless: ALL-IMMACULATE
We weren’t born in sin? Oh no? Then why do we die ? It’s a punishment for sin. See Genesis.
Was David bone in sin? He himself tells us that he was:
"[7] For behold I was conceived in iniquities; and in sins did my mother conceive me."
[Psalms 50:7]
Spencer Colgan Wallpaper & Painting correct!
Spencer Colgan Wallpaper & Painting if everyone is born with Sin they why do Babies go to heaven
Jordan , Who told you that babies go to heaven? You must be baptized in order to go to Heaven and therefore, if a baby is not baptized, the baby, born a slave to Satan, goes to limbo, untouched by the fire of hell but in capable of seeing God in heaven
Jordan God knows best.
The thing is, we are born in sin! But, it is the CHOICE of doing what is wrong or right, when we get to know what we are doing, that is what highlights the path we go: Heaven or Hell.
A baby who hasn’t had a choice yet, cannot be at fault. But even so, i say it again;”: God knows BEST. We do not have the right to send or not a SOMEONE in Heaven.
Spencer Colgan Wallpaper & Painting Mathew 18:10 Mathew 10:13-14 Mathew 19:14 Mark 10:13-14
St. John of Damascus:
"holy, undefiled, and stainless soul" (Sermon II: On the Assumption)
,,…So then, after the assent of the holy Virgin, the Holy Spirit descended on her, according to the word of the Lord which the angel spoke, *purifying* *her* , and granting her power to receive the divinity of the Word, and likewise power to bring forth. …“ (St.John of Damascus, Exact exposition of the Orthodox faith, Book 3, Chapter 2. Concerning the manner in which the Word was conceived, and concerning His divine incarnation).
@@Yasen.Dobrev Purifying does not mean always being cleasened from sin. It also means an increase of grace. Angels are purified. What from?
@@Yasen.Dobrev Would it be understood your way, it would contradict many Fathers and St. John himself.
@@alexandermarkus9587 Angels were not redeemed by Christ. Only we were redeemed. If the Most Holy Theotokos who did not have any personal sins - that is shared by the Orthodox Church and is not disputed, was immaculately conceived and so did not have the original sin, she would be an exception of the humanity because she would not have been Redeemed on the Cross by our Lord Jesus Christ and so Christ would not have died for all.
@@Yasen.Dobrev Ah, now you change the topic?
Song of songs:
2 "As the lily among thorns, so is my love among the daughters."
Lily means sinless ..thorns are sins or sin
I am always amazed by how many devout and learned Roman Catholics believe that the immaculate conception and the virgin birth are one and the same thing.
As others have said re: Mary, its not new at all and as for original sin, the Orthodox also affirm this position by virtue of the sixth ecumenical council.
No, not so. Orthodox Christians don't reject the Immaculate Conception. You must be a wolf under sheep clothe.
Read this and repent.
On December 8, 1854 Pope Pius IX defined as dogma that Mary of Nazareth was conceived without original sin. By this dogma, the Catholic Church confesses: “The most Blessed Virgin Mary was, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God and by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, Saviour of the human race, preserved immune from all stain of original sin.” (CCC #491-492, 508)
Unfortunately, many Christians objected this dogma. Referring to Rm. 5:12-13, they argued that since sin has spread to all men, and that sin has been in the world before the law was given; Mary could not be conceived without sin. In addition, for Mary to be conceived without sin, they argued, her parents would have to be sinless as well. So was Mary conceived without sin?
To answer this question, and to understand this teaching of the Catholic Church, it would be helpful to begin with the Book of Exodus, chapters 25-30. In these chapters, through Moses, the Lord commanded the Israelites to build a sanctuary that he may dwell in their midst.
Within the boundary of the sanctuary were the tabernacle, the altar for burnt offering, the bronze laver and its base, and many other furnishings for the tabernacle. The heart of the sanctuary, however, was the tabernacle, which housed the Ark of the Covenant. When the Lord commanded the Israelites to build this sanctuary, he was very specific about the exact details as how everything had to be made, but most noticeable were the construction of the Ark of the Covenant, and the blending of the holy anointing oil. Concerning the construction of the Ark, the Lord said: Ex 25:10-22, (10) You shall make an ark of acacia wood; two and a half cubits long, one and a half cubits wide, and one and a half cubits high. (11) And you shall overlay it with pure gold, within and without shall you overlay it, and you shall make upon it a molding of gold round about. See Ex 25:12-22 for more details. To blend the anointing oil, the Lord commanded, Ex 30:23-25, (23) Take the finest spices: of liquid myrrh five hundred shekels, and of sweet-smelling cinnamon half as much, that is, two hundred and fifty, and of aromatic cane two hundred and fifty, (24) and of cassia five hundred, according to the shekel of the sanctuary, and of olive oil a hin; (25) and you shall make of these a sacred anointing oil blended as by the perfumer; a holy anointing oil it shall be.
The Lord further commanded: Ex 30:26-29, (26) With this sacred anointing oil you shall anoint the meeting tent and the ark of the covenant,
(27) and the table and all its utensils, and the lampstand and its utensils, and the altar of incense, (28) and the altar of burnt offering with all its utensils and the laver and its base. Then the Lord declared, Ex 30:29, When you have consecrated them, they shall be most holy; whatever touches them shall be holy. Thus, creatures consecrated to the Lord became holy, but note that the Ark became most holy even if, at the time of the consecration, it was empty, (Ex 25:16), and that the anointing oil was holy even if it wasn’t consecrated to the Lord. The anointing oil was holy because the Lord preserved it to be holy, he said, Ex 30:25, “...; a holy anointing oil it shall be.”
So Scriptures tell Christians that though this world has been under a curse (Gn. 3:17-19), and that sin has spread to all men (Rm. 5:12); the Lord, in his omnipotence, can always have any of his creatures consecrated to him, and he can always preserve any of his creatures for his ‘personal use’. When he did, consecrated and preserved creatures became holy.
Scriptures also tell Christians that the Lord had the old Ark of the Covenant made to house his covenant with the Israelites, or the stone tablets on which the ten commandments or the words of the Lord were written (Ex 40:20). This covenant was not the last, nor was it eternal; yet the Ark, which housed it, had to be the most holy. How holy then Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, in whom the Eternal Word dwells has to be? Therefore, since the old Ark which was made of acacia wood, by human hands, and covered with pure gold was the most holy among all things; the new Ark, Mary, who was created by God’ hands, over shadowed by the Most High (Lk 1:35), from whom the Eternal Word received his flesh must be the most holy among all creatures.
One question, which will surely arise is: Who consecrated Mary to God? The answer is, of course, Mary did. She consecrated herself to God, and she did it freely saying, Lk. 1:38, Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord. May it be done to me according to your word. By her consecration of self, the Word incarnated in her virginal womb, and in her the Word really, truly, and substantially dwelled. Mary must be the most holy among all creatures, angels included. This, understandably, will lead us to the next question: Was Mary the most holy only from the time she consecrated herself to God, or was she always the most holy? As pointed out earlier, the old Ark was the most holy when it housed the words of God as well as when it was empty. Mary, the New Ark, therefore, had to be the most holy when she carried Jesus in her womb as well as when Jesus was not physically in her. In other words, Mary was the most holy throughout her life. This was so, for just in the same way that God had preserved the anointing oil to be holy, so that, by this oil, God gave consecrated creatures their holiness; God had also preserved Mary to be holy and free from sin, so that, through her, God gave his only Son to the world. This preservation, through Prophet Isaiah, God had announced to his people: Is 7:14, Therefore the Lord himself will give you this sign: The virgin shall be with child, and bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel.
So it’s clear that God had preserved Mary to be the Virgin; God had also made his will known more than 700 years before Mary was conceived in her mother’s womb. Mary, therefore, had to be the most holy and free from original sin at the time of her conception.
Thus, by defining as dogma that Mary of Nazareth was conceived without original sin, the Catholic Church did not define the Immaculate Conception as a new revelation. Instead, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, she only brought forward the favor, which the Almighty had bestowed on Mary, Lk. 1:30, "Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God.” This favor was only one of the many great things the Almighty had done for her so that all ages will call her blessed. (Lk. 1:39-56) Who through all ages will call her blessed? Only Mary’s offspring will. The offspring of her adversary will undoubtedly never call her blessed. (Gn 3:14-15)
Finally, as for the argument: if Mary was conceived without sin, her parents would have to be sinless as well. It’s clear that since the consecration of the Ark made holy only the acacia wood and the gold which was used in the construction of the Ark, and that God preserved only Mary to be holy and free from sin to be the mother of his Son; neither the rest of the acacia wood and gold were made holy nor Mary’s parents were preserved to be sinless.
Christians, please pray: “O Mary conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to Thee.” By praying this prayer, we ask Mary to pray for us, not that we pray to her.
Tuyen Pham BS, we do reject it. It doesn’t matter what the Pope says, we’re not Roman Catholic heretics.
O K calling eachother heretics does not solve the issues. Roman Catholics are no more heretics than Eastern Orthodox or oriental orthodox. Eastern Orthodox reject filioque even though st athanasius taught filioque in the Athanasian creed “22. The Holy Spirit is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.” (Athanasian creed verse 22) we do not have different faith only different expressions of faith. Eastern Orthodoxy is Extremely helenized to the point that the churches of Antioch and Alexandria of the Eastern Orthodox patriarchates are nothing like the original churches just Greek copies. The oriental Orthodox have the original liturgies from Antioch and Alexandria whereas the Eastern Orthodox are so heavily hellenized that even the Russians have lost quite a lot of tradition the schismatic old believers practice the original Russian orthodox faith, the current patriarchate is a Greek reformed version of its former glory thanks to Nikons reforms by order of the patriarchate of Constantinople. The big problem is the Eastern Orthodox’s view that all churches have to have the same expression of faith. The Oriental Orthodox and Catholic view is that the expression can be different but the faith has to be the same. That’s why catholics and oriental Orthodox have extremely diverse liturgies, whereas the Eastern Orthodox Liturgies are extremely similar, the only differences are in the vernacular, the vestments are quite similar other than the kamilavkion and the kamilavka (Russian) , and the differences in church design slightly. Oriental Orthodox have varying liturgies depending on the church the Coptic Orthodox Church uses vestments traditional to Alexandria, uses st marks liturgy and uses original Coptic dialects in liturgies, the also hold the original cathedral of st mark and hold their own traditions different from their other oriental orthodox brothers.The Syriac Orthodox Church of Antioch uses Syriac, the original vestments of the area, speaks and prays in Aramaic, their priests wear kippahs, and their churches are the original churches in Antioch. The Armenian Orthodox have their own unique vestments, liturgy, architecture, vernacular, and other such things yet they are still in unity with the original Orthodox churches. The tewahedo church is vibrant and has their own form of worship in liturgy, through their mezmurs, they have their own icon styles, they also have different vestments, and architecture.the St Thomas Christians of India maintain their own liturgy, traditions, iconography, vestments, architecture; and their own traditions . All the Oriental Orthodox churches are united in faith but express their faith quite differently, some use icons some don’t, some use stone work, some don’t, some use statues others do not. Their is not this same diversity in worship in the Eastern Orthodox only Hellenism asserting itself on the other patriarchates, the Russians weren’t even allowed to express their iconography in a different way the patriarch of Constantinople indemnes it as heresy and had Nikon destroy all the icons , the old believers still maintain the true Russian traditions, liturgy, vestments, etc. The only Apostolic Church other than the Oriental Orthodox that accepts liturgical diversity is the Catholic Church their are 33 eastern churches all with different liturgies they all express the faith differently even to the point that some do not use filioque, yet they are still in communion. The Eastern Orthodox patriarchates hold petty grudges and political ideologies that stubbornly prevent unity with both the Catholic Church and the Oriental Orthodox.
was adam and eve fully human? Does Sin mean your fully human?
@@atanasiogreene8493 you are misinformed. The "Athanasian" creed is problematic and so your whole argument that the orthodox are misguided for discarding it is does not hold it's ground.
The "creed" was not even written by Athanasius, but written by Latin christians in either Southern France or Spain and only ATTRIBUTED to Athanasius long after he himself had passed away.
And it's not even a valid creed. It was never discussed in any of the Eucumenical councils of the church. But orthodox generally agree that, with the exception of the reference to the filioque, it's theologically sound.
And I wonder why, if this creed is so essential to the western churches, it is not used more often nowadays. How do you justify the fact that it's use has declined?
Quoting a papal encyclical to uphold this doctrine is like resorting to hadith in order to justify the Qur'an.
IMMACULATE CONCEPTION in ISLAM:
Muslims believe in the immaculate conception (i.e., not conceived in sin) of only two persons: Mary and Jesus, as do the Roman Catholic Church. All Christians believe in the immaculate conception of Jesus, but not all believe in the immaculate conception of Mary. The doctrine of Immaculate Conception of Mary was imposed as an Article of Faith in the Roman Catholic Church by Pope Pious IX on Dec. 18th, 1854. The Muslim belief stem from the hadiths:
Narrated Said bin Al-Musaiyab:
Abu Huraira said, "I heard Allah's Apostle saying, 'There is none born among the off-spring of Adam, but Satan touches it. A child therefore, cries loudly at the time of birth because of the touch of Satan, except Mary and her child." Then Abu Huraira recited: "And I seek refuge with You for her and for her offspring from the outcast Satan" (3.36) (Sahih Bukhari 4.641)
Thus, Islam believes that only Mary and Jesus were not touched by Satan. Even Muhammad did not have this distinction
See this clarified something I knew all my life and have struggled with about my life. I'm taking it to the church. Thank you💛
St. Ephraim the Syrian (c. 350):
"Thou, and Thy Mother are alone in this. You are wholly beautifu in every respect. There is in Thee, Lord, no stain, nor any spot in Thy Mother. (Poem to Christ)
The Orthodox understanding of Sin is only coherent position.
This is an incorrect representation of the Latin-Catholic view of original sin. Original sin does not mean that anyone is born with guilt. It means that we have to suffer the consequences of the fall (of Adam and Eve), which includes a strong inclination to sin, disorder, etc. Baptism into the body of Christ imparts the virtues of Faith, Hope, and Charity into one’s soul, and with that grace oneness with Christ. It doesn’t mean that the struggle won’t continue though. I really don’t get why some in the Orthodox Church characterize the Latin view as saying that one is born with guilt. “Actual” sin- which is the sin which one commits himself through the internal or external actions - is what makes you personally guilty in Latin theology. I feel like a lot of times some Orthodox misleadingly strawman attack the Latin Catholic view by describing a more Calvainist or Protestant view of sin and then attacking that as the “Latin” view. Very much not true.
It says HAIL MARY..... FULL OF *GRACE* in order for Jesus to be born Mary needed to be cleaned from all sin as no sin could touch God. Mary was different from everyone else because she was the vessel to bring the savior into the world. Yes she was fully human but she needed to be cleaned before birthing the lord. She is the ark of the covenant and the greatest saint that ever lived
Whether Mary was saved in advanced or without sin or whatever doesn’t matter. What matters is that she was simply a vessel for the Son of God. Period, that’s all that matters
We would not agree. Truth matters. The implications of the legalistic belief about original sin and the substitutionary atonement, and raising Mary to a level above normal humanity are toxic to the spiritual life.
orthodoxnet i agree with you, but what I’m saying is that discussions like these tends to divide rather than representing both sides so that an answer can be found. The title of your video is very generalizing and most likely won’t be taken well by orthodox Christians, you might have good intentions but it’s something to watch out for. I’m not orthodox or anything, but i hope you get what i mean. Ofc the truth matters, but I’m addressing how we get to that truth
victoria A Mary was much more than a mere vessel, she was a mother. And she freely cooperated with God in everything.
@@clairestevens3194 You have described the Theotokos’ virtue wonderfully.
The Latin understanding of her human nature is that her human nature was programmed to be superior to human nature from the beginning (free from inherited guilt, unlike every other human being according to their theology of Original Sin, which we do not believe). This removes the virtue that you spoke of. It makes her a holy pre-programmed robot. The Theotokos was either, according to some fathers, sinless from birth (she never sinned willfully), or was sinless from the time of the conception of Jesus Christ. However, she was not a different kind of human being than everyone else. She made choices, and the choices were not made for her.
People get very confused because the Orthodox Christians think that Mary was either sinless from birth or sinless from the time of the Annunciation. They confuse this belief with the matins teaching of the “immaculate conception”. They don’t understand that she made choices, just as we do. God did not make her choices for her. Exempting Mary from inherited guilt makes the choice for her. Of course, there is no inherited guilt (there is inherited corruption, since both Mary and Jesus died flesh), and I have said many times before that the “immaculate conception” is a heresy which became necessary because of an ancient heresy, that of inherited guilt, or so-called “Original Sin”.
The Latins believe in inherited guilt, the Orthodox Christians do not. Of course, many Orthodox Christians would say they do because they do not understand their faith. Some also have strange views on sexual morality, angels, fasting, and many other things because they don’t understand the faith. If their only experience of their faith is Divine Liturgy, then they would not understand the depth of our theology from the beautiful Vespers and Matins and other services. It’s very clear that we believe that mankind has an inherited weakness and predilection toward sin because of the passions, but not inherited guilt.
Jesus Christ inherited all of the passions of humanity from the prelapsarian state of Adam and Eve. Adam and Eve were born with no sinful passions. They had the so-called blameless passions, which are part of being a human being. They developed sinful passions because they made sinful choices. Our Lord never made any sinful choices, and therefore remained completely free of sin. He passed on the ability to become completely free of sin to us through baptism.
One might ask if the Lord was born in such a way that he had only the blameless passions and none of the sinless sinful passions, was he different in His human nature and the rest of humanity? No, he was not. Sin is an addition to prelapsarian human nature which distorts and sickens the soul. Sinful passions are like cancer. Having cancer does not change our human nature but it does sicken it and to some extent, medically distort it, since cancer always makes some parts of the body not function as they should.
Claire Stevens i agree with you, but her as a mother isn’t quite what this is about. She’s not limited to being “just a vessel” but she was a vessel, like how our mothers were as well for US, Mary was obviously set apart. my bad for giving the wrong impression
"This day, O faithful, from saintly parents begins to take being the SPOTLESS lamb, the MOST PURE tabernacle, Mary …” (From the Office of Matins, the Third Ode of the Canon.
Does that prove him wrong or right?
@@firekoovin3347 Read carefully! SPOTLESS = IMMACULATE TABERNACLE IS CONCEIVED? MOST PURE LAMB?
So now I ask you!
@@alexandermarkus9587 ah its not supporting it 😎
@@firekoovin3347 It is absolutely supporting it. One must be decepted or stupid not to see the exact teaching.
@@alexandermarkus9587 💀ouch man I forgot to read pure tabernacle
It was fitting that the New Adam and the New Eve were made in the same perfection of the Old Adam and the Old Eve in order to correct the mistakes of choosing an imperfect state over our natural perfect state as human beings. The New Eve was not created inferior to the Old Eve. It was first the New Eve’s perfect obedience that made way for the New Adam’s perfect obedience. It is typologically and theologically perfect and fitting.
The concept of original sin is what holds me back the most from entertaining the thought that the Christian god is the living god. Why would god create me damned from the start. That’s not justice, or love.
look I appreciate what you're saying but if Mary being sinless means that she wasn't fully human, then obviously Jesus being sinless means that he wasn't fully human also. So, that whole thing falls apart.
They either should both be sinless, or both be sinful.
"Today the MOST-IMMACULATE and PURE Lady hath issued forth from a barren wóman
Today all things rejoice in her natívity!
The bonds of Adam have been broken and Eve has been freéd from the curse!"
All those in heaven rejoice and mankind is gíven peace! /
And we glorify her and crý aloud: /
Glory to God in the Híghest, ///
And on earth peace, good wíll among men!
False. Jesus is the way the truth and the light. Not his mother.
"O renowned womb of Anna, in which slowly, wirh additions from Her, AN ALL-HOLY INFANT GREW"
Where exactly is this in this Bible?
An all holy infant with ancestral sin
@orthodoxnet your forgetting the fact that sin is not the definition of bieng a human it just comes along with most humans but Mary was conceived without sin so how does this make her an alien or "not human?"
Does that make Adam and Eve less human? - for they were created without original sin... 🤔 I might add, if God incarnate (Jesus) inherited original sin from His mother, would that not mean that God is tainted by sin?... 🤔
Jesus, in His humanity, is like us in all ways, except for sin, for the Divine cannot partake of a sinful nature. Mary is the vessel through which our Lord obtained his humanity, so it only makes sense that she would be Immaculate, so that her Son could be, by extension.
As a Catholic, I firmly reject this heresy, however it is interesting to see what others think. 😇 Thank you for sharing this information with us, I have had an inkling for some weeks that the Orthodox Church held these particular views on Mary, so I honestly appreciate your concise provision of the specifics pertaining to this topic.
I have lots of respect for our Orthodox brothers, and their teachings, but this is one point on which we differ. :)
Take care, and God Bless You,
geniussnake497 :-)
Why would he obtain original sin from his mother? If God preserved Mary from original sin, why not just preserve Christ from original sin? If christ would be tainted by original sin due to mary, if she wasn't preserved. Then wouldnt mary also be tainted by original sin by her parents?
Mary in the example of how God is a gentleman. He preserved her to bring His only son. She is pure and loyal to Him. Mary didn’t know about Jesus. She didn’t know she was going to be gracious until the angel Gabriel told her.
The Most Holy Mother of God has Herself said that She is the Immaculate Conception during the apparitions at Lourdes.
This is a false vision, according to Orthodox Christians. Remember, I am an Orthodox Christian priest, and teach Orthodox doctrine, and do not go to Latin channels to contradict them or call them Heretics. This is a thing called "manners".
@@seraphimh With due respect for the office of the Holy Priesthood bestowed on you by Our Lord Jesus Christ and for you personally as a child of God, I do not intend to be impolite. God intended for us to have this exchange as I in general do not visit orthodox channels.
In the charity of Christ, it is necessary for people to be aware of what Our Holy Mother has said, through which, as in all She does, gives Glory to God.
May Our Lord Jesus Christ have mercy on us poor sinners.
Please, do not espouse doctrines could we consider to be heretical. I do not go to other people's channels or websites and contradict their religion. I'm trying to teach, and if you make a comment, fine but if you persist I won't be able to allow it. I do not want people to be exposed to Roman Catholic heresies because they have watched my video. This is not technically a discussion forum it is a forum where I have videos and people comment or ask questions. It it is not a polemical site where I am inviting people to debate me. I talked about manners before, and if there are Manners, I don't even need to say these things - they're just understood. Priest Seraphim Holland
@@seraphimh
Patristic writings on Mary's purity abound.
1) The Fathers call Mary the tabernacle exempt from defilement and corruption (Hippolytus, "Ontt. in illud, Dominus pascit me");
2) Origen calls her worthy of God, immaculate of the immaculate, most complete sanctity, perfect justice, neither deceived by the persuasion of the serpent, nor infected with his poisonous breathings ("Hom. i in diversa");
3) Ambrose says she is incorrupt, a virgin immune through grace from every stain of sin ("Sermo xxii in Ps. cxviii);
4) Maximus of Turin calls her a dwelling fit for Christ, not because of her habit of body, but because of original grace ("Nom. viii de Natali Domini");
5) Theodotus of Ancyra terms her a virgin innocent, without spot, void of culpability, holy in body and in soul, a lily springing among thorns, untaught the ills of Eve, nor was there any communion in her of light with darkness, and, when not yet born, she was consecrated to God ("Orat. in S. Dei Genitr.").
6) In refuting Pelagius St. Augustine declares that all the just have truly known of sin "except the Holy Virgin Mary, of whom, for the honour of the Lord, I will have no question whatever where sin is concerned" (On Nature and Grace 36).
7) Mary was pledged to Christ (Peter Chrysologus, "Sermo cxl de Annunt. B.M.V.");
8) it is evident and notorious that she was pure from eternity, exempt from every defect (Typicon S. Sabae);
9) she was formed without any stain (St. Proclus, "Laudatio in S. Dei Gen. ort.", I, 3);
10) she was created in a condition more sublime and glorious than all other natures (Theodorus of Jerusalem in Mansi, XII, 1140);
11) when the Virgin Mother of God was to be born of Anne, nature did not dare to anticipate the germ of grace, but remained devoid of fruit (John Damascene, "Hom. i in B. V. Nativ.", ii).
12) The Syrian Fathers never tire of extolling the sinlessness of Mary. St. Ephraem considers no terms of eulogy too high to describe the excellence of Mary'sgrace and sanctity: "Most holy Lady, Mother of God, alone most pure in soul and body, alone exceeding all perfection of purity ...., alone made in thy entirety the home of all the graces of the Most Holy Spirit, and hence exceeding beyond all compare even the angelicvirtues in purity and sanctity of soul and body . . . . my Lady most holy, all-pure, all-immaculate, all-stainless, all-undefiled, all-incorrupt, all-inviolate spotless robe of Him Who clothes Himself with light as with a garment . . . flower unfading, purple woven by God, alone most immaculate" ("Precationes ad Deiparam" in Opp. Graec. Lat., III, 524-37).To St. Ephraem she was as innocent as Eve before her fall, a virgin most estranged from every stain of sin, more holy than the Seraphim, the sealed fountain of the Holy Ghost, the pure seed of God, ever in body and in mind intact and immaculate ("Carmina Nisibena").
13) Jacob of Sarug says that "the very fact that God has elected her proves that none was ever holier than Mary; if any stain had disfigured her soul, if any other virgin had been purer and holier, God would have selected her and rejected Mary". It seems, however, that Jacob of Sarug, if he had any clear idea of the doctrine of sin, held that Mary was perfectly pure from original sin ("the sentence against Adam and Eve") at the Annunciation.
Source: www.newadvent.org/cathen/07674d.htm
@@andreasdabukke : all the Patristic texts highlight her Virginal purity - In Perpetuam. Nothing more.
Ave Maria...
Orthodox reject original sin?
Yes, as the Latins teach it. There are many comments on this group that explain this.
@@orthodoxnet what do the orthodox teach on this matter.? Many comments I would prefer a comment from an Orthodox priest if you would I would highly appreciate it.
@@anomalousviewer3164 If you read through the comments, you will find I have made many questions. I am happy to respond to questions or comments. I just delete contradiction and Roman Catholic teaching.
no they dont, they teach it the same as the latins
St. John of Damascus:
"Her whole being is the bridal chamber of the Holy Spirit; Her whole being is a City of the living God which "the flowings of the river gladden"; that is FLOODS OF THE GIFTS OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. She is ALL-FAIR, ENTIRELY THE COMPANION OF GOD
Why is Baptism necessary for salvation if human beings are not born with original sin. To believe this you would have to believe that you would have acted differently in the Garden of Eden, but our concupiscence and weakness to sin against God and betray His love for us by our sin is proof that we also would have done the same thing before we are regenerated through Christ.
Jesus was fully human and fully divine. If God wanted a human mother he would have wanted the PERFECT mother. Someone who would be as perfect as Adam and Eve when they were created by God, without sin. Mary being immaculate doesn't make her non-human. Because Jesus as well was fully human and was immaculate as well.
Vincenzo Rutigliano: it makes her less-than-human. 'It' - the Mariological Immaculate Conception - makes her a pre-conditioned automaton. i.e. that she was 'pre-programed' like a machine to say yes to God's plan. Where is the inviolable gift of free-will in that? She who bore Christ without seed was herself borne of seed. Christ inherited His Humanity through the seed of His Mother and through that human inheritance, the Davidic lineage. Therefore, mankind's Salvation is dependent upon Christ's redemptive taking up of the stained ancestral nature NECESSARILY borne of His Mother upon His Conception and Incarnation.
@@terrytzaneros8007 following that logic, let's say that Mary were born with original sin. Jesus human existence would also inherit it.
@@vincenzorutigliano5435 : our Lord was tempted in all things like other men - but without sin. This is the teaching of the Apostle and of the Church.
Someone, anonymously posted only the words "anathema on you" . This is a useless and stupid comment and I deleted it. First of all this poor person doesn't understand what an anethema is; it is to lift someone up to God. Is that Anonymous person praying for me or just saying a stupid comment in a hit-and-run? These hit-and-run comments never have any justification they just say you're a terrible person because you don't believe what I believe. I tire of them and I delete them because they just take up useless space. There are using it as a curse. They don't understand the word. Most people don't understand theology but they still talk about it.
I was brought up Roman Catholic and I'd wondered why the OC disputes this
It has to do with the Orthodox East view of the fall of man and the redemption offered by Christ
RC believe that Everyone is born "tainted" or somehow guilty of the sin of Adam.
The Orthodox believe that Adam only bears the mark of his sin ....and that it cannot be transfered ...or inherited
In OC view, Mary would not have inherited the sin of Adam, Anyway...that no 1 does
She was made to be holy because God chose her to be Theotokos
Further, Orthodox teach that we do not inherit the original sin of Adam ...but rather the "fallout" of that sin...namely
age, sickness, death
The Orthodox have a great devotion. to the Mother Of God
Christianity got astray from the right path. This is what God CLEARLY EXPLAINED WHEN HE SENT THE SEAL OF PROPHETS MUHAMMAD (PEACE BE UPON HIM). This is why you see Christians worship Jesus (peace be upon him) as a God or son of God which is CLEARLY WRONG. Since Adam (peace be upon him) God was only 1, he was not a human who eats and drink like any of us, he didn't have a son, he didn't walk in the markets like human do....etc He was only 1 with no partner. So worship him alone with no partner and believe in his last prophet, and follow Islam, and obey the commands of God and stay away from whatever he have forbidden, and do Good deeds for the sake of God. This is your way to please God, Your Creator and to enter Paradise in the hereafter.
Listen to Quran in TH-cam. Islam is a man made cult heresy. It was created by Muhammad a student of an Arian bishop, he was a warlord and pedophile. Islam is not a perfect religion, it is man made, Orthodoxy is not it is the only religion created by God.
Listen to Quran in TH-cam. Muhammad did not fix anything only bring back the things jesus fought against. Muhammad brought back the laws that Jesus fulfilled, he brought violence and the sword. Causing violent punishment for sins rather than leaving it in Gods hands. Islam is ruled by the clerics who make up quranic interpretations to form caliphates and other empires that persecuted what Muhammad called ‘people of the book’. Islam is nothing more than a restoration of the pharosaic heresies and the continuation of Arianism and Gnosticism.
@The Pascha Bunny No, they are not! No, one who is not baptised is allowed to enter an orthodox Temple
@@AgainstNeWorldOrder Islam is a nonsense Religion of a pervert
So I’m new to learning about the orthodox faith (Protestant, Pentecostal currently though visiting a Russian Orthodox Church). My question is does the Orthodox Church not believe Mary had a virgin birth when she had Jesus?
The parents of the Panagia, past child conceiving age. I am Orthodox Eastern Orthodox. Maria was likely conceived without sin from the result of prayer by her parents. We can't say this for certain it is probable like 99%. I can agree she was conceived without sin.
I am deleting comments such as, with no explanation, “I am the Immaculate Conception.” Of course, this refers to apparitions of the Mother of God that are accepted by the Latins but not by Orthodox Christians.
I’m an Orthodox Christian and I do not accept apparitions which in a self-serving way tell of a ***new*** dogma. A new dogma is actually an oxymoron. There are no new dogmas. If the Mother of God wanted us to think she was the Immaculate Conception she would’ve said it a long time ago. This is the only so-called dogma that I’m aware of where the Mother of God advertises for it.
You may have a different opinion. It’s a free country. You can go to a Roman Catholic site and learn about the immaculate conception, but you’re not going to learn to believe the immaculate conception here. For Orthodox Christians, the Roman conception of the immaculate conception is false.
I delete things that just contradict or say that I’m a heretic or other such things. I don’t go on Roman Catholic sites and call them heretics. I am trying to teach Orthodox doctrine here, and you may disagree with it, but you may not just contradict it and say nasty things.Priest Seraphim Holland
The faith is a living thing which must be explored and examined. New dogmas are not made by men rewriting God's word but by our growing in understanding it
@temporarysanity Jesus is God. Mary is his mother therefore Mary is the Mother of God
@temporarysanity we call her the mother of God. You don't understand the title.
The Most Holy Theotokos said it looong time ago.
mary did say to someone she is the immaculate conception, she said it to bernadette in lourdes in 1853 she said. ''I am the Immaculate Conception'' she said it from her own lips herself
Adam and Eve were also created without sin...
One Immaculate Conception. One Incarnation. One Virgin Birth. All Three Christ's ALONE!
Are you Catholic?
@@timothyfreeman97 yes. A member of the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church of the Oecumenical Throne.
Theodore Parris Then you must believe that our Lady has been immaculately conceived. :)
@@Gabrieluchyp12 As you can calculate from the above, One never was Two.
BELIEVE IN THE LORD JESUS AND BE SAVED, FOLLOW JESUS , LIVE IN REPENTANCE, BE TRANSFORMED BY THE WORD OF GOD 🙏🙏
Hail Mary full of Grace. The only woman who is and was full of grace because only a woman full of grace could carry the Lord
Subscribed just to learn more
Thank you
It's a twisted doctrine. My baby brother died before being baptized. They disposed of its body. No funeral, no player. According to the church my brother will burn in hell. A dead dog gets a better burial.
Dont give a damn what the church says. Human beings are born pure. From all Abrahamic religions, at least Islam acknowledged this.
I'm very sorry for your loss. You were describing an organization that is not the church. You describing the Roman Catholics not Orthodox. I would never do such a thing
@@seraphimh to be more precise, i am describing the Romanian Orthodox Church 35 years ago. About 19 years ago my mom wanted to give charity on behalf of my dead brother. The priest raised his voice and said "there's no charity for pagans" and forbade her to give charity for my brother on church's premises. That event made a strong impression on me. I don't deny your good intentions, but that's the official doctrine of the Orthodox Church put into practice.
My mom could never get over the brother death, this took a toll on my parents' marriage and 32 years years later their finally divorced.
Only after spending a couple of years in the Middle East I've finally found my inner peace.
That is terrible. A baby. Even if I identify myself as catholic. The priest was the one acting against charity.
His body is her body. As there was no earthly father. He was born without sin, and so He would have absolutely created her without sin. Makes sense to me that He wouldn't want to be conceived from a body that was sinful.
God cannot be within sin, so by his essence, Jesus was born within sin.
@@Kryptic712 Your statement "God cannot be within sin .. Jesus was born within sin" is a contradiction in terms.
I believe in your question she is without sin any of the angel came up to her you're full of grace
Your right. So much of the Catholic faith is based on non Biblcal concerns emphasized in their Councils of men. Openning the door to philosophy, pagan ideas of opinions, assumptions, theories, speculations and false conclusions adopted as fact. Thanks for your video.
I like this because it simply isn’t said in any scripture until a mistranslation from Hebrew to Greek. ‘Alma’ simply means a young woman of child bearing age and it certainly doesn’t mean ‘virgin.’
Orthodox are right and Thankyou
Mary Mareden, We celebrate the Theotokos Mary's conception on the 9th every December (New Style/Gregorian Calendar, and thirteen days thereafter in the 'Old' Style/Julian), the day following the RC's own 'Immaculate Conception' of the Virgin Mary to Ss Anna & Joachim. It is observed as The Conception by St. Anna of the Most Holy Theotokos. God continue to bless and enlighten you who bear Our Lady's most holy name.
Eastern Orthodox are wrong that is why they remain national entities bashing the Catholic church to justify their existence.💒✝️💜😷
Short and to the point. Thank you Otac
Jesus was the sinless God-Man, period. And Mary was a human, and like all humans she had sin, whether small or big. P.S, Jesus called her “woman” more than once as recorded in the Bible, indicating that she was like all other human beings in need of a saviour; Jesus came to save her from her sins too.
So if we are not guilty of sin when we are born (original sin) then if we die as an infant, or unbaptized, we will go to heaven?
Tell me you don’t understand the immaculate conception without telling me you don’t understand the immaculate conception. 🙄🙄🙄
Good orthodox =+100 points
Glorious beard = +100000000000000000points
Wake up
(This is a joke)
The Catholic theologians distinguish between the original sin as a debt (The need for redemption to restore our justice upon God) and as an act (The proclivity towards evil). The Blessed Virgin Mary was preserved from the original sin as an act, in the sense that since her Conception she never had any tendency to sin, nor the Evil had any influence on her. Still, she obviously was a fully human being who needed the sacrifice of Our Lord Jesus Christ to enter Heaven.
The base misunderstanding is the word guilt. Guilt in the catholic sense here is not that you as a falle
person are guilty, it's that you as a fallen person bear the effects of the sin (something that orthodox also believe). It's an old use if the word that people get confused about and understandably so because there are church documents that use that language
God Can Do Anything He Needs to Do and Has The Power He Even Made You. Have a Think About It.
God Bless you.
You’re putting God in your little human box and it’s normal for humans to be ignorant. GLORY BE TO GOD AND ALL HIS POWER AND DIVINITY. ✝️