O
Orthodox Christian
Guest
If I could interrupt the anti-Catholic feeding frenzy for just a moment, I'd like to return to the subject of this thread, which is not a ccritical analysis of Rome's doctrines, but rather a survey of the doctrines of other tradiions regarding the mother of Jesus.
Eastern Orthodox tradition teaches that Mary was born of a man and a woman who were childless into old age. Joachim (Heli) and Anna prayed to the Lord and Gabriel announced to them that they would birth an exceptional child. These traditions can be found expressly in the proto-evangelion of Saint James (non-canonical).
Scripture verifies that Mary was a virgin, betrothed to Joseph. Scripture also states explicitly that Jesus had brothers, but does not state specifically that Mary had other children. Scripture refers to brothers Jude and James as sons of Alphaeus, but these may or may not be the James and Judas of which are refrred to in Acts 1:13.
Orthodox tradition holds that Mary remained ever-Virgin. This is not biblically explicit, but biblically derived, specifically on the basis of two issues:
1. The fact that Mary is NOT referred to as the mother of Jesus' brothers
2. The fact that Jesus gave care of His mother ot John the Apostle.
Regarding her position as intercessor:
Orthodox theology teaches that the saints are alive- more alive than we- and that heaven is near, that the Church is One visible and invisible. Those who were intercessors and warriors while in the flesh are fairly and logically believed to continue to be so, and more, when freed from the cares of this world.
Regarding her bodily assumption: Orthodox do not dogmatically hold to this position. It is an ancient tradition of the Church, and like many others, is not recorded in canonical scripture. We can say with some confidence that Thomas was run through by a spear in India, and we can say with some confidence that Mary was assumed into heaven- both come down to us in oral tradition, and both have liberal scriptural precedent.
Regarding Mary as '"co-redemptrix:"
In the fullest sense, this idea is to us unthinkable and blasphemous. In a contextualized sense, one could make an argument that all saints, but especially those who really live the life of dying to self and living to the Lord, participate in the redemption of the world. One must be very careful how that is expressed, for only He accomplished that which was essential
consider Isaiah 63:3
It would be helpful if a positive statement of Marian doctrine could be stated by an Evangelical. By positive, I mean not in reaction to or refutation of Rome.
A sidebar discussion of interest would be as to whether it is good doctrine to teach that people in heaven pray for those on earth, or not, and why.
Eastern Orthodox tradition teaches that Mary was born of a man and a woman who were childless into old age. Joachim (Heli) and Anna prayed to the Lord and Gabriel announced to them that they would birth an exceptional child. These traditions can be found expressly in the proto-evangelion of Saint James (non-canonical).
Scripture verifies that Mary was a virgin, betrothed to Joseph. Scripture also states explicitly that Jesus had brothers, but does not state specifically that Mary had other children. Scripture refers to brothers Jude and James as sons of Alphaeus, but these may or may not be the James and Judas of which are refrred to in Acts 1:13.
Orthodox tradition holds that Mary remained ever-Virgin. This is not biblically explicit, but biblically derived, specifically on the basis of two issues:
1. The fact that Mary is NOT referred to as the mother of Jesus' brothers
2. The fact that Jesus gave care of His mother ot John the Apostle.
Regarding her position as intercessor:
Orthodox theology teaches that the saints are alive- more alive than we- and that heaven is near, that the Church is One visible and invisible. Those who were intercessors and warriors while in the flesh are fairly and logically believed to continue to be so, and more, when freed from the cares of this world.
Regarding her bodily assumption: Orthodox do not dogmatically hold to this position. It is an ancient tradition of the Church, and like many others, is not recorded in canonical scripture. We can say with some confidence that Thomas was run through by a spear in India, and we can say with some confidence that Mary was assumed into heaven- both come down to us in oral tradition, and both have liberal scriptural precedent.
Regarding Mary as '"co-redemptrix:"
In the fullest sense, this idea is to us unthinkable and blasphemous. In a contextualized sense, one could make an argument that all saints, but especially those who really live the life of dying to self and living to the Lord, participate in the redemption of the world. One must be very careful how that is expressed, for only He accomplished that which was essential
consider Isaiah 63:3
It would be helpful if a positive statement of Marian doctrine could be stated by an Evangelical. By positive, I mean not in reaction to or refutation of Rome.
A sidebar discussion of interest would be as to whether it is good doctrine to teach that people in heaven pray for those on earth, or not, and why.