Theotokos and Labor Pains

[Nikita]

Im looking to convert so forgive my ignorance. It is my understanding now, that the Blessed Virgin Mary (Theotokos) was NOT born withour 'orogional sin' because in Orthodoxy, it is not beleived that there is origional sin. My question is, with that in mind, and considiering that in roman theology it is said that through origional sin woman merited painful childbirth, my question is this:
DID Mary have labor pains?
Seems like a petty question, but its a petty question I have had for some time. Maybe some of you might have a better grasp on this than I do at the moment.
God Bless.
Jessica

[Anastasios]

That's not a question we can answer. The hymns say "no". Whether she did in "reality" is not even an issue. None of the gospel writers was around when she gave birth!

anastasios

[Seraphim Reeves]

Jessica,

Im looking to convert so forgive my ignorance. It is my understanding now, that the Blessed Virgin Mary (Theotokos) was NOT born withour 'orogional sin' because in Orthodoxy, it is not beleived that there is origional sin. My question is, with that in mind, and considiering that in roman theology it is said that through origional sin woman merited painful childbirth, my question is this:
DID Mary have labor pains?

There are two questions here. The first regards Our Lady's giving birth to Christ our God...the other has to do with the RC doctrine of "original sin" and "the immaculate conception."

As for the Mother of God's birthing of Christ, all of our Tradition says it was without the pains typical of child bearing.

A different matter are the RC understanding of "original sin" and their doctrine of our Lady's "immaculate conception."

The "immaculate conception" (once a highly disputed teaching in the RCC, which was even taught against by RC giants like Thomas Aquinas, and the Dominican Order in general) teaches that the Blessed Virgin is fundamentally different from us in the area of sin - she was not born with "original sin" - from the moment of Her conception, they teach She was in the "state of grace".

From an Orthodox view, there are several problems with this teaching. The first being, it has no solid claim to antiquity in the post-schism Latin tradition, let alone in the Holy Tradition of the Orthodox Church (to which the Papacy once belonged.) Thus, the assertion of this, unilaterally, by the Papacy as a sacred dogma is itself worthy of criticism. This was primarily the line taken by the Ecumenical Patriarchate in it's reaction to Pius IX's self appointed "definition" of said teaching.

However, on a deeper level, there is at play different understandings of what "original sin" is.

While it is true that the RCC developed an increasingly "legalistic" outlook in it's interpretation of the economy of salvation after the schism (for example, Anslem of Canterbury's teaching on the atonement, which has become part of the foundation of both Roman Catholicism and Protestantism), I think it is fair to say that at least "officially" the RCC's doctrine (save for it's false emphasis perhaps) isn't terribly off. My undersanding is that the RCC teaches that being members of fallen Adam (by descent), men are not born in the innocence and justice Adam was - that is to say, they are born without indwelling Grace, and are made bondservants to concupiscence (the out of control passions of the flesh and soul.) While Orthodoxy would stress more the ontological aspects of the fall, and point out that it's primarily because of our mortality that the "bad effects" of Adam's sin (concupiscence) is with us, it's flaws are more in the way of narrowness and omission than outright error.

Of course, this is my understanding of the RCC's official, "on the books" teaching - I know that in reality, in the popular writings and piety of the RCC, the judicial outlook has had more of a detrimental effect (to the point that in popular works and piety, a very false portrayal of God is to be found.) Protestantism also tends to have this very distorted "popular" outlook as well, except they've dogmatized it (for example, this outlook is enshrined in the writings of Luther and Calvin.)

The problem with the "immaculate conception" teaching, is that by saying our Lady was "conceived without sin or taint", what they're effectively saying is that She was not mortal, and that She did not have to struggle as we did. As St.John (Maximovitch) pointed out in his work on Our Lady, The Orthodox Veneration of the Theotokos, that rather than glorifying the Theotokos, this teaching denies the intense struggle She endured throughout Her life. While it's true She is a central figure in the economy of salvation, and the hand of God was upon Her from Her very beginning (for example, the story of Our Lady's miraculous conception from two, elderly parents - Sts.Anna and Joachim), She was not free of the basic limitations we are.

However, I must return to the central truth in this matter - that to teach that the Theotokos was free from "original sin", is to teach She was not mortal. This contradicts the consistant Tradition of the Orthodox Church, which celebrates to this day the Dormition of the Mother of God (Her peaceful repose and total transmission to Paradise - hence why we have no physical relics of the Blessed Virgin, as we do of other Saints, and Apostles.) This is also why the RC teaching of the "immaculate conception" and "assumption" of the Blessed Virgin, are conspicuously free of any mention of Her death - because they know full well the implication of their teaching on this subject. Right now, one can be a Roman Catholic, and believe the Blessed Virgin never died (but was simply assumed into Heaven), and be in good standing with the RCC.

Some may argue that this observation (that to say the Mother of God is "free from original sin" = "the Mother of God being immortal") is incorrect, for we all affirm that the Lord Jesus Christ was completly without sin, yet He most certainly did die. However, there is an important reason why this is so - Christ did not suffer and die because such was His lot, due to sin, but because He chose to. His Incarnation, and the taking upon Himself of the burdens of this fallen world, including death itself, was a choice.

Thus, if the RC doctrine of the "immaculate conception" is true, and it is also true the Theotokos did in fact die (as the Orthodox Church believes, and many RC's believe), then we are left with an unnerving question - did the Theotokos also "choose" to die?

This is blasphemous, from an Orthodox p.o.v. However, it would fit very well with the increasingly exagerated/distorted cult to the Blessed Virgin in the RCC, which seeks to make Her a "co-redemptrix" with Christ (the Redeemer.) This is not a "co-redemption" in any normal sense (like we'd say all good members of the Church have a part in, through their prayers and sufferings on behalf of sinners), but something unique to the Blessed Virgin. That's the RC theologenum (which many in the RCC want to make a "dogma".) It is not a very surprising idea, since it would lend itself very well to the "immaculately conceived"/"dying" Blessed Virgin paradigm very well.

Do not get me wrong - the Theotokos, our Lady, our sweet and all-holy, virginal Mother, is lauded liturgically and privately in the Orthodox Church, far, far more than you'll ever see in Roman Catholicism. There is no truly Orthodox prayer rule, without prayers seeking the help of the Blessed Virgin. However, this robust veneration of our Lady, is within a correct paradigm, lacking the grievous distortions of the RCC. The "exageration" of the RCC in regard to our Lady, is not due to the degree or extent of their veneration of Her, but what they say and teach about Her.

Seraphim

[LatinTrad]

AMDG

Hello there, Mr. Reeves! How are you?

I must take issue with your post about Catholic teaching on Our Lady's Immaculate Conception.

First of all, Pius IX's definition of the dogma cites the Fathers and Scripture itself as the foundation for saying that the Most Holy Theotokos and ever-Virgin Mary is without all stain of Original Sin. All the Fathers taught that she was conceived in a unique state of holiness that precluded the presence of any sin or defect whatsoever. The Angel Gabriel addressed her as kecharitomené, which implies that she was already filled with God's grace.

The dogma of the Immaculate Conception does not imply that Mary was not mortal, strictly speaking, since the Church teaches that the immortality before the Fall was a "preternatural" gift. Thus, by nature Mary was mortal; by grace she merited immortality; by choice she laid her life down (as did her Son).

Not all of that is defined dogma--for instance, whether the Theotokos did or did not die--but the scenario above is completely in line with the Catholic teaching and the orthodox Fathers.

Regarding St. Thomas Aquinas, it is important to note that he did come to hold the Immaculate Conception, and argues in favor of it in his Commentary on the Sentences of Peter Lombard.

There is much to respond to in your post, which I cannot do because I am at work, but I would like to add one more thing--why the heck do I always see Easterners claiming that they venerate the Theotokos "far, far more than you'll ever see in Roman Catholicism"? Do not overstate your thesis, Mr. Reeves.

Ave Maris Stella
Dei Mater alma
Atque semper Virgo
Felix Caeli porta!

Regina sine labe originali concepta, ora pro nobis!

LatinTrad

[OrthodoxyOrDeath]

JessieMarie,

This will have to be short...and I do not have time to read some of the other replies but it seems the question of "original sin" was answered.

"DID Mary have labor pains?"

Absolutley not. She had no labor pains and there was no delivery in the normal sense since she is "ever Virgin". Jesus was miraculously delivered from the womb.

I hope someone can expand on this further since I have to go...

[Anastasios]

Jesus was born the normal way, just like the rest of us. Orthodox are fond of saying there was no immaculate conception because Mary is just like us. She most certainly gave birth in the same way. She was ever-virgin though. The fathers say she felt no labor pains. I believe it. But let's not say she delivered miraculously--that is what the heretic Docetists taught--that Jesus passed through Mary like water through a pipe, they said.

anastasios

[尼古拉前执事]

Whoa! The fathers (Saints John of Damascus, Ambrose, Gregory of Nyssa, Hesychios, Joseph the Hymnographer, Ephraim, Jerome, etc.) have clearly stated that she remained a physical virgin after the miraculous birth of Christ and that no midwives were needed, even though they were called for. At the birth there was a bright flash of light. Just like Christ passed through the stone of his sepulcher, he passed through the Theotokos in the way of natural birth, but leaving her in the same state as before.