This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on December 8, 2007, December 8, 2008, December 8, 2009, December 8, 2010, December 8, 2011, December 8, 2012, December 8, 2013, December 8, 2014, and December 8, 2015. |
In the Wikipedia Article entitled “Feast of the Immaculate Conception”, there is a phrase which states: “A feast called the Conception of Mary arose in the Eastern (Catholic) Church in the seventh century.”
It should be pointed out first of all, that there was no such thing as the Eastern Catholic Church in the seventh century. There was one holy, catholic, apostolic church, and parts of it were in the East and part of it was in the West.
Secondly, it should be pointed out that this feast in the East has nothing to do with the Roman Catholic dogma or feast of the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin – a concept applied to it much later, and only in the Roman Church. It is true that we speak of the Holy Virgin Mother of God as sinless, spotless, most pure, and ever-virgin. Some unfortunately use the Western term ‘immaculate’. This confuses the faithful into mistakenly thinking that the “Immaculate Conception” of the Virgin is a teaching of the Orthodox Church. It also confuses those in the Roman Church who are looking for historical validation of a theological point of view which doesn’t exist.
The Wikipedia article about John Duns Scotus which links to this page with the word ‘feast’ asserts that the feast of the Immaculate Conception existed in the East since the seventh century. This is not accurate. The feast which exists in the East is the Feast of the Conception of the Virgin, and it has more to do with the removal of Saint Anna’s shame at being childless than it has to do with any statement that the Virgin was born without sin.
The icons of the feast include many which show Saints Joachim and Anna in an embrace.
Thirdly, this feast is not a major feast of the Eastern Church.
Finally, it should be remembered that in the Eastern Church, the term ‘doctrine’ or ‘dogma’ is applied only to theology pertaining to the Holy Trinity, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. It applies to theology about Our Lord’s birth, of course, but does not apply to the life of His Most Holy Mother in any other way.
The Sessional Hymn from Matins of the Feast: In days of old, the choir of the Prophets Proclaimed the pure and immaculate divine maiden and Virgin, Whom Anna conceives, though she is barren and childless! We bless her today with gladness of heart! For we have been saved for the sake of the one// Who alone is pure and spotless!
John Udics 07:59, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This article needs some citations, particularly for the lengthy quote, and regarding the generalizations about certain theologians and philosophers. I will try and get to those, but I am unsure of where to find information on negative statements (i.e. "Bernard and Thomas Aquinas could not see theological justification for this teaching"...incidentally, which Bernard is being talked about here?) although the Catholic Encyclopedia might have some answers.
Also, the comments about the Eastern Church would well be incorporated, so I hope the contributor...contributes to the actual article at some point. It would be nice not to get "sectarian" about it, but there are some important and valid points to be made.
And I removed the comment about the doctrine taking "a long time" to develop, as this is a very relative statement. What is a "long time" in the context of doctrinal development? Zerobot 07:37, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Trying to find the exact detail, but only Irish catholic-run schools close on Dec 8th every year (this means lots of parents take the day off to shop etc) but I don't think it's a civil service holiday. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.56.61.222 (talk) 10:12, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Since the calendar reform of the Second Vatican Council, this celebration has had the rank of a solemnity, not of a feast. I think that all references to it should be changed.76.123.203.164 (talk) 16:42, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I`ve linked to a pro Immaculate article. Would a low Anglican care to put the opposing case?andycjp (talk) 03:36, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't want to touch this article because the Immaculate Conception articles seemed to be highly protected by the Wikipedia editors.
But I want to point out that the last reference, LCMS regarding the Lutheran views on the Immaculate Conception of Mary has long been gone.
Hopefully someone can note this and remove the link by replacing it with a reliable source that is *active*.
More importantly, I strongly dissagree that the Lutherans accept the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception. My aunt is Lutheran and their church truly prohibits such views, which saddens me because I am a devout Roman Catholic. I was quoted by my relatives that the Immaculate Conception was no longer taught by Martin Luther from the beginning of his protestant ministry.
WHICH goes to the point that the Lutheran claim that the Immaculate Conception is tolerable in their churches is a bit----hilarious. God bless. LoveforMary (talk) 23:05, 13 January 2012 (UTC)LoveforMary[reply]
Dec. 8 is a Sunday this year; last previous case of this was in 2002. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.20 (talk) 22:18, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Feast of the Immaculate Conception. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:19, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"marked the first instance of formal definition of a dogma."
How can this be true? Every ecumenical council (let's leave VII out of the discussion) formally defines dogma. 2600:1015:B062:47B:0:3C:EC6B:AD01 (talk) 12:48, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]