Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re; "Amalolbhava Mathave".

Expand Messages
  • Issac K. Joseph
    Dear Fr. George As moderators already clarified you regarding SOC–RC agreements, with all due respect to you, let me put my thoughts on your second argument
    Message 1 of 1 , Nov 27, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear Fr. George

      As moderators already clarified you regarding SOC–RC agreements, with all due respect to you, let me put my thoughts on your second argument on Immaculate conception.

      I think you misunderstood the word "Immaculate". If you cannot digest the RC doctrine of Immaculate conception, it is not meaning that St. Mary was not Immaculate. She was and is Immaculate (sinless status). Only difference is the timing.

      I think we, the OO church, believes that St. Mary become Immaculate (sinless status) from the time she was greeted by the Angles. But RC doctrine says she was Immaculate in her mother's womb, which we rejects. So St. Mary was and is Immaculate and no harm to call her "Amalolbhava (sinless status) Mathave". If I am wrong, I request the learned members to correct me.

      Further, is it is not funny for a learned priest to argue that Jacobite Church is teaching R.C. faith, based on a song in a commercial 'Video Album' released and sold by private parties in a Church Perunal site, and keeping it as the PROOF for the argument???

      In Christ
      Issac K Joseph
      # 0917

      --- In SOCM-FORUM@yahoogroups.com, Fr.T.George wrote:
      >
      > Dear Abraham Kurien,
      >
      > My statement that " We are one in Christ" has been based on Chrstian love. Could you negate this fact? How would you justify the stance taken by jacobite church in having intercommunion with the Roman catholic church which upholds the doctrine of Immaculate conception of St.Mary? The intercommunion means one church and one faith.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.