Contarini:
I am happy to tell you why I don’t believe in the IC, but it might be better first for you to say why you think a Trinitarian Christian ought to believe in the IC (apart from the authority of the See of Rome defining the dogma).
OK, I’ll bite…
BrianH:
The Immaculate Conception is not even hinted at in scripture except for one phrase…“full of grace” Luke 1:28 of which the meaning of is greatly debated(of course Catholics disagree thus the whole second Eve…Ark of Covenant argument). It is also a later developing Christian tradition based upon my reserach.
From the February 2001 issue of
This Rock magazine:The phrase “full of grace” in Like 1:28 is a translation of the Greek word
kecharitomene. This word represents the proper name of the person being addressed by the angel, and it therefore expresses a characteristic quality of Mary.
Kecharitomene is a perfect passive participle of
charitoo, meaning “to fill or endow with grace.” Since this term is in the perfect tense, it indicates a perfection of grace that is both intensive and extensive. This means that the grace Mary enjoyed was not a result of the angel’s visit, and was not only as “full” or strong or complete as possible at any given time, but it extended over the whole of her life, from conception onward. She was in a state of sanctifying grace from the first moment of her existence to have been called “full of grace.”
Over the centuries, the Fathers and doctors of the Church spoke often about the fittingness of the privilege of Mary’s Immaculate Conception. The dogma is especially fitting when one examines the honor that was given to the Ark of the Covenant. It contained the manna (bread from heaven), stone tablets of the Ten Commandments (the word of God), and the staff of Aaron (an instrument of Israel’s redemption). If this box was created with such honor—to carry a stick, some bread, and stone tablets—how much more should Mary be made a worthy dwelling place for God himself? She is the new Ark of the Covenant because she carried the real bread from heaven, the Word of God, and the instrument of our redemption, Jesus’ body.
Some argue that the new ark is not Mary but the body of Jesus. Even if this were the case, it is worth noting that 1 Chronicles 15:14 records that the persons who bore the ark were to be sanctified. There would seem to be no sense in sanctifying men who carried a box and not sanctifying the womb who carried the Holy One himself. After all, wisdom will not dwell “in a body under debt of sin” (Wis. 1:4 [NAB]).
The Fathers of the Church spoke of this long before the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception was officially defined in 1854… probably around the same time they were busy developing the “fullness of the Trinitarian Doctrine that came out of later Ecumenical Councils and Creeds” if I had to guess
Shibboleth:
The few Protestant denominations that have taken a hard stand against the Immaculate Conception do it on the basis that they feel if Mary was born as was born Eve without stain and ultimately lived a life without sin that would mean that she would not need a redeemer…
From the same February 2001 issue of
This Rock magazine:The Church does not hesitate to profess that Mary needed a savior. It was by the grace of God—and not the work of Mary—that she was saved from sin in a most perfect manner. By what is called “preservative redemption,” Mary was preserved from sin at the time of her natural conception. John the Baptist was sanctified in the womb prior to his birth (Luke 1:15), and Mary was sanctified at her conception. It is no difficulty that Christ distributed the grace of Calvary some forty-five years or so before it happened, just as he bestows it upon us two thousand years after the fact. The
Catechism of the Catholic Church states that this gift was given to Mary, making her “redeemed in a more exalted fashion, by reason of the merits of her Son” (492). She has more reason to call God her Savior than we do, because he saved her in an even more glorious manner!
God can “save” a person from a sin by forgiving them, or by providing them the grace never to fall into that particular sin. An ancient analogy is often useful to explain this: A person can be saved from a pit in two ways; one can fall into it and be brought out, or one can be caught before falling into it. Mankind is saved in the first manner, and Mary in the second. Both are saved from the pit of sin. If Jesus wished to save his mother from the stain of sin, what is to prevent him?
rotestants and Catholics alike would agree that there are exceptions. For example, a child below the age of reason is not capable of committing actual sin. By definition he can’t sin, since sinning requires the ability to reason and the ability to intend to sin. This is indicated by Paul later in the epistle to the Romans when he speaks of the time when Jacob and Esau were unborn babies as a time when they “had done nothing either good or bad” (Rom. 9:11).