Did Mary Ever Sin?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Vigis
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Basil

Basil explains that the meaning of Luke 2:34-35 is clear. Mary sinned, and she needed to be restored after Jesus’ resurrection, just as Peter was restored:

“About the words of Simeon to Mary, there is no obscurity or variety of interpretation…By a sword is meant the word which tries and judges our thoughts, which pierces even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of our thoughts. Now every soul in the hour of the Passion was subjected, as it were, to a kind of searching. According to the word of the Lord it is said, ‘All ye shall be offended because of me.’ Simeon therefore prophesies about Mary herself, that when standing by the cross, and beholding what is being done, and hearing the voices, after the witness of Gabriel, after her secret knowledge of the divine conception, after the great exhibition of miracles, she shall feel about her soul a mighty tempest. The Lord was bound to taste of death for every man–to become a propitiation for the world and to justify all men by His own blood. Even thou thyself, who hast been taught from on high the things concerning the Lord, shalt be reached by some doubt. This is the sword. ‘That the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed.’ He indicates that after the offence at the Cross of Christ a certain swift healing shall come from the Lord to the disciples and to Mary herself, confirming their heart in faith in Him. In the same way we saw Peter, after he had been offended, holding more firmly to his faith in Christ. What was human in him was proved unsound, that the power of the Lord might be shewn.” - Basil (Letter 260:6, 260:9)

These are just a few examples of very powerful Church fathers believing that Mary did sin and there are many more fathers who also believed the same thing. I would appear to be no consensus about the sinlessness or lack of in the early church. I realize that the same fathers also said the opposite. For example:

**“Mary, a Virgin not only undefiled but a Virgin whom grace has made inviolate, free of every stain of sin.” Ambrose, Sermon 22:30 (A.D. 388). **

Where’s the consensus?

Thank you and God bless.

Soli Deo Gloria!
 
Perfect I was just going to start a thread about this but I can ask the question here.

Someone asked me if I believed that Mary was sinless. I said of course. So she asked me about Romans 3:23 “for all have sinned.”

I asked if she believed the ‘all’ that Paul is revering to really means all? She said yes, every single person has sinned, including Mary. I asked if she thought Jesus had sinned, because He was human. She said He didnt count because the Bible says that He is not from the “seed of adam”.

Now I wasnt expecting this and I didnt ask her to show it to me because I didnt want it to be true and me not know how to deal with the verse. I brought up that Jesus refers to himself as the ‘son of man’ more than anything else in the Bible and I asked if she thought children under the age of reason could sin. She just kept going back that Jesus was not from the “seed of Adam” and there for did not count for Romans 3:23. Also she said she believed that Jesus did have a Human nature, but she just kept saying that he was not from the seed of Adam and therefore Romans did not refer to him.

So does anyone know what verse she was talking about and how it deals with this?

God Bless
 
Roman_Catholic said:
Perfect I was just going to start a thread about this but I can ask the question here.

Someone asked me if I believed that Mary was sinless. I said of course. So she asked me about Romans 3:23 “for all have sinned.”

I asked if she believed the ‘all’ that Paul is revering to really means all? She said yes, every single person has sinned, including Mary. I asked if she thought Jesus had sinned, because He was human. She said He didnt count because the Bible says that He is not from the “seed of adam”.

Now I wasnt expecting this and I didnt ask her to show it to me because I didnt want it to be true and me not know how to deal with the verse. I brought up that Jesus refers to himself as the ‘son of man’ more than anything else in the Bible and I asked if she thought children under the age of reason could sin. She just kept going back that Jesus was not from the “seed of Adam” and there for did not count for Romans 3:23. Also she said she believed that Jesus did have a Human nature, but she just kept saying that he was not from the seed of Adam and therefore Romans did not refer to him.

So does anyone know what verse she was talking about and how it deals with this?

God Bless
Click to expand...
Indeed Jesus being fully man AND fully God was without Sin.
 
Roman_Catholic said:
I asked if she believed the ‘all’ that Paul is revering to really means all? She said yes, every single person has sinned, including Mary. I asked if she thought Jesus had sinned, because He was human. She said He didnt count because the Bible says that He is not from the “seed of adam”.

Now I wasnt expecting this and I didnt ask her to show it to me because I didnt want it to be true and me not know how to deal with the verse. I brought up that Jesus refers to himself as the ‘son of man’ more than anything else in the Bible and I asked if she thought children under the age of reason could sin. She just kept going back that Jesus was not from the “seed of Adam” and there for did not count for Romans 3:23. Also she said she believed that Jesus did have a Human nature, but she just kept saying that he was not from the seed of Adam and therefore Romans did not refer to him.
Click to expand...
Does Romans 3:23 say “All from the seed of Adam have sinned,” or does it say, “All have sinned”? She’s placing an artificial restriction on the word “all” – the very same sort of thing she accuses us of doing.

You’re on the right apologetic path by asking question infants can sin. Also ask whether the severely mentally handicapped have sinned. God has clearly made exceptions to the statement “all have sinned.”

Jeremy
 
Mary was and is the most perfect example of humanity–God’s most perfect creation. Jesus of course is not a creation but is Creator.

I know it goes against the grain in our egalitarian society to acknowledge that any given person could be ‘better’ than any other person. . .but our society (and believe me I love America because with all its faults it is still the land of the free and the home of the brave) is not the Kingdom of Heaven.

I honor the Blessed Mother above ALL CREATURES. I worship God alone as Creator.
 
Vigis said:
I am now trying to learn more about Catholicism before I join the Church again. I am quite perplexed on many things. One of these things is did Mary ever sin? I have no problem in believing that Mary was preserved from Original Sin. But it also comes to my mind that Adam and Eve were created without Original Sin. So did Mary choose to fall from grace as they did? Or did she remain sinless throughout her life? Answers and explainations would be greatly appreciated. God speed.
Click to expand...
Vigis,

If you study the ProtoEvangelium, you’ll get a clearer picture. In brief, Gen 3:15 tells of the punishment God is going to give to the Serpent in the Garden for the whole “Apple-Gate” incident. “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and hers; He will strike at your head, while you strike at his heel.”.

God is not referring to Eve in this, because Eve did not have a “Seed”. All of their children were the seed of Adam’s. Only one person in all of history could be the product of a Woman’s Seed, and that person in Jesus. Hence, God is prophecying the triumph of Jesus as he strikes at Satan’s head when He triumphs on the Cross (which is Satan striking at His heel).

That would make the Woman in Genesis 3:15 Mary.

Another key phrase is “I will put enmity between you and the Woman.” If Mary had sinned, she would be a slave to sin, and hence a slave to Satan. But “enmity” means enemies, lifelong enemies in Hebrew literature. You can’t be an enemy of someone’s if you are their slave, but slavery to sin would mean that Satan was victorious over Mary.

This is one of the prophecies that the Church used to develope Mary’s Immaculate Conception and her sinless states.
 
nasb said:
Sounds like an Apostolic Tradition, but I have to ask, is this what the Church has always believed? By looking at the Church Fathers, there is obviously no agreement between them as to whether Mary was sinless her whole life.

Ambrose

Ambrose believed that original sin was communicated by means of sexual intercourse. Thus, Jesus avoided original sin by being born of a virgin. Mary, however, would have original sin:
Click to expand...
NASB, Welcome to the Forums. You bring up a good point, and certainly it is confusing, because the very same Ambrose and Augustine bring up conflicting statements.
“Mary, a Virgin not only undefiled but a Virgin whom grace has made inviolate, free of every stain of sin.”
Ambrose,Sermon 22:30(A.D. 388),in JUR,II:166
http://www.cin.org/users/jgallegos/res/dot_clr.gif
“We must except the Holy Virgin Mary, concerning whom I wish to raise no question when it touches the subject of sins, out of honour to the Lord; for from Him we know what abundance of grace for overcoming sin in every particular was conferred upon her who had the merit to conceive and bear Him who undoubtedly had no sin.”
Augustine,Nature and Grace,4236,in NPNF1,V:135
Click to expand...
Maybe this would be a good topic for a new thread, so as not to completely hi-jack this one.
 
NotWorthy said:
Vigis,

If you study the ProtoEvangelium, you’ll get a clearer picture. In brief, Gen 3:15 tells of the punishment God is going to give to the Serpent in the Garden for the whole “Apple-Gate” incident. “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and hers; He will strike at your head, while you strike at his heel.”.

God is not referring to Eve in this, because Eve did not have a “Seed”. All of their children were the seed of Adam’s. Only one person in all of history could be the product of a Woman’s Seed, and that person in Jesus. Hence, God is prophecying the triumph of Jesus as he strikes at Satan’s head when He triumphs on the Cross (which is Satan striking at His heel).

That would make the Woman in Genesis 3:15 Mary.

Another key phrase is “I will put enmity between you and the Woman.” If Mary had sinned, she would be a slave to sin, and hence a slave to Satan. But “enmity” means enemies, lifelong enemies in Hebrew literature. You can’t be an enemy of someone’s if you are their slave, but slavery to sin would mean that Satan was victorious over Mary.

This is one of the prophecies that the Church used to develope Mary’s Immaculate Conception and her sinless states.
Click to expand...
Thank you. This answers the question someone had about the book of Romans and what it said. This clearly shows that Mary is an exception to what Saint Paul states. God speed.
 
Vigis said:
Thank you. This answers the question someone had about the book of Romans and what it said. This clearly shows that Mary is an exception to what Saint Paul states. God speed.
Click to expand...
Thank you. You may also want to study Romans 3:23 and how Psalm 53 is related to it.

Paul in Romans is quoting a Psalm.Psalm 53, - “Fools say in their hearts, “There is no God.” Their deeds are loathsome and corrupt; not one does what is right. God looks down from heaven upon the human race, To see if even one is wise, if even one seeks God. All have gone astray; all alike are perverse. Not one does what is right, not even one.”

This seems to be using exxageration as a literary form to prove a point.
 
jemfinch said:
Does Romans 3:23 say “All from the seed of Adam have sinned,” or does it say, “All have sinned”? She’s placing an artificial restriction on the word “all” – the very same sort of thing she accuses us of doing.
Click to expand...
That’s right. Either “all” means all, or it doesn’t. Since Christ is excluded, it doesn’t.

And then there’s Isaiah 64:7: There is no one that calls upon thy name…

Are there really none who call upon God by name? I wonder if Christians who insist that"all have sinned" really means all, would also agree that neither they nor any other Christians ever call upon God’s name? :eek: Or is this another example of exaggeration for emphasis?
 
Here some other examples of the word “all” that would show that it isn’t always as literal as it sounds. members.aol.com/johnprh/all.html#mor

Romans 15:14
“I myself am satisfied about you, my brethren, that you yourselves are full of goodness, filled with all knowledge, and able to instruct one another.” RSV

However, only God has infinite “all” knowledge.

1 Corinthians 15:22
“For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall **all **be made alive.” RSV

And the Bible tells us that Enoch and Elijah did not die, Genesis 5:24 and 2 Kings 2:11. Also see Hebrews 11:5 “By faith Enoch was taken up so that he should not see death; and he was not found, because God had taken him.”
And not “all” choose to follow God. Some chose death and eternal damnation.

Matthew 3:5-6
“Then went out to him [John the Baptist] Jerusalem and **all **Judea and all the region about the Jordan, and they were baptized by him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins.”
And yet did “all” Jerusalem to him ? Did the Pharisees go too ?

Luke 2:1
“And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that **all **the world should be taxed.”

Did Caesar tax the people from South Africa, India, China, and South America ? How could he when he did not even control the whole world ?

Matthew 2:3
“When Herod the king heard this, he was troubled, and **all **Jerusalem with him”

Really? Everyone in Jerusalem?

Matthew 26:56
“ … Then all the disciples left him [Jesus] and fled.”

But we read in just two verses later that Peter did follow Christ in Matthew 26:58. Cf. Luke 22:54 . And in John 18:15-16 We read that another disciple followed Christ along with Simon Peter. And this other disciple knew the high priest and was therefore able to get Peter into the gate.

This “other disciple,” is John. He even follows Christ all the way to the cross where he is identified as the “beloved disciple.” See John 19:26. The passage in John 21: 20-24 clarifies that he is none other than John, the author of the fourth Gospel.

Therefore, the word “all” in Mat. 26:56 as well as these other examples allows for exceptions. And so therefore, the word “all” in Romans 3:23 also can allow for exceptions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top