Different Mary questions

[aj830]

Ok so I tend to think up different situations for things I am not really prepared to answer with people of other faiths and here are some things that I understand but can’t really put into words to explain about specific beliefs about the Blessed Virgin Mary and just some things I was wondering.

1.Mary being born free from original sin makes sense to me and I feel I can explain the reasoning behind it, but after Jesus’ birth what is the evidence and proof that she remained sinless? Was it possible for her to “fall” and if she had would it have been equivalent to the kind of fall of Adam and Eve into sin?

2.Since Mary was free from original sin was it “easier” for her to resist temptation having been free from it all her life, with the whole St. Francis de Sales analogy of a fruit unblemished can be preserved in hay but once bruised it can only be preserved in honey. So since she was unblemished to begin with was it possible for her to go through her life easier.

These were just two things that had me wondering, The first one is kind of those tip of the tongue answers that I can never seem to get in my head but completley believe and the second was just something I kind of started to think about a little.

 

[Pophead]

Ok so I tend to think up different situations for things I am not really prepared to answer with people of other faiths and here are some things that I understand but can’t really put into words to explain about specific beliefs about the Blessed Virgin Mary and just some things I was wondering.

1.Mary being born free from original sin makes sense to me and I feel I can explain the reasoning behind it, but after Jesus’ birth what is the evidence and proof that she remained sinless? Was it possible for her to “fall” and if she had would it have been equivalent to the kind of fall of Adam and Eve into sin?

2.Since Mary was free from original sin was it “easier” for her to resist temptation having been free from it all her life, with the whole St. Francis de Sales analogy of a fruit unblemished can be preserved in hay but once bruised it can only be preserved in honey. So since she was unblemished to begin with was it possible for her to go through her life easier.

These were just two things that had me wondering, The first one is kind of those tip of the tongue answers that I can never seem to get in my head but completley believe and the second was just something I kind of started to think about a little.

Enoch walked with God and was no more, for it is said the Lord took him. She must have been predestined and transfigured, only her predestination happened in the womb like Jeremiah, and her transfiguration was like Elijah’s, taken up into heaven. These type of things I am sure happened with others, but we have no documents to prove it, or do we ? The election of grace and rapture is something that is set to happen sometime in the future. I believe that if one really walks in the Spirit there is not need that one should sin, but then … there is always that doubt … what if … and always that fear … what if … no rapture. What I am saying is that Mary was not the first that something like this happened to one of us humans, and it will certainly not be the last. Did Jesus not say, ‘ye are gods’ ?

Pophead.

 

[promethius95945]

1.Mary being born free from original sin makes sense to me and I feel I can explain the reasoning behind it, but after Jesus’ birth what is the evidence and proof that she remained sinless? Was it possible for her to “fall” and if she had would it have been equivalent to the kind of fall of Adam and Eve into sin?

She remained sinless. Mary was the new ark of the covenant and as such remained pure once and for all time for Jesus only (incidently, this is also part of why we know she had no other children). She did not “fall,” but rather she was assumed, eventually into heaven (much like elijah)

2.Since Mary was free from original sin was it “easier” for her to resist temptation having been free from it all her life, with the whole St. Francis de Sales analogy of a fruit unblemished can be preserved in hay but once bruised it can only be preserved in honey. So since she was unblemished to begin with was it possible for her to go through her life easier.

Unfortunately, this can’t be answered. We know Mary lacked a sinful nature but we don’t know if she was ever tempted to sin or not (Jesus also lacked a sin nature but the devil tempted Him in the wilderness. All we know is tempted or not she refrained from sin.

 

[Verbum]

Hi AJ,

Mary was like our first parents before the fall, except that she did not undergo a test. Her intellect was illuminated in such a way that her will was never bent toward sin. She was confirmed in the state of innocence. Here’s what St. Thomas Aquinas says, in the Summa Theologica, about the original state of innocence.

But the very rectitude of the primitive state, wherewith man was endowed by God, seems to require that, as others say, he was created in grace, according to Eccles. 7:30, “God made man right.” For this rectitude consisted in his reason being subject to God, the lower powers to reason, and the body to the soul: and the first subjection was the cause of both the second and the third; since while reason was subject to God, the lower powers remained subject to reason, as Augustine says [Cf. De Civ. Dei xiii, 13; De Pecc. Merit. et Remiss. i, 16. Now it is clear that such a subjection of the body to the http://forums.catholic-questions.org/cathen/14153a.htm”]soul

and of the lower powers to reason, was not from nature; otherwise it would have remained after sin; since even in the demons the natural gifts remained after sin, as Dionysius declared (Div. Nom. iv). Hence it is clear that also the primitive subjection by virtue of which reason was subject to God, was not a merely natural gift, but a supernatural endowment of grace; for it is not possible that the effect should be of greater efficiency than the cause. Hence Augustine says (De Civ. Dei xiii, 13) that, “as soon as they disobeyed the Divine command, and forfeited Divine grace, they were ashamed of their nakedness, for they felt the impulse of disobedience in the flesh, as though it were a punishment corresponding to their own disobedience.” Hence if the loss of grace dissolved the obedience of the flesh to the soul, we may gather that the inferior powers were subjected to the soul through grace existing therein.

Summa Theologica, First Part, question 95
See
newadvent.org/summa/1095.htm

Verbum

 

[VociMike]

Hi AJ,

Mary was like our first parents before the fall, except that she did not undergo a test.

Do we actually know that she did not undergo a test? I would find it surprising if she did not.

Perhaps the Passion of her son, Our Lord, was her test? I don’t know.

 

[Gill79]

Ok so I tend to think up different situations for things I am not really prepared to answer with people of other faiths and here are some things that I understand but can’t really put into words to explain about specific beliefs about the Blessed Virgin Mary and just some things I was wondering.

1.Mary being born free from original sin makes sense to me and I feel I can explain the reasoning behind it, but after Jesus’ birth what is the evidence and proof that she remained sinless? Was it possible for her to “fall” and if she had would it have been equivalent to the kind of fall of Adam and Eve into sin?

2.Since Mary was free from original sin was it “easier” for her to resist temptation having been free from it all her life, with the whole St. Francis de Sales analogy of a fruit unblemished can be preserved in hay but once bruised it can only be preserved in honey. So since she was unblemished to begin with was it possible for her to go through her life easier.

These were just two things that had me wondering, The first one is kind of those tip of the tongue answers that I can never seem to get in my head but completley believe and the second was just something I kind of started to think about a little.

read about Job

the sence

Job well blessed in wealth begin unright perfect man
as he been godly so well so pleased God according to Job good perfect attuide so God bless him a lot, so long through God blessing on Job so Job protected as God put hedge around him from temptions in rewards blessing. catch is God bless him SO LONG rightly. but cos it long time since he was put to test in faith, so devil appear to God in heaven among angels who praising God

something like this to God. okay Job been great no weakness great, but what about NOW it been long time his faith are tested. so how can u God be sure he will not fall cos u protected bless him so much maybe he weaker not strong as he once ?

God respond I think Job a great wonderful man that why he are blessed a lot and long time.

devil respond yes sure but prove it NOW it been such long time how can YOU know that for sure as he havent been tested maybe it not as once it was ?

God respond fair enough what u saying. okay i premit u some power to test Job but I believe he will confirm to my thought of him that he still strong and he was, ever untest long time.

devil his agents went done the bad stuff

Job proved God to be true that his faith still strong ever it not tested for long time.
to add pains to devil bright idea. outcome is job blessed ever more in turn much stronger as result of struggles

much be quite humilating for him devil considering it was his idea in first place!

Gillian

 

[Jerry-Jet]

Adam and Eve had sanctifying grace before they fell–in other words before they fell they had no inclination towards sin.

That does not mean that they possesed every grace that God could personally give.

Since mary was Full of grace she had so much grace that even God could not give her anymore grace because He had already given her a full measure–in other words she couldn’t have taken anymore grace!

With that much grace and with no inclination towards sin that we have after the fall–she was in a strong position to avoid sin.

We do not know if she was put to a test but we do know that Satan tempted Jesus–if he would tempt Jesus who was divine and had Infinite grace–which Mary didn’t have–she was full of grace but not infinitly full of grace–why wouldn’t have satan tempted her?

As to whether it was hard to avoid let me ask this: was it hard for jesus to avoid satan’s temptation? I would think not!

Since god doesn’t allow us to be tempted beyond what we can bear and since he provided mary with a full measure of grace and since she possesed sanctifying grace then I think it wasn’t HARD for mary to avoid sin but was of course harder for her than Jesus for who it was not hard at all!

Jesus’ greatest test was the cross because he bore the sins of the entire world throughout all history. How many trillions of sins is that? Can you imagine bearing such ad never wavering in having your will and God’s exactly the same?!

Our minds cannot fasthom the infiniteness of Jesus and his infinite love for us!

And though we can’t fathom what it must have been like to be mary we can partly imagine it and the pain at watching her son the Son of God Jesus die for us on the Cross!

So yes Mry was put to a stout test but God gave her grace enough to overcome!

 

[Della]

Ok so I tend to think up different situations for things I am not really prepared to answer with people of other faiths and here are some things that I understand but can’t really put into words to explain about specific beliefs about the Blessed Virgin Mary and just some things I was wondering.

1.Mary being born free from original sin makes sense to me and I feel I can explain the reasoning behind it, but after Jesus’ birth what is the evidence and proof that she remained sinless? Was it possible for her to “fall” and if she had would it have been equivalent to the kind of fall of Adam and Eve into sin?

Why would she have been more liable to “fall” after giving birth to Jesus? Does giving birth somehow make a woman, any woman more liable to commit sin? I’m sorry, but your question makes no sense.

It would have been possible for Mary to fall into sin if she were inclined to sin, but she wasn’t. She was meant to be the Second Eve, the Mother of the Redeemed. In her we see the perfection we, as ordinary human beings (unlike Jesus who was the God-man and therefore totally incapable of sinning) can attain. It is why she is, after Christ himself, our prime example.

2.Since Mary was free from original sin was it “easier” for her to resist temptation having been free from it all her life, with the whole St. Francis de Sales analogy of a fruit unblemished can be preserved in hay but once bruised it can only be preserved in honey. So since she was unblemished to begin with was it possible for her to go through her life easier.

Mary had no concupiscence, or inclination to sin, but life was not easier for her. Indeed, seeing others whom she loved in sin must have been a great sorrow for her. And seeing her beloved Son reviled and rejected by his own people must have pierced her heart with agony. No, she didn’t have an easy time of it living in a world filled with sin.

 

[batteddy]

1.Mary being born free from original sin makes sense to me and I feel I can explain the reasoning behind it, but after Jesus’ birth what is the evidence and proof that she remained sinless? Was it possible for her to “fall” and if she had would it have been equivalent to the kind of fall of Adam and Eve into sin?

Mary was free like the rest of us. Grace is something that the will cooperates with (the possibility of cooperation being itself a grace), it does not coerce the Will.

Mary was in a state like Eve before the Fall. At least spiritually, though we know she had the bodily infirmities such as hunger, thirst, fatigue, pain, sorrow, and death that fallen bodies are subject to.

Eve was free and had grace available to her…and she sinned. Mary was free and had grace available to her…and she didnt. That is the wonderful difference.

Mary was definitely not some automaton whose will was overruled by grace.

Mary could have sinned inasmuch as she had free will. But the whole reason God chose her is because He foresaw that, given His grace, she wouldn’t.

2.Since Mary was free from original sin was it “easier” for her to resist temptation having been free from it all her life, with the whole St. Francis de Sales analogy of a fruit unblemished can be preserved in hay but once bruised it can only be preserved in honey. So since she was unblemished to begin with was it possible for her to go through her life easier.

It is generally believed that, as a result of her Immaculate Conception, Mary did not have concupisence. Her body and mind suffered like ours, and her soul was created in a state “already baptized”…but it had one possible difference from a baptized person’s soul:

In baptism, it is like a sword is removed from the soul. But the wound, concupiscence, is still there. Mary was preserved from every having that “sword” in the first place, so there never was any wound.

Now, does this make it more or less easy for her to sin?

Eve did not have concupiscence and yet still sinned. Christ did not have concupiscence (it would be incompatible with his divinity to have his will favor evil), and couldn’t have sinned, being God and having the Beatific Vision…but he still was tempted in a real sense. Externally tempted, but not internally. And Mary probably was too.

You see…in his original state, man still had two appetites. An upper and a lower. And the lower, by nature, was and is attracted to those things for the good of the body, and the upper is attracted to those things for the good of the soul. And even in his original state, sometimes this conflicted.

BUT, in his original state, the upper was firmly in control. Reason was firmly in control. The lower appetite might find something attractive, but it would present it’s request to Reason, and if reason said no, that’s not good for the soul…that would be the end of it. The lower appetite would submit and quiet itself immediately…though the free will would still be the final judge.

Now, however, with concupiscence…the lower disobeys the upper. The lower finds something attractive…and even when reason says that it isn’t good for the soul…the lower lusts against it, refusing to submit and quiet itself. The lower keeps asking for it, keeps trying to persuade the will. Normally, reason would merely have to dismiss the request once, but now…it keeps arguing in favor of the flesh before the Will and unless reason wrestles with it and argues just as strongly and persistantly…the will is heavily inclined to choose the evil.

Would lacking this make Mary’s life any easier? Did it make it any easier for Adam and Eve to resist sin? Did it make Christ’s life any “easier”? I can’t really say.

 

[Verbum]

Hi AJ,

Do we actually know that she did not undergo a test? I would find it surprising if she did not.

Perhaps the Passion of her son, Our Lord, was her test? I don’t know.

Adam and Eve were given a test and we’re told about it.There is not reason to believe that Mary was given a test. For what purpose?

Verbum

 

[Jerry-Jet]

So by sharing in temptation like her son did she would be better equiped to make intercession for us!

 

[Verbum]

Hi Jerry,

Jesus’ temptation could not be a test because he is sinless by nature. Mary was free from concupiscence, which seems to preclude any yielding to temptation.

As for Jesus’ “temptation” it is more for our edification than anything else : Jesus’ kingdom is not of this world.

Verbum

 

[Jerry-Jet]

Is it harder or easier for Mary to intercede for us who are trying to deal with temptation if she has also had to deal with temptation?

It is my personal belief that Mary asked Jesus for the priviledge of facing death so as to unite herself with what her Son faced and Jesus granted her the favor and immediately after dying she was of course Assumed into Heaven.

The Catholic Church has never made a definitive teaching on whether Mary died or not before the Assumption but many theologians believe she did die.

If that is true, It just makes sense to me that if Mary was indeed united to her Son in all things that she would also be united with Him in also facing temptation.

I can’t prove it but it makes sense.

If she never faced temptation she is singularly unique in that apect.

That doesn’t make sense to me.

 

[paarsurrey]

Hi
Sorry for the interruption.
There is an article:
Jesus Lived in India- Holger Kersten, German Scholar.
sol.com.au/kor/7_01.htm

This article is a summary of Kersten’s exhaustive research into Christ’s travels after the Crucifixion, his arrival in India with the Mother Mary and finally his death and entombment in Kashmir.

“The historian Mullah Nadini (1413) also recounts a story of Yuz Asaf who was a contemporary to King Gopadatta, and confirms that he also used the name Issar, ie. Jesus. There is also much historical truth in the towns and villages of Northern India to prove that Jesus and his mother Mary spent time in the area. For instance, at the border of a small town called Mari, there is nearby a mountain called Pindi Point, upon which is an old tomb called Mai Mari da Asthan or “The final resting place of Mary”. The tomb is said to be very old and local Muslims venerate it as the grave of Issa’s (ie Christ’s) Mother. The tomb itself is oriented East-West consistent with the Jewish tradition, despite the fact it is within a Muslim area. Assuming its antiquity, such a tomb could not be Hindu either since the Hindus contemporary to Christ cremated their dead and scattered their ashes as do Hindus today.”

This is a new information on Mary, must be looked into.

Thanks

 

[LilyM]

Hi AJ,

Mary was like our first parents before the fall, except that she did not undergo a test. Her intellect was illuminated in such a way that her will was never bent toward sin. She was confirmed in the state of innocence. Here’s what St. Thomas Aquinas says, in the Summa Theologica, about the original state of innocence.

Summa Theologica, First Part, question 95
See
newadvent.org/summa/1095.htm

Verbum

The Annunciation was her test - since she had the free will to say no, even if she had every natural and supernatural advantage pushing her to say yes. Had she said no she would’ve fallen like Eve.