How Could Mary Have Suffered?

  • Thread starter Thread starter tonsofquestions
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

tonsofquestions

Guest
My understanding(and correct me if I’m wrong) is that pain and suffering are a result of Original Sin, that before Adam and Eve sinned, there was no suffering in the world. My question is this, the Bible says that Simeon(the guy who couldn’t die till he’d seen the Messiah), told Mary, “and you yourself shall be pierced with a sword”. I’ve also heard Catholics reference Mary’s suffering on Calvary(as any mother would suffer in that kind of situation), and one person even said that Mary’s sufferings contributed to our Redemption(though I’m pretty sure that particular point is a heresy), so am I correct in believing that Mary suffered on Calvary? And if so, how is that possible, since she was free from Original Sin and yet still suffered(pretty intensely, from what I’ve heard)?
 
Mary definitely suffered on calvary watching her son die.

Try telling the Mother of a soldier who’s been sent back in a coffin from Iraq that she isn’t suffering.

Did Jesus suffer on the cross? He was also free from original sin.

Just because a single person is free of original sin doesn’t mean they won’t suffer.
 
There is a feast day to commemorate the Seven Sorrows of Mary. They are:
  • at the prophecy of Simeon;
  • at the flight into Egypt;
  • having lost the Holy Child at Jerusalem;
  • meeting Jesus on his way to Calvary;
  • standing at the foot of the Cross;
  • Jesus being taken from the Cross;
  • at the burial of Christ.
 
praise_Jesus said:
Mary definitely suffered on calvary watching her son die.

Try telling the Mother of a soldier who’s been sent back in a coffin from Iraq that she isn’t suffering.

Did Jesus suffer on the cross? He was also free from original sin.

Just because a single person is free of original sin doesn’t mean they won’t suffer.
Click to expand...
I brought up Jesus being able to suffer on another thread, someone gave an explanation but when I asked if it was really Church teaching they never got back to me.

However, isn’t pain and suffering a consequence of Original Sin?
 
We all suffer from the effects of original sin. Doesn’t have to be our own sinful nature, but the effects of others’ sinful actions cause much pain.

As praise_Jesus said, Jesus Himself suffered greatly, yet He was without sin. But Jesus transformed suffering and pain into salvation! He took something horrible and turned it into something wonderful. Therein lies the power of suffering and offering our suffering to, through, with and in Jesus.

Mary offered her entire being to God, “Behold the handmaid of the Lord, let it be done to me according to thy word.” Her entire life was an offering to God, as our entire lives should be.
 
And while we’re at it, why was Jesus able to suffer if He was free from Original Sin?
 
Didi said:
We all suffer from the effects of original sin. Doesn’t have to be our own sinful nature, but the effects of others’ sinful actions cause much pain.

As praise_Jesus said, Jesus Himself suffered greatly, yet He was without sin. But Jesus transformed suffering and pain into salvation! He took something horrible and turned it into something wonderful. Therein lies the power of suffering and offering our suffering to, through, with and in Jesus.

Mary offered her entire being to God, “Behold the handmaid of the Lord, let it be done to me according to thy word.” Her entire life was an offering to God, as our entire lives should be.
Click to expand...
So Mary suffered from the effects of Original Sin? Didn’t many of the Church Fathers say that she experienced no pain during childbirth? Wasn’t that one of the reasons they thought she was Immaculately Conceived?
 
I think it’s been stated here but where does one get the idea that freedom from Original Sin implies no suffering?

Yes the sin of our first parents brought original sin and suffering into the world. But that doesn’t mean anyone who is free from original sin is free from suffering.

And some church fathers believed that Mary felt no pain during child birth because she was free from original sin. But nowhere does this mean that she couldn’t suffer in another way. If she felt no pain from childbirth this does not imply in any way that she would not suffer when her son died.
 
tonsofquestions said:
My understanding(and correct me if I’m wrong) is that pain and suffering are a result of Original Sin, that before Adam and Eve sinned, there was no suffering in the world.
Click to expand...
Where do you find that? Scripture? Catechism? ECF? Pain is not inherently evil or “bad”, it serves a purpose. I don’t ever remember any Catholic teaching saying there was no suffering or pain in the world prior to original sin, in fact, Scripture tells Eve that her pain in child bearing would increase, how could you increase something that didn’t exist? Scripture does not say now since you have sinned you will have pain, but that it would increase, which to me means it was already going to happen, just not as strongly.
 
praise_Jesus said:
I think it’s been stated here but where does one get the idea that freedom from Original Sin implies no suffering?

Yes the sin of our first parents brought original sin and suffering into the world. But that doesn’t mean anyone who is free from original sin is free from suffering.
Click to expand...
Like I said, someone else on an older thread said that some ECF’s claimed that Mary did not suffer pain in childbirth, which is why they believed she was Immaculately Conceived. However, isn’t childbirth part of the suffering that was introduced through Original Sin? So if she did experience the effects of Original Sin, wouldn’t that mean she would have birth pains? Ehich would mean that ECF had no idea what he was talking about. Now that I’m looking back at the thread where the person said this, however, they did not mention a specific Church Father, so I’ll have to look it up myself and see if there really was an ECF that said this. If anyone knows of one, please post it, I’ll get back to you guys after I see what I can find.
 
Tom said:
Where do you find that? Scripture? Catechism? ECF? Pain is not inherently evil or “bad”, it serves a purpose. I don’t ever remember any Catholic teaching saying there was no suffering or pain in the world prior to original sin, in fact, Scripture tells Eve that her pain in child bearing would increase, how could you increase something that didn’t exist? Scripture does not say now since you have sinned you will have pain, but that it would increase, which to me means it was already going to happen, just not as strongly.
Click to expand...
By the way, this is what I found in the Cathechism:

376 By the radiance of this grace all dimensions of man’s life were confirmed. As long as he remained in the divine intimacy, man would not have to suffer or die. The inner harmony of the human person, the harmony between man and woman, and finally the harmony between the first couple and all creation, comprised the state called “original justice”.

400 The harmony in which they had found themselves, thanks to original justice, is now destroyed: the control of the soul’s spiritual faculties over the body is shattered; the union of man and woman becomes subject to tensions, their relations henceforth marked by lust and domination. Harmony with creation is broken: visible creation has become alien and hostile to man. Because of man, creation is now subject “to its bondage to decay”. Finally, the consequence explicitly foretold for this disobedience will come true: man will “return to the ground”, for out of it he was taken. Death makes its entrance into human history.
 
It wasn’t an explicit dogma but here is a quote referencing it.

“To Eve it was said: ‘In pain you shall bring forth children’ (Gen. 3:16). Mary was exempt from this law, for
preserving her virginal integrity inviolate, she brought forth Jesus the Son of God, without experiencing, as we have
already said, any sense of pain.” (The Catechism of the Council of Trent, issued by order of Pope Pius V, 1566, from
English translation in Robert I. Bradley, S.J. and Eugene Kevane (eds.), The Roman Catechism, pp. 49-50)

We also have the quote from St. Augustine:
“In conceiving you were all pure, in giving birth you were without pain.” (St. Augustine, Sermone de Nativitate)

But her not having pain in childbirth is unrelated.

If someone is without original sin they may not feel pain in childbirth, but this in no way implies that they cannot suffer from the sins of another.

Feeling no pain in childbirth would be a personal experience for Mary that is independent from the actions of others. When she suffered at calvary due to Jesus’ death this was caused by the actions of other people.

Free from original sin does not mean free from suffering at the hands of others
 
praise_Jesus said:
It wasn’t an explicit dogma but here is a quote referencing it.

“To Eve it was said: ‘In pain you shall bring forth children’ (Gen. 3:16). Mary was exempt from this law, for
preserving her virginal integrity inviolate, she brought forth Jesus the Son of God, without experiencing, as we have
already said, any sense of pain.” (The Catechism of the Council of Trent, issued by order of Pope Pius V, 1566, from
English translation in Robert I. Bradley, S.J. and Eugene Kevane (eds.), The Roman Catechism, pp. 49-50)

We also have the quote from St. Augustine:
“In conceiving you were all pure, in giving birth you were without pain.” (St. Augustine, Sermone de Nativitate)

But her not having pain in childbirth is unrelated.

If someone is without original sin they may not feel pain in childbirth, but this in no way implies that they cannot suffer from the sins of another.

Feeling no pain in childbirth would be a personal experience for Mary that is independent from the actions of others. When she suffered at calvary due to Jesus’ death this was caused by the actions of other people.

Free from original sin does not mean free from suffering at the hands of others
Click to expand...
I don’t understand. Was she free from the effects of Original Sin or wasn’t she?
 
She was conceived without original sin.

But she was still human.

You are confusing what it means for a person to be free from original sin versus the effects that original sin has had on humanity as a whole.
 
praise_Jesus said:
She was conceived without original sin.

But she was still human.

You are confusing what it means for a person to be free from original sin versus the effects that original sin has had on humanity as a whole.
Click to expand...
So did she experience the effects that original sin had on humanity?
 
tonsofquestions said:
I don’t understand. Was she free from the effects of Original Sin or wasn’t she?
Click to expand...
The inherited effect of original sin is concupiscence, the tendency to sin. This is the effect that she was freed from. She was not freed from the natural consequences of the sins of others.
 
davidv said:
The inherited effect of original sin is concupiscence, the tendency to sin. This is the effect that she was freed from. She was not freed from the natural consequences of the sins of others.
Click to expand...
Is concupiscence the only effect she was freed from? And by the way, does her freedom from concupiscence mean it was impossible for her to sin(I don’t think that’s what you’re saying but I thought I’d make sure).
 
tonsofquestions said:
Is concupiscence the only effect she was freed from?
Click to expand...
I don’t know
And by the way, does her freedom from concupiscence mean it was impossible for her to sin(I don’t think that’s what you’re saying but I thought I’d make sure).
Click to expand...
No it does not take away her free will. Adam and Eve were without sin, yet were able to chose evil over good.

Those of us afflicted with concupiscence not only have to contend with external temptations, like Adam and Eve, but also are confronted with temptations from within.
Without concupiscence, the internal temptations are absent.
 
Here are a couple points from the Catechism I recommend you read the section where these are from to better understand the concept of original sin

407 The doctrine of original sin, closely connected with that of redemption by Christ, provides lucid discernment of man’s situation and activity in the world. By our first parents’ sin, the devil has acquired a certain domination over man, even though man remains free. Original sin entails “captivity under the power of him who thenceforth had the power of death, that is, the devil”.298 Ignorance of the fact that man has a wounded nature inclined to evil gives rise to serious errors in the areas of education, politics, social action299 and morals.

408 The consequences of original sin and of all men’s personal sins put the world as a whole in the sinful condition aptly described in St. John’s expression, “the sin of the world”.300 This expression can also refer to the negative influence exerted on people by communal situations and social structures that are the fruit of men’s sins.301

I believe you have been equating original sin with suffering. Original sin is NOT suffering. Original sin is our wounded nature, our separation from God, our captivity under the power of the devil. Mary was conceived without original sin. But she was human and all humans are capable of suffering and probably always have been.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top