How to answer Protestant objections to Mary's Immaculate Conception

[AlegreFe]

The Founders of Protestantism, Luther, Calvin and Zwingili, all believed in the Immaculate Conception.

Most absolutely!

Martin Luther had the belief of Mary’s Immaculate Conception, Luther’s words follow:

It is a sweet and pious belief that the infusion of Mary’s soul was effected without original sin; so that in the very infusion of her soul she was also purified from original sin and adorned with God’s gifts, receiving a pure soul infused by God; thus from the first moment she began to live she was free from all sin" (Sermon: “On the Day of the Conception of the Mother of God,” 1527).

She is full of grace, proclaimed to be entirely without sin- something exceedingly great. For God’s grace fills her with everything good and makes her devoid of all evil. (Personal {“Little”} Prayer Book, 1522).
source

 

[Fergal]

How to answer Protestant objections to Mary’s Immaculate Conception ???

Use Holy Scripture…Oh wait, there isn’t anything in there on that

Isn’t it funny how Rowan Williams, Head of the Anglican Communion stated that there is nothing contrary to scripture contained in the Marian dogmas of the Catholic Faith.

***From an Anglican point of view, the key questions are two: can such devotional practice and the definition of these two Marian dogmas be reconciled with the reading of Scripture and with the tradition of Christian teaching that has been received from the early centuries in East and West? And…Would it be necessary for Anglicans to subscribe to these two Marian dogmas before Anglicans and Catholics could once more share the eucharist together?

What we have achieved, we suggest, is an answer to the first question and a partial answer to the second. We have shown that our two traditions are nothing like so far apart on Mary as we might have thought. We have shown that Scripture bears witness to a pattern of grace and hope in God’s working which the doctrines of the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption reflect: this is the pattern of grace and hope in Christ to which we refer in our title of our report. We found it helpful to consider first the teaching that ‘God has taken the Blessed Virgin Mary in the fullness of her person into his glory’ and then to see how the sanctifying grace of God filled her life from the beginning, how ‘Christ’s redeeming work reached “back” in Mary to the depths of her being and to her earliest beginnings’. This was our way of approaching the two Marian doctrines in the light of our reading of Scripture. If we are right - that it is legitimate to approach the dogmas in this way - then Anglicans should not reject Roman Catholic Marian doctrine out of hand as ‘unscriptural’. ***

anglicancommunion.org/acns/news.cfm/2005/5/27/ACNS

Obviously some of his flock are deaf

 

[Robin_L.in_TX]

I remind them of how absolutely pure the Ark of the Covenant was and show them how Mary is the Ark of the New Covenant comparing the contents of the Old Ark with Mary’s blessed womb.

Then I have them read over Luke’s Gospel of the Visitation, comparing it with 2 Samuel where David is bringing the Ark to Jerusalem, both of them residing in the Hill Country fo rthree month, David leaping and dancing before the Ark as it was brought into Jerusalem–the same word describing the leaping of the infant John in Elizabeth’s womb when she greeted Mary.

Then I remind them of the non-Levite who thought to keep the Ark from falling to the ground, who touched it unpurified and immediately was struck down.

As Rosalind Moss says, (paraphrase) no good Jewish man would lay a finger on his wife if she had carried God in her womb–not then, not later, not ever.

This article has probably been linked already, but it is a good one: catholic.com/thisrock/1991/9112fea1.asp

In Christ’s peace and joy,

Robin L. in TX

 

[Randy_Carson]

How to answer Protestant objections to Mary’s Immaculate Conception ???

Use Holy Scripture…Oh wait, there isn’t anything in there on that

Answering the Question, “Where is that in the Bible?”

The Evangelical starts with the assumption that scripture existed first and that tradition was slowly and incrementally added to it as time progressed. However, the original deposit of faith was given to the Apostles years before Scripture was ever penned. The Church was founded on this truth from Christ. Some of this deposit was then written in Scripture, some was scrupulously passed from bishop to bishop as oral tradition, and some was later clarified as dogma by the agreement of the bishops in the councils of the Church.

These sources, of course, should be expected not to contradict each other. If the Church teaches something as true, it is justifiable to check that it is not contradicted by Scripture. But if the Church teaches something and the Bible is silent or ambiguous, that does not mean the teaching is any less truly a part of the original deposit of faith given the Apostles. The focus must shift from what is biblical to what is true. The first is always contained in the second, but all of the second is not necessarily contained in the first.

When an Evangelical asks, “Where is that doctrine in the Bible?”, the correct response is “First show me from Scripture why you believe all Christian doctrines must be in the Bible.” It can be frustrating for Evangelicals to confront this issue, but it is important for them to understand the lack of biblical basis for their question. Truth is at issue here.

Adapted from Born Fundamentalist, Born Again Catholic by David B. Currie, pp.61-62.

 

[Gamera]

A Protestant recently asked me how if Jesus was born to a sinless mother, doesn’t that mean that her parents would have to have been sinless also? How far do we have to go back with that logic? What do I say?

Your friend isn’t thinking it through logically. Had Mary’s parents been free of Original Sin, then every child born to them would have been free of Original Sin : not just Mary, but Mary and all her brothers and sisters. That is far more radical than the simplicity of merely having Mary individually be conceived free of Original Sin.

 

[Good_Fella]

If sin cannot be united with God, what about recieving Jesus in Holy Communion?

Good question. Catholics must be in a state of grace in order to worthily receive the Holy Eucharist. If we are in a state of mortal sin, we must receive the Sacrament of Reconciliation before receiving Holy Communion. Regular confession is also necessary for our countless venial sins and sins of omission. Mary had to be “full of grace” (kecharitomene), but not just “filled with grace” (pleres charito), as in our case, to worthily receive the Word become flesh by conceiving Him in her womb.

Pax vobiscum
Good Fella