How was Mary concieved

[YAQUBOS]

Peace be with you!

John 21:25 “There are also many other things that Jesus did, but if these were to be described individually, I do not think the whole world would contain the books that would be written.”

Yet we know about these “things that Jesus did” from Sacred Tradition. The Word of God doesn’t have to just be written for it to still be His Word.

All what is not written in the Bible is not necessary for our Salvation.

As for the human tradition, we have discussed it much in other topics. For this topic, let’s just say that, according to other traditional churches, the tradition seems not to talk about the Immaculate Conception… It seems that the tradition contradicts itself according to the people who hear it…

By the way: don’t you think the Immaculate Conception, if it is true, is a so important truth to be written in the Bible?

In Love,
Yaqubos†

 

[YAQUBOS]

Peace be with you!

JimG:

By your own logic, if the bible doesn’t tell us anything about it, then you can’t really say whether or not “the birth of Mary was like the birth of all humans,” since that conclusion itself is an addition to the word of God.

I didn’t say that we can’t be sure about how was the birth of Mary.

The Bible says clearly how all humans are born.
The Bible doesn’t say any special thing about the birth of Mary.
So there is nothing special about her birth.

The same can be said about all humans.

The Bible says clearly how all humans are born.
The Bible doesn’t say any special thing about the birth of the apostle Peter.
So there is nothing special about his birth.

But where does the problem begin? When suddenly some people want to believe there is something special about her birth…

In Love,
Yaqubos†

 

[RobedWithLight]

YAQUBOS:

Peace be with you!

All what is not written in the Bible is not necessary for our Salvation.

Yaqubos†

Is that statement in the Bible?

Gerry

 

[YAQUBOS]

Peace and Love be with you!

RobedWithLight:

Is that statement in the Bible?

Gerry

“but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name.” ( John 20:31 )

“and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;
so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.” ( 2 Timothy 3:15-17 )

In Love,
Yaqubos†

 

[MattG]

Todd Easton:

The circumstances of Mary’s conception are related in the apocraphal gospel, Protoevangelium of James, a second-century writing.(www.newadvent.org/fathers/0847.htm))

 Hello, Todd, there is another Protoevangelium that is discovered at Genesis 3:15 and is the first promise of the Saviour and the woman who bore Him.  She is mentioned as having enmity in Gen 3:15 with the one specifically addressed in Gen 3:14.

Then the LORD God said to the serpent:
“Because you have done this, you shall be banned
from all the animals
and from all the wild creatures;
On your belly shall you crawl,
and dirt shall you eat
all the days of your life.
3:15 I will put enmity between you and the woman,
and between your offspring and hers;
He will strike at your head,
while you strike at his heel.”(NAB)
This enmity is a promise of sinlessness.
For prophesy of Mary’s perpetual virginity see Ezekiel 44:2:
The Closed Gate.
44:1 Then he brought me back to the outer gate of the sanctuary, facing the east; but it was closed.
44:2 He said to me: This gate is to remain closed; it is not to be opened for anyone to enter by it; since the LORD, the God of Israel, has entered by it, it shall remain closed.(NAB)

 

[prodromos]

JPrejean:

As I understand it, the Orthodox also believe Mary was not entirely sinless, because if she had been sinless, she would not have needed to Christ to save her.

You do not understand correctly .

Orthodox believe Mary was without sin and our wounded nature is not dependant on whether or not we sin personally, it comes from being the same flesh as Adam.

This is one of the prayers we say to the Theotokos every evening

O undefiled, untainted, uncorrupted, most pure, chaste Virgin, Thou Bride of God and Sovereign Lady, who didst unite the Word of God to mankind though thy most glorious birth giving, and hast linked the apostate nature of our race with the heavenly; who art the only hope of the hopeless, and the helper of the struggling, the ever-ready protection of them that hasten unto thee, and the refuge of all Christians: Do not shrink with loathing from me a sinner, defiled, who with polluted thoughts, words, and deeds have made myself utterly unprofitable, and through slothfulness of mind have become a slave to the pleasures of life. But as the Mother of God Who loveth mankind, show thy love for mankind and mercifully have compassion upon me a sinner and prodigal, and accept my supplication, which is offered to thee out of my defiled mouth; and making use of thy motherly boldness, entreat thy Son and our Master and Lord that He may be pleased to open for me the bowels of His lovingkindness and graciousness to mankind, and, disregarding my numberless offenses, will turn me back to repentance, and show me to be tried worker of His precepts. And be thou ever present unto me as merciful, compassionate and well disposed; in the present life be thou a fervent intercessor and helper, repelling the assaults of adversaries and guiding me to salvation, and at the time of my departure taking care of my miserable soul, and driving far away from it the dark countenances of the evil demons; lastly, at the dreadful day of judgment delivering me from torment eternal and showing me to be an heir of the ineffable glory of thy Son and our God; all of which may I attain, O my Sovereign Lady, most holy Theotokos, in virtue of thine intercession and protection, through the grace and love to mankind of thine only begotten Son, our Lord and God and Savior, Jesus Christ, to Whom is due all glory, honor and worship, together with His unoriginate Father, and His Most Holy and good and life creating Spirit, now and ever, and unto ages of ages. Amen.

 

[RobedWithLight]

YAQUBOS:

Peace and Love be with you!

“but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name.” ( John 20:31 )

The passage you cited merely establishes that scripture was written so that men might believe that Jesus is indeed the Son of God. Nowhere does it say that scripture alone is sufficient, nor does it say that reading only the written form is the** only way** for one to believe that Jesus is who He says He is. What about the first disciples of the apostles who never knew Christ personally and never saw His wonders. Did they read any “Bible” for them to believe in Christ?

Besides, if you would read the previous verse(v. 30), it speaks of Jesus making many miraculous signs in the presence of His disciples not recorded in the book.

“and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;
so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.” ( 2 Timothy 3:15-17 )

It is well and good you pointed this out. The passage merely says that all scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching. It does not say that it is a mandatory requirement for teaching. A candle is profitable for burning down a house, but that doesn’t mean a candle is required to burn that same house down, because we can likewise use a blowtorch to do the same job.

In any case this is already off-topic and is better suited for a thread dealing specifically with Sola Scriptura.

Peace

Gerry

 

[edwinG]

Todd Easton:

The circumstances of Mary’s conception are related in the apocraphal gospel, Protoevangelium of James, a second-century writing.(www.newadvent.org/fathers/0847.htm))

Hi Todd,
How old was James when he wrote this Protoevangelium?
Christ be with you
walk in love
edwinGhttp://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon7.gif

 

[edwinG]

dumspirospero:

Not sure exactly what you mean, but to put it simply…Mary was conceived without Original Sin and she was born through natural physical birth. Now, even though she was without original sin, she still retained her Free Will.

Hi dumspirospero,
I imagine Mary kept her state of sinlessness. How did she do this?
I can think of two possible ways. One she obeyed the leaders of the temple, something no one had done perfectly before her.
or
She follow the leading of the Holy Spirit.

Or was there some other way?
Christ be with youhttp://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon7.gif
walk in love
edwinG

 

[JPrejean]

JimG:

Thanks for this reply, as I was simply unaware of this aspect of Orthodox belief. I’m not sure that Catholicism teaches that Christ has to inherit the consequences of original sin in order to save us. I thought that simply assuming a human nature was sufficient.

You’re welcome. I’m not sure that there is a defined dogma on the subject, but the uniformity behind “what is not assumed is not healed” has been so consistent that I would be reluctant to deny the proposition.

As for Mary being sinless, I do believe that the Church teaches that Mary was also saved from sin; she was just saved before she commited any (or received any guilt from original sin.) This is possible since God’s application of divine Grace is not temporally confined.

Sure. As I said, the Orthodox simply don’t believe that there was any guilt from original sin to be removed. However, I have been rightly corrected by prodromos on the following point:

prodromos:

You do not understand correctly .

Orthodox believe Mary was without sin and our wounded nature is not dependant on whether or not we sin personally, it comes from being the same flesh as Adam.

It appears that I fell into the same trap. I took a statement that “if Mary had no sin, she would not need a Savior” in the Western sense (salvation from actual guilt) rather than the broader Eastern sense (healing the wounded human nature). Mea culpa.

 

[larryo]

prodromos:

What I mean is that if Mary did not have the same wounded human nature that all are born with then the flesh that Christ took from her in His incarnation was not our flesh in which case only Mary is saved. Orthodox believe that for us to be saved, Mary had to have our same wounded nature.

“For we have not a high priest not able to sympathise with our infirmities, but tempted in all things in like manner, sin apart.” (Hebrews 4:15)

“What is not assumed, is not healed” (St Gregory Nazianzus)

“Although Christ took our filth upon himself, nevertheless he is not himself defiled by the pollution, but in his own self he cleanses the filth, for it says, the light shone in the darkness, but the darkness did not overpower it.” (St Gregory Nyssen)

A nature fallen through original sin is not *the *true human nature present in Adam and Eve at their creation. Because of the effects of original sin, our human nature is deformed. In order to prepare a pure receptacle for the presence of The Word, God–who is outside of time–used the grace merited by Christ on the cross to redeem Mary at the moment of conception. Like the rest of us, Mary was redeemed, except that she was redeemed in advance by the grace of God in order to provide a suitable human environment for the Word made flesh. This is reflected in the way the archangel Gabriel addressed Mary as “full of grace.” If something is truly full, there is no space for anything else. Full of grace, devoid of sin or the inclination to sin.

 

[JimG]

YAQUBOS:

But where does the problem begin? When suddenly some people want to believe there is something special about her birth…

Such as Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli…

 

[yelias]

All,

  Thank you for the many responses and great discussion. I should have clarified my question, because some of were confused. My thought or quest was, was she conceived through natural means (i.e. sex) or was she conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit.

Thanks again for the respondents.

 

[JimG]

I think that she was conceived in the normal way, but without having original sin. The “immaculate conception” refers to her being conceived without original sin; it has nothing to do with sex.

(I am still suprised at the number of Catholics who think that the term refers to Jesus’ conception rather than Mary’s.)

 

[Erich]

YAQUBOS:

By the way: don’t you think the Immaculate Conception, if it is true, is a so important truth to be written in the Bible?

There are plenty of important truths which are not written (or weakly written) in the Bible. I would strongly encourage you to read By What Authority? An Evangelical Discovers Catholic Tradition by Mark Shea He does an excellent job of enumerating at least five crucial but weakly attested non-negotiables of Christian theology and ethics, namely:

1. the canon of Scripture itself
2. the sanctity of human life
3. monogamy
4. the Trinity
5. public revelation ended with the death of the last Apostle.

(BTW, chapter 6 of his book is excerpted here for all to read.)

 

[RMP]

Bishop Fulten Sheen used a great analogy for the immaculate conception. Most people outside of christianity deny a need of redemptiom. They deny a need for penance. They do not believe in sin. You could say they all believe that THEY were immaculately conceived. So if those who arent even of the faith believe, why is it difficult for us christians to believe it? If GOD is the greatest artist, THE creator, with his will to present to us the greatest masterpiece, Jesus, the perfect man, he would not choose a tainted canvas. The church testifies, HE didnt.

The commandement: Honor thy Father and thy Mother. What greater honor can be bestowed to his Mother than redemption by anticipation, born w/o sin, and assumption into heaven in a incorruptable, glorified body. The same fate we all hope to share.

So dont be talking about Jesus’s MOMA!

 

[YAQUBOS]

Peace be with you!

YAQUBOS:

*But where does the problem begin? When suddenly some people want to believe there is something special about her birth… *

JimG:

Such as Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli…

Yes, if these people added anything to the biblical teaching about the birth of Mary.

No, if they didn’t add anything to the biblical teaching about the birth of Mary.

In Love,
Yaqubos†

 

[prodromos]

larryo:

This is reflected in the way the archangel Gabriel addressed Mary as “full of grace.” If something is truly full, there is no space for anything else. Full of grace, devoid of sin or the inclination to sin.

A small question.

How would the Church describe the condition of a faithful, repentant Catholic who has just partaken of Holy Communion at Mass?

 

[SherryLynn9]

JimG:

Yes, I’ve heard that since our nature is received from our parents, that original sin is inherited in that way, through generation. *On the other hand, original sin resides primarily in the soul, which is created by God at the moment of conception, *so I’m not sure. That would be a good question to bring up. I’ve never been quite comfortable with it, because it leads to the somewhat puritanical notion that there is something inherently evil about sex, and the Church has never taught that.

I was never taught what my soul’s status was before my conception. I guess the Lord will tell me someday. I do believe the Word that says we have original sin; I have not been overly concerned how it was passed down, other than what David said. It’s just odd to think of God creating a brand new soul with original sin. God created things good… then I think of Romans where Paul says about the fleshly nature… I’ll ask Jesus to open my ears and my eyes concerning this and ask Father in RCIA class on Sunday. Thanks for your response.

 

[JimG]

SherryLynn9:

I was never taught what my soul’s status was before my conception. . . . It’s just odd to think of God creating a brand new soul with original sin.

I see your point. Since we do not believe in the pre-existence of souls, and the soul is spirit, not matter, it must be directly created by God, yet not as a “separate” entity, but rather so intimately united to our bodies that we have but one human nature, not two. And since original sin is a product of human nature, human generation has something to do with it.

Original sin is primarily a lack of sanctifying grace, (which is not something intrinsic to human nature), and secondarily the inheritance of a “fallen” nature with concupiscience.