Mary - sinner - Romans 3?

[JohnVIII]

… I also think that if Mary was sinless than SHE could have become the proptitiation for our sins. …

She could have!

… surely only God can atone for the sins of the world?

Indeed!

Each person of the Holy Trinity has a different purpose.

Each of us hold a differing source of authority for determining what the truth is. That is why we end up believing different things with regard to Mary. For “good Catholics” the dogma is spelled out for them by the authority of the Bishop of Rome. For Eastern Orthodox it usually is some sort of consensus of the Church Fathers. And for Protestants it is the Holy Bible. As brother [user]Richard Kastner[/user] said:

I’m not stretching anything, merely pointing out what this scripture clearly says.

… and I am willing to concede that what brother [user]Richard Kastner[/user] said the Bible clearly teaches about Mary does seem to be what it teaches about Mary. However, for me, I like to look at any and all sources of authority and compare them and weigh each according to the likelihood that the authority that it is based is sound. And I do tend to weigh Bible scripture higher that the opinion of the Roman Church. But there is other scriptures that are not a part of the canon made under the authority of the Church; and I am going to quote one of these from the so-called Gospel According to Thomas, v. #101:

" Jesus said “Whoever does not hate his father and his mother as I do cannot become a disciple to Me. And whoever does not love his father and his mother as I do cannot become a disciple to Me. For My mother gave me falsehood but My true Mother gave me life.” "

In this verse, Jesus said that His Mother [Mary] gave Him falsehood, but His true Mother [the Holy Spirit] gave Him life! It is my interpretation that just as Paul spoke of “the likeness of sinful flesh”, this “likeness” is the “falsehood” referred to. In other words, if you look at Mary as She appears you would see only the untruth that it is only a sinful woman you see. But if you look at Her spiritually you will see the truth of Who the Mother of Jesus is, namely the Holy Spirit!

Remember that Paul said, " Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more. " (2 Corinthians 5:16). And with this instruction from Paul in mind you can easily understand what Jesus was saying when He said, " Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God. " (Matthew 19:17). Now “what this scripture clearly says” (using brother [user]Richard Kastner[/user] words) is that Jesus is neither God nor is He good! But interpreting Matthew 19:17 spiritually as Paul said we should do we then can understand that Jesus is both good and is God! So, if you use this same spiritual understanding of what the Scriptures say about Mary you will come up with the correct understanding that Mary is good and indeed sinless, just as Jesus is sinless.

Scripture has alot more to say about Jesus because that is the main focus that the Holy Spirit desired that the focus should be on. If Matthew 19:17 was all we had on Jesus hardly anyone would believe that He is God or even that He is sinless! We have much less scripture on Mary because Mary desired that She should not be the main focus. But the Holy Church learned by the time of the 3rd Ecumenical Council that what we believe about Mary will steer what we believe about Jesus; so what better way to correct heresy about Jesus then by holding a correct view of His Mother?!

 

[Richard_Kastner]

Romans 8
“…God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man…”

Romans 8 does not say: …by sending his own Son in the likeness of Mary.

Romans 8 says: “…by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man…”

That’s not me saying it; it’s scripture. If you want to interpret Romans 8 as …by sending his own Son in the likeness of Mary - that’s cool.

This is what the KJV has for Rom.8:3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

It says that God sent His son “in the likeness of sinful flesh” The flesh that Jesus came in the likeness of was Mary, therefore Mary was a sinner.

Here it is from the Douay Rheims Rom.8:3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh; God sending his own Son, **in the likeness of sinful flesh **and of sin, hath condemned sin in the flesh

You will note they are exactly the same and not “in the likeness of sinful man”

 

[Richard_Kastner]

Remember that Paul said, " Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more. " (2 Corinthians 5:16). And with this instruction from Paul in mind you can easily understand what Jesus was saying when He said, " Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God. " (Matthew 19:17). Now “what this scripture clearly says” (using brother [user]Richard Kastner[/user] words) is that Jesus is neither God nor is He good! But interpreting Matthew 19:17 spiritually as Paul said we should do we then can understand that Jesus is both good and is God!

It is a mistake to think that Jesus is saying that He is not holy or God in Matt 19:17And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. He does not tell the one who came to Him not to call Him Good, but that there was only one good and that is God. In effect He was saying that He was both God and holy.
So, if you use this same spiritual understanding of what the Scriptures say about Mary you will come up with the correct understanding that Mary is good and indeed sinless, just as Jesus is sinless.

So, if you use this same spiritual understanding of what the Scriptures say about Mary you will come up with the correct understanding that Mary is good and indeed sinless, just as Jesus is sinless.

Use this same spiritual understanding of what Scriptures to get this idea that Mary is sinless?

 

[roselily]

Luke 1:28 And he came to her and said, ‘Greetings, favoured one! The Lord is with you.’

O Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to you!

Most Holy Mother is like our Savior, full of love and mercy without sin.

but I will on be on my knees,
“Mea culpa, mea culpa!”

 

[roselily]

This is where we begin to need theologians, especially as Christianity and the understanding of it developed.

The Lord Jesus has blessed the Church with many saints down through the ages, who through reflections of past works, began to discern through shared experience of Christ in the Eucharist, the reflections of our faith walk with Him.

Traditionally this is the state of perfection.

The Latin Church, derived of celibate priesthood and its subequent calling to forsake all for the Gospel–even lawful marriage-- more profoundly discerned the path that Christ took being the Savior and Atonement of sin for us, how our lives are a lifelong calling to renounce our selves, die to self and allow the New Man of Christ to grow within, and how all of us must make the same walk.

For the past hundreds of years, theologians discussed among themselves whether or not Mary had to make the same walk.

It went back then to whether or not she was conceived without sin. If she was conceived without sin, then she was the only one who did not need a savior?

In the 1800’s, thought evolved that Mary was uniquely created by the Father and that her entire being was freely disposed, full of grace, to say ‘yes’ to the will of God. At her conception, and propensity to always affirm the will of God, she freely chose Christ as Savior at her conception.

It took up to the early 1950’s for the Church to declare through dogma and the 2,000 year old history of documented saints and studies and Marian reflections, that through Pope Pius XII Mary was conceived without sin.

Mary chose Christ as Savior and Redeemer, ‘yes’ to God, to Christ at her conception, she a unique creature of God, a creature like us but as a channel of grace, a bridge of grace between us and Christ.

Mary subsequently is called the Mother of Sinners, the Advocate of sinners. She is the greatest helper to sinners to finally turn to God in confidence of His mercy. She is capable, upon a person’s request, to reform and put into good order the soul who entrusts himself to her, and to give the soul courage in God in spite of one’s past sins, no matter how many or great.

O Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to you!

Ah, you are right, Kathleen,:hug1:

 

[1cor719]

Can someone clean (Jesus) come from someone unclean (Mary) ?

Is this logical but? Because then you could say that Mary’s mother had to be “clean”, and then her mother, and her’s, and so on.

I don’t disagree with the overall point though! ie that Mary was immaculately conceived.

 

[Richard_Kastner]

Luke 1:28 And he came to her and said, ‘Greetings, favoured one! The Lord is with you.’

O Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to you!

Most Holy Mother is like our Savior, full of love and mercy without sin.

Are you trying to say that the last two sentences you quote here are in Luke 1?
They are not.

 

[bmadamsberry]

Can someone clean (Jesus) come from someone unclean (Mary) ?

Yes, because G-d is G-d. To say that Mary must have been ‘clean’ because something clean cannot come from something unclean leads to two problems.

1. G-d can do whatever He wants. So yes, Christ could be born from an ‘unclean’ Mary.
2. You have an endless problem. If you hold true that something clean cannot come from something unclean, then Mary (clean) must have come from a clean Anne! And so on and so forth.

I’m not attacking the conclusion (Mary was Immaculate- I am Catholic afterall), but I am attack the premise.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Oh. . .kay.

Situation: On a road to a city, an earthquake took place and caused a deep pit to form. Because of the gradient of the road, the fact that rain was falling and a deep fog was all around, many travelers on that road fell into the pit because they couldn’t see it ahead of them.

Luckily, a man saw the situation, ran out with ropes, and began hauling people out of the pit. They were saved!!

And another man, seeing likewise, ran back up the road, and set up a warning rope across the road so that the travelers would not fall into the pit.

ALL the people wound up saved from the pit–some because after they fell in, they were pulled out by a rope. . .

and others were saved BEFORE THEY EVEN FELL IN by a man who physically went out and prevented the people from going further and falling.

So. . we are saved from sin after we ‘fall’ . . .by baptism.

MARY was saved from sin through the intercession of her Son at her conception --before she WOULD have fallen.

For that reason, there was no necessity for Mary’s MOTHER to be free of sin. It was an ‘instantaneous’ act of salvation at the very moment of conception. Without that action, the conception would have been a normal ‘sinful’ person of a ‘sinful’ parent; WITH the salvific action, it became a MIRACULOUS ‘clean’ conception.

Now, lest you argue that Christ could have done the same out of a ‘sinful’ Mary; Christ’s own birth of a woman was ITSELF miraculous enough. And of course, Christ also had precedent.

If HE was to be the new Adam (and Scripture tells us that He was), then where was the new Eve? That would be Mary, whose Son would ‘crush the serpent’s head’. If Mary was the new Eve, and both Adam and Eve were created without sin (and we know that is true), then the new Adam would be without sin (and Christ was) and the new EVE would likewise be without sin (and Mary was.)

 

[Richard_Kastner]

No. I disagree. If Jesus was in the likeness of sin in His flesh, coming from Mary also in the likeness of sin in Flesh. There is no conclusion that Mary is with sin.

Here is Roma.8:3 again
Rom.8:3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

I would suggest that you prayerfully read this. It does NOT say that Mary came in the likeness of sinful flesh, but Jesus did. Since Mary was the ONLY one that Jesus shared His flesh with, the ONLY conclusion that we can have is that Mary was a sinner.

Romans is directed to Judaizing Christians and the contrast of Old and New Covenant. In Romans 7 Paul tells us of the Death of the Old Covenant likening it to marriage.

This is all irrelevant.

No one disagrees that life begins in the womb. The New Covenant is life and the new life of the New Covenant began in the womb and we can deduce that the New Covenant culimnating in the death of Christ was embryonic in the womb yet still the New Covenant and for Mary, the Old Covenant did not bind her.

I have no idea what you are trying to say here.

That flesh became flesh at the moment of conception and if He was sent in the likeness to the likeness then there was no sin in either of those entities as the blood of one is the blood of the other. The flesh of the mother is united by the Placenta and there is no differentiating this from that. The mother/baby/placenta are life without designating one or the other. We just call them by name. Life is these parts.

So you are saying that all of Jesus ancestors were sinless?

Did the spirit of God not dwell in Mary?

I’m sure He did. Just as He will in all of us, if we allow Him.

If God can bless who He chooses to bless and Curse who He chooses to Curse How can you say how is that God has made Mary sinless.

I can because Rom.8:3 says she is a sinner. How can you say she isn’t?

 

[Richard_Kastner]

Oh. . .kay.

Situation: On a road to a city, an earthquake took place and caused a deep pit to form. Because of the gradient of the road, the fact that rain was falling and a deep fog was all around, many travelers on that road fell into the pit because they couldn’t see it ahead of them.

Luckily, a man saw the situation, ran out with ropes, and began hauling people out of the pit. They were saved!!

And another man, seeing likewise, ran back up the road, and set up a warning rope across the road so that the travelers would not fall into the pit.

ALL the people wound up saved from the pit–some because after they fell in, they were pulled out by a rope. . .

and others were saved BEFORE THEY EVEN FELL IN by a man who physically went out and prevented the people from going further and falling.

So. . we are saved from sin after we ‘fall’ . . .by baptism.

MARY was saved from sin through the intercession of her Son at her conception --before she WOULD have fallen.

For that reason, there was no necessity for Mary’s MOTHER to be free of sin. It was an ‘instantaneous’ act of salvation at the very moment of conception. Without that action, the conception would have been a normal ‘sinful’ person of a ‘sinful’ parent; WITH the salvific action, it became a MIRACULOUS ‘clean’ conception.

Now, lest you argue that Christ could have done the same out of a ‘sinful’ Mary; Christ’s own birth of a woman was ITSELF miraculous enough. And of course, Christ also had precedent.

If HE was to be the new Adam (and Scripture tells us that He was), then where was the new Eve? That would be Mary, whose Son would ‘crush the serpent’s head’. If Mary was the new Eve, and both Adam and Eve were created without sin (and we know that is true), then the new Adam would be without sin (and Christ was) and the new EVE would likewise be without sin (and Mary was.)

But the new Adam came to save the original Adam and Eve and ALL of their descendants from their sins. Sins commited after their creation or birth.

There is nothing in scripture that verifies you scenario of Jesus’ saving His mother before she sinned and Rom 8:3For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh, says otherwise.

 

[David_Castlen]

Personally, I try always to keep in mind that I could be wrong.

Including Mary in the Romans 3 passage is sensible, because it’s the simplest interpretation. I’ve been taught that, when trying to understand Scripture, you should look at what’s simplest and most straight-forward first. So, when Romans 3 v23 says ‘all have sinned’, I would say it means ‘all’, as in everyone (excluding Jesus, because we know from elsewhere that He was without sin). The reason I wouldn’t exclude Mary from that is because I don’t see anything elsewhere in Scripture that would lead me to believe she is excluded. You use Scripture to interprete Scripture, so any conclusions have to be compatible with the whole of the Bible. If Mary was totally without sin, I would expect that to be mentioned somewhere in the Bible, but as far as I know, it is not. I am willing to be corrected, of course, so feel free. /QUOTE

1. Go back to the Ps that is being quoted in 3:23. You will see that “all” is an all like, “all FSU fans are loud” It is representative of most it is not universal of FSU fans. Read the Ps and find out that some are righteous.
2. When interpreting the scriptures look for context, and what how it fits into the Tradition of the Church; the source of the bible. The Catechism gives a six or seven paragraph instruciton… I can ot find mine now… I know someone on this blog will give you the details.
3. Remember: Peter told us we are not to interpret the bible on our own and Paul’s letter to Tim said the church was the pillar and bulwark of the faith

 

[pablope]

Godith;8327321:

Personally, I try always to keep in mind that I could be wrong.

1. When interpreting the scriptures look for context, and what how it fits into the Tradition of the Church; the source of the bible.

1. Remember: Peter told us we are not to interpret the bible on our own and Paul’s letter to Tim said the church was the pillar and bulwark of the faith

Following the reasoning you stated here, and what does the CC teach about Mary-that she was sinless.

So what else is there to discuss? Is it to derogate Mary? I hope not.

 

[Frankk]

I would suggest that you prayerfully read this. It does NOT say that Mary came in the likeness of sinful flesh, but Jesus did. Since Mary was the ONLY one that Jesus shared His flesh with, the ONLY conclusion that we can have is that Mary was a sinner.

I can because Rom.8:3 says she is a sinner. How can you say she isn’t?

Simply because Rom. 8:3 says nothing about Mary. Mary benefited first of all and uniquely from Christ’s victory over sin: she was preserved from all stain of original sin and by a special grace of God committed no sin of any kind during her whole earthly life.

Consider your own mother. If you could wouldn’t you want to make her perfect in every way? Of course you would - but you can’t. Christ is God. He, of course, could - and he did. It would be inconceivable that he would do anything other!

 

[Nicea325]

But the new Adam came to save the original Adam and Eve and ALL of their descendants from their sins. Sins commited after their creation or birth.

There is nothing in scripture that verifies you scenario of Jesus’ saving His mother before she sinned and Rom 8:3For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh, says otherwise.

Again and where does Scripture teach explicitness about everything God has said and done? And you are above God to know what He can and cannot do? One of my issues against Protestanism: Always placing limits on God based on what finite knowledge claims (humans).

 

[JosephConroy]

JosephConroy;8407174:

False premise. Simply because Mary was sinless does not mean her parents had to be sinless too.

SO then that old bugaboo of false doctrine Consistency rears its head again! Substitute the Name Jesus For Mary and mother for parents and you have the whole matter! Only NOW you agree with it!

" False premise. Simply because Jesus was sinless does not mean his mother had to be sinless too."

I along with many people feel that the overwhelming need that Catholics have to transform Mary from a normal human being to one that is in some ways much MORE than just an ordinary woman (thereby robbing the incarnation of its magnificence that God was incarnate NOT in a flawless human being but that GOD condescended to be born of humanity fallen waiting for a redeemer.)

Jesus sinlessness did NOT derive from Mary but rather from the fact that he was GOD manifest in the flesh.

I wonder sometimes if the real issue here is not a subliminal one of Mary being almost deified in Catholicism and the feeling that her being someone who failed God like all the rest of us somehow takes away from that. Just wondering. I know the protestations that arise when that point is raised, all the “WE DON’T DO THAT” s BUT the reality is people aren’t dumb and they KNOW IT WHEN THEY SEE no matter what terminology is used to obfuscate that reality.

 

[David_Castlen]

Again and where does Scripture teach explicitness about everything God has said and done? And you are above God to know what He can and cannot do? One of my issues against Protestanism: Always placing limits on God based on what finite knowledge claims (humans).

Very ensightful, Nicea; I also have found that. There is no better example of it than their (God bless them they DO love Jesus - the ones I know) rejection of the Eurcharist and the Mass as a representation of His Passion and our union with Him.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

But the new Adam came to save the original Adam and Eve and ALL of their descendants from their sins. Sins commited after their creation or birth.

There is nothing in scripture that verifies you scenario of Jesus’ saving His mother before she sinned and Rom 8:3For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh, says otherwise.

Romans 8:3, just as Psalm 14, in using the term ‘all’ does not specifically mean that ‘all’ as in every single solitary person’. I asked before, is a newborn baby personally sinful? How about a person born with, say, trisomy 21 who cannot see, hear, speak. . .is that person sinful? So not every person born has ‘personally sinned’.

If you believe in original sin, then there is absolutely nothing Scriptural which contraindicates the idea that a person could be conceived without sin. Certainly Adam and Eve were created without sin. Further, Luke 2 addresses Mary as ‘full of grace’. Again I ask, is there any way a person who is full of grace can be sinful, and (without the circular ‘romans 8’ please) where is that indicated in Christian teaching?

Why for 1500 years did all Christians understand Mary to be ever Virgin, to be conceived without sin; that ‘prayer’ meant a communication with another person, not necessarily to “God alone”, that the Eucharist is literally the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ, etc. . .and then out of thin air come up with a whole bunch of 'different teaching’s that just seems to go on splintering and changing constantly?

If St. Paul warns us (and he did) not to accept a ‘different gospel’, who is the person who is actually TEACHING a different gospel from the one St. Paul and the apostles taught? It is not the Catholic Church which teaches differently! We hold fast to the teachings that have been taught, both by written word and oral teaching, just as St. Paul says. . .

 

[CopticChristian]

Here is Roma.8:3 again
Rom.8:3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

I would suggest that you prayerfully read this. It does NOT say that Mary came in the likeness of sinful flesh, but Jesus did. Since Mary was the ONLY one that Jesus shared His flesh with, the ONLY conclusion that we can have is that Mary was a sinner.

This is all irrelevant.

I have no idea what you are trying to say here.

So you are saying that all of Jesus ancestors were sinless?

I’m sure He did. Just as He will in all of us, if we allow Him.

I can because Rom.8:3 says she is a sinner. How can you say she isn’t?

No. Scripture does not conclude that Mary was a sinner. Scripture alone does not do that. 1.3 billion bible Christians, the Patristic fathers and the Church disagree with you. So No you are not correct.

 

[Richard_Kastner]

Romans 8:3, just as Psalm 14, in using the term ‘all’ does not specifically mean that ‘all’ as in every single solitary person’. I asked before, is a newborn baby personally sinful? How about a person born with, say, trisomy 21 who cannot see, hear, speak. . .is that person sinful? So not every person born has ‘personally sinned’.

The word “all” is not used in Rom.8:3

If you believe in original sin, then there is absolutely nothing Scriptural which contraindicates the idea that a person could be conceived without sin. Certainly Adam and Eve were created without sin. Further, Luke 2 addresses Mary as ‘full of grace’. Again I ask, is there any way a person who is full of grace can be sinful, and (without the circular ‘romans 8’ please) where is that indicated in Christian teaching?

Grace is the unmerited gift of salvation through the sacrafice of Jesus Christ on the cross. The people of the old testament were saved by a forward looking to the cross brought to knowledge through the rituals of the sanctuary, so when Luke 2 adresses Mary as “full of grace” it is merely saying that Mary is a beneficiary of that saving grace through faith that her son is the Messiah and would one day ATONE FOR HER SINS on that cross.

Acts 4:33
And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all.

Acts 18:27
And when he was disposed to pass into Achaia, the brethren wrote, exhorting the disciples to receive him: who, when he was come, helped them much which had believed through grace:

Rom.1
4And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:
5By whom we have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations, for his name:

Being filled with grace is the means by which we are all saved. Even Jesus’ mother.

Rom.3
20Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
21But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
22Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
23For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
24Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:

Rom.5
14Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.
15But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.
16And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification.
17For if by one man’s offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)
18Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.
19For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
20Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:
21That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.

These are but a few of many passages that tell us that we can all be filled with grace and beneficiaries of Jesus sacrifice through faith.

So, to answer your question “Again I ask, is there any way a person who is full of grace can be sinful, and (without the circular ‘romans 8’ please) where is that indicated in Christian teaching?”

I don’t believe that I said that a person that is “full of gace” can be sinful. And that is for the simple reason that their sins have been forgiven. They are however sinners. Like alcoholics that no longer drink.

Why for 1500 years did all Christians understand Mary to be ever Virgin, to be conceived without sin; that ‘prayer’ meant a communication with another person, not necessarily to “God alone”, that the Eucharist is literally the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ, etc. . .and then out of thin air come up with a whole bunch of 'different teaching’s that just seems to go on splintering and changing constantly?

Because error is believed for a long time does not make it the truth.

If St. Paul warns us (and he did) not to accept a ‘different gospel’, who is the person who is actually TEACHING a different gospel from the one St. Paul and the apostles taught? It is not the Catholic Church which teaches differently! We hold fast to the teachings that have been taught, both by written word and oral teaching, just as St. Paul says. . .

Where does Paul teach that Mary was sinless. Romans 8:3 seems to say the opposite.