Mary

[Dstep]

Hello,

Was the Blessed Virgin Mary chosen to be the Mother of God because she was sinless or was She created sinless because God already chose her. Also, does the Immaculate Conception mean that Mary couldn’t sin, therefore taking away Her free will?

 

[jediliz]

Hello,

Was the Blessed Virgin Mary chosen to be the Mother of God because she was sinless or was She created sinless because God already chose her. Also, does the Immaculate Conception mean that Mary couldn’t sin, therefore taking away Her free will?

well, God knew from the beginning he would have to send his only Begotten Son. And it would be by a woman’s seed that satan would be conquered and destroyed. God chose Mary at the moment of her conception (The Immaculate Conception) to be free of Original Sin so that she would be prepared to give birth to the Messiah. Her YES to the Angel Gabriel completed this deal and she conceived and bore the Savior of the World - Christ the Lord.

Considering her SON was to be perfect - the mother had to be free of imperfection and stain of original sin.

Hope that helps a little.

 

[Pugsly]

Hello,

Was the Blessed Virgin Mary chosen to be the Mother of God because she was sinless or was She created sinless because God already chose her. Also, does the Immaculate Conception mean that Mary couldn’t sin, therefore taking away Her free will?

These are good inquiries. First of all…Jesus had free will…so did Mary. Mary was chosen…and considered herself quite blessed because of it. Before Jesus was formed in her womb (as a spotless Lamb of God) Mary was hedged-about by God’s greatest graces and protection…After Jesus was born…it would seem she was exposed to more than usual tempations (study about her 7 sorrows) and her free will was certainly exercised.

Now, Mary certainly could sin according to her free will…but Holy Mother Church tells us she did NOT before the birth of Jesus…and to think that she remained absolutely sinless the rest of her life is a matter of contraversy.

Personally, I beleve the Bible when it says that ALL have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God…that not ONE could be found that did not go astray…that NONE tread the winepress with the Lord Jesus…etc.

 

[empther]

Personally, I beleve the Bible when it says that ALL have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God…that not ONE could be found that did not go astray…that NONE tread the winepress with the Lord Jesus…etc.

Does that include babies who die at birth?

Paul, for that’s who’s talking, is talking about original sin, which means we’re born with concupisence meaning we’re not in control of our passions and liable to sin.

Mary was exempt from concupisdence, but she was still capable of sin.

Could she have said no to Gabriel’s announcement? Yes, and it would not have been a sin. She had the right to have or not have a son.
But of course there was no doubt she’d say yes because she understood what it meant.

 

[Mary_Ellen]

Hello,

Was the Blessed Virgin Mary chosen to be the Mother of God because she was sinless or was She created sinless because God already chose her. Also, does the Immaculate Conception mean that Mary couldn’t sin, therefore taking away Her free will?

She was created sinless because God had chosen her to be the mother of His Son.

She was conceived without sin but had free will to commit sin at any time and also had the free will to say “No,” to God’s request through Gabriel.

Of course, at the time of her conception God knew that she would later say “Yes,” but that does not change the fact that she had free will at the time of the Annunciation. God lives outside of our narrow time-limited existence.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Considering her SON was to be perfect - the mother had to be free of imperfection and stain of original sin.

Are you saying that if Mary wasn’t perfect, Christ wouldn’t be perfect?

 

[dronald]

She was created sinless because God had chosen her to be the mother of His Son.

She was conceived without sin but had free will to commit sin at any time and also had the free will to say “No,” to God’s request through Gabriel.

Of course, at the time of her conception God knew that she would later say “Yes,” but that does not change the fact that she had free will at the time of the Annunciation. God lives outside of our narrow time-limited existence.

I’m confused about one thing… Does that mean Mary’s parents and grandparents were sinless too?

 

[Steveabrous]

Hello,

Was the Blessed Virgin Mary chosen to be the Mother of God because she was sinless or was She created sinless because God already chose her. Also, does the Immaculate Conception mean that Mary couldn’t sin, therefore taking away Her free will?

Hello,

She was chosen to be Christ’s mother and was redeemed at her conception and preserved from original sin. Since she did not have the effects of original sin she did not experience temptation and therefore did not sin. Her free will was in tact.

Now before you say it. yes Jesus was tempted by the devil. But I believe did not experience the emotion of Temptation. In other words it was a futile attempt by Satan.

 

[Dorothy]

I’m confused about one thing… Does that mean Mary’s parents and grandparents were sinless too?

No.

At the moment of Mary’s conception she was free from original sin.

 

[chimo]

Hello,

Was the Blessed Virgin Mary chosen to be the Mother of God because she was sinless or was She created sinless because God already chose her. Also, does the Immaculate Conception mean that Mary couldn’t sin, therefore taking away Her free will?

I don’t know if Mary had to be sinless to receive Jesus. We are still sinners when we receive the Sacraments especially in the Holy Eucharist so I do not think that we need to be sinless to receive Jesus. Rather it is the Body of Christ which can cleanses and forgives us. With Mary I really don’t think of her of having to been sinless so that Jesus would come. Does Jesus need a sinless person for that to happen? Can not God enter sinful people like He does every time we receive Him in Holy Communion. I tend to see the sinlessness of Mary as not necessary for her to receive Jesus in her womb but rather as the condition she had inherited when she received the Holy Spirit in His fullness. I sense her Immaculate Conception was more she had received the Holy Spirit in His fullness. That is why the Angel called her Full of Grace. Her cooperation with this fullness of Grace that was in her enabled her not to sin in this life. When we are baptised we are only receive a portion of the Holy Spirit. I believe the Immaculate Conception of Mary was her receiving this same Holy Spirit not as a portion as we receive but in a Fullness of what is the final condition of what we all need to enter Heaven. In this manner Mary had a quite head start. Her life was so full of the Holy Spirit at such an early time (her conception). I am sure she still had her free will intact but with his fullness of the Holy Spirit in her she was willing to say yes to God.

 

[bzkoss236]

I don’t know if Mary had to be sinless to receive Jesus. We are still sinners when we receive the Sacraments especially in the Holy Eucharist so I do not think that we need to be sinless to receive Jesus.

So you think it is okay to receive the Eucharist in the state of mortal sin?

Remember that Mary is referred to as the Ark of the New Covenant.

The old Ark was made of the purest of metals, why wouldn’t Mary have been made pure as well? To be worthy to bear the Son of God. The old Ark killed the man who touched it unworthily, even though he tried to keep it from falling.

We don’t teach that Mary had to be sinless for Jesus to be sinless, but more that because Jesus is God that Mary had to be sinless to conceive Him. This does not mean that Mary’s parents had to be sinless either, because Mary is not God.

You could argue that God didn’t need to do that, which is essentially true, but God doesn’t need to do anything. God does that which He wills.

 

[chimo]

So you think it is okay to receive the Eucharist in the state of mortal sin?

Remember that Mary is referred to as the Ark of the New Covenant.

The old Ark was made of the purest of metals, why wouldn’t Mary have been made pure as well? To be worthy to bear the Son of God. The old Ark killed the man who touched it unworthily, even though he tried to keep it from falling.

We don’t teach that Mary had to be sinless for Jesus to be sinless, but more that because Jesus is God that Mary had to be sinless to conceive Him. This does not mean that Mary’s parents had to be sinless either, because Mary is not God.

You could argue that God didn’t need to do that, which is essentially true, but God doesn’t need to do anything. God does that which He wills.

We receive Jesus normally in the state of which the Church calls the venial state. I would never say that people can receive Him in a mortal sin state. If you read my post that is what I am saying that we receive Him in a venial state. I do not believe it was necessary for the Mother of God to be sinless to receive Jesus. Now here I am referring to a venial state. God can work with those in a venial state. I believe that Mary’s sinlessness was necessary for her to work a long side her Son as the best companion and disciple He would have. So I see her Immaculate Conception as necessary to make her work with her Son. He has someone who was worthy to be a faithful disciple and companion all throughout her life. You must understand I believe Mary to be sinless as well. I believe that this condition given to her at her Conception was important enough to prepare her to be the Handmaiden of the Lord. Why not God give this to her? I am saying the same as you do but I believe it was more for her than it was for her Son. He is of need of a helpmate that will work with His redemption of mankind. In this Mary became a cornerstone to help her Son achieved Redemption for all of us. She becomes the co-worker in the redemptive process that her Son was willing to undergo for us. Her merits in achieving this with her Son is something we need to look at.

Not once I said Mary had sinned. I said in my first post she was sinless. However I see her remaining sinless for different reasons. I believe God needed another disciple to resemble more His Son so God gave to Mary all of the Holy Spirit all at once at her conception so as to give this great head start to become His most faithful disciple. Whenever we receive the Holy Spirit in His fullness would not that mean that God wants you to learn early to be a most worthy saint!

 

[Lancer]

These are good inquiries. First of all…Jesus had free will…so did Mary. Mary was chosen…and considered herself quite blessed because of it. Before Jesus was formed in her womb (as a spotless Lamb of God) Mary was hedged-about by God’s greatest graces and protection…After Jesus was born…it would seem she was exposed to more than usual tempations (study about her 7 sorrows) and her free will was certainly exercised.

Now, Mary certainly could sin according to her free will…but Holy Mother Church tells us she did NOT before the birth of Jesus…and **to think that she remained absolutely sinless the rest of her life is a matter of contraversy. **

Personally, I beleve the Bible when it says that ALL have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God…that not ONE could be found that did not go astray…that NONE tread the winepress with the Lord Jesus…etc.

It is a dogma of the Church that Mary did remain sinless her entire life…full of grace…is just that… there is no room for sin…regardless of the temptations…she was full of grace and exercised her free will to say no to all temptations…the most obvious is the sin of pride…her humility speaks volumes of her sinless life…after all she had done…been part of…been through…she is quite invisible and voiceless…the first and greatest disciple. Also as her title defines her as the Mother of God…from the incarnation through all eternity…that will never change…no matter how improbable it seems to us…so it really seems to me quite improbable that the Mother of God would ever have sinned.

493 The Fathers of the Eastern tradition call the Mother of God “the All-Holy” (Panagia), and celebrate her as “free from any stain of sin, as though fashioned by the Holy Spirit and formed as a new creature”.138 By the grace of God Mary remained free of every personal sin her whole life long.

508 From among the descendants of Eve, God chose the Virgin Mary to be the mother of his Son. “Full of grace”, Mary is “the most excellent fruit of redemption” (SC 103): from the first instant of her conception, she was totally preserved from the stain of original sin and she remained pure from all personal sin throughout her life.

Lastly… remember what Gabriel said to her…

Luke 1:34-38
Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (RSV-CE)

34 And Mary said to the angel, “How can this be, since I have no husband?” 35 And the angel said to her,

“The Holy Spirit will come upon you,
and the power of the Most High will overshadow you;
therefore the child to be born[a] will be called holy,
the Son of God.
36 And behold, your kinswoman Elizabeth in her old age has also conceived a son; and this is the sixth month with her who was called barren. 37 **For with God nothing will be impossible.” **38 And Mary said, “Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word.” And the angel departed from her.

She simply believed…it was possible…and in faith, trusted in God’s powerful graces.

Pax Christi

 

[ConstantineTG]

We receive Jesus normally in the state of which the Church calls the venial state. I would never say that people can receive Him in a mortal sin state.

There is no distinction between mortal and venial sins in the Orthodox Church. We understand that all who come are in a state of “getting better” from their sickness of sin. There is no strict rule of going to confession after committing a mortal sin before Communion. The Eucharist, as it says in our Liturgy, is for the forgiveness of sins and life eternal. Frequent confession is required so that one has an earnest desire to get better and do better. A priest may forbid one from receiving Communion not because of “mortal sins”, but if one hasn’t been to confession for a while there is no guarantee that the person is striving to become a better Christian, which is what is really the requirement for receiving the Eucharist.

 

[Dstep]

There is no distinction between mortal and venial sins in the Orthodox Church. We understand that all who come are in a state of “getting better” from their sickness of sin. There is no strict rule of going to confession after committing a mortal sin before Communion. The Eucharist, as it says in our Liturgy, is for the forgiveness of sins and life eternal. Frequent confession is required so that one has an earnest desire to get better and do better. A priest may forbid one from receiving Communion not because of “mortal sins”, but if one hasn’t been to confession for a while there is no guarantee that the person is striving to become a better Christian, which is what is really the requirement for receiving the Eucharist.

ConstantineTG,

I don’t really understand why the Orthodox Church doesn’t believe in the distinction between mortal and venial sins. Doesn’t the Bible say that some sins lead to death and others don’t? Also doesn’t the Bible say that if you eat and drink the Body and Blood unworthily then you eat and drink judgment on yourself? How do the Orthodox reconcile their teachings with this?

 

[chimo]

There is no distinction between mortal and venial sins in the Orthodox Church. We understand that all who come are in a state of “getting better” from their sickness of sin. There is no strict rule of going to confession after committing a mortal sin before Communion. The Eucharist, as it says in our Liturgy, is for the forgiveness of sins and life eternal. Frequent confession is required so that one has an earnest desire to get better and do better. A priest may forbid one from receiving Communion not because of “mortal sins”, but if one hasn’t been to confession for a while there is no guarantee that the person is striving to become a better Christian, which is what is really the requirement for receiving the Eucharist.

Yes Constantine that is true about the Eastern Church. However this may be will it not to be our advantage to make this distinction in the Orthodox Church so that people can understand these two “poles” by which our Catholic brothers and sisters often talk about. I find those within the Catholic Church will often go to Confession more regular than those in the Orthodox Church and I believe it is because they have a more discipline regarding sin and the average Catholic tends to think about this more than the average Orthodox. This distinction between what is mortal and venial will be a vital important tool when we can analyse our sins in regards to what is mortal and what is venial. If I understand it right the Mass and the Divine Liturgy is only for those who commit venial sins since our Lord Jesus only forgives us our venial sins within every reception at Holy Communion. Mortal sins if I understand it can wipe our whatever presence of God that was in you. In a sense you empty yourself of God when a mortal sin is committed. This is actually confirmed from the writings of St. Mary Faustina when in her Dairy the Lord Jesus reassured her she has not committed any mortal sin in her life. He says that only a mortal sin when committed will do its job as He will exit such a person.

The only way in receiving back Jesus is through the Sacrament of Holy Confession as this Sacrament can restore those who have committed any mortal sins. This distinction can be important for the Orthodox as well so that we will try to avoid such sins as do our Catholic brothers and sisters are taught. It will be the advantage for all of us to avoid such sins. However the venial sins are those sins which does not make God exit such a person since these sins are those sins which God can work with, it will be to our advantage to know them as well. Since this distinction is found mostly within the Catholic Church we see our Catholic brothers and sisters attending to Confession more often.

 

[ConstantineTG]

ConstantineTG,

I don’t really understand why the Orthodox Church doesn’t believe in the distinction between mortal and venial sins. Doesn’t the Bible say that some sins lead to death and others don’t? Also doesn’t the Bible say that if you eat and drink the Body and Blood unworthily then you eat and drink judgment on yourself? How do the Orthodox reconcile their teachings with this?

Sin is death as per Patristic teaching. Sin that leads to death are those sins that you do over and over and over again that remains unabated. It is not quantifiable acts. Sometimes it is those everyday things that you don’t even notice, things that you may consider “venial”, but because it is habitual and part of your everyday life, it can lead to spiritual death more than, say, committing murder. Not everyone who has killed is a murderer, and I think many who do out of accident or carelessness fully regret of that act. But one who, say, likes to stare at women’s bodies and have sexual thoughts as a matter of habit, it is more dangerous as they do not even realize they sin all the time out of habit.

Even Scripture did not quantify what exactly these sins are, which points that they are not something that you just make a list of and avoid. But rather something where one becomes attached to a certain type of sin so much that they cannot get it out of their system. Its very much like an addiction.