Mary's immaculate conception and history

[guanophore]

You mention Eph 1:6, where the verb χαριτοω has “us” as its object. I don’t know enough Greek to answer the question for myself, but at first sight it looks pretty conclusive that if χαριτοω is something that—according to Paul—can happen to any faithful follower of Christ, it is inconsistent to argue that in Luke 1:28 Mary is being set apart as a unique case. On the other hand, I’m aware that Paul can sometimes use words to convey a different meaning compared with the Evangelists’ use of the same terms. What is the answer here?

It is the same word, with the same meaning. Yes, we can all walk in grace and not fall into sin, just as Mary did.

the original Greek means “she who was given grace (presumably, by God, right? ) in the past (as a completed action, with the implication that its effects continue on through the present)".

But as Gorgias has pointed out, the tense here with reference to Mary is quite unique. She existed in this state before the angel came to her, and the angel greets her "Hail, κεχαριτωμένη " , using this as a Title, rather than her name. This is quite unique in the Scriptures.

Yet Greek Orthodox, who would have theologians well versed in biblical Greek, do not necessarily believe in the immaculate conception.

They refer to Mary as “all Holy”.

 

[Benadam]

Can you give an example?

MT1926:

Mary’s appearances have this effect. Our Lady of Guadalupe. The Resurrection and Jesus’ appearances afterwards before He ascended. The shroud of Turin which is evidence of a miraculous event. The Saints. St Paul’s conversion?

 

[tgGodsway]

I love your question. But the answer is that not only do the founding Apostles and gospel writers not bring this up, they taught the opposite. All people are born into the family of sinners. Mary herself believed this.

 

[guanophore]

Mary’s appearances have this effect. Our Lady of Guadalupe. The Resurrection and Jesus’ appearances afterwards before He ascended. The shroud of Turin which is evidence of a miraculous event. The Saints. St Paul’s conversion?

OIC. Then you are not making any distinction between pious legend and miracles approved by the Church (not considered “legends”)?

 

[guanophore]

All people are born into the family of sinners. Mary herself believed this.

No, Mary believed that God saved her from sin. There is nothing in scripture to support that this did not happen before she was born.

 

[tgGodsway]

Trying to argue from silence is a poor argument. Joseph and Mary practiced the law by offering the sin offering in Jerusalem. You know this. What is the real issue.

 

[guanophore]

Trying to argue from silence is a poor argument. Joseph and Mary practiced the law by offering the sin offering in Jerusalem. You know this. What is the real issue.

The “sin” offering, tgG, as we have discussed before, was for ritual cleansing after giving birth to a child. It has nothing to do with actual sin.

 

[kainosktisis]

Jesus Christ was baptized by St. John the Baptist. Are we then to assume that He had sin that He needed to repent of since John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance (See Acts 19:4)?

The following transpired in the Gospel of St. Matthew 3 (BibleHub):

13 Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to be baptized by John.

14 But John tried to deter him, saying, “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?”

15 Jesus replied, “Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness.” Then John consented.

16 As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting on him.

17 And a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.”

 

[Gorgias]

I love your question. But the answer is that not only do the founding Apostles and gospel writers not bring this up, they taught the opposite. All people are born into the family of sinners.

Re-read St Paul. He talks about “Jews and Gentiles” being sinners. That’s what he means. In fact, just before he makes the statement you’re referencing, he explicitly uses ‘all’ to reference ‘Jews and Gentiles’.

Tell me: do babies who die in childbirth commit actual, personal sin? If not, then you can’t say “all” means “each individual human being.”

Mary herself believed this.

Edited to add: Oh… you’re talking about the Presentation in the temple, from Luke 2? That’s referring to Leviticus 12 (check the cross-reference in your Bible at Luke 2:22 ).

The text in Leviticus 2 is talking about ritual impurity, not sin:

And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, "Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a woman have conceived seed, and born a man child: then she shall be unclean seven days; according to the days of the separation for her infirmity shall she be unclean.

"And in the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised. And she shall then continue in the blood of her purifying three and thirty days; she shall touch no hallowed thing, nor come into the sanctuary, until the days of her purifying be fulfilled.

…

"And when the days of her purifying are fulfilled, for a son, or for a daughter, she shall bring a lamb of the first year for a burnt offering, and a young pigeon, or a turtledove, for a sin offering, unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, unto the priest: Who shall offer it before the Lord, and make an atonement for her; and she shall be cleansed from the issue of her blood. This is the law for her that hath born a male or a female.

“And if she be not able to bring a lamb, then she shall bring two turtles, or two young pigeons; the one for the burnt offering, and the other for a sin offering: and the priest shall make an atonement for her, and she shall be clean.”

The “atonement” here is for ritual impurity, not personal sin. If you have a text that demonstrates that it’s for personal sin, I’d love to see it…

 

[Kmon23]

They do (well I do, I’m Orthodox), but it doesn’t mean we necessarily believe in the Immaculate Conception,

 

[Gorgias]

They do (well I do, I’m Orthodox), but it doesn’t mean we necessarily believe in the Immaculate Conception,

That’s because you don’t necessarily believe in Original Sin, right? I mean, if Original Sin isn’t part of your doctrine, then a doctrine that says “Mary was conceived without Original Sin” isn’t exactly on the agenda…

 

[Benadam]

Yes, I include miraculous events that advanced and validate the Catholic faith. What might be of the Sensus Fidelium.

 

[guanophore]

Mary’s appearances have this effect. Our Lady of Guadalupe. The Resurrection and Jesus’ appearances afterwards before He ascended. The shroud of Turin which is evidence of a miraculous event. The Saints. St Paul’s conversion?

Yes, I only include miraculous events that advanced and validate the Catholic faith. What might come from the Sensus Fidelium.

I wasn not aware that the Shroud of Turin had been authenticated as a miracle.

 

[Benadam]

Good point I put it in because it is responded to like it is a part of the resurrection by the faithful.

 

[tgGodsway]

guanophore, again, you don’t know what you are talking about here when you say, “actual sin.” Mary’s offering was two fold and it came from Leviticus 12:6-8. Here, I’ll quote it for you.

Lev 12:6-8 ‘When the days of her purification are fulfilled, whether for a son or a daughter, she shall bring to the priest a lamb of the first year as a burnt offering, and a young pigeon or a turtledove as a sin offering, to the door of the tabernacle of meeting.
7 Then he shall offer it before the LORD, and make ATOMENENT FOR HER. And she shall be clean from the flow of her blood. This is the law for her who has borne a male or a female.
8 And if she is not able to bring a lamb, then she may bring two turtledoves or two young pigeons–one as a BURNT offering and the other as a SIN offering. So the priest shall make atonement for her, and she will be clean.’ "

If Mary was born without sin, lived her entire life without sin, she had absolutely no need to subject herself to the requirements of the LAW at all. The Law was given to sinners. Mary practiced it, along with her husband.

Secondly, the scriptures are clear about sinners. Hear it again from Paul’s letter to Rome, “Therefore as through one man, (Adam)
sin entered into the world, and death through sin; and so death passed unto ALL MEN, for that ALL SINNED.” Rom. 5:12.

If the so-called sacred tradition says anything contrary to the word of God, the tradition is not of God, but of men.

 

[Kmon23]

Well that’s sorta the debate of Original Sin vs Ancestral Sin. Original sin per St. Augustine says we inherit the guilt of the original sin, however this aspect of his theology was not accepted by the Catholic Church (a close reading of Council of Trent shows this, where the latin word reatus is used). However, there is no doubt the whole of Augustine’s theology (which includes original guilt) has influenced the outlook on anthropology in relation to the Divine in how Catholics define Original Sin. Even though Original Guilt is not accepted in Catholicism, the attitude during the Middle Ages was that you are very much damned even if you do not commit sin (but die without sanctifying grace).

The East, which was not significantly influenced by St. Augustine’s rather low anthropology and theology/Original sin, may agree that we may not see the heavenly kingdom without God’s grace, but was much more hesitant to actively affirm damnation for certain things.

Especially in light of scholasticism where a much more systematic form of theology became the norm in the West, and in light of Augustine’s theology, it made sense that although the Immaculate Conception is not “necessary” for Christ’s birth, it was fitting that she be preserved from Original Sin and its effects (namely concupiscence) altogether, since the attitude of having Original Sin altogether was seen as being damnable/evil

In the East we don’t have categories of sanctifying/actual grace, nor a binary state of mortal sin v. sanctifying grace, and since neither would we say having Original Sin connotates ontological state of evil. This is why in the East, it is the free will of man and our own personal actions determining our relation to God more so than just being in a state of the original sin.

Just being in a state of unregeneration has a much lower view in the West than in the East.

It’s also since the West had to combat Pelagianism, so monergism has a much stronger influence in Western thought (hence why Luther/Calvin, being born out of the Western theological tradition, are naturally monergists), while the East is very strongly synergists in language. Not to say the West denies man’s free will, but compared to the East, the West does emphasize more God’s sovereignty/grace vs. the East’s emphasis on free will working with God’s grace (it’s why some would accuse St. John Chrysostom of being Pelagian).

But it doesn’t change the fact that the East don’t define the moment of the Theotokos’ sanctification (whether at conception, pre-conception, a gradual sanctification during her life, or before the Annunciation), while the West dogmatically does.

So yes, the Immaculate Conception is not on our agenda, but it doesn’t change the fact the CC requires assent to this dogma, while the Orthodox do not.

 

[guanophore]

If Mary was born without sin, lived her entire life without sin, she had absolutely no need to subject herself to the requirements of the LAW at all. The Law was given to sinners. Mary practiced it, along with her husband.

This is flawed reasoning. Jesus followed the Law, as did Paul the Apostle, along with other Apostles… They did not “have” to follow it. An example of baptism was given above. Mary chose to follow the Law, as should we all. The Law was given to God’s chosen people as their custodian until Jesus came.

If you do not understand the difference between ritual uncleanness and a moral offense against God, I can’t help you. Having a child is not a sin, and the bleeding that occurs during menstruation and childbirth is not sinful.

Jesus is the fulfillment of the Law (rituals of this kind are no longer required.)

Secondly, the scriptures are clear about sinners. Hear it again from Paul’s letter to Rome, “Therefore as through one man, (Adam)

sin entered into the world, and death through sin; and so death passed unto ALL MEN, for that ALL SINNED.” Rom. 5:12.

If the so-called sacred tradition says anything contrary to the word of God, the tradition is not of God, but of men.

Yes, this is why Mary needed to be saved from sin. She is the new Eve, created free from this sin, so that her flesh could be given for His flesh.

 

[tgGodsway]

Tell me: do babies who die in childbirth commit actual, personal sin? If not, then you can’t say “all” means “each individual human being

Gorgias, what kind of debate is this?.. this is a poor argument. Paul’s doctrine was speaking not to specifics such as babies, but general in nature. You know that. Why skirt what the holy Spirit is saying to the Church?

 

[tgGodsway]

ritual impurity

ritual purity is your invention. It doesn’t say ritual purity. It doesn’t imply ritual purity. If Mary were sinless from birth, she would have no impurities or feel the need to offer the sacrifice in the first place. We can dance this dance all night long but it won’t change what is obvious in the passage.

 

[tgGodsway]

Jesus followed the Law, as did Paul the Apostle, along with other Apostles… They did not “have” to follow it.

Jesus obeyed the Law because He was righteous, the apostles, prior to their ministry obeyed the law because they were under it as Jews. Mary called God her “savior” because she knew she needed to be saved. You try to argue from what Mary didn’t say! She didn’t say that she knew how from her conception she was sinless. She didn’t say she was living a sinless life on earth when her first son was born and then after. Her peers didn’t agree that she was sinless. The Apostles didn’t say, they knew she was sinless… on and on and on this weak argument can go.

You claim Mary is sinless without confirmation from the word of God. I gave you Paul’s words on this, how sin passed to ALL men, yet you do not have the ears to hear what the holy Spirit is saying to you.