Please Help: How do we know Mary was sinless?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Student26
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Student26

Guest
Hello forum,

I am having a number of difficulties this-evening, particularly with accepting the dogmas of Mary.

My main contention goes like this:

How do we know that Mary was sinless?
How would the Apostles have known?
How could anybody have known?

How do we know that Our Lady was assumed into Heavenly Glory?
There is no evidence for this.
The fact that her body was never found does not prove that she was assumed into Heavenly Glory.

I am feeling as though I accept a number of things as a Catholic that I don’t understand, or even feel makes any rational sense. Why should we simply accept these things because Tradition holds them (i.e., lots of other people believe them).

Please pray for me/ help.

X
 
Student26 said:
Hello forum,

I am having a number of difficulties this-evening, particularly with accepting the dogmas of Mary.

My main contention goes like this:

How do we know that Mary was sinless?
How would the Apostles have known?
How could anybody have known?

How do we know that Our Lady was assumed into Heavenly Glory?
There is no evidence for this.
The fact that her body was never found does not prove that she was assumed into Heavenly Glory.

I am feeling as though I accept a number of things as a Catholic that I don’t understand, or even feel makes any rational sense. Why should we simply accept these things because Tradition holds them (i.e., lots of other people believe them).

Please pray for me/ help.

X
Click to expand...
We hold that Mary was sinless because we believe that God would not have formed his son in any impure crucible. It also allowed Mary’s “fiat” (her ‘yes’ / ‘be it done unto me according to thy Will’ to the offer to bear the Christ-child in her womb) to be pure and unreserved. There could be no reservation about such a thing on the basis of their being a taint of sin since no evil could exist in Mary if she were to bear that child in her womb. Evil, of even the slightest quantity, would not be able to bear and nurture and give succour to such a child. By our reason alone it can be clear that Mary was sinless.

As for the doctrine of the Assumption, until it was made a Dogma, it, to the best of my knowledge, had been a pious tradition of the Church dating right back to the beginning. The fact that it had not been formally ‘dogmatised’ does not make it wrong if the Church had believed it without question for the whole of its history. The fact that it the Holy Spirit had consistently allowed popes and bishops and priests to teach this as a fact, unaltered, for two millenia, leads me to trust the Church on this. This is one of the things that Faith is about: having faith in the wisdom of the Church through the ages.

Remember, some of the things we believe in we also call ‘mysteries’. It’s not because we’re taking a wild guess at something or that we don’t understand them, it’s because there’s a ‘deeper truth’ behind them that we can only know by its action in the world and by what it does, rather than how it does it.
 
Please Help: How do we know Mary was sinless?
Click to expand...
Virgin Mary was concieved by her mother St. Anne and her father St. Joachim; this was a list of generations and holy ancestors which God prepared beforehand for the birth of Jesus.

Since Jesus Christ was without sin then Virgin Mary would be immaculate.
 
Wesley7 said:
Virgin Mary was concieved by her mother St. Anne and her father St. Joachim; this was a list of generations and holy ancestors which God prepared beforehand for the birth of Jesus.

Since Jesus Christ was without sin then Virgin Mary would be immaculate.
Click to expand...
You don’t know any of this. You’ve just conjectured this. It’s just your own line of reasoning. This response is no better than a Protestant sola scriptura response. When I say you I refer to the Church.

You cannot just say that something is TRUE because it seems to make theological sense.
 
God’s peace. Divine revelation consists of the Holy Scriptures, Holy Tradition, and the Magisterial teaching of the Church. Through Divine revelation, we know things that reason and “evidence” can never tell us. One of these revelations is the sinlessness, or Immaculate Conception, of the Blessed Virgin Mary, which we accept in faith because of the Divine authority God has entrusted to His Catholic Church. If you transfer the seat of this authority to human reason and “proof” (and exactly what would this be, in the case of the Immaculate Conception?), then where will you stop? Will you next call the Divinity of Christ and the Resurrection into question? This is the road to atheism. If you follow it, you have cut yourself adrift from what God has put in place for your salvation. It’s just that serious. Blessings, ~Br. Carlo~
 
We do pray for you! :gopray2:

All of us have doubts - it’s part of the human experience. But it is faith that sustains us!

While I have never experienced the doubts you have expressed, you are certainly not the first to have them. Yet, it does seem you fervently seek the Truth and ask sincerely for help in alleviating your doubts. All is not lost if you continue to seek and desire knowledge of the Truth.

Perhaps you may start by recalling that in the years Christ spent with His disciples, they often experienced doubt. Despite their direct witness to His many miracles and teachings, it was difficult at times for them to accept the Truth which they felt in their hearts, but could not reconcile in their minds. Eventually, they were filled with the Holy Spirit, never to doubt again. You must also seek this same gift of grace from the Holy Spirit, first and foremost.

In Eastern Christian tradition, the first Sunday after Easter (Pascha) is the Sunday of Thomas. Our very first reflection on the resurrection on the very first Sunday after Easter every year focuses on the doubt of Thomas. We are reminded that we are blessed because we have not born witness to anything which we believe, yet we are still capable of believing it. Recall the words of our Lord to Thomas in your own prayers:
Jesus said to him, “Have you come to believe because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and have believed.” [John 20:29]
Click to expand...
May the Holy Spirit descend upon you and grace you with the gift of faith once more, so that you may “love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, with all your being, with all your strength and with all your mind” [Luke 10:27].
 
I can direct you to a site that has some insightful Information on the Virgin Mary.
Edward P. Sri is assistant professor of religious studies at Benedictine College in Atchison, Kansas. He holds a license in sacred theology (S.T.L.) from the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas in Rome.He also is a campus director for the Fellowship Of Catholic University Students (FOCUS).Its also a Catholic site with articles from many priests.
He wrote ten different items concerning the Virgin Mary.

hsi-online.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=category&sectionid=7&id=64&Itemid=270

It should help.Read the article The Original Mary: Our Lady’s Life Before the Annunciation
 
Two things:

First, asking ‘how we know’ would seem to indicate to the readers that if people give you an answer, you would consider the answer and respond to what the answer is.

If you’re asked, get a response, and then don’t even address the answer but counter with “but how do you KNOW” that seems to indicate that you don’t want to know the answer itself, but rather, that you want guaranteed certainty on this point from a ‘scientifically proven’ view. . .an eyewitness report that has been preserved on parchment with authenticated seal of GOD or some such.

Second: Let’s turn this on its head.

How do **you **know Mary was not sinless?

Think about it. Where is the evidence?

Where is the teaching about her faults and failings? Where is the Old Testament foreshadowing, metaphor, simile, and examples that announce and predict Christ being born of ‘sinful woman?’ Where is the consistent, infallible pronouncement mandated and taught by the Holy Spirit that teaches Mary was not sinless? Where?
 
Tantum_ergo said:
How do **you **know Mary was not sinless?

Think about it. Where is the evidence?

Where is the teaching about her faults and failings? Where is the Old Testament foreshadowing, metaphor, simile, and examples that announce and predict Christ being born of ‘sinful woman?’ Where is the consistent, infallible pronouncement mandated and taught by the Holy Spirit that teaches Mary was not sinless? Where?
Click to expand...
“Since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23).

I don’t suppose Scripture details the faults and failings of every single creature yet we know that all have sinned… Nowhere does it say that Christ shall be born of a sinless woman. What you rely upon for this is conjecture, “metaphor, simile”. Is that it? It’s nice to know that this Holy Faith is built upon little more than conjecture and metaphor and simile.

I do happen to believe but don’t tell me that because there is no account of Mary’s faults that consequently it’s rational to believe she led a sinless life. I do happen to think that we can know this from the Archangel Gabriel’s greeting and bending our minds to what is implied in his greeting…but your rudeness and expectation that it is rational is nonsense.
 
Student26 said:
“Since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23).

I don’t suppose Scripture details the faults and failings of every single creature yet we know that all have sinned… Nowhere does it say that Christ shall be born of a sinless woman. What you rely upon for this is conjecture, “metaphor, simile”. Is that it? It’s nice to know that this Holy Faith is built upon little more than conjecture and metaphor and simile.

I do happen to believe but don’t tell me that because there is no account of Mary’s faults that consequently it’s rational to believe she led a sinless life. I do happen to think that we can know this from the Archangel Gabriel’s greeting and bending our minds to what is implied in his greeting…but your rudeness and expectation that it is rational is nonsense.
Click to expand...
So I guess the Disciples were sinning left and right while they were with Jesus I must assume you believe this - Mary was with Jesus his entire live from birth to death - knew who he was from the beginning and lived a life dedicated to him and after his crucifixion - I suppose if you were with Jesus - Knew who he was - listened to all he said - had angels visit you - you would be sinning all the time - right?It would have no effect on you at all as an individual right?People live righteous lives today just on faith. You must believe that Jesus presence on the people around him had an effect on how they lived their lives and Mary was very special and lived a sinless life because of all of this and the holy spirit was with her - wouldn’t you?
 
I will also add that Mary was considered to be about thirteen to sixteen years old when this happened - she was just a child - more than likely brought up in a very religious life and we must assume that the Holy spirit was with her all this time - I highly doubt it was any other way. You have to take it on faith.
 
  • If we humans inherit the nature of our parents, and if Christ did not have a fallen nature, then one of two possible scenarios presents itself:
    EITHER:
    Scenario #1 is that Christ – our Redeemer and Savior – inherited from His mother a pristine human nature which was not fallen. *Her nature was “saved” from fallen-ness prior to Christ’s conception. *In this scenario it is Mary who is the object of prior salvation. *This is the Catholic view.
    OR:
    Scenario #2 is that Mary was fallen at the time of Christ’s conception, but that Christ was prevented from (i.e., “saved” from) inheriting her fallen-ness through the intervention of the Holy Spirit. *In this scenario it is Christ who is the object of the immediate saving work of the Spirit. *This is the Protestant view even if few Protestants ever think of it in these terms.
    In both scenarios we have the necessity of a “saving” intervention by the Holy Spirit.
    But, in Scenario #2 we can see a great difficulty arising. *Why? *Because for Jesus to have been “saved” from inheriting Original Sin that means that Our Savior would have needed a savior AND Our Redeemer would have needed a redeemer and THAT is something that Scripture never points to and that, in reality, is an utter impossibility. *For Christ Himself is “THE SAVIOR” and He is “THE REDEEMER”.
    Here the hard-core Fundamentalist who requires an explicit Biblical mandate is at total loss when asked to supply the slightest Scriptural reference to Jesus needing to be saved or redeemed at any time during the Incarnated earthly life of the Messiah.
Second

*in Luke 1:28 Mary is called “Kecharitomenae” – “Full of grace” or, more properly, “She who is perfectly graced.” *This could not be possible unless Mary was already sinless prior to the angel’s arrival – that is, before her “yes” to God. *
If not than mankind, WAS NOT redeemed by the INCARNATE Son (the God-man), but by the Son INDEPENDENTLY of His Incarnation!!! *And, if this is the case, then the Incarnation would not be necessary at all. *Rather, the eternal Son could have remained in Heaven and “zapped” everyone on earth with sinlessness from there. 🙂 *However, that’s obviously not what we believe. *We do not believe that Mary became sinless via the eternal Son’s (spiritual) Presence entering her womb, nor do we believe that Jesus’ own humanity became sinless because of the eternal Son’s “taking on” of it. *Rather, we believe that the God-man (the Incarnate Christ – the New Adam) redeems humanity and we believe that this happened because 1) the saving merits of the God-man were applied to His intended mother outside of time / in advance (rendering her sinless), and that Jesus took His own sinless humanity from her – that is, Jesus also “redeemed” His own humanity in advance (in redeeming His mother’s) by applying the merits of own His Incarnation to His mother, and then taking that sinless humanity from her. *Now, obviously, this is a great and profound mystery which must be contemplated prayerfully. *But, it is very consistent and air-tight, and in full accord with the Apostolic Deposit which is, of course, what the Church had to thoroughly examine (taking centuries to do so) before it dogmatized the Immaculate Conception.
 
When you have a question regarding Catholic belief, be confident to know that it is already answered in apologetics, and thoroughly.

The Old Testament (OT) has many things that point to Christ’s coming in the future. All the ‘things’ in the OT are lesser, and point to, Christ Who is greater and the fulfillment.

One example is the heavenly manna that the Israelites enjoyed in the desert, how God fed them every day. Now that manna points to the true Bread that comes down from Heaven, Christ in the most holy Eucharist. The Eucharist is of course greater than the heavenly manna that the Israelites enjoyed.

OK. Let’s take an event out of the OT. 2 Samuel 6 when David brought the ark up. The ark was placed on a new cart, the oxen walking along, the people rejoicing. At verse 6, we see that the oxen were making the ark tip, and a man put out his hand to steady it. On that very spot, the man died.

We call Mary the Ark of the New Covenant. She contained within her womb the Son of God incarnate, which is by far greater than the contents of the ark. (Don’t forget, as a side note, how God gave very specific instructions as to how to construct the ark, and how it had gold and angels on it’s top.) Mary, as the Ark of the New Covenant, was greater than this ark, which pointed to her and her motherhood. God had her design and perfection in mind from long ago, and to think that if a man should even touch the original ark to steady it, he should drop dead. God’s plan was that she should be free of all sin that she might be worthy to carry the Son of God. It was by Christ’s merit that she obtained such a unique and privileged state.

A side note. Mary’s spouse was the Holy Spirit and Joseph understood that and was obedient to God to be the caretaker and supporter of these 2. What an honor and privilege for him. They did not share marital relations and it’s shocking to a Catholic mind to even suggest that they did.

There is an answer to questions in apologetics regarding the ‘brothers of the Lord’ as well. Of course there is.

There are more responses in apologetics regarding Mary (or any other Catholic teaching) if you wish to pursue that question further.
 
Student26 said:
You don’t know any of this. You’ve just conjectured this. It’s just your own line of reasoning. This response is no better than a Protestant sola scriptura response. When I say you I refer to the Church.

You cannot just say that something is TRUE because it seems to make theological sense.
Click to expand...
So I don’t know what I’m talking about? . .
 
“All have sinned and fallen short”.
If ‘all’ means all, then JESUS sinned.
Jesus is God AND man.
 
Student26 said:
Hello forum,

I am having a number of difficulties this-evening, particularly with accepting the dogmas of Mary.

My main contention goes like this:

How do we know that Mary was sinless?
How would the Apostles have known?
How could anybody have known?

How do we know that Our Lady was assumed into Heavenly Glory?
There is no evidence for this.
The fact that her body was never found does not prove that she was assumed into Heavenly Glory.

I am feeling as though I accept a number of things as a Catholic that I don’t understand, or even feel makes any rational sense. Why should we simply accept these things because Tradition holds them (i.e., lots of other people believe them).

Please pray for me/ help.

X
Click to expand...
We have Luke 1:28 and in contrast we have Romans 3:23. Please note that original sin is a condition not an actual sin.

When we say Mary is the immaculate conception (and Mary appeared and said this), born without sin, that does not mean she lived a sinless life nor does it mean she did (whether she actually lived a sinless life is not discussed in the dogma–read it again if you question this).

Further, immaculate conception does not mean Mary was not saved by Jesus Christ. Mary was indeed redeemed–this is our belief. But Mary’s redemption occurred at her conception. Her condition in life was that she was not stained by the sin of Adam and Eve.
 
Student26 said:
Hello forum,

How do we know that Our Lady was assumed into Heavenly Glory?
There is no evidence for this.
The fact that her body was never found does not prove that she was assumed into Heavenly Glory.

I am feeling as though I accept a number of things as a Catholic that I don’t understand, or even feel makes any rational sense. Why should we simply accept these things because Tradition holds them (i.e., lots of other people believe them).

Please pray for me/ help.

X
Click to expand...
We have church writings, historical and authentic, regarding marys dormition on mt Zion.

Mary was laid to rest in gethsmane in a garden.

St Thomas was the last apostle to arrive but arrived 3 days after her death and found her empty tomb. Current dogma is not explicit whter she was assumed into heaven on formation or on the 3rd day. Either specific explanation is opn to belief and discussion but the assumption is not true de Fide revelation but is fide ecclesIastica.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top