Protestants who believe Mary, the Mother of God sinned

[Answersplease]

Than there was no need, if Mary could be spared from original sin and not her mother, than wouldn’t the same be true of Jesus? Is so, there is no reason for Mary to have been immaculately conceived?

Your understanding of the Catholic viewpoint is as faulty as some of the Catholics here.

Many Catholics are unable to defend the teachings of their Church.

The main reason for the Catholic teaching about Saint Mary mother of God being sinless,
is that the Holy Bible says the angel called her “full of grace”;
and another reason is that the Catholic Church considers Saint Mary as being the new Ark of the Covenant because she carried Jesus The Christ in her womb.

How would it be if the stone tablets of the Ten Commandments were carried not in a special Ark, but in wood made from the fence of a pig pen, or if the Ark were made of some kind of unclean material. Do you think that would please God?

Jesus The Christ came to fulfill the law, the Catholic Church considers Saint Mary mother of God to be the new Ark of the Covenant; and the angel sent by God called Saint Mary full of grace.

That’s the way it is,

you don’t have to believe it.

PS.

Just in case you are wondering why people use the title mother of God when adressing Saint Mary…

There was a heresy that was growing in which the heretics were claiming that Jesus The Christ was not really God Himself.

So the title mother of God was given to Saint Mary, to make it plainly clear to all the faithful that the Church considers Jesus The Christ to be God, since Saint Mary is His mother.

Now before you ask, Saint Mary is Jesus’ mother because she is the biological mother of His human nature, as well as doing the role of His mother after He was born.

 

[ccolley]

Which leads to the problem…does that mean Mary’s mother was also without sin, and her mother, and her mother, and her mother, and her mother…How many generations of immaculate conceptions does it take? Also, this part: The Catechism of the Catholic Church says… is all but meaningless to any protestant.

It just took one generation…Mary did not “inherit” her gift from her parents …it was given to her by God because she was to be Theotokos(God bearer). Besides we have many OT prophets that were “righteous” before God.

Psalm 14 [13]
They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds, there is none that does good. 2 The LORD looks down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there are any that act wisely, that seek after God. 3 They have all gone astray, they are all alike corrupt; there is none that does good, no, not one. 4 Have they no knowledge, all the evildoers who eat up my people as they eat bread, and do not call upon the LORD? 5 There they shall be in great terror, for God is with the generation of the righteous. 6 You would confound the plans of the poor, but the LORD is his refuge. 7 O that deliverance for Israel would come out of Zion! When the LORD restores the fortunes of his people, Jacob shall rejoice, Israel shall be glad.

So we have some “evildoers” and then we have God’s People AKA the “Generation of the Righteous”. All those OT prophets that were righteous (ie Enoch, Elijah). Righteous means to be upright before God…to NOT have sinned! This was the “Generation of the Righteous”…so why couldn’t this generation have included Mary and her Mother and Father as well? Remember that Generation meant a set of people, and didn’t get it’s present definition until much later on.
CC

 

[shawn38]

The very fact you are using Capitalized “She” and “Her” reveal you consider her God. Capitalization of pronouns is a reference to God.

Una

It’s understood what you are saying, but lets be respectful and not presume what anyone says.

 

[shawn38]

God is perfect, He could not live in sin. He simply could not dwell where sin abounded…but, most Protestants do not believe this way, as you have demonstrated, SO…could Mary have sinned with Jesus gestating?

This is predicated on several things:

A belief in original sin as espoused by the CC is necessary or the IC is not necessary.

It wasn’t until Adam and Eve disobeyed God’s commandment, they became like gods, recognizing right and wrong (Gen 3). Sin and death entered the world. The discernment is not sin in itself, but it enables our heart to convict us.

Could Mary have led a sinless life through the birth of Christ? Absolutely.
Her entire life? I suppose. However once she accepted Christ as Lord and Savior (Luke 1:47) she was under grace, not the law (Rom 6).

Romans 6:15What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means! 16Don’t you know that when you offer yourselves to someone to obey him as slaves, you are slaves to the one whom you obey—whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness? 17But thanks be to God that, though you used to be slaves to sin, you wholeheartedly obeyed the form of teaching to which you were entrusted. 18You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness.

Romans 5:12Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned— 13for before the law was given, sin was in the world. But sin is not taken into account when there is no law.

 

[KathleenGee]

All I can say from personal experience is that the protestants do not want to know or believe that there is a greater reality out there called the communion of saints.

Mary is so powerful in that she lightens our cross, and brings a certain joy inspite of our sufferings for the Lord…

It is Mary who makes the Catholic Church a family among believers…and brings with her the sense of beauty and virtue.

American women really need to come to know the Blessed Mother who can be of great help to them and restore those who are fallen to their original dignity.

 

[rev_kevin]

Since it could go either way, please answer, in both ways, please.

Like I said nobody knows for sure. You’re asking me to speculate on something that no one for sure can answer.

 

[crazzeto]

This had never crossed my mind, not that I don’t think she could have, or would have, but it’s never crossed my mind as at all relevant. That’s not to make light of the question, but I think mine is a rather protestant attitude. You could just as well be asking me if she were left or right handed, as my focus is on what she accomplished, brought forth, etc.

If she was not sinnless, and if she was not ever virgin how could one possibly prove the nativity story? When I ask this question, we have to take off our 2,000 years of hind sight glasses and consider this from the perspective of the jews living at that time.

 

[Fidelis_Unus]

The very fact you are using Capitalized “She” and “Her” reveal you consider her God. Capitalization of pronouns is a reference to God. Una

Um no … Capitalization of pronouns refers to Holy.

 

[Fidelis_Unus]

Could Mary have led a sinless life through the birth of Christ? Absolutely. Her entire life? I suppose. However once she accepted Christ as Lord and Savior (Luke 1:47) she was under grace, not the law (Rom 6).

Mary had accepted Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior long before anyone else and in a way experienced by no other human being! I’m sorry, but this comment makes no sense to me. Why would she have to accept someone she had already profoundly accepted years before?

 

[Xavierlives]

Do you believe it was possible for Her, and did She infact, sin, while pregnant with Jesus?

So what is the implication if she had? Sin umbilicus?

 

[adstrinity]

So what is the implication if she had? Sin umbilicus?

Kinda, yeah. If She did sin while pregnant, what effect would that have on the Fetus?

 

[BrianH]

But once again, Mary’s mother sinned and that had no effect…so whats the difference?
My answer is I have no idea. Speculative because it says nothing about it.

 

[mike52ad]

It is a known and agreed fact, by Catholics and Protestants alike that Jesus Christ followed the law perfectly. It is agreed by all that He was absolutely sinless. If this is a fact then it follows that he followed the Ten Commandments perfectly as well. If this is the case then he followed the fourth commandment, Honor thy father and mother, perfectly. It is also agreed that we can do no better then to follow Jesus in all that He did. Therefore, since Jesus honored Mary as he should have done as a dutiful son, and since becasue of by Baptism I am an adopted son of God and Jesus is my brother, it follows that Mary is at the very least my stepmother and worthy of honor and respect. That is what Catholics do, they continue to honor the Mother of Jesus as their mother in imitation of Jesus. We do not worship her and in fact she would be shocked if we did. Her entire life was spent pointing to her Son. At the wedding feast of Cana she said the wisest thing ever said when she said “Do whatever He tells you.”

The core question here is did Mary sin? The answer is no becasue through the love of God the Father, she was preserved from original sin and therefore she did not suffer from the same concupiscence that we suffer from. Protestants suffer from myopia when studying this as there is but one reference (a strong one) in Scripture, “Hail Full of Grace” is the greeting she receives from the angel. She could not be full of grace if she had sinned. The angel was not delivering the grace, he was acknowleding that she already had it. It was God’s will that preserved Mary from sin and made her the New Eve, her uttered YES nullifed the no whispered in the garden as we ate of the fruit and hid from God. Let no one sully the name of Mary as she was the very first Christian. She believed in Christ before he was in her womb, before she uttered the yes that began the greatest story ever told. She followed Him throughout His life and at what seemed the end, she held His lifeless Body in her hands and wept a mother’s tears.
If you say God would not grant her the favor of Immaculate Conception, then perhaps your god is too small. My God is not encumbered by time and space, he granted her this favor and she humbly acknowledged it…“My sould proclaims the greatness of the Lord…”
Mary most holy, pray for us!

 

[AmateurPianist]

Do you believe it was possible for Her, and did She infact, sin, while pregnant with Jesus?

Never thought about this but gut reaction:
(1) Possible for her: yes
(2) Did in fact: who knows but statistically probable

 

[adstrinity]

Let me phrase one of the questions this way: Knowing sin seperates us from God, how would Mary sinning would have affected the Baby?

OR

If She didn’t sin at this time, how is that possible, that She would then go back to sinning (IF She could have resumed sinning after Her Son’s birth)?

And, thank you for all the Protestants who have answered, especially the ones who have said this is not something you have thought about because, you, as a Protestant, just do not think it’s relevant to anything. That is the kind of thing that is helpful to those who do not think the way you do. Thank you, also, for the people who have pointed out what is an inherently Catholic mindset in the question. I know that Orthodox re-word some questions we have for them because we use Latin terminology and that is not always compatible with their Greek answers.

 

[SyCarl]

The sinless of Mary may or may not be true. I am one of those Protestants who believe that this is one of things that the Catholic Church says must be believe that I think is unnecessary. It is not necessary to know all possible truth and this is one thing we don’t need to know.

However, even if Mary had to be sinless in order to bear Jesus, this does not necessarily mean that she was born without any stain of sin. Several in the early church seem to think she was purified when she became pregnant by the Holy Spirit.

1. This is the Holy Ghost, who came upon the Holy Virgin Mary; for since He who was conceived was Christ the Only begotten, the power of the Highest overshadowed her, and the Holy Ghost came upon her, and sanctified her, that she might be able to receive Him, by whom all things were made

Cyril of Jerusalem (Catechetical Lectures, Lecture 17, Paragraph 6)
newadvent.org/fathers/310117.htm

So then, after the assent of the holy Virgin, the Holy Spirit descended on her, according to the word of the Lord which the angel spoke, purifying her, and granting her power to receive the divinity of the Word, and likewise power to bring forth.

John of Damascus (Exposition of the Faith, Book 3, Chapter 2)
newadvent.org/fathers/33043.htm

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

You’re basically making the argument Thomas Aquinas made in his opinion about the Immaculate Conception. I would hope that the Catechism of the Catholic Church is not meaningless to you. I don’t find the Augsburgh Confession or Small/Large Catechisms of Luther meaningless or the Book of Common Prayer, etc. meaningless. There is truth in all denominations to some degree. Saying the Catechism is meaningless is not a very tactful or good way to have discourse with Catholics and make it a productive conversation. Catholics are very holistic about their faith making use of Scripture, Tradition, the papacy and the catechism, etc., not just sola scriptura. Obviously as a Lutheran sola scriptura is your only mode of understanding salvation and church polity so if you harbor a “meaningless” attitude toward the Catechism, why dialogue or even discuss Catholic topics with Catholics and expect any common ground, fruit from the conversation, or agreement?

Which leads to the problem…does that mean Mary’s mother was also without sin, and her mother, and her mother, and her mother, and her mother…How many generations of immaculate conceptions does it take? Also, this part: The Catechism of the Catholic Church says… is all but meaningless to any protestant.

 

[adstrinity]

You’re basically making the argument Thomas Aquinas made in his opinion about the Immaculate Conception. I would hope that the Catechism of the Catholic Church is not meaningless to you. I don’t find the Augsburgh Confession or Small/Large Catechisms of Luther meaningless or the Book of Common Prayer, etc. meaningless. There is truth in all denominations to some degree. Saying the Catechism is meaningless is not a very tactful or good way to have discourse with Catholics and make it a productive conversation. Catholics are very holistic about their faith making use of Scripture, Tradition, the papacy and the catechism, etc., not just sola scriptura. Obviously as a Lutheran sola scriptura is your only mode of understanding salvation and church polity so if you harbor a “meaningless” attitude toward the Catechism, why dialogue or even discuss Catholic topics with Catholics and expect any common ground, fruit from the conversation, or agreement?

I don’t think that Lutheranteach was being disrespectful or hostile, which is how it sounds like you’re reading his reply, I think he’s just informing us, if we want to converse with the Protestants on this, we can show them our sources, but, they don’t carry weight with Protestants.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

The problem is, I can quote to you a myriad of early father quotations that say the exact opposite. That is the danger in just grabbing onto a few ECF quotes and making that the end-all of the given controversy or dogmatic quandry. Catholics take all the arguments and look at them but in the end accept the judgment of the holy father.

The sinless of Mary may or may not be true. I am one of those Protestants who believe that this is one of things that the Catholic Church says must be believe that I think is unnecessary. It is not necessary to know all possible truth and this is one thing we don’t need to know.

However, even if Mary had to be sinless in order to bear Jesus, this does not necessarily mean that she was born without any stain of sin. Several in the early church seem to think she was purified when she became pregnant by the Holy Spirit.

Cyril of Jerusalem (Catechetical Lectures, Lecture 17, Paragraph 6)
newadvent.org/fathers/310117.htm

John of Damascus (Exposition of the Faith, Book 3, Chapter 2)
newadvent.org/fathers/33043.htm

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I’m not reading his reply as hostile at all, trust me. I am just saying that calling the Catechism “meaningless” as a source for good, sound theology in a discussion with Catholics is a fruitless and unnecessary endeavor. Sola scriptura from one party and the scriptures, tradition, reason, papacy and catechism on the other side will only go in circles like a cat chasing its tail. I felt no ill will or anger in Lutheranteach’s post, but I thought calling the catechism meaningless is not productive. I don’t think the only way to converse with Protestants is with the Bible. I would hope that they understand the councils that decided the great theology of the early church and who compiled the biblical canon play a huge part in understanding God and His Church and that a Bible-alone approach can be overcome. Guys like Scott Hahn were sola-scriptura buffs until he went searching to trash the Catholic Church and ran into the ECF’s and his eyes opened up.

I don’t think that Lutheranteach was being disrespectful or hostile, which is how it sounds like you’re reading his reply, I think he’s just informing us, if we want to converse with the Protestants on this, we can show them our sources, but, they don’t carry weight with Protestants.