Why aren't we all immaculately conceived?

[mpartyka]

Read this in another thread:

Mary, immaculately conceived and ever-pure, sinless by virtue of her selection to be Christ’s mother…It is part of her unique situation to have been preserved from all sin.

Question: Why doesn’t God prevent all of us from contracting the stain of original sin as He did with Mary?

And as a side question, is it correct to say that God prevented Mary from contracting original sin in her conception, or only that He prevented Mary from contracting the stain of original sin in her conception (i.e., she contracted it, same as all of us do, but she wasn’t allowed to be affected by it)? I think the main question is still relevant in either case.

–Mike

 

[Scoobyshme]

Read this in another thread:

Question: Why doesn’t God prevent all of us from contracting the stain of original sin as He did with Mary?

And as a side question, is it correct to say that God prevented Mary from contracting original sin in her conception, or only that He prevented Mary from contracting the stain of original sin in her conception (i.e., she contracted it, same as all of us do, but she wasn’t allowed to be affected by it)? I think the main question is still relevant in either case.

–Mike

Mike,

I would say the easy answer is that God created Mary without Original sin because she was to conceive and give birth to Jesus.  Remember...Jesus is God.  Always has been, always will be.  If we could create our own mother, wouldn't we make her as perfect as possible? :)

I would say the correct thing to say is that Mary was created without Original sin.  Never had it, in other words.  In case you're interested, this is from the Bible.  In Luke 1:28, where the angel addresses Mary as "full of grace" this is a loose translation from the Greek.  The Greek word used was "kecharitomene."  This word, used in the fashion it was in Luke 1:28 means that Mary was "full of grace" from the very moment of her conception, in such a manner as to be permanent thereafter (forever).  One cannot be "full of grace" and have sin on their soul.  The two states of mutually exclusive.  :)

 

[JohnDamian]

The argument in the middle ages on Original Sin held three positions;

Eadmar; Mary was Conceived free from the stain of Sin.

Thomistic/Bonaventurian; Mary was completely free from sin, but she was not given this grace at the instant of her conception.

Scotist: Mary needed redeption like other human beings; but through the merits of Jesus Crucifixion; given in advanced, she was conceived without the stain of Original Sin.

THIS is the final declaration; by Pope Pius IX on the matter; ex cathedera
We declare, pronounce and define that the doctrine which holds that the Blessed Virgin Mary, at the first instant of her conception, by a singular privilege and grace of the Omnipotent God, in virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Saviour of mankind, was preserved immaculate from all stain of original sin, has been revealed by God, and therefore should firmly and constantly be believed by all the faithful.
—Pope Pius IX, Ineffabilis Deus



It is the affirmation of Scotist teaching by Pope Pius IX that we can see that it was the merit’s of the Crucifixion given in advance that allowed her to be free from Original Sin. In the same way; we are able; through baptism to become “baptised into Christs death” as Paul says in Romans; that we may rise out and be reborn into life free from sin.

 

[po18guy]

Here is the official teaching of the Church on Mary’s conception, with footnotes beneath. “LG” refers to the Papal document “Lumen Gentium” (“Light of the Nations”) and a link to it is at the bottom:

CCC490 To become the mother of the Savior, Mary "was enriched by God with gifts appropriate to such a role."132 The angel Gabriel at the moment of the annunciation salutes her as “full of grace”.133 In fact, in order for Mary to be able to give the free assent of her faith to the announcement of her vocation, it was necessary that she be wholly borne by God’s grace.

CCC491 Through the centuries the Church has become ever more aware that Mary, “full of grace” through God,134 was redeemed from the moment of her conception. That is what the dogma of the Immaculate Conception confesses, as Pope Pius IX proclaimed in 1854:

The most Blessed Virgin Mary was, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God and by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, Savior of the human race, preserved immune from all stain of original sin.135

CCC492 The “splendor of an entirely unique holiness” by which Mary is “enriched from the first instant of her conception” comes wholly from Christ: she is “redeemed, in a more exalted fashion, by reason of the merits of her Son”.136 The Father blessed Mary more than any other created person “in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places” and chose her “in Christ before the foundation of the world, to be holy and blameless before him in love”.137

CCC493 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.

“Let it be done to me according to your word. . .”

CCC494 At the announcement that she would give birth to “the Son of the Most High” without knowing man, by the power of the Holy Spirit, Mary responded with the obedience of faith, certain that “with God nothing will be impossible”: "Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord; let it be [done] to me according to your word."139 Thus, giving her consent to God’s word, Mary becomes the mother of Jesus. Espousing the divine will for salvation wholeheartedly, without a single sin to restrain her, she gave herself entirely to the person and to the work of her Son; she did so in order to serve the mystery of redemption with him and dependent on him, by God’s grace:140

As St. Irenaeus says, "Being obedient she became the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race."141 Hence not a few of the early Fathers gladly assert. . .: "The knot of Eve’s disobedience was untied by Mary’s obedience: what the virgin Eve bound through her disbelief, Mary loosened by her faith."142 Comparing her with Eve, they call Mary “the Mother of the living” and frequently claim: "Death through Eve, life through Mary."143

132 LG 56.
133 Lk 1:28.
134 Lk 1:28.
135 Pius IX, Ineffabilis Deus (1854): DS 2803.
136 LG 53, 56.
137 Cf. Eph 1:3-4.
138 LG 56.
139 Lk 1:28-38; cf. Rom 1:5.
140 Cf. LG 56.
141 St. Irenaeus, Adv. haeres. 3, 22, 4: PG 7/1, 959A.
142 St. Irenaeus, Adv. haeres. 3, 22, 4: PG 7/1, 959A.
143 LG 56; Epiphanius, Haer. 78, 18: PG 42, 728CD-729AB; St. Jerome, Ep. 22, 21: PL 22, 408.

vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html

 

[Prophesy]

Mary is the special case because she conceived Christ (perhaps the answer is as simple as the dismissive counter-question ‘Why aren’t all children Jesus?’). However this is not truly fair.

Humanity has sinned and the wages of sin are death. Mary though human, was given the pre-temporal gift of her Son’s salvation at the time of her birth (think of being instantly baptized at conception). Mary would still be able to sin, but because she did not know sin (similar to the Jewish idiom of ‘husband knowing wife’), she wasn’t pre-configured to sin like most of us are.

This is why Mary’s response to Gabriel is so important ‘And Mary said: Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it done to me according to thy word.’ (Luke 1:38).

So we, who do not need to be cleansed from sin by necessity (remembering that Mary did if she was to bare Christ) do receive the grace of Christ’s sacrifice in a similar fashion, though at a later time (baptism).

-Prophecy

 

[po18guy]

Question: Why doesn’t God prevent all of us from contracting the stain of original sin as He did with Mary?

This is a strictly rhetorical question, since God also gave the angels free will to decide once for all time Whom they would serve, and one third of them chose to rebel and join Satan. Their nature was eternally changed at the time of their decision. Adam and Eve had the same free will, and chose incorrectly, thus changing human nature for all time.

God frees us from the pain of original sin through our Baptism, but the stain of original sin remains - affecting us and providing our cross to bear in this life.

 

[mpartyka]

…she wasn’t pre-configured to sin like most of us are…So we, who do not need to be cleansed from sin by necessity (remembering that Mary did if she was to bare Christ)…

1. My question, really, is why, if it’s possible for God to prevent all of us from being pre-configured to sin, doesn’t He?
2. Why was it necessary for Mary to be completely free from original sin from her conception in order to bear Christ? After all, if baptism accomplishes for us what God’s intervention did for Mary, then it seems only necessary that she would have needed to be freed from original sin from, say, birth, not conception (i.e., before original sin had a chance to become actual sin).

–Mike

 

[po18guy]

1. My question, really, is why, if it’s possible for God to prevent all of us from being pre-configured to sin, doesn’t He?

We have no way of knowing, in this life, why He does as He does, other than it relates to His infinite love of us. We know only what He does and He is inscrutable in His thoughts and actions. He does know that, if we must struggle against sin, and choose to love Him, that our love of Him is genuine and genuinely desired.

1. Why was it necessary for Mary to be completely free from original sin from her conception in order to bear Christ? After all, if baptism accomplishes for us what God’s intervention did for Mary, then it seems only necessary that she would have needed to be freed from original sin from, say, birth, not conception (i.e., before original sin had a chance to become actual sin).–Mike

Our Baptism does not correspond to what God did for Mary, as mother of the Word incarnate. Sin was never a part of her (as it was not a part of Adam and Eve), whereas sin defines you and I. We were cleansed through baptism, but Mary was preserved from the need. She is a new garment which will never be soiled, while we were conceived and born dirty, but have been washed. This is the difference.

All of the Baptized are cleansed of original sin - but the stain of that sin remains. It is our fallen human nature, which leads us to imperfection. Since Jesus was, for nine months, inseparably joined with Mary, and since God is perfect and incapable of sin, it was revealed to man that the one who bore His human nature must also be preserved from sin as well as its resulting stain. God can choose to do anything, but He has chosen to act in a certain manner through history, thus revealing a tiny portion of His nature.

He can do anything. He chooses only to do certain things. He is mystery. Ours is to ponder this and love Him unreservedly.

 

[mpartyka]

He does know that, if we must struggle against sin, and choose to love Him, that our love of Him is genuine and genuinely desired.

So He doesn’t know that with regard to Mary’s love?

All of the Baptized are cleansed of original sin - but the stain of that sin remains.

What does the stain of original sin do to a person? Sounds like it must be pretty bad.

He can do anything. He chooses only to do certain things. He is mystery. Ours is to ponder this and love Him unreservedly.

I’ve heard it argued with regard to the Immaculate Conception, “It was fitting that God did it, and He had power to do it, therefore He did it.” Why is it not fitting that God do it for all of us?

–Mike

 

[po18guy]

So He doesn’t know that with regard to Mary’s love?

Of course, He certainly does. But, whereas our love is imperfect, Mary’s love was and is perfect.

What does the stain of original sin do to a person? Sounds like it must be pretty bad.

Not knowing you, I assume here that you adhere to the concept of original sin. You already know the stain: a disposition toward the seven capital sins - pride, avarice, gluttony, lust, sloth, envy and anger. If baptism truly left us completely pure, we should not then be subject to these sins. Yet, we are.

I’ve heard it argued with regard to the Immaculate Conception, “It was fitting that God did it, and He had power to do it, therefore He did it.” Why is it not fitting that God do it for all of us?–Mike

Again, isn’t this a rhetorical question, since we have no way of knowing God’s reasoning?

If God could “raise up sons of Abraham from these stones” (Matthew 3:9, Luke 3:8), why didn’t he? Some things we are not granted to know in this life.

 

[mpartyka]

If baptism truly left us completely pure, we should not then be subject to these sins. Yet, we are.

So Mary didn’t receive the same cleansing at her conception that we receive in baptism, because if she had, she would still have been predisposed to sin in the same way that we still are after baptism, correct? She was prevented from contracting original sin in the first place (and therefore never got stained by it), whereas we contract it and are then cleansed from it (but not from the stain of it), right?

–Mike

 

[po18guy]

So Mary didn’t receive the same cleansing at her conception that we receive in baptism, because if she had, she would still have been predisposed to sin in the same way that we still are after baptism, correct? She was prevented from contracting original sin in the first place (and therefore never got stained by it), whereas we contract it and are then cleansed from it (but not from the stain of it), right?

–Mike

Yes, absolutely right.

 

[mpartyka]

Since Jesus was, for nine months, inseparably joined with Mary, and since God is perfect and incapable of sin, it was revealed to man that the one who bore His human nature must also be preserved from sin as well as its resulting stain.

Does this mean that at least part of the stain of original sin resides in the body, not in the soul? Because it’s not like Jesus was linked soul-to-soul with Mary in the womb, just body-to-body – i.e., he “took flesh” from her; he didn’t “take soul” from her, since souls are directly created by God. Does any of the stain of original sin reside in the soul rather than in the body?

–Mike

 

[po18guy]

Does this mean that at least part of the stain of original sin resides in the body, not in the soul? Because it’s not like Jesus was linked soul-to-soul with Mary in the womb, just body-to-body – i.e., he “took flesh” from her; he didn’t “take soul” from her, since souls are directly created by God. Does any of the stain of original sin reside in the soul rather than in the body?

–Mike

I thank you for asking this, because I have had to consult the catechism (CCC) and scripture to delve into this concept. Yes. As long as we are alive, we are a fusion of body and soul, and both are corrupted. We share a common DNA ancestry with Adam and Eve and so we also share their sinful nature, just as Cain and Abel did - receiving that fallen nature from their parents. Sin resides also in the body, at least as to its effects: disease and death as well as decay, which were not a part of our original nature. Thus, how could Jesus be conceived of without sin, yet receive nutrients from a sinful mother without corrupting his human body? We were created as perfect spirits, but inherited sin through the body. Once we are separated from that body, and (please, God!) are in His presence, we will again be perfect - even though our sinful bodies decay in the ground. At the resurrection, we will receive glorified, sinless bodies, which will endure forever.

CCC400 The harmony in which they (Adam and Eve) had found themselves, thanks to original justice, is now destroyed: the control of the soul’s spiritual faculties over the body is shattered; the union of man and woman becomes subject to tensions, their relations henceforth marked by lust and domination.282 Harmony with creation is broken: visible creation has become alien and hostile to man.283 Because of man, creation is now subject “to its bondage to decay”.284 Finally, the consequence explicitly foretold for this disobedience will come true: man will “return to the ground”,285 for out of it he was taken. Death makes its entrance into human history.286

CCC401 After that first sin, the world is virtually inundated by sin There is Cain’s murder of his brother Abel and the universal corruption which follows in the wake of sin. Likewise, sin frequently manifests itself in the history of Israel, especially as infidelity to the God of the Covenant and as transgression of the Law of Moses. And even after Christ’s atonement, sin raises its head in countless ways among Christians.287 Scripture and the Church’s Tradition continually recall the presence and universality of sin in man’s history:

What Revelation makes known to us is confirmed by our own experience. For when man looks into his own heart he finds that he is drawn towards what is wrong and sunk in many evils which cannot come from his good creator. Often refusing to acknowledge God as his source, man has also upset the relationship which should link him to his last end, and at the same time he has broken the right order that should reign within himself as well as between himself and other men and all creatures.288
The consequences of Adam’s sin for humanity

CCC402 All men are implicated in Adam’s sin, as St. Paul affirms: “By one man’s disobedience many (that is, all men) were made sinners”: "sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned."289 The Apostle contrasts the universality of sin and death with the universality of salvation in Christ. "Then as one man’s trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one man’s act of righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all men."290
CCC403 Following St. Paul, the Church has always taught that the overwhelming misery which oppresses men and their inclination towards evil and death cannot be understood apart from their connection with Adam’s sin and the fact that he has transmitted to us a sin with which we are all born afflicted, a sin which is the “death of the soul”.291 Because of this certainty of faith, the Church baptizes for the remission of sins even tiny infants who have not committed personal sin.292

CCC404 How did the sin of Adam become the sin of all his descendants? The whole human race is in Adam “as one body of one man”.293 By this “unity of the human race” all men are implicated in Adam’s sin, as all are implicated in Christ’s justice. Still, the transmission of original sin is a mystery that we cannot fully understand. But we do know by Revelation that Adam had received original holiness and justice not for himself alone, but for all human nature. By yielding to the tempter, Adam and Eve committed a personal sin, but this sin affected the human nature that they would then transmit in a fallen state.294 It is a sin which will be transmitted by propagation to all mankind, that is, by the transmission of a human nature deprived of original holiness and justice. And that is why original sin is called “sin” only in an analogical sense: it is a sin “contracted” and not “committed” - a state and not an act.

Footnotes:
282 Cf. Gen 3:7-16.
283 Cf. Gen 3:17,19.
284 Rom 8:21.
285 Gen 3:19; cf. 2:17.
286 Cf. Rom 5:12.
287 Cf. Gen 4:3-15; 6:5,12; Rom 1:18-32; 1 Cor 1-6; Rev 2-3.
288 GS 13 § 1.
289 Rom 5:12,19.
290 Rom 5:18.
291 Cf. Council of Trent: DS 1512.
292 Cf. Council of Trent: DS 1514.
293 St. Thomas Aquinas, De Malo 4,1.
294 Cf. Council of Trent: DS 1511-1512

 

[neophyte]

1. Why was it necessary for Mary to be completely free from original sin from her conception in order to bear Christ?..

The teaching isn’t that it was necessary, but rather that it happened.
There are good discussions about how it was fitting, how it was a way to fulfill the charge to honor one’s father and mother, and the like. But the dogmatic teaching doesn’t really address any of that.

 

[mpartyka]

Thus, how could Jesus be conceived of without sin, yet receive nutrients from a sinful mother without corrupting his human body?

But doesn’t this just move the corruption one step back? I mean, how could Mary be conceived of without sin, yet receive nutrients from a sinful mother (Anna) without corrupting her human body? Did God have to continue to preserve Mary from contracting original sin the whole time she was in her mother’s womb? And if so, why didn’t he simply do this with Jesus in Mary’s womb, and never mind having Mary be immaculately conceived?

We were created as perfect spirits, but inherited sin through the body.

I think that’s why I’m having difficulty with the idea that God would prevent one person from contracting original sin but wouldn’t prevent everyone from contracting original sin. Why would God create all these perfect spirits just to see them corrupted through no direct fault of their own unless that was the way it had to be? I mean, with the exception of what the future would hold for her, it doesn’t seem like there was anything about Mary that made it possible for God to preserve her from original sin but impossible for Him to do the same for the rest of us. And if (1) God hates it when human beings sin; (2) original sin inclines human beings to sin; and (3) it’s entirely possible for God to prevent all human beings from contracting original sin, then why wouldn’t he prevent all human beings from contracting original sin? Wouldn’t a world in which human babies are born fresh and clean like Adam and Eve (and Mary) be more pleasing to God (and to the rest of us) than one in which human babies are corrupted and stained with sin from the get-go?

–Mike

 

[fhansen]

What does the stain of original sin do to a person? Sounds like it must be pretty bad.

It places them in a mistrustful, rebellious, exiled state in relation to God, i.e. turned away from Him

I’ve heard it argued with regard to the Immaculate Conception, “It was fitting that God did it, and He had power to do it, therefore He did it.” Why is it not fitting that God do it for all of us?

–Mike

Because Mary is part of Gods plan of salvation. We’re all given a fair shake-a measure of grace-she’s just given more, but for all of our benefit.

 

[po18guy]

But doesn’t this just move the corruption one step back? I mean, how could Mary be conceived of without sin, yet receive nutrients from a sinful mother (Anna) without corrupting her human body? Did God have to continue to preserve Mary from contracting original sin the whole time she was in her mother’s womb? And if so, why didn’t he simply do this with Jesus in Mary’s womb, and never mind having Mary be immaculately conceived?

Remember that Mary is more than just a womb. She is our Lord’s earthly mother. She raised Him to adulthood and, for 30 years, He was obedient to her (Luke 2:41-51). Ever after, she was obedient to Him, as is proper. God will not obey sin.

Mary is not just another woman. She was an integral part of His plan from the beginning. She is estimated to have been only 15 years of age at the time of Christ’s conception. What on earth could this unknown teenager have accomplished in her short and anonymous life to merit being the mother of Jesus? Thus, she was created for that very purpose. When you build something for a specific purpose, certain elements are designed in, not added on later. Thus, sinlessness begat sinlessness by the power of the Holy Spirit. There is a perfect symmetry here between condemnation and redemption: God created two perfect humans in Adam and Eve. Through their sin, mankind fell from grace for all time. In God’s plan of redemption, He also created two human natures who were without sin: Jesus and Mary. Through them, mankind was restored to grace. Adam is credited with man’s fall, even though Eve was tempted and ate first. Jesus is credited with man’s redemption, even though Mary had to be born and say yes to Gabriel first.
Just as it takes two to tango, it takes two to un-tango.

I am speaking of our Lord only in His human nature here. He is divine, while Mary is a creation, like you and I, but preserved from sin by God. Clean blood from a clean cup. Our God can certainly do anything and everything He wants. However, much of what He does He restricts in its nature or effect, since it serves as a lesson for mankind. Even if He re-made man in a perfect image, we retain free will, and would only fall once again. It is apparent, from what He has done, that it is better to work around our fallen nature than to change the rules in the middle of the game.

I think that’s why I’m having difficulty with the idea that God would prevent one person from contracting original sin but wouldn’t prevent everyone from contracting original sin. Why would God create all these perfect spirits just to see them corrupted through no direct fault of their own unless that was the way it had to be? I mean, with the exception of what the future would hold for her, it doesn’t seem like there was anything about Mary that made it possible for God to preserve her from original sin but impossible for Him to do the same for the rest of us. And if (1) God hates it when human beings sin; (2) original sin inclines human beings to sin; and (3) it’s entirely possible for God to prevent all human beings from contracting original sin, then why wouldn’t he prevent all human beings from contracting original sin? Wouldn’t a world in which human babies are born fresh and clean like Adam and Eve (and Mary) be more pleasing to God (and to the rest of us) than one in which human babies are corrupted and stained with sin from the get-go?

–Mike

You ask very valid questions. God is infinite. He creates everything from nothing. God’s unfathomable love of us is the reason for all that He does. Some of it is easily seen as love, and some not - such as His discipline and justice. Much of what we all ponder is simply the mystery of God. Man cannot and will not ever know the complexity and inscrutability of God. He is greater and infinitely complex, while we are lesser and simpler. We must simply trust that He has chosen, for His own perfect reasons, to do things a certain way. A tiny part of what He has done has also been revealed to man. We know only that what God does is perfect, and it is due to our own imperfection that we have such difficulty understanding Him.

 

[Matorin]

The question was not answered. Please explain why the same standard is not applied, I’m very interested to know. If Jesus required his mother to be free from sin, and let us be straight here Jesus existed before Mary, he is the Divine Word who has existed eternally with God since before time was created, and his existence is not dependent upon Mary. It is fruitless mind games to ask whether or not Jesus would have been born into a human body if Mary had refused, she didn’t so we don’t need to open that can of worms needlessly. I know I’m going to get lambasted here, but you give Mary too much credit. She is created, she is the recipient, she is passive. If an Angel says “You will be with child and give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever; his kingdom will never end,” you don’t have a lot of options. If God says it is going to happen it will happen. Take a look at Judge 6 for a quick reference. The power was not with Mary’s choice. When a king gives a command and the servant says “It will be done as you wish” the servant isn’t taking authority upon himself and saying “Okay I’ll do what you say” the servant has no choice.

Does this diminish her acceptance? No, her heart was in the right place (seemingly from her words) and God blessed her. From that passage getting something like this: http://www.stalphonsusbalt.org/stamother.htm is completely insane.

Ack sorry for the tangent. Question: Did Jesus need his mother to be sinless in order to be sinless himself? Or is the sin passed down through men and since there was no man only the Holy Spirit, Mary did not need to be sinless?

Assuming she was sinless at the time of the Angel’s visit, why is it necessary to say she was born this way? And why is it necessary to say she was conceived this way?

Please answer all 4 questions.

 

[po18guy]

If God says it is going to happen it will happen. Take a look at Judge 6 for a quick reference. The power was not with Mary’s choice. When a king gives a command and the servant says “It will be done as you wish” the servant isn’t taking authority upon himself and saying “Okay I’ll do what you say” the servant has no choice.

First: No shotgun attacks. One question at a time. OK? You seem to be saying that man does not have free will. Is this correct?