Why do Catholic believe that Mary is sinless?

  • Thread starter Thread starter awfulthings9
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
Oren:
I had a protestant say that since John the Baptist’s Father and others were ‘filled with the Holy Spirit’ then that must mean they were sinless too. Since Mary is filled with grace and sinless. How would you counter that argument?
Click to expand...
There is nothing wrong with believing others have also been sinless by virtue of God’s grace. For example, St. John the Baptist is also considered sinless by tradition and private revelation.

But not all who have been given grace have stayed in it (e.g. Adam and Eve, baptised infants), and also, there are other cases in scripture (King Saul, Caiphas, etc.).

Finally, being filled with the Holy Spirit is not the same as being addressed as “full of grace” by an angel. Angels don’t greet people like that, with such honor, because normally angels have much more dignity and purity than we do. But in this case, the angel renders her honor because of that and also that the Lord is with her.

hurst
 
Ave Maria!:
First of all I accepted the DOGMA (a decree/teaching of the faith that must be believed) of the Immaculate Conception on faith.

But it all makes perfect sense, really. I know about Romans 2:23 that the protestants use our of context to show that ALL have sinned. Has a newly baptised infant sinned? No. There are instances in Scripture where is says something like ALL came…did that mean every single person in town came? No one was homebound, etc. So that one Pauline verse does not clinch any argument for me.

And we know from the reading of the Old Testament just how particular God was in the construction of the Ark and of the Temple, etc. Would He have been less choosy in the design of the Ark of the New Testament which is the Second Person of the most Blessed Trinity, Christ?

We know Mary proclaims her joy in God her Savior? Yes, He was her Savior but she was saved beforehand. Could not God do that? Of course! Our Lady was never under satan’s dominion! In Genesis we read about the emnity of the devil and THE woman.
What woman never succumbed to satan’s wiles? Only Mary and so by her Seed, the devil is crushed. We see Mary standing on the globe crushing a snake don’t we?

If someone were to fall into a pit and another pulls them out, that one who pulls them out saves them, right? Well suppose that someone sees someone else heading for the pit and stops them from falling in; are they not still a savior? Sure. By a one singular special privilege, Our Lady was saved even from the stain of original sin. This is why she was also assumed body and soul into heaven for this beloved would not know decay.

Our Lady! Our Mother! Conceived without sin! She trembled slightly as she revealed herself to St. Bernadetter, “I am the Immaculate Conception.” All glory be to God!
Ave Maria!
Click to expand...
I find this difficult because it undermines Jesus’ humanity.
If the Word became flesh and dwelt among us then it is not so intimate and special if his humanity was not like ours.
Being of the Holy Spirit is one thing but having a perfect mother is really stacking the deck. It sounds awfully close to gnosticism ( they taught Jesus was just Spirit and not fully incarnated or something of the sort.)
Don’t be offended- I’m in this apologetics forum because I’m having real sincere questions.
Al
 
Just something to think about with regards to infinite regression. Is it not possible that God sanctified St. Anne after she was born but before she concieved Mary? I don’t know alot about these things and never really investigated this but it seems plausible since he did sanctify Jeremiah and St. John in the womb. This would negate the need for infinite regression.

While I’m at it I believe that since Mary was truly born without sin she was never inflicted with sickness which as I understand it is a result of the first sin.
 
40.png
all4one:
I find this difficult because it undermines Jesus’ humanity.
If the Word became flesh and dwelt among us then it is not so intimate and special if his humanity was not like ours.
Being of the Holy Spirit is one thing but having a perfect mother is really stacking the deck. It sounds awfully close to gnosticism ( they taught Jesus was just Spirit and not fully incarnated or something of the sort.)
Don’t be offended- I’m in this apologetics forum because I’m having real sincere questions.
Al
Click to expand...
Al, I think it’s been mentioned either on this thread or another that Jesus Christ in His humanity and His mother are the only humans fully so because sin is a deformation of what humanity is supposed to be. IOW, to prepare humanity for its true reformation through the life, death and resurrection of the God-Man Mary (from her mother’s womb) is by God’s prediliction the first of those who will be true images of what Christ has come to accomplish in each of us.
 
Luke 1:42 parallels 2 Samuel 6:15, again illustrating that Mary is the Ark of the New Covenant, recalling the Ark of the Old Covenant. “Elizabeth, filed with the Holy Spirit, cried out in a loud voice and said, 'Most blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb. (Lk 1:42)” "Then David, girt with a linen apron, came dancing before the Lord with abandon as he and all the Israelites were bringing up the ark of the Lord with shouts of joy and to the sound of the horn.

Luke 1:43 parallels 2 Samuel 6:9, illustrating the same point. "And how does this happen to me that the mother of my Lord should come to me? (Lk 1:43). "David feared the Lord that day and said, "How can the ark of the Lord come to me? (2 Sam 6:9).

Luke 1:44 “For at that moment the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the infant in my womb leaped for joy,” parallels 2 Samuel 6:14-16, “Then David, girt with a linen apron, came dancing before the Lord with abandon, and he and all the Israelites were bringing up the Ark of the Lord with shouts of joy and to the sound of the horn. As the ark of the Lord was entering the City of David, Saul’s daughter Michal looked down through the window and saw kind david leaping and dancing before the Lord …,” illustrating, again that Mary, Ark of the New Covenant, was just as revered as the Ark of the Old Covenant by the joy expressed by the infant John the Baptist and Elizabeth.

I hope I’ve shown that Mary is scripturally proven to be the Ark of the New Covenant. This key point is important in proving her sanctity, her sinlessness. The Ark of Old was holy ground, and so is the New Ark, Mary. The Ark of Old remained sanctified throughout its existence—the same with the New Ark. The Ark of Old was sanctified by God’s real presence between the Cheribum and the Shekkiniah (sp) cloud. The Ark of the New Covenant was sanctified at the moment of her Immaculate Conception, that is, being conceived free from the stain of Original sin in light of the merits of her son, Jesus Christ. God, in his Providence, before Jesus’s conception, before Mary’s conception, knew that Jesus Christ would fulfill the role of Messiah and would Redeem all Mankind through His infinite meritorious suffering as Son of God, so in light of this foreknowledge, He sanctified Mary, too, at the moment of her Immaculate conception, so as to be a worthy dwelling place for the Most High God-Man.

Mary remained free of sin her whole life, also as a singular privilege, as she was to be the mother and caretaker of the Most High. Also, the sinless flesh of Mary would form the sinless flesh of Christ, so it was necessary that she be sinless. Lacking original sin, she did not inherit concupiescence, the tendency to sin which is inherited along with Original Sin, so she remained sinless. A key point to remember is that Mary had a free will and she chose not to sin, but the reason was because of the foreseen merits of her Son. She was given graces beyond imagining, graces probably greater than both that of Adam and Eve combined. She was, and is, a very extraordinary woman and mother.

On the same note, Joseph was also sanctified at some point so as to also be a worthy foster father of Jesus, though not in the same manner as Mary. He had Original Sin, but was purified in some manner, through canonical scripture doesn’t mention this. One of my early catechists (a priest) taught me this idea. We got the info on Joseph out of an old Catholic Encyclopedia, and I (think) their source was an old Apocryphal text.

BTW … (John the Baptist was sanctified in the womb upon contact with Mary bearing the preborn infant Christ. The moment the preborn John the Baptist leapt in the womb of Elizabeth during the Visitation is commonly held to be the moment of John’s sanctification. Perhaps St. Joseph was sanctified in a similar manner—not in the womb, per se, but maybe upon contact with the pregnant Mary, or maybe he was sanctified after believing and obeying what the Holy Spirit said to him regarding Mary and her unborn child?? There would be no need for an Immaculate conception of Joseph because, well, Joseph doesn’t have a womb that needs sanctification. At no time would Jesus Christ be living inside the body of Joseph. HA! This is just my best guess in the matter of the sanctification of Joseph).

Anyway, I hope this helps you in your quest for truth. God Bless.
 
Someone else mentioned this … Adam and Eve before the fall were perfect humans. They fell. So we had to be redeemed in a parallel manner, as OT and NT refect one another. In the beginning, perfect Woman was extracted from the flesh of the perfect Man, Eve from Adam. In the end, perfect Man was extracted from the flesh of the perfect Woman, Jesus from Mary. See how the texts reflect one another? So beautiful!

Mary and Jesus are, actually, the most “human” humans, or the most “normal” humans that ever existed. We were meant, originally, to be like them, sinless loving creatures that knew, loved and served God selflessly.

Someone mentioned that the sinlessness of Christ and Mary made them doubt Christ’s role of redeemer because Christ and Mary weren’t like us sinners. Here’s my answer to this:

In order to redeem Man, it took a New Adam — a perfect Man to redeem fallen Man. The fact that Christ and Mary were sinless does not detract from Christ’s role as Redeemer. It would’ve been impossible for someone born with original sin to be the Messiah. It took someone of infinite quality and perfection to serve as the Messiah, and because only God is infinite, that Person had to be both Man and God. Jesus is 100% God and 100% Man united hypostatically. Christ had two wills: a human will and a divine will.

The human will is what caused the original fall. The human will of Adam chose to eat the forbidden fruit in disobedience to the Divine Will of God, so a human will had to be pinned to a cross at the orders of the Divine Will in order to redeem mankind. Because these two wills were united hypostatically in Christ, the human will was-- sort of–grafted onto the Divine Will, so that anything that Jesus Christ did as Man He also did as God, and so anything He did in his Human life had an infinite quality to it. At Calvary, the Human Will was fused with the Cross, and Christ’s infinite suffering satisfied the Father as the most perfect sacrifice and blew open the Gates of Heaven. Allelujah!!! Praise God!

God Bless.
 
P.S.

I mentioned Christ’s Immaculate conception. I meant this as a figure of speech only, for Christ’s conception–free of Original Sin–took place as a result of Mary’s Immaculate Conception. Sinless flesh from sinless flesh.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top