Could Mary have sinned?

[little2add]

 Of course, but she chose not to

(Free will,  but that's another subject )

 

Edited December 21, 2015 by little2add

[Nihil Obstat]

1 hour ago, little2add said:

 Of course, but she chose not to

(Free will,  but that's another subject )

 

Donny, you are out of your element.

[Cam42]

It's time to weigh in Nihil Obstat.  What are your thoughts on the matter?    And go!

[Nihil Obstat]

I think the issue here is the false understanding of free will requiring or somehow implying ability to sin. The ability to sin is a defect of free will, not a constitutive element. The first sin introduced the 'ability' to sin, which actually decreased and harmed our free will. To be able to sin is to be threatened by slavery. Mary's preservation from sin is truer freedom than our own.

Mary's fiat was, I hasten to remind this thread, possible through grace. And only grace. Her fiat through grace in turn freed her in a irrevocable way from the bondage of sin. And the grace required for her fiat was likewise predestined by God's active Will.

[Kevin]

7 hours ago, Nihil Obstat said:

The first sin introduced the 'ability' to sin

Are you serious? You claim to have some kind of elevated understanding, but you seemed to lack a basic grasp of causality.

[little2add]

11 hours ago, Nihil Obstat said:

Donny, you are out of your element.

  Well aren't you special 

 A little pompous but   Special 

[Nihil Obstat]

3 hours ago, Kevin said:

Are you serious? You claim to have some kind of elevated understanding, but you seemed to lack a basic grasp of causality.

[Anomaly]

11 hours ago, Nihil Obstat said:

I think the issue here is the false understanding of free will requiring or somehow implying ability to sin. The ability to sin is a defect of free will, not a constitutive element. The first sin introduced the 'ability' to sin, which actually decreased and harmed our free will. To be able to sin is to be threatened by slavery. Mary's preservation from sin is truer freedom than our own.

Mary's fiat was, I hasten to remind this thread, possible through grace. And only grace. Her fiat through grace in turn freed her in a irrevocable way from the bondage of sin. And the grace required for her fiat was likewise predestined by God's active Will.

Logically, the ability to sin had to exist before the first sin, otherwise there would not have been the First Sin (Neither Adam's or Lucifer's).   I think that is what was being pointed out. 

[Nihil Obstat]

5 minutes ago, Anomaly said:

Logically, the ability to sin had to exist before the first sin, otherwise there would not have been the First Sin (Neither Adam's or Lucifer's).   I think that is what was being pointed out. 

I phrased it a bit clumsily (at the dinner table for a Christmas dinner), but I stand behind the concept I was getting at. Which is essentially the introduction of concupiscence. Adam and Eve's choice to sin was fully conscious, fully willful, and made with perfect understanding. That is why the rebellion of the angels was irrevocable, and that is why Adam's sin introduced such a powerful break between humanity and the divine. Mary's fiat is in every respect the opposing answer to Adam's sin. In Adam's sin the unspoiled, justified man was debased and made lowly. In Mary's fiat, broken mankind was raised to the divine through the merits of Christ and - through grace - Mary's perfect cooperation.

[Anomaly]

So you are saying Adam and Eve and Lucifer chose to sin with full knowledge of the consequences of their acts?

[Nihil Obstat]

6 minutes ago, Anomaly said:

So you are saying Adam and Eve and Lucifer chose to sin with full knowledge of the consequences of their acts?

I was not thinking about consequences. I will reserve judgement for now. But full knowledge of the nature and gravity of their acts, absolutely. And for a being from their perspective, the consequences would rightfully be seen as secondary anyway. The true horror of Satan's non serviam and Adam's eating of the fruit was their refusal to honour God according to His glory.

[Anomaly]

Why didn't Gid provide sufficient grace to Adam and Eve so they could have free will and not sin?

[Nihil Obstat]

I do not know. I am sure @Cam42 can address that.

[Anomaly]

17 minutes ago, Nihil Obstat said:

I do not know. I am sure @Cam42 can address that.

Lol.  Exactly the root of the quetstion if Mary had ability to sin and what free will means.  Whether Mary sinned or not or was protected from sin for a period of time or if it was a unique reward for willful assent has to be understood in context.  

Edited December 21, 2015 by Anomaly

[Nihil Obstat]

22 minutes ago, Anomaly said:

Lol.  Exactly the root of the quetstion if Mary had ability to sin and what free will means.  Whether Mary sinned or not or was protected from sin for a period of time or if it was a unique reward for willful assent has to be understood in context.  

Of course it was a reward - but it was a reward for a fiat that, in an important sense, occurs outside of time, and also due to gratuitous grace. Grace that could only have been offered to the Mother of God. It is not like we are talking about some random person unrelated to our salvation history - Mary's immaculacy could not have been offered to anybody but the Mother of God.

[Cam42]

38 minutes ago, Anomaly said:

Lol.  Exactly the root of the quetstion if Mary had ability to sin and what free will means.  Whether Mary sinned or not or was protected from sin for a period of time or if it was a unique reward for willful assent has to be understood in context.  

No, Mary did not have the ability to sin.  Her will was perfected at her conception.  She was excluded from original sin, therefore she did not know what sin was on a metaphysical or epistemological level.  Sin was completely foreign to her nature.  Sure, she saw sin all around her, but because she was perfected in her will, she was never put in a near occasion to sin.

This is the miracle of the Immaculate Conception and the further miracle of her impeccability.

[Anomaly]

Why not give the grace of freedom from sin in the first place and avoided all this spiritual torment?

[Cam42]

1 hour ago, Anomaly said:

Why didn't Gid provide sufficient grace to Adam and Eve so they could have free will and not sin?

Free will is not bound to sin.  God did provide sufficient grace to Adam and Eve.  But they gave into temptation.  They were not impeccable.  We have this flawed notion that free will and sin are two sides of the same coin.  They are not.  Sin is a defect of free will, not an attribute.  God did not create any man to sin.  God did not create sin, itself.

True freedom lies in the ability to live in God's grace without succumbing to sin.

1 minute ago, Anomaly said:

Why not give the grace of freedom from sin in the first place and avoided all this spiritual torment?

He did.  God's commandment to Adam was what?  It was to know Him, which he did.  It was to love Him, which he did.  It was to serve Him, which he did not do (Adam ate of the fruit, of which he was forbidden to eat).  God's plan was never for Adam and Eve to sin.  But once they did, He brought about the salvation of man through the Incarnation.  Because the Second Person of the Trinity was to become fully human, He had to pass through a human vessel.  There is no way that God could pass through a sinful vessel and remain sinless.  Therefore, God excluded Mary at her conception from original sin.  This didn't mean that she didn't share in the redemption of Christ, but rather that she was redeemed at the moment of he conception, not her death, as all other men were and are.  Mary lived an impeccable life, because she was the Theotokos.  She had to be spotless in order to fulfill that mission.  She gave her fiat as a confirmation of what was already true.

[Kevin]

2 hours ago, Nihil Obstat said:

Again, your charity and maturity never cease to amaze. And I guess pointing out a basic flaw in logic is "salty"

But anyway, it actually does seem the Church teaches that Mary was impeccable, according to Canon 23 of Trent---i.e. her free will was held down by Calvinist irresistible grace her whole life like a robot with a "do not sin" protocol. Yet another reason to consider converting to the Orthodox or any other church.

[Anomaly]

15 minutes ago, Cam42 said:

Free will is not bound to sin.  God did provide sufficient grace to Adam and Eve.  But they gave into temptation.  They were not impeccable.  We have this flawed notion that free will and sin are two sides of the same coin.  They are not.  Sin is a defect of free will, not an attribute.  God did not create any man to sin.  God did not create sin, itself.

True freedom lies in the ability to live in God's grace without succumbing to sin.

He did.  God's commandment to Adam was what?  It was to know Him, which he did.  It was to love Him, which he did.  It was to serve Him, which he did not do (Adam ate of the fruit, of which he was forbidden to eat).  God's plan was never for Adam and Eve to sin.  But once they did, He brought about the salvation of man through the Incarnation.  Because the Second Person of the Trinity was to become fully human, He had to pass through a human vessel.  There is no way that God could pass through a sinful vessel and remain sinless.  Therefore, God excluded Mary at her conception from original sin.  This didn't mean that she didn't share in the redemption of Christ, but rather that she was redeemed at the moment of he conception, not her death, as all other men were and are.  Mary lived an impeccable life, because she was the Theotokos.  She had to be spotless in order to fulfill that mission.  She gave her fiat as a confirmation of what was already true.

You're avoiding the simple point with verbosity.  If Mary could have the grace to not sin, then it is apparent that it could be given.   Why not make angels and creation and humans with sufficient grace to be incapable of sin in the first place? 

Edited December 21, 2015 by Anomaly