Could Mary have sinned?

[jmjtina]

Our Lady had free will. And her free will and her entire being was full of grace.

She couldn't have sinned because her free will was perfectly formed and she was full of grace thus being able to do God's Will perfectly.

[ofpheritup]

[quote name='hot stuff' date='Oct 29 2005, 07:15 PM']School is in session.
[right][snapback]773672[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

DEFINIITELY...
Since we are in "school." I still have an opinion and a question.

The "choice Mary made at her conception."
Is it just me or does anyone else disagree.

I distinctly do not remember my own conception and Mary being human I don't think she would remember her's either. So how could she or anyone else for that matter have an awareness to make a decision?

ps. I had time to think (never a good sign)

If Mary said yes at her conception then why did God send the Angel Gabriel to her to ask her to be the Mother of Jesus. Going with the present mind set shouldn't that have "already been take care of?"

Edited October 30, 2005 by ofpheritup

[jmjtina]

how is it that we are thinking of the brain and human awareness? Our not our souls a different matter? How is it that when we die, even though we are dead, etc, God is able to grant us mercy in a split second (we are free to accept or not accept) when reality tells us that a decision like that takes time to contemplate etc (and probably a counselor) ?

Why are thinking of the realms of this world? Did God not say in scripture that He knew us before we were born? That even though our mothers would forget us, He would not?

How are we to know our mother forgot us? How is he to know us if we aren't even at the "age of reason" to know someone?

I think we are thinking the way of man, and not the way of God. I can agree that Our Lady, the Mother of God made her decision at conception. Bottom line is, she had perfect free will and was thus able to do God's will perfectly.

[DancesforLove]

Ohhhh NO I voted wrong lol.

Yes Mary could have sinned, everyone can sin.

[jmjtina]

as was previously stated:

Could Mary sin? No. She was the Mother of God, she carried the divine Jesus in her womb! It would have been against her character. [b]Was she capable?[/b] Yes, insofar as she was a human, however her choices would always lead to the good, so she would not sin.

[quote]Hippolytus

"[T]o all generations they [the prophets] have pictured forth the grandest subjects for contemplation and for action. Thus, too, they preached of the advent of God in the flesh to the world, his advent [b]by the spotless and God-bearing (theotokos) Mary[/b] in the way of birth and growth, and the manner of his life and conversation with men, and his manifestation by baptism, and the new birth that was to be to all men, and the regeneration by the laver [of baptism]" (Discourse on the End of the World 1 [A.D. 217]). [/quote]


good question ofpheritup. You know what comes to my mind? The fulfillment of scripture. It had to be done to fulfill the prophecy. Also, it's the same as asking as to why did Jesus have to say, "Let your Will not mine be done"? He knew he had to die and it was already "taken care". Why did He say that? Is that the human aspect of it? Verification? Like when we recite our baptimal vows, why do we say it every Easter? Isn't it already taken care of the first time we said it? Or when we say I love you to our beloved? Shouldn't they know the answer to that? Or when we say "Amen" everytime we go to recieve Jesus in the Eucharist, wasn't that already "taken care of" at our First communion?

But we say it over and over again......let me think about this some more!

Edited October 30, 2005 by jmjtina

[Cam42]

[quote name='ofpheritup' date='Oct 30 2005, 02:35 AM']DEFINIITELY...
Since we are in "school."  I still have an opinion and a question.

The "choice Mary made at her conception."
Is it just me or does anyone else disagree.

I distinctly do not remember my own conception and Mary being human I don't think she would remember her's either. So how could she or anyone else for that matter have an awareness to make a decision?

ps.  I had time to think (never a good sign)

If Mary said yes at her conception then why did God send the Angel Gabriel to her to ask her to be the Mother of Jesus. Going  with the present mind set shouldn't that have "already been take care of?"
[right][snapback]773870[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I actually spoke to this directly, for you. I know that there was a lot of posting last night and it may have been overlooked in all of the rhetoric.

However, here is what I said, several posts ago:

[quote name='Cam42' date=' Yesterday, 07:47 PM'][b]The term conception does not mean the active or generative conception by her parents. Her body was formed in the womb of the mother, and the father had the usual share in its formation. [i][u]The question does not concern the immaculateness of the generative activity of her parents.[/u][/i][/b] Neither does it concern the passive conception absolutely and simply (conceptio seminis carnis, inchoata), which, according to the order of nature, precedes the infusion of the rational soul. [b]The person is truly conceived when the soul is created and infused into the body. [u]Mary was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin at the first moment of her animation, and sanctifying grace was given to her before sin could have taken effect in her soul.[/u][/b][/quote]

We are not talking about the biological aspect of this. It has no bearing in dogmatic theology. What we are talking about is the moment when the soul is created and infused into the body. It is a simultaneous event, however, it is a distinct event. So, while the nuance is subtle, the nuance is clear. We are not talking about the carnal conception, but the animative conception. Remember, we as humans only pro-create. We do not do the creating. We participate in the creation the human person, but it is the infusion of the soul that makes the human special in the eyes of God. And it was at that moment, simultaneous with the pro-creative act of Mary's parents, but different, that she was preserved from original sin.

[jmjtina]

[quote]We are not talking about the biological aspect of this. It has no bearing in dogmatic theology. What we are talking about is the moment when the soul is created and infused into the body. It is a simultaneous event, however, it is a distinct event. So, while the nuance is subtle, the nuance is clear. We are not talking about the carnal conception, but the animative conception. Remember, we as humans only pro-create. We do not do the creating. We participate in the creation the human person, but it is the infusion of the soul that makes the human special in the eyes of God. And it was at that moment, simultaneous with the pro-creative act of Mary's parents, but different, that she was preserved from original sin.[/quote]



well there ya go.

sometimes when I should sleep on it, I don't. Thanks Cam. found it again on pg. 2. See what happens when I re-read and I'm awake? :

[qfnol31]

Now that that's all been cleared up, might I mention it sounded like she couldn't have sinned because she was Theotokos whereas I think it would be more accurate to say we know she didn't sin for that reason? The first way appears to deny her capacity to sin...

[Thy Geekdom Come]

None of you make any sense and are only confusing me more.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote]Mary is not Eve. Mary is the NEW Eve.[/quote]

I never said she was. What I meant is that Eve was able to accept all God's grace the same way, and yet, she could change her mind (and did). It follows that Mary had the capacity to change her mind as well.

I keep asking (repeatedly) if you are trying to say that Mary couldn't sin not because she lacked the capacity, but because she simply didn't. As I understand it, it would go like this:

God foresaw that Mary would not reject His graces.

Therefore, God predestined Mary to be the Mother of Christ.

Therefore, He made her immaculate from the point of Conception, preserving her from every stain of original sin.

Thus, she couldn't sin...not because of her immaculate nature, but rather, that her immaculate nature was granted to her because she wouldn't sin, and thus, since this immaculate nature filled her with the grace necessary to follow God perfectly (if she cooperated), she "couldn't" sin...not because she was incapable, but because God knew that it would never be the case that she would sin, that is, that the situation in which Mary would sin would never occur, and therefore, that she couldn't sin. However, such a situation *could* occur, but it never would, and thus, would never be actualized and thus, to all-knowing God, couldn't exist.

The problem I have is that you seem to keep saying:

God made Mary the Immaculate Conception.

Therefore, that grace kept her from sinning.

She accepted that grace at the moment of conception (which I still don't get, since it would require an act of the will), and kept accepting it, but could never reject it.

This seems inconsistent with Eve's case...she accepted her nature...kept accepting it...and then rejected it. It seems impossible and just plain wrong to say that Mary couldn't reject it later. Granted, she didn't, but to say that she didn't have the ability must be wrong.

Meanwhile, I'm tired of having it implied that I'm a heretic...if the Church wants people to believe, and those people are more than willing to believe, it would be nice if the Church would articulate a little more what they were supposed to believe. I can't just take a Church Scholar's word for it that its a defined teaching (and if it is, then I submit, but how can I know that it really is, especially when it seems so ridiculous and no one will explain it to me?)

[Cam42]

[quote name='Raphael' date='Oct 30 2005, 02:38 PM']None of you make any sense and are only confusing me more.
[right][snapback]774135[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

No one said that dogmatic theology was easy to understand. I am sorry that you don't understand what is being said. However, what I am saying, tina is supporting and Al and qfnol have seen cannot be stated any clearer.

I honestly don't know how to put it any clearer. Mary could not sin, becuase if she had, she would not be capable of being the Mother of God, PRECISELY because Christ had to come from a perfect human.

Had Mary sinned, God would have chosen another. Was Mary capable of sinning, yes, because she was human. But she could not, because she perfectly participated in the salvific action of God.

Mary's action was perfected at the moment of her conception. That is why it is the Immaculate Conception. Had her action been anything other, then she would not have been Immaculate.

As I have said about a million times, Mary could not sin. The reason she could not have sinned? Because she participated perfectly in the Incarnation. She gave Christ his human nature. Had her nature not been perfect as well, Christ would not have been perfect. So, could she have sinned? No. She had a choice, and she chose the good. This freedom to choose the good is not a privation of the ability to sin, but rather the perfection of the grace which God bestowed upon her at the moment of Conception. God exlcuded Original Sin from her, so that she could act perfectly, in the redemptive mission of Christ.

Does that mean that somehow she was incapable of sinning? No, not at all, but that is a totally different question, from a philosophical and theological point of view.

My position is supported by Popes, Fathers and Doctors of the Church. I have quoted them, I have also quoted Cardinal Newman.....I suppose that I could and will now quote Aquinas:

[quote name='Summa Theologica III:27:3']The Holy Ghost effected a twofold purification in the Blessed Virgin. The first was, as it were, preparatory to Christ's conception: which did not cleanse her from the stain of sin or fomes, but rather gave her mind a unity of purpose and disengaged it from a multiplicity of things (Cf. Dionysius, Div. Nom. iv), since even the angels are said to be purified, in whom there is no stain, as Dionysius says (Eccl. Hier. vi). The second purification effected in her by the Holy Ghost was by means of the conception of Christ which was the operation of the Holy Ghost. And in respect of this, it may be said that He purified her entirely from the fomes.[/quote]

[quote name='Summa Theologica III:27:4']God so prepares and endows those, whom He chooses for some particular office, that they are rendered capable of fulfilling it, according to 2 Cor. 3:6: "(Who) hath made us fit ministers of the New Testament." Now the Blessed Virgin was chosen by God to be His Mother. Therefore there can be no doubt that God, by His grace, made her worthy of that office, according to the words spoken to her by the angel (Lk. 1:30,31): "Thou hast found grace with God: behold thou shalt conceive," etc. But she would not have been worthy to be the Mother of God, if she had ever sinned. First, because the honor of the parents reflects on the child, according to Prov. 17:6: "The glory of children are their fathers": and consequently, on the other hand, the Mother's shame would have reflected on her Son. Secondly, because of the singular affinity between her and Christ, who took flesh from her: and it is written (2 Cor. 6:15): "What concord hath Christ with Belial?" Thirdly, because of the singular manner in which the Son of God, who is the "Divine Wisdom" (1 Cor. 1:24) dwelt in her, not only in her soul but in her womb. And it is written (Wis. 1:4): "Wisdom will not enter into a malicious soul, nor dwell in a body subject to sins."

We must therefore confess simply that the Blessed Virgin committed no actual sin, neither mortal nor venial; so that what is written (Cant 4:7) is fulfilled: "Thou art all fair, O my love, and there is not a spot in thee," etc.[/quote]

[quote name='Summa Theologica III:27:5']In natural things at first there is perfection of disposition, for instance when matter is perfectly disposed for the form. Secondly, there is the perfection of the form; and this is the more excellent, for the heat that proceeds from the form of fire is more perfect than that which disposed to the form of fire. Thirdly, there is the perfection of the end: for instance when fire has its qualities in the most perfect degree, having mounted to its own place.

In like manner there was a threefold perfection of grace in the Blessed Virgin. The first was a kind of disposition, by which she was made worthy to be the mother of Christ: and this was the perfection of her sanctification. The second perfection of grace in the Blessed Virgin was through the presence of the Son of God Incarnate in her womb. The third perfection of the end is that which she has in glory.

That the second perfection excels the first, and the third the second, appears (1) from the point of view of deliverance from evil. For at first in her sanctification she was delivered from original sin: afterwards, in the conception of the Son of God, she was entirely cleansed from the fomes: lastly, in her glorification she was also delivered from all affliction whatever. It appears (2) from the point of view of ordering to good. For at first in her sanctification she received grace inclining her to good: in the conception of the Son of God she received consummate grace confirming her in good; and in her glorification her grace was further consummated so as to perfect her in the enjoyment of all good.[/quote]

And finally;

[quote name='Summa Theologica III:27:5']In every genus, the nearer a thing is to the principle, the greater the part which it has in the effect of that principle, whence Dionysius says (Coel. Hier. iv) that angels, being nearer to God, have a greater share than men, in the effects of the Divine goodness. Now Christ is the principle of grace, authoritatively as to His Godhead, instrumentally as to His humanity: whence (Jn. 1:17) it is written: "Grace and truth came by Jesus Christ." But the Blessed Virgin Mary was nearest to Christ in His humanity: because He received His human nature from her. Therefore it was due to her to receive a greater fulness of grace than others.[/quote]

All of this is offered as support for my position. Micah, I will let you sift through the Aquinas, but you will see that my position is not only supported by Newman, from earlier posts, but also from Aquinas.

[Cam42]

[quote name='Raphael' date='Oct 30 2005, 02:52 PM']I never said she was.  What I meant is that Eve was able to accept all God's grace the same way, and yet, she could change her mind (and did).  It follows that Mary had the capacity to change her mind as well.

I keep asking (repeatedly) if you are trying to say that Mary couldn't sin not because she lacked the capacity, but because she simply didn't.  As I understand it, it would go like this:

God foresaw that Mary would not reject His graces.

Therefore, God predestined Mary to be the Mother of Christ.

Therefore, He made her immaculate from the point of Conception, preserving her from every stain of original sin.

Thus, she couldn't sin...not because of her immaculate nature, but rather, that her immaculate nature was granted to her because she wouldn't sin, and thus, since this immaculate nature filled her with the grace necessary to follow God perfectly (if she cooperated), she "couldn't" sin...not because she was incapable, but because God knew that it would never be the case that she would sin, that is, that the situation in which Mary would sin would never occur, and therefore, that she couldn't sin.  However, such a situation *could* occur, but it never would, and thus, would never be actualized and thus, to all-knowing God, couldn't exist.

The problem I have is that you seem to keep saying:

God made Mary the Immaculate Conception.

Therefore, that grace kept her from sinning.

She accepted that grace at the moment of conception (which I still don't get, since it would require an act of the will), and kept accepting it, but could never reject it.

This seems inconsistent with Eve's case...she accepted her nature...kept accepting it...and then rejected it.  It seems impossible and just plain wrong to say that Mary couldn't reject it later.  Granted, she didn't, but to say that she didn't have the ability must be wrong.

Meanwhile, I'm tired of having it implied that I'm a heretic...if the Church wants people to believe, and those people are more than willing to believe, it would be nice if the Church would articulate a little more what they were supposed to believe.  I can't just take a Church Scholar's word for it that its a defined teaching (and if it is, then I submit, but how can I know that it really is, especially when it seems so ridiculous and no one will explain it to me?)
[right][snapback]774147[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

We have been explaining it to you. However, you are making a fundamental mistake in your view.

[quote name='Raphael']The problem I have is that you seem to keep saying:

God made Mary the Immaculate Conception.

Therefore, that grace kept her from sinning.[/quote]

It isn't the grace that is preventing Mary from sinning, it is her perfect participation in that grace which was given at her conception, to which she could not sin. It is her free choice to participate in the grace at all times. Had she at some point not participated in that grace, then she would have ceased to be the Immaculate Conception. That is what I have been getting at. And that is where I have never waivered.

Look back to what all of the supportive quotes say and you'll see where I am coming from. It is easy to see that when it is read in that light.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

Cam, I'm not against your position...I don't even know what your position is. It sounds like you're taking a variety of positions.

She could sin...but she couldn't...I mean...what is that?

[quote]I honestly don't know how to put it any clearer. Mary could not sin, becuase if she had, she would not be capable of being the Mother of God, PRECISELY because Christ had to come from a perfect human.[/quote]

Her choosing not to sin happened throughout her life, though...it wasn't a once-for-all decision.

I would say that Mary DIDN'T sin, because if she had, she couldn't have been the Mother of God. I would say that if she had, she wouldn't have been chosen to the the Mother of God. I would say that because God knew in His omniscience that she never would sin, He made her the Immaculate Conception, so that her agreement with His will could be perfect.

However, I would not say that God made her the Immaculate Conception and thus she was forced not to sin (which is what it sounds like you've been saying half the time; the other half of the time, you've been denying that). Her Immaculate Conception had to be freely accepted by her. I believe that it was her sinlessness, foreseen by God, which prompted Him to grant her the Immaculate Conception, and it was the Immaculate Conception's graces which perfected her sinlessness.

Now, of course, since the Immaculate Conception was granted to her because of her foreseen virtue, it is obvious that she could not have changed her mind, because then she would never have received the Immaculate Conception, but in that case, the Immaculate Conception is the result of her virtue and not the cause of it. Further, without the grace of the Immaculate Conception, no one could have the strength to resist sin that well, right?

So what we get into is a which came first argument (not temporally, but in the concept of cause and effect).

[Cam42]

I don't know how to say it any clearer. Sorry.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Oct 30 2005, 04:45 PM']I don't know how to say it any clearer.  Sorry. 
[right][snapback]774177[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Okay...all the aspects of the argument, what caused what? I think getting this in order might help...in the sequence of events (though not necessarily along the path of linear time), what caused what?

[StColette]

*looks out from under her lampshade*

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='StColette' date='Oct 30 2005, 04:50 PM']*looks out from under her lampshade*
[right][snapback]774183[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
You keep that up and the kids are gonna start requesting you as their nightlight.

[StColette]

[quote name='Raphael' date='Oct 30 2005, 03:51 PM']You keep that up and the kids are gonna start requesting you as their nightlight.
[right][snapback]774184[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Mt:5:15:
Neither do men light a candle and put it under a bushel, but upon a candlestick, that it may shine to all that are in the house. (DRV)

Okay back to the correct topic lol

[Jaime]

[quote name='Raphael' date='Oct 30 2005, 03:48 PM']Okay...all the aspects of the argument, what caused what?  I think getting this in order might help...in the sequence of events (though not necessarily along the path of linear time), what caused what?
[right][snapback]774179[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Ok let me take a stab at explaining Camster's train of thought.

Was Mary capable of sinning? Yes. She was human and therefore capable of sinning. If she had been born with original sin, she would have sinned.

However, God (being outside of time) knew that if Mary received the grace she received, she would choose to remain sinless her entire life. That is why he chose her.

Now snapping back into the timeline again

Could Mary have sinned? Camster takes it as a past tense question. If it were possible for her to choose to sin after being conceived without original sin, God would not have bestowed the grace upon her. We know that Mary led a sinless life. Mary would not have been chosen if she had not led a perfect life. Therefore she could not sin.

Is it determinism? No because Mary had the free will to accept the gift.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='hot stuff' date='Oct 30 2005, 06:32 PM']Ok let me take a stab at explaining Camster's train of thought. 

Was Mary capable of sinning?  Yes.  She was human and therefore capable of sinning.  If she had been born with original sin, she would have sinned.

However, God (being outside of time) knew that if Mary received the grace she received, she would choose to remain sinless her entire life.  That is why he chose her. 

Now snapping back into the timeline again

Could Mary have sinned? Camster takes it as a past tense question.  If it were possible for her to choose to sin after being conceived without original sin, God would not have bestowed the grace upon her.  We know that Mary led a sinless life. Mary would not have been chosen if she had not led a perfect life.  Therefore she could not sin.

Is it determinism? No because Mary had the free will to accept the gift.
[right][snapback]774285[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

True genius is not determined by who can speak of lofty things, but by who can communicate lofty things to simpletons. For this, I'll call you a genius. :