Why Mary Was Sinless

[dairygirl4u2c]

People often say Mary needed to be sinless for Jesus to be sinless. But then someone else would say then wouldn't mary's mom need to be sinless? If Jesus needed sinless vessle to be sinless, Mary would presumably need a sinless vellst o be sinnless. The debate usually goes nowhere. Usually because the person saying Mary needs to be sinless doesn't address the concern.
Here are a few ideas for why

1. Mary was sinless is because she had to be sinless in order to bear God (St. Anne, Mary's mother, did not have to bear God and therefore didn't have to be sinless). This fits with Mary's place as the Ark of the New Covenant. I'm sure you'll recall that any sinful person who touched the Ark of the Old Covenant died immediately, even if they touched it for good reason, because the Ark had to be completely pure. Mary, the New Ark, also must be completely pure, in order to bear God.
I'm not sure why Jesus would be considered an Ark though, but this is a reason if he's like an Ark. Mary's mom wouldn't need to be because Mary isn't like an Ark. Other people touched Jesus and lived, but didn't have him coursing thorugh their viens etc, I guess is the argument.

2. Simple respect. If Jesus is God, having him in a sinnless vesssle seems fitting. Mary is not God and so doesn't need a sinnless vessel. This idea makes most sense to me.

feel free to add more ideas.

[Budge]

Dairygirl.

Please go buy a Bible and read it. Get a KJV, they are better. {though if you have to read another do it}

There you will find the answers to what you want to know, you ask all these questions, and seem more confused then ever.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1209235' date='Mar 6 2007, 05:29 PM']I'm not sure why Jesus would be considered an Ark though, but this is a reason if he's like an Ark. Mary's mom wouldn't need to be because Mary isn't like an Ark. Other people touched Jesus and lived, but didn't have him coursing thorugh their viens etc, I guess is the argument.[/quote]
Jesus is the New Covenant. Mary is the Ark of the New Covenant.

[dairygirl4u2c]

Okay I'm not sure why Mary could not be touched. People touched her all the time. THe first reason doesn't make much sense to me.

Budge. Mary can be sinless, and not conflict with all have sinned passage in teh bible because that is just a gneral rule that all have sinned. Also, Mary can be sinless and still have Jesus as savior, because he prevented her from being sinful. So, these are not reasons necessarily for saying Mary was sinful and not exploring the topic of the thread.

DO you tink catholics are simply trying to deify Mary even if they deny it and even entertaining this thread's topic is acknowledging that? If that's your idea, then say it.

Edited March 6, 2007 by dairygirl4u2c

[Mr.Cat]

[b]Ark of the New Covenant[/b]: The Blessed Virgin is the Ark of the New Covenant for in the Sacred Scriptures she is referred to as being the Ark, namely by Saint John the Apostle in his writing of the [b]Apocalypse[/b] ([i]Book of Revelation[/i]). This although does not make her like the Old Ark but rather she is a perfected fulfillment of what the old was. In this light she does not require to have immaculate parents for those who constructed the original ark (sinful humans) were under the same instruction. When we read the scriptures of where those people touched the ark it was either in dominion over it or influence it, therefore this shadows that the hand of Satan (his dominion of sin) will not touch the Blessed Virgin. Likewise the Blessed Virgin because she bore the New Covenant she is the New Ark being pure and immaculate. The early church writers say to the effect that while the old ark was of gold she is of purity. She is a pure vessel for our Blessed Lord not because He “required” a pure vessel but rather that it is not in the dignity of the Son of God to be born of a sinful woman.

[b]Second Eve[/b]: From the [b]Book of Genesis[/b] there is the promise of the woman whom the devil would have no claim over and would bring forth a seed that likewise would be free from the devil’s dominion. In of this message there is the foretelling of the Second Eve and the Second Adam. Our Blessed Lord is called the Second Adam for He repairs the rebellion of the First Adam (being the master and father of humanity) thus He becomes the King and Father of humanity to die on the cross for our salvation. But when we read the Scriptures likewise Eve partook in this rebellion as assistance so the Blessed Virgin is the New Eve working subordinately with Christ in the redemption of mankind. Like the first Adam and Eve were born without sin likewise the new Adam and Eve are sinless.

[b]Full of Grace[/b]: The Angel in [b]Saint Luke the Apostle’s Gospel[/b] declares the Blessed Virgin to be full of grace. Light and darkness cannot exist in the same place and likewise grace and sin cannot exist in the same place. Therefore to be full of grace ([i]superabundantly overflowing with grace[/i]) it is impossible that the stain of sin be within her. Further when we look at the Latin “[i]gratia plena[/i]” it suggests an eternal singular grace meaning that this state of grace did not come to her later but rather it had always been with her, from the moment of conception. Moreover the only other person in the Sacred Scriptures to be called “gratia plena” (full of grace) is our Blessed Lord. So this title is very exalted and does go to giving evidence that she is preserved from sin by the redemption of the cross.

[b]Above the Angels[/b]: The Angel when greeting the Blessed Virgin uses the word “hail” ([i]which isn’t a good description of the meaning[/i]) in [b]Saint Luke’s Gospel[/b]. The word hail in this time period is only used for those people extremely above someone else in society and more perfect, in this time namely referring to the Roman Emperor, whom was considered “divine.” So the Angel was declaring that she was above himself in perfection and authority, was quite big of a statement so there is no question of why it immediately says after this she pondered the meaning of this greeting. The Angels in Heaven are immaculate from sin in their own way so therefore to be above the Angels she must likewise be immaculate.

[b]Mother of God[/b]: The Blessed Mother is the mother of our Blessed Lord whom was God whom assumed human nature at the time of the Incarnation. Therefore He is truly God and truly man but at the same time a single person but with two natures. The argument is very much like a child, the mother does not contribute the soul to her child but we do not distinguish in terms for the child is a single person but spiritual and physical. Moreover in [b]Saint Luke’s Gospel[/b] she is called the Mother of the Lord by her cousin Saint Elisabeth the word being “[i]Adoni[/i]” (Lord God) thus she is the Mother of God. But because Almighty God supplies all the graces that we need in life He supplied the Blessed Virgin likewise all those graces that she would need in bearing and upbringing the Son of God. This grace preserved her from sin for Almighty God would not allow a sinful creature to have command over His Immaculate Son.

I hope this helps...

Edited March 6, 2007 by Mr.CatholicCat

[scardella]

The main issue is that Mary, in order to receive the unveiled presence of God in utero, had to be full of grace that she might live. The original ark contained some measure of the presence of God within. If Jesus is God Himself and unclean people died by touching the original ark, then how much more holy must the Ark of the New Covenant be in order to contain the fullness of God Himself?

On a biological level, isn't it true that for some time the mother's blood circulates through the baby? I'm not sure of this.

Last I checked, Mary wasn't God. She seems to do a good job with the whole intercession thing, though

[CatholicCid]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1209248' date='Mar 6 2007, 05:42 PM']Okay I'm not sure why Mary could not be touched. People touched her all the time. THe first reason doesn't make much sense to me.[/quote]

I don't think anyone would claim that you would die if you touched Mary... It sounds like you're taking the idea way to literally... Such as the Ark was made out of wood, but that doesn't mean Mary was also.

[Urib2007]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1209235' date='Mar 6 2007, 02:29 PM']People often say Mary needed to be sinless for Jesus to be sinless. But then someone else would say then wouldn't mary's mom need to be sinless? If Jesus needed sinless vessle to be sinless, Mary would presumably need a sinless vellst o be sinnless. The debate usually goes nowhere. Usually because the person saying Mary needs to be sinless doesn't address the concern.
Here are a few ideas for why

1. Mary was sinless is because she had to be sinless in order to bear God (St. Anne, Mary's mother, did not have to bear God and therefore didn't have to be sinless). This fits with Mary's place as the Ark of the New Covenant. I'm sure you'll recall that any sinful person who touched the Ark of the Old Covenant died immediately, even if they touched it for good reason, because the Ark had to be completely pure. Mary, the New Ark, also must be completely pure, in order to bear God.
I'm not sure why Jesus would be considered an Ark though, but this is a reason if he's like an Ark. Mary's mom wouldn't need to be because Mary isn't like an Ark. Other people touched Jesus and lived, but didn't have him coursing thorugh their viens etc, I guess is the argument.

2. Simple respect. If Jesus is God, having him in a sinnless vesssle seems fitting. Mary is not God and so doesn't need a sinnless vessel. This idea makes most sense to me.

feel free to add more ideas.[/quote]

The only person who lived a sinless life was the Jesus Christ. Mary wasn't sinless. Don't get me wrong. Mary was indeed a good woman, but she sinned.

Edited March 6, 2007 by Urib2007

[Knight of the Holy Rosary]

How can one have sin on their soul and still be 'filled with grace'?

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Urib2007' post='1209297' date='Mar 6 2007, 06:59 PM']The only person who lived a sinless life was the Jesus Christ. Mary wasn't sinless. Don't get me wrong. Mary was indeed a good woman, but she sinned.[/quote]

You have no proof for that assertion, just opinion.

[jeffpugh]

Thank you Mr Catholic Cat for all of that awesome stuff on Mary... now I have some more things to tell my protestant friend when we get into the Immaculate Conception 'dialogue' again.

[Mr.Cat]

[quote][b]Genesis 3:15[/b]
"I will put [b]enmities[/b] between [u]thee and the woman[/u], and [u]thy seed and her seed[/u]: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel."
[url="http://www.drbo.org/chapter/01003.htm"]http://www.drbo.org/chapter/01003.htm[/url][/quote]This verse is very important because no where else do we see this wording and further it is the promise to send a redeemer, for it foretells the defeat of the devil. The word enmity can be described in this passage to mean extreme hatred and separation, so to have extreme separation of hatred between the woman and the serpent the woman must be free from sin. For in sin the devil has claim over us or he has some to accuse us. This verse also foretells the coming of our Blessed Lord from this Immaculate Woman, therefore if one denies the Immaculate Conception and Status of the Blessed Virgin then one is attacking our Blessed Lord Himself.

This Scripture verse doesn’t make sense unless this woman is the Blessed Virgin and unless this verse is the Blessed Virgin it cannot be our Blessed Lord. This verse has no other application and therefore it would be completely unscriptural to propose that the Blessed Virgin was born with sin. For this reason one of the offences that Our Lady of Fatima against her Immaculate Heart is obstinate doubt in her immaculate status. Further this is more reason why the Church infallibly proclaimed this doctrine of the Immaculate Conception in addition to making it a dogmatic law, making it required belief of all the faithful.

Edited March 7, 2007 by Mr.CatholicCat

[NewReformation]

[quote name='Knight of the Holy Rosary' post='1209303' date='Mar 6 2007, 06:05 PM']How can one have sin on their soul and still be 'filled with grace'? [/quote]

I dunno...how could that happen...???
And Stephen, full of grace and power, was doing great wonders and signs among the people. Acts 6:8

There are only two places in the Greek where the phrase "full of grace" is used, and neither of those is in reference to Mary.

[NewReformation]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1209304' date='Mar 6 2007, 06:05 PM']You have no proof for that assertion, just opinion.[/quote]
Romans 3:23 "[b]All[/b] have sinned."

[jesussaves]

Luk 1:28 And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, [thou that art] highly favoured, the Lord [is] with thee: blessed [art] thou among women.

[Farsight one]

[quote name='NewReformation' post='1209919' date='Mar 7 2007, 03:49 PM']Romans 3:23 "[b]All[/b] have sinned."[/quote]Either it is a generalization, or it isn't.

If it is a generalization, than we need only lump the vast majority of humanity into the group "all"

If it is not a generalization, than we need to lump even Jesus himself into the group "all"

Since Jesus was sinless, and therfore not a part of "all", it is a generalization. And since it is a generalization, it does not necessarily encompass Mary.

Edited March 7, 2007 by Farsight one

[NewReformation]

[quote name='Farsight one' post='1209930' date='Mar 7 2007, 04:04 PM']Either it is a generalization, or it isn't.

If it is a generalization, than we need only lump the vast majority of humanity into the group "all"

If it is not a generalization, than we need to lump even Jesus himself into the group "all"

Since Jesus was sinless, and therfore not a part of "all", it is a generalization that does not necessarily encompass Mary.[/quote]
Jesus is the sole sinless being. Sorry, not a generalization. Jesus was a "human," yes, but He was also God.

[Farsight one]

[quote name='NewReformation' post='1209932' date='Mar 7 2007, 04:05 PM']Jesus is the sole sinless being. Sorry, not a generalization. Jesus was a "human," yes, but He was also God.[/quote]You can't say it's not a generalization AND it doesn't include Jesus. If it doesn't include Jesus, than it doesn't literally mean "all", and is by default a generalization. How do you not understand this?

[NewReformation]

[quote name='Farsight one' post='1209936' date='Mar 7 2007, 04:08 PM']You can't say it's not a generalization AND it doesn't include Jesus. If it doesn't include Jesus, than it doesn't literally mean "all", and is by default a generalization. How do you not understand this?[/quote]

How do you not understand that this verse is referring to all persons who are not God?

Rom 3:1-31 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? (2) Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God. (3) For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? (4) God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged. (5) But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? I (speak as a man) (6) God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world? (7) For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner? (8) And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just. (9) What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin; (10) As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: (11) There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. (12) They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one. (13) Their throat is an open sepulcher; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips: (14) Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: (15) Their feet are swift to shed blood: (16) Destruction and misery are in their ways: (17) And the way of peace have they not known: (18) There is no fear of God before their eyes. (19) Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. (20) Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. (21) But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; (22) Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: (23) [color="#FF0000"]For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;[/color] (24) [b]Being justified [/b]freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: (25) Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; (26) To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus. (27) Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith. (28) Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. (29) Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also: (30) Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith. (31) Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

Now, who is this "all" referring to? Is it referring to God? Jesus Christ? Or humans? Who is being justified? Is Christ being justified? Or humans who put their faith in Christ?

And again, there are only two occurences in the Greek where the phrase "full of grace" is used, and neither occurrence refers to Mary.

[Mr.Cat]

[b]Post 1 of 2[/b]
Some Protestants use this verse "all have sinned" in an attempt to prove that Mary was also with sin. But "all have sinned " only means that all are subject to original sin. Mary was spared from original sin by God, not herself. The popular analogy is God let us fall in the mud puddle, and cleaned us up afterward through baptism. In Mary's case, God did not let her enter the mud puddle. "All have sinned" also refers only to those able to commit sin. This is not everyone. For example, infants, the retarded, and the senile cannot sin. Finally, "all have sinned," but Jesus must be an exception to this rule. This means that Mary can be an exception as well. Note that the Greek word for all is "[i]pantes[/i]." Also the Angels in Heaven are free from sin.[quote][b]1 Corinthians 15:22[/b]
"And as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all shall be made alive."
[url="http://www.drbo.org/chapter/53015.htm"]http://www.drbo.org/chapter/53015.htm[/url][/quote]In Adam all ("[i]pantes[/i]") have died, and in Christ all ("[i]pantes[/i]") shall live. This proves that "all" does not mean "every single one." This is because not all have died (such as Enoch and Elijah who were taken up to heaven), and not all will go to heaven ([i]because Jesus said so[/i]).[quote][b]Romans 5:12[/b]
"Wherefore as by one man sin entered into this world, and by sin death; and so death passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned."
[url="http://www.drbo.org/chapter/52005.htm"]http://www.drbo.org/chapter/52005.htm[/url][/quote]Paul says that death spread to all ("[i]pantes[/i]") men. Again, this proves that "all" does not mean "every single one" because death did not spread to all men (as we have seen with Enoch and Elijah). [quote][b]Romans 5:19[/b]
"For as by the disobedience of one man, many were made sinners; so also by the obedience of one, many shall be made just."
[url="http://www.drbo.org/chapter/52005.htm"]http://www.drbo.org/chapter/52005.htm[/url][/quote]Here Paul says "many (not all) were made sinners." Paul uses "[i]polloi[/i]," not "[i]pantes[/i]." Is Paul contradicting what he said in [b]Romans 3:23[/b]? Of course not. Paul means that all are subject to original sin, but not all reject God.[quote][quote][b]Acts of the Apostles 6:8[/b]
"And Stephen, full of grace and fortitude, did great wonders and signs among the people."
[url="http://www.drbo.org/chapter/51006.htm"]http://www.drbo.org/chapter/51006.htm[/url][/quote]
[quote][b]Acts of the Apostles 6:8[/b]
"Stephanus autem [b]plenus[/b] gratia et fortitudine faciebat prodigia et signa magna in populo "
[url="http://www.drbo.org/lvb/chapter/51006.htm"]http://www.drbo.org/lvb/chapter/51006.htm[/url][/quote][/quote]Saint Stephen the Martyr was indeed full of grace, as the translation calls for, but when we look at the Latin Vulgate by Saint Jerome it is not “[i]gratia plena[/i]” like it calls the Blessed Virgin and our Blessed Lord but is “[i]plenus gratia[/i]” not in the eternal tense. Meaning that he was full of grace at the moment of his martyrdom (where all sin is washed away in Baptism of Blood) thus attaining eternal life. Because it is not etneral he was not always full of grace as “[i]gratia plena[/i]” suggests which is in the eternal tense.

Edited March 7, 2007 by Mr.CatholicCat