Could Mary have sinned?

[Paphnutius]

[quote name='Brother Adam' date='Nov 10 2005, 09:29 AM']Well....I've got the word from on high, or at as high as it gets around here. The opinion of Dr. Mark Miravalle is basically that Mary indeed could have sinned. He says that he certainly sympathizes with those who want to put forth that she could have not sinned, but to say so would diminish the power of her immaculate conception and her 'fiat'. He says that Mary had to make the free choice to say yes, and a free choice includes the ability to have said no. He basically nodded his head in agreement that Mary participated in original holiness and had the same ability as the First Eve to chose against God.
[right][snapback]784732[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
I will go ahead and post here in light of a new opinion. I am not seeking to argue with him, but I do wonder on how he would interpert CCC 1732. If Mary was indeed "full of grace", then would her will not be definitevly bound to the Good? That would seem to make it impossible to choose evil.

[quote]1732 As long as freedom has not bound itself definitively to its ultimate good which is God, there is the possibility of choosing between good and evil, and thus of growing in perfection or of failing and sinning. This freedom characterizes properly human acts. It is the basis of praise or blame, merit or reproach.
[/quote]

[quote]1742 Freedom and grace. The grace of Christ is not in the slightest way a rival of our freedom when this freedom accords with the sense of the true and the good that God has put in the human heart. On the contrary, as Christian experience attests especially in prayer, the more docile we are to the promptings of grace, the more we grow in inner freedom and confidence during trials, such as those we face in the pressures and constraints of the outer world. By the working of grace the Holy Spirit educates us in spiritual freedom in order to make us free collaborators in his work in the Church and in the world:
[/quote]I know that you are only repeating his opinion and this is not directed towards you. I am simply curious as to how he would reply to this.

[qfnol31]

According to the doctrine of Trent, we are to accept or reject that grace. That parts on our side.

[qfnol31]

[quote]The Synod furthermore declares, that in adults, the beginning of the said Justification is to be derived from the prevenient [Page 33] grace of God, through Jesus Christ, that is to say, from His vocation, whereby, without any merits existing on their parts, they are called; that so they, who by sins were alienated from God, may be disposed through His quickening and assisting grace, to convert themselves to their own justification, by freely assenting to and co-operating with that said grace: in such sort that, while God touches the heart of man by the illumination of the Holy Ghost, neither is man himself utterly without doing anything while he receives that inspiration, forasmuch as he is also able to reject it; yet is he not able, by his own free will, without the grace of God, to move himself unto justice in His sight. Whence, when it is said in the sacred writings: Turn ye to me, and I will turn to you, we are admonished of our liberty; and when we answer; Convert us, O Lord, to thee, and we shall be converted, we confess that we are prevented by the grace of God.[/quote]

I believe that's the relative section.

[Aloysius]

[quote name='Brother Adam' date='Nov 10 2005, 10:29 AM']Well....I've got the word from on high, or at as high as it gets around here. The opinion of Dr. Mark Miravalle is basically that Mary indeed could have sinned. He says that he certainly sympathizes with those who want to put forth that she could have not sinned, but to say so would diminish the power of her immaculate conception and her 'fiat'. He says that Mary had to make the free choice to say yes, and a free choice includes the ability to have said no. He basically nodded his head in agreement that Mary participated in original holiness and had the same ability as the First Eve to chose against God.
[right][snapback]784732[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
so basically, he said that Mary had the capacity to sin. imagine that, that he would interpret "could" in such a way, the same way most people here have interpretted it-- having the capacity, the ability, to say no or to sin.

if you were to explain to him how Cam is interpretting "could", that in the light of eternity she would not have done it and could not have done it without no longer being of the same nature, i'm sure he would agree with she "couldn't" have sinned.

[Aloysius]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Oct 29 2005, 08:16 PM']Could Mary sin?  No. It would have been against her character. [b] Was she capable?  Yes, insofar as she was a human, however her choices would always lead to the good, so she would not sin.  [/b]
[right][snapback]773674[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

THERE IS NO DISAGREEMENT HERE.

like I keep saying, what Cam is saying would be more clear if he would just use "would not have sinned" rather than "could not have sinned" because "could not have sinned" connotates to everyone that she did not have the capacity. but Cam himself says she was capable (what we mean when we say she could have sinned) so there is no disagreement.

[Laudate_Dominum]

"Could Mary have sinned?" is a fairly speculative question and you'll get different answers from different perspective in different theological schools.
My own answer would actually be three answers:
1. Yes
2. No
3. Maybe

Paradoxically, I'd say all three are correct.

Yes, from the perspective of her unique participation in the redemption every bit as real and efficacious as Eve's participation in the fall.
No, from the point of view of her eternal unconditioned joint predestination and a somewhat nuanced take on the unique grace proper to her vocation.
Maybe, from the perspective of a tentative state following by her being presented with an ultimate choice of particpation in, or rejection of God's plan, followed by a state of perfection more akin to that of the angels and saints in heaven which excludes the possibility of sin.

Alright, I admit, I'm kind of playing around. I just like yes/no/maybe type answers.

[Paphnutius]

[quote name='qfnol31' date='Nov 10 2005, 11:01 AM']I believe that's the relative section.
[right][snapback]784780[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]I also understand that is in relation to justification. this is something different I understand your point though...That still does not resolve 1732 however.

[qfnol31]

[quote]1732 As long as freedom has not bound itself definitively to its ultimate good which is God, there is the possibility of choosing between good and evil, and thus of growing in perfection or of failing and sinning. This freedom characterizes properly human acts. It is the basis of praise or blame, merit or reproach.[/quote]

Because we are men, we have to make our response daily. It is the angels who had one "choice" and 1/3 fell after that. Also, I assume that since man is contintually making a choice, he only stops once he is in the place of the Beatific Vision.

Mary had a special type of grace, but grace must continually be accepted, not just a single answer. It is a continuation of "yes."

[Cam42]

[quote name='qfnol31' date='Nov 13 2005, 10:39 PM']Because we are men, we have to make our response daily.  It is the angels who had one "choice" and 1/3 fell after that.  Also, I assume that since man is contintually making a choice, he only stops once he is in the place of the Beatific Vision.

Mary had a special type of grace, but grace must continually be accepted, not just a single answer.  It is a continuation of "yes." 
[right][snapback]787720[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Are you sure you don't want to discuss this from a virtue v. morals standpoint?

[qfnol31]

How so?

[Cam42]

nevermind.

[qfnol31]

I'm lost...

[Guest Rick777]

Mary is sinless, she was immaculately concieved....end of story.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Rick777' date='Nov 14 2005, 07:57 PM']Mary is sinless, she was immaculately concieved....end of story.
[right][snapback]789068[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
:applause:

[rkwright]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Oct 29 2005, 10:56 PM']
Because Mary was excluded from original sin (B), she was destined to be the Mother of God (A).  Mary could not change her view ( C ), because she was excluded from original sin (B). Because she could not change her view ( C ), she was destined to be the Mother of God (A).

There it is in syllogistic view.

If B's are A's
and C's are B's
then C's are A's.

Does that help?  If not, let me try this.

Mary was excluded from original sin.  Because she participated in this, she could not sin, because she could do nothing other than good.  To do other than good would lose the grace that was given to her at her conception.  The grace given to her at her conception was effacious.  It allowed her to choose good every single time.

Since merely sufficient grace (gratia mere sufficiens) in its very concept contains the idea of a withholding of consent on the part of free will, and is therefore at the very outset destined to inefficiency (gratia inefficax), the question in its last analysis reduces itself to the relation between free will and efficacious grace (gratia efficax), which contains the very idea that by it and with it the free will does precisely that which this grace desires should be done.

Mary participated completely and totally in gratia efficax.  Humans who were born with original sin participate in gratia mere sufficiens, which leads to gratia inefficax.  Mary did not participate in that.  She participtated in gratia efficax.  Because she was excluded from original sin from her conception.  This is what we strive for and this is why she is called the new Eve and the prototypical Christian.
[right][snapback]773756[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I hate to bring this back up, I've been reading and re-reading this for the past few days, and don't queit fully understand. I get the logic that Cam lays out in the post I quoted, now how does that fit in with God choosing Mary b\c she could not sin? The quotes from Jacob S? that if there were any holier he would have picked someone else. I know I'm looking at this through time, and thats probably hurting my view point but heres what I'm seeing...

On one hand we have Cam's above logic, that b\c Mary was exluded from OS, she was destined to be Mother of God. That seems to line up chronologically also, God excludes OS, Mary doesn't sin, Mary is Mother of God.

Now on the other hand we have God choosing Mary b\c she is the most holy, the most worthy as the other quotes have shown.

How do you reconcile the 2? I know they must meet up and are both correct but I'm not seeing it. Did God know that she would never sin, so he chose her, then gave her the grace, so that she would never sin? Or.. Did God give her the grace, b\c he knew that once the grace was in place she could not sin, but that seems to negate any real choosing, he could have chosen anyone.
Help!

Edited November 16, 2005 by rkwright