Could Mary have sinned?

[Aloysius]

the ark of the covenant had to be pure so that it could hold the commandments, the manna, the staff of aaron, in general so that it could hold God's presence; those things were in themselves pure as well; but the ark itself was built by sinful impure people.

now, the commandments, the manna, the priesthood of aaron, are all wrapped up to prefigure Christ, God's presence among the people in the arc also prefigures Christ; the ark itself prefigures Mary. built by the impure, but built pure, so that it could hold the ultimately sacred.

Mary, born of sinful parents, born sinless, so that she could hold the ultimate sacred.

[dairygirl4u2c]

so you're saying it just has to be pure. why? just because, you say. (or maybe implying you don't know) and you have the ark example to bolster that argument.
it's a reasonable argument, given the example, but it doesn't really explain why.

Edited November 20, 2007 by dairygirl4u2c

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1422884' date='Nov 20 2007, 01:59 PM']so you're saying it just has to be pure. why? just because, you say. (or maybe implying you don't know) and you have the ark example to bolster that argument.
it's a reasonable argument, given the example, but it doesn't really explain why.[/quote]

Well, the short answer is God says so, but it's easy to see why based on Jewish experiences. After the Fall, humanity was divided from divinity and people did not dare venture too close to God. Just read virtually any Old Testament account of God appearing to someone. Moses had to remove his sandals at the burning bush and he feared for his life when God offered to allow his Presence to pass by him. A priest who performed the Yom Kippur sacrifice incorrectly while in the Holy of Holies would die on the spot. Mary was afraid even at the appearance of Gabriel. The Jews were fully aware that God's wrath is suffered by anyone who gets "too close" to God.

How, then, can God become flesh and dwell within a woman's womb? If not for the Immaculate Conception, the Annunciation would be impossible for Mary would die from God's wrath.

Edited November 20, 2007 by LouisvilleFan

[Jaime]

you guys need to go back and read what Camster wrote. Its annoyingly brilliant

[dairygirl4u2c]

cam makes a good point. she's full of grace which she cannot deny. so, effectively, she cannot sin. but, theoretically, she at least as the potential to sin, in that she has in a sense the option.

i think you would have to break out a latin phrase here. cause i can hear some object "if she can't sin because of her grace, then she doesn't even have potential to sin"

you have to distinguish the following questions, each could have a term distinguishing the different types of free will involved:
will she sin?
can she sin given her grace?
can she sin given her option to sin?

what's a tenstion in hte preceding questions is the same tension that exists when you ask whether you have freedom to sin? someone would object you are free without sin, but another would say you're free to sin. it's just terminiology problems.
a latin phrase would be nice. or maybe a "per se" freedom designation somewhere to contrast colloquially used terms for freedom.

i remember someone said that when God made Mary, it's similar to this analogy. People get up at night. They eat too much and get fat. Mary gets up, she's opens the fridge, and she can choose to eat or she can choose to not. God knows she would choose to not, but that doesn't mean she never had a choice.
this analogy was in reference to whether Mary could have said No when asked to incarnate Jesus. the question wasn't just superfluous mere formalities after all.
but, i think it could also apply to whether Mary could sin.

edit: i thought the angel had asked her permission to have Jesus. i remember being told that in reference to "may it be done to me according to you word". on closer inspection, the angel said matter of factly that she would have Jesus. there's a certain poeticness to what Cam said, in that there wasn't even a question. free will wasn't so much hindered by not asking, really. it wold ahve been a mere formality to ask.

Edited November 21, 2007 by dairygirl4u2c

[dairygirl4u2c]

[quote]26In the sixth month, God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth, a town in Galilee, 27to a virgin pledged to be married to a man named Joseph, a descendant of David. The virgin's name was Mary. 28The angel went to her and said, "Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you."

29Mary was greatly troubled at his words and wondered what kind of greeting this might be. 30But the angel said to her, "Do not be afraid, Mary, you have found favor with God. 31You will be with child and give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus. 32He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, 33and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever; his kingdom will never end."

34"How will this be," Mary asked the angel, "since I am a virgin?"

35The angel answered, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called[c] the Son of God. 36Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child in her old age, and she who was said to be barren is in her sixth month. 37For nothing is impossible with God."

38"I am the Lord's servant," Mary answered. "May it be to me as you have said." Then the angel left her.[/quote]

[dairygirl4u2c]

also... as per cam's post. that explains why she couldn't sin as per herself, her own dispostion.

it doesn't explain why she couldn't sin as per carrying jesus.

an important distinction.
though, i guess if you establish the first point, the second one is arguably just idle philosphy not grounded in much of anything, mere words and thoughts. like "if 1 plus one equals three then i can give you two dollars and you'll get three !!"

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1423250' date='Nov 21 2007, 12:23 PM']edit: i thought the angel had asked her permission to have Jesus. i remember being told that in reference to "may it be done to me according to you word". on closer inspection, the angel said matter of factly that she would have Jesus. there's a certain poeticness to what Cam said, in that there wasn't even a question. free will wasn't so much hindered by not asking, really. it wold ahve been a mere formality to ask.[/quote]

Of course. Moses wasn't asked whether he wanted to lead the Israelites out of Egypt... he was told to do it. But that didn't keep him from griping and moaning about it rather than submitting in humility.

[dairygirl4u2c]

but i still don't think, given that she was told... that she didn't have an option, theoretically.
otherwise she didn't ahve free will. and i don't think that's the case.

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1423353' date='Nov 21 2007, 07:30 PM']but i still don't think, given that she was told... that she didn't have an option, theoretically.
otherwise she didn't ahve free will. and i don't think that's the case.[/quote]

Well, I don't think any of our personal opinions about Mary really matter But it seems safe to say that she "theoretically" had free will along with the grace to choose good in every instance.

Maybe another way of looking at it is beginning with the concept of free will. If you're locked away in a prison, are you free? Sin is basically a spiritual prison, so perhaps Mary and Jesus are the only truly free people who ever lived. And if that's the case, our concept of "freedom" is actually closer to pride because it's focused on valuing our own will above God's. So instead of questioning whether Mary has free will, maybe we ought to question whether we are free.


Is there an easy way to search for Cam42's posts in this thread? I tried using the search function, but it didn't seem to work very well. Do I have to click through all 17 pages?

[rkwright]

Honestly... I would read all 17 pages... this is a good thread and many of the things you are discussing have already been answered

[sacredheartandbloodofjesus]

To restate the Question a little clearer for those who read the title of the phorum, the question is like this "Was Mary capable of sinning?"

The dogma of the Immaculate conception says she was [b]preserved[/b] [u]immune[/u] from the stain of original sin.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='sacredheartandbloodofjesus' date='19 February 2010 - 12:37 AM' timestamp='1266557843' post='2059293']
To restate the Question a little clearer for those who read the title of the phorum, the question is like this "Was Mary capable of sinning?"

The dogma of the Immaculate conception says she was [b]preserved[/b] [u]immune[/u] from the stain of original sin.
[/quote]
I warned y'all not to bump this.

[Jaime]

[quote name='Raphael' date='19 February 2010 - 08:59 AM' timestamp='1266587941' post='2059375']
I warned y'all not to bump this.
[/quote]

Micah is right that he warned you

[mommas_boy]

[quote name='Era Might' date='28 October 2005 - 06:57 AM' timestamp='1130500634' post='772715']
Yes, she could have sinned. To deny such would be to deny her humanity. Your distinctions vis a vis original sin and concupiscence are correct.
[/quote]

Christ was human. Could He have sinned?