Could Mary have sinned?

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' date='20 February 2010 - 11:48 AM' timestamp='1266684525' post='2059948']
Mary could have sinned but did not. Eve could have sinned and did. Both were made prefect, and both full of grace one kept her grace the other fell from it.
[/quote]
The grace of Mary was greater than the grace of Eve, but if by "could have sinned" you mean "had the power to sin" and not that God's foreknowledge could have been wrong that she would not sin, then yes, I agree.

[Veridicus]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='20 February 2010 - 04:26 AM' timestamp='1266661593' post='2059888']
The Eastern Churches are unanimous in their testimony that the Theotokos died a natural death. In fact, the original name of the feast, [i]Dormition[/i], which is maintained in the Eastern Churches to this day, means "falling asleep"; and moreover, the icon of the feast depicts the separation of Mary's soul, which is shown as a small child held by Christ, from her body.

According to the Byzantine tradition the [i]Dormition[/i] (on 15 August) commemorates the Virgin's death, while her resurrection and assumption are celebrated three days later.
[/quote]

I was under the impression that after her death/dormition Mary's body experienced no corruption (during that period of time between her death and her assumption). If her Soul was fully separated from her body, would not her body have decayed in the way all matter bereft of an animating substance decays? Or am I just trapped hopelessly in Western concepts of Animus?

[Veridicus]

[quote name='Raphael' date='20 February 2010 - 11:04 AM' timestamp='1266685455' post='2059955']
The grace of Mary was greater than the grace of Eve, but if by "could have sinned" you mean "had the power to sin" and not that God's foreknowledge could have been wrong that she would not sin, then yes, I agree.
[/quote]

Arguments about the infalliblility of God's foreknowledge and how it plays out in our present space/time always make me think of that scene in Minority Report where Tom Cruise's character rolls the ball across the table and as it falls off the edge Colin Ferrel's character reaches down and catches it. Cruise's character asks the other why he grabbed the ball and he replies "Because it was going to fall". Its all about perspective.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Veridicus' date='20 February 2010 - 12:18 PM' timestamp='1266686320' post='2059961']
Arguments about the infalliblility of God's foreknowledge and how it plays out in our present space/time always make me think of that scene in Minority Report where Tom Cruise's character rolls the ball across the table and as it falls off the edge Colin Ferrel's character reaches down and catches it. Cruise's character asks the other why he grabbed the ball and he replies "Because it was going to fall". Its all about perspective.
[/quote]
I always work by remembering that God is outside of time, which means in a sense that if we laid out the entire timeline of history on a table, God could walk all around it. He can stand at the end of the timeline and see what we have done and will have done in the future and then walk to the front of the timeline to give us what we need in order to do it. It's still us doing it freely, but He is able to see what we will do in the future with the same kind of certainty we have only after the fact.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Raphael' date='20 February 2010 - 01:04 PM' timestamp='1266685455' post='2059955']
The grace of Mary was greater than the grace of Eve, but if by "could have sinned" you mean "had the power to sin" and not that God's foreknowledge could have been wrong that she would not sin, then yes, I agree.
[/quote]
If Eve was in the Garden of Eden - Paradise - how could Mary have more grace then Eve? Wouldn't it be the same?

[Veridicus]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='20 February 2010 - 11:29 AM' timestamp='1266686963' post='2059966']
If Eve was in the Garden of Eden - Paradise - how could Mary have more grace then Eve? Wouldn't it be the same?
[/quote]

Mary, or at least her womb, was in a way the 'New Garden of Eden' for the New Adam was she not? I think I read that though-line in a Fulton Sheen book.

[kafka]

Mary did not have a fallen human nature. That is clear in the dogma of the Immaculate Conception. No concupiscence, she could not be influenced by the world. She could be tempted by the fallen angels but she would have resisted like Christ.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='20 February 2010 - 12:29 PM' timestamp='1266686963' post='2059966']
If Eve was in the Garden of Eden - Paradise - how could Mary have more grace then Eve? Wouldn't it be the same?
[/quote]
In the same way that our salvation is better than our original state. Adam and Eve were in a sort of friendship with God, but did not have a share in the Divine Nature. We do through Baptism. Mary did through her Immaculate Conception.

[Veridicus]

[quote name='kafka' date='20 February 2010 - 11:47 AM' timestamp='1266688020' post='2059968']
Mary did not have a fallen human nature. That is clear in the dogma of the Immaculate Conception. No concupiscence, [b]she could not be influenced by the world[/b]. She could be tempted by the fallen angels but [b]she would have resisted like Christ[/b].
[/quote]

I think where we disagree, at least linguistically, is that I desist from attaching the impeccability of Christ to Mary. Retrospectively we see that she never sinned; but in my opinion she was more like a pre-Fall Eve (lacked fallen human nature, no concupiscience) who [i]could [/i]be tempted and influenced but over the course of her life never [i]did[/i] because her human will grew in conformity to the divine will. It seems to me the capacity to be tempted by the word and the burden of concupiscience are two different things. Christ's human will could be tempted, but unlike Mary, Christ's will was impeccable in his conformity to the divine will since he possessed both and beheld the Beatific Vision.

Edited February 20, 2010 by Veridicus

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Veridicus' date='20 February 2010 - 10:06 AM' timestamp='1266685602' post='2059958']
I was under the impression that after her death/dormition Mary's body experienced no corruption (during that period of time between her death and her assumption). If her Soul was fully separated from her body, would not her body have decayed in the way all matter bereft of an animating substance decays? Or am I just trapped hopelessly in Western concepts of Animus?
[/quote]
Christ's soul was fully separated from His body, and He experienced no corruption prior to His resurrection on the third day, and the same is believed to be the case in connection with the resurrection of the Theotokos.

[Veridicus]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='20 February 2010 - 01:18 PM' timestamp='1266693484' post='2060008']
Christ's soul was fully separated from His body, and He experienced no corruption prior to His resurrection on the third day, and the same is believed to be the case in connection with the resurrection of the Theotokos.
[/quote]

This is true. I accept your logic.

[Apotheoun]

[size="3"][b]POPE JOHN PAUL II

GENERAL AUDIENCE[/b][/size]

[i]Wednesday, 25 June 1997[/i]



[b]Mary and the human drama of death[/b]

1. Concerning the end of Mary’s earthly life, the Council uses the terms of the Bull defining the dogma of the Assumption and states: “The Immaculate Virgin, preserved free from all stain of original sin, was taken up body and soul into heavenly glory, when her earthly life was over” (Lumen gentium, n. 59). With this formula, the Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, following my Venerable Predecessor Pius XII, made no pronouncement on the question of Mary’s death. Nevertheless, Pius XII did not intend to deny the fact of her death, but merely did not judge it opportune to affirm solemnly the death of the Mother of God as a truth to be accepted by all believers.

Some theologians have in fact maintained that the Blessed Virgin did not die and and was immediately raised from earthly life to heavenly glory. However, this opinion was unknown until the 17th century, whereas a common tradition actually exists which sees Mary's death as her entry into heavenly glory.

2. Could Mary of Nazareth have experienced the drama of death in her own flesh? Reflecting on Mary’s destiny and her relationship with her divine Son, it seems legitimate to answer in the affirmative: since Christ died, it would be difficult to maintain the contrary for his Mother.

The Fathers of the Church, who had no doubts in this regard, reasoned along these lines. One need only quote St Jacob of Sarug (†521), who wrote that when the time came for Mary “to walk on the way of all generations”, the way, that is, of death, “the group of the Twelve Apostles” gathered to bury “the virginal body of the Blessed One” (Discourse on the burial of the Holy Mother of God, 87-99 in C. Vona, Lateranum 19 [1953], 188). St Modestus of Jerusalem (†634), after a lengthy discussion of “the most blessed dormition of the most glorious Mother of God”, ends his eulogy by exalting the miraculous intervention of Christ who “raised her from the tomb”, to take her up with him in glory (Enc. in dormitionem Deiparae semperque Virginis Mariae, nn. 7 and 14: PG 86 bis, 3293; 3311). St John Damascene (†704) for his part asks: “Why is it that she who in giving birth surpassed all the limits of nature should now bend to its laws, and her immaculate body be subjected to death?”. And he answers: “To be clothed in immortality, it is of course necessary that the mortal part be shed, since even the master of nature did not refuse the experience of death. Indeed, he died according to the flesh and by dying destroyed death; on corruption he bestowed incorruption and made death the source of resurrection” (Panegyric on the Dormition of the Mother of God, n. 10: SC 80, 107).

3. It is true that in Revelation death is presented as a punishment for sin. However, the fact that the Church proclaims Mary free from original sin by a unique divine privilege does not lead to the conclusion that she also received physical immortality. The Mother is not superior to the Son who underwent death, giving it a new meaning and changing it into a means of salvation.

Involved in Christ’s redemptive work and associated in his saving sacrifice, Mary was able to share in his suffering and death for the sake of humanity’s Redemption. What Severus of Antioch says about Christ also applies to her: “Without a preliminary death, how could the Resurrection have taken place?” (Antijulianistica, Beirut 1931, 194f.). To share in Christ’s Resurrection, Mary had first to share in his death.

4. The New Testament provides no information on the circumstances of Mary’s death. This silence leads one to suppose that it happened naturally, with no detail particularly worthy of mention. If this were not the case, how could the information about it have remained hidden from her contemporaries and not have been passed down to us in some way?

As to the cause of Mary’s death, the opinions that wish to exclude her from death by natural causes seem groundless. It is more important to look for the Blessed Virgin’s spiritual attitude at the moment of her departure from this world. In this regard, St Francis de Sales maintains that Mary’s death was due to a transport of love. He speaks of a dying “in love, from love and through love”, going so far as to say that the Mother of God died of love for her Son Jesus (Treatise on the Love of God, bk. 7, ch. XIII-XIV).

Whatever from the physical point of view was the organic, biological cause of the end of her bodily life, it can be said that for Mary the passage from this life to the next was the full development of grace in glory, so that no death can ever be so fittingly described as a “dormition” as hers.

5. In some of the writings of the Church Fathers we find Jesus himself described as coming to take his Mother at the time of her death to bring her into heavenly glory. In this way they present the death of Mary as an event of love which conducted her to her divine Son to share his immortal life. At the end of her earthly life, she must have experienced, like Paul and more strongly, the desire to be freed from her body in order to be with Christ for ever (cf. Phil 1:23).

The experience of death personally enriched the Blessed Virgin: by undergoing mankind’s common destiny, she can more effectively exercise her spiritual motherhood towards those approaching the last moment of their life.

____________________

[i]To the English-speaking pilgrims and visitors, the Holy Father said:[/i]

I am pleased to welcome the professors and students of the Theological Seminary of the Reformed Church in America. I also thank the choirs for the praise of God in song. Upon all the English-speaking visitors, especially the pilgrims from Scotland, South Africa, Indonesia, Thailand, Japan, the Philippines and the United States, I cordially invoke the joy and peace of our Lord Jesus Christ.


Source: [url="http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/audiences/1997/documents/hf_jp-ii_aud_25061997_en.html"]Vatican Website / Pope John Paul II General Audience of 25 June 1997[/url]

[Jaime]

Micah will eventually be correct in saying that Apo is correct. (a little Minority Report effect to this post)

[Apotheoun]

From the Byzantine liturgy of the feast of the Dormition:

Hirmos (First Tone)

All human generations bless you, O Theotokos. The laws of nature were bypassed in you, for your birth-giving left you a virgin and your death became the herald of your life. O you who remained virginal after having given birth, and alive after having died, O Theotokos, deign always to save your inheritance!

[Veridicus]

[quote name='Veridicus' date='19 February 2010 - 11:31 PM' timestamp='1266643891' post='2059831']
and to Rexi: While I agree that Mary died, I still don't think that Mary's 'death' was at all like any death we have had experience with in our lives...is the word "Dormition" (as Easterners call it) more appropriate to emphasize the difference between corrupting death and Mary's death?
[/quote]


[quote name='Apotheoun' date='20 February 2010 - 01:38 PM' timestamp='1266694728' post='2060013']
As to the cause of Mary’s death, the opinions that wish to exclude her from death by natural causes seem groundless. It is more important to look for the Blessed Virgin’s spiritual attitude at the moment of her departure from this world. In this regard, St Francis de Sales maintains that Mary’s death was due to a transport of love. He speaks of a dying “in love, from love and through love”, going so far as to say that the Mother of God died of love for her Son Jesus (Treatise on the Love of God, bk. 7, ch. XIII-XIV).

Whatever from the physical point of view was the organic, biological cause of the end of her bodily life, it can be said that for Mary the passage from this life to the next was the full development of grace in glory, so that no death can ever be so fittingly described as a “dormition” as hers.

5. In some of the writings of the Church Fathers we find Jesus himself described as coming to take his Mother at the time of her death to bring her into heavenly glory. In this way they present the death of Mary as an event of love which conducted her to her divine Son to share his immortal life. At the end of her earthly life, she must have experienced, like Paul and more strongly, the desire to be freed from her body in order to be with Christ for ever (cf. Phil 1:23).

The experience of death personally enriched the Blessed Virgin: by undergoing mankind’s common destiny, she can more effectively exercise her spiritual motherhood towards those approaching the last moment of their life.
[/quote]

Thank you for posting this. JP2 says it much more eloquently than my futile and fetal attempts.