Could Mary have sinned?

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='kafka' date='27 February 2010 - 11:08 AM' timestamp='1267290539' post='2063728']
just a side note that I had in mind last night. Adam and Eve also did not have the Sacraments, so even though they were holy and innocent, in some sense they did lack the gifts Christians recieve after the Coming of Christ like Confirmation and the Eucharist.

The Fall of the Angels is even more obscure than the Fall of Adam and Eve. My basic understanding runs something like this:

God created the angels before he created the Universe. The spiritual is higher than the physical so that would make sense:

{1:1} In the beginning, God created heaven and earth.

Heaven being the spiritual realm of the angels and earth being the unfolding of the cosmos leading up to the formation of earth. The angels were created in the state of sanctifying grace yet they were not given the beautific vision. Instead they were given tasks by God to assist with the unfolding of the cosmos. This could have lasted literally billions of years.

The angels are pure spirits. They dwell in a spiritual realm connected to the cosmos in some way. They have the faculties of will and intellect and memory just like the souls of humans. Their social life is much like that of humans on earth. They have names and communicate with eachother in a spiritual language both beyond the comprehension of men. Their society is structured into a hierarchy. Some of the angels were probably friends with others according to the proximaty of their tasks.

Probably near the time earth was complete God revealed to them his plan for the human race. He revealed Christ on the Cross and that they were to worship and serve him. Christ and the Cross is a mystery, no one will ever fully comprehend it, even the angels and they had not yet recieved the immediate vision of God. This was their test. So what happened was some of them maybe even just one, began to doubt and deliberate about this revelation. Why should we serve a nature lower than ourselves? Or something of the sort. So instead of obeying God in an act of Faith some decided to rebel against God's plan by rejecting it, thus losing sanctifying grace. This is roughly the theological opinon of the scholastics.

Satan before he fell was Lucifer. He was probably one of the greatest angels, an archangel, who had a high task and had a lot of influence in the structure of their society. Once he fell he would have been an evil influence to many of the other angels. That is why in my opinion Christ called him a liar and murderer from the beginning. He began spreading lies about God's plan and was the indirect cause of many of the fallen angels murdering the sanctifying grace in their spirits by rejecting God's Revelation. For grace is the life of the soul. As many of the angels began to reject God a battle ensued:

{12:7} And there was a great battle in heaven. Michael and his Angels were battling with the dragon, and the dragon was fighting, and so were his angels.
{12:8} But they did not prevail, and a place for them was no longer found in heaven.
{12:9} And he was thrown out, that great dragon, that ancient serpent, who is called the devil and Satan, who seduces the whole world. And he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were cast down with him.

God was with Michael and the good angels. They cast some into hell and others were cast down from the heavens to earth in order to roam the earth in God's all wise plan. The Fall of the angels happened before Adam and Eve since Satan was in the Garden. And he assumed Michael and the good angels into Heaven. So from then on they experience the beautific vision while they continue to perform tasks for God and battle the fallen angels on earth according to God's will.

So ultimately my point is that the Fall of the Angels was not caused by their free will alone, though the choice does determine oneself, in the end it works together with intellect and memory. Everything created by God is inherently good, the will, the intellect, the memory. The Fall of the Angels is somewhat of a mystery but their choice must have been influenced by the exultation of their intellects over God's Revelation and Plan of the Incarnation which he revealed to them as a test. And this is fitting for goes to Heaven without accepting and knowing Jesus Christ.

So that is roughly my understanding. Some of the things I said are supported by Scripture but I dont want to spend the time looking up all the verses now.
[/quote]
That's a good, clear explanation, but you didn't address why the greatest of the angels was able to sin, but Mary was not.

[kafka]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='27 February 2010 - 02:00 PM' timestamp='1267297206' post='2063790']
That's a good, clear explanation, but you didn't address why the greatest of the angels was able to sin, but Mary was not.
[/quote]
very true I got hung up on the angels. I think what is wanting of me is an existential explanation. I might be able to find that if I study more of Germain Grisez's work, however the teaching that Mary could not possibly sin is not a problem to me. It is very reasonable and fits in very well with other themes of the Faith.

It was not possible for Jesus to sin since He is God, yet he made many free choices during his life. He made a personal commitment to the mission His Father gave him. It is not possible for the Angels and Saints to sin since they are with God. Yet they continue to make free choices. Free choices are created entities. They are gifts from God to serve him and glorify him and love him. Not to squander on sin.

That it was not possible for Mary to sin is not unreasonable or even impossible to God with which all things are possible. And I think it fits in well with her unique relationship with God and the mission God gave her to assist with the work of Redemption. It fits in well with what a perfect disciple of Christ is, and what a true human is meant to be. It is a very positive teaching. It fits in well with the freedom of the sons of God. It fits in well with the truth that God's plan and work of Redemption cannot fail, and that he gives people the gifts to accomplish His will without failing while keeping their autonomy and indepedence intact. It fits in well with the other free and gratuitous gifts bestowed on her by God: The Immaculate Conception, the Divine Motherhood, perpetual virginity, Mother of the Church, etc.

This is why I like what I coined above, namely a charism of impeccability given with the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit as her unique Confirmation. Confirmation is a strengthening. A unique grace of sinlessness has to be different than the state of sanctifying grace which is love-faith-hope infused at Baptism. It has to be different from the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit infused at Confirmation. A charism orientates one toward these gifts. Charism from newadvent.org:

"The term has, however, a narrower meaning: the spiritual graces and qualifications granted to every Christian to perform his task in the Church: "Every one hath his proper gift [charisma] from God; one after this manner, and another after that" (1 Corinthians 7:7 etc.)"

Mary's task in the Church is to assist God with the work of Redemption. For this it is fitting that she be given a charism of impeccability to guide all her decisions without fail. The most important decision of her life was the Fiat and for this the charism of impeccability guided her to accomplish her mission freely given to her by God to be His Mother.

Again from newadvent.org:

"Lastly, in its narrowest sense, charisma is the theological term for denoting extraordinary graces given to individual Christians for the good of others."

Her gift of impeccability is a gift to the entire Church since it enabled her or empowered her to accomplish her unique mission without fail primarily to accept God's plan for her to be the Mother of God.

Charisms do not tamper with free will. The Sacred Writers working with the charism of Inspiration were indepedent and autonomous. They were able to write using their own store of knowledge, their own style, their own historical situation, etc. yet what they wrote was inerrant and infallible with an additional level of implicit meaning where the Holy Spirit asserts truths over and above what the Sacred Writer intended. This is a gift to the entire Church since Scripture is the second pillar of truth for the Faithful. Similar with the Popes and Bishops charism of infallibility. They do not lose their autonomy and independence while exercising the unique gift given by virtue of their ordination.

Now look at the description of the gifts of the Holy Spirit from newadvent.org:

The gift of wisdom, by detaching us from the world, makes us relish and love only the things of heaven.

The gift of understanding helps us to grasp the truths of religion as far as is necessary.

The gift of counsel springs from supernatural prudence, and enables us to see and choose correctly what will help most to the glory of God and our own salvation.

By the gift of fortitude we receive courage to overcome the obstacles and difficulties that arise in the practice of our religious duties.

The gift of knowledge points out to us the path to follow and the dangers to avoid in order to reach heaven.

The gift of piety, by inspiring us with a tender and filial confidence in God, makes us joyfully embrace all that pertains to His service.

Lastly, the gift of fear fills us with a sovereign respect for God, and makes us dread, above all things, to offend Him.

So Mary's unique gift of sinlessness or her charism of impeccability orientates her will, intellect, and memory the three faculties of the soul toward love-faith-hope and the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit in such a way that she would never fail by sinning, but more than never failing she would always make the perfect decision in all that she did, in all that she said, in all that she interiorly willed, and this for the glory of God and for the benefit of all mankind and particulary the Church. And all this while keeping her independence and autonomy intact.

It was not possible for Mary to sin by virtue of her unique grace of sinlessness, or what I call her charism of impeccability.

So this is my understanding after another night of thinking. I still need the existential part refined, but I think I am genuinely on to something. It seems reasonable to me. Now I will keep my eyes open for support of this in Sacred Scripture. Obviously it would not be explicit yet it very well could be implicit in many verses. I'm not sure if the Magisterium will ever teach that it was not possible for Mary to sin, yet the Magisterium has taught that she in fact never did sin. So this is just taking that teaching another step and asking the question how and why implicit in the existing teaching.

Edited February 28, 2010 by kafka

[kafka]

edited and added some stuff to the final paragraph and first two I think

[Apotheoun]

I believe that the Holy Theotokos never willed to perform an evil or sinful act; nevertheless, she still had the capability to act sinfully, which - of course - is a disordered capacity that she never actualized.

Edited February 28, 2010 by Apotheoun

[kafka]

I agree in a sense with what you say. I am not denying her capacity, I am denying the possibility. Maybe I need to refine my wording, though I think people should be able to get a picture of the point I am trying to make.

the human nature of Jesus had the raw capability of sinning since human nature admits of sin yet he was unable to. It was impossible. Here is what Grisez says:

8. Similarly, the objection based on sinlessness can easily be resolved. Since human nature admits of sin, as man Jesus could choose sinfully. But if Jesus had chosen sinfully, the sin would have been that of the Word, and God cannot sin. Therefore, Jesus not only in fact never committed a sin; he could not possibly have done so (see DS 291/—, 556/291).4 Still, as man Jesus deliberated in a human way; the alternatives to right choices did occur to him. He considered possibilities it would have been wrong for him to choose, recognized them as such, and rejected them for this reason. Therefore, although he did not sin, he “in every respect has been tempted as we are” (Heb 4.15). Thus, Jesus could and did make a basic commitment, clearly articulated in some of his choices, for example, his free acceptance of death, expressed by the evangelists: “Abba, Father, all things are possible to you; remove this cup from me; yet not what I will, but what you will” (Mk 14.36; cf. Mt 26.39; Lk 22.42).

maybe I should change my wording to it was not possible for her to sin instead of saying she was unable to sin. But to me it means pretty much the same thing.

Edited February 28, 2010 by kafka

[Veridicus]

..... .....

[allis-challmers]

[quote]Eve was created without original sin. She sinned[/quote]


I think that Mary like Jesus was created without original sin. They could have sinned but they had enough grace and willpower not to sin.

[Veridicus]

[quote name='allis-challmers' date='28 February 2010 - 04:01 PM' timestamp='1267394510' post='2064437']
I think that Mary like Jesus was created without original sin. They could have sinned but they had enough grace and willpower not to sin.
[/quote]

Good to see another poster from Southern Indiana. It is my understanding that the Church teaches that Christ was impeccable (that is He [i]could not[/i] have sinned). See [url="http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/dictionary/index.cfm?id=34113"]catholicculture.org[/url]

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='kafka' date='28 February 2010 - 01:28 PM' timestamp='1267388928' post='2064391']
. . . I am denying the possibility. . . .
[/quote]
I only disagree with this point.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Veridicus' date='28 February 2010 - 03:15 PM' timestamp='1267395348' post='2064438']
Good to see another poster from Southern Indiana. It is my understanding that the Church teaches that Christ was impeccable (that is He [i]could not[/i] have sinned). See [url="http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/dictionary/index.cfm?id=34113"]catholicculture.org[/url]
[/quote]
Christ could not sin because He is a divine and uncreated person. To be more precise, Christ could not sin either in His natures (divine and - after the incarnation - human), or in His personal (i.e., enhypostatic) mode of willing within those natures, because He is God made man.

Edited February 28, 2010 by Apotheoun

[Veridicus]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='28 February 2010 - 05:04 PM' timestamp='1267398266' post='2064468']
I only disagree with this point.
[/quote]

I agree with your point of disagreement.

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='28 February 2010 - 05:07 PM' timestamp='1267398440' post='2064470']
Christ could not sin because He is a divine and uncreated person. To be more precise, Christ could not sin either in His natures (divine and - after the incarnation - human), or in His personal (i.e., enhypostatic) mode of willing within those natures, because He is God made man.
[/quote]

Once again, more eloquently than me.

[add]

NO and the same goes for my birth mother

[Damiano]

*["Those who do not have the ability to sin experience a greater freedom than those who can. i believe Mary had such 'greater' freedom, in that she was incapable of sinning."]

***All of your and your church's musings are mere SPECULATION with NO (i.e., zero...zilch) support in Scripture. Mary was a born sinner: "As it is written, there is NONE righteous, NO, NOT ONE: There is NONE that understandeth, there is NONE that seeketh after God" [Romans 3:10-11].

Damiano

[aalpha1989]

[quote name='Damiano' date='09 March 2010 - 03:44 PM' timestamp='1268167465' post='2069708']
*["Those who do not have the ability to sin experience a greater freedom than those who can. i believe Mary had such 'greater' freedom, in that she was incapable of sinning."]

***All of your and your church's musings are mere SPECULATION with NO (i.e., zero...zilch) support in Scripture. Mary was a born sinner: "As it is written, there is NONE righteous, NO, NOT ONE: There is NONE that understandeth, there is NONE that seeketh after God" [Romans 3:10-11].

Damiano
[/quote]

Have you been around here before?

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='aalpha1989' date='09 March 2010 - 01:46 PM' timestamp='1268167580' post='2069709']
Have you been around here before?
[/quote]
He likes to "stop storms."