Questions about the Immaculate Conception

Yes, in Orthodox theology it is just totally unnecessary. People only carry the effects of original sin, not the guilt.

Additionally, many Orthodox believe that Mary and Joseph were never married, only betrothed, so the family bloodline argument would not apply - though I don't think it makes sense anyway.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Here is how we see the IC in sacred scripture from typology and Sacred Tradition. And God did not have to make her sinless for Jesus to enter her. He just did because it was fitting. If you could create your own mother would you create her defiled in sin??

Immaculate Mary



First off I want to say the Immaculate Conception is implicit in scripture and not explicit. There are many doctrines that the bible teach that are implied but not fully spelled out such as the Trinity, the two natures of Christ, and the Immaculate conception. In order to understand the implicit doctrines we must look to the bible as a whole and in context and put the pieces of the puzzle together.In order to understand the Immaculate Conception a non-Catholic must first understand what is meant by the doctrine. Contrary to popular beliefs, it does not refer to Christ's conception in Mary's womb. The Catechism of the Catholic church quotes Pope Pius IX in 1854 in the Constitution Ineffabilis Deus saying "the Blessed Virgin Mary in the first instance of her conception, by a singular privilege and grace granted by God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the human race, was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin". This means that the Blessed Virgin Mary was given a gift by Jesus of being free of all sin personal and original since the conception of her in her mother's womb. She is the holy one: spotless, stainless, without blemish, and sinless, immaculate according to many of the early Christians such as St. Ambrose and early scripture scholar Origen.



Some Protestants would argue that Mary could not be sinless because she proclaimed that she herself had a savior. The Catholic Church teaches that Mary did have a savior, Jesus Christ, but there are two ways to be saved. One can be saved by being pulled out of the mud or one can be saved by being prevented from falling in the mud. Mary's salvation was given by Christ at her conception, anticipation for what all Christians hope for at the second coming.

Another common objection that non-Catholics raise is Romans 3:23 which says "all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God". The context of St. Paul's writings explains how this message does not pertain to Mary. Paul, when he used the word "all", was not describing every single person but rather he was using a general meaning. One can tell this by the context. Paul was speaking of personal sin and arguing that just because one was a Jew does not give him special claim to salvation. All have fallen short, both Jews and Gentiles. If St. Paul were speaking of every single human being that was born he would have to include infants, the mentally handi-capped, and Jesus, all of whom cannot sin. They are exceptions. Mary is also an exception because of her roles as the Ark of the Covenant and new Eve.

Typing away

To understand this dogma one must first understand biblical typology. Biblical typology is the study of how people and things in the Old Testament foreshadow certain fulfillments in the New Testament. Every typological fulfillment in the New Testament is greater and more real and powerful then its Old Testament type. For example, St. Paul reminds us that Jesus is a typological fulfillment of Adam (1 Cor 15:22, 45). One can see parallels between Adam and Christ. For through Adam all death comes and through Christ all life comes(Jn 3:15-16). Jesus is everything that Adam was and more. Jesus obeyed the Father perfectly, unlike Adam. Jesus fulfills and destroys Adams curse.


Mary in the New Testament is also a fulfillment of certain types namely Eve and the Ark of the Covenant. In Genesis Eve is described as a "Women" who disobeyed God. Genesis describes one woman (Eve) and one man (Adam) who are created initially immaculate. The woman and man are approached by one angel (who is fallen, the Devil) and they choose freely to disobey God and eat one food from one tree that would cause death for a whole race. In Luke's gospel the same is seen but only in reversed and redemptive way. In Luke one woman (Mary) is visited by one angel (who is holy, Gabriel) and this one woman freely chooses to obey and accept God's plan for her, unlike Eve. This one women would give birth to one man Jesus Christ who would die for all on a tree and give the world one food to eat that would give life to the whole human race (Holy Communion Jn 6:54-58).

Mary is truly the fulfillment of Eve as Jesus is of Adam. Catholic Scripture scholar Dr. Scott Hahn demonstrates that Mary is called by the title "woman" by Jesus himself(Jn 2:4, Jn 19:26-27) and in Rev 12:1-17 one discovers that the "woman" who is described as a fulfillment of Eve is the Mother of God herself.


The Fathers of the Church saw Mary as the fulfillment of Eve too. St. Justin Martyr in 155 A.D. made direct comparisons to Mary and Eve on a redemptive level. St. Ireneuas spoke of Mary as a fulfillment of Eve stating that in Luke's Gospel Mary loosed the knot of sin that Eve bound the world in. Even as early as the late 1st century the writings of Mathetes spoke of a new “incorrupt”[not corrupted by sin] Eve who was a Virgin.


The typology of Mary as New Eve is important to the Immaculate Conception because it shows implicit evidence for the doctrine. Remembering that all New Testament fulfillments are far greater and more powerful than their Old Testament types one can only conclude that Mary is immaculately conceived. Eve and Adam were created without sin; Jesus and Mary fulfill their types. Just as the new Adam, Jesus is sinless, so too the new Eve, Mary. If Mary was not conceived sinless she would be a inferior type to Eve. This is why many fathers of the church, such as St. Augustine in his work "Nature and Grace" , freely and confidently proclaimed Mary to be sinless.

New Ark of the Covenant

Another type Mary fulfills is the Ark of the Covenant. The Ark of the Covenant contained three things: the Manna from heaven, the rod of Aaron (a sign of high priestly Authority), and the ten words (or Ten Commandments) of God. Mary carried in her womb the fulfillment of all three of those things. Jesus Christ is the new manna from heaven(Jn 6:48-51) and is the new covenant high priest who rules the new kingdom, the church with a rod of iron(Rev 12:5). Like the ten words carried in the Ark, Jesus is the Word of God incarnate himself(Jn1:1,14). The United States Catholic Bishops show how St. Luke presented Mary as the new Ark of the Covenant in parallels in their pastoral letter. For example, if one compares 2 Sam 6 with Luke 1 they will find Mary being presented as the new Ark. In 2 Sam 6:2 David arose and went to Judah; in Luke 1:39 Mary arose and went to Judah. In 2 Sam 6:9 David ask "How can the ark of the Lord come to Me". In Luke 1:43 Elizabeth uses almost identical language saying " why is this granted me that the Mother of my Lord should come to me." In 2 Sam 6:11 the Ark remained for three months. In Lk 1:56 Mary stays three months with Elizabeth. In 2 Sam 6:12 David rejoices; in Lk 1:47 Mary's spirit rejoices. In 2 Sam 6:16 there is leaping and dancing. In Lk 1:41 the babe leaps in Elizabeth's womb. Also interesting to note is the Ark of the Covenant was overshadowed by the Spirit of God(Ex 40:34). Luke used the same Greek word that the Septuagint (Greek translations of the Old Testament) use in Exodus describing the Ark being overshadowed to describe Mary being overshadowed by the Holy Spirit(Lk:1:35). Clearly St. Luke sees Mary as typologically the fulfillment of the Ark.

Scripture Scholar Dr. Scott Hahn also shows how gospel writer John reveals Mary as the New Ark in the Book of Revelation(Rev 11:19). The ark of God's heavenly covenant is revealed, and in the very next verse(Rev 12:1) the woman, Mary, who gave birth to Jesus, appears. Dr. Hahn reminds readers that when Scripture was written there were no chapters and verses, and when the Book of Revelation is read in its immediate and typological context the Ark is revealed as Mary.


The Early Christian Fathers of the Church like St. Hippolytus, St. Jerome, and St. Ambrose had openly proclaimed Mary as the new Ark of the Covenant and many of the fathers of the church also spoke of her being sinless. One of the earliest hymns [The Nisibene Hymn 4th century] written in praise of Mary spoke of Mary as "without stain or blemish" and more early hymns of the early church also spoke of her as the "Ark Gilded by the Holy Ghost"[Akathist hymn 5th century]. If Mary is truly a fulfillment of the Ark then her Immaculate Conception makes sense. What the old ark contained could not be touched by sin. One had to be sanctified from sin just to carry the ark due to its precious cargo(1 Chron 15:12-14). Uzzuh was himself killed because he was a sinful man who touched the ark (2Sam 6:6-8). If the old covenant ark could not be touched by sin because of what it carried, how much more would the new covenant fulfillment of the ark (Mary) not be touched by sin for what she carried (the fulfillment of that cargo, Jesus who was far more holier). For the wisdom of God will not dwell in a body under the debt of sin(Wis 1:4), and Jesus Christ is wisdom personified(1 Cor 1:24). Combine this with St. Gabriel's proclamation to Mary giving her the title "Full of grace"(Lk 1:28) or as many Greek bible scholars have shown a more proper translation of that passage is "one who has been perfected and completed in Grace". If a person is perfected or completed in grace there is no room for sin. Hence Mary's Immaculate Conception is biblically implicit.

Conclusion

The arguments that non-Catholic scholars attempt to make disregarding the Biblical evidence for the Immaculate Conception are shown to be folly when one studies the Scripture on a deeper typological level. The Fathers of the Church proclaim Mary as the New Eve, the Ark of the Covenant, and the Immaculate. Scripture and apostolic tradition bear witness to this dogma that Protestants tend to misunderstand. Through the use of Scripture, apostolic tradition, and the Magisterium, the truth of this dogma is cemented.

Originally Posted by Athanasias

Here is how we see the IC in sacred scripture from typology and Sacred Tradition. And God did not have to make her sinless for Jesus to enter her. He just did because it was fitting. If you could create your own mother would you create her defiled in sin??

Such rationalizations are neither reliable, applicable to God's decisions, or necessary. There is no reason to think that Mary needs to ahve been sinless. If the Son of God deigned to live as one of his creatures, he surely wasn't above being born of one of them. IOW, the idea called the Immaculate Conception is no more logical than asking if we wouldn't make her a blonde if we were doing it.

First off I want to say the Immaculate Conception is implicit in scripture and not explicit.

In fact, it is neither. There is no aspect of the Biblical testimony that leads to the Immaculate Conception as a necessary conclusion.

There are many doctrines that the bible teach that are implied but not fully spelled out such as the Trinity, the two natures of Christ, and the Immaculate conception.

There's no parallel there The two natures are indeed identified and testified to in scripture, but they are not summarized in one statement. The Immaculate Conception is not in any way hinted at in scripture nor is there any reason to think that it follows from what is given us in the word.

Some Protestants would argue that Mary could not be sinless because she proclaimed that she herself had a savior. The Catholic Church teaches that Mary did have a savior, Jesus Christ, but there are two ways to be saved. One can be saved by being pulled out of the mud or one can be saved by being prevented from falling in the mud. Mary's salvation was given by Christ at her conception, anticipation for what all Christians hope for at the second coming.

Mary was not given salvation at her conception. She was not made immune to actual sin, even if we did accept the idea of the Immaculate Conception. And if you follow along in your reasoning, you will come to this--if she could be kept from sin at conception, she could be cleansed of all sin at the Annunciation, providing everything you want in your mother without the necessity of inventing the "Immaculate Conception."

...............And that is why you are not Catholic

Originally Posted by Athanasias

...............And that is why you are not Catholic

That's why I'm not Roman Catholic.

Nonetheless, I appreciate it whenever two posters clearly lay out their different positions on matters like this one. It surely beats the one-line sneers that are so often relied upon by posters (on either side) who imagine them to be so very persuasive.

It would be--and may yet be--interesting to see if other parties are influenced one way or the other by what either of us wrote here.

The flesh of Christ was provided through the body of His mother. Mary's mother did not provide the flesh of Christ. Since Mary received the grace to remain sinless, she was a pure vessel regardless of the condition of her own mother.

It is an important fact that Mary was sinless from the time of her conception, and lived a sinless life prior to the annunciation. Her holiness was the preface to her complete acceptance of the Father's will.

Peace be with you.

__________________

Gregory Nazianzen to Cledonius the Priest Against Apollinarius

For that which He has not assumed He has not healed; but that which is united to His Godhead is also saved. If only half Adam fell, then that which Christ assumes and saves may be half also; but if the whole of his nature fell, it must be united to the whole nature of Him that was begotten, and so be saved as a whole.

If Mary was not in possession of the same human nature we all inherit from Adam, then the flesh Christ assumed would not have been our flesh, and the flesh that He took to the grave and raised to new life would not have been our flesh. The only one to be saved by His death and resurrection would have been Mary.

Adam pre-fall was not in need of salvation, only post-fall. Adam's flesh pre-fall was not subject to death, only his fallen nature suffers death. Thus, if Christ did not assume the flesh of mankind which is subject to death then He did not break the curse of death over the rest of mankind through His own death and resurrection.

The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception states that Mary was conceived with a human nature that was pre-fall, one of the reasons why many Catholics believe she did not in fact die but was bodily assumed into heaven without tasting death. Unfortunately, the logical conclusion of this doctrine is that none of us can be saved

1 Corinthians 15:56
Now the sting of death [is] sin, and the power of sin the law;

Hebrews 4:15
For we have not a high priest not able to sympathise with our infirmities, but tempted in all things in like manner, sin apart.

If Christ had not assumed our fallen human condition, the flesh that was subject to death, then He could not have been tempted in all things in like manner.

Thus the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception is contrary to the Gospel of our salvation. In their effort to preserve Christ from their (incorrect) notion of original sin, the Catholics have created a doctrine which in fact denies salvation to all apart from Mary.

John

Mary preserved from sin:

"For Eve, who was a virgin and undefiled, having conceived the word of the serpent, brought forth disobedience and death. But the Virgin Mary received faith and joy, when the angel Gabriel announced the good tidings to her that the Spirit of the Lord would come upon her, and the power of the Highest would overshadow her: wherefore also the Holy Thing begotten of her is the Son of God;239 and she replied, ‘Be it unto me according to thy word.’" (Justin Martyr c.160)

"In accordance with this design, Mary the Virgin is found obedient, saying, “Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word.” (Luk_1:38) But Eve was disobedient; for she did not obey when as yet she was a virgin. And even as she, having indeed a husband, Adam, but being nevertheless as yet a virgin (for in Paradise “they were both naked, and were not ashamed,” (Gen_2:25) inasmuch as they, having been created a short time previously, had no understanding of the procreation of children: for it was necessary that they should first come to adult age,112 and then multiply from that time onward), having become disobedient, was made the cause of death, both to herself and to the entire human race; so also did Mary, having a man betrothed [to her], and being nevertheless a virgin, by yielding obedience, become the cause of salvation, both to herself and the whole human race.....And on this account does the law term a woman betrothed to a man, the wife of him who had betrothed her, although she was as yet a virgin; thus indicating the back-reference from Mary to Eve, because what is joined together could not otherwise be put asunder than by inversion of the process by which these bonds of union had arisen....And thus also it was that the knot of Eve’s disobedience was loosed by the obedience of Mary. For what the virgin Eve had bound fast through unbelief, this did the virgin Mary set free through faith. (Irenaeus c. 180)

"That the Lord then was manifestly coming to His own things, and was sustaining them by means of that creation which is supported by Himself, and was making a recapitulation of that disobedience which had occurred in connection with a tree, through the obedience which was [exhibited by Himself when He hung] upon a tree, [the effects] also of that deception being done away with, by which that virgin Eve, who was already espoused to a man, was unhappily misled, — was happily announced, through means of the truth [spoken] by the angel to the Virgin Mary, who was [also espoused] to a man.32 For just as the former was led astray by the word of an angel, so that she fled from God when she had transgressed His word; so did the latter, by an angelic communication, receive the glad tidings that she should sustain (portaret) God, being obedient to His word. And if the former did disobey God, yet the latter was persuaded to be obedient to God, in order that the Virgin Mary might become the patroness33 (advocata) of the virgin Eve. And thus, as the human race fell into bondage to death by means of a virgin, so is it rescued by a virgin; virginal disobedience having been balanced in the opposite scale by virginal obedience. For in the same way the sin of the first created man (protoplasti) receives amendment by the correction of the First-begotten, and the coming of the serpent is conquered by the harmlessness of the dove, those bonds being unloosed by which we had been fast bound to death." (ibid)

__________________

Thanks for the quotes, ContraMundum.

Are you saying that those show that the Theotokos was preserved from sin, as in "immaculately conceived"? I don't see that. What I see is that the Theotokos was obedient, where Eve was disobedient, and thus was able to bear Christ, our Salvation.

Am I misunderstanding your post?

Thanks.

Mary

__________________
Christ is risen from the dead, trampling down death by death, and upon those in the tombs bestowing Life!

I'm not saying anything much at all. Just adding that the Fathers appear to use a Midrashic interpretation on this matter- which would imply that Mary was preserved in virginity and sin. However, the whole theology is found only in traces this early on (on just about every topic), so I don't think the Fathers attempted to define much more than a simple defence of the Virgin birth.

__________________