Catholics, why is it necessary to believe that Mary was immaculately conceived?

[HeartenedHeart]

Doesn't sound like the Bible

Amazing how they think that God's word is spelled "Catechism", rather than "Bible", and the ultimate definer of what is real as "tradition" rather than "Truth".

 

[Calvin_1985]

For those that don't know what the Immaculate Conception is, it's a Catholic doctrine that Mary was conceived, born, and lived a sinless life. Ignoring the implications this has for whether or not Christ's work was actually necessary, I wonder why Catholics now see this as essential dogma.

I spoke online with a Catholic, albeit a nonpracticing one, about it. Basically it went something like this:

Me: "Why must Mary be seen as sinless when the Apostles never commented on such a matter?"

Them: "If Christ was born sinless, doesn't He require a sinless mother?"

Me: "No, since He was conceived of the Holy Spirit, and is God in the flesh."

Them: "Even so, why would God be born of a sinful woman?"

Me: "Wouldn't that require Mary to be born of a sinless woman also, and on throughout her ancestry, when we know from Matthew's genealogy that that isn't true?"

Them: "Mary was shielded from original sin."

Me: "So it's necessary for Christ to be born of a sinless woman to avoid the taint of original sin, but not Mary? Isn't that placing less limitations on a Human than on God?"

Them: "Let's just drop it, Mary is very special to me."



Now since this person was nonpracticing, I don't trust that I have all the facts. So Catholics, is there something I'm missing here? Why is it so central that Mary be sinless, rather than simply obedient?

It's simple...The sin nature is inherited by Adam.

 

[Concord1968]

I see heresy of Nestorianism is alive and well on Christian Forums

 

[JackRT]

That does not mean they slept together, once again you are putting modern ideas into antiquity. So no it does not state it right there

The Jews were a very prudish people, so much so that the language even lacked words for certain body parts and functions so they had to resort to euphemisms. One such is "He did not know her until she brought forth her first born son". Knowing her is a very clear reference to sexual intercourse but not necessarily conception. This being said, I strongly suspect that the story is heavily laden with symbolism.

 

[JackRT]

How do you manage to separate "Jesus" from "Christ"?

"Jesus" is a given name while "Christ" (anointed one) is a title. Jesus never held that title in life so I am not convinced that it is appropriate to apply it retroactively.

 

[doctorwho29]

"Jesus" is a given name while "Christ" (anointed one) is a title. Jesus never held that title in life so I am not convinced that it is appropriate to apply it retroactively.

Peter called Him the Christ

 

[Albion]

We know from scripture that God favored her before she conceived. The word used in Luke is 'charitoo' which is the same word used in Eph.

Eph 1:6 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.

So for me, I see Mary as being 'made accepted/favored/filled with grace, at some point before the conception. But that doesn't say to me that she was born without the nature to sin or that she never sinned or never would sin after Jesus was born.

Above all else, Mary must have been a very special young woman to have been chosen by God to care for, raise, and love as a mother God's very own Son and the Redeemer of the world.

But the fact that she had found favor with God means only that God picked her; it says nothing about being sinless. And as for the reference to being filled with grace (another way of saying having found favor), do you think of the gift of grace as something like filling your gas tank? --that if the needle is high enough on your gauge, that the person, any person, has therefore caught God's attention?

I know that you do not, but this is the approach that is taken when it is argued that filled with grace means Mary deserved to be the mother of Jesus.

 

[ralfyman]

Doesn't sound like the Bible

If you read it carefully, you will see the references to the Bible.

Catholicism is based on tradition and scripture.

 

[ralfyman]

Amazing how they think that God's word is spelled "Catechism", rather than "Bible", and the ultimate definer of what is real as "tradition" rather than "Truth".

Catechism refers to exposition of doctrine, and that uses both tradition and scripture.

I do not understand the hostility you express towards fellow Christians.

 

[Ecclesiastian]

But the fact that she had found favor with God means only that God picked her; it says nothing about being sinless. And as for the reference to being filled with grace (another way of saying having found favor), do you think of the gift of grace as something like filling your gas tank? --that if the needle is high enough on your gauge, that the person, any person, has therefore caught God's attention?

I know that you do not, but this is the approach that is taken when it is argued that filled with grace means Mary deserved to be the mother of Jesus.

To add, doesn't the New Testament advise Christians to be "full of grace"?

 

[Ecclesiastian]

I do not understand the hostility you express towards fellow Christians.

Unfortunately you'll find hostility on both sides among laity.

 

[GodLovesCats]

If you read it carefully, you will see the references to the Bible.

Catholicism is based on tradition and scripture.

I suspect Heartened Heart chose not to look carefully and never will.

One thing I never understood is why Catholicsm focuses so much on traditions that were created by men. Different Protestant churches have different traditions, even within denominations, and there are modern Protestant churches that do the opposite of what is traditional. Why do Cahtolics think they can't change?

 

[Davidnic]

I suspect Heartened Heart chose not to look carefully and never will.

One thing I never understood is why Catholicsm focuses so much on traditions that were created by men. Different Protestant churches have different traditions, even within denominations, and there are modern Protestant churches that do the opposite of what is traditional. Why do Cahtolics think they can't change?

Because what Catholics believe is that they're not traditions, small t (cultural traditions or innovations in practice).

But Traditions, capital T.

Meaning that they were passed on by Christ to the Apostles who passed them to their followers. And testified to in the writings of the Early Church Fathers.


For what we believe on that:

Scripture and Tradition

 

[GodLovesCats]

Oral preaching is what all churches do. It has nothing to do with Catholic traditions.

 

[Monk Brendan]

"Jesus" is a given name while "Christ" (anointed one) is a title. Jesus never held that title in life so I am not convinced that it is appropriate to apply it retroactively.

Actually, He did.

When He asked Simon, "Who do you say that I am?" the apostle answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God."

Do you remember the rest of the story now?

 

[doctorwho29]

Catechism refers to exposition of doctrine, and that uses both tradition and scripture.

I do not understand the hostility you express towards fellow Christians.

But should tradition be on the same level as Scripture? Revelation forbids adding to or removing from Scripture

 

[JackRT]

But should tradition be on the same level as Scripture? Revelation forbids adding to or removing from Scripture

Actually Revelation only forbids adding to or removing from Revelation.

 

[Davidnic]

But should tradition be on the same level as Scripture? Revelation forbids adding to or removing from Scripture

“stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter” 2 Thess. 2:15

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

I understand not attributing any sins to Mary, since we don't know of any she committed but the idea of the Immaculate conception seems to lessen the impact of Christ's taking on our human nature and redeeming it. On the Roman Catholic view it seems Jesus and Mary didn't have normal human natures and so I must ask, what was redeemed by Christ during his life? A nature like my own? Like Adam's fallen nature? No, a nature distinct, different, utterly free of the influence of the original transgression.

I'm open to being corrected on the specifics but if what I've said is true I think the Catholic position somewhat weakens Christ's salvation of us.

 

[doctorwho29]

I understand not attributing any sins to Mary, since we don't know of any she committed but the idea of the Immaculate conception seems to lessen the impact of Christ's taking on our human nature and redeeming it. On the Roman Catholic view it seems Jesus and Mary didn't have normal human natures and so I must ask, what was redeemed by Christ during his life? A nature like my own? Like Adam's fallen nature? No, a nature distinct, different, utterly free of the influence of the original transgression.

I'm open to being corrected on the specifics but if what I've said is true I think the Catholic position somewhat weakens Christ's salvation of us.

You make excellent points! To my understanding Catholic teachings really diminish the cross. If sacraments and whatnot save us, why did Jesus die?