A Question for Catholics

[RileyG]

Jesus too submitted Himself to Baptism. Jesus did not need it. Mary was without sin.

Amen!

 

[RileyG]

Good point, 1st sentence. 2nd: that was to “Fulfill all righteousness”, which is only in Messiah Jesus. He is our righteousness, as Christians. Mary, et al, that is.

Mary, et al, what?

 

[RileyG]

One comment posted in this thread was something like Mary being a sinner is a relatively new idea. Practice sin, of course not. But being sinless? The Scripture passages in Leviticus and Luke make it plain that she was dependent on God to walk by faith, obeying the Jewish customs (mandated by the Lord) and in the process was filled with grace.

Concerning Luke 2:21-24:

On the eighth day after Messiah Jesus was born, Joseph and Mary had Jesus circumcised. This could have been done by a rabbi at Bethlehem or in Jerusalem:

On the eighth day, when it was time to circumcise him, he was named Jesus, the name the angel had given him before he had been conceived (Luke 2:21).

This was in accordance with the Scripture’s requirement in Leviticus 12:1-2:

1 The Lord said to Moses, 2 "Say to the Israelites: 'A woman who becomes pregnant and gives birth to a son will be ceremonially unclean for seven days, just as she is unclean during her monthly period.
3 On the eighth day the boy is to be circumcised.

The next steps were for Joseph and Mary to go to Jerusalem so that Mary could undergo the post-birthing rite of burnt and sin offerings—and then present the infant Jesus for consecration. As Leviticus 12: 4,6-8 states:

4 Then the woman must wait thirty-three days to be purified from her bleeding…
6 "When the days of her purification for a son or daughter are over, she is to bring to the priest at the entrance
to the Tent of Meeting a year-old lamb for a burnt offering and a young pigeon or a dove for a sin offering.
7 He shall offer them before the Lord to make atonement for her, and then she will be ceremonially clean from her flow of blood. " 'These are the regulations for the woman who gives birth to a boy or a girl. 8 If she cannot afford a lamb, she is to bring two doves or two young pigeons, one for a burnt offering and the other for a sin offering. In this way the priest will make atonement for her, and she will be clean.' "

We see from the above that Joseph was to assist Mary in either having a lamb offered, or lacking the money for a
lamb, two doves or young pigeons. So, which creatures were offered up for Mary? We are given the answer in Luke 2:22-24:

22 When the time of their purification according to the Law of Moses had been completed, Joseph and Mary took him
to Jerusalem to present him to the Lord 23 (as it is written in the Law of the Lord, "Every firstborn male is to be consecrated to the Lord"), 24 and to offer a sacrifice in keeping with what is said in the Law of the Lord: "a pair of doves or two young pigeons."

Here, verse 24 isolates the description of the sacrifice to two types of birds: doves and pigeons.

Tying these passages from Leviticus and Luke together, there is something important to consider: there was a “sin offering” for Mary. She was not sinless, although, bless God, she lived a holy life.

________
All Scripture text quoted is taken from the HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION ®. Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society. Used by permission of Zondervan. All rights reserved. Bold and italicized text are mine.

Per the original Greek she is/was/always FULL OF GRACE. No sin was/is found within her. Ever!

She was only responding to the ancient Jewish law.

Blessings

 

[David Lamb]

Per the original Greek she is/was/always FULL OF GRACE. No sin was/is found within her. Ever!

She was only responding to the ancient Jewish law.

Blessings

Yet she in her praise said:

“And my spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior.” (Lu 1:47 NKJV)

If she was completely sinless, she didn't need a Saviour.

 

[Michie]

Hail Mary, Conceived Without Sin

Did the Blessed Virgin Mary need a savior? How can Catholics believe she was without sin when the Bible says "all have sinned?" Here's how.

www.catholic.com

 

[RileyG]

Yet she in her praise said:

“And my spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior.” (Lu 1:47 NKJV)

If she was completely sinless, she didn't need a Saviour.

Per Catholic teaching, Christ saved her at the moment of her conception. Christ is indeed her savior, he just saved her before she “fell into the pit of sinfulness” so to speak.

 

[RileyG]

The twisted deceptions have been used for 2000 years to trick the people who don't care to seek truth. More are deceived today because they don't even read Scripture nor seek Jesus .

I do read Scripture and I do seek Jesus. I am not deceived.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Per Catholic teaching, Christ saved her at the moment of her conception. Christ is indeed her savior, he just saved her before she “fell into the pit of sinfulness” so to speak.

Yup. Still saved. Still sinless.

 

[Quasiblogo]

Mary, et al, what?

That Jesus was Mary’s righteousness, just as He is ours.

 

[chevyontheriver]

That Jesus was Mary’s righteousness, just as He is ours.

Of course he is. No Catholic would deny that. What we do say is that Mary was saved from ever having sinned.

 

[RileyG]

Yup. Still saved. Still sinless.

Of course he is. No Catholic would deny that. What we do say is that Mary was saved from ever having sinned.

Amen and amen!

 

[RileyG]

That Jesus was Mary’s righteousness, just as He is ours.

No one says otherwise.

 

[David Lamb]

Per Catholic teaching, Christ saved her at the moment of her conception. Christ is indeed her savior, he just saved her before she “fell into the pit of sinfulness” so to speak.

But then the question arises: If she was not a sinner, from what did she need to be saved?

 

[The Liturgist]

But then the question arises: If she was not a sinner, from what did she need to be saved?

Original or ancestral sin, unless one subscribes to Pelagianism, in which case the idea of original sin is rejecfed.

 

[David Lamb]

Original or ancestral sin, unless one subscribes to Pelagianism, in which case the idea of original sin is rejecfed.

I am certainly no Pelagian. I thought RileyG was saying that Mary was sinless, not that she had original sin.

 

[Quasiblogo]

I certainly understand the Catholic arguments, having been raised in the RCC and spent a year in a Franciscan order. Scriptures+Tradition versus Scriptures that validate the veracity of Tradition is a "battlefield" of sorts that finds no compromise, other than to say that I know that it is possible to fellowship within commonalities. There are plenty of them. As my Mom and I, we subtly agreed agreed on, "Okay Mom, no Mariology"; "Okay Son, no counterarguing it."
She, being charismatic, made it easy as I am a charismatic evangelical (okay, okay, Catholics also call themselves 'evangelical' within the RCC rendering of the term).

Apart from the familial realm, I generally maintain the same posture, proactively. Of course, there are, I think, valid exceptions. And a civil discussion about the differences like this platform is, for me, one of them. Thank you, CF. So without further delay, I redirect:

Acts 4:12 - "There is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name[than that of Messiah Jesus] under heaven given among mortals by which we must be saved.” (NRSVCE). To which, doubtless, Catholics will say, "Well, that we accept".

However, there is...

Matthew 6:10 - "your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven."

My point being that our beliefs here must reflect what is revealed from Heaven, that is the "no other", other than Jesus. By default, that to me excludes Mary in the salvation, sanctification and justification processes--other than to say that the narratives concerning Mary are Holy Spirit-sent for example, encouragement, and perseverance by that same Spirit.

Now, how should I react to Matthew 18:18 - "Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." (NRSVCE). From my RCC experience, this quote quickly finds a ready platform for talking about sacraments of Confession, Eucharist and also about Papal authority. What is explained in this link makes the most sense to me: What Does it Mean ‘Whatever You Bind on Earth’? (Matthew 18:18)

That paragraph above, pardon me, deviates from the discussion topic of Mary, but there are so many other themes that tie directly to the primary matter being discussed.

 

[chevyontheriver]

But then the question arises: If she was not a sinner, from what did she need to be saved?

Very simply she needed to be saved from the inevitability that she would become a sinner.

 

[chevyontheriver]

I certainly understand the Catholic arguments, having been raised in the RCC and spent a year in a Franciscan order. Scriptures+Tradition versus Scriptures that validate the veracity of Tradition is a "battlefield" of sorts that finds no compromise, other than to say that I know that it is possible to fellowship within commonalities. There are plenty of them. As my Mom and I, we subtly agreed agreed on, "Okay Mom, no Mariology"; "Okay Son, no counterarguing it."
She, being charismatic, made it easy as I am a charismatic evangelical (okay, okay, Catholics also call themselves 'evangelical' within the RCC rendering of the term).

Apart from the familial realm, I generally maintain the same posture, proactively. Of course, there are, I think, valid exceptions. And a civil discussion about the differences like this platform is, for me, one of them. Thank you, CF. So without further delay, I redirect:

Acts 4:12 - "There is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name[than that of Messiah Jesus] under heaven given among mortals by which we must be saved.” (NRSVCE). To which, doubtless, Catholics will say, "Well, that we accept".

However, there is...

Matthew 6:10 - "your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven."

My point being that our beliefs here must reflect what is revealed from Heaven, that is the "no other", other than Jesus. By default, that to me excludes Mary in the salvation, sanctification and justification processes--other than to say that the narratives concerning Mary are Holy Spirit-sent for example, encouragement, and perseverance by that same Spirit.

Now, how should I react to Matthew 18:18 - "Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." (NRSVCE). From my RCC experience, this quote quickly finds a ready platform for talking about sacraments of Confession, Eucharist and also about Papal authority. What is explained in this link makes the most sense to me: What Does it Mean ‘Whatever You Bind on Earth’? (Matthew 18:18)

That paragraph above, pardon me, deviates from the discussion topic of Mary, but there are so many other themes that tie directly to the primary matter being discussed.

I’m thinking you need a new thread for that. This thread is already long in the tooth.

 

[The Liturgist]

Very simply she needed to be saved from the inevitability that she would become a sinner.

Yes, well put.

 

[RileyG]

I am certainly no Pelagian. I thought RileyG was saying that Mary was sinless, not that she had original sin.

Yes, Mary is sinless and was conceived without original sin (Immaculate Conception) per Catholic teaching.

She NEEDED a SAVIOR in CHRIST because she was only human. A very special human, but ONLY human (not divine), nonetheless.