The church teaches us Mary had an Immaculate Conception, meaning she was born without any original sin. Does there exist any theological speculations as to how this would have affected her every day life? Seems to me being born without original sin should have some rewards, like a healthier body, more astute mind, longer life, higher IQ, etc. If there were no differences in her non-original sin state from the state of other women around her, then the whole concept of original sin and its effects on us seems like a lot of made up nonsense. What would I be like if I did not have original sin??
She still suffers the physical bodily effects because, like us, she is also living outside the locked gates of Eden.
However she was free from the gravity of concupiscence which always blinds and weakens us all at times as to recognising and doing what is best.
She still lived by faith though, she misunderstood what her son was about many times.
I think it is correct that Our Lady was assumed into heaven at the age of 59. If I remember properly, one or more of the mystics say that Mary did not age past 33. She always looked the same after that.
I distinctly remember one account saying that Mary lived 15 more years after the death and resurrection of her Son, so those two accounts don’t seem to sync together.
(Someone here probably knows the mystic’s accounts of the life of Mary better than I do.)
Mystics are fallible when it comes to propositions outside of faith or morals.
And even wrt faith and morals noone has to believe them even if they are canonised.
Weird. This seems to me to be the second or third time I’ve recently seen on this site that someone has made this assertion.
The Immaculate Conception means that Mary was conceived without original sin, not that she was only born without original sin. She had already been without original sin for nine months by the time she was born!
Hmm… why would there be physical differences from this different spiritual state?
Or, do you just mean that, since particular sins have distinct physical side effects, then Mary would never experience those side effects? That would make sense. (However, I don’t know that it would be remarkable, since everyone who didn’t participate in a particular sin would likewise not suffer the effects of that sin.)
You wouldn’t have a darkened intellect and a weakened will. You wouldn’t suffer from concupiscence.
I don’t consider my intellect to be darkened and my will to be weak. Gees, I gave up smoking, after 30 years on the stuff. As for “suffering” from concupiscence. No suffering here, I’m glad I have it, gave me two nice children and a lot of fun. Sounds like a well fed, well paid eunuch, would describe your person with no consequences from original sin. What reasons would he have to think of sinning? There must have been some measurable biological difference between Mary and her contemporary’s if original sin indeed has an effect on a human.
Well you just demonstrated darkened intellect in not understanding the root meaning of the word suffer. Which is to be a helpless victim…even more so when a happy one.
Do you see all things as they really are… or are you sometimes truly tempted to want something that isn’t the greatest good? If so, then your intellect is ‘darkened’. Do you sometimes sin? Then your will is weakened.
Congratulations! So… since you knew that you should give it up, that implies that you chose poorly 30+ years ago. “Darkened intellect.”
So… sin leads to children? Sin is ‘fun’? sigh
Nope. That doesn’t even make sense.
The direct effects of original sin are on our souls. What is the “measurable biological” dimension of our souls?
This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.