Mary, Original Sin and Free Will


#1

I recently heard a priest comment that theoretically Mary could have said no to the angel Gabriel when asked to become the Mother of Jesus. But that her Immaculate Conception, meaning she was free from original sin, made it impossible for her to choose aginst the will of God. If this is true for Mary who had free will, how then was it possible for Adam and Eve, each also with free will, and each also without original sin (it did not yet exist right) to commit a sin by choosing against God?


#2

[quote=Steve Girone]I recently heard a priest comment that theoretically Mary could have said no to the angel Gabriel when asked to become the Mother of Jesus. But that her Immaculate Conception, meaning she was free from original sin, made it impossible for her to choose aginst the will of God. If this is true for Mary who had free will, how then was it possible for Adam and Eve, each also with free will, and each also without original sin (it did not yet exist right) to commit a sin by choosing against God?
[/quote]

That preist is wrong. Mary could have easily gone against the will of God if she desired. She was born in the same state that Adam and Eve were created.

Original Sin does not give you free will, free will is a gift that God gave to Adam and Eve before they fell. Original Sin is just the loss of Original Justice or Original Holiness.

Mary could have easily said no but she did not desire to go against his will. Of her own will she submitted to the will of God.

Otherwise it would have been pointless for the early church fathers to compare Mary to Eve because she would not have been able to make the choice. They compare her with Eve saying that Eve denied God and Mary said yes. Here are a couple posts with a couple links to what the fathers say of Mary as the new Eve.

forums.catholic.com/showpost.php?p=334244&postcount=15

forums.catholic.com/showpost.php?p=334304&postcount=17


#3

i believe in god and 2 his only son jesus…
and 2 his mother virgin mary…
but i dnt think that we consider mary is a god,saint or redmedptrix!
because mary is only a instrument to born juses…
she the one who choosen by the god!..
but mary is came from in a original sin so i dnt think that she
is able to be a redmedptrix because she came from in a original sin…

why we consider mary is a saint or god???
she have a statue tha tthe catholic treat that like a god???
she is only a instrument not a god or saint at all???
who can explain 2 me???


#4

[quote=marvhet]i believe in god and 2 his only son jesus…
and 2 his mother virgin mary…
but i dnt think that we consider mary is a god,saint or redmedptrix!
because mary is only a instrument to born juses…
she the one who choosen by the god!..
but mary is came from in a original sin so i dnt think that she
is able to be a redmedptrix because she came from in a original sin…

why we consider mary is a saint or god???
she have a statue tha tthe catholic treat that like a god???
she is only a instrument not a god or saint at all???
who can explain 2 me???
[/quote]

Saint Worship ?

catholic.com/library/Saint_Worship.asp

The Key to Understanding Mary

cin.org/users/james/files/key2mary.htm


#5

[quote=marvhet]i believe in god and 2 his only son jesus…
and 2 his mother virgin mary…
but i dnt think that we consider mary is a god,saint or redmedptrix!
because mary is only a instrument to born juses…
she the one who choosen by the god!..
but mary is came from in a original sin so i dnt think that she
is able to be a redmedptrix because she came from in a original sin…

why we consider mary is a saint or god???
she have a statue tha tthe catholic treat that like a god???
she is only a instrument not a god or saint at all???
who can explain 2 me???
[/quote]

Mary is the greatest of the saints. We do believe that she is kind of like a co-redemptrix but it is in the sense of the writtings of the fathers I linked to earlier.


#6

[quote=marvhet]i believe in god and 2 his only son jesus…
and 2 his mother virgin mary…
but i dnt think that we consider mary is a god,saint or redmedptrix!
because mary is only a instrument to born juses…
she the one who choosen by the god!..
but mary is came from in a original sin so i dnt think that she
is able to be a redmedptrix because she came from in a original sin…

why we consider mary is a saint or god???
she have a statue tha tthe catholic treat that like a god???
she is only a instrument not a god or saint at all???
who can explain 2 me???
[/quote]

Catholics do not and never considered Mary as a “god”, but I would agree that she is a saint, because of her perfect obedience to God’s will, when she wholeheartedly agreed to become the mother of the Saviour. Is not perfect obedience a prime requirement for sainthood? In this sense, all saints are instruments of God, by doing His will, just as a scalpel is the surgeon’s instrument in performing an operation.

Gerry :slight_smile:


#7

[quote=jimmy]She was born in the same state that Adam and Eve were created.
[/quote]

If this is true then the flesh that Christ took on (which He received from His mother Mary) had no need of salvation, ie. only Mary’s flesh was taken to the grave and raised to eternal life and our fallen flesh did not. Thus we are without hope.

Thankfully Mary was not conceived any differently from the rest of us and it was indeed our flesh which Christ took on. In this fact lies all our hope.

John.


#8

[quote=prodromos]If this is true then the flesh that Christ took on (which He received from His mother Mary) had no need of salvation, ie. only Mary’s flesh was taken to the grave and raised to eternal life and our fallen flesh did not. Thus we are without hope.

Thankfully Mary was not conceived any differently from the rest of us and it was indeed our flesh which Christ took on. In this fact lies all our hope.

John.
[/quote]

I would think that Mary’s conscious experience was the same in that she shared with Adam and Eve the state of Original Innocence. In that state of Original Innocence the temptation is the same as well, which is to not eat of the tree in the middle of the garden.’ Metaphysically I agree with you John but not if the term ‘state’ is refering to a state of consciousness, ie; unhindered by distortions of reality caused by shame.

Can you explain what you mean by Christ’s flesh needing salvation?.Mary’s flesh was generated by the will of man, but Christ’s was not.


#9

Christ took on our flesh, took it to the grave, raised it to life and glorified it. If it was not our flesh, our fallen flesh that Christ assumed, then Christ healed nothing. “That which is not assumed is not healed.”

John


#10

[quote=prodromos]Christ took on our flesh, took it to the grave, raised it to life and glorified it. If it was not our flesh, our fallen flesh that Christ assumed, then Christ healed nothing. “That which is not assumed is not healed.”

John
[/quote]

It was our flesh which he took on.

She was concieved of both a man and a woman so Mary was concieved physically with Original Sin but at conception she was filled with the grace of God. God sanctified her like she sanctified John the Baptist.

newadvent.org/cathen/07674d.htm

ccel.org/a/aquinas/summa/TP/TP027.html#TPQ27A2THEP1


#11

[quote=prodromos]If this is true then the flesh that Christ took on (which He received from His mother Mary) had no need of salvation, ie. only Mary’s flesh was taken to the grave and raised to eternal life and our fallen flesh did not. Thus we are without hope.

Thankfully Mary was not conceived any differently from the rest of us and it was indeed our flesh which Christ took on. In this fact lies all our hope.

John.
[/quote]

I miss spoke in that post without even thinking about what I said. What I should have said was that although she was born with the nature of man, she was concieved with the grace of God. She was concieved with a form of Original Justice, but she was born into the race of man. The Catholic encyclopedia article I gave in my last post can give a little info.


#12

[quote=Benadam]I would think that Mary’s conscious experience was the same in that she shared with Adam and Eve the state of Original Innocence. In that state of Original Innocence the temptation is the same as well, which is to not eat of the tree in the middle of the garden.’ Metaphysically I agree with you John but not if the term ‘state’ is refering to a state of consciousness, ie; unhindered by distortions of reality caused by shame.

Can you explain what you mean by Christ’s flesh needing salvation?.Mary’s flesh was generated by the will of man, but Christ’s was not.
[/quote]

He is speaking of Christs flesh as the flesh of the race of man - Christ acted on behalf of mankind - needing salvation.

He is correct, but that does not affect the point. I miss spoke. Mary was bron with Adams flesh, but she was sanctified and given grace, so she was born in the state of Original Justice. So she was born in the same state that Adam was created partly, but she was also born in the same state physically that Adam died in.

Mary was given at conception, what any person is given at baptism, grace. If we were to follow podromos’ arguement, then all of us would recieve death, without resurrection, because we have recieved the same that Mary recieved, but what we recieved was at baptism. There is a difference between the two - one at conception and one at baptism - but what that means is that her soul was protected from sin at conception. Sin did not show itself at all. But she did reiceve the effects of sin, death and sorrow, because she was born into the race.


#13

[quote=jimmy]It was our flesh which he took on.

I agree Christ took on the very same human flesh as we have. The point I make when I mention that it wasn’t by the will of man that He was concieved is that His conception was brought about by the will of God. No other since Adam and Eve were concieved this way. The generating force was not carnal but divine. The generating force of His conception was the Holy Spirit and the passive force that recieved it was without original sin. These are the conditions of the first creation. Mary’s soul was embodied with fallen flesh but I can’t agree that Christ’s was.
[/quote]


#14

Yes it was, Christ had the same flesh that Mary and the rest of humanity has. One view of the redemption is that Christ died in order to make man immortal. By dieing for us he saved us from death. Christ recieved his flesh from Mary, hence it was the same as the flesh that Adam had and the same as the flesh that we had.

Another point is, Christ died so his flesh had to be a fallen flesh. The flesh of Adam and Eve was created immortal but they sinned and it became mortal.

This is from Aquinas.

As Augustine says (Contra Faust. xiv), sin is accursed, and, consequently, so is death, and mortality, which comes of sin. “But Christ’s flesh was mortal, ‘having the resemblance of the flesh of sin’”; and hence Moses calls it “accursed,” just as the Apostle calls it “sin,” saying (2 Cor. 5:21

): “Him that knew no sin, for us He hath made sin”—namely, because of the penalty of sin. “Nor is there greater ignominy on that account, because he said: ‘He is accursed of God.’” For, “unless God had hated sin, He would never have sent His Son to take upon Himself our death, and to destroy it. Acknowledge, then, that it was for us He took the curse upon Himself, whom you confess to have died for us.” Hence it is written (Gal. 3:13): "Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us."
Aquinas clearly recognized that Christ had a fallen flesh.
[/quote]


#15

Dear marhvet,

Be more concise with your terms. Mary is NOT regarded as Redemptrix, nor has she ever been called such. The correct title is CO-Redemptrix which underscores her total dependence on her Son as the one, sole Redeemer of mankind.

Prodromos,

I think you are expressing a rather heterodox view regarding the flesh of Christ. Perhaps Father Ambrose can give some input here. Christ took on our human nature, but it was a perfect human nature, completely spotless and stainless. He obtained this perfect flesh from His mother. Orthodoxy may or may not contest this last sentence, but no Orthodox will or should ever state that Jesus’ acquisition of our human nature means that he also acquired the sinful nature that needed to be recreated through His Sacrifice.

He carried our sins ON THE CROSS, and at no other time. Recall that in the OT type of the scapegoat, the high priest would, by imposition of hands, symbolically transfer the sins of Israel on the scapegoat AT THE TIME OF THE SACRIFICE.

God bless,
Greg


#16

When using the term Co-redemptrix, it is important to remember that the Co- portion comes from the Latin “cum” which means “with,” not as we commonly assume it to mean, “equal with.”

All of us, if we, by the grace of God, come to align our will with the Father’s, are co-redemptors in that God’s will is accomplished through us. Mary is just capital “C” Co, in that without the sinless Ark of the New Covenant, salvation through Jesus could not have happened, at least not in that fullness of time.

Also, it makes it easier for me to think about this, when I remember that the Immaculate Conception merely means that Mary was born with the sanctifying grace which we receive at Baptism, which Adam and Eve had from the moment of their ensoulment.

Just as the Ark of the Covenant in the OT was so holy because God sat upon the Mercy Seat there, Mary had to be sinless for God to reside within her. The High Priests had to be ritually pure before he could enter the Holy of Holies to pour the blood of the atonement sacrifice upon the Mercy Seat, once a year. For an unpurified, non-Levite to even touch the external surface of the Ark meant death as poor Uzziah discovered. So Mary had to be unsullied by original sin to nurture God in her womb for nine months. This is also why Joseph, a good and devout Jewish man would never have even considered having sexual relations with the woman who had carried the Son of God within her womb.

Her Immaculate Conception is also a beautiful forshadowing of the New Creation of the New Covenant, reminding us that God did not create us to be broken, but to be with Him as Adam and Eve originally were, and as Mary now is.

Fr. Saunders’ article on the Immaculate Conception can be found at catholicexchange.com/vm/index.asp?art_id=26362 .

In Christ’s peace and joy,

Robin L. in TX


#17

Mary’s soul was embodied with fallen flesh but I can’t agree that Christ’s was.

disclaimer:
I don’t believe Mary’s flesh was fallen, in the sense I read it there. I acknowledge that her conception was by the will of man yet preserved from sin at that instant. The generating force was fallen but I believe the substance it generated was cleansed before it incarnated.


#18

[quote=GAssisi]Prodromos,

I think you are expressing a rather heterodox view regarding the flesh of Christ. Perhaps Father Ambrose can give some input here. Christ took on our human nature, but it was a perfect human nature, completely spotless and stainless. He obtained this perfect flesh from His mother. Orthodoxy may or may not contest this last sentence, but no Orthodox will or should ever state that Jesus’ acquisition of our human nature means that he also acquired the sinful nature that needed to be recreated through His Sacrifice.
[/quote]

How can Hebrews 4:15 be true if Christ did not have our fallen flesh?

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


#19

[quote=Benadam]Mary’s soul was embodied with fallen flesh but I can’t agree that Christ’s was.
[/quote]

disclaimer:
I don’t believe Mary’s flesh was fallen, in the sense I read it there. I acknowledge that her conception was by the will of man yet preserved from sin at that instant. The generating force was fallen but I believe the substance it generated was cleansed before it incarnated.
She had to have a fallen flesh, and that is accepted by the Catholic Church. That is why it is acceptable to believe that Mary died before being assumed into heaven. She had the same flesh Adam had, which is a fallen flesh. If she did not she would not have experienced death because Adam and Eve were created immortal.

If you read Ineffabilus Deus, you will see that the cleansing of Original Sin did not occur before conception and ensoulment. It occured at the same time as conception and ensoulment.


#20

[quote=jimmy]She had to have a fallen flesh, and that is accepted by the Catholic Church. That is why it is acceptable to believe that Mary died before being assumed into heaven. She had the same flesh Adam had, which is a fallen flesh. If she did not she would not have experienced death because Adam and Eve were created immortal.

If you read Ineffabilus Deus, you will see that the cleansing of Original Sin did not occur before conception and ensoulment. It occured at the same time as conception and ensoulment.
[/quote]

quote from the Catholic Encyclopedia:

by which gift every stain and fault, all depraved emotions, passions, and debilities, essentially pertaining to original sin, were excluded. But she was not made exempt from the temporal penalties of Adam – from sorrow, bodily infirmities, and death.

I’m guessing that is why your saying that Mary’s flesh was fallen.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.