The Church Fathers-Mary: Without Sin

“[T]he report concerning the child was noised abroad in Bethlehem. Some said, ‘The Virgin Mary has given birth before she was married two months.’ And many said, ‘She has not given birth; the midwife has not gone up to her, and we heard no cries of pain’” (Ascension of Isaiah 11 [A.D. 70]).

“So the Virgin became a mother with great mercies. And she labored and bore the Son, but without pain, because it did not occur without purpose. And she did not seek a midwife, because he caused her to give life. She bore as a strong man, with will . . . ” (Odes of Solomon 19 [A.D. 80])

“[Jesus] became man by the Virgin so that the course which was taken by disobedience in the beginning through the agency of the serpent might be also the very course by which it would be put down. Eve, a virgin and undefiled, conceived the word of the serpent and bore disobedience and death. But the Virgin Mary received faith and joy when the angel Gabriel announced to her the glad tidings that the Spirit of the Lord would come upon her and the power of the Most High would overshadow her, for which reason the Holy One being born of her is the Son of God. And she replied ‘Be it done unto me according to your word’ [Luke 1:38]” (Dialogue with Trypho the Jew 100 [A.D. 155]).

“Consequently, then, Mary the Virgin is found to be obedient, saying, ‘Behold, O Lord, your handmaid; be it done to me according to your word.’ Eve, however, was disobedient, and, when yet a virgin, she did not obey. Just as she, who was then still a virgin although she had Adam for a husband—for in paradise they were both naked but were not ashamed; for, having been created only a short time, they had no understanding of the procreation of children, and it was necessary that they first come to maturity before beginning to multiply—having become disobedient, was made the cause of death for herself and for the whole human race; so also Mary, betrothed to a man but nevertheless still a virgin, being obedient, was made the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race. . . . Thus, the knot of Eve’s disobedience was loosed by the obedience of Mary. What the virgin Eve had bound in unbelief, the Virgin Mary loosed through faith” (Against Heresies 3:22:24 [A.D. 189]).

“The Lord then was manifestly coming to his own things, and was sustaining them by means of that creation that is supported by himself. He was making a recapitulation of that disobedience that had occurred in connection with a tree, through the obedience that was upon a tree [i.e., the cross]. Furthermore, the original deception was to be done away with—the deception by which that virgin Eve (who was already espoused to a man) was unhappily misled. That this was to be overturned was happily announced through means of the truth by the angel to the Virgin Mary (who was also [espoused] to a man). . . . So if Eve disobeyed God, yet Mary was persuaded to be obedient to God. In this way, the Virgin Mary might become the advocate of the virgin Eve. And thus, as the human race fell into bondage to death by means of a virgin, so it is rescued by a virgin. Virginal disobedience has been balanced in the opposite scale by virginal obedience. For in the same way, the sin of the first created man received amendment by the correction of the First-Begotten” (ibid., 5:19:1 [A.D. 189]).

“And again, lest I depart from my argumentation on the name of Adam: Why is Christ called Adam by the apostle [Paul], if as man he was not of that earthly origin? But even reason defends this conclusion, that God recovered his image and likeness by a procedure similar to that in which he had been robbed of it by the devil. It was while Eve was still a virgin that the word of the devil crept in to erect an edifice of death. Likewise through a virgin the Word of God was introduced to set up a structure of life. Thus what had been laid waste in ruin by this sex was by the same sex reestablished in salvation. Eve had believed the serpent; Mary believed Gabriel. That which the one destroyed by believing, the other, by believing, set straight” (The Flesh of Christ 17:4 [A.D. 210].

“If therefore it might come to pass by the power of your grace, it has appeared right to us your servants that, as you, having overcome death, do reign in glory, so you should raise up the body of your Mother and take her with you, rejoicing, into heaven. Then said the Savior [Jesus]: ‘Be it done according to your will’” (The Passing of the Virgin 16:2–17 [A.D. 300]).

“You alone and your Mother are more beautiful than any others, for there is no blemish in you nor any stains upon your Mother. Who of my children can compare in beauty to these?” (Nisibene Hymns 27:8 [A.D. 361]).

“Mary’s life should be for you a pictorial image of virginity. Her life is like a mirror reflecting the face of chastity and the form of virtue. Therein you may find a model for your own life . . . showing what to improve, what to imitate, what to hold fast to” (The Virgins 2:2:6 [A.D. 377]).

“The first thing which kindles ardor in learning is the greatness of the teacher. What is greater [to teach by example] than the Mother of God? What more glorious than she whom Glory Itself chose? What more chaste than she who bore a body without contact with another body? For why should I speak of her other virtues? She was a virgin not only in body but also in mind, who stained the sincerity of its disposition by no guile, who was humble in heart, grave in speech, prudent in mind, sparing of words, studious in reading, resting her hope not on uncertain riches, but on the prayer of the poor, intent on work, modest in discourse; wont to seek not man but God as the judge of her thoughts, to injure no one, to have goodwill towards all, to rise up before her elders, not to envy her equals, to avoid boastfulness, to follow reason, to love virtue. When did she pain her parents even by a look? When did she disagree with her neighbors? When did she despise the lowly? When did she avoid the needy?” (ibid., 2:2:7).

“Come, then, and search out your sheep, not through your servants or hired men, but do it yourself. Lift me up bodily and in the flesh, which is fallen in Adam. Lift me up not from Sarah but from Mary, a virgin not only undefiled, but a virgin whom grace had made inviolate, free of every stain of sin” (Commentary on Psalm 118:22–30 [A.D. 387]).

“Our Lord . . . was not averse to males, for he took the form of a male, nor to females, for of a female he was born. Besides, there is a great mystery here: that just as death comes to us through a woman, life is born to us through a woman; that the devil, defeated, would be tormented by each nature, feminine and masculine, as he had taken delight in the defection of both” (Christian Combat 22:24 [A.D. 396]).

“That one woman is both mother and virgin, not in spirit only but even in body. In spirit she is mother, not of our head, who is our Savior himself—of whom all, even she herself, are rightly called children of the bridegroom—but plainly she is the mother of us who are his members, because by love she has cooperated so that the faithful, who are the members of that head, might be born in the Church. In body, indeed, she is the Mother of that very head” (Holy Virginity 6:6 [A.D. 401]).

“Having excepted the holy Virgin Mary, concerning whom, on account of the honor of the Lord, I wish to have absolutely no question when treating of sins—for how do we know what abundance of grace for the total overcoming of sin was conferred upon her, who merited to conceive and bear him in whom there was no sin?—so, I say, with the exception of the Virgin, if we could have gathered together all those holy men and women, when they were living here, and had asked them whether they were without sin, what do we suppose would have been their answer?” (Nature and Grace 36:42 [A.D. 415]).

“Therefore the Virgin is immortal to this day, seeing that he who had dwelt in her transported her to the regions of her assumption” (Homily on Simeon and Anna [A.D. 400]).

“[T]he Lord said to his Mother, ‘Let your heart rejoice and be glad, for every favor and every gift has been given to you from my Father in heaven and from me and from the Holy Spirit. Every soul that calls upon your name shall not be ashamed, but shall find mercy and comfort and support and confidence, both in the world that now is and in that which is to come, in the presence of my Father in the heavens’” (The Falling Asleep of Mary [A.D. 400]).

“And from that time forth all knew that the spotless and precious body had been transferred to paradise” (ibid.).

“The course of this life having been completed by blessed Mary, when now she would be called from the world, all the apostles came together from their various regions to her house. And when they had heard that she was about to be taken from the world, they kept watch together with her. And behold, the Lord Jesus came with his angels, and, taking her soul, he gave it over to the angel Michael and withdrew. At daybreak, however, the apostles took up her body on a bier and placed it in a tomb, and they guarded it, expecting the Lord to come. And behold, again the Lord stood by them; the holy body having been received, he commanded that it be taken in a cloud into paradise, where now, rejoined to the soul, [Mary’s body] rejoices with the Lord’s chosen ones and is in the enjoyment of the good of an eternity that will never end” (Eight Books of Miracles 1:4 [A.D. 584]).

“But Mary, the glorious Mother of Christ, who is believed to be a virgin both before and after she bore him, has, as we said above, been translated into paradise, amid the singing of the angelic choirs, whither the Lord preceded her” (ibid., 1:8).

I appreciate your posts.

That same writing, which was breathed by God Himself, is read and understood by us but interpreted by the Holy Spirit, who authored the original document…The Holy Spirit, not the Church, is infallible…

Would the infallible Holy Spirit interpret the same scripture in very different ways?

If you and I say the Holy spirit interprets a particular passage in different ways, which is then to become the Christian faith?

Ad Hominem attack much? That's such a strawman that I'm surprised your post doesn't start singing "If I only had a brain".

Is it now? Have you ever attended a Pentecostal snake service? I have.

Pentecostals don't worship snakes and you full well know it. Next time, try an attack that's at least somewhat rooted in reality.

Here's what I full well know: no Catholics worship Mary. I also know that the regard for Mary goes back right to Apostolic times, including the early Church Fathers. I know that the Eucharistic celebration goes back to the Apostolic Fathers as well. I know that the Gospel and Acts writer Luke wrote the first icon of Mary. I know that the Septuagint was the OT of choice of Jesus and the Apostles, as well as the Church to this day. I know that those who reject the Church given full authority by Christ differ from Simon Magus, those who rejected Jesus after being told about eating His body and drinking His blood, those who create or listen to another gospel not told to them by the Church and those who attack the Church incessantly and with the vilest untruths, only in degree and tactics, but not in motivation.

In dealing with those who spurn the Church, especially those who were of the Faith and then rejected it, I have normally seen at least 4 of the 7 deadly sins indulged in, and sometimes all seven. I shall list them for you:

Pride. Envy. Gluttony. Lust. Anger. Greed. Sloth.

To take this to the impersonal, I will say that I think that Martin Luther only showed six. Calvin, arguably five. I don't think that Calvin indulged in either gluttony or sloth. But he more than made up for it in the remainder...

Where does your sect get extrabiblical teachings such as justification by faih alone and imputed righteousness from?

You demonstrate to me that you do not have any idea of what new testament "grace" is all about!

Eph. 2:8-9 By "faith and not by works".

Romans 3:24&28, 5:1&9, 8:30, 1 Cor. 6:11, Gal. 2:17, 3:11&24, Jesus' death on the cross had been credited to my account and I am not guilty because of what He did for me.

You should take a good look at Gal. 5:4 "You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace."

There is a difference between personal sin, which is what I was talking about, and the sin inherited from Adam (original sin).

Actually its good you can now see that the passage in Romans is better understood as not referring to personal sin, but rather the collective sin of Adam. I believe marshmallow was trying to make that point to you before. At any rate, from this understanding you now seem to posess, it’s quite simple for you to find agreement with the Church on this point. To whit:

Yes Mary needed a Savior like all of us, but he Original Sin was never allowed to affect her. So, even if one is a rigid absolutist when it comes to Rom 3:23 et al, one can still agree with the Church. (so long as one does not confuse that sin with personal sin, as so many critics of Mary do while gleefully posting references such as Rom 3:23)

The Holy Spirit will not, ever, interpret Scripture in a different way. He is a part of the Trinity and we know that God does not change.

Now, if for example you and I disagree upon the interpretation of Scripture, that means one of three possible things has happened.

1. You have incorrectly interpreted Scripture. 2. I have incorrectly interpreted Scripture. 3. We both have incorrectly interpreted Scripture.

The way we solve this issue is, as Scripture instructs, to interpret Scripture with Scripture. Whichever of our ideas agrees with the rest of Scripture is the one which is right. Tradition has no place here.

No offense, but I’m going with God the Father.

No you're not. Not unless he's on the phone to you.

You.......that's right ......you, are reading Scripture and filtering its words through your mind. Just as when you read any document.

What is understood, is the work of your intellect. That's where the Church Fathers come in. They don't replace Scripture. They help to shed light on it. Instead of our own feeble minds, we have the help of these holy men.

St. Peter himself says (regarding some of St. Paul's letters)......
And account the longsuffering of our Lord, salvation; as also our most dear brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, hath written to you: [16] As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, to their own destruction. 2Peter 3: 15-16

Hard to be understood!

Look for enlightenment amongst those men who immediately followed the Apostles.

We're "praying," i.e. asking in the old sense (I pray thee - I prithee - pray tell) a friend to pray (in the "worship" sense) to God for us, just a friend who is already a member of the Church Triumphant in heaven.

That's the cloud of witnesses who are ready to intercede on our behalf. Because we are all members of the family of Christ, we can ask the Blessed Virgin, or St. Padre Pio, or St. Paul, or St. Therese, to pray for us. The prayers of a righteous man (or woman - the Greek says "a righteous (one)") avail much. How much more so one who is already a saint?

More Ad Hominem attacks?

Only when dealing with men.

Did you sleep through debate class or are you just this intellectually stunted?

Nope, I just consider the opponent.

Can you not make a clear, concise attack on the points or are you just relegated to using talking points.

What points are you making? I only see a mindless regurgitation of 150 year old antiCatholic screeds. Were there actual points in there?

Alinsky, is that you? I didn't know we had such a liberal great amongst us here.

The company you look like you are keeping represents the finest minds ever to come crawling out of the unelectrified swamps forgotten even by the revenooers.

Thanks for your reply:

The way we solve this issue is, as Scripture instructs, to interpret Scripture with Scripture.

But how do we do this? We cannot put Scripture, or the Holy Spirit, on the witness stand.

Do we reason it out or does the Holy Spirit interpret?

Is it now? Have you ever attended a Pentecostal snake service? I have.

I'm going to call your bluff here. Time, date and location or it didn't happen. I, personally, have grown up around Pentecostals and even snake-handlers and I know, from 30 years of personal experience, that you're lying about Pentecostals worshiping snakes.

The rest of your post is, frankly, Roman Catholic claptrap unfit for lining a birdcage. I never said that we, as Christians, shouldn't call Mary blessed, just that she wasn't sinless. Your little screed about Simon Magus, Calvin and Martin Luther matter little to me as well, since I'm not a Calvinist, Luthernist or any other type of traditional Reformed Protestant. If you actually did know as much as you claim to know about Pentecostals and other Fundamentalists like myself, you'd know we reject Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant doctrines equally if they don't line up with Scriptures.

So until you come back with something more than that, I'm finished with you. You've proven that you have no clue as to what you're talking about and debating you is, literally, throwing pearls before swine.

I think at the root of the differences - assuming both agree on intercessory prayer - is The Communion of Saints.

Somewhere along the line, after the Reformation, the Saints in Heaven portion of the Communion of Saints (as in the creeds) became lost among some Christian churches.

The new variations include the dead are asleep, or the Saints in Heaven are not in communion or can't hear, etc. As long as this difference remains, even after agreeing on the meaning of pray and the efficacy of intercessory prayer, there will still be a divide.

thank you both for your posts.

The Holy Spirit interprets it. I agree that we cannot, after a fashion, put the Scripture on the witness stand, so to speak but we can ensure that our views line up as closely with the rest of Scripture as possible. Believe it or not, I'm actually a firm believer in the idea of "in essentials, unity; in doubtful matters, liberty; in all things, charity."

I see it like this. If you and I disagree but honestly approach the Holy Spirit with the matter and allow Him to straighten us out, He will do so and there will be no disunity. If we still disagree, then we need to go back to my earlier logic tree and see where we were in error. This is why I see good things, as well as error, in all denominations. We've all fallen short, it's our nature.

I’m not making it personal, I’m challenging his account of events. Logic dictates that those who bring an accusation hold the burden of proof in the matter. He’s provided no proof, therefore his accusations are false until such a time as he provides that proof. There are clearly visible falsehoods in his testimony and I’ve challenged him on those grounds.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.