Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 (Tek) 9/28/84 based on 9/17/84; site hammer.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!orca!hammer!seifert
From: seifert@hammer.UUCP (Snoopy)
Newsgroups: net.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Religious question
Message-ID: <1480@hammer.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 4-Sep-85 16:45:10 EDT
Article-I.D.: hammer.1480
Posted: Wed Sep  4 16:45:10 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 5-Sep-85 10:13:14 EDT
References: <144@graffiti.UUCP> <57@bbncc5.UUCP> <811@aluxe.UUCP>
Reply-To: seifert@hammer.UUCP (Snoopy)
Organization: The Daisy Hill Puppy Farm
Lines: 23
Summary: 

In article <811@aluxe.UUCP> bobhic@aluxe.UUCP (ADOLT) writes:

>"Immaculate Conception" doctrine refers to the conception of
>Mary, not Jesus.  Made an article of faith by Pope Pius IX
>in 1854, it holds that "the Blessed Virgin Mary, from the
>first instant of her conception, was, by a most singular
>grace and privilege of Almighty God...preserved from all
>stain of Original Sin."

How did the Pope come to this conclusion?  Also, it seems to
be implied that Mary didn't commit any sins, otherwise she
would be stained with sin anyway. (yes? no?)  If so, it then
seems that she could have provided the sacrifice of someone
who was without sin just as well as Jesus could.  (Or was
the sacrificial person required to be male?)

The way I heard it, (no this isn't net.jokes!  :-)  ) was that
the "stain of Original Sin" was transmitted through the father,
thus Jesus could be free of sin 'merely' by means of the
virgin birth.  Mary was not required to be without sin.

Snoopy
tektronix!hammer!seifert