Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site burdvax.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!ihnp4!qantel!dual!lll-crg!gymble!umcp-cs!seismo!rochester!cmu-cs-pt!cadre!psuvax1!burdvax!bnapl From: bnapl@burdvax.UUCP (Tom Albrecht) Newsgroups: net.religion.christian Subject: Re: Religious question Message-ID: <2112@burdvax.UUCP> Date: Fri, 6-Sep-85 10:53:06 EDT Article-I.D.: burdvax.2112 Posted: Fri Sep 6 10:53:06 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 11-Sep-85 05:44:40 EDT References: <144@graffiti.UUCP> <57@bbncc5.UUCP> <811@aluxe.UUCP> Reply-To: bnapl@burdvax.UUCP (Tom Albrecht) Organization: Burroughs Corp. - SDG/Devon Lines: 45 In article seifert@hammer.UUCP (Snoopy) writes: >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 The way a Pope makes a decision regarding the official doctrine of the RC church is not well known. Since the RC church relies more on tradition than the Bible, the Pope can make up just about anything and pass it off as church teaching. The quaint notion of the "Immaculate Conception" is an example of just such a teaching. Nowhere in the Bible is there any indication that Mary was without sin. On the contrary, she cries out to God as one in need of a Savior (c.f. Luke 1:46 ff). The doctrine of the "Assumption" of Mary is another in point. The RC church teaches that after Mary died her body was taken to heaven before seeing corruption and reunited with her soul. A cute idea, but hardly biblical. The RC church has used these and other heretical doctines about Mary to justify its quasi-deification of her. -- Tom Albrecht Burroughs Corp. ...{presby|psuvax1|sdcrdcf}!burdvax!bnapl "That's the news from Lake Wobegon ... "