Mary/ model of grace

quote from here: http://www.saintaquinas.com/Justification_by_Grace.html

"The Virgin Mary is the supreme model of grace in all of God’s creatures

The holy Mother of God, the Blessed Virgin Mary, is the epitome of Christian grace. Her willing participation in the birth of Jesus Christ, her life of Christian virtue and the sorrow endured by her in Christ’s Passion provides the ultimate example of faith, hope and charity for the Body of Christ. The angel Gabriel proclaims to the Virgin Mary, "Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women (Matthew 1:28). Mary, the virgin mother of Jesus, is thus granted the fullness of grace from God and attains the highest perfection of any created creature. In her humble love for God, she willingly participates in the redemption of Christ (the second Adam) as the second Eve. Thus Catholics venerate Mary as the role model by which we give undying love to our Lord, Jesus Christ. We echo the words of Mary filled by the Holy Spirit," Because he hath regarded the humility of his handmaid; for behold from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed. Because he that is mighty, hath done great things to me; and holy is his name. And his mercy is from generation unto generations, to them that fear him (Matthew 1:48-50).''

from a comment on an Amazon book:Four Witnesses by Rod Bennett--this comment is by Mike

As you know, the Catholic Church believes and teaches that by a singular act of God's grace Mary was preserved from sin from the moment of her conception. The belief goes back to the early days of Christianity and began to be formalized around AD 200 -300.

Justification for this belief goes back to the words of the angel Gabriel to Mary when he announced to her that she was to be the mother of Christ. The word "kecharitonene", as applied to the angel's greeting to her, indicates perfection of grace, meaning no room for her to sin. It is a perfect passive participle of "charitoo". Since the term is in the perfect tense, it indicates that Mary was graced in the past but with continuing effect in the present. I would invite you to a thorough investigaton of the word. Luke 1:28 happens to be the only place in the Bible where anyone is addressed with this important title. These facts beg the question, how can Mary be completely and perfectly with God's grace, yet have sin in her? The answer for me--she can't.

In Latin, this word was translated "full of grace" which is a good but not exact translation. Another less accurate translation is "highly favored one". Even so, it was post-reform Luther's view that "she (Mary) is full of grace, entirely without sin... Moreover, God guarded and protected her from all that might be harmful to her". Luther's Works 1522. My observation though is that many, many Protestants have thrown the views of Luther and other original reformers under the bus. One can only wonder when or if all the break-offs will ever cease. I see the continuation of these break-offs as a pattern fueled by Satan, for he knows, "a house divided will fall'.

In your argument, you referred us to Romans 3:10 where Paul states there is no one, without exception, who is without sin. That sweeping generalization by Paul should be considered with God-given judgement (I believed you've used the term common sense) because right off the bat, Paul omitted Jesus Christ from his statement. The argument against exceptions further breaks down when one considers babies and children who die before reaching the age of reason. Those with severe mental deficidencies might also be considered. Babies in the womb are yet another consideration. Paul himself speaks of Jacob and Esau who, as unborn children, "had done nothing good or bad" (Rom 9:11). The point is THERE ARE VALID EXCEPTIONS to Paul's statement, even though, as a generalization, the statement is true. This is supported by the fact that such generaliztions are used in many other placdes in scripture, as in this same letter to the Romans (11:26), where Paul ssays that "all Israel will be saved", and in Mt 2:3 it says "all of Jerusalem" were troubled. Yet, were all of Israel going to be saved, or was each and every person in Jerusalem troubled?

I won't elaborate here, but the Church also understands Mary to be the fulfillment of three Old Testament types: the cosmos, Eve, and the ark of the covenant. A type is a person, event, or thing in the OT which foreshadows or symbolizes some future reality God brings to pass. (Col 2:17, Heb 1:1, 9:9, 9:24, 10:1, 1 Cor 15:45-49, Gal 4:24-25)

To briefly illustrate, in her role as the new Eve (Gen 3:15, Judges 4:21, 9:53; Judith 13:6-8, 18, 20, Jn 2:4, 19-26, Rev 12:1) it is clear that Mary's victory over Satan is complete through the merits of her Son (Gen 3:15, 1 Sam 17:46-57, Mt 27:33, Jn19:17, Mk 15:22, Lk 223-33). That would not be the case if for even a moment Mary was under Satan's power through sin.

In conclusion, I should point out, that as I observe Protestants objections, I observe them to be reluctant to discuss the inconsistencies, gaps, constradictions, problems with logic, and predjudices in their own beliefs. This is not to be unduly critical for the sake of being critical, it's just an observation. I also observe many of my Protestant friends to have been, from birth in many cases, the recipients of false teachings and innuendo about what Catholics believe, as well as holding some profound venom for the word "Catholic", a disdain which I sense taints their judgement. In fairness, I will cite a few examples.

from comment 385 http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2009/07/ecclesial-deism/

Also, from 189 A.D., well before the 4th century, St. Irenaeus writes on the importance of Mary to our salvation, in strong terms that I cannot imagine most modern Reformed Protestants accepting:

“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]).

(Source: http://www.churchfathers.org/category/mary-and-the-saints/mary-without-sin/)

Through her obedience to God in consenting to bear the Incarnation, Mary “was made the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race.” Again, these are the words of a well-known defender of Christianity against heretics in 189 A.D.

also in a comment on the same thread:St. Augustine writes on Mary in his “Nature and Grace” from 415 A.D.:

“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]).

(Source for the above early Church passages on Mary:http://www.churchfathers.org/category/mary-and-the-saints/mary-without-sin/

from comment that answers a statement about the church father's beliefs found at comment 70 here http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2010/12/marys-immaculate-conception/

A number of Fathers specifically taught that the Virgin Mary committed actual sin even after the conception and birth of Christ (e.g. St. Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origin and St. Basil).

Tertullian and Origen are not Fathers. St. Irenaeus says that at Cana Jesus checked Mary’s “untimely haste.” But this is not a sin, nor does St. Irenaeus say that she sinned. Instead, in that same work, he says that by her obedience she undid the knot the first Eve made by her sin, as I’ve explained in comment #30 above. As for St. Basil, he does not say that Mary sinned, but rather that the sword that pierced her heart at the Cross included “some doubt.” Whether this is sinful doubt, or the sinless sort of faith-seeking-understanding shown in the “how can this be?” she expressed at the Annunciation, St. Basil does not say, though it is likely that he (like Origen), not knowing of the solution worked out later by Bl. Duns Scotus (see the post at the top of this page) believed that in order for her to be saved by Christ, she had to have sinned in some venial way at the Cross. Even so, one other Church Father does not constitute a moral consensus, and thus the position is not justifiably called “catholic” or “Catholic.”