Carol Burnett Show outtakes - Tim Conway's Elephant Story

I laugh every time I see this. Warning: mild swearing at the end.

The Development of the Doctrine of the Immaculate Conception

The feast of the Immaculate Conception of Mary was celebrated on the 8th of December.

From the very moment of her conception she was free from the all stain of original sin and in a state of grace. Immaculate means 'without stain'. But she still suffered from the effects of sin – sorrow, illness, death.

How is this possible?

Well, Mary received grace same as us via Christ's death on the cross; His death is an eternal event meaning that the effects of it reach back in time as well as forward. Same as with the Sacrifice of the Mass it cannot be confine to time. God granted her freedom from sin to make her a fitting mother for His Son.

If was officially declared on 8 December 1854 by Pope Pius IX. So does that mean that the Pope just thought of it one day and said to himself 'that's a good idea'?

No it does not.

Let's first start with the Bible (I'm using the Dewey Rheims translation); Genesis 3:15 “I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she/he shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.”

There is a parallel between Eve and Mary; If there is to be complete enmity between the woman and the serpent, then she never should have been in any way subject to him even briefly. This implies an Immaculate conception.

Luke 1:28 “And the angel being come in, said unto her: Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.”

An angel declared her 'full of grace'; it indicates an unique abundance of grace in her person.

There are a lot angels visiting people in the Bible, but Mary is the only one greeted by 'Full of Grace”

As I've said before the doctrine was not invented in 1854, it was defined or declared. That only happens for two reasons; firstly being that there is a controversy that needs to be cleared up or secondly when the Magisterium believes that the faithful can be helped by a particular emphasis on an already preexisting belief.

The declaration was prompted by the latter of the two. Pius IX had a great devotion to Mary and hoped that the declaration would inspire others in their devotion to Mary.

Let's us now turn to the Fathers of the Church. Now who exactly are these guys? Simple answer: they are men who lived before 750 and are called as such because of their leadership in the early Church, especially in defending, expounding, and developing Catholic doctrines. For the first two centuries, most of these men were bishops, although in later years certain priests and deacons were also recognized as Fathers. They were closes to the sources than we are today.

Many of them make very blatant statements about Mary's immaculate nature.

• St. Justine Martyr (d.165) the Church’s first major lay apologist, remarks on Mary's obedience to God (her willingness to do His will) in opposite to Eve's disobedience.
• St. Irenaenus (2^nd century) Bishop in Gaul, expands on that saying that Mary's obedience undid what Eve's disobedience brought to man.
• Origen (184/5-253/4) calls her worthy of God, immaculate of the immaculate.
• The Syrian Fathers wouldn't shut up (as it were) about her sinlessness.

The Syrians were really the first to have a feast day commemorating this, since about the 5^th century. It becomes wide spread by the 7^th century in the East and by the 8^th it is celebrated in parts of the Western Church.

The feast day became very deeply rooted in Anglo-Saxon monasteries by the 11^th century. We even find an old calendar in Winchester dating 1030 with 'Conceptio S'ce S. Mariae'. The monks celebrated it and it was encouraged to the devotion of the individual.

But then, cue ominous music please, the Normans arrived.

For the Normans the feast appeared to be very English, too English; they considered it a product a product of insular simplicity and ignorance (the celebration, not the idea behind it mind you). Thus we can thank the Normans for stopping public devotion, but it lived on in the devotion of the individual. Thank you Normans (sarcasm in abundance here).

It was reestablished, however, by Anselm the Younger, nephew of St. Anselm (Yeah, that's not confusing).

It is after this, going into the 12^th century, that we begin to see a confusion over the idea of the Immaculate Conception.

St Bernard of Clairvaux protested what he perceived to be a new way of honoring Mary and reproved the canons (those are people of a religious order who are attached to a particular church) of the Cathedral of Lyons for acting without the authority of Rome when they started celebrating it in 1240. He saw it as a foreign to the traditions of the Church, but here's the kicker – he didn't know that the Church in Greece and Syria had been celebrating the feast with a rich tradition regarding the sinlessness of Mary. (There's no phone system, email, facebook, twitter, or texting)

He was not wrong in wanting a careful inquiry into the reason for observing the feast.

Even St Thomas Aquinas, one of the foremost philosophers and theologians of the Medieval Church, had difficulty grasping the concept. As seen in the Summa Theologica (III.27:2,a2), mostly along the lines of Mary's redemption, how could she be redeemed if she had not sinned.

For some reason, the major philosophers and theologians at the time were stuck on two possibilities:

One, the sanctification of Mary happened before the fusion of the soul into the body; or

Two, the sanctification happened after the union of soul and body.

None of them ever truly considered the moment between – the sanctification of the soul at the moment of conception. The idea of both the sanctification and the fusion of the soul could be simultaneous in time.

This is a good example of how science and faith work together.  When conception was better defined by science it aided in a clearer understanding of the doctrine.

Of course there were some issues, because people always have issues.

St Paul in Romans (5:12) states that all men have sinned via Adam. That would include Mary, right? By this declaration, St. Paul is trying to explain that all men need redemption via Christ. Mary is no exception to this rule as stated before.

Then the silence of the Church Fathers. Well, as we have seen the Church Fathers were not silent, just the ones that most people in the West were reading. There was limited access to those sources and some were lost to them, but not to us today.

It was Blessed John Duns Scotus (d. 1308)(a Franisican) who provided the answer of the simultaneous sanctification and conception. He stated that God had sanctified Mary at the moment of her conception in His foreknowledge that the Blessed Virgin would consent to bear Christ. In other words, she too had been redeemed—her redemption had simply been accomplished at the moment of her conception, rather than (as with all other Christians) in baptism. It was essentially Scotus who laid the foundation of the doctrine that we see to day and Pius IX referenced him when declaring the feast.

After Scotus the doctrine became commonplace at all the major universities and the feast was fast spreading. Most religious orders took up the celebration, except the Dominicans – why? They're sticking with Aquinas.

In 1439 the University of Paris asked the Council of Basle for a dogmatic definition. After 2 years the bishops declared the Immaculate Conception : a doctrine which was pious, constant with Catholic worship, faith, right reason and Holy Scripture and no one could declare contrary to this.

Problem solved, right? 

But wait – this is 1441. The problem? Council of Basle was not an ecumenical council, meaning that anything it declared only effected the area that those bishops lead, not for the Church as a whole. So disputes and discussions continued.

In 1661 P. Alexander VII promulgated in 'Sollicitudo omnium Ecclesiarum' the true sense of the word 'conceptio', and that the immunity of Mary from original sin in the first moment of the creation of her soul and its formation into the body was the subject of the feast. This was when it was finally universally accepted within the Church. So by the time Pius IX promulgated the dogma on 8 December 1854 there was a ring of 'about time'.

In the decades that followed an octave was attached to the feast then became a holy day of obligation, then was allowed a vigil. All of which were in practice in local tradition in many areas.

Our Lady of Immaculate Conception was decreed By the First Council of Baltimore (1846) as the principal Patron of the US.

(This is a rough transcript of a lecture I gave to the RCIA class at my church for the Feast Day.)