This would be impossible if Mary were touched by any sin, since every sin diminishes grace. No other human is referred to in this manner in Scripture.
But then ... to those who want to believe that a human being has God's authority to _add_ doctrine to Scripture ... that is just a minor detail.
I assume you hold this opinion of Luther for adding the word "alone" to Romans 3:28 and his attempts to discard James, Esther and Revelation and the actions of others who choose to freely edit those parts of Sacred Scripture that did not fit their new doctrines and opinions.
"This would be impossible if Mary were touched by any sin, since every sin diminishes grace. No other human is referred to in this manner in Scripture."
The fact that Mary had to receive God's grace is conclusive that she had sin, like all of Adam's children. And of course she is unique in Scripture--she is the mother of the Messiah, the Incarnation of the LORD Himself. No other human is referred to in this manner in Scripture. But this does not equate to making the leap of attributing to her blasphemous titles, sinless states apart from the atonement of Jesus Christ, and pagan goddess worship (sadly Rome is falling deeper and deeper into the cesspool of heresy).
"And Mary said: "My soul exalts the Lord, And my spirit has rejoiced in God *my Savior*. "For He has had regard for the humble state of His bondslave; For behold, from this time on all generations will count me blessed" (Luke 1:47, NASB, emphasis mine).
"For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed; for the demonstration, I say, of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. Where then is boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? Of works? No, but by a law of faith. For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law" (Romans 3:23-28).
"But then ... to those who want to believe that a human being has God's authority to _add_ doctrine to Scripture ... that is just a minor detail."
"I assume you hold this opinion of Luther for adding the word "alone" to Romans 3:28".
"For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law" (Romans 3:28, NASB).
We don't need Luther to add anything--Scripture is quite clear that justification in the salvic sense is based upon the finished work of Jesus Christ and His perfect atonement. The eternal Truth stands--the atonement of Jesus Christ is either sufficient (alone) or it is insufficient (plus works). Christians know that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is the power of God unto salvation--not the synergy of a finite god and his partial atonement with the contributions of corrupted men dead in their sins.
Grammatically, Romans 3:28 is quite clear and uncomplicated. Many (probably most) Romanists are completely ignorant of Scripture and the historic Christian faith as well, and have no clue whatsoever what the Reformers actually wrote and believed in a comprehensive context, but simply the bits and pieces tossed out to them by Robert Sungenis, et. al.
Rome denies the Gospel, and officially at the Council of Trent, repudiated it and placed its anathema upon the Gospel. In accordance with Scripture, God places His anathema upon anyone that would do such a thing. With all of her manifest corruptions, it was at Trent that Rome officially and boldly proclaimed itself as a non-christian religion. Deny the Gospel, you deny the historic Christian faith.
You con't... "...and his attempts to discard James, Esther and Revelation and the actions of others who choose to freely edit those parts of Sacred Scripture that did not fit their new doctrines and opinions."
It is Rome that rejects Scripture, and ironically, it is Rome that has invented new doctrines and opinions in order to keep their extra-Biblical, and indeed, blasphemous teachings.
Of the numerous examples, the "Assumption of Mary" is but one that comes to mind. This particular Roman Catholic dogma originated with Gnostic heretics, it became a Roman Catholic teaching in *Munificentissimus Deus* by pope Pius XII, in *1950*.
Can anyone cite the Scripture for this one please? More germane to the context of the present analysis, what is the *historical* context of this *new* cultic teaching of Romanism?
While the assumption of Mary was new in the sense of being a Roman Catholic dogma in 1950, it has its roots in the 5th and 6th centuries, *among heretics*, and so condemned officially as such by Pope.
The teaching originates with Gnostic and Collyridian traditions, and was condemned as heretical by Pope Gelasius and this condemnation was officially confirmed by Pope Hormisdas. You may hear some Romanists attempt to say that the Gelasius condemnation is not authentic, but the *New Catholic Encyclopedia* affirms his condemnation, as does Roman Catholic scholars Denzinger, Charles Hefele, and Jurgens.
Wherever and whenever Rome held supreme sway, ignorance of Scripture reigned (and reigns) supreme--and this ignorance typically extended into the secular realm, as well. When the evangelical Christian faith triumphed, literacy, justice, representative government, private property, freedom of the press, were the order of the day. The historic Protestant nations birthed the above--historic Romanist nations are the seat of oppression, heresy, and ignorance.
Where the spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
Theologically, Roman Catholicism is simply the heresy so soundly refuted and rejected by God the Holy Spirit through the apostle Paul in the book of Galatians; the similarities between the two heresies are striking; please note that item number one is a vital and important *truth* of the Christian faith--the caveat is to beware the logical fallacy of composition and not conclude that because they hold to good doctrine in one area that the entire edifice is still not corrupted:
Galatian Judaizers:
1. Belief in Jesus as Messiah and Son of God
2. Circumcision
3. Become a Jew
4. Sacrificial System
5. Priests
6. High Priests
7. Altars
8. Feast Days
9. Laver of Water
10. Dietary Regulations
11. Candles
12. Incense
13. Shew Bread
14. Keep the Ten Commandments
15. Tradition of the Elders
Modern Roman Catholicism:
1. Belief in Jesus as Messiah and Son of God
2. Baptism
3. Become a Roman Catholic
4. Sacrificial System
5. Priests
6. High Priests
7. Altars
8. Feast Days
9. Font of Holy Water
10. Dietary Regulations (only recently changed--another "new doctrine" of the Romanist system)
11. Candles
12. Incense
13. The Eucharist Wafer
14. Keep the Ten Commandments
15. Traditions of the "Church Fathers" (which in many, many instances do not support Romanism but go against it).