"The 8th December, 1854, Pope Pius IX was sitting upon his throne: a triple crown of gold and diamonds was on his head; silk and damask - red and white vestments on his shoulders; 500 mitred prelates were surrounding him, and more than 50,000 b people were at his feet, in the incomparable St Peter's Church of Rome. After a few minutes of the most solemn silence, a Cardinal, dressed in his purple robe, left his seat, and gravely walked towards the Pope, kneeled before him, and humbly prostrating himself at his feet, said:
"Holy Father, tell us if we can believe and teach that the Mother of God, the Holy Virgin Mary, was immaculate in her conception?"

The Supreme Pontiff answered,
"I do not know: let us ask the light of the Holy Ghost."

The Cardinal withdrew: the Pope and the numberless multitudes fell on their knees, and the harmonious choir sang the
"Veni Creator Spiritus."

The last note of the sacred hymn had hardly rolled under the vaults of the temple, when the same Cardinal left his place, and again advanced towards the throne of the Pontiff, prostrated himself at his feet, and said:

"Holy Father, tell us if the Holy Mother of God, the Blessed Virgin Mary, was immaculate in her conception?"

The Pope again answered:
"I do not know: let us ask the light of the Holy Ghost."

And again, the "Veni Creator Spiritus" was sung.

The most solemn silence, had, a second time, succeeded to the melodious sacred song, when again the eyes of the multitude were following the grave steps of the purple robed Cardinal advancing, for the third time to the throne of the successor of St Peter, to ask again:

"Holy Father, tell us if we can believe that the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Holy Mother of God, was immaculate."
The Pope, as if he had just received a direct communication from God, answered with a solemn voice:

"Yes! We must believe that the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, was immaculate in her conception…There is no salvation to those who do not believe this dogma!"
And with a loud voice, the Pope intoned the Te Deum: the bells of 300 churches in Rome rang: the cannons/the citadel were fired."

So records Father Chiniquy/book, "50 Years in the Church of Rome."

The Bible does not teach such a doctrine.... but actually denies it, declaring all have sinned. So where did it come from? The early Church Fathers did not teach it.

Origen, although he ascribed to Mary high spiritual prerogatives, he taught that at the time of Christ's passion, the sword of disbelief pierced Mary's soul; that she was struck by the poniard of doubt; and that for her sins also Christ died (Origen, Homily 17 /Luke)

In the same manner
St. Basil writes in the fourth century: he sees in the sword, of which Simeon speaks, the doubt which pierced Mary's soul (Epistle 259).

St. Chrysostom accuses her of ambition, and of putting herself forward unduly when she sought to speak to Jesus at Capharnaum (Matthew 12:46; Chrysostom, Hom. xliv; cf. also "In Matt.", hom. iv).

St. Augustine contradicts himself on the matter. In one place, he has her without personal sin [being cleansed after birth]…in another he says: "He (Christ) alone, being made man, but remaining God, never had any sin; nor did He take on Him a flesh of sin, though from the flesh of sin of His mother. For what of flesh He thence took, He either when taken immediately purified, or purified in the act of taking it." (De Peccato, p. 61, Paris, 1690 / De Peccatororum Meritius ii. c.24) .


St Thomas Acquinas the greatest scholar of the Roman Church wrote: "The blessed Virgin contracted original sin, although she was delivered from it later, because if the soul of Mary were not affected by that sin since she was conceived, it would derogate from the dignity of Christ, who is the sole and universal Saviour of all." (Part III, quest. 27, art. 2)

St. Bernard a canonized saint of the Roman Church who is considered to be one of the greatest fathers and scholars of all time denied the doctrine when he wrote:.

"In general we may say, that although to a few it was conceded to be born holy, to no one however was it granted to be conceived holy. So that for this reason sanctity of conception should remain the privilege of one only, of Him that is, who, entering alone in the world without sin, had to purge all sin, and procure sanctity for all. Jesus Christ alone.. was holy before and after conception.... all the others have to repeat the sad words that David used to say about himself:  was conceived in iniquity; my mother conceived me in sin.' And if this is so, for what reason will one want to celebrate the feast of conception?" (St. Bernard, Opera Omnia, vol. 1, pp. 390-391, or Migne Patrology, vol. 182, Col. 332)

St. Albert the Great who was called by the Roman Catholic theologians with the colorful title of "The Secretary and Writer of the Mother of God" also denied the doctrine saying Mary would had to have been born of a virgin to be born Immaculate.
St. Ambrose, another great figure of the Latin Church, proclaims: "Of all that are born of women, the Holy Lord Jesus was the only one who experienced not the contagion of earthly corruption by reason of the novelty of His immaculate birth." (De Peccato, Bened. Ed., Paris, 1686)

Among other famous writers Bonaventura and Cardinal Cajetan also objected to the doctrine.


Gregory/Great and Innocent III are two of these.

Leo I ("The Great", Bishop of Rome from 440-461) adamantly denied the idea that anyone other than Christ was sinless (Sermon 24 in Nativ. Dom.)

ope Gelasius (492), who condemned several heretical practices including communion under one species, transub-statiation, and others which were later accepted as good by his own Church, stated: "It belongs alone to the Immaculate Lamb to have no sin at all." (Gelasii Papae Dicta, vol. 4, col. 1241, Paris, 1671)

Pope Gregory the Great (590)
considered as the outstanding pontiff of the first thousand years of the Roman Church, who extended the temporal power and wrote the famous "Dialogues" and an important book of homilies on the gospel, sustained: "For He (Christ) alone was born holy, who, in order that He might overcome 'this condition of corruptible nature, was not conceived after the manner of men." (Homilia in Nativitate)

Pope Innocent III (1216) asserted: "She (Eve) was produced without sin, but she brought forth in sin; she (Mary) was produced in sin, but she brought forth without sin." (De Festo Assump., sermo 2)
Pope Sixtus IV refused to declare the doctrine true, but rather forbade the discussion of it because of the bitterness it generated between the Dominicans and the Franciscans.

This deduction of history is agreed upon by the Roman Catholic Father William G. Most. He writes the following:

"We turn to the early Fathers of the Church....  many of them speak of her as the New Eve. They could have reasoned: the first Eve had an immaculate start in life--no sin was yet committed. So the New Eve, who was to share in undoing the harm of original sin, should have also an immaculate start. However, none of the Fathers actually followed this line of reasoning. (A few Fathers even tried to find sins she had committed, e.g. St. John Chrysostom, Homilies on John 21. PG 59. 130ff).
During the middle ages, authors such as St. Bernard of Clairvaux and St. Thomas Aquinas denied the doctrine...  it was not generally seen at this time how an Immaculate conception of Mary would not take away from the universality of redemption through Christ.

After a while, however, the theological tide began to turn.... This was due especially to the work of the Franciscan, Venerable John Duns Scotus... Scotus wrote (cited from J. B. Carol, Mariology I, 368): "Either God was able to do this, and did not will to do it, or He willed to preserve her, and was unable to do so. If able to and yet unwilling to perform this for her, God was miserly towards her. And if He willed to do it but was unable to accomplish it, He was weak, for no one who is able to honor his mother would fail to do so." [Note: Scotus here shows his folly. He is attempting to force GOD to follow the logic of sinful men. First he must prove that it is was necessary for Mary to be born sinless. Secondly he would have to prove that is was expedient. Thirdly, he would have to explain how GOD could be considered "Miserly", when he gave his very Son to redeem Mary, who like the rest of mankind was not worthy of salvation? Truly Scotus' logic is pathetic.]

Now back to our history. After that this change in theological tide had gone far towards removing objections, the Popes began to make statements of varying clarity. Sixtus IV in 1477 (DS 1400) praised the liturgical celebration of the Immaculate Conception [Note: This is the same feast that was admirably condemned by St. Bernard]. The same Pope added further support in 1483 (DS 1425-26), condemning those who said it was sinful to preach and believe the Immaculate Conception. The Council of Trent explicitly declared in its decree on original sin (DS 1516): "... it is not its intention to include in this decree ... the blessed and Immaculate Virgin Mary, Mother of God. Rather, the Constitutions of Sixtus [IV] of happy memory are to be observed."

[The objectors to the doctrine rightly taught that Christ would not be the Universal Redeemer if Mary was sinless. The Franciscan theologians solved the difficulty when they invented the following doctrine: "Christ, the most perfect mediator, preserved Mary from original sin by an equally perfect act of healing. Duns Scotus (Scotland, 1266-1308) explained that the Immaculate Conception came through God's application of the grace of Christ beforehand". Thus another doctrine was invented, to support the later doctrine of the immaculate conception. Rome must continue adding new doctrines to the patch work of her false gospel].

After Trent, the attacks on the Immaculate Conception were greatly moderated. Then Pope St. Pius V, in 1567 (DS 1973) condemned the error of Baius who said Our Lady was subject to original sin. And in 1568 the same Pope put the feast of the Immaculate Conception on the calendar of the Roman breviary."
[taken from the booklet: Mary's Immaculate Conception by Father William G. Most]

It clear that this teaching concerning Mary is UNBIBLICAL, and isn't even HISTORICAL, but was denied by some of the Greatest Theologians ever. It is simply a doctrine created by man, to exalt Mary to a position that no person can hold, because it is filled by the Sinless Lamb of GOD, Jesus Christ.

We will close with the words of the Roman Catholic scholar, Melchior Canus, who taught dogmatic theology at the University of Salamanca, Spain, and was a delegate theologian at the council of Trent, who declared:

"The doctrine which holds that the blessed Virgin was free from all original sin is nowhere delivered in the Scriptures, according to their proper sense; nay, the general law which is delivered in them embraces all who were descended from Adam, without any exception.. Nor can it be said that this doctrine has descended in the Church by Apostolic Tradition, for traditions of this kind cannot have come to us through any other persons than by the ancient bishops and holy authors who succeeded the Apostles. But it is evident that the ancient writers did not receive their doctrine from their predecessors." (De Locis, vol. 1, p. 337)