I'm arguing based on the fact that the Theotokos did not need to be "immaculately conceived," and there's no clear tradition that says she was immaculate in an ontological sense. When the Holy Spirit came upon her, to me that is the purification necessary to bear Christ. Anyone Christ touched was purified, since the Holy Spirit He possessed was His very own.
Wouldn't being "blameless" and still have "original guilt" or some sort of "ontological blame" proves quite succinctly that being "immaculate" and having "original sin" can also be compatible?
In this way, if the Minerals/Chemicals wish to become anything more, the Plants must reach down and pull them up saying "You, too, can achieve my greatness in the universe. To grow and move with the wind". And again, if the plants want to roam the world and see with eyes, the animal must "reach down and pull the plants up" saying "You can be a part of this wonder". And still, if animals want to be cognizant of the universe and contemplate the heavens, man must come and bring the animal "to this world". And of course, if Man wants to achieve more, God must come down and reach man up saying "You too can experience true love and fullness of spirit".
I like this teaching. I understand he says the difference is that man has free will. I think this is a strong and powerful statement and a testimony to giving of the OT laws. Sure they had trouble following it. It can be based on personal struggle, which is still manifest in many of us today, even though we have the full grace of Godliness with us. It can be based on personal rebellion, curiosity, not wanting to obey as well. It seemed the Theotokos was reared well by her parents, in my opinion, and seeing she had blameless relatives, her family all over seems to be quite holy. We assess the holiness of the Theotokos through the holiness of her parents. It is written in the Coptic Synexarium:
Although we know little about St. Anna, having been chosen to be the mother of the Mother of God in the flesh is an indication of her virtues and righteousness, which distinguished her from other women to have this great grace.
How did the Mother of the Theotokos have "great grace" in her virtues and righteousness to give birth to the Theotokos, who was also filled with virtues and righteousness before illumination? By this idea, we can say St. Anna was perfect. St. Gregory Palamas was quoted earlier elsewhere on the constant perfection generation by generation of the Theotokos' ancestry all the way down to her. It's a testimony of good family upbringing and the grace that they maintained even in their poor state to follow the will of God together. It's a testimony to the communal and good family that is righteous together, as opposed to the family that falls together (Adam and Eve). They reared their daughter to be the most blessed among women, not in an ontological sense. They have accumulated experience and heightened their own senses, so that even though they're blind in a spiritual sense, they can still walk uprightly through the grace of obedience. To me, it's like trusting someone to catch you when you're about to fall on them. It's very hard to do, but the Old Testament always tried to teach and remind people, "Trust in the Lord".
I suppose I'm only restating what I believe at this point. It seems there's no other way to talk about this unless one does more research on the subject of grace before Christ and grace after. We can study what exactly was the merit that lead the Holy Spirit to lead prophets, kings, and priests in the OT, and how the holy fathers interpret them. Only then can one I suppose understand ideas about the Theotokos.
What's the most worrisome is that my views can be considered heresy in the Catholic Church, as perhaps borderline semi-Pelagian, like St. John Cassian. I need to do more reading on this, but generally, I've been told by MardukM (a Coptic Catholic) that in pre-Christ era, some people were moved by "prevenient grace," some through grace of immaculateness, though not since conception, whereas the Theotokos the grace of immaculateness from the moment of her conception. I thought, well, if some can be moved by prevenient grace, why not all keep it consistent that all can be moved by prevenient grace until the Incarnation of the Logos occurs?