Was Mary
Immaculately Conceived?
No!
It was in 1854 A.D. that the Roman Catholic Church
officially proclaimed through the infallible announcement of Pope Pius IX that Mary was immaculately
conceived, that is, conceived without the stain of original sin. However, it’s
nowhere to be found in Scripture. And yet, there is an immaculate conception in
the Incarnation of Jesus Christ. As Isaiah
9:6 proclaims, “For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given... And
His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father [Father of Eternity], Prince of
Peace.”
But, the Catholic will say, “Hold on, there is one passage
of Scripture that supports the Immaculate Conception”. And this is what they’ll
show you. “And the angel being come in, said unto her: Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou
among women.” (Luke 1:28) Douay Rheims Version
This is where Catholics get their “Hail Mary, full of grace”
prayer from. Now in most translations it says “Rejoice, highly favored one”
(NKJV) or “Greetings, you who are highly favored!” (NIV)
The point of showing you these differences is to show that
this statement from the angel Gabriel is merely a greeting, and should NOT be
looked at as a basis for praying to Mary. Also, the phrase “full of grace” or
“highly favored” comes from the Greek word “khar-ee-to’-ō” (χαριτόω).
It should be noted that, the term “Kecharitomene” (κεχαριτωμένη) is translated in the
Latin Vulgate as “gratia plena”, meaning ‘full of grace’. However, all modern
versions of the Bible which translate from the original Greek, and NOT from the
Latin, translate “kecharitomene” as “highly favored one” “highly favored”
“favored one” “favored woman”. All these variations are closer to the original
Greek term than the Latin Vulgate term “full of grace”. Even the most recent
up-to-date Catholic versions which also translate from the original Greek have
translated kecharitomene as “favored
one” (NRSVCE, NJB “you who enjoy God’s favor”, NAB, not to be confused with NASB). The actual way of saying ‘full of grace’ in Greek is “playrace khareetos” (plērēs charitos, πλήρης χάριτος).
But what does “full of grace” actually mean for Catholics?
For Catholics, “full of grace” means, “transformation of the
subject by favor or grace; plenitude of favor or grace; of a singular and
permanent kind; perfection of grace; extensive and from birth the whole
lifelong”.
That’s quite a mouth full. Does such a Greek word have that
kind of definition? Absolutely Not! Such a Roman Catholic definition is just
utter nonsense. All that the Catholics are trying to do is try to come to the
false conclusion that Mary never sinned because she was “full of grace”. They
reason by saying, “how could Mary have sinned if she was ‘full of Grace’. She
cannot sin.” Therefore, in making the declaration that Mary was immaculately
conceived, they depend entirely upon
this verse only. Essentially, Mary was conceived without sin because she
was “full of grace”. They argue that because the Greek word is in the perfect
tense, that therefore means that Mary’s ‘full of grace’ is somehow “permanent
and of a singular kind”[i],
and hence “is unchanging, everlasting, definitive”[ii].
Yet the truth is that the Greek word “charitoō” used here in
the perfect tence (kecharitomene) does
not mean what the Catholics want it to mean. This Greek word takes place in the
same participle form in Sir 18:17 with no theological importance:
Sir. 18:17: οὐκ ἰδοὺ λόγος ὑπὲρ δόμα ἀγαθόν καὶ ἀμφότερα παρὰ
ἀνδρὶ κεχαριτωμένῳ (“Behold, is not
a word better than a good gift? But both accompany a favored man”)
Not only that, but the perfect tense in Luke 1:28 merely talks about the current state of Mary without
referring to how long Mary has been in that state, or will be in that state.
For example, John 14:29 states: “And
now I have told you before it comes, that when it does come to pass, you may
believe.”
The word “told” is in the perfect tense, but obviously it
doesn’t mean that Jesus has told his disciples from the beginning of their
lives, i.e. their conception. Instead, He just now told them. Compare Acts.
7:56; 10:45; and Matt. 13:46 as well, where all of them use the perfect tense,
yet not one of them imply a permanent state or condition.
If we want to know the meaning of this word, we must look at
it in context. We need only to read what follows in Luke 1:30, where the angel Gabriel says, “Do not be afraid, Mary,
for you have found favor with
God.”
God has favored Mary. Even Strong’s
Exhaustive Concordance states that the Greek root word charitoō
means “to endow with charis, primarily signified ‘to make
graceful or gracious’ and came to denote ‘to
cause to find favor’”. There’s nothing here about “plenitude of favor
or grace, or from beginning to end sinlessness, or being without sin” as the
Catholics wish to apply all of this to the term “full of grace”. Contextually
speaking, Mary was “favored” by God because she was elected by Him to be the
one to conceive and birth the Messiah, NOT
because of some permanent and intrinsic quality of grace within Mary. In other
words, Mary was not chosen because she was considered ‘highly favored’, but
rather, she became ‘highly favored’
because God chose her for the task of conceiving and giving birth to Christ
Jesus.
If we turn to Ephesians
1:5-6 the exact same term is used in Greek. Paul is speaking in reference
to what God has given to His own, saying “Having predestined us to adoption as
sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will, to
the praise of the glory of His grace, by which He made us accepted in the Beloved.” (NKJV)
The phrase “made us accepted” or in other translations
“freely bestowed favor on us” (HNV), or “graced us” (DRA) is the exact same
“grace” term that’s used in Luke 1:28.
My response to the Catholics is this: if you are going to
define “full of grace” with such a ridiculous definition for Mary, then you
must apply that definition to all believers as well based on Eph. 1:6. Catholics can’t have it both
ways.
Scripture also tells us that others were “full of grace”,
not just Mary. For example, in Acts 6:8
Stephen is said to be “full of grace” (πλήρης χάριτος)(NRSVCE, DRA). In Luke 1:41, Elizabeth is said to be
“filled with the Holy Spirit” (DRA). In Acts
11:24, Barnabas is said to be “full of the Holy Spirit” (NRSVCE). And as we
all know, the Holy Spirit is the “Spirit of grace” (Hebrews 10:29, NRSVCE, DRA). And many more in Scripture were “full
of grace” especially our Lord Jesus Christ in John 1:14, who was “full of grace and truth”. It is only fair,
then, to apply the Catholic definition to the term “full of grace” to Stephen,
Elizabeth, and Barnabas. But, we already know that the Catholic definition is
nothing but a complete myth.
Therefore, the term “full of grace” found in Luke 1:28 simply means that God favored
Mary as the context shows in Luke 1:30.
Thus, “Full of grace” does NOT mean that Mary was conceived without sin or that
she lived a sinless life. Mary was full of grace, and so is every believer. So,
Mary's grace was a received grace, NOT grace to bestow to others. She received
grace, NOT because of some personal merit, but simply for the
sake of free grace. Mary "found favor with God", and thus,
her being “full of grace” has nothing to do with being praised for what she
supposedly was, immaculately conceived, or for what she supposedly did, living
sinless, as Catholics would have us believe. When one is graced by God it
glorifies God, not man.
However, some Catholics mistakenly argue that the Greek word
“kecharitomene” (κεχαριτωμένη) is a noun, and thus, they reason that because
this word is used in place of Mary’s name, it therefore is a title or name
given to Mary to indicate a characteristic quality of her unique abundance of
grace in a supernatural, godlike state of soul. But, the word “kecharitomene”
is a feminine verb since Mary is the subject of this verb, and it’s in the
perfect passive participle form derived from the root verb “charitoō”. It’s not
a noun. The meaning of “kecharitomene” is “endued with grace”. In other words,
Mary was given grace by God, grace that she neither earned nor gained, but
rather, because God willed that she would be the one to bear and carry our
Savior. She was a blessed recipient of God’s grace, NOT the source of grace, so
that she could conceive and bear Jesus without the aid of man through the
agency of the Holy Spirit.
Furthermore, the Greek term “kecharitomene” or
“kecharitomenos” can be grammatically used to describe any other person without
any implication of that person being immaculately conceived or living sinless.
Even Catholic apologist, Jimmy Akin,
concedes that kecharitomene “is a Greek term that you could use in that exact
grammatical formation for someone else who wasn’t immaculately conceived and
the sentence would still make sense....This is something where I said
previously, we need the additional source of information from tradition and we
need the guidance of the magisterium to be able to put these pieces together.”
Therefore, the phrase, “full of grace” is not evidence for
the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception. In fact, even the Catholic Encyclopedia acknowledges
this, stating that the term kecharitomene “serves only as an
illustration, not as a proof of the
dogma”.
To prove my point even further that the Catholics themselves
admit that the term “full of grace” does not refer to the Immaculate
Conception, we read in the New Catholic Encyclopedia, “The
words of Gabriel, “Hail, full of grace” (Lk. 1.28), have also been appealed to
as a revelation of the Immaculate Conception, on the grounds that to be truly
full of grace, Mary must have had it always. This interpretation, however,
overlooks the fact that the Greek term κεχαριτωμένη [kecharitomene] is not
nearly so explicit as the translation “full of grace” might suggest. It implies
only that God’s favor has been lavished on Mary, without defining the degree of
grace.” (Volume VII, Page 378)
Moreover, almost every Catholic NT scholars in current
years, including Raymond Brown and Joseph Fitzmeyer, acknowledge that the older
Roman Catholic interpretations of the Greek term kecharitomene “clearly go beyond the meaning of Luke’s text.”[iii]
Yet Catholics, will in their desperation claim that when the
angel Gabriel says to Mary “Blessed are you among women” (Luke 1:28), that Mary is blessed above all women and above all
Mankind because of her supposed Immaculate Conception and sinless life. There
are two problems with this argument. One, Catholics who use this argument
fail at both English and Greek grammar because it never says that she is
blessed above women, but rather she is blessed among women. And Two,
the verse only mentions that she’s
blessed among women, NOT above the whole Human race.
Still, Catholics will argue that the phrase “Blessed are you
among women” should be interpreted as the NAB renders it, “Most blessed are you
among women”. But such an interpretation is inconsistent with the Greek
Grammar, as well as deceptive.
First, because
Greek is a far more specific language, the term "εὐλογημένη"
(Blessed) is NOT in the superlative
form (i.e. “Most blessed).
Second, "εὐλογημένη"
is the feminine form of "εὐλογημένος" and is in the Passive Perfect Participle form derived
from the Greek verb “eulogeō” (εὐλογέω).
Third, the
feminine superlative form of PP participle “εὐλογημένη” is “εὐλογημένότατη” (Most blessed).
Fourth, in Luke 1:42 both the masculine and
feminine forms are used (εὐλογημένη
σὺ ἐν γυναιξίν καὶ εὐλογημένος ὁ
καρπὸς τῆς κοιλίας σου = Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit
of your womb!) and yet only the feminine is falsely interpreted as "most
blessed", just so Catholics could justify lifting up Mary above everyone
else. That's being very deceptive.
Fifth, the Catholic
Douay–Rheims Bible says "Blessed art thou among women". Even the
other more recent Catholic versions which follow the GREEK say "Blessed are you among women" (RSVCE, NRSVCE). Only
those versions which follow Catholic theology translate this verse as
"Most blessed are you among women" (NAB, not to be confused with
NASB), while leaving the second part of the verse unchanged "blessed is
the fruit of your womb". WHY the inconsistency? WHY the deception?
Sixth, In Luke 19:38, we read "Blessed be
the king who cometh in the name of the Lord..." (DRB) The Greek uses the
masculine form "Εὐλογημένος" and it's referring to Jesus. One would
think that if "Εὐλογημένος" actually meant "most blessed"
that that is how it would have been translated when referring to Jesus Himself,
but it's not. There is absolutely NO Bible version which ever translates
this as "Most blessed be the King". In fact, even the NAB, which uses
"Most blessed" in Luke 1:28,42, simply translates "Εὐλογημένος"
as "Blessed is the King".
The inconsistency is so clear as day that it's no surprise
Catholics have been trying so hard to find anything in Scripture to support
their false Marian beliefs. They would go so far as to change God's word to fit
their own dogma.
But even if Catholics still want to believe that Mary is
blessed above all of Humanity based on this phrase in Luke 1:28, the phrase “blessed are you among women” is actually not
found in the earliest Greek manuscripts and is found in later Greek texts. And
even though this phrase is repeated in Luke
1:42 by Elizabeth towards Mary, it does not have as much weight as it would
have had from an angel sent by God.
Now, keep in mind that the doctrine of the Immaculate
Conception was not approved until 1854 by Pope
Pius IX. This means that before 1854, for nearly 1900 years Mary was with
sin. And yet, the Catholic religion is not limited to the Bible only. They
don’t hold to the Scriptures alone because they believe that they have “rights”
to change the Bible according to their man-made traditions and their
proclamations of their fallible councils.
And yet, Catholics will object, saying that the Church and
the Church faithful throughout history were unanimous in believing in the
doctrine of the Immaculate Conception. Really?
The Early Church seems to have been oblivious about the
doctrine of the Immaculate Conception for centuries. In fact Catholics
themselves admit this in a book called A Handbook of the Catholic Faith,
authored by N.G.M. Van Doornik, S. Jelsma, & A. Van De Lisdonk; and the
book was given the Imprimatur or official endorsement of the Vatican
Church. In it we read:
““This point of doctrine [the immaculate conception] is not
expressly dealt with anywhere in the Bible, nor was it preached by the
Apostles, and for many centuries it was not mentioned at all by the Church. Gradually,
however, as the idea of the future dogma began to develop among the faithful,
theologians submitted the point to the closest examination, and finally, the
view then generally prevailing was formally pronounced as a dogma of the Church
by His Holiness Pope Pius IX in 1854” (p. 238).
There are five
damaging admissions this Catholic book makes: One, the doctrine of the
Immaculate Conception is never taught “anywhere in the Bible”, and thus,
there’s no biblical grounds for this fallacious notion. Two, this dogma was
virtually unknown to the 12 Apostles. Three, for centuries this idea was
completely foreign to the Early Church. Four,
the concept of the Immaculate Conception slowly developed through time. Five,
this dogma has no biblical authority, and thus, has no divine approval
whatsoever, but is instead believed in simply because the Vatican Church used
its ‘authority” that it claims to have to dogmatically teach it through its
papacy and fallible councils.
Thus, we arrive at our conclusion, and that is, all
generations would call Mary blessed, NOT because of the concept of the
Immaculate Conception, but rather, because she was chosen by God to be the humble
instrument by which the Son of God became flesh.
No comments:
Post a Comment