Ask a Traditional Catholic

[Randy Carson]

Wow. That's not even close to true.

Mary – Full of Grace (kecharitomene)

When discussing the Immaculate Conception, an implicit reference may be found in the angel’s greeting to Mary. The angel Gabriel said, "Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you" (Luke 1:28). The phrase "full of grace" is a translation of the Greek word kecharitomene. It therefore expresses a characteristic quality of Mary.

The traditional translation, "full of grace," is better than the one found in many recent versions of the New Testament, which give something along the lines of "highly favored daughter." Mary was indeed a highly favored daughter of God, but the Greek implies more than that (and it never mentions the word for "daughter"). The grace given to Mary is at once permanent and of a unique kind. Kecharitomene is a perfect passive participle of charitoo, meaning "to fill or endow with grace." Since this term is in the perfect tense, it indicates that Mary was graced in the past but with continuing effects in the present. So, the grace Mary enjoyed was not a result of the angel’s visit. In fact, Catholics hold, it extended over the whole of her life, from conception onward. She was in a state of sanctifying grace from the first moment of her existence.

Additionally, the angel’s greeting, “Hail, Full of Grace” suggests that “Full of Grace” is being used as a title and not as a mere description. This is analogous to the Roman greeting, “Hail, Caesar” said to someone whose name was “Julius” and whose title was “Caesar”. The angel did not say, “Hail, Mary, full of grace”; this is part of OUR prayer in the rosary.

From this passage, we can find clear support for the Church’s teaching that Mary was preserved from all stain of original sin and was herself full of grace from the moment that she was immaculately conceived in her mother’s womb by a singular gift of God.

Where does it say in the bible in reference to Mary (or anyone actually for that matter) "born without sin".

I just showed you in the post above. When a glass is "full" of water, it contains no air. Mary was full of grace; she had no sin in her.

Many saints have been filled or blessed with grace, but they were all still born with original sin according to Catholic theology.

But not protected from sin from the moment of their conception. You will not find any Church document claiming otherwise for these saints.

You've missed the core problem Randy, the one of which Anglicans particularly have with this Dogma. Mary was born without sin so as to not "taint" Jesus in some way, childbirth having the connentations of impurity and sin.

Incorrect. (And I missed nothing, btw.)

Mary was NOT conceived without sin in order to protect Jesus from inheriting Adam's sin. If that were the goal, God could have simply ensured that Jesus was conceived immaculately and left Mary's conception to the normal course of such things. But that wasn't the purpose.

Mary was conceived without sin because it was fitting that Jesus be carried in the womb of an Immaculate Mother. She was the new Ark of the Covenant which was untouched by human hands.

For Mary to be born without sin, she would have to be born under the same conditions, and her mother, and her mother....If we're all decended from Eve (which the Catholic Church actually insists is absolute infallible truth, Evolution might be a thing but Adam and Eve is too) this just doesn't work.

Nope. No infinite regression is required. God is bigger than that.

I don't doubt you can construe meanings out of scriptures that have gone through at very least four different translations by the time they reach you, but they don't have any foundation within tradition or the earliest readings of scripture.

Nope. Just Greek to English.

I turn to the Orthodox and Copts again here who also have very strong Mariological scholarship traditions, and while they too revere Mary even they agree this one just came out of nowhere.

That's their opinion, but what do you expect from churches that do not have the advantage of being led by the Holy Spirit through an infallible Patriarch?

We could actually turn this problem into what it means for the nature of Christ, how can he be fully human when his birth and nature was so inhuman, but that would be too technical, too far off topic and quite frankly the above example demonstrates the logical inconsistencies well enough by itself.

Rubbish. All you managed to do was to repeat the errors of the Protestants and Orthodox with whom you have studied. Big whoop.

Were Adam and Eve fully human? How was that possible given that their own "births" were so "inhuman"?

And Jesus' had two natures, not one. Or did you not learn that during the course of your studies?

One person. Two natures. Two wills. He had a fully human nature just as you and I have.