In the first post of this series, I gave a summary of the four Catholic dogmas concerning Mary. In this post, a New Testament witness to Mary’s role in the Incarnation, specifically that of Luke. Among the Synoptic Gospels, the Gospel of Luke stands out with regard to Mary’s role in the birth of Jesus. Matthew’s birth narrative certainly includes Mary, but she is a fairly passive character. She is found to be pregnant by the Holy Spirit (ἐν γαστρὶ ἔχουσα ἐκ πνεύματος ἁγίου) in Matt 1:18, but Matthew’s attention in this narrative seems more focussed on Joseph than on Mary; namely, the angel who visits Joseph instructs him on how he is to handle his future wife who has become pregnant. Mark, of course, has no birth narrative. Mary appears in the Gospel of John, and her character is significant, but her role in that Gospel will necessitate another post (I write this retrospectively, seeing how long this particular post has become).
In Luke, Mary’s role in Jesus’ birth is extensive and pronounced. After he has visited both Zechariah and Elizabeth to announce the forthcoming birth of John the Baptist (Luke 1:5-25), the angel Gabriel is sent by God to visit Mary in Nazareth. When he greets her, he does so by means of the title κεχαριτωμένη, a perfect participle that means, “one who has been graced.” Typically, English translations render this “favored one” or even “highly favored one.” In my opinion, a better translation of this participle would in fact match the sense of the Ave Maria, “one who is full of grace.” The perfect tense typically means action completed in the past, but with continuing effects into the future. All of these things considered, Gabriel’s address to Mary shows that she is in possession of grace, that she has been in possession of grace, and that her possession of grace is distinct from the rest who are in Luke’s narrative. Canonically speaking, her possession of grace distinguishes her from everyone else as well.
Gabriel continues by telling Mary that she will become pregnant with a son (by the power of the Holy Spirit), that her son will be called the son of the Most High (ὐψίστου), and that God will give to him the throne of David, which will last forever (Luke 1:32-33). Mary’s response to Gabriel has given rise to no shortage of theological reflection; she says, in reference to herself, “Behold, the servant(f) of the Lord. May it be to me according to your word” (Luke 1:38). This response, known simply as Mary’s Fiat, effectively sets in motion the events of the Incarnation. This is not to say that the Word becoming flesh was some sort of afterthought, or that without Mary’s consent humanity could not have been redeemed. To be sure, redemption could have occurred in any number of ways. However, the means by which God chose to act was through a virgin in Nazareth who was not only able to bear the Redeemer, but who was willing to bear the Redeemer. Mary’s being graced (κεχαριτωμένη) shows her ability to undertake such a task; her Fiat shows her willingness.
Mary’s encounter with Elizabeth is also worth noting in this discussion. When she goes to see her relative (Luke 1:36, 39-40), John the Baptist is still in Elizabeth’s womb. Upon seeing Mary (who is now pregnant), John leaps in the womb and Elizabeth is immediately filled with the Holy Spirit. She exclaims, “You have been blessed among women; also the fruit of your womb has been blessed!” Elizabeth then makes a statement that has often been glossed over, “Why has this happened to me, that the mother of my Lord might come to me?” (Luke 1:43). This entire scene is striking on account of its theological richness. Namely, Mary comes to Elizabeth when she is barely pregnant (i.e., the baby is likely not showing yet), and yet Elizabeth, empowered by the Spirit, is aware that Mary is with child. Moreover, Elizabeth asserts that Mary is the mother of her Lord. Now, I’m not going to press things too far and say that Luke singlehandedly gave birth (pardon the pun) to the concept of Mary as θεοτόκος that would be championed at Ephesus in 431…I’m also not going to say that Luke’s metaphysics of the Incarnation (if we may even speak of such things at this point) is sophisticated enough to support the theological weight of such a claim. However, I will say is that Luke’s portrayal of this scene seems to me as Mariological as it is Christological…it could perhaps be said to be more Mariological than it is Christological. Namely, although Jesus is technically in this scene (in utero), His character is quite passive in every sense of the word. The focus is on Mary’s being the Mother of the Lord.
At this point, we may rightly speak of a shift in focus. After Elizabeth has finished praising Mary, Mary begins to prophesy in what is now known as the Magnificat (Luke 1:46-55). In this hymn of praise, Mary directs the reader’s attention, not to herself, but to God; specifically, she speaks of God’s saving action. Granted, Mary’s hymn of praise also addresses the topic of her own role in this work, especially at the beginning, but this is always as a means to show the larger picture of God’s action in and among humanity. In a sense, the Magnificat embodies what any talk of Mary should embody. That is, Mary’s role in this process is beyond question; as mentioned earlier, Mary’s Fiat has set in motion the events of the Incarnation, and as such, her Fiat shows her own willingness to participate in the work of redemption. The work of redemption is always and undeniably the work of God, but at least in Luke’s Gospel, Mary’s role in this plan remains undeniable.
Scattered throughout the New Testament, there are other texts that speak either specifically of Mary or broadly of Jesus having a human mother. I have chosen to focus here on the Annunciation narrative in Luke, as it strikes me as among the most Mariological narratives in the New Testament. If you’re interested in looking for yourself at the other New Testament authors who speak of Mary, the Marian Library at the University of Dayton has a fine resource that can be accessed here.
