This is a scholarly Latin biblical commentary by Joseph Knabenbauer (1839-1911) on Luke 1:26-38, the Annunciation narrative. The translation preserves the technical theological terminology, patristic citations, and exegetical method characteristic of 19th-century Catholic biblical scholarship. Abbreviations for commentators and sources have been expanded or clarified where possible. Translated by Qwen.

Father Joseph Knabenbauer's Commentary on Luke 1:26-38 

(The Annunciation)

Introduction to the Passage

As Salmeron notes (vol. 3, tract 1), this most sweet and most beautiful gospel announcement of the Annunciation contains a mission that is remarkable and illustrious in every respect. For great indeed—indeed, greatest—is that Prince who sends; great also is He who is sent; again, great also is she to whom the mission is destined; and great, indeed most excellent, is the matter that is treated—not a particular matter, but a universal one pertaining to the salvation of all. Therefore, this mission surpasses all others to the same degree that God is greater than man, and to the degree that the mystery of the Incarnation is recognized as surpassing all worldly affairs. The evangelist describes this sublime matter in a manner of speaking that, by its native sincerity and purity, both presents the matter in an illustrious way and, by its sweetness and the majesty of the subject, carries the minds of readers into admiration and delight, while at the same time being most highly commended by its candid simplicity and truth, alien from all deceit.

The Historical Setting (Luke 1:26-27)

To establish the certainty of the history, Luke describes everything distinctly: the time, the place, the person sent, and the person to whom the mission was made. "Moreover, it is fitting that the beginning of our restoration should correspond to the beginning of our perdition, so that just as an angel was sent by God to a virgin to be consecrated by divine childbirth, so once a serpent was sent by the devil to Eve to deceive her by the spirit of pride; just as Eve, believing the serpent, was corrupted by lust, so this virgin, believing the angel, was endowed with divine conception, so that the children of Eve might be liberated and sanctified through the son of the virgin" (Jansenius).

Then, as St. Thomas says (III p., q. 30, art. 2), by divine ordination it comes about that divine benefits reach men through the mediation of angels. Hence, verse 26: "In the sixth month," namely, from the time when Elizabeth had conceived, as is openly reported in verse 24 ("five months"), and as is evident from verse 36, "the angel Gabriel was sent," the messenger of the Incarnation (cf. Daniel 9:21; cf. verse 19), "by God to a city of Galilee called Nazareth." Nazareth was a town so obscure that no mention of it is made in the books of the Old Testament; it was insignificant, as is clear from John 1:46. Isaiah had already predicted (7:16) that Emmanuel, the son of the Virgin, the Messiah, would grow up not in Judea, but in the region of the kingdom of Israel (see what I have noted on that passage in my Commentary on Isaiah), in a humble and poor condition; by which oracle he foretold to the house of David both the privation and ruin of the kingdom and its obscurity. Therefore, it is entirely consistent with the prophecy that we find the noble stock of David in an unknown town of Galilee, which itself was also held in contempt by the Jews.

Verse 27: "to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David, and the name of the virgin was Mary." Some refer the phrase "of the house of David" to Joseph (cf. Calmet, Cajetan, Toletus, Lucas of Bruges, Bisping, Schegg, Fillion); but others rightly observe that it is better referred to the virgin (cf. Cajetan, Schanz, Knabenbauer, Weiss). For the remaining statements also refer to her (cf. Wieseler, Beiträge, p. 143); moreover, below in verses 32 and 69 it is altogether supposed that Mary is of the house of David; furthermore, in 2:4 it is finally said so explicitly of Joseph that he is of the house and family of David, that it does not appear why this should be repeated if it had already been said of him in this passage. For other things that show Mary's Davidic origin, see my Commentary on Matthew, vol. I, p. 1 ff.; there also, p. 43, the name Mary has been discussed. Perhaps you may object with Specht: since it is said "and the name of the virgin," this indicates that "of the house of David" refers to Joseph, for otherwise one would expect "and her name." But I respond with Schanz and Weiss that "virgin" can absolutely be repeated for the sake of emphasis, in a certain rhetorical manner, because it is especially proclaimed in this entire narrative that the angel is sent to a virgin and that the account concerns a virgin. Finally, to others it has seemed that "of the house of David" should be referred in like manner both to the virgin and to Joseph (cf. Barradius, Euthymius, Albertus Magnus, Reischl).

The Angelic Salutation (Luke 1:28)

When it is said in verse 28, "And the angel having entered to her," it is signified that the angel appeared in bodily form and spoke with the virgin alone in a private chamber (Jansenius); alone in her inner rooms she is greeted by the angel (St. Ambrose). And with most [commentators] we may piously meditate that He who had formed her and chosen her as mother, and who disposed all her actions with wondrous providence, had at that time—when she was about to conceive the Son of God—raised her mind to lofty contemplation, and it seems very consistent that at that time her mind was occupied with desire for the coming of the Messiah (cf. Toletus).

The angel said: "Hail, full of grace" [kecharitōmenē]. The Greek chaire corresponds to the Hebrew shalom lach—"peace to you"—by which phrase we must believe the angel, speaking Hebrew, made use (Maldonatus, Jansenius, Salméron, Lapide, Lucas, etc.), as the Syriac version also has. The angel announces to her peace, joy, gladness; he bids her to be of good courage, greeting her in a friendly manner. Chaire among the Greeks also is a formula of greeting and of good wishes, and such a salutation is a sign of benevolence, friendship, and love, by which indeed we wish all best and fortunate things to those whom we approach; for even when the Hebrews use the name of peace for salutation, they understand by it what we mean by "salvation," namely, all prosperity and happiness (Lucas).

It is solemn among the ancients to compare Eve with Mary in various ways. Thus: "Whereas God had said to Eve: 'In pain you shall bring forth children,' the joy which the angel announces loosens that sorrow" (Catena Aurea); "This joy loosens the curse of Eve: Eve was commanded to have sorrow, this woman [has] joy, the opposite of sorrow" (Euthymius, Theophylact; similarly St. Gregory of Nyssa, Homily 13 on the Canticle, Migne 44, 1053; Toletus, Lucas, Catena Cordubensis; and very many testimonies of this kind from Procopius of Gaza, Germanus, John Damascene, John Geometer, Nicetas, Bede, Fulgentius, Theodotus of Ancyra, Andrew of Crete, Hesychius of Jerusalem, Gregory of Caesarea, Proclus, etc., are recited by Passaglia, De Immaculato Deiparae Conceptu, vol. I, p. 1031 ff., Rome 1854). This is also frequently expressed in the hymns of St. Ephrem; cf. Th. J. Lamy, S. Ephraemi Hymni et Sermones, vol. II, pp. 522, 526, 530, 550; vol. III, p. 980, etc.

"Full of Grace" [Kecharitōmenē]

A most excellent encomium of the virgin is pronounced: "full of grace" [kecharitōmenē], from which comes the verb charitoō (in the New Testament this means to bestow divine grace, favor, gift, benefit given by God; and that it is employed here also in this sense is clear also from the fact that the angel, as if explaining, soon adds: "for you have found favor with God"). Moreover, the verb charitoō, by its form and derivation, means to adorn someone with grace, to enrich, to heap up; whence kecharitōmenē means "grace heaped up" or "full." The ancients well expressed the force of the word: the Old Latin (Itala), Vulgate: "gratia plena" [full of grace]; Syriac: malyat taybuta [full of grace]; and Greek writers in the same way show, explaining kecharitōmenē in praises of the Blessed Virgin, that by this voice is declared a certain greatest abundance of grace.

Falkenarius treats this matter well in his Scholia on this passage: "It will suffice for us to have examined the force of the word: charitoō [to heap with grace]; kecharitōmenē is 'grace heaped up' or 'full'... In this sense Paul [uses it] in Ephesians 1:6: 'God,' he says, 'echaritōsen us,' that is, 'has heaped us with grace in His beloved Son.' Nor does Luke use a new word, inasmuch as Sirach had already employed it in 18:17. Even if, besides our passage, no other were given in which this word is found, from its very form we would understand its significative force; for whatever words are of this form, all signify to heap up or to make full: haimatoō signifies 'to stain with blood,' thaumatoō 'to fill with wonder,' tephroō 'to cover with ashes'; to be overwhelmed with sleep is in Greek karousthai; one who is said to have been entirely eyes, like the poet's Argus, is ommatoōmenos, etc. Cf. Passaglia, l.c., p. 1093." And Rosenmüller adds: "Recent Greeks use [this word] in this sense, that a man kecharitōmenos is 'full of grace,' voller Reiz und Anmut [full of charm and grace]."

Thus, for example, St. John Damascene (Homily on the Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin, Migne 96, 656): "Hail, O kecharitōmenē, you who are more venerable than the Thrones and more glorious than the Cherubim"; and repeating "Hail, O kecharitōmenē," he continues: "because you are more admirable than the Thrones, more sovereign than the Dominations, of greater virtue than the Virtues, superior to the Principalities, more sublime than the Powers, more beautiful than the Cherubim and more august than the Seraphim, because you are nobler than all things that are from the rising of the sun," etc. In the Oration on the Nativity of Christ (among the works of St. Chrysostom, Migne 61, 737), the author says: "Hail, O kecharitōmenē, O interminable grace of the holy virgin"; thus he explains the word concerning interminable grace. Theodotus of Ancyra, among other things, has this (Migne 77, 1428): "Hail, full of grace... you who are wholly venerable, wholly glorious, wholly good, incomparable, surpassing all clarity, wholly compacted with the splendors of light," etc. Passaglia (l.c., p. 1060 ff.) brings forward other and more numerous testimonies on this matter. Since the Latin Fathers everywhere read "Ave, gratia plena," it is easily evident that they dwell on these words and explain them concerning the most abundant grace bestowed upon the Virgin. Passaglia (l.c., p. 1046 ff.) exhibits many of their testimonies. Excellent also are the testimonies of the Syriac Church. St. Ephrem begins a hymn on the Blessed Mary (XIV, Lamy l.c., vol. II, p. 578) thus: "The angel saw a virgin truly wonderful and, carried away by admiration of her, as if from love he addressed her tenderly, saying: 'Peace to you, full of grace'; heaven is not more exalted than you," etc.

The Meaning of the Angelic Praise

For rightly understanding the dignity and holiness of the Blessed Virgin, one must consider that this encomium is attributed to her before Jesus is conceived in her. Therefore, by the angelic salutation we are taught how God prepared her, so that she might merit to become a worthy dwelling place for the Son of God. Moreover, Luke notes that this word kecharitōmenē is used here antonomastically by the angel in place of a proper name, as if this were her own proper name; for it is not said "Hail, Mary, full of grace," but "Hail, O full of grace"; which manner of speaking has no place unless someone so excels in that kind of thing which is attributed to him that he is to be considered singular and almost unique in this respect, just as when "the Just One" is said for Christ and "the Wise One" for Solomon. Thus, therefore, the Virgin is here singularly called kecharitōmenē, as if she alone were and no one was to be compared with her with respect to the excellence, dignity, and abundance of grace, so that certainly she surpassed not only women but all creatures. Indeed, it was the intention of the angel—indeed, of God—to honor her greatly, when, suppressing her native name, He gave her a name from grace, as one who alone abounded in every kind of grace and alone was worthy to please God.

Moreover, although she is said to be "full of grace," it is by no means denied that she was capable of increase of grace, in which she grew daily more and more by the acts of virtues arising from grace itself and conferring more abundant grace.

"The Lord is with You"

Just as kecharitōmenē, because it is an appellative, is said assertively, so also "the Lord is with you" is enunciated not as a wish ("may the Lord be with you," Cajetan), but affirmatively: "He is with you" (cf. Dionysius the Carthusian, Faber, Jansenius, Maldonatus, Lucas, Jansen of Ghent, Lapide, Sylvius, Schegg, Schanz, Fillion, Keil, Weiss, Specht), and this likewise is said of her before Jesus is conceived. For the angel congratulates her on a present good (Lucas): "The Lord pursues you with singular favor and love" (as Suarez explains on III p., q. 30, art. 4), "and in a singular manner dwells in you" (Jansenius); "He keeps you in His protection and governs you" (Lucas). Since God is in all things by presence, power, and essence, it necessarily follows that if it is affirmed of someone that God is with him, this is to be understood in a singular and excellent manner concerning God's peculiar favor, protection, a most abundant communication of divine goods, and assistance eminently bestowed in a difficult matter. Because the angel is sent as messenger of the Incarnation, these words—which indeed are pronounced before the conception—are nevertheless rightly so understood that they also signify that most sublime love of God by which God the Father wills to give His Son to the Virgin as a son.

What St. Thomas has (III p., q. 30, art. 4): "He expressed the conception in this, that He said: 'The Lord is with you,'" Suarez strives to explain in this manner: "[The angel] announced the Son to her and signified to her that she was chosen so that the Lord might be in her in a singular manner." That the conception is expressed is also stated in the Sermon on the Seasons 195, 2 (formerly Sermon 18, among the works of St. Augustine, vol. V, in the Appendix): "Thus is the Lord with you, that He may be in your heart, be in your womb, fill your mind, fill your flesh." But of itself it is only enunciated that the Lord is with her; indeed, He is with her in an excellent manner and always was from her very birth, because she was chosen to become the mother of Jesus.

"Blessed Are You Among Women"

And because she was thus chosen and in a distinguished manner loved by the Son of God as one who would be His mother, therefore she is also "blessed among women," namely, by the Lord who is with you, affected with the most ample benefits and graces, happy and blessed (Lucas). Just as the two preceding enunciations, so also this third is not of one wishing, but affirming: "among women" or "inter mulieres," i.e., more than all women, as if to say: "You alone are free from the curse; all the rest are subject to the curse" (Jansenius); "you, heaped with the most ample divine blessings before all" (Jansen of Ghent). Moreover, women are mentioned not so much because comparison is usually made between things of the same kind (Maldonatus), but rather because the blessings [bestowed on her] are especially particular—such as election to the dignity of Mother of God and what follows from it, conception while preserving virginity, childbirth without pain—which adorn and exalt her before all women. Eve incurred the curse; Mary is greeted as "blessed among all women."

This salutation, both in its form and occasion, is, like that kecharitōmenē, altogether unique. For neither Jael nor Judith, who alone seem to have obtained a similar salutation, can rightly come into comparison. For these are praised on account of some singular deed, and they are praised in another manner: Jael indeed [is called] "blessed among women" [teborak mi-nashim] in Judges 5:24, and Judith is praised by Uzziah: "Blessed are you, daughter, by the Most High God above all women on earth, and blessed is the Lord..." etc. (Judith 13:18). These women were chosen by God to give temporal salvation once to the people of God; therefore they were to be blessed by men (Judges 5:24) and by God, for this one purpose, blessed with divine favor and assistance (Judith 13:18, or Vulgate 23). And because they were chosen by God for this and equipped with His help, they also exhibit a certain figure and type of the Blessed Virgin, who was chosen and adorned with divine gifts, that she might conceive and bear Him who would bring eternal salvation to the world. Whence what appears in the type must be fulfilled in the antitype in a much more excellent manner. Therefore she is said to be "blessed by the Lord" (cf. Faber, Jansenius, Maldonatus, Lucas, Jansen of Ghent, Lapide, Fillion); the other [explanation], which some sometimes explain concerning praise and honor among men (St. Thomas, Cajetan), is certainly consequent upon the former.

Patristic Interpretation of the Salutation

Concerning this angelic salutation there exist very many sermons, homilies, and explanations by the Fathers and ecclesiastical writers, which it is not of this place to enumerate. I shall not hesitate to add one thing: what is the sum of those things which our ancestors have consigned to writing concerning the angelic salutation. This, however, is—as Passaglia writes (l.c., p. 1028), who there demonstrates his opinion by citing very many passages—"that it was a new speech, a new acclamation, a new formula of blessing, an unusual salutation, a strange salutation, unheard of in human custom, read nowhere, discovered nowhere before, reserved for the Virgin alone and uniquely congruent with her dignity." With these words, therefore, our ancestors describe this salutation. Therefore, from these things which are most truly said, we shall rightly infer with the same writer: "...now indeed by new speeches, new acclamations, and new formulas of blessing, new things are signified; by an unusual salutation, a strange salutation, and one unheard of in human custom, nothing other than things unusual, strange, and above human custom are expressed; by a salutation read nowhere and discovered nowhere before, it is shown that it is eminent and altogether singular; finally, by a salutation reserved for the Virgin alone and uniquely congruent with her dignity, nothing can be contained that is common and that ought not to be considered the private possession of the Virgin alone." Therefore, from these things it is easily perceived what was the notion and estimation of Christian antiquity concerning the singular grace and holiness of the Blessed Virgin; nor less is it inferred from these that by these encomiums is also tacitly signified the immaculate conception of the Virgin and her perfect immunity from every stain of sin.

Mary's Reaction (Luke 1:29)

Now what did the most blessed Virgin [do] in response to such things? Verse 29: "Who [when she had heard] was troubled at his word and deliberated [dielogizeto]"; she deliberated with herself what kind of salutation this was, what it meant, where it tended, of what kind of notion and signification it was to be attributed to her. For since she was a most humble virgin and thought modestly concerning herself, she was not slightly moved in mind by the splendid appearance of the angel (if you wish to regard the testimony of some witnesses) and by the magnificent salutation. That this disturbance of mind and fear (cf. verse 30) had its root in the Virgin's humility, Dionysius, Faber, Jansenius, Salméron, Maldonatus, Lucas, Suarez (in III p., q. 30, disp. 9, sect. 3, §3), Jansen of Ghent, Bisping, Reischl, and Grimm rightly maintain; with this affection is intimately associated astonishment and admiration at so new and unusual a salutation, which others express in this manner. Thus Origen says she was terrified by that strange salutation reserved for her alone; and St. Ambrose writes: "She marveled at the new formula of blessing, which was read nowhere, discovered nowhere before; this salutation was reserved for Mary alone" (similarly Bede, Albertus Magnus, Salméron, Lucas, among others). At the same time, moved by that magnificent salutation, since she did not perceive where it tended, nevertheless she ought altogether to suspect that something great and exceeding the common order was being asked of her (cf. Albertus Magnus, Schegg, Schanz). But because she was humble and thought most modestly concerning herself, she could not but be disturbed, foreseeing such a thing.

Interpretations of Mary's Troubling

Very many derive the reason for the disturbance from this: that she was troubled by virginal and most chaste modesty at the entrance of the angel in the form of a youth, and also by the salutation itself, which was gentle and sweet, indeed, which could seem to have something amorous about it; "for it is characteristic of virgins to tremble," says St. Ambrose, "and to fear at every entrance of a man." St. Ambrose, Bede, Bonaventure, Albertus Magnus, Cajetan, Jansenius, Salméron, Calmet, and Lamy advance this reason. But that she was disturbed at the angel's youthful form is asserted altogether gratuitously; for this cause, as Toletus notes, does not suit the words "at his word," nor indeed the following word "she deliberated, what kind of salutation this was." Moreover, I think this reason for the disturbance is alien to the holiness and dignity of the Blessed Virgin; for I altogether judge that we must think with Maldonatus: "That the most holy Virgin even suspected anything amorous seems to me unworthy of such great purity of hers; virginity ought to be simple and least suspicious, which is stained in a certain way not only by desiring what is not permitted and by thinking what is less, but also by suspecting concerning others in order to guard itself... I judge that angelic purity altogether is to be posited in Mary; but angels cannot even suspect or fear any danger to their purity; therefore that thought ('what kind of salutation this was') proceeded not from chastity, although chastity also was most great in her, indeed for that very reason not from chastity because it was most great, but from humility..."

Moreover, from the manner of narrating it is to be concluded that Mary immediately perceived the apparition to be angelic, that an angel had come to her; and indeed it is fitting that the angel, appearing, immediately manifest himself as an angel sent from God. Now if this [be so], how could there be place for suspicion and shame? Nor do I think that those are to be assented to who think that the virgin hesitated whether the apparition was divine or diabolical, whether the salutation was lustful or divine, illusory and sent by a demon or true and brought by God (Catena Aurea, Theophylact, Euthymius, Jansenius, Cajetan, Maldonatus, Calmet). But Dionysius, Toletus, and Sylvius rightly refute this opinion: for if she had been doubtful about the apparition, she would rather have thought who he was than what kind his salutation was; again, it is not probable that in so great and so difficult a mystery to believe, the Lord permitted that the messenger should seem uncertain; finally, they warn that the Blessed Virgin was not without the gift of discernment of spirits. Moreover, as I have warned, the narration itself indicates to us that the angel appeared and was recognized as such by the Virgin. Now by this fact alone those conclusions—that she feared for her chastity or doubted, etc.—are altogether excluded.

The Angel's Reassurance (Luke 1:30-31)

Because it could not happen that she who was troubled and fearing might accurately perceive the message that was to be delivered, first the angel expels fear from her heart, so that, established in quiet, she may receive the divine response (Catena Aurea, Theophylact). Verse 30: "And the angel said to her: 'Do not fear, Mary'"; by the very calling of her proper name, the angel shows himself familiar and friendly to her, and by gentle address he bids her to be free from all disturbance and fear; no prudent person will doubt that the angel's words accomplished what they signify. And he subjoins the reason: "for you have found grace with God"; which manner of speaking, frequent in Sacred Scripture, both says in general that someone is pleasing, acceptable, worthy that some benefit be conferred upon him, and also often signifies that someone is singularly and before others eminently acceptable and that a certain highest favor is bestowed upon him (cf. Genesis 6:8; Exodus 33:12; Judges 6:17). And that it is said here in this sense is clear from what follows, by which indeed the highest dignity that can be thought of in a creature is announced to the Virgin.

Verse 31: "Behold, you shall conceive in your womb and shall bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus." Most interpreters rightly judge that by these very words allusion is made to Isaiah 7:14 (cf. St. Bonaventure, Jansenius, Maldonatus, Salméron, Toletus, Lucas, Jansen of Ghent, Lapide, Lamy, Sylvius, Bisping, Reischl, Schanz, Fillion, Knabenbauer; Weiss denies this without merit). Concerning the name Jesus, see what I have said in my Commentary on Matthew, vol. I, p. 62; it signifies "Yahweh is salvation"; whence, because He who is to be born as man is "Yahweh is salvation," the son who is to be brought forth by the Virgin is truly Emmanuel, i.e., "God with us" (cf. on Isaiah 7:14). Maternal authority is asserted, for it is also reported that mothers imposed names on their sons; see Genesis 4:1; 19:37-38; 29:32-35; 30:6, etc.

The Messianic Announcement (Luke 1:32-33)

Now the angel so describes the son of the Virgin that, both according to the oracles of the prophets and according to the popular expectation and opinion of the people, it appears manifest that he is the kingly Messiah. Verse 32: "He will be great"—what kind of greatness this will be is explained by the nature of the son and his kingdom: "and He will be called the Son of the Most High," i.e., He will be and as such will be recognized; "and the Lord God will give Him the throne [ton thronon] of David His father"; since the son of the Virgin is said to originate from the Davidic stock, even Protestant interpreters affirm that by these words Mary is clearly designated as sprung from the same Davidic stock (cf. Wieseler, Keil, Weiss); "and He will reign over the house of Jacob forever" (verse 33), "and of His kingdom there will be no end." God had promised David: "I will raise up your seed after you and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever" (2 Kings 7:12-13; cf. Psalm 88:30). Thenceforth it is solemn among the prophets to announce, in the restoration of the kingdom of God, a king from the house of David, whom they themselves also sometimes call David (Hosea 3:5; Jeremiah 30:9; Ezekiel 34:23; 37:24), who will sit upon the throne of David and upon his kingdom, to establish it and strengthen it forever (Isaiah 9:7). And at that time when the ruin of David's temporal kingdom was impending, these promises are promulgated again and again: "Behold, the days are coming, and I will raise up for David" (i.e., for David) "a righteous Branch" (Jeremiah 23:5; 30:9; 33:15); and in Ezekiel the Lord says that the royal crown is to be taken away, "until He comes whose right it is, and I will give it to Him" (Ezekiel 21:26-27). If now the angel announces: "And the Lord God will give Him the throne of David His father," does he not clearly teach that this very oracle of Ezekiel is now to be fulfilled? And if he says: "And He will reign over the house of Jacob forever," he recalls what the patriarch Jacob had already prophesied concerning the scepter that "shall not depart from Judah until He comes to whom is the obedience of the peoples" (Genesis 49:10), who therefore will bear that scepter forever, who will be "ruler in Israel" (Micah 5:2). That a king, the son of David, whom God would raise up to reign over Israel, was also desired by popular expectation, the so-called Psalms of Solomon and other profane writings demonstrate, concerning which see what I have said in my Commentary on Matthew, vol. I, pp. 10-11.

Moreover, by the fact that He is said to reign forever, His dignity far surpasses the dignity of the kings of Israel. If indeed the king of Israel is called son by God ("I will be to him a father, and he will be to me a son," 2 Kings 7:15; 1 Chronicles 22:10), it is necessary that the kingly Messiah be called Son of the Most High in a far different and more sublime sense. Moreover, to this consideration is added that the divine nature of the Messiah is already sufficiently declared in Isaiah 9:6; therefore, by this appellation is not only declared the Messiah as beloved and chosen by God (as some explain; cf. Weiss), in nearly the same sense in which others also are called sons of the Most High (Psalm 82:6, Hebrew), but His divine nature and origin from the Father is designated. To exhibit the majesty of God to the mind, Hypsistos ["Most High"] is employed, Hebrew Elyon (Genesis 14:18; Psalm 7:18; 9:3; 21:8; 57:3; Daniel 7:18, etc.; Mark 5:7; Luke 1:76; 6:35; 8:28; Acts 16:17; Hebrews 7:1).

Mary's Question (Luke 1:34)

Most clearly, therefore, the divine messenger indicates to Mary that she is chosen to become the mother of the Messiah and consequently to be elevated to such dignity and blessedness as no virgin of Israel could attain or desire by thinking. What then [does] Mary [do]? Verse 34: "But Mary said to the angel: 'How shall this be, since I do not know a man?'" The question can be that of one admiring the prediction of conception and childbirth, since nevertheless it is established for her to remain a virgin perpetually; and that one must stop at such admiration, Schegg, Bisping, Schanz, Keil, Weiss, and Specht judge. But this does not seem to suffice. For Mary knows that a heavenly messenger is speaking, and therefore she believes that what he says is true and that therefore what he announced will come to pass; cf. verse 45: "Blessed is she who believed," Elizabeth greets her, filled with the Holy Spirit. Therefore, she believes it will happen, but she does not yet understand the manner by which it can happen. "And to inquire in this manner concerning something which is asserted by God to be future, how it can happen, is not only not imputed as a vice of diffidence, but is even to be reckoned to praise and ascribed to the prudence of the inquirer, if nevertheless it is necessary or expedient to know that manner" (Jansenius). Now it was altogether necessary for the Virgin to know that manner; therefore, on account of that question she is rightly called makaria [blessed] (Catena Aurea).

Moreover, it was necessary on account of that very reason which she adds. When, to the angel saying "You shall conceive and bear," she opposes "I do not know a man," the sense can only be this: "In the manner in which this happens by the order of nature, it can in no way be effected in me." And since she opposes this reason to the heavenly messenger, it was also necessary for the Blessed Virgin to be evidently persuaded that her firm counsel of perpetually abstaining from matrimonial intercourse was approved, accepted, and ratified by God, so indeed that it was now not permitted (without a new revelation concerning this matter and an explicit command of God) to depart from that counsel. For since the angel speaks concerning conception to a virgin already betrothed, what could seem more natural at first sight than that the virgin be commanded to consummate the marriage? Since, therefore, Mary so responds, this response has true sense in the opinion commonly received among Catholic interpreters: that the Blessed Virgin, by singular divine inspiration, had consecrated her virginity to God or had uttered a vow of virginity to be perpetually preserved.

Since, therefore, it is clear from her words that what the angel said cannot be accomplished in a natural manner, she inquires concerning the manner in which God wills that to happen. "For when she says: 'How shall this be?' she did not doubt concerning the effect, but sought the quality of the effect itself" (St. Ambrose); and the angel's response itself clearly teaches, as Suarez notes (in III p., q. 28, disp. 6, §2, §5), that the Blessed Virgin inquired simply and prudently concerning the manner. In the same sense, by far the most interpreters understand the words (cf. St. Ambrose, Augustine De Civitate Dei 16, 24; Migne 41, 501; Bernard, Homily 4 on 'Missus est', n. 3; Migne 183, 80; Bede, Albertus Magnus, Bonaventure, Catena Aurea, Theophylact, Dionysius, Faber, Jansenius, Cajetan, Maldonatus, Salméron, Toletus, Lucas, Jansen of Ghent, Lapide, Sylvius, Lamy, Calmet, Reischl, Grimm, Fillion, Meschler, etc.), nor can it be said by any means with Schegg that such an inquiry ought rather to be reckoned as curiosity. For since what the angel announces—and therefore commands to be done—cannot be accomplished by the usual divine command in the customary manner, it was certainly the virgin's part to inquire further by what reason God willed that to be brought into effect and what was the order of her obedience, or what was to be done by her, inasmuch as she was bound by that impediment.

To some it has sometimes seemed that from this interrogation of the Virgin, she had not yet understood that the conception of the Messiah was being announced to her (thus Suarez l.c., disp. 6, §2, §6), and they derive the reason for doubting from this: because if she had understood the origin of the Messiah, she would also have immediately perceived from Isaiah that she would conceive as a virgin. However, St. Ambrose already anticipated and solved this difficulty, who says that Mary had read: "Behold, a virgin shall conceive," etc. (Isaiah 7:14), and had believed it would happen, "but how it would happen she had not read; for how it would happen had not been revealed even to so great a prophet"; and in the same manner Bede, Albertus Magnus, Dionysius, and Salméron respond, wishing therefore that the Virgin be taught and instructed concerning the manner by which she could conceive and bear while preserving virginity. Nor do I think it can be admitted with Suarez that the Virgin did not immediately understand that the matter concerned the Messiah; for the words of the angel are too clear and open and sufficiently express also the popular expectation of the Jews; whence, even if the Virgin had not sufficiently perceived the oracles of the prophets, from the popular opinion alone concerning the Messiah she could and ought to have been rendered certain.

Rejection of Alternative Interpretations

As Suarez reports, Medina also, supposing that Mary fully understood the prophecy of Isaiah, thinks that she wished by that interrogation to test and discern whether that spirit which appeared was of God or of a demon. But Suarez rightly rejects this: "For this is against the sincere faith of the Virgin; for this is to say that she doubted, when she said 'How shall this be?', whether that was a divine revelation or not, whereas the Saints say that she had already believed and had inquired concerning the manner," etc. (on q. 30, art. 4).

The Virgin's Vow of Virginity

That the Blessed Virgin bound herself by a vow is clearly taught by St. Augustine, On Virginity, ch. 4 (vol. 6, p. 342 ff., Benedictine edition): "Before she conceived, He chose her, already dedicated to God, from whom she was to be born. The words which Mary returned to the angel announcing her pregnancy indicate this: 'How...?' which she certainly would not have said unless she had previously vowed her virginity to God." Likewise, in the sermon ascribed to St. Gregory of Nyssa (On the Nativity of the Lord; Migne 46, 1140), it is similarly said: "If she had been led by Joseph for the sake of children, how would she have shown that she was hearing something new when the angel announced childbirth to her? But because flesh consecrated to God had to be presented intact and whole as a certain holy offered gift, therefore, 'although,' she says, 'you are an angel, although you come from heaven, although what is shown surpasses human nature, nevertheless it is unlawful for me to know a man. How without a man shall I be a mother? For I know Joseph as a betrothed, but I do not know a man.'" And in the same sense St. Bernard writes: "She does not ask whether this will be, but how; as if to say: 'Since my Lord knows, witness of my conscience, that it is the vow of His handmaid not to know a man, by what law, by what order will it please Him that this be done? If it must be that I break my vow in order to bear such a son, I both rejoice concerning the son and grieve concerning the purpose; nevertheless let His will be done. But if I conceive as a virgin, as a virgin also I shall bear, which indeed, if it pleases Him, will not be impossible; then I shall truly know that He has regarded the humility of His handmaid.'"

And that the Blessed Virgin vowed virginity is taught by St. Thomas (III p., q. 28, art. 4), and Suarez (l.c., disp. 6, §2, §4) simply says: "Among Catholics there is no contention but that the Blessed Mary vowed virginity"; and the same opinion Albertus Magnus, Dionysius, Jansenius, Salméron, Maldonatus, Toletus, Lapide, Lucas, Jansen of Ghent, Sylvius, Lamy, Calmet, Bisping, Reischl, and Fillion defend; and concerning the firm purpose of preserving virginity, which was conceived by God's inspiration, even Schegg and Schanz explain.

Protestant Interpretations and Their Refutation

Otherwise the Protestants: Keil and Weiss discern nothing else in Mary's words than that she confesses herself to have an immaculate conscience; from which opinion does not much differ what Cajetan has: "She did not say: 'I shall not know,' but 'I do not know,' because she understood the words of the angel to be fulfilled then; I bring the greatest reason for inquiring concerning the manner by which I may now conceive, since up to the present I have not had knowledge of a man; that is, because I am a virgin." But Jansenius rightly criticizes this interpretation: "which understanding is most absurd, both because thus it would have had to be said: 'because I have not yet known a man,' and because incongruously the virgin would have adduced as the cause of her admiration and question that she had not yet known a man; for she ought to understand that the future conception would have as cause the future intercourse rather than the past." And Jansen of Ghent also rightly notes that the interrogation would be futile because she could know [a man] afterward, nor can the words of the Virgin be understood concerning a purpose alone, because she could change the purpose by her own and prudent will for a matter of such importance, but it must be understood concerning such a purpose that she could not depart from it, as if she were to say: "I cannot or it is not permitted to me"; and in the same manner Salméron, Lucas, etc. And indeed, unless someone wishes of his own accord to be blind, he must confess that the response would be insipid, ridiculous, absurd: "How shall I conceive? I am still a virgin." To the matter also Jansenius rightly notes that Mary ought to have certainly known by heavenly reason that her vow was approved by God, since otherwise from the announced future conception she could soon have thought that that vow was disapproved by God and was not to be kept by her. It is also clear that a firm purpose of this kind or vow is best expressed in the present tense. For one who, bound by vow or precept, abstains from wine or meat, will say to one asking him to drink wine or eat meat: "I do not drink wine, I do not eat meat."

Mary's Love of Virginity

Nor is it to be passed over that [commentators] have aptly warned that in these words of the Virgin shines an admirable love of chastity and virginity; namely, burning with desire of preserving it, even when the conception of so great a son was announced, she was not forgetful of her purpose and vow, but desired to preserve it (cf. Toletus, Lapide, etc.). This is also expressed, among other places, in the sermon ascribed to St. Gregory of Nyssa (On the Nativity of Christ; Migne 46, 1140): "But what [does] Mary [do]? Hear the chaste voice of the Virgin. The angel announces childbirth; but she clings to virginity and judges that integrity is to be preferred to the angelic demonstration; nor is she unbelieving toward the angel, nor does she depart from her purpose." And St. Bernard exclaims: "Immovable purpose of virginity, which did not in any way waver even when the angel promised a son" (Sermon on the Assumption of the Blessed Mary 4, 6; Migne 183, 428).

The Angel's Explanation (Luke 1:35)

That the Blessed Virgin inquired concerning the manner is clear from the angel's very response. Verse 35: "And answering," i.e., satisfying the one inquiring and replying, "the angel said to her: 'The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you.'" The Holy Spirit was already in the Blessed Virgin; but because He produces a new effect in her, He is said to come into her anew; which new inhabitation of His is expressed in the second member by the symbol of the cloud, in which God was accustomed to manifest His presence in a singular manner over His tabernacle; cf. Exodus 40:32: "The cloud covered the tabernacle, and the glory of the Lord filled it." Mary, therefore, is as it were a new ark of the covenant in which the Lord rests. This word "will overshadow" [episkiasei], says Lamy, indicates a peculiar and highest manner of the presence, inhabitation, and operation of God, to which pertains the overshadowing of the cloud in the tabernacle of the covenant (similarly Reischl, Grimm, Schanz, Fillion); and the word episkiazein is employed by the LXX in Exodus 40:35 and Numbers 9:22 for the Hebrew shakan, which verb is used concerning the cloud resting over the tabernacle and concerning God dwelling in the midst of the people. Therefore, in a new manner, for a new effect, the Holy Spirit will operate in the Blessed Virgin by His power.

By comparison also with Acts 5:15 the matter can be illustrated: "They carried out the sick into the streets, so that when Peter came, at least his shadow might overshadow some of them, and they might be freed from their infirmities"; therefore, just as the bodily presence of Peter repaired bodily harms, so the presence of the Holy Spirit in the Blessed Virgin effected that the Virgin conceived. And just as Christ, speaking of the descent of the Holy Spirit upon the apostles, says that they will be "clothed with power from on high" and will receive "power of the Holy Spirit coming upon [them]" (Luke 24:49; Acts 1:8), so here the operation of the Holy Spirit is indicated in a similar manner by the word "power"; "the angel seems to have used the name 'power' and 'Most High' with highest counsel, because the matter concerned was one that especially demanded divine power, which both names declare" (Maldonatus), namely, the procreation of human nature and its union with the divine Word; "and therefore also: 'that which will be born [of you] will be called Holy, the Son of God'"—to gennōmenon hagion [the holy thing that is born], that which is born, that which is brought forth; that gennōmenon is to be explained in this sense most rightly think, and not: "the Holy One who is begotten" (as some, as Meyer and Weiss, wish). For the notion of begetting (as they restrict it to the function of the father) is by the thing itself and also by the words "coming upon" and "overshadowing" most far removed from the Holy Spirit; moreover, the word gennan is usually employed in the notion of being born; cf. Matthew 2:1, 4; 19:12; Luke 1:13, 57; 23:29; John 3:4; 9:2, etc. And that it was so understood is also shown by the added phrase ek sou [of you], which, although rarely in manuscripts, nevertheless is read frequently enough among the Fathers. "The holy thing, therefore, that is born will be called," i.e., will be and will be recognized and proclaimed, "the Son of God"; that which is born or arises in the Blessed Virgin is holy because that human nature, already by force of its origin from the Virgin full of grace and prevented by divine power, is immune from the common stain of human origin and is altogether consecrated to God; moreover, because it far transcends all created holiness, that human nature is united to the divine Word by its very origin.

Why the Child is Called Son of God

Moreover, from that very manner altogether admirable by which the Virgin conceives and bears by divine power, it ought to be concluded that that offspring is the Son of God, and that very supernatural manner itself will effect that He be recognized as such. For neither did this nativity befit anyone other than Him who truly was the Son of God, and again it would not have been congruous for the Son of God to be born in time in another manner (cf. Jansenius, Salméron, Cajetan, Dionysius, Jansen of Ghent); for it was not becoming for Him to have a father on earth, who had God as Father in heaven (Lucas). Thus that dio kai [therefore also] is to be conceived. For what is sometimes proposed—that Christ is called Son of God because He was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit, and therefore also as man has divine origin—cannot be admitted. For it would follow that Christ ought to be called Son of the Holy Spirit, or, since the external works of God are common to the whole Most Holy Trinity, that Christ be called Son of the Most Holy Trinity. Moreover, from the very notion of filiation is to be rejected what Maldonatus says: "He will be called, i.e., will be, the Son of God, because not by a man, but by God by the power of the Holy Spirit will He be generated" (and similarly speak Schegg, Bisping, Reischl, Grimm); for Christ as man does not proceed from the Holy Spirit according to likeness of species (cf. Suarez on III p., q. 32, art. 3), and St. Thomas lucidly explains the matter: "It must be said that Christ was conceived of the Virgin Mary, she supplying the matter in likeness of species, and therefore He is called her son. But Christ, inasmuch as He is man, was conceived of the Holy Spirit as of an active principle, yet not according to likeness of species, as a man is born of his father; and therefore Christ is not called the son of the Holy Spirit, nor indeed of the whole Trinity" (III p., q. 32, art. 3). Therefore, dio kai must be explained concerning the cause of the knowledge of the Son of God, so that a certain logical consequence is inferred, as they also often explain that [passage] of Psalm 44:3: "Grace is poured out upon your lips; therefore God has blessed you" (cf. Delitzsch, Riehm on this passage); which in our passage is done the more easily because by the very word "will be called" it is already designated that He is recognized and proclaimed by others.

Interpretation of "Overshadow"

There are some who explain the second member: "the power of the Most High will overshadow you," not concerning the Holy Spirit, but concerning the Son of God (cf. Catena Aurea, Theophylact, Bernard, Homily 4 on 'Missus est', n. 4; Migne 183, 84; Faber); others understand it concerning God the Father (Jansenius, Dionysius, Toletus). If in the former manner, that dio kai follows most easily. For then the very Word of God is designated, which, inhabiting in the Blessed Virgin, assumes the human body as it were the shadow of His divinity. But "to overshadow" [episkiazein] only expresses more clearly what was said in the first member "will come upon" [epieleusetai], especially if the symbol of the cloud of the Lord is held before the eyes; moreover, as has already been expounded, the name "power" is also employed elsewhere to declare the operation of the Holy Spirit. Wherefore it is altogether advisable to retain the parallelism of the members, so manifest, also in the explanation.

Moreover, from the word "to overshadow" the ancients were accustomed to deduce various things. Since shade tempers heat and ardor and provides refreshment, not rarely they explain that the Blessed Virgin was preserved from all ardor of concupiscence and lust. And because in Sacred Scripture it is said: "Under the shadow of your wings protect me; in the shadow of your wings I will hope" (Psalm 16:8; 56:2), others have explained "to overshadow" concerning the peculiar protection and strengthening of God. Others think that the mystery of the Incarnation is indicated by this word, because just as a shadow is a certain image of a body, by which the body itself is in a certain way recognized, so the Son of God in that assumed nature so lay hidden that from it and from the works the Son of God could be recognized; or that the Word by the very Incarnation, having assumed a body, made as it were a certain shadow and covering (cf. Albertus Magnus, Toletus, Salméron, among whom various expositions of the Fathers are reported). Maldonatus prefers before others: "to overshadow as if to cover with a cloud, to rain upon," as if it were said that it would be that the power of the Most High so rains upon the virgin that He fecundates her. Finally, neither are there lacking those who think that by that word the embrace of a man is designated in an honorable manner (Toletus, Salméron, Bisping prefer this); but Schanz rightly warns that such a notion is to be banished most far away.

The Sign of Elizabeth's Pregnancy (Luke 1:36-37)

The angel also adduces another favor of God which He bestowed upon a kinswoman and an example of divine power, "so that while a miracle is added, joy may be heaped upon joy" (St. Bernard, l.c., n. 6). Verse 36: "And behold, Elizabeth your kinswoman"—what kind of kinship this was is not clear; but since priests and Levites could take wives for themselves from various tribes, such kinship could easily arise between Mary of the family of David and Elizabeth of the stock of Aaron. Thus the high priest Joiada had as wife Jehosheba, daughter of King Joram (2 Chronicles 22:11). They could, for example, as some have thought, be daughters of two sisters from the tribe of Judah, of whom one married into the family of Aaron, the other into the family of David; "and she herself has conceived a son in her old age," i.e., beyond all hope and the powers of nature; announcing the son so distinctly, again he proves himself a messenger sent from heaven; for this could not yet be known by human means; and how certain the conception is, is clear from the time, namely, when already its signs appear beyond doubt, "and this is the sixth month for her who is called barren," whose conception, therefore, had long been manifest and known to all far and wide that it could in no way happen. The Blessed Virgin had asked for no sign for the confirmation of faith. Nevertheless, the angel, that he might bring joy to the Virgin concerning the reproach removed from her kinswoman Elizabeth, at the same time with some demonstration of God's power and benignity, adds this sign in place; for He who is able to give life to a dead womb, it is not foreign to Him to grant childbirth to a virgin without the companionship of a man.

Verse 37: "For no word will be impossible with God"; this is a Hebraism (cf. Romans 3:20; Galatians 2:16): God almighty can accomplish all things.

Mary's Fiat (Luke 1:38)

What [does] Mary [do]? She is chosen for the dignity of Mother of the Messiah, which dignity certainly all women of Israel would seek with greatest zeal and greatest eagerness. Verse 38: "But Mary said: 'Behold the handmaid of the Lord; let it be done to me according to your word!'" "Behold humility, behold devotion; she calls herself handmaid of the Lord who is chosen as mother, nor is she exalted by the sudden promise; at the same time, by saying 'handmaid' she claims for herself no prerogative of so great a grace that would make [her do] what was commanded" (St. Ambrose). Thus the mother already exhibits the disposition of Him whose food was to do the will of Him who sent Him. Eusebius thus depicts the obedience of Mary: "I am the handmaid of the Lord; I am a painting tablet; whatever the painter wishes, let him depict on it; what the Lord of all things wishes, let Him do" (likewise Catena Aurea). Instructed concerning the manner and that virginity is in every respect preserved, she inquires no further, but shows herself ready; and the more she heard that she was to be elevated to mother of the Messiah, the Son of God, the more she flees to the bosom of humility and recognizes and offers herself as handmaid (Cajetan); "let it be done," etc.: genoito—"she now not only believed but also desired that it might happen to her as the angel had said" (Euthymius; similarly Bede, Cajetan, Jansenius, Lucas, Jansen of Ghent, Schanz); others, as Toletus, indicate that only consent is expressed. "According to your word": the words testify to sincere faith, virginal modesty also, because by a most brief speech she embraces all things announced and honors the angel; prudence, because she exhibits her consent according to the form proposed by the angel; readiness to obey, that all things which God indicated through the angel might be done in her; "which word signifies her wonderful chastity and profound humility; for the most ardent love of purity and chastity induced her that, although she knew she would not conceive otherwise than was announced, she would also express in words that she offered consent with this condition; moreover, humility effected that she did not expressly repeat the magnificent and glorious words of the angel" (Toletus).

Why God Required the Virgin's Consent

Various reasons are usually adduced why God required the Virgin's consent: that the espousals of the Son of God with human nature are as it were celebrated; whence it was most fitting that the consent intervene of her who was as it were the spouse of the Holy Spirit and represented human nature and the Church; moreover, that just as through the consent of a woman the ruin of men took its beginning, so the restoration might proceed through the consent of a woman—the words of Tertullian are to the point: "Eve had believed the serpent; Mary believed Gabriel; what the former by believing transgressed, the latter by believing blotted out" (On the Flesh of Christ 47, 3); moreover, that God might signify that our restoration is not accomplished without our cooperation; moreover, that He might oblige us to pursue the Blessed Virgin with great affection of love, to whose as it were arbitration and consent our salvation had been entrusted, since the Word of God willed to become man for us in no other way than with Mary consenting; that also it was congruous that, as much as could be done, Mary might conceive worthily; and for this she was prepared by the angelic address and by the exercise of the virtues of faith, obedience, humility, and charity, which she would have exercised on that occasion (cf. Toletus, Sylvius, Book 4, ch. 5, q. 56).

The Angel's Departure and the Moment of Conception

Therefore, not after the utterance of her words, but after the response of the sacred Virgin, did the angel depart from her, so that also in this manner it might be signified that the angel was sent not only to announce, but also to require the Virgin's consent. Having therefore fulfilled his mission and accomplished the matter for the sake of which he was sent, he departs. "Moreover, if in his approach and first salutation he used most honorable titles, there is no doubt that in departing he used even greater signs of reverence, since now he was greeting his lady and queen, namely, the mother of his Lord and King" (Lucas). For, as Suarez says (l.c., disp. 9, §4, §1), "it is certain among Catholics that the Blessed Virgin conceived the divine Word before the angel departed from her; for this is the common opinion of the Saints." And that the mystery of the Incarnation was perfected and the Word was made flesh at that moment when Mary's words were finished, so that at that moment the Virgin conceived, is likewise an opinion certain among theologians and strengthened by the suffrages of the Fathers, as Euthymius says: "He departed, as soon as she had conceived by her word."

 CONTINUE