The verb “overshadow” (episkiazein)
holds our attention. As with several instances elsewhere in the Bible: Ps. 91
(90):1 and 4; 140 (139):7, it could be taken in a weak sense designating simply
the divine protection God bestows on man who are his friends. (André Feuillet, Jesus
and His Mother According to the Lucan Infancy Narratives and According to St.
John: The Role of the Virgin Mary in Salvation History and the Place of Woman
in the Church [trans. Leonard Maluf; Still River, Mass.: St. Bede’s
Publications, 1974], 3)
Undoubtedly there exists, in fact,
a certain analogy of situation between Lk. 1:39-45 and Cant. 2:8-14 or 5:2-5.
Like the Beloved of the Canticle, Jesus present in Mary passes over the
mountains (“Mary set out for the hill country”), in order to pay a visit to
Elizabeth and to her child, and in both cases the arrival of the mysterious
traveler provokes joy: the precursor leaps on the womb of Elizabeth somewhat
the way the bowels of the Beloved stir at the coming of her Beloved (Cant.
5:4-5). Nevertheless, in the absence of precise literary contact, we cannot
positively affirm that Luke in narrating the Visitation episode really intends
to hark back to the Canticle of Canticles as it is clear John does in 3:29. (André
Feuillet, Jesus and His Mother According to the Lucan Infancy Narratives and
According to St. John: The Role of the Virgin Mary in Salvation History and the
Place of Woman in the Church [trans. Leonard Maluf; Still River, Mass.: St.
Bede’s Publications, 1974], 12)
The verb skirtan, which
indicates the leap of the precursor (Lk. 1:44), is used often in the Septuagint
(three times out of six) to indicate the leaps of joy which greet the coming of
the Lord: Mal. 3:20; Ps. 114:4-6; Wis. 17:19. The joy referred to here (agalliasis)
is unquestionably of the soteriological and messianic order; cf. TWNT,
I, pp. 18-20. Linked with the messianic age inaugurated by Jesus (cf. 1:14, 28,
47; 2:10, 20), this joy emanates then from the Messiah living in his mother’s
womb; but in a certain way it is granted through the intervention of Mary. (André
Feuillet, Jesus and His Mother According to the Lucan Infancy Narratives and
According to St. John: The Role of the Virgin Mary in Salvation History and the
Place of Woman in the Church [trans. Leonard Maluf; Still River, Mass.: St.
Bede’s Publications, 1974], 79 n. 14)
On Tertullian, De carne Christi 17: “Eve had trusted the
serpent, Mary trusted Gabriel; the evil that Eve had caused by believing, Mary
wiped out by believing.”
How much validity is there in this
comparison between Eve and Mary? Does it really echo the evangelist’s line of
thought? According to a number of ancient commentaries, St. Luke is
intentionally taking us back to the temptation in the earthly paradise: Mary is
troubled by the greeting of the angel because she is afraid she might be in the
presence of a diabolic apparition. E. Burrows favors this hypothesis (The
Gospel of the Infancy, p. 53, note 1). He stresses the fact that the Greek
verb used to express the fear of Mary (dietarachtē) is very strong. As
for the very that follows (dielogizeto—through, pondered) it suggests,
he says, a perplexity of the intellectual order: Mary appears to be wondering,
not why she was greeted this way, but rather what were the origin and nature (potapos)
of this greeting. Comparing the church of Corinth to a virgin, St. Paul feared
it was allowing itself to be seduced as Eve was deceived by the serpent (2 Cor.
11:2-3). Why could not Mary have been afraid that Satan might be disguising
himself as an angel of light?
The great majority of commentators
remain unfavorable to this exegesis and we cannot but agree with them. The
gospel texts assigns as the sole reason for Mary’s distress, not the angelic
apparition itself, but the words of Gabriel, which appear to have disturbed her
on account of her humility. It is not necessary to look for anything else. (André
Feuillet, Jesus and His Mother According to the Lucan Infancy Narratives and
According to St. John: The Role of the Virgin Mary in Salvation History and the
Place of Woman in the Church [trans. Leonard Maluf; Still River, Mass.: St.
Bede’s Publications, 1974], 6-7)
In Clement of Alexandria's text of Sirach 9:8, we find
κεχαριτωμενης (from χαριτοω). Commenting on κεχαριτωμενης, κεχαριτωμένῳ, and κεχαριτωμένη,
André Feuillet noted the following:
[κεχαριτωμενης] occurs in Sir. 9:8
(physical sense) and [κεχαριτωμένῳ] in Sir. 18:17 and Ps. 18:26 (moral sense).
In Sir. 9:8 the Hebrew text has éshet hēn; we do not have the Hebrew
text of Sir. 18:17. For Ps. 18:26 the Hebrew reads támîm. For [κεχαριτωμένη]
in Luke 1:28, may exegetes suppose a Hebrew substratum with the root hānān:
show generosity, have pity on, do a favor. Cf. H. Sahin, Das Messias,
pp. 380-82. But this is only a conjecture and we should have no right to rely
on it in determining the sense of the text of St. Luke. Furthermore it would be
wrong to base our interpretation on the names given in a divine apparition,
whether to Gideon (“valiant warrior,” Jgs. 6:12) or to Daniel, “man of
predilections”: îsh hamudōt; LXX: anēr epithumiōn (Dn. 9:23;
10:11, 19). (André Feuillet, Jesus and His Mother According to the Lucan
Infancy Narratives and According to St. John: The Role of the Virgin Mary in
Salvation History and the Place of Woman in the Church [trans. Leonard
Maluf; Still River, Mass.: St. Bede’s Publications, 1974], 84 n. 44)
Up until very recently the Greek
participle [κεχαριτωμένη] has ordinarily been translated “Full of Grace.” It
must be admitted, this translation is only an approximation. But, while there
were good reasons for maintaining it, no valid reason can be found for
substituting in its place: “you who have found favor with God,” as does the
Ecumenical Translation of the New Testament. This last expression has the
twofold disadvantage of understanding the word charis in an exclusively
subjective sense (divine favor), though the word also designates a gift of God
(cf. Lk. 2:40 and 52; Eph. 1:6), and of neglecting the nuance of abundance
suggested by the Greek verb (charitoō—to fill to overflowing with
graces). This nuance is well brought out by the usual formula, “Full of Grace.”
(Ibid., 106)
