How do we know that Mary recited the Magnificat?

[Usbek_de_Perse]

Given that St. Luke was not present when the Angel Gabriel visited the Holy Virgin, how do we know what words she spoke when this occurred?

 

[Justice_Mercy]

Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us, it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught.

(Luke 1:1-4 ESV)

 

[Usbek_de_Perse]

This does not answer the question. And in any case, one does not quote from a book to prove it. Catholic apologists remind us of this when discussing sola scriptura.

Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us, it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught.

(Luke 1:1-4 ESV)

 

[po18guy]

The magnificat did not occur at the annunciation, but at an unknown later date, and not in Nazareth, but in the Judean hills. After Mary’s “fiat” to Gabriel at the annunciation, she arose and travelled to the hill country of Judea. The Holy Spirit was present as she entered Zechariah’s house and greeted Elizabeth. John the Baptist was present in Elizabeth’s womb. Zechariah may have been present, as with any servants in their household. Remember that we are speaking in the supernatural realm here, and that the unborn John was aware of the arrival of Mary and Jesus.

 

[itullian]

passed down thru word of mouth i guess.

 

[Publisher]

The writer of the Gospel of Luke wrote the Magnificat based on Hannah’s song…he used her song as the basis for Mary’s as “midrash”. Did Mary actually recite the words he used? I doubt it…since the magnificat is based on the Jewish scriptures.

Of course the guidence of your particular faith community should be considered.

 

[brumano]

Given that St. Luke was not present when the Angel Gabriel visited the Holy Virgin, how do we know what words she spoke when this occurred?

Because she is the only one who could speak it; exactly how it was transmitted to St. Luke’s gospel may or may not be exactly known to all, but as I’m sure you’ve already considered it is what she said that is all important, not how the saint knew of it to write it down.

 

[Maryann_C]

The writer of the Gospel of Luke wrote the Magnificat based on Hannah’s song…he used her song as the basis for Mary’s as “midrash”. Did Mary actually recite the words he used? I doubt it…since the magnificat is based on the Jewish scriptures.

Of course the guidence of your particular faith community should be considered.

Errrr Mary is a Jewish girl so why wouldn’t she know her Jewish scriptures??

 

[Publisher]

Errrr Mary is a Jewish girl so why wouldn’t she know her Jewish scriptures??

The writer of “Luke’s” gospel used the Jewish scriptures to frame his version and story of the life of Christ. The writer of the gospel used Hannah’s song as the basis for the magnificat…he used his “literary license” and had Mary “speak” the words. His gospel was written for evangelistic purposes…it is not a 100% accurate historical account…it is based on “midrash”…not historical facts.

 

[johnnyjones]

This is why the whole of the bible must be recognized as the word of God. Too much picking and choosing along with allegory after allegory.

 

[57Bill]

We honestly cannot “know” of quite a few things.

Jesus’ 40 days alone in the desert? There might be some OT scripture to confess that I am ignorant.

I like Publisher’s post and I doubt many 15(?) y/o Jewish girls had much knowledge of scripture at that time, unless there is much more that Gabriel said to Mary.

 

[Aelred_Minor]

The writer of “Luke’s” gospel used the Jewish scriptures to frame his version and story of the life of Christ. The writer of the gospel used Hannah’s song as the basis for the magnificat…he used his “literary license” and had Mary “speak” the words. His gospel was written for evangelistic purposes…it is not a 100% accurate historical account…it is based on “midrash”…not historical facts.

While the Bible is not always to be taken “literally”, it is always to be taken in the sense in which the original author intended it, since whatever the Bible actually asserts as true is true. Therefore we have to ask, does Luke assert that Mary said this prayer? In my private opinion I think the answer is clearly yes, though it is less clear whether she had herself composed the prayer, or whether she actually said the prayer spontaneously and immediately after Elizabeth’s words.

As for the Jewish nature of the prayer, as others pointed out that only increases the plausibility that Mary, a Jewish woman, wrote it. The Jews of the period, both male and female, both rich and poor, in both city and country, were instructed in the Scriptures from about age six or seven.

As for how Luke knew about it, well there is the inspiration of the Holy Spirit for one thing, though it’s clear from his preface that he used human sources as well. In fact, considering how much of the early part of the story is told essentially through the eyes of Mary, considering the statement at the end of this opening section that Mary “kept these things in her heart”, and considering that Mary lived an unknown amount of time into the age of the Church, it’s plausible that Mary was herself Luke’s human source for these chapters.

 

[Della]

The writer of “Luke’s” gospel used the Jewish scriptures to frame his version and story of the life of Christ. The writer of the gospel used Hannah’s song as the basis for the magnificat…he used his “literary license” and had Mary “speak” the words. His gospel was written for evangelistic purposes…it is not a 100% accurate historical account…it is based on “midrash”…not historical facts.

Luke was not Jewish. He was Greek. Why would a Greek depend on the midrash when he could have asked Mary directly since she was alive and accessible? From the details in Luke’s account it is obvious he got his account straight from her and not by concocting any fictional material to fit the bill. Mary expressed herself as any Jewish woman who had listened to the OT readings would have done, just as a Catholic woman would be inclined to use Catholic expressions when giving thanks or praying. Many of the Psalms are written in the same sort of language as each other, as well. It’s only natural.

We Catholics believe Mary spoke these words because there is no good evidence she didn’t apart from speculations based on the historical-critical method that may be helpful in some matters, but falls far short in others and should not be used by non-scholar lay people to dismiss matters of faith accepted for centuries by those who were much closer to the events Luke describes than we are.

 

[porthos11]

This does not answer the question. And in any case, one does not quote from a book to prove it. Catholic apologists remind us of this when discussing sola scriptura.

I don’t see why not in this case. The opening sentence easily sets the tone and basis of the writing. What we are warned against is proving inspiration of Scripture with Scripture, but in this case we are only trying to establish literal accuracy. St. Luke is stating that he obtained data from eyewitnesses. He is in essence, stating his research methodology. This is completely valid as it would be for any modern thesis or dissertation.

 

[johnnyjones]

The whole bible was written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. You should believe it all. That does not mean study is not required. After all, the mind of God is not the mind of man. The church fathers wrote it all down and put it into one place as a basis for our faith.

 

[Publisher]

Luke was not Jewish. He was Greek. Why would a Greek depend on the midrash when he could have asked Mary directly since she was alive and accessible? From the details in Luke’s account it is obvious he got his account straight from her and not by concocting any fictional material to fit the bill. Mary expressed herself as any Jewish woman who had listened to the OT readings would have done, just as a Catholic woman would be inclined to use Catholic expressions when giving thanks or praying. Many of the Psalms are written in the same sort of language as each other, as well. It’s only natural.

We Catholics believe Mary spoke these words because there is no good evidence she didn’t apart from speculations based on the historical-critical method that may be helpful in some matters, but falls far short in others and should not be used by non-scholar lay people to dismiss matters of faith accepted for centuries by those who were much closer to the events Luke describes than we are.

Since the gospels were written either by “God fearers” of Greek stock or of the Diaspora Jews which had lost touch with Hebrew…they would have been very knowledgeable as they used the LXX concerning Jewish thought. Luke, Paul’s companion in Acts was not the writer of Luke…all the gospels were written anonymously…names were added at a later time.

I understand you believe Mary spoke the words…you must follow the teachings of your faith tradition…and if it declares she spoke these words…you must believe so.

 

[Justice_Mercy]

This does not answer the question. And in any case, one does not quote from a book to prove it. Catholic apologists remind us of this when discussing sola scriptura.

You asked how we knew. If you believe in the testimony of sacred scripture, it answers the question you asked. If you don’t then it is not sufficient for you.

 

[Maryann_C]

This does not answer the question. And in any case, one does not quote from a book to prove it. Catholic apologists remind us of this when discussing sola scriptura.

There is a difference here . Catholic apologists ask you to show us where the protestant understanding is written in scripture since protestants only hold to scripture as their authority ( they claim) and no where in scripture do we find the words “sola scriptura” where as Catholics hold to sacred tradition , only part of which is recorded in scripture a teaching we DO find written in the scriptures themselves not once but several times.

 

[Della]

Since the gospels were written either by “God fearers” of Greek stock or of the Diaspora Jews which had lost touch with Hebrew…they would have been very knowledgeable as they used the LXX concerning Jewish thought. Luke, Paul’s companion in Acts was not the writer of Luke…all the gospels were written anonymously…names were added at a later time.

The Gospels were named by those who knew who wrote them. Period. Any claims to much later dates is pure speculation by “scholars” of the historical-critical method. I don’t subscribe to their findings since their methodology is seriously flawed in many areas, and not because I just want to have it “that way”. Not that you are saying that, but to stem anyone thinking that the case.

I understand you believe Mary spoke the words…you must follow the teachings of your faith tradition…and if it declares she spoke these words…you must believe so.

And I follow it because Christ’s Church which he founded tells me so, and not because, once again, it makes me happy to do so for cultural reasons. I am a “convert” to the Catholic faith. I didn’t enter into it with blind eyes or without proper investigation/study. I believe it because it’s true not because I want to follow my faith tradition. Trust me, if it weren’t true I wouldn’t waste my faith on it. Truth matters–it matters more than life itself.

 

[po18guy]

The writer of “Luke’s” gospel used the Jewish scriptures to frame his version and story of the life of Christ. The writer of the gospel used Hannah’s song as the basis for the magnificat…he used his “literary license” and had Mary “speak” the words. His gospel was written for evangelistic purposes…it is not a 100% accurate historical account…it is based on “midrash”…not historical facts.

Since the gospels were written either by “God fearers” of Greek stock or of the Diaspora Jews which had lost touch with Hebrew…they would have been very knowledgeable as they used the LXX concerning Jewish thought. Luke, Paul’s companion in Acts was not the writer of Luke…all the gospels were written anonymously…names were added at a later time.

I understand you believe Mary spoke the words…you must follow the teachings of your faith tradition…and if it declares she spoke these words…you must believe so.

What source(s) can you cite, other than personal opinion, or the opinion of others?