Kecharitomene And Sirach 18

[Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa]

Recently after discovering that Kecharitomene is NOT used only to describe Mary but apparently others (sirach 18:17) I have had a failing belief in the immaculate conception. am i getting something wrong about sirach 18? I want to beleive it but my belief in this doctrine is being hindered by this.

 

[edward_george1]

Why would that word being used there contradict belief in the Immaculate Conception? If anything, it should bolster it. It tells you what kind of person is kecharitomene, and then we know that only one person is ever directly described as that.

-Fr ACEGC

 

[Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa]

the problem with this is that it says A person, not THE person. And on top of that it uses the masculine form, implying a man.

 

[edward_george1]

You’re reading way to much into this. It says a person, and then we know of only one person described like that. Don’t make more of it than it is. No other specific person is referred to by the word, and in any case, it has a different connotation in Luke than in Sirach.

 

[porthos11]

Recently after discovering that Kecharitomene is NOT used only to describe Mary but apparently others (sirach 18:17) I have had a failing belief in the immaculate conception. am i getting something wrong about sirach 18? I want to beleive it but my belief in this doctrine is being hindered by this.

Your error is thinking Luke 1:28 is a proof-text of the Immaculate Conception when it is merely a support, albeit an extremely strong one. But you will not see that word scream “Immaculate Conception!” The authority for the Immaculate Conception is the Church, and the authority of the Church is DEFINITELY given in Scripture.

And even then, think before you take the proverbial leap. What is the Greek case in Luke, as compared to the Greek case in Sirach? If you cannot answer this question or know what the heck I’m talking about, you shouldn’t even think of getting your faith shaken over this (because you should probably humble yourself and tell yourself that “There’s probably something I don’t know that the Catholic Church does”). You are hardly the first to catch the word in Sirach.

 

[Vico]

Recently after discovering that Kecharitomene is NOT used only to describe Mary but apparently others (sirach 18:17) I have had a failing belief in the immaculate conception. am i getting something wrong about sirach 18? I want to beleive it but my belief in this doctrine is being hindered by this.

The two are:

• κεχαριτωμένῳ - perf. passive. participle, dative masculine, Sirach 18.17
• κεχαριτωμένη - perf. passive. participle, vocative feminine, Luke 1.28

Sirach 18:17 … ἀνδρὶ κεχαριτωμένῳ
Luke 1:28 … Χαῖρε, κεχαριτωμένη …

The Latin translation for Sirach phrase is homine justificato.
The Latin translation for Luke phrase is Ave gratia plena

Note that the just baptized are in a state of justification, without personal or original sin.

 

[Todd_Easton]

Kecharitomene is not only a description of the Virgin Mary, as with others (Sirach), it is also her title. Others may have received favors from God but the Virgin Mary is the quintessence (the most perfect embodiment), the ultimate (highest) example, of those who have received favors from God.

 

[JM3]

it is also her title

It is not a title, it is her name by which God knows her.

 

[JohnR77]

While Luke 1:28 supports the doctrine of Mary’s Immaculate Conception,
there are many other solid arguments for believing in it.

It is very fitting that in one person, Mary, God has completely triumphed over Satan. In her, by God’s grace, Satan was completely rebuffed from beginning to end. The rest of us have sinned and have been under the domain of Satan, till we were baptized.

This doctrine of the Immaculate Conception can be found in what God says to Satan in
Genesis 3:14-15
“And the LORD God said unto the serpent … I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.” KJV

Identity of the Woman

All Christians agree that this is a prophecy about the Messiah, Jesus Christ, coming to strike the head of the serpent, Satan. - Actually the Hebrew word that is translated as “seed” is being used in a very unusual way. Normally it applies to the male, but here it is being used in reference to a woman. It is referring to Jesus’ birth through the Virgin Mary. - So, looking back at this Scripture we should appropriately ask ourselves, of which woman’s seed was He born ? The answer of course is Mary. Jesus even goes on to identify Mary as the “Woman” in John 2:4 , 19:26, and also see Revelation 12: 1, 5.

It is important to note that the creation of the enmity between Satan and the woman is not something that the woman does, rather it is what God does, and He does it in the most perfect way. Unfortunately some Christians in their misguided attempts to defend the glory of God actually insult Him by denying Him the credit that is due for this miraculous work He did in Mary.

Enmity is a determined, enduring and extreme hostility that exists between enemies.

Every Christian once in heaven will be perfected by God’s grace. However, only of Mary, and of “her seed,” which is Jesus Christ, is it said that there will be enmity between them and Satan. Since Jesus is God and since holiness is an aspect of His Nature, he has that enmity by nature. Where as with Mary, she has it as a gift.

If there had ever been a time when Mary was under Satan’s domination through personal or original sin, then there would not be a real enmity between her and Satan. Therefore, by virtue of the grace He gave her, God put Mary in opposition to Satan from the beginning and throughout her life. Notice that God the Father says that He will put the enmity between her and Satan. Only in God, and by His gift of grace, also in Mary, can it be said that there is enmity with Satan because only in them is their entire life opposed to Satan.

Therefore, since Mary had an enmity between her and Satan, and even though she was a descendant of Adam and would have contracted Original Sin, she was saved from the stain of it by the merits of Jesus Christ from the first moment of her life.

https://www.defendingthebride.com/ma2/conception.html

I hope this helps,
John

 

[Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa]

I don’t think that it’s referring to Mary there, but rather humanity, notice how it says and THY seed AND her seed. So I think it’s talking about the seed of a man and a woman and not necessarily a prophecy.

 

[Vico]

I don’t think that it’s referring to Mary there, but rather humanity, notice how it says and THY seed AND her seed. So I think it’s talking about the seed of a man and a woman and not necessarily a prophecy.

NABRE has this translation of Gen 3:15

I will put enmity between you and the woman,
and between your offspring and hers;
They will strike at your head,
while you strike at their heel.

So one can readily see it is: the serpent and its offspring vs. the woman and her offspring.

 

[EvangAlived]

Recently after discovering that Kecharitomene is NOT used only to describe Mary but apparently others (sirach 18:17) I have had a failing belief in the immaculate conception. am i getting something wrong about sirach 18? I want to beleive it but my belief in this doctrine is being hindered by this.

What about including Ephesians 1:6, “εχαριτωσεν” also? Same basic word there also - Kata Biblon Wiki Lexicon - χαριτόω - to favor (v.)

 

[Mintaka]

Echaritousen just means graced, favored. E- is not ke-.

The interesting bit is that Sirach 18:17 and the whole section around it have a fairly obvious set of Christological/Messianic and Marian readings, although they do not seem to have been intended that way by Sirach and must have been put there by God Himself (and the Septuagint translator, who suddenly uses a word form that he does not use elsewhere).

I mean, just look at it. All that talk about a word (logos) or a gift.

Look at the whole chapter, which talks about Creation and God’s mercy, and then starts addressing gifts and words.

So it is an interesting place to talk about “andri kecharitomenou”, and I would be interested to.see what the Greek Fathers and ecclesiastical writers have to say about this passage.

 

[Mintaka]

The Vetus Latina for this verse varies; one version is very close to Jerome. But here is the other version:

“… sed utrumque hec penes virum gloria plenum.”

Yup, “full of glory.” Heh, pretty interesting!

Also there are versions of the Greek where it says “anthropou” instead of “andri”, which would make it refer to a “human,” either male or female.

 

[Cathoholic]

Excellent posts Vico!

I am going to copy your information and file it (hope you do not mind).

Great information. Many thanks.

God bless.

Cathoholic

 

[Cathoholic]

Actually the Hebrew word that is translated as “seed” is being used in a very unusual way. Normally it applies to the male, but here it is being used in reference to a woman. It is referring to Jesus’ birth through the Virgin Mary. - So, looking back at this Scripture we should appropriately ask ourselves, of which woman’s seed was He born ? The answer of course is Mary. Jesus even goes on to identify Mary as the “Woman” in John 2:4 , 19:26, and also see Revelation 12: 1, 5.

It is important to note that the creation of the enmity between Satan and the woman is not something that the woman does, rather it is what God does . . .

Also excellent John.

 

[Cathoholic]

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa . . . .

Recently after discovering that Kecharitomene is NOT used only to describe Mary but apparently others (sirach 18:17) I have had a failing belief in the immaculate conception. am i getting something wrong about sirach 18? I want to beleive it but my belief in this doctrine is being hindered by this.

Think of Jesus as the “New Adam” Aaa.

Think of Adam as a historical prefigurement or type of Jesus.

Jesus is the FULFILLMENT of Adam.

MATTHEW 5:17 17 "Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them
but to FULFIL them.

(Yes Jesus is the New Moses, The New David, etc. But I want to concentrate on Jesus as the New Adam here or Adam as a TYPE of Jesus).

ROMANS 5:14 (RSVCE) 14 Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sins were not like the transgression of
Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come.

Recall the Old Adam was made from pure undefiled ground.

God took earth and fashioned it into Adam and “breathed” life into Adam.

When we look at prefigurements to fulfillments, the fulfillment is always GREATER than the mere prefigurement.

If Adam gets to be made from PURE creation,
but the NEW Adam only merely gets to have His humanity
made from defiled rotting dying flesh . . . .

. . . You would have the OLD Adam, being GREATER than Jesus (in THAT sense).

This is NOT FITTING. It would be perverted.

It would not only call Mary into question but Jesus.

This is part of the reason WHY people like Tim Staples frequently remind us . . .

. . . "All Marian doctrines have Christologic implications!"

Adam the mere prefigurement . . . . was merely made from pure matter (pure undefiled earth).

Jesus’ human nature, the infinite fulfillment . . . . was made from pure matter (pure, undefiled flesh).

God bless.

Cathoholic

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
(Above image from “Jesus and the Jewish Roots of Mary” By Dr. Brant Pitre P. 37)

.

POPE PIUS IX And indeed it was wholly fitting that so wonderful a mother should be ever resplendent with the glory of most sublime holiness and so completely free from all taint of original sin that she would triumph utterly over the ancient serpent. To her did the Father will to give his only-begotten Son — the Son whom, equal to the Father and begotten by him, the Father loves from his heart — and to give this Son in such a way that he would be the one and the same common Son of God the Father and of the Blessed Virgin Mary. It was she whom the Son himself chose to make his Mother and it was from her that the Holy Spirit willed and brought it about that he should be conceived and born from whom he himself proceeds.[1] —Infallible proclamation from Pope Pius IX 1854

http://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius09/p9ineff.htm Ineffabilis Deus - The Immaculate Conception - Pope BI. Pius IX – Dec. 8, 1854

 

[Cathoholic]

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa . . . .

I just saw this link (concerning Genesis 3 up to 10:15 in the video) in my inbox and have reviewed it.

I wanted to share it with you too.

 

[Gorgias]

What about including Ephesians 1:6, “εχαριτωσεν” also? Same basic word there also

Echaritousen just means graced, favored. E- is not ke-.

Right. It is the same root, but the inflection is all different: echaritosen is in the aorist, which simply points to an event that occurred in the past, without referring to its effect.

 

[westie]

The two are:

• κεχαριτωμένῳ - perf. passive. participle, dative masculine, Sirach 18.17
• κεχαριτωμένη - perf. passive. participle, vocative feminine, Luke 1.28

Sirach 18:17 … ἀνδρὶ κεχαριτωμένῳ
Luke 1:28 … Χαῖρε, κεχαριτωμένη …

The Latin translation for Sirach phrase is homine justificato .
The Latin translation for Luke phrase is Ave gratia plena

Academic biblical theology is a legitimate, noble, and interesting pursuit, but sometimes we have to savor the Word like a fine wine, and focus on the spiritual sense instead of the linguistic sense.