NAB Luke 1:28

[Psalm45_9]

The Annotation for Luke 1:28 in the 1582 Catholic Rheims Translation of the Bible in to English says:

" 28Full of grace) Note the excellence prerogatives of our B. Lady, and abhor those Heretics which make her no better than other vulgar woman, and therefor to take from her fullness of grace, they say here, Hail freely beloved, contraire to all significations of the Greek word, which is at the left, *endued with Grace, as S. Paul useth it Eph. I. by S. Chrysostoms interpretation : or rather Full of grace, as-both Greek and Latin fathers have always here understood it, and the Latin’s also read it, namely S. Ambrose thus, Well is she only called full of grace, who only obtained grace which no other woman deserved, to be replenished with the author of grace. And if they did as well know the nature of these Greek words, as they would seem very skillful, they might easily observe that they signify fullness, as when them selves translate the like word (Luc. 16,20) full of force. Beza, Ulcerous."

 

[Deacon_Ed]

We need to be careful with absolutes – they are almost always incorrect. For example, consider this:

Set before you the blessed Mary, whose surpassing purity made her meet to be the mother of the Lord. When the angel Gabriel came down to her, in the form of a man, and said: “Hail, thou that art highly favored; the Lord is with thee,” she was terror-stricken and unable to reply, for she had never been saluted by a man before.

St. Jerome, Letter XXII, to Eustochium
​

​

Now, it is true that, for the most part, the Latin Fathers followed the Vulgate’s example and used “full of grace.”

Also, I want to make it clear that I am fully in accord with the teaching of the Church that Mary is “full of grace.” I am simply addressing the best way to translate the Greek here.

Deacon Ed

 

[serendipity]

Genesis315:

I mean, being “full of grace” just doesn’t seem the same as being “highly favored.” If the point was to get across that she was full of grace, then “full of grace” would have been used. The apostles were all highly favored too, but I don’t know if they would be considered “full of grace.” Am I wrong in this interpretation?

We only receive grace by the favor of God, so I don’t see it as being two separate issues.

 

[Axion]

Deacon Ed:

No, from your own analysis it simply shows that Mary was the recipient of grace. Because the word is in the perfect tense it shows that the action was completed in the past (that is, Mary already has that grace) and the effects of the process (Mary being graced) continues into the present. There is nothing that indicates a “fullness” of grace – that would be a theological interpolation. While I certainly don’t disagree that she was “full of grace” the issue is how best to translate a particular word. I disagree with your conclusion because you go beyond the linguistic framework. This has nothing to do with being liberal and everything to do wtih being faithful to the original language.

But is not a giving of grace that is completed, a **full ** giving of grace? and the continuous nature of the Greek perfect tense, gives the meaning of a **continuous ** and **enduring ** endowment with grace. So “highly” graced does not really cover this meaning.

“It is permissible, on Greek grammatical and linguistic grounds, to paraphrase kecharitomene as completely, perfectly, enduringly endowed with grace.” (Blass & DeBrunner, Greek Grammar of the New Testament, Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1961, p.166

“…Highly favored as in Luke 1:28 meaning to bestow grace upon…it really does not mean to show favor, but to give grace to” [Lexicon To The Old and New Testaments, edited by Spiros Zodhiates, TH.D, 1988 Iowa Falls, Iowa, World Bible Publications Inc.Pg. 1739]

"The fifth century scholar Jerome was correct in translating the Greek to gratiae plena ‘full of grace’, even the translators of 1611 King James Version show there approval of this in the Margin with “Much Graced” [A Look at the Greek Scriptures, 1984, New York, Garretson Cox & Company Pg. 123 ]

Now we shift from fact to as assumption. There is no indication that this is the case. The KJV’s commentary is correct. Because the word is passive she was acted upon rather than being the actor and, therefore, was not the source of the grace that she possessed. It was given to her. Since the reason stated clearly has nothing to do with your assertion (a “…desire to downgrade Mary”) I wonder why you made the assertion at all.

The statement that the use of “highly favoured” and its variants was made in an attempt to downgrade Mary is based on the decision to replace **Grace ** by Favour, as a translation for the Greek word Charis, in this **one ** case, but not elsewhere in the NT.

As far as I can discover, there is no warrant whatsoever for this change. “Favour” and “Grace” mean very different things in New Testament Greek. Replacing “Grace” with “Favour” twists the whole meaning of the text. We can see this in protestant arguments in these forums and elsewhere that Mary was “highly favoured” only in that she was picked to bear Jesus.

Actually, they haven’t “stuck to the original” but, rather, to the Vulgate’s translation which, because of its common usage in the Hail Mary, is part and parcel of our Catholic tradtion (note the lower case “t”).

It’s more than that. The original Greek uses the word **Charis ** for Mary. Since **Charis ** is translated **grace ** virtually everywhere else in the NT, it should be translated grace here.

Actually, I would submit that “highly graced” would be an equally valid translation, although it is not normally considered good English. Highly favored is an equally good translation.

Neither covers anything like the fullness of the meaning of Kecharitomene. But while “highly graced” is fairly acceptible, (even though it leaves open the possibility of there being some “missing” grace), “highly favoured”, so much alters the meaning of the Greek as to be to my mind a mistranslation.

 

[jimmy]

Deacon Ed:

The reason for the “change” is that the NAB is translated from the Greek instead of Latin. The word that Luke used in Greek, κεχαριτωμενη (kecharitOmenE), doesn’t mean “full of grace.” In Greek that would be *πληρης χαριτος (plErEs charitos). *St. Jerome’s translation of this word is problematic. It may reflect the already extant theological tradition that Mary was “ever sinless.” The word itself is a form of *charitoO *-- to show grace. Grammatically the word indicates the present completed, it’s passive (the form could also be what in Greek is called the middle voice, but that would mean she graced herself, so this isn’t likely), and it’s a participle. The form is Attic rather than Koine so it’s unusual in Scripture. The best translation of this word is, in fact, “highly favored” or “highly graced.”

Deacon Ed

 

[jimmy]

Deacon Ed:

We need to be careful with absolutes – they are almost always incorrect. For example, consider this:[/right]
Now, it is true that, for the most part, the Latin Fathers followed the Vulgate’s example and used “full of grace.”

Also, I want to make it clear that I am fully in accord with the teaching of the Church that Mary is “full of grace.” I am simply addressing the best way to translate the Greek here.

Deacon Ed

What does the latin say for that Jerome quote? Is it a misstranslation of the latin?

 

[jimmy]

What the perfect tense means is that it was an action that was done and completed in the past, but its effects are still affective in the present.

Like for example if I said “The cup has been filled.”. Has been filled is the perfect passive. This means that it was done at a time in the past, but it is still filled in the present. The fact that it is in the completed aspect does not infer that it is an absolutely full. What it infers is that the action was done in the past and is no longer being done.

 

[Sime]

“Hail, full of grace” This translation, approved by the ancient Fathers, agrees with the ancient Syriac and Arabic versions as well.
St. Jerome also had access to the best manuscripts that no longer exist today.- which were much closer to the original manuscripts in Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic than anything still existing today.

In the words of the Greek grammarian J. Gresham Machen, ‘The Greek perfect tense denotes the present state resultant upon a past action’ (New Testament Greek for Beginners, p. 187). The perfect is used in Matthew 4:4,7,10 (‘it is written’). Literally translated, ‘It has been written in the past and is still in force.’ Hence, Jesus expresses the continuing authority of God’s written law by using the perfect tense.

"…Ephesians 2:8, ‘For by grace are you saved through faith…’ The word ‘saved’ is translated from the Greek word sesosmenoi, which is a perfect passive participle. It means that this salvation took place at some point in the past and is continuing on in the present….

In other words, the perfect tense in Greek is a past tense with a special meaning: it is used to refer to a past action which has effects felt in the present. So, here’s what some modern, English-speaking scholars tell us “Kecharitomene” denotes, based purely on the definition of the word and its grammatical usage:

" ‘Highly favoured’ (kecharitomene). Perfect passive participle of charitoo and means endowed with grace (charis), enriched with grace as in Ephesians 1:6 . . . The Vulgate gratiae plena [full of grace] "is right, if it means ‘full of grace which thou hast received’; wrong, if it means ‘full of grace which thou hast to bestow’ " (A.T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, p. 14) - Education::Southern Baptist Theological Seminary

“It is permissible, on Greek grammatical and linguistic grounds, to paraphrase kecharitomene as completely, perfectly, enduringly endowed with grace.” (Blass and DeBrunner, Greek Grammar of the New Testament).

Luke 1:28 uses a special conjugated form of “charitoo.” It uses “kecharitomene,” while Ephesians 1:6 uses “echaritosen,” which is a different form of the verb “charitoo.” Echaritosen means “he graced” (or bestowed grace). Echaritosen signifies a momentary action, an action brought to pass (Blass and DeBrunner, Greek Grammar of the New Testament, p. 166). Whereas, Kecharitomene, the perfect passive participle, shows a completeness with a permanent result.Kecharitomene denotes continuance of a completed action (H. W. Smyth, Greek Grammar [Harvard Univ Press, 1968], p. 108-109, sec 1852:b; also Blass and DeBrunner, p. 175).

And our friend’s citation of what the term denotes:

“…to bestow grace, to show favor to someone…the divine favor for a special vocation…” (Fritz Rienecker/Cleon Rogers in their Linguistic Key to the Greek New Testament)

Ironically, that final definition is essentially coextensive with the Catholic understanding of the why of Mary’s sinlessness.

What about St.Sephen being "full of grace in Acts?

Acts 6:8 does not describe St. Stephen as “full of grace” (past-perfect tense). Rather, in the greek, Stephen is described as "filled with grace - “pleres charitos” --present tense, and literally translated as “filled with grace” (at that moment).

The Greek of Acts 6:8 is dramatically different from the Greek of Luke 1:28, which describes Mary as “full of grace.” . In Luke 1:28. Mary is called “Kecharitomenae” --past-perfect tense, and literally translated as “perfectly graced.” or "completed in grace, literally - hence “full of grace”. And so, from the point of view of the original Greek, there is simply no comparison between Luke 1:28 and Acts 6:3.

“Kecharitomenae” is a term exclusive to Luke 1:28, and so exclusive to Mary. No one else in the Bible is described in this way in regard to grace. And this becomes especially striking when we compare it to verses like Ephesians 1:6 and Ephesians 2:8, where Scripture speaks of Baptized Christians as being “graced” -(“a charie toson” --past tense), but never “perfectly graced” or “completed in grace” (“kecharitomenae” --past perfect tense).

And lastly, the most striking difference between Acts 6:8 and Luke 1:28 is that, in Luke 1:28, Mary is being called “Kecharitomenae” (that is “Full of grace” or “Perfectly graced”) as a proper name or title by the Angel Gabriel.

It is amazing how people always overlook that.

Unlike Stephen in Acts 6:8, who is merely being described as “filled with grace and power” (and merely at a given moment - in other words, it is a simple present tense.), Mary is being called - and not only called - but hailed by an angel as “Full of grace” / “Perfectly graced.” And we all know the importance of names in Scripture, right? So, “Kecharitomenae” describes Mary’s very nature because it is presented as her name: “Chaire, Kecharitomenae” —literally: “Hail, Full of grace.”

Matthew 26:49 “to Jesus, and said, Hail, master;”

Matthew 27:29 “him, saying, Hail, King of the Jews!”

“Mark 15:18” to salute him, Hail, King of the Jews!"

John 19:3 " And said, Hail, King of the Jews!"

All of these verses show that a title is given following the word Hail (kai). Just as it is when the angel greeted Mary. Hail, Full of grace!

Acts 6:8 does not describe St. Stephen as “full of grace” (past-perfect tense). And so, from the point of view of the original Greek, there is simply no comparison between Luke 1:28 and Acts 6:3 at all.

The use of the term “highly favoured” is not inaccurate, but at the same time it does not convey the literal and exact meaning of the the grammatical text. So when St. Jerome translated it in Latin as “graita plena”, it was a more accurate and literal translation of the passage.