Was Mary baptized?

[TK421]

Any narrative in early texts about this? She already received grace upon conception, but baptism is also the sacrament of initiation. (Jesus, for example, received the pre-Pentecost baptism by St John the Baptist)

 

[patrick457]

Any narrative in early texts about this? She already received grace upon conception, but baptism is also the sacrament of initiation. (Jesus, for example, received the pre-Pentecost baptism by St John the Baptist)

Well, the Jews don’t have any sort of ‘baptism’ in the sense of a sacrament of initiation as we Christians do. They did immerse themselves (tevilah) in a pool of water called a mikveh when they needed to ritually purify themselves from any impurity they have contracted in daily life. Mary, as a Jew, would have partaken of that a number of times in her life. (She would have taken one after she gave birth to Jesus.) And Jesus too. And I think pretty much every Jewish character in the New Testament. Mikvaot (the plural of mikveh) were a common fixture; just about every Jewish settlement in the Holy Land has a mikveh or more in it. That’s how Jews took the issue of ritual purity and impurity seriously.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/static/Resizer.ashx/news/468/282/249330.jpg

John’s ‘baptism’ was actually just a variation on the Jewish tevilah. Instead of being a rite designed to cleanse you of any ritual impurity you might have contracted (and thus, something that needs to be repeated every time you become ‘unclean’ - the more scrupulous could even immerse themselves a number of times in a single day!), John’s immersion was a one-time ritual, symbolizing spiritual/moral rather than ritual cleanliness (i.e. forgiveness of sins).

 

[JerryZ]

Because Baptism regenerates what is lacking to the human race namely by washing away sin (all sins, including the original sin inherited from Adam and Eve) it allows our soul to receive the indwelling of the Holy Spirit AND receiving from GOD the infusion in our souls HIS gift of Sanctifying Grace.

Now pertinent to your question. What is Mary’s new name according to the Archangel that came to annunciate to her, GOD’s will for her? "Full of Grace"

That is her name, that is the name GOD chose for her. Same as when in the Old Testament someone was worthy of extraordinary tasks, GOD changed their names forever: Abram → Abraham, Sarai → Sarah and so on.

Since Mary IS Full of Grace, she did not need Baptism per se.
However I would not be surprised if she did indeed receive it, NOT because she needed it, but because as Jesus himself noted when HE received it:

Matthew 3:15“Permit this for now. For in this way it is fitting for us to fulfill all justice.”

…

 

[frangiuliano115]

Well, the Jews don’t have any sort of ‘baptism’ in the sense of a sacrament of initiation as we Christians do. They did immerse themselves (tevilah) in a pool of water called a mikveh when they needed to ritually purify themselves from any impurity they have contracted in daily life. Mary, as a Jew, would have partaken of that a number of times in her life. (She would have taken one after she gave birth to Jesus.) And Jesus too. And I think pretty much every Jewish character in the New Testament. Mikvaot (the plural of mikveh) were a common fixture; just about every Jewish settlement in the Holy Land has a mikveh or more in it. That’s how Jews took the issue of ritual purity and impurity seriously.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/static/Resizer.ashx/news/468/282/249330.jpg

John’s ‘baptism’ was actually just a variation on the Jewish tevilah. Instead of being a rite designed to cleanse you of any ritual impurity you might have contracted (and thus, something that needs to be repeated every time you become ‘unclean’ - the more scrupulous could even immerse themselves a number of times in a single day!), John’s immersion was a one-time ritual, symbolizing spiritual/moral rather than ritual cleanliness (i.e. forgiveness of sins).

Could we say that John’s baptism was a sign of an inner change in a person, or a decision, or desire, on their part to repent and serve God? However, I don’t believe any su pernatural gift was imparted as in Jesus’ baptism of the Holy Spirit. (after pentecost).

Fran

 

[truetofaith]

Also, were all the Apostles baptized?

 

[pianistclare]

Mary didn’t need Baptism.

 

[spedteacherita]

Mary didn’t need Baptism.

Jesus was baptized why wouldn’t Mary if she was conceived without sin? No disrespect intended.

Blessings!

Rita

 

[Jeannie52]

Because Baptism regenerates what is lacking to the human race namely by washing away sin (all sins, including the original sin inherited from Adam and Eve) it allows our soul to receive the indwelling of the Holy Spirit AND receiving from GOD the infusion in our souls HIS gift of Sanctifying Grace.

Now pertinent to your question. What is Mary’s new name according to the Archangel that came to annunciate to her, GOD’s will for her? "Full of Grace"

That is her name, that is the name GOD chose for her. Same as when in the Old Testament someone was worthy of extraordinary tasks, GOD changed their names forever: Abram → Abraham, Sarai → Sarah and so on.

Since Mary IS Full of Grace, she did not need Baptism per se.
However I would not be surprised if she did indeed receive it, NOT because she needed it, but because as Jesus himself noted when HE received it:

…

Great post! Thank you for sharing this.

 

[JM3]

Cornelius a Lapide’s commentary

I have need to be baptized, &c. That is, to be spiritually washed from my sins, and perfected by the Spirit of Thy grace. Have need here does not signify an obligation of precept, as though the Baptist was obliged to receive the baptism of Christ. For this precept of baptism was given and promulged by S. Peter on the Day of Pentecost, and therefore after John’s death. Some gather from this place that John was soon afterwards baptized by Christ Himself, as were also the Blessed Virgin Mary, SS. Peter, James, and John, and the rest of the Apostles. This is stated by S. Evodius, who succeeded S. Peter in the Chair of Antioch, in an Epistle of his, entitled τὸ φώς.

In favour of this idea are also Nazian. (Orat. 39 towards the end); “Christ knew,” he says, “that He would Himself shortly afterwards baptize the Baptist;” also S. Chrysostom, who says, “John baptized Christ with water, but Christ baptized John with the Spirit.” Whence the author of the Imperfect Comment. says, “It is plainly written in apocryphal writings, that John baptized Christ with water, but He baptized John with the Spirit.”

Abulensis thinks, on the other hand, that John was not baptized by Christ. And he proves it by the marvelling of John’s disciples, who soon afterwards told John that Christ, whom he had baptized, was Himself baptizing, and that all men were coming unto Him. For this would have been needlessly told to John if he had been baptized by Christ, and he would have given this reply to his disciples. So that it is a doubtful point whether John was baptized by Christ or not.

 

[JM3]

Could we say that John’s baptism was a sign of an inner change in a person, or a decision, or desire, on their part to repent and serve God? However, I don’t believe any su pernatural gift was imparted as in Jesus’ baptism of the Holy Spirit. (after pentecost).

Fran

Cornelius a Lapide’s commentary

And were baptized, &c. Unaptly Calvin interprets were baptized to mean were taught the baptism of repentance. For to baptize does not mean to teach, but to wash the body with water, as is plain from verse 13. The baptism of John was different from the baptism of Christ, as I show against the heretics on Acts xix. 2. The baptism of John was only a sign and protestation of repentance, and a preparation for the baptism of Christ, that they might be justified by it. Hence they were confessing their sins. For repentance, or sorrow for sin, causes a man to confess his sins, and seek for a remedy for them and for pardon. Thus the Jews in certain cases were obliged to confess their sins to a priest, as I have shown on Levit. v. 5, and vi. 6, 7, and Numb. v. 7. But this confession was not a Sacrament, nor did it procure remission of sins, as in the confession instituted by Christ. For in that, as in a Sacrament, the priest, by the power conferred upon him by Christ in ordination, absolves the penitent from his sins. But that confession of the Jews was only a sign of penitence and compunction, or inward contrition, which, if it were perfect, that is to say, proceeding from the love of God above all things, would put away sins and justify. “For charity covereth a multitude of sins.”(1 Pet. iv. 8).

 

[frangiuliano115]

Cornelius a Lapide’s commentary

Thanks.

Yes. Of course the Jews were justified by their “water” baptism. I’d say that even the ones who weren’t - and most weren’t, since baptism in the OT did not exist, were still justified by their faith. (Book of Hebrews).

Fran

 

[TK421]

How and why would she have been baptized?
She was Jewish!

.

No she wasn’t. Not as a teenager or adult. She was/is Christian. Baptism was a command for all Christians, whether of Gentile or Jewish origin.

How: the same way anybody else is.

 

[TK421]

@ JM3:

Thank you for the reference. I suspect that the answer would be ‘yes’. That theologically makes sense to me, since sacraments are administered other than purely for reasons of bare necessity, and it would seem strange for the Blessed Virgin not to have full participation in the sacraments.

 

[TK421]

It’s also a question of how cognizant Mary was of her own immaculate nature. If there was an angel that sat on her shoulder and gave her formal catechisis in her vocation and all the dogmatic stipulation attached, or it God didn’t allow her to struggle through it in her joys and in her anxieties. She may have, for all intents of purposes, gotten baptized out of a sense of necessity and devotion.

 

[TimothyH]

How and why would she have been baptized?
She was Jewish!
TK421;13381002:

No she wasn’t. Not as a teenager or adult. She was/is Christian. Baptism was a command for all Christians, whether of Gentile or Jewish origin.

How: the same way anybody else is.

The idea of a clear division between Judaism and early Christianity is false.

Scripture records that Christians participated in Jewish worship at least until the destruction of the temple in 70 AD.

Mary purifies herself, presents Jesus and offers sacrifice according to the Jewish law (Luke 2:22). She goes to all the Jewish festivals (Luke 2:42:43). The disciples go the temple daily (Acts 2:46). Peter and John attend the afternoon prayer/offering at the Temple (Acts 3:1). Paul goes to the temple to offer sacrifice (Acts 21:26) and is under a Nazarite vow (Acts 21:23).

There is a clear nexus of temple Judaism and Christianity. It wasn’t until the destruction of the Temple in 70AD that Christians and Jews started distancing themselves from each other.

-Tim-

 

[patrick457]

Could we say that John’s baptism was a sign of an inner change in a person, or a decision, or desire, on their part to repent and serve God? However, I don’t believe any su pernatural gift was imparted as in Jesus’ baptism of the Holy Spirit. (after pentecost).

Fran

Yes! Josephus said of John’s baptism: “For immersion in water, it was clear to him, could not be used for the forgiveness of sins, but as a sanctification of the body, and only if the soul was already thoroughly purified by right actions.” For John’ baptism, it was apparently not the act itself that resulted in the forgiveness of sins: the immersion is jut a sign/acknowledgment of the inner change leading to the forgiveness of sins.

And you’re right: Jesus had the Holy Spirit and the voice from Heaven when He was baptized, but that’s because He was Jesus. It was a sign to witnesses (to John) that He was no ordinary man, but that He was special.

 

[patrick457]

The idea of a clear division between Judaism and early Christianity is false.

Scripture records that Christians participated in Jewish worship at least until the destruction of the temple in 70 AD.

Mary purifies herself, presents Jesus and offers sacrifice according to the Jewish law (Luke 2:22). She goes to all the Jewish festivals (Luke 2:42:43). The disciples go the temple daily (Acts 2:46). Peter and John attend the afternoon prayer/offering at the Temple (Acts 3:1). Paul goes to the temple to offer sacrifice (Acts 21:26) and is under a Nazarite vow (Acts 21:23).

There is a clear nexus of temple Judaism and Christianity. It wasn’t until the destruction of the Temple in 70AD that Christians and Jews started distancing themselves from each other.

-Tim-

Exactly. The earliest Christians were simply Jews who believed that Jesus was the messiah; they still didn’t think of themselves as belonging to a distinct religion separate from Judaism. The ‘Jesus movement’ was still just one of the varieties of Judaism that were around at the time.

 

[otjm]

@ JM3:

Thank you for the reference. I suspect that the answer would be ‘yes’. That theologically makes sense to me, since sacraments are administered other than purely for reasons of bare necessity, and it would seem strange for the Blessed Virgin not to have full participation in the sacraments.

Well, she was not ordained; she did not go to reconciliation/confession, she was not married…

And she had no need of baptism.

 

[frangiuliano115]

Well, she was not ordained; she did not go to reconciliation/confession, she was not married…

And she had no need of baptism.

Mary was married to her husband Joseph.

Jesus had no need of baptism either. This doesn’t mean I think she went down to the Jordon and got baptized by him.

However, she was present at pentecost when the H.S. came upon the disciples. And the bible says that they were also baptized.

So she was married and she was baptized - although they weren’t “sacraments” as we understand them today (but already were de facto). And because she didn’t go to a christian church and get married as today, it doesn’t mean she wasn’t!

Fran

 

[frangiuliano115]

Exactly. The earliest Christians were simply Jews who believed that Jesus was the messiah; they still didn’t think of themselves as belonging to a distinct religion separate from Judaism. The ‘Jesus movement’ was still just one of the varieties of Judaism that were around at the time.

Thanks for the reply re John’s baptism.

Yes. The first christians were called The Way.

Fran