Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Catholic
Marian Reflections III: Panagia, All Holy One (Part III)

Marian Reflections III: Panagia, All Holy One (Part III)

Last updated on: March 11, 2016 at 11:49 am by Henry Karlson

Marian Reflections III: Panagia, All Holy One (Part III) 2016-03-11T11:49:42-05:00 Henry Karlson

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Icon of St Anne with Infant Mary on Wall; Photograph by Henry Karlson

This is the third part of a series reflecting on Mary as Panagia, the All Holy One. Click here for Part I and click here for Part II.

Key to understanding Mary’s holiness, and the grace which was hers from the time of her conception onward, is to see how it came about through God’s long interaction with her family line. God was at work with Israel to prepare for the coming of the God-man, the messiah. That preparation included the development of the family line of the messiah, where grace was slowly but naturally infused by those who cooperated with God through the Law of Moses. With each application of grace, the family line slowly but surely edged closer and closer to achieving its purpose, which was the birth of the woman, the virgin, the sign of God and God’s grace in human history (cf. Isa. 7:14), who then, full of grace, could have the God-man dwell within her, and like the burning bush, not be consumed by the consuming-fire of God (cf. Heb. 12:29). Each of the ancestors of Christ brought particular graces into the line of Christ, grace which slowly accumulated with grace, so that at last Mary could be born, full of grace, receiving in her all the grace which had been established in her family line before her. In and through that grace, she was then free to make the decision for or against God, for our against God’s purpose for her, by accepting or denying her role in salvation history – for it is only in such perfect freedom could the God-man himself be born in such a way that God would remain true to himself – for God does not force himself upon us, but rather gives himself to us in an act of love awaiting our response (with Mary, then, representing the natural human answer to God). [1]

Just as the history of Israel is important, and in some ways represents the center of human history before the incarnation, we find that Jesus’ family line to be central to the history of Israel.[2] Jesus is the messiah, and as prophecy showed us, as the messiah he is the heir or son of David (cf. 2 Sam 7:12 -16). As with many prophecies, what was implied was not entirely clear in its proclamation but only revealed its full meaning through its fulfillment. Many, if not most, upon hearing it probably assumed that the prophecy was about one of David’s immediate successors, like Solomon, and believed that their messianic expectations would soon be fulfilled.[3] However, as prophecy often uses poetic language and historical types to prepare the way for their fulfillment, such a misunderstanding would be transcended once it became clear that such a messiah did not arise, making it possible for them to realize that it would be someone from David’s family line who would be placed upon the eternal messianic throne.

Nonetheless, because of the way prophecy uses historical figures to represent elements of its fulfillment, Solomon would, in some ways, represent the messianic king, even as Moses’ successor, Joshua, became a type of the messiah. Solomon built the temple, even as Jesus built the eternal temple, the church, the body of Christ. Solomon was full of wisdom, even as Jesus is wisdom incarnate. The Song of Songs was written based upon the love Solomon had with his beloved, while spiritually, the text refers to the love Christ has for us (collectively in the church as well as singularly in our soul).

We know that Jesus is understood to be the heir of David. Yet, how are we to recognize this, how are we to trace his lineage to David? Scripture, in its genealogies, seems to indicate such succession comes through Joseph and yet Joseph was not his real father. How then can Jesus be said to be the son of David? While we could, in theory, say that he was legally Joseph’s son, and so is connected to David’s line in a legal fashion, such an answer seems to be the easy way out, and indeed, seems to offer an unsatisfactory solution to the problem.

The traditional answer lies with the belief that Mary must also be descended from the line of David.[4] Is there any evidence we can give for this? Yes, said St John of Damascus:

But there was a law that one tribe should not marry into another. And Joseph, who was descended from the tribe of David and was a just man, for the holy Gospel testifies to this in his regard, would not have espoused the blessed Virgin illegally, but only if she were descended from the same tribe. Consequently, it was sufficient to show the descent of Joseph. [5]

The law which St John of Damascus referenced is found in the book of Numbers. It stated that women had to marry within their tribes if they wanted inheritance rights:

The inheritance of the people of Israel shall not be transferred from one tribe to another; for every one of the people of Israel shall cleave to the inheritance of the tribe of his fathers. And every daughter who possesses an inheritance in any tribe of the people of Israel shall be wife to one of the family of the tribe of her father, so that every one of the people of Israel may possess the inheritance of his fathers. So no inheritance shall be transferred from one tribe to another; for each of the tribes of the people of Israel shall cleave to its own inheritance (Num. 36: 7- 9 RSV).

Mary’s legal rights were protected only if she married someone within her tribe, not if she married someone outside of it. We know Joseph’s background, as the genealogies in the Gospels show. Since Mary and Joseph were betrothed to each other, they shared a common heritage, and this is what allows us to see how through Mary Jesus was the natural heir and successor of David. And this law was not something which was neglected or abandoned – rather, it was taken in all seriousness by Israel, as can be seen by the way Ezra reacted to those who had returned to Israel after the Babylonian Exile and failed to live up to its expectations:

After these things had been done, the officials approached me and said, “The people of Israel and the priests and the Levites have not separated themselves from the peoples of the lands with their abominations, from the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Jebusites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Egyptians, and the Amorites. For they have taken some of their daughters to be wives for themselves and for their sons; so that the holy race has mixed itself with the peoples of the lands. And in this faithlessness the hand of the officials and chief men has been foremost.” When I heard this, I rent my garments and my mantle, and pulled hair from my head and beard, and sat appalled. Then all who trembled at the words of the God of Israel, because of the faithlessness of the returned exiles, gathered round me while I sat appalled until the evening sacrifice (Ezra 9:1-4 RSV).

The people repented. Those who had who married contrary to the Mosaic Law put their wives and children away (cf. Ezra 10:2-4; 7-44). While this might seem to be cruel, both to the wives and to the children alike, some, like Bede, suggested that these marriages were shown to be wrong because they were secondary marriages where the original wives of the exiles had been already been put away and were the real victims here.[6]

But, as with all things God does, God had a purpose, a reason, for is inclusion in the Mosaic Law, and so there was a purpose behind this aspect of the law as well. We must remember that while some of the Mosaic Law served to promote universal moral law, much of it was about the promotion and development of ritual purity for the people of Israel. That is, while we can find the moral law contained within the Mosaic Law, and so the Mosaic Law offers something for those outside of Israel, it also contained special laws meant only for those living out the Mosaic Covenant, laws which (as the Council of Jerusalem in the Acts of Apostles 15 makes clear) were not meant for all peoples at all times. They served a historical purpose, which is why they were good and true, but that purpose was the development of the lineage of the messiah, that is, the law and prophets pointed to and became the historical means by which the messiah would be born. They helped provide avenues of grace by which humanity could slowly work its way out of the pit of sin and become ready for the birth of the God-man, Jesus, as Robert Grosseteste explained:

For, as is clear from the foregoing, the positive precepts of the Old Law had been given for these reasons: so that they might test the humble obedience of man; so that they might crush his swelling pride, which was saying that he who acted was not at fault, but rather he who commanded was at fault; so that the complaint might be taken away by which the one who had fallen into the pit of sin was able to complain that he could not climb out by the rungs of the mandates of the natural law unless the rungs of the mandates of the positive law were inserted between them; and so that, as has been said, they might be signs and testimonies of our restoration. [7]

More to Come

[1] It is often asked by those who deny the teaching implied by the immaculate conception that if Mary had to be free from sin in order to give birth to Jesus, does that suggest that her parents, like her, had to be sinless in order for her to be born sinless from them? The answer is no. As should be clear, she was the sole source for Jesus’ humanity, while she had two sources for hers. When her parents came together, in grace, the higher levels of grace which was already in their individual lives was able to be combined together to establish a sinless conception, taking grace-filled qualities from both parents while not transmitting any impurity. She, on the other hand, had no mixture with anyone else to produce the fruit of her womb, Jesus, so all that Jesus had for his human nature and flesh came from one source, Mary. If there were any impurity left in her, it could and would have been transmitted to Jesus because there would be nothing to complement and overcome that impurity, unlike what happened with her conception in St. Anne. Nonetheless, we must remember, her parents, indeed, her immediate family (St. Elizabeth, St. John the Baptist, et. al.), were all extremely holy as a result of this accumulation of grace, so that, though her parents were not sinless, they were certainly extremely holy and lived lives close to natural human perfection.

[2] Israel is at the center because of its place in salvation history, for it was Israel God chose to represent him as a sign to the nations of the world, but also because God chose Israel as the people in which the God-man would be found. In this way, we must not deny God’s work with other nations, as some do, but rather see that they had God at work with them so that they can take their unique talents, insights and walk with God and merge it with Israel in the body of Christ.

[3] At this time, to be sure, the messianic expectation existed thanks to the Torah and Moses’ predictions, such as when Moses said, “The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your brethren — him you shall heed “ (Deut. 18:15 RSV), but it was be later, with the prophets, that Israel’s understanding of the role of the messiah would be drastically increased.

[4] There is indication, from her cousins, that she was also descended from the Levites, but this would make perfect sense: the messiah is priest-king, and so combines both lineages in himself.

[5] St John of Damascus, “On the Orthodox Faith” in Saint John of Damascus Writings. trans. Fredric H. Chase Jr. (New York: Fathers of the Church, Inc., 1958), 362.

[6] See Bede, On Ezra and Nehemiah. trans. Scott DeGregorio (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2006), 136-7.

[7] Robert Grosseteste, On the Cessation of the Laws. trans. Stephen M. Hildebrand (Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 2012), 90.

Stay in touch! Like A Little Bit of Nothing on Facebook:

A Little Bit of Nothing

Previous Post

March 10, 2016

Please God with Love, Not Men With False Piety

Next Post

March 12, 2016 Marian Reflections III: Panagia, All Holy One (Part IV)

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Abortion Abraham abuse Aesthetics AI Aliens Ambrose Ancestors and Everything Andrew Angels Animals Anne Anthony Antisemitism apologetics Apophatic Apostle John Aquinas Artificial Intelligence Asanga Ascension Asceticism Assumption Atheism Attachment Augustine Authority Avarice Balthasar Baptism Beauty Biden birthright citizenship Bishops Black History Books Buddhism Bulgakov Byzantine Calendar C.S. Lewis Calcidius Catholic Catholicism Catholicism Celibacy Charity Chastity children Chrismation Christ Christmas Christology Church Climate Change Common Good Communion Confession Confirmation Conscience Constantine conventions conversion councils Covid Creation Cross Dead Death Death Penalty Debate Deception Demagogues Demons Desert Monks Desert Mothers Desire destruction development Dialogue Dignity Dionsyius Dionysius Discipline Diversity Division Doctor Who doctrine dogma Dormition Dualism Easter Easter Series Ecumenical Councils Ecumenism Education Election Empathy Environment Error Eschatology eschaton Eternity Ethics Eucharist Evangelism Eve Evil evolution Faeries Faith Fear femininity Ficino Florence Florensky Folktale Fools Forgiveness Freedom Future gender Gentile Gentiles Glory Gnostic God gods Good Samaritan Goodness Gospel Government Grace Great Fast Guns Hate healing Health Heaven Hell Hellenism Heresy Hierarchy Hildegard Hinduism History Holiness Holy Spirit Holy Week Hope Horror Human rights humanity Humility hypocrisy ICE icon icons Identification Identity Idol II Nicea Immigration incarnation Individualism Informal Reflections Inklings Intention Inter-Religious Interfaith Internet Interpretation Intrinsic evil Irenaeus Islam Israel Jacob Jerome Jesus Jews John Chrysostom John of Damascus John the Baptist Joseph Judaism justice Justification kenosis Kindnesss Kingdom of God Kingdom of Heaven Law Law of Moses Lazarus Leaf by Niggle Lent Lenten Reflection Liberation Theology Lies Life Listen Literature Liturgy locutions Logic Logos Love Marriage Martyrs Mary Mass Maximos The Confessor Meanness Meditation Mercy Middle Path Migrants Mind Miracles Miriam Morals Moses Movies Music Muslims Myths Names Nationalism Native Americans New Year Nicea Nicholas Nothing Novatian Obedience Occam's Razor Ordination Origen Original Sin Orthodox orthopraxis Pagans Palamas Palm Sunday Paradise Paschaltide Paul Peace Pentecost person Peter piety PKD Plato pluralism Plurality Poem Poetry Poiltics Politics Poor Pope Pope Francis Pope Leo XIV Post Office Prayer Pride Pro-life Prodigal Son propaganda Prophecy Prophets Providence Putin Racism Reading Reason Reflection Refugees Relationships Religion Religion Series Religious Liberty Repent Republicans Rest Resurrection Rich Rites Russia Sacraments Saints Salvation Salvian Santa Science Scripture Self-Giving Sexuality Sibyl Sick Silence Sin Singlehood Social Justice Society Sodom Solovyov Speculations Spiritual Reflection St. Cyril of Alexandria St. Justin Martyr Suffering Sunday of the Paralytic Man Sunday of the Samaritan Woman Superhero Supreme Court Teaching Technology Thanksgiving The Father the Universe Theological Reflection Theology Theosis Theotokos Thomas Timaeus Time Tolerenace Tolkien Tradition Transfiguration Trinity Trump Truth Uncategorized Unity Universities USCCB Value Vatican II Vegetarian Vices Violence Virtue Vocations War Water Welcome Wisdom Womanhood Women Work World View Worship Writing Zacchaeus

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz