The Annunciation and the Dumbest Question Ever Asked

Many regard Christmas as the day the God became man.  But if you think about it, you’ll realize the Word had already been flesh for 9 months prior to His reception in Bethlehem.  The true epoch-making event occurred when a young girl said to an angel, “Let it be done to me according to your word.”

Today I wanted to examine an often overlooked detail in that extraordinary exchange and explore its implications.


 Is Mary Completely Daft?

Imagine you - armed with knowledge of future events -  approached my wife at our wedding reception.  You said to her, “You’re going to have a baby boy!”

And rather than expressing excitement, she got a confused look and replied, “How shall this be?!”

Imagine your reaction to this question, “What do you mean, ‘how shall this be’?  You’re a married woman!  You’re amazed and confused about the possibility of having a son?  Don’t you know what married people do?  Are you an idiot?”

Anyone with even the most basic knowledge of where babies come from would find this question absurd.  And yet… this is precisely the question Mary asked.  The angel Gabriel appeared to Mary and said:

 “Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you.”  “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God.  Behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus.” – Luke 1:28-33

 To which Mary replied:

“How shall this be, for I know not man?” – Luke 1:34 

Ummm….. what?

Let’s assume for a moment that Mary wasn’t as dumb as nails and knew where babies came from. Why would she ask this question?

An Alternate Explanation:

The answer, I propose is found in the book of Numbers.  Chapter 30 of that book lays out the laws regarding vows of perpetual virginity within Hebrew society:

“When a woman, while still a maiden in her father’s house, makes a vow to the Lord, or binds herself to a pledge of virginity, if her father learns of her vow or the pledge to which she bound herself and says nothing to her about it, then any vow or any pledge she has made remains valid.”

“If she marries while under a vow or under a rash pledge to which she bound herself, and her husband learns of it, yet says nothing to her that day about it, then the vow or pledge she made remains valid.”

“If it is in her husband’s house that she makes a vow or binds herself under oath to a pledge, and her husband learns of it yet says nothing to express to her his disapproval, then any vow or any pledge she has made remains valid.”  - Numbers 30: 4-5,7-8, 11-12

 If one reads that and looks back at her statement that she “knows not man”, it becomes very plausible that Mary had entered into such a vow.  So the reason why the angel’s question brought about confusion was that she didn’t intend to have a normal marriage.  Her relationship with Joseph was always intended to be one of guardianship, not as a conjugal spouse.

The Historic Christian Understanding:

This understanding has long been reflected in the writings of the ancient Christian Church, as is seen in the works of Saint Augustine:

 “Her virginity was on this account more pleasing and accepted.  This is shown by the words which Mary spoke in answer to the Angel announcing to her conception; ‘How, shall this be, seeing I know not a man?'  Which assuredly she would not say, unless she had before vowed herself unto God as a virgin. But she was espoused to a just man, who would rather guard against violent persons what she had already vowed.”  - Augustine, On Holy Virginity, 4, A.D. 401

So while it is true that the Bible says that Joseph did not “know” Mary until Jesus was born… he didn’t “know” her afterward either.

 

Thanks for joining me.

Addendum:  The word "until"

In the comments to this original post, a reader asked about the phrase found in Matthews Gospel which says:

“He knew her not until she had given birth.” – Matthew 1:25

Here is what Saint John Chrysostem has to say on the matter:

"And when he had taken her, he knew her not, till she had brought forth her first-born Son.’ He has here used the word till, not that you should suspect that afterwards he did know her, but to inform you that before the birth the Virgin was wholly untouched by man. 

But why then, it may be said, has he used the word, till? Because it is usual in Scripture often to do this, and to use this expression without reference to limited times. For so with respect to the ark likewise, it is said, ‘The raven returned not till the earth was dried up.’ And yet it did not return even after that time. So then here likewise, it uses the word till, to make certain what was before the birth, but as to what follows, it leaves you to make the inference. 

 Thus, what it was necessary for you to learn of Him, this He Himself has said; that the Virgin was untouched by man until the birth; but that which both was seen to be a consequence of the former statement, and was acknowledged, this in its turn he leaves for you to perceive; namely, that not even after this, she having so become a mother, and having been counted worthy of a new sort of travail, and a child-bearing so strange, could that righteous man ever have endured to know her? For if he had known her, and had kept her in the place of a wife, how is it that our Lord commits her, as unprotected, and having no one, to His disciple, and commands him to take her to his own home?" - Homilies on Matthew, Homily 5, Section 5.

Once again we see that the ancient Church believed much as the Catholics of today do.  That the word “until” did not carry with it the implication that the opposite state of affairs ensued afterward.  But rather, this was simply meant to underscore the fact that Jesus was born of a virgin.  And he backs this up by noting that Jesus left Mary to his disciple John as if she had no one else to take care of her.