A reader writes:
I know there is a different explanation, but when reading the biblical account of Zachary’s not understanding the angels message about John the Baptist, and Mary’s not understanding about when the angel told her about Jesus, they seem the same. Yet, Zacahry was punished while Mary was praised. I’m curious about how to explain this to non-Catholic friends who look for "holes" in Catholic teaching, and sometimes the bible itself.
I appreciate the difficulty you are perceiving, as it’s something I’ve had to ponder myself. And it’s not just a problem for Catholics. I wondered about this as a Protestant.
Here’s what we’re told about the case of Zechariah:
And Zechari’ah said to the angel, "How shall I know this? For I am an old man, and my wife is advanced in years." And the angel answered him, "I am Gabriel, who stand in the presence of God; and I was sent to speak to you, and to bring you this good news. And behold, you will be silent and unable to speak until the day that these things come to pass, because you did not believe my words, which will be fulfilled in their time" [Luke 1:18-20].
And here’s what we’re told about Mary:
And Mary said to the angel, "How shall this be, since I have no husband?"
And the angel said to her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God. And behold, your kinswoman Elizabeth in her old age has also conceived a son; and this is the sixth month with her who was called barren. For with God nothing will be impossible."
And Mary said, "Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word." And the angel departed from her [Luke 1:34-38].
And we’re told:
[Elizabeth:] "And blessed is she who believed that there would be a fulfilment of what was spoken to her from the Lord" [Luke 1:45].
On its face, it could appear that a different standard is being applied to Zechariah than to Mary. Both query the angel about the prophesied miraculous birth, yet when this happens Zechariah is struck mute while Mary is given an explanation and a non-painful sign (i.e., the fact Elizabeth is already miraculously present). Then we have a blessing pronounced upon Mary for her belief.
It seems to me that there are several possible explanations:
- We are not meant to understand the praise of Mary as a contrast to Zechariah. It’s simply praise made without reference to his situation. The difference of the signs they are given is just part of the mystery of God’s providence and is not meant to be understood as a punishment or criticism of Zechariah’s response.
- We are meant to understand that Mary is being praised and favorably treated in comparison to Zechariah, but this is due to something not captured, or fully captured, in the text, such as a inward disposition on Zechariah’s part in comparison to Mary’s inward disposition.
- We are meant to understand a contrast between the two but there is something about the two situations that makes Mary’s reaction more reasonable than Zechariah’s. For example, it might be argued that what is being proposed in Mary’s case requires a far greater leap of faith (a birth with no man involved) in comparison to what is being proposed in Zechariah’s (a birth past the normal age). Thus it might be more reasonable for Mary to ask questions up front than it was for Zechariah, and when these questions were answered, she was ready to believe.
- We are meant to understand a contrast between the two and the text does hint at the basis for the contrast. For example, Zecharaiah asks a different question that Mary does. Zechariah asks the angel for a sign to prove it to him ("How will I know this?"), whereas Mary only asks for an explanation ("How will this be?"). Taken on their faces, Mary’s question is more open to the miraculous than Zechariah’s is. She is more ready to believe, and thus she is praised for this. One might even assert (consistently with the text though not required by it) that she had already believe what the angel said when she asked her question. She was just wanting clarification of the means by which it would happen rather than demanding proof that it would.
Hope this helps!
I fully agree with explanation number 4. I think there’s a difference between Zechariah’s asking how he’s to know that the angel’s words are true, and Mary’s asking by what means the angel’s words are going to come true.
Ditto on 4. Zechariah doubted; Mary believed. Not only was Mary not rebuked by the angel for lack of faith, as was Zechariah, but she was specifically pronounced blessed for her faith by Elizabeth under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
By itself the angel’s silence could arguably be construed as at least compatible with a double standard — i.e., both Zechariah and Mary doubted, but the angel for whatever reason chose to punish only Zechariah and cut Mary a break — but the contrast between the angel’s rebuke of Zechariah for his lack of faith vs. Elizabeth’s prophetic pronouncement “Blessed is she who believed” strongly contradicts this “double standard” interpretation.
It’s also worth noting that Mary’s answer — “How shall this be? For I know not a man” — seems to contain an intimation of the Virgin Birth and of Mary’s perpetual virginity. After all, nothing in the angel’s words implied that the child would be conceived immediately. There were certainly precedents in Mary’s religious tradition for women receiving promises of a child to be conceived which were not fulfilled immediately, or even until years later.
Had Mary been a typical Jewish fiancee looking forward to married life and children, and an angel appeared to her and announced that she would have a child, the most natural interpretation would be for her to assume that the angel’s words merely implied that her marriage to Joseph would be fruitful.
That she immediately sees that the angel is not in fact saying any such thing — that she understands that her coming marriage to Joseph will have nothing to do with the generation of this child, so that her state of virginity would seem to pose an insurmountable obstacle to the angel’s words — suggests that she had not foreseen for herself a life of conjugal marriage and childrearing. In fact, it supports the ancient (at least 2nd century) tradition that Mary had taken a vow of virginity.
I also agree with the slight difference in Mary’s and Zachariah’s responses being one possible explanation, as well as explanation #3. There was some precedent in Jewish history (Isaac) for the sort of miracle that the angel predicted for Zachariah, but for Mary this was a totally unique and nearly incomprehensible concept, NOT TO MENTION which, the elderly Zachariah had been a servant of God his entire life and should have responded with more faith, whereas Mary was just a young teen.
In addition, Zachariah’s lack of faith may have been of a magnitude that was actually sinful, whereas for Mary this was impossible.
Before I even got down to your 4 points, I had thought of #4 myself, but by the time I finished reading; I had partially changed my mind.
#3 is a much bigger deal than suggested here, because Zachariah should have been very familiar with the story of Abraham & Sarah; which was essentially the same promise and miracle the angel had just presented to Zachariah.
#3 has always been my belief too for exactly the reasons stated above. Being old and having a kid was attested to in one of the most sacred and repeated traditions of Judaism. To forget it would be akin to forgetting your entire ancestry.
“One might even assert (consistently with the text though not required by it) that she had already believed what the angel said when she asked her question. She was just wanting clarification of the means by which it would happen rather than demanding proof that it would.”
I agree. She wanted to know how she, who “knows no man” (i.e., she had taken a vow of lifelong celibacy, as St. Augustine and other Fathers explain), could possibly become pregnant.
I also agree with #4. The Pope briefly spoke on this subject in his General Audience on 6 May 1998:
Sorry, that last post was mine.
I’ve heard this question from priests and can’t believe that it’s even a topic. There is a 5th explanation that is not posted on your site but is quite aparent from scripture. Gabriel said that he is ANSWERING Zechariah prayer; Zechariah was praying for something but didn’t believe God was powerful enough to deliver it. Mary wasn’t praying for what Gabriel communicated to her.
I think more is expected of Zechariah as he is a priest and it is said that the more one is given the more will be taken away, when one fails to believe. Also, he asked for a sign – and he surely gets one. He is unable to speak and that must have made his task of priest difficult because I am sure he must have had to say incantations while offering sacrifices. This gave him a lot of time to reconsider his beliefs and faith.
Zechariah is a man who is admitted to the Holy of Holies, a place where God is present and he offers sacrifice to God there. This must have been the highest position and probably given to men of great faith and belief.
Mary, on the other hand was young, inexperienced and should I say female – and probably not expected to comprehend for all the above reasons.