I’ve heard that there is a growing trend of Protestants converting to Catholicism. Many explanations have been proposed to account for this phenomenon. One of them is the devotion, or functional worship, of Mary. For various reasons, people find considerable unbiblical comfort in Mary. While Catholics deny that they worship Mary, they admit that she deserves special veneration. Part of this veneration stems from their belief that Mary was born sinless (the “Immaculate Conception”), and that she remained sinless.
One of their arguments for this view derives from Luke 1:28, where Gabriel appears to Mary and calls her the “highly favored one.” This term is the perfect passive participle of a verb (“to bestow grace”). The grammatical argument made by Catholics is that the perfect tense indicates a completed action with ongoing results. In other words, if Mary was endowed with grace, then that grace is viewed as a permanent state. It keeps going.
Of course, a person can be favored for various reasons. They can experience God’s grace in different ways. But Catholics interpret this grace as sinlessness. I have experienced God’s grace throughout my life, but trust me, I am not sinless.
Because of the tense of the participle, Catholics also argue that Mary was not only sinless at the time of the Lord’s birth, but that she remained sinless for the rest of her life. The perfect tense denotes an action that continues.
However, the verse never states that Mary is without sin, nor does any other passage in Scripture make such a claim. She was not (cf. Rom 3:23). In short, this interpretation is not derived from exegeting the passage itself, but from an inference drawn, in part, from the grammar. The grammar is carrying an enormous amount of theological weight. Indeed, the entire doctrine of the Immaculate Conception is rooted in this grammatical argument. That is a lot of weight for a verb and its tense to carry!
Protestants often look at this argument and rightly disagree, noting that Catholics are forcing theology into the grammar. However, Protestants have done similar things.
For example, those who hold to a Calvinistic view frequently appeal to Greek participles and tense forms to argue that “genuine” or “true” saving faith must continue. A typical example is John 3:16, where the phrase “the one who believes” (ho pisteuōn) appears. The argument typically proceeds as follows:
- The present participle suggests ongoing action,
- Belief is not a one-time act, but a continuing condition,
- If belief ceases, it proves that saving faith never truly existed.
Like the Catholic argument regarding Mary, this conclusion is not drawn from the text itself, but from an interpretation of the grammar. Scripture never states that eternal life is received only if belief continues uninterrupted for the rest of one’s life. That conclusion is inferred, not explicitly stated. In reality, the present tense denotes an ongoing condition only when the context requires it.
More importantly, it contradicts Jesus’ own illustration in John 4, where He tells the Samaritan woman that one drink—not continuous drinking—is sufficient to receive life (John 4:10, 14). His entire point is that the water He gives is unlike physical water, which requires continual drinking. Eternal life is received once, not repeatedly, nor is it maintained through ongoing faith.
Grammatical arguments can appeal to certain people. They can be helpful. But if they contradict what the Bible teaches and deny the grace of God, the person who uses such arguments is placing more weight on the grammar than it can bear.
An expert or a book by a renowned scholar can convey an air of authority and scholarship. This may lead some to leave Protestantism and convert to Catholicism. Only then will they be able to give Mary her due. It may lead others to adopt a theology that denies the grace of God and teaches that in order to enter the kingdom of God, a person must continue to believe and to perform good works until they die. This theology makes assurance impossible.
Both outcomes are tragic.
