I don’t care what your views or on the matter
No one was ever in a better position to say that than Jesus. Yet He never did. Why do you suppose that is?
Anyway, interesting citation you provided. I found the section on Luke 1:28 rather weak, there being only a bare handful of sources cited, and none of those draw from the Biblical text any argument to support an immaculate conception. Frankly, this is not surprising, because even Aquinas knew that the sanctification of Mary from the womb, though he believed it himself, could NOT be defended from Scripture:
Nothing is handed down in the canonical Scriptures concerning the sanctification of the Blessed Mary as to her being sanctified in the womb; indeed, they do not even mention her birth.
See Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Third Part, Question 27, Article 1
I also found the passage from Augustine too short and cryptic to give me a clue where he was really coming from, so I looked for fuller discussions and found this, in which he clearly states the only person ever born without sin was Jesus, a doctrine that could be preached from any Baptist pulpit:
The same holy man also, in his Exposition of Isaiah, speaking of Christ, says: “Therefore as man He was tried in all things, and in the likeness of men He endured all things; but as born of the Spirit, He was free from sin. For every man is a liar, and no one but God alone is without sin. It is therefore an observed and settled fact, that no man born of a man and a woman, that is, by means of their bodily union, is seen to be free from sin. Whosoever, indeed, is free from sin, is free also from a conception and birth of this kind.” Moreover, when expounding the Gospel according to Luke, he says: “It was no cohabitation with a husband which opened the secrets of the Virgin’s womb; rather was it the Holy Ghost which infused immaculate seed into her unviolated womb. For the Lord Jesus alone of those who are born of woman is holy, inasmuch as He experienced not the contact of earthly corruption, by reason of the novelty of His immaculate birth; nay, He repelled it by His heavenly majesty.”
See Augustine, Of the Grace of Christ and of Original Sin, Book II, Chapter 41
As for the text of Luke 1:28, I know you don't care for Protestant views, but what are we to do? The text doesn't say "full of grace." Grace is favor. Favor is grace. But in Ephesians 1:6, that same word, that save favor or grace, is applied equally to all who believe in Jesus. So whatever it is, it's not unique to Mary. It's for all believers. These are lexical facts, as much as the sun rises in the east and sets in the west. Do you wish us to lie against our consciences? Of course not. And we couldn't do that anyway. We read the text and it says what is says. Sometimes we like what Scripture says, and sometimes we think, as sinful humans, that something different should have been said. But God the Holy Spirit chose these words. What choice do we have but to simply believe and accept what He has said?
Because of the unparalleled role that Mary accepts at this turning point of salvation history, the best translation is the most exhalted one
Please do not take offense at this, but I have to point this out. That is a circular argument. You are concluding, in advance, that the text supports your position, therefore the "best" translation is the one that supports the conclusion you've already chosen though other means, patristics, tradition, what your priest told you, whatever. That's not how you do Biblical translation. If you want to know what it means to be your own pope, that is the very example of it, predetermining a conclusion then insisting the inspired text conform to that conclusion.
These are the words of God. This is holy ground. It demands respect. We cannot come to this ground and tell God what to say. Instead we must sit and respectfully listen to the words He has given us as He gave them to us. It is what
He says about Mary that we should listen to. There is nothing wrong with learning from godly teachers gifted with wisdom. But we are all fallible, all vulnerable to the temptations of pride and haste that produce errors in understanding, errors in judgment. But the word of God is God-breathed. It is without error, just as Christ is without sin. It is God's lamp, given to light our path. We cannot do better that to follow that light wherever it leads us.
John 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.
Peace,
SR
These are the words of God. This is holy ground. It demands respect. We cannot come to this ground and tell God what to say. Instead we must sit and respectfully listen to the words He has given us as He gave them to us. True whether we do so or not. As i pointed out, the church began because the laity saw the Truth while the leadership did not/would not.
White debates this issue here and gets into detail with the Greek. (The fact that the Roman Catholic Church has to attempt to build such a complex theology on the form of a participle in a greeting should say a great deal in and of itself.)
And Swan stated ,
I was though pleased recently to hear Roman Catholic Magisterium interpreter Jimmy Akin say of Luke 1:28 on the word kecharitomene: "This is a Greek term that you could use in that exact grammatical formation for someone else who wasn't immaculately conceived and the sentence would still make sense." He then gives the example of using the term of Mary's grandmother. He also stated, "This is something where I said previously, we need the additional source of information from tradition and we need the guidance of the magisterium to be able to put these pieces together." This is a frank admission that the text does not plainly support the Roman Catholic interpretation and needs to be supplemented by another ultimate authority. In other words, the IC must be read into Luke 1:28.