According to
the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
“Mary, in whom the Lord himself has just made his
dwelling, is the daughter of Zion in person, the ark of the covenant, the place
where the glory of the Lord dwells. She is "the dwelling of God
. . . with men." (CCC #2676)
One can find much information
online, in articles, books and other literature from Catholics calling Mary
(the mother of Jesus Christ) the “Ark of the New Covenant.” They call her this because she has “housed”
the Savior in her womb, just as the Old Testament ark of the covenant was “housing”
the presence of God.
But what exactly was the Old
Testament ark of the covenant? It was
basically a gold-plated wooden box, and it was one of several pieces of
furniture placed in the Old Testament tabernacle (and later, in the temple). The tabernacle consisted of an “outer court”
and two separate rooms. The furniture of
the tabernacle included the brazen (brass) altar and the brazen laver sitting
outside in the “outer court.” The first
room, called the “holy place,” contained the table of showbread, the golden
lampstand, and the altar of incense. And
the last room, the “Most Holy Place” (also called the “Holy of Holies”) was the
most sacred area in the whole tabernacle and it was separated from the holy
place by a thick veil. The Most Holy
place contained only one piece of
furniture, and that was the ark of the covenant (on which sat the mercy seat),
where the very presence of God dwelt on earth.
No one could ever enter this place without dying, except for the high
priest; and he could only enter it one day a year, on the Day of Atonement, to
atone for his own sins and then to atone for the sins of all Israel. See this link for a good discussion on the
tabernacle:
Catholics seem to see Mary as
some kind of fulfillment of the Old Testament ark, since Jesus was in her womb. That’s why Catholics call her the “Ark of the
New Covenant.” But should Mary be given
this title? Is this proper? Is it biblical?
The Catholic Church claims
that it is indeed biblical. They will
point to passages in the Old Testament about the ark that seem to parallel
certain aspects of Mary’s life. They try
to demonstrate similarities between Mary’s discussion with the angel Gabriel,
and with the glory of God “overshadowing” the tabernacle. Or they will see a parallel in Mary’s stay at
Elizabeth’s house for three months and David’s moving of the ark to the house
of Obed-edom for three months. Also, they
will say that David’s dancing before the ark resembles Elizabeth’s child
“leaping” in the womb. Or they will
compare some of the language that David used with that of Elizabeth (John the
baptist’s mom). Catholics will claim
that the typology strongly suggests that Mary is now the ark. We do not deny that there seem to be some
parallels in these accounts, but their typology is not as strong as Catholics
claim. There are other things that
happened with the ark that would also detract
from the claim of Mary as the new ark:
For example, if Mary is truly
and fully a type of the ark, then who did Uzzah represent? He was the one who touched the ark and died (2
Samuel 6:6-7). Had anyone touched
Mary and died because of it? If Mary is the “new ark,” then can Catholics
demonstrate that Mary was also captured and stolen by the Philistines, like the
ark was in 1 Samuel 4:10-11? And who
held up Mary (as the ark was) while the Jordan River parted (Joshua
3:14-17)?
Of course, Catholics may object
and say, “Not every single thing that happened to the ark has happened to
Mary. Typology has its limits, you know. All types have a breaking point, and you
can’t just pick and choose what you want in typology. It can be subject to abuse.”
That’s exactly the reason we need to be careful with Catholic typology! Types simply help us to see the big picture,
but some will try to force something into being a “type,” when it was never intended
to be. And this Catholic insistence that
Mary is the New Covenant Ark is one of those abuses.
But the Bible never says that
Mary was the “Ark of the New Covenant.”
If we’re going to follow this Catholic pattern, then who is now the “New
Brazen Altar” or the “New Brazen Laver”?
Or why is no one recognized as the “New Veil”? Who is the “New Table of Showbread”? These types are ALL fulfilled in Jesus, and not anyone else. They point to Him as their final fulfillment (Hebrews 9:1-11). Why would we think that one of those items (the most important one, no less) should
be attributed to Mary? Was God saving the most important piece of
furniture, the holiest one, to represent and honor HER above even her Son? Does anyone really think that this was God’s
intent? If anyone is the “Ark of the New
Covenant,” it is Jesus, Himself.
It is one thing to say that
Mary was simply a type of the ark of
the covenant for a short time, but it is another thing to give her the
permanent status and glory of that holy item, especially when it points to Jesus as the true Ark and the true
Temple, containing God’s presence (John 2:18-21). Remember, Jesus is not in her womb anymore!
The ark of the covenant is
only mentioned twice in the entire New Testament (Hebrews 9:4; Revelation 11:19)
and there is nothing at all about Mary becoming the “new ark” in either of
these passages. The authors of Hebrews
and Revelation had ample opportunity to mention this “important” Catholic
concept at this point, but nothing of Mary is mentioned here.
We think that Mary, herself,
would heartily disagree with Catholics concerning many of the things they
believe about her. We believe that the
biblical Mary, the humble handmaid of the Lord (Luke 1:38, 48), would
admit to being a type of the ark at one
point in her life (during her pregnancy), but she would never claim such an
exalted title that Catholics try to give her.
We believe that she, like every true Christian, would agree with John
the baptist when he said, “He (Jesus) must increase, but I must decrease” (John
3:30). But Mary is in no way
“decreasing” in the Catholic Church today!
For example, in the Catholic rosary, there are many more prayers to Mary
than there are to Jesus, or God the Father.
As long as the Catholic version of Mary is around, Jesus just can’t seem
to be “increasing” as He should. But
once again, Mary is not the “New Ark.”
Jesus Christ should be recognized as the fulfillment of every part of
the tabernacle / temple. He is the center
of all prophecy (Luke 24:27; Revelation 19:10), and He and His
plan of redemption can be found on every page of Scripture.
