# Ark of the New Covenant?



## cih1355 (Sep 7, 2004)

Roman Catholics believe that Mary was the ark of the New Covenant. 


The following is a quote from a Roman Catholic:

"No, the focus is fully on Christ himself. Christ is typed in the Old
Testament by the Old Covenant with God, given to Isreal...Christ was
and is the New Covenant...

Mt. 26:27-28 "Then he took a cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them,
saying, 'Drink from it, all of you, for this is my blood of the
covenant, which will be shed on behalf of many for the forgiveness of
sins."

In the OT, the Covenant, the 10 Commandments was held in the Ark of
the Covenant. Christ was the New Covenant.. how much more holy would
Mary have had to be to hold the New Covenant, than the Ark would have
had to have been holding the Old? We are told in the OT that the Ark
was on procession...it was in danger of falling over, a man reached
out to try to right it, and was struck DEAD on the spot from touching
it...that's how holy an object it was..now imagine the Mother of
Christ...how much holier would she have had to be holding our Lord in
the flesh?

The Ark held the 10 commandments, the NEW Ark of the Covenant held
Christ. The Ark held manna..the NEW Ark of the Covenant, (Mary),
held the bread in the body of Christ. The first Ark held the Word of
God in stone, the NEW Ark (Mary) held the God incarnate.

Mary's status in the whole story of Christ cannot be downplayed. She
was important. Her Grace was important. She was the NEW Eve...where
mankind's downfall came from the sin of Eve, mankind's redemption
came from the 'sinlessness' of Mary.

Another relationship is found in Lukes Gospel. It's the similarities
between the story of David and Mary's visitation to Elizabeth.

"..The story begins as David 'arose and went' (2 Sam 6:2), Luke's
account of the visitation (of Mary to Elizabeth) begins with the same
words: Mary 'arose and wnet' (1:39). In their journeys, then, both
Mary and David proceeded to the hill country of Judah. David
acknowledges his unworthiness with the words 'How can the ark of the
Lord come to me?' (2 Sam 6:9) == words we find echoed as Mary
approaches her kinswoman Elizabeth: 'Why is this granted me, that the
mother of my Lord should come to me?' (Lk 1;43). Note here that the
sentence is almost verbatim, except that 'ark' is replaced
by 'mother'. We read further that David 'danced' for joy in the
presence of the ark (2 Sam 6:14,16), and we find a similar expression
used to describe the leaping of the child within Elizabeth's womb as
Mary approached (Lk 1:44). Finally the ark remained in the hill
country for three months (2 Sam 6:11), the same amount of time Mary
spent with Elizabeth (Lk 1:56)." "Hail, Holy Queen", Scott Hahn,
Doubleday, 2001, Pg. 64).

So you see, Mary's sinlessness cannot be made too much of, in fact,
the more you start reading about the types of the OT revealed in the
New, the more you see the importance she really played in the whole
story of Christ himself."

How would you respond to this?


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Sep 11, 2004)

Whew, their hearts are hardened and their eyes are blind to the truth. Nevertheless, Mariolatry has recently been refuted on this thread: http://www.puritanboard.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=73550#73550


----------

