Hail Stephen, Full Of Grace...

[Farsight one]

So, check out Acts 6:8 - where it says Stephen was full of grace. Does this mean that he was preserved from sin too? What's up with this? and how might one respond to this used as an argument against the immaculate conception?

[PopeClementI(MorClemis)]

Just look to the Greek text, the words used to describe Stephen are adjective; while in regard to Mary it describes her person.

Acts 6:8 - stefanoV de plhrhV [b]pistews[/b] kai dunamewV epoiei terata kai shmeia megala en tw law

"faith", from the Greek πιστις (pi'stis)

Luke 1:28 - kai eiselqwn o aggelos proV authn eipen caire [b]kecaritwmenh[/b] o kurioV meta sou euloghmenh su en gunaixin

"[i]made[/i] full of grace"

[thessalonian]

It simply means that at that point in his life, i.e. at the time of his death he was full of grace, i.e. had been fully sanctified. That is why he is one of the canonized saints of the Church. One could argue that when it uses the phrase for mary that she was only "full of grace" at that moment. However there is other supporting evidence considering the Ark of the Covenant, etc.

[Laudate_Dominum]

Going off of PopeClement's transliteration of the Greek it is pretty obvious that "full of grace" is not a perfect translation. If the text reads [i]pleres pistews kai dunamews[/i] it is saying something quite different than [i]kecharitwmene[/i]. The acts text here does not even include the word grace ([i]charis[/i], [i]charitow[/i]) but is speaking of Stephen's fullness of faith. It is perhaps more loaded than this but the sense is hardly comparable to [i]kecharitwmene[/i] which describes Our Lady. I could look into it further if you like but on the surface (based on PC's post) I fail to see the basis of the argument.

Peace.