TGC contributor Gavin Ortland Says Mary is the ‘Ark of the Covenant’

Anti-biblical ecumenism taken to the next level

Staff Writer

“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.”  (Catechism of the Catholic Church 2676).

Months after TGC contributor Gavin Ortland got into a fracas after he arguing that pro-LGBTQ ‘Christians’ and Universalists are still in the faith, he shared some ‘surprising theological views’ he holds, including that Jesus’ mother Mary is the new Ark of the Covenant.

 Fr. Thomas Esposito, writing for the Catholic Register, explains why believe this to be the case:

Immediately after accepting her vocation as the mother of Jesus, Mary “sets out in haste into the hill country” (Luke 1:39). She eagerly speeds her steps to visit her relative Elizabeth, herself pregnant despite her advanced age. As soon as Elizabeth hears Mary’s greeting, little John the Baptist leaps in her womb, rejoicing in the presence of his Lord. Just as the Ark was the portable sanctuary accompanying Israel through the desert, so Mary travels with the new presence of God in her womb. And John the Baptist’s womb-jumping imitates David, who danced with abandon before the Ark as it entered Jerusalem for the first time (2 Samuel 6:14-15). In referring to Mary as “the mother of my Lord” (Luke 1:43), Elizabeth confirms this bold interpretation of Mary’s womb as the Ark of the new covenant – the name, “Lord,” after all, is the divine name God reveals to Moses in Exodus 3:14-15.

As part of their idolatry, Roman Catholics believe that Mary never sinned, was eternally a virgin, and never tasted death, assuming bodily into heaven like Jesus himself. They think she also acts as an intermediary between men and Jesus, with many insisting that she is a co-mediator with Christ. Because they are committed to this narrative, they twist the scriptures to find any way to elevate her and abase the Lord of Glory, and this lofty title and shallow comparison. In discussion with Roman Catholic apologist Patrick Madrid, Dr. James White addresses some of these claims, writing:

The greatest effort in typological interpretation by Mr. Madrid comes in his attempt to parallel the Ark of the Covenant and Mary. The first parallel he draws has to do with the fact that God took such great pains to make sure the Ark was properly constructed. He says,

“God wanted the ark to be as perfect and unblemished as humanly possible so it would be worthy of the honor of bearing the written Word of God. How much more so would God want Mary, the ark of the new covenant, to be perfect and unblemished since she would carry within her womb the Word of God in flesh.‘

Does this kind of interpretation bear the weight of investigation? While we admit the force such things carry with those who already accept these doctrine, we point out that there is no way to test the interpretation. We can easily point out absurdities to which the parallel can be pushed–for example, must Mary have been stolen by God’s enemies for a time, so that she could be brought back to the people of God with great rejoicing? Who was Mary’s Uzzah (2 Samuel 6:3-8)?

Madrid draws a further parallel between the three months the ark was with Obededom and the three months Mary was with Elizabeth. What, then, is the parallel with David’s action of sacrificing a bull and a fattened calf when those who were carrying the ark had taken six steps (2 Samuel 6:13)? See, Mr. Madrid feels free to pick and choose what aspects of Mary’s life he wishes to parallel in the ark, and which he does not–there are no rules in this kind of interpretation, and it can lead to just about any conclusion.