Catholics and Non-Catholics: Do you believe in the Perpetual Virginity of the Blessed Mother?

[Barbkw]

Wesley’s Notes on the Bible

1:25 He knew her not, till after she had brought forth - It cannot be inferred from hence, that he knew her afterward: no more than it can be inferred from that expression, 2Sam 6:23, Michal had no child till the day of her death, that she had children afterward. Nor do the words that follow, the first - born son, alter the case. For there are abundance of places, wherein the term first born is used, though there were no subsequent children. Luke 2:7.

 

[Dokimas]

Here is another way to look at it:

[BIBLEDRB]2 sam 6:23[/BIBLEDRB]

Context is helpful key to understand if there’s most likely a change after ‘until’. The context of the verse you quoted is obvious.

 

[Catholic20064]

The marriage of Mary and Joseph was an extraordinary circumstance, not an ordinary one. Ordinarily, husbands and wives are not called to lifelong mutual chastity. In extraordinary circumstances, they may be, but it’s very rare.

As to why the Church has “gone out on a limb” – why, just look how Mary has been devalued in Protestant churches. I’ve hardly seen a Protestant church that actually calls Mary blessed as is said in the Gospel of Luke ("…all generations shall call me blessed.") She’s often calling nothing but a vessel, used by God and then tossed by the wayside. It’s shameful. I grew up in the ELCA and Mary was really only ever talked about during the Christmas season, instead of held up as a role model of Christian obedience as she is in the Catholic Church. Her perpetual virginity is important because Mary is the New Eve and is also typified by the Ark of the New Covenant, all of which plays into salvation theology.

I don’t really believe that Mary would have been less the “New Eve” or the “Ark of the New Covenant” if she had had a normal sexual life within marriage with Joseph. She may have been a perpetual virgin, but there is no necessity that she be one for us to be saved through Jesus’ atonement and resurrection.

 

[faithfully]

I guess I don’t understand why this is so hard to believe. How many NORMAL people fall in the habit of a sexless marriage. For whatever reason.

It just seems to me that a man that knows his wife gave birth to the son of God, could abstain in the same way a priest does, with no doubt. That Mary has zero questions in her mind the way most of us do. She could easily commit to a life of abstenance… Plenty of nuns abstain. No?

Why so hard to even consider that 2 people holding the LORD in their hands wouldn’t commit their entire life to his devotion, spreading the word and caring for his.

As a Catholic, I was raised to believe this. It is simple knowledge to me. I don’t question it. I will admit. I was FLOORED when a guest in my house annouced that there was no way Mary remained a virgin or WAS a virgin who became pregnant. Interesting to reflect back and notice my JAW hitting the floor. And the scooch away from the window, incase lightening struck…

 

[Dokimas]

Wesley’s Notes on the Bible

1:25 He knew her not, till after she had brought forth - It cannot be inferred from hence, that he knew her afterward: no more than it can be inferred from that expression, 2Sam 6:23, Michal had no child till the day of her death, that she had children afterward. Nor do the words that follow, the first - born son, alter the case. For there are abundance of places, wherein the term first born is used, though there were no subsequent children. Luke 2:7.

Same Greek word:

Matthew 2:
13 ¶ Now when they had departed, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream, saying, “Arise, take the young Child and His mother, flee to Egypt, and stay there until I bring you word; for Herod will seek the young Child to destroy Him.”
14 When he arose, he took the young Child and His mother by night and departed for Egypt,
15 and was there until the death of Herod, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying, “Out of Egypt I called My Son.”

Can you infer anything from these uses of ‘until’?

I can give you several more examples in the NT if you’d like.

 

[david_ruiz]

The Church’s Sacraments come from Christ, not the Old Testament. Mary and Joseph’s marriage was a legal one in every respect, but by Church definition today it would not be considered a Sacramental one, as consummation is necessary to be joined in a Sacramental marriage by Church law.

However, in regard to an Old Testament covenantal relationship, as was stated in an earlier response, Numbers 30 provides for a woman to bind herself to the Lord in chastity, and if accepted by her father and/or husband, the vow remains valid. It is quite possible that Mary made an oath of abstinence to the Lord that was accepted by her father and Joseph. It may even have been that Joseph made a “vow to the Lord…(binding) himself under oath to a pledge of abstinence…(where he was required to) fulfill exactly the promise he…uttered.” (Numbers 30:3) This is not so far-fetched as the Church has always stated that Joseph was the “most chaste spouse” of Mary.

I understand your view on Numbers .I find it strange to make a vow of chastity,for life and still be betrothed ? Why .Why wouldn’t she become like a nun ? Are there any instances where one makes this vow ,then gets betrothed ,then married -??? You say this was a custom ??? As far as O.T… ,that is what counts for Mary and Joseph .Were they according to Jewish tradition really married ? apart from vowing chastity ?..I am not sure Catholics have always said Joseph was chaste .I thought at one time (past 1500 years) ,it was said that Jesus’s "bretheren " were possibly children of Joseph from another marriage (the wife dying).

 

[Anrando]

Hello,

I’m afraid I am NOT a Biblical scholar and cannot contribute to the Bible verses “throw down” here as both sides in this discussion try to “prove” the unprovable.

Frankly I don’t see the purpose in trying to show that Mary had sex other than to validate our current cultural imperative that sex is the be all and end all of our corporeal existence.

We have become so sex obsessed that many can’t belief that any human might actually choose to live without it. It seems we are looking at the world of 2000 years ago through our MTV colored glasses. Chastity, until the last 50 years, was considered admirable and 'holy" in many cultures. it was not the unimaginable horror that it is portrayed as today.

Believe it or not Church history is filled with saints who lived a celibate life. Why do we have so much trouble imagining that Mary, chosen by G-d to give birth to the Son, the most perfect of women, would be incapable of forgoing carnal pleasure. Is it because we ourselves can not do so?

As I posited in my early post, the Eastern tradition of Joseph being an old man, a widower possibly with children, when he took Mary in, a young woman who had taken a vow of chastity, to protect her as his wife seems a very logical explanation for their relationship. Is it SO hard to even imagine that Joseph was not looking for a sexual relationship when he “married” Mary to “legitimize” her status in the Hebrew community. It would also explain why Joseph “disappeared” before Jesus’ ministry began. He was old and he died.

Personally I find the Eastern tradition greatly honors Joseph, a man who obeyed the call of G-d to care for Mary and her child, even without that seemingly now all important promise of sex. Can I “prove” this? of course not. Just throwing it out there.

Regards,
Bill Unland (not afraid to actually use my name…seems rare here for some reason)

 

[MagsM]

At the cross, Mary was there - without Joseph - and the only other male there was Jesus’ chosen apostle John. If Mary had children, where were they at the cross, or at the tomb?

Thanks Barb. These are my reasons for believing too.
It makes zero sense that all these “other children” would not be there at the cross or tomb. with her. Even more, why would Jesus give His own mother to John the apostle and not to her own children? She was a holy woman - remember that she raised the Son of God who was sinless. Her “own children” would “do the right thing”, even if they themselves did not believe in Jesus. She would have gone to live with them, not with John. These reasons alone (and taken solely from scripture for the protestants ) are the reasons I do not believe there were any children of Mary other than Jesus. No further children allows for her perpetual virginity. And unlike our MTV culture, virginity was prized by all, and thankfully still is by some, especially God. :bible1:

 

[david_ruiz]

Were there some warped views on marriage and sex and virginity, that the latter was “spiritual” "? Indeed did not Paul warn against putting away spouses to be more “spiritual” (Corin.) A type of works , like look what I can do for God . Did St. Ambrose say marriage was a crime against God ? Tertullian , that marriage was an obscene , moral crime,and Augustine also had some of these tendencies (did the three become celibate ),that it was superior ,to marriage ?? Some of this could be the seedbed for the need to make Mary an ever -virgin .

 

[MagsM]

Believe it or not Church history is filled with saints who lived a celibate life. Why do we have so much trouble imagining that Mary, chosen by G-d to give birth to the Son, the most perfect of women, would be incapable of forgoing carnal pleasure. Is it because we ourselves can not do so?
…
Personally I find the Eastern tradition greatly honors Joseph, a man who obeyed the call of G-d to care for Mary and her child, even without that seemingly now all important promise of sex.

:clapping:



Isn’t it horrifying how our culture thinks no man or woman would forgo sex, even very devout and holy ones?

 

[KathleenGee]

Christ said there are those who are made for the Kingdom, who do not marry…

Having sex is irrelevant to building Christ’s kingdom. Mary did not have sex and yet she brought forth the Messiah…how she would allow herself to be open to sex after the virgin birth does not make sense…her entire being was directed towards God and the total care of the Son.

To have more children who had a totally different constitution would divide her attention to say the least.

The family of Nazareth is rightly called The Holy Family.

 

[Todd520]

Christ said there are those who are made for the Kingdom, who do not marry…

Having sex is irrelevant to building Christ’s kingdom. Mary did not have sex and yet she brought forth the Messiah…how she would allow herself to be open to sex after the virgin birth does not make sense…her entire being was directed towards God and the total care of the Son.

To have more children who had a totally different constitution would divide her attention to say the least.

The family of Nazareth is rightly called The Holy Family.

Kathleen, none of your statements really support the catholic position that she must have remained a virgin, and they have the underlying premise that marital relations take one away from being close to God

Also, I’m pretty sure Jesus was a very low maintenance child (fully divine nature).

 

[Nicea325]

There aren’t many ways to misinterpret the word ‘until,’ and the context of the sentence doesn’t support the other inflection to me. Here is the exact scripture. “But he [Joseph] had no union with her until she gave birth to a son.” Mark 1:25

In this context, it seems to imply that their, ‘lack of ‘unity,’’ stopped after Jesus was born.

wanner47: The context of the word ‘until’ is different in the scripture that you mentioned, and the one that I mentioned.

Also, I’m not trying to knock Mary or anyone’s beliefs, I am obviously subject to error, but it just doesn’t make sense to me the other way.

No exactly. What does Scriptures say?
2

Samuel 6:23 tells us: Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child until the day of her death.

So did Michal have children after her death?

Examine Acts 2:34-35 (also see Psalm 110:1, Matt 22:44): For David did not go up into heaven, but he himself said: ‘The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool.”’

Did Jesus cease to sit at the right hand of the Father after his enemies are made his footstool?

 

[Dokimas]

No exactly. What does Scriptures say?
2

Samuel 6:23 tells us: Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child until the day of her death.

So did Michal have children after her death?

Examine Acts 2:34-35 (also see Psalm 110:1, Matt 22:44): For David did not go up into heaven, but he himself said: ‘The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool.”’

Did Jesus cease to sit at the right hand of the Father after his enemies are made his footstool?

Matth 2:
13 ¶ Now when they had departed, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream, saying, “Arise, take the young Child and His mother, flee to Egypt, and stay there until I bring you word; for Herod will seek the young Child to destroy Him.”
14 When he arose, he took the young Child and His mother by night and departed for Egypt,
15 and was there until the death of Herod, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying, “Out of Egypt I called My Son.”

Did Jesus and His family stay in Egypt?

Matthew 5:
Mt 5:25 "Agree with your adversary quickly, while <2193> you are on the way with him, lest your adversary deliver you to the judge, the judge hand you over to the officer, and you be thrown into prison.
Mt 5:26 "Assuredly, I say to you, you will by no means get out of there till <2193> you have paid the last penny.

After the last penny was paid, did Jesus expect the person to stay in prison?

Matthew 17:
Mt 17:9 Now as they came down from the mountain, Jesus commanded them, saying, “Tell the vision to no one until <2193> the Son of Man is risen from the dead.”

Did Jesus expect His disciples to keep His secret after He was risen from the dead?

Mt 23:39 “for I say to you, you shall see Me no more till you say, ‘Blessed is He who comes in the name of the LORD!’”

Did they or will they ever see Jesus again?

This is just in Matthew. There are several more like this in the NT.

 

[Nicea325]

Matth 2:
13 ¶ Now when they had departed, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream, saying, “Arise, take the young Child and His mother, flee to Egypt, and stay there until I bring you word; for Herod will seek the young Child to destroy Him.”
14 When he arose, he took the young Child and His mother by night and departed for Egypt,
15 and was there until the death of Herod, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying, “Out of Egypt I called My Son.”

Did Jesus and His family stay in Egypt?

Matthew 5:
Mt 5:25 "Agree with your adversary quickly, while <2193> you are on the way with him, lest your adversary deliver you to the judge, the judge hand you over to the officer, and you be thrown into prison.
Mt 5:26 "Assuredly, I say to you, you will by no means get out of there till <2193> you have paid the last penny.

After the last penny was paid, did Jesus expect the person to stay in prison?

Matthew 17:
Mt 17:9 Now as they came down from the mountain, Jesus commanded them, saying, “Tell the vision to no one until <2193> the Son of Man is risen from the dead.”

Did Jesus expect His disciples to keep His secret after He was risen from the dead?

Mt 23:39 “for I say to you, you shall see Me no more till you say, ‘Blessed is He who comes in the name of the LORD!’”

Did they or will they ever see Jesus again?

This is just in Matthew. There are several more like this in the NT.

While on the cross Jesus gives Mary into the care of John because Mary had no other sons to take up the authority of the “first born.” In the absence of the father, the first born was head of the family. At the death of Jesus, had Mary had another son, he would have had the responsibility to care for his mother. But Mary, having no other sons was given by Jesus into the care of the Beloved Apostle John with these words: “Then he said to the disciple, “Behold, your mother!” And from that hour the disciple took her to his own home” (John 19:27, RSVCE).

From its earliest days, the Church has held fast to the perpetual virginity of Mary. St. Jerome’s famous Treatise Against Helvedius hits this issue with Scripture, facts and sarcasm. He is shocked that anyone would be so impious as to suggest Mary had children subsequent to Jesus. He cites early writers like Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp, Justin Martyr and Irenaeus to support his claim that the perpetual virginity of Mary had always been maintained by the Church from its earliest days.

It wasn’t until after the Protestant Reformation that the doctrine of Mary’s ever-virginity was
questioned. Interestingly enough, and a surprise to many Protestants is the fact that many of the notable reformers affirmed the doctrine, men such as Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, and John Wesley.

 

[d2bc]

Matth 2:
13 ¶ Now when they had departed, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream, saying, “Arise, take the young Child and His mother, flee to Egypt, and stay there until I bring you word; for Herod will seek the young Child to destroy Him.”
14 When he arose, he took the young Child and His mother by night and departed for Egypt,
15 and was there until the death of Herod, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying, “Out of Egypt I called My Son.”

Did Jesus and His family stay in Egypt?

Matthew 5:
Mt 5:25 "Agree with your adversary quickly, while <2193> you are on the way with him, lest your adversary deliver you to the judge, the judge hand you over to the officer, and you be thrown into prison.
Mt 5:26 "Assuredly, I say to you, you will by no means get out of there till <2193> you have paid the last penny.

After the last penny was paid, did Jesus expect the person to stay in prison?

Matthew 17:
Mt 17:9 Now as they came down from the mountain, Jesus commanded them, saying, “Tell the vision to no one until <2193> the Son of Man is risen from the dead.”

Did Jesus expect His disciples to keep His secret after He was risen from the dead?

Mt 23:39 “for I say to you, you shall see Me no more till you say, ‘Blessed is He who comes in the name of the LORD!’”

Did they or will they ever see Jesus again?

This is just in Matthew. There are several more like this in the NT.

Yes, you’ve show that “until” CAN mean there was a change after, just as others have put forth verses that show the couldn’t have been a change afterward. It was used in BOTH ways, so the verse can only show us that they didn’t have relations before Jesus’ birth, and cannot definitively prove they did or did not after his birth. But you can agree that it does show us that it is at least POSSIBLE that they continued to refrain from marital relations after His birth?
As Catholics we don’t have to rely on scripture alone to define our beliefs, but are free to look to the writings of other people that were there or directly knew people that were there. Scripture alone seems to paint people into a corner with no clear answers to many questions, Mary’s perpetual virginity being only one of them. I thank God daily that I was blessed to find my way home. Life is much simpler on this side of the Tiber in so many ways…

 

[Catholic20064]

While on the cross Jesus gives Mary into the care of John because Mary had no other sons to take up the authority of the “first born.” In the absence of the father, the first born was head of the family. At the death of Jesus, had Mary had another son, he would have had the responsibility to care for his mother. But Mary, having no other sons was given by Jesus into the care of the Beloved Apostle John with these words: “Then he said to the disciple, “Behold, your mother!” And from that hour the disciple took her to his own home” (John 19:27, RSVCE).

From its earliest days, the Church has held fast to the perpetual virginity of Mary. St. Jerome’s famous Treatise Against Helvedius hits this issue with Scripture, facts and sarcasm. He is shocked that anyone would be so impious as to suggest Mary had children subsequent to Jesus. He cites early writers like Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp, Justin Martyr and Irenaeus to support his claim that the perpetual virginity of Mary had always been maintained by the Church from its earliest days.

It wasn’t until after the Protestant Reformation that the doctrine of Mary’s ever-virginity was
questioned. Interestingly enough, and a surprise to many Protestants is the fact that many of the notable reformers affirmed the doctrine, men such as Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, and John Wesley.

I just read Against Helvedius. While Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp, Justin Martyr and Iraneaeus are mentioned as supporting the claim of perpetual virginity, there is no actual quote from them in support of it. Do you know if there are any original quotes? The earliest I’ve ever seen is the Protoevangelium of James which was written around 150 A.D.

The Catholic Answers web site then notes Origin’s statement of 248 A.D.:

“The Book [the Protoevangelium] of James [records] that the brethren of Jesus were sons of Joseph by a former wife, whom he married before Mary. Now those who say so wish to preserve the honor of Mary in virginity to the end, so that body of hers which was appointed to minister to the Word . . . might not know intercourse with a man after the Holy Spirit came into her and the power from on high overshadowed her. And I think it in harmony with reason that Jesus was the firstfruit among men of the purity which consists in [perpetual] chastity, and Mary was among women. For it were not pious to ascribe to any other than to her the firstfruit of virginity” (Commentary on Matthew 2:17 [A.D. 248]).

I think it is curious that Catholic Answers had to add the word “perpetual” in brackets. There is nothing in that quote that would necessitate Origin’s belief in the perpetual virginity of Mary because his quote says “those who say so.” This makes it sound as if it is an unsettled issue at the time of Origin. The other quotes are well beyond what would be called the earliest days of the Church. Here is the entire tract:

catholic.com/library/Mary_Ever_Virgin.asp

I can accept the perpetual virginity of Mary on faith, but I have a hard time believing that people who trust in the atonement and resurrection of Jesus for their salvation will have to also claim they believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary for their salvation.

 

[Jesness]

While on the cross Jesus gives Mary into the care of John because Mary had no other sons to take up the authority of the “first born.” In the absence of the father, the first born was head of the family. At the death of Jesus, had Mary had another son, he would have had the responsibility to care for his mother. But Mary, having no other sons was given by Jesus into the care of the Beloved Apostle John with these words: “Then he said to the disciple, “Behold, your mother!” And from that hour the disciple took her to his own home” (John 19:27, RSVCE).

Now I actually read an interesting explanation to this from a book about the rosary. The author points out that whether or not Jesus had ‘brothers’ or ‘cousins’ can be left up to speculation because we may never truly know the answer to that, but one thing is for certain. Jesus gave his Mother to his disciple; or, to put it another way- a believer. Jesus declares that his true, Mothers, sisters and brothers are those who do the will of His Father in heaven. If he had ‘natural’ brothers, he still couldn’t leave his Mother to them, because they weren’t really a part of his family.

This makes more sense than the argument that he didn’t have any brothers and that’s why he didn’t give his Mother to one of them. This is also consistent with the scriptures.

 

[StevenFrancis]

Yes. Of course. It’s dogma!

 

[onenow1]

Holy Mother Church teaches that Holy Mother Mary was a perpetual virgin, good enough for me.

Exactly Kim ! God, chose Mary from everlasting to everlasting, this is really that simple.

God Bless
onenow1

Gal. 4: 4, But when the time had fully come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law,