Did Mother Mary have other children?

[mommamia]

I am Catholic by birth, and have never really questioned the ever-virgin story.

Until I read this whole thread. Its clear to me that the Catholic posters are (sadly) defending an illogical position.

Its funny, the more I talk to those who can supposedly “explain” the faith to me, the more I find that much of our “sacred tradition” is not able to be defended.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Good to see you agree that the verse could mean Joseph and Mary could have consumated their marriage. You’re the first to admit it. Thank you.

Hmmm…

I think the primary point of what I said was that the verse cannot be used to prove that Joseph and Mary did have normal relations. It could imply what you suggest, but it does not do so definitively. In other words, that verse cannot be used to prove either position conclusively. Thus, its value as a smoking gun proof-text is completely eliminated.

And as a Catholic apologist, this is important because non-Catholics claim that it does. Undermining the ABSOLUTE meaning of the misinterpretation is just one brick in a wall that has to be built brick by brick to protect the truth.

Catholics don’t point to Matthew 1:25 in support of Perpetual Virginity, but we do have to spend a lot of time explaining heos hou to those who want to deny it.

 

[Dokimas]

Hmmm…

I think what I said was that the verse cannot be used to prove that Joseph and Mary did have normal relations. It could imply what you suggest, but it does not do so definitively. In other words, that verse cannot be used to prove either position conclusively. Thus, its value as a smoking gun proof-text is completely eliminated.

And as a Catholic apologist, this is important because non-Catholics claim that it does. Undermining the ABSOLUTE meaning of the misinterpretation is just one brick in a wall that has to be built brick by brick to protect the truth.

The Truth doesn’t need protecting. Because the Truth stands on its own, is it possible that the wall is not necessary thus wrong.

 

[Randy_Carson]

The Truth doesn’t need protecting. Because the Truth stands on its own, is it possible that the wall is not necessary thus wrong.

Oh. Okay.

One wonders why the early Church bothered holding councils at all?

Arius, Pelagius, Nestorius…these guys should have been left alone. Why bother refuting their heresies when the Truth doesn’t need protecting?

 

[Tantum_ergo]

I will not judge the work of the Holy Spirit. Like I said we have seen the manifestation of the Holy Spirit at our church and others like it. The Holy Spirit is always welcome to do His work at our church. The fruits of the Spirit are evident so we know He is present.

I do not want to argue about communion we take it in obedience to the command of Christ in reverence. It is a solemn ocasion. We must not take it in an unworthy manner.

This takes place at our church.
1 Chor 12:7-11 Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good. 8To one there is given through the Spirit the message of wisdom, to another the message of knowledge by means of the same Spirit, 9to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by that one Spirit, 10to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues,a and to still another the interpretation of tongues. 11All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he gives them to each one, just as he determines.

Excuse me, how am I asking you to 'judge the work of the Holy Spirit?

I’m asking you a plain question. A very simple question.

Two groups of Christians. Both claim the Holy Spirit leads them to understand a Scriptural passage. One says the passage speaks of Jesus telling us to eat his real flesh and blood. The other says no, it is symbolic only.

Now you tell me. . .**which of the two positions is correct?

ONLY ONE can be correct.**

You yourself obviously adhere to one or the other as being truth. That means you **reject the other as being false.

Are you ashamed of the Holy Spirit? Are you ashamed of stating what you believe is truth?**

 

[Randy_Carson]

I am Catholic by birth, and have never really questioned the ever-virgin story.

Until I read this whole thread. Its clear to me that the Catholic posters are (sadly) defending an illogical position.

Its funny, the more I talk to those who can supposedly “explain” the faith to me, the more I find that much of our “sacred tradition” is not able to be defended.

Try me.

 

[Randy_Carson]

If dogmas can be undermined then they are not very solid.

The problem is not with the strength of the dogma…it is with the understanding of the believers who hear it.

Look at mommamia…Catholic…never questioned the Perpetual Virginity of Mary…probably never really even thought about it.

You come in asking a bunch of questions (which I can answer easily), but she’s now confused because the refutation of your objections is complex and she doesn’t understand the answers fully, yet.

See how this works? See why Jesus said it would be better for you to have a millstone tied around your neck and be thrown into the sea than to cause one of His little ones to stumble?

 

[Tantum_ergo]

I am Catholic by birth, and have never really questioned the ever-virgin story.

Until I read this whole thread. Its clear to me that the Catholic posters are (sadly) defending an illogical position.

Its funny, the more I talk to those who can supposedly “explain” the faith to me, the more I find that much of our “sacred tradition” is not able to be defended.

With the greatest respect and love, I ask you to consider this. . .

Jesus Christ is God made man. Not only becoming a man like us, He suffered and died on the cross for us.

Was that a ‘logical position’ for God?

How about things like 'turning the other cheek" and blessing those who curse you? Are those the actions of ‘logical’ people?

What I’m getting at is, why would you be able to accept, without blinking, that God became man, suffered and died on a cross, as being perfectly reasonable (I mean, St. Paul himself referred to the cross as a stumbling block for the logically-minded Greeks). . .and yet find it ‘illogical’ to consider that the woman who bore the Son of God in her womb for 9 months and who nurtured Him and mothered Him the rest of His life. . .might have remained ever-Virgin?

Especially since the idea that she did indeed remain Virgin has been taught consistently for nearly 2000 years, and even among Protestants like our Methodist friend Zooey was taught and believed. . .it is indeed only a very relatively recent canard to claim that Mary was not ever Virgin.

Far greater minds that yours or mine have have no trouble accepting the true teaching. . .and they didn’t find it ‘illogical’. I truly wonder that so many seem eager to denigrate Mary and to indeed to ‘paganize’ God. Really, think about it. In this recent claim, He’s no better then than the Greek and Roman gods who slept with the wives of human beings and fathered demigods like Hercules. He ‘stole’ the betrothed wife of Joseph (Mary), impregnated her and left her. How awful!

 

[Bill_Pick]

Excuse me, how am I asking you to 'judge the work of the Holy Spirit?

I’m asking you a plain question. A very simple question.

Two groups of Christians. Both claim the Holy Spirit leads them to understand a Scriptural passage. One says the passage speaks of Jesus telling us to eat his real flesh and blood. The other says no, it is symbolic only.

Now you tell me. . .**which of the two positions is correct?

ONLY ONE can be correct.**

You yourself obviously adhere to one or the other as being truth. That means you **reject the other as being false.

Are you ashamed of the Holy Spirit? Are you ashamed of stating what you believe is truth?**

Jerrichoo Can you please tell me how you can eat a piece of Bread and water unworthy

 

[rev_kevin]

First of all, I never asked you which charitable things you do… That is between you and the Lord above. One should never boast like the pharisees who “wore their good deeds on their shoulders for all to see”.

Since you asked however, I’ve been homeless since 2008, and my wife and I lived out of a tent for most of 2009… My children have suffered greatly and I am now in recovery mode… I openly admit that It is all due to my own faults and failures…
Today however, I work for the Lord Full-Time. since you asked.

No. I’m protecting the Church from those who wish to destroy her. It’s my duty to spread God’s truth, as well as to correct those who attempt to spread lies.

I’m not boasting I thought you asked.
Now believe it or not we have something in common. Me, my wife and children were homeless back in 2001-2002 due to my illness. I admire you for telling me the truth about your life, It takes a big man to admit fault.

 

[rev_kevin]

Bill Pick
Will you please stop with the slander. I have not said anything about you nor have I talked to you. So please keep me out of your discussions.
I don’t want somebody like you in my life or talkling slander about me.
If you feel the urge to slander me or talk about me, first pray to the Lord for guidence I’m sure he will tell you this is not the christian thing to do. By the way talking about someone like you are me is a sin.
God bless you

 

[rev_kevin]

rev First of ally you are undermine the dogmas of the Catholic church, and why do uu say you believe on your opinion you know what they say about opinions

Once again Bill Pick
Don’t post things to me please. I’m through with you.

 

[Bill_Pick]

Bill Pick
Will you please stop with the slander. I have not said anything about you nor have I talked to you. So please keep me out of your discussions.
I don’t want somebody like you in my life or talkling slander about me.
If you feel the urge to slander me or talk about me, first pray to the Lord for guidence I’m sure he will tell you this is not the christian thing to do. By the way talking about someone like you are me is a sin.
God bless you

God Bless you rev but i do not know what you are talking, I do not remember talking to for three or 4 weeks…The last tine you left the board crying

 

[rev_kevin]

Sure thing.

What TEPO actually said was:

In other words, denying this about Mary does not serve God; it is a self-serving position. TEPO makes not claim about whether someone is serving God OVERALL. He simply points out that denying this one doctrine does not advance the cause of Christianity.

However, you read WAY more into his post as shown here:

**
See the difference? TEPO didn’t say you’re not serving the Lord OVERALL; he simply stated that denying the Marian doctrines do not serve the Lord.

You could be serving God just fine in other ways.

Got it. But how does not believing Mary was ever-virgin have to do with serving God or does not advance the cause of Christianity? I don’t see the connection.

 

[rev_kevin]

God Bless you rev but i do not know what you are talking, I do not remember talking to for three or 4 weeks…The last tine you left the board crying

Bill
This is what I’m talking about I have not talked to you in 3 or 4 weeks and now you have to start in for some reason. Now I’m asking you nicely to stop it.

 

[rcballi46]

I don’t see what the fuss is all about. If Mary had no other children besides Jesus - fine. But so what if she did? Some have commented that Mary having sex with her husband somehow ‘disgraces’ (defiles) her (and her husband). That’s a ridiculous arguement.
We are thought that sex is a gift from God (the Church teaches ‘within the context of marriage’). If Mary was just like us ‘in all things, but sin’, then she probably had sexual relations with her husband - which, according the Church, is not sinful. Besides, I think the Church places too much emphasis on the status of Mary’s virginity, and virginity as a whole.
When I inquired about joining a religious order (with the intention of becoming a priest), the ‘Recruiter Priest’ found out that I had previously been married - the marriage was anulled by the Church - but his response was: “I couldn’t possibly recommend you to study for the priesthood, because you have ‘known’ (loved?) a woman” - his words.
Actually, I thought that ‘attribute’ of having ‘known’ (loved?) a woman, would serve to benefit couples when they came to be counseled by me (as a priest) - as opposed to them coming to see a celibate priest.
It appears to me that the Church has some growing up to do - when it comes to sex and women. Incidentally, I find it laughable that the act of masturbation is thought to be a ‘mortal’ sin - one could end up in hell - if one were to die prior to going to confession - for doing such a ‘dastartly’ deed. Of course, if you kill somebody, like an abortion and you go to confession - you’re liable to be with the Lord for ever (provided you didn’t masturbate just prior to dying, without benefit of an additional confession - then you’ll fry in hell for all eternity). Sometimes the Church and many of its followers get hung up on the legalise of the faith - kind of like the Jewish Lawyers of Jesus’ time (He repuked them many a times) - and they lose His message of Love:
In any case, I respect and honor Mary, the Mother of Jesus, whether she is a ‘perpetual’ virgin, or not. Just as I respect and honor Joseph, her husband, the Foster-Father of Jesus. He, too, said “Yes” to God, when he accepted Mary and her unborn Child that was not of his making, married her, and took them into his house. That took a lot of faith on Joseph’s part - whether he had sexual relations with his wife, or not. His role in God’s plan of salvation was of no less or greater significance than that of his wife.
I would imagine that Jesus gaves his earthly father alot more Kudos than his Church does - when compared to Mary. Finally, sex is a gift from God - like any gift of His we can use it for what He had intended it for, or abuse it. With much respect, however, I disagree with the Church’s contention that each single act of sex (masturbation) - even when repeated from time to time - constitutes a ‘mortal’ sin - with all the horrific conotations that entails! (Remember, it once was a mortal sin if we deliberately ate meat on Ash Wednesday and all Fridays of the year- and it still is during Lent - another ridiculuous conotation)!

 

[Randy_Carson]

Got it. But how does not believing Mary was ever-virgin have to do with serving God or does not advance the cause of Christianity? I don’t see the connection.

Denial of a truth is a lie; the faith of those who deny a truth is incomplete.

Incompleteness tends to expand and increase. The fragmentation of Protestantism is a perfect example of this. The closer a denomination is confessionally to the original Church (yeah, the Catholic Church), then the more complete it is.

However, over time, some branches of Protestantism have wandered further and further afield so that some branches of Protestantism are not only at odds with the Catholic Church which they are protesting but with one another, as well.

In nature, entropy is the principle that things go from a state of order to disorder. And in theology, disorder ultimately leads to heresy.

This is why some people are again denying that Mary is the Mother of God. The ancient heresy was defeated in the fifth century, but it has reared its ugly head again in modern day evangelicalism.

 

[rev_kevin]

Denial of a truth is a lie; the faith of those who deny a truth is incomplete.

Incompleteness tends to expand and increase. The fragmentation of Protestantism is a perfect example of this. The closer a denomination is confessionally to the original Church (yeah, the Catholic Church), then the more complete it is.

However, over time, some branches of Protestantism have wandered further and further afield so that some branches of Protestantism are not only at odds with the Catholic Church which they are protesting but with one another, as well.

In nature, entropy is the principle that things go from a state of order to disorder. And in theology, disorder ultimately leads to heresy.

This is why some people are again denying that Mary is the Mother of God. The ancient heresy was defeated in the fifth century, but it has reared its ugly head again in modern day evangelicalism.

I don’t see how this is true that Mary was ever-virgin. I’m not denying the truth because there is no evidence that Mary stayed a virgin all her life. Just because your dogma says so is not enough evidence. How do you know the dogma is the truth?

 

[Tantum_ergo]

There is no evidence. . .none, zip, zilch, nada. . .that Mary did NOT remain a Virgin all her life.

Nothing in Scripture that says she had any children other than Jesus. Nothing in Scripture that says that she and Joseph had sexual relations.

Nothing in authentic and authoritative Christian teaching, dogma or doctrine for the first 1500 years that posited that she was not ever-virgin.

Nothing even from the first ‘reformers’ that said that she was not ever-virgin.

Why did some people a couple of hundred years ago decide to change the teaching?

I’ll ask you this too, Rev. Kev.

Scripture, and the Holy Spirit, tell me that Mary remained a virgin. There is nothing in Scripture that says that she and Joseph had sex, and no child mentioned as child of Mary other than Jesus.

Now you’re telling me that Scripture and the Holy Spirit tell you differently.

The Holy Spirit cannot contradict Himself.

So how do you know that your recent and jumped up tradition of men is from the Holy Spirit, and my long-standing and authoritative tradition somehow isn’t?

 

[Good_Fella]

No where in the bible does it say or infer we should rely on for salvation or pray to Mary. That’s what my bible says and that’s what your bible says.

We don’t rely on Mary for our salvation, but we do rely on her for her prayers so that through them we may receive all the graces necessary for our salvation. Likewise, we rely on her fiat which resulted in the coming of the Saviour into the world. God is just, as well as merciful, so he honours our free will for his own sake and his good pleasure.By attempting to deprive Mary of her free will, you deny her the virtues of faith, hope, and charity.

“Blessed are you who believed that what was spoken to you by the Lord would be fulfilled.”
Luke 1, 45

Again, by praying to Mary, we do not worship her but entreat her to pray for us and thereby join her prayers to God with ours. Because of her closeness to God, by virtue of her divine maternity and purity, Mary’s prayers are more efficacious than ours. Thus we vitally rely on them. St.Paul himself relied on the prayers of other righteous people, and so he asked them for their prayers. There is no explicit record of the apostle supplicating the departed saints, but there are enough passages in his letters that implicitly indicate he believed in the Communion of Saints in heaven and orally taught this doctrine in more length. This is another topic altogether, so I won’t get into any details by citing Scripture. In any event, the teachings of the early Church Fathers reveal that this doctrine was universally held in the Church by the end of the 2nd century. And it was never disputed until modern Protestants appeared. The saints in heaven are more alive than we are in God’s presence as living members of the mystical body of Christ, priests of God and of Christ (Rev 20:6) who intercede for us by their prayers.

Praise the Lord from the heavens, praise him in the heights! Praise him, all his angels, praise him, all his host.
Psalm 148, 1-2

The saints are alive in heaven!

And they are praying for us!

An angel came and stood at the altar with a golden censer, and he was given much incense to mingle with the prayers of the saints upon the golden altar before the throne [in heaven]; and the smoke of the incense rose with the prayers of the saints from the hand of the angel before God.
Revelation 8, 3-4

“Under your mercy we take refuge, O Mother of God. Do not reject our supplications in necessity, but deliver us from danger, O you alone pure and blessed.”
Sub Tuum Praesidium (c. A.D. 250)

If someone declares bible truths does that make them infallible also?

Nothing declared in contravention of Sacred Tradition and the teachings of the Magisterium is biblically true nor infallible.

“He who hears you hears me.”

You hold to tradition over the written word. I hold only to the written word.

Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement or by a letter of ours.
2 Thessalonians 2, 15

PAX :heaven: