Hi having a discussion with a friend and I quoted the CCC 507 to try and show why Mary’s (perpetual) virginity is important. I’m not quite sure how to respond to this.
Obviously this argument is without the use of the protoevangelium of James, which I’m still trying to argue has SOME validity. So to answer this I would have to assume Mary didn’t have a vow of virginity. I don’t think this should be an issue since the Church doesn’t restrict us to believe either case, if I’m not mistaken.
Hello cat_holic, you’ve received some good answers, especially with regards your use of the protoevangelium, so I’m just going to get right into your friend’s rebuttal.
I can accept the symbol of Mary to the church. Not so sure about Mary being the perfect realization of the Church… that’s like saying Manna is the perfect realization of Christ.
Your friend should read CCC 507 again. It does not say that Mary is the perfect realization of the Church. What it says exactly is “Mary is… the most perfect realization of the Church.”
The perfect and
the most perfect mean two very different things.
It also seems to suggest that the purity of her faith is shown in her virginity… but here I’m stuck on a contradiction. If one were to be married, being faithful to the husband would surely include being faithful in sex.
There are two things here that absolutely need to be said.
First, the Church understands Mary’s spouse to be the Holy Spirit. In fact, this is one of the foundations of the Church’s teaching that Mary and Joseph never had sexual intercourse, and thus no other children. Joseph’s marriage to Mary was an act of obedience to the will of God, because this is what the angel directed him to do.
The annunciation narratives are rife with the language of marital union. The image of the Holy Spirit “overshadowing” her recalls the image of “spreading one’s skirt over,” an OT euphemism of intercourse. This same image we see in the opening verse of Genesis, “and the spirit of God moved over the waters.” The term “moved” may be translated as “hovered” and carries with it a connotation of
seeding, or
planting. From this sprung the life of the waters, an image that is again repeated after the great flood, when a
dove moved over the waters and brought life back to the ark.
After learning that Mary was pregnant of the Holy Spirit, Joseph would have understood the marital union that then existed between Mary and the Holy Spirit, according to the Jewish marriage customs. Thus, by taking Mary as wife, Joseph was not taking her as such in the proper sense, but more in the sense of a protector and provider. Had Mary and Joseph had sexual intercourse, Mary would actually have been committing adultery against the Holy Spirit.
Second, the Church does not understand “virginity” in the conventional sense; that is, never having had sexual intercourse. I call this the conventional sense because that is not what the word meant originally, but rather that is how it has come to be understood in modern times.
Virginity comes from the Latin “virginem” which means “maiden, unwedded girl or woman,” also an adjective, “fresh, unused,” probably related to
virga “young shoot.” In the 12th century, the Angle-French word “virgine” meant “unmarried or chaste woman.” In the 13th century, it held two meanings, “young woman in a state of inviolate chastity,” and “pure, untainted.” In the 14th century the term was also applied chaste men.
Here, the point is that in calling Mary a perpetual virgin, the Church means primarily that she was perpetually chaste, pure, sinless, perfectly faithful to her husband, God the Holy Spirit. Thus, her perpetual virginity is tied very closely to her immaculate conception, and in fact extends out from it. It does not specifically mean that she did not have other children, though that is implied by it. It is implied by it because she is the spouse of the Holy Spirit, and if she had other children, it would mean a violation of her chastity in an adulterous relationship.
