How can I prove that the Virgin Mary has always been a virgin?

[KEVIN_WILCOX]

just ask the question, WWJD (what would Joseph do?)

you’re bride (my understanding that being betrothed meant they were already in the process of getting married but haven’t reach that time that they will co-habit and thus can engage in intimacy, from what i read about customs during their time) has just conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit. you’re doubtful this is true but angels start appearing in your dreams telling you otherwise. finally your wife gives birth to a son just as the angels have told you and some unexplained phenomena surrounded the birth. star brighter than usual, 3 men who may or may not be kings came from nowhere bearing gifts, shepherds came praising the child, angels singing in praise in the heavens. at this point its pretty clear in your mind the child is the Son of God as the angel have told you.

so, knowing that your wife just gave birth to the Son of God, would you still have the appetite or the urge to engage your wife in intimacy? even ever?

How do you know what you read actually took place; that it’s not gleanings from the O.T. brought forward to prove a point? Scripture narratives were not written with the same style we use today.
Why do you imply sex is something sinful, to be avoided? That sex between 2 married people is failure in relationship? That it does not give glory to God?
Even if Mary was physically a virgin before the birth of Jesus, and I find no evidence outside of wishful thinking, what evidence is there to prove physical virginity post-birth? Again, wishful thinking?
And does it matter? Spiritual reality is not dependant upon physical condition.
In interpretation of Doctrine the Church Fathers were infallible, in understanding limited.

Marian theology is very much effected by the cult of the Goddess:
2 sects fighting for the right of supremacy and Christianity is an inclusive religion.

 

[panevino]

How do you know what you read actually took place; that it’s not gleanings from the O.T. brought forward to prove a point? Scripture narratives were not written with the same style we use today.
Why do you imply sex is something sinful, to be avoided? That sex between 2 married people is failure in relationship? That it does not give glory to God?
Even if Mary was physically a virgin before the birth of Jesus, and I find no evidence outside of wishful thinking, what evidence is there to prove physical virginity post-birth? Again, wishful thinking?
And does it matter? Spiritual reality is not dependant upon physical condition.
In interpretation of Doctrine the Church Fathers were infallible, in understanding limited.

Marian theology is very much effected by the cult of the Goddess:
2 sects fighting for the right of supremacy and Christianity is an inclusive religion.

i have not read your posts, this one seems to suggest that you dont believe mary was virgin b4 birth. is that correct? not sure if your trying to convince everyone that we need scriptural proof or that you simply dont believe it.

i did not think ‘choy’ or myself (see post #295) are implying that sex is sinful.

there are quite alot of versus that shine a positive light on abstaining from sex for the kingdom, see Matt. 19:11–12, Luke 18:28, 1 cor 7:7, 1 cor 7:32, 1 Cor 7:36 & Ex19:14

we are merely saying that based on these verses that it is not a stretch to believe that mary and joseph refrained from sex.

can you let me know what your thoughts are on my post#295.

 

[Vico]

Kevin Wilcox, you wrote: “Even if Mary was physically a virgin before the birth of Jesus, and I find no evidence outside of wishful thinking, what evidence is there to prove physical virginity post-birth?”

The teaching authority, Magisterium, is embodied in the episcopacy. The Church by consensus fidelium, since the fifth Ecumenical Council (554), has accepted perpetual virginity, so it is dogma. Saint Augustine called denial of ever-virgin a herecy. See Catechism of the Catholic Church 2089 for the definition of heresy as an obstinate post-baptismal denial or an obstinate doubt concerning a truth.

Blessed Pope John Paul II also stated this ever-virgin dogma to a Marian Study Conference in Capua, Italy, on June 10, 1992. Perpetual physical virginity before and after birth.

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/speeches/1992/may/index.htm

Not only Catholic and Orthodox, but the reformers Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli accept the perpetual virginity of Mary.

 

[elzermank]

Virgin - biological or spiritual?
There is no mention in the Scripture of Jesus eating, drinking, urinating or defaecating.
If he was fully human these must have taken place.
There is no mention of Mary having sex with Joseph. She may not have done. Because it is not written it does not mean it did not take place. Does our understanding reflect our view of women, our view of sex?

 

[elzermank]

Firstly, in reply to someone (!) I’ve obviously lost the thread… I do believe there was mention of Jesus eating and drinking. In fact some called him a drunk and a glutton! But that’s beside the point here.

The scriptures don’t tell us everything, they tell us what is important to know. We know Mary was totally (full of grace) and utterly consecrated to God (fiat). We know she was intimately involved with Him from His conception to His death, and on to his Ascension and the coming of the Holy Spirit, and the early church. She was the only one.

The other point I would like to make is that the idea of Mary’s virginity is not a prudish, puritanical kind of thought. It is a matter of her total commitment to God, just as priests and nuns commit their bodies as well as their souls to God, every day. Just, in a way, as husbands and wives commit their bodies exclusively to one another, not to all and sundry. It’s love, shown in the physical world as well as the spiritual. We Christians must never think physical love is somehow bad or dirty. That’s the puritanical, popular culture stuff we hear all the time, and it seeps into our psyche. God said 'be fruitful and multiply!".

I often say to my children to kneel down before they say their prayers. We know we can pray just as well hanging upside down from the chandelier, but the fact is, ‘we begin to praise with our bodies’. The body and soul are intermingled and one influences the other. I position my body to concentrate with my soul. If the soul is sick, the body suffers too, and vice versa. Protestants often criticise the ceremony of the Catholic Church - but God knows we need a physical world too, to help us focus on the spiritual. Anyway, Mary was ALL for God, body and soul.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Kevin,

I think you have caught the very essence of the disucssion. Allow me to highlight your comment

How do you know what you read actually took place; that it’s not gleanings from the O.T. brought forward to prove a point? Scripture narratives were not written with the same style we use today.
Why do you imply sex is something sinful, to be avoided? That sex between 2 married people is failure in relationship? That it does not give glory to God?
Even if Mary was physically a virgin before the birth of Jesus, and I find no evidence outside of wishful thinking, what evidence is there to prove physical virginity post-birth? Again, wishful thinking?
And does it matter? Spiritual reality is not dependant upon physical condition.
In interpretation of Doctrine the Church Fathers were infallible, in understanding limited.

Marian theology is very much effected by the cult of the Goddess:
2 sects fighting for the right of supremacy and Christianity is an inclusive religion.

Just how do we know anything? And, if this is some ‘gleaning from the OT’ … goodness, who knows what other gleanings may be lurking elsewhere in the NT?! No one is saying or implying that sex is sinful or to be avoided - God created sex and said it was good.

Really, this entire area is scientifically UNPROVEABLE - however, somewhere along the line I think you will need to come to terms with the what the teaching authority of the Chruch has said. It really is a requirement to believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary - so, dismissing this doctrine of FAITH as some type of ‘cult of the Goddess’ seems to indicate the path you have chosen for yourself - and it is not the path of Christ’s Church.

Personally, I find your dismissive comment to be an act of incredibly poor judgment and a genuine disappointment coming from someone claiming to be a Catholic.

God bless

 

[tqualey]

Hi, John1,

Thank you.

Hi tqualey,

For a bother in Christ,I will try to fulfill your wish.

First, in response to Vico’s post, I’m in agreement that God chose Mary to give birth and to raise Jesus along with Joseph. I don’t think that God chose Mary as “the means to our Salvation”. Now, as to dismissing anything about any part of the life of Jesus, I most certainly do not! This goes to the point that I’ve made before, just because I don’t think it is really important whether or not Mary remained a virgin after the birth of Jesus, in no way diminishes the respect the I have for her as the mother and parent of our Lord and Savior. Her role, and Joshep’s role as the parents that raised Jesus had to be awesome!

Next, I agree with you that Mary probably holds a special place in the heart of Jesus, and that when she prays/asks for anything Jesus will accomodate her.

Next, I do take a position, I doesn’t make a difference to me whether she remained a virgin or not, because I respect Mary as being blessed by God and the mother of our Lord and Savior. I don’t think that you can positively prove or disprove her perpetual virginity from anything in Scripture.

Next, I do appreciate Mary’s God given role and her obedience to God. I think I’ve already covered that, so there’s no sense in going over it again.

Next, I don’t neccessarily believe all of the traditions taught by the Catholic Church, even though I’m a member of the Catholic Church. As far as speaking for what every protestant church believes or does not believe, I cannot render an opinion because I don’t know. I do know that if any church that follows the bible, can’t help but follow at least some of the traditions handed down from the Apostles, as some are spelled out in Scripture.However, what does the views of theprotestant churches have to do with the original point of the thread? By the way, there’s a lot of disunity inside the Catholic Church? The polls said that almost half of the Catholics in the US voted for Obama! (not going there…ha ha!)

Lastly, I think that as Christian we all have the ability to receive the Holy Spirit, as promised, and to be led by the Holy Spirit. With that said, I also believe that we have the mind of Christ. I don’t believe that we always follow the leading of the Holy Spirit because we also have a carnal nature. Perhaps some people are beter at following the Holy Spirit than others, but I believe that Christians have to go through a “growing” process as they persevere in their faith in Christ. I don’t think that Jesus made any mistakes, or wishes that he had not chosen any of His Apostles. I didn’t mean to infer that you or anyone else is not a “thinking Christian”. For me, when faced with what appears to be a contradiction in what is being taught by men, and what is clearly being stated in Scripture, then I have to pray for guidence from the Holy Spirit and then to research the topic more throughly.

Your wish has been granted, now back to the thread!

God bless

 

[KEVIN_WILCOX]

Conjecture is not the way of Truth.
The idea of Mary’s virginity originated in the apocryphal Book of James. Clement of Alexandria (a Father of the Church) asserted it as authority, others followed.The Council of Trent continued to uphold the virginity of Mary. The dogmatic constitution of the Second Vatican Council (1964) refrained from declaring physical virginity pre- and post- partum an article of faith (because it went against reason?)
Is Mary to be considered both physically and spiritually ever-virgin?

St Augustine saw the transmission of sin through the male. The son of God chose to be born from a virgin because this was the only way a child could enter the world without sin.

In other cultures, some ancient races, virgin birth was considered normal binding material with the spiritual.
Until the last century the thought of automatic arising was normal.

 

[Tomb54]

Ok can someone tell me something about Jewish law of the 1st Century? IS it a sin not to Honor your mother and father? If your Jewish mother was widowed in the 1st century and the eldest son was killed would not the remaining children be **required by the law **to take care of the mother?

I am not in full understanding on how the Jews view this law “Honor your Mother and Father” but if I am right then what Jesus did on the cross would be in violation of Jewish law if he had brothers and sisters to take care of His mother. Please someone with more knowledge help me here.

 

[KEVIN_WILCOX]

Ok can someone tell me something about Jewish law of the 1st Century? IS it a sin not to Honor your mother and father? If your Jewish mother was widowed in the 1st century and the eldest son was killed would not the remaining children be **required by the law **to take care of the mother?

I am not in full understanding on how the Jews view this law “Honor your Mother and Father” but if I am right then what Jesus did on the cross would be in violation of Jewish law if he had brothers and sisters to take care of His mother. Please someone with more knowledge help me here.

There are probably many alive today who hoped sex would result in becoming pregnant.
Fact is, we don’t know if Mary was sexually virginal. So why assert she was?

 

[panevino]

Conjecture is not the way of Truth.
The idea of Mary’s virginity originated in the apocryphal Book of James. Clement of Alexandria (a Father of the Church) asserted it as authority, others followed.The Council of Trent continued to uphold the virginity of Mary. The dogmatic constitution of the Second Vatican Council (1964) refrained from declaring physical virginity pre- and post- partum an article of faith (because it went against reason?)
Is Mary to be considered both physically and spiritually ever-virgin?

St Augustine saw the transmission of sin through the male. The son of God chose to be born from a virgin because this was the only way a child could enter the world without sin.

In other cultures, some ancient races, virgin birth was considered normal binding material with the spiritual.
Until the last century the thought of automatic arising was normal.

I’m still confused as to whether you believe or not that mary was a virgin at the birth?
just in case “Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son…” mat 1:23

regarding after birth…
proto of james is not the only doc that supports it at around 120AD
Saint Hegesippus (110 to 180) also wrote “Symeon, the son of the Lord’s uncle, Clopas, was appointed the next bishop. All proposed him as second bishop because he was a cousin of the Lord.” newadvent.org/fathers/250104.htm

and writtings of Papias ~>115AD newadvent.org/fathers/0125.htm which lists all the bretehren as cousins aligning with what hegesippus wrote/would write.

I dont think there is one single bit of info that anyone could give you that will make you trust the church teaching. it consideration of lots of information that reveals it along with faith in protection that the church has when teaching on moral and faith.

 

[Vico]

Both the Fifth (533) and Sixth (680) Ecumenical Councils declared as dogma, the ever-virgin, before, during, and after giving birth.

Ever-virgin was added to the Creed at the fifth.

See: Mariology: a dogmatic treatise on the Blessed Virgin Mary, mother of God by Joseph Pohle (especially page 97)

 

[KEVIN_WILCOX]

Spiritual or physical virginity?
How does Mary (or any woman) give birth and yet keep an intact hymen?
There is evidence to suggest physical virginity, there is evidence to suggest lack of physical virginity. Church Fathers for and those against (Oregin and Tertullian). Was Mary a physical virgin? No decision can be reached - it is not an article of the Faith.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Kevin,

Chances are, it really is just a matter of perspective…

Maybe a better line of inquiry would be, “How does God keep the entire universe in existence?” or how about … if you are both Scriptural and economic … Matt 10:29 “Aren’t two sparrows sold for a penny…” and Luke 12:6 “Aren’t five sparrows sold for two pennies…” (that means you get a free one! but in eather case God knows about all of them!

So, I guess if God can keep the entire universe together… and know about the lives of low cost sparrows (even the discounted one!) surely, managing the birth of His Divinely Conceived Son so that Mary remained a physical virgin should not be too much of a challenge…don’t you think…

Spiritual or physical virginity?
How does Mary (or any woman) give birth and yet keep an intact hymen?
There is evidence to suggest physical virginity, there is evidence to suggest lack of physical virginity. Church Fathers for and those against (Oregin and Tertullian). Was Mary a physical virgin? No decision can be reached - it is not an article of the Faith.

Seriously, the main argument I have presented is that Christ promised that His Church would never teacher error - His Church declared that Mary was always a virgin - and it is a matter of Faith. Now, you are questioning God’s ability to maintain a piece of tissue to satisfy your need for surity? Really? You are going to have to do better then that…

God bless

 

[Vico]

Kevin Wilcox, you asked: “Spiritual or physical virginity?”

Physical ever-virgin as given by the scriptural definition of virgin. In everything that concerns the integrity of the flesh, is the way Blessed Pope John Paul II put it (translated). *

Luke 1:34 (Rheims): “And Mary said to the angel: How shall this be done, because I know not man?”

She was also pure.

• Read item 6 from the Address of Blessed Pope John Paul II, at the vatican link. (Translate from Italian).

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/speeches/1992/may/documents/hf_jp-ii_spe_19920524_concilio-capua_it.html

 

[KEVIN_WILCOX]

Reconciling the physical with the spiritual and not have it look like we’re chasing the ghost in the machine is a challenge - where do we stop? How is it reconciled in Mary’s mother - Who (and how) could a person be holy enough to carry and give birth to Mary? And what about her mother? And hers?..

Mary’s physical virginity is not an article of the faith.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Kevin,

Mary’s physical virginity IS an article of Faith. Look at this link: catholicapologetics.org/ap080300.htm and stop your head long plunge into error.

Reconciling the physical with the spiritual and not have it look like we’re chasing the ghost in the machine is a challenge - where do we stop? How is it reconciled in Mary’s mother - Who (and how) could a person be holy enough to carry and give birth to Mary? And what about her mother? And hers?..

Mary’s physical virginity is not an article of the faith.

Now, if you have any doubts - then provide your references for Mary’s LACK of virginity. If not - then it probably would be a good idea for you to sit down and be quiet.

God bless

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Honestly, Kevin, the strawmen are getting ridiculous. What ABOUT St. Anne (Mary’s mother)? There would be no need for her to be conceived immaculately. . .

Why you can accept that Jesus Christ, son of God, God Almighty, could be 'born of" Mary, and yet cavil at the idea of her remaining virgin is beyond me. Surely if God could be born of woman He could as easily maintain that woman’s virginity.

What’s that saying again about those who swallow camels yet strain at gnats?

You believe God was born a human being (now there is a difficult belief. . .God made Himself into a finite creature). . .that’s a ‘camel.’

Yet after accepting that big ol’ camel, you somehow can’t accept that He could have been born and His mother maintain her virginity?? As if it’s more difficult to God to do the latter than the former???

 

[Vico]

Kevin Wilcox, you wrote: "Mary’s physical virginity is not an article of the faith. "

You will read in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, 499:

“In fact, Christ’s birth “did not diminish his mother’s virginal integrity but sanctified it.”” (LG 57)

And if you read the text at the link I provided, you read a confirmation of the physical nature. Blessed Pope John Paul II also mentions the historical references:

cf. Second Roman. Lateran., Can. 3: ID Mansi, Sacrorum Conciliorum nova et collectio very large, X, col. 1151; Second Tolet. XVI, Symbolum, Art. 22

anche per quanto concerne l’integrità della carne; (also with regard to integrity of the flesh)

And he explains:

“Affirming the reality of the virginal conception of Christ does not mean that in reference to it, we can provide demonstrable evidence of rationale. In fact, the virginal conception of Christ is a truth revealed by God, that man can accept in virtue of obedience of faith (cf. Rom 16, 26).”

 

[Tomb54]

There are probably many alive today who hoped sex would result in becoming pregnant.
Fact is, we don’t know if Mary was sexually virginal. So why assert she was?

Well if my question can be answered on the Jewish laws aspect then sorry but it would be proof she was virgin even sexually as Jesus did not sin or is that up for debate too?