S
Stylus
Guest
A friend of mine recently told me, that Mary had children after Jesus. I refused to believe but where do people get theories like this, and above all how can I prove them wrong?
- Status
D
desire_the_end
Guest
A curious matter, but not ultimate in its truth. I can’t say that I identify with one view or another.
I wish I could help you about that though. It seems to affect your faith if Mary did conceive of another son, but it doesn’t bother me at all and I see no reason that it should bother you so much.
Godbless.
Tony
I wish I could help you about that though. It seems to affect your faith if Mary did conceive of another son, but it doesn’t bother me at all and I see no reason that it should bother you so much.
Godbless.
Tony
E
ElizabethJoy
Guest
Don’t let this stuff shake you - the Catholic Church has been answering slander and lies for 2000 years. 
Your questions are well-answered right here on Catholic Answers.
catholic.com/library/Brethren_of_the_Lord.asp
catholic.com/library/Mary_Ever_Virgin.asp
catholic.com/library/Immaculate_Conception_and_Assum.asp
Your questions are well-answered right here on Catholic Answers.
catholic.com/library/Brethren_of_the_Lord.asp
catholic.com/library/Mary_Ever_Virgin.asp
catholic.com/library/Immaculate_Conception_and_Assum.asp
C
CARose
Guest
Hi Stylus,
You are correct in your understanding that Mary did not have any children other than Christ. You are right to be indignant at the insistance of such an error. The womb which carried Jesus was specifically reserved for the Son of God and none other. Just as the Tabernacle at Church does not hold bread for tomorrows dinner, nor is the Chalice used to serve wine at dinner, sacred objects are reserved for their sacred purpose.
This is the Catholic understanding of Mary.
Those who believe that Mary had other children get this from scripture that refers to the brothers of Jesus. These are brethren of Christ, just as we say we are all brothers in Christ. I may be getting this wrong, so those of you reading, please don’t jump down my throat if I refer to the wrong language, but I believe it’s Arameic that doesn’t have a word for Cousin, it may be Greek. So, those of Christ’s family who were present with his mother were not his brothers, they were his family, as in cousins.
It is also possible that they were his step brothers, as it is possible that Joseph was a widower with children when he married Mary. The Church has not stated definitively on this matter, as it has little bearing on Christ.
I hope this helps,
CARose
You are correct in your understanding that Mary did not have any children other than Christ. You are right to be indignant at the insistance of such an error. The womb which carried Jesus was specifically reserved for the Son of God and none other. Just as the Tabernacle at Church does not hold bread for tomorrows dinner, nor is the Chalice used to serve wine at dinner, sacred objects are reserved for their sacred purpose.
This is the Catholic understanding of Mary.
Those who believe that Mary had other children get this from scripture that refers to the brothers of Jesus. These are brethren of Christ, just as we say we are all brothers in Christ. I may be getting this wrong, so those of you reading, please don’t jump down my throat if I refer to the wrong language, but I believe it’s Arameic that doesn’t have a word for Cousin, it may be Greek. So, those of Christ’s family who were present with his mother were not his brothers, they were his family, as in cousins.
It is also possible that they were his step brothers, as it is possible that Joseph was a widower with children when he married Mary. The Church has not stated definitively on this matter, as it has little bearing on Christ.
I hope this helps,
CARose
A
awalt
Guest
I heard the Catholic Answers Live discussion on Marian Dogma, and I learned a few things I was fuzzy on:
“Dogma” is the highest level of teaching authority the Church can bestow - higher than doctrine issued by the Magisterium.
There are 4 Marian Dogmas, of which Mary’s virginity before, during, and after the birth of Christ is one (she is the Mather of God, her IMmaculate Conception, and her Assumption are the other 3).
There is no higher truth than Mary’s virginity.
“Dogma” is the highest level of teaching authority the Church can bestow - higher than doctrine issued by the Magisterium.
There are 4 Marian Dogmas, of which Mary’s virginity before, during, and after the birth of Christ is one (she is the Mather of God, her IMmaculate Conception, and her Assumption are the other 3).
There is no higher truth than Mary’s virginity.
L
Larry_B
Guest
Individuals get theories like this from their own private interpretation of scripture. You can only show them what the Church teaches and why based on Scripture and Sacred Tradition. Pray for their conversion. The Holy Spirit can move hearts.
Larry
J
Jaded27
Guest
How do you explain Jesus preaching at the temple when he was young and Joseph, Mary, and his brothers and sisters coming to get him?
I am not trying to antagonize you, but as someone above said, why would this shake your faith so much? Mary is still the mother of Jesus whether she had other children or not. I’d just avoid arguing with people who are going to have their own beliefs. If your friend believes that, let them. There is no need to “prove a friend wrong”. What is the point on something like that? It’s not as if they said “there is no god” or something.
I am not trying to antagonize you, but as someone above said, why would this shake your faith so much? Mary is still the mother of Jesus whether she had other children or not. I’d just avoid arguing with people who are going to have their own beliefs. If your friend believes that, let them. There is no need to “prove a friend wrong”. What is the point on something like that? It’s not as if they said “there is no god” or something.
B
buffalo
Guest
E
ElizabethJoy
Guest
Where do you find that? I’ve never heard of a version of the temple story which included brothers and sisters. In fact, Catholic apologists turn to this story as a bit of evidence that He did not have brothers and sisters.
There is no Biblical evidence that Jesus had full biological brothers and sisters - there is Biblical evidence that he did not.
What does it matter? It matters a great deal, because if you prove that Jesus had brothers and sisters, then it would prove that Mary did not remain ever-virgin, and thus, the Church would have taught error.
Jesus told us that His church would be protected from teaching error. If the Catholic church has taught error, then it is not Christ’s church, is it?
J
Jaded27
Guest
Ah yes. Can’t have that now can we?
Kidding, kidding.
E
ElizabethJoy
Guest
No, we can’t - not unless it’s the truth.Ah yes. Can’t have that now can we?
Kidding, kidding.
Okay.But, seriously, if it weren’t a big deal, why would so many protestant denominations spend the amounts of time and energy that they do on attacking the Catholic dogma of ever-virgin Mary?
I think they see it as a weak link, theologically - all they have to do is break one link, right?
J
Jaded27
Guest
Honestly can’t answer that one for ya. I don’t spend an exorbitant (sp. sorry) amount of time on it. Just happened to notice the post, thought I’d comment, the usual.
V
Vincent1560
Guest
Look, I am an evangelical and believe Mary had other children. However it is important for you to realise that regardless of wether you believe in Mary’s perpetual virginty you should not be given to doubting Christ. Paul warns of giving into foolish disputes. If opening yourself to the possibility that papal authority is not infallible will shake your faith in Jesus (which I fear by your post) then be fully convinced of the Cathlic postion and avoid people and places who will challenge you in this area. Initially when I read this thread I was tempted to post all the reasons why I believe Mary had other children, but I realized that that was my pride and desire to be shown right talking, and would not be charitable to you. I have Protestant friends in similar circmstances. They believe that evolution in any form is incompatible with their faith and thus it is not good for them to sign up for biology courses and be in environments likely to stumble them until they get more secure in their faith. My advice to you would be to pray and read God’s word until you are fully convinced of its divine origin and have a faith in its author that is rock solid and will not be swayed by your conclusions on thological issues tangential to salvation (i.e evolution, papal infallibility, Mary’s perpetual virginity etc.) God Bless I will pray for you, and stay in the word!
N
Nan_S
Guest
Having exhaused the Holy Bible looking for scriptures that say these “brothers” of the Lord were the sons of Mary, I’ve turned to the writings of the early church and still can’t find any evidence of it. I was sure that if it was true, someone would have mentioned it. Perhaps you know someplace else I can look?
I have to admire your intense focus on the core of Christian Truth - absolute faith in Jesus - to the exclusion of anything that could be a distraction. I became convicted of that same Christian Truth myself many years ago, and still am today.
However, I still found that the Holy Bible was often confusing, appearing contradictory at times. I certainly did not want to subject myself to divine judgment for misinterpreting God’s word and being too arrogant to admit it. So I opened myself up to the guidance of the Holy Spirit, questioned the ideas and interpretations I had taken for granted, and tested them for proof.
Being myself unable to understand Greek or Hebrew, I went in search of those who could, who had made it their life’s work to understand God’s word, and who were taught by others who had also made it their life’s work to the exclusion of all other pursuits.
And I found what I was seeking - here in the Catholic Church. This was the only church that could consistently defend its teachings from scripture. This church, alone amidst all others, never ran or quickly changed the subject when asked, “What do you teach about the Holy Bible and why? How do you explain these apparent contradictions? What else do teach and can you defend those positions from scripture and history?”
I am now enjoying the Wedding Feast of the Lamb, the original Church founded by Jesus Christ Himself, in all its glorious richness, and I will not sit by and fast. Yes, I have accepted the various doctrines of the Catholic Church which trouble so many of our Protestant bretheren, because when I demanded that they be tested and proven, scripture and history bore good fruit.
Luke 5:33-34, 39 And they said to him, “The disciples of John fast often and offer prayers, and so do the disciples of the Pharisees, but yours eat and drink.” And Jesus said to them, “Can you make wedding guests fast while the bridegroom is with them? … And no one after drinking old wine desires new; for he says, ‘The old is good.’”
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
V
Vincent1560
Guest
Nan S:
PM sent
E
ElizabethJoy
Guest
I didn’t say that you spent a much time or effort on disproving the dogma of ever-virgin Mary. I was speaking of protestants in general, so my apologies if it seemed that I was speaking of you, personally.
I would like to repeat my question as to where you found scripture that says that Jesus’ parents and brothers and sisters found Him in the temple teaching.
M
Mystophilus
Guest
I am going to disagree with you. I do not want you to take this as a personal attack, nor as an attempt to damage your faith in Mary, the Church, or - most importantly - God.
I think that you to look at the text and read what it says:
While Jesus was still talking to the crowd, his mother and brothers stood outside, wanting to speak to him. Someone told him, “Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to speak to you.” (Matthew 12:46-7, also in Mark 3:31-4 and Luke 8:19-21)
Coming to his hometown, he began teaching the people in their synagogue, and they were amazed. “Where did this man get this wisdom and these miraculous powers?” they asked. “Isn’t this the carpenter’s son? Isn’t his mother’s name Mary, and aren’t his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas? Aren’t all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all these things?” And they took offense at him. (Matthew 13:54-7)
I saw none of the other apostles, only James, the Lord’s brother. (Galatians 1:19)
While some within the Catholic Church claim that these people so mentioned are not really the children of Mary, there is no support within the text for such a reading. This idea has to come from outside and be superimposed onto the reading of the Bible as an a priori assumption.
Other contributors to this thread have said that they have not found statements from early Christian writers which say that the people mentioned were Mary’s children. What ought to be pointed out is that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence: you cannot prove that it does not exist by your failure to find it.
Personally, I see no reason why any early church writer should have made any mention of it, when it was clearly defined by Matthew, Mark, Luke and Paul. However, the Catholic Encyclopedia lists a few references for the idea that the people mentioned were not actually Mary’s children; I will go through them and get back to you.
L
Liberian
Guest
Stylus,
First I have to ask, what do you mean by “prove”? Something like this is going to come down to what one person said versus what another person said, or else you will have to infer from theological considerations. Everybody involved died almost two thousand years ago.
Theological considerations include the idea that Mary is the Spouse of the Holy Spirit, and I doubt that God would put up with somebody else trying to have relations with His wife.
- Liberian
M
Mystophilus
Guest
A list of early Christian writers who believed in the Perpetual Virginity of Mary (from here):
The Protoevangelium of James [A.D. ?120-150?]
Origen [A.D. 248]
Hilary of Poitiers [A.D. 354]
Athanasius [A.D. 360]
Epiphanius of Salamis [A.D. 375]
Jerome [A.D. 383]
Didymus the Blind [A.D. 386]
Ambrose of Milan [A.D. 388]
Pope Siricius I [A.D. 392]
Augustine [in three texts, A.D. 401, 411, 428]
Leporius [A.D. 426]
Cyril of Alexandria [A.D. 430]
Pope Leo I [A.D. 450].
That leaves us with a choice, then. Either we read the C1st writers in isolation (sola scriptura: Mary had other children), or we accept the C2nd-5th ideas as modifying our reading of the Gospels (tradition: Mary did not have other children).
You’d think that, with the number of times that I have been wrong, I would be more used to it. Stupid humanity.
The Protoevangelium of James [A.D. ?120-150?]
Origen [A.D. 248]
Hilary of Poitiers [A.D. 354]
Athanasius [A.D. 360]
Epiphanius of Salamis [A.D. 375]
Jerome [A.D. 383]
Didymus the Blind [A.D. 386]
Ambrose of Milan [A.D. 388]
Pope Siricius I [A.D. 392]
Augustine [in three texts, A.D. 401, 411, 428]
Leporius [A.D. 426]
Cyril of Alexandria [A.D. 430]
Pope Leo I [A.D. 450].
That leaves us with a choice, then. Either we read the C1st writers in isolation (sola scriptura: Mary had other children), or we accept the C2nd-5th ideas as modifying our reading of the Gospels (tradition: Mary did not have other children).
You’d think that, with the number of times that I have been wrong, I would be more used to it. Stupid humanity.
- Status