Mary and her Virginity

[erigby27]

If you read the Protoevangelium of James (a work by an early church father, written less than sixty years after the death of the Blessed Virgin), you will learn much more about the life of Mary.

When Mary’s birth was prophesied to St. Anne, Anne was so grateful to God (as she had been unable to conceive) that she vowed to raise Mary in utter devotion to the Lord and to present her to the temple, where she would become a consecrated virgin (rare but not unheard of) and live life perpetually undefiled. When she turned twelve years old (I take thi to mean that at this age she started menstruating), her elders concerned themselves with finding her a protector- someone who would guard her virginity. They determined that the best option would be to find a man who was an older widower- Joseph was perfect because he already had children. When the angel came to her, she was surprised at his claim that she would conceive for two reasons: First, she had never had relations with a man, and Second, she planned never to have relations with a man.

 

[twopekinguys]

If you read the Protoevangelium of James (a work by an early church father, written less than sixty years after the death of the Blessed Virgin), you will learn much more about the life of Mary.

When Mary’s birth was prophesied to St. Anne, Anne was so grateful to God (as she had been unable to conceive) that she vowed to raise Mary in utter devotion to the Lord and to present her to the temple, where she would become a consecrated virgin (rare but not unheard of) and live life perpetually undefiled. When she turned twelve years old (I take thi to mean that at this age she started menstruating), her elders concerned themselves with finding her a protector- someone who would guard her virginity. They determined that the best option would be to find a man who was an older widower- Joseph was perfect because he already had children. When the angel came to her, she was surprised at his claim that she would conceive for two reasons: First, she had never had relations with a man, and Second, she planned never to have relations with a man.

Excellent information:thumbsup:

 

[GodIsGracious]

If I said that I didn’t buy another car until I sold my old one, it wouldn’t make any sense to conclude that I didn’t own another car for the rest of life.

It also doesn’t make sense to conclude that you DID own another car for the rest of your life either.

 

[GodIsGracious]

Okay, I want to ask this question at RCIA, but I have been quiet so far. I don’t want this to turn into a free for all as my question about James did in the other thread. So please keep the responses specific to the question if we can.

I understand and have faith that Mary was a virgin mother to Jesus. The church teaches us that she remained a virgin and this seems very important to the church. I am not disagreeing with this, just trying to understand more clearly.

The questions are…
Where in the scripture does it imply that she remained a virgin throughout her life?
Why is it so important that she have remained so?

I hope your questions have been answered for you. May I suggest that next time, ask your questions in “Apologetics.” Here in the non-Catholic forums you’ll be deterred from the Truth. This site isn’t immune to evil doings.

 

[Good_Fella]

That’s not entirely correct. There has always been the debate on this, especially when the Scriptures tell us otherwise.

The Scriptures can’t tell us otherwise. Scripture comes from Tradition and must be interpreted in light of it. Meanwhile the Church has never debated over the question of Mary’s chastity. Individuals like Helvidius may have challenged the traditional doctrine of Mary’s perpetual virginity, and were soundly refuted, but that’s as far as it goes.

PAX :harp:

 

[adstrinity]

That’s a ridiculous thing to say and you know it. The issue at hand never suggests that Jesus is anything other than God. The Scriptures prove that.

But, do YOU believe Jesus is God, the Second Person of the Trinity? It is a very legitmate question because if you don’t believe it, then we’re talking past each other.

 

[Oneheartway]

“I hope your questions have been answered for you. May I suggest that next time, ask your questions in “Apologetics.” Here in the non-Catholic forums you’ll be deterred from the Truth. This site isn’t immune to evil doings.”

I ask here to get the views of others and sometimes they are able to point me directly to my answer. I don’t think the debate itself is an issue.

I am willing to accept that she was a virgin when she concieved Jesus. I am willing to accept she remained one throughout her life, but I don’t think it is sacrilege to ask so I do. And after reading the replies, I am willing to accept that it really does not matter if she remained one or not. She was the mother of Jesus and therefore deserves some amount of reverence from us. St. Joseph as well, maybe less so since he was not a direct relation, but I am sure Jesus revered him as his stepfather.

I also realize that asking questions here may recieve responses that are tending me away from the truth. But I want to hear the detractors as well as the supporters. I have experienced christianity in many different churches, whether they be baptist, methodist, lutheran, presbetyerian (sp), non-denominational, and catholic. I do not think the teachings of Jesus are affected whether we believe Mary to be a perpetual virgin or not. As someone said, we ask for Mary to pray for us… we are not praying to Mary. I personally pray to Jesus and will probably always do so. I will show dutiful respect to Mary and Joseph as I should, but I do not need their intervention on my behalf since god is omniscient and will know of my prayers to him.

I suppose it goes back to what my priest said, “97% of what we (christians) believe is the same, and the other 3% won’t keep you out of heaven”.

So I ask these questions…
Whether James was the true brother of Jesus?
What happened to Joseph?
And this question as well…
To get answers and hopefully references in scripture so I can read them myself.

Do the answers really matter. If Mary was not a perpetual virgin or if James was brother to Jesus, does it really affect our beliefs? I don’t think so.

The real answer to my question here is that we do not have a biblical passage to prove she was or was not a perpetual virgin. We do not have a biblical passage to prove that James was not really Jesus’s brother, step or otherwise. And as I am beginning to learn, it does not matter anyway.

 

[wmscott]

Nowhere in Scripture does it say that Mary remained a virgin her whole life nor does it speak to any of the Catholic dogmas regarding Mary. They must admit that these teachings come from their Magisterium and not the Scriptures.

It is important for Catholics to believe that she remained a virgin to be able to balance all of their other beliefs about Mary although Scripture never even hints toward this.

Sellers1, I find that your attitude and comments towards the Blessed mother and Catholics to be offensive and rude. Throughout this entire thread, so far, you have provided nothing but one verse from Sacred Scripture and you took it out of context. Twopekinguys provided you with the correct context of that passage. The burden of proof is on you to come up with compelling evidence to support you position. All you have done is spew your personal opinion and your fallible personal interpretation of Sacred Scripture.

 

[Richard_Kastner]

The Scriptures can’t tell us otherwise. Scripture comes from Tradition and must be interpreted in light of it.

This may be off topic, but I was just browsing through this thread and I noticed this statement and I just had to say something.

To the best of my knowledge the tradition of the CC is taken from the magisterium, (church hierarchy) and the early church fathers all of which are men and because they are men are sinners and prone to err. Scripture while written down by men is the divinely inspired word of God, who is not a sinner and never errs. My question to you is, if scripture is the word of God and tradition is the word of man, how could the word of God possibly be subject to the word of man?

 

[Jerom3]

I don’t believe anyone would argue with you that Mary was a virgin when she conceived Jesus. But as to her remaining a virgin, the scriptures simply don’t support that and no one believed that she remained a virgin until the third century. Certainly the writers of the gospels and epistles didn’t believe she remained a virgin as they referred to the brothers and sisters of Jesus in the scriptures. Furthermore, there is only conjecture that Joseph had been married before and already had children. Nothing supports that at all.

Mary never took a solemn vow of virginity as some say. Nowhere in scripture does it say that. In fact she was betrothed to Joseph and would have married him whether Jesus was born or not.

When asking those questions, read the scriptures and see exactly what they say. That is the only way to find the truth. Where are these “traditions” written down? Nowhere. We all know that anything passed by “word of mouth” will soon be distorted and that is why the scriptures say that they are written so that we will know the truth. Nothing spread by mouth can be trusted. Ask your trainers where these 'traditions" are written down so that one might know what they are? Could they be talking of the catechisms that were written hundreds of years later? Ask yourself why there is no written record of any of these traditions but instead plenty of writings of the early church fathers and they most all say that is a tradition is not found in scripture it is invalid and not true. In addition, virtually every verse of scripture in the NT is repeated by the early church fathers in their writings. Go to the CCEL website and read all of them.

When it comes to James, the Lord’s brother, ask yourself why it is always written that way? If James is merely a “brother in Christ” then why isn’t the term used anytime anyone else is mentioned in scripture. Peter talks of Paul but doesn’t call Paul the brother of the Lord but Paul calls James the Lord’s brother. Why would he call him that?

Ignatius is an early church father, born in the first century and died in the second. He was a disciple of John and in a letter to John, he mentions going to visit John and Mary, the Lord’s mother and comments on what he has heard of James. He says he has been told that James looks just like Jesus and looks as if they came from the same womb. Others have told him that when he looks at James, he is seeing Jesus.

We at least do have scripture saying that James was brother of the Lord, and more scripture saying that Jesus had siblings. No one can take that away.

Nothing would help you like a good study of the early church fathers and what they who were there in the beginning believed.

You also asked what happened to Joseph. God did not reveal that to us. Last we hear of him, he is with Mary, Jesus and others. We don’t know anymore than that. We also know however that he was probably about the same age or a little older than Mary and was a good Jew. Good Jews who are married are very faithful to God and their family and to think that Joseph and Mary would have forgone the marriage bed, instead of utilizing it fully and making children as God commanded, as all good Jews do would be a little disenginuous.

I’m like you. It really isn’t important whether Mary remained a virgin although scripture tells us different. What is important is that scripture tells us there is only one mediator between man and God and that is Jesus Christ. To manufacture another one would be blasphemous. We are also told to pray to God only. No one else will hear our prayers.

Good luck in your search for the truth but be sure to search dilligently and everywhere…

JC

 

[Jerom3]

If you read the Protoevangelium of James (a work by an early church father, written less than sixty years after the death of the Blessed Virgin), you will learn much more about the life of Mary.

When Mary’s birth was prophesied to St. Anne, Anne was so grateful to God (as she had been unable to conceive) that she vowed to raise Mary in utter devotion to the Lord and to present her to the temple, where she would become a consecrated virgin (rare but not unheard of) and live life perpetually undefiled. When she turned twelve years old (I take thi to mean that at this age she started menstruating), her elders concerned themselves with finding her a protector- someone who would guard her virginity. They determined that the best option would be to find a man who was an older widower- Joseph was perfect because he already had children. When the angel came to her, she was surprised at his claim that she would conceive for two reasons: First, she had never had relations with a man, and Second, she planned never to have relations with a man.

Would you actually believe that?

This book could not have been written by James, the Lord’s brother. He was martyred prior to 70 AD. This book is pseudepigraphical. Things mentioned in it came from the Septuagint rather than the Hebrew Masoetic Text and is not to be trusted. It was written around 150 AD long after James and Mary were both dead.

Scholars believe it was written specifically to embellish the events surrounding Mary in the gospels and for no other reason.

Origen of Alexandria is the first to mention it in the third century. He says the text is of “dubious, recent appearance” and was written to make the claim that Joseph had been married prior and had children. There is absolutely no truth accepted by any scholars to this writing. It is simply wistful thinking to support the false claims.

 

[dpgreen]

Sellers1 - in order to remain in meaningful dialogue it would be helpful if you stopped telling contributors that their arguments are weak and putting forward one-liners that prove nothing for your side.

The bible does tell us that Mary remained a virgin when she exclaimed that she “knew not man”. In ancient times that would mean that she had a vow of virginity, which was not uncommon in those times. Fr Sippo, has a paper on this very subject which I will endeavour to find a link to and post to you. Perhaps we need to get our heads out of the 21st century and get them into ancient times. Please avail yourself with some good material which Catholic Answers can provide. I say it is very important whether we believe in the Marian doctrines. I think Tim Staples CD set explains this very well. So if your journey to the CC is to be fully complete, please take the time to know as much as you can. Ignorance can be a problem, particularly when debating with ‘bible-Christians’.

Sellers1 - the early church was the Catholic Church. They believed in the Eucharist, infant baptism, priesthood, MARY and so on. How do you know that the bible you have is the bible Jesus intended us to have. There were several canons being tossed around at the time of the early church. It wasn’t until the 4th century that the Church defined the canon of scripture. In fact, in the NT when Jesus was quoting from the OT He used the Septuagint version, which coincidentally contained all the books of the OT that the Catholic Church have, eg Maccabbees. The Protestant church has removed them.

 

[jpaul1953]

“I hope your questions have been answered for you. May I suggest that next time, ask your questions in “Apologetics.” Here in the non-Catholic forums you’ll be deterred from the Truth. This site isn’t immune to evil doings.”

I ask here to get the views of others and sometimes they are able to point me directly to my answer. I don’t think the debate itself is an issue.

I am willing to accept that she was a virgin when she concieved Jesus. I am willing to accept she remained one throughout her life, but I don’t think it is sacrilege to ask so I do. And after reading the replies, I am willing to accept that it really does not matter if she remained one or not. She was the mother of Jesus and therefore deserves some amount of reverence from us. St. Joseph as well, maybe less so since he was not a direct relation, but I am sure Jesus revered him as his stepfather.

I also realize that asking questions here may recieve responses that are tending me away from the truth. But I want to hear the detractors as well as the supporters. I have experienced christianity in many different churches, whether they be baptist, methodist, lutheran, presbetyerian (sp), non-denominational, and catholic. I do not think the teachings of Jesus are affected whether we believe Mary to be a perpetual virgin or not. As someone said, we ask for Mary to pray for us… we are not praying to Mary. I personally pray to Jesus and will probably always do so. I will show dutiful respect to Mary and Joseph as I should, but I do not need their intervention on my behalf since god is omniscient and will know of my prayers to him.

I suppose it goes back to what my priest said, “97% of what we (christians) believe is the same, and the other 3% won’t keep you out of heaven”.

So I ask these questions…
Whether James was the true brother of Jesus?
What happened to Joseph?
And this question as well…
To get answers and hopefully references in scripture so I can read them myself.

Do the answers really matter. If Mary was not a perpetual virgin or if James was brother to Jesus, does it really affect our beliefs? I don’t think so.

The real answer to my question here is that we do not have a biblical passage to prove she was or was not a perpetual virgin. We do not have a biblical passage to prove that James was not really Jesus’s brother, step or otherwise. And as I am beginning to learn, it does not matter anyway.

Hi Oneheartway,

What matters is the truth. Being that Christ himself said that Simon Keifas (Peter) is the rock and whatever is held bound or loosed will be accepted by Christ and Heaven, the Church can make these infallable statements through the power granted the Popes.

The early Church fathers and the early Protestants all believed in her perpetual virginity. It’s not the point of the importance of her remaining a virgin, but the reality in the truth.

Every Catholic doctrine and dogma not clearly found in the Bible, Protestants protest. The rights to the truth were past on to St Peter and since Christ did not return yet, the succession continues along with the right to decide truths of the Church.

Many Protestants say you must repeat the sinner’s prayer and be rebaptized to receive an irrevocable salvation. Where is that in the Bible (they say John 3:16 …where in that verse does it say what they make a convert say). And, who gave the Protestants the authority to make that call since they broke from the Church who has the authority to make that call on all matters of faith…They themselves gave the right to they themselves. Well, isn’t that convenient. At least we got Matt 16:15-20. That’s a heck of a lot more than they have to make claim on who has the right.

The Church was searching for the truth at the time. They should of had no reason to falsify any doctrines/dogmas since the Church was making the original claim, not protesting one to deny the doctrines/dogmas.

May God guide us always.

jpaul1953

 

[Sellers1]

Sellers1, I find that your attitude and comments towards the Blessed mother and Catholics to be offensive and rude. Throughout this entire thread, so far, you have provided nothing but one verse from Sacred Scripture and you took it out of context. Twopekinguys provided you with the correct context of that passage. The burden of proof is on you to come up with compelling evidence to support you position. All you have done is spew your personal opinion and your fallible personal interpretation of Sacred Scripture.

Aw no way man, not so fast The burden of proof is yours my friend. You have proven nothing in so far as all you claim about Mary. I told you that the Mary of the Bible and the Mary of Catholic theology resemble nothing of each other and you nor anyone else on your side of the issue has refuted it. And my fallible interpretation is no less prudent than your fallible interpretation. Sorry pal, you cannot continue to side step Scripture and claim things to be true that are in contrast to Scripture. Try again.

 

[Sellers1]

Sellers1 - in order to remain in meaningful dialogue it would be helpful if you stopped telling contributors that their arguments are weak

If the shoe fits

If you are going to throw things like this around, at least back them up. I gave you Scripture and you gave me more of your rhetoric which cannot be proven because it is contrary to Scripture. Show me. That’s all, show me. Mary assumed into Heaven, Mary always virgin, Mary immaculately conceived, just show me, that’s all.

 

[Sellers1]

This may be off topic, but I was just browsing through this thread and I noticed this statement and I just had to say something.

To the best of my knowledge the tradition of the CC is taken from the magisterium, (church hierarchy) and the early church fathers all of which are men and because they are men are sinners and prone to err. Scripture while written down by men is the divinely inspired word of God, who is not a sinner and never errs. My question to you is, if scripture is the word of God and tradition is the word of man, how could the word of God possibly be subject to the word of man?

Good question. Too bad you won’t get an honest answer.

 

[Sellers1]

But, do YOU believe Jesus is God, the Second Person of the Trinity? It is a very legitmate question because if you don’t believe it, then we’re talking past each other.

It’s not the point and you know that.

 

[Lmray61]

I have a thought; In Mathew 1:25 wouldn’t it have been more logical to insert the word “after” following the word “until” saying “until after” if they meant she had relations or did that word exist then? I’m guessing it probably was left out for a reason if it was in their language…but just a thought

 

[Guyonthestreet]

I ‘‘get’’ that Catholics believe Mary was a virgin and remained a virgin all her life.

I ‘‘get’’ that some protestant branches/individuals/other faiths don’t believe this and believe that Mary had marital relations with Joseph and had other children.

What I don’t get is why anyone even gives Mary’s virginity a second thought. Or even a first thought.

When I see an icon or picture of Mary, I remember she is the mother of God, and I think ‘‘Wow’’.

I see a woman who was hard working, faithful, virtuous, loving, who raised up a son who would be the salvation of all mankind.

I never once think about her virginity or not. In fact, it kinda feels a bit disrespectful and yukky to even think about it.

Why is it important whether Mary remained a virgin or not??

 

[Primox]

Where in the scripture does it imply that she remained a virgin throughout her life?

Scripture may be, at best, ambiguous about whether or not Mary remained a virgin. There certainly isn’t any convincing reason to believe otherwise. When we can’t look to scripture for absolution, we can look to what the early church believed: that Mary was rollin’ like olive oil: virginal

Why is it so important that she have remained so?

It may not necessarily be important for any reason other than that it’s the truth, and of course, we want to abide in truth.