Mary & Perpetual Virginity

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cruxis117
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Cruxis117

Guest
I’m discussing with a Protestant the Perpetual Virginity of Mary. The Protestant is claiming that the Greek word for cousin was used in Colossians 4:10, and because it wasn’t used in Matthew 13:55, or where it speaks about James being the brother of Jesus, then Mary must have been the mother of James. Can anyone help me on this exegesis, and the perpetual virginity in general?
 
Greetings in the Lord Jesus Christ!

Here are my thoughts as a general help: Mary Ever Virgin.

A couple of additional thoughts from Augustine:

“Her virginity also itself was on this account more pleasing and accepted, in that it was not that Christ being conceived in her, rescued it beforehand from a husband who would violate it, Himself to preserve it; but, before He was conceived, chose it, already dedicated to God, as that from which to be born. This is shown by the words which Mary spoke in answer to the Angel announcing to her her conception; ‘How,’ says she, ‘shall this be, seeing I know not a man?’ (Luke 1:34) Which assuredly she would not say, unless she had before vowed herself unto God as a virgin” (St. Augustine, Of Holy Virginity).

“Didn’t the Virgin Mary do the will of the Father? I mean, she believed by faith, she conceived by faith, she was chosen to be the one from whom salvation in the very midst of the human race would be born for us, she was created by Christ before Christ was created in her. Yes, of course, holy Mary did the will of the Father. And therefore it means more for Mary to have been a disciple of Christ than to have been the mother of Christ. It means more for her, an altogether greater blessing, to have been Christ’s disciple than to have been Christ’s mother… So that is why Mary, too, is blessed, because she heard the word of God and kept it. She kept truth safe in her mind even better than she kept flesh safe in her womb” (St. Augustine, Sermon 72/A, 7).

Her virginity links her with the image of the Church, whom Paul “betrothed… to one husband, to present… as a pure virgin to Christ” (2 Corinthians 11:2). Her motherhood of the disciples does this as well (cf. John 19:26-27 and Revelation 12:17). Seeing Mary as the prototype of the Church and as the Mother of the Church is beneficial to understanding the manner of her salvation and discipleship. Her perpetual virginity, being a bodily sign of her “sincere and pure devotion to Christ” (2 Corinthians 11:3), is a sign to us that what Paul was striving to bring about in the hearts of those to whom he wrote was already accomplished in Mary from the beginning of her life and preserved forever. She is in a special way the virgin “who follow the Lamb wherever He goes” (Revelation 14:4).

My personal faith is that James relates to Jesus as a step-brother, rather than as a cousin. This may help your friend with the noted distinctive usages of brother and cousin.

With love in Christ,
Pete

Help John Bugay
 
Here’s the thing. There are two James who are mentioned in Scripture. There is "James " the brother of John, whose father is Zebedee, and James who is called the brother of the Lord --whose father is ALPHEUS. Not Joseph.

Mary is mentioned in Scripture as the wife of Joseph, the carpenter. She is never mentioned as the wife of Zebedee or the wife of Alpheus.

So how can James be the brother of the Lord? James’ mother is not Mary and his father is not Joseph.

Now, Alpheus could be the brother of Joseph. He could be the brother-in-law of Mary (married to a sister). He could be a nephew of Joseph (or even Mary) or a cousin of either. Any one of those relationships could have led to Alpheus’ son being called a ‘brother’ to the Lord.
 
The word used is in a quotation, in the language they were speaking, there was no word for cousin or brother/sister in law. You see many examples in the OT of cousins and other relatives calling each other “brother”.

If there had actually been other members of Jesus’ family, He would not have given St John to be her son when He was dying on the cross, as she would have had other children to care for her.
 
Let’s not forget that 99% of the protestant reformers believed in Mary’s Perpetual Virginity!
 
As a Catholic specifically, and a Christian in a more general way, Mary’s perpetual virginity is one of the least insane things I am expected to believe.
 
It really astonishes me, the lengths that some Protestants go to to argue against Mary’s perpetual virginity. I say this because this doctrine is really an “end of the line” doctrine. In the Catholic context, it doesn’t really imply much, at least on its own. In fact, thousands of people since her time have remained virgins their entire life.

Similarly, in the Protestant context, I cannot think of a single way that their theology would be forced to change if any of them ever decided to accept her perpetual virginity. There seems to be no impetus whatsoever, other than to say that she was not special or different from any average person in any way.
 
There are many simple arguments which prove or help prove that Jesus didn’t have brothers. Taken together, they form a reasonably secure argument. A few are below.

–

In Luke 2:41-51, when Mary and Joseph take Jesus to the temple at the age of 12, it is clear that Jesus is an only child. If Mary and Jospeh had other children after Jesus, whey did they wait at least 12 years to have the second child? Given the culture, the fact Mary couldn’t fill a perscription for birth control pills down at the local pharmacy, and the argument by some that Jesus had up to five siblings, does this not seem incredibly odd?

–

The argument that use of the words adelphos (singular) and adelphoi (plural) in scripture must always mean literal brother(s) - siblings from the same mother - does not hold water in even the most cursory glance at the use of the words in the greek texts.

As for you, do not be called ‘Rabbi.’ You have but one teacher, and you are all brothers. (Matthew 23:8)

And stretching out his hand toward his disciples, he said, "Here are my mother and my brothers. For whoever does the will of my heavenly Father is my brother, and sister, and mother." (Matthew 12:49-50)

In both of the passages quoted above, the word used is adelphos/adelphoi. Neither of these refers to a sibling from the same mother. The same word is used many other times throughout the New Testament to signify a brotherly relationship other than siblings from the same mother. The fact that anepsios (cousin) was not used in Matthew 13:55 proves nothing. If I call my La-Z-Boy a “Chair”, that does not disprove that it is a recliner nor does it turn it into a bar stool.

–

John’s Gosple has Mary, the mother of Jesus at the foot of the cross during the crucifixion. Mark and Matthew have Mary, the mother of James and Joseph “Looking on from a distance” during the crucifixion. They are two different women named Mary in two different places with two seperate sets of sons.

–

When Jesus saw his mother and the disciple there whom he loved, he said to his mother, “Woman, behold, your son.” Then he said to the disciple, “Behold, your mother.” And from that hour the disciple took her into his home. (John 19:26-27)

In Jewish culture, the responsibilty to care for parents fell to the oldest son. If Jesus had brothers, why then did he commend Mary into the care of the Apostle John? John even took Mary into his home and tradition holds that he cared for Mary into her old age in the city of Ephesus. Jesus knew that he was to die and the question has to be asked as to why he did not prepare a place for his mother with James or Joseph if they were also Mary’s sons. Most Protestants claim that James (and not Peter) was the leader of the early Church based on his definative decision allowing the gentiles to remain uncircumcised in Acts 11. These same Protestants should admit that as the leader of the Church and Jesus’ brother, James would have been the most likely choice to care for Mary after Jesus’ death.

–

Following on to the apologetic above regarding Jesus commending Mary into John’s care, tradition holds that John was a virgin. Acknowledging that this is not in scripture and so not likely to sway a Bible only Christian, It makes sense for Jesus to entrust his mother, in the absence of brothers, to a consecrated virgin. By entrusting Mary to a consecrated virgin, Mary’s own virginity would have been given some guarantee of security.

–
I hope some of these help.

-Tim-
 
In a lot of Protestant groups, there’s gradually been a bigger and bigger push for women to marry, even if they don’t want to, just as there has been a bigger and bigger push for ministers either to start out married or to marry very quickly, so that he can have a wife to do all the minister’s wife jobs. There used to be a lot of distrust of any man or woman who wasn’t married with kids, in these traditions, particularly if the community was small and needed all the marriage and kid opportunities it could get. This eventually morphed in some groups from approval of widows and widowers remaining single, to disapproval of widows and widowers and a sense that they couldn’t possibly raise kids. Oh, and some weirder communities even read the Bible as saying that women could only be saved through having kids; and many Protestant communities came to see monks and nuns as deeply sinister and creepy.

So yep, obviously you can’t have perpetual virginity approved by the Holy Family, if you’re always leaning on your own virgins and widows to hurry up and get married, or else.

Of course, the end of this tendency has been things like the polygamous and free love sects of upstate New York in the 1800’s, and all the silliness about Jesus not being allowed to be a virgin Bridegroom to the Bride, either, with a lot of made-up possible girlfriends for Him.
 
The word in Matt 13:55 is adelphoi. Paul uses this word to greet all the ‘brothers’ at the various cities he is writing to (see Col 1:1-2)… So it is pretty clear that Paul doesn’t see this term as referring exclusively to blood relationships. Thus when Paul uses anesios (not sure about the transliteration…) in Col 4:10 it is not because he understands adelphoi as a blood brother but rather for another reason. It is also important to remember that Matthew and Paul had very different educations and their comfort with the Greek language would not have been the same. Languages are not a science and words are understood differently by individuals and cultures.

Hope that helps!
 
No matter what the shreds of historical evidence gives us about Jesus having a brother (ie - Mary having other children), there is little doubt that Mary and Joseph were married.

What I don’t get is why God, after giving Mary the greatest gift imaginable in the form of a special visit from the Holy Spirit, would not bless Mary and Joseph’s marriage with sex.

Can anyone shed some light on this?
 
Maybe Jesus entrusted Mary to John because He knew John would be the only apostle to die of natural causes. It would have done no good to let James take her if he was goig to be martyred before Mary died. Also, the church suffered in Jerusalem and possibly there was a famine since Paul referenced collecting money from Gentile churches to aid Christians in Jerusalem. Sending Mary to live with John got her out of Jerusalem and spared her hardship.
I find it dificult to believe in a culture that so highly valued children that Mary would not be blessed with more. Lastly, I agree with the previous post, why should Mary and Joseph not be blessed with the unitative aspects of a sexual relationship?:confused:
 
Boatswain2PA said:
What I don’t get is why God, after giving Mary the greatest gift imaginable in the form of a special visit from the Holy Spirit, would not bless Mary and Joseph’s marriage with sex.

Can anyone shed some light on this?
Click to expand...
That great gift of the special visit from the Holy Spirit made Mary the spouse of the Holy Spirit. Although it is not in the same way as she was Joseph’s spouse, still, the Holy Spirit was first, and so she was not free to have sexual relations with another after him.
 
Ezekiel 44:1-3

1 "Then He brought me back to the outer gate of the sactuary which faces toward the east, but it was shut.

2 "And the LORD said to me, 'This gate shall be shut; it shall not be opened, and no man shall enter by it, because the LORD God of Israel has entered by it; therefore it shall be shut.

3 “‘As for the prince, because he is the prince, he may sit in it to eat bread before the LORD; he shall enter by way of the vestibule of the gateway, and go out the same way.’”

btw the aramaic word for “brother” means “kin”. So they were probably his cousins or something. And there is a possiblity that Joseph had a wife before Mary and had other children i.e. Jesus’s half- brothers.
 
Spirithound said:
the Holy Spirit was first, and so she was not free to have sexual relations with another after him.
Click to expand...
I’ve heard that reasoning before, I just don’t buy it. By saying she “was not free” to share sexual relations with her husband, you are implying God wouldn’t let her. Why would God prevent her from fully enjoying her marriage for the next 30+ years?
 
Boatswain2PA said:
I’ve heard that reasoning before, I just don’t buy it. By saying she “was not free” to share sexual relations with her husband, you are implying God wouldn’t let her. Why would God prevent her from fully enjoying her marriage for the next 30+ years?
Click to expand...
Mary was a consecrated virgin. Joseph married her so that she might have someone to take care of her. The status of women was quite different in society than it is today, and unmarried women would’ve been in dire straits had she been alone when her parents died.
 
Speaking as a mother of three, I cannot imagine that if God had blessed me and overshadowed me (spousally in the Holy Spirit) and trusted me to bring up His Son, that I would then turn around and say, well golly sakes, now I got this here baby who is God and man, subject to everything from the usual infant diseases to being searched for by evil men to be killed, so that I and my husband Joseph have to flee to another COUNTRY to be safe and stay for years, and I have to raise this child up and watch over Him. . .

SO the BEST way to do that is to go around and have a bunch of OTHER babies who will then require my attention and divert it from my FIRST child.

Can you just SEE the sibling rivalry… .

“Mom, mom, Jesus won’t let me walk on water too, make Him let me. . .”

“Mom, tell Jesus to stop bringing everybody’s pets back from the dead. . .”

And Mary, as one child is about to fall off a steep cliff, another child is being chased by a wild bull, a third child is caught in a burning building. . .running, screaming. . .

to JESUS who just got a paper cut. . .

“Don’t cry, sweetheart, mommy will take care of you” (complete focus on this while the other children die. . .)
 
:bounce::bluelite::crutches::whackadoo::choocho::onpatrol::egyptian::nunchuk:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top