Mary's Perpetual Virginity

[Charlie_Zeaiter]

Why is knowing Mary’s Perpetual Virginity important to our faith?

Would it matter if Mary and Joseph did engage in sexual relations like any ordinary married couple?

 

[fermat]

To me it does. Here is why:

There have been billions of humans, millions of priest, thousands of bishops, and of those bishops, 265 were the bishops of Rome. But only one Mary.

Mary is the only being of God who was so perfect that she could hold God in her womb.

Think about what we do with the containers that held the real presence of Christ after consecration. They are purified on the altar (at least in the Roman rite), and carefully put away all because these are vessels that held Jesus Christ. The fact that Jesus was there makes them holy.

Look at the Arc of the Covenant. People did open, touch, look at it, etc. This was a vessel, like Mary, that held God. No one would ever profane it by storing their dirty laundry in it, just as Mary wouldn’t profane her womb by accepting a man into her.

The reason is that it is so important is that if Mary was just another womb, then God came into the world in imperfection, which is a direct contradiction to His nature. Once that womb had been set aside for Him, it could be used for anything else. I don’t imagine anyone would take a chalice and drink beer out of it. You just don’t do those things. I think of Mary in the same way. Holy beyond our ability to understand and reserved exclusively for her Son.

 

[LilyM]

Why is knowing Mary’s Perpetual Virginity important to our faith?

Would it matter if Mary and Joseph did engage in sexual relations like any ordinary married couple?

Yes indeed it would.

It would indicate that the presence of Jesus within her womb did NOT sanctify her body to Him, and turn it into His temple and tabernacle. Did NOT make her a new Ark of the Covenant, which like the old could never be touched, or a new Holy of Holies, which like the old could never be entered except by the High Priest (in this case, of course, Jesus Himself).

In short, it would indicate that Jesus was NOT God.

The Marian dogmas and doctrines are not made up for fun or out of mere pious regard for Our Lady. They are essential belief precisely because they are so relevant to who CHRIST was.

 

[Marc_Anthony]

Look up the Protoevangelium of James for why the Church believes Mary to be ever virgin.

 

[VetA]

To me it does. Here is why:

There have been billions of humans, millions of priest, thousands of bishops, and of those bishops, 265 were the bishops of Rome. But only one Mary.

Mary is the only being of God who was so perfect that she could hold God in her womb.

Think about what we do with the containers that held the real presence of Christ after consecration. They are purified on the altar (at least in the Roman rite), and carefully put away all because these are vessels that held Jesus Christ. The fact that Jesus was there makes them holy.

Look at the Arc of the Covenant. People did open, touch, look at it, etc. This was a vessel, like Mary, that held God. No one would ever profane it by storing their dirty laundry in it, just as Mary wouldn’t profane her womb by accepting a man into her.

The reason is that it is so important is that if Mary was just another womb, then God came into the world in imperfection, which is a direct contradiction to His nature. Once that womb had been set aside for Him, it could be used for anything else. I don’t imagine anyone would take a chalice and drink beer out of it. You just don’t do those things. I think of Mary in the same way. Holy beyond our ability to understand and reserved exclusively for her Son.

Yes indeed it would.

It would indicate that the presence of Jesus within her womb did NOT sanctify her body to Him, and turn it into His temple and tabernacle. Did NOT make her a new Ark of the Covenant, which like the old could never be touched, or a new Holy of Holies, which like the old could never be entered except by the High Priest (in this case, of course, Jesus Himself).

In short, it would indicate that Jesus was NOT God.

The Marian dogmas and doctrines are not made up for fun or out of mere pious regard for Our Lady. They are essential belief precisely because they are so relevant to who CHRIST was.

My thoughts exactly

 

[panevino]

Why is knowing Mary’s Perpetual Virginity important to our faith?

Would it matter if Mary and Joseph did engage in sexual relations like any ordinary married couple?

think about who the father is.

Where is the honour for this father
if a man fathers children by her.

Would she, knowing that the father of her son was the holy spirit, even entertain the idea.

There is no way in my mind.
They would of dedicated themseleves to god and raising Jesus.
Think about the responsibility they would of felt.

Perpetual virginity is honour due to god the father.

 

[Fair_Lady]

But only one Mary.

Mary is the only being of God who was so perfect that she could hold God in her womb.

I have a question:
If Mary was required to be “perfect” in order to hold God in her womb, how perfect would Mary’s mother have had to be in order to hold Mary in her womb?

 

[Scoobyshme]

I have a question:
If Mary was required to be “perfect” in order to hold God in her womb, how perfect would Mary’s mother have had to be in order to hold Mary in her womb?

Mary is not God, so her mother (St. Anne) was not required to be like Mary in that respect. I think when the other poster said “perfect” they were referring to the fact that Mary was conceived without Original Sin. This is backed up by Luke 1:28, where the angel appeared to Mary and addressed her as “kecharitomene” (Greek - which we have loosely translated as “full of grace”). The Greek word, however, implies far more than just “full of grace.” In the way and tense in which this word is used, we can conclude that Mary was not just conceived “full of grace” but remained that way permanently (her whole life). Someone cannot be “full of grace” and sin at the same time. The two are mutually exclusive.

 

[regression]

Why is knowing Mary’s Perpetual Virginity important to our faith?

Would it matter if Mary and Joseph did engage in sexual relations like any ordinary married couple?

In addition to what was said above, I don’t consider Mary and Joseph an “ordinary married couple”. I don’t know of any other couples where the woman gets pregnant without a man and gives birth to the Son of God. To me that makes them extra-ordinary.

 

[UNITE_MY_WILL]

Not to get off topic…However, when I was a protestant I like many, if not most didn’t uderstand the veneration of our Lady. I thought it was worship or adoration which is for God alone. Now, I am ashamed for jumping to false assumptions and for not showing the mother of my Lord the proper and deserved love and respect. I love my Blessed Mother because of God. Due to God’s great mercy He created my Blessed Mother, He saved her from the stain of orginal sin so she and she alone could be my Lord’s mother. She answers with “Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord. Let it be done to me according to Your word” (Luke 1:38) I love her for her humility “My soul glorifies the Lord and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior, for he has been mindful of the humble state of his servant. From now on all generations will call me blessed, for the Mighty One has done great things for me— holy is his name…" (Luke 1:47-49) and her instructon “Do whatever he tells you.” (John 2:5) I love her because Jesus loved her and He gave her to us as our mother to bring into our home. (John 19:27) I love her because she ONLY and ALWAYS leads me to the “fruit of her womb, Jesus” never to herself. She is perfect and beautiful because God created her that way and she DID as HE tells us “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.”(Matt 5:48)

 

[chaunceygardner]

Why is knowing Mary’s Perpetual Virginity important to our faith?

Historically (at the very beginning) it was not important; the Church made it so over time.

Would it matter if Mary and Joseph did engage in sexual relations like any ordinary married couple?

Not to me, and it would make them human, like you and me. But that is perhaps the problem, because today we have made Mary much more than human (just read the many threads that discuss various aspects of Mary). So to accept that Mary and Joseph actually lived like other adults of their time would mean throwing out all that has been piled on to the image of Mary over the centuries. I like the Mary we find in the Gospels, who appears to me to be a real person, someone I could easily relate to (like her Son). The image of Mary that we adore today is just that, an image; it is not real, nor is it true to the Gospels.

Whether Mary was ever virgin, or assumed bodily into heaven, or sinless, or whatever, has absolutely no bearing on what it means to be a follower of Jesus. For some it may actually detract from understanding and doing what is essential to attaining the Kingdom of God.

 

[zach_dunn]

Historically (at the very beginning) it was not important; the Church made it so over time.

Not to me, and it would make them human, like you and me. But that is perhaps the problem, because today we have made Mary much more than human (just read the many threads that discuss various aspects of Mary). So to accept that Mary and Joseph actually lived like other adults of their time would mean throwing out all that has been piled on to the image of Mary over the centuries. I like the Mary we find in the Gospels, who appears to me to be a real person, someone I could easily relate to (like her Son). The image of Mary that we adore today is just that, an image; it is not real, nor is it true to the Gospels.

Whether Mary was ever virgin, or assumed bodily into heaven, or sinless, or whatever, has absolutely no bearing on what it means to be a follower of Jesus. For some it may actually detract from understanding and doing what is essential to attaining the Kingdom of God.

So understanding Jesus’ true nature was not historically relevant and does not have any bearing on being a follower of Jesus? I have to disagree.

 

[rwoehmke]

Consider that if Mary had other children by Joseph and was not ever Virgin there would have been a suspicion, more probably even a presumption, particularly in the patriarchal society of those first centuries, that Joseph was actually the Father of Jesus and not the son of God Most High. That is not to say that the previous posts about Mary are in any way incorrect or doubtful. She is the Queen Mother of the King of kings. I often go to her when I am troubled and need an advocate.

 

[FCEGM]

Why is knowing Mary’s Perpetual Virginity important to our faith?

Would it matter if Mary and Joseph did engage in sexual relations like any ordinary married couple?

Charlie, this was addressed in an earlier thread:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=413357

 

[UNITE_MY_WILL]

Historically (at the very beginning) it was not important; the Church made it so over time.

Not to me, and it would make them human, like you and me. But that is perhaps the problem, because today we have made Mary much more than human (just read the many threads that discuss various aspects of Mary). So to accept that Mary and Joseph actually lived like other adults of their time would mean throwing out all that has been piled on to the image of Mary over the centuries. I like the Mary we find in the Gospels, who appears to me to be a real person, someone I could easily relate to (like her Son). The image of Mary that we adore today is just that, an image; it is not real, nor is it true to the Gospels.

Whether Mary was ever virgin, or assumed bodily into heaven, or sinless, or whatever, has absolutely no bearing on what it means to be a follower of Jesus. For some it may actually detract from understanding and doing what is essential to attaining the Kingdom of God.

We do not ADORE, we venerate our Lady, adoration is for God alone. Although the Blessed Mother was human, no one, you, nor I have or will ever be like her. She is the mother of our Lord! If you believe this fact alone, she deseves special honor. If you believe God’s word you should call her blessed. If some are “detracted” by her role in salvation history, that’s on them not her. She only points to Christ, never herself. Some are detracted by their charity work, jobs, or families. It incumbent on the person to not be diverted. Please understand our Blessed Mother is the same as in the Bible, she only wants God’s will to be done and nothing else. If someone implies anything different they are in the wrong not our Lord’s mother. If someone says untruths about you, who’s at fault? We only venerate our blessed Mother for her role in salvation history, we adore God because he is God, creator of heaven and earth.

Peace,
T

 

[JoeT777]

Why is knowing Mary’s Perpetual Virginity important to our faith?

Would it matter if Mary and Joseph did engage in sexual relations like any ordinary married couple?

For the Catholic the question has been settled by a pronouncement:

“We declare, pronounce, and define that the doctrine which holds that the most Blessed Virgin Mary, in the first instance of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege granted by Almighty God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the human race, was preserved free from all stain of original sin, is a doctrine revealed by God and therefore to be believed firmly and constantly by all the faithful.” Pope Pius IX, Ineffabilis Deus, 1854

We really needn’t go farther than this, but let’s do for fun.

Mary was born Immaculate. She cannot be perceived as a ‘mere’ woman; this misconception denies God’s plan viewing at as insignificant for the formation of our faith in Christ. The Roman Catholic Church’s declaration of the Immaculate Conception isn’t made lightly; the claim isn’t that a sinless Christ HAD to be borne by a sinless woman. It isn’t that Christ HAD to be borne of a sinless woman but that he WAS borne of a sinless woman. Prophesy referred to this as an identifiable mark for the Messiah, i.e. the Son of God. God preserves Mary from original sin so that Divine Justice will prevail. “I will put enmities between you and the woman, and your seed and her seed: she shall crush your head, and you shall lie in wait for her heel.” (Gen 3:15 DRV). In His infinite mercy God overthrows the damnable serpent through the Blessed Virgin. Those who would eviscerate the Blessed Virgin Mary would instead stain and subjugate Mary to Satan. The Catholic faith holds Blessed Virgin singularly preserved, that is exempt from ALL stain of sin original sin or private (actual) sin through God’s grace.

Paul tells us why this is; “For as by the disobedience of one man [the original sin of Adam], many were made sinners” (Rom 5:19), any man born has original sin. Christ being both man and God can be considered a perfect sacrifice only without sin. “Behold the Lamb of God. Behold him who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29), the Paschal Lamb, the perfect sacrifice. These are two seeming diametrically opposed absolutes; one that all men are born with original sin, the stain of sin, the other that Christ was perfect without sin. But Christ is both man and God, perfect on both accounts. As a result, there can only be one solution to this apparent dichotomy, Christ was born of a women whose original sin had been removed. Furthermore, He would be born of a woman that hadn’t known sin because of His residence within her womb.

St. Jerome ventures still further;

…that Joseph himself on account of Mary was a virgin, so that from a virgin wedlock a virgin son was born. For if as a holy man he does not come under the imputation of fornication, and it is nowhere written that he had another wife, but was the guardian of Mary whom he was supposed to have to wife rather than her husband, the conclusion is that he who was thought worthy to be called father of the Lord, remained a virgin. St. Jerome, The Perpetual Virginity of Mary

Another prophecy is found in verse, Jeremiah 31:22 “How long wilt thou be dissolute in deliciousness, O wandering daughter? For the Lord hath created a new thing upon the earth: A WOMAN SHALL COMPASS A MAN.” In this verse we see God’s mystical solution; rightly we conclude that Mary was Immaculate, protected from knowing the sins of Adam, protected from knowing the sins of men (or woman). But, how does one COMPASS Christ the man without ENCOMPASSING the God that is Christ? At the moment Christ was conceived God was infused; at that same moment Mary’s womb must be spiritually clean; as clean as any ritually cleaned Tabernacle of Moses. Remember, Christ first ministry was to Hebrew therefore He must be identifiable to the Jew – a Jew would not recognize a God that didn’t reside in a ritually purified Tabernacle.

Christ is perceived as ‘infused,’ as opposed to conjoin or as injected into man. Thus we hold the Blessed Virgin Mary’s womb as the dwelling place of God is a human Holy of Holies, or a human Ark of the Covenant. According to Jewish tradition, the Tabernacle must remain pure even after the Ark has been removed – the spot on which the Ark of the Covenant rests becomes a holy place. Thus the Blessed Virgin Mary remains celibate in her life. This is because, she is literally full of grace, full of God; would we, (or could we), expect less. Would the Jewish Nation accept a Paschal Lamb any less than spotless, any less flawless?

(continued)

JoeT

 

[JoeT777]

The Tabernacle contained an outer court and inner court. See Ex 25-31 and Ex 39-40. Moses “commissioned” Beseleel, called by God to be the architect of the tabernacle and its furnishings; he was the son of Uri and the grandson of Hur along with Ooliab to build the tabernacle. In viewing the Tabernacle we move from outside inward we to a structure surrounded by a wall. Only one gate faces the east, a narrow gate; prefiguring Christ’s warning, “narrow is the gate of righteousness.” The gate opens into the outer court in which we find the sacrificial altar and the bronze laver. On this altar is where the perfect Lamb is sacrificed.

The inner court has a antechamber containing the Menorah, the Altar of Incense, the Table of Shewbread (otherwise known as The Proposition Loaves), behind the veil was the Holy of Holies. In this most Holy place was the Ark of the Covenant.

God residence is made holy by His command. Therefore, Moses was ordered to keep the Tabernacle spiritually and ritually clean. The Ark of the Testimony (Exodus 25:16, 22; 26:33, etc.), the Ark of the Testament (Exodus 30:26), the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord (Numbers 10:33; Deuteronomy 10:8, etc.), the Ark of the Covenant (Joshua 3:6, etc.), the Ark of God (1 Samuel 3:3, etc.), the Ark of the Lord (1 Samuel 4:6, etc.) was the Incarnate Word of God; all of which take residence in the womb taking the form of the Person of Jesus. Judaism or Catholicism certainly wouldn’t suggest that God should take up residence in an unholy place.

The Tabernacle was the birthplace of the Jewish religion. Mary was a living Tabernacle and the birthplace of our Catholic faith as well. Christ said “Do not think that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets. I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.” He came to live, with perfection, to consummate the Old Covenant and to establish the New Covenant. But Matthew doesn’t stop quoting Christ with simply “filling”, “For amen I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot, or one tittle shall not pass of the law, till all be fulfilled.” And too, we shouldn’t forget that in Christ’s birth, another wondrous birth occurs; the birth of God’s Kingdom on earth.

Where did the Holy Spirit put the New Covenant word? Christ, the New Covenant, was placed in the Ark of the New Covenant, the womb of Mary. (Cf. Luke 1, Rev 11:19, Rev 12:1) God was infused into man to become Christ. Christ was one person with two natures, one of God, the other of man. Thus after the proper time, Christ was born of Mary as foretold by the angel; “Behold thou shalt conceive in thy womb and shalt bring forth a son: and thou shalt call his name Jesus. He shall be great and shall be called the Son of the Most High. And the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of David his father: and he shall reign in the house of Jacob for ever. And of his kingdom there shall be no end.” (Luke 1: 31-33) Eventually, like light passes through a window He passes through the veil, a veil not rent. Christ now becomes like the Menorah (light of the world), whose Word fell on the Altar of Incense to rise pleasingly to God, whose light fell on the loaves of proposition (likened to the Twelve Apostles). These loaves were consumed by the high Priests who were said to receive Divine knowledge. As you probably know, a Divine Hope is born out of knowledge giving the expectation of obtaining the Vision of the Divine. This is Christ’s birth, the Divine Hope.

These are the reasons Mary’s Perpetual Virginity is essential to all Christianity.

JoeT

 

[stephe1987]

In what would it defile Mary to have sexual relations with her husband after Jesus was born?

Before Jesus was born, it was important that Mary remained a virgin for the virgin birth of Christ, and that she was born without sin so that her body was in a proper state to give birth to the Son of God.

Mary and Joseph were married in the eyes of God. They would not be fornicating or committing adultery by having children together after Jesus. Sex between two people married to one other is not wrong. In fact, isn’t the very purpose of marriage to start a family and raise children together? Have children naturally, or adopt if you cannot conceive for whatever reason? Why did they get married at all? Why not just be friends?

Joseph was not God, so any children he might have had with Mary would not be Sons or Daughters of God. It do not see how it would be bad or offensive to Jesus if He had brothers and sisters.

I do not see why Mary would have to be forever a virgin to be worthy of respect and admiration. She gave birth to Jesus Christ! That right there is an honor above any other woman, and men cannot give birth at all.

Maybe the brothers and sisters mentioned in the Bible were children of Joseph, or cousins or friends of his. But I do not understand why the Bible would say the word “until” if she didn’t have relations with her husband after Jesus was born. That is a strange word to use, or perhaps a different word to translate to modern English would have been a better choice?

 

[jaedle]

“I will put enmities between you and the woman, and your seed and her seed: she shall crush your head, and you shall lie in wait for her heel.” (Gen 3:15 DRV). In His infinite mercy God overthrows the damnable serpent through the Blessed Virgin. Those who would eviscerate the Blessed Virgin Mary would instead stain and subjugate Mary to Satan.

You are using an inaccurate translation of Genesis 3:15. The line, “she shall crush your head,” should be translated “he shall crush your head.” As the authors of the New Jerome Biblical Commentary explain, “‘He’ refers to offspring, which is masc. in Hebrew. Christian tradition has sometimes referred it to Christ, but the literal reference is to the human descendants of Eve, who will regard snakes as enemies.” So it is Christ, not Mary, who “overthrows the damnable serpent.”

The Catholic faith holds Blessed Virgin singularly preserved, that is exempt from ALL stain of sin original sin or private (actual) sin through God’s grace.

Paul tells us why this is; “For as by the disobedience of one man [the original sin of Adam], many were made sinners” (Rom 5:19), any man born has original sin. Christ being both man and God can be considered a perfect sacrifice only without sin. “Behold the Lamb of God. Behold him who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29), the Paschal Lamb, the perfect sacrifice. These are two seeming diametrically opposed absolutes; one that all men are born with original sin, the stain of sin, the other that Christ was perfect without sin. But Christ is both man and God, perfect on both accounts. As a result, there can only be one solution to this apparent dichotomy, Christ was born of a women whose original sin had been removed. Furthermore, He would be born of a woman that hadn’t known sin because of His residence within her womb.

There is no contradiction between Romans 5:19 and John 1:29. To see this, simply read the entire verse: “For just as one man’s [Adam’s] trespass led to condemnation for all, so one man’s [Jesus Christ’s] act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all.” (NRSV). If you read this verse in context, it becomes evident that Paul is contrasting Adam and Christ, sin and righteousness, death and life. Ironically, Mary is not even mentioned in Paul’s entire letter, let alone this passage.

Another prophecy is found in verse, Jeremiah 31:22 “How long wilt thou be dissolute in deliciousness, O wandering daughter? For the Lord hath created a new thing upon the earth: A WOMAN SHALL COMPASS A MAN.” In this verse we see God’s mystical solution; rightly we conclude that Mary was Immaculate, protected from knowing the sins of Adam, protected from knowing the sins of men (or woman). But, how does one COMPASS Christ the man without ENCOMPASSING the God that is Christ? At the moment Christ was conceived God was infused; at that same moment Mary’s womb must be spiritually clean; as clean as any ritually cleaned Tabernacle of Moses. Remember, Christ first ministry was to Hebrew therefore He must be identifiable to the Jew – a Jew would not recognize a God that didn’t reside in a ritually purified Tabernacle.

In Jeremiah 31:22, the line, “a woman shall compass a man” is variably translated “a woman will play a man’s part,” (REB) “the woman must encompass the man with devotion,” (NAB) and “the Woman sets out to find her Husband again.” (NJB). In other words, the meaning of this Hebrew phrase is uncertain. Interestingly, the Septuagint has an entirely different text: “men will walk in salvation.” This verse cannot be honestly interpreted to validate the dogma of the “Immaculate Conception.”

 

[regression]

Maybe the brothers and sisters mentioned in the Bible were children of Joseph, or cousins or friends of his. But I do not understand why the Bible would say the word “until” if she didn’t have relations with her husband after Jesus was born. That is a strange word to use, or perhaps a different word to translate to modern English would have been a better choice?

This article explains “until”:

catholic.com/library/Brethren_of_the_Lord.asp

Specifically the section under “Fundamentalist Arguments”