Mary's Perpetual Virginity

[ssa_trad_cath]

I’ve recently had a conversation with another Catholic (who is a Catechist and is taking a Catechism course at a Catholic college!) in which she questioned the Church’s teaching about Mary’s perpetual virginity. She made several statements, which included a comment that if Mary and Joseph never had sexual relations it meant they weren’t really married, because if there’s no sex, there’s no marriage. She also had difficulty with the idea of being a virgin “during” childbirth, which I’ve just noticed is being discussed on another thread.

My question really is: does anybody have any good references concerning Church teaching on this? Either statements of the doctrine or explanations? I’m not sure whether this really counts as Apologetics or Sacred Scripture, but I noticed there was already a current thread here about Mary’s experience of childbirth.

Thanks

 

[Uzziah1]

Although I don’t remember the source at all, one of the really interesting discussions on the non-consummation of marriage between Mary and Joseph which I read, years ago, suggested that after Joseph was informed in a special way that Mary was pregnant by a special act of God the Holy Spirit, as described in Matthew 1:20, he and Mary both apprehended that Mary was “God’s consort,” not to be defiled.

 

[Soypomeor]

Äîáðûé äåíü
âèäåë òóò íà forums.catholic-questions.org êòî òî óæå ýòî îïèñûâàë â òåìå, íî íå ñîâñåì âåðíî, âîò äîïîëíåíèå.
Ìåæäó íàìè ãîâîðÿ, ýòî î÷åâèäíî. Ïðåäëàãàþ Âàì ïîïðîáîâàòü ïîèñêàòü â google.com
áóêìåêåðñêèå êîíòîðû â ìîñêâå

 

[Gorgias]

if Mary and Joseph never had sexual relations it meant they weren’t really married, because if there’s no sex, there’s no marriage.

She’s being anachronistic. In Jewish custom of the day, there were a number of things that could be done in order to make the marriage valid; among them were consummation, the bride being taken into the groom’s house to live, etc. As memory serves, as long as a couple of them were complete, the marriage was valid. In other words, you could skip one and it would not affect the validity of the marriage.

In the Catholic Church, consummation is important. Nevertheless, its absence doesn’t invalidate a marriage. A valid marriage that is not consummated is still a valid marriage: it is intrinsically indissoluble. That is, the marriage may be dissolved extrinsically (e.g., by the Pope) for a just cause. (At the point that the marriage is consummated, though, the marriage becomes intrinsically and extrinsically indissoluble, with rare exceptions.)

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

I’ve recently had a conversation with another Catholic (who is a Catechist and is taking a Catechism course at a Catholic college!) in which she questioned the Church’s teaching about Mary’s perpetual virginity. She made several statements, which included a comment that if Mary and Joseph never had sexual relations it meant they weren’t really married, because if there’s no sex, there’s no marriage. She also had difficulty with the idea of being a virgin “during” childbirth, which I’ve just noticed is being discussed on another thread.

My question really is: does anybody have any good references concerning Church teaching on this? Either statements of the doctrine or explanations? I’m not sure whether this really counts as Apologetics or Sacred Scripture, but I noticed there was already a current thread here about Mary’s experience of childbirth.

Thanks

There is a Christmas Carol that says that The Baby Jesus entered and exited Mary as the sun through the window.
That person is monolithic and shortsighted. There was no sex but there was “sex”, meaning, somehow the Holy Spirit, as the gospel say, “covered” Mary with His “shadow”. what does it mean?
we do not know.
Was the ovula of Mary developped by cloning or was it created a sperma that joined the ovula?

 

[fred_conty]

I’ve recently had a conversation with another Catholic (who is a Catechist and is taking a Catechism course at a Catholic college!) in which she questioned the Church’s teaching about Mary’s perpetual virginity. She made several statements, which included a comment that if Mary and Joseph never had sexual relations it meant they weren’t really married, because if there’s no sex, there’s no marriage. She also had difficulty with the idea of being a virgin “during” childbirth, which I’ve just noticed is being discussed on another thread.

My question really is: does anybody have any good references concerning Church teaching on this? Either statements of the doctrine or explanations? I’m not sure whether this really counts as Apologetics or Sacred Scripture, but I noticed there was already a current thread here about Mary’s experience of childbirth.

Thanks

This article will help.
cin.org/users/james/files/talmud.htm

 

[gentle_atheist]

To put it bluntly, if Mary is not the spouse of the Holy Spirit then that would make Jesus a bastard.

If Mary is the spouse of the Holy Spirit and she has relations with Joseph then that would make Mary an adulteress.

For an ancient defense of Mary’s perpetual virginity there is the famous essay by St. Jerome: Against Helvidius

 

[po18guy]

I’ve recently had a conversation with another Catholic (who is a Catechist and is taking a Catechism course at a Catholic college!) in which she questioned the Church’s teaching about Mary’s perpetual virginity. She made several statements, which included a comment that if Mary and Joseph never had sexual relations it meant they weren’t really married, because if there’s no sex, there’s no marriage. She also had difficulty with the idea of being a virgin “during” childbirth, which I’ve just noticed is being discussed on another thread.

My question really is: does anybody have any good references concerning Church teaching on this? Either statements of the doctrine or explanations? I’m not sure whether this really counts as Apologetics or Sacred Scripture, but I noticed there was already a current thread here about Mary’s experience of childbirth.

Thanks

Those who think that Mary and Joseph could not have remained chaste are thinking as man does and not as God does. Those who think that Mary would vow to be the handmaid/bond slave of her own son, and then would break that vow and divide her time between Him and other children are not thinking this through - or even worse.

As well, angels deliver exactly the message that God tells them to - nothing more and nothing less. An angel commanded Joseph to take Mary as his wife. He obeyed. What God has declared a marriage, man must not deny. IMO, the catechist should refrain from further duty in that capacity until and unless they can grant intellectual assent to the teachings of the Church.

This appears to demonstrate a crisis of faith, as spoken of in CCC 2087-2089. It is not good.

 

[ssa_trad_cath]

Thanks for the replies.

IMO, the catechist should refrain from further duty in that capacity until and unless they can grant intellectual assent to the teachings of the Church.

I find myself agreeing with this. What bothered me is that is this person is a catechist, and may be passing on her own difficulties with matters of faith to the people she is catechising. If she is having difficulties with Mary’s perpetual virginity, there may be other areas too. I tried to express Church teaching as I understand it, but she looked at me as if I was mad!

Thanks again.

 

[po18guy]

Thanks for the replies.

I find myself agreeing with this. What bothered me is that is this person is a catechist, and may be passing on her own difficulties with matters of faith to the people she is catechising. If she is having difficulties with Mary’s perpetual virginity, there may be other areas too. I tried to express Church teaching as I understand it, but she looked at me as if I was mad!

Thanks again.

I personally know of a Southern Baptist couple who are in a 30+ year virginal marriage. They have accomplished this without an angel’s appearance. It is fairly clear to me that a person who does not trust Mary’s vow also does not trust her own.