Mother mary's perpetual virginity

[Trebor135]

It is absolutely true and certain that Mary was favored above all women by conceiving, caring, bearing, loving and training her Son, the Son of God.

Amen.

There is no Scripture or reason that I see that would make her any less holy by having other children through Joseph. Sex is not sinful. It is ordained of God.

Sex in marriage is indeed a good and holy thing. But St. Mary was chosen by God to serve him permanently in a special way.

Mary is NOT the Mother of God! She is the mother of Jesus’ human body. If Mary truly was the Mother of God- she would be the Source and Creator of God! She is NOT!

Turning to Luke chapter one, we read:

[41] And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit
[42] and she exclaimed with a loud cry, “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb!
[43] And why is this granted me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?
[44] For behold, when the voice of your greeting came to my ears, the babe in my womb leaped for joy.
[45] And blessed is she who believed that there would be a fulfilment of what was spoken to her from the Lord.”

Would you not say that “Lord” is synonymous with “God”? If, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, Elizabeth in effect called St. Mary the “mother of God”, why should we not be ready and eager to do likewise?

She is a daughter of God, that was also godly, but not sinless! In two passages Jesus, while respecting His mother, put her and his siblings on the same plane as anyone that obeys the Word of God. Matthew 12:46 ¶ While he yet talked to the people, behold, his mother and his brethren stood without, desiring to speak with him.
47 Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee.
48 But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren?
49 And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!
50 For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.
Mark 3:32 And the multitude sat about him, and they said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren without seek for thee.
33 And he answered them, saying, Who is my mother, or my brethren?
34 And he looked round about on them which sat about him, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!
35 For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother.

Neither of these passages show that St. Mary committed sin.

Matthew 1:46 And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord,
47 And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.
48 For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.
49 For he that is mighty hath done to me great things; and holy is his name.
50 And his mercy is on them that fear him from generation to generation.

Mary said herself, “God, my Savior”. If she didn’t need a Savior, she would not have said that.

No one claims that St. Mary did not need a saviour, but rather that by God’s grace she did not commit sin.

“All have sinned {including Mary} and come short of the Glory of God.” Romans 3:23

But St. Paul does not use “all” to mean “each and every”. He writes in Romans 11:26 that “all Israel will be saved”, although no one points to this verse to argue that each and every Jewish person that has ever lived will reach heaven.

It was not necessary that Mary be sinless to bear the Son of God.

No one is arguing this way, either. St. Mary was the Ark of the New Covenant, a reality at which St. Luke strongly hints.

She was consecrated and blessed. Mary is NOT to be worshiped! Jesus told the devil, "Matthew 4:10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.
Luke 4:8 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.

Catholics/Orthodox do not worship St. Mary–they instead give her honour. I’d like to know what you make of the Israelites’ actions in the following passage:

1 Chronicles 29:20: Then David said to all the assembly, “Bless the LORD your God.” And all the assembly blessed the LORD, the God of their fathers, and bowed their heads, and worshiped the LORD, and did obeisance to the king.

Is idolatry being committed here?

There are several great reasons for Jesus to give the care of His mother to John the Apostle rather than the other boys in her family, whether step or blood brothers of Jesus.
Jesus saw that John was the most loving disciple and one that would take care of Mary as if she were his own mother. John was the only one of Jesus’ brothers that was at the crucifixion. John was the only one of the boys to that point that had been a part of His ministry. John would outlive the brothers of Jesus and Mary.

But would not Jesus have sought to avoid slighting his blood brothers (if he had any)?

 

[wes144]

The focus needs to be on Christ, the Only Sinless One! Not His mother, Mary, or anyone else.

“Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.” acts 4:12

“For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;” 1Timothy 2:5

"Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help."His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish. 5 ¶ Happy is he that hath the God of Jacob for his help, whose hope is in the LORD his God: 6 Which made heaven, and earth, the sea, and all that therein is: which keepeth truth for ever: Psalm 146:3-6

“Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.” Acts 5:29

Jesus said, “If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.” John 7:17

“To the Law and to the Testimony. If they speak not according to this word, it is because there NO LIGHT in them!” Isaiah 8:20

 

[De_Montfort]

The focus needs to be on Christ, the Only Sinless One! Not His mother, Mary, or anyone else.

“Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.” acts 4:12

“For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;” 1Timothy 2:5

"Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help."His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish. 5 ¶ Happy is he that hath the God of Jacob for his help, whose hope is in the LORD his God: 6 Which made heaven, and earth, the sea, and all that therein is: which keepeth truth for ever: Psalm 146:3-6

“Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.” Acts 5:29

Jesus said, “If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.” John 7:17

“To the Law and to the Testimony. If they speak not according to this word, it is because there NO LIGHT in them!” Isaiah 8:20

Mary IS sinless, she is the ark of the New Covenant! The old ark was made of wood that didn’t decay lined in pure gold. In the same way Christ applied His merits to Her at Her conception, pure, holy, Immaculate.

Jesus had no blood brothers, there was no word for cousin to use so the term brother was used for extended family.

Mary is the first to obey God. She did so perfectly. She doesn’t take away from Christ but leads all to Christ. She is God’s unspeakable world created for Him alone.

You do not understand the bond of Jesus and Mary. It would be easier to seperate light from the sun, or heat from the fire.

It is not us who have highly honored Her but God himself.

 

[Trebor135]

The focus needs to be on Christ, the Only Sinless One! Not His mother, Mary, or anyone else.

“Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.” acts 4:12

“For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;” 1Timothy 2:5

"Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help."His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish. 5 ¶ Happy is he that hath the God of Jacob for his help, whose hope is in the LORD his God: 6 Which made heaven, and earth, the sea, and all that therein is: which keepeth truth for ever: Psalm 146:3-6

“Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.” Acts 5:29

Jesus said, “If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.” John 7:17

“To the Law and to the Testimony. If they speak not according to this word, it is because there NO LIGHT in them!” Isaiah 8:20

Non-Protestant CAF members believe everything found in these passages–you have no need to give us a lecture about the central and indispensable role of Christ in our salvation.

You did not address any of the points I raised in my previous post, so I shall reiterate the most pertinent one…

Are God and King David allowing, and the people committing, the sin of idolatry in the following passage (emphasis added)?

1 Chronicles 29:20: Then David said to all the assembly, “Bless the LORD your God.” And all the assembly blessed the LORD, the God of their fathers, and bowed their heads, and worshiped the LORD, and did obeisance to the king.

 

[Cadellin]

I think it’s pretty clear that the Biblical reference to Jesus’s brothers could very well mean … Joseph’s children from a previous time.

No it couldn’t. Jesus is called ‘Son of David.’ This is a title that was given to Joseph’s first son. As Jesus is called Son of David he must have been Joseph’s oldest son.

 

[Nystra]

A quick question from someone searching his soul for possible conversion:

Many of you are stating that the burden for proof is upon those who say Mary was not a perpetual virgin. I think, in reality, the burden of proof is upon those who say she was. Where do we see this within doctrine? Is it ONLY within Tradition?

Bear in mind that its conceptually possible for Mary to have had no additional children and yet not be a virgin any longer. While having other children would prove she didn’t remain a virgin, she isn’t a self-evident perpetual virgin simply because she DIDN’T have additional children.

Furthermore, why is it important to her sacred stature that she retain virginhood? She was married.

 

[PRmerger]

No it couldn’t. Jesus is called ‘Son of David.’ This is a title that was given to Joseph’s first son. As Jesus is called Son of David he must have been Joseph’s oldest son.

Do you have a reference that Son of David is a title in reference to Joseph’s first son? I’ve never heard that before.

 

[PRmerger]

Furthermore, why is it important to her sacred stature that she retain virginhood? She was married.

Because, as with all doctrines on Mary, they help us understand the nature of Christ.
That is, all teachings on Mary only point to Jesus. An impoverished understanding of Mary leads to an impoverished understanding of Jesus.

Thus, Mary’s sinless status only helps affirm and confirm the dogma of Jesus’ divinity. How so? Because the womb which contained He Who Could Not Be Contained was especially set apart for this. If this womb held other sinful creatures, how special could that first “creature” have been?

Imagine trying to evangelize a Muslim. He could validly say: You believe Mary had other children? Hmmm…if Jesus were divine, how could the womb which carried him also carry other sinful creatures? I don’t think Jesus could have been God if the womb which carried him also carried mere humans.

It’s like the Ark of the Covenant, when it was through carrying the Divine Presence, later carrying some pretty desert pebbles. That wouldn’t make sense, would it?

 

[PRmerger]

The focus needs to be on Christ, the Only Sinless One! Not His mother, Mary, or anyone else.

Our focus IS on Christ. And he has directed us to venerate his mother. We only honor who he honors.

“Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.” acts 4:12

Amen!

Were you under the misapprehension that Catholics proclaim that we are saved by anyone except Jesus?

“For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;” 1Timothy 2:5

This is 100% Catholic!

"Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help."His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish. 5 ¶ Happy is he that hath the God of Jacob for his help, whose hope is in the LORD his God: 6 Which made heaven, and earth, the sea, and all that therein is: which keepeth truth for ever: Psalm 146:3-6

Indeed!

“Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.” Acts 5:29

To be sure!

Jesus said, “If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.” John 7:17

Absolutely!

“To the Law and to the Testimony. If they speak not according to this word, it is because there NO LIGHT in them!” Isaiah 8:20

For sure!

 

[marymyheroine]

I have a question to propose that relates to this subject, as well. What about the Bible using the term “cousin” when stating that Mary went to visit her “cousin Elizabeth”. I’ve always, even when very young, just always felt in my heart that Mary had no other children besides Jesus. However; someone in my prayer group proposed this question for us to ponder. It made me very curious as well. Any answers on this for me

 

[De_Montfort]

I have a question to propose that relates to this subject, as well. What about the Bible using the term “cousin” when stating that Mary went to visit her “cousin Elizabeth”. I’ve always, even when very young, just always felt in my heart that Mary had no other children besides Jesus. However; someone in my prayer group proposed this question for us to ponder. It made me very curious as well. Any answers on this for me

A couple things to notice, the proper term used is “kinswomen”.

Also notice it’s an angel that speaks this way not a human jewish person. It’s the Jewish language that lacked the term cousin, not an intellegent angel.

 

[brumano]

I don’t know why all this is important to our lives as Christians. Mary was our Lords mother and was blessed to have such an honor and I mean no disrespect to her, but, she gets to Heaven the same way we do. By the Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ.
I always thought that Jesus had half brothers in the flesh… one being James. I believe there were others. But, this conversation reminds me of the question “How many Angels can you put on a pin head?”
Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
Eph 2:9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
John 3: 16 says that God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believes (trust in and relies on) in Him shall not perish but have Everlasting Life.
I am happy and full of joy that I am saved by His wonderful Grace and even though I can never live up to His standard. “For all have sinned and fall short of the Glory of God!”
All I can do is trust and obey. God is Spirit and those that are led by the Spirit are the Children of God.
So, that being said…I suppose Mary is one of God’s Children.
Remember that it was Jesus that gave His life for us…Not Mary.

I think you might want to think some of these misconceptions of yours about Mary over a little more deeply, maybe you could start by remembering that if Mary had not been who she is and all that she is, God would not have had His Son Jesus to give His life for us; of all women whoever were or will be, only Mary could receive Him as His Mother.

 

[brumano]

Never understood this one at all either, it 's as you say irrelevant.

 

[snarflemike]

A quick question from someone searching his soul for possible conversion:

Many of you are stating that the burden for proof is upon those who say Mary was not a perpetual virgin. I think, in reality, the burden of proof is upon those who say she was. Where do we see this within doctrine? Is it ONLY within Tradition?

One of the strongest bits of evidence in scripture is the fact that Jesus gave his mother to the apostle John, and it is stated that she lived in his house from that hour on (that is, for the rest of her life). Imagine that happening if she had other children. Imagine those children allowing their mother to live in the house of an unrelated man!

Bear in mind that its conceptually possible for Mary to have had no additional children and yet not be a virgin any longer. While having other children would prove she didn’t remain a virgin, she isn’t a self-evident perpetual virgin simply because she DIDN’T have additional children.

True, but to have sex is to have the possibility of children. Where in the old testament is it ever acceptable for a woman to bear the children of two fathers, unless one has died or divorced (abandoned) the woman. And God neither died nor abandoned Mary.

Furthermore, why is it important to her sacred stature that she retain virginhood? She was married.

It’s important because God has revealed it to us. Why would it be important if she did have other children? To say “she was married” isn’t very useful, for how many other marriages are like hers? How many other married women give birth to God incarnate? So no matter whether she had other children or not, her marriage was unlike any other in all of history.

 

[hawkeye125646]

You are taking this verse out of context.

1Then he brought me back the way of the gate of the outward sanctuary which looketh toward the east; and it was shut. 2Then said the LORD unto me; This gate shall be shut, it shall not be opened, and no man shall enter in by it; because the LORD, the God of Israel, hath entered in by it, therefore it shall be shut. 3It is for the prince; the prince, he shall sit in it to eat bread before the LORD; he shall enter by the way of the porch of that gate, and shall go out by the way of the same.

Verse 3 says he shall sit in it and eat bread before the Lord, he shall enter and exit by the same gate.

This Cannot be Mary’s womb.

This is in reference, also, to the Mary Being the Ark of the covenant

1. The Ark contained the Ten Commandments [the words of God in stone], a pot of manna, and Aaron’s rod that came back to life [Deuteronomy 10:3-5; Hebrews 9:4]. Foreshadowing too The womb of the Virgin contained Jesus: the living Word of God enfleshed, the living bread from heaven, “the Branch” (Messianic title) who would die but come back to life [Luke 1:35].
2. The Ark traveled to the hill country of Judah to rest in the house of Obed-edom [2 Samuel 6:1-11] Foreshadowing to Mary traveled to the hill country of Judah (Judea) to the home of Elizabeth [Luke 1:39]
3. Dressed in a priestly ephod, King David approached the Ark and danced and leapt for joy [2 Samuel 6:14] Foreshadowing to John the Baptist, son of a priest who would himself becomes a priest, leapt for joy in Elizabeth’s womb at the approach of Mary [Luke 1:43]
4. David shouted for joy in the presence of God and the holy Ark [2 Samuel 6:15] foreshadowing to Elizabeth exclaimed with a loud cry of joy in the presence God within Mary [Luke 1:42]
5. David asked, “How is it that the Ark of the Lord comes to me?” [2 Samuel 6:9] Foreshadowing to Elizabeth asks, “Why is this granted unto me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?” [Luke 1:43]
6. The Ark remained in the house of Obed-edom for 3 months [2 Samuel 6:11] froeshadowing to Mary remained in the house of her cousin Elizabeth for 3 months [Luke 1:56].

You see the Ark of the Covenant, cotained the BREAD OF THE PRESENCE… As such, Ezekiels prophecy was also in conjuction with the Ark of the Covenant! If you want more corralations, I will provide them for you! May God bless you!

 

[TimothyH]

A quick question from someone searching his soul for possible conversion:

Many of you are stating that the burden for proof is upon those who say Mary was not a perpetual virgin. I think, in reality, the burden of proof is upon those who say she was. Where do we see this within doctrine? Is it ONLY within Tradition?

Bear in mind that its conceptually possible for Mary to have had no additional children and yet not be a virgin any longer. While having other children would prove she didn’t remain a virgin, she isn’t a self-evident perpetual virgin simply because she DIDN’T have additional children.

Furthermore, why is it important to her sacred stature that she retain virginhood? She was married.

Mary is the spouse of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit overshadowed Mary and she concieved in her womb a child, Jesus.

For Mary to have had children by someone else, or for Mary to have attempted to have children by someone other than the Holy Spirit makes her an adulterer.

The theological consequences of the Second Person of the Trinity incarnate being the illegitimate offspring of an adulterer are tremendous, almost unthinkable. We are Christ’s body. What would that make us? If Mary was not chaste with Joseph then she is an adulterer, the wife of two husbands, and Christians are the illegitimate members of her illegitimate son’s body.

It simply cannot be.

-Tim-

 

[Cat_Herder]

Furthermore, why is it important to her sacred stature that she retain virginhood? She was married.

This is why.

 

[Cadellin]

Do you have a reference that Son of David is a title in reference to Joseph’s first son? I’ve never heard that before.

It was something posted on CAF. I’ve had a look for the post but couldn’t find it.

 

[NeedImprovement]

Many of you are stating that the burden for proof is upon those who say Mary was not a perpetual virgin. I think, in reality, the burden of proof is upon those who say she was. Where do we see this within doctrine? Is it ONLY within Tradition?
. . .

Actually ," in reality ", burden of proof is commonly understood that one is innocent until proven guilty .

• You are saying she did something . We are saying she didn’t.
• You/they are saying it was lawful - and that it was desired by God that Mary should, in a biological sense , have more children. We say, while it may have been lawful, that this this was not our Blessed Lord’s design ; He had a more noble idea.
• You/they , in a sense, really do appear to be swallowing the camel and straining out the gnat : You will admit that the Holy Spirit overshadowed our Blessed Mother, and that as a virgin she conceived our Lord Jesus Christ in her womb by the Holy Spirit , but you/they refuse to even admit that it might be contingent that Mary could have remained a virgin, or that this could have been God’s will . We on the other hand, as Catholics, profess the perpetual virginity of our Blessed Mother in its completeness - making the logical link which you/they reject : Mary remained a virgin before Christ’s birth, during Christ’s birth and after Christ’s birth ; to express the most difficult part of it in the simplest terms,as a priest friend of mine once said to me, " Our Lord came out of our Blessed Mother’s womb the same way He entered it - miraculously." So you agree to believe some of the miracle - but not the entire miracle. . . You might further try asking yourself honestly, which side of that equation - your/their side - or the Catholic side , is the one which runs contrary to reason ?

. . . Where do we see this within doctrine? Is it ONLY within Tradition?
. . .

Mary’s perpetual virginity is dogma . We don’t actually have the exact same definitions of doctrine and tradition that non catholics have . This might help:

The Marian Dogmas

 

[NeedImprovement]

( . . . “Mary had other children” - so close , but yet so far . . . ).

Indeed, our Blessed Mother has tons of children . But for those who’s thinking is fixed solely on the corporeal they probably won’t be able to see it. Maybe it could help if they were somehow able to elevate their thinking to also encompass the spiritual ; if they were able to see how many children Mary bore in the womb of her suffering at the foot of the Cross.

An earlier post claimed that Mary wasn’t the Mother of God. Mary is the Mother of God . Anyone who says the Blessed Virgin Mary is not the Mother of God , is simultaneously saying that Jesus is not the Son of God.

Bishop Sheen had such an eloquence when he wrote. For him, it was natural to combine the Blessed Virgin Mary’s motherhood and her perpetual virginity all into one. Here is an excerpt from his reflections on the children of Mary from THE SEVEN LAST WORDS (Alba House publishing edition) :

The Third Word ; Woman , Behold your Son pgs [25,26]:

"…Nazareth passed to Calvary, and the nails of the shop into the nails of human malignity. From the Cross He contemplated His last will and testament. He had already committed His blood to the Church, His garments to His enemies, a thief to Paradise, and would soon commend His body to the grave and His soul to His Heavenly Father. To whom, then,could He give the two treasures which he loved above all others, Mary and John ? He would bequeath them to one another, giving at once a son to His Mother and a Mother to His friend. ‘Woman!’ It was the second Annunciation! The midnight hour, the silent room, the ecstatic prayer had given way to the mount of Calvary, the darkened sky, and a Son hanging on a Cross. Yet, what consolation! It was only an angel who made the first Annunciation, but it is God’s own sweet voice which makes the second.

‘Behold your son!’ It was the second Nativity! Mary had brought forth her First-born without labor, in the cave at Bethlehem; she now brings forth her second-born,John, in the labors of the Cross. At this moment Mary is undergoing the pains of childbirth, not only for her second-born,who is John, but also for the millions who will be born to her in Christian ages as ‘Children of Mary.’

Now we can understand why Christ was called ‘her First-born.’ It was not because she was to have other children by the blood of flesh, but because she was to have other children by the blood of her heart. Truly, indeed, the Divine condemnation against Eve is now renewed against the new Eve,Mary, for she is bringing forth her children in sorrow.

Mary, then, is not only the Mother of Our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, but she is also our Mother, and not by a title of courtesy, not by legal fiction, not by a mere figure of speech, but by the right of bringing us forth in sorrow at the foot of the Cross. It was by weakness and disobedience at the foot of the tree of Good and Evil that Eve lost the title Mother of the Living; it is at the foot of the tree of the Cross that Mary, by sacrifice and obedience, regained for us the title, Mother of the Living. What a destiny to have the Mother of God as my Mother and Jesus as my Brother !"