S
Sandalwood
Guest
good points. These are things I’ve wrestled with over the years, especially of late.
The most intense debate between Catholic and Protestant:Mary the Mother of God
- Status
1
1holycatholic
Guest
O
onenow1
Guest
N
nickybr38
Guest
*It is generally taught that he died at some time between Jesus’s visit to the temple at around age 12, and the Wedding at Cana. This would fit in with the tradition of Joseph being quite an old man at the time of his wedding to the BV Mary. It would also fit with Jesus’s “brothers” (half-brothers or cousins) being older than Him - which they would have to be, to criticise Him. *
It would also explain why Mary hung out with extended family much of the time. Hm! Interesting! It’s too bad we don’t have any concrete information. Oh well. Some things shall remain a mystery.
It would also explain why Mary hung out with extended family much of the time. Hm! Interesting! It’s too bad we don’t have any concrete information. Oh well. Some things shall remain a mystery.
P
placido
Guest
This is novel requirement; for something to be true, it must be mentioned by Paul.
Better believe she did not have parents … then we can take it from there.
No, becoming the mother of Christ is not quite enough to make her 'blessed among women" because the bible says ** AND ** … “blessed are you among women, AND blessed is the fruit of your womb”!
placido
P
Pitcharan
Guest
In India we (i) Bow when the name of Jesus is mentioned twice in the Gloria and (ii) kneel during the entire liturgy of the ecucharist, and bow when it is elevated by the celebrant priest, i.e. when a says “take this and eat…for this is my body” and "take this and drink…" and also when it is elevated again during “though Him, with Him and in Him ….”
We kneel when the Eucharist is elevated or exposed.
We bow before the altar and when the Holy Spirit is mentioned in the Creed.
Although in some churches in my diocese which might remain nameless…(San Jose, CA)…the priests keep everybody standing for everything…a travesty!
P
PLeeD
Guest
Matthew 1:24-25 (Young’s Literal Translation)
24 And Joseph, having risen from the sleep, did as the messenger of the Lord directed him, and received his wife, 25 and did not know her till she brought forth her son – the first-born, and he called his name Jesus.
Seems to me that any normal reading of verse 25 implies that Joseph and Mary did the things husbands and wives normally do. Is there someplace else in the bible that supports perpetual virginity, or does that come from Tradition?
EDIT: Look at the third definition for the word “know” per “Strong’s G1097 - ginōskō”.
blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G1097&t=KJV
P
PLeeD
Guest
You sound like my 11 year old posting on facebook. You really pwned him with that reponse, didn’t you?
1 Peter 3:15 - “sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence”
Instead of jumping down someone’s throat over one word, how about next time explaining what Catholics mean by ‘adoration’? That word has several definitions, and is normally used differently than Catholics use the term.
R
Roy5
Guest
Sorry. Never heard of Young’s literal translation.
My translation of Matt. 1:25 reads: And (Joseph) knew her not until she had brought forth her firstborn son and he called his name Jesus.
My translation of Matt. 1:25 reads: And (Joseph) knew her not until she had brought forth her firstborn son and he called his name Jesus.
Code:
We know what 'knew her' means in scripture.
I simply don't care. If Mary was a lifelong virgin, fine. If not, why is this a problem? She and Joseph were married. Today the absence of sexual relations within marriage is grounds for divorce and annulment, and even in the church as I recall. This tendency of the church to think of sexual relations as somehow 'impure' has done lots of damage over the years. Why couldn't the Holy Family be like other families where the husband and wife expressed their love sexually? Personally, I find that a better example for the world than for them to live as brother and sister. It's a weird Greek concept and certainly not Hebraic.
P
PLeeD
Guest
I agree. Perpetual virginity, or lack of it, make no difference to my faith. It makes a big difference to Catholics.
I’m just wondering what other support there might be in the NT or OT for PV?
EDIT: I like to go to YLT on matters of interpretation. It’s supposed to be closer to being a direct word-for-word translation of the original Greek or Hebrew texts. It can be hard to read, so I look to other versions for general reading. But the YLT is good for getting down to what the original writers intended. To go any deeper, I look at the Blue Letter Bible web site, which breaks the KJV down back to the original Greek and Hebrew.
I’m just wondering what other support there might be in the NT or OT for PV?
EDIT: I like to go to YLT on matters of interpretation. It’s supposed to be closer to being a direct word-for-word translation of the original Greek or Hebrew texts. It can be hard to read, so I look to other versions for general reading. But the YLT is good for getting down to what the original writers intended. To go any deeper, I look at the Blue Letter Bible web site, which breaks the KJV down back to the original Greek and Hebrew.
C
Chris258
Guest
That verse does indeed seem to imply that Joseph and Mary had sex after Jesus was born. However, the word ‘until’ or ‘till’ in that sentence is not meant to imply that. The original Greek fundamentally means ‘during the period of time from Joseph’s receiving Mary to Jesus’ birth, Joseph did not have sex with Mary’.
From a biblical commentary by Protestant authors:
Here are a couple of the referenced verses from Young’s Literal Translation for examples of the ambiguity in the words translated ‘until’:
I hope this doesn’t imply Zombie Samuel came and visited Saul, unless we’re referring to that little screw-up with the medium!
Sarai was past child-bearing age when she had Isaac, but I doubt she could beat what Michal did!
I sure hope Paul didn’t want Timothy to stop doing these things after he left!
M
mark_a
Guest
P
panevino
Guest
PV has nothing to do with some idea of sex being impure.
Mary served God the Father. As did Joseph. Per marys words
Luke 1:38 And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her.
PV is a byproduct of thier commitment to God, and being included in bringing His son into the world.
A
Axion
Guest
This sort of nonsense is pushed by those who think that the modern obsession with sex pervaded biblical society. Strangely this includes some modern protestants who are the only ones who devote endless time to trying to “prove” that the person known for 2,000 years as the Virgin Mary wasn’t a virgin, and that bearing the only-begotten Son of God wasn’t enough for her. This obsession is probably based in trying to disprove Catholicism (and Orthodoxy, and the other ancient Churches and witnesses.)
The principal reason (apart from its contradiction to Church teaching) for objecting to the attempt to turn the Virgin Mary into the mother of a brood of ornery offspring is that this makes two fundamental errors.
- It misunderstands Biblical faith and spirituality. Jesus, John the Baptist and other Jews who devoted their lives to God did remain celibate. This was of course also advocated by Paul, and vows of celibacy even between husband and wife, are attested in the Old Testament.
Similarly the idea that Jesus had a batch of “brothers” and “sisters” who shared his blood yet did nothing whatsoever of note is another detraction from his uniqueness. It leads naturally to the next stage of this “normal” pattern, which is the theory that Jesus also had a wife and several kids of his own! After all, proponents argue, it was wrong for Jewish men not to marry and have children, and wouldn’t Jesus have lived a “normal” life?
P
placido
Guest
Matthew was concerned with making 100 % sure that Joseph was not Jesus’ biological father. He was not concerned with what may of may not have happened after Jesus was born.
By the way, if Joseph and Mary “did the things husbands and wives normally do”, then how on earth did they not have any other child twelve years after Jesus’ birth?
placido
P
placido
Guest
Perpetual virginity, or lack of it, makes not difference to your faith (short term), but on the long run (after establishing that Mary had other children) people may come up with a variety of wild teachings like “the Jesus dynasty” and you would find it difficult to refute them.
placido
R
rwiding
Guest
I believe if one looks into the few but powerful, multi-dimensional yet very straightforward times when The Blessed Mother appears in the Gospels the question answers itself.When was the official declaration of Mary’s perpetual virginity, if there was one…? I have been trying to search for this information, but I can’t find an answer
Spend some time meditating on the words of Archangel Gabriel (or was it Rafael?) appeared to Mary; or perhaps the significance of her visit to Elizabeth’s House; remembering the Gospels Mirror the fulfillment of the Sacred Scriptures; Laws, Teachings, Stories and Symbols of the Old Testament.
This was one issue I never understood and actually kept me far away from a much deeper relationship with the Holy Trinity. I don’t know how it all made sense, it just did. Our Blessed Mother is not to be end in herself; but perhaps the Greatest of all signposts leading us closer to the Heart of Christ. Not for her Glory, but His.
Some of the details for some reason and niggling little questions and doubts one day, for no particular reason just went away with the help of our Blessed Mother as if a missing piece of still an imperfect picture came into place; imperfect yet more complete.
F
FNDRB58
Guest
Here’s Father Serpa’s response in the Ask An Apologist section when asked why honor Mary as we do…
Hi,
Well, first of all we honor Mary as we do because God does. It was the Father who chose Mary to cooperate with Him in being the channel through which His Son would become man. She held God in her womb and nursed God at her breasts. No one, not any of the apostles or the saints who followed them, were ever called to be the tabernacle where the Word was made flesh! No one has had a more significant role in the history of salvation! No one! The more sensitive we are to just who Jesus is, the more we are taken by the one who was closest to Him. He, after all is God made flesh, and she is His mother.
Fr. Vincent Serpa, O.P.
Hi,
Well, first of all we honor Mary as we do because God does. It was the Father who chose Mary to cooperate with Him in being the channel through which His Son would become man. She held God in her womb and nursed God at her breasts. No one, not any of the apostles or the saints who followed them, were ever called to be the tabernacle where the Word was made flesh! No one has had a more significant role in the history of salvation! No one! The more sensitive we are to just who Jesus is, the more we are taken by the one who was closest to Him. He, after all is God made flesh, and she is His mother.
Fr. Vincent Serpa, O.P.
I
inkaneer
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roy5
Haven’t read all these postings, but what always has troubled me especially about the centrality of Mary in Catholic adoration is that St. Paul never mentions her even once. He wrote a bunch of letters with plenty of theological material, but Mary is completely omitted. Why?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roy5
The whole story of her parents, Anne and Joachim, is not found in the Bible - not even their names - so that raises questions, too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roy5
But isn’t becoming the mother of Christ quite enough to make her ‘blessed among women’?
Originally Posted by Roy5
Haven’t read all these postings, but what always has troubled me especially about the centrality of Mary in Catholic adoration is that St. Paul never mentions her even once. He wrote a bunch of letters with plenty of theological material, but Mary is completely omitted. Why?
Yes kit is. Paul also mentions only two Apostles, Peter and James. Maybe we can do some editing here and reduce the scriuptures to only what Paul confirms.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roy5
The whole story of her parents, Anne and Joachim, is not found in the Bible - not even their names - so that raises questions, too.
Well you know the early church did refer to her as the new Eve. So maybe there was a second creation? What do you think guys?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roy5
But isn’t becoming the mother of Christ quite enough to make her ‘blessed among women’?
Notice that he says “mother of Christ” instead of “Mother of God” and he doesn’t capitalize the ‘M’ in mother even though it is a title. Notice also that he calls her ‘Mary’ even though the scriptures say future generations would call her Blessed. Just goes to show how far protestantism has distanced itself from the early church who revered the Blessed Virgin and from whom we obtain our doctrines. It also show how divorced protestant theology is not only from that of the Apostolic Tradition but of the people that protestants call “The Grest Reformers”.
I
inkaneer
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roy5
As for her perpetual virginity, I don’t see that as essential, and Matt. 1:25 suggests that she and Joseph may have lived quite normally as husband and wife.
Jerome in his writing against the heretic Helvidius wrote:
“… Might I not array against you the whole series of ancient writers? Ignatius, Polycarp, Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, and many other apostolic and eloquent men, who against [the heretics] Ebion, Theodotus of Byzantium, and Valentinus, held these same views and wrote volumes replete with wisdom. If you had ever read what they wrote, you would be a wiser man” (Against Helvidius: The Perpetual Virginity of Mary 19 [A.D. 383]).
Helvidius was a heretic who claimed Mary had other children by Joseph. Jerome defends the teaching of the church that she was ‘ever virgin’ by referring to men of the first and second centuries like Polycarp and Ignatius who claimed that The Mother of God was “ever virgin.” What makes these men [Ignatius and Polycarp] important is that they were the disciples of the Apostle John into whose care Jesus gave his mother. They literally learned the faith at the feet of the Apostle. Now if anybody in the first century would know if The Blessed Virgin Mary had other children it would be John. So why did this Apostle tell Polycarp and Ignatius she didn’t? Is it unreasonable to think that Ignatius and Polycarp wrote what John had told them? It’s a rhetorical question.
Originally Posted by Roy5
As for her perpetual virginity, I don’t see that as essential, and Matt. 1:25 suggests that she and Joseph may have lived quite normally as husband and wife.
That is because of poor exogesis on your part. The Blessed Mary could not have any marital relations with Joseph because Joseph was no dummy. He was an upright and just man He also knew the OT. He knew what happened when the ark of the covenant was defiled by men. Blessed Mary is the arc of the New Covenant. Just as the old ark was the tabernacle that contained the manna, the stone tablets and the rod of Aaron signifying the bread from heaven, the word of God and the priesthood The blessed Virgin Mary is the tabernacle that contained Christ who was the Bread from Heaven, The Word and the eternal High Priest. Furthermore The Blessed Mary says twice in scripture that she is the handmaid of the Lord. She says it to the angel Gabriel [Luke 1:38] and she says it to Elizabeth [Luke 1:48]. That word has significance that we tend to ignore because it is not a word that we are accustomed to using today. But in the ancient world of the first century a handmaid was a female servant dedicated to serving one person and only that one person. Many times the handmaid was a slave. The word is translated from the Greek doule[feminine] or *doulos *[masculine] and according to the KJV lexicon it means:
- a slave, bondman/bondwoman, man/woman of servile condition
a. a slave
metaph., one who gives himself up to another’s will
b. those whose service is used by Christ in extending and advancing his cause
among men
c. devoted to another to the disregard of one’s own interests - a servant, attendant
Jerome in his writing against the heretic Helvidius wrote:
“… Might I not array against you the whole series of ancient writers? Ignatius, Polycarp, Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, and many other apostolic and eloquent men, who against [the heretics] Ebion, Theodotus of Byzantium, and Valentinus, held these same views and wrote volumes replete with wisdom. If you had ever read what they wrote, you would be a wiser man” (Against Helvidius: The Perpetual Virginity of Mary 19 [A.D. 383]).
Helvidius was a heretic who claimed Mary had other children by Joseph. Jerome defends the teaching of the church that she was ‘ever virgin’ by referring to men of the first and second centuries like Polycarp and Ignatius who claimed that The Mother of God was “ever virgin.” What makes these men [Ignatius and Polycarp] important is that they were the disciples of the Apostle John into whose care Jesus gave his mother. They literally learned the faith at the feet of the Apostle. Now if anybody in the first century would know if The Blessed Virgin Mary had other children it would be John. So why did this Apostle tell Polycarp and Ignatius she didn’t? Is it unreasonable to think that Ignatius and Polycarp wrote what John had told them? It’s a rhetorical question.
- Status