M
MrS
Guest
Perhaps if you read this rather brief article:
catholic.com/library/Mary_Ever_Virgin.asp
you would raise better questions. If you chose to.
.
- Status
catholic.com/library/Mary_Ever_Virgin.asp
you would raise better questions. If you chose to.
.
D
dianaiad
Guest
Thank you.
did some research. The page you sent me to included several people who quoted the Protoevangelium of James, the book to which you are, evidently, referring. I note the following:
Origin is quoted as if he were in full agreement with it.
The fact is, he actually stated that it was of dubious and recent (well, to him, anyway) appearance. “Dubious” does not sound good. As well, the Protoevangelium of James was specifically mentioned in the list of books that Catholics were “not to receive” in the DECRETUM GELASIANUM, wherein the Pope listed the canonical works; those which were to be accepted as scripture (pretty much as now comprised by Catholics) and those which were not to be ‘received,’ or used.The document you are using as proof of your claims is specifically mentioned as one that is not to be used.
The problems with it include: the purported author isn’t the true author. The author was,a s were many of the authors of other ‘protoevangelistic’ gospels of the time, ignorant of Jewish law and custom; they were the ancient equivalent of modern day movie adaptations; well intentioned, perhaps, but, well…fiction.
I would have accepted this work, by the way, as the very evidence I was asking for from you…except that your own Popes and scholars tell us that it’s buggy.
See, as I said, it wouldn’t matter to me one bit if it turns out that Mary did make this vow (only the Protoevangelium says that Anna, her mother, made it FOR her—she didn’t have any say in the matter–and oh, that has her being married off to Joseph when she was twelve.). My faith is in Jesus the Christ, and while I honor His mother very much, I don’t put quite the emphasis upon her that you do. (shrug) So if it turns out that she was truly virgin all her life…not a problem for me.
What intrigues me is this amazing, almost hysterical defense of her perpetual virginity–and now it turns out that the basis for your belief is a book that was not written by the man named as the author, shows little or no understanding of Jewish custom and law, and was thrown out in about 450 (give or take fifty years…) by your own authorities.
Do you have something else?
P
Peter_J
Guest
P
Peter_J
Guest
Goodness. I’m channeling an old Star Trek episode here…I’m a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (that’s “LDS,” not “LSD.” )
Actually that was one of the movies. Number 4, to be specific.
P
Peter_J
Guest
No need to get yelled at, just for asking a good question.
Maybe. Maybe not. Keep in mind that Catholics are required to believe in Mary’s perpetual virginity, but not in the specific theory that, even before the Annunciation, she was already planning on celibacy. (Although I do think that’s the most reasonable explanation.)
D
dianaiad
Guest
Now IF that Protoevangelium of James has any basis in fact, then it is possible that her mother made that vow for her.
I can see where the beliefs come from, using that document as a basis. The problem is that this document has been deemed to be inaccurate and untrustworthy to the point that the Catholics themselves put it on a list of books 'not to be received."
So I guess we are at a bit of an impasse here; there’s this Tradition that everybody has relied on to inform their beliefs about Mary, but it is based upon a document that was discredited by the church itself.
Given that this is so, there has to be something else. I’m beginning to think that there may be something else…but blamed if I know what it is.
S
sail1993
Guest
Here are my feelings and beliefs regarding the Blessed Virgin Mary:
Mary is the only person ever conceived without original sin. I exclude Adam and Eve as they were created rather than conceived. She is “Full of Grace” as decreed by the Archangel Gabriel during the Annunciation. Our Holy Mother’s womb was the first tabernacle of Jesus. As the earthly Mother of Jesus his unbounded love for her would obviously be beyond description or understanding by our small earthbound hearts and minds. After her death Jesus brought her up to heaven and reunited her body with her soul. She was too holy for Him to allow her body to decompose. That makes her the one and only person to reside in heaven in an earthly body. Mary was crowned Queen of Heaven by God the Father as His daughter, by God the Son as His mother, by God the Holy Spirit as His chaste spouse. She is the dispenser of God’s graces. (Why we as Catholics do not ask her for them more often is beyond me. We need them now during these troubling times more than ever.) Mary, in addition to being the Mother of Our Lord is also our mother and her love and devotion to each of us is far greater than that of our own earthly mothers. Given these Catholic truths I’d say God thinks quite highly of her. I trust her completely as God trusted her with his own Son. I think that our minds are so narrow that we fail to realize that God is all powerful and in Mary he created the perfect human being to be the first tabernacle of His son. And in Joseph he created the perfect protector of Our Lord and Mary. Why is it so difficult to believe that two wonderful holy people who loved God with all their hearts (and knew what He had done for and by way of the two of them) would choose to remain celibate? Not to mention they were both visited by angels more than once. That in itself would be more than a little intimidating.
Many years ago a protestant that I met briefly asked me why we “worship Mary”, by praying the rosary, etc. He thought it an awful sin worthy of damnation. Although he was trying to be polite about it I could see that it pained him. My explanation to him was that as Catholics we are taught that Mary was the most pure person ever born and remained so until her death. As the Mother of Jesus, when we venerate her during the Hail Mary or the rosary we are asking for her intercession and actually praying to Jesus through her. And since she was the Mother of Jesus and his love for her was so great, how could he possibly refuse her anything? He appeared a bit relieved by my response and as a protestant brought up thinking that Catholics are nothing but a bunch of damned to hell heretics he seemed to have a better understanding of why we honor Mary as we do. I hope at some point he explored her further and is taking advantage of all she has to offer him.
And while it is true that we are not required to believe in Marian apparitions, (I personally do not believe she appears between the panes of the window of that Springfield, Mass hospital but people are praying the rosary there and that brings them closer to Our Lord, so that’s a plus,) I do believe in the apparitions at Lourdes, Fatima, Medjugorie and others. Some believe that these apparitions add nothing to the faith but I respectfully disagree. Mary, during these apparitions almost always urges penance, prayer and conversion. She often speaks of the anger of her Son and that without penance, prayer and conversions she will be unable to “hold back His hand” from giving the world what we rightly deserve. That’s a scary image. Rather than not adding to our faith she is telling us what’s going on in heaven. God’s mad at us and he’s not going to tolerate it much longer. She is telling us what God wants us to do to get back in his good graces. It’s up to us to listen or not. I believe she loves us so much and because God loves her so much He allows her to come down to earth to try to help and guide us. It may sound simplistic but that’s the easiest way for me to explain it. As Catholics we are given so much that other Christians churches do not have. Confession, Penance, the Mass, the Eucharist, even something as overlooked as the power of Holy Water. I feel sad for protestants who do not have these sacraments and do not take advantage of Mary’s graces and intercessions. As Catholics we know better and we should not turn our back on all these gifts but rather ask for and accept them as often as possible. (sorry to be so wordy, but I’m very grateful to Mary) For more on Mary I highly recommend St. Louis De Montfort’s book “True Devotion to Mary”. Pope JPII said reading it was a “turning point in my life”. It literally explains point by point why we should be devoted to Mary. The first few pages offer great insight into her humility and why we heard so little of her in the writings of the Apostles. I remember years ago my mother telling me that God surrounded Mary with thousands of angels so Satan couldn’t even see her. I wish I knew where she read that.
(POST IS TOO LONG SO I HAVE TO SPLIT IT)
Mary is the only person ever conceived without original sin. I exclude Adam and Eve as they were created rather than conceived. She is “Full of Grace” as decreed by the Archangel Gabriel during the Annunciation. Our Holy Mother’s womb was the first tabernacle of Jesus. As the earthly Mother of Jesus his unbounded love for her would obviously be beyond description or understanding by our small earthbound hearts and minds. After her death Jesus brought her up to heaven and reunited her body with her soul. She was too holy for Him to allow her body to decompose. That makes her the one and only person to reside in heaven in an earthly body. Mary was crowned Queen of Heaven by God the Father as His daughter, by God the Son as His mother, by God the Holy Spirit as His chaste spouse. She is the dispenser of God’s graces. (Why we as Catholics do not ask her for them more often is beyond me. We need them now during these troubling times more than ever.) Mary, in addition to being the Mother of Our Lord is also our mother and her love and devotion to each of us is far greater than that of our own earthly mothers. Given these Catholic truths I’d say God thinks quite highly of her. I trust her completely as God trusted her with his own Son. I think that our minds are so narrow that we fail to realize that God is all powerful and in Mary he created the perfect human being to be the first tabernacle of His son. And in Joseph he created the perfect protector of Our Lord and Mary. Why is it so difficult to believe that two wonderful holy people who loved God with all their hearts (and knew what He had done for and by way of the two of them) would choose to remain celibate? Not to mention they were both visited by angels more than once. That in itself would be more than a little intimidating.
Many years ago a protestant that I met briefly asked me why we “worship Mary”, by praying the rosary, etc. He thought it an awful sin worthy of damnation. Although he was trying to be polite about it I could see that it pained him. My explanation to him was that as Catholics we are taught that Mary was the most pure person ever born and remained so until her death. As the Mother of Jesus, when we venerate her during the Hail Mary or the rosary we are asking for her intercession and actually praying to Jesus through her. And since she was the Mother of Jesus and his love for her was so great, how could he possibly refuse her anything? He appeared a bit relieved by my response and as a protestant brought up thinking that Catholics are nothing but a bunch of damned to hell heretics he seemed to have a better understanding of why we honor Mary as we do. I hope at some point he explored her further and is taking advantage of all she has to offer him.
And while it is true that we are not required to believe in Marian apparitions, (I personally do not believe she appears between the panes of the window of that Springfield, Mass hospital but people are praying the rosary there and that brings them closer to Our Lord, so that’s a plus,) I do believe in the apparitions at Lourdes, Fatima, Medjugorie and others. Some believe that these apparitions add nothing to the faith but I respectfully disagree. Mary, during these apparitions almost always urges penance, prayer and conversion. She often speaks of the anger of her Son and that without penance, prayer and conversions she will be unable to “hold back His hand” from giving the world what we rightly deserve. That’s a scary image. Rather than not adding to our faith she is telling us what’s going on in heaven. God’s mad at us and he’s not going to tolerate it much longer. She is telling us what God wants us to do to get back in his good graces. It’s up to us to listen or not. I believe she loves us so much and because God loves her so much He allows her to come down to earth to try to help and guide us. It may sound simplistic but that’s the easiest way for me to explain it. As Catholics we are given so much that other Christians churches do not have. Confession, Penance, the Mass, the Eucharist, even something as overlooked as the power of Holy Water. I feel sad for protestants who do not have these sacraments and do not take advantage of Mary’s graces and intercessions. As Catholics we know better and we should not turn our back on all these gifts but rather ask for and accept them as often as possible. (sorry to be so wordy, but I’m very grateful to Mary) For more on Mary I highly recommend St. Louis De Montfort’s book “True Devotion to Mary”. Pope JPII said reading it was a “turning point in my life”. It literally explains point by point why we should be devoted to Mary. The first few pages offer great insight into her humility and why we heard so little of her in the writings of the Apostles. I remember years ago my mother telling me that God surrounded Mary with thousands of angels so Satan couldn’t even see her. I wish I knew where she read that.
(POST IS TOO LONG SO I HAVE TO SPLIT IT)
S
sail1993
Guest
(PART TWO OF MY WORDY POST)
Another series of books I highly recommend are those detailing the visions of Venerable Anne Catherine Emmerich. I have read the four volume set “The Life of Jesus Christ and Biblical Revelations” and also “The Life of the Blessed Virgin Mary”. Although you can just read the part that explains only the Passion in “The Dolorous Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ” I think you will be missing so much about the life of Jesus, Mary, the saints, angels and so much more. The Mel Gibson movie The Passion, was based upon her visions. (It’s a shame that Mel lost so much credibility in recent years but that does not reflect upon these books). Her account of the Passion would drive you to your knees because of all He suffered for us. She also offers so much insight into the Holy Family’s life in exile, the childhood of Jesus, and the life of Our Lord before he began his mission. It explains the relationship of the apostles to Jesus and nulls the protestant misconception that Mary was not “ever virgin” or that Jesus had actual brothers. The books show the lineage of Our Lord and His relationship to the Apostles that protestants often call the “brothers” of Jesus. Her story of Mary Magdalene’s three conversions and subsequent devotion to Jesus is inspiring. Her two short paragraphs of angels collecting the pieces of flesh and blood of Our Lord that was torn from his body during the scourging and bearing of the cross and divinely putting His body back together in the tomb is heart wrenching (volume four, page 362). It was quite interesting finding out who that “good thief” was who was crucified next to Jesus and his prior relationship to Our Lord. The Immaculate Conception of Mary and the story of the Nativity are fascinating. It gives one a greater understanding of what procreation would have been like without original sin. The murder of the Innocents by Herod is heartbreaking and when I think of all the babies aborted in the world that‘s what it reminds me of. The stories of the creation of man and of original sin in the Garden of Eden makes you wish you could go back there and stop Eve from picking that fruit. After reading these books you would never doubt the power of God, His love for us or doubt the truths of the Catholic Church.
Just two more books! “Purgatory; Explained By The Lives And Legends Of The Saints”, by Fr. F.X. Schouppe, S.J… I first read this book years ago and never forgot it. It’s over 100 years old and gives a view of purgatory that will make you not want to even throw a piece of litter on the ground for fear of offending God!! It also shows the power of prayer and why it is so important to pray for the Holy Souls in purgatory. But to ease the pain of that book you should afterward read “Diary of Saint Maria Faustina Kowalska” which shows us God’s Divine Mercy. I truly believe that one should not be read without the other. The first so that we should rightly fear God and the second so we embrace Him and His mercy.
God Bless you all!
Another series of books I highly recommend are those detailing the visions of Venerable Anne Catherine Emmerich. I have read the four volume set “The Life of Jesus Christ and Biblical Revelations” and also “The Life of the Blessed Virgin Mary”. Although you can just read the part that explains only the Passion in “The Dolorous Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ” I think you will be missing so much about the life of Jesus, Mary, the saints, angels and so much more. The Mel Gibson movie The Passion, was based upon her visions. (It’s a shame that Mel lost so much credibility in recent years but that does not reflect upon these books). Her account of the Passion would drive you to your knees because of all He suffered for us. She also offers so much insight into the Holy Family’s life in exile, the childhood of Jesus, and the life of Our Lord before he began his mission. It explains the relationship of the apostles to Jesus and nulls the protestant misconception that Mary was not “ever virgin” or that Jesus had actual brothers. The books show the lineage of Our Lord and His relationship to the Apostles that protestants often call the “brothers” of Jesus. Her story of Mary Magdalene’s three conversions and subsequent devotion to Jesus is inspiring. Her two short paragraphs of angels collecting the pieces of flesh and blood of Our Lord that was torn from his body during the scourging and bearing of the cross and divinely putting His body back together in the tomb is heart wrenching (volume four, page 362). It was quite interesting finding out who that “good thief” was who was crucified next to Jesus and his prior relationship to Our Lord. The Immaculate Conception of Mary and the story of the Nativity are fascinating. It gives one a greater understanding of what procreation would have been like without original sin. The murder of the Innocents by Herod is heartbreaking and when I think of all the babies aborted in the world that‘s what it reminds me of. The stories of the creation of man and of original sin in the Garden of Eden makes you wish you could go back there and stop Eve from picking that fruit. After reading these books you would never doubt the power of God, His love for us or doubt the truths of the Catholic Church.
Just two more books! “Purgatory; Explained By The Lives And Legends Of The Saints”, by Fr. F.X. Schouppe, S.J… I first read this book years ago and never forgot it. It’s over 100 years old and gives a view of purgatory that will make you not want to even throw a piece of litter on the ground for fear of offending God!! It also shows the power of prayer and why it is so important to pray for the Holy Souls in purgatory. But to ease the pain of that book you should afterward read “Diary of Saint Maria Faustina Kowalska” which shows us God’s Divine Mercy. I truly believe that one should not be read without the other. The first so that we should rightly fear God and the second so we embrace Him and His mercy.
God Bless you all!
C
Canto
Guest
Joseph became the guardian of Mary, he protected her.A couple of questions. If Mary’s choice was to be celibate why did she Mary Joesph? Or better yet why would Joseph Mary her? Did He also chose a life of celibacy? And two. You said understanding Joseph’s age? Where can I read about Joseph’s age?:
It has traditonally been thought that he was older
We don’t read much of Joseph in the scriptures, we don’t read of him at the wedding feast or his son’s crucifixion for example.
A question: What do you think Mary meant by asking the angel “how can this be since I do not know man.”
Why would she ask such a question if she didn’t intend on remaining a virgin. Wouldn’t she just assume she’d have to have sex with her husband Joseph?
Gregory of Nyssa understood this in support of the view that Mary had taken a lifelong vow of virginity, even in marriage:
For if Joseph had taken her to be his wife, for the purpose of having children, why would she have wondered at the announcement of maternity, since she herself would have accepted becoming a mother according to the law of nature?
Augistine said
Surely, she would not say, ‘HOW shall this be?’ unless she had already vowed herself to God as a virgin…If she intended to have intercourse, she wouldn’t have asked this question!
Vows taken by a married woman from the book of Numbers…
[6] And if she is married to a husband, while under her vows or any thoughtless utterance of her lips by which she has bound herself, [7] and her husband hears of it, and says nothing to her on the day that he hears; then her vows shall stand, and her pledges by which she has bound herself shall stand. [8] But if, on the day that her husband comes to hear of it, he expresses disapproval, then he shall make void her vow which was on her, and the thoughtless utterance of her lips, by which she bound herself; and the LORD will forgive her.
G
GodIsGracious
Guest
There’s also Oral Tradition. We keep telling you people this, but of course, you people who insist on “if it’s not in the bible” or “if Person X did not say it themselves” or “if it’s not written down” then it’s not acceptable.
The only thing I have to say is that the next time you’re at a family gathering and you hear a story about a family member from generations past that’s not written down anywhere or said from that person’s lips, or written by that person’s hand, then don’t believe that family story. Good or bad. Because you have no proof. Even though there are other family members who agree to the story.
(Note: “you” and “you’re” used to mean the general “you” and “you’re” and not specifically directed at the person I quoted.)
D
dianaiad
Guest
.
I appreciate it very much when someone shares his beliefs with me, and yours is an honest, and heartfelt testimony to your faith and your love for Mary. Thank you.
The only question I have is one that comes from my own culture and understanding of family and God’s purpose for us, so please excuse me for it:
I have been taught all my life that marriage is sacred, and that no higher calling exists than that of ‘father’ and ‘mother.’ As a result, the thought that one’s love for, and intimate relations with, one’s spouse might be ‘unholy,’ or a distraction–or something ‘lesser’ that would diminish Mary in any way is one that is very difficult to wrap my mind around.
You ask me why it would be difficult to believe that Mary and Joseph would choose to remain celibate, and you give me as reasons that they were both visited by angels and were intimidated by that.
From my POV, I need to ask you; why is it so difficult to believe that they would choose to be man and wife, fully, and thus stand together in their service to the Lord?
I guess what I am saying is this: assuming that visits from angels and being chosen of God for this tremendous thing MUST result in celibacy is begging the question. Why? There is nothing, and I do repeat, NOTHING sinful in marital sexual relations. In fact, it is commanded of us. Mary’s Son mentioned it…when a man leaves his parents, and takes a wife, and they two become one flesh; it’s a good thing.Sex is a wonderful, glorious and holy thing between married couples; a commandment of God, and in no way sinful. Between married couples, it is supposed to be a joy and a joining–and also a way to become more ‘one’ so that they might serve the Lord and their families as He would have them serve.
So, it is holy, since it is a commandment. So holy a thing is it that messing around with sex outside the marriage bonds is considered (by us, at least) to be one of the most serious of sins–akin to blasphemy; it is a desecration of the bodies God created for us.
It’s why the consequences of Mary’s alleged transgression (getting pregnant before the wedding with Joseph) were so high.
I understand that I am asking something that might cause a huge paradigm shift in your POV, but I’m asking you to do it anyway; put yourself in the shoes of someone whose attitude toward sex is evidently different from yours, someone for whom it is NOT a given that visits from angels would automatically cause very holy people to abstain from sex with their spouses.
I guess I’m not very good at explaining the problem I’m having here. I guess it’s just that we are looking at the situation from two very different lenses. You have a deep love for Mary, and have an equally deep and gut level feeling that no-one as holy as she would have sex, because sex is intrinsically evil.
I do not venerate Mary as you do, though I certainly respect your feelings for her, and I think that she is the most worthy of all women. I also have been raised to believe that sex between married people is as holy and important a part of the sacrament of marriage as anything can be, and there is nothing unholy or sinful about it. For anybody. It is a 1 Corinthians 11:11 thing, I guess.
Thank you again for sharing your wonderful faith in Mary and in her Son.
D
dianaiad
Guest
Mary was not yet Joseph’s wife; she was betrothed to be his wife, but was not yet his wife. She was in that stage that we call ‘engagement’ but was more than that. In fact, it’s a stage that has been a recurring theme throughout the years since; more than engaged–in that breaking it took legal action and resulted in most of the consequences of a divorce–and less than marriage in that they did not live together or have sex.
Remember, at the time of the annunciation she was living with HER parents, not with Joseph. She then went directly to her cousin and stayed with her for three months. She was not in Joseph’s care in any way during that time.
As to her question, since she was a virgin, and the announcement was rather immediate, the question would have been a natural one from any girl; how can I get pregnant? I’ve never known (biblical sense) a man?
How about…because even though Gregory might consider women to be abysmally stupid, God wouldn’t have chosen a fool to bear His Son; she understood quite well what was required for conception?
Any good Jewish girl understood that unmarried women should be celibate. She was not yet married; the question is quite understandable in that light.
First we have to establish that she actually took such a vow. So far the only indication that she may have (or rather that Anna may have done it for her) is a book that was thrown out of consideration (Catholics were not to ‘receive’ it) around 450 AD.
M
MrS
Guest
First we have to establish that she actually took such a vow. So far the only indication that she may have (or rather that Anna may have done it for her) is a book that was thrown out of consideration (Catholics were not to ‘receive’ it) around 450 AD.
couple of points (or opinion if you prefer}
First… glad you recognize that the Catholic Church is the decision maker in all of this
Second… you simply asked for ANY reference that would or could suggest that this POV has been long held and merits consideration
Third… the Catholic Church did canonize the books of the Bible… which is and has been the book of the Catholic Church… for all to share, not self interpret
Fourth… the Canon only declares what is the Truth and must be accepted as the Truth. It does NOT say that other books are lies and must be rejected. Perhaps, and I say perhaps, there are other writings from the early periods of the Church that are either fully truthful, or partially truthful. We accept the full canon of Scripture as Truth. That is separate from any “rejection” or dismissal of other writing.
Fifth… we have yet to discuss the OT “types” of Mary that are fulfilled in the NT. These all support the perpetual virginity of Mary, her holiness, and her exalted position as the Mother of God.
Sixth… we have yet to discuss the full implication of the Greek which we translate “full of grace”
.
couple of points (or opinion if you prefer}
First… glad you recognize that the Catholic Church is the decision maker in all of this
Second… you simply asked for ANY reference that would or could suggest that this POV has been long held and merits consideration
Third… the Catholic Church did canonize the books of the Bible… which is and has been the book of the Catholic Church… for all to share, not self interpret
Fourth… the Canon only declares what is the Truth and must be accepted as the Truth. It does NOT say that other books are lies and must be rejected. Perhaps, and I say perhaps, there are other writings from the early periods of the Church that are either fully truthful, or partially truthful. We accept the full canon of Scripture as Truth. That is separate from any “rejection” or dismissal of other writing.
Fifth… we have yet to discuss the OT “types” of Mary that are fulfilled in the NT. These all support the perpetual virginity of Mary, her holiness, and her exalted position as the Mother of God.
Sixth… we have yet to discuss the full implication of the Greek which we translate “full of grace”
.
C
Canto
Guest
The angel tells Mary God wants her to give birth to the Messiah.
Logically Mary would think okay I guess Joseph and I will have to have sex, cause that’s how you get pregnant.
Yet she says how can this be since I do not no man? Rather than being a stupid woman (certainly not what Gregory implies) she would have been aware of how babies were made, so unless she intended to have sex with Joseph, why the question?
…Alfred Adersheim, in his Sketches of Jewish Social Life, p. 148, says there was a distinction between betrothal and marriage. He immediately adds, however, that from the moment of betrothal the woman was treated as if she were married;…In other words, Mary and Joseph were legally married but had not yet begun living together as husband and wife when Mary as a virgin became pregnant through the power of the Holy Spirit. When an angel informed Joseph in a dream of Mary’s condition, he believed the angel and took Mary to his home. If any of the neighbors noticed Mary was pregnant, they would not have suspected impropriety; they knew the couple had been married for some time. Mary’s condition wouldn’t have been too obvious to the community in any case because Mary soon went into the hill country for three months to visit her cousin Elizabeth (Luke 1:39-40, 56). It is important to understand that no slightest hint of impropriety—much less of immorality—could have been permitted in the carrying out of the birth of Christ, upon whose life, death, and resurrection the whole plan of redemption depended. Deut. 23:2, for example, forbids participation in the Lord’s assembly by a person of illegitimate birth or by any of his descendants to the tenth generation. If there had been any such suspicion, Jesus would have had no possibility of being accepted by the common people. (See Mark 6:2-3 and John 7:46.)
After all, if God had wished Jesus to have no human father what were the possibilities? He could have chosen a virgin who was not betrothed, or a widow who would have been willing to have a baby and be known as a “single mother” (always insisting that her baby had no human father). In both cases the baby would have been deprived of the important presence of a father in the home, and the mother would have been in danger of punishment under the Jewish law. As for the son, any claim he might make or any good he might do would be rejected as coming from a man of illegitimate birth.
God could have chosen a woman already married and living with her husband. It would not, then, have been a “virgin birth,” but it could have been a birth by the Holy Spirit without a human father. The nature of the birth, then, could have been kept secret (as in the case of Mary) until the appropriate time. But how could even the mother and her husband be sure that there was no earthly father for the baby?
The only other possibility, it would seem, was what God actually did: he chose a pure young woman, betrothed and legally married to a godly young man, but who had not…had any sexual contact with her husband. In this situation the baby could be conceived by the Holy Spirit. The husband could receive his wife…
G
Good_Fella
Guest
The Church’s traditional belief in the perpetual virginity of Mary isn’t culturally conditioned. The Holy Spirit transcends any human culture.
Neither the Son of Man, John the Baptist, nor the apostle Paul ever married. Haven’t you ever wondered why? Certainly it wasn’t because they thought marriage would make them less holy or something lesser. Perhaps they had a higher object of love in sight.
Whatever makes you think that Joseph and Mary would feel intimidated as you might feel under the same circumstances?
You forget Mary had already conceived a child of another Person while she was betrothed to Joseph before the consummation of their marriage.
Is this the eleventh commandment?
Jesus, Mary, and Joseph were a family which served God like no other family.
So, it is holy, since it is a commandment. So holy a thing is it that messing around with sex outside the marriage bonds is considered (by us, at least) to be one of the most serious of sins–akin to blasphemy; it is a desecration of the bodies God created for us.
Marriage is a holy sacrament of the Church.
Try putting yourself in the shoes of Mary and Joseph instead of trying to put them in your shoes. You presume they shared your way of thinking.
I’m sure neither Mary, Paul, nor John the Baptist chose not to get married or abstain from having marital relations because they thought sex was intrinsically evil.
Catholics haven’t been raised to believe that marital relations are “intrinsically evil” or “unholy” or “sinful”. We perceive Mary’s chastity in a more positive light.
PAX :harp:
P
Peter_J
Guest
Thanks for that reply, dianaiad. It sounds you have a very reasonable-minded approach to these debates. (And a five-month-late Welcome to the forum!
)
P
Peter_J
Guest
The problem with that argument is, Gabriel simply said “You will conceive” without specifying when it would happen. Hence, if Mary and Joseph were planning to have regular marital relations, Mary would have simply figured that Gabriel meant that she would conceive by Joseph, once he had taken her into his home. It would have been strange for her to ask “How shall this be?”
D
dianaiad
Guest
Have you ever played that game where people sit in a circle, and someone whispers a sentence into the ear of the person sitting in the next chair, and that person whispers what was heard to the next person, and so on around the circle? The object of the game is to see how much the sentence changes from the first speaker to the last listener. It is not, please note, to see IF it changes, but how much.
So, m’friend, though you made your suggestion sarcastically, my reaction to it is…ok. The odds that any story told from person to person down the generations will remain accurate are slim to impossible. Therefore, while I would enjoy that family story, I would not base my eternal salvation and all my religious faith upon it without some first hand written corroboration.
In other words, oral history isn’t worth the paper it’s not written upon. Not when something as important as this is under discussion, anyway.
D
dianaiad
Guest
First we have to establish that she actually took such a vow. So far the only indication that she may have (or rather that Anna may have done it for her) is a book that was thrown out of consideration (Catholics were not to ‘receive’ it) around 450 AD.
couple of points (or opinion if you prefer}
First… glad you recognize that the Catholic Church is the decision maker in all of this
(grin) I only point out that if it is the decision maker in all of this, then the church decided that the book used to justify this idea is, er, ‘dubious’ and not to be believed or received by the church.
MrS:
I did mention that this certainly explains why some people believe it, but the problem remains; why do they believe it when the document you gave me was thrown out by the very people who are now using it to justify the position?
…and this particular book wasn’t among 'em. Which was the point, yes?
Uhmn…in this particular case…the church did precisely that. Or "not to be received’ has a very different meaning to you than it does to me.
Using eisegesis, yes, they would. However, those same verses would still apply to her if she fully fulfilled her role as wife to Joseph.
So you are telling me that someone who is full of grace cannot be married in the fullest sense of the word?
Should we all not then become Shakers?
G
GodIsGracious
Guest
Yes, and it’s called “Telephone.” Which is why I mentioned telling family stories around the dinner table. I’m sure great aunt mathilda’s great great grandfather had some mighty heroic deeds in the revolutionary war when, really, he was probably sweeping up the mess the cooks made. We could probably prove his existence and work in the revolutionary war through documentation that he existed there, but what he actually did is probably up to oral tradition.
Same thing.
Also, I find it ironic that you mention how important this discussion is, yet, you seem to think that our Blessed Mother would be so common as the rest of us.
It’s just going to come down to what you believe. Are you going to believe what the Catholic Church tells us about Mary? Are you going to believe what great aunt Mathilda said about her great great grandfather? Are you going to believe what your father said about someone else? Probably. Because you trust them.
BTW, what I think is missing is this: Many Catholics, I know myself being one of them, trusts in the Holy Spirit to reveal his teachings to us through the Catholic church (as just one conduit to those teachings.) It’s a matter of faith. Which is why not everyone is Catholic. There are just some things that people simply do not believe. (Even by some Catholics!)
- Status