And the current head of the CDF has questioned the physical virginity of the Blessed Mother; in spite of the four Marian dogmas!
ebb tide:
No I don’t think he rejected it, what he was I think examining was the question of Mary’s virginity during birth in terms of whether she experienced any pain or not, etc. as it relates to Mary’s perpetual virginity. While affirming the Virgin Birth, which he did affirm, that is that Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit was Incarnate of the Virgin Mary and became Man, what he was dealing with was whether Mary experienced same thing all other woman experience when giving Birth and her hymen was broken or not. He in no way denied 1) The Virgin Birth [the fundamental doctrine as expressed in the Nicene Creed], nor the 2) Perpetual Virginity of Mary in that Mary did not engage in relations with St. Joseph and the brothers and sisters of the Lord are cousins or children of St. Joseph from an earlier Wife as St. Jerome details in his Writing against Helvidius.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church to be honest is not clear on this point. What the Church has always taught is that Mary was a virgin before, through and after the Birth of Christ. However, the prophet Isaiah does state “Before she comes into Labor, she gives birth, before the pains come upon her, she safely delivers a male child” (cf Isaiah 66:7). Thus, if one applies this prefiguration to Mary, one can make a case she experienced no pain if one wants to associate all pain with original sin. However, while the Church teaches, and I accept, the Immaculate Conception, that Mary by a singular Grace of God was saved in an extraordinary way, the NT does also allude that Mary would also experience the pain and sorrow of all other human beings, which does not contradict that she was preserved free from original sin and saved by God’s Grace from the moment of her conception. St. Luke states “and you yourself a sword will pierce: (cf. Luke 2:35) and later in Luke in the passage on the Finding in the Temple St Luke states “Your father and I have been looking for you with great anxiety” (Luke 2:48).
So my take is that as a theologian, the head of the CDF was only looking at all the Biblical texts and posing the question whether Mary experienced the pains and trials of all other humans, including what all woman go thru. Now if you want to draw the connection of Genesis 3:15 that because of Eve’s Sin, woman have child bearing pains and thus the Immaculate Conception would come into conflict with making a statement that Mary experienced pain in Child birth, then an appeal to Isaiah 66:7 could be applied to Mary in this context.
To my knowledge, the Church has “Never definitively taught” that Mary did not suffer in Childbirth or did suffer. One would think given that the Son of God suffered on the Cross, Mary also experienced suffering as St. Luke’s Gospel indicates and that she united her suffering to CHrist, which St.Paul calls all of us to do (cf. Colossians 1:24).
In closing, I do not see where your charges against the head of the CDF are accurate and I think show a misunderstanding of what the Church actually teaches. Again, the Church has never defined authoritatively on Mary’s virginity during childbirth and of course one should tread lightly when dealing with this question. There are various opinions on this among the Western Fathers and Eastern Fathers but none of their views have been taught definitively.