Replies

Mary's response to Gabriel is not in the past tense, that was the point I was trying to make. "How shall this be..." (ἔσται -future tense), "since I do not know man" (γινώσκω -present tense). Literally then she is not saying that she "has not known a man" but that she "does not know man" and it is this phrase which theologians have interpreted to indicate a vow of perpetual virginity.

How is one led to such a conclusion? Crucially the first part of the angel's message regards a future event: he tells Mary that she will in the future conceive a child. (Note the angel was not at this point announcing that Mary had already conceived a child since the incarnation would only happen once Mary uttered her fiat which is recorded in verse 38 after this exchange). So the Angel is not saying in verse 31 "You are already with child", to which a bemused Mary could legitimately have asked, "How is this possible since I am a virgin?"

Instead a girl about to be married expresses confusion as to how she could possibly conceive a child in the future. Such a response would be utterly bizarre. Bizarre unless we understand Mary to be saying something different which is, "How could God wish me to have a child since I have consecrated myself to him as a virgin?".

Verse 35 then records the angel's response to Mary's legitimate question. He explains how Mary will conceive without breaking her vow of perpetual virginity.

To sum up, it makes no logical sense for Mary to respond to the angel's announcement of a future pregnancy with the statement that this is not possible because she has not yet known a man.

This in response to your post asking for any direct Scriptural justification for the doctrine of the perpertual virginity of Our Lady; about tradition and early Church documents I have nothing I can usefully add to what has already been cited.

(White marriages are not too common these days.)

Vera Lex, ""How shall this be..." (ἔσται -future tense), "since I do not know man" (γινώσκω -present tense). Literally then she is not saying that she "has not known a man" but that she "does not know man" and it is this phrase which theologians have interpreted to indicate a vow of perpetual virginity. " I understand that they "interpreted" this to mean she had a vow of perpetual virginity. It simply isn't in the Greek text. It is present tense. She did not know a man at the point when Gabriel approached her. It didn't make any Earthly sense and still doesn't. It was miraculous. At least on that, we can agree. "To sum up, it makes no logical sense for Mary to respond to the angel's announcement of a future pregnancy with the statement that this is not possible because she has not yet known a man." I believe it makes perfect human sense to ask the question with a sincere heart. I also agree with the observation that Protestants make too little of the place of honor God bestowed on Mary. The Roman Church makes too much of it. And that the truth lies closer to the Roman position. Thank you for your post, ampu