Posted on 05/31/2011 11:34:50 AM PDT by sigzero
Mary was a virgin who was to conceive by being overshadowed by the Holy Spirit and give birth to the Son of God. Few in Christian realms would deny Mary was a virgin and remained a virgin through pregnancy and the birth of Christ. This was the ultimate fulfillment of a prophecy from Isaiah:
Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel. (Isaiah 7:14, emphasis added)
However, Mary’s virginity after the birth of Christ can become a heated debate in some circles. Though some may think this is a Roman Catholic versus Protestant view, it is not. Many Protestants, including people like Martin Luther and John Calvin, have held to Mary remaining a virgin for the duration of her life. Let’s look at the issues in a little more detail.
(Excerpt) Read more at answersingenesis.org ...
I am an old timer. But I am still shocked that someone would dis his own mama so.
Yeah, I feel the same. Time was respect for parents was assumed. Not so much today. Even here.
Very very true. And then again some things just transcend time like the fact that a marriage must be consummated to be a marriage.
If one looks at an Orthodox icon of the Flight into Egypt done in full traditional style without Western influences, you will see St. Joseph the Betrothed depicted as an aged man (as also in icons of the Nativity), and besides him and, as one would expect, the Theotokos and Ever-Virgin Mary, and Our Lord Jesus Christ as an infant, a young man. That young man is St. James, titled Brother of the Lord, later the first Bishop of Jerusalem (you will recall his presidency at the Council of Jerusalem recorded in The Acts of the Apostles).
St. James is so titled, because alone among Jesus' foster brothers (a state for which the Greek αδελφός would be used), not only did he share the exile in Egypt, but also shared his inheritance from Joseph with Our Lord.
Now, for those of you who fancy that the word "only" occurs somewhere in St. Paul's exhortation to Timothy, "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. . ." (possibly in place of the word "all", as that seems to be where it would go from the way self-proclaimed "Biblical Christians" seem to use that passage -- rusty though my Greek is, I am certain "only" is not a valid translation of πᾶσα), I cannot prove what I telling you, as the relevant events are not recorded in the canonical Scriptures.
The Church in this matter regards the testimony of the Proto-Evangelium of James as trustworthy as to the basic outline of the life of the Virgin Mary: her dedication to God by Joachim and Anna, her vow of virginity, her life in the Temple until reaching puberty, her betrothal to the aged Joseph as a way of protecting her vow once she could no longer live in the Temple due to ritual purity laws, St. James's sharing of the exile in Egypt. . .
(A note to my separated Latin brethren, the strapping young virile-looking St. Joseph, intent on a life of asexual chastity, depicted in Western art never lived. St. Joseph was an aged widower when he was betrothed to Mary. Nor was it helpful that St. Jerome seems to have forgotten or never learned the truth of the matter, and started the speculation that αδελφός might have been used in a loose sense to mean "kinsman", the criticism of which position various and sundry heretics use to bolster their denial of the Perpetual Virginity of the Theotokos.)
Quite frankly, when people use the Church's Scriptures to try vainly to disprove what the Church has always taught, I am strongly tempted to adopt the position of Tertullian, that those outside the Church have no right to use her books.
You would think, though, that if Mary’s virginity were that important in the grand scheme of things, that much more would be brought out about the relationship between Mary, Joseph, the “kids”, and all that. Personally, I don’t really care if she remained a virgin, it doesn’t matter, not at all.
Mary was a mortal creature, designed, created by God to serve his purpose. That she did. But that’s all she did. She is no more special than any other of God’s creation. She did His will. As do we all.
If this subject has already been brought up on this thread, I apologize. The Jesuits ruined me as a theologian, but I still like to read.
Funny!!
Ordinarily, yes, as a sign of the anticipation of an heir, as the purpose of the union. And probably Joseph had such an expection. But then something extraordinary happened, did it not? Something that changed his life forever.
***Quite frankly, when people use the Church’s Scriptures to try vainly to disprove what the Church has always taught, I am strongly tempted to adopt the position of Tertullian, that those outside the Church have no right to use her books.***
Are you suggesting that I have not right to use the Bible?
>>This was based on Scripture. <<
No. It was based on flawed men misinterpreting scripture. That is why I don’t trust the interpretation of others. I may listen to it or read it, then it is up to me to decide for myself if I agree with their interpretation. My relationship with God is personal.
Everyone dies alone.
There are many Orthodox Icons showing St James and an infant Jesus. One famous one has the Holy Family running to Egypt with James holding the gifts of the Magi.
http://hilltopshepherd.wordpress.com/2011/03/19/saint-joseph-the-role-model-of-all-men/
Sorry, I am not good enough at HTML to post the icon, but it is half way down the article. And I don’t really know what the article was about.
In Jewish law, a marriage that has not been consummated is not considered a full marriage. Same with most Christian laws until very recently.
Not quite. Galileo got in trouble because the idiot in his book was the Pope. Who was also his patron. The fact Galileo didn't end up dead was a novelty of the time. Pulled that with the king of France as your patron and you would die watching you innards burn. The idea that the earth wasn't the center of the known universe was pretty common by that time.
Tertuallian would have said you are not (unless you are a Catholic Christian — and by “Catholic” I mean an Orthodox Christian though others on the board would mean a Latin Christian). But, notice, I only said I was strongly tempted to adopt Tertullian’s position, not that I have.
I find it vexing that in these latter days some seem to think that all previous generations of Christians, including those who themselves heard the preaching of Holy Apostles, managed to get things wrong, not individually — that surely happened — but in unison, in their consensus. Such folk seem to think Christ’s promise that the Spirit would lead his followers into all truth was somehow void down until the present day, or perhaps sometime in the 19th century when whatever innovation they are hawking, be it denial of the Perpetual Virginity of Mary or the existence of a “pre-tribulation rapture”, was first conceived. In both those cases, not only the Orthodox, but the Latins, the monophysites, the Nestorians, and the original protestant “reformers” are all in agreement against the innovation.
And, as the folks who push these innovations, unlike Joseph Smith, don’t do so on the basis of adding a new revelation or “Scripture”, but on the basis of purported fidelity to the Church’s Scriptures, the vexation presents a strong temptation to adopt Tertullian’s view.
If you have Christ you are never alone, especially in death.
Linguistically, you really don't have a leg to stand on here. Wouldn't it be better, just to say you hold it's true because a bunch of Popes, and others said so?
The Perpetual Virginity of Mary has been taught from Apostolic times, and recorded since the second century in Christian writings, and was universally held among all Christians until 1500 years later. That Mary was not a Perpetual Virgin is a new false gospel that comes with the heresies attendant with protestantism.
It is you who proclaim a new false gospel. Therefore the onus is on you to prove from scripture that Mary had relations with Joseph after the birth of Christ.
That you cannot do.
>>If you have Christ you are never alone, especially in death.<<
What I mean by that is that you will not have your wife, your kids, your priest, or even those who died at the same time you did. It will be just you and Him. You will not be able to say, “but my priest said...”
I misunderstood. I won’t be saying anything as I expect I will be struck dumb by His glory and majesty. I will however be listening.
I can do anything I want, and so can you - including believing that sex between a husband and wife somehow lessens the stature of the wife, and that there’s a queen of Heaven.
Thanks for at least finally admitting that the basis of your argument is appeal to authority.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.