Posted on 03/17/2012 2:30:01 PM PDT by reaganaut
I understand the history of the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary (ἀειπαρθένος). I know it was taught as early as the 4th century, and I understand the development of "Spritual Marriages" in the Early Middle ages. That isn't what I am asking.
I have a good grasp of the history, doctrine and Biblical texts. I have done a lot of research on the topic. I grew up in Catholic school and Matthew 1:25 always got me in trouble during Catechism class.
Douay-Rheims Bible
And he knew her not till she brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS. (Matthew 1:25).
"Know" is a very common idiom for sex in Judaism of the period of writing. Again, I don't want to debate the text or history.
Protestants have no issue with Joseph and Mary having a normal marriage and having sexual relations AFTER the birth of Jesus (not before for obvious reasons) and having other children.
What I am curious about is the WHY the doctrine is important to MODERN Catholics (Medieval Catholics I get). Why does matter if Mary was ever-virgin (after the birth of Christ) or not?
First, I don’t want to take the time starting an argument or getting bogged down in one in the religion forum.
So, I’ll just note that Catholics obviously don’t interpret Matthew 1:25 as necessarily meaning that Mary knew Joseph after the birth of Jesus. Someone else with the time or the will to do so could give a better explanation if they wish.
Also, are you asking why Catholics hold to the perpetual virginity of Mary or why the perpetual virginity of Mary is important to Catholics? If it’s the latter, then Matthew 1:25 and whether the doctrine is true or not is not really relevant to the question. But since you mentioned it, I’m guessing that you would like some explanation as to why Catholics believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary, not just why it is important to Catholics.
>>However that doesn’t answer the question as to why she MUST have remained a Virgin AFTER the birth of Christ.<<
Again, purity. The Virgin Birth is one of last times we see God’s hand directly. It is critical He be seen in the event, which included her staying a virgin through and, more importantly, after.
And that about exhausts what I can assemble from my years as a Catholic way back when...
The Immaculate Conception is a dogma of the Catholic Church maintaining that Mary was kept free of original sin from her moment of conception and is not to be confused with the virginity of Mary or the virgin birth of Jesus.
Totally agree with you! Reality is that we live in a world hostile to Christianity, and we do have to learn how to defend ourselved. Even from other Christians, who like St. Paul, believed persecuting Christians was a noble cause. Acts 9:4
First, I know there is often confusion between the Virgin Birth and Perpetual Virginity of Mary and I was seeing some confusion, hence my clarification.
The Bible never says she chose to remain a virgin or that they did not have a conjugal marriage. My vocab choice was fine.
However, thank you for your statement and I see perhaps a glimmer of why even though not directly addressed.
They never had a conjugal marriage, nor was she ever planning on one either.
- - - - -
Interesting statement. Could you source that please? I am sincerely interested.
Why does anyone who doesn’t believe it—Care.
- - - - -
Because I am trying to understand why it is such a hot button.
I posted this as Ecumenical because I wasn’t starting a fight. I want to understand why it is important.
You wrote:
“The Bible never says she chose to remain a virgin or that they did not have a conjugal marriage.”
So say you. Ask yourself why Mary went unpunished for putting a question to Gabriel when Zachariah was struck mute.
“My vocab choice was fine.”
Not for a Christian.
Jesus is God. Nothing can make Him “impure”.
But since you mentioned it, I’m guessing that you would like some explanation as to why Catholics believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary, not just why it is important to Catholics.
- - - - —
I understand the text, interpretation, etc. But I don’t get why there is hostility to the idea that she wasn’t.
This is an Ecumenical thread specifically because I DID NOT want to start a fight. In my work, I am constantly asking “why?” and this was one area where I didn’t understand the why.
http://www.askacatholic.com/_webpostings/answers/2000_08AUG/2000AugUsageOfUntil.cfm
If Joseph and Mary never had sexual intercourse, then their marriage was never consummated. Therefore, the marriage was invalid. On that basis, Joseph would not be Jesus’ stepfather and was just a friend.
My thought has always been that Middle Eastern cultures put a great emphasis on virginity (look at how nowadays they actually have operations to “recreate” it, as if a physical hymen actually is that important).
To the Biblical Christian this is not important in the least. The important point for us is that Jesus was born of God, who is Spirit. A spirit does not take a woman’s virginity, but He was born of the Holy Spirit who “overshadowed” Mary. Thus Jesus is divine. Other than that, Mary remaining “perpetually” virgin has always smacked of the thought that sex is unclean and unholy, whether in or out of marriage.
I know our Catholic brethren disagree with this. It seems very obvious to me, and is one of the reasons I am not Catholic.
Mormons believe God impregnated Mary as a physical being. I obviously have great issues with this.
I hate to “hit and run” but I won’t be around for the flames for awhile, I’ll check in later for the fires!
I’ve always believed small philosophical ideas have great impact on cultures. IMHO, this is one of those “small, huge, ideas”.
That theory implies an infinite regression i.e. Mary could not be “pure” without Mary’s mother being “pure”.
I believe Mary gave birth to Jesus as a virgin because that arrangement fulfilled prophecy.
It is critical He be seen in the event, which included her staying a virgin through and, more importantly, after.
- - - -
Thank you for your honest response and that does make quite a bit of sense, even if I don’t see Mary remaining a virgin her whole life detracting from her purity, I can see where you are going with this.
Thanks again. That helps alot
The problem with this perfecting of Mary, the ever-virgin, the sinless, the bodily assumed, outside of the lack of scriptural validation, is that a perfect, sinless Mary would have had the same, physical issues as far as the inherited sin nature, as Jesus would have had, if all the learned and elaborate speculations and intellectualizations regarding His birth were actually the case.
Accepting that He was born of a virgin and that virgin was Mary, who was regarded as special and unique among women and therefore capable of bearing the Christ Child is as far as I'll go.
Great teachers of the Church from at least the fourth century spoke of Mary as having remained a virgin throughout her life:
Athanasius (Alexandria, 293 - 373)
Epiphanius (Palestine, 315? - 403)
Jerome (Stridon, present day Slovenia, 345? - 419)
Augustine (Numidia, now Algeria, 354 - 430)
Cyril (Alexandria, 376 - 444)
Martin Luther(lutheran church) was one of the biggest defenders of this concept.
Ummm...I’m a devout Christian who is not in any way hostile to Catholicism. I’m just trying to understand something that is foreign to me.
Not sure where Venturer got the idea I was hostile.
That's fine. I didn't mean to imply that you were trying to start a fight if that's what you think I was doing.
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.