The Church Fathers- Mary: Ever Virgin

“And behold, an angel of the Lord stood by [St. Anne], saying, ‘Anne! Anne! The Lord has heard your prayer, and you shall conceive and shall bring forth, and your seed shall be spoken of in all the world.’ And Anne said, ‘As the Lord my God lives, if I beget either male or female, I will bring it as a gift to the Lord my God, and it shall minister to him in the holy things all the days of its life.’ . . . And [from the time she was three] Mary was in the temple of the Lord as if she were a dove that dwelt there” (Protoevangelium of James 4, 7 [A.D. 120]).

“And when she was twelve years old there was held a council of priests, saying, ‘Behold, Mary has reached the age of twelve years in the temple of the Lord. What then shall we do with her, lest perchance she defile the sanctuary of the Lord?’ And they said to the high priest, ‘You stand by the altar of the Lord; go in and pray concerning her, and whatever the Lord shall manifest to you, that also will we do.’ . . . [A]nd he prayed concerning her, and behold, an angel of the Lord stood by him saying, ‘Zechariah! Zechariah! Go out and assemble the widowers of the people and let them bring each his rod, and to whomsoever the Lord shall show a sign, his wife shall she be. . . . And Joseph [was chosen]. . . . And the priest said to Joseph, ‘You have been chosen by lot to take into your keeping the Virgin of the Lord.’ But Joseph refused, saying, ‘I have children, and I am an old man, and she is a young girl’” (ibid., 8–9).

“And Annas the scribe came to him [Joseph] . . . and saw that Mary was with child. And he ran away to the priest and said to him, ‘Joseph, whom you did vouch for, has committed a grievous crime.’ And the priest said, ‘How so?’ And he said, ‘He has defiled the virgin whom he received out of the temple of the Lord and has married her by stealth’” (ibid., 15).

“And the priest said, ‘Mary, why have you done this? And why have you brought your soul low and forgotten the Lord your God?’ . . . And she wept bitterly saying, ‘As the Lord my God lives, I am pure before him, and know not man’” (ibid.).

“The Book [the Protoevangelium] of James [records] that the brethren of Jesus were sons of Joseph by a former wife, whom he married before Mary. Now those who say so wish to preserve the honor of Mary in virginity to the end, so that body of hers which was appointed to minister to the Word . . . might not know intercourse with a man after the Holy Spirit came into her and the power from on high overshadowed her. And I think it in harmony with reason that Jesus was the firstfruit among men of the purity which consists in [perpetual] chastity, and Mary was among women. For it were not pious to ascribe to any other than to her the firstfruit of virginity” (Commentary on Matthew 2:17 [A.D. 248]).

“If they [the brethren of the Lord] had been Mary’s sons and not those taken from Joseph’s former marriage, she would never have been given over in the moment of the passion [crucifixion] to the apostle John as his mother, the Lord saying to each, ‘Woman, behold your son,’ and to John, ‘Behold your mother’ [John 19:26–27), as he bequeathed filial love to a disciple as a consolation to the one desolate" (Commentary on Matthew 1:4 [A.D. 354]).

“Let those, therefore, who deny that the Son is by nature from the Father and proper to his essence deny also that he took true human flesh from the ever-virgin Mary” (Discourses Against the Arians 2:70 [A.D. 360]).

“We believe in one God, the Father almighty, maker of all things, both visible and invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God . . . who for us men and for our salvation came down and took flesh, that is, was born perfectly of the holy ever-virgin Mary by the Holy Spirit” (The Man Well-Anchored 120 [A.D. 374]).

“And to holy Mary, [the title] ‘Virgin’ is invariably added, for that holy woman remains undefiled” (Medicine Chest Against All Heresies 78:6 [A.D. 375]).

“[Helvidius] produces Tertullian as a witness [to his view] and quotes Victorinus, bishop of Petavium. Of Tertullian, I say no more than that he did not belong to the Church. But as regards Victorinus, I assert what has already been proven from the gospel—that he [Victorinus] spoke of the brethren of the Lord not as being sons of Mary but brethren in the sense I have explained, that is to say, brethren in point of kinship, not by nature. [By discussing such things we] are . . . following the tiny streams of opinion. Might I not array against you the whole series of ancient writers? Ignatius, Polycarp, Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, and many other apostolic and eloquent men, who against [the heretics] Ebion, Theodotus of Byzantium, and Valentinus, held these same views and wrote volumes replete with wisdom. If you had ever read what they wrote, you would be a wiser man” (Against Helvidius: The Perpetual Virginity of Mary 19 [A.D. 383]).

“We believe that God was born of a virgin, because we read it. We do not believe that Mary was married after she brought forth her Son, because we do not read it. . . . You [Helvidius] say that Mary did not remain a virgin. As for myself, I claim that Joseph himself was a virgin, through Mary, so that a virgin Son might be born of a virginal wedlock” (ibid., 21).

“It helps us to understand the terms ‘first-born’ and ‘only-begotten’ when the Evangelist tells that Mary remained a virgin ‘until she brought forth her first-born son’ [Matt. 1:25]; for neither did Mary, who is to be honored and praised above all others, marry anyone else, nor did she ever become the Mother of anyone else, but even after childbirth she remained always and forever an immaculate virgin” (The Trinity 3:4 [A.D. 386]).

“Imitate her [Mary], holy mothers, who in her only dearly beloved Son set forth so great an example of material virtue; for neither have you sweeter children [than Jesus], nor did the Virgin seek the consolation of being able to bear another son” (Letters 63:111 [A.D. 388]).

“You had good reason to be horrified at the thought that another birth might issue from the same virginal womb from which Christ was born according to the flesh. For the Lord Jesus would never have chosen to be born of a virgin if he had ever judged that she would be so incontinent as to contaminate with the seed of human intercourse the birthplace of the Lord’s body, that court of the eternal king” (Letter to Bishop Anysius [A.D. 392]).

“In being born of a Virgin who chose to remain a Virgin even before she knew who was to be born of her, Christ wanted to approve virginity rather than to impose it. And he wanted virginity to be of free choice even in that woman in whom he took upon himself the form of a slave” (Holy Virginity 4:4 [A.D. 401]).

“It was not the visible sun, but its invisible Creator who consecrated this day for us, when the Virgin Mother, fertile of womb and integral in her virginity, brought him forth, made visible for us, by whom, when he was invisible, she too was created. A Virgin conceiving, a Virgin bearing, a Virgin pregnant, a Virgin bringing forth, a Virgin perpetual. Why do you wonder at this, O man?” (Sermons 186:1 [A.D. 411]).

“Heretics called Antidicomarites are those who contradict the perpetual virginity of Mary and affirm that after Christ was born she was joined as one with her husband” (Heresies 56 [A.D. 428]).

“We confess, therefore, that our Lord and God, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, born of the Father before the ages, and in times most recent, made man of the Holy Spirit and the ever-virgin Mary” (Document of Amendment 3 [A.D. 426]).

“[T]he Word himself, coming into the Blessed Virgin herself, assumed for himself his own temple from the substance of the Virgin and came forth from her a man in all that could be externally discerned, while interiorly he was true God. Therefore he kept his Mother a virgin even after her childbearing” (Against Those Who Do Not Wish to Confess That the Holy Virgin is the Mother of God 4 [A.D. 430]).

“His [Christ’s] origin is different, but his [human] nature is the same. Human usage and custom were lacking, but by divine power a Virgin conceived, a Virgin bore, and Virgin she remained” (Sermons 22:2 [A.D. 450]).

smv: The question would be WHY would it happen with J. Duplantis? Or anyone for that matter, in this present age?

interesting question -- Quix any answers for this unbiblical stuff by J Duplantis, the demonic-possessed?

Quix: Mary K Baxter's Heaven and Hell books are solid, edifying, Biblical
And here is the extreme funny -- Baxter says that Paradise was sent down to Hell.
But Jesse Duplantis says Paradise is surrounding the City of Heaven

Now Quix's posts say both con-artists are speaking the truth. how is that logically possible?

", and the Holy Spirit resides in each believer, it only makes sense that a saved person can understand God's Word."

Were that the case then all believers would agree 100% on the interpretation of Scripture and there would be no schisms, heresies, denominations or Churches of one. Instead, absent any teaching authority you have a situation in which tens of thousands of "churches" who loudly disagree not only with the Catholic Church, but with each other.

No Christian argues the authority of the Bible, but are you certain an infallible Bible sufficient for you? Either you, or you are not. If you are infallibly certain, then you assert for yourself, and of course for every reader of Scripture, a personal infallibility which you deny the Pope, and which we claim only for him. You make every man his own Pope.

If you are not infallibly certain that you understand the true meaning of the whole Bible, then of what use to you is the objective infallibility of the Bible without an infallible interpreter?

Imagine that! A non-Christian talking about the Bible! Mazotah!

Have you finally stopped preaching that the Apostles were not blessed because they saw Jesus?

what about accepting the fact that Jesus rose from the dead?

Presently no screed name (post 431): Jesus Christ was persecuted and died - that is the only focus for a Christian

Actually for us Christians we believe that Jesus Christ was persecuted, died, rose from the dead and is not sitting at the right hand of God the Father -- because Jesus Christ IS God

Now, I realise that it is difficult for many to acknowledge that, it is the central mystery of our Christian faith which is not only that Christ DIED, but more importantly that HE TRIUMPHED OVER DEATH, He rose again from the dead, He IS/WAS/will always be GOD

Non-Christians cannot acknowledge this fact of Jesus's resurrection and that Jesus Christ is God

Christians acknowledge the fact that Jesus ROSE from the dead, ASCENDED into heaven and is GOD.

If non-Christian deniers of Christ would only have the honesty tell the world what they are -- we Christians (Lutherans, Orthodox, Presbyterians, Catholics, Pentecostals etc. etc) freely acknowledge that we consider Jesus Christ to be God.

"Anyway, I absolutely agree that the doctrine of Scriptural Sufficiency is one of the things that the Protestant Reformation got right."

Would you go so far as to agree in the doctrine of Gospel Sufficiency in which all that is necessary for Salvation was spoken directly by Jesus in the Synoptic Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John and that everything else in the Bible and the Traditions of the Church are subordinate to and in support of those Gospels?

Some can't bring themselves to say Christ is their one Lord and God.

I shout it out.

All Christians believe it.

: Jesus Christ is my Lord, God and Savior.

NL — do note that paladin believes in the truth encapsulated in the Nicene Creed. In my humble opinion this is a good discussion but on a completely wrong thread. He believes in a Trinitarian Christian God, which shows in his posts where we are discussing as brethern rather than fighting.

Well, Jesse Duplantis, who is defended in Quix's post doesn't just add to scripture, he thrashes them when he says

“I’m going to say something that will knock your lights off. Go has the power to take life, but He can’t. He’s got the power to do it, but He won’t. He’s bound; He can’t. He says, “Death and life is in the power of” who’s tongue? Yours. You ready for this? You want something that’ll knock your lights off? You choose when you live; you choose when you die. Death and life is in the power of your tongue, not God’s.?

It's a wonder that Quix who keeps shouting about non-biblical stuff doesn't see this non-biblical stuff from Jesse...

Cronos: note of course that the term purgatory is better understood by our friends by using the term "Final Sanctification for the saved" -- they believe that when you die you will see a flashback of your life and sins before achieving the holiness in the joy of heaven.

Iscool: Why would we see our sins???

I dunno - ask Quix, these are what his posts espouse.....

Iscool: Why would we see our sins???

Iscool: And what mature Christian doesn't know this???

I dunno - ask Quix, these are what his posts espouse.....

smvoice: The problem is not with mature Christians, but those who seem to think they are on some kind of sin score card system for salvation.

Interesting -- I was relating Quix's pentecostal beliefs. Now if you want to ask him why he believes that "Final Sanctification for the saved" -- they believe that when you die you will see a flashback of your life and sins before achieving the holiness in the joy of heaven. -- feel free to ask him...

Laying aside my answer for a moment, let me just ask you straight. What's your intention here? Are you looking to clarify your understanding of my position and stance upon Scripture?

"What's your intention here?"

My intentions are two fold; first to bask in your refreshing honesty and candor. Civil and informed discussions are too rare in the Religion Forum. The other is to better understand our starting point for the discussion of the many things we have in common and the few things we differ on. Think of it like artillery bracketing. I want to determine the boundaries of your beliefs up to, and sometimes past the point of absurdity. I never fail to learn from these discussions.

Thank you, Quix. I'm looking forward to your always excellent thread. I've really missed discussing issues with you guys, especially you and am glad to be back if only for short times. Keep up your great work! Maranatha!

smvoice

The unsaved cannot understand the meaning of the book if they do not have the author of the book explaining it to them. They are dependent on the five senses to guide them and that always leads to man, and that always leads to man's fallible senses and in the end, destruction. It's so simple.
Easy-peasy you say? How did the author of the book explain it to you?

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.