Why is the perpetual virginity of Mary so important to Catholics? [Ecumenical Vanity]

Reaganaut | 3/17/12 | Reaganaut

[Not gonna take it anymore]

http://www.fisheaters.com/mary.html

Matthew 27: 55-56 tells us of three women at the Cross: “And many women were there beholding afar off, which followed Jesus from Galilee, ministering unto him: Among which was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of Zebedees children.”

Mark 15:40 tells us of the three women there, “There were also women looking on afar off: among whom was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the less and of Joses, and Salome.”

John 19:25 is the most inclusive, telling us of four women’s presence, “Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene.” (Note here the reference to Mary’s “sister” who’s named Mary!)

Putting all these together, we can cross off Joses and James the Less as being Jesus’ blood brothers because their mother is the wife of Cleophas.

We can cross Simon off the list because Mark 3:18 tells us he is a Canaanite, “And Andrew, and Philip, and Bartholomew, and Matthew, and Thomas, and James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus, and Simon the Canaanite...”

Jude, we are told in Jude 1:1, is the “servant of Jesus Christ and the brother of James.”

Crossing just one name off the list is enough to prove the point that the Hebrew word “brother” means many things (just as the word does in English today, my “brother or sister in Christ!”) and to prove that this is so even in the very particular context of Mark 6:3.

St. Papias, writing in the first and early second centuries and called by St. Irenaeus a “hearer of John,” refers clearly to all the above Marys in his letter, a fragment of which survives to this day. He writes:

Mary the mother of the Lord; Mary the wife of Cleophas or Alphaeus, who was the mother of James the bishop and apostle, and of Simon and Thaddeus, and of one Joseph; Mary Salome, wife of Zebedee, mother of John the evangelist and James; Mary Magdalene. These four are found in the Gospel. James and Judas and Joseph were sons of an aunt of the Lord’s. James also and John were sons of another aunt of the Lord’s. Mary, mother of James the Less and Joseph, wife of Alphaeus was the sister of Mary the mother of the Lord, whom John names of Cleophas, either from her father or from the family of the clan, or for some other reason. Mary Salome is called Salome either from her husband or her village. Some affirm that she is the same as Mary of Cleophas, because she had two husbands. [read the complete letter fragment here: http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0125.htm.

And perhaps I missed this in the Bible. Where is Jesus called one of the sons of Mary or a son of Mary? He is always called the son. (Singular)

[dangus]

>>Well, Catholics believe Mary was sinless, so if anyone should be chaste, should it not be Mary?
- - - -
>But sex is not a sin, so it wouldn’t apply.

No, sex isn’t a sin, but that’s not the syllogism I was making. Paul said that celibacy was preferable, but permitted marriage for those who couldn’t hack it. Better to get married than to commit sin. That means marriage isn’t a sin, but is nonetheless a consequence of sin;* It’s a blessing given to sinners that they may not continue in sin, but it is not our heavenly state. (”For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.”) Since the commission of sin isn’t on the table, then celibacy is preferable.

“But Mary was already married,” you’re probably object. Yes, but why did Paul recommend celibacy?

“But I would have you without carefulness. He that is unmarried careth for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please the Lord: But he that is married careth for the things that are of the world, how he may please [his] wife. There is difference [also] between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that is married careth for the things of the world, how she may please [her] husband.” — 1 COR 7: 32-35

Now, if a woman is married, she is obliged to have sexual relations with her husband, and vice versa, since that is the fulfillment of their marriage, but Mary and Joseph’s marriage was fulfilled by Christ; The Holy Family was given the gift of being able to devote themselves completely to God THROUGH these mundane concerns.

The Protestant objection to this is argument is that Paul tells Timothy that “a bishop should be blameless, the husband of one wife.” If Paul teaches that it is better for a man to be celibate, how does celibacy bring blame? Paul wasn’t saying that a bishop must be married, but that he must not be a polygamist. His presumption was that any highly respected elder *would* be married, because his audience, like himself, was entirely composed of converts to Christianity. Although eventually, celibacy would be a sign of those with the greatest devotion to God, that was not the case when Paul taught Timothy.

History confirms the Catholic interpretation of Timothy: It was very common for priests to be married in antiquity, and is still very common throughout the Eastern churches. But bishops have always been selected from among the celibate, because they have chosen the way that allows them to be most completely devoted to God.

Incidentally, I am married. Our relationship has been extremely spiritually healing for both of us.

This is a very complex, deep subject, and I do not claim to be any authority. As a Catholic however, who had discern between marriage and the priesthood, I did have to wrestle this, so I can offer what I learned, but I’m not claiming to have expertly or even authentically represented the Catholic doctrine, but merely my best attempts at understanding it.

[Colorado Cowgirl]

In all matters of doctrine, it seems to always boil down to the same common denominator. Who is our Authority? Is it God, where we receive and obey God’s Word as the ultimate authority, or is it man, where we receive and obey our teachers words as the authority? Those who reject scripture in favor of their teachers (no matter what religion) have another authority other than that of the Bible.
There is one Mediator between God and man, and one redeemer and it’s the Lord Jesus Christ. And the idea of Mary as a Co-redemptrix is anathema. We don’t have to artificially make her Holy, she is Holy just like all the rest of God’s Chosen vessels. ..by the Blood of Christ. Amen!

[Not gonna take it anymore]

From your post:

We don’t know when Joseph died, but Joseph was NEVER mentioned again after Jesus’ birth. Mary was mentioned again, but not Joseph. It’s assumed that he didn’t live too much longer. But, who knows really.

[redgolum]

Feeling better today, so I can actually spend some time to post. Growing up as a Lutheran, we were taught that Mary probably was a virgin for the whole of her life.

My two pastors growing up made the point that Joseph knew Jesus was from God, and would have had second thoughts about consummating the marriage because of that. There is also a tradition that he was older, and had a previous marriage with children. In the end though, it was not listed as "dogma". Luther believed she remained a virgin, and so do a lot of later theologians.

[Country Gal]

I’d like to further expand on the post earlier about the Church history and documents. I’m a history buff. I love history. Unfortunately, you’re only going to get information that is biased to the point of view of the person providing it in this case. My friend who is Orthodox Greek states all of the same arguments as the Catholics do, but says they are completely different from the Catholics and that the Catholics are wrong.

So, how do I, a mere Country Gal, navigate through all of it? Could I go to the Vatican and ask for all of their documents, and then to the Greek Orthodox and do the same?
No. I can’t.

So I have to trust that the God who spoke the universe into existence, who measured the oceans’ in the palms of His hands, who measured the galaxies by the span of His hand, was able to preserver His word the way He wanted it.

Did he do it through mankind? Yes, but He didn’t have to. I don’t care if He did it through flying space monkeys with bazookas. I trust that He did it, and it is my final authority.

May your relationship to Christ be so much more important to you than your religion.

Blessings to all my brothers and sisters in Christ.

[dangus]

>> BTW, we do have Apostolic Succession, just not the way you see it. Our authority comes from Christ alone through our faith. <<

Just so you know, apostolic succession means that authority came through succeeding the apostles; if you authority came directly from Christ, but through no-one else, that wouldn’t be apostolic *succession.*

All Christians do have authority through Christ, in doctrinal matters. They can say, “this is the Word of the Lord,” and, if indeed it is, they present the authority of that Word. But the authority referred to in apostolic succession also consists of authority in temporal matters, the administration of the church, including resolving conflicts where men of good conscience nonetheless disagree on their interpretation of a biblical teaching.

[Colorado Cowgirl]

“May your relationship to Christ be so much more important to you than your religion. Blessings to all my brothers and sisters in Christ.” Amen. And Thank You!

[vladimir998]

Actually, no. Mary and Zachariah were saying two different things with their questions.

[vladimir998]

Why do you ask?

[vladimir998]

Joseph never knew her in the conjugal sense. He was a God-fearing man. He knew what his job was, and he knew where not to tread.

[Zuriel]

**we can cross off Joses and James.....We can cross Simon off.... Crossing just one name off the list is enough to prove the point..**

Common names make your position rather weak. After all, there are four Marys mentioned in the gospels. In the lineage recorded in Luke, there are four Josephs. That’s just one family tree that liked that name.

Back in the 80’s I worked at place with about 11 mechanics, 7 named ‘Jim’. One day, at breaktime, a fellow walked in asking if the place was hiring. One of the guys spoke up: “It would improve your chances if your name is Jim.” The fellow promptly replied, “It CAN be!”, to which everyone laughed. (he ended up getting hired, even though his name was Mark)

**St. Papias, writing in the first and early second centuries and called by St. Irenaeus a “hearer of John,” refers clearly to all the above Marys in his letter, a fragment of which survives to this day.**

People had to make a living back then, just like today. If writing a book about history pays the bills, then write it. It doen’t have to accurate, if a payday is the main goal. I find it amazing that, just because a document is really old, it is regarded as accurate, even if the scriptures seem to prove otherwise.

**Where is Jesus called one of the sons of Mary or a son of Mary? He is always called the son. (Singular)**

Because, in your obsession in elevating Mary to almost-God status, you overlook that the primary subject of the discussion in Mark 6:3 is not Mary, but Jesus. Mary is referred to as his mother, as a sidenote to the fact that the hearers were astonished at the wisdom and miracles of “this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him.”

They were offended that this whippersnapper, that grew up in a normal family with siblings (though they knew not of his virgin birth), was suddenly teaching in the synagogue. This carpenter, teaching in the synagogue with authority, without going to seminary? (so to speak)

Since the RCC stance is that those others in Mark 6:3 are not sons of the same Mary, then maybe Andrew and Simon Peter weren’t really full brothers either. Maybe I should write a book about that. heh

[Zuriel]

**Joseph never knew her in the conjugal sense. He was a God-fearing man. He knew what his job was, and he knew where not to tread.**

That’s an opinion, not a fact. It’s a concept that sounds somehow noble, if one needs to support a postion. You need a verse that says something like: “And Joseph knew her not before OR after the birth of Christ”. But, Joseph knew her not TILL she had her firstborn.

The gospels point to Jesus Christ; Mary is a sidenote (a greatly blessed one), but a sidenote to the salvation message. What Mary mothered was flesh, which suffered and died. The soul and spirit came from God the Father alone, who raised that flesh back up from the dead (divinity doesn’t die, or it isn’t divine. You can’t kill the eternal, not even for a minute).

[vladimir998]

You wrote:

“That’s an opinion, not a fact.”

Nope. It’s a fact. All orthodox Christians know it too.

“You need a verse that says something like: “And Joseph knew her not before OR after the birth of Christ”.”

Nope. Not all truths are contained in the Bible. Not all truths are explicitly stated in the Bible.

“But, Joseph knew her not TILL she had her firstborn.”

Anyone who has ever studied foreign languages - especially Biblical languages - knows that “till” doesn’t mean how the same thing we always assume it does in English.

“The gospels point to Jesus Christ; Mary is a sidenote (a greatly blessed one), but a sidenote to the salvation message.”

Actually, no. Mary is not a “sidenote to the salvation message.” She is really the first one saved by Christ.

“What Mary mothered was flesh, which suffered and died.”

Women do not give birth to flesh. They give birth to persons. Jesus was a person. He was not just flesh. Nestorianism is not orthodox.

“The soul and spirit came from God the Father alone, who raised that flesh back up from the dead (divinity doesn’t die, or it isn’t divine. You can’t kill the eternal, not even for a minute).”

As someone said elsewhere:

“unless you deny the divinity of Jesus which then would be a very different discussion, you have to see that God died. But again, what death did he die? Death is basically the separation of body and soul; a person dies when such separation happens. The soul goes to God and the body goes to the grave till the resurrection of the body at the end of time. But death is that separation.

“Jesus Christ as a person was divine: God in the flesh. He was not just human nor just God nor two distinct persons. He was one person with two natures. The person of Jesus was the Second Person of the Trinity in the flesh. At death, that Jesus experienced such separation of flesh and soul. Thus, God died. To say God died is not to say that God ceased to exist in the absolute as the death of NO ONE implies that! Unless you believe in anihilationism.”

[reaganaut]

I’m for to be hoping you get what ya ask-ed fer.

- - - -
I did. Its called Salvation.

Still praying for you here Fred. HUGS.

[johngrace]

"It doesn’t seem that there were a lot of variety in names back then."

Do you know any Jewish people? They always honor their relatives. so Mary was a poplar name. So was Jesus(the Greek) which is Joshua in Hebrew.

I have a friend Named Illene. She honored her male relative by this spelling. Instead of the name "Eileen". His name begins with an " I" letter.

LUKE 1

57 When it was time for Elizabeth to have her baby, she gave birth to a son. 58 Her neighbors and relatives heard that the Lord had shown her great mercy, and they shared her joy.

59 On the eighth day they came to circumcise the child, and they were going to name him after his father Zechariah, 60 but his mother spoke up and said, “No! He is to be called John.”

61 They said to her, “There is no one among your relatives who has that name.”

62 Then they made signs to his father, to find out what he would like to name the child. 63 He asked for a writing tablet, and to everyone’s astonishment he wrote, “His name is John.”

THIS NAME HONORING HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS.

[reaganaut]

Thank you for your response. It was well articulated and gave me some food for thought. I do appreciate it very much.

[reaganaut]

Thank you for the post. I do take issue with this one statement: “This, IMO, would be why the teaching of the Catholic Church, established at or near Christ’s death, should be accepted while teaching from other sects (such as Mormons) are not. “

Please do not put Mormons in the same camp as Protestants. It is not a topic for this thread and this is an ecumenical thread, however I would gladly discuss my reasons for that via Freepmail as I used to be Mormon.

[reaganaut]

Thank you. Cheers, indeed!

[reaganaut]

somewhere something has been said about man being created in His own image

- - - -
Because the verse isn’t about PHYSICAL image like you have been taught. We are created in the image of God by possessing moral and intellectual qualities that the beasts of the earth do not.