Brothers and Sisters?

OSV.com ^ | 05-01-17 | Msgr. Charles Pope

[Salvation]

Brothers and Sisters?

Q. I know that the Church believes in Mary’s perpetual virginity, but what are we to make of the passages in the Gospel that refer to Jesus’ brothers and sisters?

Rose, via email

A. There are a number of places in the New Testament (see Mk 3:31-34; 6:3; Mt 12:46; 13:55; Lk 8:19-20; Jn 2:12; 7:3-10; Acts 1:14; and 1 Cor 9:5) where Jesus’ kinsfolk are mentioned using terms such as “brother” (adelphos), “sister” (adelphe) or “brethren” (adelphoi). But “brother” has a wider meaning both in the Scriptures and at the time they were written. It is not restricted to our literal meaning of a full brother or half-brother in the sense of sibling.

Even in the Old Testament “brother” had a wide range of meaning. In the Book of Genesis, for example, Lot is called Abraham’s brother (see 14:14), but his father was Haran — Abraham’s brother (Gn 11:26-28). So, Lot was actually a nephew of Abraham.

The term “brother” could also refer widely to friends or mere political allies (see 2 Sm 1:26; Am 1:9). Thus, in family relationships, “brother” could refer to any male relative from whom you are not descended. We use words like kinsmen and cousins today, but the ancient Jews did not.

In fact, neither Hebrew nor Aramaic had a word meaning “cousin.” They used terms such as “brother,” “sister” or, more rarely, “kin” or “kinsfolk” (syngenis) — sometimes translated as “relative” in English.

James, for example, whom St. Paul called the “brother of the Lord” (Gal 1:19), is identified by Paul as an apostle and is usually understood to be James the Younger. But James the Younger is elsewhere identified as the son of Alphaeus (also called Clopas) and his wife, Mary (see Mt 10:3; Jn 19:25). Even if James the Greater were meant by St. Paul, it is clear that he is from the Zebedee family, and not a son of Mary or a brother of Jesus (in the strict modern sense) at all.

The early Church was aware of the references to Jesus’ brethren, but was not troubled by them, teaching and handing on the doctrine of Mary’s perpetual virginity. This is because the terms referring to Jesus’ brethren were understood in the wider, more ancient sense. Widespread confusion about this began to occur after the 16th century with the rise of Protestantism and the loss of understanding the semantic nuances of ancient family terminology.

[ealgeone]

The first Christian on record to claim that Mary had other children was Helvidius (approx. 350 A.D.) Jerome referred to Helvidius's theory as "novel, wicked, and a daring affront to the faith of the whole world". This [judging by Jerome's reaction] was an entirely new interpretation, one nobody had ventured before.

Source??

[Mrs. Don-o]

I mentioned that these are multi-valent. Mary is the Mother of the Messiah. I don't see how any Christian can deny this.

The Woman of the Great Sign (Rev. 12) is the Mother of the Messiah (Mary) and is also the mother of her other offspring, "all those who keep the Commandments and bear witness to Jesus." That is, the Mother of the Believers. That makes her the sign of the Church, Mater Ecclesia, who as she give birth to Christ seen as the Mystical Body, the Church, is in great travail.

Mary is identified in the NT as "full of grace," not "full of sin." Her Savior, Jesus, has saved her from sin preemptively in view of her being predestined to be His mother in the Incarnation.

Your criticism of the Douay-Rheims translation is a little extreme. There is no doctrinal divergency: in every case, Christ is crushing Satan. As the Woman who is the enemy of Satan ("I will put enmity between you [Satan] and the Woman") she overcomes him by her "Seed," Christ.

Grammatically, the "one" who will crush the serpent's head is a Greek term which is reflexive, maybe best translated as "that one." It's hard to render in English, as can be seen by eminent Protestant translations, which often rendered it not "he" or "she," but "it" or "they":

King James Bible
And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel

JPS Tanakh 1917
And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; they shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise their heel.'

American King James Version
...it shall bruise your head...

English Revised Version
...it shall bruise thy head... Webster's Bible Translation
... it shall bruise thy head...

Paul interprets this that God will crush Satan under YOUR (the Church's) feet:

King James Bible
Romans 15:20
And the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen.

The Douay-Rheims translation emphasized that women's "enmity" finally triumphed via her Seed. This was better and clearer when replaced by the singular Seed ("He") triumphing, but the meaning is unchanged: the Woman's enmity to the Serpent culminates in her Seed defeating him.

All of the translations support this conclusion as their meaning.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Jerome (c. 383), "The Perpetual Virginity of Blessed Mary - Against Helvidius", in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (ed.Schaff, Wace, and Knight), Second Series, Vol. 6.

It's online several places, including the New Advent website (LINK).

[Mrs. Don-o]

Jerome (c. 383), "The Perpetual Virginity of Blessed Mary - Against Helvidius", in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (ed.Schaff, Wace, and Knight), Second Series, Vol. 6.

It's online several places, including the New Advent website (LINK).

[BlueDragon]

You spoke of Gnosticism, and that's double nonsense: the historic doctrines of Christianity were forged in opposition to Gnosticism.

The case can be made that the idea of Mary being "ever" virgin first arose from Gnostic sources.

[MHGinTN]

Again, you are asserting the opinion of your religion’s leadership. The woman who gives birth in Rev is Israel, GOD’s chosen. As reinforced by Daniel’s prophecy, Messiah is cut off from the Jews ‘with nothing’. ANY opinion is as good as any other, unless the opinion has scriptural substantiation. You teach ‘an other religion’, not Christianity. You teach people to honor catholiciism and follow its ‘sacramental striving for salvation / eternal life, which is directly contrary to the Gospel of God’s Grace in / through Christ Jesus. You teach people to work for eternal life. You are working in the stealthy spirit of antichrist.

[MHGinTN]

Yes, we see why you have promoted the Mother of Jesus to demigoddess status as ‘mother of god’ ... you must keep the lies afloat for the sake of your institutional org’s empowerment. You teach a perverted Gospel which inserts Mary as a mediator between man and God, which is not The Gospel as delivered.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Yes, Adam was a member (not just member, progenitor) of the human family: in fact, the primal father of all human beings (via Eve, the mother of all the living); and all the rest of the family are his seed, i.e. his offspring.

Genesis 3:20
And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.

Jesus is unique in that He is the "seed of the Woman" as prophesied in Genesis 3:15. But of course He had no human father: His Father was God. His mother, Mary, was a human being, descendant of Adam and Eve. Thus via His mother's side of the family, Jesus too is in the same family, the human race.

This is the significance of the genealogies If this were not true, the proper response to the genealogies--- and a good chunk of the OT --- would be "who cares?" They would be irrelevant.

[ealgeone]

I mentioned that these are multi-valent. Mary is the Mother of the Messiah. I don't see how any Christian can deny this.

Mary is the mother of Jesus. Yes. All Christians agree upon that.

Your criticism of the Douay-Rheims translation is a little extreme. There is no doctrinal divergency: in every case, Christ is crushing Satan. As the Woman who is the enemy of Satan ("I will put enmity between you [Satan] and the Woman") she overcomes him by her "Seed," Christ.

What you consider extreme is accurate however. The DR translation has lead to many problems with the Biblical understanding of Mary.

Mary is identified in the NT as "full of grace," not "full of sin." Her Savior, Jesus, has saved her from sin preemptively in view of her being predestined to be His mother in the Incarnation.

Again, another bad translation leading to bad theology. The text does not say what you want it to say.

The Greek renders it as "favored with grace". It does not indicate Mary was sinless. The Catholic Encyclopedia online concurs you cannot read Mary's sinlessness into the passage in Luke as I have posted countless times before but to no avail. The Catholic continues to ignore its own sources due to the steep indoctrination they've undergone.

No direct or categorical and stringent proof of the dogma can be brought forward from Scripture. http://www.catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=6056

That's a direct quote.

The salutation of the angel Gabriel -- chaire kecharitomene , Hail, full of grace ( Luke 1:28 ) indicates a unique abundance of grace, a supernatural, godlike state of soul, which finds its explanation only in the Immaculate Conception of Mary. But the term kecharitomene (full of grace ) serves only as an illustration, not as a proof of the dogma.

Another direct quote. Same source.

[ealgeone]

A source 283 years after the Apostles died??

[MHGinTN]

And you have told us earlier that you are certain GOD used an ovum from Mary to form the body of JESUS. Which we have shown to you makes GOD a defrauder of Joseph since the incarnation of Jesus in Mary’s womb occurred AFTER Mary was already espoused to Joseph thus all her reproductive genetic future was espoused to Joseph, from which you claim GOD took an ovum for His making of Jesus. But of course you also impugn GOD as not being capable of making Jesus without using a Mary ovum yet you agree Adam is of the human family. Typical catholic mumbo jumbo duplicity.

[PeterPrinciple]

You teach a perverted Gospel which inserts Mary as a mediator between man and God, which is not The Gospel as delivered.

---

Yes, that is the basic /core issue in the discussion with Catholics. It is the Gospel message. All details go back to that issue.

[Mrs. Don-o]

"The first Christian on record to claim that Mary had other children was Helvidius."

Jerome (237-420 AD) who was the eminent scholar of his day, considered Helvidius' claim "novel" and shocking. I conclude that he thought of Helvidius' denial of the ever-virginity of Mary as an innovation.

If this is false, then tell me what churchman before Helvidius claimed that Mary, specifically, had other children, or that someone (other than Jesus) was called "son of Mary".

I'll be grateful for a link. I'll follow any link you supply.

[Mrs. Don-o]

MHG, I would not want to misrepresent your beliefs. Do I understand you correctly that you do not consider Jesus to be genetically related to Mary? You believe she is not His biological mother?

Other FReepers in this discussion: do you agree with this?

[MHGinTN]

Since you have chosen to disbelieve eyewitnesses to the family of Mary and Joseph, you are beyond the truth reaching you catholiciism indoctrinated mind.

[MHGinTN]

Prove me out; is God a defrauder by Catholic dogma? Did God have to use a female ovum to make Adam?

[metmom]

Mary of the Bible certainly did have other children...

The Greeks weren't stupid. They knew what *brother* and *sister* were and had words for them that distinguished them from *cousin* or *relative*.

Nor was the Holy Spirit wrong when HE inspired Scripture and chose to use the words *brother* and *sister*.

He chose those words for a reason.

Psalm 69:8 I have become a stranger to my brothers, an alien to my mother's sons.

Matthew 1:24-25 When Joseph woke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him: he took his wife, but knew her not until she had given birth to a son. And he called his name Jesus.

Matthew 12:46-47 While He was still speaking to the multitudes, behold, His mother and brothers were standing outside, seeking to speak to Him. And someone said to Him, “Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside seeking to speak to You.”

Matthew 13:55 “Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?”

Mark 6:2-3 And when the Sabbath had come, He began to teach in the synagogue; and the many listeners were astonished, saying, “Where did this man get these things, and what is this wisdom given to Him, and such miracles as these performed by His hands?”... “Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and brother of James, and Joses, and Judas, and Simon? Are not His sisters here with us?”

John 2:12 After this He went down to Capernaum, He and His mother, and His brothers, and His disciples; and there they stayed a few days.”

Acts 1:14 These all with one mind were continually devoting themselves to prayer, along with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with His brothers.

1 Corinthians 9:4-5 Do we not have a right to eat and drink? Do we not have a right to take along a believing wife, even as the rest of the apostles, and the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas?

Galatians 1:19 But I did not see any other of the apostles except James, the Lord’s brother.

Strong's Concordance

http://biblehub.com/greek/80.htm

adelphos: a brother

Original Word: ἀδελφός, οῦ, ὁ

Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine

Transliteration: adelphos

Phonetic Spelling: (ad-el-fos')

Short Definition: a brother

Definition: a brother, member of the same religious community, especially a fellow-Christian.

Here is a link to the occurrences of the Greek word *adelphos*.

http://biblehub.com/greek/80.htm

The word *sister* (adelphe) in the Greek is the same.

http://biblehub.com/greek/79.htm

The word used is *brother* not *cousin*.

It can't mean a member of the same religious community in the context in which they occur, because then that would mean every man in Israel could be identified as Jesus' brother. So that would not identify Jesus as anyone in particular's brother.

It's not going to mean *brother in Christ* as that concept was not yet in place and the Jews, who knew Jesus as a Jew and knew His brothers as Jews, would not even begin to understand the new birth and what being in Christ meant.

They didn't even understand who JESUS was, much less being a *brother in Christ*.

The only definition left then, is to mean physical brother.

And it would not be *cousin*.

The word for *relative* that is used for Elizabeth is *suggenes*, not *adelphe*.

http://biblehub.com/greek/4773.htm

Strong's Concordance

suggenes: akin, a relative

Original Word: συγγενής, ές

Part of Speech: Adjective

Transliteration: suggenes

Phonetic Spelling: (soong-ghen-ace')

Short Definition: akin, a relative

Definition: akin to, related; subst: fellow countryman, kinsman.

[Sontagged]

Excellent GBU

[metmom]

Catholics defending to the death that Mary entered a fraudulent marriage with Joseph, one that would earn anyone an annulment so fast your head would spin.

Funny how it’s considered in invalid marriage when the rest of humanity does it, but it’s a badge of honor when Mary does it.

And then Catholics claim what champions of marriage they are and then hold up as the ideal Mary and Joseph.

[Jim Noble]

The first asserts that genuine Christianity was lost, buried, and dead for about 1400 years or so and then only began to be emerge

So, in other words, Joseph Smith was right?