Al, good ole Al. He does some research but not all of it. I appreciate that any of it is done at all.
FYI, The original text of the Smalcald Articles doesn’t have the bracketed portion in it; that bit was added only when translated into Latin at a later date and is not binding on us.
That would e why it is never taught at any church or class I have gone to. And again the book of Concord is not scripture nor does it claim to be equal with scripture unlike the catholics who elevate their writings to be equal to (and i have been time by some better than) scripture
Maybe you need to do more.
and is not binding on us.
It used to be the standard belief for LCMS. From Shepard of the Hills:
If the Christology of a theologian is orthodox in all other respects, he is not to be regarded as a heretic for holding that Mary bore other children in a natural manner after she had given birth to the Son of God. [Franz Pieper, Christian Dogmatics (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1951), 2: 308]
Notice that Francis Pieper, LC-MS President from 1899-1911, shows the normal, default position for Lutherans: They believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary. Not believing it to be true is the exception, which is allowed if the Christology of a theologian is orthodox in all other respects. Denying the perpetual virginity of Mary is a recent innovation and a historical aberration within the Church.
Did you get that? "Denying the perpetual virginity of Mary is a recent innovation and a historical aberration within the Church[LCMS]".
I wonder if Lutherans used to believe in the perpetual virginity because "sex is evil", which is the claim made by some about Catholics.
Oh well. At least LCMS stayed with the "Mother of God" phraseology. But I suppose that could also be eliminated soon with the fluidity of their belief.