Why Believe in Perpetual Virginity?

[rrguy]

Mary and Joseph were married after the birth of Christ.
Mark records the names of Jesus brothers and indicates more than one sister. Mark 6:3 Is not 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.
Mark and Matthew both record His mother and brothers wanting to meet with Him.
Mark 3: 31-35
Matthew 12: 26-50

The same church which insists Mary remained a virgin doesn't sanction a marriage in name only where there is no intention of ever having children. Many see this as the word of God having been added to by the teaching of man. For example, purgatory is never mentioned, though Hell is mentioned many times, and Christ taught us to pray to God rather than praying to intercessors. Still, Catholicism is a Christian religion and they are saved by the blood of Christ just as we are. So if they are wrong or we are wrong we can find out together in Heaven.

I really appreciate how you mentioned differences but also the main similarities that count between Christian. I have read from both sides and both seem to stay convinced. Obviously going to one church may not point out teachings in Bible that support something they don't. Example Purgatory is not mentioned in name. Yet one might as well even deny that there is something called the Bible because no such name is found in the Bible. One might try deny the Trinity, Incarnation, and so forth because these exact words are not found in the Bible? I never read about alter calls in Bible? So one side claim references in the Bible that support others claim they don't? Both agree without God neither possible. Some Church seem almost anti Catholic and it's sad they act like kneeling to pray is too Catholic? Yet forget many Brothers an Sisters in Christ have same beliefs an same disagreement Catholic or Different Protestant. Like Methodist or Lutheran may agree with Catholic on something but disagree with each other?

 

[rstrats]

brightlights,

re: "If it is not revealed in the Scriptures how can it be said to be revealed in the church?"



I think that the Latin Rite organization maintains that in addition to scriptural doctrine that they are authorized by scripture to receive extra-Biblical revelation with regard to the supreme being's wishes concerning further doctrine.

 

[FireDragon76]

One of the best things that the Reformation did for Biblical exegesis was to discard all of the excesses of analogical interpretation and the "four senses of Scripture". I don't understand why you, @Sine Nomine, would want to return to that.

I don't think he necessarily wants that but he is putting the issue in context and pointing out there are other ways of seeing reality beyond the focus on factuality or historical verification. The western mind takes truth equalling factuality for granted, but actually this is the weakest aspect of religion.

It's not completely true that the Reformation did away with analogy altogether. Especially in the Lutheran and some of the Anglican tradition- the seeming cotradictions and mystery that he talked about are very much part of the tradition still. The Swiss/Reformed and Anabaptists, on the other hand, seemed to be the most given to the "modern" analytical/literal mind. Zwingli was probably the earliest proponent of this sort of thinking (one reason that Luther and Zwingli did not agree), with Calvin being given to it, to a slightly lesser extent.

 

[RC1970]

I believe this business of perpetual virginity is rooted in the idea that Mary is "immaculate" which itself is another false doctrine, and deserving of a whole other thread of discussion.

The problem is best described by the following quote:

“Oh what a tangled web we weave, When first we practice to deceive” ~ Sir Walter Scott

One false dotrine begets another ad infinitem.

 

[brightlights]

I believe this business of perpetual virginity is rooted in the idea that Mary is "immaculate" which itself is another false doctrine, and deserving of a whole other thread of discussion.

The problem is best described by the following quote:

“Oh what a tangled web we weave, When first we practice to deceive” ~ Sir Walter Scott

One false dotrine begets another ad infinitem.

I agree that the Immaculate Conception is another false doctrine. But, historically speaking, the doctrine of perpetual virginity appeared much earlier than the doctrine of Immaculate Conception.

Logically speaking, however, I totally see your point.

 

[com7fy8]

The Holy Spirit's indwelling of believers is kinda sorta totally different from the Incarnation.

My point is that ones are saying that Mary had to be without sin, in order for Jesus to be in her body. And what I am offering is, that we children of God still do have some amount of sin, yet Jesus Himself lives in us. Therefore, it is not necessary to be without sin, in order to have Jesus in you.

I mean > Jesus was in Mary's physical womb. But in us He is in our hearts, being more and more formed in us.

"My little children, for whom I labor in birth again until Christ is formed in you," (Galatians 4:19)

There are women who are not virgins, but they have Jesus being formed in them . . . not only in their physical wombs, but becoming their new inner Person in their hearts! So, it is not necessary that Mary be without sin, in order to have Jesus in her physical womb.

 

[truefiction1]

If it is not revealed in the Scriptures how can it be said to be revealed in the church?

It is revealed by the Power of the Holy Spirit, so it is by the will of the Father and through His Word(Christ). For it is as is written in Scripture: "There are many more things that Jesus did. If all of them were written down, I suppose not even the world itself would have space for the books that would be written.…" (John 21:24)

The things that Jesus does by the Power of the Holy Spirit are still being done, even as I type this, within the Church which commemorates the most holy Theotokos as "ever-virgin Mary". That is how it can be said to be revealed in the Church.

 

[brightlights]

Here too, theology takes precedence over either history of science. The earliest writings on virginity was the ever-virginity of Scripture, and that in a nutshell is what the ever-virginity of Mary points us toward. Mary is everything good and pure that the nation and Torah of Israel represents that culminates in the Word, the fruit of her womb, Jesus himself.
For sure there are Catholics who have a more concrete literal reading of the dogma than that, just as there are Catholics that are pretty literal about the Genesis of mankind too.
Scripturally speaking, it is the Virgin birth that is most important to history, for this points to the miraculous nature of Christ. The dogma goes beyond scripture to give a fuller understanding of who Mary is, not just as poor Jewish girl without means in the times of the Roman Empire, but most importantly, as the Mother of God.
Catholic theologians recognize well enough that there is no real history behind the claim of perpetual virginity. They also understand that that is not what the dogma is all about. The purity and the goodness and the splendor of God's plan for his Chosen people culminates in Mary, Mother of God, and bears fruit in her womb in the child, Jesus.

So you seem to be suggesting that the perpetual virginity of Mary is not historical, but it is a theological idea that conveys some important truth.

But I see a few problems with this, even if it is just theological:

1. Why would Mary's perpetual virginity enhance her status as the mother of God? Is it because sex is dirty?
   
   
2. Doesn't this de-emphasize God's sovereign grace in working through sinful people to bring about his purposes. Some of what I'm hearing in this thread suggests that Mary was chosen because she was extra holy or super special in some way. And the fact that she never had sex as a married woman makes her even more super special. And this glorifies Mary. But from what I read of Scripture God works through the poor, the unnoticed, the sinful, the despised, the forgotten, and the weak. Like Abraham who betrayed Sarai to save his own skin. Or Moses who initially refused to go when God called him. Or Noah whose heart was full of sin and became the first drunkard after the flood. Why should Mary be any different?

 

[brightlights]

It is revealed by the Power of the Holy Spirit, so it is by the will of the Father and through His Word(Christ). For it is as is written in Scripture: "There are many more things that Jesus did. If all of them were written down, I suppose not even the world itself would have space for the books that would be written.…" (John 21:24)

The things that Jesus does by the Power of the Holy Spirit are still being done, even as I type this, within the Church which commemorates the most holy Theotokos as "ever-virgin Mary". That is how it can be said to be revealed in the Church.

If it is not revealed in Scripture, how do we know that it is from the Holy Spirit?

In the words of the Dude, all of this is just, like, your opinion, man.

 

[KWCrazy]

I really appreciate how you mentioned differences but also the main similarities that count between Christian. I have read from both sides and both seem to stay convinced. Obviously going to one church may not point out teachings in Bible that support something they don't. Example Purgatory is not mentioned in name. Yet one might as well even deny that there is something called the Bible because no such name is found in the Bible. One might try deny the Trinity, Incarnation, and so forth because these exact words are not found in the Bible? I never read about alter calls in Bible? So one side claim references in the Bible that support others claim they don't? Both agree without God neither possible. Some Church seem almost anti Catholic and it's sad they act like kneeling to pray is too Catholic? Yet forget many Brothers an Sisters in Christ have same beliefs an same disagreement Catholic or Different Protestant. Like Methodist or Lutheran may agree with Catholic on something but disagree with each other?

The history of the Catholic church, like the history of the Jews, has both moments of glory and wretched hypocrisies. The early church believed that it was sinful for a layman to read the Bible. That gave the priests and enormous latitude because nothing they said could be disputed. To this day, according to the last survey I read, Catholics read their Bibles less than any other major religion. This doesn't mean they are any less devout, but it does make them vulnerable to false teaching.

The Bible doesn't tell us everything. It doesn't tells us everything jesus said, because that would be too voluminous and would have required many scribes. However, we have a direct connection with God through the Holy Spirit.

We should concentrate on the things that unite us, not dwell on the things that separate us.

 

[truefiction1]

So sex is dirty and Mary was totally pure. Therefore she never had sex?

No. In married life, purity consists of the faithfulness of the spouses to each other, not in abstaining from intercourse. But that isn't why the mother of God never had sex.
It is a well known point that those who are nearest to perfection in the Kingdom of God are those who remained virgin. The Lord is virgin and God even says in His word that it is the ideal way to live, even though not everyone will be able to do it.

 

[patdee]

Roman Christians believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary. This is the doctrine that not only was Mary a virgin at the time she conceived Jesus, but that she remained a virgin throughout her life.

Why believe this?

I understand that the Roman Church teaches this doctrine, and that this reason alone is enough for assenting Catholics to accept it. But there doesn't seem to be any basis for this belief in Scripture and I don't understand what is gained by believing it.

To me it seems rooted in a medieval error that virginity or even celibacy is somehow holier than sex and marriage.

---------------------------------------------------------------

Indeed: both the LIES of the "virginity of Mary" (AFTER Jesus) and "celibacy" were created by the RCC (Roman Catholic "Cult") BECAUSE this organization was, and is, nothing but an extension of the dreaded Roman empire; that never really "fell". Even though officially it did fall in 476 AD, according to history. It is well and very much alive today. It infiltrated the Christian movement in the 4th (the 300's) century and "officially" took it over. The true Christians went "underground" and were protected by Jesus through His Holy Spirit.

The true Christians broke away officially in 1517, when a catholic priest, Martin Luther, wrote his contention of 99 "thesis"; and pinned it to the Wittenberg catholic door in Germany. That began a "protestant" reformation*; that spawned all the denominations, worldwide today.

* They "protest" the RCC.

This cult has created more satan-led myths than probably ANY other religious organization since creation. Mary HAD a number of children AFTER Jesus. Only a blind fool would not understand that by reading the bible. Celibacy was created by taking Paul's words and misunderstanding them; because the RCC was created and fomented in hell by satan.

For Paul said, talking to the elders of the church, "I would that ye not marry; for you will be too busy to do Jesus' work". The RCC never finished Paul's words, "........But IF you must lust, then get married so you do not live in sin" (paraphrasing of course).

Since lusting is innate, few if any men, would ever fulfill what Paul was saying. So celibacy was and is a joke! They have proven that by any shadow of doubt ever since.

Further; Mary was NEVER "deified" as they teach. She is NOT in Heaven; she can NOT hear a single prayer; even though she was a very loving, kind and righteous woman. She is in the grave as are ALL who have died; waiting for "Judgment day" to determine whether a person will be saved, or cast into hell. But she was STILL just a "mortal" woman.

They also, created their pompous "popentates" to delineate Jesus. They have succeeded (sadly) in that endeavor to the "nth" degree; for most catholics worship their popes (and Mary of course), FAR more than they have ever worshiped Jesus. This is promulgated by satan of course. Today the RCC is totally run by the Italian "mafia" of all things. Oh indeed yes.

They are brainwashed in "catechism" into a world of control by said mafia and its religious clothed, and evil men; to dupe them. VERY few of them have EVER come out of that cesspool of dunghills. OH indeed yes.

Sadly, it is the largest so-called "christian" organization on earth. And the most evil. For with few exceptions, EVERY thing they say do or think is of satan. OH indeed yes.

The facts ARE there. One of the most heinous things they ever did; was to slaughter in the most horrible of ways; over 50 million "Saints" over a span of 1,260 yrs (538 AD to 1798 AD). Oh indeed yes. They burned them to death; beheaded them; drew and quartered them and fed them to wild animals, etc, in the coliseums of Rome. Imagine: Hitler is only credited with 25 million torcherous deaths! Wow!

Do the research. It is indisputable to any thinking person.

In any case, may Jesus bless you and yours always.

 

[brightlights]

It is a well known point that those who are nearest to perfection in the Kingdom of God are those who remained virgin. The Lord is virgin and God even says in His word that it is the ideal way to live, even though not everyone will be able to do it.

I think this is one of the things I'm fishing for. Where in the heck did you get this idea? Jesus was a celibate man, yes. And he says that some are gifted with celibacy. But nowhere does he, nor Paul, nor anyone else in Scripture, ever claim that celibacy makes for greater holiness or is in any way a superior state.

So this is just an error. And from this error flows strange doctrines like the perpetual virginity of Mary. Possibly even priestly celibacy flows from this same error.

 

[truefiction1]

If it is not revealed in Scripture, how do we know that it is from the Holy Spirit?

In the words of the Dude, all of this is just, like, your opinion, man.

Only because of your own lack of experience of Life within the Church. For it remains true even now as is written in Scripture: "And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power: That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God." (1 Corinthians 2:4-5)

 

[brightlights]

Only because of your own lack of experience of Life within the Church. For it remains true even now as is written in Scripture: "And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power: That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God." (1 Corinthians 2:4-5)

What I see here is a misuse of Scripture and a claim that I've never been part of the church.

But I've been part of the church for a long time - just not the Roman or the Greek church. Maybe this doesn't count for you.

And the verse you've quoted, those it uses words similar to words you're using, does not mean what you're wanting it to mean.

 

[2Timothy2:15]

Oddly enough, Sacred Scripture gives no direct indication that she ever lost her virginity

Galatians 1:19 But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother.

Oddly enough scripture does indicate that Jesus had a brother born James, obviously after the birth of our Lord.

 

[truefiction1]

I think this is one of the things I'm fishing for. Where in the heck did you get this idea? Jesus was a celibate man, yes. And he says that some are gifted with celibacy. But nowhere does he, nor Paul, nor anyone else in Scripture, ever claim that celibacy makes for greater holiness or is in any way a superior state.

So this is just an error. And from this error flows strange doctrines like the perpetual virginity of Mary. Possibly even priestly celibacy flows from this same error.

It is in Scripture for sure, as well as something that has been revealed within the Church throughout the age of the Church. In other words, since the time of the Apostles, those through whom God's gifts shine brightest and more abundantly have, overall, been those who chose lives of virginity in order to be more free to serve God. This is what the Apostle Paul is saying here: "It is good for a man not to touch a woman." (1 Corinthians 7:1)

 

[truefiction1]

Galatians 1:19 But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother.

Oddly enough scripture does indicate that Jesus had a brother born James, obviously after the birth of our Lord.

James is a stepbrother of the Lord, not a blood relative.

 

[2Timothy2:15]

James is a stepbrother of the Lord, not a blood relative.

Where does it say he is a "stepbrother"? If you mean because Jesus was impregnated by the Holy Spirit then I will agree with that. But there is no mention of Joeseph having children prior to Jesus so it is obviously the product of Joeseph and Mary, after the birth of Jesus.

 

[rstrats]

truefiction1,

re: "James is a stepbrother of the Lord, not a blood relative."

How do you know that? What scripture says that he was a stepbrother?