The Truth about the Brothers & Sisters

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

BrotherFinn

Guest
More ink has been spilled about this issue than many that are of more serious import to the Christian world. Both sides in the issue have valid points. To cut through the nonsense, we could basically say that these points boil down to:

1. Why do explicit references to the "brothers" and "sisters" of Jesus have to be "gotten around?" What's wrong with the idea that Mary and Joseph had a normal marital relationship resulting in children? Isn't this just another symptom of Catholic disdain for sexuality and the glorification of celibacy?

2. Doesn't the notion that Mary and Joseph had a massive brood of children seem to undermine the unique "sign" God intended to convey about Jesus in the virginal conception? Why would anyone be exceptionally inclined believe Mary's first-born was conceived without a father when she and the father obviously went on to have a whole squad of kids? Wouldn't that make the "virginal conception" of Jesus appear to be a blatant theft from the prevalent "virgin birth" pagan myths of the day? Also, Scripture says that Joseph took Mary into his home but did NOT consummate the marriage upon doing so, even though this was his lawful right and obligation. It's obvious he respectfully feared God's work in Mary. Being a Law-saturated Jew and knowing full well that Mary's child was conceived by God Himself, how could he, like his ancestors fearing the presence of God in the tabernacle and leaving it untouched, abandon his course?

Both points are very valid. The facts are:

A. Scripture speaks quite freely about "brothers" and "sisters" of Jesus, and we must therefore believe that he did indeed have true "brothers" and true "sisters"... BUT we must also realize that there would have been MANY individuals in Jesus life who would have been TRULY called, known and remembered as "Brothers" and "Sisters" of Jesus. Siblings would obviously be called by the Aramaic/Hebrew "ah," but equally so would be cousins, nephews, uncles, neices, etc. If one of Jesus' Aramaic-speaking disciples were speaking to another person about a group of cousins of Jesus sitting on a log, this disciple would have historically, liguistically, and verbally said "Those are the Brothers and Sisters of the Lord over there on that log." Jesus spoke Aramaic. So did his disciples. So did the first men to record the sayings and fragmentary accounts of Jesus' life, *before* the Gospels themselves were written. Any close male relative or kinsman (kinswoman) of Jesus would have been remembered as, referred to in speech, and recorded in Aramaic writing as a "Brother or Sister" of Jesus. This is simply a fact--no matter siblings or cousins. When the authors of the Gospel narratives wrote their accounts in Greek, they knew quite obviously about a group of individuals known as the "Brothers of the Lord" and that is naturally how they described (transcribed) them in Greek. It's the same with Paul. He journeyed to Jerusalem and spoke Aramaic with the disciples of Jesus, and met those who were known, according to that tongue, as "Brothers" of the Lord. It was no stretch for him to explicitly refer to these men by their proper Aramaic titles when writing about them to his Greek-speaking readers.

B. The overwhelming majority of the early apostolic and post-apostolic churches were under the distinct impression that Jesus was Mary's only child, and that Joseph respected God's work in Mary throughout their marriage. This impression was an ancient one, folks. An early church historian (mid 100's) named Hegesippus spoke of the famed "Brothers" of the Lord who oversaw the Jerusalem Church--James, Simon, and Judas. Yet later on in his work Hegesippus clearly records that Simon was the son of Clopas, the brother of Joseph, and hence the cousin of Jesus. Contradiction? NO! We know that this cousin Simon would have been called, known, and remembered by all the Aramaic, Hebrew-speaking community as the "brother" of the Jesus--hence his description as "brother" in the Gospel narratives. Moreover, one of the "Marys" at Calvary was described as the wife of Clopas (the uncle of Jesus) (John 19:24ff), and in other Gospel narratives this same Mary is described as the "mother of James and Joses" (Mark 15:40 et al) who were elsewhere called the "brothers" of Jesus. Obviously, there was a case of confused "actual relationship identities" from the historic reality of Jesus' daily life to the decades-later composition of the Gospel narratives. Even so, the fact remains that, when the various pieces of the puzzle are put together, Scripture does not state that these individuals were born of Mary Mother of Jesus, and even indicates (Mark 15:40,etc.) that they were the offspring of another woman who was likely the wife of Jesus paternal uncle--thus making her children true Brothers of Jesus in Aramaic, but "cousins" according to our more streamlined understanding.

C. I think it's extremely telling that the only time the Scripture narratives DO address the sexual relationship of Mary and Joseph, it's to say that Joseph did NOT have sex with her!--even after taking her into his home as wife, even at the very *moment* it would have been his legal right and his obligation to do so! But he didn't. In fact, ancient Jewish law did not prohibit sexual relations during the course of a pregnancy. Highly unusual circumstances, yes, but let's not beat around the proverbial Burning Bush-- God called Joseph and Mary to a highly unusual marriage! Their own plans were put aside to favor the often perilous, always challenging care , nurturing, and raising of the Word-Made-Flesh.
 
Bro Finn, thanks for raising those points. I understood the point about "Brothers and Sisters" a long while ago, but hey :)

I think the misunderstanding is not because Catholics "disdain for sexuality and the glorification of celibacy?" (your words). I think its merely because they simply did not know the reason, and surmised for themselves. At which case those who do know are called to explain the
 
Upvote 0
S

savinggrc

Guest
Hey BroFinn,

Have you a copy of the Aramaic Matthew? That would be a fabulous thing to have... :D Without it, this is all just speculation.

The Bible says He had bros and sis' and the reason why it goes against the grain for Catholics is simply because they are taught, in many parishes though not all, that she was a perpetual virgin and that she was sinless.

Karen
 
Upvote 0

Blackhawk

Monkey Boy
Feb 5, 2002
4,930
73
52
Ft. Worth, tx
Visit site
✟22,925.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Brother Finn,

You have showed that Mary could of been a virgin maybe. However you have shown that it is really only speculation at best. I think your strongest point is the one about tradition. The others really do not show why the words should not be translated as brother and sister. I am not saying you are wrong. I am only saying that you really do not know if you are right at all. You just do not have much proof that it should not be translated as a real brother and sister and that Mary did not have other children.

blackhaw
 
Upvote 0
S

savinggrc

Guest
I reckon I don't see why it's so important to Catholics to believe that Mary was a perpetual virgin - how ridiculous to believe that her husband would not have relations with her. Indeed, God moved so that Sarah could conceive and she had Isaac and no one tries to turn her into a virgin forever. :)

I'm not trying to be ugly, but she was just a woman. She has no power to save you nor to keep you. Saint? Yes, as is every other born again believer. But perpetual virgin? Sinless? No. :D
 
Upvote 0
See, this is where Catholicism varies with other religions. Mary is given deference because she is the Mother of Christ. She bore him in her womb, and gave birth to Him. Of all the women in the world, why her? God must have a pretty darn reason in making her so special. Thus, she is not just a woman.

As for the other stuff you raised:
*perpetual virginity
*saint
*sinless

These are part of Catholic doctrine. Would you want an extensive dialogue on this? If so, it should be another thread.
 
Upvote 0

Blackhawk

Monkey Boy
Feb 5, 2002
4,930
73
52
Ft. Worth, tx
Visit site
✟22,925.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
"Of all the women in the world, why her? God must have a pretty darn reason in making her so special."

This is really not a good argument. Why? Because why would Mary have to be the reason why God chose her? Could it not be that she was the lucky person God chose to use? If that was the case then Mary was definitely "blessed" and "favored." So Mary did not have to be special herself at all. God could of made Mary the mother of Jesus for many reasons so this is just not a good argument at all.

Blackhaw
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Blackhawk

Monkey Boy
Feb 5, 2002
4,930
73
52
Ft. Worth, tx
Visit site
✟22,925.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
KC,

grace :" But perpetual virgin? Sinless? No."

KC "And your stating this as fact based on what evidence?"

I think that this was stated because Grace can find no evidence to support these claims in scripture. I will aks you why you think that she was a perpetual virgin and sinless?

blackhaw
 
Upvote 0

KC Catholic

Everybody's gone surfin'...Surfin' U.S.A
Feb 5, 2002
4,009
76
56
Overland Park, KS
✟14,377.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Well, as we stated above...Gabriel pronounced her 'Full of Grace' and this acknowledgement is significant.

Someone who is considered "Full of Grace" is someone without sin, who is pure. Adam and Eve were full of grace before their fall in the garden.

We believe that Mary was 'full of grace' without the stain of original sin. What I can't understand is why people have such a hard time with this belief - it's Jesus' mother.
 
Upvote 0

Blackhawk

Monkey Boy
Feb 5, 2002
4,930
73
52
Ft. Worth, tx
Visit site
✟22,925.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
KC,

Why does " full of Grace" mean that " is someone without sin, who is pure. Adam and Eve were full of grace before their fall in the garden?" I do not understand the jump there. We are all full of grace. That is all who are Christians.

blackhaw
 
Upvote 0

KC Catholic

Everybody's gone surfin'...Surfin' U.S.A
Feb 5, 2002
4,009
76
56
Overland Park, KS
✟14,377.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Hi Blackhawk:

I saw this on one of my favorite websites for understanding the Catholic Faith...www.catholic.com

Mary: "Full of Grace"

The Fathers of the Church taught that Mary received a number of distinctive blessings in order to make her a more fitting mother for Christ and the prototypical Christian (follower of Christ). These blessings included her role as the New Eve (corresponding to Christ’s role as the New Adam), her Immaculate Conception, her spiritual motherhood of all Christians, and her Assumption into heaven. These gifts were given to her by God’s grace. She did not earn them, but she possessed them nonetheless.

The key to understanding all these graces is Mary’s role as the New Eve, which the Fathers proclaimed so forcefully. Because she is the New Eve, she, like the New Adam, was born immaculate, just as the First Adam and Eve were created immaculate. Because she is the New Eve, she is mother of the New Humanity (Christians), just as the first Eve was the mother of humanity. And, because she is the New Eve, she shares the fate of the New Adam. Whereas the First Adam and Eve died and went to dust, the New Adam and Eve were lifted up physically into heaven.

Of particular interest in the following quotations from the Fathers are those that speak of Mary’s immaculate nature. We will all one day be rendered immaculate (sinless), but Mary, as the prototypical Christian, received this grace early. God granted her freedom from sin to make her a fitting mother for his Son.

Even before the terms "original sin" and "immaculate conception" had been defined, early passages imply the doctrines. Many works mention that Mary gave birth to Jesus without pain. But pain in childbearing is part of the penalty of original sin (Gen. 3:16). Thus, Mary could not have been under that penalty. By God’s grace, she was immaculate in anticipation of her Son’s redemptive death on the cross. The Church therefore describes Mary as "the most excellent fruit of redemption" (CCC 50:cool: .


When they refer to 'early church fathers' they are talking about the leaders of the christian church in the beginning. Here are some of their thoughts:

The Ascension of Isaiah

"[T]he report concerning the child was noised abroad in Bethlehem. Some said, ‘The Virgin Mary has given birth before she was married two months.’ And many said, ‘She has not given birth; the midwife has not gone up to her, and we heard no cries of pain’" (Ascension of Isaiah 11 [A.D. 70] ).



The Odes of Solomon

"So the Virgin became a mother with great mercies. And she labored and bore the Son, but without pain, because it did not occur without purpose. And she did not seek a midwife, because he caused her to give life. She bore as a strong man, with will . . . " (Odes of Solomon 19 [A.D. 80] ).



Justin Martyr

"[Jesus] became man by the Virgin so that the course which was taken by disobedience in the beginning through the agency of the serpent might be also the very course by which it would be put down. Eve, a virgin and undefiled, conceived the word of the serpent and bore disobedience and death. But the Virgin Mary received faith and joy when the angel Gabriel announced to her the glad tidings that the Spirit of the Lord would come upon her and the power of the Most High would overshadow her, for which reason the Holy One being born of her is the Son of God. And she replied ‘Be it done unto me according to your word’ [Luke 1:38]" (Dialogue with Trypho the Jew 100 [A.D. 155]).



Irenaeus

"Consequently, then, Mary the Virgin is found to be obedient, saying, ‘Behold, O Lord, your handmaid; be it done to me according to your word.’ Eve, however, was disobedient, and, when yet a virgin, she did not obey. Just as she, who was then still a virgin although she had Adam for a husband—for in paradise they were both naked but were not ashamed; for, having been created only a short time, they had no understanding of the procreation of children, and it was necessary that they first come to maturity before beginning to multiply—having become disobedient, was made the cause of death for herself and for the whole human race; so also Mary, betrothed to a man but nevertheless still a virgin, being obedient, was made the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race. . . . Thus, the knot of Eve’s disobedience was loosed by the obedience of Mary. What the virgin Eve had bound in unbelief, the Virgin Mary loosed through faith" (Against Heresies 3:22:24 [A.D. 189]).

"The Lord then was manifestly coming to his own things, and was sustaining them by means of that creation that is supported by himself. He was making a recapitulation of that disobedience that had occurred in connection with a tree, through the obedience that was upon a tree [i.e., the cross]. Furthermore, the original deception was to be done away with—the deception by which that virgin Eve (who was already espoused to a man) was unhappily misled. That this was to be overturned was happily announced through means of the truth by the angel to the Virgin Mary (who was also [espoused] to a man). . . . So if Eve disobeyed God, yet Mary was persuaded to be obedient to God. In this way, the Virgin Mary might become the advocate of the virgin Eve. And thus, as the human race fell into bondage to death by means of a virgin, so it is rescued by a virgin. Virginal disobedience has been balanced in the opposite scale by virginal obedience. For in the same way, the sin of the first created man received amendment by the correction of the First-Begotten" (ibid., 5:19:1 [A.D. 189]).



Tertullian

"And again, lest I depart from my argumentation on the name of Adam: Why is Christ called Adam by the apostle [Paul], if as man he was not of that earthly origin? But even reason defends this conclusion, that God recovered his image and likeness by a procedure similar to that in which he had been robbed of it by the devil. It was while Eve was still a virgin that the word of the devil crept in to erect an edifice of death. Likewise through a virgin the Word of God was introduced to set up a structure of life. Thus what had been laid waste in ruin by this sex was by the same sex reestablished in salvation. Eve had believed the serpent; Mary believed Gabriel. That which the one destroyed by believing, the other, by believing, set straight" (The Flesh of Christ 17:4 [A.D. 210] .



Pseudo-Melito

"If therefore it might come to pass by the power of your grace, it has appeared right to us your servants that, as you, having overcome death, do reign in glory, so you should raise up the body of your Mother and take her with you, rejoicing, into heaven. Then said the Savior [Jesus]: ‘Be it done according to your will’" (The Passing of the Virgin 16:2–17 [A.D. 300] ).



Ephraim the Syrian

"You alone and your Mother are more beautiful than any others, for there is no blemish in you nor any stains upon your Mother. Who of my children can compare in beauty to these?" (Nisibene Hymns 27:8 [A.D. 361]).



Ambrose of Milan

"Mary’s life should be for you a pictorial image of virginity. Her life is like a mirror reflecting the face of chastity and the form of virtue. Therein you may find a model for your own life . . . showing what to improve, what to imitate, what to hold fast to" (The Virgins 2:2:6 [A.D. 377]).

"The first thing which kindles ardor in learning is the greatness of the teacher. What is greater [to teach by example] than the Mother of God? What more glorious than she whom Glory Itself chose? What more chaste than she who bore a body without contact with another body? For why should I speak of her other virtues? She was a virgin not only in body but also in mind, who stained the sincerity of its disposition by no guile, who was humble in heart, grave in speech, prudent in mind, sparing of words, studious in reading, resting her hope not on uncertain riches, but on the prayer of the poor, intent on work, modest in discourse; wont to seek not man but God as the judge of her thoughts, to injure no one, to have goodwill towards all, to rise up before her elders, not to envy her equals, to avoid boastfulness, to follow reason, to love virtue. When did she pain her parents even by a look? When did she disagree with her neighbors? When did she despise the lowly? When did she avoid the needy?" (ibid., 2:2:7).

"Come, then, and search out your sheep, not through your servants or hired men, but do it yourself. Lift me up bodily and in the flesh, which is fallen in Adam. Lift me up not from Sarah but from Mary, a virgin not only undefiled, but a virgin whom grace had made inviolate, free of every stain of sin" (Commentary on Psalm 118:22–30 [A.D. 387]).



Augustine

"Our Lord . . . was not averse to males, for he took the form of a male, nor to females, for of a female he was born. Besides, there is a great mystery here: that just as death comes to us through a woman, life is born to us through a woman; that the devil, defeated, would be tormented by each nature, feminine and masculine, as he had taken delight in the defection of both" (Christian Combat 22:24 [A.D. 396]).

"That one woman is both mother and virgin, not in spirit only but even in body. In spirit she is mother, not of our head, who is our Savior himself—of whom all, even she herself, are rightly called children of the bridegroom—but plainly she is the mother of us who are his members, because by love she has cooperated so that the faithful, who are the members of that head, might be born in the Church. In body, indeed, she is the Mother of that very head" (Holy Virginity 6:6 [A.D. 401]).

...

"Having excepted the holy Virgin Mary, concerning whom, on account of the honor of the Lord, I wish to have absolutely no question when treating of sins—for how do we know what abundance of grace for the total overcoming of sin was conferred upon her, who merited to conceive and bear him in whom there was no sin?—so, I say, with the exception of the Virgin, if we could have gathered together all those holy men and women, when they were living here, and had asked them whether they were without sin, what do we suppose would have been their answer?" (Nature and Grace 36:42 [A.D. 415]).



Timothy of Jerusalem

"Therefore the Virgin is immortal to this day, seeing that he who had dwelt in her transported her to the regions of her assumption" (Homily on Simeon and Anna [A.D. 400] ).



John the Theologian

"[T]he Lord said to his Mother, ‘Let your heart rejoice and be glad, for every favor and every gift has been given to you from my Father in heaven and from me and from the Holy Spirit. Every soul that calls upon your name shall not be ashamed, but shall find mercy and comfort and support and confidence, both in the world that now is and in that which is to come, in the presence of my Father in the heavens’" (The Falling Asleep of Mary [A.D. 400] ).

"And from that time forth all knew that the spotless and precious body had been transferred to paradise" (ibid.).



Gregory of Tours

"The course of this life having been completed by blessed Mary, when now she would be called from the world, all the apostles came together from their various regions to her house. And when they had heard that she was about to be taken from the world, they kept watch together with her. And behold, the Lord Jesus came with his angels, and, taking her soul, he gave it over to the angel Michael and withdrew. At daybreak, however, the apostles took up her body on a bier and placed it in a tomb, and they guarded it, expecting the Lord to come. And behold, again the Lord stood by them; the holy body having been received, he commanded that it be taken in a cloud into paradise, where now, rejoined to the soul, [Mary’s body] rejoices with the Lord’s chosen ones and is in the enjoyment of the good of an eternity that will never end" (Eight Books of Miracles 1:4 [A.D. 584]).

"But Mary, the glorious Mother of Christ, who is believed to be a virgin both before and after she bore him, has, as we said above, been translated into paradise, amid the singing of the angelic choirs, whither the Lord preceded her" (ibid., 1::cool: .


Hope this helps...

 
Upvote 0

Blackhawk

Monkey Boy
Feb 5, 2002
4,930
73
52
Ft. Worth, tx
Visit site
✟22,925.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
KC,

Very impressive list of Church Fathers and others. It did help me to understand why Catholics believe the way you do thanks.

So it is tradition. And I know for you tradition is very important. Not to say that for me traditin is not important just not as miportant. I see Irreaneus, Tertullain, Augustine, and Ambrose are all god men of God but they did make mistakes. Now could they have all been wrong? I say yes. You will probably say no. Okay. That seems to be where we differ. Oh do you know of any verses in the Bible that would supprt the fact that Mary "recieved this grace early?" That would help me believe it.

Know that even though we very much disagree with this that I do not think that this is something that is essential. Meaning that I think that we can disagree as Christian brothers and sisters about this. Neither are heretical. So until I here from you again Peace be with you.

Blackhaw
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
S

savinggrc

Guest
"Someone who is considered "Full of Grace" is someone without sin"

Can you show me Biblical evidence to support this?

"We believe that Mary was 'full of grace' without the stain of original sin. "

The problem with this is that ya'll stated on the other thread that Mary did need the saving work of Jesus Christ. Now, the Bible says that all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. If Mary was without sin, even the very sin nature, then she could have saved us. Jesus wouldn't have had to come and die. But that's not the way it happened. Jesus is the only One Who has ever been without sin.

Hebrews 4:15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

Hebrews 9:28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

The reason that non-Catholics have such a hard time with Mary being a sinless perpetual virgin is because her being so elevates her to a level equal with Christ. None is equal with Him. All have sinned - including Mary. All need His atoning work on the cross for salvation, even Mary.

I noted that in the quotes provided that the references to Mary being a virgin were in regard to her birthing Christ. I don't deny that. She was a virgin when God overshadowed her and Jesus was conceived. That part I am not disputing. Their quotes, however, do not deal with Mary after Jesus' birth, living as a wife and mother. They only deal with the actual conception and the birth.

Karen
 
Upvote 0

Blackhawk

Monkey Boy
Feb 5, 2002
4,930
73
52
Ft. Worth, tx
Visit site
✟22,925.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Karen,

I think that they are saying that Mary was not sinless because of what she did. She just received the total of justification and sanctification early and that she got a gift of God that she did not have a sin nature. So in a way MAry was not special but God made her special because of her purpose. So Mary was saved by God but in a different way than we were but still because of Jesus' sacrifice on the cross. Am I correct KC?

Blackhaw

KC: do you believe that Mary was a co-redemtrix? (sp?) Meaning that Mary played a role in our salvation. That is besides the fact that God used her to bear Jesus. I have heard that some Catholics say that she does play a part in it. That I can't agree with and I think it is heretical. Do you think that way?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

KC Catholic

Everybody's gone surfin'...Surfin' U.S.A
Feb 5, 2002
4,009
76
56
Overland Park, KS
✟14,377.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I think that they are saying that Mary was not sinless because of what she did. She just received the total of justification and sanctification early and that she got a gift of God that she did not have a sin nature. So in a way MAry was not special but God made her special because of her purpose. So Mary was saved by God but in a different way than we were but still because of Jesus' sacrifice on the cross. Am I correct KC?


Right on the money Blackhawk!


KC: do you believe that Mary was a co-redemtrix? (sp?) Meaning that Mary played a role in our salvation. That is besides the fact that God used her to bear Jesus. I have heard that some Catholics say that she does play a part in it. That I can't agree with and I think it is heretical. Do you think that way?

My belief (and most other Catholics) runs along the line of "the fact that God used her to bear Jesus" part. And that is significant role in relationship to salvation history, but not one that would elevate her to the level of Christ.

Its like that 'Shake and Bake' commercial where the little girl says "Mom made Shake and Bake and I helped."

Corny, I know..but Mary 'helped' in the salvation of all of us by saying "Yes lord." She didn't die on the cross or re-establish our path to heaven, Christ did all the Salvation work and said "It is finished."

And the Church has pulled back on the "Co-redemptrix' issue because of the confusion the word alone has caused. It really means that someone was working along with Christ in Salvation history. It was never to elevate Mary to Jesus' level, but to recognize her role in salvation history.

So, that issue is basically moot now.

Karen
The reason that non-Catholics have such a hard time with Mary being a sinless perpetual virgin is because her being so elevates her to a level equal with Christ. None is equal with Him. All have sinned - including Mary. All need His atoning work on the cross for salvation, even Mary.


And you are correct. Blackhawk's statements reflect that we acknowledge that Mary needed a savior - and she proclaimed it as well. God applied Christs redemption to Mary at the moment of her conception - thus setting her apart from us.

We, too will receive that redemption and grace once we are judged by Christ. We have some of that grace and redemption now based on our witness and faith in Jesus Christ as our lord and savior. But we are still imperfect until we are made perfect by Christs redemption in heaven.

I noted that in the quotes provided that the references to Mary being a virgin were in regard to her birthing Christ. I don't deny that. She was a virgin when God overshadowed her and Jesus was conceived. That part I am not disputing. Their quotes, however, do not deal with Mary after Jesus' birth, living as a wife and mother. They only deal with the actual conception and the birth.


That is true, I see your point. There are historical documents that allude to Mary remaining a virgin even after Jesus was born. One called "The Protoevangelium of James" was written about 60 years after Mary died.

I hate doing this, but I don't have time to put it into my own words, so I am going to paste the article from www.catholic.com. This helped me understand why we believe she was a virgin all her life.

Mary: Ever Virgin

Most Protestants claim that Mary bore children other than Jesus. To support their claim, these Protestants refer to the biblical passages which mention the "brethren of the Lord." As explained in the Catholic Answers tract "Brethren of the Lord," neither the Gospel accounts nor the early Christians attest to the notion that Mary bore other children besides Jesus. The faithful knew, through the witness of Scripture and Tradition, that Jesus was Mary’s only child and that she remained a lifelong virgin.

An important historical document which supports the teaching of Mary’s perpetual virginity is the Protoevangelium of James, which was written probably less than sixty years after the conclusion of Mary’s earthly life (around A.D. 120), when memories of her life were still vivid in the minds of many.

According to the world-renowned patristics scholar, Johannes Quasten: "The principal aim of the whole writing [Protoevangelium of James] is to prove the perpetual and inviolate virginity of Mary before, in, and after the birth of Christ" (Patrology, 1:120–1).

To begin with, the Protoevangelium records that when Mary’s birth was prophesied, her mother, St. Anne, vowed that she would devote the child to the service of the Lord, as Samuel had been by his mother (1 Sam. 1:11). Mary would thus serve the Lord at the Temple, as women had for centuries (1 Sam. 2:22), and as Anna the prophetess did at the time of Jesus’ birth (Luke 2:36–37). A life of continual, devoted service to the Lord at the Temple meant that Mary would not be able to live the ordinary life of a child-rearing mother. Rather, she was vowed to a life of perpetual virginity.

However, due to considerations of ceremonial cleanliness, it was eventually necessary for Mary, a consecrated "virgin of the Lord," to have a guardian or protector who would respect her vow of virginity. Thus, according to the Protoevangelium, Joseph, an elderly widower who already had children, was chosen to be her spouse. (This would also explain why Joseph was apparently dead by the time of Jesus’ adult ministry, since he does not appear during it in the gospels, and since Mary is entrusted to John, rather than to her husband Joseph, at the crucifixion).

According to the Protoevangelium, Joseph was required to regard Mary’s vow of virginity with the utmost respect. The gravity of his responsibility as the guardian of a virgin was indicated by the fact that, when she was discovered to be with child, he had to answer to the Temple authorities, who thought him guilty of defiling a virgin of the Lord. Mary was also accused of having forsaken the Lord by breaking her vow. Keeping this in mind, it is an incredible insult to the Blessed Virgin to say that she broke her vow by bearing children other than her Lord and God, who was conceived through the power of the Holy Spirit.

The perpetual virginity of Mary has always been reconciled with the biblical references to Christ’s brethren through a proper understanding of the meaning of the term "brethren." The understanding that the brethren of the Lord were Jesus’ stepbrothers (children of Joseph) rather than half-brothers (children of Mary) was the most common one until the time of Jerome (fourth century). It was Jerome who introduced the possibility that Christ’s brethren were actually his cousins, since in Jewish idiom cousins were also referred to as "brethren." The Catholic Church allows the faithful to hold either view, since both are compatible with the reality of Mary’s perpetual virginity.

Today most Protestants are unaware of these early beliefs regarding Mary’s virginity and the proper interpretation of "the brethren of the Lord." And yet, the Protestant Reformers themselves—Martin Luther, John Calvin, and Ulrich Zwingli—honored the perpetual virginity of Mary and recognized it as the teaching of the Bible, as have other, more modern Protestants.



The Protoevangelium of James

"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.).



Origen

"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]).



Hilary of Poitiers

"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]).



Athanasius

"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] ).



Epiphanius of Salamis

"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]).



Jerome

"[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).



Didymus the Blind

"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]).



Ambrose of Milan

"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]).



Pope Siricius I

"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]).



Augustine

"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]).



Leporius

"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]).



Cyril of Alexandria

"[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] ).



Pope Leo I

"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] ).



Council of Constantinople II

"If anyone will not confess that the Word of God
. . . came down from the heavens and was made flesh of holy and glorious Mary, mother of God and ever-virgin, and was born from her, let him be anathema" (Anathemas Against the "Three Chapters" 2 [A.D. 553]).


So as you can see, it was believed for quiet some time that Mary was indeed ever-virgin and its just been fairly recently that people have questioned the belief.

Peace to you both.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.