History of the Widespread Belief in Mary's Perpetual Virginity

Hey guys!

Preface, yes, I believe in the perpetual virginity, but tired from discussions with a protestant who's rewriting some of Christian history just to be anti-Catholic. I want to prevent him from misunderstanding history and being ridiculed.

So, I've been speaking to a protestant who contends that several "faulty" Roman doctrines, including the perpetual virginity of Mary, are the fault of St. Augustine. I told him that while two of the problems he listed were legitimate concerns about Augustinian theology and subsequent Catholic theology, that the perpetual virginity of Mary significantly predates Augustine, who was also not influential in the East. He countered with it being a faulty belief in both East and West because of St. Jerome. Now, given given the history of St. Jerome and his views on the holy family and the "brothers of Christ", this is again faulty.

So, I told him I needed time to write up an explanation of the history until its dogmatization at the 5th Ecumenical Council.

He responded with nothing could change his mind on the doctrine other than Scripture but that he was interested in the history. I responded that that wasn't interested in changing his mind on the dogma, but I wanted to help him create a position that was historically accurate and wouldn't leave him open to ridicule. And, that's all there is in it for me. It's just that while there are honest concerns with Roman Catholic theology as stems from St. Augustine, the dogma of the perpetual virginity isn't one of them and will leave him open to not being taken particularly seriously. He has a genuine interested in having his history corrected.

I've started by outlining the three parts of perpetual virginity (at Christ's conception, at His birth, for the rest of Mary's life). After that, I plan on explaining the Protoevangelium of James and its reception in East and West. Am going to add quotes from Clement of Alexandria (support of protoevangelium and perpetual virginity), Origen (support of perpetual virginity but disagreement with protoevangelium), and Tertullian (his disregard for both the perpetual virginity and the protoevangelium) to show how widespread this belief may have been. Also going to outline how while St. Jerome agreed with the perpetual virginity, he disagreed with the protoevangelium because it disagreed with his views on the holy family and the "brothers of Christ". Also plan on pointing out that Pope Innocent I condemned the protoevangelium because it contradicted St. Jerome's readings, but that it continued to be widely read and influential in eastern Patriarchates.

Plan on quoting Hilary of Poitiers on his reading of Jesus giving Mary to John at the foot of the cross in the Gospel of John. Plan on quoting Ezekial 44:2, and I know there's Patristic commentary on that reading, but can't recall from whom; have it somewhere. Honestly very tired tonight while typing this up, and in essence, I'm asking for help doing my homework.

Who else should I quote or what else should I reference to point out that it was a widespread early belief that had little to do with either St. Jerome or St. Augustine.

Thanks in advance,
Catie

ArmyMatt said:

I mean, I would ask him if it is faulty theology, what evidence does he have that Christians went from believing Mary wasn’t ever-virgin to believing she is? when did that change occur according to him?

if he can’t answer, it’s just an assertion.

Click to expand...

He says the belief started with St. Jerome. That said, he wants to know the history of it since I've said he's incorrect, and I've agreed I won't proselytize (don't think I'm going to win anyone to my views if I'm just beating them over the head with a hammer.) Hoping to prevent him from being mocked so he'll understand the history of it, and I guess also hoping to provide the correct history for anyone else who's following our discussion (it's elsewhere.) If he'd said the Immaculate Conception of Mary stemmed from an Augustinian framework, I would have agreed. Perpetual Virginity of Mary, on the other hand, was around long enough that the Protoevangelium was composed to defend it.

prodromos said:

I always try to show how consistent the Tradition is with Scripture.
If Jesus is the eldest son among other childten of Mary then He automatically has a position of greater authority over His brothers and sisters. Add to that the fact that younger brothers and sisters would have been growing up in the shadow of the perfect older brother. His influence on them would have been tremendous. The Scriptures however paint a very different picture far more consistent with older brothers trying to direct and control their celebrity little brother and entirely inconsisten with Jesus being the eldest. It is understood through Tradition that Salome, the wife of Zebedee and mother of James and John, is one of Joseph's daughters. Who else would be so bold than and older sister to ask of Jesus that her sons sit at His left and right hand in His kingdom.

Click to expand...

Good point! And I've pointed out long before reading it pointed out in Patristics that if Mary had had other sons, Jesus would not have given her into St. John's care. One of the other sons would have taken over her care.

ArmyMatt said:

sure, but my point is that’s a very specific assertion which he should have evidence for. because he isn’t saying it developed during the 5th century, but pointing to a specific saint.

so, it’s not you proselytizing but you asking for something to back his claim.

Click to expand...

I agree. And I told him I would outline the history to correct him, so I'm trying to do that. Just not sure of the best quotes/references to add past what I outlined in my initial post.

If I finally piece together a cogent outline, is there anyone I could private message it to for a quick once over?

GDL said:

Will you post once it's done?

Aside from the history, what's the best exegetical study from Scripture you or anyone here is aware of?

What is the ultimate importance of this topic?

Click to expand...

Yes, I can post it once it's done. I'm just trying to make sure I have all of my bases covered. Importance of the topic is that the belief in Mary's Perpetual Virginity was an early and widespread belief.

ArmyMatt said:

I gotcha, I am just saying don’t forget to point out he has no history on his side. this isn’t even something up in the air.

Click to expand...

For sure, he's been blaming it on Augustine and Jerome so far. I think the fact that the RCC, EOC, OOC, and Assyrian Church of the East all hold to some version of the Perpetual Virginity of Mary is a testament to it as a longstanding belief in Christianity, likely based upon Ezekiel 44:2 (so typology asserting Mary as the New Temple) and the narrative of the Crucifixion in John's Gospel. I also suspect that the popularity of the Protoevangelium of James occurred because its narrative about Mary's Perpetual Virginity opposed certain Gnostic beliefs that questioned the virgin birth or claimed that Joseph was Jesus's father.

In effect, the Perpetual Virginity of Mary is a dogma that, when codified at the Fifth Ecumenical Council, protects general understandings in Christology. I don't have a particularly long thesis on that yet, but I'm sure my brain will find something or outline something at some point.

Platina said:

Outside of the texts abacabb mentions, the earliest Father I'm aware of who explicitly testifies to it is Clement of Alexandria. See the section on ever-virginity here: On the Panagia

Click to expand...

Yep! He's the earliest Father who attests to it, and I've referenced that in the document I'm putting together, along with referencing Origen and Tertullian who make references to both the Protoevangelium and Mary's Perpetual Virginity that differ from what Clement of Alexandria says. (Note: I'm aware of the status of Origen and Tertullian, but their comments are from the same time frame as Clement of Alexandria's, and Origen agreeing with the Ever Virginity while disagreeing with the Protoevangelium is important)

abacabb3 said:

Perpetual virginity is attested to in many early sources: 1st century Asceinsion of Isaiah, 2nd Century Protoevangelicum of James and Odes of Solomon, etc. After that point one literally loses count. In the fourth century, both Rome and Milan held councils precisely on the issue and upheld the perpetual virginity of the Theotokos.

In effect, the doctrine of perpetual virginity is literally as old as the biblical canon.

For more:

Is Venerating Mary an Early Christian Practice?

Perhaps the most noticeable divergence between Orthodox and Protestant piety is the regard both respective parties have for Mary. The Theotokos, a title for Mary which means “God bearer” in Greek, …

orthodoxchristiantheology.com

Click to expand...

Yep, I'm in particular referencing the Protoevangelium, while leaving out the Ascension of Isaiah because of difficulty in determining its age and emergence as well as likely Gnostic content. I'll consider adding in the Odes of Solomon as a reference point. I think I'll hold onto the idea that "the doctrine of the perpetual virginity as literally as old as the Biblical canon," so thank you for spelling that out.