Why is Mary’s perpetual virginity so controversial for non-Catholic Christians?

Michie said:

Q: Something that’s always been kind of interesting to me is how much Protestants object to Mary’s perpetual virginity. I get balking at her Immaculate Conception, her as mediatrix of all graces, asking for her intercession, etc. But remaining a virgin is a thing people can and have done, a totally human thing, and it being true or false has no effect on Protestant theology. Yet there’s this intense focus on it. Why don’t Protestants just let that one be and agree to disagree but not get worked up about it?

A: First of all, I think we need to make sure we’re not painting with too broad a brush. “Protestants” is a big category, and different Protestant denominations profess a wide variety of specific beliefs on different points of Christian doctrine. For example, certain traditional Anglicans or Episcopalians might retain a belief in Mary’s perpetual virginity, even to the point of giving some of their parishes names like “the Church of St. Mary the Virgin.”

But getting to the real substance of your question, one thought is that many Protestant denominations have a very heavy emphasis on “sola scriptura,” or the belief that we should look to the Bible alone for knowledge of faith and morals. This is in contrast with the Catholic belief in both the Bible and the teachings outside of Scripture, which have been handed down via sacred tradition (as described in 2 Thes 2:15).

Continued below.

Why is Mary's perpetual virginity so controversial for non-Catholic Christians?

Why do non-Catholic Christians dispute Mary's perpetual virginity, despite its limited impact on Protestant theology?

www.oursundayvisitor.com

Click to expand...

1Co 7:5 Do not refuse one another except perhaps by agreement for a season, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, lest Satan tempt you through lack of self-control.
1Co 7:6 I say this by way of concession, not of command.
1Co 7:7 I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has his own special gift from God, one of one kind and one of another.
1Co 7:8 To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is well for them to remain single as I do.
1Co 7:9 But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to be aflame with passion.

Click to expand...

Mrk 12:23 In the resurrection whose wife will she be? For the seven had her as wife."
Mrk 12:24 Jesus said to them, "Is not this why you are wrong, that you know neither the scriptures nor the power of God?
Mrk 12:25 For when they rise from the dead, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.

Click to expand...

Michie said:

Q: Something that’s always been kind of interesting to me is how much Protestants object to Mary’s perpetual virginity. I get balking at her Immaculate Conception, her as mediatrix of all graces, asking for her intercession, etc. But remaining a virgin is a thing people can and have done, a totally human thing, and it being true or false has no effect on Protestant theology. Yet there’s this intense focus on it. Why don’t Protestants just let that one be and agree to disagree but not get worked up about it?

A: First of all, I think we need to make sure we’re not painting with too broad a brush. “Protestants” is a big category, and different Protestant denominations profess a wide variety of specific beliefs on different points of Christian doctrine. For example, certain traditional Anglicans or Episcopalians might retain a belief in Mary’s perpetual virginity, even to the point of giving some of their parishes names like “the Church of St. Mary the Virgin.”

But getting to the real substance of your question, one thought is that many Protestant denominations have a very heavy emphasis on “sola scriptura,” or the belief that we should look to the Bible alone for knowledge of faith and morals. This is in contrast with the Catholic belief in both the Bible and the teachings outside of Scripture, which have been handed down via sacred tradition (as described in 2 Thes 2:15).

Continued below.

Why is Mary's perpetual virginity so controversial for non-Catholic Christians?

Why do non-Catholic Christians dispute Mary's perpetual virginity, despite its limited impact on Protestant theology?

www.oursundayvisitor.com

Click to expand...

Lady Bug said:

I am struggling sort of, with this, because of the verse that goes "He did not know her until she brought forth their firstborn son." I've seen the explanation for this but I'm struggling with trying to understand why it doesn't mean what it plainly says. However, I'm not trying to cause problems, and I realize that the notion of her PV does not really affect me in my everyday life

Click to expand...

Lady Bug said:

I am struggling sort of, with this, because of the verse that goes "He did not know her until she brought forth their firstborn son." I've seen the explanation for this but I'm struggling with trying to understand why it doesn't mean what it plainly says. However, I'm not trying to cause problems, and I realize that the notion of her PV does not really affect me in my everyday life

Click to expand...

FaithT said:

It’s said that there was no word for cousins in the NT but doesn’t Scripture say that Mary visited her cousin Elizabeth?

Click to expand...

Lady Bug said:

I am struggling sort of, with this, because of the verse that goes "He did not know her until she brought forth their firstborn son." I've seen the explanation for this but I'm struggling with trying to understand why it doesn't mean what it plainly says. However, I'm not trying to cause problems, and I realize that the notion of her PV does not really affect me in my everyday life

Click to expand...

FaithT said:

In my Bible, the NRSV, it refers to Elizabeth as Mary‘s relative, not cousin. So Jesus‘ brothers could have been stepbrothers, adopted brothers or cousins but they didn’t have a word for cousin in that language. The Bible’s that use the word cousin are incorrect.

Click to expand...

Michie said:

But remaining a virgin is a thing people can and have done, a totally human thing, and it being true or false has no effect on Protestant theology. Yet there’s this intense focus on it.

Click to expand...

lismore said:

Hello! Perhaps that is the reason- they're concerned over what could be seen as a peripheral idea that seems to be presented so much, something that could be considered a distraction from the core of the gospel.

Acts 16: 31 They replied, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved—you and your household.”

In the statement by the Apostle above, nothing about Mary.

Perhaps adding in more to the gospel than is necessary for salvation can be seen as potentially causing the focus to become blurred.

God Bless

Click to expand...

1Co 3:1 But I, brethren, could not address you as spiritual men, but as men of the flesh, as babes in Christ.
1Co 3:2 I fed you with milk, not solid food; for you were not ready for it; and even yet you are not ready,
1Co 3:3 for you are still of the flesh. For while there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not of the flesh, and behaving like ordinary men?

Click to expand...

Eph 4:11 And his gifts were that some should be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers,
Eph 4:12 to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ,
Eph 4:13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ;
Eph 4:14 so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the cunning of men, by their craftiness in deceitful wiles.
Eph 4:15 Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ,
Eph 4:16 from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by every joint with which it is supplied, when each part is working properly, makes bodily growth and upbuilds itself in love.

Click to expand...

David Lamb said:

There is a word for cousin in the bible. It is used here:

“Aristarchus my fellow prisoner greets you, with Mark the cousin of Barnabas (about whom you received instructions: if he comes to you, welcome him),” (Col 4:10 NKJV)

The word is ἀνεψιός anepsios.

Click to expand...

FaithT said:

Anybody want to take this?

Click to expand...

From G1 (as a particle of union) and an obsolete form νέπος nepos (a brood); properly akin, that is, (specifically) a cousin: - sister’s son.
Total KJV occurrences: 1

Click to expand...

fide said:

Well, frankly I get confused with terms of relations as soon as it gets past brother or sister, which often gets me into trouble. However, taking another way to consider this issue, my E-Sword X tells me that ἀνεψιός (anepsios), Strongs 431, is used only 1 time in the NT. The app says:

It sounds to me that the culture from which the text comes simply did not use the term - their family relationships did not find that term useful. As has been brought out many times before, "brother" in this culture was used in many different ways, and fit their understanding of the term "family". My understanding of Mary fits with all that Catholic Tradition has passed on to us.

Click to expand...

fide said:

Well, frankly I get confused with terms of relations as soon as it gets past brother or sister, which often gets me into trouble. However, taking another way to consider this issue, my E-Sword X tells me that ἀνεψιός (anepsios), Strongs 431, is used only 1 time in the NT. The app says:

It sounds to me that the culture from which the text comes simply did not use the term - their family relationships did not find that term useful. As has been brought out many times before, "brother" in this culture was used in many different ways, and fit their understanding of the term "family". My understanding of Mary fits with all that Catholic Tradition has passed on to us.

Click to expand...

mourningdove~ said:

I was listening to "Catholic Answers' on the radio the other evening.
Not my usual source for information, but someone called into the program and shared this:

The caller said that some Catholics believe that Joseph was a perpetual virgin, and he asked them if was true?
And he asked if it is required that Catholics believe this about Joseph?

Catholic Answers kind of skirted the issue, and said that yes, it may be true.
(I don't recall them saying that Catholics are required to believe this, but I think not.)

Honestly, it shocked me to think that Joseph may have been a perpetual virgin.
The idea seems very foreign to me. Never heard this before.

From the Catholic perspective, I always understood Joseph to be an older man who may have fathered other children, in a previous relationship. Even that he may have been a widower.

What are your thoughts on this?
What do the traditional writings say about Joseph?
WAS he a perpetual virgin?

Click to expand...