Perpetual virginity (not a hate thread)

[katholikos]

.

 

[simonthezealot]

Re: Tertullian:

I found the Wikipedia citation which is from Jurgens.

I could mention that Tertullian died in heresy and was often out of the mainstream of Christian thought whether he was talking about traducianism or this particular issue, but it is probably sufficient to point out that as important as Tertullian was where he was catholic, he was not always, and, as often as not, represents a rather singular voice.

Helvidius was a relative nobody theologically and Jovinian was a heretic.

The point remains that the doctrine that Mary remained a virgin throughout her life, after bearing Christ, is affirmed by, by far, the greater weight of ancient testimony: Jerome, Augustine and Athanasius outweigh nearly everyone, not to mention Hilary, Ambrose, Origen and Siricius.

Now, this does not mean that it is true.

But it does mean that the opinion of a single father, during a period of intense theological expansion and development should be given an appropriate value.

Is it a numbers game? 2 of the earliest and respected fathers Ireneaus and Hegessipus both wrote in opposition to the doctrine of PV, Hegessipus as quoted by eusebius called Him James brother according to the flesh...
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf201.iii.viii.xi.html

Irenaeus refers to Mary giving birth to Jesus when she was
"as yet a virgin" (Against Heresies, 3:21:10).

The implication is that she didn't remain a virgin. Irenaeus compares Mary's being a virgin at the time of Jesus' birth to the ground being "as yet virgin" before it was tilled by mankind. The ground thereafter ceased to be virgin, according to Irenaeus, when it was tilled. The implication is that Mary also ceased to be a virgin.
Elsewhere, Irenaeus writes:
"To this effect they testify, saying, that before Joseph had come together with Mary, while she therefore remained in virginity, 'she was found with child of the Holy Ghost;'" (Against Heresies, 3:21:4)
Irenaeus seems to associate "come together" with sexual intercourse. The implication is that Joseph and Mary had normal marital relations after Jesus was born.


basil and tertullian were also writers at odds with the view rome promotes

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

Is it a numbers game? 2 of the earliest and respected fathers Ireneaus and Hegessipus both wrote in opposition to the doctrine of PV, Hegessipus as quoted by eusebius called Him James brother according to the flesh...
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf201.iii.viii.xi.html

Irenaeus refers to Mary giving birth to Jesus when she was
"as yet a virgin" (Against Heresies, 3:21:10).

The implication is that she didn't remain a virgin. Irenaeus compares Mary's being a virgin at the time of Jesus' birth to the ground being "as yet virgin"
Elsewhere, Irenaeus writes:
"To this effect they testify, saying, that before Joseph had come together with Mary, while she therefore remained in virginity, 'she was found with child of the Holy Ghost;'" (Against Heresies, 3:21:4)
Irenaeus seems to associate "come together" with sexual intercourse. The implication is that Joseph and Mary had normal marital relations after Jesus was born.


basil and tertullian were also writers at odds with the view rome promotes before it was tilled by mankind. The ground thereafter ceased to be virgin, according to Irenaeus, when it was tilled. The implication is that Mary also ceased to be a virgin.

Thank you.


So....


1. God in His Scripture says NOTHING about how often Mary had sex after Jesus was born.

2. Mary said NOTHING about how often she had sex after Jesus was born.

3. No one who ever so much as met Mary ever said ANYTHING about how often Mary had sex after Jesus was born.

4. The first time ANYTHING is said about this, the views are all over the map. Some say she had sex, some say she didn't.

5. Some RCC "Fathers" said she was a PERPETUAL virgin. Some say she wasn't. None of them claim to have any special knowledge about that little detail of her marital life.

6. EVENTUALLY (long, long after Mary died and all those who ever so much as met her) there began to develop a view that she never had sex. And many centuries later, this was declared to be an issue of HIGHEST importance for all to know.

Is that correct?




.

 

[Anoetos]

When what we're looking for is a consensus then, yes, it's a numbers game.

Contrarily, one or two opinions establish nothing beyond a minority precedent.

Regarding "as yet a virgin"; context indicates that the purpose was not to expand on Jesus having siblings but upon the virgin birth of Christ (which no christian denies, speaking of "numbers games"). Irenaeus is saying that she was a virgin when Christ was born, and not abnormally so, she was a maiden.

 

[Rick Otto]

quote=Anoetos; Just guessing, but I think Thekla was asking whether the belief that Jesus had siblings from His Mother was ever commonly held, not whether it was held by someone "popular". In this sense, the reference is not to "popularity" but to "something common to a group of people"

Right. So how big of a group do we need?
The fact that three people of note established a position of doubt fulfills her pre-Enlightenment criteria, if not the repugnance criteria, which I felt was a little bit of rhetoric & couldn't take but half seriously. The half-joke that "he was popular" expressed my thought that if one person finds it important enough to express, undoubtedly there are more who concur.

I am new to the thread and haven't read the whole thing, so if you've given citations of these worthies expressing the opinion that Mary was not Semper Virgo please direct me to them.

No, I haven't, thank you. I don't rely much on antiquity or catholicism of belief to validate them. More sure for me, is their correlation to scripture & it's principles.

If not, could you give them now please?

I found what I did in Wiki. I'm not a very good student of ECFs simply for the above stated reasons.

 

[Rick Otto]

I gotta go grab some grub. I didn't bring my dinner to work tonight. I'm on break, but when I get back, I can still post because I'm only feeding printed sheets into the cutter this PC is running.

 

[Anoetos]

I would think either a simple majority or a consensus among the greater fathers would be adequate.

But if you "don't rely much on antiquity or catholicism of belief to validate" doctrine then why cite Tertullian at all?

Seems like it could be a much simpler discussion without involving all these old dead guys.



That said, ISTM that we are left with something of an epistemological rift. You understand Scripture to say one thing, I (and the majority of the fathers, the more important ones included) understand it to say something else.

 

[Rick Otto]

Thank you.


So....


1. God in His Scripture says NOTHING about how often Mary had sex after Jesus was born.

2. Mary said NOTHING about how often she had sex after Jesus was born.

3. No one who ever so much as met Mary ever said ANYTHING about how often Mary had sex after Jesus was born.

4. The first time ANYTHING is said about this, the views are all over the map. Some say she had sex, some say she didn't.

5. Some RCC "Fathers" said she was a PERPETUAL virgin. Some say she wasn't. None of them claim to have any special knowledge about that little detail of her marital life.

6. EVENTUALLY (long, long after Mary died and all those who ever so much as met her) there began to develop a view that she never had sex. And many centuries later, this was declared to be an issue of HIGHEST importance for all to know.

Is that correct?
.

Far as I can tell,... maybe except for the "special knowlege" part.
Tradition will undoubtedy be identified as special knowlege.

I know it's asking a lot, but maybe you could type "consummated her marriage to Joseph".
Not for just me, I don't mind, but that three letter word gets a seemingly irrepressible negative emotional response from our PV defending compadres.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

Far as I can tell,... maybe except for the "special knowlege" part.
Tradition will undoubtedy be identified as special knowlege.

I know it's asking a lot, but maybe you could type "consummated her marriage to Joseph".
Not for just me, I don't mind, but that three letter word gets a seemingly irrepressible negative emotional response from our PV defending compadres.

It does? Is sex a dirty word among them?



.

 

[simonthezealot]

I (and the majority of the fathers, the more important ones included) understand it to say something else.

Lets see I give you guys 100-180 years after Christ. with links to their writings ...
These are yours Siricius 3rd century Athanasius early 4th, Jerome and Augustine 4th-5th century, and Hilary and Ambrose early 4th who were both earlier influences of Origen

What does this tell you? It is obvious to be honest...

 

[Anoetos]

Lets see I give you guys 100-180 years after Christ. with links to their writings ...
These are yours Siricius 3rd century Athanasius early 4th, Jerome abd Augustine 4th-5th century, and Hilary and Ambrose early 4th who were both earlier influences of Origen

What does this tell you? It is obvious be honest...

I certainly haven't denied that the doctrine developed. Nor have I insisted that it was current or "popular" in the first or second century.

It appears to have really only taken off in the fourth century, possibly the late third.

 

[simonthezealot]

I certainly haven't denied that the doctrine developed. Nor have I insisted that it was current or "popular" in the first or second century.

It appears to have really only taken off in the fourth century, possibly the late third.

Sorry didn't mean to come across accusatory if you took it that way...
Yes developing for sure.

 

[Anoetos]

Sorry didn't mean to come across accusatory if you took it that way...
Yes developing for sure.

Not at all, not at all, I completely understand.

Many Catholics have no real concept of history and believe whatever anyone tells them as long as they tell them first that they are a "Catholic Apologist".

 

[Rick Otto]

quote=Anoetos; I would think either a simple majority or a consensus among the greater fathers would be adequate.

But if you "don't rely much on antiquity or catholicism of belief to validate" doctrine then why cite Tertullian at all?

Seems like it could be a much simpler discussion without involving all these old dead guys.

No Kidding!
Remember? I was indulging Thekla's desire for pre-Enlightenment & pre-middle class formation opposition to PV, that's all.

That said, ISTM that we are left with something of an epistemological rift. You understand Scripture to say one thing, I (and the majority of the fathers, the more important ones included) understand it to say something else.

Right.
I respect consensus a little more than antiquity, but if it violates my understanding of scripture, I won't personaly accept it. A semi-frequent response to that has been that I'm making myself a Pope, but of course I don't excommunicate anyone for not agreeing with me, claim inerrancy or infallability, etc.

 

[Philothei]

Remember? I was indulging Thekla's desire for pre-Enlightenment & pre-middle class formation opposition to PV, that's all.

It is called "cherry picking" Otto we know what you are doing ....

 

[Rick Otto]

Not at all, not at all, I completely understand.

Many Catholics have no real concept of history and believe whatever anyone tells them as long as they tell them first that they are a "Catholic Apologist".

I've seen way to plenty of the same on the Prot side.

 

[Rick Otto]

It is called "cherry picking" Otto we know what you are doing ....

I don't deserve your company, Philothei.

 

[Kristos]

I love cherry pie. Last year we got the best cherries from Door County, WI and my wife made a delicious pie with them.

Why is still called the Holy Land? Why do Christians of all denominations make pilgramages to the the Holy Land? They go on one of those "follow in the footsteps of Christ" tours. As see all the holy places and the holy land. As if land could be holy...What's up with that?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

I love cherry pie. Last year we got the best cherries from Door County, WI and my wife made a delicious pie with them.

Why is still called the Holy Land? Why do Christians of all denominations make pilgramages to the the Holy Land? They go on one of those "follow in the footsteps of Christ" tours. As see all the holy places and the holy land. As if land could be holy...What's up with that?

I like this passage in Ezekiel 43

Ezekiel 43:12 This law of the House upon summit of the mountain all of boundary of it/her round about - round about holiness of holinesses.
Behold! this law of the House.

 

[Kristos]

everything holy seems to happen on a mountian...