Source of Non-Ever Virgin POV

[simonthezealot]

http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2004/02/luther-calvin-and-other-early.html


.

Dave a catholic w/o a doctrate? cmon

 

[Epiphanygirl]

The bible.

funny, the way I read the Bible tells me that she did remain a virgin.....so does historical Christianity for 2000 years......would love to see any ECF teachings that show any councils proclaiming or that prove otherwise, but I won't hold my breath....Plenty of non-Apostolics have been led astray by reading into the Bible what they want....or what they think......big mistake

 

[Epiphanygirl]

Dave a catholic w/o a doctrate? cmon

Does not having a doctorate make him wrong? We have a ton of others who do....and they all say the same thing.

 

[PaladinValer]

Just so it is clear, I believe in the Perpetual Virginity of the Most Blessed Virgin, St. Mary, Theotokos and Christokos, Mother of All Graces and Queen of Heaven.

With her "yes," I was saved!

 

[simonthezealot]

Luther treats at length the miracle of the virgin birth, and on the basis of lack of biblical evidence to the contrary, Mary must have remained perpetually virgin:

Scripture does not quibble or speak about the virginity of Mary after the birth of Christ, a matter about which the hypocrites are greatly concerned, as if it were something of the utmost importance on which our whole salvation depended. Actually, we should be satisfied simply to hold that she remained a virgin after the birth of Christ because Scripture does not state or indicate that she later lost her virginity... But the Scripture stops with this, that she was a virgin before and at the birth of Christ; for up to this point God had need of her virginity in order to give us the promised blessed seed without sin. [46]
Interestingly, Luther implies a disbelief in Mary’s bodily assumption through the use of a similar argument: "we have no knowledge of the death of Mary, the mother of Christ. Sarah alone has this glory, that the definite number of her years, the time of her death, and the place of her burial are described. Therefore this is great praise and very sure proof that she was precious in the eyes of God."[47]
While holding this belief, Luther will not have Mary’s perpetually virginity extolled. He condemns those who venerate this attribute, and notes that it exists only to bring forth the Messiah:
Now just take a look at the perverse lauders of the mother of God. If you ask them why they hold so strongly to the virginity of Mary, they truly could not say. These stupid idolators do nothing more than to glorify only the mother of God; they extol her for her virginity and practically make a false deity of her. But Scripture does not praise this virginity at all for the sake of the mother; neither was she saved on account of her virginity. Indeed, cursed be this and every other virginity if it exists for its own sake, and accomplishes nothing better than its own profit and praise.
The Spirit extols this virginity, however, because it was needful for the conceiving and bearing of this blessed fruit. Because of the corruption of our flesh, such blessed fruit could not come, except through a virgin. Thus this tender virginity existed in the service of others to the glory of God, not to its own glory.[48]

Even in Luther’s acceptance of perpetual virginity, it was not to be worshipped as the attribute of a goddess. Luther points out that Mary fades from the biblical account after the birth, because the emphasis of the Scriptures are on her child:

"For the prophet and the evangelist, and St. Paul as well, do not treat of this virgin beyond the point where they have from her that fruit for whose sake she is a virgin and everything else. After the child is born they dismiss the mother and speak not about her, what became of her, but only about her offspring."[49]

That Luther did not spend entire treatises defending perpetual virginity serves to show that what was important to him was not Mary’s lack of children, but rather the child she did give birth to. Throughout his career, he would minimize the emphasis on this Marian doctrine.
[48] Ibid., 45:204.
[49] Ibid., 45:211.

 

[PaladinValer]

Straw Man, Simon.

The issue isn't whether Luther thought the Vatican Church placed too much emphasis on the BVM but whether he believed in the BVM's perpetual virginity.

You asked me for proof that Luther and Co. believed in it. If you want to still disagree in the light of clear and undeniable evidence, you are of course welcome to, but let's please keep to the question and not being up straw men.

 

[simonthezealot]

Straw Man, Simon.

The issue isn't whether Luther thought the Vatican Church placed too much emphasis on the BVM but whether he believed in the BVM's perpetual virginity.

You asked me for proof that Luther and Co. believed in it. If you want to still disagree in the light of clear and undeniable evidence, you are of course welcome to, but let's please keep to the question and not being up straw men.

PV,
Look at my posts again...On the one i edited to say oops I was was speaking of the IC.
On the next I agreed with you but put it in its proper context...
Peace

 

[simonthezealot]

Dave a catholic w/o a doctrate? cmon

Armstrong repeatedly quotes Luther out of context.

 

[PaladinValer]

The only context was whether Luther believed in the perpetual virginity of the BVM or not.

The fact that he didn't make a big deal out of it isn't the point, nor is it the point of this thread, which asks for the source of the doctrine that the BVM was not perpetually a virgin. If you might shed some light on it, I'm sure everyone would be interested in whatever you had to say.

 

[simonthezealot]

Does not having a doctorate make him wrong? We have a ton of others who do....and they all say the same thing.

HOPE THESE HELP!
Basil

Contrary to what Roman Catholics often suggest, there were many people in the early centuries of Christianity who rejected the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary. Though the doctrine was popular among the later church fathers, there was opposition to it even in those later centuries. The church father Basil commented that the view that Mary had other children after Jesus "was widely held and, though not accepted by himself, was not incompatible with orthodoxy" (J.N.D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines [San Francisco, California: HarperCollins Publishers, 1978], p. 495).

 

[simonthezealot]

Hegesippus


The New Testament evidence is against the perpetual virginity doctrine. Luke, for example, was familiar with Greek words he could have used to express the doctrine, and he used that terminology repeatedly, but not with regard to Mary and her children. Instead of using the Greek term for "only-born" (Luke 7:12, 8:42, 9:38), he used the term "first-born" (Luke 2:7) to refer to Jesus. He uses the word "supposedly" to describe Jesus' relationship with Joseph (Luke 3:23), but doesn't use any such terminology to describe Jesus' relationship with His brothers and sisters. He understood the difference between a "relative" and a "brother", even distinguishing between the two within a single sentence (Luke 21:16), but he repeatedly chooses the term "brother" to describe Jesus' siblings.
The church father Hegesippus apparently didn't believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary. Hegesippus refers to Jude as "the Lord's brother according to the flesh" (church history of Eusebius, 3:20). He refers elsewhere to Symeon, a "cousin of the Lord" (church history of Eusebius, 4:22). We know, then, that Hegesippus understood the differences between the Greek terms for "brother" and "cousin". He chose "brother", and added the words "according to the flesh", to describe Jesus' sibling named Jude.

 

[simonthezealot]

Irenaeus

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.

 

[simonthezealot]

Tertullian

Tertullian apparently didn't believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary. He writes that Jesus' brothers were "really" his brothers, his "blood-relationship" (Against Marcion, 4:19). Elsewhere, Tertullian comments:
"Behold, there immediately present themselves to us, on the threshold as it were, the two priestesses of Christian sanctity, Monogamy and Continence: one modest, in Zechariah the priest; one absolute, in John the forerunner: one appeasing God; one preaching Christ: one proclaiming a perfect priest; one exhibiting 'more than a prophet,' - him, namely, who has not only preached or personally pointed out, but even baptized Christ. For who was more worthily to perform the initiatory rite on the body of the Lord, than flesh similar in kind to that which conceived and gave birth to that body? And indeed it was a virgin, about to marry once for all after her delivery, who gave birth to Christ, in order that each title of sanctity might be fulfilled in Christ's parentage, by means of a mother who was both virgin, and wife of one husband." (On Monogamy, 8)
Tertullian says that Mary is representative of both ideals, monogamy and continence. She represented virginity for a while, then represented monogamy within marriage. The latter seems to *replace* the former, as something distinct from it, which is a denial of the perpetual virginity doctrine.

 

[PaladinValer]

simon, you have forgotten that, in the Early Church, doctrine and dogma were declared not by individuals but councils.

Where is the source of the doctrine? What council or synod?

 

[simonthezealot]

Historically, what is the source of the teaching that Mary did not remain a Virgin?

I'm not looking for right or wrong here, but a historical trace of this teaching. Was it a product of the Reformation? Or perhaps a by-product? Are there any ancient teachings along these lines, and what happened to them?

Please cite your references, Name, date, title, etc. If you don't wish to cite your reference, please don't post because I'm not interested in your opinion. Thanks!

HE ASKED FOR REFERENCES NOT DOCTRINES

simon, you have forgotten that, in the Early Church, doctrine and dogma were declared not by individuals but councils.

Where is the source of the doctrine? What council or synod?

SEE ABOVE

 

[PaladinValer]

That's true, but what I said is also true.

The Fifth Ecumenical Council declared her to be a perpetual virgin. Since it was an Ecumenical Council, it was the final decision. In addition, since it was declared to be a doctrine, it cannot be repealed.

Since the Holy Spirit revealed this and worked through the Church by this Ecumenical Council, I am obligated to believe it.

 

[simonthezealot]

That's true, but what I said is also true.

The Fifth Ecumenical Council declared her to be a perpetual virgin. Since it was an Ecumenical Council, it was the final decision. In addition, since it was declared to be a doctrine, it cannot be repealed.

Since the Holy Spirit revealed this and worked through the Church by this Ecumenical Council, I am obligated to believe it.

Have fun with it!
Makes no never mind on my salvation.
Why would the HS reveal something that could potentially take away pure sincere devotion to Christ? Just curious, cuz it seems to me just cuz a councel votes on something doesn't mean it is HS revealed. Look at the domus speculatores bull...it was in total error.
sorry my bad that u were from rome

 

[PaladinValer]

And what is so devotion-steeling about the doctrine of the perpetual virginity? I can't worship her anyway nor is she able to dispense Grace (except once, of course, when she gave birth to Grace Incarnate). I give all glory to God, but I do give due reverence to His mother, who, through Christ my Brother, is my mother too.

The Ecumenical Councils always invoked the Holy Spirit. Its been that tradition in all Apostolic churches that, before a synod or council that the Holy Spirit is petitioned to descend upon the group. Are you suggesting that the Holy Spirit ignored their earnest plea at the beginning of the council?

In addition, a papal bull does not equate always to a declaration of doctrine or dogma: that has, to my knowledge, only happened twice.

And lastly, my congregational icon is Anglican, not Vatican Catholic, though I think it would be Christian of you not to spread falsities about other churches or denominations.

 

[Merciel]

I know of an early source that argues against the perpetual virginity of Mary: Helvidius.
John Calvin: "Helvidius has shown himself too ignorant, in saying that Mary had several sons, because mention is made in some passages of the brothers of Christ."
St. Jerome regarding Helvidius on the perpetual virginity of Mary: "I was requested by certain of the brethren not long ago to reply to a pamphlet written by one Helvidius. I have deferred doing so, not because it is a difficult matter to maintain the truth and refute an ignorant boor who has scarce known the first glimmer of learning, but because I was afraid my reply might make him appear worth defeating."
Yeah. I want to be in his ranks!

 

[Merciel]

Have fun with it!
Makes no never mind on my salvation.
Why would the HS reveal something that could potentially take away pure sincere devotion to Christ? Just curious, cuz it seems to me just cuz a councel votes on something doesn't mean it is HS revealed. Look at the domus speculatores bull...it was in total error.
sorry my bad that u were from rome

That's similar to the argument atheists use against the Bible: "Why would God create a book that could potentially be misinterpreted?" Therefore, God isn't real, right? Because things can be perverted?