In response to Gary's question:
First of all, let me begin by saying that Mary was a PERPETUAL VIRGIN, this meaning: She was a virgin before, during, after the birth of Christ. She did not have any other children.
Many fundamentalists challenge the Catholic doctrine of Mary's Perpetual Virginity. One of the most common claims is that scripture states that Jesus had brothers, . Matthew 13:55 states: "Is he not the carpenter's son? Is not his mother named Mary and his brothers james, Joseph, Simon, and Judas?" It is extremely important to denote that the word "brother" used in the bible can also mean "relative." In fact, two of the brothers mentioned, namely James and Joseph are identified as the sons of another Mary, the wife of Clopas (Please compare the scripture verses Matthew 27:56 & John 19:25). In addition to this, it does not make sense, if Jesus had blood brothers, that He would have entrusted Mary to John and not one of these so called "brothers."
Just for historical accuracy, let us make it clear that this doctrine was not even challenged until about 400 AD (the time of Saint Jerome) AND it is interesting to note that the founders of Protestantism did not challenge the Perpetual Virginity of Mary. EXAMPLES:
Luther wrote: " It is an artical of faith that Mary is the Mother of the Lord and still a virgin.....Chrsit, we believe, came forth from a womb left perfectly intact."(See works of Luther v. 11, pp. 319-320; v. 6 p. 510)
Calvin wrote: " There are certain folk who have wished to suggest from this passage (Matt 1:25) that the Virgin Mary had other children than the Son of God, and that Joseph had then dwelt with her later; BUT WHAT FOLLY THIS IS! For the gospel writer did not wish to record what happened afterwards; he simply wished to make clear Joseph's obedience and to show also that Joseph had been well and truly assured that it was God who had sent his angel to Mary. He had therefore never dwelt with her nor had he shared her company...and besides this Our Lord Jesus Christ is called the first-born. This is not because there was a second or a third, but because the gospel writer is paying regard to the precedence. Scripture speaks thus of naming the first born wheter or no there was any question of the second."(Sermon on Matthew 1:22 -25, published in 1562)
Zwingli: " I firmly believe that Mary, according ot the words of th gospel as a pure Virgin brought forth for us the Son of God and in childbirth and after childbirth forever remained a pure, intact Virgin." (Zwingli Opera, v. 1, p. 424)
I have a question for the Fundementalists: Why do they not honor Mary as their own Founders did?
I would like to add that in Hebrew and Aramaic there was not a word that was used for cousin that differed from the word that they used for brother or sister. That is why in the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, the Septuagint that was already in use by the Jews of Jesus' time, the Greek does not translate the Hebrew word for brothers into the Greek word for cousins. Take for instance the Old Testament case of Lot and Abraham. Lot was Abraham's nephew but the Hebrew calls him brother and so the Greek translation, the Septuagint, also calls Lot the brother of Abraham - in Greek 'adelphos' which means brother, instead of 'anepsios' which is the Greek word for cousin. What this means is that the Greek translators stayed as true to the original Hebrew as is possible, even though it meant using the word brothers, a word which they probably never would have thought would be misconstrued to deny the perpetual virginity of Our Lady.
ReplyDeleteAwesome answer! if i may also add a few things. in order to understand scripture you must understand the times and customs. speaking as an arab where we do things differently than Americans, in our language which was the same language as Christ, there was no word for COUSIN. we just call them "my uncles son/daughter". therefor the writer could not use the word cousin because we don't have it in our language, so he used the word BROTHERS. also, if we look at the cross we have 3 Mary's, we have our Blessed Mother, Mary Mag. and we have Mary wife of Clopus. Mary wife of Clopus is prob the one who's kids they are talking about. one last thing, when the head of the house hold dies around those times its the oldest son would take over and take care of the widowed mother. when Joseph died Jesus took over because he was her only SON. when Jesus died, he gave Mary to John to take care of, because she had NO OTHER KIDS. :)
ReplyDeleteMight I add that St. Jerome, who was the first person to translate the Bible from Hebrew into Latin, over 1500 years ago, who therefore knew the Bible back to front, also wrote the first treatise against a heretic that used the word "brothers of Jesus" to say that Mary was not a perpetual virgin. Here is a quote from that awesome book:
ReplyDelete"[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]).
And one more just for good measure!
"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).
Ezekiel 44:1-2. Pope Benedict tells us that the Fathers of the Church saw this verse of the prophet as a verse about Mary's perpetual virginity. Isn't it incredible? In Mary, we ought to admire the work of the Creator and the Redeemer. Rather than try to equate ourselves with her, or her holiness with ours, we ought to marvel at the grace of God active in her life of charity and total humility. In the end, the Tradition of the Church is loud and clear, in perfect conformity with the Sacred Scriptures that were inspired by God and preserved by the very same Catholic Church who identified the inspired works authoritatively in the first place. Still we must not forget, Jesus does have many brothers, and Mary has many more children than are named in the Gospels. Who are they? All of us.
ReplyDelete