|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login | |
|
RE: The perpetual discussion on Mary's Virginity - 4/19/2005 1:29:40 PM
|
|
|
Lurker
Posts: 740
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Silver Spring, MD
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: whisper *Sigh* I don't know why I visit the theology folder. I don't think there's been a time I've posted that I've not been ignored. Anyone? I'll try to get to this when I have time. :)
|
|
|
|
RE: The perpetual discussion on Mary's Virginity - 4/20/2005 1:17:57 AM
|
|
|
JOE6778
Posts: 2
Joined: 4/19/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: whisper *Sigh* I don't know why I visit the theology folder. I don't think there's been a time I've posted that I've not been ignored. Anyone? I posted my first reply on another thread and I, too, was ignored. I don't know why it is that Mary is given such high stature within the Catholic church- almost equal to Jesus Himself. They believe that Mary was born without sin (Immaculate Conception), and that she remained a virgin all her life when in fact the Bible clearly teaches that she had other children. It also teaches that everyone is a sinner (except Jesus). When the disciples came to Jesus and said His mother and brothers were waiting to see Him, He answered "who are my mother and brothers? it is those that hear God's word and put it into practice." (Loke 8:21) Jesus clearly didn't take this opportunity to point out that she was holy above all. He certainly didn't treat her that way when at the wedding at Cana when Mary told Jesus they were out of wine, he said to her "Woman, what does that have to do with us? My hour has not yet come." (John 2:4). The Book of Jude was written by Jesus's brother. James was also written by another of Jesus's brothers. James was also the leader of the church at Jerusalem. Its only recent Catholic church doctrine that teaches these things about Mary. It's not in the Bible. That's why there's so many questionable doctrines in the Catholic church- they come from the tradition of men and not the Word of God.
|
|
|
|
RE: The perpetual discussion on Mary's Virginity - 4/20/2005 6:54:39 AM
|
|
|
sdaw
Posts: 877
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: whisper *Sigh* I don't know why I visit the theology folder. I don't think there's been a time I've posted that I've not been ignored. Anyone? quote:
I'm not very familiar with the arguments of perpeptual virginity of Mary, but I'm confused by this: " We do call her sinless, but not sinless in the same manner as Jesus. We believe Mary did not act on her sinful impulses but she surely had them as we all do. " Certainly you don't think Mary was without sin! There is no one who is good but God alone. So if by sinful impulses you meant sexual impulses... well then, I fail to see how wanting sex with your husband is a sin. Either way, I'm confused. Dear whisper, I'll not ignore you here. Yes, Catholics and Orthodox do believe that Mary was sinless. This was not due to her inate goodness, but an extraordinary gift of God's grace to her. No, it is not a matter of "sexual impulses." viva il papa! Es lebe der Papst!
|
|
|
|
RE: The perpetual discussion on Mary's Virginity - 8/3/2005 4:37:50 PM
|
|
|
warrior4heaven
Posts: 8
Joined: 7/29/2005
From: Alabama originally, but currently reside in DE
Status: offline
|
First off, protestants are not trying to bring Mary down. However, we are not trying to bring her up to Christs level either. Yes she was the mother of our Lord and Saviour, therefore she is most certainly worthy of our love, respect, and admiration. Furthermore, even if she did die a virgin (which she didnt) why would that matter? It doesnt change who she was. Mary remained a virgin in order to give birth to Jesus. Her virginity beyond that point is a stale issue. While you say protestants bring Mary down, Catholics raise her to the level idolatry. The lord makes it very clear. "Thou shalt have none before me". But whats the point of discussing this. I mean Catholics have been manipulating the word of God forever now. The Virgin Mary is a FALSE teaching, just like your belief in the "Assumption". The word assumption should never be associated with faith. If you assume anything, that means your faith isnt strong enough to convince you!!
|
|
|
|
RE: The perpetual discussion on Mary's Virginity - 8/3/2005 4:52:44 PM
|
|
|
Lurker
Posts: 740
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Silver Spring, MD
Status: offline
|
Warrior4heaven. Your fervor is admirable. But I wonder, have you read the entirety of the thread yet? There's many examples that talk about the scriptural support for the Theotokos' perpetual virginity. I believe most of your arguments have already been answered in the thread.
_____________________________
Do not be afraid of Christ! He takes nothing away, and he gives you everything. When we give ourselves to him, we receive a hundredfold in return. Yes, open, open wide the doors to Christ—and you will find true life. -Pope Benedict XVI
|
|
|
|
RE: The perpetual discussion on Mary's Virginity - 8/4/2005 9:28:50 AM
|
|
|
bridgefin
Posts: 135
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Boca Raton, FL
Status: offline
|
Warrior4heaven, quote:
First off, protestants are not trying to bring Mary down. However, we are not trying to bring her up to Christs level either. Good. Neither are we and we consider it a most severe sin to even approach that. quote:
Yes she was the mother of our Lord and Saviour, therefore she is most certainly worthy of our love, respect, and admiration. By golly, you could be Catholic with that statement! Well, actually we might ratchet that up just a tad by claiming that the privelege given to Mary to be His mother was the highest honor that God ever gave to any man and thus she is deserving of the highest honor we would pay to any man. quote:
Furthermore, even if she did die a virgin (which she didnt)... Since that is the topic of this discussion maybe you would like to prove such a strong statement. quote:
...why would that matter? It doesnt change who she was. Mary remained a virgin in order to give birth to Jesus. Why did Mary have to remain a virgin in order to give birth to Jesus? Please explain the reason. And don't just say to fulfill prophecy...why would the prophecy require Mary be born of a virgin? quote:
Her virginity beyond that point is a stale issue. Obviously it is to you but not to us. Is truth a stale issue or does it have meaning? quote:
While you say protestants bring Mary down, Catholics raise her to the level idolatry. The lord makes it very clear. "Thou shalt have none before me". Catholic teaching is very clear to avoid any level of idolatry. Please defend this statement from Catholic teaching ort withdraw it. And, yes, Protestants fail, as a norm, to honor Mary. They are not part of "all generations shall call me blessed." It comes with their innate anti-Catholicism. quote:
But whats the point of discussing this. I mean Catholics have been manipulating the word of God forever now. The Virgin Mary is a FALSE teaching, just like your belief in the "Assumption". The word assumption should never be associated with faith. If you assume anything, that means your faith isnt strong enough to convince you!! It would appear that you came here on your own free will to discuss this. Look in the mirror. For most of its history Catholicism was not attacked by other forms of Christianity. We were free to interpret Scripture exactly as it appeared without any cause to defend or axe to grind. We did not need any manipulation because there was no predefined cause to protect. That is not so with Protestants. It is far easier to make that charge stick against those who would attack their ancestry. Is there going to be any defense of your claims or are you just here to says that you are infallible in your teaching and everyone else is wrong? In Christ, George
|
|
|
|
RE: The perpetual discussion on Mary's Virginity - 8/4/2005 9:43:59 AM
|
|
|
sdaw
Posts: 877
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
quote: But whats the point of discussing this. I mean Catholics have been manipulating the word of God forever now. The Virgin Mary is a FALSE teaching, just like your belief in the "Assumption". The word assumption should never be associated with faith. If you assume anything, that means your faith isnt strong enough to convince you!! The Assumption is not an assumption, meaning accepting something as true without requiring proof. The Assumption refers to the belief that Mary's body was translated into the glorified state without undergoing the decomposition of death. On the Feast of St. John Vianney Blessed be God in His Angels and in His Saints!
|
|
|
|
RE: The perpetual discussion on Mary's Virginity - 8/4/2005 1:43:01 PM
|
|
|
warrior4heaven
Posts: 8
Joined: 7/29/2005
From: Alabama originally, but currently reside in DE
Status: offline
|
The assumption is a classic example of "Adding to Gods word". The assumption was added to Catholic belief in the 1950's. That is my biggest problem with Catholicism. You feel as though you have some divine right to take away, or add to the word of God. [Edited by Admin.]
< Message edited by Fritzpw_Admin -- 8/4/2005 2:46:41 PM >
|
|
|
|
RE: The perpetual discussion on Mary's Virginity - 8/4/2005 1:55:27 PM
|
|
|
rcjames
Posts: 5693
Joined: 7/15/2005
From: Oklahoma
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: sdaw The Assumption is not an assumption, meaning accepting something as true without requiring proof. The Assumption refers to the belief that Mary's body was translated into the glorified state without undergoing the decomposition of death. On the Feast of St. John Vianney Blessed be God in His Angels and in His Saints! Wow! I would really like to have Chapter and Verse for that one. That idea was developed when? 1950? Lordy, I am older than that dogma. Thanks RC
_____________________________
Just a country Preacher's humble opinion Read the first chapter of my latest book here; http://www.deliveranceofsara.com
|
|
|
|
RE: The perpetual discussion on Mary's Virginity - 8/4/2005 2:08:12 PM
|
|
|
CatholicCritter
Posts: 137
Joined: 6/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: warrior4heaven The assumption is a classic example of "Adding to Gods word". The assumption was added to Catholic belief in the 1950's. That is my biggest problem with Catholicism. You feel as though you have some divine right to take away, or add to the word of God. Heres another example: God says we shall call no other man "Father" (other than our own physical father of course) yet Catholic priests are commonly referred to as Father. This is false. The Assumption was DEFINED in 1950 but was part of the first deposit of faith. Learn what the Catholic Church actually teaches before making such statements. There are writings from the first century which denote this belief as prevalent and the Church does not limit God's revelation to Scripture alone because God did not limit his revelation to Scripture alone. [Edited by Admin.]
< Message edited by Fritzpw_Admin -- 8/4/2005 2:47:05 PM >
_____________________________
http://saintunderconstruction.blogspot.com/ "There are not 100 people who hate the Catholic Church, yet there are millions who hate what they believe the Catholic Church to be." --Archbishop Fulton Sheen
|
|
|
|
RE: The perpetual discussion on Mary's Virginity - 8/4/2005 2:49:59 PM
|
|
|
Fritzpw_Admin
Posts: 7663
Joined: 2/28/2005
From: New Jersey
Status: offline
|
ADMIN'S NOTE :: ATTENTION PLEASE This discussion is about Mary's virginity NOT about what we call priests. Please stay on topic as several posts have been edited. Please do not reply to this message within the Community. Please email Community@salemwebnetwork.com with questions, comments, or concerns. Please do not send me PMs regarding this message.
_____________________________
Fritz Senior Manager of Social Media fritz@salemwebnetwork.com Want to see my latest online project? Check out http://budurl.com/CWonFacebook
|
|
|
|
RE: The perpetual discussion on Mary's Virginity - 8/4/2005 2:58:53 PM
|
|
|
CatholicCritter
Posts: 137
Joined: 6/17/2005
Status: offline
|
I've yet to see the case actually made for the Assumption and notice that the mod limited it to interpretation of Scripture alone. With the mod's permission, I can take a stab at creating the WHOLE case so people at least know what their debating.
_____________________________
http://saintunderconstruction.blogspot.com/ "There are not 100 people who hate the Catholic Church, yet there are millions who hate what they believe the Catholic Church to be." --Archbishop Fulton Sheen
|
|
|
|
RE: The perpetual discussion on Mary's Virginity - 8/4/2005 3:10:45 PM
|
|
|
Fritzpw_Admin
Posts: 7663
Joined: 2/28/2005
From: New Jersey
Status: offline
|
This thread isn't even about the Assumption. Request denied. Check the Catholic Discussion index for the discussion on the Assumption.
_____________________________
Fritz Senior Manager of Social Media fritz@salemwebnetwork.com Want to see my latest online project? Check out http://budurl.com/CWonFacebook
|
|
|
|
RE: The perpetual discussion on Mary's Virginity - 8/4/2005 3:25:04 PM
|
|
|
CatholicCritter
Posts: 137
Joined: 6/17/2005
Status: offline
|
Yes, my bad. Mistyped. With regard to the Perpetual Virginity of Mary, consider this. On the Cross, Jesus says to Mary, 'Woman, behold your son' and to John, 'Behold, your Mother'. Jewish Law required that if any siblings existed, that the mother would go to live with them after the first born passed on. This is one deduction we can make that Mary had no other children, otherwise Christ would've given her to them and not to John. Considering Jesus kept the Commandments perfectly and abided by Jewish Law (kept the Passover, Dedication of the Temple, etc.) he would've placed his mother in the care of any brothers or sisters. Finally, there was no actual word for 'cousin' in Hebrew or Aramaic so people used the term 'son of my uncle' or just used 'brother'. The way the 'brethren' spoke to him, they could only be elder siblings or they would not give him advice or boss him around, yet we know that Jesus was the first born of Mary so these older 'brethren' could not have been from Mary, could they? apologies for the mistype, mod.
_____________________________
http://saintunderconstruction.blogspot.com/ "There are not 100 people who hate the Catholic Church, yet there are millions who hate what they believe the Catholic Church to be." --Archbishop Fulton Sheen
|
|
|
|
RE: The perpetual discussion on Mary's Virginity - 8/5/2005 1:16:52 PM
|
|
|
Cilas-Liag
Posts: 1
Joined: 7/29/2005
Status: offline
|
How can a Virgin stay a virgin after childbirth? Say if there was a way to artifically make a woman pregnant without her losing her virginity. Wouldn't she lose her Virginity during the Childbirth when the baby comes out? I mean I'm just a guy. But I don't think the poor girl would stay a virgin. :)
|
|
|
|
RE: The perpetual discussion on Mary's Virginity - 8/5/2005 1:33:50 PM
|
|
|
Lurker
Posts: 740
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Silver Spring, MD
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Cilas-Liag How can a Virgin stay a virgin after childbirth? Say if there was a way to artifically make a woman pregnant without her losing her virginity. Wouldn't she lose her Virginity during the Childbirth when the baby comes out? I mean I'm just a guy. But I don't think the poor girl would stay a virgin. :) "Virgin" in this context mean having never had sexual intercourse.
_____________________________
Do not be afraid of Christ! He takes nothing away, and he gives you everything. When we give ourselves to him, we receive a hundredfold in return. Yes, open, open wide the doors to Christ—and you will find true life. -Pope Benedict XVI
|
|
|
|
RE: The perpetual discussion on Mary's Virginity - 8/5/2005 1:39:41 PM
|
|
|
bridgefin
Posts: 135
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Boca Raton, FL
Status: offline
|
It is the absence of sexual relations which constitutes virginity, not childbirth. Until recently the two worked hand in hand, with the exception of Mary, who conceived without sexual relations. Given today's realities, I guess you could have a virgin who was artificially inseminated and produced a child. She would, I presume, remain a virgin since childbirth doesn't remove virginity. Given today's realities you also have Bill and Fred claiming they are married to each other, so today's realities are not the best yardstick to measure much of consequence. In Christ, George
|
|
|
|
RE: The perpetual discussion on Mary's Virginity - 8/5/2005 5:15:52 PM
|
|
|
Child4Jesus
Posts: 465
Joined: 5/24/2005
From: Long Island, Nassau, Elmont, NY
Status: online
|
2 Samuel 6:16-23 NLT 16 But as the Ark of the LORD entered the City of David, Michal, the daughter of Saul, looked down from her window. When she saw King David leaping and dancing before the LORD, she was filled with contempt for him. 17 The Ark of the LORD was placed inside the special tent that David had prepared for it. And David sacrificed burnt offerings and peace offerings to the LORD. 18 When he had finished, David blessed the people in the name of the LORD Almighty. 19 Then he gave a gift of food to every man and woman in Israel: a loaf of bread, a cake of dates, and a cake of raisins. Then everyone went home. 20 When David returned home to bless his family, Michal came out to meet him and said in disgust, "How glorious the king of Israel looked today! He exposed himself to the servant girls like any indecent person might do!" 21 David retorted to Michal, "I was dancing before the LORD, who chose me above your father and his family! He appointed me as the leader of Israel, the people of the LORD. So I am willing to act like a fool in order to show my joy in the LORD. 22 Yes, and I am willing to look even more foolish than this, but I will be held in honor by the girls of whom you have spoken!" 23 So Michal, the daughter of Saul, remained childless throughout her life. 2 Samuel 6:16-23 Amplified 16 As the ark of the Lord came into the City of David, Michal, Saul's daughter [David's wife], looked out of the window and saw King David leaping and dancing before the Lord, and she despised him in her heart. 17 They brought in the ark of the Lord and set it in its place inside the tent which David had pitched for it, and David offered burnt offerings and peace offerings before the Lord. 18 When David had finished offering the burnt offerings and peace offerings, he blessed the people in the name [and presence] of the Lord of hosts, 19 And distributed among all the people, the whole multitude of Israel, both to men and women, to each a cake of bread, a portion of meat, and a cake of raisins. So all the people departed, each to his house. 20 Then David returned to bless his household. And [his wife] Michal daughter of Saul came out to meet David and said, How glorious was the king of Israel today, who stripped himself of his kingly robes and uncovered himself in the eyes of his servants' maids as one of the worthless fellows shamelessly uncovers himself! 21 David said to Michal, It was before the Lord, Who chose me above your father and all his house to appoint me as prince over Israel, the people of the Lord. Therefore will I make merry [in pure enjoyment] before the Lord. 22 I will be still more lightly esteemed than this, and will humble and lower myself in my own sight [and yours]. But by the maids you mentioned, I will be held in honor. 23 And Michal the daughter of Saul had no child to the day of her death. No matter how a person wants to twist it, verse 23 CLEARLY means that she had no children. Trying to use this a prooftext is very faulty and misleading. Matthew 1:18-25 (New American Standard Bible) 18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows: when His mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child by the Holy Spirit. 19 And Joseph her husband, being a righteous man and not wanting to disgrace her, planned to send her away secretly. 20 But when he had considered this, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, "Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife; for the Child who has been conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit. 21 "She will bear a Son; and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins." 22 Now all this took place to fulfill what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet: 23 "BEHOLD, THE VIRGIN SHALL BE WITH CHILD AND SHALL BEAR A SON, AND THEY SHALL CALL HIS NAME IMMANUEL," which translated means, "GOD WITH US." 24 And Joseph awoke from his sleep and did as the angel of the Lord commanded him, and took Mary as his wife, 25 but kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Jesus. Matthew 1:18-25 (New King James Version) 18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows: After His mother Mary was betrothed to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Spirit. 19 Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not wanting to make her a public example, was minded to put her away secretly. 20 But while he thought about these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take to you Mary your wife, for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit. 21 And she will bring forth a Son, and you shall call His name JESUS, for He will save His people from their sins.” 22 So all this was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying: 23 “Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel,” which is translated, “God with us.” 24 Then Joseph, being aroused from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord commanded him and took to him his wife, 25 and did not know her till she had brought forth her firstborn Son. And he called His name JESUS. What does it mean to know? For a husband to know is why means have sexual relations with her. Genesis 4 Cain Murders Abel 1 Now Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain, and said, “I have acquired a man from the LORD.” Genesis 4:17 And Cain knew his wife, and she conceived and bore Enoch. And he built a city, and called the name of the city after the name of his son—Enoch. Genesis 4:25 And Adam knew his wife again, and she bore a son and named him Seth, “For God has appointed another seed for me instead of Abel, whom Cain killed.”
|
|
|
|
RE: The perpetual discussion on Mary's Virginity - 8/5/2005 9:09:59 PM
|
|
|
Ps103
Posts: 11698
Joined: 4/16/2005
From: Here, now
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Cilas-Liag How can a Virgin stay a virgin after childbirth? Say if there was a way to artifically make a woman pregnant without her losing her virginity. Wouldn't she lose her Virginity during the Childbirth when the baby comes out? I mean I'm just a guy. But I don't think the poor girl would stay a virgin. :) Clarify something for me, Cilas. Regardless of whether or not you believe in Mary's perpetual virginity, do you believe in the Virgin Birth? (not trying ot drag us off-topic, but the phrasing of that post bothered me.)
_____________________________
Fasten your seatbelts...it's going to be a bumpy night.
|
|
|
|
RE: The perpetual discussion on Mary's Virginity - 8/7/2005 5:01:06 PM
|
|
|
Child4Jesus
Posts: 465
Joined: 5/24/2005
From: Long Island, Nassau, Elmont, NY
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: S.Benedict Mary: Ever Virgin Most Protestants claim that Mary bore children other than Jesus. To support their claim, these Protestants refer to the biblical passages which mention the "brethren of the Lord." As explained in the Catholic Answers tract Brethren of the Lord, neither the Gospel accounts nor the early Christians attest to the notion that Mary bore other children besides Jesus. The faithful knew, through the witness of Scripture and Tradition, that Jesus was Mary’s only child and that she remained a lifelong virgin. An important historical document which supports the teaching of Mary’s perpetual virginity is the Protoevangelium of James, which was written probably less than sixty years after the conclusion of Mary’s earthly life (around A.D. 120), when memories of her life were still vivid in the minds of many. According to the world-renowned patristics scholar, Johannes Quasten: "The principal aim of the whole writing [Protoevangelium of James] is to prove the perpetual and inviolate virginity of Mary before, in, and after the birth of Christ" (Patrology, 1:120–1). To begin with, the Protoevangelium records that when Mary’s birth was prophesied, her mother, St. Anne, vowed that she would devote the child to the service of the Lord, as Samuel had been by his mother (1 Sam. 1:11). Mary would thus serve the Lord at the Temple, as women had for centuries (1 Sam. 2:22), and as Anna the prophetess did at the time of Jesus’ birth (Luke 2:36–37). A life of continual, devoted service to the Lord at the Temple meant that Mary would not be able to live the ordinary life of a child-rearing mother. Rather, she was vowed to a life of perpetual virginity. However, due to considerations of ceremonial cleanliness, it was eventually necessary for Mary, a consecrated "virgin of the Lord," to have a guardian or protector who would respect her vow of virginity. Thus, according to the Protoevangelium, Joseph, an elderly widower who already had children, was chosen to be her spouse. (This would also explain why Joseph was apparently dead by the time of Jesus’ adult ministry, since he does not appear during it in the gospels, and since Mary is entrusted to John, rather than to her husband Joseph, at the crucifixion). According to the Protoevangelium, Joseph was required to regard Mary’s vow of virginity with the utmost respect. The gravity of his responsibility as the guardian of a virgin was indicated by the fact that, when she was discovered to be with child, he had to answer to the Temple authorities, who thought him guilty of defiling a virgin of the Lord. Mary was also accused of having forsaken the Lord by breaking her vow. Keeping this in mind, it is an incredible insult to the Blessed Virgin to say that she broke her vow by bearing children other than her Lord and God, who was conceived through the power of the Holy Spirit. The perpetual virginity of Mary has always been reconciled with the biblical references to Christ’s brethren through a proper understanding of the meaning of the term "brethren." The understanding that the brethren of the Lord were Jesus’ stepbrothers (children of Joseph) rather than half-brothers (children of Mary) was the most common one until the time of Jerome (fourth century). It was Jerome who introduced the possibility that Christ’s brethren were actually his cousins, since in Jewish idiom cousins were also referred to as "brethren." The Catholic Church allows the faithful to hold either view, since both are compatible with the reality of Mary’s perpetual virginity. Today most Protestants are unaware of these early beliefs regarding Mary’s virginity and the proper interpretation of "the brethren of the Lord." And yet, the Protestant Reformers themselves—Martin Luther, John Calvin, and Ulrich Zwingli—honored the perpetual virginity of Mary and recognized it as the teaching of the Bible, as have other, more modern Protestants. The Protoevangelium of James "And behold, an angel of the Lord stood by [St. Anne], saying, ‘Anne! Anne! The Lord has heard your prayer, and you shall conceive and shall bring forth, and your seed shall be spoken of in all the world.’ And Anne said, ‘As the Lord my God lives, if I beget either male or female, I will bring it as a gift to the Lord my God, and it shall minister to him in the holy things all the days of its life.’ . . . And [from the time she was three] Mary was in the temple of the Lord as if she were a dove that dwelt there" (Protoevangelium of James 4, 7 [A.D. 120]). "And when she was twelve years old there was held a council of priests, saying, ‘Behold, Mary has reached the age of twelve years in the temple of the Lord. What then shall we do with her, lest perchance she defile the sanctuary of the Lord?’ And they said to the high priest, ‘You stand by the altar of the Lord; go in and pray concerning her, and whatever the Lord shall manifest to you, that also will we do.’ . . . [A]nd he prayed concerning her, and behold, an angel of the Lord stood by him saying, ‘Zechariah! Zechariah! Go out and assemble the widowers of the people and let them bring each his rod, and to whomsoever the Lord shall show a sign, his wife shall she be. . . . And Joseph [was chosen]. . . . And the priest said to Joseph, ‘You have been chosen by lot to take into your keeping the Virgin of the Lord.’ But Joseph refused, saying, ‘I have children, and I am an old man, and she is a young girl’" (ibid., 8–9). "And Annas the scribe came to him [Joseph] . . . and saw that Mary was with child. And he ran away to the priest and said to him, ‘Joseph, whom you did vouch for, has committed a grievous crime.’ And the priest said, ‘How so?’ And he said, ‘He has defiled the virgin whom he received out of the temple of the Lord and has married her by stealth’" (ibid., 15). "And the priest said, ‘Mary, why have you done this? And why have you brought your soul low and forgotten the Lord your God?’ . . . And she wept bitterly saying, ‘As the Lord my God lives, I am pure before him, and know not man’" (ibid.). Origen "The Book [the Protoevangelium] of James [records] that the brethren of Jesus were sons of Joseph by a former wife, whom he married before Mary. Now those who say so wish to preserve the honor of Mary in virginity to the end, so that body of hers which was appointed to minister to the Word . . . might not know intercourse with a man after the Holy Spirit came into her and the power from on high overshadowed her. And I think it in harmony with reason that Jesus was the firstfruit among men of the purity which consists in [perpetual] chastity, and Mary was among women. For it were not pious to ascribe to any other than to her the firstfruit of virginity" (Commentary on Matthew 2:17 [A.D. 248]). Hilary of Poitiers "If they [the brethren of the Lord] had been Mary’s sons and not those taken from Joseph’s former marriage, she would never have been given over in the moment of the passion [crucifixion] to the apostle John as his mother, the Lord saying to each, ‘Woman, behold your son,’ and to John, ‘Behold your mother’ [John 19:26–27), as he bequeathed filial love to a disciple as a consolation to the one desolate" (Commentary on Matthew 1:4 [A.D. 354]). Athanasius "Let those, therefore, who deny that the Son is by nature from the Father and proper to his essence deny also that he took true human flesh from the ever-virgin Mary" (Discourses Against the Arians 2:70 [A.D. 360]). Epiphanius of Salamis "We believe in one God, the Father almighty, maker of all things, both visible and invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God . . . who for us men and for our salvation came down and took flesh, that is, was born perfectly of the holy ever-virgin Mary by the Holy Spirit" (The Man Well-Anchored 120 [A.D. 374]). "And to holy Mary, [the title] ‘Virgin’ is invariably added, for that holy woman remains undefiled" (Medicine Chest Against All Heresies 78:6 [A.D. 375]). Jerome "[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]). "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). Didymus the Blind "It helps us to understand the terms ‘first-born’ and ‘only-begotten’ when the Evangelist tells that Mary remained a virgin ‘until she brought forth her first-born son’ [Matt. 1:25]; for neither did Mary, who is to be honored and praised above all others, marry anyone else, nor did she ever become the Mother of anyone else, but even after childbirth she remained always and forever an immaculate virgin" (The Trinity 3:4 [A.D. 386]). Ambrose of Milan "Imitate her [Mary], holy mothers, who in her only dearly beloved Son set forth so great an example of material virtue; for neither have you sweeter children [than Jesus], nor did the Virgin seek the consolation of being able to bear another son" (Letters 63:111 [A.D. 388]). Pope Siricius I "You had good reason to be horrified at the thought that another birth might issue from the same virginal womb from which Christ was born according to the flesh. For the Lord Jesus would never have chosen to be born of a virgin if he had ever judged that she would be so incontinent as to contaminate with the seed of human intercourse the birthplace of the Lord’s body, that court of the eternal king" (Letter to Bishop Anysius [A.D. 392]). Augustine "In being born of a Virgin who chose to remain a Virgin even before she knew who was to be born of her, Christ wanted to approve virginity rather than to impose it. And he wanted virginity to be of free choice even in that woman in whom he took upon himself the form of a slave" (Holy Virginity 4:4 [A.D. 401]). "It was not the visible sun, but its invisible Creator who consecrated this day for us, when the Virgin Mother, fertile of womb and integral in her virginity, brought him forth, made visible for us, by whom, when he was invisible, she too was created. A Virgin conceiving, a Virgin bearing, a Virgin pregnant, a Virgin bringing forth, a Virgin perpetual. Why do you wonder at this, O man?" (Sermons 186:1 [A.D. 411]). "Heretics called Antidicomarites are those who contradict the perpetual virginity of Mary and affirm that after Christ was born she was joined as one with her husband" (Heresies 56 [A.D. 428]). Leporius "We confess, therefore, that our Lord and God, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, born of the Father before the ages, and in times most recent, made man of the Holy Spirit and the ever-virgin Mary" (Document of Amendment 3 [A.D. 426]). Cyril of Alexandria "[T]he Word himself, coming into the Blessed Virgin herself, assumed for himself his own temple from the substance of the Virgin and came forth from her a man in all that could be externally discerned, while interiorly he was true God. Therefore he kept his Mother a virgin even after her childbearing" (Against Those Who Do Not Wish to Confess That the Holy Virgin is the Mother of God 4 [A.D. 430]). Pope Leo I "His [Christ’s] origin is different, but his [human] nature is the same. Human usage and custom were lacking, but by divine power a Virgin conceived, a Virgin bore, and Virgin she remained" (Sermons 22:2 [A.D. 450]). NIHIL OBSTAT: I have concluded that the materials presented in this work are free of doctrinal or moral errors. Bernadeane Carr, STL, Censor Librorum, August 10, 2004 IMPRIMATUR: In accord with 1983 CIC 827 permission to publish this work is hereby granted. +Robert H. Brom, Bishop of San Diego, August 10, 2004 I don't know how I didn't realize this but ALL that you have qouted is the opinion of Men. There is ZERO Bible Scripture in there. Please qoute the Bible and NOT the opinions of Men.
|
|
|
|
RE: The perpetual discussion on Mary's Virginity - 8/8/2005 5:18:38 PM
|
|
|
Lurker
Posts: 740
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Silver Spring, MD
Status: offline
|
Child4Jesus: If you wish... Exodus 13:2,12 - Jesus is sometimes referred to as the "first-born" son of Mary. But "first-born" is a common Jewish expression meaning the first child to open the womb. It has nothing to do the mother having future children. Exodus 34:20 - under the Mosaic law, the "first-born" son had to be sanctified. "First-born" status does not require a "second" born. Ezek. 44:2 - Ezekiel prophesies that no man shall pass through the gate by which the Lord entered the world. This is a prophecy of Mary's perpetual virginity. Mary remained a virgin before, during and after the birth of Jesus. Mark 6:3 - Jesus was always referred to as "the" son of Mary, not "a" son of Mary. Also "brothers" could have theoretically been Joseph's children from a former marriage that was dissolved by death. However, it is most likely, perhaps most certainly, that Joseph was a virgin, just as were Jesus and Mary. As such, they embodied the true Holy Family, fully consecrated to God. Luke 1:31,34 - the angel tells Mary that you "will" conceive (using the future tense). Mary responds by saying, "How shall this be?" Mary's response demonstrates that she had taken a vow of lifelong virginity by having no intention to have relations with a man. If Mary did not take such a vow of lifelong virginity, her question would make no sense at all (for we can assume she knew how a child is conceived). She was a consecrated Temple virgin as was an acceptable custom of the times. Luke 2:41-51 - in sea | | |