Tag: Perpetual Virginity

4 min read

Mary

Two Lessons from Perpetual Virginity of Mary

Father Harrison Ayre

December 19, 2022 7:00 am December 19, 2022

4 min read

3930 views

Comments Off

4 min read

Hearing of the doctrine of Mary’s virginity, we often are satisfied with an explanation of the miraculousness of Jesus’ conception. Yet the doctrine goes further than this mere fact, dealing…

Hearing of the doctrine of Mary’s virginity, we often are satisfied with an explanation of the miraculousness of Jesus’ conception. Yet the doctrine goes further than this mere fact, dealing with his birth and Mary’s state after the birth of Jesus. As the Catechism states: “The deepening of faith in the virginal motherhood led the Church to confess Mary’s real and perpetual virginity even in the act of giving birth to the Son of God made man” (No. 499). Thus the Church professes with absolute belief that Mary maintained her virginal integrity before, during and after the birth of Jesus.

When discussing such sensitive mysteries of faith, it is important to begin with humility and reverence toward the teaching. It can be easy to give way to questions of mechanics that become too personal and treads too far upon the holiness of the mystery of Jesus’ birth and Mary’s virginity. We can easily approach this question with very contemporary concerns, which, as valid as they might be, miss the heart of the doctrine that is vital for the life of the Church. Why, then, does the Church insist on it? There are two lessons to be gleaned: one is in reference to the fall, and thus to our salvation; the other is the connection between her role in the life of the Church.

Virginity and the Fall

We learn in Genesis that man and woman are commanded to multiply and fill the Earth (see 1:28). We also know that the fall of man brings about pain and suffering in childbirth (see Gen 3:16). The Bible’s first book reveals to us two facts here: that childbearing is part of God’s original plan, but that the fall has twisted this plan, and has had an effect on how childbearing takes place. The fathers of the Church talk about how procreation, while still a good, takes on a different reality because of the fall. It is clear from the biblical evidence that something changed in light of the fall, for the fall affected all of creation, including the body.

The virginity of Mary, then — because Mary is without sin — reveals something to us in her motherhood about what procreation and childbearing would have been like prior to the fall. This is still mysterious, and, looking at this through our own fallenness, we can struggle to see the reality clearly. But the perpetual virginity of Mary is meant to reveal something about why we were originally created. Since Mary is without sin, the effects of the fall do not affect her in the bearing of Jesus. Since her Immaculate Conception brings about her salvation, she is bearing in herself the effects of the Cross in time prior to its historical enacting. Mary is already redeemed in her conception, and so the effect of sin that affects all generations does not affect her. Her perpetual virginity is a sign of the victory of her Son and is a witness to the salvific efficacy of the Cross and Resurrection. Her virginity is the sign of the new creation, which is a fulfillment of the old represented in Adam and Eve. Thus, a new form of love is possible through Christ and embodied in Mary.

Mother of the Church

The doctrine of Mary’s perpetual virginity extends to her role and mission as regards the universal Church. By being the perpetual virgin — which is a sign of a universal love that is not exclusive but rather inclusive, Mary embraces the whole Church as her children just as she embraces her Son, of whose body we are members. The whole point of virginal love is to love with a full vision, to say that Christ’s way is the exclusive way by which life is to be lived. Mary’s perpetual virginity is a sign of our destiny where we are neither married nor given in marriage (cf Mt 22:30). Mary’s exclusivity makes her love universal, and is a sign of the universal love of Jesus to which she always says “yes.” By embracing her Son, she embraces the members of his Body, the Church. This perpetual virginity, therefore, points to her motherhood of the Church, as well as is a sign that she is always “giving birth” to Christ who is to be formed in us (see Gal 4:19). Her virginity is a constant openness to God in the Holy Spirit, a constant giving birth, and a constant love that cares for each one of us. Mary’s perpetual virginity is not a reduction of her sexuality, then, but is rather the fullest expression of love whereby she can love all people with an openness that has no limits.

Father Harrison Ayre is a priest of the Diocese of Victoria, British Columbia. Follow him on Twitter at @FrHarrison.

Comments Off

2 min read

Advent

Since Mary was Ever-Virgin, Did She Deliver Her Son in the Normal Way?

Paul Thigpen

December 15, 2022 7:15 am December 15, 2022

2 min read

26650 views

Comments Off

2 min read

One rather delicate question sometimes raised by Catholics concerns the physical nature of Jesus’ birth: Given that Mary was a virgin, did she deliver her Son in the normal way?…

One rather delicate question sometimes raised by Catholics concerns the physical nature of Jesus’ birth: Given that Mary was a virgin, did she deliver her Son in the normal way? Or was it through a miracle that left her body physically intact?

All faithful Catholics are agreed on Mary’s perpetual virginity. The debate centers on what exactly is meant by “virginity.” Does it consist simply in never having had sexual relations? If so, Mary can rightly be called “ever-virgin” without our assuming that Jesus’ birth was miraculous.

But what if a woman must also be physically intact to be considered a virgin? This understanding, at least with regard to Mary, has probably been the “majority position” throughout much of Church history, represented by many figures who carry considerable weight.

For example, nearly all the Fathers and Doctors of the Church who have addressed the issue seem to believe that Jesus was delivered miraculously, exiting her womb without injuring her flesh in any way. The Lateran Synod of 649, which was a regional rather than an ecumenical council, said specifically that Mary “generated without injury”; several popes spoke in a similar way.

Some have argued that such pronouncements should be considered infallible teachings of the Church’s ordinary and universal Magisterium. But in light of the conditions necessary for infallibility, that is by no means an assured conclusion. Perhaps it’s best to say that in this matter, a solemn clarification or confirmation by a pope or ecumenical council would be most welcome.

In the meantime, let’s pray that pondering these mysteries will deepen our faith.

Paul Thigpen is a former editor of The Catholic Answer.

Comments Off

4 min read

Mary

Mary’s Perpetual Virginity

Father Ray Ryland

February 18, 2019 10:39 am February 18, 2019

4 min read

4473 views

Comments Off

4 min read

Non-Catholics who reject our Lady’s perpetual virginity use Matthew 1:24-25. In ordinary language, the phrase “knew her not until she had borne a son” would imply that she and Joseph had conjugal union after the birth of her Son. The Bible of the Virgin’s time (the Old Testament) sometimes uses the word “until” (and the word “to”) in a different sense. Here are some examples.

The raven that Noah set free “went forth and did not return until the waters were dried up upon the earth” (Gn 8:7, RSV). In fact, the raven never came back. In somewhat the same sense the Old Testament occasionally uses the preposition “to.” We read in 2 Samuel 6:23 that “Michal the daughter of Saul had no children to the day of her death” (RSV). Would your non-Catholic informant imply this means Michal had children after her death? Or what about Moses’ grave. Deuteronomy 34:6 reports that no one knows where Moses was buried “to this day.” Again, this does not imply someone would know the location after the time when the sacred writer wrote. The use of “until” and “to” only means an event did not occur up to a certain point.

You may read in 1 Maccabees the use of the word “before” with a similar meaning. After victory in battle, the Maccabean forces “went up to Mount Zion with gladness and joy, and offered burnt offerings, because not one of them had fallen before they returned in safety” (5:54, RSV). This clearly does not mean they were slain after they returned.

St. Luke, therefore, is not reporting or even implying that the Virgin and Joseph lived as husband and wife after she had borne her Son. St. Luke’s account of the Visitation makes this even clearer. When the angel Gabriel told the Blessed Virgin she was to bear a son, she was astonished. She asked, literally, “how can this be since I do know not man?” (1:34). The Old Testament commonly speaks of sexual union as a man and woman “knowing” one another. (Among other instances, Genesis 4:1 [RSV] records, “Now Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain….”)

Ordinarily, a young woman engaged at this time, soon to be married, would not be surprised at being told she would give birth in the future. Why was Mary obviously amazed? Because she had vowed perpetual virginity within the bounds of her approaching marriage. This has always been the Church’s understanding of her consternation. Non-Catholics sometimes argue that a virginal marriage (known technically as a “Josephite” marriage) is “unnatural.” That may be true, but it’s no argument against there being such a marriage. It was “unnatural” for a virgin to bear a Son. And it was certainly “unnatural” for a couple to raise a child who was God in the flesh.

Another argument used by non-Catholics is taken from St. Luke’s reference to Our Lord as the Virgin’s “first-born son” (2:7). Among the Israelites, a woman’s first son was always called “first-born,” even though she later may have had no more sons. In the Old Testament the term “first-born son” primarily connoted the bearer of special privileges and rights in the family. An appendix to the Catholic version of the RSV explains that the term does not necessarily mean the first of several. “The word is used even in modern times without necessarily implying subsequent births.”

Finally, in Matthew 12:46 and Mark 6:3, we read about “brothers” and “sisters” of Jesus. Non-Catholics assume this refers to children of the Virgin and St. Joseph. But the Greek and Hebrew words for “brother” and “sister” are ambiguous terms. Sometimes they refer to an ally (as in Dt 2:37). At other times “brother” means a friend (see 2 Sm 1:26). Christ’s Church has always taught that that the meaning of “brother” or “sister” as it pertains to Jesus refers to relatives or friends, never blood brother or blood sister.

Comments Off