DEFENDING THE PRIVILEGES OF OUR LADY
Part II of III : The Perpetual Virginity of the Mother of God

By Father Paul K. Raftery, O.P.
Behind much misunderstanding of the special graces
granted to our Blessed Lady
is a false sense of competition
between the Church's devotion toward
her and worship of Our Blessed Lord. With every privilege granted
to Mary, something is taken
away from Our Lord, so the thinking goes.
There is a failure to see the support her privileges
give to our belief in her Son. In dealing with such misunderstanding, we
should be quick to stress that, in fact, every privilege attributed by
the Church to Our Lady reinforces
the holiness and divine
origins of her
Son. Her
perpetual virginity is a prime example of
this support, as we shall see below, beginning with what the Scriptures
say about the birth of Our Savior.
Scriptural Background
Both Saint Matthew and Saint Luke give explicit
accounts of the virgin birth of Jesus;
both tell us that God became incarnate in the womb of Mary by a special
miracle allowing her to
conceive without having relations with a husband. This was in fulfillment of a plan God had in mind for all eternity,
and revealed for the first time in the early 700s B.C.,
when He said through
the prophet Isaiah: "Behold, a virgin shall
conceive and bear a son, and shall call His name Emmanuel, that is God-is-with-us"
(7:14). Nowhere in scriptural references to the virgin birth
is any rationale given for God
choosing this course of action. But the wisdom of
God here is not beyond us to discern. Saint Thomas, who
lists four reasons in all, says for the first of these that the virgin
birth was fitting:
to maintain the dignity of the Father Who sent Him. For since
Christ is the true and natural Son of God, it was not fitting that He should have another
father than God: lest the dignity belonging to God be transferred to another (III,
28, 1).
God, Whose
power is almighty, could have chosen
to become incarnate in a human nature conceived in the usual way between
husband and wife. But so important it is that mankind acknowledge the greatness of God in
Jesus Christ,
that it would be counter-productive for the Father
to introduce a possible source of confusion. A human father
for Jesus in addition to His Eternal Father would be precisely this.
Already God had been working through His prophets, men
who had been created from the conjugal union
of husband and wife and whom He
endowed with His wisdom
and power. But if the coming of the Eternal Son into this world had resulted from natural procreation, one can surmise the temptation of weak human minds to
fail to see Him as different
from these merely human messengers of
God. As Saint Thomas wisely
observes above, the human father, nearest to us and easiest to identify with, would tend
to receive a greater amount of attention. The true
and eternal fatherhood of
God would be compromised,
and His dignity transferred to the human
father. The end result would be that Our Lord's
true nature as the
Son of God would retreat into the
background and be ignored. So there is a problem here of representing His divine origins
in the most clear and definitive manner. This, in fact, is what God
has accomplished by assuming human
nature through a virgin.
Thus the divinely chosen function of Our Ladys virginity
is to bolster our faith in
the divinity of her Son.
From the first appearance of the Church's teaching
on her virginity
in Matthew and Luke we can see that this is the case.
Signs of an Early Tradition
But the accounts in Matthew and Luke are only a
partial glimpse of an underlying current of belief held by the Church
from its beginning. The full expression of
this belief is that our Blessed Lady was a virgin before, during,
and after Jesus
birth. This will be a point difficult to get across to Protestants
because of their failing to acknowledge the larger body of teaching, or Sacred Tradition, from which the New
Testament Scriptures were composed. The New Testament was a
written form of teaching, inspired by the Holy
Spirit, that arose from a much broader body of knowledge,
also inspired by the Holy Spirit,
communicated in the teaching and preaching
of the apostles. There is no question that this broader, divinely-given teaching is implied in the Scriptures
themselves. Clearly the apostles were aware of much Our
Lord said and did, that is not recorded
in the Gospels. Saint John testifies to
this at the very end of his Gospel (John 21:25). From
this broader, non-written, but first-hand source of revelation they derived their
teaching, as Saint Paul testifies in a number of passages (1Corinthians
11:23, Galatians 1:12, 2Timothy 2;2). Indeed, these
passages show that, at first, divinely inspired tradition
was the only form of teaching available.
Mary's virginity
before, during, and after
birth, comes from this broad, non-written teaching, handed
down by the apostles. It has continued down the centuries
as a divinely-inspired teaching of the Church along with that of the Sacred Scriptures. This is our understanding of Sacred Tradition that most of us are familiar
with, but is nevertheless worthwhile to review it in this consideration of the teaching on
Our Lady's perpetual
virginity. A divinely-inspired
and apostolic origin to her
perpetual virginity, and indeed to all her privileges, needs to be kept
firmly in mind.
But as we mentioned in passing in the last issue with the doctrine on the Trinity, the full expression of the Church's teaching does not
necessarily appear right at the beginning. A Christian
living around 100 would not have the
terminology available to say "I believe that in the one God
there are three Persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit." Such would have
been the belief, but the use of the word person
for Father, Son,
and Holy Spirit did not come into the Church's terminology until about a hundred years later. Expression of belief develops
with time.
With the Blessed Mother's virginity, the belief was held from the beginning
that she was a virgin
before, during, and after
the birth of her Son.
But there was a similar need for time in order that the belief reach full
expression. We have a partial glimpse of this belief in the Gospels,
showing her virginity
before and at the time of
conception. But seventy or eighty years later
an anonymous author wrote a work entitled The Protoevangelium of James that reflects a fuller
expression of Mary's virginity
which was then current. It should be noted that the Protoevangelium
was never recognized by the Church as being
part of its inspired Scriptures. The work
includes a number of legendary events surrounding the life of Mary
up until the birth of Our Lord that point
clearly to human authorship, not divine. What does
come through, however, are two important points:
the miraculous appearance
of Jesus at birth without
affecting Mary's physical condition as a virgin; and
a description of Joseph
as widower already having children at the time he
was betrothed to Mary.
Through this latter detail there is an explanation provided for the "brethren of the Lord" in the Gospels,
and, hence, an allusion to Our Lady's virginity after the birth of Jesus.
The full expression of the belief is coming into view. Within another
hundred years after the Protoevangelium of James,
another author comes forward to speak even more clearly on the full tradition.
Origen, a scripture scholar from
Alexandria and speaking for the Church
in the early 200s, praises those who
acknowledge Mary's virginity
throughout her life, saying how:
those who speak thus mean to safeguard Marys dignity in the
virginity she conserved until the end, so that the body chosen to serve the Word, Who
said, The Holy Spirit will come upon you and the power of the Most High will
overshadow you, did not know any relations with a man, after the point that the Holy
Spirit came down upon her and the power of the Most High overshadowed her. (quoted
in Luigi Gambero, Mary and the Fathers of the Church, 75-76)
Such appeals as we are making here to the presence of the full teaching on Our Lady's virginity
in the early Church will mean little to Christians
who rely on Scripture as their only authority. But it would be important
to point out that the first generations of Christians, as is born out in
the writings from the period, did not think of Mary in the manner of contemporary Bible
Christians. A belief that she was a
highly virtuous, but typical
wife and mother with a number of children, so common today, would receive little
acceptance among early Christians. Origen's statement
was representative of mainline Christian thinking of that time. Our Lady had for Christians an
important role as the one whom the Holy Spirit
overshadowed. She had a body that had been specially chosen, as Origen
said, to serve the Word. Thus, her perpetual
virginity was a recognition of the uniqueness of that body and the exceptional way
it was used by God. Another
prominent theologian of the day, Hippolytus, remarked
that
being outside of the flesh, the Word of God took upon Himself the
holy flesh from the holy Virgin; like a Bridegroom, He prepared for Himself that garment
which He would weave together with His sufferings on the Cross . . . . In this way He
intended to obtain the salvation for man, who was perishing (Gambero, 87).
The holiness of
Mary and the emphasis on her virginity
was something that the average believer simply expected to be true.
She had to be holy
because the Word, Who was Holiness Itself,
demanded it. She had to be a virgin throughout her
life because having been used so profoundly by God,
her body
belonged to Him
and no other.
Responding to Arianism
Thus the early Church's understanding of Mary's virginity
was in fact coming from a profound respect for the Word Who had taken flesh in her womb. It is well worth noting that the period
for the most clear statements on the perpetual virginity
of Mary came during the Arian crisis in which the divinity
of Christ was being denied.
Teachers and sects who denied
the perpetual virginity of
Mary were often found associated with or
embracing heresy about Our
Lord. An early Christian sect in Palestine known
as the Ebionites, who
denied the virgin
birth of Our Lord,
also denied His
divinity. A prominent teacher in Rome
by the name of Helvidius who caused a stir by asserting that Mary and Joseph
had children after the birth of Jesus
was also associated with the Arian heresy.
Another bishop in Asia Minor, Bonosus, who
was condemned
for denying
Mary's virginity
after the birth of her Son,
was the founder of an Arian sect that
continued down to the seventh century.
In this time of doctrinal turmoil, then,
the defenders of Christ's divinity turned to
the long-standing belief in the perpetual virginity
of Mary as a guarantee
of the true coming of
the Word of God into
her womb. Mary's
permanent virginity was a gift from God to the Church to verify that Jesus
truly is the Son of God. It was a miraculous virginity to reinforce the miracle of God becoming man. It
is meant to support our faith in
Christ's divinity,
not to weaken it. It
is with this support in mind that the fifth century
preacher Proclus of Constantinople states:
If the Mother had not remained a virgin, Her Child would have
been a mere man, and His birth not wonderful. If, to the contrary, she remained a virgin
after His birth, how will the Son not be God, and the mystery indescribable?
(Gambero, 253)
Although for all practical purposes the doctrine
of our Blessed Lady's
life-long virginity had been fully
elaborated by the fifth century, the formal
definition did not come until the Lateran Council of
649. According to canon
3 of that Council, the conception of
our Blessed Lord was "of
the Holy Spirit without seed," and Mary
"bore Him without any corruption, her virginity remaining
intact after His birth" (Denz. 503). With this statement the perpetual virginity of Mary was fully integrated into the teaching authority of the Church, and
became a dogma of faith to which Catholics must give their assent.
Common Scriptural Objections
The objections non-Catholics have raised against the perpetual virginity of Our Lady derive from the lack of clear reference
to the teaching in the Gospels. As we have mentioned, the Gospels
are only part of a much broader teaching handed on by the apostles. Both Matthew
and Luke relate that Mary conceived
the Son of God as a virgin, through the power
of the Holy Spirit.
But they say nothing of her giving
birth in a miraculous way that
physically preserved her virginal integrity, nor do they say anything directly
about her remaining
a virgin for the rest of her life. This opens the door for dissent against the teaching by Protestants,
who acknowledge no other source of revelation than Sacred
Scripture. Interestingly enough, this dissent did not
begin with the three founding fathers of
the Protestant reformation, Luther, Calvin,
and Zwingli. All three
accepted without question the virginity of
Mary before, during,
and after birth. Zwingli himself gave
one of the most openly Catholic affirmations of the
doctrine when he said, "I
firmly believe that Mary, according to the words of the 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" (Zwinglii Opera, Corpus Reformatorum, 1, 424, cited
in Theotokos, A Theological Encyclopedia of the Blessed Virgin Mary, 378).
Contrary, then, to the beginnings of the Protestant movement,
the subsequent trend has been to deny the perpetual
virginity of Mary based on
three main points:
the verse in Matthew that Joseph
"knew her not until she had borne a
Son" (1:25), implying, the dissenters say, that after this set period of
time Joseph and Mary
had conjugal relations;
Luke's statement that "she
gave birth to her first-born Son" (2:7), indicating that
more children followed; and
all three of the Gospels
reference to the "brethren of the
Lord".
None of the objections are original to Protestants.
They were raised many times in the early Church.
Still to this day, they have been most effectively dealt with by Saint Jerome
in his apologetic tract Perpetual Virginity of
Blessed Mary (written in 383)
against the heretical theologian, Helvidius. By way of a brief summary of Saint
Jerome on the three points
mentioned above, it can be said that:
The use of "until" in
the Scriptures does not always indicate a set
period of time. Often it implies time in an indefinite sense. An obvious
example is the Lord's statement,
translating from the Greek text: "Behold,
I am with you always, until the end of the age" (Matthew
28:20). Our Lord clearly means He will be with us not only up to the end of the
age, but afterwards as well!
The use of the word "first-born"
by the Jews was for a male offspring that opened the womb. As is evident
from the law on redeeming the first-born in Numbers
18:15, there is no implication of other offspring.
In Holy Scripture
there are actually four different uses of
"brethren". It can designate a natural
relationship (as in Esau and Jacob); a bond
of race (all Jews are called brothers to one another);
a relationship among family members (Lot and Abraham are
called brothers, even though Abraham was actually his uncle); a
relationship of charity (as Saint
Paul often uses "brethren" in his
letters). Thus, it is not at all true that the literal sense of
the phrase "brethren of the Lord"
can only mean that Jesus had brothers and
sisters.
The Gospels,
in fact, are inconclusive in themselves as regards the virginity
of Mary after the
birth of Jesus. They neither affirm her perpetual
virginity, nor deny it. And so here we can see the importance of an authoritative guide
to the interpretation of the Scriptures - a guide
inspired by the same Spirit Who authored
the Scriptures. This we know as the teaching
authority, or magisterium,
of the Church, from which comes the full
belief in our Blessed Lady's permanent virginity.


|