"Did Mary stay a virgin?" A conversation with a friend
David,
I have recently been
doing some reading on the history of the early Christian Church. Most of my
understanding of early church history has come from reading the new testament.
It had always been my understanding that Mary was a virgin only until after
Jesus was born, and then Joseph consummated their marriage and they had other
sons and daughters (Matthew 13:55-56). I have recently read some interesting
theories that I had not heard before. One theory is that Joseph had a previous
wife that had died before he married Mary and that he already had children
through this previous wife. My problem with this is that it seems to be pure
speculation with no scriptural evidence to back it up. The other theory is that
Jesus brothers and sisters that are mentioned are actually cousins of Jesus
(through Cleopas the brother of Joseph), and when the scriptures say
"brother" this really means a very close relative. The catholic
apologist use the reference from the gospel of John when Jesus asks John to
take care of his mother; their argument is that if Mary had other sons that
they would have taken care of her and their wouldn't have been a reason to ask
one of Jesus' close disciples to take care of her.
I have also read that
this idea of the perpetual virginity of Mary dates all the way back to the time
of Constantine and that early Church leaders like Jerome and Eusebius promoted
the idea of the perpetual virginity of Mary. I also read that early on denial
of the perpetual virginity of Mary was considered a form of heresy. Some
sources say that even early protestant leaders, like Luther and John Wesley,
still believed in the perpetual virginity of Mary.
I was curious what your
thoughts on this matter were. Take your time. I'm not expecting a quick
response here. I'm sure you could come close to writing a book on this subject
if you wanted to.
Friend
Hey Friend,
I’ll respond in blue.
I have recently been doing
some reading on the history of the early Christian Church. Most of my
understanding of early church history has come from reading the new testament.
It had always been my understanding that Mary was a virgin only until after
Jesus was born, and then Joseph consummated their marriage and they had other
sons and daughters (Matthew 13:55-56). This is certainly the predominate view among all Protestants. I have recently read some interesting theories that I had not heard
before. One theory is that Joseph had a previous wife that had died before he
married Mary and that he already had children through this previous wife. My
problem with this is that it seems to be pure speculation with no scriptural
evidence to back it up. I concur with you. It’s
certainly possible. There is just no evidence for it at all. The other theory is that Jesus brothers and sisters that are
mentioned are actually cousins of Jesus (through Cleopas the brother of
Joseph), and when the scriptures say "brother" this really means a
very close relative. Yep, this is the standard
Catholic view. The term for “brother” and the term for “cousin” are different
terms in Greek (and Old Testament analogies are irrelevant because they are not
in Greek). The Greek terms are not ambiguous. Now, there apparently is some
(scant) evidence that ancient authors weren’t always strict in their
usage. So, again, it is possible. Nevertheless, the overwhelming
majority of instances of those Greek terms are the “plain” meanings of
“brother” and “cousin.” And every time those terms are used in the Gospels, it
sure seems like the natural readings are most appropriate: Jesus had brothers
and sisters (e.g., Mk 6:3). The catholic apologist use the reference from the gospel of John
when Jesus asks John to take care of his mother; their argument is that if Mary
had other sons that they would have taken care of her and their wouldn't have
been a reason to ask one of Jesus' close disciples to take care of her. Again, that’s not true. Jesus’s ministry was not the typical
“Jewish” way of things. He was adamant that kingdom allegiance always
outweighed family allegiance (e.g., Mk 3:33-35; Matt 8:22). It is not compelling
to me to presume that “if Jesus had siblings then they would have…”anything.
Again, it’s possible; I just don’t find their suggestion persuasive.
(BTW: John was almost certainly considered very special in the Johannine
community from which the Gospel was written. Most scholars argue that John
includes Jesus’s statement here to emphasize John’s respect in the community.)
I have also read that
this idea of the perpetual virginity of Mary dates all the way back to the time
of Constantine and that early Church leaders like Jerome and Eusebius promoted
the idea of the perpetual virginity of Mary. That is correct; it is a very early belief. Jerome, Ambrose,
Augustine, and many other argued/assumed that Mary stayed a virgin. A few
leaders disagreed (like Bonosus, bishop of Sardica or Naissus; or Helvidius in
Rome). I also read that early
on denial of the perpetual virginity of Mary was considered a form of heresy. That is correct, by many leaders and councils.
Some sources say that
even early protestant leaders, like Luther and John Wesley, still believed in
the perpetual virginity of Mary. As far as I understand, that is correct. But…of course they did.
J Especially Wesley, who was Anglican (and
Anglicans are closely related to Roman Catholics in theology; this is why
Methodists baptize children, call baptism and communion a “sacrament,” etc.).
Really, it’s possible
they’re right. I just don’t find any of their arguments compelling. While I’m
sure there are Catholics who find their arguments compelling, it seems to me
that the majority of them are making these arguments because of a deeply-held
history of believing that virginity is much more Christian than marriage (modern views of sex in Catholicism vary; I’m
referencing the view held for centuries in Roman Catholicism). This is an
ancient idea (in fact, there are numerous ancient writings we know of by church leaders praising/cajoling/convincing their congregations--singles and married--to remain celibate. Why? Because they believed that virgins spent more time with the
Lord (e.g., 1 Cor 7:34) and because (they thought) sex made one lust, which was
a sin. And there’s “no way” that Mary would lust. Unfortunately, Jesus never
suggested that celibacy was more “Christian” than marriage. He seemed quite
ambivalent to the whole thing (Matt 19:3-12).
At the end of the day, I
still find this verse convincing enough:
“Isn't this the carpenter, the son of Mary and
brother of James, Joses, Judas, and Simon? And aren't his sisters here with
us?" (Mar 6:3 NET)
My thoughts! (And I’m
aware Roman Catholics will disagree! J)
I also forgot to mention
Gal. 1:19, when Paul mentions who he saw in Jerusalem… “except James, the
brother of our Lord.” = εἰ μὴ Ἰάκωβον τὸν ἀδελφὸν τοῦ κυρίου.
Every single NT scholar
on the planet that I know of concurs with me that this doesn’t mean James was Jesus’s
“cousin” or “buddy” or “close relative.” We believe the Greek term’s most basic
use is right: James is Jesus’s brother. And James is considered an “Apostle”
because he saw the resurrected Jesus (1 Cor 15:7). This doesn’t mean he was
part of The Twelve.
DP